politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The country’s leading psephologists bring more bad news for Co
Options
Comments
-
We lost it last Wednesday.RobD said:
The UK will be a vassal of the EU? I thought we never lost sovereignty?williamglenn said:
If it happens while the UK is under the A50 process or in transition, the UK will be a vassal of the EU and they will dictate the terms: in effect the rUK will have no choice but to stay in the single market.TheWhiteRabbit said:
... but Scotland is going to have two new relationships: one with the UK AND one with the EU.williamglenn said:
This is the wrong way round.chestnut said:I'm intrigued by the notion of how Scotland would hypothetically transition out of the UK given the way things are going with the UK/EU split.
In 2014 it was sold as referendum one day, independence 18 months later.
Contrast that to the relatively simple task of extricating the UK from the EU.
Creating a new state is relatively straightforward and has been done countless times before. Extricating a state, maintaining continuity, from the network of treaties that is the EU has never been done, and is an order of magnitude more complex.
0 -
0
-
The UK is a supplicant to the EU? Right. Remind me again of the EU budget contributions.williamglenn said:
England is not the economic or political might in this continent, and we are now a supplicant to the EU indefinitely if we don't want to jump off a cliff edge.Gallowgate said:
How so? What meaningful difference will it make? Embarrassing, maybe, but England is the economic might on this Island.williamglenn said:
If it happens while the UK is under the A50 process or in transition, the UK will be a vassal of the EU and they will dictate the terms: in effect the rUK will have no choice but to stay in the single market.TheWhiteRabbit said:
... but Scotland is going to have two new relationships: one with the UK AND one with the EU.williamglenn said:
This is the wrong way round.chestnut said:I'm intrigued by the notion of how Scotland would hypothetically transition out of the UK given the way things are going with the UK/EU split.
In 2014 it was sold as referendum one day, independence 18 months later.
Contrast that to the relatively simple task of extricating the UK from the EU.
Creating a new state is relatively straightforward and has been done countless times before. Extricating a state, maintaining continuity, from the network of treaties that is the EU has never been done, and is an order of magnitude more complex.0 -
One of yours is claiming its only the UK in the EU that is stopping Germany finishing what they started in 1939. There are lunatics on both sides.Stark_Dawning said:
She's not the one speculating about going to war with a NATO ally. I'm afraid that's your crowd, Richard.Richard_Tyndall said:
I assume she is one of the lunatics we have let out of the asylum.williamglenn said:-1 -
Naught but Tory propaganda from TSE!!!
JICIPM!!!!0 -
Scotland as a "new" state. Intriguing. It implies leaving everything you had before behind.williamglenn said:
This is the wrong way round.chestnut said:I'm intrigued by the notion of how Scotland would hypothetically transition out of the UK given the way things are going with the UK/EU split.
In 2014 it was sold as referendum one day, independence 18 months later.
Contrast that to the relatively simple task of extricating the UK from the EU.
Creating a new state is relatively straightforward and has been done countless times before. Extricating a state, maintaining continuity, from the network of treaties that is the EU has never been done, and is an order of magnitude more complex.
Everything.
0 -
Yes we are. We are one of the largest economies in Europe and are currently forecast to overtake Germany within my lifetime.williamglenn said:
England is not the economic or political might in this continent, and we are now a supplicant to the EU indefinitely if we don't want to jump off a cliff edge.Gallowgate said:
How so? What meaningful difference will it make? Embarrassing, maybe, but England is the economic might on this Island.williamglenn said:
If it happens while the UK is under the A50 process or in transition, the UK will be a vassal of the EU and they will dictate the terms: in effect the rUK will have no choice but to stay in the single market.TheWhiteRabbit said:
... but Scotland is going to have two new relationships: one with the UK AND one with the EU.williamglenn said:
This is the wrong way round.chestnut said:I'm intrigued by the notion of how Scotland would hypothetically transition out of the UK given the way things are going with the UK/EU split.
In 2014 it was sold as referendum one day, independence 18 months later.
Contrast that to the relatively simple task of extricating the UK from the EU.
Creating a new state is relatively straightforward and has been done countless times before. Extricating a state, maintaining continuity, from the network of treaties that is the EU has never been done, and is an order of magnitude more complex.0 -
I see Boris is having to grovel again......................
Britain expresses 'regret' after egg is thrown at Saudi general
Activists in London attempted a citizen's arrest and threw an egg at the general in protest at Saudi military action in Yemen.0 -
Don't be so dramatic. I voted remain and am a massive supporter of the EU, but to suggest that we are now a 'vassal state' is ridiculous. The UK, or even England & Wales in the future will be fine outside of the EU.williamglenn said:
England is not the economic or political might in this continent, and we are now a supplicant to the EU indefinitely if we don't want to jump off a cliff edge.Gallowgate said:
How so? What meaningful difference will it make? Embarrassing, maybe, but England is the economic might on this Island.williamglenn said:
If it happens while the UK is under the A50 process or in transition, the UK will be a vassal of the EU and they will dictate the terms: in effect the rUK will have no choice but to stay in the single market.TheWhiteRabbit said:
... but Scotland is going to have two new relationships: one with the UK AND one with the EU.williamglenn said:
This is the wrong way round.chestnut said:I'm intrigued by the notion of how Scotland would hypothetically transition out of the UK given the way things are going with the UK/EU split.
In 2014 it was sold as referendum one day, independence 18 months later.
Contrast that to the relatively simple task of extricating the UK from the EU.
Creating a new state is relatively straightforward and has been done countless times before. Extricating a state, maintaining continuity, from the network of treaties that is the EU has never been done, and is an order of magnitude more complex.
0 -
Gallowgate, meet williamglenn.Gallowgate said:
Don't be so dramatic. I voted remain and am a massive supporter of the EU, but to suggest that we are now a 'vassal state' is ridiculous. The UK, or even England & Wales in the future will be fine outside of the EU.williamglenn said:
England is not the economic or political might in this continent, and we are now a supplicant to the EU indefinitely if we don't want to jump off a cliff edge.Gallowgate said:
How so? What meaningful difference will it make? Embarrassing, maybe, but England is the economic might on this Island.williamglenn said:
If it happens while the UK is under the A50 process or in transition, the UK will be a vassal of the EU and they will dictate the terms: in effect the rUK will have no choice but to stay in the single market.TheWhiteRabbit said:
... but Scotland is going to have two new relationships: one with the UK AND one with the EU.williamglenn said:
This is the wrong way round.chestnut said:I'm intrigued by the notion of how Scotland would hypothetically transition out of the UK given the way things are going with the UK/EU split.
In 2014 it was sold as referendum one day, independence 18 months later.
Contrast that to the relatively simple task of extricating the UK from the EU.
Creating a new state is relatively straightforward and has been done countless times before. Extricating a state, maintaining continuity, from the network of treaties that is the EU has never been done, and is an order of magnitude more complex.
0 -
What immigration projections are that forecast based on?Philip_Thompson said:
Yes we are. We are one of the largest economies in Europe and are currently forecast to overtake Germany within my lifetime.williamglenn said:
England is not the economic or political might in this continent, and we are now a supplicant to the EU indefinitely if we don't want to jump off a cliff edge.Gallowgate said:
How so? What meaningful difference will it make? Embarrassing, maybe, but England is the economic might on this Island.williamglenn said:
If it happens while the UK is under the A50 process or in transition, the UK will be a vassal of the EU and they will dictate the terms: in effect the rUK will have no choice but to stay in the single market.TheWhiteRabbit said:
... but Scotland is going to have two new relationships: one with the UK AND one with the EU.williamglenn said:
This is the wrong way round.chestnut said:I'm intrigued by the notion of how Scotland would hypothetically transition out of the UK given the way things are going with the UK/EU split.
In 2014 it was sold as referendum one day, independence 18 months later.
Contrast that to the relatively simple task of extricating the UK from the EU.
Creating a new state is relatively straightforward and has been done countless times before. Extricating a state, maintaining continuity, from the network of treaties that is the EU has never been done, and is an order of magnitude more complex.
0 -
Actually you're quite right. Shall we issue a joint statement?Richard_Tyndall said:
One of yours is claiming its only the UK in the EU that is stopping Germany finishing what they started in 1939. There are lunatics on both sides.Stark_Dawning said:
She's not the one speculating about going to war with a NATO ally. I'm afraid that's your crowd, Richard.Richard_Tyndall said:
I assume she is one of the lunatics we have let out of the asylum.williamglenn said:0 -
williamglenn said:
We lost it back in 1993RobD said:
The UK will be a vassal of the EU? I thought we never lost sovereignty?williamglenn said:
If it happens while the UK is under the A50 process or in transition, the UK will be a vassal of the EU and they will dictate the terms: in effect the rUK will have no choice but to stay in the single market.TheWhiteRabbit said:
... but Scotland is going to have two new relationships: one with the UK AND one with the EU.williamglenn said:
This is the wrong way round.chestnut said:I'm intrigued by the notion of how Scotland would hypothetically transition out of the UK given the way things are going with the UK/EU split.
In 2014 it was sold as referendum one day, independence 18 months later.
Contrast that to the relatively simple task of extricating the UK from the EU.
Creating a new state is relatively straightforward and has been done countless times before. Extricating a state, maintaining continuity, from the network of treaties that is the EU has never been done, and is an order of magnitude more complex.
0 -
Looking back, Ed Miliband seems like a giant of Labour politics. But only in comparison to his successor.
Watching this interview with Ed this morning, I realise what a lucky escape we had:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-394724460 -
Read the posts from FF43 at the end of last night's thread for an explanation of why this is the case.Gallowgate said:
Don't be so dramatic. I voted remain and am a massive supporter of the EU, but to suggest that we are now a 'vassal state' is ridiculous. The UK, or even England & Wales in the future will be fine outside of the EU.williamglenn said:
England is not the economic or political might in this continent, and we are now a supplicant to the EU indefinitely if we don't want to jump off a cliff edge.Gallowgate said:
How so? What meaningful difference will it make? Embarrassing, maybe, but England is the economic might on this Island.williamglenn said:
If it happens while the UK is under the A50 process or in transition, the UK will be a vassal of the EU and they will dictate the terms: in effect the rUK will have no choice but to stay in the single market.TheWhiteRabbit said:
... but Scotland is going to have two new relationships: one with the UK AND one with the EU.williamglenn said:
This is the wrong way round.chestnut said:I'm intrigued by the notion of how Scotland would hypothetically transition out of the UK given the way things are going with the UK/EU split.
In 2014 it was sold as referendum one day, independence 18 months later.
Contrast that to the relatively simple task of extricating the UK from the EU.
Creating a new state is relatively straightforward and has been done countless times before. Extricating a state, maintaining continuity, from the network of treaties that is the EU has never been done, and is an order of magnitude more complex.
Yes we'll be fine, but we won't be in control.0 -
Got on Stade at 4/1 pre match. Laid off at half time for 125% profit.
Will be gutted if they win now.0 -
That's rather a sinister one even by US standards. I mean, average kooks about aliens, Elvis Presley, the Mithraic cult and even 9/11 truthers are one thing. But threatening to shoot a man who lost his son in a school shooting, that's just surreal.JosiasJessop said:Off-topic:
Conspiracy theorists are sh*ts:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-391940350 -
-
You lost me at "Read the posts from FF43..."williamglenn said:
Read the posts from FF43 at the end of last night's thread for an explanation of why this is the case.Gallowgate said:
Don't be so dramatic. I voted remain and am a massive supporter of the EU, but to suggest that we are now a 'vassal state' is ridiculous. The UK, or even England & Wales in the future will be fine outside of the EU.williamglenn said:
England is not the economic or political might in this continent, and we are now a supplicant to the EU indefinitely if we don't want to jump off a cliff edge.Gallowgate said:
How so? What meaningful difference will it make? Embarrassing, maybe, but England is the economic might on this Island.williamglenn said:
If it happens while the UK is under the A50 process or in transition, the UK will be a vassal of the EU and they will dictate the terms: in effect the rUK will have no choice but to stay in the single market.TheWhiteRabbit said:
... but Scotland is going to have two new relationships: one with the UK AND one with the EU.williamglenn said:
This is the wrong way round.chestnut said:I'm intrigued by the notion of how Scotland would hypothetically transition out of the UK given the way things are going with the UK/EU split.
In 2014 it was sold as referendum one day, independence 18 months later.
Contrast that to the relatively simple task of extricating the UK from the EU.
Creating a new state is relatively straightforward and has been done countless times before. Extricating a state, maintaining continuity, from the network of treaties that is the EU has never been done, and is an order of magnitude more complex.
Yes we'll be fine, but we won't be in control.0 -
Brexit illustrates almost absolutely that Sindy is a task of gargantuan proportion and costs. It is a separation far more complex than Brexit.williamglenn said:
If it happens while the UK is under the A50 process or in transition, the UK will be a vassal of the EU and they will dictate the terms: in effect the rUK will have no choice but to stay in the single market.TheWhiteRabbit said:
... but Scotland is going to have two new relationships: one with the UK AND one with the EU.williamglenn said:
This is the wrong way round.chestnut said:I'm intrigued by the notion of how Scotland would hypothetically transition out of the UK given the way things are going with the UK/EU split.
In 2014 it was sold as referendum one day, independence 18 months later.
Contrast that to the relatively simple task of extricating the UK from the EU.
Creating a new state is relatively straightforward and has been done countless times before. Extricating a state, maintaining continuity, from the network of treaties that is the EU has never been done, and is an order of magnitude more complex.
It also proves the EU's thinking on the flow of orderly withdrawal, debt obligation, re-engagement and intruding into bilateral affairs (see Gibraltar).
God knows how little Nikki would explain this all away.
0 -
Ah, the 15 year Brexit process?williamglenn said:
Read the posts from FF43 at the end of last night's thread for an explanation of why this is the case.Gallowgate said:
Don't be so dramatic. I voted remain and am a massive supporter of the EU, but to suggest that we are now a 'vassal state' is ridiculous. The UK, or even England & Wales in the future will be fine outside of the EU.williamglenn said:
England is not the economic or political might in this continent, and we are now a supplicant to the EU indefinitely if we don't want to jump off a cliff edge.Gallowgate said:
How so? What meaningful difference will it make? Embarrassing, maybe, but England is the economic might on this Island.williamglenn said:
If it happens while the UK is under the A50 process or in transition, the UK will be a vassal of the EU and they will dictate the terms: in effect the rUK will have no choice but to stay in the single market.TheWhiteRabbit said:
... but Scotland is going to have two new relationships: one with the UK AND one with the EU.williamglenn said:
This is the wrong way round.chestnut said:I'm intrigued by the notion of how Scotland would hypothetically transition out of the UK given the way things are going with the UK/EU split.
In 2014 it was sold as referendum one day, independence 18 months later.
Contrast that to the relatively simple task of extricating the UK from the EU.
Creating a new state is relatively straightforward and has been done countless times before. Extricating a state, maintaining continuity, from the network of treaties that is the EU has never been done, and is an order of magnitude more complex.
Yes we'll be fine, but we won't be in control.0 -
Remind me who won in 1713calum said:
0 -
To slightly misquote Blackadder, compared to the current leader Labour would be making more progress if led by an asthmatic ant carrying heavy shopping.JosiasJessop said:Looking back, Ed Miliband seems like a giant of Labour politics. But only in comparison to his successor.
Watching this interview with Ed this morning, I realise what a lucky escape we had:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-394724460 -
Alex Jones is a knob.ydoethur said:
That's rather a sinister one even by US standards. I mean, average kooks about aliens, Elvis Presley, the Mithraic cult and even 9/11 truthers are one thing. But threatening to shoot a man who lost his son in a school shooting, that's just surreal.JosiasJessop said:Off-topic:
Conspiracy theorists are sh*ts:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-39194035
I would use stronger language but this is a family site.0 -
Remember that unequal treaty we signed with Spain? LOLSunil_Prasannan said: 0 -
The one where we aren't in control of our choicesRobD said:
Ah, the 15 year Brexit process?williamglenn said:
Read the posts from FF43 at the end of last night's thread for an explanation of why this is the case.Gallowgate said:
Don't be so dramatic. I voted remain and am a massive supporter of the EU, but to suggest that we are now a 'vassal state' is ridiculous. The UK, or even England & Wales in the future will be fine outside of the EU.williamglenn said:
England is not the economic or political might in this continent, and we are now a supplicant to the EU indefinitely if we don't want to jump off a cliff edge.Gallowgate said:
How so? What meaningful difference will it make? Embarrassing, maybe, but England is the economic might on this Island.williamglenn said:
If it happens while the UK is under the A50 process or in transition, the UK will be a vassal of the EU and they will dictate the terms: in effect the rUK will have no choice but to stay in the single market.TheWhiteRabbit said:
... but Scotland is going to have two new relationships: one with the UK AND one with the EU.williamglenn said:
This is the wrong way round.chestnut said:I'm intrigued by the notion of how Scotland would hypothetically transition out of the UK given the way things are going with the UK/EU split.
In 2014 it was sold as referendum one day, independence 18 months later.
Contrast that to the relatively simple task of extricating the UK from the EU.
Creating a new state is relatively straightforward and has been done countless times before. Extricating a state, maintaining continuity, from the network of treaties that is the EU has never been done, and is an order of magnitude more complex.
Yes we'll be fine, but we won't be in control.
They have immense faith in the concept of the great demon WTO.0 -
Pizzagate was, if anything, worse:ydoethur said:
That's rather a sinister one even by US standards. I mean, average kooks about aliens, Elvis Presley, the Mithraic cult and even 9/11 truthers are one thing. But threatening to shoot a man who lost his son in a school shooting, that's just surreal.JosiasJessop said:Off-topic:
Conspiracy theorists are sh*ts:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-39194035
https://arstechnica.co.uk/tech-policy/2017/03/pizzagate-dc-shooter-pleads-guilty-to-weapons-related-charges/
Lucky no-one was killed. And as in the nature of the screwed-up nature of conspiracy theorists, some people still pretend to believe (or more worryingly, really do believe) that the above case was a false-flag operation, and there really is a child abuse ring operating out of the pizza joint ...0 -
Who liberated Spain from Napoleon during the Peninsula War?
The Spaniards should be eternally grateful to us!0 -
We lost influence last Wednesday. That's different from sovereignty, but arguably more important in reality. We gained notional sovereignty - we can theoretically say we won't do this or that, unlike when we were bound by collective decisions. But because we are no longer able to influence those collective decisions, which nevertheless affect us, we end up with less actual say over our own affairs. Counter-intuitive.williamglenn said:
We lost it last Wednesday.RobD said:The UK will be a vassal of the EU? I thought we never lost sovereignty?
0 -
May I suggest some rhyming slang? After this memorable incident involving the then Shadow Secretary of State for education, in education we now use the expression 'a Tristram'.TheScreamingEagles said:
Alex Jones is a knob.ydoethur said:
That's rather a sinister one even by US standards. I mean, average kooks about aliens, Elvis Presley, the Mithraic cult and even 9/11 truthers are one thing. But threatening to shoot a man who lost his son in a school shooting, that's just surreal.JosiasJessop said:Off-topic:
Conspiracy theorists are sh*ts:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-39194035
I would use stronger language but this is a family site.0 -
Who would NATO back??Sunil_Prasannan said:0 -
Influence? 8% of the QMV vote. 1/28th of the right to veto.FF43 said:
We lost influence last Wednesday. That's different from sovereignty, but arguably more important in reality. We gained notional sovereignty - we can theoretically say we won't do this or that, unlike when we were bound by collective decisions. But because we are no longer able to influence those collective decisions, which nevertheless affect us, we end up with less actual say over our own affairs. Counter-intuitive.williamglenn said:
We lost it last Wednesday.RobD said:The UK will be a vassal of the EU? I thought we never lost sovereignty?
Is there anything more minor than a minor shareholder?0 -
Conservatives on both sides i think?Richard_Tyndall said:
One of yours is claiming its only the UK in the EU that is stopping Germany finishing what they started in 1939. There are lunatics on both sides.Stark_Dawning said:
She's not the one speculating about going to war with a NATO ally. I'm afraid that's your crowd, Richard.Richard_Tyndall said:
I assume she is one of the lunatics we have let out of the asylum.williamglenn said:0 -
Claiming we are sane by comparison? I am not sure anyone would believe usStark_Dawning said:
Actually you're quite right. Shall we issue a joint statement?Richard_Tyndall said:
One of yours is claiming its only the UK in the EU that is stopping Germany finishing what they started in 1939. There are lunatics on both sides.Stark_Dawning said:
She's not the one speculating about going to war with a NATO ally. I'm afraid that's your crowd, Richard.Richard_Tyndall said:
I assume she is one of the lunatics we have let out of the asylum.williamglenn said: 0 -
And we also provided a welcome boost to their shipbuilding industry shortly after the Armada thingy.Sunil_Prasannan said:Who liberated Spain from Napoleon during the Peninsula War?
The Spaniards should be eternally grateful to us!0 -
Sorry to disappoint, but if they did support anyone it'd be the defender. No way they'd support an aggressor, especially given the views of the inhabitants.calum said:
Who would NATO back??Sunil_Prasannan said:0 -
Seems we have an explanation for Fillon's movement in the polls....Russian voodoo polling...https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/02/french-polling-watchdog-warns-over-russian-news-agency-election-report
0 -
The vote's the end of the process, not the beginning. Influence occurs from the start of negotiating a change. How can we frame this change to our benefit? And the large countries have much more influence at those stages than during the actual vote.chestnut said:
Influence? 8% of the vote.FF43 said:
We lost influence last Wednesday. That's different from sovereignty, but arguably more important in reality. We gained notional sovereignty - we can theoretically say we won't do this or that, unlike when we were bound by collective decisions. But because we are no longer able to influence those collective decisions, which nevertheless affect us, we end up with less actual say over our own affairs. Counter-intuitive.williamglenn said:
We lost it last Wednesday.RobD said:The UK will be a vassal of the EU? I thought we never lost sovereignty?
Is there anything more minor than a minor shareholder?0 -
This only refers to one 'poll'?dixiedean said:Seems we have an explanation for Fillon's movement in the polls....Russian voodoo polling...https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/02/french-polling-watchdog-warns-over-russian-news-agency-election-report
0 -
I start to think more kindly of the pseudo scholarship I have recently been critiquing from the likes of Dorothy Murdock, Richard Carrier and Rene Salm.JosiasJessop said:
Pizzagate was, if anything, worse:ydoethur said:
That's rather a sinister one even by US standards. I mean, average kooks about aliens, Elvis Presley, the Mithraic cult and even 9/11 truthers are one thing. But threatening to shoot a man who lost his son in a school shooting, that's just surreal.JosiasJessop said:Off-topic:
Conspiracy theorists are sh*ts:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-39194035
https://arstechnica.co.uk/tech-policy/2017/03/pizzagate-dc-shooter-pleads-guilty-to-weapons-related-charges/
Lucky no-one was killed. And as in the nature of the screwed-up nature of conspiracy theorists, some people still pretend to believe (or more worryingly, really do believe) that the above case was a false-flag operation, and there really is a child abuse ring operating out of the pizza joint ...
They may be delusional and frequently unpleasant but at least they're not actually evil.0 -
The EU works on horse-trading. Members trade the things they don't care about for those that they do. A country with the weight of the UK can avoid most of the things they really hate and can win a good proportion of things they really want. Now it will be close to zero.chestnut said:
Influence? 8% of the QMV vote. 1/28th of the right to veto.FF43 said:
We lost influence last Wednesday. That's different from sovereignty, but arguably more important in reality. We gained notional sovereignty - we can theoretically say we won't do this or that, unlike when we were bound by collective decisions. But because we are no longer able to influence those collective decisions, which nevertheless affect us, we end up with less actual say over our own affairs. Counter-intuitive.williamglenn said:
We lost it last Wednesday.RobD said:The UK will be a vassal of the EU? I thought we never lost sovereignty?
Is there anything more minor than a minor shareholder?0 -
Michael Howard reminding everyone he is a swivel-eyed lunatic. And all because the EU has pointed out Gibraltar is a matter for the Spanish and the UK to deal with, and that as an EU member state Spain gets to say whether the Brexit deal will apply to Gibraltar.calum said:
0 -
Although we also damaged their cork industry quite badly:GeoffM said:
And we also provided a welcome boost to their shipbuilding industry shortly after the Armada thingy.Sunil_Prasannan said:Who liberated Spain from Napoleon during the Peninsula War?
The Spaniards should be eternally grateful to us!
https://vimeo.com/835303810 -
Hard to know what to do about it...JosiasJessop said:
Pizzagate was, if anything, worse:ydoethur said:
That's rather a sinister one even by US standards. I mean, average kooks about aliens, Elvis Presley, the Mithraic cult and even 9/11 truthers are one thing. But threatening to shoot a man who lost his son in a school shooting, that's just surreal.JosiasJessop said:Off-topic:
Conspiracy theorists are sh*ts:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-39194035
https://arstechnica.co.uk/tech-policy/2017/03/pizzagate-dc-shooter-pleads-guilty-to-weapons-related-charges/
Lucky no-one was killed. And as in the nature of the screwed-up nature of conspiracy theorists, some people still pretend to believe (or more worryingly, really do believe) that the above case was a false-flag operation, and there really is a child abuse ring operating out of the pizza joint ...
Must be so hard to have lost a child and then be attacked for making it up.
0 -
No two. May well be backed up by Russian money in the markets to give the impression of momentum.RobD said:
This only refers to one 'poll'?dixiedean said:Seems we have an explanation for Fillon's movement in the polls....Russian voodoo polling...https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/02/french-polling-watchdog-warns-over-russian-news-agency-election-report
0 -
I wasn't sure what movement you were referring to. Fillon looks static on the wikipedia list of polls.dixiedean said:
No two. May well be backed up by Russian money in the markets to give the impression of momentum.RobD said:
This only refers to one 'poll'?dixiedean said:Seems we have an explanation for Fillon's movement in the polls....Russian voodoo polling...https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/02/french-polling-watchdog-warns-over-russian-news-agency-election-report
0 -
Why should we listen to anything he says on the matter when he exhibits the same degree of ignorance about the workings of the EU as you do?williamglenn said:
Read the posts from FF43 at the end of last night's thread for an explanation of why this is the case.Gallowgate said:
Don't be so dramatic. I voted remain and am a massive supporter of the EU, but to suggest that we are now a 'vassal state' is ridiculous. The UK, or even England & Wales in the future will be fine outside of the EU.williamglenn said:
England is not the economic or political might in this continent, and we are now a supplicant to the EU indefinitely if we don't want to jump off a cliff edge.Gallowgate said:
How so? What meaningful difference will it make? Embarrassing, maybe, but England is the economic might on this Island.williamglenn said:
If it happens while the UK is under the A50 process or in transition, the UK will be a vassal of the EU and they will dictate the terms: in effect the rUK will have no choice but to stay in the single market.TheWhiteRabbit said:
... but Scotland is going to have two new relationships: one with the UK AND one with the EU.williamglenn said:
This is the wrong way round.chestnut said:I'm intrigued by the notion of how Scotland would hypothetically transition out of the UK given the way things are going with the UK/EU split.
In 2014 it was sold as referendum one day, independence 18 months later.
Contrast that to the relatively simple task of extricating the UK from the EU.
Creating a new state is relatively straightforward and has been done countless times before. Extricating a state, maintaining continuity, from the network of treaties that is the EU has never been done, and is an order of magnitude more complex.
Yes we'll be fine, but we won't be in control.0 -
Thinking of this daft row about us going to war over Gibraltar I am not sure that those who are outraged may represent the majority view.
Indeed Downing Street's states
'The Prime Minister will never enter into arrangements under which the people of Gibraltar would pass under the sovereignty of another state against their freely and democratically expressed wishes, nor will it ever enter into a process of sovereignty negotiations with which Gibraltar is not content'
Clear statement of support that is unambiguous and correct0 -
Because it is not a recognised poll. Russian News Agencies are reporting their own polls saying Fillon leads. It is a none-too-subtle way of influencing the election. The question of why Fillon was shortening has been raised a couple of times on here in the past few days. This may be an answer.RobD said:
I wasn't sure what movement you were referring to. Fillon looks static on the wikipedia list of polls.dixiedean said:
No two. May well be backed up by Russian money in the markets to give the impression of momentum.RobD said:
This only refers to one 'poll'?dixiedean said:Seems we have an explanation for Fillon's movement in the polls....Russian voodoo polling...https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/02/french-polling-watchdog-warns-over-russian-news-agency-election-report
0 -
Ohhh okay! Yeah, not sure how helpful that will be!dixiedean said:
Because it is not a recognised poll. Russian News Agencies are reporting their own polls saying Fillon leads. It is a none-too-subtle way of influencing the election.RobD said:
I wasn't sure what movement you were referring to. Fillon looks static on the wikipedia list of polls.dixiedean said:
No two. May well be backed up by Russian money in the markets to give the impression of momentum.RobD said:
This only refers to one 'poll'?dixiedean said:Seems we have an explanation for Fillon's movement in the polls....Russian voodoo polling...https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/02/french-polling-watchdog-warns-over-russian-news-agency-election-report
0 -
"It quoted Moscow-based Brand Analytics, an online audience research firm, as saying that its study based on an analysis of French social media put Fillon out in front."RobD said:
Ohhh okay! Yeah, not sure how helpful that will be!dixiedean said:
Because it is not a recognised poll. Russian News Agencies are reporting their own polls saying Fillon leads. It is a none-too-subtle way of influencing the election.RobD said:
I wasn't sure what movement you were referring to. Fillon looks static on the wikipedia list of polls.dixiedean said:
No two. May well be backed up by Russian money in the markets to give the impression of momentum.RobD said:
This only refers to one 'poll'?dixiedean said:Seems we have an explanation for Fillon's movement in the polls....Russian voodoo polling...https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/02/french-polling-watchdog-warns-over-russian-news-agency-election-report
Not even pretending to be a poll.0 -
I imagine this rather contrived row is playing pretty well for TM - she gets to be seen as standing up for Britain, taking a firm line etc...Big_G_NorthWales said:Thinking of this daft row about us going to war over Gibraltar I am not sure that those who are outraged may represent the majority view.
Indeed Downing Street's states
'The Prime Minister will never enter into arrangements under which the people of Gibraltar would pass under the sovereignty of another state against their freely and democratically expressed wishes, nor will it ever enter into a process of sovereignty negotiations with which Gibraltar is not content'
Clear statement of support that is unambiguous and correct0 -
Note that Howard hasn't been told to shut up!rkrkrk said:
I imagine this rather contrived row is playing pretty well for TM - she gets to be seen as standing up for Britain, taking a firm line etc...Big_G_NorthWales said:Thinking of this daft row about us going to war over Gibraltar I am not sure that those who are outraged may represent the majority view.
Indeed Downing Street's states
'The Prime Minister will never enter into arrangements under which the people of Gibraltar would pass under the sovereignty of another state against their freely and democratically expressed wishes, nor will it ever enter into a process of sovereignty negotiations with which Gibraltar is not content'
Clear statement of support that is unambiguous and correct0 -
I agree about that.chestnut said:
Given that we have voted Leave, whoever was doing the trading on our behalf clearly failed to convince the UK public that they had done a competent job in this respect.FF43 said:Members trade the things they don't care about for those that they do.
It's a lack of interest, I guess. People don't much like the EU and have even less interest in it, so they misunderstand what it was doing, leading to the various false assumptions behind Brexit. What we are seeing now is those assumptions unwinding.0 -
A lucky escape indeed. It was worth flouting election law to return David Cameron to Number 10.JosiasJessop said:Looking back, Ed Miliband seems like a giant of Labour politics. But only in comparison to his successor.
Watching this interview with Ed this morning, I realise what a lucky escape we had:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-394724460 -
The failure to keep UK in the EU is down to a complete failure by the likes of Junckers and others to listen to the demands for change to what they see as their precious project and legacy and the irony for Juncker's is that he was in charge when the UK resigned and that will be his legacy. David Cameron was right when he voted against him.FF43 said:
I agree about that.chestnut said:
Given that we have voted Leave, whoever was doing the trading on our behalf clearly failed to convince the UK public that they had done a competent job in this respect.FF43 said:Members trade the things they don't care about for those that they do.
It's a lack of interest, I guess. People don't much like the EU and have even less interest in it, so they misunderstand what it was doing, leading to the various false assumptions behind Brexit. What we are seeing now is those assumptions unwinding.
If they had moved to moderate free movement to free movement subject to confirmed employment I do not think we would have left0 -
If anything, Brexit is proceeding more smoothly than anticipated.FF43 said:
I agree about that.chestnut said:
Given that we have voted Leave, whoever was doing the trading on our behalf clearly failed to convince the UK public that they had done a competent job in this respect.FF43 said:Members trade the things they don't care about for those that they do.
It's a lack of interest, I guess. People don't much like the EU and have even less interest in it, so they misunderstand what it was doing, leading to the various false assumptions behind Brexit. What we are seeing now is those assumptions unwinding.
The economics have been stellar so far and the early negotiation soundings point to a constructive arrangement.
We have two years now to parallel plan for WTO if need be.0 -
With due respect, that is just wrong. You are confusing complex with complicated. Brexit has a level of complexity that is unprecedented... for example, the number of primary parties involved (at least 33), their different, sometimes conflicting, interests that will change over time makes Brexit highly complex... Scottish independence would involve two parties. Seperating, for example, HMRC into Scottish and rUK organisation will be complicated but perfectly doable given time and resources.chestnut said:
Brexit illustrates almost absolutely that Sindy is a task of gargantuan proportion and costs. It is a separation far more complex than Brexit.williamglenn said:
If it happens while the UK is under the A50 process or in transition, the UK will be a vassal of the EU and they will dictate the terms: in effect the rUK will have no choice but to stay in the single market.TheWhiteRabbit said:
... but Scotland is going to have two new relationships: one with the UK AND one with the EU.williamglenn said:
This is the wrong way round.chestnut said:I'm intrigued by the notion of how Scotland would hypothetically transition out of the UK given the way things are going with the UK/EU split.
In 2014 it was sold as referendum one day, independence 18 months later.
Contrast that to the relatively simple task of extricating the UK from the EU.
Creating a new state is relatively straightforward and has been done countless times before. Extricating a state, maintaining continuity, from the network of treaties that is the EU has never been done, and is an order of magnitude more complex.
It also proves the EU's thinking on the flow of orderly withdrawal, debt obligation, re-engagement and intruding into bilateral affairs (see Gibraltar).
God knows how little Nikki would explain this all away.0 -
I agree with your first paragraph. The worst thing (for them and us) is that so many apparatchiks within the EU are deaf. It's bad for them, as their project is not universally popular within the member states, and we might not be the last to leave. It's bad for us, as rather than address the complaints people have (some of which are even reasonable), they may choose to punish us instead, pour encourager les autres.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The failure to keep UK in the EU is down to a complete failure by the likes of Junckers and others to listen to the demands for change to what they see as their precious project and legacy and the irony for Juncker's is that he was in charge when the UK resigned and that will be his legacy. David Cameron was right when he voted against him.FF43 said:
I agree about that.chestnut said:
Given that we have voted Leave, whoever was doing the trading on our behalf clearly failed to convince the UK public that they had done a competent job in this respect.FF43 said:Members trade the things they don't care about for those that they do.
It's a lack of interest, I guess. People don't much like the EU and have even less interest in it, so they misunderstand what it was doing, leading to the various false assumptions behind Brexit. What we are seeing now is those assumptions unwinding.
If they had moved to moderate free movement to free movement subject to confirmed employment I do not think we would have left0 -
They do have to comply with the various requirements to act fairly and foster good relations. If there is any indication of punishment then they are laying themselves open to substantial damages at sometime in the futureJosiasJessop said:
I agree with your first paragraph. The worst thing (for them and us) is that so many apparatchiks within the EU are deaf. It's bad for them, as their project is not universally popular within the member states, and we might not be the last to leave. It's bad for us, as rather than address the complaints people have (some of which are even reasonable), they may choose to punish us instead, pour encourager les autres.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The failure to keep UK in the EU is down to a complete failure by the likes of Junckers and others to listen to the demands for change to what they see as their precious project and legacy and the irony for Juncker's is that he was in charge when the UK resigned and that will be his legacy. David Cameron was right when he voted against him.FF43 said:
I agree about that.chestnut said:
Given that we have voted Leave, whoever was doing the trading on our behalf clearly failed to convince the UK public that they had done a competent job in this respect.FF43 said:Members trade the things they don't care about for those that they do.
It's a lack of interest, I guess. People don't much like the EU and have even less interest in it, so they misunderstand what it was doing, leading to the various false assumptions behind Brexit. What we are seeing now is those assumptions unwinding.
If they had moved to moderate free movement to free movement subject to confirmed employment I do not think we would have left0 -
The Conservatives are not unique in that situation during that election.DecrepitJohnL said:
A lucky escape indeed. It was worth flouting election law to return David Cameron to Number 10.JosiasJessop said:Looking back, Ed Miliband seems like a giant of Labour politics. But only in comparison to his successor.
Watching this interview with Ed this morning, I realise what a lucky escape we had:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39472446
Do you really think that a small-majority Ed-led government, yet alone a minority one, would have been better that what we have now? If so, and putting your party preference to one side, on what basis?
If you are tempted to talk about the EU referendum, that was inevitable. And the later it as left, the more sure a leave victory would be (see my previous post below).
But we were spared.0 -
I am not that optimistic for a multitude of reasons. The regulations will give them loads of room for mischief if they choose, and which courts will decide on any damages?Big_G_NorthWales said:
They do have to comply with the various requirements to act fairly and foster good relations. If there is any indication of punishment then they are laying themselves open to substantial damages at sometime in the futureJosiasJessop said:
I agree with your first paragraph. The worst thing (for them and us) is that so many apparatchiks within the EU are deaf. It's bad for them, as their project is not universally popular within the member states, and we might not be the last to leave. It's bad for us, as rather than address the complaints people have (some of which are even reasonable), they may choose to punish us instead, pour encourager les autres.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The failure to keep UK in the EU is down to a complete failure by the likes of Junckers and others to listen to the demands for change to what they see as their precious project and legacy and the irony for Juncker's is that he was in charge when the UK resigned and that will be his legacy. David Cameron was right when he voted against him.FF43 said:
I agree about that.chestnut said:
Given that we have voted Leave, whoever was doing the trading on our behalf clearly failed to convince the UK public that they had done a competent job in this respect.FF43 said:Members trade the things they don't care about for those that they do.
It's a lack of interest, I guess. People don't much like the EU and have even less interest in it, so they misunderstand what it was doing, leading to the various false assumptions behind Brexit. What we are seeing now is those assumptions unwinding.
If they had moved to moderate free movement to free movement subject to confirmed employment I do not think we would have left
We really don't want to get into a MAD situation. That's why I still think a quick, short and sharp Brexit's the best option.0 -
I couldn't agree more but in the end if the settlement was deemed unfair I assume it would go before the ECJJosiasJessop said:
I am not that optimistic for a multitude of reasons. The regulations will give them loads of room for mischief if they choose, and which courts will decide on any damages?Big_G_NorthWales said:
They do have to comply with the various requirements to act fairly and foster good relations. If there is any indication of punishment then they are laying themselves open to substantial damages at sometime in the futureJosiasJessop said:
I agree with your first paragraph. The worst thing (for them and us) is that so many apparatchiks within the EU are deaf. It's bad for them, as their project is not universally popular within the member states, and we might not be the last to leave. It's bad for us, as rather than address the complaints people have (some of which are even reasonable), they may choose to punish us instead, pour encourager les autres.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The failure to keep UK in the EU is down to a complete failure by the likes of Junckers and others to listen to the demands for change to what they see as their precious project and legacy and the irony for Juncker's is that he was in charge when the UK resigned and that will be his legacy. David Cameron was right when he voted against him.FF43 said:
I agree about that.chestnut said:
Given that we have voted Leave, whoever was doing the trading on our behalf clearly failed to convince the UK public that they had done a competent job in this respect.FF43 said:Members trade the things they don't care about for those that they do.
It's a lack of interest, I guess. People don't much like the EU and have even less interest in it, so they misunderstand what it was doing, leading to the various false assumptions behind Brexit. What we are seeing now is those assumptions unwinding.
If they had moved to moderate free movement to free movement subject to confirmed employment I do not think we would have left
We really don't want to get into a MAD situation. That's why I still think a quick, short and sharp Brexit's the best option.0 -
Ignoring the result of the first oven removal and having another oven removal to get the answer you prefer eh?Torby_Fennel said:I baked and decorated my EU flag cake today. It was a bit of a struggle to keep it together because I took it out of the oven too soon and so it started to collapse slightly... that will be the UK bit trying to break away I guess. Anyway, I gave it a bit more time in the oven and it all came together in the end. Certainly a far better result for me than the referendum was. I'm about to tuck in now.
0 -
Personally I don't think it would make much difference. But I suppose there was only 2% in it, so who knows? People had all sorts of reasons for voting Leave. Opinion polls show they did believe those assumptions - that the EU needs us more than we need them (all those cars to sell!); that Brexit would allow us to do more trade with the rest of the world; that Brexit puts us in control. To the extent those assumptions are proving false and they now believe things are going to be worse after Brexit, they don't regret their decision. It's a rationalisation of a decision that probably wasn't that rational in the first place. And I don't mean that in a disparaging way. The EU didn't feel right to them. This is a betting site that appeals to people interested in outcomes, obviously. But there's a truth in feelings as well, which maybe people here don't really respect.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The failure to keep UK in the EU is down to a complete failure by the likes of Junckers and others to listen to the demands for change to what they see as their precious project and legacy and the irony for Juncker's is that he was in charge when the UK resigned and that will be his legacy. David Cameron was right when he voted against him.FF43 said:
I agree about that.chestnut said:
Given that we have voted Leave, whoever was doing the trading on our behalf clearly failed to convince the UK public that they had done a competent job in this respect.FF43 said:Members trade the things they don't care about for those that they do.
It's a lack of interest, I guess. People don't much like the EU and have even less interest in it, so they misunderstand what it was doing, leading to the various false assumptions behind Brexit. What we are seeing now is those assumptions unwinding.
If they had moved to moderate free movement to free movement subject to confirmed employment I do not think we would have left0 -
Stade win, I suffer regret at making 25% of what i ould have.0
-
I think it would have been better for sure.JosiasJessop said:
The Conservatives are not unique in that situation during that election.DecrepitJohnL said:
A lucky escape indeed. It was worth flouting election law to return David Cameron to Number 10.JosiasJessop said:Looking back, Ed Miliband seems like a giant of Labour politics. But only in comparison to his successor.
Watching this interview with Ed this morning, I realise what a lucky escape we had:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39472446
Do you really think that a small-majority Ed-led government, yet alone a minority one, would have been better that what we have now? If so, and putting your party preference to one side, on what basis?
If you are tempted to talk about the EU referendum, that was inevitable. And the later it as left, the more sure a leave victory would be (see my previous post below).
But we were spared.
An Ed led govt would be spending it's time working on issues like housing and better pay rather than having to renegotiate our entire relationship with our largest trading partner. Our universities would be mopping up the talent displaced by Trump, people would be talking about Europe as the leaders of the free world taking back over from America.
Cameron would have been axed and perhaps replaced by Theresa May. Too soon for Boris i suspect.
Not so sure the longer the wait the bigger the leave vote. I think Trump's election would have hurt leave...0 -
So, establishing, for example, the pension entitlements of 40,000 eurocrats would be more arduous than 6m existing and God knows how many former UK public sector workers?Rexel56 said:
With due respect, that is just wrong. You are confusing complex with complicated. Brexit has a level of complexity that is unprecedented... for example, the number of primary parties involved (at least 33), their different, sometimes conflicting, interests that will change over time makes Brexit highly complex... Scottish independence would involve two parties. Seperating, for example, HMRC into Scottish and rUK organisation will be complicated but perfectly doable given time and resources.chestnut said:
Brexit illustrates almost absolutely that Sindy is a task of gargantuan proportion and costs. It is a separation far more complex than Brexit.williamglenn said:
If it happens while the UK is under the A50 process or in transition, the UK will be a vassal of the EU and they will dictate the terms: in effect the rUK will have no choice but to stay in the single market.TheWhiteRabbit said:
... but Scotland is going to have two new relationships: one with the UK AND one with the EU.williamglenn said:
This is the wrong way round.chestnut said:I'm intrigued by the notion of how Scotland would hypothetically transition out of the UK given the way things are going with the UK/EU split.
In 2014 it was sold as referendum one day, independence 18 months later.
Contrast that to the relatively simple task of extricating the UK from the EU.
Creating a new state is relatively straightforward and has been done countless times before. Extricating a state, maintaining continuity, from the network of treaties that is the EU has never been done, and is an order of magnitude more complex.
It also proves the EU's thinking on the flow of orderly withdrawal, debt obligation, re-engagement and intruding into bilateral affairs (see Gibraltar).
God knows how little Nikki would explain this all away.
I would be surprised if it were easier with Sindy bearing in mind the sheer scale of the financial obligation, the differing funding capacity of the negotiating sides and the relative employment levels on both sides of the border if I am being honest.
That kind of complication would surface in cross border tax returns, employment records, national insurance contributions, personal debt reclaims etc.
0 -
Good post and I post on here as a remainer who was eurosceptic but hoped we could change it from within. Now leave has won I am fully behind our leaving the EU and probably a bit like Theresa May in so far as I now want to get on with it and get the best deal possible. However the hyperbole currently on display in the media and particularly Sky and BBC are not doing the Nation any favours. I would go as far as to say these news channels will see a big loss of interest in watching them if they continue creating their own fake news on a daily basis.FF43 said:
Personally I don't think it would make much difference. But I suppose there was only 2% in it, so who knows? People had all sorts of reasons for voting Leave. Opinion polls show they did believe those assumptions - that the EU needs us more than we need them (all those cars to sell!); that Brexit would allow us to do more trade with the rest of the world; that Brexit puts us in control. To the extent those assumptions are proving false and they now believe things are going to be worse after Brexit, they don't regret their decision. It's a rationalisation of a decision that probably wasn't that rational in the first place. And I don't mean that in a disparaging way. The EU didn't feel right to them. This is a betting site that appeals to people interested in outcomes, obviously. But there's a truth in feelings as well, which maybe people here don't really respect.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The failure to keep UK in the EU is down to a complete failure by the likes of Junckers and others to listen to the demands for change to what they see as their precious project and legacy and the irony for Juncker's is that he was in charge when the UK resigned and that will be his legacy. David Cameron was right when he voted against him.FF43 said:
I agree about that.chestnut said:
Given that we have voted Leave, whoever was doing the trading on our behalf clearly failed to convince the UK public that they had done a competent job in this respect.FF43 said:Members trade the things they don't care about for those that they do.
It's a lack of interest, I guess. People don't much like the EU and have even less interest in it, so they misunderstand what it was doing, leading to the various false assumptions behind Brexit. What we are seeing now is those assumptions unwinding.
If they had moved to moderate free movement to free movement subject to confirmed employment I do not think we would have left
In the end neither the extreme leavers or remainers will be satisfied but it is the Prime Minister's responsibilty to achieve a settlement that satisfies the majority of sensible non political voters - I believe she will do that0 -
Yep you are right - that's the real test.RobD said:
Note that Howard hasn't been told to shut up!rkrkrk said:
I imagine this rather contrived row is playing pretty well for TM - she gets to be seen as standing up for Britain, taking a firm line etc...Big_G_NorthWales said:Thinking of this daft row about us going to war over Gibraltar I am not sure that those who are outraged may represent the majority view.
Indeed Downing Street's states
'The Prime Minister will never enter into arrangements under which the people of Gibraltar would pass under the sovereignty of another state against their freely and democratically expressed wishes, nor will it ever enter into a process of sovereignty negotiations with which Gibraltar is not content'
Clear statement of support that is unambiguous and correct0 -
what do your savings get... 2%?Alistair said:Stade win, I suffer regret at making 25% of what i ould have.
0 -
Yet the EU would still be a festering sore on the UK's body politic. UKIP would be doing much better in the polls and hovering up the votes. And Labour's main problem in 2015: the incompetence of Ed and his team - as highlighted by the Ed Stone - would still be extant. Ed was very good at detecting issues: his solutions often (though not always) left a great deal to be desired.rkrkrk said:
I think it would have been better for sure.JosiasJessop said:
The Conservatives are not unique in that situation during that election.DecrepitJohnL said:
A lucky escape indeed. It was worth flouting election law to return David Cameron to Number 10.JosiasJessop said:Looking back, Ed Miliband seems like a giant of Labour politics. But only in comparison to his successor.
Watching this interview with Ed this morning, I realise what a lucky escape we had:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39472446
Do you really think that a small-majority Ed-led government, yet alone a minority one, would have been better that what we have now? If so, and putting your party preference to one side, on what basis?
If you are tempted to talk about the EU referendum, that was inevitable. And the later it as left, the more sure a leave victory would be (see my previous post below).
But we were spared.
An Ed led govt would be spending it's time working on issues like housing and better pay rather than having to renegotiate our entire relationship with our largest trading partner. Our universities would be mopping up the talent displaced by Trump, people would be talking about Europe as the leaders of the free world taking back over from America.
Cameron would have been axed and perhaps replaced by Theresa May. Too soon for Boris i suspect.
Not so sure the longer the wait the bigger the leave vote. I think Trump's election would have hurt leave...
He was not PM material, and he only shines in the presence of his predecessor and successor as Labour leader.
Much would also depend on whether Ed had a good majority, a small majority, or had been forced into some form of coalition.
Trump's election *may* have reduced leave at the moment, but the problems within the EU, and the problems people project onto it, are not being fixed now. They sure as heck would not be being fixed without a lost referendum.
As I've said all along, a referendum was inevitable.0 -
Quite so. Imagine a 5-10 year long Labour-SNP Government post GE2015, during which any vote on the EU was denied, and, perhaps even, other initiatives such as a European Army were enthusiastically pursued, as the eurozone federated, and issues in the UK like free movement continued to fester.JosiasJessop said:
The Conservatives are not unique in that situation during that election.DecrepitJohnL said:
A lucky escape indeed. It was worth flouting election law to return David Cameron to Number 10.JosiasJessop said:Looking back, Ed Miliband seems like a giant of Labour politics. But only in comparison to his successor.
Watching this interview with Ed this morning, I realise what a lucky escape we had:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39472446
Do you really think that a small-majority Ed-led government, yet alone a minority one, would have been better that what we have now? If so, and putting your party preference to one side, on what basis?
If you are tempted to talk about the EU referendum, that was inevitable. And the later it as left, the more sure a leave victory would be (see my previous post below).
But we were spared.
I can't see an Ed Miliband type Government do anything other than ignore such issues.
Eventually, a centre-right coalition with a pro-Brexit Tory leader would have taken power (it wouldn't have won otherwise as it'd have to scoop the votes from UKIP) but we'd be even more divided and, it's possible, that the break-up of the UK would have been assured due to a rise of English nationalism.0 -
50 Labour losses seems a bit on the low side, as does their share of the vote holding at 29% compared to 4 years ago.0
-
As the Brexit 'March' and continuing attempts to challenge Brexit showed, the real headbangers are those who want to frustrate or overturn It in spite of the will of the people.SouthamObserver said:
Michael Howard reminding everyone he is a swivel-eyed lunatic. And all because the EU has pointed out Gibraltar is a matter for the Spanish and the UK to deal with, and that as an EU member state Spain gets to say whether the Brexit deal will apply to Gibraltar.calum said:
0 -
There is a case to be made that Trump only became President because of the Leave victory, it was the Brexit vote which led the Trump campaign to focus so heavily on traditionally Democratic but white working class Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania each of which he won by a small margin. Without Trump winning those states Hillary would have narrowly won the Electoral College and the Presidencyrkrkrk said:
I think it would have been better for sure.JosiasJessop said:
The Conservatives are not unique in that situation during that election.DecrepitJohnL said:
A lucky escape indeed. It was worth flouting election law to return David Cameron to Number 10.JosiasJessop said:Looking back, Ed Miliband seems like a giant of Labour politics. But only in comparison to his successor.
Watching this interview with Ed this morning, I realise what a lucky escape we had:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39472446
Do you really think that a small-majority Ed-led government, yet alone a minority one, would have been better that what we have now? If so, and putting your party preference to one side, on what basis?
If you are tempted to talk about the EU referendum, that was inevitable. And the later it as left, the more sure a leave victory would be (see my previous post below).
But we were spared.
An Ed led govt would be spending it's time working on issues like housing and better pay rather than having to renegotiate our entire relationship with our largest trading partner. Our universities would be mopping up the talent displaced by Trump, people would be talking about Europe as the leaders of the free world taking back over from America.
Cameron would have been axed and perhaps replaced by Theresa May. Too soon for Boris i suspect.
Not so sure the longer the wait the bigger the leave vote. I think Trump's election would have hurt leave...0 -
And, God, they do themselves no favours by their continuing descent into infantility and name-calling. Michael Howard is an astute and talented mainstream politician, not a swivel-eyed lunatic. Cameron did in substance say that brexit raised the risk of WWIII, and denying it in the face of written and video evidence is like a very small child with chocolate all over its face denying it has been at the easter eggs. And so on. It is a wonder that one pram can furnish such an inexhaustible stream of toys.Mortimer said:
As the Brexit 'March' and continuing attempts to challenge Brexit showed, the real headbangers are those who want to frustrate or overturn It in spite of the will of the people.SouthamObserver said:
Michael Howard reminding everyone he is a swivel-eyed lunatic. And all because the EU has pointed out Gibraltar is a matter for the Spanish and the UK to deal with, and that as an EU member state Spain gets to say whether the Brexit deal will apply to Gibraltar.calum said:0 -
Yes, I'm not keen on half baked things.Luckyguy1983 said:
Ignoring the result of the first oven removal and having another oven removal to get the answer you prefer eh?
The first oven removal was more akin to trying to count the votes before close of poll though - or maybe it was just that my oven is a bit unreliable.
0 -
Congratulations to the Sky Blues and to the Dark Blues (in the one that mattered).0
-
Nice cakeTorby_Fennel said:
Yes, I'm not keen on half baked things.Luckyguy1983 said:
Ignoring the result of the first oven removal and having another oven removal to get the answer you prefer eh?
The first oven removal was more akin to trying to count the votes before close of poll though - or maybe it was just that my oven is a bit unreliable. 0 -
If UKIP do tank badly, that flatters all other parties. Plus your local Labour councillor probably isn't Corbyn. Plus Labour still has a decent ground operation. I can see them holding up okay in the circumstances (nowhere near where they need to be, but given the dire position).Andy_JS said:50 Labour losses seems a bit on the low side, as does their share of the vote holding at 29% compared to 4 years ago.
Their real test is mayoral. West Mids would be a big coup for Blues.0 -
Except Labour's GE2015 manifesto was a confused muddle, cobbled together at the last minute, heavy on economic fantasy, and proposed by a team that lacked credibility.rkrkrk said:
I think it would have been better for sure.JosiasJessop said:
The Conservatives are not unique in that situation during that election.DecrepitJohnL said:
A lucky escape indeed. It was worth flouting election law to return David Cameron to Number 10.JosiasJessop said:Looking back, Ed Miliband seems like a giant of Labour politics. But only in comparison to his successor.
Watching this interview with Ed this morning, I realise what a lucky escape we had:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39472446
Do you really think that a small-majority Ed-led government, yet alone a minority one, would have been better that what we have now? If so, and putting your party preference to one side, on what basis?
If you are tempted to talk about the EU referendum, that was inevitable. And the later it as left, the more sure a leave victory would be (see my previous post below).
But we were spared.
An Ed led govt would be spending it's time working on issues like housing and better pay rather than having to renegotiate our entire relationship with our largest trading partner. Our universities would be mopping up the talent displaced by Trump, people would be talking about Europe as the leaders of the free world taking back over from America.
Cameron would have been axed and perhaps replaced by Theresa May. Too soon for Boris i suspect.
Not so sure the longer the wait the bigger the leave vote. I think Trump's election would have hurt leave...
Voters sniffed it out.0 -
I've done a Labour defence list for the local elections and it would only take a small swing for the party to lose more than 50 seats. I take your point about UKIP though.SirNorfolkPassmore said:
If UKIP do tank badly, that flatters all other parties. Plus your local Labour councillor probably isn't Corbyn. Plus Labour still has a decent ground operation. I can see them holding up okay in the circumstances (nowhere near where they need to be, but given the dire position).Andy_JS said:50 Labour losses seems a bit on the low side, as does their share of the vote holding at 29% compared to 4 years ago.
Their real test is mayoral. West Mids would be a big coup for Blues.0 -
Thanks! It was just a fun and productive way to vent a few anti-Brexit feelings.RobD said:
Nice cake
However, regardless of the politics of my cake, it's always the taste that matters. Cinnamon and grape, by the way. I'm happy with it.
0 -
-
There are clearly some Remainers on here who are so diehard in the very unlikely event that Spain invaded Gibraltar and the UK sent a taskforce to defend it, they would be waving the Spanish flag with gusto and hoping the taskforce was beaten so we could crawl back to the EU with our tails between our legs!Ishmael_Z said:
And, God, they do themselves no favours by their continuing descent into infantility and name-calling. Michael Howard is an astute and talented mainstream politician, not a swivel-eyed lunatic. Cameron did in substance say that brexit raised the risk of WWIII, and denying it in the face of written and video evidence is like a very small child with chocolate all over its face denying it has been at the easter eggs. And so on. It is a wonder that one pram can furnish such an inexhaustible stream of toys.Mortimer said:
As the Brexit 'March' and continuing attempts to challenge Brexit showed, the real headbangers are those who want to frustrate or overturn It in spite of the will of the people.SouthamObserver said:
Michael Howard reminding everyone he is a swivel-eyed lunatic. And all because the EU has pointed out Gibraltar is a matter for the Spanish and the UK to deal with, and that as an EU member state Spain gets to say whether the Brexit deal will apply to Gibraltar.calum said:
0 -
Hope you enjoyed watching it crumble in your hands while you were consuming it...Torby_Fennel said:
Thanks! It was just a fun and productive way to vent a few anti-Brexit feelings.RobD said:
Nice cake
However, regardless of the politics of my cake, it's always the taste that matters. Cinnamon and grape, by the way. I'm happy with it.
0 -
It's about winning the peace now, that's what actually worries Banks, and all those who pretend only one option of Brexits is acceptable.isam said:0 -
Correct. And some have the audacity to call Brexiteers loons.HYUFD said:
There are clearly some Remainers on here who are so diehard in the very unlikely event that Spain invaded Gibraltar and the UK sent a taskforce to defend it, they would be waving the Spanish flag with gusto and hoping the taskforce was beaten so we could crawl back to the EU with our tails between our legs!Ishmael_Z said:
And, God, they do themselves no favours by their continuing descent into infantility and name-calling. Michael Howard is an astute and talented mainstream politician, not a swivel-eyed lunatic. Cameron did in substance say that brexit raised the risk of WWIII, and denying it in the face of written and video evidence is like a very small child with chocolate all over its face denying it has been at the easter eggs. And so on. It is a wonder that one pram can furnish such an inexhaustible stream of toys.Mortimer said:
As the Brexit 'March' and continuing attempts to challenge Brexit showed, the real headbangers are those who want to frustrate or overturn It in spite of the will of the people.SouthamObserver said:
Michael Howard reminding everyone he is a swivel-eyed lunatic. And all because the EU has pointed out Gibraltar is a matter for the Spanish and the UK to deal with, and that as an EU member state Spain gets to say whether the Brexit deal will apply to Gibraltar.calum said:0 -
RobD said:
Hope you enjoyed watching it crumble in your hands while you were consuming it... No crumbling at all. It seems very stable now that I've removed that difficult first slice.
0 -
I can't really see the substantive issue with what Howard said. If British territory is invaded, of course we would defend it - it's one of the few justified reasons there is for attacking another country.0
-
The RN couldn't even get close to crippling a big town in Spain.HYUFD said:
In the unlikely event of a Spanish invasion of Gibraltar that is a possible scenariomalcolmg said:UK gets ever more dire. Telegraph now speculating on who will win the war
Britain's Navy is 'far weaker' than it was during the Falklands but could still 'cripple' Spain
They'd run out of shells and missiles in a week. They looked great in the Falklands because the territory and the enemy was so sparse.
I'm not sure we'd want to Nuke Spain if they stole Gibraltar, but that would certainly be our only plausible military option. Diplomacy otherwise - deploy the Boris!0 -
I admit i am feeling the best kind of regret making a more than 100%+ return but it could have been 400% damnit.TheWhiteRabbit said:
what do your savings get... 2%?Alistair said:Stade win, I suffer regret at making 25% of what i ould have.
0 -
Andrew Neil should have asked Howard if he was in favour of a preemptive strike on Madrid?Luckyguy1983 said:I can't really see the substantive issue with what Howard said. If British territory is invaded, of course we would defend it - it's one of the few justified reasons there is for attacking another country.
0 -
HYUFD said:
There are clearly some Remainers on here who are so diehard in the very unlikely event that Argentina invaded theIshmael_Z said:
And, God, they do themselves no favours by their continuing descent into infantility and name-calling. Michael Howard is an astute and talented mainstream politician, not a swivel-eyed lunatic. Cameron did in substance say that brexit raised the risk of WWIII, and denying it in the face of written and video evidence is like a very small child with chocolate all over its face denying it has been at the easter eggs. And so on. It is a wonder that one pram can furnish such an inexhaustible stream of toys.Mortimer said:
As the Brexit 'March' and continuing attempts to challenge Brexit showed, the real headbangers are those who want to frustrate or overturn It in spite of the will of the people.SouthamObserver said:
Michael Howard reminding everyone he is a swivel-eyed lunatic. And all because the EU has pointed out Gibraltar is a matter for the Spanish and the UK to deal with, and that as an EU member state Spain gets to say whether the Brexit deal will apply to Gibraltar.calum said:MalvinasFalklands and the UK sent a taskforce to defend it, they would be waving the Argentine flag with gusto and hoping the taskforce was beaten so we could crawl back to the EU with our tails between our legs! 0 -
Senior politicians shouldn't go around sabre rattling about twisted hypotheticals like that. It's just Putinesque propaganda.Luckyguy1983 said:I can't really see the substantive issue with what Howard said. If British territory is invaded, of course we would defend it - it's one of the few justified reasons there is for attacking another country.
0 -
Public panic over Brexit reaches new heights:
https://twitter.com/PollingDigest/status/8486156665340231680
This discussion has been closed.