politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Marine Le Pen goes into the final 2 days behind in every Frenc
Comments
-
The systematic adjusting down of the LibDem voters in the raw data is concerning and looks hard to justify.david_herdson said:Just going through the YouGov figures from yesterday and was struck by this discrepancy:
Thinking about the General Election expected on 8th June, will you definitely vote for the party you mentioned earlier, or might you change your mind?
Definitely vote: Con 71 Lab 59 LD 38
Probably vote, v unlikely to change: Con 21 Lab 29 LD 35
Possibly vote, chance of change: Con 7 Lab 15 LD 20
Probably change: Con 0 Lab 0 LD 2
(rest are DKs)
What's relevant here is that the uncertainty in voting intention doesn't cross over much into an uncertainty to vote (indeed, LD voters are more certain to vote than Lab ones, despite being much less sure about who they'll vote *for*).
This might be a classic example of a poll being a snapshot rather than a prediction. Were it a prediction, you'd want to redistribute a sizable chunk of the Lib Dem vote and a smaller amount of the Lab one.
On the other hand, once again, the Lib Dems were oversampled. rcs1000 pointed out pre-2015 how the undersampling of the LDs then was a good pointer to false recall and an exaggeration of their vote share. The reverse is probably happening now. (As a rule, all parties are overrepresented as against non-voters, probably because voters tend to be more likely to engage; the issue here is that the Lib Dems are routinely *disproportionately* overrepresented).
The data on likelihood of switching generally identifies that the LibDem vote is softer than the other parties'. Each election there is significant churn in the LibDem vote; in the past they have made up for this by attracting a disproportionately high number of the switchers from the other parties (these percentages may be smaller but the base is of course larger). Whether this happens this time is another matter.0 -
Because Smithson won't publish it, it goes against his message.stodge said:
Why don't you write one and send it to OGH ?CarlottaVance said:I expect a thread on this any moment now:
In hindsight, do you think Britain was right or wrong to vote to leave the European Union?
RIGHT: 46 (+3)
WRONG: 43 (-2)0 -
Afternoon all
Well, I like Nespresso - I bought the machine as a present to myself and while I don't mainline caffeine like some of the writers on here, I do enjoy a civilised cup. I see myself as a George Clooney-type though obviously without the good looks, the wealth, the much younger wife and the lakefront pad in Italy.
as for Nespresso, their customer service is exemplary and their boutiques in Regent Street and South Kensington are delightful.
Yes, that makes me a trendy metropolitan lefty liberal member of the elite (apparently) even though I'm in the Labour stronghold of East Ham.
No sign as yet of any electioneering here - do the Conservatives sense an Enfield Southgate-style upset - I see the book now "Were You Still Up for Timms?" - it'll sell, not well I expect but enough to keep me in Nespresso capsules (or pods or whatever).0 -
You talk as if we don't know the economic risks to leaving the EU.Scott_P said:
The Leavers already cut off our nose to spite our face.Casino_Royale said:There is a certain type of Remainer who would gladly cut off their own nose to spite their own face, if it also spites the faces of others they despise as well, because they feel no sense of obligation to respect a result they detest and believe was achieved in bad faith.
What they want is absolute penance from the Leavers, a grovelling apology and for the result to be overturned. At any price.
They won't get it.
What they want is absolute adulation from the Remainers, a grovelling thankyou and for the result to be deemed a success. At any price.
They won't get it.
We do. It's just we think they were exaggerated, and they are manageable, given the political prize.
What we don't understand (well, I understand emotively) is why you're egging them on and welcoming them.0 -
It is quite hard to see how disputes across different legal jurisdictions, between a supranational body and a sovereign state can possibly be decided by settled law. Something the EU negotiators seem to be trying to obscure with their resort to legalese ahead of negotiations.Richard_Nabavi said:Incidentally, the question of which Court might have jurisdiction over any dispute over liabilities is rather delicious. Once we've left, we're no longer subject to the European Court of Justice because the EU treaties would no longer apply to us. Normally, disputes over treaties are referred to the International Court of Justice at the Hague. Unfortunately (or fortunately) the European Union is not a member of the United Nations so it has no standing at the International Court of Justice. No problem, you might think; the 27 EU countries could bring the case against us.
Except that: the Lisbon Treaty states that any legal action by member states regarding the EU treaties can only be brought in the ECJ.
Good, isn't it?
A shame they can't be publicly quizzed on this by a well briefed Andrew Neil.0 -
No, I have more than enough on in Wakefield and Hemsworth.Pulpstar said:
Hmm I took the 1-10 on Rotheram but not Burnham for a reason.david_herdson said:
Been working your morley magic in Manchester Mr Herdson ?0 -
LOLSeanT said:At least you, unlike Scott P, accepts that the EU is behaving like a bunch of boorish hoons.
They are behaving inthe best interests of their members, after the boorish hoons like you on this side of the Channel told them to get stuffed
As we always said they would, even at the height of the "BMW will not let Angela Merkel be nasty to us" bullshit that you bought into0 -
Very useful, thanks. Also answers Mr Palmer's Q earlier about the mayorals.RobD said:
Here's the full list.IanB2 said:
Then you are right, that is ridiculous. Are they giving their staff a lie in because of late working on polling day?RobD said:
An English council....IanB2 said:
Counting STV is fascinating but not particularly fast.RobD said:
Some councils aren't expected to declare until 8PM on Friday. Utterly ridiculous!IanB2 said:
There's a dawn to lunchtime BBC special!DavidL said:Unusually quiet at my polling station this morning. No tellers for anyone which is a bit unusual. It is a slightly weird STV system up here. I voted 1, 2, 3 for the Tories, Lib Dems and Labour. The 2 SNP candidates I didn't bother differentiating between. Doubt it will make any difference as we already have an SNP and Tory Councillor from the ward so I don't see any of the other Unionist parties getting a look in.
Really frustrating that these results are going to dribble out tomorrow with minimal coverage. They look like they could be genuinely interesting, especially in Scotland and Wales.
http://election.pressassociation.com/Declaration_times/all_2017_by_time.php
For the counties I imagine these are projected finish times, so the early wards will be declared an hour or two earlier.0 -
Yes. These are set out in the WTO schedules.RepublicanTory said:
If we move to WTO terms, can tariffs be applied to all goods and what is the rate?Casino_Royale said:
And yet they can be as brutal as they like but the worst that can happen is that we fall to trading with the EU solely on WTO terms.williamglenn said:
Yes, and they have every reason to play out their strong hand fully.Pulpstar said:This is worse than a divorce, in a divorce there is a judge to decide some semblance of fairness (Supposedly).
I think the EU realises the strength of it's hand if it keeps a united front and is acting accordingly, I don't think the final settlement will be remotely "fair".
If we were a small country like Greece or Slovakia, they might want to make things easier for us so we wouldn't slip into Russia's sphere of influence, but the UK has nowhere else to go geopolitically, and is too big to treat as just a minor event. Their interests dictate that they need to be absolutely brutal.0 -
I think you'll find Mike is open minded enough to publish an article that goes against "his message" as you put it as long as it is factually accurate, not a party political rant and offers a bit of sage betting advice and doesn't contravene the laws of libel and slander under which we all operate.ThreeQuidder said:
Because Smithson won't publish it, it goes against his message.stodge said:
Why don't you write one and send it to OGH ?CarlottaVance said:I expect a thread on this any moment now:
In hindsight, do you think Britain was right or wrong to vote to leave the European Union?
RIGHT: 46 (+3)
WRONG: 43 (-2)
The point is it's his site - there are plenty of forums (echo chambers) for people who want to be only with people with whom they agree.
-1 -
You don't have to use the official Nespresso capsules - you can find other cheaper marks that work in their machines. They offer a good cross between the convenience of an instant coffee, and the taste of a proper cafetiere coffee. I use it all the time.FrancisUrquhart said:
Per drink they are also pretty damn expensive.peter_from_putney said:
Funny you should say that ..... I and Her Indoors called in at at our local Currys last Christmas with a view to purchasing said Nespresso until we were persuaded out of doing so by one of their own staff, who described it as one of the greatest dust gatherers ever devised by man!Carolus_Rex said:
They can keep the Nespresso machine. Useless bloody things.SeanT said:This is really quite unbelievable stuff from the EU. No way will TMay be able to sell this.
It was presumed EU assets would be divided between Britain and the rEU, for the jolly good reason that we have paid billions towards many of them, and if we are expected to cough up for spending commitments, we jolly well get our share of these assets we bought.
But no.
"It had been hoped by some in the UK that Britain could offset its liabilities by reference to its share of EU buildings, investments and even its generous wine cellar, but it is understood that it was the EU member states who decided to stand firm on the issue.
“The EU assets belong to the union and the EU member states do not have any rights to those assets,” an EU official said. “There is no shareholding in the European Union. All of the union’s assets belong to the union and that includes buildings, other assets tangible and intangible, financial, drinkable and non-drinkable.”"
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/03/brexit-talks-will-not-be-quick-or-painless-says-eu-chief-negotiator
The EU constantly tells us that Brexit is a divorce, so it will be messy and painful. There is no other way. Fair enough. But in what kind of divorce do the house, the car, the air miles and the Nespresso machine all belong to "the wedding", and therefore they are, funnily enough, all kept by one party to the divorce, and the other party must fuck off with nothing.
Fuck the EU.0 -
WTO terms vary by product category. While some folk are very partial in the way they quote tariffs (on average, they're around 4.5%), in practice they'd be pretty painful (some agricultural tariffs are punitive).RepublicanTory said:
If we move to WTO terms, can tariffs be applied to all goods and what is the rate?Casino_Royale said:
And yet they can be as brutal as they like but the worst that can happen is that we fall to trading with the EU solely on WTO terms.williamglenn said:
Yes, and they have every reason to play out their strong hand fully.Pulpstar said:This is worse than a divorce, in a divorce there is a judge to decide some semblance of fairness (Supposedly).
I think the EU realises the strength of it's hand if it keeps a united front and is acting accordingly, I don't think the final settlement will be remotely "fair".
If we were a small country like Greece or Slovakia, they might want to make things easier for us so we wouldn't slip into Russia's sphere of influence, but the UK has nowhere else to go geopolitically, and is too big to treat as just a minor event. Their interests dictate that they need to be absolutely brutal.0 -
I don't think anyone has a problem with that, it's what comes on the point of exit.Richard_Nabavi said:
We're paying our dues for the 2 years. There's no problem at all.
But all these demands for things like farm subsidies past exit? Nope, the budget we've committed to ends in 2020. Even pensions are supposed to be covered by the current EU budget.
Since leaving the EU automatically withdraws us from the European investment Bank, we'll also be wanting our 16% share of that back also (about 40 billion).
0 -
QT tonight is all leadership material, past, present or postulated - David Davis, Leanne Wood, Rebecca Long-Bailey and Professor Nuttall.0
-
The ECB is qe'ing €80 billion a month, ten years after the crash. Sure sign of strength.0
-
Doesn't OGH publish articles from supporters of different Parties?ThreeQuidder said:
Because Smithson won't publish it, it goes against his message.stodge said:
Why don't you write one and send it to OGH ?CarlottaVance said:I expect a thread on this any moment now:
In hindsight, do you think Britain was right or wrong to vote to leave the European Union?
RIGHT: 46 (+3)
WRONG: 43 (-2)0 -
I am neither welcoming them, nor egging them on.Casino_Royale said:You talk as if we don't know the economic risks to leaving the EU.
We do. It's just we think they were exaggerated, and they are manageable, given the political prize.
What we don't understand (well, I understand emotively) is why you're egging them on and welcoming them.
And the political prize is worthless, and the costs greater than anyone dare enunciate
We were always Sovereign, and we gained politically from pooling and sharing.
And we threw it away on the word of shysters and conmen0 -
There are liberals in every partylogical_song said:
Doesn't OGH publish articles from supporters of different Parties?ThreeQuidder said:
Because Smithson won't publish it, it goes against his message.stodge said:
Why don't you write one and send it to OGH ?CarlottaVance said:I expect a thread on this any moment now:
In hindsight, do you think Britain was right or wrong to vote to leave the European Union?
RIGHT: 46 (+3)
WRONG: 43 (-2) 0 -
Yes. The EU is very nervous. It's fraying. Not just with the UK leaving, but the Greeks are decidedly unhappy, and there is talk of chastening Poland and Hungary as well.chestnut said:
It is likely to exacerbate internal friction as well.rcs1000 said:
That's absolutely right. Getting no money and no deal is at least as bad for the EU as it is for us.Casino_Royale said:
No deal means they get no divorce money, no ongoing net contributions, reduced crime and military/ security cooperation, and Ireland is screwed economically.Pulpstar said:This is worse than a divorce, in a divorce there is a judge to decide some semblance of fairness (Supposedly).
I think the EU realises the strength of it's hand if it keeps a united front and is acting accordingly, I don't think the final settlement will be remotely "fair".
They might also end up with a competitor on its doorstep that undercuts it (we know the EU is worried about this because they put dumping clauses in the negotiating guidelines) that looks sympathetically on other states that might seek to leave in future, like Denmark, EIRE and Sweden, rather than acting as a bulwark. And it's global reputation may also be damaged.
That doesn't mean it won't happen, but the EU will have significant troubles of its own if it fails to agree.
They will start to blame each other for the loss of money and the loss of trade.
As far as I can tell the standard responses are: (1) more Europe (2) slap those who fall out of line. Both of which are backstopped by German economic might.
This might not end well. And that is not good.0 -
That's generous. I'd say they were all leadership candidates, past, present or postulated.IanB2 said:QT tonight is all leadership material, past, present or postulated - David Davis, Leanne Wood, Rebecca Long-Bailey and Professor Nuttall.
I wouldn't rate any of them as leadership material.0 -
Looking forward to hearing of the good Professor's nobel-winning work on cosmic background radiation. Not sure about the others.IanB2 said:QT tonight is all leadership material, past, present or postulated - David Davis, Leanne Wood, Rebecca Long-Bailey and Professor Nuttall.
0 -
I think I have some paint to watch drying instead...IanB2 said:QT tonight is all leadership material, past, present or postulated - David Davis, Leanne Wood, Rebecca Long-Bailey and Professor Nuttall.
0 -
I've got a similar model - highly recommend the ones that do cappuccino automatically....Sandpit said:
When Mrs Sandpit and I got married a couple of years back, we pooled all the monetary gifts we received and treated ourselves to a proper coffee machine - Beans go in the top, coffee comes out of the bottom. A fantastic thing it is too, especially given that we both work from home a lot. Personal Starbucks!Beverley_C said:
I have some friends who have them. The machines tend to get used when they have visitors.FrancisUrquhart said:
Per drink they are also pretty damn expensive.peter_from_putney said:
Funny you should say that ..... I and Her Indoors called in at at our local Currys last Christmas with a view to purchasing said Nespresso until we were persuaded out of doing so by one of their own staff, who described it as one of the greatest dust gatherers ever devised by man!Carolus_Rex said:
They can keep the Nespresso machine. Useless bloody things.SeanT said:This is really quite unbelievable stuff from the EU. No way will TMay be able to sell this.
It was presumed EU assets would be divided between Britain and the rEU, for the jolly good reason that we have paid billions towards many of them, and if we are expected to cough up for spending commitments, we jolly well get our share of these assets we bought.
But no.
"It had been hoped by some in the UK that Britain could offset its liabilities by reference to its share of EU buildings, investments and even its generous wine cellar, but it is understood that it was the EU member states who decided to stand firm on the issue.
“The EU assets belong to the union and the EU member states do not have any rights to those assets,” an EU official said. “There is no shareholding in the European Union. All of the union’s assets belong to the union and that includes buildings, other assets tangible and intangible, financial, drinkable and non-drinkable.”"
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/03/brexit-talks-will-not-be-quick-or-painless-says-eu-chief-negotiator
The EU constantly tells us that Brexit is a divorce, so it will be messy and painful. There is no other way. Fair enough. But in what kind of divorce do the house, the car, the air miles and the Nespresso machine all belong to "the wedding", and therefore they are, funnily enough, all kept by one party to the divorce, and the other party must fuck off with nothing.
Fuck the EU.
For myself, i use a cafetiere which gives me a lot of randomness in my coffee. Most cups are good but occasionally you get one that is spectacular and a lovely surprise
https://espresso.com/products/delonghi-primadonna-s-de-luxe-ecam-26-455-m0 -
Does any one have a link?Casino_Royale said:
Yes. These are set out in the WTO schedules.RepublicanTory said:
If we move to WTO terms, can tariffs be applied to all goods and what is the rate?Casino_Royale said:
And yet they can be as brutal as they like but the worst that can happen is that we fall to trading with the EU solely on WTO terms.williamglenn said:
Yes, and they have every reason to play out their strong hand fully.Pulpstar said:This is worse than a divorce, in a divorce there is a judge to decide some semblance of fairness (Supposedly).
I think the EU realises the strength of it's hand if it keeps a united front and is acting accordingly, I don't think the final settlement will be remotely "fair".
If we were a small country like Greece or Slovakia, they might want to make things easier for us so we wouldn't slip into Russia's sphere of influence, but the UK has nowhere else to go geopolitically, and is too big to treat as just a minor event. Their interests dictate that they need to be absolutely brutal.
Playing devils advocate for a second-IF the exit bill is 100m maybe we just levy tariffs on EU imports until the 100m is paid off.0 -
There are no no-go areas in Britain for Corbyn's 21st century socialist surge.Pulpstar said:0 -
Someone was asking for this the other day I think
@daily_politics: The Queen's herald announced the summons of a new Parliament. Here's @Afneil with the Rothesay Herald of Arms, Sir Crispin Agnew of Lochnaw pic.twitter.com/tD9SdsOhT7
https://twitter.com/daily_politics/status/8601027012117626930 -
-
You realise we pay the tariffs, right?RepublicanTory said:Playing devils advocate for a second-IF the exit bill is 100m maybe we just levy tariffs on EU imports until the 100m is paid off.
0 -
Thank youJohn_M said:
WTO terms vary by product category. While some folk are very partial in the way they quote tariffs (on average, they're around 4.5%), in practice they'd be pretty painful (some agricultural tariffs are punitive).RepublicanTory said:
If we move to WTO terms, can tariffs be applied to all goods and what is the rate?Casino_Royale said:
And yet they can be as brutal as they like but the worst that can happen is that we fall to trading with the EU solely on WTO terms.williamglenn said:
Yes, and they have every reason to play out their strong hand fully.Pulpstar said:This is worse than a divorce, in a divorce there is a judge to decide some semblance of fairness (Supposedly).
I think the EU realises the strength of it's hand if it keeps a united front and is acting accordingly, I don't think the final settlement will be remotely "fair".
If we were a small country like Greece or Slovakia, they might want to make things easier for us so we wouldn't slip into Russia's sphere of influence, but the UK has nowhere else to go geopolitically, and is too big to treat as just a minor event. Their interests dictate that they need to be absolutely brutal.
You are quite correct about agricultural tariffs ( which we could remove on imports from outside the EU once we leave)
My Kiwi cousins are watching this very closely0 -
Don't be silly. Mike has published plenty of articles he's disagreed with, including a few from me.ThreeQuidder said:
Because Smithson won't publish it, it goes against his message.stodge said:
Why don't you write one and send it to OGH ?CarlottaVance said:I expect a thread on this any moment now:
In hindsight, do you think Britain was right or wrong to vote to leave the European Union?
RIGHT: 46 (+3)
WRONG: 43 (-2)
When he disagrees, you can expect a well-argued reply from him early in the thread.
I've never had a piece rejected and only once had a single change required - and that was for legal reasons over a comment I made about the phone hacking police investigation.
If you make a good, reasoned case, I have little doubt that it'd be published.0 -
There were many remainers that argued precisely that the EU would be vindictive in negotiations, to stop the risk of contagion. While there were many leavers arguing that BMW and Audi were going to tell Merkel the line to take, and that pure economic interest would mean they act responsibly.SeanT said:
At least you, unlike Scott P, accepts that the EU is behaving like a bunch of boorish hoons.Stark_Dawning said:
Yes, this is starting to turn into the nightmare scenario many of us dreaded - the EU acting like petulant b*stards while we're totally exposed and helpless. Perhaps the slow realization of this explains Theresa's erratic performance yesterday. Fear does that.Pulpstar said:This is worse than a divorce, in a divorce there is a judge to decide some semblance of fairness (Supposedly).
I think the EU realises the strength of it's hand if it keeps a united front and is acting accordingly, I don't think the final settlement will be remotely "fair".
I still think there will be a flawed 11th hour deal haggled out at 5am on the night of the deadline, just like there has been for every crisis the EU has faced ever. The EU response to May's speech yesterday has been to dismiss it as electioneering - once the heat of the election is over we may start to see things return to normal a bit.0 -
Prosaically put - and the real problem with the Remain tactics. It suggested that the overal situation was that we are too wee, too poor and too remote to succeed on our own. Despite saving Europe from itself countless times in the past 500 years.SeanT said:
If the costs of leaving the EU are actually "greater than anyone dare enunciate, such that leaving is impossibly painful and expensive (as you constantly say), then we aren't in any meaningful sense sovereign, at all. We are in jail.Scott_P said:
I am neither welcoming them, nor egging them on.Casino_Royale said:You talk as if we don't know the economic risks to leaving the EU.
We do. It's just we think they were exaggerated, and they are manageable, given the political prize.
What we don't understand (well, I understand emotively) is why you're egging them on and welcoming them.
And the political prize is worthless, and the costs greater than anyone dare enunciate
We were always Sovereign, and we gained politically from pooling and sharing.
And we threw it away on the word of shysters and conmen
Sure we theoretically have a key to the cell door, but beyond the door is a minefield, patrolled by starving wolves. We are not free, if you are right, and we certainly are not sovereign.0 -
You are free to saw your own leg offSeanT said:If the costs of leaving the EU are actually "greater than anyone dare enunciate, such that leaving is impossibly painful and expensive (as you constantly say), then we aren't in any meaningful sense sovereign, at all. We are in jail.
Sure we theoretically have a key to the cell door, but beyond the door is a minefield, patrolled by starving wolves. We are not free, if you are right, and we certainly are not sovereign.
It would be impossibly painful, expensive and would cause lots of inconvenience in the future.
But nobody denies you are free to do it.
What I have issue with are the folk (like you) who want to do it, believed it was a good idea, trusted the shysters who said it offer untold benefits, are still in denial about the pain and costs but determined to lash out that those of us who cautioned against it.0 -
Yes, you disagree with the result. That much is clear.Scott_P said:
I am neither welcoming them, nor egging them on.Casino_Royale said:You talk as if we don't know the economic risks to leaving the EU.
We do. It's just we think they were exaggerated, and they are manageable, given the political prize.
What we don't understand (well, I understand emotively) is why you're egging them on and welcoming them.
And the political prize is worthless, and the costs greater than anyone dare enunciate
We were always Sovereign, and we gained politically from pooling and sharing.
And we threw it away on the word of shysters and conmen
But, you lost, and you show no signs of ever being able to come to terms with that.
Personally, I think life's too short to be that bitter. But, hey-ho, your choice.0 -
PB, 27th April:
"We have cross-over in YouGov’s BREXIT tracker: More now think it was wrong than right."
It would appear that we have now had double-crossover: Right 46%, Wrong 43%
Looking forward with anticipation to another thread devoted to the subject.
In non-Brexit related news, I have just been to strike my blow for democracy. By-elections here in Royston, so we get no less than three opportunities to choose between the two available options: "Conservative" and "Loser." That's nice, isn't it...?0 -
-
YESScott_P said:
You realise we pay the tariffs, right?RepublicanTory said:Playing devils advocate for a second-IF the exit bill is 100m maybe we just levy tariffs on EU imports until the 100m is paid off.
But we can also levy them on imports from the EU-
You do realise that ??0 -
No, working class and lower middle class voters 'threw it away' to regain sovereignty and control of immigration primarily despite the endless warnings of economic doom from the Remain side. May understand that which is why she is heading for a landslide, in 10 years time we may return to the single market under a future Labour government but for now the voters put border control first and the fact UK unemployment is still relatively low and the economy still growing means they can afford to for nowScott_P said:
I am neither welcoming them, nor egging them on.Casino_Royale said:You talk as if we don't know the economic risks to leaving the EU.
We do. It's just we think they were exaggerated, and they are manageable, given the political prize.
What we don't understand (well, I understand emotively) is why you're egging them on and welcoming them.
And the political prize is worthless, and the costs greater than anyone dare enunciate
We were always Sovereign, and we gained politically from pooling and sharing.
And we threw it away on the word of shysters and conmen0 -
Very vice to hear the proclamation, although in their own wisdom Betfair have decided to keep money wagered on the election date for another five weeks.Scott_P said:Someone was asking for this the other day I think
@daily_politics: The Queen's herald announced the summons of a new Parliament. Here's @Afneil with the Rothesay Herald of Arms, Sir Crispin Agnew of Lochnaw pic.twitter.com/tD9SdsOhT7
https://twitter.com/daily_politics/status/8601027012117626930 -
We go from a free trade environment in Europe to a slightly protectionist environment, as regulated by the WTO, which is pursuing progressive global trade liberalisation.RepublicanTory said:
YESScott_P said:
You realise we pay the tariffs, right?RepublicanTory said:Playing devils advocate for a second-IF the exit bill is 100m maybe we just levy tariffs on EU imports until the 100m is paid off.
But we can also levy them on imports from the EU-
You do realise that ??0 -
You seem to think that the minefield and wolves were put there by the builders of the "jail". Remainers would argue that far from a jail, the EU is a fortress that protected us from the minefield and wolves.SeanT said:
If the costs of leaving the EU are actually "greater than anyone dare enunciate", such that leaving is impossibly painful and expensive (as you constantly say), then we aren't in any meaningful sense sovereign, at all. We are in jail.Scott_P said:
I am neither welcoming them, nor egging them on.Casino_Royale said:You talk as if we don't know the economic risks to leaving the EU.
We do. It's just we think they were exaggerated, and they are manageable, given the political prize.
What we don't understand (well, I understand emotively) is why you're egging them on and welcoming them.
And the political prize is worthless, and the costs greater than anyone dare enunciate
We were always Sovereign, and we gained politically from pooling and sharing.
And we threw it away on the word of shysters and conmen
Sure we theoretically have a key to the cell door, but beyond the door is a minefield, patrolled by starving wolves. We are not free, if you are right, and we certainly are not sovereign.0 -
Macron has made noises in the past about the need for EU reform. Did he add anything in the French presidential debate?Casino_Royale said:
Yes. The EU is very nervous. It's fraying. Not just with the UK leaving, but the Greeks are decidedly unhappy, and there is talk of chastening Poland and Hungary as well.chestnut said:
It is likely to exacerbate internal friction as well.rcs1000 said:
That's absolutely right. Getting no money and no deal is at least as bad for the EU as it is for us.Casino_Royale said:
No deal means they get no divorce money, no ongoing net contributions, reduced crime and military/ security cooperation, and Ireland is screwed economically.Pulpstar said:This is worse than a divorce, in a divorce there is a judge to decide some semblance of fairness (Supposedly).
I think the EU realises the strength of it's hand if it keeps a united front and is acting accordingly, I don't think the final settlement will be remotely "fair".
They might also end up with a competitor on its doorstep that undercuts it (we know the EU is worried about this because they put dumping clauses in the negotiating guidelines) that looks sympathetically on other states that might seek to leave in future, like Denmark, EIRE and Sweden, rather than acting as a bulwark. And it's global reputation may also be damaged.
That doesn't mean it won't happen, but the EU will have significant troubles of its own if it fails to agree.
They will start to blame each other for the loss of money and the loss of trade.
As far as I can tell the standard responses are: (1) more Europe (2) slap those who fall out of line. Both of which are backstopped by German economic might.
This might not end well. And that is not good.0 -
Correct and Kohl and Mitterand and Reagan were not so different to Merkel, Macron and Trump who May has to deal withYorkcity said:
Yes it seems that way back to 1983 .HYUFD said:
Zero chance of that, once May has her 100+ majority she will dominate the Tory Party in the way no Tory leader has since Thatcher at her heighttyson said:
I fear you are right about May...that she is such an obsessional, control freak she will not be able to stop herself meddling....,.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Morning Tyson - If you think Theresa May will stand on the sidelines I think you will be dissappointed. However I hope a deal can be arrived at on citizens asap but unfortunately any idea they will stay under the ECJ for the rest of their lives is not going to happen.tyson said:@Big G
It is fascinating seeing your perspective through May tinted glasses.
First there is no conceivable way the UK will come out of this with a good deal. If it does, the other 27 members will pay close attention, and the EU will fall apart. Britain has to be punished for it's moment of populist folly otherwise the disease will spread and destroy the Union.
Second, the best person to get the deal must be someone who is capable of cultivating good relationships, socially adept, comfortable in their own shoes, jovial, humorous, diligent, hard working, reliable, intelligent, hard nosed, open minded, savvy, thick skinned, carries gravitas, able to compromise and empathise, pragmatic, charismatic.... Since we are leaving the EU the political affiliations of the person are much less important than their ability to strike a deal.
Since May carries few of the above, I would suggest it is in the UK's interests for her to remain as far away as possible.
David Davis is actually the best pic the Tories have as far as I can see. There could have been others, Osborne for instance, Mandelson another, Blair obviously, Cameron.....but May quite frankly needs to STFU because her interventions.... her control freakery, thin skin etc.... will be extremely damaging for the country.
As far as I am aware the conservative manifesto is going to include control of our borders, and the ending of the ECJ in our affairs. In those circumstances the ECJ will be replaced by our Supreme Court though a transistion period may be agreed
that is precisely why I said yesterday the men in grey coats will be moving in approximately this time next year, and David Davis or Philip Hammond will be installed as the next PM......0 -
Tariffs levied on EU imports are paid for by usRepublicanTory said:YES
But we can also levy them on imports from the EU-0 -
There is a lot of talk of sawing off legs, impossible pain, and expense.Scott_P said:
You are free to saw your own leg offSeanT said:If the costs of leaving the EU are actually "greater than anyone dare enunciate, such that leaving is impossibly painful and expensive (as you constantly say), then we aren't in any meaningful sense sovereign, at all. We are in jail.
Sure we theoretically have a key to the cell door, but beyond the door is a minefield, patrolled by starving wolves. We are not free, if you are right, and we certainly are not sovereign.
It would be impossibly painful, expensive and would cause lots of inconvenience in the future.
But nobody denies you are free to do it.
What I have issue with are the folk (like you) who want to do it, believed it was a good idea, trusted the shysters who said it offer untold benefits, are still in denial about the pain and costs but determined to lash out that those of us who cautioned against it.
Where's the evidence?0 -
An indiction of what is going on in Wales by 2.00 am then.... Hoping that Shadsy isn't still up!RobD said:
Here's the full list.IanB2 said:
Then you are right, that is ridiculous. Are they giving their staff a lie in because of late working on polling day?RobD said:
An English council....IanB2 said:
Counting STV is fascinating but not particularly fast.RobD said:
Some councils aren't expected to declare until 8PM on Friday. Utterly ridiculous!IanB2 said:
There's a dawn to lunchtime BBC special!DavidL said:Unusually quiet at my polling station this morning. No tellers for anyone which is a bit unusual. It is a slightly weird STV system up here. I voted 1, 2, 3 for the Tories, Lib Dems and Labour. The 2 SNP candidates I didn't bother differentiating between. Doubt it will make any difference as we already have an SNP and Tory Councillor from the ward so I don't see any of the other Unionist parties getting a look in.
Really frustrating that these results are going to dribble out tomorrow with minimal coverage. They look like they could be genuinely interesting, especially in Scotland and Wales.
http://election.pressassociation.com/Declaration_times/all_2017_by_time.php0 -
I second this.david_herdson said:
Don't be silly. Mike has published plenty of articles he's disagreed with, including a few from me.ThreeQuidder said:
Because Smithson won't publish it, it goes against his message.stodge said:
Why don't you write one and send it to OGH ?CarlottaVance said:I expect a thread on this any moment now:
In hindsight, do you think Britain was right or wrong to vote to leave the European Union?
RIGHT: 46 (+3)
WRONG: 43 (-2)
When he disagrees, you can expect a well-argued reply from him early in the thread.
I've never had a piece rejected and only once had a single change required - and that was for legal reasons over a comment I made about the phone hacking police investigation.
If you make a good, reasoned case, I have little doubt that it'd be published.
TSE and OGH are scrupulously fair editors.0 -
And they would be wrong.rpjs said:
You seem to think that the minefield and wolves were put there by the builders of the "jail". Remainers would argue that far from a jail, the EU is a fortress that protected us from the minefield and wolves.SeanT said:
If the costs of leaving the EU are actually "greater than anyone dare enunciate", such that leaving is impossibly painful and expensive (as you constantly say), then we aren't in any meaningful sense sovereign, at all. We are in jail.Scott_P said:
I am neither welcoming them, nor egging them on.Casino_Royale said:You talk as if we don't know the economic risks to leaving the EU.
We do. It's just we think they were exaggerated, and they are manageable, given the political prize.
What we don't understand (well, I understand emotively) is why you're egging them on and welcoming them.
And the political prize is worthless, and the costs greater than anyone dare enunciate
We were always Sovereign, and we gained politically from pooling and sharing.
And we threw it away on the word of shysters and conmen
Sure we theoretically have a key to the cell door, but beyond the door is a minefield, patrolled by starving wolves. We are not free, if you are right, and we certainly are not sovereign.0 -
Don't be unfair, Scott. As David Davis has pointed out, some people weren't bright enough to realise we were always sovereign.Scott_P said:
I am neither welcoming them, nor egging them on.Casino_Royale said:You talk as if we don't know the economic risks to leaving the EU.
We do. It's just we think they were exaggerated, and they are manageable, given the political prize.
What we don't understand (well, I understand emotively) is why you're egging them on and welcoming them.
And the political prize is worthless, and the costs greater than anyone dare enunciate
We were always Sovereign, and we gained politically from pooling and sharing.
And we threw it away on the word of shysters and conmen-1 -
New thread. >>>0
-
And right on time we have Scott's monthly posting to emphasize his total lack of understanding of basic concepts like sovereignty.Scott_P said:
I am neither welcoming them, nor egging them on.Casino_Royale said:You talk as if we don't know the economic risks to leaving the EU.
We do. It's just we think they were exaggerated, and they are manageable, given the political prize.
What we don't understand (well, I understand emotively) is why you're egging them on and welcoming them.
And the political prize is worthless, and the costs greater than anyone dare enunciate
We were always Sovereign, and we gained politically from pooling and sharing.
And we threw it away on the word of shysters and conmen0 -
Agreed-and something that many on here might want to take note of.Casino_Royale said:
We go from a free trade environment in Europe to a slightly protectionist environment, as regulated by the WTO, which is pursuing progressive global trade liberalisation.RepublicanTory said:
YESScott_P said:
You realise we pay the tariffs, right?RepublicanTory said:Playing devils advocate for a second-IF the exit bill is 100m maybe we just levy tariffs on EU imports until the 100m is paid off.
But we can also levy them on imports from the EU-
You do realise that ??
I am NOT in favour of the UK levying tariffs on the EU but if they want to play rough so can we.
My suggestion of raising the 100m was deliberately provocative !0 -
Is that the first chapter of your next book?SeanT said:
Imagine you're sitting in a room, and you want to leave. The door is ajar. The 27 other guys in the room tell you that "you're free to leave at any time".TOPPING said:
Don't be unfair, Scott. As David Davis has pointed out, some people weren't bright enough to realise we were always sovereign.Scott_P said:
I am neither welcoming them, nor egging them on.Casino_Royale said:You talk as if we don't know the economic risks to leaving the EU.
We do. It's just we think they were exaggerated, and they are manageable, given the political prize.
What we don't understand (well, I understand emotively) is why you're egging them on and welcoming them.
And the political prize is worthless, and the costs greater than anyone dare enunciate
We were always Sovereign, and we gained politically from pooling and sharing.
And we threw it away on the word of shysters and conmen
But then they add, "by the way, if you do try and leave, there is a ravenous Doberman right outside, who will probably bite off your penis. We've deliberately kept him hungry for a week, though we used your money to feed him in the past. And if you get beyond the dog, we've built a moat full of angry crocodiles. Good luck!"
Are you, in fact, "free to leave the room"? Legalistically, maybe yes, but in actuality, in the real world? No. Not at all.
If Brexit is as bad as Remoaners say, then we were and are no longer sovereign in the EU. And this implicit imprisonment was only going to get worse, given the plans to widen the moat and buy another Doberman.
We have to make a run for it.0 -
Both are probably correct.Paristonda said:
There were many remainers that argued precisely that the EU would be vindictive in negotiations, to stop the risk of contagion. While there were many leavers arguing that BMW and Audi were going to tell Merkel the line to take, and that pure economic interest would mean they act responsibly.SeanT said:
At least you, unlike Scott P, accepts that the EU is behaving like a bunch of boorish hoons.Stark_Dawning said:
Yes, this is starting to turn into the nightmare scenario many of us dreaded - the EU acting like petulant b*stards while we're totally exposed and helpless. Perhaps the slow realization of this explains Theresa's erratic performance yesterday. Fear does that.Pulpstar said:This is worse than a divorce, in a divorce there is a judge to decide some semblance of fairness (Supposedly).
I think the EU realises the strength of it's hand if it keeps a united front and is acting accordingly, I don't think the final settlement will be remotely "fair".
Political leaders in the EU countries with a significant stake in their relationship with Britain are being pulled both ways.0 -
To be fair to the EU though rUK would do the same to Scotland if it voted for independenceSeanT said:
Imagine you're sitting in a room, and you want to leave. The door is ajar. The 27 other guys in the room tell you that "you're free to leave at any time".TOPPING said:
Don't be unfair, Scott. As David Davis has pointed out, some people weren't bright enough to realise we were always sovereign.Scott_P said:
I am neither welcoming them, nor egging them on.Casino_Royale said:You talk as if we don't know the economic risks to leaving the EU.
We do. It's just we think they were exaggerated, and they are manageable, given the political prize.
What we don't understand (well, I understand emotively) is why you're egging them on and welcoming them.
And the political prize is worthless, and the costs greater than anyone dare enunciate
We were always Sovereign, and we gained politically from pooling and sharing.
And we threw it away on the word of shysters and conmen
But then they add, "by the way, if you do try and leave, there is a ravenous Doberman right outside, who will probably bite off your penis. We've deliberately kept him hungry for a week, though we used your money to feed him in the past. And if you get beyond the dog, we've built a moat full of angry crocodiles. Good luck!"
Are you, in fact, "free to leave the room"? Legalistically, maybe yes, but in actuality, in the real world? No. Not at all.
If Brexit is as bad as Remoaners say, then we were and are no longer sovereign in the EU. And this implicit imprisonment was only going to get worse, given the plans to widen the moat and buy another Doberman.
We have to make a run for it.0 -
Not altogether keen on having my penis bitten off if there's an alternative, not sure that's a great vision for the future? Emasculated UK drifting woefully, sans pecker, harping on about how great we used to be in bed!SeanT said:
Imagine you're sitting in a room, and you want to leave. The door is ajar. The 27 other guys in the room tell you that "you're free to leave at any time".TOPPING said:
Don't be unfair, Scott. As David Davis has pointed out, some people weren't bright enough to realise we were always sovereign.Scott_P said:
I am neither welcoming them, nor egging them on.Casino_Royale said:You talk as if we don't know the economic risks to leaving the EU.
We do. It's just we think they were exaggerated, and they are manageable, given the political prize.
What we don't understand (well, I understand emotively) is why you're egging them on and welcoming them.
And the political prize is worthless, and the costs greater than anyone dare enunciate
We were always Sovereign, and we gained politically from pooling and sharing.
And we threw it away on the word of shysters and conmen
But then they add, "by the way, if you do try and leave, there is a ravenous Doberman right outside, who will probably bite off your penis. We've deliberately kept him hungry for a week, though we used your money to feed him in the past. And if you get beyond the dog, we've built a moat full of angry crocodiles. Good luck!"
Are you, in fact, "free to leave the room"? Legalistically, maybe yes, but in actuality, in the real world? No. Not at all.
If Brexit is as bad as Remoaners say, then we were and are no longer sovereign in the EU. And this implicit imprisonment was only going to get worse, given the plans to widen the moat and buy another Doberman.
We have to make a run for it.0 -
SeanT
'But then they add, "by the way, if you do try and leave, there is a ravenous Doberman right outside, who will probably bite off your penis. We've deliberately kept him hungry for a week, though we used your money to feed him in the past. And if you get beyond the dog, we've built a moat full of angry crocodiles. Good luck!"
Reminds me of the old East Europe communist block,so popular they had to put a wall around it & shoot people if they tried to leave.0 -
Andrew
'But all these demands for things like farm subsidies past exit? Nope, the budget we've committed to ends in 2020. Even pensions are supposed to be covered by the current EU budget.
Since leaving the EU automatically withdraws us from the European investment Bank, we'll also be wanting our 16% share of that back also (about 40 billion).'
According to Newsnight the €100 billion figure put up by France & Poland is based on UK receiving zero share of EU assets.
Perhaps the EU who are masters of bureaucracy can tell us which article it is that says we have to pay anything when an EU member leaves & the formula for calculating the exit bill.0 -
The article is perfectly clear. It is article 50, which says that the treaties cease to apply two years after notification. Any amount that were due and payable before that have to be paid; any amounts after that have no validity as the treaties no longer apply.walterw said:
Andrew
'But all these demands for things like farm subsidies past exit? Nope, the budget we've committed to ends in 2020. Even pensions are supposed to be covered by the current EU budget.
Since leaving the EU automatically withdraws us from the European investment Bank, we'll also be wanting our 16% share of that back also (about 40 billion).'
According to Newsnight the €100 billion figure put up by France & Poland is based on UK receiving zero share of EU assets.
Perhaps the EU who are masters of bureaucracy can tell us which article it is that says we have to pay anything when an EU member leaves & the formula for calculating the exit bill.0 -
It says nothing about the return of share of assets.archer101au said:The article is perfectly clear. It is article 50, which says that the treaties cease to apply two years after notification. Any amount that were due and payable before that have to be paid; any amounts after that have no validity as the treaties no longer apply.
walterw said:Andrew
'But all these demands for things like farm subsidies past exit? Nope, the budget we've committed to ends in 2020. Even pensions are supposed to be covered by the current EU budget.
Since leaving the EU automatically withdraws us from the European investment Bank, we'll also be wanting our 16% share of that back also (about 40 billion).'
According to Newsnight the €100 billion figure put up by France & Poland is based on UK receiving zero share of EU assets.
Perhaps the EU who are masters of bureaucracy can tell us which article it is that says we have to pay anything when an EU member leaves & the formula for calculating the exit bill.
That is the killer. There is a case for both the UK and EU positions.
Is it joint ownership (where the assets belong to the survivors) or ownership in common (where the assets are divided up)?
I suspect this will go to the ECJ as I think it is unbridgeable in negotiation.0 -
ECJ will be rejected by the UK so it is either a compromise with a joint ECJ - Supreme Court arrangement or referral to the International Court in the Hague.Barnesian said:
It says nothing about the return of share of assets.archer101au said:The article is perfectly clear. It is article 50, which says that the treaties cease to apply two years after notification. Any amount that were due and payable before that have to be paid; any amounts after that have no validity as the treaties no longer apply.
walterw said:Andrew
'But all these demands for things like farm subsidies past exit? Nope, the budget we've committed to ends in 2020. Even pensions are supposed to be covered by the current EU budget.
Since leaving the EU automatically withdraws us from the European investment Bank, we'll also be wanting our 16% share of that back also (about 40 billion).'
According to Newsnight the €100 billion figure put up by France & Poland is based on UK receiving zero share of EU assets.
Perhaps the EU who are masters of bureaucracy can tell us which article it is that says we have to pay anything when an EU member leaves & the formula for calculating the exit bill.
That is the killer. There is a case for both the UK and EU positions.
Is it joint ownership (where the assets belong to the survivors) or ownership in common (where the assets are divided up)?
I suspect this will go to the ECJ as I think it is unbridgeable in negotiation.
The obvious problem for the EU is that it would take years with appeals etc and in the meantime they will have an enormous hole in their budget to fill.
There was a poll recently that showed the voters would reluctantly pay a few billion but the sums the EU are demanding will be politically impossible for any UK politician to agree to.
As this negotiation goes on it is not beyond possibilty that a substantial majority will demand we leave and any idea of a second referendum will result in a comprehensive ' no way'0
