politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » TMay struggles on in spite of a bad cough and having to deal w
Options
Comments
-
Erm no. More likely is the PM is slightly unwell at a crucial time.Stark_Dawning said:
Boris caused it. The pressure he's been exerting with his constant disobedience has built and built and Theresa finally snapped.SeanT said:
Actually, Boris looks like he is almost crying, and his face is full of human empathy, and pity (which is the natural reaction, the speech was so sad)GIN1138 said:
I am acquainted with Boris Johnson. He is ambitious and smart and he can be ruthless, but he is not some evil careerist monster. He is also, sincerely, a eurosceptic.0 -
So Rees-Mogg flees non-Brexiting Britain to Svalbard, only to be eaten by a polar bear. It's one way of dealing with the trauma I suppose.rpjs said:IIRC it's mandatory under local law to carry a rifle outside the limits of Longyearbyen, the capital, in case of polar bear attack.
0 -
For someone who pretends to care about facts and logic, you're quite relaxed about taking a quote out of context and ignoring subsequent clarification in order to make a bogus point.logical_song said:
What the guy who doesn't take advice from people who know what they're doing (aka 'experts')Essexit said:
I've said it before and I'll say it again; I wish Michael Gove were Prime Minister. Who knows, he may yet have an opportunity to become Foreign Secretary at the least.rcs1000 said:
One problem is that one of the major players (who shall remain nameless) sees it less as an opportunity to improve his country, and more as an opportunity to become Prime Minister.Cyclefree said:Brexit may or may not have been the right decision for the country. But the way it is being implemented is utterly incompetent, unprofessional and disastrous. That annoys me almost more than anything else.
But the biggest problem, as you identify, is lack of a clear (and articulated) vision of where we want to be and the trade offs required to get there.0 -
You see I can agree with you on just about every word there. I don't like May and I don't think she is in any way fit to lead our country. But that is a million miles from YS and his laughing at someone who is clearly in difficulties.nielh said:
I do feel some empathy for May. The reaction to her coughing is deeply unfair. I agree with the jist of her citizens of nowhere comments but it was ill judged and taken massively out of context. No sympathy at all from me for her unnecessary election fiasco and happy to laugh at her expense at crushing the saboteurs (although it wasn't her words, just a daily mail front page)Richard_Tyndall said:
Nah. You are just a nasty piece of sputum with zero empathy. The simplest options are usually the correct ones.YellowSubmarine said:@casino_royale @Elliot @Richard_Tyndall Ridiculous bed wetting. They'll be writing books about May for decades. How did someone prevent enough to give the often misunderstood ' Nasty Party ' speech and who deservedly became PM end up offering the 9 month " Citizens of nowhere " to ' Crush the Sabateurs ' nightmare ? She's reaping what she sowed.
But actually I am far more concerned about the EU migrants who have 'accidentally' recieved deportation letters from the home office and are terrified for their famillies and livelihoods. I also notice that there is no shortage of deranged psychopaths who celebrate such actions as the implementation of rules and laws. They are the people with no empathy.
What does May ultimately stand to lose? her job? pride? Some people are going to lose much more because of her decisions.
As I mentioned the other day I detested Heath for his politics but I would challenge anyone with a soul not to feel a huge wave of empathy when you saw him in interviews being forced to talk about his private life.
YS is just a nasty piece of work.0 -
And, Ireland also coped with leaving the UK.TheScreamingEagles said:
We coped with Ireland seceding, the EU will cope with us leaving.Casino_Royale said:
(1) It is. They lose £10pa. They lose a sixth of their economy/population. They lose 25% of their military heft. They lose their chief financial centre. I recognise they are angry and also dismissive, but that matters.Beverley_C said:
That does not seem to be the caseCasino_Royale said:I think we are more important to them than their rhetoric or behaviour suggest. Financially, economically and militarily.
True, but we need to stop fannying about. Either we go in or we continue out.Casino_Royale said:This needs visionary leaders on both sides who can put the events of the last 18 months behind them, recognise the new political reality, and work together on a sustainable long-term win-win UK-EU relationship that works.
There is no middle way. There never was.
(2) That simply isn't the case. There are a variety of associate memberships and alternative models on offer between full clean break and membership.
But our crime is to have been in the club, and voted to Leave it.
That's not my point: my point is that the UK will continue to be important to the EU after we Leave.
That's a true a statement as the other way round.0 -
I expect the EU to agree to an EEA type arrangement with us. Why wouldn't they? But you can never be totally sure.Casino_Royale said:If that does happen there is, of course, a number of emergency measures the UK could take, if it had the parliamentary majority to do so.
In reality, given the arithmetic, I expect the Government would fall and Corbyn would win.
A sensible deal would ultimately be made within 5-10 years because the EU would have made its point about the consequences of Leaving.
0 -
A deal you surely reject as valueless since to admit otherwise would involve the EU conceding compromises that you profess to be impossible?williamglenn said:
People who wanted a semi-detached relationship will curse the day they turned their backs on Cameron's deal.RoyalBlue said:
Absolutely. Clean Brexit or EU + Schengen + Eurozone on the way to a federal (and hopefully more democratic) state.Beverley_C said:
That does not seem to be the caseCasino_Royale said:I think we are more important to them than their rhetoric or behaviour suggest. Financially, economically and militarily.
True, but we need to stop fannying about. Either we go in or we continue out.Casino_Royale said:This needs visionary leaders on both sides who can put the events of the last 18 months behind them, recognise the new political reality, and work together on a sustainable long-term win-win UK-EU relationship that works.
There is no middle way. There never was.0 -
There's no doubt in my mind that there are many at the heart of Brussels who think just like WilliamGlenn on that.RoyalBlue said:
Absolutely. Clean Brexit or EU + Schengen + Eurozone on the way to a federal (and hopefully more democratic) state.Beverley_C said:
That does not seem to be the caseCasino_Royale said:I think we are more important to them than their rhetoric or behaviour suggest. Financially, economically and militarily.
True, but we need to stop fannying about. Either we go in or we continue out.Casino_Royale said:This needs visionary leaders on both sides who can put the events of the last 18 months behind them, recognise the new political reality, and work together on a sustainable long-term win-win UK-EU relationship that works.
There is no middle way. There never was.0 -
-
The idea that you can have a democratic state of 500 million people who don't even speak the same language is for the birds.RoyalBlue said:
Absolutely. Clean Brexit or EU + Schengen + Eurozone on the way to a federal (and hopefully more democratic) state.Beverley_C said:
That does not seem to be the caseCasino_Royale said:I think we are more important to them than their rhetoric or behaviour suggest. Financially, economically and militarily.
True, but we need to stop fannying about. Either we go in or we continue out.Casino_Royale said:This needs visionary leaders on both sides who can put the events of the last 18 months behind them, recognise the new political reality, and work together on a sustainable long-term win-win UK-EU relationship that works.
There is no middle way. There never was.
The EU wants to think of itself as the European equivalent of the US but, sadly, lacks a real understanding of what has made the US Constitution and political settlement as successful and long-standing as it is.
That is why you get someone like Juncker making a State of the Union address, echoing what the US President does, but utterly lacking the essential ingredient, namely, election by the voters of that President.
0 -
Would it really be that much of a disaster? We'd take a fair economic hit but it would be accompanied by the Bank cutting interest rates and starting up QE again. I suspect we'd have a medium recession and then resume growth. If that came with control of immigration and part of the blame was pushed on Barnier, I think they could get away with it.Casino_Royale said:
If that does happen there is, of course, a number of emergency measures the UK could take, if it had the parliamentary majority to do so.FF43 said:
TBF we don't know for sure that the EU will offer us the option of a client state on their terms. I think they will. The default is crash out and disaster. Then we don't have a choice. It's what it is.Casino_Royale said:
I think it's more that we can't decide, and the EU aren't willing to offer us a choice.FF43 said:
We're passed that. Our choice, and it is a genuine choice, is between being a client, rather than a member, of the EU or crashing out of the system entirely. While we may talk glibly of no deal being better than a bad deal, no deal is a failure. There is no mandate or will for "do what it takes". Brexit was supposed to at least leave us no worse off. Given the choice between mediocrity and disaster, people will choose mediocrity. That's why I think we end up in the client status. Not many people have fully absorbed the situation we are in. I think Mrs May has, from her change in rhetoric since her Lancaster House speech. But once people understand the reality, they won't be happy about it.Sean_F said:
Despite that, 17m people voted for it, and very few have changed their minds.
In reality, given the arithmetic, I expect the Government would fall and Corbyn would win.
A sensible deal would ultimately be made within 5-10 years because the EU would have made its point about the consequences of Leaving.
If I were the Tories, I would be pointing out how unreasonable the EU was being on the ECJ. On Ireland and money, it's hard to see who is right. On citizens rights, it is ridiculous to demand EU courts have power over EU citizens in the UK but not vice versa.0 -
Perhaps May and Osborne both need to get to know their party better.TheScreamingEagles said:If Mrs May had gotten to know her party better, she would have realised how badly the dementia tax would go down with Tory voters.
0 -
He already knew it well enough, it explains why he helped take the Tories from 198 seats to 331 seats, and Mrs May took the party backwards.Essexit said:
Perhaps May and Osborne both need to get to know their party better.TheScreamingEagles said:If Mrs May had gotten to know her party better, she would have realised how badly the dementia tax would go down with Tory voters.
0 -
This is how I feel. Despite being on the left I see May as being clunky but a pretty moderate Tory in the scheme of things. Corbyn's lot are complete ideologues.Richard_Tyndall said:
You see I can agree with you on just about every word there. I don't like May and I don't think she is in any way fit to lead our country. But that is a million miles from YS and his laughing at someone who is clearly in difficulties.nielh said:
I do feel some empathy for May. The reaction to her coughing is deeply unfair. I agree with the jist of her citizens of nowhere comments but it was ill judged and taken massively out of context. No sympathy at all from me for her unnecessary election fiasco and happy to laugh at her expense at crushing the saboteurs (although it wasn't her words, just a daily mail front page)Richard_Tyndall said:
Nah. You are just a nasty piece of sputum with zero empathy. The simplest options are usually the correct ones.YellowSubmarine said:@casino_royale @Elliot @Richard_Tyndall Ridiculous bed wetting. They'll be writing books about May for decades. How did someone prevent enough to give the often misunderstood ' Nasty Party ' speech and who deservedly became PM end up offering the 9 month " Citizens of nowhere " to ' Crush the Sabateurs ' nightmare ? She's reaping what she sowed.
But actually I am far more concerned about the EU migrants who have 'accidentally' recieved deportation letters from the home office and are terrified for their famillies and livelihoods. I also notice that there is no shortage of deranged psychopaths who celebrate such actions as the implementation of rules and laws. They are the people with no empathy.
What does May ultimately stand to lose? her job? pride? Some people are going to lose much more because of her decisions.
As I mentioned the other day I detested Heath for his politics but I would challenge anyone with a soul not to feel a huge wave of empathy when you saw him in interviews being forced to talk about his private life.
YS is just a nasty piece of work.0 -
May's seat loss was substantially down to Osborne's austerity.TheScreamingEagles said:
He already knew it well enough, it explains why he helped take the Tories from 198 seats to 331 seats, and Mrs May took the party backwards.Essexit said:
Perhaps May and Osborne both need to get to know their party better.TheScreamingEagles said:If Mrs May had gotten to know her party better, she would have realised how badly the dementia tax would go down with Tory voters.
0 -
£10 per annum? Surely they could look down the back of the sofa to find that?Casino_Royale said:
(1) It is. They lose £10pa. They lose a sixth of their economy/population. They lose 25% of their military heft. They lose their chief financial centre. I recognise they are angry and also dismissive, but that matters.Beverley_C said:
That does not seem to be the caseCasino_Royale said:I think we are more important to them than their rhetoric or behaviour suggest. Financially, economically and militarily.
True, but we need to stop fannying about. Either we go in or we continue out.Casino_Royale said:This needs visionary leaders on both sides who can put the events of the last 18 months behind them, recognise the new political reality, and work together on a sustainable long-term win-win UK-EU relationship that works.
There is no middle way. There never was.
(2) That simply isn't the case. There are a variety of associate memberships and alternative models on offer between full clean break and membership.
But our crime is to have been in the club, and voted to Leave it.
0 -
The root of the problem is that the party needs to get to know the country better.Essexit said:
Perhaps May and Osborne both need to get to know their party better.TheScreamingEagles said:If Mrs May had gotten to know her party better, she would have realised how badly the dementia tax would go down with Tory voters.
0 -
Look on it as an amoeba. Or Hydra. We are cutting ourselves off but they will reform, close the wound and carry on. They are not going to spend too much time thinking "O Woe" but will carry on with what they are left with.Casino_Royale said:
(1) It is. They lose £10pa. They lose a sixth of their economy/population. They lose 25% of their military heft. They lose their chief financial centre. I recognise they are angry and also dismissive, but that matters.Beverley_C said:
That does not seem to be the caseCasino_Royale said:I think we are more important to them than their rhetoric or behaviour suggest. Financially, economically and militarily.
True, but we need to stop fannying about. Either we go in or we continue out.Casino_Royale said:This needs visionary leaders on both sides who can put the events of the last 18 months behind them, recognise the new political reality, and work together on a sustainable long-term win-win UK-EU relationship that works.
There is no middle way. There never was.
(2) That simply isn't the case. There are a variety of associate memberships and alternative models on offer between full clean break and membership.
But our crime is to have been in the club, and voted to Leave it.
I don't think the EU wants to take over the world, I think they just want to be the EU: a close-knit group of neighbouring nations with shared values and approach to a range of issues. They would even have tolerated a two-speed such group but we decided against it.
They don't "need" to do anything because on March 20th 2019 they will still be the EU with some changes here and there.0 -
You can tell the government and civil service intent by the Queen's speech and rhetoric.FF43 said:
I expect the EU to agree to an EEA type arrangement with us. Why wouldn't they? But you can never be totally sure.Casino_Royale said:If that does happen there is, of course, a number of emergency measures the UK could take, if it had the parliamentary majority to do so.
In reality, given the arithmetic, I expect the Government would fall and Corbyn would win.
A sensible deal would ultimately be made within 5-10 years because the EU would have made its point about the consequences of Leaving.
We will leave *the* customs union and *the* single market, we will have fisheries, agriculture, regional policy repatriated, free movement will end, as well as the ECJ formally.
We will shadow the EU in a large number of regulatory areas (but not all) and follow
ECJ case law. We will not in all. We will have control over free movement, whilst setting
generous quotas and visas to EU citizens. We will decide our own fisheries policy whilst setting access/quotas with our neighbours on new terms. We will formally leave the customs union and do new trade deals elsewhere whilst trying to closely align our customs arrangements with the EU. We will save some money. We will try and align our foreign /defence policy with the EU but not within EU structures.
It will be Good Enough.
The question is how much blood has to be waded through on each side to get there.0 -
We need to agree something with the EU, just to to keep operating. So that's the basics like international flights, customs arrangements on day one etc. So we will need to agree to their demands on Article 50: citizens' rights, some tens of billions of euros as a financial settlement and at least an acknowledgement of the intractable Irish border issue. In return we should get a two year grace period while we decide what happens next. That's Theresa May's job. It will be step by step.Elliot said:
Would it really be that much of a disaster? We'd take a fair economic hit but it would be accompanied by the Bank cutting interest rates and starting up QE again. I suspect we'd have a medium recession and then resume growth. If that came with control of immigration and part of the blame was pushed on Barnier, I think they could get away with it.Casino_Royale said:
If that does happen there is, of course, a number of emergency measures the UK could take, if it had the parliamentary majority to do so.FF43 said:
TBF we don't know for sure that the EU will offer us the option of a client state on their terms. I think they will. The default is crash out and disaster. Then we don't have a choice. It's what it is.Casino_Royale said:
I think it's more that we can't decide, and the EU aren't willing to offer us a choice.FF43 said:
We're passed that. Our choice, and it is a genuine choice, is between being a client, rather than a member, of the EU or crashing out of the system entirely. While we may talk glibly of no deal being better than a bad deal, no deal is a failure. There is no mandate or will for "do what it takes". Brexit was supposed to at least leave us no worse off. Given the choice between mediocrity and disaster, people will choose mediocrity. That's why I think we end up in the client status. Not many people have fully absorbed the situation we are in. I think Mrs May has, from her change in rhetoric since her Lancaster House speech. But once people understand the reality, they won't be happy about it.Sean_F said:
Despite that, 17m people voted for it, and very few have changed their minds.
In reality, given the arithmetic, I expect the Government would fall and Corbyn would win.
A sensible deal would ultimately be made within 5-10 years because the EU would have made its point about the consequences of Leaving.
If I were the Tories, I would be pointing out how unreasonable the EU was being on the ECJ. On Ireland and money, it's hard to see who is right. On citizens rights, it is ridiculous to demand EU courts have power over EU citizens in the UK but not vice versa.0 -
When Osborne and Cameron were fighting to defend Osborne's record ("long term economic plan" etc) it was accepted.Elliot said:
May's seat loss was substantially down to Osborne's austerity.TheScreamingEagles said:
He already knew it well enough, it explains why he helped take the Tories from 198 seats to 331 seats, and Mrs May took the party backwards.Essexit said:
Perhaps May and Osborne both need to get to know their party better.TheScreamingEagles said:If Mrs May had gotten to know her party better, she would have realised how badly the dementia tax would go down with Tory voters.
What wasn't accepted was just brushing off the economy like it didn't matter. People are prepared to accept austerity when it is "part of the plan" and viewed as necessary, May and Hammond didn't bother to fight for it though.0 -
Brexit is substantially down to Osbourne's drawn out death by a thousand cuts austerity.Elliot said:
May's seat loss was substantially down to Osborne's austerity.TheScreamingEagles said:
He already knew it well enough, it explains why he helped take the Tories from 198 seats to 331 seats, and Mrs May took the party backwards.Essexit said:
Perhaps May and Osborne both need to get to know their party better.TheScreamingEagles said:If Mrs May had gotten to know her party better, she would have realised how badly the dementia tax would go down with Tory voters.
0 -
So how’d you explain the Tory seat gains in 2015? Osborne’s austerity ?Elliot said:
May's seat loss was substantially down to Osborne's austerity.TheScreamingEagles said:
He already knew it well enough, it explains why he helped take the Tories from 198 seats to 331 seats, and Mrs May took the party backwards.Essexit said:
Perhaps May and Osborne both need to get to know their party better.TheScreamingEagles said:If Mrs May had gotten to know her party better, she would have realised how badly the dementia tax would go down with Tory voters.
0 -
Fighting an election from opposition and fighting it from government are different tasks. Also, Corbyn is clearly a more formidable opponent (surprisingly) than Brown or Miliband.TheScreamingEagles said:
He already knew it well enough, it explains why he helped take the Tories from 198 seats to 331 seats, and Mrs May took the party backwards.Essexit said:
Perhaps May and Osborne both need to get to know their party better.TheScreamingEagles said:If Mrs May had gotten to know her party better, she would have realised how badly the dementia tax would go down with Tory voters.
0 -
You're missing the point.TOPPING said:
Look on it as an amoeba. Or Hydra. We are cutting ourselves off but they will reform, close the wound and carry on. They are not going to spend too much time thinking "O Woe" but will carry on with what they are left with.Casino_Royale said:
(1) It is. They lose £10pa. They lose a sixth of their economy/population. They lose 25% of their military heft. They lose their chief financial centre. I recognise they are angry and also dismissive, but that matters.Beverley_C said:
That does not seem to be the caseCasino_Royale said:I think we are more important to them than their rhetoric or behaviour suggest. Financially, economically and militarily.
True, but we need to stop fannying about. Either we go in or we continue out.Casino_Royale said:This needs visionary leaders on both sides who can put the events of the last 18 months behind them, recognise the new political reality, and work together on a sustainable long-term win-win UK-EU relationship that works.
There is no middle way. There never was.
(2) That simply isn't the case. There are a variety of associate memberships and alternative models on offer between full clean break and membership.
But our crime is to have been in the club, and voted to Leave it.
I don't think the EU wants to take over the world, I think they just want to be the EU: a close-knit group of neighbouring nations with shared values and approach to a range of issues. They would even have tolerated a two-speed such group but we decided against it.
They don't "need" to do anything because on March 20th 2019 they will still be the EU with some changes here and there.
The 16-17% of their chunk they just lost (so they are now 83-84%) is still going to be sitting on their doorstep.
It does not disappear. Therefore, it matters.0 -
Lol!Philip_Thompson said:
£10 per annum? Surely they could look down the back of the sofa to find that?Casino_Royale said:
(1) It is. They lose £10pa. They lose a sixth of their economy/population. They lose 25% of their military heft. They lose their chief financial centre. I recognise they are angry and also dismissive, but that matters.Beverley_C said:
That does not seem to be the caseCasino_Royale said:I think we are more important to them than their rhetoric or behaviour suggest. Financially, economically and militarily.
True, but we need to stop fannying about. Either we go in or we continue out.Casino_Royale said:This needs visionary leaders on both sides who can put the events of the last 18 months behind them, recognise the new political reality, and work together on a sustainable long-term win-win UK-EU relationship that works.
There is no middle way. There never was.
(2) That simply isn't the case. There are a variety of associate memberships and alternative models on offer between full clean break and membership.
But our crime is to have been in the club, and voted to Leave it.0 -
The disenfranchised in 2015 had little reason to vote so they didn't vote.TheScreamingEagles said:
So how’d you explain the Tory seat gains in 2015? Osborne’s austerity ?Elliot said:
May's seat loss was substantially down to Osborne's austerity.TheScreamingEagles said:
He already knew it well enough, it explains why he helped take the Tories from 198 seats to 331 seats, and Mrs May took the party backwards.Essexit said:
Perhaps May and Osborne both need to get to know their party better.TheScreamingEagles said:If Mrs May had gotten to know her party better, she would have realised how badly the dementia tax would go down with Tory voters.
Come 2016 and polling stations were full of people being told what they had to do for they had either never voted before or had rarely done so...
Equally the first real obvious council budget cuts only appeared round here in April 2015 as councils cancel and scrap anything and everything they aren't legally required to do....0 -
Not necessarily, but it's the boring technicalities and practicalities of cross-border lorry movement, aircraft movement, shipping and energy supply that would cause the headlines.Elliot said:
Would it really be that much of a disaster? We'd take a fair economic hit but it would be accompanied by the Bank cutting interest rates and starting up QE again. I suspect we'd have a medium recession and then resume growth. If that came with control of immigration and part of the blame was pushed on Barnier, I think they could get away with it.Casino_Royale said:
If that does happen there is, of course, a number of emergency measures the UK could take, if it had the parliamentary majority to do so.FF43 said:
TBF we don't know for sure that the EU will offer us the option of a client state on their terms. I think they will. The default is crash out and disaster. Then we don't have a choice. It's what it is.Casino_Royale said:
I think it's more that we can't decide, and the EU aren't willing to offer us a choice.FF43 said:
We're passed that. Our choice, and it is a genuine choice, is between being a client, rather than a member, of the EU or crashing out of the system entirely. While we may talk glibly of no deal being better than a bad deal, no deal is a failure. There is no mandate or will for "do what it takes". Brexit was supposed to at least leave us no worse off. Given the choice between mediocrity and disaster, people will choose mediocrity. That's why I think we end up in the client status. Not many people have fully absorbed the situation we are in. I think Mrs May has, from her change in rhetoric since her Lancaster House speech. But once people understand the reality, they won't be happy about it.Sean_F said:
Despite that, 17m people voted for it, and very few have changed their minds.
In reality, given the arithmetic, I expect the Government would fall and Corbyn would win.
A sensible deal would ultimately be made within 5-10 years because the EU would have made its point about the consequences of Leaving.
If I were the Tories, I would be pointing out how unreasonable the EU was being on the ECJ. On Ireland and money, it's hard to see who is right. On citizens rights, it is ridiculous to demand EU courts have power over EU citizens in the UK but not vice versa.
I think EIRE is going to need a special status inside the EU to make this work, and the UK is going to have to have something special for NI within the UK.0 -
Interest rates are as low as they can go more or less. Unconvinced QE will have much impact.Elliot said:
Would it really be that much of a disaster? We'd take a fair economic hit but it would be accompanied by the Bank cutting interest rates and starting up QE again. I suspect we'd have a medium recession and then resume growth. If that came with control of immigration and part of the blame was pushed on Barnier, I think they could get away with it.
If I were the Tories, I would be pointing out how unreasonable the EU was being on the ECJ. On Ireland and money, it's hard to see who is right. On citizens rights, it is ridiculous to demand EU courts have power over EU citizens in the UK but not vice versa.
I think a 'medium' recession would actually be very damaging to the government. Hurts them on their economic credibility (where they currently still lead Labour).
And after very little growth for the past 10 years to go back into recession will look disastrous.0 -
They also talked about having a "transition" period. Actually it's a misnomer because it doesn't transition to a new, defined situation. What they really mean is continuation period. I believe them when they say their intention is to leave the SIngle Market and Customs Union etc. But the here and now is the continuation period and those other things are later. The first doesn't lead to the second. The first puts off the second and they need it to put off the second.Casino_Royale said:
You can tell the government and civil service intent by the Queen's speech and rhetoric.FF43 said:
I expect the EU to agree to an EEA type arrangement with us. Why wouldn't they? But you can never be totally sure.Casino_Royale said:If that does happen there is, of course, a number of emergency measures the UK could take, if it had the parliamentary majority to do so.
In reality, given the arithmetic, I expect the Government would fall and Corbyn would win.
A sensible deal would ultimately be made within 5-10 years because the EU would have made its point about the consequences of Leaving.
We will leave *the* customs union and *the* single market, we will have fisheries, agriculture, regional policy repatriated, free movement will end, as well as the ECJ formally.
We will shadow the EU in a large number of regulatory areas (but not all) and follow
ECJ case law. We will not in all. We will have control over free movement, whilst setting
generous quotas and visas to EU citizens. We will decide our own fisheries policy whilst setting access/quotas with our neighbours on new terms. We will formally leave the customs union and do new trade deals elsewhere whilst trying to closely align our customs arrangements with the EU. We will save some money. We will try and align our foreign /defence policy with the EU but not within EU structures.
It will be Good Enough.
The question is how much blood has to be waded through on each side to get there.0 -
India is a democratic state with multiple languages and over a billion people.Cyclefree said:
The idea that you can have a democratic state of 500 million people who don't even speak the same language is for the birds.RoyalBlue said:
Absolutely. Clean Brexit or EU + Schengen + Eurozone on the way to a federal (and hopefully more democratic) state.Beverley_C said:
That does not seem to be the caseCasino_Royale said:I think we are more important to them than their rhetoric or behaviour suggest. Financially, economically and militarily.
True, but we need to stop fannying about. Either we go in or we continue out.Casino_Royale said:This needs visionary leaders on both sides who can put the events of the last 18 months behind them, recognise the new political reality, and work together on a sustainable long-term win-win UK-EU relationship that works.
There is no middle way. There never was.
The EU wants to think of itself as the European equivalent of the US but, sadly, lacks a real understanding of what has made the US Constitution and political settlement as successful and long-standing as it is.
That is why you get someone like Juncker making a State of the Union address, echoing what the US President does, but utterly lacking the essential ingredient, namely, election by the voters of that President.
There is no reason that a federal EU could not operate that way.0 -
No, it had value, but the implication is that the long term associate membership it implied would not mean 'less Europe' than we have today.Casino_Royale said:
A deal you surely reject as valueless since to admit otherwise would involve the EU conceding compromises that you profess to be impossible?williamglenn said:
People who wanted a semi-detached relationship will curse the day they turned their backs on Cameron's deal.RoyalBlue said:
Absolutely. Clean Brexit or EU + Schengen + Eurozone on the way to a federal (and hopefully more democratic) state.Beverley_C said:
That does not seem to be the caseCasino_Royale said:I think we are more important to them than their rhetoric or behaviour suggest. Financially, economically and militarily.
True, but we need to stop fannying about. Either we go in or we continue out.Casino_Royale said:This needs visionary leaders on both sides who can put the events of the last 18 months behind them, recognise the new political reality, and work together on a sustainable long-term win-win UK-EU relationship that works.
There is no middle way. There never was.0 -
Russia is on their doorstep. They manage.Casino_Royale said:
You're missing the point.TOPPING said:
Look on it as an amoeba. Or Hydra. We are cutting ourselves off but they will reform, close the wound and carry on. They are not going to spend too much time thinking "O Woe" but will carry on with what they are left with.Casino_Royale said:
(1) It is. They lose £10pa. They lose a sixth of their economy/population. They lose 25% of their military heft. They lose their chief financial centre. I recognise they are angry and also dismissive, but that matters.Beverley_C said:
That does not seem to be the caseCasino_Royale said:I think we are more important to them than their rhetoric or behaviour suggest. Financially, economically and militarily.
True, but we need to stop fannying about. Either we go in or we continue out.Casino_Royale said:This needs visionary leaders on both sides who can put the events of the last 18 months behind them, recognise the new political reality, and work together on a sustainable long-term win-win UK-EU relationship that works.
There is no middle way. There never was.
(2) That simply isn't the case. There are a variety of associate memberships and alternative models on offer between full clean break and membership.
But our crime is to have been in the club, and voted to Leave it.
I don't think the EU wants to take over the world, I think they just want to be the EU: a close-knit group of neighbouring nations with shared values and approach to a range of issues. They would even have tolerated a two-speed such group but we decided against it.
They don't "need" to do anything because on March 20th 2019 they will still be the EU with some changes here and there.
The 16-17% of their chunk they just lost (so they are now 83-84%) is still going to be sitting on their doorstep.
It does not disappear. Therefore, it matters.0 -
Whilst of course seats are the most important thing for winning an election, they are no judge of popularity or support, at least not in the way you try to use them.TheScreamingEagles said:
So how’d you explain the Tory seat gains in 2015? Osborne’s austerity ?Elliot said:
May's seat loss was substantially down to Osborne's austerity.TheScreamingEagles said:
He already knew it well enough, it explains why he helped take the Tories from 198 seats to 331 seats, and Mrs May took the party backwards.Essexit said:
Perhaps May and Osborne both need to get to know their party better.TheScreamingEagles said:If Mrs May had gotten to know her party better, she would have realised how badly the dementia tax would go down with Tory voters.
In 2010 Cameron got 10,703,754 votes
In 2015 he got 11,334,226 votes
A modest improvement of around 600,000 votes.
In 2017 May got 13,669,883 votes
Don't ask me how as I don't rate her at all. But the fact is she increased Tory support by over 2.3 million votes in two years. On that basic measure she was clearly far more popular than Cameron.0 -
Tbf to Hammond, he wanted to fight on the economy, but Mrs May and Nick Timothy wanted to sack Hammond after the election so kept him hidden during the campaign.Philip_Thompson said:
When Osborne and Cameron were fighting to defend Osborne's record ("long term economic plan" etc) it was accepted.Elliot said:
May's seat loss was substantially down to Osborne's austerity.TheScreamingEagles said:
He already knew it well enough, it explains why he helped take the Tories from 198 seats to 331 seats, and Mrs May took the party backwards.Essexit said:
Perhaps May and Osborne both need to get to know their party better.TheScreamingEagles said:If Mrs May had gotten to know her party better, she would have realised how badly the dementia tax would go down with Tory voters.
What wasn't accepted was just brushing off the economy like it didn't matter. People are prepared to accept austerity when it is "part of the plan" and viewed as necessary, May and Hammond didn't bother to fight for it though.0 -
Dr. Foxinsox, only if the people of 27/28 countries decided their nations were regions and their new country was the EU.0
-
Greetings all, from PB's most eligible "unmarried man"
-1 -
Is England a region of the UK?Morris_Dancer said:Dr. Foxinsox, only if the people of 27/28 countries decided their nations were regions and their new country was the EU.
0 -
She also managed to reawaken the anti-Tory mob that Cameron had kept quiet, a more useful comparison is Dave’s leads over Labour in both pure votes and percentages.Richard_Tyndall said:
Whilst of course seats are the most important thing for winning an election, they are no judge of popularity or support, at least not in the way you try to use them.TheScreamingEagles said:
So how’d you explain the Tory seat gains in 2015? Osborne’s austerity ?Elliot said:
May's seat loss was substantially down to Osborne's austerity.TheScreamingEagles said:
He already knew it well enough, it explains why he helped take the Tories from 198 seats to 331 seats, and Mrs May took the party backwards.Essexit said:
Perhaps May and Osborne both need to get to know their party better.TheScreamingEagles said:If Mrs May had gotten to know her party better, she would have realised how badly the dementia tax would go down with Tory voters.
In 2010 Cameron got 10,703,754 votes
In 2015 he got 11,334,226 votes
A modest improvement of around 600,000 votes.
In 2017 May got 13,669,883 votes
Don't ask me how as I don't rate her at all. But the fact is she increased Tory support by over 2.3 million votes in two years. On that basic measure she was clearly far more popular than Cameron.0 -
Oh your first point I agree, so why did Dave achieve better in 2015 than May did in 2017.Essexit said:
Fighting an election from opposition and fighting it from government are different tasks. Also, Corbyn is clearly a more formidable opponent (surprisingly) than Brown or Miliband.TheScreamingEagles said:
He already knew it well enough, it explains why he helped take the Tories from 198 seats to 331 seats, and Mrs May took the party backwards.Essexit said:
Perhaps May and Osborne both need to get to know their party better.TheScreamingEagles said:If Mrs May had gotten to know her party better, she would have realised how badly the dementia tax would go down with Tory voters.
0 -
But the Indian states only have a fraction of the powers EU member states have - and only Kashmir (controversial as it is) is permitted to fly its own flag.foxinsoxuk said:
India is a democratic state with multiple languages and over a billion people.Cyclefree said:
The idea that you can have a democratic state of 500 million people who don't even speak the same language is for the birds.RoyalBlue said:
Absolutely. Clean Brexit or EU + Schengen + Eurozone on the way to a federal (and hopefully more democratic) state.Beverley_C said:
That does not seem to be the caseCasino_Royale said:I think we are more important to them than their rhetoric or behaviour suggest. Financially, economically and militarily.
True, but we need to stop fannying about. Either we go in or we continue out.Casino_Royale said:This needs visionary leaders on both sides who can put the events of the last 18 months behind them, recognise the new political reality, and work together on a sustainable long-term win-win UK-EU relationship that works.
There is no middle way. There never was.
The EU wants to think of itself as the European equivalent of the US but, sadly, lacks a real understanding of what has made the US Constitution and political settlement as successful and long-standing as it is.
That is why you get someone like Juncker making a State of the Union address, echoing what the US President does, but utterly lacking the essential ingredient, namely, election by the voters of that President.
There is no reason that a federal EU could not operate that way.0 -
.
Brexit killed off for a generation the ability of the Tories to use 'the economy' as a vote winner.Philip_Thompson said:
When Osborne and Cameron were fighting to defend Osborne's record ("long term economic plan" etc) it was accepted.Elliot said:
May's seat loss was substantially down to Osborne's austerity.TheScreamingEagles said:
He already knew it well enough, it explains why he helped take the Tories from 198 seats to 331 seats, and Mrs May took the party backwards.Essexit said:
Perhaps May and Osborne both need to get to know their party better.TheScreamingEagles said:If Mrs May had gotten to know her party better, she would have realised how badly the dementia tax would go down with Tory voters.
What wasn't accepted was just brushing off the economy like it didn't matter. People are prepared to accept austerity when it is "part of the plan" and viewed as necessary, May and Hammond didn't bother to fight for it though.0 -
Slightly O/T
Have Ryanair staff been channeling the Tories?
“To overthrow this structure will require immense force of will, stamina and commitment from every pilot,” the letter read.
“It is entirely possible that things will get worse before they get any better. Expect management to fight any change by all means available to them. There will be casualties.
“To paraphrase Churchill: Let us make sure future colleagues look back and say: ‘This was their finest hour’.”0 -
Deliberate targeting of their ally’s seats. Fortunately for the DUP the Conservative Party in N Ireland is not much above vestigial or something nasty would happen to them.TheScreamingEagles said:
So how’d you explain the Tory seat gains in 2015? Osborne’s austerity ?Elliot said:
May's seat loss was substantially down to Osborne's austerity.TheScreamingEagles said:
He already knew it well enough, it explains why he helped take the Tories from 198 seats to 331 seats, and Mrs May took the party backwards.Essexit said:
Perhaps May and Osborne both need to get to know their party better.TheScreamingEagles said:If Mrs May had gotten to know her party better, she would have realised how badly the dementia tax would go down with Tory voters.
0 -
Don't give Juncker any ideas!Sunil_Prasannan said:
But the Indian states only have a fraction of the powers EU member states have - and only Kashmir (controversial as it is) is permitted to fly its own flag.foxinsoxuk said:
India is a democratic state with multiple languages and over a billion people.Cyclefree said:
The idea that you can have a democratic state of 500 million people who don't even speak the same language is for the birds.RoyalBlue said:
Absolutely. Clean Brexit or EU + Schengen + Eurozone on the way to a federal (and hopefully more democratic) state.Beverley_C said:
That does not seem to be the caseCasino_Royale said:I think we are more important to them than their rhetoric or behaviour suggest. Financially, economically and militarily.
True, but we need to stop fannying about. Either we go in or we continue out.Casino_Royale said:This needs visionary leaders on both sides who can put the events of the last 18 months behind them, recognise the new political reality, and work together on a sustainable long-term win-win UK-EU relationship that works.
There is no middle way. There never was.
The EU wants to think of itself as the European equivalent of the US but, sadly, lacks a real understanding of what has made the US Constitution and political settlement as successful and long-standing as it is.
That is why you get someone like Juncker making a State of the Union address, echoing what the US President does, but utterly lacking the essential ingredient, namely, election by the voters of that President.
There is no reason that a federal EU could not operate that way.0 -
Not really. If you want a measure of the opposition to her then look at the overall percentage of the vote she got. She not only increased the number of people voting for her she increased the percentage of the voters who supported her as well from the 36.8% that Cameron got in 2015 to 42.4%. By any measure of basic voting she was more popular than Cameron.TheScreamingEagles said:
She also managed to reawaken the anti-Tory mob that Cameron had kept quiet, a more useful comparison is Dave’s leads over Labour in both pure votes and percentages.Richard_Tyndall said:
Whilst of course seats are the most important thing for winning an election, they are no judge of popularity or support, at least not in the way you try to use them.TheScreamingEagles said:
So how’d you explain the Tory seat gains in 2015? Osborne’s austerity ?Elliot said:
May's seat loss was substantially down to Osborne's austerity.TheScreamingEagles said:
He already knew it well enough, it explains why he helped take the Tories from 198 seats to 331 seats, and Mrs May took the party backwards.Essexit said:
Perhaps May and Osborne both need to get to know their party better.TheScreamingEagles said:If Mrs May had gotten to know her party better, she would have realised how badly the dementia tax would go down with Tory voters.
In 2010 Cameron got 10,703,754 votes
In 2015 he got 11,334,226 votes
A modest improvement of around 600,000 votes.
In 2017 May got 13,669,883 votes
Don't ask me how as I don't rate her at all. But the fact is she increased Tory support by over 2.3 million votes in two years. On that basic measure she was clearly far more popular than Cameron.0 -
Sorry - aviation matters were discussed in the previous threadBlue_rog said:Slightly O/T
Have Ryanair staff been channeling the Tories?
“To overthrow this structure will require immense force of will, stamina and commitment from every pilot,” the letter read.
“It is entirely possible that things will get worse before they get any better. Expect management to fight any change by all means available to them. There will be casualties.
“To paraphrase Churchill: Let us make sure future colleagues look back and say: ‘This was their finest hour’.” 0 -
There is a cure for that.Sunil_Prasannan said:Greetings all, from PB's most eligible "unmarried man"
0 -
I thought Sikkim had a state flag too. Also, the central government has the power to suspend a state government and impose "President's Rule", which is a power it has used frequently.Sunil_Prasannan said:
But the Indian states only have a fraction of the powers EU member states have - and only Kashmir (controversial as it is) is permitted to fly its own flag.foxinsoxuk said:
India is a democratic state with multiple languages and over a billion people.Cyclefree said:
The idea that you can have a democratic state of 500 million people who don't even speak the same language is for the birds.RoyalBlue said:
Absolutely. Clean Brexit or EU + Schengen + Eurozone on the way to a federal (and hopefully more democratic) state.Beverley_C said:
That does not seem to be the caseCasino_Royale said:I think we are more important to them than their rhetoric or behaviour suggest. Financially, economically and militarily.
True, but we need to stop fannying about. Either we go in or we continue out.Casino_Royale said:This needs visionary leaders on both sides who can put the events of the last 18 months behind them, recognise the new political reality, and work together on a sustainable long-term win-win UK-EU relationship that works.
There is no middle way. There never was.
The EU wants to think of itself as the European equivalent of the US but, sadly, lacks a real understanding of what has made the US Constitution and political settlement as successful and long-standing as it is.
That is why you get someone like Juncker making a State of the Union address, echoing what the US President does, but utterly lacking the essential ingredient, namely, election by the voters of that President.
There is no reason that a federal EU could not operate that way.0 -
The Lib Dems.TheScreamingEagles said:
Oh your first point I agree, so why did Dave achieve better in 2015 than May did in 2017.Essexit said:
Fighting an election from opposition and fighting it from government are different tasks. Also, Corbyn is clearly a more formidable opponent (surprisingly) than Brown or Miliband.TheScreamingEagles said:
He already knew it well enough, it explains why he helped take the Tories from 198 seats to 331 seats, and Mrs May took the party backwards.Essexit said:
Perhaps May and Osborne both need to get to know their party better.TheScreamingEagles said:If Mrs May had gotten to know her party better, she would have realised how badly the dementia tax would go down with Tory voters.
0 -
Twelve more men 'who raped eight girls under 16' are charged in new probe into Asian sex gangs in Rotherham
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4948528/Twelve-men-charged-Rotherham-sex-investigation.html0 -
-
Sikkim had a flag, but not since joining India in 1975.rpjs said:
I thought Sikkim had a state flag too. Also, the central government has the power to suspend a state government and impose "President's Rule", which is a power it has used frequently.Sunil_Prasannan said:
But the Indian states only have a fraction of the powers EU member states have - and only Kashmir (controversial as it is) is permitted to fly its own flag.foxinsoxuk said:
India is a democratic state with multiple languages and over a billion people.Cyclefree said:
The idea that you can have a democratic state of 500 million people who don't even speak the same language is for the birds.RoyalBlue said:
Absolutely. Clean Brexit or EU + Schengen + Eurozone on the way to a federal (and hopefully more democratic) state.Beverley_C said:
That does not seem to be the caseCasino_Royale said:I think we are more important to them than their rhetoric or behaviour suggest. Financially, economically and militarily.
True, but we need to stop fannying about. Either we go in or we continue out.Casino_Royale said:This needs visionary leaders on both sides who can put the events of the last 18 months behind them, recognise the new political reality, and work together on a sustainable long-term win-win UK-EU relationship that works.
There is no middle way. There never was.
The EU wants to think of itself as the European equivalent of the US but, sadly, lacks a real understanding of what has made the US Constitution and political settlement as successful and long-standing as it is.
That is why you get someone like Juncker making a State of the Union address, echoing what the US President does, but utterly lacking the essential ingredient, namely, election by the voters of that President.
There is no reason that a federal EU could not operate that way.0 -
I was only joking.SeanT said:
Actually, Boris looks like he is almost crying, and his face is full of human empathy, and pity (which is the natural reaction, the speech was so sad)GIN1138 said:
I am acquainted with Boris Johnson. He is ambitious and smart and he can be ruthless, but he is not some evil careerist monster. He is also, sincerely, a eurosceptic.
I like Boris and as an "outsider" to the Tory Party it looks like a "no-brainer" for him to take over from Theresa like yesterday...0 -
She saved us from Leadsome.Elliot said:
This is how I feel. Despite being on the left I see May as being clunky but a pretty moderate Tory in the scheme of things. Corbyn's lot are complete ideologues.Richard_Tyndall said:
You see I can agree with you on just about every word there. I don't like May and I don't think she is in any way fit to lead our country. But that is a million miles from YS and his laughing at someone who is clearly in difficulties.nielh said:
I do feel some empathy for May. The reaction to her coughing is deeply unfair. I agree with the jist of her citizens of nowhere comments but it was ill judged and taken massively out of context. No sympathy at all from me for her unnecessary election fiasco and happy to laugh at her expense at crushing the saboteurs (although it wasn't her words, just a daily mail front page)Richard_Tyndall said:
Nah. You are just a nasty piece of sputum with zero empathy. The simplest options are usually the correct ones.YellowSubmarine said:@casino_royale @Elliot @Richard_Tyndall Ridiculous bed wetting. They'll be writing books about May for decades. How did someone prevent enough to give the often misunderstood ' Nasty Party ' speech and who deservedly became PM end up offering the 9 month " Citizens of nowhere " to ' Crush the Sabateurs ' nightmare ? She's reaping what she sowed.
But actually I am far more concerned about the EU migrants who have 'accidentally' recieved deportation letters from the home office and are terrified for their famillies and livelihoods. I also notice that there is no shortage of deranged psychopaths who celebrate such actions as the implementation of rules and laws. They are the people with no empathy.
What does May ultimately stand to lose? her job? pride? Some people are going to lose much more because of her decisions.
As I mentioned the other day I detested Heath for his politics but I would challenge anyone with a soul not to feel a huge wave of empathy when you saw him in interviews being forced to talk about his private life.
YS is just a nasty piece of work.0 -
PMs need to command the respect of their colleagues. I'm not sure sympathy will help here.williamglenn said:0 -
Boris as PM will be a bigger disaster than Theresa May.GIN1138 said:
I was only joking.SeanT said:
Actually, Boris looks like he is almost crying, and his face is full of human empathy, and pity (which is the natural reaction, the speech was so sad)GIN1138 said:
I am acquainted with Boris Johnson. He is ambitious and smart and he can be ruthless, but he is not some evil careerist monster. He is also, sincerely, a eurosceptic.
I like Boris and as an "outsider" to the Tory Party it looks like a "no-brainer" for him to take over from Theresa like yesterday...
Trust me, trust JohnO, trust Michael Gove.0 -
David Cameron: Boris Johnson told people he was 'not a Leaver'SeanT said:
Actually, Boris looks like he is almost crying, and his face is full of human empathy, and pity (which is the natural reaction, the speech was so sad)GIN1138 said:
I am acquainted with Boris Johnson. He is ambitious and smart and he can be ruthless, but he is not some evil careerist monster. He is also, sincerely, a eurosceptic.
https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/conservative-party/boris-johnson/news/75196/david-cameron-boris-johnson0 -
That's a load of codswallop.JonathanD said:.
Brexit killed off for a generation the ability of the Tories to use 'the economy' as a vote winner.Philip_Thompson said:
When Osborne and Cameron were fighting to defend Osborne's record ("long term economic plan" etc) it was accepted.Elliot said:
May's seat loss was substantially down to Osborne's austerity.TheScreamingEagles said:
He already knew it well enough, it explains why he helped take the Tories from 198 seats to 331 seats, and Mrs May took the party backwards.Essexit said:
Perhaps May and Osborne both need to get to know their party better.TheScreamingEagles said:If Mrs May had gotten to know her party better, she would have realised how badly the dementia tax would go down with Tory voters.
What wasn't accepted was just brushing off the economy like it didn't matter. People are prepared to accept austerity when it is "part of the plan" and viewed as necessary, May and Hammond didn't bother to fight for it though.
Almost all of the 48% will have voted that way because they thought it was best economically, if it wasn't for the economy Leave would have been even further in the lead. Very few voted Remain despite the economy.
While a large portion of the 52% voted that way because they thought it was best economically, whether it be the £350 million a week gross befpre rebate that we send to the EU or the ability to sign our own trade deals outside the EU etc
The economy still matters.0 -
"We count 12 LibDem MPs, Lord Vader, but their majorities are so small, they're evading our Turbo-lasers!"Essexit said:
The Lib Dems.TheScreamingEagles said:
Oh your first point I agree, so why did Dave achieve better in 2015 than May did in 2017.Essexit said:
Fighting an election from opposition and fighting it from government are different tasks. Also, Corbyn is clearly a more formidable opponent (surprisingly) than Brown or Miliband.TheScreamingEagles said:
He already knew it well enough, it explains why he helped take the Tories from 198 seats to 331 seats, and Mrs May took the party backwards.Essexit said:
Perhaps May and Osborne both need to get to know their party better.TheScreamingEagles said:If Mrs May had gotten to know her party better, she would have realised how badly the dementia tax would go down with Tory voters.
0 -
A year and a half old article during the referendum campaign? Hardly impartial.logical_song said:
David Cameron: Boris Johnson told people he was 'not a Leaver'SeanT said:
Actually, Boris looks like he is almost crying, and his face is full of human empathy, and pity (which is the natural reaction, the speech was so sad)GIN1138 said:
I am acquainted with Boris Johnson. He is ambitious and smart and he can be ruthless, but he is not some evil careerist monster. He is also, sincerely, a eurosceptic.
https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/conservative-party/boris-johnson/news/75196/david-cameron-boris-johnson0 -
Non sequitur. Clearly you're not interested in taking the point seriously.TOPPING said:
Russia is on their doorstep. They manage.Casino_Royale said:
You're missing the point.TOPPING said:
Look on it as an amoeba. Or Hydra. We are cutting ourselves off but they will reform, close the wound and carry on. They are not going to spend too much time thinking "O Woe" but will carry on with what they are left with.Casino_Royale said:
(1) It is. They lose £10pa. They lose a sixth of their economy/population. They lose 25% of their military heft. They lose their chief financial centre. I recognise they are angry and also dismissive, but that matters.Beverley_C said:
That does not seem to be the caseCasino_Royale said:I think we are more important to them than their rhetoric or behaviour suggest. Financially, economically and militarily.
True, but we need to stop fannying about. Either we go in or we continue out.Casino_Royale said:This needs visionary leaders on both sides who can put the events of the last 18 months behind them, recognise the new political reality, and work together on a sustainable long-term win-win UK-EU relationship that works.
There is no middle way. There never was.
(2) That simply isn't the case. There are a variety of associate memberships and alternative models on offer between full clean break and membership.
But our crime is to have been in the club, and voted to Leave it.
I don't think the EU wants to take over the world, I think they just want to be the EU: a close-knit group of neighbouring nations with shared values and approach to a range of issues. They would even have tolerated a two-speed such group but we decided against it.
They don't "need" to do anything because on March 20th 2019 they will still be the EU with some changes here and there.
The 16-17% of their chunk they just lost (so they are now 83-84%) is still going to be sitting on their doorstep.
It does not disappear. Therefore, it matters.0 -
You'll give credit to ISIS before you give Osborne and Cameron for victory in 2015.Essexit said:
The Lib Dems.TheScreamingEagles said:
Oh your first point I agree, so why did Dave achieve better in 2015 than May did in 2017.Essexit said:
Fighting an election from opposition and fighting it from government are different tasks. Also, Corbyn is clearly a more formidable opponent (surprisingly) than Brown or Miliband.TheScreamingEagles said:
He already knew it well enough, it explains why he helped take the Tories from 198 seats to 331 seats, and Mrs May took the party backwards.Essexit said:
Perhaps May and Osborne both need to get to know their party better.TheScreamingEagles said:If Mrs May had gotten to know her party better, she would have realised how badly the dementia tax would go down with Tory voters.
You are the reason why the Tories are struggling to beat Corbyn, you won't accept why the Tories won in 2015 thanks to Dave and George.0 -
And meTheScreamingEagles said:
Boris as PM will be a bigger disaster than Theresa May.GIN1138 said:
I was only joking.SeanT said:
Actually, Boris looks like he is almost crying, and his face is full of human empathy, and pity (which is the natural reaction, the speech was so sad)GIN1138 said:
I am acquainted with Boris Johnson. He is ambitious and smart and he can be ruthless, but he is not some evil careerist monster. He is also, sincerely, a eurosceptic.
I like Boris and as an "outsider" to the Tory Party it looks like a "no-brainer" for him to take over from Theresa like yesterday...
Trust me, trust JohnO, trust Michael Gove.0 -
Why do they keep saying 'Asian'? A more accurate descriptor should be applied.FrancisUrquhart said:Twelve more men 'who raped eight girls under 16' are charged in new probe into Asian sex gangs in Rotherham
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4948528/Twelve-men-charged-Rotherham-sex-investigation.html0 -
You sound like one of those lefty London luvvies wot told us Boris would be a disaster in 2008.TheScreamingEagles said:
Boris as PM will be a bigger disaster than Theresa May.GIN1138 said:
I was only joking.SeanT said:
Actually, Boris looks like he is almost crying, and his face is full of human empathy, and pity (which is the natural reaction, the speech was so sad)GIN1138 said:
I am acquainted with Boris Johnson. He is ambitious and smart and he can be ruthless, but he is not some evil careerist monster. He is also, sincerely, a eurosceptic.
I like Boris and as an "outsider" to the Tory Party it looks like a "no-brainer" for him to take over from Theresa like yesterday...
Trust me, trust JohnO, trust Michael Gove.0 -
Um, because they were up against Ed?TheScreamingEagles said:
You'll give credit to ISIS before you give Osborne and Cameron for victory in 2015.Essexit said:
The Lib Dems.TheScreamingEagles said:
Oh your first point I agree, so why did Dave achieve better in 2015 than May did in 2017.Essexit said:
Fighting an election from opposition and fighting it from government are different tasks. Also, Corbyn is clearly a more formidable opponent (surprisingly) than Brown or Miliband.TheScreamingEagles said:
He already knew it well enough, it explains why he helped take the Tories from 198 seats to 331 seats, and Mrs May took the party backwards.Essexit said:
Perhaps May and Osborne both need to get to know their party better.TheScreamingEagles said:If Mrs May had gotten to know her party better, she would have realised how badly the dementia tax would go down with Tory voters.
You are the reason why the Tories are struggling to beat Corbyn, you won't accept why the Tories won in 2015 thanks to Dave and George.0 -
I'm not even a Tory member. I'll give Cameron credit, and although I disagreed with him over Brexit I think he's basically a decent bloke.TheScreamingEagles said:
You'll give credit to ISIS before you give Osborne and Cameron for victory in 2015.Essexit said:
The Lib Dems.TheScreamingEagles said:
Oh your first point I agree, so why did Dave achieve better in 2015 than May did in 2017.Essexit said:
Fighting an election from opposition and fighting it from government are different tasks. Also, Corbyn is clearly a more formidable opponent (surprisingly) than Brown or Miliband.TheScreamingEagles said:
He already knew it well enough, it explains why he helped take the Tories from 198 seats to 331 seats, and Mrs May took the party backwards.Essexit said:
Perhaps May and Osborne both need to get to know their party better.TheScreamingEagles said:If Mrs May had gotten to know her party better, she would have realised how badly the dementia tax would go down with Tory voters.
You are the reason why the Tories are struggling to beat Corbyn, you won't accept why the Tories won in 2015 thanks to Dave and George.0 -
OGH & TSE tie themselves in no end of knots trying to wish this away.Richard_Tyndall said:
By any measure of basic voting she was more popular than Cameron.TheScreamingEagles said:
She also managed to reawaken the anti-Tory mob that Cameron had kept quiet, a more useful comparison is Dave’s leads over Labour in both pure votes and percentages.Richard_Tyndall said:
Whilst of course seats are the most important thing for winning an election, they are no judge of popularity or support, at least not in the way you try to use them.TheScreamingEagles said:
So how’d you explain the Tory seat gains in 2015? Osborne’s austerity ?Elliot said:
May's seat loss was substantially down to Osborne's austerity.TheScreamingEagles said:
He already knew it well enough, it explains why he helped take the Tories from 198 seats to 331 seats, and Mrs May took the party backwards.Essexit said:
Perhaps May and Osborne both need to get to know their party better.TheScreamingEagles said:If Mrs May had gotten to know her party better, she would have realised how badly the dementia tax would go down with Tory voters.
In 2010 Cameron got 10,703,754 votes
In 2015 he got 11,334,226 votes
A modest improvement of around 600,000 votes.
In 2017 May got 13,669,883 votes
Don't ask me how as I don't rate her at all. But the fact is she increased Tory support by over 2.3 million votes in two years. On that basic measure she was clearly far more popular than Cameron.
Yes of course what ultimately matters is how many seats you get - but how would Cameron (let alone Osborne) have done against a Corbyn 2017?0 -
Indeed.Richard_Tyndall said:
Whilst of course seats are the most important thing for winning an election, they are no judge of popularity or support, at least not in the way you try to use them.TheScreamingEagles said:
So how’d you explain the Tory seat gains in 2015? Osborne’s austerity ?Elliot said:
May's seat loss was substantially down to Osborne's austerity.TheScreamingEagles said:
He already knew it well enough, it explains why he helped take the Tories from 198 seats to 331 seats, and Mrs May took the party backwards.Essexit said:
Perhaps May and Osborne both need to get to know their party better.TheScreamingEagles said:If Mrs May had gotten to know her party better, she would have realised how badly the dementia tax would go down with Tory voters.
In 2010 Cameron got 10,703,754 votes
In 2015 he got 11,334,226 votes
A modest improvement of around 600,000 votes.
In 2017 May got 13,669,883 votes
Don't ask me how as I don't rate her at all. But the fact is she increased Tory support by over 2.3 million votes in two years. On that basic measure she was clearly far more popular than Cameron.
I've been suggesting this for months.
The problem as I see is not that Mrs May isn't popular; its that the left have finally decided to play fantasy politics at exactly the time when people are wanting to believe it is that easy...0 -
Can I change my vote to remainFF43 said:
So Rees-Mogg flees non-Brexiting Britain to Svalbard, only to be eaten by a polar bear. It's one way of dealing with the trauma I suppose.rpjs said:IIRC it's mandatory under local law to carry a rifle outside the limits of Longyearbyen, the capital, in case of polar bear attack.
0 -
A Tory majority.CarlottaVance said:
OGH & TSE tie themselves in no end of knots trying to wish this away.Richard_Tyndall said:
By any measure of basic voting she was more popular than Cameron.TheScreamingEagles said:
She also managed to reawaken the anti-Tory mob that Cameron had kept quiet, a more useful comparison is Dave’s leads over Labour in both pure votes and percentages.Richard_Tyndall said:
Whilst of course seats are the most important thing for winning an election, they are no judge of popularity or support, at least not in the way you try to use them.TheScreamingEagles said:
So how’d you explain the Tory seat gains in 2015? Osborne’s austerity ?Elliot said:
May's seat loss was substantially down to Osborne's austerity.TheScreamingEagles said:
He already knew it well enough, it explains why he helped take the Tories from 198 seats to 331 seats, and Mrs May took the party backwards.Essexit said:
Perhaps May and Osborne both need to get to know their party better.TheScreamingEagles said:If Mrs May had gotten to know her party better, she would have realised how badly the dementia tax would go down with Tory voters.
In 2010 Cameron got 10,703,754 votes
In 2015 he got 11,334,226 votes
A modest improvement of around 600,000 votes.
In 2017 May got 13,669,883 votes
Don't ask me how as I don't rate her at all. But the fact is she increased Tory support by over 2.3 million votes in two years. On that basic measure she was clearly far more popular than Cameron.
Yes of course what ultimately matters is how many seats you get - but how would Cameron (let alone Osborne) have done against a Corbyn 2017?
They would have fought on the economy and nailed Corbyn on it.
They would have reminded the country of Liam Byrne’s note.
Mrs May didn’t mention it.0 -
The serious point applies much more strongly in the other direction. The EU isn’t going anywhere.Casino_Royale said:
Non sequitur. Clearly you're not interested in taking the point seriously.TOPPING said:
Russia is on their doorstep. They manage.Casino_Royale said:
You're missing the point.TOPPING said:
Look on it as an amoeba. Or Hydra. We are cutting ourselves off but they will reform, close the wound and carry on. They are not going to spend too much time thinking "O Woe" but will carry on with what they are left with.Casino_Royale said:
(1) It is. They lose £10pa. They lose a sixth of their economy/population. They lose 25% of their military heft. They lose their chief financial centre. I recognise they are angry and also dismissive, but that matters.Beverley_C said:
That does not seem to be the caseCasino_Royale said:I think we are more important to them than their rhetoric or behaviour suggest. Financially, economically and militarily.
True, but we need to stop fannying about. Either we go in or we continue out.Casino_Royale said:This needs visionary leaders on both sides who can put the events of the last 18 months behind them, recognise the new political reality, and work together on a sustainable long-term win-win UK-EU relationship that works.
There is no middle way. There never was.
(2) That simply isn't the case. There are a variety of associate memberships and alternative models on offer between full clean break and membership.
But our crime is to have been in the club, and voted to Leave it.
I don't think the EU wants to take over the world, I think they just want to be the EU: a close-knit group of neighbouring nations with shared values and approach to a range of issues. They would even have tolerated a two-speed such group but we decided against it.
They don't "need" to do anything because on March 20th 2019 they will still be the EU with some changes here and there.
The 16-17% of their chunk they just lost (so they are now 83-84%) is still going to be sitting on their doorstep.
It does not disappear. Therefore, it matters.0 -
Nothing today has changed my mind that Theresa May will stay in Office until mid 2019.
Her speech was excellent up to and including the protester but the cold and cough she has been carrying this week overwhelmed her and her message became more difficult to follow
I do not think it was the diabetes but this can add to the problem
She has moved towards the left on some policies but that is necessary. She is walking a very difficult path between remain and leave and really it is almost impossible for any of the current politicians across the parties to do any better.
I do have reservation about Theresa but the fact she had a bad cold and cough is not one of them.
0 -
Tory votes 2017: 13,669,883TheScreamingEagles said:
A Tory majority.CarlottaVance said:
OGH & TSE tie themselves in no end of knots trying to wish this away.Richard_Tyndall said:
By any measure of basic voting she was more popular than Cameron.TheScreamingEagles said:
She also managed to reawaken the anti-Tory mob that Cameron had kept quiet, a more useful comparison is Dave’s leads over Labour in both pure votes and percentages.Richard_Tyndall said:
Whilst of course seats are the most important thing for winning an election, they are no judge of popularity or support, at least not in the way you try to use them.TheScreamingEagles said:
So how’d you explain the Tory seat gains in 2015? Osborne’s austerity ?Elliot said:
May's seat loss was substantially down to Osborne's austerity.TheScreamingEagles said:
He already knew it well enough, it explains why he helped take the Tories from 198 seats to 331 seats, and Mrs May took the party backwards.Essexit said:
Perhaps May and Osborne both need to get to know their party better.TheScreamingEagles said:If Mrs May had gotten to know her party better, she would have realised how badly the dementia tax would go down with Tory voters.
In 2010 Cameron got 10,703,754 votes
In 2015 he got 11,334,226 votes
A modest improvement of around 600,000 votes.
In 2017 May got 13,669,883 votes
Don't ask me how as I don't rate her at all. But the fact is she increased Tory support by over 2.3 million votes in two years. On that basic measure she was clearly far more popular than Cameron.
Yes of course what ultimately matters is how many seats you get - but how would Cameron (let alone Osborne) have done against a Corbyn 2017?
They would have fought on the economy and nailed Corbyn on it.
They would have reminded the country of Liam Byrne’s note.
Mrs May didn’t mention it.
Tory votes 2015: 11,334,2260 -
Mr. Vance, Cameron/Osborne would've done significantly better by virtue of not running such an absolutely terrible campaign.
They made some mistakes in 2010 and had a better time in 2015, but neither came anywhere near close to the catastrophic litany of idiocy and ill-judgement that was the 2017 campaign.0 -
& Ruth D.TheScreamingEagles said:
Boris as PM will be a bigger disaster than Theresa May.GIN1138 said:
I was only joking.SeanT said:
Actually, Boris looks like he is almost crying, and his face is full of human empathy, and pity (which is the natural reaction, the speech was so sad)GIN1138 said:
I am acquainted with Boris Johnson. He is ambitious and smart and he can be ruthless, but he is not some evil careerist monster. He is also, sincerely, a eurosceptic.
I like Boris and as an "outsider" to the Tory Party it looks like a "no-brainer" for him to take over from Theresa like yesterday...
Trust me, trust JohnO, trust Michael Gove.0 -
Who?Sunil_Prasannan said:Greetings all, from PB's most eligible "unmarried man"
0 -
No way on Gods earth would Cameron have gone to the country before 2020. Why should he? He had a majority.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Vance, Cameron/Osborne would've done significantly better by virtue of not running such an absolutely terrible campaign.
They made some mistakes in 2010 and had a better time in 2015, but neither came anywhere near close to the catastrophic litany of idiocy and ill-judgement that was the 2017 campaign.0 -
Just TMay just have bad luck? I mean: a cold, letters alling down, a comedian sneaking through.
Exactly which parts of this her ault?
0 -
Now he's mocking her;
https://twitter.com/BorisJohnson/status/915597216483500032
This can't go on for much longer.0 -
The prankster was TSEMarkHopkins said:
Just TMay just have bad luck? I mean: a cold, letters alling down, a comedian sneaking through.
Exactly which parts of this her ault? 0 -
Maybe we ultimately need a true beleaver in charge to properly take ownership of the situation.logical_song said:
She saved us from Leadsome.Elliot said:
This is how I feel. Despite being on the left I see May as being clunky but a pretty moderate Tory in the scheme of things. Corbyn's lot are complete ideologues.Richard_Tyndall said:
You see I can agree with you on just about every word there. I don't like May and I don't think she is in any way fit to lead our country. But that is a million miles from YS and his laughing at someone who is clearly in difficulties.nielh said:
I do feel some empathy for May. The reaction to her coughing is deeply unfair. I agree with the jist of her citizens of nowhere comments but it was ill judged and taken massively out of context. No sympathy at all from me for her unnecessary election fiasco and happy to laugh at her expense at crushing the saboteurs (although it wasn't her words, just a daily mail front page)Richard_Tyndall said:
Nah. You are just a nasty piece of sputum with zero empathy. The simplest options are usually the correct ones.YellowSubmarine said:@casino_royale @Elliot @Richard_Tyndall Ridiculous bed wetting. They'll be writing books about May for decades. How did someone prevent enough to give the often misunderstood ' Nasty Party ' speech and who deservedly became PM end up offering the 9 month " Citizens of nowhere " to ' Crush the Sabateurs ' nightmare ? She's reaping what she sowed.
But actually I am far more concerned about the EU migrants who have 'accidentally' recieved deportation letters from the home office and are terrified for their famillies and livelihoods. I also notice that there is no shortage of deranged psychopaths who celebrate such actions as the implementation of rules and laws. They are the people with no empathy.
What does May ultimately stand to lose? her job? pride? Some people are going to lose much more because of her decisions.
As I mentioned the other day I detested Heath for his politics but I would challenge anyone with a soul not to feel a huge wave of empathy when you saw him in interviews being forced to talk about his private life.
YS is just a nasty piece of work.0 -
I doubt Boris will make a move while she's still hanging on though. His plan is to grind her into the dust.Pong said:Now he's mocking her;
https://twitter.com/BorisJohnson/status/915597216483500032
This can't go on for much longer.0 -
The Cameron of 2015 would have. The Cameron of 2016 had blown all his political credit and was polling little if any better than Corbyn. He would certainly have fought a far better campaign than May but he'd have been starting from much further back (and as such, wouldn't have called an election in the first place.TheScreamingEagles said:
A Tory majority.CarlottaVance said:
OGH & TSE tie themselves in no end of knots trying to wish this away.Richard_Tyndall said:
By any measure of basic voting she was more popular than Cameron.TheScreamingEagles said:
She also managed to reawaken the anti-Tory mob that Cameron had kept quiet, a more useful comparison is Dave’s leads over Labour in both pure votes and percentages.Richard_Tyndall said:
Whilst of course seats are the most important thing for winning an election, they are no judge of popularity or support, at least not in the way you try to use them.TheScreamingEagles said:
So how’d you explain the Tory seat gains in 2015? Osborne’s austerity ?Elliot said:
May's seat loss was substantially down to Osborne's austerity.TheScreamingEagles said:
He already knew it well enough, it explains why he helped take the Tories from 198 seats to 331 seats, and Mrs May took the party backwards.Essexit said:
Perhaps May and Osborne both need to get to know their party better.TheScreamingEagles said:If Mrs May had gotten to know her party better, she would have realised how badly the dementia tax would go down with Tory voters.
In 2010 Cameron got 10,703,754 votes
In 2015 he got 11,334,226 votes
A modest improvement of around 600,000 votes.
In 2017 May got 13,669,883 votes
Don't ask me how as I don't rate her at all. But the fact is she increased Tory support by over 2.3 million votes in two years. On that basic measure she was clearly far more popular than Cameron.
Yes of course what ultimately matters is how many seats you get - but how would Cameron (let alone Osborne) have done against a Corbyn 2017?
They would have fought on the economy and nailed Corbyn on it.
They would have reminded the country of Liam Byrne’s note.
Mrs May didn’t mention it.0 -
Brexit changed everything.david_herdson said:
The Cameron of 2015 would have. The Cameron of 2016 had blown all his political credit and was polling little if any better than Corbyn. He would certainly have fought a far better campaign than May but he'd have been starting from much further back (and as such, wouldn't have called an election in the first place.TheScreamingEagles said:
A Tory majority.CarlottaVance said:
OGH & TSE tie themselves in no end of knots trying to wish this away.Richard_Tyndall said:
By any measure of basic voting she was more popular than Cameron.TheScreamingEagles said:
She also managed to reawaken the anti-Tory mob that Cameron had kept quiet, a more useful comparison is Dave’s leads over Labour in both pure votes and percentages.Richard_Tyndall said:
Whilst of course seats are the most important thing for winning an election, they are no judge of popularity or support, at least not in the way you try to use them.TheScreamingEagles said:
So how’d you explain the Tory seat gains in 2015? Osborne’s austerity ?Elliot said:
May's seat loss was substantially down to Osborne's austerity.TheScreamingEagles said:
He already knew it well enough, it explains why he helped take the Tories from 198 seats to 331 seats, and Mrs May took the party backwards.Essexit said:
Perhaps May and Osborne both need to get to know their party better.TheScreamingEagles said:If Mrs May had gotten to know her party better, she would have realised how badly the dementia tax would go down with Tory voters.
In 2010 Cameron got 10,703,754 votes
In 2015 he got 11,334,226 votes
A modest improvement of around 600,000 votes.
In 2017 May got 13,669,883 votes
Don't ask me how as I don't rate her at all. But the fact is she increased Tory support by over 2.3 million votes in two years. On that basic measure she was clearly far more popular than Cameron.
Yes of course what ultimately matters is how many seats you get - but how would Cameron (let alone Osborne) have done against a Corbyn 2017?
They would have fought on the economy and nailed Corbyn on it.
They would have reminded the country of Liam Byrne’s note.
Mrs May didn’t mention it.
Counterfactual0 -
What proportion of these anonymous anecdotes are made up?TheScreamingEagles said:
There have been loads since the election but very little in the way of an actual challenge... I'm not saying it won't happen - but what are the Tories waiting for?
Is it just that resentment of Boris and not wanting him to be PM means they will support TM?0 -
So how has the big speech of the day gone?
No not Mrs May's conference speech, the launch of new Google Pixel products.0 -
How does this ministry sound to you:TheScreamingEagles said:
Boris as PM will be a bigger disaster than Theresa May.GIN1138 said:
I was only joking.SeanT said:
Actually, Boris looks like he is almost crying, and his face is full of human empathy, and pity (which is the natural reaction, the speech was so sad)GIN1138 said:
I am acquainted with Boris Johnson. He is ambitious and smart and he can be ruthless, but he is not some evil careerist monster. He is also, sincerely, a eurosceptic.
I like Boris and as an "outsider" to the Tory Party it looks like a "no-brainer" for him to take over from Theresa like yesterday...
Trust me, trust JohnO, trust Michael Gove.
PM- Boris
CotE - Gove
Foreign Sec - JRM
Home Sec - Priti
David Davis - Brexit Sec
Would you tear up your membership card? 0 -
Indeed. In a counterfactual universe Cameron would have carried on to mitigate the effects of Leaving.nielh said:
Brexit changed everything.david_herdson said:
The Cameron of 2015 would have. The Cameron of 2016 had blown all his political credit and was polling little if any better than Corbyn. He would certainly have fought a far better campaign than May but he'd have been starting from much further back (and as such, wouldn't have called an election in the first place.TheScreamingEagles said:
A Tory majority.CarlottaVance said:
OGH & TSE tie themselves in no end of knots trying to wish this away.Richard_Tyndall said:
By any measure of basic voting she was more popular than Cameron.TheScreamingEagles said:
She also managed to reawaken the anti-Tory mob that Cameron had kept quiet, a more useful comparison is Dave’s leads over Labour in both pure votes and percentages.Richard_Tyndall said:
Whilst of course seats are the most important thing for winning an election, they are no judge of popularity or support, at least not in the way you try to use them.TheScreamingEagles said:
So how’d you explain the Tory seat gains in 2015? Osborne’s austerity ?Elliot said:
May's seat loss was substantially down to Osborne's austerity.TheScreamingEagles said:
He already knew it well enough, it explains why he helped take the Tories from 198 seats to 331 seats, and Mrs May took the party backwards.Essexit said:
Perhaps May and Osborne both need to get to know their party better.TheScreamingEagles said:If Mrs May had gotten to know her party better, she would have realised how badly the dementia tax would go down with Tory voters.
In 2010 Cameron got 10,703,754 votes
In 2015 he got 11,334,226 votes
A modest improvement of around 600,000 votes.
In 2017 May got 13,669,883 votes
Don't ask me how as I don't rate her at all. But the fact is she increased Tory support by over 2.3 million votes in two years. On that basic measure she was clearly far more popular than Cameron.
Yes of course what ultimately matters is how many seats you get - but how would Cameron (let alone Osborne) have done against a Corbyn 2017?
They would have fought on the economy and nailed Corbyn on it.
They would have reminded the country of Liam Byrne’s note.
Mrs May didn’t mention it.
Counterfactual0 -
Awful. Just awful.GIN1138 said:
Hoe does this ministry sound to you:TheScreamingEagles said:
Boris as PM will be a bigger disaster than Theresa May.GIN1138 said:
I was only joking.SeanT said:
Actually, Boris looks like he is almost crying, and his face is full of human empathy, and pity (which is the natural reaction, the speech was so sad)GIN1138 said:
I am acquainted with Boris Johnson. He is ambitious and smart and he can be ruthless, but he is not some evil careerist monster. He is also, sincerely, a eurosceptic.
I like Boris and as an "outsider" to the Tory Party it looks like a "no-brainer" for him to take over from Theresa like yesterday...
Trust me, trust JohnO, trust Michael Gove.
PM- Boris
CotE - Gove
Foreign Sec - JRM
Home Sec - Priti
Would you tear up your membership card?
I’d remain a member but wouldn’t campaign for it until we returned to sanity.0 -
It's more than that. A leadership contest could well lead to one (or more) of the following:rkrkrk said:
What proportion of these anonymous anecdotes are made up?TheScreamingEagles said:
There have been loads since the election but very little in the way of an actual challenge... I'm not saying it won't happen - but what are the Tories waiting for?
Is it just that resentment of Boris and not wanting him to be PM means they will support TM?
1) An irrevocable split in the Tory Party
2) The collapse of the Brexit talks
3) A Corbyn-led government
4) Another general election
0 -
In life you make your own luck...MarkHopkins said:
Just TMay just have bad luck? I mean: a cold, letters alling down, a comedian sneaking through.
Exactly which parts of this her ault?0 -
I am not sure I understand what happened with regard to the prankster.
If the prankster used a BBC pass, or was vouched for by the BBC, then I would have thought it was they who should be answering searching questions.
(I’ve no particularly brief to defend Theresa May, I think she should go)
But, if journalists are to be allowed access to politicians & passes to conferences, then news organisations need to behave responsibly.0 -
which put on 2.3 million votes......I don't argue that the campaign will go down in history as a classic "how not to do it".....and yet, despite that, they still got more than 2 million more votes....Morris_Dancer said:the 2017 campaign.
0 -
There's brown bread, white breadTheScreamingEagles said:
All sorts of wholemeal bread
It comes in funny packages
With writing on the side
But it doesn't matter which one you have
'Cause when you cut the crusts off
Have it with marmalade
Or butter, cheese, tomatoes, beans, banana
Or chocolate if you're strange
It doesn't really matter0 -
Mr. Cwsc, is it confirmed it was a BBC pass?
Miss Vance, vote share is irrelevant. Seats are what count. Worth remembering that 10,000 changed either way would've utterly transformed the result.0 -
Let Rigby name the person thenTheScreamingEagles said:0
This discussion has been closed.