politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » With Priti Patel flying in from Kenya her situation and the go
Comments
-
Well luckily I'm not cynical otherwise I would think this story has been planted with the Jewish Chronicle to help a Minister who has proven very friendly towards Israel and may be in a spot of bother as a consequence.rottenborough said:
Categorical denial is current state of play.DavidL said:If No 10 were in fact aware of these meetings but did not want them disclosed to the Foreign Office (at least officially) and Mrs May allowed an FO Minister to make a statement in the House that they were not disclosed we may just be leaving a period of relative calm....
0 -
The Tory policy on Brexit is very coherent actually, leave the single market, after a 2 year transition and do a FTA with the EU and end free movement and replace it with a points systemanothernick said:
A major reshuffle would make no fundamental difference. It might look good for a week or two but the fundamental problem would be unchanged. The Tory Party has no coherent policy on Brexit and a reshuffle will not conjour one up. They are completely incapable of governing.Richard_Nabavi said:
A major and bold reshuffle would be a risk, of course, but one with considerable potential upside. Conversely, doing as little as possible is also a risk, but one with with little or no upside. What's more, now is a particularly good time to be bold, because her most dangerous ministers are currently weak and the sexual harassment scandal is a restraining factor on any plots.TOPPING said:And yet we still mock Brown for not having the cojones to call an election. Such changes are unstable, unpredictable and events can turn on the slightest (or in this case, most enormous) issue.
I don't blame her for not rocking the boat.
It is execrable, weak, bad government, a shambles. But I don't blame her for it.
There will never be a better time for her to seize the initiative.
However, she won't.
The LD policy on Brexit to be fair to them is also coherent, they want to permanently stay in the single market and customs union.
It is Corbyn and Starmer who do not really have a clue what their long term Brexit policy is.0 -
-
I was trying to work this though but actually, I think she's toast either way. The basic problem is that all the Leave cabinet ministers, apart from Gove, are not very good. Sacking one but not others will cause resentment at disparate treatment; sacking all would cause uproar. On top of which, she probably can't sack Hammond two weeks before the Budget, which would just compound Leavers' wrath. Further, bringing in the likes of JRM is unlikely to solve the main problem while adding new ones to the mix (is he any good? If not, status quo ante plus the experience of an ineffective reshuffle; if so, boosts his leadership credentials).Jonathan said:
She either carries on like this, or rolls the dice. No brainer.Richard_Nabavi said:
A major and bold reshuffle would be a risk, of course, but one with considerable potential upside. Conversely, doing as little as possible is also a risk, but one with with little or no upside. What's more, now is a particularly good time to be bold, because her most dangerous ministers are currently weak and the sexual harassment scandal is a restraining factor on any plots.TOPPING said:And yet we still mock Brown for not having the cojones to call an election. Such changes are unstable, unpredictable and events can turn on the slightest (or in this case, most enormous) issue.
I don't blame her for not rocking the boat.
It is execrable, weak, bad government, a shambles. But I don't blame her for it.
There will never be a better time for her to seize the initiative.
However, she won't.0 -
Well, she’s not flying on BA, so there’s a chance the plane might have wifi.Sandpit said:Priti s plane now two hours from Heathrow.
The fun thing is that no-one on the plane will have any idea what’s going on back on the ground in London, unless someone chooses to make a call on the sat phone system. You can’t make an incoming call to the plane, except via ATC or the airline.
She’ll have no idea at all that 22,000 people and the two 24h news channels have been following the plane in real time all day!0 -
Patel reaches Croatia.
The Long Flight Home.
0 -
Perhaps, then she can retire and I think she knows it.TGOHF said:
It wont be far off - certainly within 60 days.HYUFD said:
At this rate 60 seconds after Brexit will be the precise point May's premiership ends.TGOHF said:
If you think the level of hostility that May is facing is unrelated to Brexit then I have a bridge for sale.TheScreamingEagles said:The EU must look at Mrs May and her cabinet and think this lot will not outsmart us in the Brexit negotiations.
Hence why no one wants the job - until 60 seconds after Brexit.
External forces are at work at present - can she stagger over the line in March '19.0 -
Before Thatcher, Soubry's views were in the majority. Thatcher called them 'wets'.El_Capitano said:Guardian reporting on Five Live:
Soubry agreed. She said: "I’m with Mary [Creagh]. I think Mary’s instincts are usually good and on this one I’m sure she is right."
I'm increasingly wondering about Soubry's place in the Conservatives. She seems to be freelancing as an independent centrist rather than a whipped Tory MP.
As it is, the whips seem to have largely given up, just rolling over and abstaining every time Labour looks like winning a vote. But assuming Patel also becomes an enemy of May after the near-inevitable sacking, that DUP-enhanced majority is looking more precarious by the day. How on earth is any Brexit legislation going to get through?0 -
Stephen Pollard from the Jewish Chronicle stands by his story despite n10 denial. He says it comes from two strong sources.0
-
DD to FO, Gove to Brexit is a valid move. Boris to chair.david_herdson said:
I was trying to work this though but actually, I think she's toast either way. The basic problem is that all the Leave cabinet ministers, apart from Gove, are not very good. Sacking one but not others will cause resentment at disparate treatment; sacking all would cause uproar. On top of which, she probably can't sack Hammond two weeks before the Budget, which would just compound Leavers' wrath. Further, bringing in the likes of JRM is unlikely to solve the main problem while adding new ones to the mix (is he any good? If not, status quo ante plus the experience of an ineffective reshuffle; if so, boosts his leadership credentials).Jonathan said:
She either carries on like this, or rolls the dice. No brainer.Richard_Nabavi said:
A major and bold reshuffle would be a risk, of course, but one with considerable potential upside. Conversely, doing as little as possible is also a risk, but one with with little or no upside. What's more, now is a particularly good time to be bold, because her most dangerous ministers are currently weak and the sexual harassment scandal is a restraining factor on any plots.TOPPING said:And yet we still mock Brown for not having the cojones to call an election. Such changes are unstable, unpredictable and events can turn on the slightest (or in this case, most enormous) issue.
I don't blame her for not rocking the boat.
It is execrable, weak, bad government, a shambles. But I don't blame her for it.
There will never be a better time for her to seize the initiative.
However, she won't.0 -
Particularly after letting preparations and expectations get out of control.rottenborough said:
The decision was never really the issue. The problem was the way the whole thing was handled including an excruciating interview iirc with Andy Marr explaining why there had never ever ever been a plan to hold an early election.Jonathan said:
We learned this year that Brown got that decision soooooo right.TOPPING said:
And yet we still mock Brown.Scott_P said:@philipjcowley: Everyone, today: She should do a major reshuffle. Stamp of authority. Nothing to lose.
Major reshuffle -> civil war in Conservative Party -> May ousted
Everyone, tomorrow: She crazy.
Calling an election was the right call for May: the error was in how she conducted it.0 -
It makes the Major administration look like the Elizabethan Golden Age.SouthamObserver said:
No argument from me on that. How blessed we are to have the two combined.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Edit - I’d say this is the second worst opposition ever. The worst was the one Corbyn led before the general election.
I am struggling to think of a government that gets close to the current one for sheer ineptitude and dysfunctionality.
0 -
HYUFD said:
The Tory policy on Brexit is very coherent actually, leave the single market, after a 2 year transition and do a FTA with the EU and end free movement and replace it with a points systemanothernick said:
A major reshuffle would make no fundamental difference. It might look good for a week or two but the fundamental problem would be unchanged. The Tory Party has no coherent policy on Brexit and a reshuffle will not conjour one up. They are completely incapable of governing.Richard_Nabavi said:
A major and bold reshuffle would be a risk, of course, but one with considerable potential upside. Conversely, doing as little as possible is also a risk, but one with with little or no upside. What's more, now is a particularly good time to be bold, because her most dangerous ministers are currently weak and the sexual harassment scandal is a restraining factor on any plots.TOPPING said:And yet we still mock Brown for not having the cojones to call an election. Such changes are unstable, unpredictable and events can turn on the slightest (or in this case, most enormous) issue.
I don't blame her for not rocking the boat.
It is execrable, weak, bad government, a shambles. But I don't blame her for it.
There will never be a better time for her to seize the initiative.
However, she won't.
The LD policy on Brexit to be fair to them is also coherent, they want to permanently stay in the single market and customs union.
It is Corbyn and Starmer who do not really have a clue what their long term Brexit policy is.</blockquot
The Tory policy on Brexit is very coherent? Dream on!0 -
It was reported earlier that there’s no WiFi on this plane, it’s a factory option for the 787 rather than a standard fit.rpjs said:
Well, she’s not flying on BA, so there’s a chance the plane might have wifi.Sandpit said:Priti s plane now two hours from Heathrow.
The fun thing is that no-one on the plane will have any idea what’s going on back on the ground in London, unless someone chooses to make a call on the sat phone system. You can’t make an incoming call to the plane, except via ATC or the airline.
She’ll have no idea at all that 22,000 people and the two 24h news channels have been following the plane in real time all day!0 -
In the 70s there was a plan for a coup to replace an inept PM with Lord Mountbatten.
Who is the Lord Mountbatten de nos jours?0 -
Is there a book open on a journalist shouting "Mrs Patel" at the airport ?0
-
Is this not what Marxists say? It was the execution (and not just of 40m people) that was the problem, not the ideas.david_herdson said:
Particularly after letting preparations and expectations get out of control.rottenborough said:
The decision was never really the issue. The problem was the way the whole thing was handled including an excruciating interview iirc with Andy Marr explaining why there had never ever ever been a plan to hold an early election.Jonathan said:
We learned this year that Brown got that decision soooooo right.TOPPING said:
And yet we still mock Brown.Scott_P said:@philipjcowley: Everyone, today: She should do a major reshuffle. Stamp of authority. Nothing to lose.
Major reshuffle -> civil war in Conservative Party -> May ousted
Everyone, tomorrow: She crazy.
Calling an election was the right call for May: the error was in how she conducted it.0 -
-
DD to FO and Gove to Brexit I could live with, particularly if there was a handover period. Boris needs to go now. The party chairmanship was the job for him in July 2016 (provided there was an administratively able deputy) but not now.Jonathan said:
DD to FO, Gove to Brexit is a valid move. Boris to chair.david_herdson said:
I was trying to work this though but actually, I think she's toast either way. The basic problem is that all the Leave cabinet ministers, apart from Gove, are not very good. Sacking one but not others will cause resentment at disparate treatment; sacking all would cause uproar. On top of which, she probably can't sack Hammond two weeks before the Budget, which would just compound Leavers' wrath. Further, bringing in the likes of JRM is unlikely to solve the main problem while adding new ones to the mix (is he any good? If not, status quo ante plus the experience of an ineffective reshuffle; if so, boosts his leadership credentials).Jonathan said:
She either carries on like this, or rolls the dice. No brainer.Richard_Nabavi said:
A major and bold reshuffle would be a risk, of course, but one with considerable potential upside. Conversely, doing as little as possible is also a risk, but one with with little or no upside. What's more, now is a particularly good time to be bold, because her most dangerous ministers are currently weak and the sexual harassment scandal is a restraining factor on any plots.TOPPING said:And yet we still mock Brown for not having the cojones to call an election. Such changes are unstable, unpredictable and events can turn on the slightest (or in this case, most enormous) issue.
I don't blame her for not rocking the boat.
It is execrable, weak, bad government, a shambles. But I don't blame her for it.
There will never be a better time for her to seize the initiative.
However, she won't.0 -
Princess AnneTheScreamingEagles said:In the 70s there was a plan for a coup to replace an inept PM with Lord Mountbatten.
Who is the Lord Mountbatten de nos jours?0 -
Mexicanpete said:
So no actual contradictory arguments thenHYUFD said:
The Tory policy on Brexit is very coherent actually, leave the single market, after a 2 year transition and do a FTA with the EU and end free movement and replace it with a points systemanothernick said:
A major reshuffle would make no fundamental difference. It might look good for a week or two but the fundamental problem would be unchanged. The Tory Party has no coherent policy on Brexit and a reshuffle will not conjour one up. They are completely incapable of governing.Richard_Nabavi said:
A major and bold reshuffle would be a risk, of course, but one with considerable potential upside. Conversely, doing as little as possible is also a risk, but one with with little or no upside. What's more, now is a particularly good time to be bold, because her most dangerous ministers are currently weak and the sexual harassment scandal is a restraining factor on any plots.TOPPING said:And yet we still mock Brown for not having the cojones to call an election. Such changes are unstable, unpredictable and events can turn on the slightest (or in this case, most enormous) issue.
I don't blame her for not rocking the boat.
It is execrable, weak, bad government, a shambles. But I don't blame her for it.
There will never be a better time for her to seize the initiative.
However, she won't.
The LD policy on Brexit to be fair to them is also coherent, they want to permanently stay in the single market and customs union.
It is Corbyn and Starmer who do not really have a clue what their long term Brexit policy is.0 -
The 3D view on FlightRadar is nice, you can even spin the plane and see what view out of the window would look like.
0 -
It is not exactly an uncommon name. If a flight from the subContinent has arrived recently you might get a few dozen women shouting "Yes? What do you want?" back at the journo.Pulpstar said:Is there a book open on a journalist shouting "Mrs Patel" at the airport ?
0 -
If Patel has any documentation then it really gets interesting, Foreign office telegrams, emails from the PM's private office, WhatsApp message from a No10 SPAD etcrottenborough said:
0 -
-
Electric? Seems slightly excessive.Jonathan said:
DD to FO, Gove to Brexit is a valid move. Boris to chair.david_herdson said:
I was trying to work this though but actually, I think she's toast either way. The basic problem is that all the Leave cabinet ministers, apart from Gove, are not very good. Sacking one but not others will cause resentment at disparate treatment; sacking all would cause uproar. On top of which, she probably can't sack Hammond two weeks before the Budget, which would just compound Leavers' wrath. Further, bringing in the likes of JRM is unlikely to solve the main problem while adding new ones to the mix (is he any good? If not, status quo ante plus the experience of an ineffective reshuffle; if so, boosts his leadership credentials).Jonathan said:
She either carries on like this, or rolls the dice. No brainer.Richard_Nabavi said:
A major and bold reshuffle would be a risk, of course, but one with considerable potential upside. Conversely, doing as little as possible is also a risk, but one with with little or no upside. What's more, now is a particularly good time to be bold, because her most dangerous ministers are currently weak and the sexual harassment scandal is a restraining factor on any plots.TOPPING said:And yet we still mock Brown for not having the cojones to call an election. Such changes are unstable, unpredictable and events can turn on the slightest (or in this case, most enormous) issue.
I don't blame her for not rocking the boat.
It is execrable, weak, bad government, a shambles. But I don't blame her for it.
There will never be a better time for her to seize the initiative.
However, she won't.0 -
Oh for a "Like" buttonHYUFD said:
Princess AnneTheScreamingEagles said:In the 70s there was a plan for a coup to replace an inept PM with Lord Mountbatten.
Who is the Lord Mountbatten de nos jours?0 -
I am surprised you did not prpose the Queen or Prince Charles - back to ruling by divine rightHYUFD said:
Princess AnneTheScreamingEagles said:In the 70s there was a plan for a coup to replace an inept PM with Lord Mountbatten.
Who is the Lord Mountbatten de nos jours?0 -
If she follows the example ofJonathan said:So, you're Patel. You're on the flight. What do you do. Does LHR have a back door?
Does she go to no10 or do a little press conference at the airport?
What does she do with duty frees?
D.B. Cooper, that will make the situation only slightly weirder than it already is.0 -
I wonder if they take her down the steps of the plane straight to a government car and out through the side door with a police escort - or do they have her walk trough the terminal hounded by dozens of hacks out of the regular front door to her car?Pulpstar said:Is there a book open on a journalist shouting "Mrs Patel" at the airport ?
The latter would be hilarious, and would signal clearly that she’s toast before she gets close to No.10.0 -
Number Ten saying that Priti Patel is flying back from Nairobi is hilarious. Do they realise they are invoking a memory of the end of one reign and the beginning of another in 1952?
Meanwhile, for a few hours at least, Boris, Damian, Brian and Brenda will be pleased that Priti is getting most of the spotlight.0 -
I would leave DD in place. It's an extremely complicated brief and he seems to be reasonably on top of it.david_herdson said:DD to FO and Gove to Brexit I could live with, particularly if there was a handover period. Boris needs to go now. The party chairmanship was the job for him in July 2016 (provided there was an administratively able deputy) but not now.
Ruth Davidson to party chair. Jeremy Hunt to FO if he wants it (he might not). Alistair Burt to DFID. Esther McVey to Health if Hunt has had enough, or to Leader of the House. Split Damian Green's role into two.0 -
It is Comedy Hour already?HYUFD said:
The Tory policy on Brexit is very coherent actually... (snip)anothernick said:
A major reshuffle would make no fundamental difference. It might look good for a week or two but the fundamental problem would be unchanged. The Tory Party has no coherent policy on Brexit and a reshuffle will not conjour one up. They are completely incapable of governing.Richard_Nabavi said:
A major and bold reshuffle would be a risk, of course, but one with considerable potential upside. Conversely, doing as little as possible is also a risk, but one with with little or no upside. What's more, now is a particularly good time to be bold, because her most dangerous ministers are currently weak and the sexual harassment scandal is a restraining factor on any plots.TOPPING said:And yet we still mock Brown for not having the cojones to call an election. Such changes are unstable, unpredictable and events can turn on the slightest (or in this case, most enormous) issue.
I don't blame her for not rocking the boat.
It is execrable, weak, bad government, a shambles. But I don't blame her for it.
There will never be a better time for her to seize the initiative.
However, she won't.
0 -
Doesn't that depend what you mean by a FTA? Because if it's "free movement of goods, services and capital" but no free movement of people then you're back to asking the EU to agree to split up the indivisible freedoms - and unwillingness to do that is pretty much axiomatic for the EU.HYUFD said:
So is the Tory position that the EU can be persuaded to change their minds on that, or that the FTA being referred to is not complete free movement of goods and services? If the former, does anyone seriously think it's possible? If the latter, what level of freedom is the target?0 -
I don't think the Queen would want that even if offered it on a plate, Charles maybe but his earlier namesake found out the hard way that is no longer an option.Beverley_C said:
I am surprised you did not prpose the Queen or Prince Charles - back to ruling by divine rightHYUFD said:
Princess AnneTheScreamingEagles said:In the 70s there was a plan for a coup to replace an inept PM with Lord Mountbatten.
Who is the Lord Mountbatten de nos jours?0 -
Freedom of goods principally a la the Canada FTA with some preferred access for the City if possible.Polruan said:
Doesn't that depend what you mean by a FTA? Because if it's "free movement of goods, services and capital" but no free movement of people then you're back to asking the EU to agree to split up the indivisible freedoms - and unwillingness to do that is pretty much axiomatic for the EU.HYUFD said:
So is the Tory position that the EU can be persuaded to change their minds on that, or that the FTA being referred to is not complete free movement of goods and services? If the former, does anyone seriously think it's possible? If the latter, what level of freedom is the target?0 -
What should be possible is a FTA covering at least all manufactured goods, and perhaps agricultural products. Anything we can get on services would be a nice bonus, but might not be attainable without freedom of movementPolruan said:
Doesn't that depend what you mean by a FTA? Because if it's "free movement of goods, services and capital" but no free movement of people then you're back to asking the EU to agree to split up the indivisible freedoms - and unwillingness to do that is pretty much axiomatic for the EU.HYUFD said:
So is the Tory position that the EU can be persuaded to change their minds on that, or that the FTA being referred to is not complete free movement of goods and services? If the former, does anyone seriously think it's possible? If the latter, what level of freedom is the target?
It's actually perfectly coherent: essentially, something like Canada has, but hopefully a bit better. It's also very much in the EU's interests, although they seem a bit backwards in recognising this.
Edit: I see @HYUFD got there first.0 -
Surely they would be the ultimate pro-Brexiteers?HYUFD said:
I don't think the Queen would want that even if offered it on a plate, Charles maybe but his earlier namesake found out the hard way that is no longer an option.Beverley_C said:
I am surprised you did not prpose the Queen or Prince Charles - back to ruling by divine rightHYUFD said:
Princess AnneTheScreamingEagles said:In the 70s there was a plan for a coup to replace an inept PM with Lord Mountbatten.
Who is the Lord Mountbatten de nos jours?
0 -
Even if it's true, the pressure to collide with keeping it quiet would be immense. Revelation could mean the entire government falls and they all lose their jobs.AlsoIndigo said:
If Patel has any documentation then it really gets interesting, Foreign office telegrams, emails from the PM's private office, WhatsApp message from a No10 SPAD etcrottenborough said:0 -
No, because every country that has ever tried to implement some version of Marxism has never got anywhere near the ideal and has always continued to repress and murder. By contrast, most governments, in most democracies, that go into an election with a 20-point lead come out of it with a stonking win.DavidL said:
Is this not what Marxists say? It was the execution (and not just of 40m people) that was the problem, not the ideas.david_herdson said:
Particularly after letting preparations and expectations get out of control.rottenborough said:
The decision was never really the issue. The problem was the way the whole thing was handled including an excruciating interview iirc with Andy Marr explaining why there had never ever ever been a plan to hold an early election.Jonathan said:
We learned this year that Brown got that decision soooooo right.TOPPING said:
And yet we still mock Brown.Scott_P said:@philipjcowley: Everyone, today: She should do a major reshuffle. Stamp of authority. Nothing to lose.
Major reshuffle -> civil war in Conservative Party -> May ousted
Everyone, tomorrow: She crazy.
Calling an election was the right call for May: the error was in how she conducted it.
May should, and could, have:
1. Used Crosby properly to vet the manifesto
2. Turned up to the debates
3. Spoken more to the public
4. Talked about the economy and let others do so
5. Made the election about the party and not principally herself
6. Been smarter in hitting Corbyn and McDonnell with their record
None of this is rocket science - and to the extent that it is, that's why you employ rocket scientists.0 -
Malcolm tucker / bad al would never have allowed this...
https://order-order.com/2017/11/08/damian-green-finds-lifeboat/0 -
The Queen was rumoured as such (the Queen Mother was certainly anti EU) though Charles more of a Remainer I thinkBeverley_C said:
Surely they would be the ultimate pro-Brexiteers?HYUFD said:
I don't think the Queen would want that even if offered it on a plate, Charles maybe but his earlier namesake found out the hard way that is no longer an option.Beverley_C said:
I am surprised you did not prpose the Queen or Prince Charles - back to ruling by divine rightHYUFD said:
Princess AnneTheScreamingEagles said:In the 70s there was a plan for a coup to replace an inept PM with Lord Mountbatten.
Who is the Lord Mountbatten de nos jours?0 -
Do Leavers call TAs FTAs to make them sound better, and disguise the fact that to get a TA you normally have to sign up to a whole load of concessions? Just look at TTIP.Polruan said:
Doesn't that depend what you mean by a FTA? Because if it's "free movement of goods, services and capital" but no free movement of people then you're back to asking the EU to agree to split up the indivisible freedoms - and unwillingness to do that is pretty much axiomatic for the EU.HYUFD said:
So is the Tory position that the EU can be persuaded to change their minds on that, or that the FTA being referred to is not complete free movement of goods and services? If the former, does anyone seriously think it's possible? If the latter, what level of freedom is the target?0 -
Does this mean you support paying 60 billion euros to the EU as the "divorce bill" ?HYUFD said:
Freedom of goods principally a la the Canada FTA with some preferred access for the City if possible.
What would you say to those in your Party who think we should leave the EU without paying a penny ?
How do you think the 60 billion gap in the public finances should be closed - by increased borrowing or by spending cuts and if the latter in which areas should the cuts be made ?
0 -
Promised say an extra £200-300m a week for the NHS by 2022....and that would also allowed boris to be able to campaign without having to constantly answer the bus question.david_herdson said:
No, because every country that has ever tried to implement some version of Marxism has never got anywhere near the ideal and has always continued to repress and murder. By contrast, most governments, in most democracies, that go into an election with a 20-point lead come out of it with a stonking win.DavidL said:
Is this not what Marxists say? It was the execution (and not just of 40m people) that was the problem, not the ideas.david_herdson said:
Particularly after letting preparations and expectations get out of control.rottenborough said:
The decision was never really the issue. The problem was the way the whole thing was handled including an excruciating interview iirc with Andy Marr explaining why there had never ever ever been a plan to hold an early election.Jonathan said:
We learned this year that Brown got that decision soooooo right.TOPPING said:
And yet we still mock Brown.Scott_P said:@philipjcowley: Everyone, today: She should do a major reshuffle. Stamp of authority. Nothing to lose.
Major reshuffle -> civil war in Conservative Party -> May ousted
Everyone, tomorrow: She crazy.
Calling an election was the right call for May: the error was in how she conducted it.
May should, and could, have:
1. Used Crosby properly to vet the manifesto
2. Turned up to the debates
3. Spoken more to the public
4. Talked about the economy and let others do so
5. Made the election about the party and not principally herself
6. Been smarter in hitting Corbyn and McDonnell with their record
None of this is rocket science - and to the extent that it is, that's why you employ rocket scientists.0 -
You should have no worries about Soubry, like Ken Clarke the one thing really detests is unreconstructed socialists like Corbyn and McDonnell.El_Capitano said:Guardian reporting on Five Live:
Soubry agreed. She said: "I’m with Mary [Creagh]. I think Mary’s instincts are usually good and on this one I’m sure she is right."
I'm increasingly wondering about Soubry's place in the Conservatives. She seems to be freelancing as an independent centrist rather than a whipped Tory MP.
As it is, the whips seem to have largely given up, just rolling over and abstaining every time Labour looks like winning a vote. But assuming Patel also becomes an enemy of May after the near-inevitable sacking, that DUP-enhanced majority is looking more precarious by the day. How on earth is any Brexit legislation going to get through?0 -
AIUI after Cooper the aircraft that had a door openable in flight were retrofitted to disable that.Ishmael_Z said:
If she follows the example ofJonathan said:So, you're Patel. You're on the flight. What do you do. Does LHR have a back door?
Does she go to no10 or do a little press conference at the airport?
What does she do with duty frees?
D.B. Cooper, that will make the situation only slightly weirder than it already is.0 -
If you watch Prison Break you find out what happened to D.B. Cooper.rpjs said:
AIUI after Cooper the aircraft that had a door openable in flight were retrofitted to disable that.Ishmael_Z said:
If she follows the example ofJonathan said:So, you're Patel. You're on the flight. What do you do. Does LHR have a back door?
Does she go to no10 or do a little press conference at the airport?
What does she do with duty frees?
D.B. Cooper, that will make the situation only slightly weirder than it already is.0 -
In the long run it would be less costly than no FTA but above all it ends free movement which was, along with restoring sovereignty, the key motive for Leave voters and therefore non negotiablestodge said:
Does this mean you support paying 60 billion euros to the EU as the "divorce bill" ?HYUFD said:
Freedom of goods principally a la the Canada FTA with some preferred access for the City if possible.
What would you say to those in your Party who think we should leave the EU without paying a penny ?
How do you think the 60 billion gap in the public finances should be closed - by increased borrowing or by spending cuts and if the latter in which areas should the cuts be made ?0 -
The most popular Prime Minister ever gives his thoughts.
https://twitter.com/AlexDean94/status/9282396114989752330 -
Did you know the guy never said he was d.b Cooper, he said his name was dan cooper. It was a local journalist who misheard it / put it together with a local small time thief in his town called d.b Cooper. The authorities didnt challenge it as they used it as a way to filter out the hoax calls.rpjs said:
AIUI after Cooper the aircraft that had a door openable in flight were retrofitted to disable that.Ishmael_Z said:
If she follows the example ofJonathan said:So, you're Patel. You're on the flight. What do you do. Does LHR have a back door?
Does she go to no10 or do a little press conference at the airport?
What does she do with duty frees?
D.B. Cooper, that will make the situation only slightly weirder than it already is.
0 -
Did you see her EU Flag Hat?HYUFD said:
The Queen was rumoured as such (the Queen Mother was certainly anti EU) though Charles more of a Remainer I thinkBeverley_C said:
Surely they would be the ultimate pro-Brexiteers?HYUFD said:
I don't think the Queen would want that even if offered it on a plate, Charles maybe but his earlier namesake found out the hard way that is no longer an option.Beverley_C said:
I am surprised you did not prpose the Queen or Prince Charles - back to ruling by divine rightHYUFD said:
Princess AnneTheScreamingEagles said:In the 70s there was a plan for a coup to replace an inept PM with Lord Mountbatten.
Who is the Lord Mountbatten de nos jours?0 -
Anyone want to give me a précis about the elections in America yesterday?
A harbinger for Trump getting walloped in 2020 and the Dems taking the House in 2018?
Or is Trump gonna win in 2020?0 -
Absolutely. Labour is clearly not a home for Tory defectors of any stripe. But I wonder under what scenario she might consider returning to the (successor of the) SDP.TheScreamingEagles said:You should have no worries about Soubry, like Ken Clarke the one thing really detests is unreconstructed socialists like Corbyn and McDonnell.
0 -
Does CETA provide full freedom of goods? I was under the impression that there were some tariffs (though substantially reduced from an already low level) and quite a few non-tariff barriers.HYUFD said:
Freedom of goods principally a la the Canada FTA with some preferred access for the City if possible.Polruan said:
Doesn't that depend what you mean by a FTA? Because if it's "free movement of goods, services and capital" but no free movement of people then you're back to asking the EU to agree to split up the indivisible freedoms - and unwillingness to do that is pretty much axiomatic for the EU.HYUFD said:
So is the Tory position that the EU can be persuaded to change their minds on that, or that the FTA being referred to is not complete free movement of goods and services? If the former, does anyone seriously think it's possible? If the latter, what level of freedom is the target?0 -
Had forgotten about Green. Assuming the Cabinet Secs report on him is on TM's desk then it would make sense to get rid of both Green and Patel today rather than a sacking every two days.0
-
This table from Open Europe from before the referendum shows why any Canada style PTA will be highly disadvantageous to the UK. It covers sectors (medium to high chances of access in green) where we have large trade deficits with the EU, but not the sectors we do best at:HYUFD said:
Freedom of goods principally a la the Canada FTA with some preferred access for the City if possible.
https://openeurope.org.uk/today/blog/how-would-key-export-sectors-fare-under-brexit/
0 -
There may well be a few minor barriers remaining but certainly far fewer tariffs than WTO terms would be.Polruan said:
Does CETA provide full freedom of goods? I was under the impression that there were some tariffs (though substantially reduced from an already low level) and quite a few non-tariff barriers.HYUFD said:
Freedom of goods principally a la the Canada FTA with some preferred access for the City if possible.Polruan said:
Doesn't that depend what you mean by a FTA? Because if it's "free movement of goods, services and capital" but no free movement of people then you're back to asking the EU to agree to split up the indivisible freedoms - and unwillingness to do that is pretty much axiomatic for the EU.HYUFD said:
So is the Tory position that the EU can be persuaded to change their minds on that, or that the FTA being referred to is not complete free movement of goods and services? If the former, does anyone seriously think it's possible? If the latter, what level of freedom is the target?0 -
Obviously anyone with half a brain (thus excluding Corbyn) knows that in reality Marxism is a really, really stupid idea. No one would dispute that the campaign was inept. But was it a good idea in the first place? I am not so sure.david_herdson said:
No, because every country that has ever tried to implement some version of Marxism has never got anywhere near the ideal and has always continued to repress and murder. By contrast, most governments, in most democracies, that go into an election with a 20-point lead come out of it with a stonking win.DavidL said:
Is this not what Marxists say? It was the execution (and not just of 40m people) that was the problem, not the ideas.david_herdson said:
Particularly after letting preparations and expectations get out of control.rottenborough said:
The decision was never really the issue. The problem was the way the whole thing was handled including an excruciating interview iirc with Andy Marr explaining why there had never ever ever been a plan to hold an early election.Jonathan said:
We learned this year that Brown got that decision soooooo right.TOPPING said:
And yet we still mock Brown.Scott_P said:@philipjcowley: Everyone, today: She should do a major reshuffle. Stamp of authority. Nothing to lose.
Major reshuffle -> civil war in Conservative Party -> May ousted
Everyone, tomorrow: She crazy.
Calling an election was the right call for May: the error was in how she conducted it.
May should, and could, have:
1. Used Crosby properly to vet the manifesto
2. Turned up to the debates
3. Spoken more to the public
4. Talked about the economy and let others do so
5. Made the election about the party and not principally herself
6. Been smarter in hitting Corbyn and McDonnell with their record
None of this is rocket science - and to the extent that it is, that's why you employ rocket scientists.0 -
Bring back the cones hotline.....TheScreamingEagles said:The most popular Prime Minister ever gives his thoughts.
https://twitter.com/AlexDean94/status/9282396114989752330 -
Yes, my mistake. If the UK had used its existing powers in relation to that distinction under the previous Home Secretary then the referendum may well have turned out differently. (Who was that again?)Pulpstar said:
Shouldn't it be the free movement of labour, not people ?Polruan said:
Doesn't that depend what you mean by a FTA? Because if it's "free movement of goods, services and capital" but no free movement of people0 -
The Dems will certainly take the House in 2020 but Trump could still be competitive on 2020, some of his voters sat out yesterday but will be there in 2020.TheScreamingEagles said:Anyone want to give me a précis about the elections in America yesterday?
A harbinger for Trump getting walloped in 2020 and the Dems taking the House in 2018?
Or is Trump gonna win in 2020?
Biden, Sanders or Warren his likely opponent in my view.0 -
Damian asking - "What's the WIFI signal like on board?"
https://twitter.com/DamianGreen/status/9282510193347420160 -
It was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on free movement from the new accession countries in 2004 which was really the pivotal factor on immigration in terms of the Leave vote.Polruan said:
Yes, my mistake. If the UK had used its existing powers in relation to that distinction under the previous Home Secretary then the referendum may well have turned out differently. (Who was that again?)Pulpstar said:
Shouldn't it be the free movement of labour, not people ?Polruan said:
Doesn't that depend what you mean by a FTA? Because if it's "free movement of goods, services and capital" but no free movement of people0 -
Good afternoon, everyone.0
-
Very good.calum said:Damian asking - "What's the WIFI signal like on board?"
https://twitter.com/DamianGreen/status/928251019334742016
You should have saved that for Guido's caption competition on Friday.0 -
One further thought: if the "undisclosed" meeting was on 7th September in Whitehall what on earth was her private office doing? Surely those responsible for her official diary would also be responsible for letting No 10 and the relevant department(s) know of the meeting? Why would they not?0
-
May lost her majority because of Brexit. Remain voters angry about the referendum abandoned her. Brexit is a curse on the Tories - it has destroyed three prime ministers, their reputation for competence, their parliamentary majority and their reputation abroad. It may yet destroy the party completely.david_herdson said:
No, because every country that has ever tried to implement some version of Marxism has never got anywhere near the ideal and has always continued to repress and murder. By contrast, most governments, in most democracies, that go into an election with a 20-point lead come out of it with a stonking win.DavidL said:
Is this not what Marxists say? It was the execution (and not just of 40m people) that was the problem, not the ideas.david_herdson said:
Particularly after letting preparations and expectations get out of control.rottenborough said:
The decision was never really the issue. The problem was the way the whole thing was handled including an excruciating interview iirc with Andy Marr explaining why there had never ever ever been a plan to hold an early election.Jonathan said:
We learned this year that Brown got that decision soooooo right.TOPPING said:
And yet we still mock Brown.Scott_P said:@philipjcowley: Everyone, today: She should do a major reshuffle. Stamp of authority. Nothing to lose.
Major reshuffle -> civil war in Conservative Party -> May ousted
Everyone, tomorrow: She crazy.
Calling an election was the right call for May: the error was in how she conducted it.
May should, and could, have:
1. Used Crosby properly to vet the manifesto
2. Turned up to the debates
3. Spoken more to the public
4. Talked about the economy and let others do so
5. Made the election about the party and not principally herself
6. Been smarter in hitting Corbyn and McDonnell with their record
None of this is rocket science - and to the extent that it is, that's why you employ rocket scientists.0 -
I think so too !Polruan said:
Yes, my mistake. If the UK had used its existing powers in relation to that distinction under the previous Home Secretary then the referendum may well have turned out differently. (Who was that again?)Pulpstar said:
Shouldn't it be the free movement of labour, not people ?Polruan said:
Doesn't that depend what you mean by a FTA? Because if it's "free movement of goods, services and capital" but no free movement of people0 -
It covers manufacturing which is what matters to Leave areas.FF43 said:
This table from Open Europe from before the referendum shows why any Canada style PTA will be highly disadvantageous to the UK. It covers sectors (medium to high chances of access in green) where we have large trade deficits with the EU, but not the sectors we do best at:HYUFD said:
Freedom of goods principally a la the Canada FTA with some preferred access for the City if possible.
https://openeurope.org.uk/today/blog/how-would-key-export-sectors-fare-under-brexit/
It is not so good for the City but then the Leave vote was never a vote to protect the City and on even the worst Brexit projections London will still be the largest financial centre in Europe even if Frankfurt and Paris and Zurich narrow the gap.0 -
The counterfactual is what would have happened had she not called an election? One question is whether Corbyn would have been toppled by then or not. My guess is 'not'. I don't think the PLP would have wanted another leadership election this summer despite the dire polling and local election results. better to wait another year.DavidL said:
Obviously anyone with half a brain (thus excluding Corbyn) knows that in reality Marxism is a really, really stupid idea. No one would dispute that the campaign was inept. But was it a good idea in the first place? I am not so sure.david_herdson said:
No, because every country that has ever tried to implement some version of Marxism has never got anywhere near the ideal and has always continued to repress and murder. By contrast, most governments, in most democracies, that go into an election with a 20-point lead come out of it with a stonking win.DavidL said:
Is this not what Marxists say? It was the execution (and not just of 40m people) that was the problem, not the ideas.david_herdson said:
Particularly after letting preparations and expectations get out of control.rottenborough said:
The decision was never really the issue. The problem was the way the whole thing was handled including an excruciating interview iirc with Andy Marr explaining why there had never ever ever been a plan to hold an early election.Jonathan said:
We learned this year that Brown got that decision soooooo right.TOPPING said:
And yet we still mock Brown.Scott_P said:@philipjcowley: Everyone, today: She should do a major reshuffle. Stamp of authority. Nothing to lose.
Major reshuffle -> civil war in Conservative Party -> May ousted
Everyone, tomorrow: She crazy.
Calling an election was the right call for May: the error was in how she conducted it.
May should, and could, have:
1. Used Crosby properly to vet the manifesto
2. Turned up to the debates
3. Spoken more to the public
4. Talked about the economy and let others do so
5. Made the election about the party and not principally herself
6. Been smarter in hitting Corbyn and McDonnell with their record
None of this is rocket science - and to the extent that it is, that's why you employ rocket scientists.
Beyond that, she'd still have had Brexit to deal with and still had a small majority, though that would probably have seemed larger than it was with Labour in disarray. And at some point, the bubble would still have burst.0 -
The obvious flaw in PB Tory logic is that the Labour party manifesto, and party itself is not Marxist, even if the shadow chancellor and LoTO have Marxist sympathies.DavidL said:
Obviously anyone with half a brain (thus excluding Corbyn) knows that in reality Marxism is a really, really stupid idea. No one would dispute that the campaign was inept. But was it a good idea in the first place? I am not so sure.david_herdson said:
No, because every country that has ever tried to implement some version of Marxism has never got anywhere near the ideal and has always continued to repress and murder. By contrast, most governments, in most democracies, that go into an election with a 20-point lead come out of it with a stonking win.DavidL said:
Is this not what Marxists say? It was the execution (and not just of 40m people) that was the problem, not the ideas.david_herdson said:
Particularly after letting preparations and expectations get out of control.rottenborough said:
The decision was never really the issue. The problem was the way the whole thing was handled including an excruciating interview iirc with Andy Marr explaining why there had never ever ever been a plan to hold an early election.Jonathan said:
We learned this year that Brown got that decision soooooo right.TOPPING said:
And yet we still mock Brown.Scott_P said:@philipjcowley: Everyone, today: She should do a major reshuffle. Stamp of authority. Nothing to lose.
Major reshuffle -> civil war in Conservative Party -> May ousted
Everyone, tomorrow: She crazy.
Calling an election was the right call for May: the error was in how she conducted it.
May should, and could, have:
1. Used Crosby properly to vet the manifesto
2. Turned up to the debates
3. Spoken more to the public
4. Talked about the economy and let others do so
5. Made the election about the party and not principally herself
6. Been smarter in hitting Corbyn and McDonnell with their record
None of this is rocket science - and to the extent that it is, that's why you employ rocket scientists.
Indeed the fact that the Tories are lifting large chunks of that manifesto, and implementing it shows that they are as much Marxists.0 -
There are many tariff rate quotas, so only limited numbers of those items qualify for the zero rate. The question is how limiting those quotas are in practice. I don't know the answer to that.Polruan said:
Does CETA provide full freedom of goods? I was under the impression that there were some tariffs (though substantially reduced from an already low level) and quite a few non-tariff barriers.HYUFD said:
Freedom of goods principally a la the Canada FTA with some preferred access for the City if possible.Polruan said:
Doesn't that depend what you mean by a FTA? Because if it's "free movement of goods, services and capital" but no free movement of people then you're back to asking the EU to agree to split up the indivisible freedoms - and unwillingness to do that is pretty much axiomatic for the EU.HYUFD said:
So is the Tory position that the EU can be persuaded to change their minds on that, or that the FTA being referred to is not complete free movement of goods and services? If the former, does anyone seriously think it's possible? If the latter, what level of freedom is the target?
There are also a lot of non tariff barriers, particularly on the Canadian side. Canada is more protectionist than people realise.0 -
That's one of Mrs May's worst crimes, she's detoxifying Corbyn.foxinsoxuk said:
The obvious flaw in PB Tory logic is that the Labour party manifesto, and party itself is not Marxist, even if the shadow chancellor and LoTO have Marxist sympathies.
Indeed the fact that the Tories are lifting large chunks of that manifesto, and implementing it shows that they are as much Marxists.0 -
And each of them would be more competent and able than the current incumbents to be International Development Secretary, Foreign Secretary or indeed PM.Beverley_C said:
It is not exactly an uncommon name. If a flight from the subContinent has arrived recently you might get a few dozen women shouting "Yes? What do you want?" back at the journo.Pulpstar said:Is there a book open on a journalist shouting "Mrs Patel" at the airport ?
0 -
"It's OK, the lifetime-long views of the two most senior figures in the party and of the most senior adviser are no guide to the party's political position".foxinsoxuk said:
The obvious flaw in PB Tory logic is that the Labour party manifesto, and party itself is not Marxist, even if the shadow chancellor and LoTO have Marxist sympathies.
Indeed the fact that the Tories are lifting large chunks of that manifesto, and implementing it shows that they are as much Marxists.
Yeah, right.
0 -
The monarchy is all about stability and continuity - the Leninism of Brexit would not appeal I think.logical_song said:
Did you see her EU Flag Hat?HYUFD said:
The Queen was rumoured as such (the Queen Mother was certainly anti EU) though Charles more of a Remainer I thinkBeverley_C said:
Surely they would be the ultimate pro-Brexiteers?HYUFD said:
I don't think the Queen would want that even if offered it on a plate, Charles maybe but his earlier namesake found out the hard way that is no longer an option.Beverley_C said:
I am surprised you did not prpose the Queen or Prince Charles - back to ruling by divine rightHYUFD said:
Princess AnneTheScreamingEagles said:In the 70s there was a plan for a coup to replace an inept PM with Lord Mountbatten.
Who is the Lord Mountbatten de nos jours?0 -
Some on-the-money points, but I think you overlook the extent to which the Brexit vote, and the government's reaction to it in abandoning Osbo's "long-term economic plan", neutralised their ability to play the economy during the election. Leading to a manifesto with few numbers. This made your 4 and 6 difficult to play.david_herdson said:
No, because every country that has ever tried to implement some version of Marxism has never got anywhere near the ideal and has always continued to repress and murder. By contrast, most governments, in most democracies, that go into an election with a 20-point lead come out of it with a stonking win.DavidL said:
Is this not what Marxists say? It was the execution (and not just of 40m people) that was the problem, not the ideas.david_herdson said:
Particularly after letting preparations and expectations get out of control.rottenborough said:
The decision was never really the issue. The problem was the way the whole thing was handled including an excruciating interview iirc with Andy Marr explaining why there had never ever ever been a plan to hold an early election.Jonathan said:
We learned this year that Brown got that decision soooooo right.TOPPING said:
And yet we still mock Brown.Scott_P said:@philipjcowley: Everyone, today: She should do a major reshuffle. Stamp of authority. Nothing to lose.
Major reshuffle -> civil war in Conservative Party -> May ousted
Everyone, tomorrow: She crazy.
Calling an election was the right call for May: the error was in how she conducted it.
May should, and could, have:
1. Used Crosby properly to vet the manifesto
2. Turned up to the debates
3. Spoken more to the public
4. Talked about the economy and let others do so
5. Made the election about the party and not principally herself
6. Been smarter in hitting Corbyn and McDonnell with their record
None of this is rocket science - and to the extent that it is, that's why you employ rocket scientists.
I certainly agree on 2/3 - the obvious precedent being Major pulling out his soap box when he fell behind. Of course Mrs May never imagined that she was behind...0 -
Yes, the modification was called a “Cooper Vane”. The aircraft involved in the incident was (quite deliberately) a Boeing 727, with a rearwards-pointing staircase in the tail of the aircraft.rpjs said:
AIUI after Cooper the aircraft that had a door openable in flight were retrofitted to disable that.Ishmael_Z said:
If she follows the example ofJonathan said:So, you're Patel. You're on the flight. What do you do. Does LHR have a back door?
Does she go to no10 or do a little press conference at the airport?
What does she do with duty frees?
D.B. Cooper, that will make the situation only slightly weirder than it already is.0 -
Her Majesty knows that if you support Brexit and voting to back control from unelected leaders, then logically you must support the abolition of the monarchy too.anothernick said:
The monarchy is all about stability and continuity - the Leninism of Brexit would not appeal I think.logical_song said:
Did you see her EU Flag Hat?HYUFD said:
The Queen was rumoured as such (the Queen Mother was certainly anti EU) though Charles more of a Remainer I thinkBeverley_C said:
Surely they would be the ultimate pro-Brexiteers?HYUFD said:
I don't think the Queen would want that even if offered it on a plate, Charles maybe but his earlier namesake found out the hard way that is no longer an option.Beverley_C said:
I am surprised you did not prpose the Queen or Prince Charles - back to ruling by divine rightHYUFD said:
Princess AnneTheScreamingEagles said:In the 70s there was a plan for a coup to replace an inept PM with Lord Mountbatten.
Who is the Lord Mountbatten de nos jours?0 -
Prior to the election the Republicans controlled the Virginia House of Delegates 66-34.TheScreamingEagles said:Anyone want to give me a précis about the elections in America yesterday?
A harbinger for Trump getting walloped in 2020 and the Dems taking the House in 2018?
Or is Trump gonna win in 2020?
As of this morning Dems were 48-47 ahead with 5 races too close to call and it looks most likely it will be a 50-50 split.
The heavily Bannon backed Governor candidate got creamed in the suburbs with his Dem opponent winning 60%+ of people under 45. Crucially the Republican did brilliantly in rural Virginia and got absolutely destroyed in the suburbs.
https://twitter.com/JonahNRO/status/928244887308455937
This looks amazing for the Dems in 2018.
I got on @ 3/1 for Dem control of Congress. I feel smug right now.0 -
Mr Eagles, surely you’re not describing electoral success by votes cast rather than seats won?TheScreamingEagles said:The most popular Prime Minister ever gives his thoughts.
tps://twitter.com/AlexDean94/status/9282396114989752330 -
Mr. Eagles, I'm not sure that's true. Marxist toxicity is why the Conservative polling is bizarrely high.0
-
at last some good news
#Southern Railway drivers have voted by 4-1 to accept a deal to end their long-running dispute over driver-operated trains0 -
Technically Juncker was elected by the EU Parliament we had a vote for.TheScreamingEagles said:
Her Majesty knows that if you support Brexit and voting to back control from unelected leaders, then logically you must support the abolition of the monarchy too.anothernick said:
The monarchy is all about stability and continuity - the Leninism of Brexit would not appeal I think.logical_song said:
Did you see her EU Flag Hat?HYUFD said:
The Queen was rumoured as such (the Queen Mother was certainly anti EU) though Charles more of a Remainer I thinkBeverley_C said:
Surely they would be the ultimate pro-Brexiteers?HYUFD said:
I don't think the Queen would want that even if offered it on a plate, Charles maybe but his earlier namesake found out the hard way that is no longer an option.Beverley_C said:
I am surprised you did not prpose the Queen or Prince Charles - back to ruling by divine rightHYUFD said:
Princess AnneTheScreamingEagles said:In the 70s there was a plan for a coup to replace an inept PM with Lord Mountbatten.
Who is the Lord Mountbatten de nos jours?0 -
Didn't that vote pass the Commons something like 418-0, with votes in favour from all the major Brexiteers who were in parliament at the time?HYUFD said:
It was Blair's failure to impose transition controls on free movement from the new accession countries in 2004 which was really the pivotal factor on immigration in terms of the Leave vote.Polruan said:
Yes, my mistake. If the UK had used its existing powers in relation to that distinction under the previous Home Secretary then the referendum may well have turned out differently. (Who was that again?)Pulpstar said:
Shouldn't it be the free movement of labour, not people ?Polruan said:
Doesn't that depend what you mean by a FTA? Because if it's "free movement of goods, services and capital" but no free movement of people0 -
Because the terrible twosome believed their own propaganda that May was the new messiah, and would sleepwalk into a landslide regardless, and wanted her to have supreme power after.david_herdson said:
No, because every country that has ever tried to implement some version of Marxism has never got anywhere near the ideal and has always continued to repress and murder. By contrast, most governments, in most democracies, that go into an election with a 20-point lead come out of it with a stonking win.DavidL said:
Is this not what Marxists say? It was the execution (and not just of 40m people) that was the problem, not the ideas.david_herdson said:
Particularly after letting preparations and expectations get out of control.rottenborough said:
The decision was never really the issue. The problem was the way the whole thing was handled including an excruciating interview iirc with Andy Marr explaining why there had never ever ever been a plan to hold an early election.Jonathan said:
We learned this year that Brown got that decision soooooo right.TOPPING said:
And yet we still mock Brown.Scott_P said:@philipjcowley: Everyone, today: She should do a major reshuffle. Stamp of authority. Nothing to lose.
Major reshuffle -> civil war in Conservative Party -> May ousted
Everyone, tomorrow: She crazy.
Calling an election was the right call for May: the error was in how she conducted it.
May should, and could, have:
1. Used Crosby properly to vet the manifesto
2. Turned up to the debates
3. Spoken more to the public
4. Talked about the economy and let others do so
5. Made the election about the party and not principally herself
6. Been smarter in hitting Corbyn and McDonnell with their record
None of this is rocket science - and to the extent that it is, that's why you employ rocket scientists.
A lesson in hubris.0 -
Corbyn won the 2016 local elections before MayTheScreamingEagles said:
That's one of Mrs May's worst crimes, she's detoxifying Corbyn.foxinsoxuk said:
The obvious flaw in PB Tory logic is that the Labour party manifesto, and party itself is not Marxist, even if the shadow chancellor and LoTO have Marxist sympathies.
Indeed the fact that the Tories are lifting large chunks of that manifesto, and implementing it shows that they are as much Marxists.0 -
That's a rather different point from the one we were discussing. Obviously the Labour Party as a whole are not Marxist.foxinsoxuk said:
The obvious flaw in PB Tory logic is that the Labour party manifesto, and party itself is not Marxist, even if the shadow chancellor and LoTO have Marxist sympathies.DavidL said:
Obviously anyone with half a brain (thus excluding Corbyn) knows that in reality Marxism is a really, really stupid idea. No one would dispute that the campaign was inept. But was it a good idea in the first place? I am not so sure.david_herdson said:
No, because every country that has ever tried to implement some version of Marxism has never got anywhere near the ideal and has always continued to repress and murder. By contrast, most governments, in most democracies, that go into an election with a 20-point lead come out of it with a stonking win.DavidL said:
Is this not what Marxists say? It was the execution (and not just of 40m people) that was the problem, not the ideas.david_herdson said:
Particularly after letting preparations and expectations get out of control.rottenborough said:
The decision was never really the issue. The problem was the way the whole thing was handled including an excruciating interview iirc with Andy Marr explaining why there had never ever ever been a plan to hold an early election.Jonathan said:
We learned this year that Brown got that decision soooooo right.TOPPING said:
And yet we still mock Brown.Scott_P said:@philipjcowley: Everyone, today: She should do a major reshuffle. Stamp of authority. Nothing to lose.
Major reshuffle -> civil war in Conservative Party -> May ousted
Everyone, tomorrow: She crazy.
Calling an election was the right call for May: the error was in how she conducted it.
May should, and could, have:
1. Used Crosby properly to vet the manifesto
2. Turned up to the debates
3. Spoken more to the public
4. Talked about the economy and let others do so
5. Made the election about the party and not principally herself
6. Been smarter in hitting Corbyn and McDonnell with their record
None of this is rocket science - and to the extent that it is, that's why you employ rocket scientists.
Indeed the fact that the Tories are lifting large chunks of that manifesto, and implementing it shows that they are as much Marxists.0 -
In a word, "Nissan". I could see the government signing up to this highly unequal arrangement just to keep Nissan in Sunderland. But there's another problem to a Canadian style PTA. There's no transition available to it. We have to go through Hard Brexit first. What it will eventually be, how long it takes and whether it happens at all are very uncertain. The EU has more comprehensive trade agreements than anyone else but even so they lack them with some very big economies, including the USA, China, Japan and India.HYUFD said:
It covers manufacturing which is what matters to Leave areas.FF43 said:
This table from Open Europe from before the referendum shows why any Canada style PTA will be highly disadvantageous to the UK. It covers sectors (medium to high chances of access in green) where we have large trade deficits with the EU, but not the sectors we do best at:HYUFD said:
Freedom of goods principally a la the Canada FTA with some preferred access for the City if possible.
https://openeurope.org.uk/today/blog/how-would-key-export-sectors-fare-under-brexit/
It is not so good for the City but then the Leave vote was never a vote to protect the City and on even the worst Brexit projections London will still be the largest financial centre in Europe even if Frankfurt and Paris and Zurich narrow the gap.0 -
Sandy may have changed his mind, now, but, putting aside the fact I am a married man for a second, I still would.Jonathan said:Does this farce now qualify for a -gate suffix?
Prittigate?0 -
Though the GOP candidate Gillespie was also a former Bush aide who beat an even more conservative primary challenger and Bannon and Trump are now saying he lost as he was not Trumpite enoughAlistair said:
Prior to the election the Republicans controlled the Virginia House of Delegates 66-34.TheScreamingEagles said:Anyone want to give me a précis about the elections in America yesterday?
A harbinger for Trump getting walloped in 2020 and the Dems taking the House in 2018?
Or is Trump gonna win in 2020?
As of this morning Dems were 48-47 ahead with 5 races too close to call and it looks most likely it will be a 50-50 split.
The heavily Bannon backed Governor candidate got creamed in the suburbs with his Dem opponent winning 60%+ of people under 45. Crucially the Republican did brilliantly in rural Virginia and got absolutely destroyed in the suburbs.
https://twitter.com/JonahNRO/status/928244887308455937
This looks amazing for the Dems in 2018.
I got on @ 3/1 for Dem control of Congress. I feel smug right now.
0 -
True, but Momentum are working on that.DavidL said:That's a rather different point from the one we were discussing. Obviously the Labour Party as a whole are not Marxist.
0 -
The one risky thing May did was call the election. And look where she ended up?TOPPING said:
She won't because it is an asymmetric risk. Do something, risk getting ejected. Do nothing, risk becoming ever weaker (on the assumption that surely - surely - if anyone was going to try their hand against her they would have done so by now).Richard_Nabavi said:
A major and bold reshuffle would be a risk, of course, but one with considerable potential upside. Conversely, doing as little as possible is also a risk, but one with with little or no upside. What's more, now is a particularly good time to be bold, because her most dangerous ministers are currently weak and the sexual harassment scandal is a restraining factor on any plots.TOPPING said:And yet we still mock Brown for not having the cojones to call an election. Such changes are unstable, unpredictable and events can turn on the slightest (or in this case, most enormous) issue.
I don't blame her for not rocking the boat.
It is execrable, weak, bad government, a shambles. But I don't blame her for it.
There will never be a better time for her to seize the initiative.
However, she won't.
She might well view her habit of a lifetime of playing it safe, and excessive caution, as vindicated, now.0
