politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » NEW EMERGENCY PB / POLLING MATTERS PODCAST: Bye Bye Boris and
Options
Comments
-
Good point. Which of the Fuck Business parties should people vote for next time round?ralphmalph said:
There are a heck of a lot of voters out there that see big business as crony business, even May recognises this. They have lived with posted workers under cutting wages, etc, etc.Scott_P said:
Resigning in an effort to further his career may have been, by accident, the single greatest contribution to good governance BoZo has made since becoming an MPralphmalph said:Also I think what Boris does next is key as well. If he tours the studio's and writes articles saying this is a bad deal and he articulates a positive future for the UK on a simple FTA then the Govt is in trouble. Because 1) there is no person in the Cabinet that can do "vision" like Boris, they are the Glum family. 2) Even though London peeps may detest Boris for his role in the the leave campaign, the actual leave voters throughout the country still listen to him and will make time for him.
There are a lot of Tory MP's in leave areas or areas with large leave votes that would have Boris campaign with them in an instant and refuse to have May, Hammond, Clarke et al any where near their campaign.
Now that they no longer have to keep him onside, cabinet colleagues are free to be much more vocal, and realistic, about the dangers of Fuck Business Brexit.
F business will be OK with them, it is one reason why Corbyn got a hearing.0 -
Read the original Twitter thread that sparked this exchange. Or this one:Philip_Thompson said:
Self-harm to the USA or harm to Europe?SouthamObserver said:
The US pulling out of Europe would be a monumental act of self-harm. It would also run entirely counter to British interests. Trump’s policies are the most explicitly hostile to the UK’s foreign policy and trade aims and objectives than those pursued by any other US president since at least the19th century. It is genuinely amazing how much leeway the British right give him. If the half African Obama was doing it they would be up in arms.rottenborough said:
Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.another_richard said:
Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.rottenborough said:Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.
https://twitter.com/DanielBShapiro/status/1016435137708544001
Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.
America's interests have changed and Europe just isn't that important for the USA now. Their big rival isn't the USSR, it's China. Their most likely battleground isn't Europe, it's the Pacific.
It may not be pleasant for Europeans that have gotten used to being protected effectively for free by the Americans while simultaneously mocking America's 'Military Industrial Complex' but the reality is that regardless of who is President the Pacific is now more important than the Atlantic for America. That was true under Obama and it's true now.
https://twitter.com/claireberlinski/status/1015872007521603585?s=21
0 -
The Americans have done very well indeed out of the last 70 years.Alanbrooke said:
Europe has been taking a peace dividend while Putin has been doing his land grabs. Only piggy backing off the yanks has allowed the Europeans to do this.Philip_Thompson said:
Self-harm to the USA or harm to Europe?SouthamObserver said:
The US pulling out of Europe would be a monumental act of self-harm. It would also run entirely counter to British interests. Trump’s policies are the most explicitly hostile to the UK’s foreign policy and trade aims and objectives than those pursued by any other US president since at least the19th century. It is genuinely amazing how much leeway the British right give him. If the half African Obama was doing it they would be up in arms.rottenborough said:
Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.another_richard said:
Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.rottenborough said:Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.
https://twitter.com/DanielBShapiro/status/1016435137708544001
Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.
America's interests have changed and Europe just isn't that important for the USA now. Their big rival isn't the USSR, it's China. Their most likely battleground isn't Europe, it's the Pacific.
It may not be pleasant for Europeans that have gotten used to being protected effectively for free by the Americans while simultaneously mocking America's 'Military Industrial Complex' but the reality is that regardless of who is President the Pacific is now more important than the Atlantic for America. That was true under Obama and it's true now.
0 -
or you can look at the parasite economies like Luxemburg which spend 0.9% on defence become tax havens for big corporates and hide behind the defence capabilities of others.ralphmalph said:
Also with Merkel and the rest of the EU (with the exception of Poland) buying Russian gas in huge quantities, they are proving the hard currency for Putin's military expansion, then bleating you must protect us, you must protect us. No wonder the sherman taxpayer is hacked off.Alanbrooke said:
Europe has been taking a peace dividend while Putin has been doing his land grabs. Only piggy backing off the yanks has allowed the Europeans to do this.Philip_Thompson said:
Self-harm to the USA or harm to Europe?SouthamObserver said:
The US pulling out of Europe would be a monumental act of self-harm. It would also run entirely counter to British interests. Trump’s policies are the most explicitly hostile to the UK’s foreign policy and trade aims and objectives than those pursued by any other US president since at least the19th century. It is genuinely amazing how much leeway the British right give him. If the half African Obama was doing it they would be up in arms.rottenborough said:
Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.another_richard said:
Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.rottenborough said:Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.
https://twitter.com/DanielBShapiro/status/1016435137708544001
Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.
America's interests have changed and Europe just isn't that important for the USA now. Their big rival isn't the USSR, it's China. Their most likely battleground isn't Europe, it's the Pacific.
It may not be pleasant for Europeans that have gotten used to being protected effectively for free by the Americans while simultaneously mocking America's 'Military Industrial Complex' but the reality is that regardless of who is President the Pacific is now more important than the Atlantic for America. That was true under Obama and it's true now.0 -
There is a lot of difference between big business and SMEs. Big business in general.is anti-competition, pro-regulation and not unsupportive of high taxes (as they kill off competitors) whereas SMEs are the opposite in those three factors. Most of my SME clients (though by no means all) are pro Brexit as they feel that the EU is built to protect the biggest companies and outside the EU there will be more opportunities.ralphmalph said:
There are a heck of a lot of voters out there that see big business as crony business, even May recognises this. They have lived with posted workers under cutting wages, etc, etc.Scott_P said:
Resigning in an effort to further his career may have been, by accident, the single greatest contribution to good governance BoZo has made since becoming an MPralphmalph said:Also I think what Boris does next is key as well. If he tours the studio's and writes articles saying this is a bad deal and he articulates a positive future for the UK on a simple FTA then the Govt is in trouble. Because 1) there is no person in the Cabinet that can do "vision" like Boris, they are the Glum family. 2) Even though London peeps may detest Boris for his role in the the leave campaign, the actual leave voters throughout the country still listen to him and will make time for him.
There are a lot of Tory MP's in leave areas or areas with large leave votes that would have Boris campaign with them in an instant and refuse to have May, Hammond, Clarke et al any where near their campaign.
Now that they no longer have to keep him onside, cabinet colleagues are free to be much more vocal, and realistic, about the dangers of Fuck Business Brexit.
F business will be OK with them, it is one reason why Corbyn got a hearing.
Therefore it is not surprising that big business wants to stay in the EU - and indeed is in favour of further integration, it made similar noises about joining the Euro. Whether big business is more important than the hundreds of thousands of SMEs is more open to question.0 -
What if the EU accepts Chequers and polls show 60%+ support for Remain versus Chequers? (And minimal support for No Deal.) It seems to me the PM can't lose from that scenario if she calls a referendum.TOPPING said:Didn't I answer? If the EU accepts Chequers (big if), then Chequers.
0 -
or we could ask how did business get itself in to this position ?TOPPING said:
Good point. Which of the Fuck Business parties should people vote for next time round?ralphmalph said:
There are a heck of a lot of voters out there that see big business as crony business, even May recognises this. They have lived with posted workers under cutting wages, etc, etc.Scott_P said:
Resigning in an effort to further his career may have been, by accident, the single greatest contribution to good governance BoZo has made since becoming an MPralphmalph said:Also I think what Boris does next is key as well. If he tours the studio's and writes articles saying this is a bad deal and he articulates a positive future for the UK on a simple FTA then the Govt is in trouble. Because 1) there is no person in the Cabinet that can do "vision" like Boris, they are the Glum family. 2) Even though London peeps may detest Boris for his role in the the leave campaign, the actual leave voters throughout the country still listen to him and will make time for him.
There are a lot of Tory MP's in leave areas or areas with large leave votes that would have Boris campaign with them in an instant and refuse to have May, Hammond, Clarke et al any where near their campaign.
Now that they no longer have to keep him onside, cabinet colleagues are free to be much more vocal, and realistic, about the dangers of Fuck Business Brexit.
F business will be OK with them, it is one reason why Corbyn got a hearing.0 -
Must admit I missed the stuff about Obama threatening to pull the US out of NATO and imposing sanctions on British goods. I did notice a big fuss about a Churchill bust though.Alanbrooke said:
Obama the Pacific president was doing it and nobody left or right batted an eye lidSouthamObserver said:
The US pulling out of Europe would be a monumental act of self-harm. It would also run entirely counter to British interests. Trump’s policies are the most explicitly hostile to the UK’s foreign policy and trade aims and objectives than those pursued by any other US president since at least the19th century. It is genuinely amazing how much leeway the British right give him. If the half African Obama was doing it they would be up in arms.rottenborough said:
Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.another_richard said:
Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.rottenborough said:Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.
https://twitter.com/DanielBShapiro/status/1016435137708544001
Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.
0 -
The appearance of a thing is not the same as the reality of a thing, and that's just as well in this case, but Putin would certainly appear ascendant if Trump withdraws from NATO, recognises the annexation of the Crimea and withdraws troops from Europe.asjohnstone said:
Putin isn't ascendant, Russia is a joke on the verge of bankruptcy.OblitusSumMe said:
This could be the making of the EU. Every country needs an enemy to define itself against. Abandoned by Trump, with Putin ascendant, the opportunity for the EU to establish itself, to make some creation myths, is there.rottenborough said:
Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.another_richard said:
Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.rottenborough said:Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.
https://twitter.com/DanielBShapiro/status/1016435137708544001
Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.0 -
If the EU accepts Chequers (and I agree it's a big if), I think Parliament will fall in line. Enough people see it as a first step. There will be die hards on both sides that think it gives away too much or too little, but there will be majority cross party support IMO.TOPPING said:
Didn't I answer? If the EU accepts Chequers (big if), then Chequers.0 -
So have the Europeans. But now things have changed.SouthamObserver said:
The Americans have done very well indeed out of the last 70 years.Alanbrooke said:
Europe has been taking a peace dividend while Putin has been doing his land grabs. Only piggy backing off the yanks has allowed the Europeans to do this.Philip_Thompson said:
Self-harm to the USA or harm to Europe?SouthamObserver said:
The US pulling out of Europe would be a monumental act of self-harm. It would also run entirely counter to British interests. Trump’s policies are the most explicitly hostile to the UK’s foreign policy and trade aims and objectives than those pursued by any other US president since at least the19th century. It is genuinely amazing how much leeway the British right give him. If the half African Obama was doing it they would be up in arms.rottenborough said:
Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.another_richard said:
Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.rottenborough said:Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.
https://twitter.com/DanielBShapiro/status/1016435137708544001
Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.
America's interests have changed and Europe just isn't that important for the USA now. Their big rival isn't the USSR, it's China. Their most likely battleground isn't Europe, it's the Pacific.
It may not be pleasant for Europeans that have gotten used to being protected effectively for free by the Americans while simultaneously mocking America's 'Military Industrial Complex' but the reality is that regardless of who is President the Pacific is now more important than the Atlantic for America. That was true under Obama and it's true now.0 -
However the person who wrote that thread seems to share a lot of Trump's beliefs about Europe. She wrote a book over a decade ago caricaturing Europe as a scary and violent powder keg.SouthamObserver said:
Read the original Twitter thread that sparked this exchange. Or this one:Philip_Thompson said:
Self-harm to the USA or harm to Europe?SouthamObserver said:
The US pulling out of Europe would be a monumental act of self-harm. It would also run entirely counter to British interests. Trump’s policies are the most explicitly hostile to the UK’s foreign policy and trade aims and objectives than those pursued by any other US president since at least the19th century. It is genuinely amazing how much leeway the British right give him. If the half African Obama was doing it they would be up in arms.rottenborough said:
Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.another_richard said:
Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.rottenborough said:Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.
https://twitter.com/DanielBShapiro/status/1016435137708544001
Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.
America's interests have changed and Europe just isn't that important for the USA now. Their big rival isn't the USSR, it's China. Their most likely battleground isn't Europe, it's the Pacific.
It may not be pleasant for Europeans that have gotten used to being protected effectively for free by the Americans while simultaneously mocking America's 'Military Industrial Complex' but the reality is that regardless of who is President the Pacific is now more important than the Atlantic for America. That was true under Obama and it's true now.
https://twitter.com/claireberlinski/status/1015872007521603585?s=21
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menace_in_Europe0 -
Ukip are on 5% with YouGov.
Up 2% on the last poll.0 -
What opportunities do they see outside the EU thst aren’t there now? We’re an SME (or were until last week) that did well over 50% of its business outside the EU. The UK’s membership never stopped us.GreenHeron said:
There is a lot of difference between big business and SMEs. Big business in general.is anti-competition, pro-regulation and not unsupportive of high taxes (as they kill off competitors) whereas SMEs are the opposite in those three factors. Most of my SME clients (though by no means all) are pro Brexit as they feel that the EU is built to protect the biggest companies and outside the EU there will be more opportunities.ralphmalph said:
There are a heck of a lot of voters out there that see big business as crony business, even May recognises this. They have lived with posted workers under cutting wages, etc, etc.Scott_P said:
Resigning in an effort to further his career may have been, by accident, the single greatest contribution to good governance BoZo has made since becoming an MPralphmalph said:Also I think what Boris does next is key as well. If he tours the studio's and writes articles saying this is a bad deal and he articulates a positive future for the UK on a simple FTA then the Govt is in trouble. Because 1) there is no person in the Cabinet that can do "vision" like Boris, they are the Glum family. 2) Even though London peeps may detest Boris for his role in the the leave campaign, the actual leave voters throughout the country still listen to him and will make time for him.
There are a lot of Tory MP's in leave areas or areas with large leave votes that would have Boris campaign with them in an instant and refuse to have May, Hammond, Clarke et al any where near their campaign.
Now that they no longer have to keep him onside, cabinet colleagues are free to be much more vocal, and realistic, about the dangers of Fuck Business Brexit.
F business will be OK with them, it is one reason why Corbyn got a hearing.
Therefore it is not surprising that big business wants to stay in the EU - and indeed is in favour of further integration, it made similar noises about joining the Euro. Whether big business is more important than the hundreds of thousands of SMEs is more open to question.
0 -
Well you always look at the small stuff.SouthamObserver said:
Must admit I missed the stuff about Obama threatening to pull the US out of NATO and imposing sanctions on British goods. I did notice a big fuss about a Churchill bust though.Alanbrooke said:
Obama the Pacific president was doing it and nobody left or right batted an eye lidSouthamObserver said:
The US pulling out of Europe would be a monumental act of self-harm. It would also run entirely counter to British interests. Trump’s policies are the most explicitly hostile to the UK’s foreign policy and trade aims and objectives than those pursued by any other US president since at least the19th century. It is genuinely amazing how much leeway the British right give him. If the half African Obama was doing it they would be up in arms.rottenborough said:
Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.another_richard said:
Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.rottenborough said:Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.
https://twitter.com/DanielBShapiro/status/1016435137708544001
Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.
Obama on the other hand made quite clear that US focus would shift to the Pacific especially given the rise of China. Europe was simply an area declining in importance and where he thought Mrs Merkel could hold the line.
0 -
The problem will be if the EU does not accept it.MaxPB said:
If the EU accepts Chequers (and I agree it's a big if), I think Parliament will fall in line. Enough people see it as a first step. There will be die hards on both sides that think it gives away too much or too little, but there will be majority cross party support IMO.TOPPING said:
Didn't I answer? If the EU accepts Chequers (big if), then Chequers.
TM has no room to water it down and a hard Brexit becomes a very real prospect. It is good to see she has ordered more work on preparation for a hard Brexit0 -
Not really. A settled Europe has allowed the US to look elsewhere.Alanbrooke said:
So have the Europeans. But now things have changed.SouthamObserver said:
The Americans have done very well indeed out of the last 70 years.Alanbrooke said:
Europe has been taking a peace dividend while Putin has been doing his land grabs. Only piggy backing off the yanks has allowed the Europeans to do this.Philip_Thompson said:
Self-harm to the USA or harm to Europe?SouthamObserver said:
The US pulling out of Europe would be a monumental act of self-harm. It would also run entirely counter to British interests. Trump’s policies are the most explicitly hostile to the UK’s foreign policy and trade aims and objectives than those pursued by any other US president since at least the19th century. It is genuinely amazing how much leeway the British right give him. If the half African Obama was doing it they would be up in arms.rottenborough said:
Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.another_richard said:
Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.rottenborough said:Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.
https://twitter.com/DanielBShapiro/status/1016435137708544001
Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.
America's interests have changed and Europe just isn't that important for the USA now. Their big rival isn't the USSR, it's China. Their most likely battleground isn't Europe, it's the Pacific.
It may not be pleasant for Europeans that have gotten used to being protected effectively for free by the Americans while simultaneously mocking America's 'Military Industrial Complex' but the reality is that regardless of who is President the Pacific is now more important than the Atlantic for America. That was true under Obama and it's true now.
0 -
If he goes a whole new ball game opens upEl_Capitano said:0 -
Mr. Capitano, she needn't worry. Gove is known for never stabbing anyone in the back.
....0 -
I think the resignations put that into sharp focus and probably helps the government avoid big concessions.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The problem will be if the EU does not accept it.MaxPB said:
If the EU accepts Chequers (and I agree it's a big if), I think Parliament will fall in line. Enough people see it as a first step. There will be die hards on both sides that think it gives away too much or too little, but there will be majority cross party support IMO.TOPPING said:
Didn't I answer? If the EU accepts Chequers (big if), then Chequers.
TM has no room to water it down and a hard Brexit becomes a very real prospect. It is good to see she has ordered more work on preparation for a hard Brexit
Theresa can (rightly) say that, if you don't like this, then wait until Gove and Javid put their hard/WTO brexit forwards.
I think @AlastairMeeks had a thread on this aspect a few months ago.0 -
The point is that Pax Americana has been a bipartisan issue. Both sides see the huge benefits to the US it has delivered - and continues to deliver.williamglenn said:
However the person who wrote that thread seems to share a lot of Trump's beliefs about Europe. She wrote a book over a decade ago caricaturing Europe as a scary and violent powder keg.SouthamObserver said:
Read the original Twitter thread that sparked this exchange. Or this one:Philip_Thompson said:
Self-harm to the USA or harm to Europe?SouthamObserver said:
The US pulling out of Europe would be a monumental act of self-harm. It would also run entirely counter to British interests. Trump’s policies are the most explicitly hostile to the UK’s foreign policy and trade aims and objectives than those pursued by any other US president since at least the19th century. It is genuinely amazing how much leeway the British right give him. If the half African Obama was doing it they would be up in arms.rottenborough said:
Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.another_richard said:
Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.rottenborough said:Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.
https://twitter.com/DanielBShapiro/status/1016435137708544001
Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.
America's interests have changed and Europe just isn't that important for the USA now. Their big rival isn't the USSR, it's China. Their most likely battleground isn't Europe, it's the Pacific.
It may not be pleasant for Europeans that have gotten used to being protected effectively for free by the Americans while simultaneously mocking America's 'Military Industrial Complex' but the reality is that regardless of who is President the Pacific is now more important than the Atlantic for America. That was true under Obama and it's true now.
https://twitter.com/claireberlinski/status/1015872007521603585?s=21
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menace_in_Europe
Anyone who thinks Putin is only interested in what happens to Russia’s West really hasn’t been paying much attention.
0 -
What position? Every PB Leaver is queuing up to tell us how wonderfully we are doing.Alanbrooke said:
or we could ask how did business get itself in to this position ?TOPPING said:
Good point. Which of the Fuck Business parties should people vote for next time round?ralphmalph said:
There are a heck of a lot of voters out there that see big business as crony business, even May recognises this. They have lived with posted workers under cutting wages, etc, etc.Scott_P said:
Resigning in an effort to further his career may have been, by accident, the single greatest contribution to good governance BoZo has made since becoming an MPralphmalph said:Also I think what Boris does next is key as well. If he tours the studio's and writes articles saying this is a bad deal and he articulates a positive future for the UK on a simple FTA then the Govt is in trouble. Because 1) there is no person in the Cabinet that can do "vision" like Boris, they are the Glum family. 2) Even though London peeps may detest Boris for his role in the the leave campaign, the actual leave voters throughout the country still listen to him and will make time for him.
There are a lot of Tory MP's in leave areas or areas with large leave votes that would have Boris campaign with them in an instant and refuse to have May, Hammond, Clarke et al any where near their campaign.
Now that they no longer have to keep him onside, cabinet colleagues are free to be much more vocal, and realistic, about the dangers of Fuck Business Brexit.
F business will be OK with them, it is one reason why Corbyn got a hearing.0 -
I'm a Brexiteer (a liberal, sovereignty, anti-elitism based one...) and I have to admit I've lost. I'm pretty sure we will be remaining in the EU in all but name: paying into it, accepting its laws, doing as we are told.
The fear for me was that the UK was too immersed in managerial elitism to accept the revolutionary change Brexit offered. For every ideas-man like Gove there are twenty suits who resist change. Big businesses, career politicians, corporatists, lawyers and civil servants run the show in the UK, as they do everywhere, and the UK has surrendered to the comfort of it. There's fuck all us working class provincial folk can do. Brexit was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for us but our politicians have shown they are not up to the hugeness of it and my fear that we'd be quietly, cleverly shunted towards remaining as an EU-member is being realised.
I think the EU is a great idea but I fear that its current function will lead to a rise in extremism across the EU. It is magnificent at pissing off the dispossessed and looking after the elites. That won't end well. I always hoped we could change it, use our democratic clout to push it in a better direction but the EU has proved it's more powerful than us and we've lost.
Theresa May was always the perfect politician to do their bidding. She's boring and managerial, lacking in ideas, guile and curiosity and was never broad enough in her horizons to lead a movement.
Not the end of the world, but a shame.
ps - a great opportunity for Corbyn too. He can now actively go after all the blue collar voters by positioning himself as the pure anti-elite choice.0 -
And the United States is a British creation.SouthamObserver said:
Read the original Twitter thread that sparked this exchange. Or this one:Philip_Thompson said:
Self-harm to the USA or harm to Europe?SouthamObserver said:
The US pulling out of Europe would be a monumental act of self-harm. It would also run entirely counter to British interests. Trump’s policies are the most explicitly hostile to the UK’s foreign policy and trade aims and objectives than those pursued by any other US president since at least the19th century. It is genuinely amazing how much leeway the British right give him. If the half African Obama was doing it they would be up in arms.rottenborough said:
Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.another_richard said:
Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.rottenborough said:Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.
https://twitter.com/DanielBShapiro/status/1016435137708544001
Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.
America's interests have changed and Europe just isn't that important for the USA now. Their big rival isn't the USSR, it's China. Their most likely battleground isn't Europe, it's the Pacific.
It may not be pleasant for Europeans that have gotten used to being protected effectively for free by the Americans while simultaneously mocking America's 'Military Industrial Complex' but the reality is that regardless of who is President the Pacific is now more important than the Atlantic for America. That was true under Obama and it's true now.
https://twitter.com/claireberlinski/status/1015872007521603585?s=210 -
I suspect people in Poland and Ukraine might not agree with your call of settled.SouthamObserver said:
Not really. A settled Europe has allowed the US to look elsewhere.Alanbrooke said:
So have the Europeans. But now things have changed.SouthamObserver said:
The Americans have done very well indeed out of the last 70 years.Alanbrooke said:
Europe has been taking a peace dividend while Putin has been doing his land grabs. Only piggy backing off the yanks has allowed the Europeans to do this.Philip_Thompson said:
Self-harm to the USA or harm to Europe?SouthamObserver said:
The US pulling out of Europe would be a monumental act of self-harm. It would also run entirely counter to British interests. Trump’s policies are the most explicitly hostile to the UK’s foreign policy and trade aims and objectives than those pursued by any other US president since at least the19th century. It is genuinely amazing how much leeway the British right give him. If the half African Obama was doing it they would be up in arms.rottenborough said:
Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.another_richard said:
Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.rottenborough said:Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.
https://twitter.com/DanielBShapiro/status/1016435137708544001
Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.
America's interests have changed and Europe just isn't that important for the USA now. Their big rival isn't the USSR, it's China. Their most likely battleground isn't Europe, it's the Pacific.
It may not be pleasant for Europeans that have gotten used to being protected effectively for free by the Americans while simultaneously mocking America's 'Military Industrial Complex' but the reality is that regardless of who is President the Pacific is now more important than the Atlantic for America. That was true under Obama and it's true now.
0 -
Agree.MaxPB said:
If the EU accepts Chequers (and I agree it's a big if), I think Parliament will fall in line. Enough people see it as a first step. There will be die hards on both sides that think it gives away too much or too little, but there will be majority cross party support IMO.TOPPING said:
Didn't I answer? If the EU accepts Chequers (big if), then Chequers.
And @williamglenn I don't dispute that all things being equal there is an argument for a second referndum. However, things are most decidedly not equal and I just find it very difficult to get my head around there being a second referendum. I am not 100% sure I want one or it would do any good. The nation has told the government to seek a new settlement with the EU and the government seems to be trying to do that. It is of course a choice between bad options, but I don't see how this can be changed.
As someone once said, wisely: now is not the time for logic.0 -
Mr. Fenster, you may be right.
That could lead to the rise of the far right here. I know keep banging on about it, and hope I'm wrong, but when voters decide the mainstream parties can't be trusted to deliver what they want the only options available are disengagement from politics and moving to the fringes.0 -
House-building rose 7% in May.Philip_Thompson said:
No houses are built? I wonder what all those buildings with 3-5 bedrooms that have been getting built around here are then?rottenborough said:
Adonis comes out with some very odd comments (see eg The Secret Barrister).0 -
She is more of a pragmatist and your comments do seem the direction of travel.Fenster said:I'm a Brexiteer (a liberal, sovereignty, anti-elitism based one...) and I have to admit I've lost. I'm pretty sure we will be remaining in the EU in all but name: paying into it, accepting its laws, doing as we are told.
The fear for me was that the UK was too immersed in managerial elitism to accept the revolutionary change Brexit offered. For every ideas-man like Gove there are twenty suits who resist change. Big businesses, career politicians, corporatists, lawyers and civil servants run the show in the UK, as they do everywhere, and the UK has surrendered to the comfort of it. There's fuck all us working class provincial folk can do. Brexit was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for us but our politicians have shown they are not up to the hugeness of it and my fear that we'd be quietly, cleverly shunted towards remaining as an EU-member is being realised.
I think the EU is a great idea but I fear that its current function will lead to a rise in extremism across the EU. It is magnificent as pissing off the dispossessed and looking after the elites. That won't end well. I always hoped we could change it, use our democratic clout to pish it in a better direction but it's proved it's more powerful than us and we've lost.
Theresa May was always the perfect politician to do their bidding. She's boring and managerial, lacking in ideas, guile and curiosity and was never broad enough in her horizons to lead a movement.
Not the end of the world, but a shame.
However, remain has gone now and it is still not certain that a hard Brexit will follow if more conservatives rebel or the EU tries to get more from her. This is it for both UK and the EU
0 -
ah, I thought you were advancing the proposition that business now has no party to speak in its favour.TOPPING said:
What position? Every PB Leaver is queuing up to tell us how wonderfully we are doing.Alanbrooke said:
or we could ask how did business get itself in to this position ?TOPPING said:
Good point. Which of the Fuck Business parties should people vote for next time round?ralphmalph said:
There are a heck of a lot of voters out there that see big business as crony business, even May recognises this. They have lived with posted workers under cutting wages, etc, etc.Scott_P said:
Resigning in an effort to further his career may have been, by accident, the single greatest contribution to good governance BoZo has made since becoming an MPralphmalph said:Also I think what Boris does next is key as well. If he tours the studio's and writes articles saying this is a bad deal and he articulates a positive future for the UK on a simple FTA then the Govt is in trouble. Because 1) there is no person in the Cabinet that can do "vision" like Boris, they are the Glum family. 2) Even though London peeps may detest Boris for his role in the the leave campaign, the actual leave voters throughout the country still listen to him and will make time for him.
There are a lot of Tory MP's in leave areas or areas with large leave votes that would have Boris campaign with them in an instant and refuse to have May, Hammond, Clarke et al any where near their campaign.
Now that they no longer have to keep him onside, cabinet colleagues are free to be much more vocal, and realistic, about the dangers of Fuck Business Brexit.
F business will be OK with them, it is one reason why Corbyn got a hearing.
whereas you were just trolling werent you ?
0 -
Gove is too wounded by the reaction to his turning on Boris. Gove is still in rehab.Big_G_NorthWales said:
If he goes a whole new ball game opens upEl_Capitano said:0 -
It depends how opinion shifts over the next few weeks. If there is a genuine backlash against Chequers then I agree it could be dangerous, but if not then it could be cathartic and give us a chance to avoid the interminable debate that would follow if the Chequers settlement were imposed on us.TOPPING said:
Agree.MaxPB said:
If the EU accepts Chequers (and I agree it's a big if), I think Parliament will fall in line. Enough people see it as a first step. There will be die hards on both sides that think it gives away too much or too little, but there will be majority cross party support IMO.TOPPING said:
Didn't I answer? If the EU accepts Chequers (big if), then Chequers.
And @williamglenn I don't dispute that all things being equal there is an argument for a second referndum. However, things are most decidedly not equal and I just find it very difficult to get my head around there being a second referendum. I am not 100% sure I want one or it would do any good. The nation has told the government to seek a new settlement with the EU and the government seems to be trying to do that. It is of course a choice between bad options, but I don't see how this can be changed.
As someone once said, wisely: now is not the time for logic.0 -
Mr. Evershed, is he?
If anything, I'd guess people are more likely to be grateful to Gove for knifing Boris last time.0 -
The behaviour of Pub Cos. shows what is wrong with quite a lot of big business in this country,Alanbrooke said:
ah, I thought you were advancing the proposition that business now has no party to speak in its favour.TOPPING said:
What position? Every PB Leaver is queuing up to tell us how wonderfully we are doing.Alanbrooke said:
or we could ask how did business get itself in to this position ?TOPPING said:
Good point. Which of the Fuck Business parties should people vote for next time round?ralphmalph said:
There are a heck of a lot of voters out there that see big business as crony business, even May recognises this. They have lived with posted workers under cutting wages, etc, etc.Scott_P said:
Resigning in an effort to further his career may have been, by accident, the single greatest contribution to good governance BoZo has made since becoming an MPralphmalph said:Also I think what Boris does next is key as well. If he tours the studio's and writes articles saying this is a bad deal and he articulates a positive future for the UK on a simple FTA then the Govt is in trouble. Because 1) there is no person in the Cabinet that can do "vision" like Boris, they are the Glum family. 2) Even though London peeps may detest Boris for his role in the the leave campaign, the actual leave voters throughout the country still listen to him and will make time for him.
There are a lot of Tory MP's in leave areas or areas with large leave votes that would have Boris campaign with them in an instant and refuse to have May, Hammond, Clarke et al any where near their campaign.
Now that they no longer have to keep him onside, cabinet colleagues are free to be much more vocal, and realistic, about the dangers of Fuck Business Brexit.
F business will be OK with them, it is one reason why Corbyn got a hearing.
whereas you were just trolling werent you ?0 -
The problem is to deliver what the voters want without delivering the consequences of what they want.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Fenster, you may be right.
That could lead to the rise of the far right here. I know keep banging on about it, and hope I'm wrong, but when voters decide the mainstream parties can't be trusted to deliver what they want the only options available are disengagement from politics and moving to the fringes.0 -
Who was the man who was asking the questions? I thought Cressida Dick was both reasonable and correct. The questioner on the other hand seemed to have a very unwholesome agendaMorris_Dancer said:Mr. Palmer, if the 'culture war' (I dislike the term) has not been fed recently then it's because you and the Westminster bubble haven't been paying attention. Rape gangs in Newcastle and Oxford have been sent down relatively recently, the Telford situation appears unresolved, and Westminster types are more comfortable talking about Julia Hartley-Brewer's knee.
There was surprisingly open and honest reporting about the Rotherham scandal at the time but there's been a shameful reticence since.
This hasn't gone away, it's just being downplayed. Cressida Dick (whose name suits her well) wibbled the following some months ago.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOA9n3QdpFw
The comment from just after 2.40 is particularly ridiculous. In the same way men commit far more murders than women, and women are more likely to be shoplifters, the notion there's no discernible pattern is palpable politically correct bullshit. From 4.25 is particularly depressing.0 -
Mr. Alan, to be fair, the voters also wanted a referendum on Lisbon. And never had a say on the EU's creation. Or the absence of migration controls on new accession countries, the surrender of half the rebate, or Cameron's feeble renegotiation effort.
A pro-EU political class drove us so far along the road, making sceptical noises in opposition and EU-phile moves in government to try and bind us to the EU, that we're significantly entangled.
None of that is the fault of the electorate, nor is May's utterly cackhanded negotiation approach of prevarication and capitulation.
If the electorate had been asked sooner (ie Lisbon, when we were promised a vote and denied it) the situation would be far better.0 -
https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/1016617865292677120
Tom Watson fires off, into his own feet once again.0 -
I'm going to keep saying this until it penetrates your block head, no conservative government would ever put remain back on a ballot paper, it would mean the end of our party for at least a generation, possibly forever. You may be wedded to the EU, the party is not and has never been.williamglenn said:
It depends how opinion shifts over the next few weeks. If there is a genuine backlash against Chequers then I agree it could be dangerous, but if not then it could be cathartic and give us a chance to avoid the interminable debate that would follow if the Chequers settlement were imposed on us.TOPPING said:
Agree.MaxPB said:
If the EU accepts Chequers (and I agree it's a big if), I think Parliament will fall in line. Enough people see it as a first step. There will be die hards on both sides that think it gives away too much or too little, but there will be majority cross party support IMO.TOPPING said:
Didn't I answer? If the EU accepts Chequers (big if), then Chequers.
And @williamglenn I don't dispute that all things being equal there is an argument for a second referndum. However, things are most decidedly not equal and I just find it very difficult to get my head around there being a second referendum. I am not 100% sure I want one or it would do any good. The nation has told the government to seek a new settlement with the EU and the government seems to be trying to do that. It is of course a choice between bad options, but I don't see how this can be changed.
As someone once said, wisely: now is not the time for logic.0 -
Morning all
To lighten the mood slightly, yesterday in the office, one of my colleagues who I shall simply say is a man of the Left, shouted across at me "your mate Boris has resigned".
My response was as follows "first, Boris isn't my friend. I simply live in a city where he used to be Mayor. I admit we do have one thing in common - we've both got stuck on a zip wire but that's another story".0 -
my brother has a lovely sayingSean_F said:
The behaviour of Pub Cos. shows what is wrong with quite a lot of big business in this country,Alanbrooke said:
ah, I thought you were advancing the proposition that business now has no party to speak in its favour.TOPPING said:
What position? Every PB Leaver is queuing up to tell us how wonderfully we are doing.Alanbrooke said:
or we could ask how did business get itself in to this position ?TOPPING said:
Good point. Which of the Fuck Business parties should people vote for next time round?ralphmalph said:
There are a heck of a lot of voters out there that see big business as crony business, even May recognises this. They have lived with posted workers under cutting wages, etc, etc.Scott_P said:
Resigning in an effort to further his career may have been, by accident, the single greatest contribution to good governance BoZo has made since becoming an MPralphmalph said:Also I think what Boris does next is key as well. If he tours the studio's and writes articles saying this is a bad deal and he articulates a positive future for the UK on a simple FTA then the Govt is in trouble. Because 1) there is no person in the Cabinet that can do "vision" like Boris, they are the Glum family. 2) Even though London peeps may detest Boris for his role in the the leave campaign, the actual leave voters throughout the country still listen to him and will make time for him.
There are a lot of Tory MP's in leave areas or areas with large leave votes that would have Boris campaign with them in an instant and refuse to have May, Hammond, Clarke et al any where near their campaign.
Now that they no longer have to keep him onside, cabinet colleagues are free to be much more vocal, and realistic, about the dangers of Fuck Business Brexit.
F business will be OK with them, it is one reason why Corbyn got a hearing.
whereas you were just trolling werent you ?
if youre dealing with a company that has an ethics policy, shouldn't you first ask why they need one ?0 -
In lighter news, Vettel seems pleased with his new car:
https://twitter.com/SeenThruGlass/status/10162557801804308480 -
0
-
What that misses is that past European conflicts were not simply because Europe is in itself a violent place, but because global power was concentrated in neighbouring European nations. Europe ruled the world and fought each other for control.SouthamObserver said:
Read the original Twitter thread that sparked this exchange. Or this one:Philip_Thompson said:
Self-harm to the USA or harm to Europe?SouthamObserver said:
The US pulling out of Europe would be a monumental act of self-harm. It would also run entirely counter to British interests. Trump’s policies are the most explicitly hostile to the UK’s foreign policy and trade aims and objectives than those pursued by any other US president since at least the19th century. It is genuinely amazing how much leeway the British right give him. If the half African Obama was doing it they would be up in arms.rottenborough said:
Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.another_richard said:
Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.rottenborough said:Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.
https://twitter.com/DanielBShapiro/status/1016435137708544001
Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.
America's interests have changed and Europe just isn't that important for the USA now. Their big rival isn't the USSR, it's China. Their most likely battleground isn't Europe, it's the Pacific.
It may not be pleasant for Europeans that have gotten used to being protected effectively for free by the Americans while simultaneously mocking America's 'Military Industrial Complex' but the reality is that regardless of who is President the Pacific is now more important than the Atlantic for America. That was true under Obama and it's true now.
https://twitter.com/claireberlinski/status/1015872007521603585?s=21
That isn't true now. Even if America pulled out of Europe completely overnight the old status quo ante no longer exists. Europe is simply not as important as it was.0 -
It's nonsense by Adonis. Housing starts are about 40k per quarter, double what they were at the trough, and almost back to where they were before the financial crisis. Do we need to do a lot more? Yes, but things have been steadily improving year by year.Philip_Thompson said:
No houses are built? I wonder what all those buildings with 3-5 bedrooms that have been getting built around here are then?rottenborough said:0 -
Nonsense. Loads of houses are being built near me - the Gov't might well be dangerously exposed to a fall in prices with the help to buy stuff but that's a different matter.rottenborough said:0 -
0
-
Not close to an answer. What does that mean? Chequers is an approach to a trade agreement, it does not provide an answer on the backstop which needs to be in the withdrawal agreement, if you think it does, say what it is.TOPPING said:
Didn't I answer? If the EU accepts Chequers (big if), then Chequers.archer101au said:
The question is very simple. What text for the NI backstop will be in the WA that can pass in the HoC. Do you have an answer or just more insults? Because this is a Remainer plan, would be a bit embarrassing if it doesn't actually work.TOPPING said:
What was the question? What will the HoC tolerate? Well the Chequers agreement neatly squares the NI circle and if you exclude the tail of Brex-o-loons, I believe that they will tolerate that.archer101au said:
You are not really answering the question. The UK remaining aligned may solve the problem in your eyes, but as I pointed out, this would be part of a separate trade agreement, not the withdrawal agreement. And since this agreement is not legally binding until it is signed way in the future, May still needs to agree the backstop text.TOPPING said:
And as I keep pointing out, that is the very nub of the whole Brexit process. Who knew? Well that man Dave did.
And as we can see it is what is driving all the rest of it.
And also as you note, there are only two options, the entire UK remains regulatorily aligned, or some kind of high-fandangled super smart technology and process. The likes of which you described recently.
As it stands, the one looking more doable is the former.
So, what can the backstop text say that will pass the HoC? Because I am absolutely certain that the EU backstop text cannot pass.
"Not what people voted for" is disingenous bolleaux.0 -
Perhaps there has been more scheming and planning than first thought?El_Capitano said:0 -
The closure of any iconic British manufacturer (Airbus, JLR) as a result of Brexit would mean the end of your party for at least a generation, possibly forever.MaxPB said:I'm going to keep saying this until it penetrates your block head, no conservative government would ever put remain back on a ballot paper, it would mean the end of our party for at least a generation, possibly forever.
0 -
Trump gives every indication of having already decided NATO is over.another_richard said:
Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.rottenborough said:Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.
https://twitter.com/DanielBShapiro/status/1016435137708544001
Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.0 -
Mr. Urquhart, scheming? In the Conservative Party?!
Sacre bleu!0 -
Gove denies everything, apparently.0
-
How much importance do you think the PM is giving to the gender balance when she is making Cabinet appointments - and how much importance should she give to gender balance?
Just asking.0 -
Another prominent Brexiteer runs away because Brexit is a steaming pile of shit and he knows it?Big_G_NorthWales said:
If he goes a whole new ball game opens upEl_Capitano said:
Not entirely clear that is bad news for the PM.
It's bad news for Brexit...0 -
No it wouldn't. The voters would blame the company and or the EU.Scott_P said:
The closure of any iconic British manufacturer (Airbus, JLR) as a result of Brexit would mean the end of your party for at least a generation, possibly forever.MaxPB said:I'm going to keep saying this until it penetrates your block head, no conservative government would ever put remain back on a ballot paper, it would mean the end of our party for at least a generation, possibly forever.
As always, don't try original thought, it doesn't work for you single brain cell.0 -
May would be wise not to trust the duplicitous sod.Big_G_NorthWales said:
If he goes a whole new ball game opens upEl_Capitano said:
As he did with Boris he will back you one day and condemn you the next.0 -
That's exactly what a plotter would say!El_Capitano said:Gove denies everything, apparently.
0 -
About time. It may have noticed that its former adversary the Warsaw Pact dissolved itself 25 years ago.Dura_Ace said:
Trump gives every indication of having already decided NATO is over.another_richard said:
Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.rottenborough said:Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.
https://twitter.com/DanielBShapiro/status/1016435137708544001
Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.0 -
The party is wedded to power. Giving Corbyn the opportunity to bring down the government over Brexit is not in its short term interests, and imposing a controversial settlement without a specific mandate is not in its long term interests.MaxPB said:
I'm going to keep saying this until it penetrates your block head, no conservative government would ever put remain back on a ballot paper, it would mean the end of our party for at least a generation, possibly forever. You may be wedded to the EU, the party is not and has never been.williamglenn said:
It depends how opinion shifts over the next few weeks. If there is a genuine backlash against Chequers then I agree it could be dangerous, but if not then it could be cathartic and give us a chance to avoid the interminable debate that would follow if the Chequers settlement were imposed on us.TOPPING said:
Agree.MaxPB said:
If the EU accepts Chequers (and I agree it's a big if), I think Parliament will fall in line. Enough people see it as a first step. There will be die hards on both sides that think it gives away too much or too little, but there will be majority cross party support IMO.TOPPING said:
Didn't I answer? If the EU accepts Chequers (big if), then Chequers.
And @williamglenn I don't dispute that all things being equal there is an argument for a second referndum. However, things are most decidedly not equal and I just find it very difficult to get my head around there being a second referendum. I am not 100% sure I want one or it would do any good. The nation has told the government to seek a new settlement with the EU and the government seems to be trying to do that. It is of course a choice between bad options, but I don't see how this can be changed.
As someone once said, wisely: now is not the time for logic.
The danger for the Conservatives comes from *not* putting Remain back on a ballot paper.0 -
The next poll on Brexit should be interesting. Even the residents of Hartlepool must now realise that there's a little more to it than putting a cross on a piece of paper and all foreigners will disappear0
-
Lol, the contortions you go through are actually becoming funny, though a little bit sad.williamglenn said:
The party is wedded to power. Giving Corbyn the opportunity to bring down the government over Brexit is not in its short term interests, and imposing a controversial settlement without a specific mandate is not in its long term interests.MaxPB said:
I'm going to keep saying this until it penetrates your block head, no conservative government would ever put remain back on a ballot paper, it would mean the end of our party for at least a generation, possibly forever. You may be wedded to the EU, the party is not and has never been.williamglenn said:
It depends how opinion shifts over the next few weeks. If there is a genuine backlash against Chequers then I agree it could be dangerous, but if not then it could be cathartic and give us a chance to avoid the interminable debate that would follow if the Chequers settlement were imposed on us.TOPPING said:
Agree.MaxPB said:
If the EU accepts Chequers (and I agree it's a big if), I think Parliament will fall in line. Enough people see it as a first step. There will be die hards on both sides that think it gives away too much or too little, but there will be majority cross party support IMO.TOPPING said:
Didn't I answer? If the EU accepts Chequers (big if), then Chequers.
And @williamglenn I don't dispute that all things being equal there is an argument for a second referndum. However, things are most decidedly not equal and I just find it very difficult to get my head around there being a second referendum. I am not 100% sure I want one or it would do any good. The nation has told the government to seek a new settlement with the EU and the government seems to be trying to do that. It is of course a choice between bad options, but I don't see how this can be changed.
As someone once said, wisely: now is not the time for logic.
The danger for the Conservatives comes from *not* putting Remain back on a ballot paper.0 -
guffScott_P said:
The closure of any iconic British manufacturer (Airbus, JLR) as a result of Brexit would mean the end of your party for at least a generation, possibly forever.MaxPB said:I'm going to keep saying this until it penetrates your block head, no conservative government would ever put remain back on a ballot paper, it would mean the end of our party for at least a generation, possibly forever.
iconic british manufacturers have been closing for years
GKN which is 259 years old, has revenues of £10bn and employs 58,000 people is about to get asset stripped and sold off
nobody's even mentioning it.
0 -
Gove might be a bit ticked off at not getting FS? May broke with her traditional balance between leavers and remainers.Yorkcity said:
May would be wise not to trust the duplicitous sod.Big_G_NorthWales said:
If he goes a whole new ball game opens upEl_Capitano said:
As he did with Boris he will back you one day and condemn you the next.
Personally I buy the idea that Gove belatedly realised that Boris wasn't up to it, and then realised he had to stop him. More poor judgement originally than duplicitous, although I'm just speculating really.0 -
"The Brexit dream is dying."MaxPB said:
Lol, the contortions you go through are actually becoming funny, though a little bit sad.williamglenn said:
The party is wedded to power. Giving Corbyn the opportunity to bring down the government over Brexit is not in its short term interests, and imposing a controversial settlement without a specific mandate is not in its long term interests.MaxPB said:
I'm going to keep saying this until it penetrates your block head, no conservative government would ever put remain back on a ballot paper, it would mean the end of our party for at least a generation, possibly forever. You may be wedded to the EU, the party is not and has never been.williamglenn said:
It depends how opinion shifts over the next few weeks. If there is a genuine backlash against Chequers then I agree it could be dangerous, but if not then it could be cathartic and give us a chance to avoid the interminable debate that would follow if the Chequers settlement were imposed on us.TOPPING said:
Agree.MaxPB said:
If the EU accepts Chequers (and I agree it's a big if), I think Parliament will fall in line. Enough people see it as a first step. There will be die hards on both sides that think it gives away too much or too little, but there will be majority cross party support IMO.TOPPING said:
Didn't I answer? If the EU accepts Chequers (big if), then Chequers.
And @williamglenn I don't dispute that all things being equal there is an argument for a second referndum. However, things are most decidedly not equal and I just find it very difficult to get my head around there being a second referendum. I am not 100% sure I want one or it would do any good. The nation has told the government to seek a new settlement with the EU and the government seems to be trying to do that. It is of course a choice between bad options, but I don't see how this can be changed.
As someone once said, wisely: now is not the time for logic.
The danger for the Conservatives comes from *not* putting Remain back on a ballot paper.
Trust Boris to turn what could have been a day of rebellion into a day of mourning.0 -
I’ve been told by one very prominent Leaver that ‘It started in Bruxelles’ will be as successful as ‘It started in America’ because there’s enough comments from Leavers prior to the referendum saying it was all Project Fear which will be Leave’s ‘We abolished boom and bust’MaxPB said:
No it wouldn't. The voters would blame the company and or the EU.Scott_P said:
The closure of any iconic British manufacturer (Airbus, JLR) as a result of Brexit would mean the end of your party for at least a generation, possibly forever.MaxPB said:I'm going to keep saying this until it penetrates your block head, no conservative government would ever put remain back on a ballot paper, it would mean the end of our party for at least a generation, possibly forever.
As always, don't try original thought, it doesn't work for you single brain cell.0 -
I did indeed:MaxPB said:
I think the resignations put that into sharp focus and probably helps the government avoid big concessions.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The problem will be if the EU does not accept it.MaxPB said:
If the EU accepts Chequers (and I agree it's a big if), I think Parliament will fall in line. Enough people see it as a first step. There will be die hards on both sides that think it gives away too much or too little, but there will be majority cross party support IMO.TOPPING said:
Didn't I answer? If the EU accepts Chequers (big if), then Chequers.
TM has no room to water it down and a hard Brexit becomes a very real prospect. It is good to see she has ordered more work on preparation for a hard Brexit
Theresa can (rightly) say that, if you don't like this, then wait until Gove and Javid put their hard/WTO brexit forwards.
I think @AlastairMeeks had a thread on this aspect a few months ago.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2017/07/01/everything-is-negotiable-how-the-election-result-may-have-improved-britains-negotiating-position-in-the-brexit-talks/0 -
Unfortunately, he misreads some of the data he is using (which is not entirely his fault, it is confusingly presented).CarlottaVance said:Conservative voters:
twitter.com/goodwinmj/status/1016601113091592192?s=21
twitter.com/goodwinmj/status/1016603486442663936?s=21
He says, "..when given the option -- 'free movement for free trade?' -- an overwhelming majority say no. Most want free movement to stop."
He appears to be misreading the percentages as percentages of Conservative voters, in which case 59% easily beats 33%, but it is actually that 59% of those who would not trade free movement for free trade support the Conservatives, while only 33% of those who would make that trade do so.
Since more voters overall would make that trade (1053 vs 527 in the unweighted base) then the balance for Conservative voters is pretty close (347 vs 311), but actually slightly in favour of allowing free movement of people in return for free trade, not overwhelmingly against.0 -
they put a cross on a piece of paper, elected Perter Mandelson and then all the foreigners started to appear. Theyre going for doubles or quitsRoger said:The next poll on Brexit should be interesting. Even the residents of Hartlepool must now realise that there's a little more to it than putting a cross on a piece of paper and all foreigners will disappear
0 -
He was first out of the traps to back her on Sunday.Scott_P said:
Another prominent Brexiteer runs away because Brexit is a steaming pile of shit and he knows it?Big_G_NorthWales said:
If he goes a whole new ball game opens upEl_Capitano said:
Not entirely clear that is bad news for the PM.
It's bad news for Brexit...
Which in the scheme of things means bugger all .0 -
-
Just because they say something it doesn't make it true. Ever since BAE Systems sold its stake to EADS about a decade ago the writing has been on the wall for future UK investment by Airbus, their political masters would rather the work was done at home.Scott_P said:
LOLMaxPB said:The voters would blame the company and or the EU.
Airbus issues a press release blaming Brexit. "The voters won't blame Brexit..."
Keep taking the tablets. Or not. They don't appear to be working.0 -
By a British company, Melrose. Also, the GKN management plan was to sell the largest division to an American outfit for a huge knockdown price. I'm not sure this is a good example.Alanbrooke said:
guffScott_P said:
The closure of any iconic British manufacturer (Airbus, JLR) as a result of Brexit would mean the end of your party for at least a generation, possibly forever.MaxPB said:I'm going to keep saying this until it penetrates your block head, no conservative government would ever put remain back on a ballot paper, it would mean the end of our party for at least a generation, possibly forever.
iconic british manufacturers have been closing for years
GKN which is 259 years old, has revenues of £10bn and employs 58,000 people is about to get asset stripped and sold off
nobody's even mentioning it.0 -
South Hampshire is currently one big house building site, it really is quite extraordinairy the number of houses that are being builtPhilip_Thompson said:
No houses are built? I wonder what all those buildings with 3-5 bedrooms that have been getting built around here are then?rottenborough said:0 -
Maybe, the difference is that if the party is seen to be undoing the public vote then we will be finished, for good. What is it the Bible says, shame for 99 generations? We'd be lucky to escape with just 99.TheScreamingEagles said:
I’ve been told by one very prominent Leaver that ‘It started in Bruxelles’ will be as successful as ‘It started in America’ because there’s enough comments from Leavers prior to the referendum saying it was all Project Fear which will be Leave’s ‘We abolished boom and bust’MaxPB said:
No it wouldn't. The voters would blame the company and or the EU.Scott_P said:
The closure of any iconic British manufacturer (Airbus, JLR) as a result of Brexit would mean the end of your party for at least a generation, possibly forever.MaxPB said:I'm going to keep saying this until it penetrates your block head, no conservative government would ever put remain back on a ballot paper, it would mean the end of our party for at least a generation, possibly forever.
As always, don't try original thought, it doesn't work for you single brain cell.0 -
I never thought I'd say this, but Theresa seems to have come out of the last few days as a woman reborn. Her government seems refreshed, she relaxed yet emboldened, the nation as one. (DD and Boris meanwhile just feel like so much dead wood, to be hacked away and merrily chucked in the skip.)0
-
North Oxon and South Northants the same.currystar said:
South Hampshire is currently one big house building site, it really is quite extraordinairy the number of houses that are being builtPhilip_Thompson said:
No houses are built? I wonder what all those buildings with 3-5 bedrooms that have been getting built around here are then?rottenborough said:0 -
Really? The Tory party has never been wedded to the EU? The Tory party has until very recently always been pro-the EU. It is the UKIP tendency within it which has turned a party which understood the value of engagement with Europe into one which apparently sees the EU as an enemy.MaxPB said:
I'm going to keep saying this until it penetrates your block head, no conservative government would ever put remain back on a ballot paper, it would mean the end of our party for at least a generation, possibly forever. You may be wedded to the EU, the party is not and has never been.williamglenn said:
It depends how opinion shifts over the next few weeks. If there is a genuine backlash against Chequers then I agree it could be dangerous, but if not then it could be cathartic and give us a chance to avoid the interminable debate that would follow if the Chequers settlement were imposed on us.TOPPING said:
Agree.MaxPB said:
ITOPPING said:
And @williamglenn I don't dispute that all things being equal there is an argument for a second referndum. However, things are most decidedly not equal and I just find it very difficult to get my head around there being a second referendum. I am not 100% sure I want one or it would do any good. The nation has told the government to seek a new settlement with the EU and the government seems to be trying to do that. It is of course a choice between bad options, but I don't see how this can be changed.
As someone once said, wisely: now is not the time for logic.
It is possible to be sceptical, even highly sceptical, of the EU's structures, political direction and bureaucracy while still recognising that, overall, the positives for Europe as a whole and for Britain, outweigh the negatives. The Tory party used to understand that. It was why one of the best achievements of the EU - the Single Market - was to a very significant extent the brainchild of Britain, a Britain run by a Tory government that would never have had senior politicians saying "Fuck business". It was Labour (see its 1983 manifesto) which was stupid over Europe. Corbyn may still be stuck in 1983 as far as the EU is concerned but the Tory party is now behaving utterly stupidly over the EU - and is doing so in a manner which is detrimental to itself but, more importantly, utterly detrimental to the country's interests.
That is not - and has not - been the M.O. of the Tory party in most of my lifetime. Still, every so often parties are taken over by their militant tendency. We saw this over Maastricht. We are seeing it now. Tories need to grow up and behave like adults.
If the facts change - and lots of facts in the world have changed since 23 June 2016 - sensible people reconsider and some may even change their mind.0 -
-
Only if the jobs weren't replaced elsewhere which seems unlikely while we still have full employment.Scott_P said:
The closure of any iconic British manufacturer (Airbus, JLR) as a result of Brexit would mean the end of your party for at least a generation, possibly forever.MaxPB said:I'm going to keep saying this until it penetrates your block head, no conservative government would ever put remain back on a ballot paper, it would mean the end of our party for at least a generation, possibly forever.
Its not just the mines that closed under Thatcher but also "iconic British manufacturers" like British Leyland went defunct too. The party survived that.0 -
Doesn't he always...El_Capitano said:Gove denies everything, apparently.
0 -
Max you appear to think I don't know this. You are looking at this solely from a City view and that simply means sell for the highest price. Melrose have no history of developing businesses or products, they are simply the BTR of our generation. And eventually BTR ran out of things to break up and left a pile of shit behind them.MaxPB said:
By a British company, Melrose. Also, the GKN management plan was to sell the largest division to an American outfit for a huge knockdown price. I'm not sure this is a good example.Alanbrooke said:
guffScott_P said:
The closure of any iconic British manufacturer (Airbus, JLR) as a result of Brexit would mean the end of your party for at least a generation, possibly forever.MaxPB said:I'm going to keep saying this until it penetrates your block head, no conservative government would ever put remain back on a ballot paper, it would mean the end of our party for at least a generation, possibly forever.
iconic british manufacturers have been closing for years
GKN which is 259 years old, has revenues of £10bn and employs 58,000 people is about to get asset stripped and sold off
nobody's even mentioning it.
It's deja vu all over again.
0 -
As does May. Birds of a feather ...GIN1138 said: 0 -
-
Right now that would be the danger for the party. There would be a riotwilliamglenn said:
The party is wedded to power. Giving Corbyn the opportunity to bring down the government over Brexit is not in its short term interests, and imposing a controversial settlement without a specific mandate is not in its long term interests.MaxPB said:
I'm going to keep saying this until it penetrates your block head, no conservative government would ever put remain back on a ballot paper, it would mean the end of our party for at least a generation, possibly forever. You may be wedded to the EU, the party is not and has never been.williamglenn said:
It depends how opinion shifts over the next few weeks. If there is a genuine backlash against Chequers then I agree it could be dangerous, but if not then it could be cathartic and give us a chance to avoid the interminable debate that would follow if the Chequers settlement were imposed on us.TOPPING said:
Agree.MaxPB said:
If the EU accepts Chequers (and I agree it's a big if), I think Parliament will fall in line. Enough people see it as a first step. There will be die hards on both sides that think it gives away too much or too little, but there will be majority cross party support IMO.TOPPING said:
Didn't I answer? If the EU accepts Chequers (big if), then Chequers.
And @williamglenn I don't dispute that all things being equal there is an argument for a second referndum. However, things are most decidedly not equal and I just find it very difficult to get my head around there being a second referendum. I am not 100% sure I want one or it would do any good. The nation has told the government to seek a new settlement with the EU and the government seems to be trying to do that. It is of course a choice between bad options, but I don't see how this can be changed.
As someone once said, wisely: now is not the time for logic.
The danger for the Conservatives comes from *not* putting Remain back on a ballot paper.0 -
And it will be lovely for her MPs to knock on voters' doors explaining the greatness of her Brexit deal when the leading Brexiteers in her government have resigned due to betrayal.Stark_Dawning said:I never thought I'd say this, but Theresa seems to have come out of the last few days as a woman reborn. Her government seems refreshed, she relaxed yet emboldened, the nation as one. (DD and Boris meanwhile just feel like so much dead wood, to be hacked away and merrily chucked in the skip.)
I suppose the EU was always destined to tear the Tories apart. Great opportunity for Corbyn now.0 -
Timing is everything. We need to see where things stand in October when the anger has subsided.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Right now that would be the danger for the party. There would be a riotwilliamglenn said:
The party is wedded to power. Giving Corbyn the opportunity to bring down the government over Brexit is not in its short term interests, and imposing a controversial settlement without a specific mandate is not in its long term interests.MaxPB said:
I'm going to keep saying this until it penetrates your block head, no conservative government would ever put remain back on a ballot paper, it would mean the end of our party for at least a generation, possibly forever. You may be wedded to the EU, the party is not and has never been.williamglenn said:
It depends how opinion shifts over the next few weeks. If there is a genuine backlash against Chequers then I agree it could be dangerous, but if not then it could be cathartic and give us a chance to avoid the interminable debate that would follow if the Chequers settlement were imposed on us.TOPPING said:
Agree.MaxPB said:
If the EU accepts Chequers (and I agree it's a big if), I think Parliament will fall in line. Enough people see it as a first step. There will be die hards on both sides that think it gives away too much or too little, but there will be majority cross party support IMO.TOPPING said:
Didn't I answer? If the EU accepts Chequers (big if), then Chequers.
And @williamglenn I don't dispute that all things being equal there is an argument for a second referndum. However, things are most decidedly not equal and I just find it very difficult to get my head around there being a second referendum. I am not 100% sure I want one or it would do any good. The nation has told the government to seek a new settlement with the EU and the government seems to be trying to do that. It is of course a choice between bad options, but I don't see how this can be changed.
As someone once said, wisely: now is not the time for logic.
The danger for the Conservatives comes from *not* putting Remain back on a ballot paper.0 -
Airbus have already written to all their workers and frankly they will not be sanguine with the Government if Airbus go.Scott_P said:
LOLMaxPB said:The voters would blame the company and or the EU.
Airbus issues a press release blaming Brexit. "The voters won't blame Brexit..."
Keep taking the tablets. Or not. They don't appear to be working.0 -
They'll both scheme themselves to their political doom in the end...Philip_Thompson said:0 -
Except all the foreigners didn't start to appear in Hartlepool. 3% non-uk born according to Office of Nat Stats.Alanbrooke said:
they put a cross on a piece of paper, elected Perter Mandelson and then all the foreigners started to appear. Theyre going for doubles or quitsRoger said:The next poll on Brexit should be interesting. Even the residents of Hartlepool must now realise that there's a little more to it than putting a cross on a piece of paper and all foreigners will disappear
0 -
I fear that anger will not subside, it will buildwilliamglenn said:
Timing is everything. We need to see where things stand in October when the anger has subsided.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Right now that would be the danger for the party. There would be a riotwilliamglenn said:
The party is wedded to power. Giving Corbyn the opportunity to bring down the government over Brexit is not in its short term interests, and imposing a controversial settlement without a specific mandate is not in its long term interests.MaxPB said:
I'm going to keep saying this until it penetrates your block head, no conservative government would ever put remain back on a ballot paper, it would mean the end of our party for at least a generation, possibly forever. You may be wedded to the EU, the party is not and has never been.williamglenn said:
It depends how opinion shifts over the next few weeks. If there is a genuine backlash against Chequers then I agree it could be dangerous, but if not then it could be cathartic and give us a chance to avoid the interminable debate that would follow if the Chequers settlement were imposed on us.TOPPING said:
Agree.MaxPB said:
If the EU accepts Chequers (and I agree it's a big if), I think Parliament will fall in line. Enough people see it as a first step. There will be die hards on both sides that think it gives away too much or too little, but there will be majority cross party support IMO.TOPPING said:
Didn't I answer? If the EU accepts Chequers (big if), then Chequers.
And @williamglenn I don't dispute that all things being equal there is an argument for a second referndum. However, things are most decidedly not equal and I just find it very difficult to get my head around there being a second referendum. I am not 100% sure I want one or it would do any good. The nation has told the government to seek a new settlement with the EU and the government seems to be trying to do that. It is of course a choice between bad options, but I don't see how this can be changed.
As someone once said, wisely: now is not the time for logic.
The danger for the Conservatives comes from *not* putting Remain back on a ballot paper.0 -
-
It's vital now that Theresa spins her EU deal as an unmitigated triumph. That shouldn't be too difficult - the EU will be helpful with that, and the Cabinet should be able to speak with a single, enthusiastic voice now that the moaning minnies have slouched off. Thereafter if Boris or DD criticise it'll just sound like sour grapes - from a pair of losers who weren't up to the task themselves.Fenster said:
And it will be lovely for her MPs to knock on voters' doors explaining the greatness of her Brexit deal when the leading Brexiteers in her government have resigned due to betrayal.Stark_Dawning said:I never thought I'd say this, but Theresa seems to have come out of the last few days as a woman reborn. Her government seems refreshed, she relaxed yet emboldened, the nation as one. (DD and Boris meanwhile just feel like so much dead wood, to be hacked away and merrily chucked in the skip.)
I suppose the EU was always destined to tear the Tories apart. Great opportunity for Corbyn now.0 -
but is it wrong ?Big_G_NorthWales said:0 -
What's the "Hmmmm" for ?Scott_P said:
Sky Sports Racing is the re-brand of At The Races that will launch next year. Ascot was shown on ATR until Racing UK poached the media rights three or four years ago.
None of this affects the ITV Racing Contract so the arrangement basically will be:
Sky if you want detailed racing coverage
ITV if you want racing with fashion, frippery and royals.
Currently ATR isn't part of the Sky Sports package so you don't need an extra subscription if you have the basic package.
0 -
Why would it subside if the EU start making conditions. For the EU it is this deal or no deal (sadly)williamglenn said:
Timing is everything. We need to see where things stand in October when the anger has subsided.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Right now that would be the danger for the party. There would be a riotwilliamglenn said:
The party is wedded to power. Giving Corbyn the opportunity to bring down the government over Brexit is not in its short term interests, and imposing a controversial settlement without a specific mandate is not in its long term interests.MaxPB said:
I'm going to keep saying this until it penetrates your block head, no conservative government would ever put remain back on a ballot paper, it would mean the end of our party for at least a generation, possibly forever. You may be wedded to the EU, the party is not and has never been.williamglenn said:
It depends how opinion shifts over the next few weeks. If there is a genuine backlash against Chequers then I agree it could be dangerous, but if not then it could be cathartic and give us a chance to avoid the interminable debate that would follow if the Chequers settlement were imposed on us.TOPPING said:
Agree.MaxPB said:
If the EU accepts Chequers (and I agree it's a big if), I think Parliament will fall in line. Enough people see it as a first step. There will be die hards on both sides that think it gives away too much or too little, but there will be majority cross party support IMO.TOPPING said:
Didn't I answer? If the EU accepts Chequers (big if), then Chequers.
And @williamglenn I don't dispute that all things being equal there is an argument for a second referndum. However, things are most decidedly not equal and I just find it very difficult to get my head around there being a second referendum. I am not 100% sure I want one or it would do any good. The nation has told the government to seek a new settlement with the EU and the government seems to be trying to do that. It is of course a choice between bad options, but I don't see how this can be changed.
As someone once said, wisely: now is not the time for logic.
The danger for the Conservatives comes from *not* putting Remain back on a ballot paper.0
This discussion has been closed.