Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Get ready for possibly the Xmas TV event of the year – May v C

12346»

Comments

  • felixfelix Posts: 14,262

    felix said:

    IanB2 said:

    “It was clear to most Europeans that the Brexiters’ promises were empty,” said Anna-Lena Högenauer of Luxembourg’s Institute of Political Sciences. “Most, though, thought it was just politics, that there was some kind of plan behind the rhetoric.” The discovery that there was not, Högenauer said, was something of a shock. “The UK basically jumped into the ocean blindfold, and started paddling round in circles. It was almost like it expected the EU not just to say what Brexit should look like, but to devise a version of it that would suit Britain.”

    TBH that’s what it looked to some of us here, didn’t it.
    Well, yes. The Brexiteers' lack of work is astonishing. They even witter on about how Cameron should have done the work for them by telling them what Brexit was (which they would then have argued against, as they're arguing against the deal now).

    And as we see with the ERG chaos, even when things are in their hands, they're utterly incompetent.

    But it's easier to wave your hands in the air, screech and scream about how wrong something is, than it is to actually deal with difficult realities.

    And to give May some credit, she's trying to navigate those complexities. Many of the backseat drivers shouting "I could do better!" are, if their previous records are anything to go by, deluded.
    'Leave' was a protest vote that managed to capture a huge segment of the public mood - it is a boil on the body politic the lancing of which will be painful but it requires some very hard thinking on the part of an establishment which must bear some responsibility for losing so much of the public over so many years. Sadly there is as little sign of any recognition of its culpability as of, say the DUP emerging into the 21st century [ its barely in the 20th!].
    +1
    There were also a few individuals who expected to ride the tiger to dazzling personal success.
    Yup - can't think who you might mean :)
  • "The U.K.’s Prime Minister, Theresa May, has succeeded in what she set out to do. She has brought the country together. Politicians of all colors, along with their supporters, are at last in full agreement. They are united in their hatred of Mrs. May’s Brexit deal. And with reason. It is a terrible deal.
    ...
    All roads seem now to lead to either a General Election, or a second referendum."
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/francescoppola/2018/11/24/why-theresa-mays-brexit-deal-is-terrible-for-the-u-k/?utm_source=quora&utm_medium=referral#281178ee7bd7
  • felix said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Anyone know if Gib is still British? Or has she given it away? :D

    In Spain Sanchez is criticised for achieving nothing new - even the official news says pretty much the same thing, as does the Gibraltar PM. But of course you know better.

    Sanchez has achieved exactly what he set out to achieve a week before the Andalusian elections. Anyone listening to his statement yesterday would know that this is what the whole flare-up was about. He is a smart politician. But all that’s happened in practice is that what was already set out in various documents - that Spain has a veto over a UK/EU FTA and that Gibraltar will not be part of a UK/EU FTA, but will instead be an entirely Anglo-Spanish matter - has been made explicitly and very publicly clear. The real significance is that this is a preview of what comes next. Once the WA is agreed, each EU member state will be pursuing its own national interest as attention turns to the final trade deal. The WA was the easy bit for the UK!!

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 41,239

    felix said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Anyone know if Gib is still British? Or has she given it away? :D

    In Spain Sanchez is criticised for achieving nothing new - even the official news says pretty much the same thing, as does the Gibraltar PM. But of course you know better.

    Sanchez has achieved exactly what he set out to achieve a week before the Andalusian elections. Anyone listening to his statement yesterday would know that this is what the whole flare-up was about. He is a smart politician. But all that’s happened in practice is that what was already set out in various documents - that Spain has a veto over a UK/EU FTA and that Gibraltar will not be part of a UK/EU FTA, but will instead be an entirely Anglo-Spanish matter - has been made explicitly and very publicly clear. The real significance is that this is a preview of what comes next. Once the WA is agreed, each EU member state will be pursuing its own national interest as attention turns to the final trade deal. The WA was the easy bit for the UK!!

    Especially as anything tricky is fudged by clever wording in the WA, and left for the future. As Tony Blair identifies in his letter to the EU.

    If there is a GE before the final deal is done, the next government has a poisoned inheritance.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 41,239

    felix said:

    IanB2 said:

    “It was clear to most Europeans that the Brexiters’ promises were empty,” said Anna-Lena Högenauer of Luxembourg’s Institute of Political Sciences. “Most, though, thought it was just politics, that there was some kind of plan behind the rhetoric.” The discovery that there was not, Högenauer said, was something of a shock. “The UK basically jumped into the ocean blindfold, and started paddling round in circles. It was almost like it expected the EU not just to say what Brexit should look like, but to devise a version of it that would suit Britain.”

    TBH that’s what it looked to some of us here, didn’t it.
    Well, yes. The Brexiteers' lack of work is astonishing. They even witter on about how Cameron should have done the work for them by telling them what Brexit was (which they would then have argued against, as they're arguing against the deal now).

    And as we see with the ERG chaos, even when things are in their hands, they're utterly incompetent.

    But it's easier to wave your hands in the air, screech and scream about how wrong something is, than it is to actually deal with difficult realities.

    And to give May some credit, she's trying to navigate those complexities. Many of the backseat drivers shouting "I could do better!" are, if their previous records are anything to go by, deluded.
    'Leave' was a protest vote that managed to capture a huge segment of the public mood - it is a boil on the body politic the lancing of which will be painful but it requires some very hard thinking on the part of an establishment which must bear some responsibility for losing so much of the public over so many years. Sadly there is as little sign of any recognition of its culpability as of, say the DUP emerging into the 21st century [ its barely in the 20th!].
    +1
    There were also a few individuals who expected to ride the tiger to dazzling personal success.
    And one individual who thought a near miss and becoming champion of the lost cause would suit his career ambitions very nicely, and never expected to be entering the tiger's cage, let alone be giving it a ride.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 31,204
    felix said:

    IanB2 said:

    “It was clear to most Europeans that the Brexiters’ promises were empty,” said Anna-Lena Högenauer of Luxembourg’s Institute of Political Sciences. “Most, though, thought it was just politics, that there was some kind of plan behind the rhetoric.” The discovery that there was not, Högenauer said, was something of a shock. “The UK basically jumped into the ocean blindfold, and started paddling round in circles. It was almost like it expected the EU not just to say what Brexit should look like, but to devise a version of it that would suit Britain.”

    TBH that’s what it looked to some of us here, didn’t it.
    Well, yes. The Brexiteers' lack of work is astonishing. They even witter on about how Cameron should have done the work for them by telling them what Brexit was (which they would then have argued against, as they're arguing against the deal now).

    And as we see with the ERG chaos, even when things are in their hands, they're utterly incompetent.

    But it's easier to wave your hands in the air, screech and scream about how wrong something is, than it is to actually deal with difficult realities.

    And to give May some credit, she's trying to navigate those complexities. Many of the backseat drivers shouting "I could do better!" are, if their previous records are anything to go by, deluded.
    'Leave' was a protest vote that managed to capture a huge segment of the public mood - it is a boil on the body politic the lancing of which will be painful but it requires some very hard thinking on the part of an establishment which must bear some responsibility for losing so much of the public over so many years. Sadly there is as little sign of any recognition of its culpability as of, say the DUP emerging into the 21st century [ its barely in the 20th!].
    The public mood was shaped by decades of the media - and especially the press - publishing negative stories about the EU that were often not quite factual. After all, many of us like to feel miffed by reading a negative story as we drink our morning coffee. The fact that Europhobia has devastated the Conservative Party on several occasions, including bringing down PMs, means more stories and more sales.

    Bad news sells.

    The media - many of whom are now aghast at Brexit - have much responsibility for the leave vote. As are Europhiles who did f'all work to counter the false stories, yet alone the extreme ones.

    (I'm not saying the EU is flawless - far from. It's just that every ill facing the country has been placed at their doorstep over the years.)
  • daodaodaodao Posts: 821
    edited November 2018

    "The U.K.’s Prime Minister, Theresa May, has succeeded in what she set out to do. She has brought the country together. Politicians of all colors, along with their supporters, are at last in full agreement. They are united in their hatred of Mrs. May’s Brexit deal. And with reason. It is a terrible deal.
    ...
    All roads seem now to lead to either a General Election, or a second referendum."
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/francescoppola/2018/11/24/why-theresa-mays-brexit-deal-is-terrible-for-the-u-k/?utm_source=quora&utm_medium=referral#281178ee7bd7

    If the HoC vetoes the deal, Mrs May will prevaricate and try to repeat the vote a few weeks later, after some token effort at adjusting it with the EU and persuading some MPs to change their minds. Even if a second vote is lost, Tory MPs are unlikely to "no confidence" her, even if there is a VoC, for fear of letting in JC and his Marxist gang. Meanwhile, the clock ticks down to 29/3/19, hopefully without a GE, EUref3 or an article 50 extension.
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,160
    edited November 2018
    Mr Observer,

    "Once the WA is agreed, each EU member state will be pursuing its own national interest as attention turns to the final trade deal. The WA was the easy bit for the UK!!"

    I've been saying this for a long time. The current state of the EU is an uneasy half-way house between squabbling individual countries and a unified one country-Europe. We know the final intended destination. If it fits with your ideal, then by all means embrace it. Otherwise, we need to leave.

    As a matter of interest, does anyone actually believe it is currently where it intends to stay? if so, I have some magic beans you might like
  • Good morning, everyone.

    Ah, the EU. Where democracy goes to die.

    Common sense too, if Article 13 and the reaction to it is anything to go by (though the EU is far from unique in being pig ignorant about the teh interwebz works).
  • felixfelix Posts: 14,262
    CD13 said:

    Mr Observer,

    "Once the WA is agreed, each EU member state will be pursuing its own national interest as attention turns to the final trade deal. The WA was the easy bit for the UK!!"

    I've been saying this for a long time. The current state of the EU is an uneasy half-way house between squabbling individual countries and a unified one country-Europe. We know the final intended destination. If it fits with your ideal, then by all means embrace it. Otherwise, we need to leave.

    As a matter of interest, does anyone actually believe it is currently where it intends to stay? if so, I have some magic beans you might like

    Very astute - in all despair at the foolishness which has engulfed the UK we forget the fact that the organisation which binds us is similarly riven with division, inequality a cumbersome and corrupt bureaucracy and barely hidden financial problems that makes the UK seem a beacon of probity and consensus. Nevertheless the two need each other [ the UK probably more than the EU] but overall the closer we are the better for both. How we get back to anything sensible is beyond me but I suspect the May deal, for all its faults, makes more sense than the alternatives currently on offer. So sad that at such a critical point in our History both of the main parties are horrendously badly led and riven with division.
  • felix said:

    IanB2 said:

    “It was clear to most Europeans that the Brexiters’ promises were empty,” said Anna-Lena Högenauer of Luxembourg’s Institute of Political Sciences. “Most, though, thought it was just politics, that there was some kind of plan behind the rhetoric.” The discovery that there was not, Högenauer said, was something of a shock. “The UK basically jumped into the ocean blindfold, and started paddling round in circles. It was almost like it expected the EU not just to say what Brexit should look like, but to devise a version of it that would suit Britain.”

    TBH that’s what it looked to some of us here, didn’t it.
    Well, yes. The Brexiteers' lack of work is astonishing. They even witter on about how Cameron should have done the work for them by telling them what Brexit was (which they would then have argued against, as they're arguing against the deal now).

    And as we see with the ERG chaos, even when things are in their hands, they're utterly incompetent.

    But it's easier to wave your hands in the air, screech and scream about how wrong something is, than it is to actually deal with difficult realities.

    And to give May some credit, she's trying to navigate those complexities. Many of the backseat drivers shouting "I could do better!" are, if their previous records are anything to go by, deluded.
    'Leave' was a protest [ its barely in the 20th!].
    The public mood was shaped by decades of the media - and especially the press - publishing negative stories about the EU that were often not quite factual. After all, many of us like to feel miffed by reading a negative story as we drink our morning coffee. The fact that Europhobia has devastated the Conservative Party on several occasions, including bringing down PMs, means more stories and more sales.

    Bad news sells.

    The media - many of whom are now aghast at Brexit - have much responsibility for the leave vote. As are Europhiles who did f'all work to counter the false stories, yet alone the extreme ones.

    (I'm not saying the EU is flawless - far from. It's just that every ill facing the country has been placed at their doorstep over the years.)

    In the six years before the referendum our then PM and Chancellor continually gave the very strong impression that they believed the EU was a millstone around the UK’s neck and that large numbers of EU immigrants were a lot more trouble than they were worth. No doubt they felt it was the politically expedient thing to do, but when they suddenly turned round to claim the opposite no wonder so many people ignored them.

  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,160
    An extension to Art 50 is pointless. It's not the time, it's the political will by the EU that is lacking. As far as they are concerned, delay means more chance of a re-think. And bureaucrats never hurry, especially when they don't like the direction they are heading.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,285
    I see Blair is helping to get the deal over the line.

    That’s the only justifiable explanation, because he knows how much he is politically detested, right? And how every time he appears, he damages whatever cause he argues for. Surely he knows? I mean, he is a pretty straight sort of guy.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 13,776
    CD13 said:

    Mr Observer,

    "Once the WA is agreed, each EU member state will be pursuing its own national interest as attention turns to the final trade deal. The WA was the easy bit for the UK!!"

    I've been saying this for a long time. The current state of the EU is an uneasy half-way house between squabbling individual countries and a unified one country-Europe. We know the final intended destination. If it fits with your ideal, then by all means embrace it. Otherwise, we need to leave.

    As a matter of interest, does anyone actually believe it is currently where it intends to stay? if so, I have some magic beans you might like

    I am certain the EU does intend to stay in the half way house. There is zero appetite amongst its members for a superstate. Not being a superstate is possibly a weakness that will eventually undermine the project.
  • daodao said:

    "The U.K.’s Prime Minister, Theresa May, has succeeded in what she set out to do. She has brought the country together. Politicians of all colors, along with their supporters, are at last in full agreement. They are united in their hatred of Mrs. May’s Brexit deal. And with reason. It is a terrible deal.
    ...
    All roads seem now to lead to either a General Election, or a second referendum."
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/francescoppola/2018/11/24/why-theresa-mays-brexit-deal-is-terrible-for-the-u-k/?utm_source=quora&utm_medium=referral#281178ee7bd7

    If the HoC vetoes the deal, Mrs May will prevaricate and try to repeat the vote a few weeks later, after some token effort at adjusting it with the EU and persuading some MPs to change their minds. Even if a second vote is lost, Tory MPs are unlikely to "no confidence" her, even if there is a VoC, for fear of letting in JC and his Marxist gang. Meanwhile, the clock ticks down to 29/3/19, hopefully without a GE, EUref3 or an article 50 extension.
    Sounds like you're happy to inflict a No Deal Brexit on us.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 18,793
    edited November 2018
    Mortimer said:

    I see Blair is helping to get the deal over the line.

    That’s the only justifiable explanation, because he knows how much he is politically detested, right? And how every time he appears, he damages whatever cause he argues for. Surely he knows? I mean, he is a pretty straight sort of guy.

    Chuckle. Good to see the old Master (George Osborne) make the foe wobbly at the knee. He is signaling to followers in the Commons (Cameroon’s and Blairites) to hold the line.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 31,204

    In the six years before the referendum our then PM and Chancellor continually gave the very strong impression that they believed the EU was a millstone around the UK’s neck and that large numbers of EU immigrants were a lot more trouble than they were worth. No doubt they felt it was the politically expedient thing to do, but when they suddenly turned round to claim the opposite no wonder so many people ignored them.

    I disagree with that. What they were saying, as a whole, was generally much more nuanced than that. As Cameron's final deal shows.
  • Mortimer said:

    I see Blair is helping to get the deal over the line.

    That’s the only justifiable explanation, because he knows how much he is politically detested, right? And how every time he appears, he damages whatever cause he argues for. Surely he knows? I mean, he is a pretty straight sort of guy.

    If that were the case, given Blair’s frequent interjections on Brexit wouldn’t the entire country now be squarely and clearly in favour of the May deal?

  • In the six years before the referendum our then PM and Chancellor continually gave the very strong impression that they believed the EU was a millstone around the UK’s neck and that large numbers of EU immigrants were a lot more trouble than they were worth. No doubt they felt it was the politically expedient thing to do, but when they suddenly turned round to claim the opposite no wonder so many people ignored them.

    I disagree with that. What they were saying, as a whole, was generally much more nuanced than that. As Cameron's final deal shows.

    George Osborne clearly has regrets:

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/oct/31/george-osborne-we-got-things-wrong-in-run-up-to-eu-vote
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 28,952

    felix said:

    IanB2 said:

    “It was clear to most Europeans that the Brexiters’ promises were empty,” said Anna-Lena Högenauer of Luxembourg’s Institute of Political Sciences. “Most, though, thought it was just politics, that there was some kind of plan behind the rhetoric.” The discovery that there was not, Högenauer said, was something of a shock. “The UK basically jumped into the ocean blindfold, and started paddling round in circles. It was almost like it expected the EU not just to say what Brexit should look like, but to devise a version of it that would suit Britain.”

    TBH that’s what it looked to some of us here, didn’t it.
    Well, yes. The Brexiteers' lack of work is astonishing. They even witter on about how Cameron should have done the work for them by telling them what Brexit was (which they would then have argued against, as they're arguing against the deal now).

    And to give May some credit, she's trying to navigate those complexities. Many of the backseat drivers shouting "I could do better!" are, if their previous records are anything to go by, deluded.
    'Leave' was a protest vote that managed to capture a huge segment of the public mood - it is a boil on the body politic the lancing of which will be painful but it requires some very hard thinking on the part of an establishment which must bear some responsibility for losing so much of the public over so many years. Sadly there is as little sign of any recognition of its culpability as of, say the DUP emerging into the 21st century [ its barely in the 20th!].
    The public mood was shaped by decades of the media - and especially the press - publishing negative stories about the EU that were often not quite factual. After all, many of us like to feel miffed by reading a negative story as we drink our morning coffee. The fact that Europhobia has devastated the Conservative Party on several occasions, including bringing down PMs, means more stories and more sales.

    Bad news sells.

    The media - many of whom are now aghast at Brexit - have much responsibility for the leave vote. As are Europhiles who did f'all work to counter the false stories, yet alone the extreme ones.

    (I'm not saying the EU is flawless - far from. It's just that every ill facing the country has been placed at their doorstep over the years.)
    Quite right; it's quite a thought that back in 1973 and again in 1975 the Daily Mail was enthusiatic about our membership.

    And in defence of my fellow Europhiles, some of the stuff published was so nonsensical that sane people thought no-one wold believe it.

    And, to be fair, uncontrolled immigration at a time of austerity created a major problem.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 57,783
    FF43 said:

    CD13 said:

    Mr Observer,

    "Once the WA is agreed, each EU member state will be pursuing its own national interest as attention turns to the final trade deal. The WA was the easy bit for the UK!!"

    I've been saying this for a long time. The current state of the EU is an uneasy half-way house between squabbling individual countries and a unified one country-Europe. We know the final intended destination. If it fits with your ideal, then by all means embrace it. Otherwise, we need to leave.

    As a matter of interest, does anyone actually believe it is currently where it intends to stay? if so, I have some magic beans you might like

    I am certain the EU does intend to stay in the half way house. There is zero appetite amongst its members for a superstate. Not being a superstate is possibly a weakness that will eventually undermine the project.
    Zero? Didn't the French finance minster call for the EU to become an empire?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 34,320
    edited November 2018
    CD13 said:

    An extension to Art 50 is pointless. It's not the time, it's the political will by the EU that is lacking. As far as they are concerned, delay means more chance of a re-think. And bureaucrats never hurry, especially when they don't like the direction they are heading.

    The only reason to extend or revoke A50 is to have a GE or #peoplesvote. The EU civil service have taken a lot of time over the 585 pages, they are not going back to the drawing board to help out the Tory Europhobes.

    Those sick of Brexit are going to be sicker still as we grind our way through the post WA trade negotiations, unprecedented negotiations aimed at reducing our existing terms of trade.

    The ERG will fold after their tantrums as clearly they are not a coherent group and have done very little research on European affairs.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 34,320
    RobD said:

    FF43 said:

    CD13 said:

    Mr Observer,

    "Once the WA is agreed, each EU member state will be pursuing its own national interest as attention turns to the final trade deal. The WA was the easy bit for the UK!!"

    I've been saying this for a long time. The current state of the EU is an uneasy half-way house between squabbling individual countries and a unified one country-Europe. We know the final intended destination. If it fits with your ideal, then by all means embrace it. Otherwise, we need to leave.

    As a matter of interest, does anyone actually believe it is currently where it intends to stay? if so, I have some magic beans you might like

    I am certain the EU does intend to stay in the half way house. There is zero appetite amongst its members for a superstate. Not being a superstate is possibly a weakness that will eventually undermine the project.
    Zero? Didn't the French finance minster call for the EU to become an empire?
    And we have volenteered to be their imperial colony.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 28,952
    RobD said:

    FF43 said:

    CD13 said:

    Mr Observer,

    "Once the WA is agreed, each EU member state will be pursuing its own national interest as attention turns to the final trade deal. The WA was the easy bit for the UK!!"

    I've been saying this for a long time. The current state of the EU is an uneasy half-way house between squabbling individual countries and a unified one country-Europe. We know the final intended destination. If it fits with your ideal, then by all means embrace it. Otherwise, we need to leave.

    As a matter of interest, does anyone actually believe it is currently where it intends to stay? if so, I have some magic beans you might like

    I am certain the EU does intend to stay in the half way house. There is zero appetite amongst its members for a superstate. Not being a superstate is possibly a weakness that will eventually undermine the project.
    Zero? Didn't the French finance minster call for the EU to become an empire?
    All right; 1%
  • Mr. Observer, Osborne also didn't want a referendum to be held.

    Dr. Foxy, I agree (although People's Vote is a ridiculous Soviet-style term to try and avoid calling a second referendum a second referendum).
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 13,776
    RobD said:

    FF43 said:

    CD13 said:

    Mr Observer,

    "Once the WA is agreed, each EU member state will be pursuing its own national interest as attention turns to the final trade deal. The WA was the easy bit for the UK!!"

    I've been saying this for a long time. The current state of the EU is an uneasy half-way house between squabbling individual countries and a unified one country-Europe. We know the final intended destination. If it fits with your ideal, then by all means embrace it. Otherwise, we need to leave.

    As a matter of interest, does anyone actually believe it is currently where it intends to stay? if so, I have some magic beans you might like

    I am certain the EU does intend to stay in the half way house. There is zero appetite amongst its members for a superstate. Not being a superstate is possibly a weakness that will eventually undermine the project.
    Zero? Didn't the French finance minster call for the EU to become an empire?
    There is debate about governance of the EU, which is problematic, in part because the EU is both powerful and NOT a superstate. But none of the nation states are prepared to give up their prerogatives.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 31,204

    In the six years before the referendum our then PM and Chancellor continually gave the very strong impression that they believed the EU was a millstone around the UK’s neck and that large numbers of EU immigrants were a lot more trouble than they were worth. No doubt they felt it was the politically expedient thing to do, but when they suddenly turned round to claim the opposite no wonder so many people ignored them.

    I disagree with that. What they were saying, as a whole, was generally much more nuanced than that. As Cameron's final deal shows.

    George Osborne clearly has regrets:

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/oct/31/george-osborne-we-got-things-wrong-in-run-up-to-eu-vote
    And indeed he should - they lost. That doesn't make your statement correct.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 18,793
    FF43 said:

    RobD said:

    FF43 said:

    CD13 said:

    Mr Observer,

    "Once the WA is agreed, each EU member state will be pursuing its own national interest as attention turns to the final trade deal. The WA was the easy bit for the UK!!"

    I've been saying this for a long time. The current state of the EU is an uneasy half-way house between squabbling individual countries and a unified one country-Europe. We know the final intended destination. If it fits with your ideal, then by all means embrace it. Otherwise, we need to leave.

    As a matter of interest, does anyone actually believe it is currently where it intends to stay? if so, I have some magic beans you might like

    I am certain the EU does intend to stay in the half way house. There is zero appetite amongst its members for a superstate. Not being a superstate is possibly a weakness that will eventually undermine the project.
    Zero? Didn't the French finance minster call for the EU to become an empire?
    There is debate about governance of the EU, which is problematic, in part because the EU is both powerful and NOT a superstate. But none of the nation states are prepared to give up their prerogatives.
    Apart from the UK of course.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,285
    Jonathan said:

    Mortimer said:

    I see Blair is helping to get the deal over the line.

    That’s the only justifiable explanation, because he knows how much he is politically detested, right? And how every time he appears, he damages whatever cause he argues for. Surely he knows? I mean, he is a pretty straight sort of guy.

    Chuckle. Good to see the old Master (George Osborne) make the foe wobbly at the knee. He is signaling to followers in the Commons (Cameroon’s and Blairites) to hold the line.
    He’s a laughing stock. Not a master since 2004.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 31,204

    Good morning, everyone.

    Ah, the EU. Where democracy goes to die.

    Common sense too, if Article 13 and the reaction to it is anything to go by (though the EU is far from unique in being pig ignorant about the teh interwebz works).

    "Ah, the EU. Where democracy goes to die."

    Ah, Europhobia, where common sense and realism die, slaughtered on the altar of hatred and xenphobia by little-minded and simplistic fools.

    See, I can do it too! ;)
  • F1: some idle browsing. Still half-asleep. Considering these, haven't backed any yet.

    Raikkonen is 6.5 to be winner without Vettel/Hamilton. He's had three podiums on the bounce. Against this, I think the Red Bull will be tasty in the race.

    Hulkenberg to win the alternative match bet against Ocon at 2.75. Simple enough. The German starts one place behind the Frenchman. 2.75 to advance one place, particularly starting on the same tyres, is reasonably good.

    Leclerc to win the alternative match bet against Grosjean at 2.37. Same deal, basically.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 18,793
    Mortimer said:

    Jonathan said:

    Mortimer said:

    I see Blair is helping to get the deal over the line.

    That’s the only justifiable explanation, because he knows how much he is politically detested, right? And how every time he appears, he damages whatever cause he argues for. Surely he knows? I mean, he is a pretty straight sort of guy.

    Chuckle. Good to see the old Master (George Osborne) make the foe wobbly at the knee. He is signaling to followers in the Commons (Cameroon’s and Blairites) to hold the line.
    He’s a laughing stock. Not a master since 2004.
    Nice trolling orthodox . I hope it makes you feel better. Let’s fall for it, just for fun.... Strange you pick that date, just before the public gave him a third term post Iraq and he nicked the Olympic Games from the French. Enjoy!
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    So, If I believed half of what was written on here, We've lost Gibraltar, We are now an Island colony of the EU/ France and as Corporal Fraser would say, We're Doomed I tell you, Doomed.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    NEW THREAD
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 13,776

    In the six years before the referendum our then PM and Chancellor continually gave the very strong impression that they believed the EU was a millstone around the UK’s neck and that large numbers of EU immigrants were a lot more trouble than they were worth. No doubt they felt it was the politically expedient thing to do, but when they suddenly turned round to claim the opposite no wonder so many people ignored them.

    I disagree with that. What they were saying, as a whole, was generally much more nuanced than that. As Cameron's final deal shows.
    I think the problem is that Blair, Cameron etc defined the EU in transactional rather than relational terms. Compromise is normal in a relationship. You win some; you lose some. But you don't care because the relationship works. The problem with the transactional approach is that everyone sees the compromises you made and it leaves you vulnerable to snake oil Brexiteers, who promise people, no compromise is necessary. Brexit can mean whatever you want it to mean and you can get it all.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 71,746
    edited November 2018

    In the six years before the referendum our then PM and Chancellor continually gave the very strong impression that they believed the EU was a millstone around the UK’s neck and that large numbers of EU immigrants were a lot more trouble than they were worth. No doubt they felt it was the politically expedient thing to do, but when they suddenly turned round to claim the opposite no wonder so many people ignored them.

    I disagree with that. What they were saying, as a whole, was generally much more nuanced than that. As Cameron's final deal shows.

    George Osborne clearly has regrets:

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/oct/31/george-osborne-we-got-things-wrong-in-run-up-to-eu-vote
    And indeed he should - they lost. That doesn't make your statement correct.
    SO is more right than wrong on this, all I can recall about Dave's immigration policy is a 'will' to get it to ' tend of thousands', a reality of 250-330K, the government expressing 'disappointment' when it didn't happen and a 'reaffirmation' of the original target.
    And if that is all I heard, the country wouldn't have heard any different. The cognitive dissonance was wearying
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 41,810
    edited November 2018
    .
This discussion has been closed.