politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Is France the next to fall to populism?
Comments
-
Surely that's Mrs Corbyn not Mrs May?bigjohnowls said:MAY ‘SNUBS’ JEWISH GUESTS AS SHE FAILS TO APPEAR AT NO.10 CHANUKAH PARTY
f***ing Antisemite
*Grabs tinfoil hat and ducks*-1 -
I am a Northerner (and I don’t count Scotland as the North - it’s Scotland) and I lived there for the first 25 years of my life. I’ve also lived in the Midlands. The thing is that incentives are different in the North. The accumulated property wealth is significantly less, and that affects decisions on careers, study etc. I believe Government has a better duty to decentralise and support regional economies, particularly in the North whose economies have been significantly affected by Globalisation. The industry is not coming back and proper plans need to be made - this will have to come from a centre left Party with sense, so I doubt it will happen for a long time.malcolmg said:
You will come out with stupid statements denigrating 2/3 of the UK which are so obviously bollox. Loads of people in the north , as you put it, work their socks off for their families.Nemtynakht said:
Sorry MalcolmG - I forgot no-one was allowed a different view to you. My wife is from the South and doesn’t share my views but I will pass on your contempt - she didn’t have to put up with the same people whinging when she was growing up.malcolmg said:
What a pompous stuck up fatuous pair of arseholes you and your wife are, the north is well shot of the pair of you , just unfortunate some poor blighters down south have to suffer you.Nemtynakht said:
I moved South as it was too depressing living in the entitled north. People expect a living to be given to them, whereas in the South people tend to work hard for it. Both my wife and I could do our jobs in the North and be much better off, but I would prefer to raise my kids somewhere with a better attitude to work.numbertwelve said:
To give credit where it’s due, I think Prescott almost got it with his regional assemblies idea. The problem was he wasn’t radical enough (given that at that point New Labour had become drunk on centralised power). What he proposed was essentially another layer of local .ydoethur said:numbertwelve said:.
With regards to regions what is needed is a strategy not influenced by Civil Service who can’t see past London oxbridge triangle. I think some of what I am saying is reflected in the BBC move to Salford, and the development of Media in Manchester. The Government has other levers to move governmental departments to other parts of the country, but not in a piecemeal way but a strategic one - transport to south wales, science and engineering in Birmingham, enough to develop groups of supporting industries.0 -
Nous Voulons le triomphe?Nigelb said:
Lost in translation, I suspect.williamglenn said:
Trump seems to have noticed something no-one else has about the riots.Theuniondivvie said:I see Andra Neil is live tweeting the French riots with unseemly relish. Of course his live tweeting involves sitting on his lardy arse and watching (no doubt multiple) tv screens.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1071382401954267136
0 -
I see you are back reading Fake News Skwawkbox again.bigjohnowls said:MAY ‘SNUBS’ JEWISH GUESTS AS SHE FAILS TO APPEAR AT NO.10 CHANUKAH PARTY
f***ing Antisemite0 -
In the first case he was appointed Acting Prime Minister by the incumbent (having also been acting PM in 1953 after Churchill's stroke while Eden had gallstones). He did not assume it on the request of the sovereign.justin124 said:
When Eden became ill in late 1956 R A Butler became de facto Acting PM until Macmillan was appointed to form a new administration. Butler was again de facto Acting PM in October 1963 when Macmillan entered hospital and made known his intention to resign. On neither occasion,however, was Butler formally appointed PM.viewcode said:
I'm not sure that's true. The PM forms the government, hires and fires ministers and chairs cabinet meetings (and other stuff), but the government would survive her absence until a new one is formed by a new PM. I should imagine it's not something you'd want to drag on, but the PM is not synonymous with HMG, she just puts it together.numbertwelve said:
If May fell under a bus, the government would technically fall under a bus too.Oort said:
If May were to fall under a bus, there would still be government ministers in office. I can appreciate that Labour would not wish to vote for a motion which says we want May removed as PM but we've got confidence in the rest of the government, but a suitable wording could surely be thrashed out between them and the DUP. If the Speaker accepted a motion of NC in May as PM the fact that he didn't tell Jeremy Corbyn not to be such a silly sausage and that it's FTPA wording or nothing would make it a different motion, would set precedent.numbertwelve said:
May leads the government. Hence if she goes so does the government. When HMQ appoints a prime minister, she appoints then to form a government in her name. The PM is the lynchpin in which the government lives or dies. No PM, no government.Oort said:
A government minister is a different kettle of fish, that’s just rejecting one part of the government. So long as the PM survives, they have the power to reshape their government.
Happy to be corrected on this if wrong.
It is also worth pointing out that in the first case he was appointed to cover sick leave (from which Eden never returned) not a gap in the government, and in the second appears to have assumed it without instructions, with disastrous career-ending results.
You could mention Curzon acting as PM in Bonar Law's absence in 1923 as well.0 -
I didn’t realise that Japanese prosecutors have a 99% conviction rate...
https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Nissan-s-Ghosn-crisis/Ghosn-faces-Japan-s-99-conviction-rate-if-charged0 -
The point of allegance is that it's undivided. A man cannot serve two masters, an army serves one Crown. Loyalty to two is loyalty to none.Charles said:
No - people can have multiple loyaltiesviewcode said:
He who is loyal to two countries is a traitor twice.Charles said:
I think you are reading too much it to it.edmundintokyo said:
I don't mean it's offensive to Charles to make that connection, I mean it's offensive to citizens of everywhere, who have no connection with the tax-evading scumbags he's talking about, who (admittedly anecdotally) seem to be the biggest nationalistic tub-thumpers out there.DavidL said:
Well Edmond, it appears that Charles himself agrees with me on this occasion. Not that I disagree with your general point. Many, probably most, people thankfully recognise the need to contribute to the society where they earn their living. Those that don't (Amazon comes to mind) are indeed parasites as someone suggested well down thread.
I am explicitly refering to the tax evading scumbags
An expat, who pays their taxes in a different jurisdiction, is not one of those. They clearly retain links to there home country but are making a life elsewhere. That’s totally fine - it will mean they have 2 sets of loyalties not no loyalties.
It is only in a forced choice (say war) it becomes tricky0 -
No idea why Netflix is so popular...
59% of it's festive output is not original and instead re-runs of classic sitcoms. On BBC2, 73% of the Christmas schedule seen before.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6474263/BBC-boss-sparks-outrage-claiming-viewers-love-repeats-Christmas.html0 -
EU will negotiate if May loses Commons Brexit vote, says Prodi
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/08/eu-will-negotiate-after-may-loses-commons-brexit-vote-says-prodi0 -
Aaaaaaaarghh!FrancisUrquhart said:No idea why Netflix is so popular...
59% of it's festive output is not original and instead re-runs of classic sitcoms. On BBC2, 73% of the Christmas schedule seen before.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6474263/BBC-boss-sparks-outrage-claiming-viewers-love-repeats-Christmas.html
Rogue apostrophe!!!!!0 -
There seems to be nearly as many media / live streams of the Paris punch up as protesters.0
-
Yup, although only part of that is police stitching innocent people up with highly coercive interogation regime and deferent courts. The other part is that they don't like to bring cases unless they're really sure they'll get a conviction.Nigelb said:I didn’t realise that Japanese prosecutors have a 99% conviction rate...
https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Nissan-s-Ghosn-crisis/Ghosn-faces-Japan-s-99-conviction-rate-if-charged0 -
Article 248 of the Japanese Code of Criminal Procedure states: "Where prosecution is deemed unnecessary owing to the character, age, environment, gravity of the offense, circumstances or situation after the offense, prosecution need not be instituted." Hence, prosecutors in Japan have a very broad discretion and only prosecute if they are going to winNigelb said:I didn’t realise that Japanese prosecutors have a 99% conviction rate...
https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Nissan-s-Ghosn-crisis/Ghosn-faces-Japan-s-99-conviction-rate-if-charged0 -
Not really. I bought my 1st house in 2012. I put 20% down on it, now own about 50% on it. I don't earn a vast amount - I just have deliberately bought cheap(I could have afforded a dearer house, but deliberately didn't buy one right on the edge of what I could afford) and lived fairly frugally, which has helped with overpayments.eek said:
So the time you can afford a 3 bedroom semi is after you've paid off most of your 25 year mortgage on the 2 bedroom terrace you first bought - so probably just before your children head to University....ydoethur said:
That's it. By paying off your borrowings.eek said:
In a world of low inflation (and probably little changes to house prices) how do you accumulate capital except by paying off your borrowings. The housing ladder from 1970-90's was based on inflation reducing mortgages to nothing over 10-15years allowing you to move from a 2 bed to 3 bed as inflation (across both goods, assets and wages) reduced your initial mortgage to nothing. That hasn't been true for the past 15 years for either housing assets or wages across large parts of the country...
As I stated before the old housing ladder that everyone imagined disappeared as inflation disappeared.
I'll currently be mortgage free aged about 45 - for the same monthly cost, if I extended my mortgage term for ten more years, I could now afford a really nice house.
The current problem has far more to do with what other things people spend their money on than anything else (e.g. I drive a 10 year old car I gave £2k for 2 years and 50,000 miles ago - most of my piers drive almost new swanky cars they've got on finance). If you can't learn to save, then you'll never be able to afford housing.0 -
That’s great. I don’t doubt that that is your experience equally valid to my own. Perhaps we have different expectations because Winchester, Chandlers Ford and Alresford seemed pretty nice to me. Don’t know the other two apart from Hemel Hempstead amazing roundabout, almost as good as the magic roundabout in Swindon.malcolmg said:
I have lived in Scotland and many parts of southern England , including Little Gaddesden , Hemel Hempstead, Winchester, Chandler's Ford and Alresford. I have to say I found no difference other than accents , there was the same mix of good , bad , scroungers and grafters in all of them , except perhaps Little Gaddesden where they were all seriously loaded.Nemtynakht said:
Call it arrogance if you want but It was my experience. I have lived on both sides of the Pennines. And in the people I know and met the attitude to work was completely different to that I have experienced and I see in the South. I come from a completely working class family, the family tree is an uninteresting mix of short lives in mining and agriculture. We had no accumulated wealth, and I was the first in my family to go to University. I stand by my assessment that Government departments need to be moved out of Landon strategically so that related industries can grow up around this.Gallowgate said:
What arrogance and tosh this is.Nemtynakht said:I moved South as it was too depressing living in the entitled north. People expect a living to be given to them, whereas in the South people tend to work hard for it. Both my wife and I could do our jobs in the North and be much better off, but I would prefer to raise my kids somewhere with a better attitude to work.
0 -
-
So I don't have any inside knowledge here but I've heard it explained like this: If the police collar you for some minor offense, they can keep you confined for several weeks. But the deal they'll offer you is that they'll let you go if you sign a confession. So you sign the confession and they file it away and let you go. But then if you get caught again, they still have the signed confession from last time, so if they prosecute this time, they can be sure they get a conviction...eek said:
Article 248 of the Japanese Code of Criminal Procedure states: "Where prosecution is deemed unnecessary owing to the character, age, environment, gravity of the offense, circumstances or situation after the offense, prosecution need not be instituted." Hence, prosecutors in Japan have a very broad discretion and only prosecute if they are going to winNigelb said:I didn’t realise that Japanese prosecutors have a 99% conviction rate...
https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Nissan-s-Ghosn-crisis/Ghosn-faces-Japan-s-99-conviction-rate-if-charged
Also iiuc they'll sometimes improvise some kind of restitution for the victim, which also means everything stays out of court.0 -
Has anyone yet pointed out that London has by some way proportionately the smallest public sector of any region? I thought not.0
-
Salah got his scoring boots on today......0
-
Vive le triomphe?alex. said:
Nous Voulons le triomphe?Nigelb said:
Lost in translation, I suspect.williamglenn said:
Trump seems to have noticed something no-one else has about the riots.Theuniondivvie said:I see Andra Neil is live tweeting the French riots with unseemly relish. Of course his live tweeting involves sitting on his lardy arse and watching (no doubt multiple) tv screens.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/10713824019542671360 -
Intelligent discussion of the options from the EU perspective if the deal goes down:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/08/eu-will-negotiate-after-may-loses-commons-brexit-vote-says-prodi
I interpret that as meaning that they'll negotiate to keep trade flowing rather than pure no-deal, and also consider some tweaks if they think it will produce a positive result. They won't want to bother with the latter if they think the revised deal would be voted down anyway.0 -
Hundreds of social media accounts linked to Russia have sought to amplify the street protests that have rocked France, according to analysis seen by The Times.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/russian-accounts-fuel-protesters-outrage-online-xx2f2g8th0 -
I usually object to that kind of assessment, but Trump really defies any logic I am able to grasp. Of course, that also means I'm baffled how one counters such a figure given he is clearly successful doing what he does.Floater said:
The man is delusionalwilliamglenn said:
Trump seems to have noticed something no-one else has about the riots.Theuniondivvie said:I see Andra Neil is live tweeting the French riots with unseemly relish. Of course his live tweeting involves sitting on his lardy arse and watching (no doubt multiple) tv screens.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/10713824019542671360 -
Why obvious lies make great propaganda - The Firehose of Falsehoodkle4 said:
I usually object to that kind of assessment, but Trump really defies any logic I am able to grasp. Of course, that also means I'm baffled how one counters such a figure given he is clearly successful doing what he does.Floater said:
The man is delusionalwilliamglenn said:
Trump seems to have noticed something no-one else has about the riots.Theuniondivvie said:I see Andra Neil is live tweeting the French riots with unseemly relish. Of course his live tweeting involves sitting on his lardy arse and watching (no doubt multiple) tv screens.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1071382401954267136
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nknYtlOvaQ00 -
But 5 exclamation marks is ok?ydoethur said:
Aaaaaaaarghh!FrancisUrquhart said:No idea why Netflix is so popular...
59% of it's festive output is not original and instead re-runs of classic sitcoms. On BBC2, 73% of the Christmas schedule seen before.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6474263/BBC-boss-sparks-outrage-claiming-viewers-love-repeats-Christmas.html
Rogue apostrophe!!!!!
0 -
Yes if you want to help save for a deposit for a house cut out expensive meals out, 2 foreign holidays a year and replacing your car or phone every year or twotheProle said:
Not really. I bought my 1st house in 2012. I put 20% down on it, now own about 50% on it. I don't earn a vast amount - I just have deliberately bought cheap(I could have afforded a dearer house, but deliberately didn't buy one right on the edge of what I could afford) and lived fairly frugally, which has helped with overpayments.eek said:
So the time you can afford a 3 bedroom semi is after you've paid off most of your 25 year mortgage on the 2 bedroom terrace you first bought - so probably just before your children head to University....ydoethur said:
That's it. By paying off your borrowings.eek said:
In a world of low inflation (and probably little changes to house prices) how do you accumulate capital except by paying off your borrowings. The housing ladder from 1970-90's was based on inflation reducing mortgages to nothing over 10-15years allowing you to move from a 2 bed to 3 bed as inflation (across both goods, assets and wages) reduced your initial mortgage to nothing. That hasn't been true for the past 15 years for either housing assets or wages across large parts of the country...
As I stated before the old housing ladder that everyone imagined disappeared as inflation disappeared.
I'll currently be mortgage free aged about 45 - for the same monthly cost, if I extended my mortgage term for ten more years, I could now afford a really nice house.
The current problem has far more to do with what other things people spend their money on than anything else (e.g. I drive a 10 year old car I gave £2k for 2 years and 50,000 miles ago - most of my piers drive almost new swanky cars they've got on finance). If you can't learn to save, then you'll never be able to afford housing.0 -
Still has more public money spent in it than anywhere else though - more than double the next two combined. It accounts for one-eighth of all public spending despite having less than one-tenth of the total population.AlastairMeeks said:Has anyone yet pointed out that London has by some way proportionately the smallest public sector of any region? I thought not.
0 -
According to Rudd this morning much of the Cabinet will switch to Norway+ ie single market and customs union if the Deal does not get through the Commons to avoid No Deal. Assuming May does not call EUref2 too of course which I would not completely rule outNickPalmer said:Intelligent discussion of the options from the EU perspective if the deal goes down:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/08/eu-will-negotiate-after-may-loses-commons-brexit-vote-says-prodi
I interpret that as meaning that they'll negotiate to keep trade flowing rather than pure no-deal, and also consider some tweaks if they think it will produce a positive result. They won't want to bother with the latter if they think the revised deal would be voted down anyway.0 -
In the circumstances, five is reasonable.kle4 said:
But 5 exclamation marks is ok?ydoethur said:
Aaaaaaaarghh!FrancisUrquhart said:No idea why Netflix is so popular...
59% of it's festive output is not original and instead re-runs of classic sitcoms. On BBC2, 73% of the Christmas schedule seen before.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6474263/BBC-boss-sparks-outrage-claiming-viewers-love-repeats-Christmas.html
Rogue apostrophe!!!!!
Six would be excessive.0 -
But the point there is that you could buy something within your budget, had a suitably sized deposit (20% deposit) and can afford to overpay the mortgage. I can safely say that that isn't the typical situation..theProle said:
Not really. I bought my 1st house in 2012. I put 20% down on it, now own about 50% on it. I don't earn a vast amount - I just have deliberately bought cheap(I could have afforded a dearer house, but deliberately didn't buy one right on the edge of what I could afford) and lived fairly frugally, which has helped with overpayments.eek said:
So the time you can afford a 3 bedroom semi is after you've paid off most of your 25 year mortgage on the 2 bedroom terrace you first bought - so probably just before your children head to University....ydoethur said:
That's it. By paying off your borrowings.eek said:
In a world of low inflation (and probably little changes to house prices) how do you accumulate capital except by paying off your borrowings. The housing ladder from 1970-90's was based on inflation reducing mortgages to nothing over 10-15years allowing you to move from a 2 bed to 3 bed as inflation (across both goods, assets and wages) reduced your initial mortgage to nothing. That hasn't been true for the past 15 years for either housing assets or wages across large parts of the country...
As I stated before the old housing ladder that everyone imagined disappeared as inflation disappeared.
I'll currently be mortgage free aged about 45 - for the same monthly cost, if I extended my mortgage term for ten more years, I could now afford a really nice house.
The current problem has far more to do with what other things people spend their money on than anything else (e.g. I drive a 10 year old car I gave £2k for 2 years and 50,000 miles ago - most of my piers drive almost new swanky cars they've got on finance). If you can't learn to save, then you'll never be able to afford housing.0 -
He only really appeals to the 30%, so you should be able to counter him by running a candidate who half the country doesn't already hate.kle4 said:
I usually object to that kind of assessment, but Trump really defies any logic I am able to grasp. Of course, that also means I'm baffled how one counters such a figure given he is clearly successful doing what he does.Floater said:
The man is delusionalwilliamglenn said:
Trump seems to have noticed something no-one else has about the riots.Theuniondivvie said:I see Andra Neil is live tweeting the French riots with unseemly relish. Of course his live tweeting involves sitting on his lardy arse and watching (no doubt multiple) tv screens.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/10713824019542671360 -
An important intervention by Prodi.FrancisUrquhart said:EU will negotiate if May loses Commons Brexit vote, says Prodi
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/08/eu-will-negotiate-after-may-loses-commons-brexit-vote-says-prodi
Need to send a forceful message to Brussels with Tuesday's vote. But will that forceful message shoot May the messenger?0 -
It will be Mrs C as the hostess at No 10's Chanukah party next year.ydoethur said:
Surely that's Mrs Corbyn not Mrs May?bigjohnowls said:MAY ‘SNUBS’ JEWISH GUESTS AS SHE FAILS TO APPEAR AT NO.10 CHANUKAH PARTY
f***ing Antisemite
*Grabs tinfoil hat and ducks*0 -
Six??????ydoethur said:
In the circumstances, five is reasonable.kle4 said:
But 5 exclamation marks is ok?ydoethur said:
Aaaaaaaarghh!FrancisUrquhart said:No idea why Netflix is so popular...
59% of it's festive output is not original and instead re-runs of classic sitcoms. On BBC2, 73% of the Christmas schedule seen before.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6474263/BBC-boss-sparks-outrage-claiming-viewers-love-repeats-Christmas.html
Rogue apostrophe!!!!!
Six would be excessive.0 -
This is why Clinton was such a foolish choice. And for that the Democrats have nobody to blame but themselves.edmundintokyo said:
He only really appeals to the 30%, so you should be able to counter him by running a candidate who half the country doesn't already hate.kle4 said:
I usually object to that kind of assessment, but Trump really defies any logic I am able to grasp. Of course, that also means I'm baffled how one counters such a figure given he is clearly successful doing what he does.Floater said:
The man is delusionalwilliamglenn said:
Trump seems to have noticed something no-one else has about the riots.Theuniondivvie said:I see Andra Neil is live tweeting the French riots with unseemly relish. Of course his live tweeting involves sitting on his lardy arse and watching (no doubt multiple) tv screens.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/10713824019542671360 -
https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1071325648306741248HYUFD said:
According to Rudd this morning much of the Cabinet will switch to Norway+ ie single market and customs union if the Deal does not get through the Commons to avoid No Deal. Assuming May does not call EUref2 too of course which I would not completely rule outNickPalmer said:Intelligent discussion of the options from the EU perspective if the deal goes down:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/08/eu-will-negotiate-after-may-loses-commons-brexit-vote-says-prodi
I interpret that as meaning that they'll negotiate to keep trade flowing rather than pure no-deal, and also consider some tweaks if they think it will produce a positive result. They won't want to bother with the latter if they think the revised deal would be voted down anyway.0 -
Seconded.ydoethur said:
This is why Clinton was such a foolish choice. And for that the Democrats have nobody to blame but themselves.edmundintokyo said:
He only really appeals to the 30%, so you should be able to counter him by running a candidate who half the country doesn't already hate.kle4 said:
I usually object to that kind of assessment, but Trump really defies any logic I am able to grasp. Of course, that also means I'm baffled how one counters such a figure given he is clearly successful doing what he does.Floater said:
The man is delusionalwilliamglenn said:
Trump seems to have noticed something no-one else has about the riots.Theuniondivvie said:I see Andra Neil is live tweeting the French riots with unseemly relish. Of course his live tweeting involves sitting on his lardy arse and watching (no doubt multiple) tv screens.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/10713824019542671360 -
At one point Clinton was the most popular politician in America iirc.ydoethur said:
This is why Clinton was such a foolish choice. And for that the Democrats have nobody to blame but themselves.edmundintokyo said:
He only really appeals to the 30%, so you should be able to counter him by running a candidate who half the country doesn't already hate.kle4 said:
I usually object to that kind of assessment, but Trump really defies any logic I am able to grasp. Of course, that also means I'm baffled how one counters such a figure given he is clearly successful doing what he does.Floater said:
The man is delusionalwilliamglenn said:
Trump seems to have noticed something no-one else has about the riots.Theuniondivvie said:I see Andra Neil is live tweeting the French riots with unseemly relish. Of course his live tweeting involves sitting on his lardy arse and watching (no doubt multiple) tv screens.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/10713824019542671360 -
Did we ever get to the bottom of whether the UK could unilaterally terminate Norway+ in the future?HYUFD said:
According to Rudd this morning much of the Cabinet will switch to Norway+ ie single market and customs union if the Deal does not get through the Commons to avoid No Deal. Assuming May does not call EUref2 too of course which I would not completely rule outNickPalmer said:Intelligent discussion of the options from the EU perspective if the deal goes down:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/08/eu-will-negotiate-after-may-loses-commons-brexit-vote-says-prodi
I interpret that as meaning that they'll negotiate to keep trade flowing rather than pure no-deal, and also consider some tweaks if they think it will produce a positive result. They won't want to bother with the latter if they think the revised deal would be voted down anyway.0 -
Long time ago.rottenborough said:
At one point Clinton was the most popular politician in America iirc.ydoethur said:
This is why Clinton was such a foolish choice. And for that the Democrats have nobody to blame but themselves.edmundintokyo said:
He only really appeals to the 30%, so you should be able to counter him by running a candidate who half the country doesn't already hate.kle4 said:
I usually object to that kind of assessment, but Trump really defies any logic I am able to grasp. Of course, that also means I'm baffled how one counters such a figure given he is clearly successful doing what he does.Floater said:
The man is delusionalwilliamglenn said:
Trump seems to have noticed something no-one else has about the riots.Theuniondivvie said:I see Andra Neil is live tweeting the French riots with unseemly relish. Of course his live tweeting involves sitting on his lardy arse and watching (no doubt multiple) tv screens.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1071382401954267136
There was a time in autumn 1997 when Blair had a 93% approval rating.0 -
That’s interesting. Thanks.edmundintokyo said:
Yup, although only part of that is police stitching innocent people up with highly coercive interogation regime and deferent courts. The other part is that they don't like to bring cases unless they're really sure they'll get a conviction.Nigelb said:I didn’t realise that Japanese prosecutors have a 99% conviction rate...
https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Nissan-s-Ghosn-crisis/Ghosn-faces-Japan-s-99-conviction-rate-if-charged
And in some contexts appears rather disturbing:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/does-japan-ever-convict-men-for-rape
0 -
Almost certainly not but if the ERG vote down the Deal at the moment Norway+ not No Deal looks the favourite alternative for MPs and the CabinetMarqueeMark said:
Did we ever get to the bottom of whether the UK could unilaterally terminate Norway+ in the future?HYUFD said:
According to Rudd this morning much of the Cabinet will switch to Norway+ ie single market and customs union if the Deal does not get through the Commons to avoid No Deal. Assuming May does not call EUref2 too of course which I would not completely rule outNickPalmer said:Intelligent discussion of the options from the EU perspective if the deal goes down:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/08/eu-will-negotiate-after-may-loses-commons-brexit-vote-says-prodi
I interpret that as meaning that they'll negotiate to keep trade flowing rather than pure no-deal, and also consider some tweaks if they think it will produce a positive result. They won't want to bother with the latter if they think the revised deal would be voted down anyway.0 -
Yup, although I think they can also throw a bit of blame at Bernie Sanders who kept pretending he was still in the running even after he'd been mathematically eliminated and encouraged the theories about it being rigged against him.ydoethur said:
This is why Clinton was such a foolish choice. And for that the Democrats have nobody to blame but themselves.edmundintokyo said:
He only really appeals to the 30%, so you should be able to counter him by running a candidate who half the country doesn't already hate.kle4 said:
I usually object to that kind of assessment, but Trump really defies any logic I am able to grasp. Of course, that also means I'm baffled how one counters such a figure given he is clearly successful doing what he does.Floater said:
The man is delusionalwilliamglenn said:
Trump seems to have noticed something no-one else has about the riots.Theuniondivvie said:I see Andra Neil is live tweeting the French riots with unseemly relish. Of course his live tweeting involves sitting on his lardy arse and watching (no doubt multiple) tv screens.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1071382401954267136
Basically it was a Corbyn-Cameron-May-scale perfect storm of leadership atrociousness.0 -
If we REMAIN, we'll end up like France0
-
Can anyone give a very brief summary of what exactly Norway+ is?
Is it more or less in the EU than May's deal?0 -
Against a halfway decent candidate - say Evan Bayh - there would have been no Bern.edmundintokyo said:
Yup, although I think they can also throw a bit of blame at Bernie Sanders who kept pretending he was still in the running even after he'd been mathematically eliminated and encouraged the theories about it being rigged against him.ydoethur said:
This is why Clinton was such a foolish choice. And for that the Democrats have nobody to blame but themselves.edmundintokyo said:
He only really appeals to the 30%, so you should be able to counter him by running a candidate who half the country doesn't already hate.kle4 said:
I usually object to that kind of assessment, but Trump really defies any logic I am able to grasp. Of course, that also means I'm baffled how one counters such a figure given he is clearly successful doing what he does.Floater said:
The man is delusionalwilliamglenn said:
Trump seems to have noticed something no-one else has about the riots.Theuniondivvie said:I see Andra Neil is live tweeting the French riots with unseemly relish. Of course his live tweeting involves sitting on his lardy arse and watching (no doubt multiple) tv screens.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1071382401954267136
Basically it was a Corbyn-Cameron-May-scale perfect storm of leadership atrociousness.
But in fact, one person who should also shoulder part of the blame is Obama. By having such an old cabinet around him, he didn't give rising talent like say Castro a proper national platform to launch a bid. Maybe he liked having the experience of Biden and Kelly to lean on (and Kerry was a good Secretary of State) but it left the party bereft of leaders in middle age with meaningful experience who could have eviscerated Trump.
Edit - that said, again, the cravenness of the Democratic governors in just leaving it open for Clinton instead of putting up a fight was not his fault, but was definitely a factor.0 -
Good luck to future Tory GE candidates trying to explain on the doorstep how they ended up locked forever into Norway+. With full CU and SM - a 180 degree turn from the last Manifesto commitment. And no Article 50 option to leave it.....HYUFD said:
Almost certainly not but if the ERG vote down the Deal at the moment Norway+ not No Deal looks the favourite alternative for MPs and the CabinetMarqueeMark said:
Did we ever get to the bottom of whether the UK could unilaterally terminate Norway+ in the future?HYUFD said:
According to Rudd this morning much of the Cabinet will switch to Norway+ ie single market and customs union if the Deal does not get through the Commons to avoid No Deal. Assuming May does not call EUref2 too of course which I would not completely rule outNickPalmer said:Intelligent discussion of the options from the EU perspective if the deal goes down:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/08/eu-will-negotiate-after-may-loses-commons-brexit-vote-says-prodi
I interpret that as meaning that they'll negotiate to keep trade flowing rather than pure no-deal, and also consider some tweaks if they think it will produce a positive result. They won't want to bother with the latter if they think the revised deal would be voted down anyway.
At least Norway + cheerleader Amber Rudd will be out of Parliament.0 -
Much more, would involve free movement and at least de facto single market membership, probably also CAP. I think it includes CJEU jurisdiction as well.Xenon said:Can anyone give a very brief summary of what exactly Norway+ is?
Is it more or less in the EU than May's deal?0 -
Of course. You run your profits.ydoethur said:
Still has more public money spent in it than anywhere else though - more than double the next two combined. It accounts for one-eighth of all public spending despite having less than one-tenth of the total population.AlastairMeeks said:Has anyone yet pointed out that London has by some way proportionately the smallest public sector of any region? I thought not.
It still massively subsidises everywhere else.0 -
So the response to May's deal failing because leaver MPs don't think it is enough of a clean break from the EU is to....be almost completely in the EU.ydoethur said:
Much more, would involve free movement and at least de facto single market membership, probably also CAP.Xenon said:Can anyone give a very brief summary of what exactly Norway+ is?
Is it more or less in the EU than May's deal?
That doesn't make any sense.0 -
TBF Biden would have been a great candidate against Trump - if his son hadn't died it could all have been quite different.ydoethur said:
Against a halfway decent candidate - say Evan Bayh - there would have been no Bern.edmundintokyo said:
Yup, although I think they can also throw a bit of blame at Bernie Sanders who kept pretending he was still in the running even after he'd been mathematically eliminated and encouraged the theories about it being rigged against him.ydoethur said:
This is why Clinton was such a foolish choice. And for that the Democrats have nobody to blame but themselves.edmundintokyo said:
He only really appeals to the 30%, so you should be able to counter him by running a candidate who half the country doesn't already hate.kle4 said:
I usually object to that kind of assessment, but Trump really defies any logic I am able to grasp. Of course, that also means I'm baffled how one counters such a figure given he is clearly successful doing what he does.Floater said:
The man is delusionalwilliamglenn said:
Trump seems to have noticed something no-one else has about the riots.Theuniondivvie said:I see Andra Neil is live tweeting the French riots with unseemly relish. Of course his live tweeting involves sitting on his lardy arse and watching (no doubt multiple) tv screens.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1071382401954267136
Basically it was a Corbyn-Cameron-May-scale perfect storm of leadership atrociousness.
But in fact, one person who should also shoulder part of the blame is Obama. By having such an old cabinet around him, he didn't give rising talent like say Castro a proper national platform to launch a bid. Maybe he liked having the experience of Biden and Kelly to lean on (and Kerry was a good Secretary of State) but it left the party bereft of leaders in middle age with meaningful experience who could have eviscerated Trump.
Hillary had a lot of money and insider control that would have been hard for talented young candidate to beat. I mean, Obama only just beat her, and he was a superb candidate.0 -
It is still better than going into the next general election with No Deal albeit worse than the Deal and in any case I would expect just as many Labour MPs to back Norway+ as Tory MPs and all LD and SNP MPs. The ERG would oppose it still but even the DUP could back it as it applies CU and SM to the whole UKMarqueeMark said:
Good luck to future Tory GE candidates trying to explain on the doorstep how they ended up locked forever into Norway+. With full CU and SM - a 180 degree turn from the last Manifesto commitment. And no Article 50 option to leave it.....HYUFD said:
Almost certainly not but if the ERG vote down the Deal at the moment Norway+ not No Deal looks the favourite alternative for MPs and the CabinetMarqueeMark said:
Did we ever get to the bottom of whether the UK could unilaterally terminate Norway+ in the future?HYUFD said:
According to Rudd this morning much of the Cabinet will switch to Norway+ ie single market and customs union if the Deal does not get through the Commons to avoid No Deal. Assuming May does not call EUref2 too of course which I would not completely rule outNickPalmer said:Intelligent discussion of the options from the EU perspective if the deal goes down:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/08/eu-will-negotiate-after-may-loses-commons-brexit-vote-says-prodi
I interpret that as meaning that they'll negotiate to keep trade flowing rather than pure no-deal, and also consider some tweaks if they think it will produce a positive result. They won't want to bother with the latter if they think the revised deal would be voted down anyway.
At least Norway + cheerleader Amber Rudd will be out of Parliament.0 -
Right now the ERG would oppose a solution that gave us perfect weather every day.HYUFD said:
It is still better thsn going into the next general election with No Deal and in any case I would expect just as many Labour MPs to back Norway+ as Tory MPs and all LD and SNP MPs. The ERG would oppose it still but even the Deal could back it as it applies CU and SM to the whole UKMarqueeMark said:
Good luck to future Tory GE candidates trying to explain on the doorstep how they ended up locked forever into Norway+. With full CU and SM - a 180 degree turn from the last Manifesto commitment. And no Article 50 option to leave it.....HYUFD said:
Almost certainly not but if the ERG vote down the Deal at the moment Norway+ not No Deal looks the favourite alternative for MPs and the CabinetMarqueeMark said:
Did we ever get to the bottom of whether the UK could unilaterally terminate Norway+ in the future?HYUFD said:
According to Rudd this morning much of the Cabinet will switch to Norway+ ie single market and customs union if the Deal does not get through the Commons to avoid No Deal. Assuming May does not call EUref2 too of course which I would not completely rule outNickPalmer said:Intelligent discussion of the options from the EU perspective if the deal goes down:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/08/eu-will-negotiate-after-may-loses-commons-brexit-vote-says-prodi
I interpret that as meaning that they'll negotiate to keep trade flowing rather than pure no-deal, and also consider some tweaks if they think it will produce a positive result. They won't want to bother with the latter if they think the revised deal would be voted down anyway.
At least Norway + cheerleader Amber Rudd will be out of Parliament.0 -
Would serve the ERG right though, poetic justiceXenon said:
So the response to May's deal failing because leaver MPs don't think it is enough of a clean break from the EU is to....be almost completely in the EU.ydoethur said:
Much more, would involve free movement and at least de facto single market membership, probably also CAP.Xenon said:Can anyone give a very brief summary of what exactly Norway+ is?
Is it more or less in the EU than May's deal?
That doesn't make any sense.0 -
And it will kill the Tory Party. Rightly, as they will have blatantly lied to the voters on the biggest issue for decades.HYUFD said:
It is still better thsn going into the next general election with No Deal and in any case I would expect just as many Labour MPs to back Norway+ as Tory MPs and all LD and SNP MPs. The ERG would oppose it still but even the Deal could back it as it applies CU and SM to the whole UKMarqueeMark said:
Good luck to future Tory GE candidates trying to explain on the doorstep how they ended up locked forever into Norway+. With full CU and SM - a 180 degree turn from the last Manifesto commitment. And no Article 50 option to leave it.....HYUFD said:
Almost certainly not but if the ERG vote down the Deal at the moment Norway+ not No Deal looks the favourite alternative for MPs and the CabinetMarqueeMark said:
Did we ever get to the bottom of whether the UK could unilaterally terminate Norway+ in the future?HYUFD said:
According to Rudd this morning much of the Cabinet will switch to Norway+ ie single market and customs union if the Deal does not get through the Commons to avoid No Deal. Assuming May does not call EUref2 too of course which I would not completely rule outNickPalmer said:Intelligent discussion of the options from the EU perspective if the deal goes down:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/08/eu-will-negotiate-after-may-loses-commons-brexit-vote-says-prodi
I interpret that as meaning that they'll negotiate to keep trade flowing rather than pure no-deal, and also consider some tweaks if they think it will produce a positive result. They won't want to bother with the latter if they think the revised deal would be voted down anyway.
At least Norway + cheerleader Amber Rudd will be out of Parliament.0 -
Even if his son hadn't died, I don't think he would have beaten Clinton. He was too old.edmundintokyo said:
TBF Biden would have been a great candidate against Trump - if his son hadn't died it could all have been quite different.ydoethur said:
Against a halfway decent candidate - say Evan Bayh - there would have been no Bern.edmundintokyo said:
Yup, although I think they can also throw a bit of blame at Bernie Sanders who kept pretending he was still in the running even after he'd been mathematically eliminated and encouraged the theories about it being rigged against him.ydoethur said:
This is why Clinton was such a foolish choice. And for that the Democrats have nobody to blame but themselves.edmundintokyo said:
He only really appeals to the 30%, so you should be able to counter him by running a candidate who half the country doesn't already hate.kle4 said:
I usually object to that kind of assessment, but Trump really defies any logic I am able to grasp. Of course, that also means I'm baffled how one counters such a figure given he is clearly successful doing what he does.Floater said:
The man is delusionalwilliamglenn said:
Trump seems to have noticed something no-one else has about the riots.Theuniondivvie said:I see Andra Neil is live tweeting the French riots with unseemly relish. Of course his live tweeting involves sitting on his lardy arse and watching (no doubt multiple) tv screens.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1071382401954267136
Basically it was a Corbyn-Cameron-May-scale perfect storm of leadership atrociousness.
But in fact, one person who should also shoulder part of the blame is Obama. By having such an old cabinet around him, he didn't give rising talent like say Castro a proper national platform to launch a bid. Maybe he liked having the experience of Biden and Kelly to lean on (and Kerry was a good Secretary of State) but it left the party bereft of leaders in middle age with meaningful experience who could have eviscerated Trump.
Hillary had a lot of money and insider control that would have been hard for talented young candidate to beat. I mean, Obama only just beat her, and he was a superb candidate.
But her whole pitch was essentially 'it's my turn and there's nobody else, so pick me.' A 50 year old instead of a 70 year old Secretary of State willing to stand and the equation might have been different - she might not even have run.0 -
Karma's a bitch - but only if you are.HYUFD said:
Would serve the ERG right though, poetic justiceXenon said:
So the response to May's deal failing because leaver MPs don't think it is enough of a clean break from the EU is to....be almost completely in the EU.ydoethur said:
Much more, would involve free movement and at least de facto single market membership, probably also CAP.Xenon said:Can anyone give a very brief summary of what exactly Norway+ is?
Is it more or less in the EU than May's deal?
That doesn't make any sense.0 -
Depends how you measure it of course. Transport for London alone has an annual budget equivalent to that of ten English county councils. London receives one third of the annual sum paid out in housing benefit. The working age benefits bill in some London boroughs approaches £2bn a year. London boroughs have the highest level of funding/spending per head of any English local authorities - particularly in inner London. Oligarchs living in one Hyde Park probably have the best street cleaning and refuse collection services in the UK - and pay the lowest council tax.AlastairMeeks said:Has anyone yet pointed out that London has by some way proportionately the smallest public sector of any region? I thought not.
Lots of 'hidden' public subsidies to a City which is now increasingly polarised between the often smug well off and the very poor and the young in their 20s who often leave given the extortionate cost of housing.
London is of course the driver of the UK economy - but that is partly driven by the level of investment it gets in transport and other sectors. Money is no object when it comes to investing in London's infrastructure.
And this disparity is arguably one of the factors why London was the only English region to vote remain.0 -
Nope. Tory voters back the Deal 41% to 39% for No Deal with Yougov with 19% for Remain.MarqueeMark said:
And it will kill the Tory Party. Rightly, as they will have blatantly lied to the voters on the biggest issue for decades.HYUFD said:
It is still better thsn going into the next general election with No Deal and in any case I would expect just as many Labour MPs to back Norway+ as Tory MPs and all LD and SNP MPs. The ERG would oppose it still but even the Deal could back it as it applies CU and SM to the whole UKMarqueeMark said:
Good luck to future Tory GE candidates trying to explain on the doorstep how they ended up locked forever into Norway+. With full CU and SM - a 180 degree turn from the last Manifesto commitment. And no Article 50 option to leave it.....HYUFD said:
Almost certainly not but if the ERG vote down the Deal at the moment Norway+ not No Deal looks the favourite alternative for MPs and the CabinetMarqueeMark said:
Did we ever get to the bottom of whether the UK could unilaterally terminate Norway+ in the future?HYUFD said:
According to Rudd this morning much of the Cabinet will switch to Norway+ ie single market and customs union if the Deal does not get through the Commons to avoid No Deal. Assuming May does not call EUref2 too of course which I would not completely rule outNickPalmer said:Intelligent discussion of the options from the EU perspective if the deal goes down:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/08/eu-will-negotiate-after-may-loses-commons-brexit-vote-says-prodi
I interpret that as meaning that they'll negotiate to keep trade flowing rather than pure no-deal, and also consider some tweaks if they think it will produce a positive result. They won't want to bother with the latter if they think the revised deal would be voted down anyway.
At least Norway + cheerleader Amber Rudd will be out of Parliament.
Yougov only has UKIP voters backing No Deal by a majority0 -
It's not about "poetic justice" for the ERG.HYUFD said:
Would serve the ERG right though, poetic justiceXenon said:
So the response to May's deal failing because leaver MPs don't think it is enough of a clean break from the EU is to....be almost completely in the EU.ydoethur said:
Much more, would involve free movement and at least de facto single market membership, probably also CAP.Xenon said:Can anyone give a very brief summary of what exactly Norway+ is?
Is it more or less in the EU than May's deal?
That doesn't make any sense.
It's about honouring the referendum result to leave which was voted on by 17 million people. Not to mention both main parties pledging to leave the EU in their manifestos.
This isn't some silly game to get back at certain MPs who aren't doing what you want.0 -
Sensible comment (well I think so anyway) from Emily Thornberry in the Guardian Weekend, when asked about Brexit.
' I think people just voted to leave – not on any other details. So what you do is say, “52% said we should leave and 48% said we should remain, so the answer is we leave but we don’t go far.” That’s the only way you can really hold the country together.'
Which is basically either May's Deal or Norway. And means that when around half the 52 have realised what a mess we've created, we can ask nicely if we can rejoin.
0 -
It's nonsense. If it was 52/48 to remain then she wouldn't be talking about compromise and how we can't fully stay in the EU. It would be we're staying and that's the end of it.OldKingCole said:Sensible comment (well I think so anyway) from Emily Thornberry in the Guardian Weekend, when asked about Brexit.
' I think people just voted to leave – not on any other details. So what you do is say, “52% said we should leave and 48% said we should remain, so the answer is we leave but we don’t go far.” That’s the only way you can really hold the country together.'
Which is basically either May's Deal or Norway. And means that when around half the 52 have realised what a mess we've created, we can ask nicely if we can rejoin.
Don't these people realise how hypocritical they look?0 -
A very neat and clean solution, Mrs C. And then all the miserable Brexiteers can go away and decide among themselves what it is they would really like to see. Then perhaps we could have another referendum, in perhaps 50 years time, and come to a real decision based on facts, without foreigners taking part and deciding everything for us. And meanwhile, the Conservative Party could have its own internal election, and tear chunks out of one another. Result - everybody happy.Beverley_C said:
Which is why I suspect that an Executive decision just to cancel Brexit on the basis that the Govt tried and failed.eek said:Adding to the complexity
twitter.com/AdamBienkov/status/1071338643892129792
It stops the electorate from being bothered (since the apparently do not like the idea - see tweet above) and Corbyn should let his MPs "rebel" so he can remain ideologically pure
There is going to be a row no matter what happens. It might as well be one with a predictable and controllable outcome.0 -
There's no meaningful polling on Norway +, cuz nobody has a clue what it means. Once you explain "basically, as you were but far less input for the same money...." expect it to get a resounding raspberry.HYUFD said:
Nope. Tory voters back the Deal 41% to 39% for No Deal with Yougov with 19% for Remain.MarqueeMark said:
And it will kill the Tory Party. Rightly, as they will have blatantly lied to the voters on the biggest issue for decades.HYUFD said:
It is still better thsn going into the next general election with No Deal and in any case I would expect just as many Labour MPs to back Norway+ as Tory MPs and all LD and SNP MPs. The ERG would oppose it still but even the Deal could back it as it applies CU and SM to the whole UKMarqueeMark said:
Good luck to future Tory GE candidates trying to explain on the doorstep how they ended up locked forever into Norway+. With full CU and SM - a 180 degree turn from the last Manifesto commitment. And no Article 50 option to leave it.....HYUFD said:
Almost certainly not but if the ERG vote down the Deal at the moment Norway+ not No Deal looks the favourite alternative for MPs and the CabinetMarqueeMark said:
Did we ever get to the bottom of whether the UK could unilaterally terminate Norway+ in the future?HYUFD said:
According to Rudd this morning much of the Cabinet will switch to Norway+ ie single market and customs union if the Deal does not get through the Commons to avoid No Deal. Assuming May does not call EUref2 too of course which I would not completely rule outNickPalmer said:Intelligent discussion of the options from the EU perspective if the deal goes down:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/08/eu-will-negotiate-after-may-loses-commons-brexit-vote-says-prodi
I interpret that as meaning that they'll negotiate to keep trade flowing rather than pure no-deal, and also consider some tweaks if they think it will produce a positive result. They won't want to bother with the latter if they think the revised deal would be voted down anyway.
At least Norway + cheerleader Amber Rudd will be out of Parliament.
Yougov only has UKIP voters backing No Deal by a majority
We should be pursuing the renegotiation that Prodi admits the EU would want once May's deal is killed off by the House of Commons. They could tweak the backstop, or admit no agreement will pass and put measures in place. Call it No Deal +, where we haven't locked ourselves into the terms of the Trade Deal in advance, but put in place pragmatic arrangments to keep trade flowing between the EU and the UK.0 -
The problem is that the 52% have a right to say, "If you'd told us we were only going to leave a little bit, we wouldn't have bothered."OldKingCole said:Sensible comment (well I think so anyway) from Emily Thornberry in the Guardian Weekend, when asked about Brexit.
' I think people just voted to leave – not on any other details. So what you do is say, “52% said we should leave and 48% said we should remain, so the answer is we leave but we don’t go far.” That’s the only way you can really hold the country together.'
Which is basically either May's Deal or Norway. And means that when around half the 52 have realised what a mess we've created, we can ask nicely if we can rejoin.0 -
Well yes, that is about right. Something soft which also makes rejoining a bit easier though something few will love (for different reasons) was probably merited based on the result. But it was attempted from the start, and she should have a word with 90% of her colleagues who are working toward remain some what may, along with those Tories also doing so (and the ERG unintentionally leading to that outcome).OldKingCole said:Sensible comment (well I think so anyway) from Emily Thornberry in the Guardian Weekend, when asked about Brexit.
' I think people just voted to leave – not on any other details. So what you do is say, “52% said we should leave and 48% said we should remain, so the answer is we leave but we don’t go far.” That’s the only way you can really hold the country together.'
Which is basically either May's Deal or Norway. And means that when around half the 52 have realised what a mess we've created, we can ask nicely if we can rejoin.0 -
The Remainiac delusions really are a sight to behold.PClipp said:
A very neat and clean solution, Mrs C. And then all the miserable Brexiteers can go away and decide among themselves what it is they would really like to see. Then perhaps we could have another referendum, in perhaps 50 years time, and come to a real decision based on facts, without foreigners taking part and deciding everything for us. And meanwhile, the Conservative Party could have its own internal election, and tear chunks out of one another. Result - everybody happy.Beverley_C said:
Which is why I suspect that an Executive decision just to cancel Brexit on the basis that the Govt tried and failed.eek said:Adding to the complexity
twitter.com/AdamBienkov/status/1071338643892129792
It stops the electorate from being bothered (since the apparently do not like the idea - see tweet above) and Corbyn should let his MPs "rebel" so he can remain ideologically pure
There is going to be a row no matter what happens. It might as well be one with a predictable and controllable outcome.0 -
Neat, clean and totally the wrong way to go about it. If you want it reversed, there has to be a second referendum (fuck that people's vote bollocks), then we can go from there.PClipp said:
A very neat and clean solution, Mrs C. And then all the miserable Brexiteers can go away and decide among themselves what it is they would really like to see. Then perhaps we could have another referendum, in perhaps 50 years time, and come to a real decision based on facts, without foreigners taking part and deciding everything for us. And meanwhile, the Conservative Party could have its own internal election, and tear chunks out of one another. Result - everybody happy.Beverley_C said:
Which is why I suspect that an Executive decision just to cancel Brexit on the basis that the Govt tried and failed.eek said:Adding to the complexity
twitter.com/AdamBienkov/status/1071338643892129792
It stops the electorate from being bothered (since the apparently do not like the idea - see tweet above) and Corbyn should let his MPs "rebel" so he can remain ideologically pure
There is going to be a row no matter what happens. It might as well be one with a predictable and controllable outcome.0 -
That wasn't the question. For myself I would look to bringing in the same immigration requirments as, perhaps, BelgiumXenon said:
It's nonsense. If it was 52/48 to remain then she wouldn't be talking about compromise and how we can't fully stay in the EU. It would be we're staying and that's the end of it.OldKingCole said:Sensible comment (well I think so anyway) from Emily Thornberry in the Guardian Weekend, when asked about Brexit.
' I think people just voted to leave – not on any other details. So what you do is say, “52% said we should leave and 48% said we should remain, so the answer is we leave but we don’t go far.” That’s the only way you can really hold the country together.'
Which is basically either May's Deal or Norway. And means that when around half the 52 have realised what a mess we've created, we can ask nicely if we can rejoin.
Don't these people realise how hypocritical they look?0 -
Interestingly, Portillo was originally against holding a referendum, because he thought that if Remain won, then that would be the whistle to start much fuller integration and possibly even joining the Euro.Xenon said:
It's nonsense. If it was 52/48 to remain then she wouldn't be talking about compromise and how we can't fully stay in the EU. It would be we're staying and that's the end of it.OldKingCole said:Sensible comment (well I think so anyway) from Emily Thornberry in the Guardian Weekend, when asked about Brexit.
' I think people just voted to leave – not on any other details. So what you do is say, “52% said we should leave and 48% said we should remain, so the answer is we leave but we don’t go far.” That’s the only way you can really hold the country together.'
Which is basically either May's Deal or Norway. And means that when around half the 52 have realised what a mess we've created, we can ask nicely if we can rejoin.
Don't these people realise how hypocritical they look?0 -
I don't know about exit from the Customs Union bit, but exit from the EEA is under Article 127 of the EEA Agreement, requiring twelve months notice by the leaving party.MarqueeMark said:
Good luck to future Tory GE candidates trying to explain on the doorstep how they ended up locked forever into Norway+. With full CU and SM - a 180 degree turn from the last Manifesto commitment. And no Article 50 option to leave it.....HYUFD said:
Almost certainly not but if the ERG vote down the Deal at the moment Norway+ not No Deal looks the favourite alternative for MPs and the CabinetMarqueeMark said:
Did we ever get to the bottom of whether the UK could unilaterally terminate Norway+ in the future?HYUFD said:
According to Rudd this morning much of the Cabinet will switch to Norway+ ie single market and customs union if the Deal does not get through the Commons to avoid No Deal. Assuming May does not call EUref2 too of course which I would not completely rule outNickPalmer said:Intelligent discussion of the options from the EU perspective if the deal goes down:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/08/eu-will-negotiate-after-may-loses-commons-brexit-vote-says-prodi
I interpret that as meaning that they'll negotiate to keep trade flowing rather than pure no-deal, and also consider some tweaks if they think it will produce a positive result. They won't want to bother with the latter if they think the revised deal would be voted down anyway.
At least Norway + cheerleader Amber Rudd will be out of Parliament.0 -
The role of government is to do the best for the whole country. The proportionate size of London’s public sector is an irrelevant measure but it’s total size is part of the problem. London sucks in talent and opportunity from the whole country, perhaps from a Europe too. This has positives and negatives for the whole country including house price inflation etc . One thing the Government can control is where it locates key state functions, and as they are mostly in London, then the associated legal, and professional support is also in London, and the relevant associated companies will also have a presence. It is in the Governments power to restructure itself to better support the whole country, however if you are an ambitious civil servant you don’t wont to get shipped off to the ministry of agriculature in Belfast, or the ministry of education in Newcastle. You want to be in London. So there it is - the structure of Governement is to suit the ambition and ease of the civil service.AlastairMeeks said:
Of course. You run your profits.ydoethur said:
Still has more public money spent in it than anywhere else though - more than double the next two combined. It accounts for one-eighth of all public spending despite having less than one-tenth of the total population.AlastairMeeks said:Has anyone yet pointed out that London has by some way proportionately the smallest public sector of any region? I thought not.
It still massively subsidises everywhere else.0 -
It does to MPs. The deal being insufficiently leavery is causing it to be voted down by the ERG and the handful of labour leavers, but given parliament as a whole would prefer to remain if it could, they are more likely to approve a version of leave which is far far softer. It would upset the ERG and more besides, but they can be outnumbered if something most Tories and most Labour figures can accept crops up.Xenon said:
So the response to May's deal failing because leaver MPs don't think it is enough of a clean break from the EU is to....be almost completely in the EU.ydoethur said:
Much more, would involve free movement and at least de facto single market membership, probably also CAP.Xenon said:Can anyone give a very brief summary of what exactly Norway+ is?
Is it more or less in the EU than May's deal?
That doesn't make any sense.
The committed leavers in parliament are not going to get any hard leave through the house, and have to rely on extended chaos preventing any other option, which not all agree with since only some of them want no deal at all. So this may be as hard a leave as is on offer. It's that, Brexit in name only, or no brexit at all, take your pick.
Because the deal is not really failing because leaver MPs don't think it is enough of a clean break. Yes, many dozens are opposed on that basis, but even if nearly all the ERG voted for the deal it would still fail if the DUP and every other party was opposed. The deal is failing both because the leavers don't like it enough, and barely anyone else, particularly in Labour, will back it.
Therefore any deal needs to secure some level of support from Labour or the others. The only way that will happen is if it is softer than May's deal, so any Brexit deal we get must be softer.
The biggest opportunity the ERG have of Brexit occurring at all is Labour and Tory remainers trying for remain too much and failing.0 -
on what metric?AlastairMeeks said:Has anyone yet pointed out that London has by some way proportionately the smallest public sector of any region? I thought not.
0 -
That, perhaps, is a large part of the problem. Much of Leaverstan is heavily dependent on public sector jobs, so relatively hard hit by austerity. That squeeze on regional wages at a time of sluggish regional investment, while most of English Remania prospered fueled the sense of grievance.AlastairMeeks said:Has anyone yet pointed out that London has by some way proportionately the smallest public sector of any region? I thought not.
Femi, who has been one of the most articulate campaigners, and one who has been active in all parts of England, has been emphasising this recently, such as:
https://twitter.com/Femi_Sorry/status/1070935943593377793?s=190 -
Sounds like the same problem the EU as a whole has. Problem arises, make noises about accepting that, complaints die down a bit, moan about giving in to populism and continue on merry way.Foxy said:
That, perhaps, is a large part of the problem. Much of Leaverstan is heavily dependent on public sector jobs, so relatively hard hit by austerity. That squeeze on regional wages at a time of sluggish regional investment, while most of English Remania prospered fueled the sense of grievance.AlastairMeeks said:Has anyone yet pointed out that London has by some way proportionately the smallest public sector of any region? I thought not.
Femi, who has been one of the most articulate campaigners, and one who has been active in all parts of England, has been emphasising this recently, such as:
https://twitter.com/Femi_Sorry/status/1070935943593377793?s=190 -
Irish backstop needed klaxon!Andy_Cooke said:
I don't know about exit from the Customs Union bit, but exit from the EEA is under Article 127 of the EEA Agreement, requiring twelve months notice by the leaving party.MarqueeMark said:
Good luck to future Tory GE candidates trying to explain on the doorstep how they ended up locked forever into Norway+. With full CU and SM - a 180 degree turn from the last Manifesto commitment. And no Article 50 option to leave it.....HYUFD said:
Almost certainly not but if the ERG vote down the Deal at the moment Norway+ not No Deal looks the favourite alternative for MPs and the CabinetMarqueeMark said:
Did we ever get to the bottom of whether the UK could unilaterally terminate Norway+ in the future?HYUFD said:
According to Rudd this morning much of the Cabinet will switch to Norway+ ie single market and customs union if the Deal does not get through the Commons to avoid No Deal. Assuming May does not call EUref2 too of course which I would not completely rule outNickPalmer said:Intelligent discussion of the options from the EU perspective if the deal goes down:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/08/eu-will-negotiate-after-may-loses-commons-brexit-vote-says-prodi
I interpret that as meaning that they'll negotiate to keep trade flowing rather than pure no-deal, and also consider some tweaks if they think it will produce a positive result. They won't want to bother with the latter if they think the revised deal would be voted down anyway.
At least Norway + cheerleader Amber Rudd will be out of Parliament.0 -
Simultaneously berating "cocky Remainers" whilst writing "the weeks after we vote to stop Brexit" suggests something of a self-awareness problem.Foxy said:
That, perhaps, is a large part of the problem. Much of Leaverstan is heavily dependent on public sector jobs, so relatively hard hit by austerity. That squeeze on regional wages at a time of sluggish regional investment, while most of English Remania prospered fueled the sense of grievance.AlastairMeeks said:Has anyone yet pointed out that London has by some way proportionately the smallest public sector of any region? I thought not.
Femi, who has been one of the most articulate campaigners, and one who has been active in all parts of England, has been emphasising this recently, such as:
https://twitter.com/Femi_Sorry/status/1070935943593377793?s=190 -
He is right.Foxy said:
That, perhaps, is a large part of the problem. Much of Leaverstan is heavily dependent on public sector jobs, so relatively hard hit by austerity. That squeeze on regional wages at a time of sluggish regional investment, while most of English Remania prospered fueled the sense of grievance.AlastairMeeks said:Has anyone yet pointed out that London has by some way proportionately the smallest public sector of any region? I thought not.
Femi, who has been one of the most articulate campaigners, and one who has been active in all parts of England, has been emphasising this recently, such as:
https://twitter.com/Femi_Sorry/status/1070935943593377793?s=190 -
But to what extent do we think that Labour MPs are voting no based on wanting a better deal Vs party political reasons? It may be that many of them will never vote for any deal presented by the Torieskle4 said:
It does to MPs. The deal being insufficiently leavery is causing it to be voted down by the ERG and the handful of labour leavers, but given parliament as a whole would prefer to remain if it could, they are more likely to approve a version of leave which is far far softer. It would upset the ERG and more besides, but they can be outnumbered if something most Tories and most Labour figures can accept crops up.Xenon said:
So the response to May's deal failing because leaver MPs don't think it is enough of a clean break from the EU is to....be almost completely in the EU.ydoethur said:
Much more, would involve free movement and at least de facto single market membership, probably also CAP.Xenon said:Can anyone give a very brief summary of what exactly Norway+ is?
Is it more or less in the EU than May's deal?
That doesn't make any sense.
The committed leavers in parliament are not going to get any hard leave through the house, and have to rely on extended chaos preventing any other option, which not all agree with since only some of them want no deal at all. So this may be as hard a leave as is on offer. It's that, Brexit in name only, or no brexit at all, take your pick.
Because the deal is not really failing because leaver MPs don't think it is enough of a clean break. Yes, many dozens are opposed on that basis, but even if nearly all the ERG voted for the deal it would still fail if the DUP and every other party was opposed. The deal is failing both because the leavers don't like it enough, and barely anyone else, particularly in Labour, will back it.
Therefore any deal needs to secure some level of support from Labour or the others. The only way that will happen is if it is softer than May's deal, so any Brexit deal we get must be softer.
The biggest opportunity the ERG have of Brexit occurring at all is Labour and Tory remainers trying for remain too much and failing.0 -
Read his other posts. Femi is just addressing the possibility of Remain winning a #Peoplesvote, something that is at least possible.Tissue_Price said:
Simultaneously berating "cocky Remainers" whilst writing "the weeks after we vote to stop Brexit" suggests something of a self-awareness problem.Foxy said:
That, perhaps, is a large part of the problem. Much of Leaverstan is heavily dependent on public sector jobs, so relatively hard hit by austerity. That squeeze on regional wages at a time of sluggish regional investment, while most of English Remania prospered fueled the sense of grievance.AlastairMeeks said:Has anyone yet pointed out that London has by some way proportionately the smallest public sector of any region? I thought not.
Femi, who has been one of the most articulate campaigners, and one who has been active in all parts of England, has been emphasising this recently, such as:
https://twitter.com/Femi_Sorry/status/1070935943593377793?s=19
Norway+ sounds a good outcome to me, very easy to Rejoin from that position. Presumably just requires a new political declaration, as the WA would be unchanged, being effectively Norway+ until Dec 2020.0 -
I have also seen it suggested that in the aftermath of Churchill's stroke in 1953 that his son-in-law - Christopher Soames - was effectively running the country!ydoethur said:
In the first case he was appointed Acting Prime Minister by the incumbent (having also been acting PM in 1953 after Churchill's stroke while Eden had gallstones). He did not assume it on the request of the sovereign.justin124 said:
When Eden became ill in late 1956 R A Butler became de facto Acting PM until Macmillan was appointed to form a new administration. Butler was again de facto Acting PM in October 1963 when Macmillan entered hospital and made known his intention to resign. On neither occasion,however, was Butler formally appointed PM.viewcode said:
I'm not sure that's true. The PM forms the government, hires and fires ministers and chairs cabinet meetings (and other stuff), but the government would survive her absence until a new one is formed by a new PM. I should imagine it's not something you'd want to drag on, but the PM is not synonymous with HMG, she just puts it together.numbertwelve said:
If May fell under a bus, the government would technically fall under a bus too.Oort said:numbertwelve said:
May leads the government. Hence if she goes so does the government. When HMQ appoints a prime minister, she appoints then to form a government in her name. The PM is the lynchpin in which the government lives or dies. No PM, no government.Oort said:
A government minister is a different kettle of fish, that’s just rejecting one part of the government. So long as the PM survives, they have the power to reshape their government.
Happy to be corrected on this if wrong.
It is also worth pointing out that in the first case he was appointed to cover sick leave (from which Eden never returned) not a gap in the government, and in the second appears to have assumed it without instructions, with disastrous career-ending results.
You could mention Curzon acting as PM in Bonar Law's absence in 1923 as well.0 -
Although I don't like Emily Thornberry, I don't think that's fair. Any sensible politician winning a referendum by less than 5% would take it as a shot across the bows. For a start it would have killed any talk of further integration via treaty changes stone dead. It would also probably have seen a fight over the budget and the rebate.Xenon said:
It's nonsense. If it was 52/48 to remain then she wouldn't be talking about compromise and how we can't fully stay in the EU. It would be we're staying and that's the end of it.OldKingCole said:Sensible comment (well I think so anyway) from Emily Thornberry in the Guardian Weekend, when asked about Brexit.
' I think people just voted to leave – not on any other details. So what you do is say, “52% said we should leave and 48% said we should remain, so the answer is we leave but we don’t go far.” That’s the only way you can really hold the country together.'
Which is basically either May's Deal or Norway. And means that when around half the 52 have realised what a mess we've created, we can ask nicely if we can rejoin.
Don't these people realise how hypocritical they look?
Arguably the folly of leavers in not reaching out is the reason why they're now panicking about a second referendum. I'm panicking because Remainers haven't tried either but are increasingly convinced they'd win because er...0 -
In which case they will be slight annoyed but not at riot levels of anger were we to just call it a bad job and remain...williamglenn said:
The problem is that the 52% have a right to say, "If you'd told us we were only going to leave a little bit, we wouldn't have bothered."OldKingCole said:Sensible comment (well I think so anyway) from Emily Thornberry in the Guardian Weekend, when asked about Brexit.
' I think people just voted to leave – not on any other details. So what you do is say, “52% said we should leave and 48% said we should remain, so the answer is we leave but we don’t go far.” That’s the only way you can really hold the country together.'
Which is basically either May's Deal or Norway. And means that when around half the 52 have realised what a mess we've created, we can ask nicely if we can rejoin.
And I suspect that is the important thing here, what other things could we have lined up to help / solve Austerity Leaverstan as A50 is revoked as a impossible task...0 -
Good afternoon, everyone.
Dreadful weather. Cold, rainy, windy, gloomy.0 -
The key other issue with the Norway options of course is that we retain freedom of movement - albeit without Norway's immigration controls infrastructure, very high cost of living and less generous non contributory welfare system which asks as a break on migrants who require state subsidies (e.g. tax credit and HB) to top up their wages to survive as you need to have lived in and paid for some time to claim welfare or housing subsidies in almost all cases. In order to stay permanently as an EU national in Norway you need a job - albeit with a grace period or means to pay your way as a retiree - and must register with the police.
In other words Norway has freedom of movement - but manages it so it isn't a beacon for the unemployed, unskilled or low paid who won't pay their way. Unlike the UK which is a free for all as one might say.
I don't see Norway doing the Tories electoral prospects much good if FOM stays without Norway's welfare systems and controls and barriers.0 -
Agreed. The question is whether Leavers would listen under such circumstances.twistedfirestopper3 said:
He is right.Foxy said:
That, perhaps, is a large part of the problem. Much of Leaverstan is heavily dependent on public sector jobs, so relatively hard hit by austerity. That squeeze on regional wages at a time of sluggish regional investment, while most of English Remania prospered fueled the sense of grievance.AlastairMeeks said:Has anyone yet pointed out that London has by some way proportionately the smallest public sector of any region? I thought not.
Femi, who has been one of the most articulate campaigners, and one who has been active in all parts of England, has been emphasising this recently, such as:
https://twitter.com/Femi_Sorry/status/1070935943593377793?s=190 -
The last thing I would want is top remainers thinking they have carte blanche to interpret what leavers want and using this as justification for cherrypicking from anything some leavers may have mentioned. After all top remainers are implacably opposed to the one thing which unites leavers, leaving the EU. If leavers were united in rejecting the system, then why did so many vote for the incumbent party at the last election?Foxy said:
That, perhaps, is a large part of the problem. Much of Leaverstan is heavily dependent on public sector jobs, so relatively hard hit by austerity. That squeeze on regional wages at a time of sluggish regional investment, while most of English Remania prospered fueled the sense of grievance.AlastairMeeks said:Has anyone yet pointed out that London has by some way proportionately the smallest public sector of any region? I thought not.
Femi, who has been one of the most articulate campaigners, and one who has been active in all parts of England, has been emphasising this recently, such as:
https://twitter.com/Femi_Sorry/status/1070935943593377793?s=190 -
Could be, which is why the risk of accidental no deal is still there, if not as high as it was now that (pending Monday's ruling) remain is back on the table. If we can actually renegotiate a bit, and if we do so successfully, and if that gets most of the Tories on board, are there enough Labour MPs willing to see it over the line even if they would prefer a Labour gov and Labour negotiation, recognising they cannot get those things?Stereotomy said:
But to what extent do we think that Labour MPs are voting no based on wanting a better deal Vs party political reasons? It may be that many of them will never vote for any deal presented by the Torieskle4 said:
It doesXenon said:
So the response to May's deal failing because leaver MPs don't think it is enough of a clean break from the EU is to....be almost completely in the EU.ydoethur said:
Much more, would involve free movement and at least de facto single market membership, probably also CAP.Xenon said:Can anyone give a very brief summary of what exactly Norway+ is?
Is it more or less in the EU than May's deal?
That doesn't make any sense.
Because the deal is not really failing because leaver MPs don't think it is enough of a clean break. Yes, many dozens are opposed on that basis, but even if nearly all the ERG voted for the deal it would still fail if the DUP and every other party was opposed. The deal is failing both because the leavers don't like it enough, and barely anyone else, particularly in Labour, will back it.
Therefore any deal needs to secure some level of support from Labour or the others. The only way that will happen is if it is softer than May's deal, so any Brexit deal we get must be softer.
The biggest opportunity the ERG have of Brexit occurring at all is Labour and Tory remainers trying for remain too much and failing.
I suspect we shall never know. Since most Labour MPs want to remain, it seems more likely if offered a referendum for that vs the deal as it stands, they would decide there is less need to renegotiate after all (or reluctantly state there is no time left). Getting enough Tories on board for that is trickier.0 -
I think that a little unlikely.justin124 said:
I have also seen it suggested that in the aftermath of Churchill's stroke in 1953 that his son-in-law - Christopher Soames - was effectively running the country!ydoethur said:
In the first case he was appointed Acting Prime Minister by the incumbent (having also been acting PM in 1953 after Churchill's stroke while Eden had gallstones). He did not assume it on the request of the sovereign.justin124 said:
When Eden became ill in late 1956 R A Butler became de facto Acting PM until Macmillan was appointed to form a new administration. Butler was again de facto Acting PM in October 1963 when Macmillan entered hospital and made known his intention to resign. On neither occasion,however, was Butler formally appointed PM.viewcode said:
I'm not sure that's true. The PM forms the government, hires and fires ministers and chairs cabinet meetings (and other stuff), but the government would survive her absence until a new one is formed by a new PM. I should imagine it's not something you'd want to drag on, but the PM is not synonymous with HMG, she just puts it together.numbertwelve said:
If May fell under a bus, the government would technically fall under a bus too.Oort said:numbertwelve said:
May leads the government. Hence if she goes so does the government. When HMQ appoints a prime minister, she appoints then to form a government in her name. The PM is the lynchpin in which the government lives or dies. No PM, no government.Oort said:
A government minister is a different kettle of fish, that’s just rejecting one part of the government. So long as the PM survives, they have the power to reshape their government.
Happy to be corrected on this if wrong.
It is also worth pointing out that in the first case he was appointed to cover sick leave (from which Eden never returned) not a gap in the government, and in the second appears to have assumed it without instructions, with disastrous career-ending results.
You could mention Curzon acting as PM in Bonar Law's absence in 1923 as well.
But there's no doubt that in 1919-21 Edith Wilson was de facto President of the United States.0 -
No one is listening. It's a weapons grade clusterfuck. Whatever happens now, we're in for years of bitterness and spite on all sides.ydoethur said:
Agreed. The question is whether Leavers would listen under such circumstances.twistedfirestopper3 said:
He is right.Foxy said:
That, perhaps, is a large part of the problem. Much of Leaverstan is heavily dependent on public sector jobs, so relatively hard hit by austerity. That squeeze on regional wages at a time of sluggish regional investment, while most of English Remania prospered fueled the sense of grievance.AlastairMeeks said:Has anyone yet pointed out that London has by some way proportionately the smallest public sector of any region? I thought not.
Femi, who has been one of the most articulate campaigners, and one who has been active in all parts of England, has been emphasising this recently, such as:
https://twitter.com/Femi_Sorry/status/1070935943593377793?s=190 -
Certainly we needed a PM who would a) carry through on their promise to address the concerns of those who are struggling, and b) recognise that both the reality of our situation and the closeness of the vote always directed towards a very soft Brexit, at least initially, as even SeanT recognised in one of his rare lucid moments, and, c) recognising that they had some irreconcilable idiots in their own party, Brexit always needed to be resolved on a cross-party basis.ydoethur said:
Although I don't like Emily Thornberry, I don't think that's fair. Any sensible politician winning a referendum by less than 5% would take it as a shot across the bows. For a start it would have killed any talk of further integration via treaty changes stone dead. It would also probably have seen a fight over the budget and the rebate.Xenon said:
It's nonsense. If it was 52/48 to remain then she wouldn't be talking about compromise and how we can't fully stay in the EU. It would be we're staying and that's the end of it.OldKingCole said:Sensible comment (well I think so anyway) from Emily Thornberry in the Guardian Weekend, when asked about Brexit.
' I think people just voted to leave – not on any other details. So what you do is say, “52% said we should leave and 48% said we should remain, so the answer is we leave but we don’t go far.” That’s the only way you can really hold the country together.'
Which is basically either May's Deal or Norway. And means that when around half the 52 have realised what a mess we've created, we can ask nicely if we can rejoin.
Don't these people realise how hypocritical they look?
Arguably the folly of leavers in not reaching out is the reason why they're now panicking about a second referendum. I'm panicking because Remainers haven't tried either but are increasingly convinced they'd win because er...
Sadly our PM did none of those things.0 -
I suspect many would not, but not everyone has the obsessive mindset of the folk who spend their days on PB.ydoethur said:
Agreed. The question is whether Leavers would listen under such circumstances.twistedfirestopper3 said:
He is right.Foxy said:
That, perhaps, is a large part of the problem. Much of Leaverstan is heavily dependent on public sector jobs, so relatively hard hit by austerity. That squeeze on regional wages at a time of sluggish regional investment, while most of English Remania prospered fueled the sense of grievance.AlastairMeeks said:Has anyone yet pointed out that London has by some way proportionately the smallest public sector of any region? I thought not.
Femi, who has been one of the most articulate campaigners, and one who has been active in all parts of England, has been emphasising this recently, such as:
https://twitter.com/Femi_Sorry/status/1070935943593377793?s=19
That said, being at the sharp end of globalisation is not an easy thing to fix, as we see across the globe whether in Ohio or Lusaka.0 -
Who can claim that believably? The current Labour leadership are the only ones who actually want any kind of significant change, and it remains to be seen if they can convince the public that it's the right changeFoxy said:
That, perhaps, is a large part of the problem. Much of Leaverstan is heavily dependent on public sector jobs, so relatively hard hit by austerity. That squeeze on regional wages at a time of sluggish regional investment, while most of English Remania prospered fueled the sense of grievance.AlastairMeeks said:Has anyone yet pointed out that London has by some way proportionately the smallest public sector of any region? I thought not.
Femi, who has been one of the most articulate campaigners, and one who has been active in all parts of England, has been emphasising this recently, such as:
https://twitter.com/Femi_Sorry/status/1070935943593377793?s=190 -
Yes, I think so. Britain's Ratners moment is going to poison politics for a generation at least.twistedfirestopper3 said:
No one is listening. It's a weapons grade clusterfuck. Whatever happens now, we're in for years of bitterness and spite on all sides.ydoethur said:
Agreed. The question is whether Leavers would listen under such circumstances.twistedfirestopper3 said:
He is right.Foxy said:
That, perhaps, is a large part of the problem. Much of Leaverstan is heavily dependent on public sector jobs, so relatively hard hit by austerity. That squeeze on regional wages at a time of sluggish regional investment, while most of English Remania prospered fueled the sense of grievance.AlastairMeeks said:Has anyone yet pointed out that London has by some way proportionately the smallest public sector of any region? I thought not.
Femi, who has been one of the most articulate campaigners, and one who has been active in all parts of England, has been emphasising this recently, such as:
https://twitter.com/Femi_Sorry/status/1070935943593377793?s=190 -
ydoethur said:
Arguably the folly of leavers in not reaching out is the reason why they're now panicking about a second referendum.
0 -
New thread0
-
C'mon peeps. Do keep up
new thread -->0
