politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » On his first day as a member of the US Senate WH2012 GOP nomin

AlastairMeeks said:

Charles said:

Verulamius said:

Charles said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Can someone direct me to a tally of MPs who have changed their minds about Theresa May's deal since the vote was pulled last month?

If there are any (and I have no idea) I doubt they will say publicly. What’s the upside?

A knighthood/damehood?

you need the agonised speech about serious concerns but, with a heavy heart and in consultation with my constituents, I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that this is the right thing for Britain... any connection or the appearance of a connection to a knighthood is purely coincidental.

This is definitely a market where there is first mover advantage. Yet no one has made the first move yet. Curious.

Why do you think there's a first-mover advantage here? I'd have thought the converse, any MPs thinking of changing their minds would be looking for cover in numbers.

Also, they need some vaguely-plausible hook to hang their U-turn on. Some flim-flam from the EU is presumably being lined up for this purpose.

Foxy said:

ydoethur said:

Anorak said:

Thread for Grabcoque, in the hope of arresting his maritime derangement: https://twitter.com/ShipBrief/status/1080406268215476224

He's certainly been all at sea this morning.

Holed below the waterline...

On might even mention bilge.

edmundintokyo said:

Back on the Dem side, Harry Enten rated the various presidential options compared to a theoretical generic candidate:

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/01/02/politics/democrats-2020-electability-elizabeth-warren-amy-klobuchar-sherrod-brown/index.html?utm_medium=social&utm_term=image&utm_content=2019-01-02T12:31:03&utm_source=twCNNp


Amy Klobuchar: +13
Sherrod Brown: +12
Kirsten Gillibrand,: +5
Beto O'Rourke: +3
Bernie Sanders: -3
Elizabeth Warren: -12

So, lump on Elizabeth Warren?

tlg86 said:

eek said:

dixiedean said:

Anorak said:

Stupid question (but I've been away for the last 2 weeks): why do we suddenly need loads of extra ferry capacity, when the existing capacity serves our needs perfectly well? What aspect of No Deal means we are suddenly importing and exporting more stuff?

The same thought occurred to me. AIUI Dover will be blocked due to extra customs checks. However, won't the same checks be needed at Ramsgate, Poole, Hull, etc.? There is still a finite, and presumably reasonably stable, predictable amount of passengers and goods needing to be transported. More ferry capacity is the answer to a question not asked. Extra Processing capacity at Customs is.

Extra processing capacity at landlocked and full beyond capacity Dover?

Logically, would it not make sense to move some of the ferries from Dover to Ramsgate? If the limiting factor is processing before boarding, then you won't need so many ferries on Dover-Calais/Dunkirk - or will the existing services be running half empty?

Dover is not the problem. Calais is. Or any other European port where ferries are parked for days while waiting for the one assigned French customs officer to inspect it. This could rapidly reduce the number of working ferries to zero, should our erstwhile EU partners decide to play silly buggers, or even if they do not but have taken our own government's woeful approach to planning extra capacity for Brexit. At the Dover end, we could just wave everything through (including stowaways) if a crisis loomed. At the French, German, Belgian and Dutch ends, we cannot.

Edit: and note that using alternative ports makes things worse, not better.

Charles said:

viewcode said:

Charles said:

Dura_Ace said:

I imagine I can hear Orff's O Fortuna in the background when I read this.

I do like that piece

"...[Arthur] Ready my knights for battle; they will ride with their King once more. I have lived through others far too long: Lancelot carried my honor and Guinevere my guilt; my knights have fought my causes and Mordred carries my sins. Now, at last, I will rule. [Aide] Guards. Knights. Squires. Prepare for battle..." (Excalibur, John Boorman, 1981)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16Y_as3nHUY

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=iiE5mE0ZorA

Temple of Doom

The guy who used to do (but no longer does) "Every Frame A Painting" did a sideproject called "Sounds Like Temp". When editing a film the editor may overlay an existing piece of music (the "temp track") to help with the beats. An original tune is then recomposed to prevent a copyright claim. But because the beats are now set, the new tune may sound uncannily like the old one.

AlastairMeeks said:

Charles said:

Verulamius said:

Charles said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Can someone direct me to a tally of MPs who have changed their minds about Theresa May's deal since the vote was pulled last month?

If there are any (and I have no idea) I doubt they will say publicly. What’s the upside?

A knighthood/damehood?

you need the agonised speech about serious concerns but, with a heavy heart and in consultation with my constituents, I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that this is the right thing for Britain... any connection or the appearance of a connection to a knighthood is purely coincidental.

This is definitely a market where there is first mover advantage. Yet no one has made the first move yet. Curious.

First mover gets publicly laughed at

Either it’s happening privately or it’s bit happening IMV

Which elections does 2019 bring (except a potential UK one)?

Australia
Canada
Denmark
EU
Greece

India if you're feeling brave?

?

Richard_Nabavi said:

edmundintokyo said:

Back on the Dem side, Harry Enten rated the various presidential options compared to a theoretical generic candidate:

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/01/02/politics/democrats-2020-electability-elizabeth-warren-amy-klobuchar-sherrod-brown/index.html?utm_medium=social&utm_term=image&utm_content=2019-01-02T12:31:03&utm_source=twCNNp


Amy Klobuchar: +13
Sherrod Brown: +12
Kirsten Gillibrand,: +5
Beto O'Rourke: +3
Bernie Sanders: -3
Elizabeth Warren: -12

So, lump on Elizabeth Warren?

At this stage it is all about name recognition which is why the septuagenarians on both sides who fought the time before, and the time before that, are getting all the attention here -- Warren, Biden and, yes, Mitt Romney.

DecrepitJohnL said:

tlg86 said:

eek said:

dixiedean said:

Anorak said:

Stupid question (but I've been away for the last 2 weeks): why do we suddenly need loads of extra ferry capacity, when the existing capacity serves our needs perfectly well? What aspect of No Deal means we are suddenly importing and exporting more stuff?

The same thought occurred to me. AIUI Dover will be blocked due to extra customs checks. However, won't the same checks be needed at Ramsgate, Poole, Hull, etc.? There is still a finite, and presumably reasonably stable, predictable amount of passengers and goods needing to be transported. More ferry capacity is the answer to a question not asked. Extra Processing capacity at Customs is.

Extra processing capacity at landlocked and full beyond capacity Dover?

Logically, would it not make sense to move some of the ferries from Dover to Ramsgate? If the limiting factor is processing before boarding, then you won't need so many ferries on Dover-Calais/Dunkirk - or will the existing services be running half empty?

Dover is not the problem. Calais is. Or any other European port where ferries are parked for days while waiting for the one assigned French customs officer to inspect it. This could rapidly reduce the number of working ferries to zero, should our erstwhile EU partners decide to play silly buggers, or even if they do not but have taken our own government's woeful approach to planning extra capacity for Brexit. At the Dover end, we could just wave everything through (including stowaways) if a crisis loomed. At the French, German, Belgian and Dutch ends, we cannot.

Edit: and note that using alternative ports makes things worse, not better.

True but we would end up playing the same game immediately at Fishguard - which would definitely cause problems for Ireland....

Paging @Edmundintokyo

Klobuchar is with Betway at 40-1 for POTUS.

They allowed me all the £40 I asked for too.

Charles said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Charles said:

Verulamius said:

Charles said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Can someone direct me to a tally of MPs who have changed their minds about Theresa May's deal since the vote was pulled last month?

If there are any (and I have no idea) I doubt they will say publicly. What’s the upside?

A knighthood/damehood?

you need the agonised speech about serious concerns but, with a heavy heart and in consultation with my constituents, I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that this is the right thing for Britain... any connection or the appearance of a connection to a knighthood is purely coincidental.

This is definitely a market where there is first mover advantage. Yet no one has made the first move yet. Curious.

First mover gets publicly laughed at

Either it’s happening privately or it’s bit happening IMV

The likely candidates should be pretty much inured to the laughter of the public, no?

IanB2 said:

eek said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

tlg86 said:

eek said:

dixiedean said:

Anorak said:

Stupid question (but I've been away for the last 2 weeks): why do we suddenly need loads of extra ferry capacity, when the existing capacity serves our needs perfectly well? What aspect of No Deal means we are suddenly importing and exporting more stuff?

The same thought occurred to me. AIUI Dover will be blocked due to extra customs checks. However, won't the same checks be needed at Ramsgate, Poole, Hull, etc.? There is still a finite, and presumably reasonably stable, predictable amount of passengers and goods needing to be transported. More ferry capacity is the answer to a question not asked. Extra Processing capacity at Customs is.

Extra processing capacity at landlocked and full beyond capacity Dover?

Logically, would it not make sense to move some of the ferries from Dover to Ramsgate? If the limiting factor is processing before boarding, then you won't need so many ferries on Dover-Calais/Dunkirk - or will the existing services be running half empty?

Dover is not the problem. Calais is. Or any other European port where ferries are parked for days while waiting for the one assigned French customs officer to inspect it. This could rapidly reduce the number of working ferries to zero, should our erstwhile EU partners decide to play silly buggers, or even if they do not but have taken our own government's woeful approach to planning extra capacity for Brexit. At the Dover end, we could just wave everything through (including stowaways) if a crisis loomed. At the French, German, Belgian and Dutch ends, we cannot.

Edit: and note that using alternative ports makes things worse, not better.

True but we would end up playing the same game immediately at Fishguard - which would definitely cause problems for Ireland....

I don't think that's a very constructive way to be looking at international relations.

Quaint

JosiasJessop said:

We had a funny moment a few months back when some leavers pointed at some undeveloped land right by the Eurotunnel terminal that they said could be used to store lorries. They'd checked Google Maps.

If they'd actually have used their brains they'd have realised that undeveloped land was actually a very steep slope leading up onto the North Downs ...

No Deal 'planning' is fiendishly difficult to get right. Too much and it's project fear and/or a terrible waste of money. Too little and it is either spiking our negotiating position or it's complacency verging on the criminal.

No doubt there is a sweet spot, a goldilocks level of NDP that is just bang on the button, but finding it would be a challenge for the most artful and accomplished of politicians.

No surprise, then, that Chris Grayling is struggling.

Let's cut him some slack.

Just seen this in the comments under the Beeb story about Seaborne

1644. Posted by Anti Brexit BBC is the why we cannot trust the BBC on
14 minutes ago
So

There it is

Too late Remainers....the Dye is Caste

We've crossed the Rubicon

Deal or no Deal with the EU

It is a pity the BBC does not investigate the EU migrants in dinghies who arrive from France

The BBC are shameless in their skewed anti brexit stories, like Khan, they deliberately undermine ....and are a sad reflection on how low progressives have sunk

Sort of thing that makes me proud to be a died in the wall leaver.

Theuniondivvie said:

Charles said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Charles said:

Verulamius said:

Charles said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Can someone direct me to a tally of MPs who have changed their minds about Theresa May's deal since the vote was pulled last month?

If there are any (and I have no idea) I doubt they will say publicly. What’s the upside?

A knighthood/damehood?

you need the agonised speech about serious concerns but, with a heavy heart and in consultation with my constituents, I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that this is the right thing for Britain... any connection or the appearance of a connection to a knighthood is purely coincidental.

This is definitely a market where there is first mover advantage. Yet no one has made the first move yet. Curious.

First mover gets publicly laughed at

Either it’s happening privately or it’s bit happening IMV

The likely candidates should be pretty much inured to the laughter of the public, no?

Better to be day 3 as someone else posted upthread

MarqueeMark said:

ydoethur said:

MarqueeMark said:

ydoethur said:

Foxy said:

ydoethur said:

Anorak said:

Thread for Grabcoque, in the hope of arresting his maritime derangement: https://twitter.com/ShipBrief/status/1080406268215476224

He's certainly been all at sea this morning.

Holed below the waterline...

He's certainly handed his credibility over on a plate. It's been riveting though.

The puns just roll on, roll off.....

You're ramping things up...

But this ferry pun could be terminal.

In dire straits, certainly.

Charles said:

MarqueeMark said:

ydoethur said:

MarqueeMark said:

ydoethur said:

Foxy said:

ydoethur said:

Anorak said:

Thread for Grabcoque, in the hope of arresting his maritime derangement: https://twitter.com/ShipBrief/status/1080406268215476224

He's certainly been all at sea this morning.

Holed below the waterline...

He's certainly handed his credibility over on a plate. It's been riveting though.

The puns just roll on, roll off.....

You're ramping things up...

But this ferry pun could be terminal.

Nah. It’s the herald of free enterprise

That one merits astern rebuke.

ydoethur said:

Charles said:

MarqueeMark said:

ydoethur said:

MarqueeMark said:

ydoethur said:

Foxy said:

ydoethur said:

Anorak said:

Thread for Grabcoque, in the hope of arresting his maritime derangement: https://twitter.com/ShipBrief/status/1080406268215476224

He's certainly been all at sea this morning.

Holed below the waterline...

He's certainly handed his credibility over on a plate. It's been riveting though.

The puns just roll on, roll off.....

You're ramping things up...

But this ferry pun could be terminal.

Nah. It’s the herald of free enterprise

That one merits astern rebuke.

We bow to your ingenuity.

Off the chart mental (Lilico, that is!)
https://twitter.com/andrew_lilico/status/1080446162962911232

Nigelb said:

ydoethur said:

Charles said:

MarqueeMark said:

ydoethur said:

MarqueeMark said:

ydoethur said:

Foxy said:

ydoethur said:

Anorak said:

Thread for Grabcoque, in the hope of arresting his maritime derangement: https://twitter.com/ShipBrief/status/1080406268215476224

He's certainly been all at sea this morning.

Holed below the waterline...

He's certainly handed his credibility over on a plate. It's been riveting though.

The puns just roll on, roll off.....

You're ramping things up...

But this ferry pun could be terminal.

Nah. It’s the herald of free enterprise

That one merits astern rebuke.

We bow to your ingenuity.

I had a feeling somebody would deck me for that one.

But let's try and funnel our discussion more productively.

Anorak said:

Off the chart mental (Lilico, that is!)
https://twitter.com/andrew_lilico/status/1080446162962911232

Not especially so (this is from 2016 but things won't have changed that much):

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/study-finds-uk-is-second-most-powerful-country-in-the-world/

DecrepitJohnL said:

kinabalu said:

Pulpstar said:

Paging @Edmundintokyo

Klobuchar is with Betway at 40-1 for POTUS.

They allowed me all the £40 I asked for too.

That looks like value. 25 on BF.

Good luck but I fear ending up with a dozen or more losers, even if I have the winner. Last time, Hillary scared off the other challengers as she had it sewn up. This year it will be more like the Republicans were four years ago, with more than a dozen fighting it out.

If we can back a dozen losers and the winner at 40-1, then we are ahead are we not ?

david_herdson said:

Anorak said:

Off the chart mental (Lilico, that is!)
https://twitter.com/andrew_lilico/status/1080446162962911232

Not especially so (this is from 2016 but things won't have changed that much):

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/study-finds-uk-is-second-most-powerful-country-in-the-world/

"Only 2 global powers". I give you China, which demolishes his argument all on its own. Also arguably Russia and France.

Sunil_Prasannan said:

eek said:

Nemtynakht said:

Rexel56 said:

Lots of talk about the man from the Hull Council estate... a city I know well having been born there and lived until I was 18, family live their including a son who moved from leafy Berkshire to take a Physics degree and has stayed there to teach in an outstanding Academy school...

... the city did have a substantial majority for leave and I’ve no doubt that this was driven by a combination of (1) a sense that the city had been neglected by successive governments since the collapse of fishing, automation of the docks and the loss of industry such as Imperial Typewriters... all in the 1970s... and (2) levels of East European immigration, especially from Poland (though the city has had a Polich community since WWII).

The City has improved a great deal in the past few years, the City of Culture events in 2017 were a significant boost and these have continued. The waterfront and Old Town are thriving with restaurants, bars and both residential and commercial property available at reasonable rent... out of the centre, a family member has just bought a beautifully restored Edwardian, 4 bed terrace for £190k.

What the city suffers from is its remoteness and the challenge of attracting major employers who will be put off by the limited pool of skilled labour and difficulty of persuading staff to relocate. Channel 4 HQ would have been a brilliant win for the city, but it was never going to happen. What would help? Rail upgrades to Leeds, Manchester and Liverpool certainly. Public Sector organisations to be relocated. Most of all, IMHO, a major, sustained campaign to incentivise commerce and industry into the city backed by promotion that it can be a great place to live. And a rocket up the local education authority or rapid academisation of all schools.

What will Brexit do for the man in the housing authority property? Not a lot. If he had skills now he would be employed and well paid, even in Hull. If there is a rapid exodus of the Polish community it will be dreadful for the local economy.

I chose Hull as an example of somewhere that voted Leave and someone recently told me it had one of the largest council estates in Britain. It sounds like it is on the up but it does seem geographically isolated.

It's a shame you picked Hull. Stoke, Crewe, Preston, Darlington all have similar problems without the isolation issue....

Crewe? It's one of the busiest train stations in the UK with no less than six railway lines converging on it.

Train station?!?

Train station?!?

It is a Railway Station!!!!!!!!!

ydoethur said:

Charles said:

MarqueeMark said:

ydoethur said:

MarqueeMark said:

ydoethur said:

Foxy said:

ydoethur said:

Anorak said:

Thread for Grabcoque, in the hope of arresting his maritime derangement: https://twitter.com/ShipBrief/status/1080406268215476224

He's certainly been all at sea this morning.

Holed below the waterline...

He's certainly handed his credibility over on a plate. It's been riveting though.

The puns just roll on, roll off.....

You're ramping things up...

But this ferry pun could be terminal.

Nah. It’s the herald of free enterprise

That one merits astern rebuke.

I’d make you a marchioness if you’d change your vote

Anorak said:

Off the chart mental (Lilico, that is!)
https://twitter.com/andrew_lilico/status/1080446162962911232

It depresses me that Andrew is so well thought of, since (as I've gone off about before on here, possibly more than once) he doesn't understand numbers.

david_herdson said:

Anorak said:

Off the chart mental (Lilico, that is!)
https://twitter.com/andrew_lilico/status/1080446162962911232

Not especially so (this is from 2016 but things won't have changed that much):

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/study-finds-uk-is-second-most-powerful-country-in-the-world/

1) Take the numbers in that table
2) Cut-and-paste them into Excel
3) Do a bar chart.

Then have a think about whether their cutoff points were reasonable.

ydoethur said:

Anorak said:

david_herdson said:

Anorak said:

Off the chart mental (Lilico, that is!)
https://twitter.com/andrew_lilico/status/1080446162962911232

Not especially so (this is from 2016 but things won't have changed that much):

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/study-finds-uk-is-second-most-powerful-country-in-the-world/

"Only 2 global powers". I give you China, which demolishes his argument all on its own. Also arguably Russia and France.

The argument is that for all the size of China's military it doesn't have the capability to deploy it outside the immediate area. Britain does. Therefore Britain can act globally and China only regionally.

You're confusing Global Power with Global Military Power.

ydoethur said:

Charles said:

ydoethur said:

Charles said:

MarqueeMark said:

ydoethur said:

MarqueeMark said:

ydoethur said:

Foxy said:

ydoethur said:

Anorak said:

Thread for Grabcoque, in the hope of arresting his maritime derangement: https://twitter.com/ShipBrief/status/1080406268215476224

He's certainly been all at sea this morning.

Holed below the waterline...

He's certainly handed his credibility over on a plate. It's been riveting though.

The puns just roll on, roll off.....

You're ramping things up...

But this ferry pun could be terminal.

Nah. It’s the herald of free enterprise

That one merits astern rebuke.

I’d make you a marchioness if you’d change your vote

My goodness, you are sinking to some titanic clangers this afternoon.

I think you're Lusing it, Tania.

eek said:

Theuniondivvie said:

What a pr**k.

https://twitter.com/ColinYeo1/status/1080452033180848128

The difference between what is an economic migrant and a refugee seems to be far more complex than I would have thought it was. Surely someone sat anywhere in Europe has already successfully fled the persecution they were fleeing...

The prickish aspect is that the complexities shouldn't even be considered just to encourager les autres, particularly in the context of this kind of crap currying favour with other pricks who may help his leadership bid.

edmundintokyo said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

edmundintokyo said:

Back on the Dem side, Harry Enten rated the various presidential options compared to a theoretical generic candidate:

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/01/02/politics/democrats-2020-electability-elizabeth-warren-amy-klobuchar-sherrod-brown/index.html?utm_medium=social&utm_term=image&utm_content=2019-01-02T12:31:03&utm_source=twCNNp


Amy Klobuchar: +13
Sherrod Brown: +12
Kirsten Gillibrand,: +5
Beto O'Rourke: +3
Bernie Sanders: -3
Elizabeth Warren: -12

So, lump on Elizabeth Warren?

I am yet to understand a single sort of voter who did not vote for Clinton but would vote for Warren, that would not do so for the generic Democrat.

Warren has this whole anti-corporatist thing, whereas one of Hillary's problems was that she was thought to be corrupt for trousering humungous speaking fees from banks. These were some of the people Trump was aiming for with the "crooked Hillary" line and by saying "Bernie Sanders" a lot, and he definitely got some while others abstained, so there's definitely a constituency there. However, it's complicated by an intersectional turf war between Warren and the Bernie Bro's.

OK, thanks. I *sort* of see it. I doubt it is enough though.

viewcode said:

ydoethur said:

Charles said:

ydoethur said:

Charles said:

MarqueeMark said:

ydoethur said:

MarqueeMark said:

ydoethur said:

Foxy said:

ydoethur said:

Anorak said:

Thread for Grabcoque, in the hope of arresting his maritime derangement: https://twitter.com/ShipBrief/status/1080406268215476224

He's certainly been all at sea this morning.

Holed below the waterline...

He's certainly handed his credibility over on a plate. It's been riveting though.

The puns just roll on, roll off.....

You're ramping things up...

But this ferry pun could be terminal.

Nah. It’s the herald of free enterprise

That one merits astern rebuke.

I’d make you a marchioness if you’d change your vote

My goodness, you are sinking to some titanic clangers this afternoon.

I think you're Lusing it, Tania.

I suggest that this exchange has hit the iceberg already. And sunk. Enough.

TheWhiteRabbit said:

eek said:

Theuniondivvie said:

What a pr**k.

https://twitter.com/ColinYeo1/status/1080452033180848128

The difference between what is an economic migrant and a refugee seems to be far more complex than I would have thought it was. Surely someone sat anywhere in Europe has already successfully fled the persecution they were fleeing...

Yes, you are "required" to seek asylum in the first safe country.

The question is, what happens if you don't.

Then surely as you cross the border from say Hungary to Austria you move from being a refugee to an economic migrant.

viewcode said:

ydoethur said:

Charles said:

ydoethur said:

Charles said:

MarqueeMark said:

ydoethur said:

MarqueeMark said:

ydoethur said:

Foxy said:

ydoethur said:

Anorak said:

Thread for Grabcoque, in the hope of arresting his maritime derangement: https://twitter.com/ShipBrief/status/1080406268215476224

He's certainly been all at sea this morning.

Holed below the waterline...

He's certainly handed his credibility over on a plate. It's been riveting though.

The puns just roll on, roll off.....

You're ramping things up...

But this ferry pun could be terminal.

Nah. It’s the herald of free enterprise

That one merits astern rebuke.

I’d make you a marchioness if you’d change your vote

My goodness, you are sinking to some titanic clangers this afternoon.

I think you're Lusing it, Tania.

That was a bold effort, but it still sank without a trace.

TheWhiteRabbit said:

eek said:

Theuniondivvie said:

What a pr**k.

https://twitter.com/ColinYeo1/status/1080452033180848128

The difference between what is an economic migrant and a refugee seems to be far more complex than I would have thought it was. Surely someone sat anywhere in Europe has already successfully fled the persecution they were fleeing...

Yes, you are "required" to seek asylum in the first safe country.

The question is, what happens if you don't.

I don't think that's right? Someone mentioned the Dublin Convention the other day but it didn't seem to be about requirements for asylum seekers - what it said was that a country where you do request asylum is within its rights to shunt you back to a previous safe country that you've passed through. But that's a statement about responsibilities for states, not responsibilities for asylum seekers.

IanB2 said:

viewcode said:

ydoethur said:

Charles said:

ydoethur said:

Charles said:

MarqueeMark said:

ydoethur said:

MarqueeMark said:

ydoethur said:

Foxy said:

ydoethur said:

Anorak said:

Thread for Grabcoque, in the hope of arresting his maritime derangement: https://twitter.com/ShipBrief/status/1080406268215476224

He's certainly been all at sea this morning.

Holed below the waterline...

He's certainly handed his credibility over on a plate. It's been riveting though.

The puns just roll on, roll off.....

You're ramping things up...

But this ferry pun could be terminal.

Nah. It’s the herald of free enterprise

That one merits astern rebuke.

I’d make you a marchioness if you’d change your vote

My goodness, you are sinking to some titanic clangers this afternoon.

I think you're Lusing it, Tania.

I suggest that this exchange has hit the iceberg already. And sunk. Enough.

Quite - I'm going to give it a wide berth from now on.

SandyRentool said:

All of these boat puns are fun(nel)

Sorry, it is the best I can manage.

Maybe I could do better after a couple of glasses of port.

That was definitely a rum effort.

Income tax return done and (small amount of) money sent!

ydoethur said:

Anorak said:

ydoethur said:

Anorak said:

david_herdson said:

Anorak said:

Off the chart mental (Lilico, that is!)
https://twitter.com/andrew_lilico/status/1080446162962911232

Not especially so (this is from 2016 but things won't have changed that much):

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/study-finds-uk-is-second-most-powerful-country-in-the-world/

"Only 2 global powers". I give you China, which demolishes his argument all on its own. Also arguably Russia and France.

The argument is that for all the size of China's military it doesn't have the capability to deploy it outside the immediate area. Britain does. Therefore Britain can act globally and China only regionally.

You're confusing Global Power with Global Military Power.

That's what we're talking about, if you read the original post.

Fair. A revealing window into the Brexiteer mentality, nevertheless.

viewcode said:

Anorak said:

Stupid question (but I've been away for the last 2 weeks): why do we suddenly need loads of extra ferry capacity, when the existing capacity serves our needs perfectly well? What aspect of No Deal means we are suddenly importing and exporting more stuff?

It's not the "more stuff", it's the "longer time to process it due to increased bureaucracy", which means a port can handle fewer ships a day.

As I pointed out to LuckyGuy1983 the other day, mitigation processes are being put into place and hopefully thay will cope and a no-deal Brexit will be undramatic (the problems will be un-newsworthy IMHO). But at the moment uncertainty rules.

No Deal Brexit effects will be highly newsworthy. However Corbyn seems to be manoeuvring towards a May Deal with figleaves, to preempt any No Brexit move by his party. So I guess May's Deal is more likely to happen. And, frankly, the only sensible form of No Deal planning is to make sure you have a Deal. Whatever its faults, May's Deal is a deal and it's available.

eek said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

eek said:

Theuniondivvie said:

What a pr**k.

https://twitter.com/ColinYeo1/status/1080452033180848128

The difference between what is an economic migrant and a refugee seems to be far more complex than I would have thought it was. Surely someone sat anywhere in Europe has already successfully fled the persecution they were fleeing...

Yes, you are "required" to seek asylum in the first safe country.

The question is, what happens if you don't.

Then surely as you cross the border from say Hungary to Austria you move from being a refugee to an economic migrant.

No, you don't stop being a refugee in either law or common sense; You'd still be a refugee if you were living in Hungary, and you don't stop being a refugee by leaving Hungary. I guess in plain English you could say you're an economic migrant as well as a refugee, but note that there are non-economic reasons to want to be in a different "safe" country; For instance, wanting to be somewhere where you speak the language, or where you have friends or family, isn't economic. (Although those things could in turn have economic motivations.)

Nigelb said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

Nigelb said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

edmundintokyo said:

Back on the Dem side, Harry Enten rated the various presidential options compared to a theoretical generic candidate:

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/01/02/politics/democrats-2020-electability-elizabeth-warren-amy-klobuchar-sherrod-brown/index.html?utm_medium=social&utm_term=image&utm_content=2019-01-02T12:31:03&utm_source=twCNNp


Amy Klobuchar: +13
Sherrod Brown: +12
Kirsten Gillibrand,: +5
Beto O'Rourke: +3
Bernie Sanders: -3
Elizabeth Warren: -12

So, lump on Elizabeth Warren?

At this stage it is all about name recognition which is why the septuagenarians on both sides who fought the time before, and the time before that, are getting all the attention here -- Warren, Biden and, yes, Mitt Romney.

Except that people actually quite like Biden.

Biden has twice run for POTUS and flopped both times. He is also now 76 years old.

Some people take a while to mature...

He was (a perhaps surprising) success as vice president, is widely liked within the Democratic party, and (for now) polls better than anyone against Trump.

Whether he'll even run is an interesting question, but as a candidate, he is way ahead of either Warren or Romney.

Yes, and indeed Biden, like all the others, is said to be pondering a run, but at the moment he wins on name recognition because he was Obama's Vice-President for eight years. It is like the next Tory leader polls show that people have seen Boris and JRM on the telly.

Look back four years at how many GOP runners made the primaries, and the Democrats are not even at that stage yet. The chances are the eventual candidate will be someone we'd not recognise. You could have named your own price for Trump.

Afternoon all

Belated New Year greetings.

As a diversion from the dreadful puns, something slightly more serious:

https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/declassified-files-dublin-now-lagging-six-years-behind-uk-in-revealing-state-papers-1-8751795

Who gets to write the history ? Answer, the side which gets its version out there first.

Theuniondivvie said:

Charles said:

Theuniondivvie said:

What a pr**k.

https://twitter.com/ColinYeo1/status/1080452033180848128

Would you also say that about @Cyclefree

She made the same point yesterday (and I agree with her)

We have a moral duty to assist asylum seekers. We may be interested in economic migrants. We are not interested in law breakers.

Are any of those views unethical?

It does not help to conflate the categories

Is Cyclefree a candidate for leadership of the Tory party? Did she say that the UK should be able to reject asylum applications out of hand without any due process, regardless of the circumstances of the case?

She would be a compelling candidate (to the extent that desiring the job doesn’t automatically make you unqualified)

She said that all asylum seekers who arrived from France should be rejected. Presumably after a process.

DecrepitJohnL said:

Yes, and indeed Biden, like all the others, is said to be pondering a run, but at the moment he wins on name recognition because he was Obama's Vice-President for eight years. It is like the next Tory leader polls show that people have seen Boris and JRM on the telly.

Look back four years at how many GOP runners made the primaries, and the Democrats are not even at that stage yet. The chances are the eventual candidate will be someone we'd not recognise. You could have named your own price for Trump.

True, but his run was exceptional in many ways.

For 2016: Clinton lead in every poll with her name in throughout early 2015 and was presumptive nominee in the media.
For 2012: Romney was a widely discussed candidate and led many polls in early 2011 (interestingly so did Trump in a couple of polls, though he didn't in early 2015).
For 2008: McCain was in the top 2 or 3 of most polls in Jan 2007 and lead some.
For 2008: Obama likewise was second in most polls and a widely discussed candidate in the press.

This time the nationwide leader for the Dem polls is Biden - maybe he should be favourite over Harris/O'Rourke (definitely over the latter, imho). The other thing which jumps out at me is that Harris is polling surprisingly low in many polls, basically the same as Warren (who perhaps deserves more credit than she's getting, though I'm not convinced since name recognition surely makes Harris' high single figures more impressive).

Primaries certainly aren't easy to predict, even at this point, but the eventual winner has tended to be very much on the radar by this point.

All figures from the relevant Wikipedia pages.

DecrepitJohnL said:

Good luck but I fear ending up with a dozen or more losers, even if I have the winner. Last time, Hillary scared off the other challengers as she had it sewn up. This year it will be more like the Republicans were four years ago, with more than a dozen fighting it out.

Yes, I thought about the arb 40 vs 25 but it doesn't compute. At first sight it looks juicy but when you factor in the interest cost on the cash you're tying up, no, not a goer. Only way to make it work is if you build up a portfolio of lays, so then it becomes a 'free' addition to that. My knowledge of American politics is better than the man on the Clapham omnibus but it's not good enough for me to contemplate doing that at this stage. Like you say, the Dem nomination will likely be a dog fight with much fighting and many a dog.

stodge said:

Afternoon all

Belated New Year greetings.

As a diversion from the dreadful puns, something slightly more serious:

https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/declassified-files-dublin-now-lagging-six-years-behind-uk-in-revealing-state-papers-1-8751795

Who gets to write the history ? Answer, the side which gets its version out there first.

A diversion from the dreadful puns? I'll have you know, Sir, these puns are a diversion from the dread of reality!

Interesting "thinking" by ambitious ministers on Britain's global post Brexit ole. The latest from Hunt is that the UK will be the invisible chain linking the world's liberal democracies. After Chris Williamson's global moral leadership got laughed out of court perhaps invisible is more realistic, albeit a synonym for non-existent.

https://twitter.com/foreignoffice/status/1080416493211389952

Nitpick question: is Singapore actually a liberal democracy?

Anorak said:

david_herdson said:

Anorak said:

Off the chart mental (Lilico, that is!)
https://twitter.com/andrew_lilico/status/1080446162962911232

Not especially so (this is from 2016 but things won't have changed that much):

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/study-finds-uk-is-second-most-powerful-country-in-the-world/

"Only 2 global powers". I give you China, which demolishes his argument all on its own. Also arguably Russia and France.

In many ways, China is a superpower, and in other ways it is developing as one. However, there is an argument that as an embryonic superpower, it's still treading warily in establishing a global footprint - how often do they send ships into the Atlantic? As such, it is arguably not yet a truly global power in a way that Britain, despite its smaller resources and economy, is.

Now, that's not an argument that I'd push too far but there is some merit to it.

Nigel_Foremain said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

viewcode said:

ydoethur said:

Charles said:

ydoethur said:

Charles said:

MarqueeMark said:

ydoethur said:

MarqueeMark said:

ydoethur said:

Foxy said:

ydoethur said:

Anorak said:

Thread for Grabcoque, in the hope of arresting his maritime derangement: https://twitter.com/ShipBrief/status/1080406268215476224

He's certainly been all at sea this morning.

Holed below the waterline...

He's certainly handed his credibility over on a plate. It's been riveting though.

The puns just roll on, roll off.....

You're ramping things up...

But this ferry pun could be terminal.

Nah. It’s the herald of free enterprise

That one merits astern rebuke.

I’d make you a marchioness if you’d change your vote

My goodness, you are sinking to some titanic clangers this afternoon.

I think you're Lusing it, Tania.

I think we need to give all these watery puns Das Boot!

I think you should all take a bow

Can't we just give them a wake?