politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Kamala Harris – my WH2020 66/1 pick from two years ago – set t
Comments
-
Think that is a South African wine labelTheuniondivvie said:Bet only gets tasty when Kamala becomes KAMALA.
0 -
If anyone is still saying that no one is talking about Brexit except geeks they must be hiding in cellars. I went out for lunch with some advertising friends and they became quite heated. I know the word cu*ts is now de rigueur after it's multiple use in Golden Globes winner 'Favourites' but the number of public figures (and not so public) earning the epithet was alarming.0
-
I dunno, "you must have no mates" is such a cutting comment.Theuniondivvie said:A plaintively Tobyoung-esque cry of 'I just don't understand why people think I'm a prick.'
https://twitter.com/JonnElledge/status/10833936605012828170 -
Advertising execs != normal folk.Roger said:If anyone is still saying that no one is talking about Brexit except geeks they must be hiding in cellars. I went out for lunch with some advertising friends and they became quite heated. I know the word cu*ts is now acceptable after it's multiple use in Golden Globes winner 'Favourites' but the number of public figures (and not so public) earning the epithet was alarming.
0 -
There are a few of us !!!!Anazina said:
Of course not – you are one the sane few GBig_G_NorthWales said:
I hope I am not !!!Anazina said:
In fairness, they are mostly certifiable so it's not really fair to judge them by any normal yardstick.rottenborough said:"Japanese PM Shinzo Abe says 'whole world' wants the UK to avoid a no-deal Brexit"
Apart from the Tory party membership that is.
0 -
Roger youve had that noble title on PB for years :-)Roger said:If anyone is still saying that no one is talking about Brexit except geeks they must be hiding in cellars. I went out for lunch with some advertising friends and they became quite heated. I know the word cu*ts is now acceptable after it's multiple use in Golden Globes winner 'Favourites' but the number of public figures (and not so public) earning the epithet was alarming.
0 -
Even so, it's another example of how some of these right-wingers like "free speech" right up until the moment someone says something mean about them.BannedInParis said:
I dunno, "you must have no mates" is such a cutting comment.Theuniondivvie said:A plaintively Tobyoung-esque cry of 'I just don't understand why people think I'm a prick.'
https://twitter.com/JonnElledge/status/10833936605012828170 -
The 35 year minimum age limit is silly.Sandpit said:
Ocasio-Cortez is ineligible for 2020, and I think 2024 as well. Too young.Pulpstar said:
He's not made enough noises to run yet. Ocasio-Cortez might be a buzz candidate you could perhaps sell in the low hundreds at some point, maybe.rottenborough said:
Joe Kennedy is 150.kinabalu said:
Seconded. I really hope they do. If they don't, I mean, call themselves a spread betting firm?Sandpit said:Ripe market for a spread bet, come on Sporting Index and put one up!
They are noticeably less adventurous on politics these days. I remember when you could get markets such as how many days would so & so survive as such & such.
I know all the arguments about too soon etc . But will he stand aside and watch Beto (only a few years older) run?
Both need to run for the senate first I think though.
You can have wise, adept, talented, emotionally intelligent 34-year-olds.
And you can have stupid, incompetent, talentless, emotionally retarded 72-year-olds.
https://goo.gl/images/GzNcSq0 -
Well it keeps NI and the UK in the “customs territory” and that should be the emphasis. Whatever situation GB signs up to should apply to NI. De-emphasise the certain rules bit. Then it's only the ERG loons that she needs to worry about.grabcocque said:
The DUP wanted Brexit to cleave NI away from the EU and Ireland and align it more closely with rUK. What the backstop does, and by extension, any future trading arrangement that can replace it, is almost exactly the opposite.TOPPING said:
Yes I have been pondering that. Not sure what exactly would do it. Not another bung. A post in government? Too extreme a move?Richard_Nabavi said:What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
Honestly I think the DUP made a massive miscalculation supporting Brexit, are aware of it, but are happy to let May be the fall guy.0 -
I dont think Corbyns in his seventies yetAnazina said:
The 35 year minimum age limit is silly.Sandpit said:
Ocasio-Cortez is ineligible for 2020, and I think 2024 as well. Too young.Pulpstar said:
He's not made enough noises to run yet. Ocasio-Cortez might be a buzz candidate you could perhaps sell in the low hundreds at some point, maybe.rottenborough said:
Joe Kennedy is 150.kinabalu said:
Seconded. I really hope they do. If they don't, I mean, call themselves a spread betting firm?Sandpit said:Ripe market for a spread bet, come on Sporting Index and put one up!
They are noticeably less adventurous on politics these days. I remember when you could get markets such as how many days would so & so survive as such & such.
I know all the arguments about too soon etc . But will he stand aside and watch Beto (only a few years older) run?
Both need to run for the senate first I think though.
You can have wise, adept, talented, emotionally intelligent 34-year-olds.
And you can have stupid, incompetent, talentless, emotionally retarded 72-year-olds.
https://goo.gl/images/GzNcSq0 -
Jonathan Powell, who knows DUP well after years of negotiating NI peace, says they have to be taken literally. When they say 'no' they mean 'no'.TOPPING said:
Yes I have been pondering that. Not sure what exactly would do it. Not another bung. A post in government? Too extreme a move?Richard_Nabavi said:What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
Nothing on earth will move them now, seems to be his point.0 -
Don't knock it as an insult, the Tobster got a whole tranche of whiny material out of it.BannedInParis said:
I dunno, "you must have no mates" is such a cutting comment.Theuniondivvie said:A plaintively Tobyoung-esque cry of 'I just don't understand why people think I'm a prick.'
https://twitter.com/JonnElledge/status/1083393660501282817
0 -
Cameron must be one of the best assignments for the VIP protection squad. Much easier to work with a former minister who does very little work and travel, than a current one who's got 20 meetings a day from 6am until midnight.FrancisUrquhart said:Being Dave's bodyguard sounds like a decent gig...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6577765/David-Cameron-Costa-Rica-Theresa-Mays-Government-sent-Brexit-meltdown.html0 -
Well Soubry and Phillips are certainly pricks (or whatever the female equivalent is.. I think Roger might be able to help with that one) and are worthy of nothing but contempt. I would suggest O'Neill consider their rage a badge of honour and a sign he is doing something right. Hopefully both of them will soon be out of public office for good.Theuniondivvie said:A plaintively Tobyoung-esque cry of 'I just don't understand why people think I'm a prick.'
https://twitter.com/JonnElledge/status/10833936605012828170 -
As a left-field idea to break the deadlock in Parliament can anyone tell me why the following wouldn't work:
Request an extension of Article 50 until the end of 2020 as an alternative to a transition but on the understanding that we park the backstop and instead immediately start negotiating the future trade agreement as would be negotiated during a transition.
That removes the cliff edge for now, deals with the Irish border for now, continues payments for now while allowing talks to get onto where they belong. And if a future trade agreement can be reached in that time then the Irish backstop which is preventing Parliament from ratifying the deal becomes moot.
Of course it requires unanimity from the other 27 but they could accept it as preferable to no deal.0 -
He's just won Costa-Rica's Walrus of the YearFrancisUrquhart said:Being Dave's bodyguard sounds like a decent gig...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6577765/David-Cameron-Costa-Rica-Theresa-Mays-Government-sent-Brexit-meltdown.html0 -
I was particularly delighted by the resurrection of the term "c*nt-struck"......Roger said:If anyone is still saying that no one is talking about Brexit except geeks they must be hiding in cellars. I went out for lunch with some advertising friends and they became quite heated. I know the word cu*ts is now de rigueur after it's multiple use in Golden Globes winner 'Favourites' but the number of public figures (and not so public) earning the epithet was alarming.
0 -
... apart from a few loopy Tory MPs and, it appears, most of the Tory party members.Big_G_NorthWales said:Japanese PM just said from no 10 that Japan is in full support of the WDA agreed betweenTM and the EU and strongly opposes no deal, as indeed does the whole world
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/04/most-tory-members-would-choose-no-deal-over-may-brexit-plan0 -
Richard_Nabavi said:
What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
Sod the DUP, what she needs is Labour to abstain, in return for a spring GE.0 -
Yeah, an extension/temporary revocation of Article 50 is I think most likely. It suits almost everyone's interests to kick the can down the road: May because it means she doesn't have to perform a full U-turn (yet), Corbyn because he doesn't have to "get off the fence" (yet), the EU because after all the status quo is their preferred option.Philip_Thompson said:As a left-field idea to break the deadlock in Parliament can anyone tell me why the following wouldn't work:
Request an extension of Article 50 until the end of 2020 as an alternative to a transition but on the understanding that we park the backstop and instead immediately start negotiating the future trade agreement as would be negotiated during a transition.
That removes the cliff edge for now, deals with the Irish border for now, continues payments for now while allowing talks to get onto where they belong. And if a future trade agreement can be reached in that time then the Irish backstop which is preventing Parliament from ratifying the deal becomes moot.
Of course it requires unanimity from the other 27 but they could accept it as preferable to no deal.0 -
No, Gordon Brown was more incompetent, with his fatal combination of being a complete control freak but also incapable of making decisions.DavidL said:
No more baffling than her inability to work with any other interested group from the opposition (any of them), to the ERG, to remainers in her own party, to pretty much everyone in her cabinet as constituted from time to time. She is an earnest, diligent, honest person driven by her perception of the national interest but I honestly cannot recall a more incompetent politician as PM in my lifetime. Its spectacular in its awfulness.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, it is baffling.grabcocque said:
You know, May's failure to keep the DUP on board throughout this process is the single most baffling part of her behaviour to me.Richard_Nabavi said:What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
* You rely on them for a functional majority
* They're good friends and allies with your fractious Brexiteer wing
* They're legendarily stubborn
* Betrayal narratives are their bread and butter
If there's one group you want inside the tent pissing out, it's them.
In normal circumstances, Theresa May would be OK, but she is hopelessly unsuited to a hung parliament, let alone a hung parliament trying to implement the impossible. What is needed in a hung parliament is a PM who can sustain a subtle combination of cajolery, flattery, ego-stroking, and inspiration of loyalty (Harold Wilson fitted the bill perfectly). Theresa May is the exact opposite - inflexible, unclubbable, cold.0 -
The backstop exists precisely because they don't trust that we'll have negotiated an FTA by 2020.Philip_Thompson said:As a left-field idea to break the deadlock in Parliament can anyone tell me why the following wouldn't work:
Request an extension of Article 50 until the end of 2020 as an alternative to a transition but on the understanding that we park the backstop and instead immediately start negotiating the future trade agreement as would be negotiated during a transition.
That removes the cliff edge for now, deals with the Irish border for now, continues payments for now while allowing talks to get onto where they belong. And if a future trade agreement can be reached in that time then the Irish backstop which is preventing Parliament from ratifying the deal becomes moot.
Of course it requires unanimity from the other 27 but they could accept it as preferable to no deal.0 -
I doubt that's within her power to grant under the terms of the FTPA.Benpointer said:Richard_Nabavi said:What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
Sod the DUP, what she needs is Labour to abstain, in return for a spring GE.0 -
Forced extradition to ROI of all Catholics, gays and liberals?TOPPING said:
Yes I have been pondering that. Not sure what exactly would do it. Not another bung. A post in government? Too extreme a move?Richard_Nabavi said:What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
0 -
Calling an election is no longer the automatic gift of the PM though.Benpointer said:Richard_Nabavi said:What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
Sod the DUP, what she needs is Labour to abstain, in return for a spring GE.0 -
I thought you approved of independent-minded parliamentarians.Richard_Tyndall said:
Well Soubry and Phillips are certainly pricks (or whatever the female equivalent is.. I think Roger might be able to help with that one) and are worthy of nothing but contempt. I would suggest O'Neill consider their rage a badge of honour and a sign he is doing something right. Hopefully both of them will soon be out of public office for good.Theuniondivvie said:A plaintively Tobyoung-esque cry of 'I just don't understand why people think I'm a prick.'
https://twitter.com/JonnElledge/status/10833936605012828170 -
May is Gordo in a skirt.Richard_Nabavi said:
No, Gordon Brown was more incompetent, with his fatal combination of being a complete control freak but also incapable of making decisions.DavidL said:
No more baffling than her inability to work with any other interested group from the opposition (any of them), to the ERG, to remainers in her own party, to pretty much everyone in her cabinet as constituted from time to time. She is an earnest, diligent, honest person driven by her perception of the national interest but I honestly cannot recall a more incompetent politician as PM in my lifetime. Its spectacular in its awfulness.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, it is baffling.grabcocque said:
You know, May's failure to keep the DUP on board throughout this process is the single most baffling part of her behaviour to me.Richard_Nabavi said:What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
* You rely on them for a functional majority
* They're good friends and allies with your fractious Brexiteer wing
* They're legendarily stubborn
* Betrayal narratives are their bread and butter
If there's one group you want inside the tent pissing out, it's them.
In normal circumstances, Theresa May would be OK, but she is hopelessly unsuited to a hung parliament, let alone a hung parliament trying to implement the impossible. What is needed in a hung parliament is a PM who can sustain a subtle combination of cajolery, flattery, ego-stroking, and inspiration of loyalty (Harold Wilson fitted the bill perfectly). Theresa May is the exact opposite - inflexible, unclubbable, cold.
Their personalities are remarkably similar.0 -
I expect Swire, Elphicke, Hayes to wobble to Yes.grabcocque said:In addition to the 71 nailed on to vote No, these are the wobblers to watch, according to ConHome: (* means already wobbled)
Might wobble to Yes
John Baron
Guto Bebb
David Evennett
Michael Fallon*George Freeman
Justine Greening
Rob Halfon*Trudy Harrison
Sir John Hayes
Gordon Henderson
Pauline Latham*Sir Edward Leigh
Sir Greg Knight
Anne Main
Scott Mann
Stephen McPartland
Nigel Mills
Damien Moore
Matthew Offord
Neil Parish
Sir Mike Penning
Royston Smith
Anna Soubry
Bob Stewart
Sir Robert Syms
Derek Thomas
Craig Tracey
Giles Watling
John Whittingdale
Sarah Wollaston
William Wragg
Might wobble to No
Robert Courts
Charlie Elphicke
Alister Jack
John Lamont
Phillip Lee
Stephen Metcalfe
Grant Shapps
Hugo Swire
Mike Wood0 -
I do. It is why I admire Clarke and Grieve for example. My dislike of Soubry is because she is an arrogant and offensive human being not because she is or is not independent. She fails to represent her own constituents and is all too willing to take offense when anyone disagrees with her. Phillips is of a similar model and equally unlikeable.williamglenn said:
I thought you approved of independent-minded parliamentarians.Richard_Tyndall said:
Well Soubry and Phillips are certainly pricks (or whatever the female equivalent is.. I think Roger might be able to help with that one) and are worthy of nothing but contempt. I would suggest O'Neill consider their rage a badge of honour and a sign he is doing something right. Hopefully both of them will soon be out of public office for good.Theuniondivvie said:A plaintively Tobyoung-esque cry of 'I just don't understand why people think I'm a prick.'
https://twitter.com/JonnElledge/status/10833936605012828170 -
I suppose there's also a parallel between Hill/Timothy and McBride and the forces of hell.Anazina said:
May is Gordo in a skirt.Richard_Nabavi said:
No, Gordon Brown was more incompetent, with his fatal combination of being a complete control freak but also incapable of making decisions.DavidL said:
No more baffling than her inability to work with any other interested group from the opposition (any of them), to the ERG, to remainers in her own party, to pretty much everyone in her cabinet as constituted from time to time. She is an earnest, diligent, honest person driven by her perception of the national interest but I honestly cannot recall a more incompetent politician as PM in my lifetime. Its spectacular in its awfulness.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, it is baffling.grabcocque said:
You know, May's failure to keep the DUP on board throughout this process is the single most baffling part of her behaviour to me.Richard_Nabavi said:What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
* You rely on them for a functional majority
* They're good friends and allies with your fractious Brexiteer wing
* They're legendarily stubborn
* Betrayal narratives are their bread and butter
If there's one group you want inside the tent pissing out, it's them.
In normal circumstances, Theresa May would be OK, but she is hopelessly unsuited to a hung parliament, let alone a hung parliament trying to implement the impossible. What is needed in a hung parliament is a PM who can sustain a subtle combination of cajolery, flattery, ego-stroking, and inspiration of loyalty (Harold Wilson fitted the bill perfectly). Theresa May is the exact opposite - inflexible, unclubbable, cold.
Their personalities are remarkably similar.0 -
Left field idea; Divide the UK into several regions and allow each to hold their own referendum. Those who want to stay in the EU-London and Scotland for example stay while places like Stoke Hartlepool Thanet and Wales form their own union. They can set up their own obesity clinics for examplePhilip_Thompson said:As a left-field idea to break the deadlock in Parliament can anyone tell me why the following wouldn't work:
Request an extension of Article 50 until the end of 2020 as an alternative to a transition but on the understanding that we park the backstop and instead immediately start negotiating the future trade agreement as would be negotiated during a transition.
That removes the cliff edge for now, deals with the Irish border for now, continues payments for now while allowing talks to get onto where they belong. And if a future trade agreement can be reached in that time then the Irish backstop which is preventing Parliament from ratifying the deal becomes moot.
Of course it requires unanimity from the other 27 but they could accept it as preferable to no deal.0 -
Well for a start:Philip_Thompson said:As a left-field idea to break the deadlock in Parliament can anyone tell me why the following wouldn't work:
Request an extension of Article 50 until the end of 2020 as an alternative to a transition but on the understanding that we park the backstop and instead immediately start negotiating the future trade agreement as would be negotiated during a transition.
That removes the cliff edge for now, deals with the Irish border for now, continues payments for now while allowing talks to get onto where they belong. And if a future trade agreement can be reached in that time then the Irish backstop which is preventing Parliament from ratifying the deal becomes moot.
Of course it requires unanimity from the other 27 but they could accept it as preferable to no deal.
1. The EU would have to change their stance that we cannot negotiate the new trade agreement while we're in the EU.
2. The EU would have to change their stance that they want a no Irish hard border backstop befor the negitiate a trade deal.
3. We'd have to elect MEPs in May (not impossible but hardly desirable if we're leaving).
4. This government's track record of negotiating anything gives zero confidence they could negotiate a new trade agreement any way.0 -
Great idea.Roger said:
Left field idea; Divide the UK into several regions and allow each to hold their own referendum. Those who want to stay in the EU-London and Scotland for example stay while places like Stoke Hartlepool Thanet and Wales form their own union. They can set up their own obesity clinics for examplePhilip_Thompson said:As a left-field idea to break the deadlock in Parliament can anyone tell me why the following wouldn't work:
Request an extension of Article 50 until the end of 2020 as an alternative to a transition but on the understanding that we park the backstop and instead immediately start negotiating the future trade agreement as would be negotiated during a transition.
That removes the cliff edge for now, deals with the Irish border for now, continues payments for now while allowing talks to get onto where they belong. And if a future trade agreement can be reached in that time then the Irish backstop which is preventing Parliament from ratifying the deal becomes moot.
Of course it requires unanimity from the other 27 but they could accept it as preferable to no deal.
I'd just like to point out that Dorset is mainly populated (well, ok financed) by ex-Londoners now so should be considered part of the Greater London region in those refs.0 -
Yes but the A50 deadline would still be there. We'd still exist within the same situation as we do now. Come 31/12/20 we either seek another extension (which they can veto), or no deal (as we might now), or enter the backstop (by ratifying this deal that's still there), or we have a deal in which case its moot.Stereotomy said:
The backstop exists precisely because they don't trust that we'll have negotiated an FTA by 2020.Philip_Thompson said:As a left-field idea to break the deadlock in Parliament can anyone tell me why the following wouldn't work:
Request an extension of Article 50 until the end of 2020 as an alternative to a transition but on the understanding that we park the backstop and instead immediately start negotiating the future trade agreement as would be negotiated during a transition.
That removes the cliff edge for now, deals with the Irish border for now, continues payments for now while allowing talks to get onto where they belong. And if a future trade agreement can be reached in that time then the Irish backstop which is preventing Parliament from ratifying the deal becomes moot.
Of course it requires unanimity from the other 27 but they could accept it as preferable to no deal.0 -
That's the main reason I called her a pound shop Gordon Brown way back in 2016.williamglenn said:
I suppose there's also a parallel between Hill/Timothy and McBride and the forces of hell.
Hill and Timothy were shameless bullies.
Arrogant too.0 -
Richard, that is an excellent and entirely fair depiction.Richard_Nabavi said:
No, Gordon Brown was more incompetent, with his fatal combination of being a complete control freak but also incapable of making decisions.DavidL said:
No more baffling than her inability to work with any other interested group from the opposition (any of them), to the ERG, to remainers in her own party, to pretty much everyone in her cabinet as constituted from time to time. She is an earnest, diligent, honest person driven by her perception of the national interest but I honestly cannot recall a more incompetent politician as PM in my lifetime. Its spectacular in its awfulness.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, it is baffling.grabcocque said:
You know, May's failure to keep the DUP on board throughout this process is the single most baffling part of her behaviour to me.Richard_Nabavi said:What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
* You rely on them for a functional majority
* They're good friends and allies with your fractious Brexiteer wing
* They're legendarily stubborn
* Betrayal narratives are their bread and butter
If there's one group you want inside the tent pissing out, it's them.
In normal circumstances, Theresa May would be OK, but she is hopelessly unsuited to a hung parliament, let alone a hung parliament trying to implement the impossible. What is needed in a hung parliament is a PM who can sustain a subtle combination of cajolery, flattery, ego-stroking, and inspiration of loyalty (Harold Wilson fitted the bill perfectly). Theresa May is the exact opposite - inflexible, unclubbable, cold.
You should patent it.0 -
True, but she could get one approved with the backing of the cabinet and most of her MPs. Labour would obviously support one.Sandpit said:
Calling an election is no longer the automatic gift of the PM though.Benpointer said:Richard_Nabavi said:What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
Sod the DUP, what she needs is Labour to abstain, in return for a spring GE.
The incentive for the Tories would be: "Brexit is delivered and we have a new leader, Corbyn's a disaster, now let us get on with running the country again."0 -
As PM I agree that Gordon Brown is in a class of 1 for incompetence but my point was as a politician. There her failings are spectacular for exactly the reasons you have listed. Despite the present farce it is hard not to conclude the British people knew what the were doing when they denied May a majority. She would have been dangerous.Richard_Nabavi said:
No, Gordon Brown was more incompetent, with his fatal combination of being a complete control freak but also incapable of making decisions.DavidL said:
No more baffling than her inability to work with any other interested group from the opposition (any of them), to the ERG, to remainers in her own party, to pretty much everyone in her cabinet as constituted from time to time. She is an earnest, diligent, honest person driven by her perception of the national interest but I honestly cannot recall a more incompetent politician as PM in my lifetime. Its spectacular in its awfulness.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, it is baffling.grabcocque said:
You know, May's failure to keep the DUP on board throughout this process is the single most baffling part of her behaviour to me.Richard_Nabavi said:What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
* You rely on them for a functional majority
* They're good friends and allies with your fractious Brexiteer wing
* They're legendarily stubborn
* Betrayal narratives are their bread and butter
If there's one group you want inside the tent pissing out, it's them.
In normal circumstances, Theresa May would be OK, but she is hopelessly unsuited to a hung parliament, let alone a hung parliament trying to implement the impossible. What is needed in a hung parliament is a PM who can sustain a subtle combination of cajolery, flattery, ego-stroking, and inspiration of loyalty (Harold Wilson fitted the bill perfectly). Theresa May is the exact opposite - inflexible, unclubbable, cold.0 -
Hey, the Cotswolds voted Remain. Can we stay? We're pretty and our farm-produce is nice.Benpointer said:
Great idea.Roger said:
Left field idea; Divide the UK into several regions and allow each to hold their own referendum. Those who want to stay in the EU-London and Scotland for example stay while places like Stoke Hartlepool Thanet and Wales form their own union. They can set up their own obesity clinics for examplePhilip_Thompson said:As a left-field idea to break the deadlock in Parliament can anyone tell me why the following wouldn't work:
Request an extension of Article 50 until the end of 2020 as an alternative to a transition but on the understanding that we park the backstop and instead immediately start negotiating the future trade agreement as would be negotiated during a transition.
That removes the cliff edge for now, deals with the Irish border for now, continues payments for now while allowing talks to get onto where they belong. And if a future trade agreement can be reached in that time then the Irish backstop which is preventing Parliament from ratifying the deal becomes moot.
Of course it requires unanimity from the other 27 but they could accept it as preferable to no deal.
I'd just like to point out that Dorset is mainly populated (well, ok financed) by ex-Londoners now so should be considered part of the Greater London region in those refs.0 -
Take it further - make everyone become their own region. I could choose to allocate funds to defence (GB Defence plc, or other possible providers) and foreign aid (everyone else) as I chose. Mostly my region wouldn't have trouble implementing any referenda.Roger said:
Left field idea; Divide the UK into several regions and allow each to hold their own referendum. Those who want to stay in the EU-London and Scotland for example stay while places like Stoke Hartlepool Thanet and Wales form their own union. They can set up their own obesity clinics for examplePhilip_Thompson said:As a left-field idea to break the deadlock in Parliament can anyone tell me why the following wouldn't work:
Request an extension of Article 50 until the end of 2020 as an alternative to a transition but on the understanding that we park the backstop and instead immediately start negotiating the future trade agreement as would be negotiated during a transition.
That removes the cliff edge for now, deals with the Irish border for now, continues payments for now while allowing talks to get onto where they belong. And if a future trade agreement can be reached in that time then the Irish backstop which is preventing Parliament from ratifying the deal becomes moot.
Of course it requires unanimity from the other 27 but they could accept it as preferable to no deal.
@Mike great tip on Kamala Harris. Omnium funds went on Gabbard, and I feel that I've rather squandered them.0 -
What was the line back in the days of Ian Paisley about the government holding private shouts with the DUP?rottenborough said:
Jonathan Powell, who knows DUP well after years of negotiating NI peace, says they have to be taken literally. When they say 'no' they mean 'no'.TOPPING said:
Yes I have been pondering that. Not sure what exactly would do it. Not another bung. A post in government? Too extreme a move?Richard_Nabavi said:What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
Nothing on earth will move them now, seems to be his point.0 -
Good. The tide is starting to turn, but it’s too little, too late.Sean_F said:
I expect Swire, Elphicke, Hayes to wobble to Yes.grabcocque said:In addition to the 71 nailed on to vote No, these are the wobblers to watch, according to ConHome: (* means already wobbled)
Might wobble to Yes
John Baron
Guto Bebb
David Evennett
Michael Fallon*George Freeman
Justine Greening
Rob Halfon*Trudy Harrison
Sir John Hayes
Gordon Henderson
Pauline Latham*Sir Edward Leigh
Sir Greg Knight
Anne Main
Scott Mann
Stephen McPartland
Nigel Mills
Damien Moore
Matthew Offord
Neil Parish
Sir Mike Penning
Royston Smith
Anna Soubry
Bob Stewart
Sir Robert Syms
Derek Thomas
Craig Tracey
Giles Watling
John Whittingdale
Sarah Wollaston
William Wragg
Might wobble to No
Robert Courts
Charlie Elphicke
Alister Jack
John Lamont
Phillip Lee
Stephen Metcalfe
Grant Shapps
Hugo Swire
Mike Wood
I think most of the hard Leavers will eventually wake up and smell the coffee, unfortunately it will be many months after the votes, which could easily boomerang us straight back into Remain.
They will then blame someone else for their myopic stupidity and laziness.-1 -
I think May has been much nicer without a majority, but ineffectual.DavidL said:
As PM I agree that Gordon Brown is in a class of 1 for incompetence but my point was as a politician. There her failings are spectacular for exactly the reasons you have listed. Despite the present farce it is hard not to conclude the British people knew what the were doing when they denied May a majority. She would have been dangerous.Richard_Nabavi said:
No, Gordon Brown was more incompetent, with his fatal combination of being a complete control freak but also incapable of making decisions.DavidL said:
No more baffling than her inability to work with any other interested group from the opposition (any of them), to the ERG, to remainers in her own party, to pretty much everyone in her cabinet as constituted from time to time. She is an earnest, diligent, honest person driven by her perception of the national interest but I honestly cannot recall a more incompetent politician as PM in my lifetime. Its spectacular in its awfulness.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, it is baffling.grabcocque said:
You know, May's failure to keep the DUP on board throughout this process is the single most baffling part of her behaviour to me.Richard_Nabavi said:What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
* You rely on them for a functional majority
* They're good friends and allies with your fractious Brexiteer wing
* They're legendarily stubborn
* Betrayal narratives are their bread and butter
If there's one group you want inside the tent pissing out, it's them.
In normal circumstances, Theresa May would be OK, but she is hopelessly unsuited to a hung parliament, let alone a hung parliament trying to implement the impossible. What is needed in a hung parliament is a PM who can sustain a subtle combination of cajolery, flattery, ego-stroking, and inspiration of loyalty (Harold Wilson fitted the bill perfectly). Theresa May is the exact opposite - inflexible, unclubbable, cold.
With a majority she would have been a democratically elected dictator, effectual in whatever way she wished to go but inpervious to feedback.0 -
"We have added Andrew Mitchell and Douglas Ross to the opposition column, on the basis of their contributions in Hansard, and removed George Freeman and Trudi Harrison, who have tweeted today that they will support the deal."
https://www.conservativehome.com/parliament/2019/01/our-estimate-of-how-many-conservative-mps-oppose-the-brexit-deal-not-100-but-64.html0 -
Harris is yet another coastal liberal.
If the Democrats want to win the Electoral College and beat Trump they need to find candidate who can appeal to blue collar workers in the rustbelt not build up even bigger leads in California0 -
I think the Thames Watershed is a good approximation to an ultra-London region.Peter_the_Punter said:
Hey, the Cotswolds voted Remain. Can we stay? We're pretty and our farm-produce is nice.Benpointer said:
Great idea.Roger said:
Left field idea; Divide the UK into several regions and allow each to hold their own referendum. Those who want to stay in the EU-London and Scotland for example stay while places like Stoke Hartlepool Thanet and Wales form their own union. They can set up their own obesity clinics for examplePhilip_Thompson said:As a left-field idea to break the deadlock in Parliament can anyone tell me why the following wouldn't work:
Request an extension of Article 50 until the end of 2020 as an alternative to a transition but on the understanding that we park the backstop and instead immediately start negotiating the future trade agreement as would be negotiated during a transition.
That removes the cliff edge for now, deals with the Irish border for now, continues payments for now while allowing talks to get onto where they belong. And if a future trade agreement can be reached in that time then the Irish backstop which is preventing Parliament from ratifying the deal becomes moot.
Of course it requires unanimity from the other 27 but they could accept it as preferable to no deal.
I'd just like to point out that Dorset is mainly populated (well, ok financed) by ex-Londoners now so should be considered part of the Greater London region in those refs.0 -
Yougov has had 45% voting for No Deal over Remain, Deltapoll has even had No Deal preferredBenpointer said:
... apart from a few loopy Tory MPs and, it appears, most of the Tory party members.Big_G_NorthWales said:Japanese PM just said from no 10 that Japan is in full support of the WDA agreed betweenTM and the EU and strongly opposes no deal, as indeed does the whole world
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/04/most-tory-members-would-choose-no-deal-over-may-brexit-plan0 -
Yeah, but America has gone tribal.HYUFD said:Harris is yet another coastal liberal.
If the Democrats want to win the Electoral College and beat Trump they need to find candidate who can appeal to blue collar workers in the rustbelt not build up even bigger leads in California
(Not that we can talk.)
0 -
Labour were back in power by 1929 though, just 5 years later.GIN1138 said:
Labour's defeat in 1924 was soon followed by a general election and a Con landslide (this election also defined 20th century politics as it saw the decimation of the Liberals which cemented the Con/Lab duopoly that dominated 20th century politics)grabcocque said:BBC Politics estimate for the meaningful vote:
Ayes: 206
Noes: 433
Majority for noes of 228.
She is on course for the biggest Commons defeat in Parliamenary history - beating the minority Labour government's losing tally of 166 in 1924.
Could we be about to see history repeat but in reverse? Lab landslide and Con split?
The only way the Tories get overtaken as Labour overtook the Liberals as the main party of the left is if they revoke Brexit and most of their voters move to UKIP or a new Farage led party which then becomes the main party of the right0 -
Biden/ Beto ?HYUFD said:Harris is yet another coastal liberal.
If the Democrats want to win the Electoral College and beat Trump they need to find candidate who can appeal to blue collar workers in the rustbelt not build up even bigger leads in California0 -
As a crumb of comfort, you will at least be able to enjoy hearing Remainers say nice things about JRM and other Ultras.Casino_Royale said:
Good. The tide is starting to turn, but it’s too little, too late.Sean_F said:
I expect Swire, Elphicke, Hayes to wobble to Yes.grabcocque said:In addition to the 71 nailed on to vote No, these are the wobblers to watch, according to ConHome: (* means already wobbled)
Might wobble to Yes
John Baron
Guto Bebb
David Evennett
Michael Fallon*George Freeman
Justine Greening
Rob Halfon*Trudy Harrison
Sir John Hayes
Gordon Henderson
Pauline Latham*Sir Edward Leigh
Sir Greg Knight
Anne Main
Scott Mann
Stephen McPartland
Nigel Mills
Damien Moore
Matthew Offord
Neil Parish
Sir Mike Penning
Royston Smith
Anna Soubry
Bob Stewart
Sir Robert Syms
Derek Thomas
Craig Tracey
Giles Watling
John Whittingdale
Sarah Wollaston
William Wragg
Might wobble to No
Robert Courts
Charlie Elphicke
Alister Jack
John Lamont
Phillip Lee
Stephen Metcalfe
Grant Shapps
Hugo Swire
Mike Wood
I think most of the hard Leavers will eventually wake up and smell the coffee, unfortunately it will be many months after the votes, which could easily boomerang us straight back into Remain.
They will then blame someone else for their myopic stupidity and laziness.0 -
Warren, Harris just repeat the Hillary coalition at best for the Democrats, though I could see Trump picking up Virginia or Nevada against either.Peter_the_Punter said:
Yeah, but America has gone tribal.HYUFD said:Harris is yet another coastal liberal.
If the Democrats want to win the Electoral College and beat Trump they need to find candidate who can appeal to blue collar workers in the rustbelt not build up even bigger leads in California
(Not that we can talk.)
Either the Democrats pick a candidate who can challenge Trump in the rustbelt or they may as well hand him re election on a plate0 -
Labour even survived 1931. Parties can be destroyed by rivals on their own side, but not by opponents on the opposite side.HYUFD said:
Labour were back in power by 1929 though, just 5 years later.GIN1138 said:
Labour's defeat in 1924 was soon followed by a general election and a Con landslide (this election also defined 20th century politics as it saw the decimation of the Liberals which cemented the Con/Lab duopoly that dominated 20th century politics)grabcocque said:BBC Politics estimate for the meaningful vote:
Ayes: 206
Noes: 433
Majority for noes of 228.
She is on course for the biggest Commons defeat in Parliamenary history - beating the minority Labour government's losing tally of 166 in 1924.
Could we be about to see history repeat but in reverse? Lab landslide and Con split?
The only way the Tories get overtaken as Labour overtook the Liberals as the main party of the left is if they revoke Brexit and most of their voters move to UKIP or a new Farage led party which then becomes the main party of the right0 -
That would be the Democrats best bet and the ticket Trump would most fear yes and one that could challenge in the Midwest and parts of the Southlogical_song said:
Biden/ Beto ?HYUFD said:Harris is yet another coastal liberal.
If the Democrats want to win the Electoral College and beat Trump they need to find candidate who can appeal to blue collar workers in the rustbelt not build up even bigger leads in California0 -
... it seemed so obvious he didn't think it would be controversial ?grabcocque said:Shinzo Abe accidentally goes off messages and calls for a People's Vote
https://twitter.com/henrymance/status/10834134068650762270 -
If we end up remaining, JRM would deserve the Grand Croix of the Legion d'Honneur.Peter_the_Punter said:
As a crumb of comfort, you will at least be able to enjoy hearing Remainers say nice things about JRM and other Ultras.Casino_Royale said:
Good. The tide is starting to turn, but it’s too little, too late.Sean_F said:
I expect Swire, Elphicke, Hayes to wobble to Yes.grabcocque said:In addition to the 71 nailed on to vote No, these are the wobblers to watch, according to ConHome: (* means already wobbled)
Might wobble to Yes
John Baron
Guto Bebb
David Evennett
Michael Fallon*George Freeman
Justine Greening
Rob Halfon*Trudy Harrison
Sir John Hayes
Gordon Henderson
Pauline Latham*Sir Edward Leigh
Sir Greg Knight
Anne Main
Scott Mann
Stephen McPartland
Nigel Mills
Damien Moore
Matthew Offord
Neil Parish
Sir Mike Penning
Royston Smith
Anna Soubry
Bob Stewart
Sir Robert Syms
Derek Thomas
Craig Tracey
Giles Watling
John Whittingdale
Sarah Wollaston
William Wragg
Might wobble to No
Robert Courts
Charlie Elphicke
Alister Jack
John Lamont
Phillip Lee
Stephen Metcalfe
Grant Shapps
Hugo Swire
Mike Wood
I think most of the hard Leavers will eventually wake up and smell the coffee, unfortunately it will be many months after the votes, which could easily boomerang us straight back into Remain.
They will then blame someone else for their myopic stupidity and laziness.0 -
And 1983 and the Tories 1997 and 1945, again as they remained the main party of the left or right respectivelySean_F said:
Labour even survived 1931. Parties can be destroyed by rivals on their own side, but not by opponents on the opposite side.HYUFD said:
Labour were back in power by 1929 though, just 5 years later.GIN1138 said:
Labour's defeat in 1924 was soon followed by a general election and a Con landslide (this election also defined 20th century politics as it saw the decimation of the Liberals which cemented the Con/Lab duopoly that dominated 20th century politics)grabcocque said:BBC Politics estimate for the meaningful vote:
Ayes: 206
Noes: 433
Majority for noes of 228.
She is on course for the biggest Commons defeat in Parliamenary history - beating the minority Labour government's losing tally of 166 in 1924.
Could we be about to see history repeat but in reverse? Lab landslide and Con split?
The only way the Tories get overtaken as Labour overtook the Liberals as the main party of the left is if they revoke Brexit and most of their voters move to UKIP or a new Farage led party which then becomes the main party of the right0 -
He'd certainly get off light in the ensuing show trials.Sean_F said:
If we end up remaining, JRM would deserve the Grand Croix of the Legion d'Honneur.Peter_the_Punter said:
As a crumb of comfort, you will at least be able to enjoy hearing Remainers say nice things about JRM and other Ultras.Casino_Royale said:
Good. The tide is starting to turn, but it’s too little, too late.Sean_F said:
I expect Swire, Elphicke, Hayes to wobble to Yes.grabcocque said:In addition to the 71 nailed on to vote No, these are the wobblers to watch, according to ConHome: (* means already wobbled)
Might wobble to Yes
John Baron
Guto Bebb
David Evennett
Michael Fallon*George Freeman
Justine Greening
Rob Halfon*Trudy Harrison
Sir John Hayes
Gordon Henderson
Pauline Latham*Sir Edward Leigh
Sir Greg Knight
Anne Main
Scott Mann
Stephen McPartland
Nigel Mills
Damien Moore
Matthew Offord
Neil Parish
Sir Mike Penning
Royston Smith
Anna Soubry
Bob Stewart
Sir Robert Syms
Derek Thomas
Craig Tracey
Giles Watling
John Whittingdale
Sarah Wollaston
William Wragg
Might wobble to No
Robert Courts
Charlie Elphicke
Alister Jack
John Lamont
Phillip Lee
Stephen Metcalfe
Grant Shapps
Hugo Swire
Mike Wood
I think most of the hard Leavers will eventually wake up and smell the coffee, unfortunately it will be many months after the votes, which could easily boomerang us straight back into Remain.
They will then blame someone else for their myopic stupidity and laziness.0 -
-
How many would it lose?TheScreamingEagles said:
I’m all for both environmental and employment protection but I thought the whole point was to take back control?0 -
China is littered with bicycle graveyards from failed cycle hire companies.FrancisUrquhart said:It appears the Chinese companies have underestimated what shits a lot of people are in the West compared to China. Maybe we need a social credit score ;-)
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jan/10/ofo-cycle-hire-firm-pulls-out-of-london0 -
Papal knighthood surely?Sean_F said:
If we end up remaining, JRM would deserve the Grand Croix of the Legion d'Honneur.Peter_the_Punter said:
As a crumb of comfort, you will at least be able to enjoy hearing Remainers say nice things about JRM and other Ultras.Casino_Royale said:
Good. The tide is starting to turn, but it’s too little, too late.Sean_F said:
I expect Swire, Elphicke, Hayes to wobble to Yes.grabcocque said:In addition to the 71 nailed on to vote No, these are the wobblers to watch, according to ConHome: (* means already wobbled)
Might wobble to Yes
John Baron
Guto Bebb
David Evennett
Michael Fallon*George Freeman
Justine Greening
Rob Halfon*Trudy Harrison
Sir John Hayes
Gordon Henderson
Pauline Latham*Sir Edward Leigh
Sir Greg Knight
Anne Main
Scott Mann
Stephen McPartland
Nigel Mills
Damien Moore
Matthew Offord
Neil Parish
Sir Mike Penning
Royston Smith
Anna Soubry
Bob Stewart
Sir Robert Syms
Derek Thomas
Craig Tracey
Giles Watling
John Whittingdale
Sarah Wollaston
William Wragg
Might wobble to No
Robert Courts
Charlie Elphicke
Alister Jack
John Lamont
Phillip Lee
Stephen Metcalfe
Grant Shapps
Hugo Swire
Mike Wood
I think most of the hard Leavers will eventually wake up and smell the coffee, unfortunately it will be many months after the votes, which could easily boomerang us straight back into Remain.
They will then blame someone else for their myopic stupidity and laziness.-1 -
Soubry is gone whenever the next election is held (and she knows it which is why she doesn't care about the government or the Conservative Party anymore) but it's hard to see Phillips getting thrown out anytime soon.Richard_Tyndall said:
Well Soubry and Phillips are certainly pricks (or whatever the female equivalent is.. I think Roger might be able to help with that one) and are worthy of nothing but contempt. I would suggest O'Neill consider their rage a badge of honour and a sign he is doing something right. Hopefully both of them will soon be out of public office for good.Theuniondivvie said:A plaintively Tobyoung-esque cry of 'I just don't understand why people think I'm a prick.'
https://twitter.com/JonnElledge/status/10833936605012828170 -
I’m beyond despair.Peter_the_Punter said:
As a crumb of comfort, you will at least be able to enjoy hearing Remainers say nice things about JRM and other Ultras.Casino_Royale said:
Good. The tide is starting to turn, but it’s too little, too late.Sean_F said:
I expect Swire, Elphicke, Hayes to wobble to Yes.grabcocque said:In addition to the 71 nailed on to vote No, these are the wobblers to watch, according to ConHome: (* means already wobbled)
Might wobble to Yes
John Baron
Guto Bebb
David Evennett
Michael Fallon*George Freeman
Justine Greening
Rob Halfon*Trudy Harrison
Sir John Hayes
Gordon Henderson
Pauline Latham*Sir Edward Leigh
Sir Greg Knight
Anne Main
Scott Mann
Stephen McPartland
Nigel Mills
Damien Moore
Matthew Offord
Neil Parish
Sir Mike Penning
Royston Smith
Anna Soubry
Bob Stewart
Sir Robert Syms
Derek Thomas
Craig Tracey
Giles Watling
John Whittingdale
Sarah Wollaston
William Wragg
Might wobble to No
Robert Courts
Charlie Elphicke
Alister Jack
John Lamont
Phillip Lee
Stephen Metcalfe
Grant Shapps
Hugo Swire
Mike Wood
I think most of the hard Leavers will eventually wake up and smell the coffee, unfortunately it will be many months after the votes, which could easily boomerang us straight back into Remain.
They will then blame someone else for their myopic stupidity and laziness.0 -
He’s one heck of a deep-state agent.Sean_F said:
If we end up remaining, JRM would deserve the Grand Croix of the Legion d'Honneur.Peter_the_Punter said:
As a crumb of comfort, you will at least be able to enjoy hearing Remainers say nice things about JRM and other Ultras.Casino_Royale said:
Good. The tide is starting to turn, but it’s too little, too late.Sean_F said:
I expect Swire, Elphicke, Hayes to wobble to Yes.grabcocque said:In addition to the 71 nailed on to vote No, these are the wobblers to watch, according to ConHome: (* means already wobbled)
Might wobble to Yes
John Baron
Guto Bebb
David Evennett
Michael Fallon*George Freeman
Justine Greening
Rob Halfon*Trudy Harrison
Sir John Hayes
Gordon Henderson
Pauline Latham*Sir Edward Leigh
Sir Greg Knight
Anne Main
Scott Mann
Stephen McPartland
Nigel Mills
Damien Moore
Matthew Offord
Neil Parish
Sir Mike Penning
Royston Smith
Anna Soubry
Bob Stewart
Sir Robert Syms
Derek Thomas
Craig Tracey
Giles Watling
John Whittingdale
Sarah Wollaston
William Wragg
Might wobble to No
Robert Courts
Charlie Elphicke
Alister Jack
John Lamont
Phillip Lee
Stephen Metcalfe
Grant Shapps
Hugo Swire
Mike Wood
I think most of the hard Leavers will eventually wake up and smell the coffee, unfortunately it will be many months after the votes, which could easily boomerang us straight back into Remain.
They will then blame someone else for their myopic stupidity and laziness.0 -
Oh good grief, finally the government is starting to do politics. I mean how long has it taken them to get to a point that was obvious months ago.TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
Ofo was a data collection firm masquerading as a cycle hire service. Mobike's areas of operation aren't contiguous so useless unless you stay within a restricted area. Which leaves Boris. Which I quite like.Alistair said:
China is littered with bicycle graveyards from failed cycle hire companies.FrancisUrquhart said:It appears the Chinese companies have underestimated what shits a lot of people are in the West compared to China. Maybe we need a social credit score ;-)
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jan/10/ofo-cycle-hire-firm-pulls-out-of-london0 -
People screamed at the Leavers until we were blue in the face that this would happen so they can't complain now.Gardenwalker said:
How many would it lose?TheScreamingEagles said:
I’m all for both environmental and employment protection but I thought the whole point was to take back control?0 -
I can’t see it being anything other than a net loser. Being part of the single market and aligning standards for Goods is controversial but we willingly sign up to global standards ISO and British Standards may move from alignment to European standards EN to global standards. Environmental and employment protection on the other hand are p9ltical decisions and it would be foolish to sign up to those without political representationGardenwalker said:
How many would it lose?TheScreamingEagles said:
I’m all for both environmental and employment protection but I thought the whole point was to take back control?
Perhaps May could try a reverse Barnier. She could say in a comfort letter that she has every intention of aligning environmental and employment protections and then claim to Labour and the EU that it is a concession.
0 -
Surely this could be repealed or amended easily so there's nothing permanent about it?TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
Brendan O'Neill is the perfect example of a snowflake.Richard_Tyndall said:
Well Soubry and Phillips are certainly pricks (or whatever the female equivalent is.. I think Roger might be able to help with that one) and are worthy of nothing but contempt. I would suggest O'Neill consider their rage a badge of honour and a sign he is doing something right. Hopefully both of them will soon be out of public office for good.Theuniondivvie said:A plaintively Tobyoung-esque cry of 'I just don't understand why people think I'm a prick.'
https://twitter.com/JonnElledge/status/1083393660501282817
He's the world's shittest troll, dishes it out but cannot take it.0 -
I thought the amendment simply brought improvements in EU rights to the Commons for a vote, and doesnt guarantee alignment?Gallowgate said:
Surely this could be repealed or amended easily so there's nothing permanent about it?TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
I read the article not as a complaint from the author but an accusation of double standards to the two MPs who bot( complain about the tone and language of debate - if its from a man it’s misogynistic, but they are quite happy to give it out.GIN1138 said:
Soubry is gone whenever the next election is held (and she knows it which is why she doesn't care about the government or the Conservative Party anymore) but it's hard to see Phillips getting thrown out anytime soon.Richard_Tyndall said:
Well Soubry and Phillips are certainly pricks (or whatever the female equivalent is.. I think Roger might be able to help with that one) and are worthy of nothing but contempt. I would suggest O'Neill consider their rage a badge of honour and a sign he is doing something right. Hopefully both of them will soon be out of public office for good.Theuniondivvie said:A plaintively Tobyoung-esque cry of 'I just don't understand why people think I'm a prick.'
https://twitter.com/JonnElledge/status/10833936605012828170 -
Not if the executive supports it.Gallowgate said:
Surely this could be repealed or amended easily so there's nothing permanent about it?TheScreamingEagles said:
If the Government gets some more Labour MPs behind the Deal it can then focus on getting Tory Remain MPs fearful of No Deal and Tory No Deal MPs fearful of EUref2 and Remain0 -
Anything legal can be repealed, amended, or discarded. The discarded option (tearing up the lawbook) is rarely mentioned by lawyers.Gallowgate said:
Surely this could be repealed or amended easily so there's nothing permanent about it?TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
That is so, although double standards are found across the political spectrum .Nemtynakht said:
I read the article not as a complaint from the author but an accusation of double standards to the two MPs who bot( complain about the tone and language of debate - if its from a man it’s misogynistic, but they are quite happy to give it out.GIN1138 said:
Soubry is gone whenever the next election is held (and she knows it which is why she doesn't care about the government or the Conservative Party anymore) but it's hard to see Phillips getting thrown out anytime soon.Richard_Tyndall said:
Well Soubry and Phillips are certainly pricks (or whatever the female equivalent is.. I think Roger might be able to help with that one) and are worthy of nothing but contempt. I would suggest O'Neill consider their rage a badge of honour and a sign he is doing something right. Hopefully both of them will soon be out of public office for good.Theuniondivvie said:A plaintively Tobyoung-esque cry of 'I just don't understand why people think I'm a prick.'
https://twitter.com/JonnElledge/status/1083393660501282817
MP's on all sides face vile abuse, it 's disgusting, but I don't think one faction has it worse than another.0 -
Health Service Journal Reports
FINANCE AND EFFICIENCY
Exclusive: Government cuts real terms NHS spending.
10 January 2019
The government will give the NHS £2bn less in real terms over the next five years than it previously said, having pushed back the planned funding growth, HSJ can reveal.
Planning documents published by NHS England this afternoon state that its budget will increase by 3.1 per cent in real terms in the second year of the period, as opposed to the 3.6 per cent that was proposed in the government’s high profile announcement last summer.
The largest annual increase, of 4.1 per cent, has instead now been reserved for the final year of the plan, in 2023-24, when an increase of 3.4 per cent was previously slated.
This will result in cumulative real terms spending over the five years being around £2bn lower than previously envisaged. In 2018-19 prices, cumulative spending will be around £632bn over the five years, rather than £634bn.0 -
This is the point I do not understand, during the ref the criticism that Corbyn made of the EU was posted workers. With control back Labour could make whatever workers rights they wanted including no posted workers. Stay in the EU orbit for rights and posted workers stay. It is again illogical from Labour.Gardenwalker said:
How many would it lose?TheScreamingEagles said:
I’m all for both environmental and employment protection but I thought the whole point was to take back control?0 -
And improved waiting times announced by the NHS today despite treating many more patients and its winterbigjohnowls said:Health Service Journal Reports
FINANCE AND EFFICIENCY
Exclusive: Government cuts real terms NHS spending.
10 January 2019
The government will give the NHS £2bn less in real terms over the next five years than it previously said, having pushed back the planned funding growth, HSJ can reveal.
Planning documents published by NHS England this afternoon state that its budget will increase by 3.1 per cent in real terms in the second year of the period, as opposed to the 3.6 per cent that was proposed in the government’s high profile announcement last summer.
The largest annual increase, of 4.1 per cent, has instead now been reserved for the final year of the plan, in 2023-24, when an increase of 3.4 per cent was previously slated.
This will result in cumulative real terms spending over the five years being around £2bn lower than previously envisaged. In 2018-19 prices, cumulative spending will be around £632bn over the five years, rather than £634bn.0 -
Why would labour do thatGallowgate said:
Surely this could be repealed or amended easily so there's nothing permanent about it?TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
And???Big_G_NorthWales said:
And improved waiting times announced by the NHS today despite treating many more patients and its winterbigjohnowls said:Health Service Journal Reports
FINANCE AND EFFICIENCY
Exclusive: Government cuts real terms NHS spending.
10 January 2019
The government will give the NHS £2bn less in real terms over the next five years than it previously said, having pushed back the planned funding growth, HSJ can reveal.
Planning documents published by NHS England this afternoon state that its budget will increase by 3.1 per cent in real terms in the second year of the period, as opposed to the 3.6 per cent that was proposed in the government’s high profile announcement last summer.
The largest annual increase, of 4.1 per cent, has instead now been reserved for the final year of the plan, in 2023-24, when an increase of 3.4 per cent was previously slated.
This will result in cumulative real terms spending over the five years being around £2bn lower than previously envisaged. In 2018-19 prices, cumulative spending will be around £632bn over the five years, rather than £634bn.0 -
Good newsbigjohnowls said:
And???Big_G_NorthWales said:
And improved waiting times announced by the NHS today despite treating many more patients and its winterbigjohnowls said:Health Service Journal Reports
FINANCE AND EFFICIENCY
Exclusive: Government cuts real terms NHS spending.
10 January 2019
The government will give the NHS £2bn less in real terms over the next five years than it previously said, having pushed back the planned funding growth, HSJ can reveal.
Planning documents published by NHS England this afternoon state that its budget will increase by 3.1 per cent in real terms in the second year of the period, as opposed to the 3.6 per cent that was proposed in the government’s high profile announcement last summer.
The largest annual increase, of 4.1 per cent, has instead now been reserved for the final year of the plan, in 2023-24, when an increase of 3.4 per cent was previously slated.
This will result in cumulative real terms spending over the five years being around £2bn lower than previously envisaged. In 2018-19 prices, cumulative spending will be around £632bn over the five years, rather than £634bn.0 -
The Mann amendment is as meaningless as the Swire amendment. The motion as amended has no legal force, doesn't commit the government to anything if it had and in any case no parliament can bind it's sucessor. For the purposes of the WA itself it's the international treaty text that matters not a HoC motion.
However this is about what MPs want to believe. If amendments like these give the Swires and Manns of this world psychological and political space to vote for May's deal then they are signifigant. Of course even the hint of moving from non regression to dynamic alignment on social/environmental legislation may well stiffen opposition at the Tory Brexiter end but that's now the game that's afoot.
Deal +. What's going to be bolted on to May's ( or sucessor's ) deal to bring in Labour votes/abstentions.
0 -
Your link does say things likebigjohnowls said:
And???Big_G_NorthWales said:
And improved waiting times announced by the NHS today despite treating many more patients and its winterbigjohnowls said:Health Service Journal Reports
FINANCE AND EFFICIENCY
Exclusive: Government cuts real terms NHS spending.
10 January 2019
The government will give the NHS £2bn less in real terms over the next five years than it previously said, having pushed back the planned funding growth, HSJ can reveal.
Planning documents published by NHS England this afternoon state that its budget will increase by 3.1 per cent in real terms in the second year of the period, as opposed to the 3.6 per cent that was proposed in the government’s high profile announcement last summer.
The largest annual increase, of 4.1 per cent, has instead now been reserved for the final year of the plan, in 2023-24, when an increase of 3.4 per cent was previously slated.
This will result in cumulative real terms spending over the five years being around £2bn lower than previously envisaged. In 2018-19 prices, cumulative spending will be around £632bn over the five years, rather than £634bn.
"being around £2bn lower than previously envisaged". It doesn't say who envisaged this.
improved (reduced) waiting times can't hurt.0 -
Wheras the £2BN cut compared to what the Government previously announced isnt.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Good newsbigjohnowls said:
And???Big_G_NorthWales said:
And improved waiting times announced by the NHS today despite treating many more patients and its winterbigjohnowls said:Health Service Journal Reports
FINANCE AND EFFICIENCY
Exclusive: Government cuts real terms NHS spending.
10 January 2019
The government will give the NHS £2bn less in real terms over the next five years than it previously said, having pushed back the planned funding growth, HSJ can reveal.
Planning documents published by NHS England this afternoon state that its budget will increase by 3.1 per cent in real terms in the second year of the period, as opposed to the 3.6 per cent that was proposed in the government’s high profile announcement last summer.
The largest annual increase, of 4.1 per cent, has instead now been reserved for the final year of the plan, in 2023-24, when an increase of 3.4 per cent was previously slated.
This will result in cumulative real terms spending over the five years being around £2bn lower than previously envisaged. In 2018-19 prices, cumulative spending will be around £632bn over the five years, rather than £634bn.0 -
For those who believe we should be making our own rules and laws and not kowtowing to the EU this would be nonsense.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Why would labour do thatGallowgate said:
Surely this could be repealed or amended easily so there's nothing permanent about it?TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
This is pretty much the minimum requirement for any relationship with the EU. The EU will insist on it even for No Deal mini deals. So:Gallowgate said:
Surely this could be repealed or amended easily so there's nothing permanent about it?TheScreamingEagles said:
a) The government simply accepting what it will have to agree to anyway.
b) Later repeal, while theoretically possible, will likely be too expensive ever to carry out.0 -
It's the difference between old and new left. Old left see the EU as entrenching capitalism. New left see it as entrenching free migration, and minority rights.ralphmalph said:
This is the point I do not understand, during the ref the criticism that Corbyn made of the EU was posted workers. With control back Labour could make whatever workers rights they wanted including no posted workers. Stay in the EU orbit for rights and posted workers stay. It is again illogical from Labour.Gardenwalker said:
How many would it lose?TheScreamingEagles said:
I’m all for both environmental and employment protection but I thought the whole point was to take back control?0 -
0
-
Agreed one of my bosses gave me the advice that if you wouldn’t want it on the front of a newspaper, or read out in court then don’t write it. I use this as a mental check when I am responding to issues in my job! It means I have developed a cold but civil toneSean_F said:
That is so, although double standards are found across the political spectrum .Nemtynakht said:
I read the article not as a complaint from the author but an accusation of double standards to the two MPs who bot( complain about the tone and language of debate - if its from a man it’s misogynistic, but they are quite happy to give it out.GIN1138 said:
Soubry is gone whenever the next election is held (and she knows it which is why she doesn't care about the government or the Conservative Party anymore) but it's hard to see Phillips getting thrown out anytime soon.Richard_Tyndall said:
Well Soubry and Phillips are certainly pricks (or whatever the female equivalent is.. I think Roger might be able to help with that one) and are worthy of nothing but contempt. I would suggest O'Neill consider their rage a badge of honour and a sign he is doing something right. Hopefully both of them will soon be out of public office for good.Theuniondivvie said:A plaintively Tobyoung-esque cry of 'I just don't understand why people think I'm a prick.'
https://twitter.com/JonnElledge/status/1083393660501282817
MP's on all sides face vile abuse, it 's disgusting, but I don't think one faction has it worse than another.0 -
Also despite the EU referendum and coalition, I don’t think he is targeted in the way thatcher or Blair was / are many years after they left power.Sandpit said:
Cameron must be one of the best assignments for the VIP protection squad. Much easier to work with a former minister who does very little work and travel, than a current one who's got 20 meetings a day from 6am until midnight.FrancisUrquhart said:Being Dave's bodyguard sounds like a decent gig...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6577765/David-Cameron-Costa-Rica-Theresa-Mays-Government-sent-Brexit-meltdown.html0 -
Quite. Walk from the station to the centre of our little Cotswold town and you'll see at least two houses still flying EU flags. I was going to suggest that our Town Council make a bid to remain a member of the EU (purely for the publicity, like Audlem bidding to become part of Wales) but Totnes beat us to it.Peter_the_Punter said:Hey, the Cotswolds voted Remain. Can we stay? We're pretty and our farm-produce is nice.
*splutter*Richard_Tyndall said:and is all too willing to take offense when anyone disagrees with her
0 -
It is £2bn less than the Governments high profile announcement last summer.Omnium said:
Your link does say things likebigjohnowls said:
And???Big_G_NorthWales said:
And improved waiting times announced by the NHS today despite treating many more patients and its winterbigjohnowls said:Health Service Journal Reports
FINANCE AND EFFICIENCY
Exclusive: Government cuts real terms NHS spending.
10 January 2019
The government will give the NHS £2bn less in real terms over the next five years than it previously said, having pushed back the planned funding growth, HSJ can reveal.
Planning documents published by NHS England this afternoon state that its budget will increase by 3.1 per cent in real terms in the second year of the period, as opposed to the 3.6 per cent that was proposed in the government’s high profile announcement last summer.
The largest annual increase, of 4.1 per cent, has instead now been reserved for the final year of the plan, in 2023-24, when an increase of 3.4 per cent was previously slated.
This will result in cumulative real terms spending over the five years being around £2bn lower than previously envisaged. In 2018-19 prices, cumulative spending will be around £632bn over the five years, rather than £634bn.
"being around £2bn lower than previously envisaged". It doesn't say who envisaged this.
improved (reduced) waiting times can't hurt.
The waiting time targets are still being missed.0 -
Have Labour indicated which amendments to the MV they're supporting?
The big question is, are they supporting the Benn amendment, which is in essence a wrecking amendment that renders the Meaningful Vote moot?0 -
Kind of reflective of the reduced status of the UK in global affairs, he did nothing internationally and made no real enemiesFrancisUrquhart said:
Also despite the EU referendum and coalition, I don’t think he is targeted in the way thatcher or Blair was / are many years after they left power.Sandpit said:
Cameron must be one of the best assignments for the VIP protection squad. Much easier to work with a former minister who does very little work and travel, than a current one who's got 20 meetings a day from 6am until midnight.FrancisUrquhart said:Being Dave's bodyguard sounds like a decent gig...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6577765/David-Cameron-Costa-Rica-Theresa-Mays-Government-sent-Brexit-meltdown.html0 -
Sky data poll - 31% expect Brexit by 29th March - 37% after March - and only 21expect no Brexit0
-
Biden/Klobuchar would be a very strong ticketHYUFD said:Harris is yet another coastal liberal.
If the Democrats want to win the Electoral College and beat Trump they need to find candidate who can appeal to blue collar workers in the rustbelt not build up even bigger leads in California0 -
The NHS will never receive adequate funding because:bigjohnowls said:Health Service Journal Reports
FINANCE AND EFFICIENCY
Exclusive: Government cuts real terms NHS spending.
10 January 2019
The government will give the NHS £2bn less in real terms over the next five years than it previously said, having pushed back the planned funding growth, HSJ can reveal.
Planning documents published by NHS England this afternoon state that its budget will increase by 3.1 per cent in real terms in the second year of the period, as opposed to the 3.6 per cent that was proposed in the government’s high profile announcement last summer.
The largest annual increase, of 4.1 per cent, has instead now been reserved for the final year of the plan, in 2023-24, when an increase of 3.4 per cent was previously slated.
This will result in cumulative real terms spending over the five years being around £2bn lower than previously envisaged. In 2018-19 prices, cumulative spending will be around £632bn over the five years, rather than £634bn.
1. It is a bottomless money pit, which grows progressively wider and blacker as the population ages and treatments become ever more numerous and expensive
2. Young people can't or won't pay the vast tax increases needed because they're crippled by high rents
3. Middle-aged people can't or won't pay the vast tax increases needed because they're crippled by gargantuan mortgages
4. Old people can't or won't pay the vast tax increases needed because they're living on fixed incomes, and they resent being made to part with any of their immense stock of property wealth whether they're dead or alive (exhibit a: how much IHT is resented; exhibit b: the hysteria over the "dementia tax")
Voters want a Rolls Royce service from the NHS, but the vast bulk of them are unwilling or unable to part with anything more than the cost of a Reliant Robin. As ever, people expect all kinds of goodies, but they think it's somebody else's responsibility to shoulder the cost.0 -
Indeed. Gordon Brown or John Major would also be good postings. They, like DC, do a few well paid lectures and speeches but not a lot else. Blair, on the other hand, probably still does more travelling than the current foreign secretary, and still gets plenty of credible threats made against him. At least it's not the constant threats that it was only a couple of decades ago under the Troubles.FrancisUrquhart said:
Also despite the EU referendum and coalition, I don’t think he is targeted in the way thatcher or Blair was / are many years after they left power.Sandpit said:
Cameron must be one of the best assignments for the VIP protection squad. Much easier to work with a former minister who does very little work and travel, than a current one who's got 20 meetings a day from 6am until midnight.FrancisUrquhart said:Being Dave's bodyguard sounds like a decent gig...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6577765/David-Cameron-Costa-Rica-Theresa-Mays-Government-sent-Brexit-meltdown.html
For retired senior politicians, it must be a right pain the arse to have a couple of policemen follow you absolutely everywhere, and certainly for former PMs knowing that it will always be the case. DC could well have 40 years left in him.0
