politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » As we wait for the Newport result an interesting chart on the
Comments
-
Yes, Cameron did once.another_richard said:
Has the UK ever vetoed anything ?rcs1000 said:
We did have a veto. We just chose not to use it.Philip_Thompson said:
For example an unfavourable trade treaty ?0 -
"Every election needs a dark horse candidate and the South Bend, Indiana, mayor seems to be it."
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/could-pete-buttigieg-could-be-new-joe-biden-bipartisan-voters-ncna9910010 -
I read John Major's autobiography many years ago (it's good, btw). He described how he vetoed the other countries' choice of Commission Presidentanother_richard said:
Has the UK ever vetoed anything ?rcs1000 said:
We did have a veto. We just chose not to use it.Philip_Thompson said:
For example an unfavourable trade treaty ?0 -
even more particularly when you lack a scoobykle4 said:
I'm lost because I don't know what these activists expected given they can presumably count and can see that the PM doesn't have the numbers to even no deal, given workarounds are being made there. Do they think she opened talks with Corbyn lightly?rottenborough said:Telegraph: "Grassroots Conservative activists are "quitting in their droves", it has been claimed, as new polling shows that more than 90 per cent disagree with Theresa May's decision to open talks with Jeremy Corbyn."
I'm lost now.
I thought Blue Momentum was trying to get extra people to join to vote for Boris?
At least see if it goes anywhere first, see what the cost is. Because simply being open to working with others, even opponents, is not wrong. Particularly when you lack a majority.0 -
' In 1886, the party formed an alliance with Spencer Compton Cavendish, Lord Hartington (later the 8th Duke of Devonshire) and Joseph Chamberlain's new Liberal Unionist Party and, under the statesmen Robert Gascoyne-Cecil, Lord Salisbury and Arthur Balfour, held power for all but three of the following twenty years before suffering a heavy defeat in 1906 when it split over the issue of free trade. In 1912, the Liberal Unionists merged with the Conservative Party. In Ireland, the Irish Unionist Alliance had been formed in 1891 which merged Unionists who were opposed to Irish Home Rule into one political movement. Its MPs took the Conservative whip at Westminster, and in essence, formed the Irish wing of the party until 1922. In Britain, the Conservative party was known as the Unionist Party because of its opposition to home rule in Ireland. 'OblitusSumMe said:
I thought the Unionist bit referred to the Unionist Party that used to stand candidates as a separate party in Scotland, but were hurriedly merged with the English Conservative Party after the Unionist Party in Northern Ireland went rogue and became the Ulster Unionists, independent of their English Conservative Bretwalda.another_richard said:
I don't think I've ever had a ballot paper with the description 'Conservative and Unionist Party' on it.rpjs said:
Surely the label "Conservative and Unionist Party" means the opposite? You can be a Conservative who's not a Unionist or a Unionist who's not a Conservative, but the Party is for those who are both.
Although correct me if I'm wrong but the Tories haven't actually gone by the moniker "Conservative and Unionist Party" for many years.
Nor, for example, did the voters of Maidenhead in 2017:
https://www3.rbwm.gov.uk/info/200394/election_results/1271/general_election_results_2017
And the Unionist bit refers to the union of Britain and Ireland and the Liberal Unionists of the 19th century so somewhat defunct now in any case.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_Party_(UK)#Conservatives_and_Unionists_(1867–1914)
The Scottish Unionists were merely the Scottish branch of the party:
' Following the merger of the Conservatives and Liberal Unionists to create the modern Conservative and Unionist Party in England and Wales, a committee was formed of the National Union of Conservative Associations for Scotland and regional Liberal Unionist associations which recommended a merger in Scotland. This was agreed in December 1912, creating the Scottish Unionist Association and the Unionist Party. '
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_Conservatives#The_Unionist_Party_(1912-1965)0 -
Pete Buttigieg to make special announcement April 14 | Local ...
https://www.southbendtribune.com/.../local/pete-buttigieg-to-make-special-announceme...
Unavailable for legal reasons, at least in EU...
What is this?
Not sure, as a heavy bettor on Pete, this sounds good.0 -
The Fiscal Compact.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes, Cameron did once.another_richard said:
Has the UK ever vetoed anything ?rcs1000 said:
We did have a veto. We just chose not to use it.Philip_Thompson said:
For example an unfavourable trade treaty ?0 -
That's right - Major thought it would be a vote winner to veto the Belgian PM and then meekly accepted the Luxemburg PM with identical views.viewcode said:
I read John Major's autobiography many years ago (it's good, btw). He described how he vetoed the other countries' choice of Commission Presidentanother_richard said:
Has the UK ever vetoed anything ?rcs1000 said:
We did have a veto. We just chose not to use it.Philip_Thompson said:
For example an unfavourable trade treaty ?0 -
They expect MPs to dump this crap PM.kle4 said:
I'm lost because I don't know what these activists expected given they can presumably count and can see that the PM doesn't have the numbers to even no deal, given workarounds are being made there. Do they think she opened talks with Corbyn lightly?rottenborough said:Telegraph: "Grassroots Conservative activists are "quitting in their droves", it has been claimed, as new polling shows that more than 90 per cent disagree with Theresa May's decision to open talks with Jeremy Corbyn."
I'm lost now.
I thought Blue Momentum was trying to get extra people to join to vote for Boris?
At least see if it goes anywhere first, see what the cost is. Because simply being open to working with others, even opponents, is not wrong. Particularly when you lack a majority.0 -
Didn't the EU just ignore his veto ?Philip_Thompson said:
Yes, Cameron did once.another_richard said:
Has the UK ever vetoed anything ?rcs1000 said:
We did have a veto. We just chose not to use it.Philip_Thompson said:
For example an unfavourable trade treaty ?0 -
To be replaced by whom in order to achieve what ?TGOHF said:
They expect MPs to dump this crap PM.kle4 said:
I'm lost because I don't know what these activists expected given they can presumably count and can see that the PM doesn't have the numbers to even no deal, given workarounds are being made there. Do they think she opened talks with Corbyn lightly?rottenborough said:Telegraph: "Grassroots Conservative activists are "quitting in their droves", it has been claimed, as new polling shows that more than 90 per cent disagree with Theresa May's decision to open talks with Jeremy Corbyn."
I'm lost now.
I thought Blue Momentum was trying to get extra people to join to vote for Boris?
At least see if it goes anywhere first, see what the cost is. Because simply being open to working with others, even opponents, is not wrong. Particularly when you lack a majority.0 -
Yes, but that doesn't get them no deal, or any other deal they might want, not with the parliamentary numbers as they are. One won't magically appear because May is gone, so it is just laziness to pretend otherwise.TGOHF said:
They expect MPs to dump this crap PM.kle4 said:
I'm lost because I don't know what these activists expected given they can presumably count and can see that the PM doesn't have the numbers to even no deal, given workarounds are being made there. Do they think she opened talks with Corbyn lightly?rottenborough said:Telegraph: "Grassroots Conservative activists are "quitting in their droves", it has been claimed, as new polling shows that more than 90 per cent disagree with Theresa May's decision to open talks with Jeremy Corbyn."
I'm lost now.
I thought Blue Momentum was trying to get extra people to join to vote for Boris?
At least see if it goes anywhere first, see what the cost is. Because simply being open to working with others, even opponents, is not wrong. Particularly when you lack a majority.0 -
Hmm. Ignore my last post. Seems Pete himself is advertising the 14th April gig
0 -
Thanks another Richard.
I'm trying to decide how many deposits the returning officer will have to repay. On the one hand a low turnout moves the 5% bar lower, but with so many minor parties standing you could see quite a large percentage of the vote split between lots of candidates with none of them saving their deposit.
I'm tempted to suggest the saved deposits will be Lab, Con and the disgraced former MP in third.
Any other ideas?0 -
https://twitter.com/PeteButtigieg/status/1113735738850447362
I am getting excited.
This has a feel of a massive, massive political upset. Maybe I am totally wrong, but still 9 on BF for nominee.
DYOR
0 -
To be better. Don’t be so binary. A sandwich with one turd in it is better than one with two.another_richard said:
To be replaced by whom in order to achieve what ?TGOHF said:
They expect MPs to dump this crap PM.kle4 said:
I'm lost because I don't know what these activists expected given they can presumably count and can see that the PM doesn't have the numbers to even no deal, given workarounds are being made there. Do they think she opened talks with Corbyn lightly?rottenborough said:Telegraph: "Grassroots Conservative activists are "quitting in their droves", it has been claimed, as new polling shows that more than 90 per cent disagree with Theresa May's decision to open talks with Jeremy Corbyn."
I'm lost now.
I thought Blue Momentum was trying to get extra people to join to vote for Boris?
At least see if it goes anywhere first, see what the cost is. Because simply being open to working with others, even opponents, is not wrong. Particularly when you lack a majority.0 -
I don't think that's true. John Major went down the opt-out route (which was also a right to opt-in) because his legal advice was that it could be done without us in any case.rcs1000 said:
We did have a veto. We just chose not to use it.Philip_Thompson said:0 -
Christchurch attacks: NZ suspect ordered to undergo mental health tests
BBC
0 -
You can't stop a bunch of other sovereign states from sharing a currency, so they could certainly have created a single currency outside the EU. Letting them do it inside the EU gives you a little bit of influence over what they're going to do anyway and no obvious downside.williamglenn said:
I don't think that's true. John Major went down the opt-out route (which was also a right to opt-in) because his legal advice was that it could be done without us in any case.rcs1000 said:
We did have a veto. We just chose not to use it.Philip_Thompson said:0 -
That's still not telling us how it would be better and how that would be achieved.TGOHF said:
To be better. Don’t be so binary. A sandwich with one turd in it is better than one with two.another_richard said:
To be replaced by whom in order to achieve what ?TGOHF said:
They expect MPs to dump this crap PM.kle4 said:
I'm lost because I don't know what these activists expected given they can presumably count and can see that the PM doesn't have the numbers to even no deal, given workarounds are being made there. Do they think she opened talks with Corbyn lightly?rottenborough said:Telegraph: "Grassroots Conservative activists are "quitting in their droves", it has been claimed, as new polling shows that more than 90 per cent disagree with Theresa May's decision to open talks with Jeremy Corbyn."
I'm lost now.
I thought Blue Momentum was trying to get extra people to join to vote for Boris?
At least see if it goes anywhere first, see what the cost is. Because simply being open to working with others, even opponents, is not wrong. Particularly when you lack a majority.0 -
Yes. Just as they built Schengen without us too.another_richard said:
Didn't the EU just ignore his veto ?Philip_Thompson said:
Yes, Cameron did once.another_richard said:
Has the UK ever vetoed anything ?rcs1000 said:
We did have a veto. We just chose not to use it.Philip_Thompson said:
For example an unfavourable trade treaty ?0 -
Ooh, now this is where it gets complicated. He did veto the watchamacallit as a EU thing, and - as was only right and proper - the EU abandoned it. But a little-known provision of the Treaty of Nice introduced "enhanced cooperation": a system whereby a subset of the EU could introduce a treaty of their own and use EU facilities. So the Euro-nations used that clause to do their own treaty, which they did. The Eurosceptics (a now rather nostalgic phrase) went ballistic, claiming that it was illegal. But "enhanced cooperation" had been discussed as a possible way forward when it looked as if Lisbon might fall, so it was neither illegal nor a surprise. Although given UK's later secession, it was a Pyrrhic victory...another_richard said:
Didn't the EU just ignore his veto ?Philip_Thompson said:
Yes, Cameron did once.another_richard said:
Has the UK ever vetoed anything ?rcs1000 said:
We did have a veto. We just chose not to use it.Philip_Thompson said:
For example an unfavourable trade treaty ?
0 -
It required a treaty so it required unanimity.williamglenn said:
I don't think that's true. John Major went down the opt-out route (which was also a right to opt-in) because his legal advice was that it could be done without us in any case.rcs1000 said:
We did have a veto. We just chose not to use it.Philip_Thompson said:
Of course, EMU could have been achieved entirely outside the existing EU framework, with the countries doing their own treaty (which is, of course, how Schengen started).
But the UK government decided it was better to be half in, than for the EU to be left behind by a new supranational entity in charge of the Single European Currency.0 -
Not sure if it was picked up earlier but Roger Helmer MEP has quit UKIP and is now supporting the Brexit party0
-
Charles Moore really is a vile disgusting human being . Why does QT continue to invite him on.0
-
Very solid Con hold in Wroxham, a safe Tory seat, small swing to LD
Greens push labour into 4th0 -
Schengen was initially created in 1985 as a treaty between five countries (and building on the historic Benelux free travel area). It only became an EU thing much later.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes. Just as they built Schengen without us too.another_richard said:
Didn't the EU just ignore his veto ?Philip_Thompson said:
Yes, Cameron did once.another_richard said:
Has the UK ever vetoed anything ?rcs1000 said:
We did have a veto. We just chose not to use it.Philip_Thompson said:
For example an unfavourable trade treaty ?0 -
Siôn Jenkins
@Sion_J
3m3 minutes ago
A couple of sources here tell me it’s looking very close between Labour and Conservative. So close, in fact, that they were predicting a recount! (Far too early to be making such predictions, if you ask me!) #NewportWest
0 replies 1 retweet 0 likes
0 -
I was shocked to read that he's only 62.nico67 said:Charles Moore really is a vile disgusting human being . Why does QT continue to invite him on.
0 -
Newport West upset on the cards?0
-
-
Because somebody else on the panel should use a logical argument to disprove what he is saying. It is called debate in non-authoritarian societies.nico67 said:Charles Moore really is a vile disgusting human being . Why does QT continue to invite him on.
0 -
-
0
-
Yes indeed it was half of the European Communities at the time, all the original members except Italy.rcs1000 said:
Schengen was initially created in 1985 as a treaty between five countries (and building on the historic Benelux free travel area). It only became an EU thing much later.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes. Just as they built Schengen without us too.another_richard said:
Didn't the EU just ignore his veto ?Philip_Thompson said:
Yes, Cameron did once.another_richard said:
Has the UK ever vetoed anything ?rcs1000 said:
We did have a veto. We just chose not to use it.Philip_Thompson said:
For example an unfavourable trade treaty ?
The Fiscal Compact followed the same precedence but including a much higher proportion of nations.0 -
Are you seriously telling me that a new leader couldn’t raise morale and enchance party unity ?another_richard said:
That's still not telling us how it would be better and how that would be achieved.TGOHF said:
To be better. Don’t be so binary. A sandwich with one turd in it is better than one with two.another_richard said:
To be replaced by whom in order to achieve what ?TGOHF said:
They expect MPs to dump this crap PM.kle4 said:
I'm lost because I don't know what these activists expected given they can presumably count and can see that the PM doesn't have the numbers to even no deal, given workarounds are being made there. Do they think she opened talks with Corbyn lightly?rottenborough said:Telegraph: "Grassroots Conservative activists are "quitting in their droves", it has been claimed, as new polling shows that more than 90 per cent disagree with Theresa May's decision to open talks with Jeremy Corbyn."
I'm lost now.
I thought Blue Momentum was trying to get extra people to join to vote for Boris?
At least see if it goes anywhere first, see what the cost is. Because simply being open to working with others, even opponents, is not wrong. Particularly when you lack a majority.
There are lots of ways forward better than Mays. Virtually any approach is.0 -
Fun fact of the day, the treaty used for Schengen was pretty much identical to the old one between Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxuembourg, just with a couple of extra countries inserted in.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes indeed it was half of the European Communities at the time, all the original members except Italy.rcs1000 said:
Schengen was initially created in 1985 as a treaty between five countries (and building on the historic Benelux free travel area). It only became an EU thing much later.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes. Just as they built Schengen without us too.another_richard said:
Didn't the EU just ignore his veto ?Philip_Thompson said:
Yes, Cameron did once.another_richard said:
Has the UK ever vetoed anything ?rcs1000 said:
We did have a veto. We just chose not to use it.Philip_Thompson said:
For example an unfavourable trade treaty ?
The Fiscal Compact followed the same precedence but including a much higher proportion of nations.0 -
Hmmmmm I wonder what the announcement will be?rottenborough said:https://twitter.com/PeteButtigieg/status/1113735738850447362
I am getting excited.
This has a feel of a massive, massive political upset. Maybe I am totally wrong, but still 9 on BF for nominee.
DYOR0 -
What is it with the English Right and Ireland? Every flipping time...nico67 said: 0 -
As there are 'lots of ways forward better than Mays' perhaps you could list a few.TGOHF said:
Are you seriously telling me that a new leader couldn’t raise morale and enchance party unity ?another_richard said:
That's still not telling us how it would be better and how that would be achieved.TGOHF said:
To be better. Don’t be so binary. A sandwich with one turd in it is better than one with two.another_richard said:
To be replaced by whom in order to achieve what ?TGOHF said:
They expect MPs to dump this crap PM.kle4 said:
I'm lost because I don't know what these activists expected given they can presumably count and can see that the PM doesn't have the numbers to even no deal, given workarounds are being made there. Do they think she opened talks with Corbyn lightly?rottenborough said:Telegraph: "Grassroots Conservative activists are "quitting in their droves", it has been claimed, as new polling shows that more than 90 per cent disagree with Theresa May's decision to open talks with Jeremy Corbyn."
I'm lost now.
I thought Blue Momentum was trying to get extra people to join to vote for Boris?
At least see if it goes anywhere first, see what the cost is. Because simply being open to working with others, even opponents, is not wrong. Particularly when you lack a majority.
There are lots of ways forward better than Mays. Virtually any approach is.0 -
I’m hearing that verification was completed early because of low turnout. #NewportWestByElection
— Felicity Evans (@felicityxevans) April 4, 20190 -
Roger Awan-Scully
Verified account @roger_scully
14s14 seconds ago
One question about Newport West was whether all the argumets about Brexit might mobilise angry voters, or if it would turn them off taking part.
From what we are hearing, it seems more likely that the latter has been the case.
0 -
I think Peston has some dodgy sources.
The likely outcome is a customs partnership , on certain sectors . May gives the rest of what Labour wants which isn’t that controversial .
No way she’ll go for a full CU .
0 -
Low turnout equals by election funtime
Could make it interesting0 -
I have deep doubts about any electoral prediction from anyone called Sion after this:brokenwheel said:Maybe the Con candidate was pretending?
https://www.twitter.com/Sion_J/status/1113936318868987905
https://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/conference/2007/09/labour-majority-increase0 -
UKIP windyedwoolie said:Low turnout equals by election funtime
Could make it interesting
[if that does happen, it was a joke, not prescience!]0 -
A few off the top of my head, could be done individually or in combination, coming from all sort of backs - though some are contradictory with others.another_richard said:
As there are 'lots of ways forward better than Mays' perhaps you could list a few.TGOHF said:
Are you seriously telling me that a new leader couldn’t raise morale and enchance party unity ?another_richard said:
That's still not telling us how it would be better and how that would be achieved.TGOHF said:
To be better. Don’t be so binary. A sandwich with one turd in it is better than one with two.another_richard said:
To be replaced by whom in order to achieve what ?TGOHF said:
They expect MPs to dump this crap PM.kle4 said:
I'm lost because I don't know what these activists expected given they can presumably count and can see that the PM doesn't have the numbers to even no deal, given workarounds are being made there. Do they think she opened talks with Corbyn lightly?rottenborough said:Telegraph: "Grassroots Conservative activists are "quitting in their droves", it has been claimed, as new polling shows that more than 90 per cent disagree with Theresa May's decision to open talks with Jeremy Corbyn."
I'm lost now.
I thought Blue Momentum was trying to get extra people to join to vote for Boris?
At least see if it goes anywhere first, see what the cost is. Because simply being open to working with others, even opponents, is not wrong. Particularly when you lack a majority.
There are lots of ways forward better than Mays. Virtually any approach is.
1: Take actions necessary to prepare for and enact No Deal if necessary [should have been done from start]
2: Have a General Election led by someone with more charisma than a zombie.
3: Have a PM with more charisma than a zombie.
4: Be prepared to propose and back an extension and a referendum.
5: Be prepared to propose and back an extension and a General Election to break the deadlock.
6: Be prepared to sack Chris Grayling*
* Doesn't solve Brexit but still worth doing.0 -
Could go either way from what we're hearing. If its closer than expected then it could be the former.marke09 said:
Roger Awan-Scully
Verified account @roger_scully
14s14 seconds ago
One question about Newport West was whether all the argumets about Brexit might mobilise angry voters, or if it would turn them off taking part.
From what we are hearing, it seems more likely that the latter has been the case.0 -
brokenwheel said:
Maybe the Con candidate was pretending?
https://www.twitter.com/Sion_J/status/1113936318868987905
Lab 1.01, so seems not.0 -
It does seem like this election will be a case of who loses the least.dyedwoolie said:Low turnout equals by election funtime
Could make it interesting
0 -
This Week says Newport West has a low turnout and a result could come in a bit earlier than expected0
-
1:30am for Newport West result.0
-
How's the campaign against Joe Biden going?0
-
It'll be interesting if Tory + UKIP is more than 50% in Newport West.marke09 said:
Roger Awan-Scully
Verified account @roger_scully
14s14 seconds ago
One question about Newport West was whether all the argumets about Brexit might mobilise angry voters, or if it would turn them off taking part.
From what we are hearing, it seems more likely that the latter has been the case.0 -
37.1% turnout0
-
Faisal saying labour source says both lab and con votes seem to be holding up0
-
Newport West: Turnout confirmed at 37.1% (-30.4 vs 2017)0
-
That’s not that bad.bigjohnowls said:37.1% turnout
0 -
23615 votes cast0
-
Extremely unlikely IMO. Though if it is and Lab hold then the UKIP voters will have ensured the seat went to a Remainer rather than a Leaver.AndyJS said:
It'll be interesting if Tory + UKIP is more than 50% in Newport West.marke09 said:
Roger Awan-Scully
Verified account @roger_scully
14s14 seconds ago
One question about Newport West was whether all the argumets about Brexit might mobilise angry voters, or if it would turn them off taking part.
From what we are hearing, it seems more likely that the latter has been the case.0 -
Turnout: 37.1% #NewportWest Votes: 23,6150
-
Labour expecting circa 10k votes0
-
Pitiful turnout, down there with David Davis pointless flounce by election
Edit- not as bad as I thought, ignore0 -
The first prediction, about a low turnout, turns out to be nonsense. 37% is pretty respectable for a by-election these days. Leeds Central in 1999 was only 19% IIRC. Maybe some more predictions about the result will also be wrong...0
-
...marke09 said:
Roger Awan-Scully
Verified account @roger_scully
14s14 seconds ago
One question about Newport West was whether all the argumets about Brexit might mobilise angry voters, or if it would turn them off taking part.
From what we are hearing, it seems more likely that the latter has been the case.
So it seems like the verdict is they're neither angry nor disillusioned, they're just kind of leaving the politicians to do politician things while they get on with their lives???marke09 said:Newport West: Turnout confirmed at 37.1% (-30.4 vs 2017)
0 -
Lewisham East was 33.3% turnoutdyedwoolie said:Pitiful turnout, down there with David Davis pointless flounce by election
0 -
Newport West is the 1,020th Westminster by-election since the 1918 General Election.0
-
2k maj if that is rightbigjohnowls said:Labour expecting circa 10k votes
0 -
Yeah I was hasty, I thought they usually got 50%, I see that isn't sobigjohnowls said:
Lewisham East was 33.3% turnoutdyedwoolie said:Pitiful turnout, down there with David Davis pointless flounce by election
0 -
I was banging on about (1) from the start. Even before we triggered Article 50, we should have been hiring additional staff for checking passports, building customs infrastructure at Dover, putting in place the right IT systems, etc.Philip_Thompson said:A few off the top of my head, could be done individually or in combination, coming from all sort of backs - though some are contradictory with others.
1: Take actions necessary to prepare for and enact No Deal if necessary [should have been done from start]
2: Have a General Election led by someone with more charisma than a zombie.
3: Have a PM with more charisma than a zombie.
4: Be prepared to propose and back an extension and a referendum.
5: Be prepared to propose and back an extension and a General Election to break the deadlock.
6: Be prepared to sack Chris Grayling*
* Doesn't solve Brexit but still worth doing.
The more prepared you are, the more credible the threat to walk away without a deal.
The other half to (1), of course, is that the government needed to have (initially at least) focused all their trade energies on rolling over existing deals. Instead, Dr Fox swanned around Washington, building up a team of trade negotiators for a deal that simply was never going to be plausible on a two year time horizon.
The more preparation you do for No Deal, the less likely you are to exit on No Deal terms.
There would always be dislocations from leaving without a Deal. But with proper planning they would have been manageable. Instead there has been negligible preparation, and we still haven't rolled over many of the most important trade agreements.
Proper Preparation Prevents Piss Poor Performance, I believe is the phrase...0 -
Prediction:
Labour 44%
Conservatives 40%0 -
TIL Bernie was kind of shady about his tax returns in 2016 (only release one year's worth) and is still being weird about them:
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/04/04/politics/bernie-sanders-tax-returns/index.html?utm_source=twCNNp&utm_term=image&utm_medium=social&utm_content=2019-04-04T20:59:08
The fact that he got away with this last time without it being a big deal is a sign of what an easy ride he got.0 -
Sounds like Kippers a poor 3rd0
-
Tories would bite your hand off for that in their current statenunuone said:Prediction:
Labour 44%
Conservatives 40%0 -
23k votes and 10k for Lab=hold?0
-
It would be close!dixiedean said:23k votes and 10k for Lab=hold?
0 -
I reckon Lab 40%
CON 32%
UKIP 22%0 -
No chance!bigjohnowls said:I reckon Lab 40%
CON 32%
UKIP 22%
If UKIP get double-digits they'll have done well.0 -
Lab- too high? Con- too low?bigjohnowls said:I reckon Lab 40%
CON 32%
UKIP 22%
UKIP who knows? Who cares?0 -
Prediction of a 4k hold from me, I'm going high ish.0
-
Let's see UKIP at least 20% I reckonPhilip_Thompson said:
No chance!bigjohnowls said:I reckon Lab 40%
CON 32%
UKIP 22%
If UKIP get double-digits they'll have done well.0 -
Do you stand by your previous comments that no deal preparation should have included building customs infrastructure on the Irish border?rcs1000 said:
I was banging on about (1) from the start. Even before we triggered Article 50, we should have been hiring additional staff for checking passports, building customs infrastructure at Dover, putting in place the right IT systems, etc.Philip_Thompson said:A few off the top of my head, could be done individually or in combination, coming from all sort of backs - though some are contradictory with others.
1: Take actions necessary to prepare for and enact No Deal if necessary [should have been done from start]
2: Have a General Election led by someone with more charisma than a zombie.
3: Have a PM with more charisma than a zombie.
4: Be prepared to propose and back an extension and a referendum.
5: Be prepared to propose and back an extension and a General Election to break the deadlock.
6: Be prepared to sack Chris Grayling*
* Doesn't solve Brexit but still worth doing.
The more prepared you are, the more credible the threat to walk away without a deal.
The other half to (1), of course, is that the government needed to have (initially at least) focused all their trade energies on rolling over existing deals. Instead, Dr Fox swanned around Washington, building up a team of trade negotiators for a deal that simply was never going to be plausible on a two year time horizon.
The more preparation you do for No Deal, the less likely you are to exit on No Deal terms.
There would always be dislocations from leaving without a Deal. But with proper planning they would have been manageable. Instead there has been negligible preparation, and we still haven't rolled over many of the most important trade agreements.
Proper Preparation Prevents Piss Poor Performance, I believe is the phrase...0 -
I don't really get the Buttigieg thing - he's pleasant enough, but basically a harmless centrist who does least well against Trump of all the candidates:
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/
Biden still doing much the best, though I'd prefer Sanders myself.0 -
You're totally wrongrottenborough said:https://twitter.com/PeteButtigieg/status/1113735738850447362
I am getting excited.
This has a feel of a massive, massive political upset. Maybe I am totally wrong, but still 9 on BF for nominee.
DYOR0 -
Want a £10 charity bet? I said sub-10%, you think at least 20% so we can put the bar at 15%?bigjohnowls said:
Let's see UKIP at least 20% I reckonPhilip_Thompson said:
No chance!bigjohnowls said:I reckon Lab 40%
CON 32%
UKIP 22%
If UKIP get double-digits they'll have done well.0 -
You're out of date, the phrase of our times is:rcs1000 said:
I was banging on about (1) from the start. Even before we triggered Article 50, we should have been hiring additional staff for checking passports, building customs infrastructure at Dover, putting in place the right IT systems, etc.Philip_Thompson said:A few off the top of my head, could be done individually or in combination, coming from all sort of backs - though some are contradictory with others.
1: Take actions necessary to prepare for and enact No Deal if necessary [should have been done from start]
2: Have a General Election led by someone with more charisma than a zombie.
3: Have a PM with more charisma than a zombie.
4: Be prepared to propose and back an extension and a referendum.
5: Be prepared to propose and back an extension and a General Election to break the deadlock.
6: Be prepared to sack Chris Grayling*
* Doesn't solve Brexit but still worth doing.
The more prepared you are, the more credible the threat to walk away without a deal.
The other half to (1), of course, is that the government needed to have (initially at least) focused all their trade energies on rolling over existing deals. Instead, Dr Fox swanned around Washington, building up a team of trade negotiators for a deal that simply was never going to be plausible on a two year time horizon.
The more preparation you do for No Deal, the less likely you are to exit on No Deal terms.
There would always be dislocations from leaving without a Deal. But with proper planning they would have been manageable. Instead there has been negligible preparation, and we still haven't rolled over many of the most important trade agreements.
Proper Preparation Prevents Piss Poor Performance, I believe is the phrase...
Public Posturing Produces Piss Poor Performance.0 -
Agents now discussing spoilt ballots result in 20 mins0
-
@DeansOfCardiff
17s
18 seconds ago
More
Candidate agents being summoned to discuss spoiled ballots #NewportWest
0 -
NickPalmer said:
I don't really get the Buttigieg thing - he's pleasant enough, but basically a harmless centrist who does least well against Trump of all the candidates:
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/
Biden still doing much the best, though I'd prefer Sanders myself.
https://jacobinmag.com/2019/04/pete-buttigieg-president-democratic-primary0 -
Yes that's finePhilip_Thompson said:
Want a £10 charity bet? I said sub-10%, you think at least 20% so we can put the bar at 15%?bigjohnowls said:
Let's see UKIP at least 20% I reckonPhilip_Thompson said:
No chance!bigjohnowls said:I reckon Lab 40%
CON 32%
UKIP 22%
If UKIP get double-digits they'll have done well.0 -
Shame we won't get to see the comments written on those spoilt ballots!marke09 said:@DeansOfCardiff
17s
18 seconds ago
More
Candidate agents being summoned to discuss spoiled ballots #NewportWest0
