This speech shows why Corbyn and his supporters have one strategic aim and one only - force an election - and are prepared to countenance absolutely anything to get there. It's a rerun of his 2017 campaign and IMO, as someone from the centre/centre-right, it does have an impact and will likely shore up the traditional heartlands vote and improve his ratings/polling during any campaign.
What I think will still prevent it making as much a difference as 2017, is Corbyn himself. That brief lustre has gone and won't return.
”Even Jesus Christ only had the one resurrection.”
This may be a minority view but I think over the course of a GE campaign Corbyn would knock spots off Johnson. He did so with May, and he is if anything less well equiped than her for such a contest. He's good at bluster and rhetoric, but he's not a details man, and he's lazy.
I suspect this is part of Labour's calculations.
Edit: At Lords yesterday for my first live glimpse of Archer and he looks the real deal.
Why does Johnson need details? The whole campaign he will kept away from any in depth interviews, probably wont do a leader debate etc etc.
He will just pop up all over the country baying about 'Will of the people' and Back Boris.
Although that attitude was a significant reason for TMay's lack of success last time. Journalists and broadcasters want their jobs to be made easy for them.
This speech shows why Corbyn and his supporters have one strategic aim and one only - force an election - and are prepared to countenance absolutely anything to get there. It's a rerun of his 2017 campaign and IMO, as someone from the centre/centre-right, it does have an impact and will likely shore up the traditional heartlands vote and improve his ratings/polling during any campaign.
What I think will still prevent it making as much a difference as 2017, is Corbyn himself. That brief lustre has gone and won't return.
”Even Jesus Christ only had the one resurrection.”
This may be a minority view but I think over the course of a GE campaign Corbyn would knock spots off Johnson. He did so with May, and he is if anything less well equiped than her for such a contest. He's good at bluster and rhetoric, but he's not a details man, and he's lazy.
I suspect this is part of Labour's calculations.
Edit: At Lords yesterday for my first live glimpse of Archer and he looks the real deal.
Jezzas big advantage is he ignores the press and gets mcdonnell to do the media performing
In fairness, you have to say he did not do that during the previous GE campaign.
And just think had he been successful he could have been King of Scotland aligned with Catholic Europe and Scotland would have been in the UK just 38 years and likely still staying in the EU or else there could have been a Francophile on the English throne and the 7 years war would never have happened nor would much of Canada and India ended up in British hands and there may not even have been an American Revolution either
And just think had he been successful he could have been King of Scotland aligned with Catholic Europe and Scotland would have been in the UK just 38 years and likely still staying in the EU
I think he was aiming at being king of the Union, wasn't he. Of course if he'd limited his ambitions to Scotland the Hanoverians might have said whatever the German for F**k it is, and let him get on with it. Although as a Catholic he wouldn't have been universally popular in Scotland.
frankly I thinbk theyre both doing the right thing
R4 just harangues its guests and doesnt actually provide much enlightenment
I am not sure that Macmillan and Gaitskell went on the Today programme to face Jack de Manio. Did Alec Douglas - Home?
political reporting has all gone a bit wonky since everyone decided to impersonate Paxman.
Maybe. Personally I am happy to see politicians refuse to bow to the demands of the media. What right do broadcasters have to insist that party leaders take part in Debates etc?
And just think had he been successful he could have been King of Scotland aligned with Catholic Europe and Scotland would have been in the UK just 38 years and likely still staying in the EU
I think he was aiming at being king of the Union, wasn't he. Of course if he'd limited his ambitions to Scotland the Hanoverians might have said whatever the German for F**k it is, and let him get on with it. Although as a Catholic he wouldn't have been universally popular in Scotland.
He reached Derby and there was a major argument amongst the Jacobite as to whether to go further, certainly Protestant lowlanders remained loyal to George and many fought on the Hanoverian side
That is as clear as mud, but basically says Gove is a lying toerag.
The government so far has claimed:
1) it was a worst case scenario (it wasn't) 2) it's for planning purposes, not a working hypothesis (it's a working hypothesis - see, for example, the sections on Northern Ireland) 3) it's out of date (it's from 1 August) 4) it's been leaked by filthy treacherous Remainer politicians (this seems inherently unlikely, given when the report was produced and what the Sunday Times said about it)
That is as clear as mud, but basically says Gove is a lying toerag.
The government so far has claimed:
1) it was a worst case scenario (it wasn't) 2) it's for planning purposes, not a working hypothesis (it's a working hypothesis - see, for example, the sections on Northern Ireland) 3) it's out of date (it's from 1 August) 4) it's been leaked by filthy treacherous Remainer politicians (this seems inherently unlikely, given when the report was produced and what the Sunday Times said about it)
"All over the place" doesn't begin to cover it.
Is it any more incoherent than claiming No Deal will not be a disaster but we nevertheless must negotiate a deal to avoid it?
So like the original referendum, when half the government campaigned one way and half the other?
And that was a BAD thing.
Labour copying it is not a good thing...
Vast majority of the Tories, the Liberals and about 30% of the Labour Party on one side. 60% (10% seemed undecided) and the rump of the Tories against. Seemed to work!
On the diabetes thing and insulin - Danes will get in their cars and bring it over personally if their is any kind of risk to the supply chain - Denmark will not under any circumstances constrain deliveries of insulin to the UK - any civil servant working on Yellowhammer who doesn't understand this is a scaremongering idiot. IT WILL NOT HAPPEN.
Do they have some magic way of avoiding the probable channel ports bottleneck?
"For our personal consumption. We are visiting your Cadbury's World...."
The problem is not just the physical bottleneck at the customs but how do you ensure that the insulin being imported is of good quality. A Chinese supplier of poor quality insulin can supply it into Europe if it declares the product is not for use in the EC. If then his insulin is brought to the border of the UK how do you distinguish between the cheap Chinese product and the good quality Danish product? Is this the responsibility of an untrained customs official. Do we put the few remaining MHRA staff who have not already moved to Netherlands on the border and if so whose is sorting out setting up new regulations.
There are serious management issues with a large number of big decisions needed to be made fast and a lack of trained people to make the decisions. Most of the industry will have no incentive to take risks. Much easier for the Danes to sell to Germany and wait for things to clear in the UK than risk having their product rejected and taking a loss.
Note I am not a doctor of philosophy but I have built up a good sized UK owned medical device company from scratch. I may not be an expert on everything like some on this board but this is my specialist subject which I live and breathe every day.
Bar codes, lot numbers?
FFS for someone in the industry you talk a lot of crap. Novo and Lilly know how to manage insulin supply and to differentiate from cheap Chinese rubbish.
quite - most of this is rubbish - Even Channel 4 FactCheck accepted Novo's stated position as being that they had no reason to expect supply disruption. Also as the Germans make more insulin than the Danes I don't see a simple market switch - as a determined remainer resident of an EU country all I see is a lot of people revelling in crisis porn for no real reason.
You are falling into exactly the same trap as many liberal Democrats did in 2004, arrogantly believing anyone could beat George W Bush and ignoring the support he still had in much of middle America
I could be reading this wrong, that is certainly possible, but it's not arrogance - it's faith in the American people. My belief that they are, fundamentally and on the whole, a decent bunch.
I get (just about) why they went for him over HRC in 2016. OK, it was close, and a bit flukey, but he did win and so they did get him, and by Nov 2020 they will have had him for 4 years.
If having experienced it they decide they want another 4 - well then I will have to re-assess my view of America and Americans. That would be terrible for both me and them, so let's hope it is not necessary. I don't think it will be.
Although I deplore the attack on Owen Jones and don’t believe violence is acceptable in any side...
Why are we so sure that Owen was attacked by political opponents?
It seems far more likely to me it was just a senseless and possibly homophobic late night attack.
I don’t believe Owen is a household name, he is unlikely to be recognised at 3am, and while he undoubtedly subjected to hateful stuff on Twitter, so is everyone else on there.
OJ is a hate figure for the far right though. He is a household name in those particular houses.
I'm hearing speculation that the attack on Owen Jones was a false flag event.
The perps were neither homophobic nor far right activists but rather were antifa people - objective being to allow Jones to get all over the media and spread his commie poison.
Shame on him if this is true. If it is, I will be burning my copy of 'Chavs: The Demonization of the Working Class'.
And just think had he been successful he could have been King of Scotland aligned with Catholic Europe and Scotland would have been in the UK just 38 years and likely still staying in the EU or else there could have been a Francophile on the English throne and the 7 years war would never have happened nor would much of Canada and India ended up in British hands and there may not even have been an American Revolution either
It's an interesting counterfactual and relies on England being prepared to accept a potentially hostile independent Scotland allied to a hostile foreign power which seems improbable. It's also worth mentioning many Scots were hostile to Charles and I believe at Culloden there were more Scots in the ranks of the Hanoverians than fought for the Jacobites, The truth was many lowlanders were doing very well out of the Union and saw no reason to support the return to an economically profligate independent Scotland so even if the Hanoverians hadn't crossed the border King Charles would have faced all sorts of internal rebellion (he was a Catholic trying to rule Calvinists).
I think the populace in Edinburgh and Glasgow and in the lowlands would never have accepted Charles and would have forced him into the Highlands. French money would have been needed to hold the Stuart throne and system together and pay for mercenaries to control the population but France was bankrupt by the 1780s and I doubt Charles or his successors would have been enamoured of events in 1788-89.
The fall of the French monarchy would have ravaged the Scottish monarchy - perhaps, given the emerging middle class we'd have had a Scottish Revolution which would have been a huge threat to England. Would the Scottish Republic, allied with Bonaparte, have invaded England - would such an invasion have succeeded?
I'm hearing speculation that the attack on Owen Jones was a false flag event.
The perps were neither homophobic nor far right activists but rather were antifa people - objective being to allow Jones to get all over the media and spread his commie poison.
Shame on him if this is true. If it is, I will be burning my copy of 'Chavs: The Demonization of the Working Class'.
We don't know who or what performed this attack. And we may never find out.
But - for all I have no time for Owen Jones - that strikes me as ridiculously far-fetched. I would have thought it was mos tprobably a bunch of homophobes out to duff up some people as a sick perverted way of amusing themselves. That's especially true given there have been several other such attacks in London recently.
So like the original referendum, when half the government campaigned one way and half the other?
I don't see a big problem with Labour negotiating a new (soft) Brexit deal and then allowing their people to campaign on either side in a referendum on it versus Remain. It's the Wilson precedent. Clearly the vast majority would be for Remain so why strong-arm Labour leavers? Just allow the split.
Neither do I think the EU would have a problem. A very closely aligned Brexit or Remain? Both are very acceptable outcomes from their point of view.
So like the original referendum, when half the government campaigned one way and half the other?
I don't see a big problem with Labour negotiating a new (soft) Brexit deal and then allowing their people to campaign on either side in a referendum on it versus Remain. It's the Wilson precedent. Clearly the vast majority would be for Remain so why strong-arm Labour leavers? Just allow the split.
Neither do I think the EU would have a problem. A very closely aligned Brexit or Remain? Both are very acceptable outcomes from their point of view.
This presupposes that Lexiters would content themselves with a realistically negotiable option without the same kind of radicalisation we've seen on the right.
But - for all I have no time for Owen Jones - that strikes me as ridiculously far-fetched. I would have thought it was mos tprobably a bunch of homophobes out to duff up some people as a sick perverted way of amusing themselves. That's especially true given there have been several other such attacks in London recently.
Indeed. I DO have time for him - quite a lot - but even with my bias the theory is clearly risible.
It could be a vanilla homophobic attack, yes, but IMO it is more likely that he was specifically targeted by far right thugs due to his political profile.
Although it is difficult to uncouple the two motives. He is such a hate figure for the far right because he is a mouthy young leftie with a big media profile AND is noisily gay (as it were) and very active on LGBT issues.
@148grss violence in the streets will just lead to Tory majorities. Brits do not like violence.
Correct. And it's simply a bad thing in itself, irrespective of electoral consequences. We should collectively decide what sort of statements are so inflammatory that they need to be illegal (e.g. "Let's kill all the (ethnic group)"), and defeat any other repellent sentiments by argument, not fists.
In general, I've always found that one can win arguments simply by having a more reasonable tone than opponents. People react against both violence and violent expression of feelings. 1930s Germany shows the dangers of meeting violent hatred with violent hatred.
The far right understand how these tactics work. They understand that democratic societies and liberal elites fetishise free speech and tolerance etc. and use it to their advantage. That is why far right activists love to claim they are being shut down, and how their free speech is being infringed when they are the minority, and the moment they get any power they immediately take that privilege away from everyone. They weaponise any virtue of liberal democracy and turn it against itself.
Exactly the same might be said about the far Left or Islamism.
So like the original referendum, when half the government campaigned one way and half the other?
I don't see a big problem with Labour negotiating a new (soft) Brexit deal and then allowing their people to campaign on either side in a referendum on it versus Remain. It's the Wilson precedent. Clearly the vast majority would be for Remain so why strong-arm Labour leavers? Just allow the split.
Neither do I think the EU would have a problem. A very closely aligned Brexit or Remain? Both are very acceptable outcomes from their point of view.
This presupposes that Lexiters would content themselves with a realistically negotiable option without the same kind of radicalisation we've seen on the right.
Corbyn's deal is just going to be May's deal + customs union. Why would the EU refuse that?
So like the original referendum, when half the government campaigned one way and half the other?
I don't see a big problem with Labour negotiating a new (soft) Brexit deal and then allowing their people to campaign on either side in a referendum on it versus Remain. It's the Wilson precedent. Clearly the vast majority would be for Remain so why strong-arm Labour leavers? Just allow the split.
Neither do I think the EU would have a problem. A very closely aligned Brexit or Remain? Both are very acceptable outcomes from their point of view.
This presupposes that Lexiters would content themselves with a realistically negotiable option without the same kind of radicalisation we've seen on the right.
Corbyn's deal is just going to be May's deal + customs union. Why would the EU refuse that?
Corbyn's idea of a customs union isn't the same as the EU's.
So like the original referendum, when half the government campaigned one way and half the other?
I don't see a big problem with Labour negotiating a new (soft) Brexit deal and then allowing their people to campaign on either side in a referendum on it versus Remain. It's the Wilson precedent. Clearly the vast majority would be for Remain so why strong-arm Labour leavers? Just allow the split.
Neither do I think the EU would have a problem. A very closely aligned Brexit or Remain? Both are very acceptable outcomes from their point of view.
This presupposes that Lexiters would content themselves with a realistically negotiable option without the same kind of radicalisation we've seen on the right.
Corbyn's deal is just going to be May's deal + customs union. Why would the EU refuse that?
Boris and Priti lining up another hostage to fortune re ending free movement overnight. The deadline for applications for settled status is December. How many trust the Home Office to process the applications in an efficient, orderly, fair and consistent manner? Hands up? How many expect to see landlords, employers and employees tied up in the Courts for months and years?
Boris and Priti lining up another hostage to fortune re ending free movement overnight. The deadline for applications for settled status is December. How many trust the Home Office to process the applications in an efficient, orderly, fair and consistent manner? Hands up? How many expect to see landlords, employers and employees tied up in the Courts for months and years?
What an utter shambles.
This proposal is a complete breach of the very clear promise made by the official Leave campaign during the referendum. So yet another example of them trying to do something for which they have no mandate.
'For The Record' is the title of the autobiography by David Cameron (pbuh)
Why? What record was he going for?
You misunderstand, it is one of several versions intended for newspaper serialisation. "For The [Daily] Record" is all about victory in Indyref and what a cow that Sturgeon woman is, whereas "For The Telegraph" deals more with his second thoughts about gay marriage, and how he intended to reintroduce National Service in his third term. And so on.
So like the original referendum, when half the government campaigned one way and half the other?
I don't see a big problem with Labour negotiating a new (soft) Brexit deal and then allowing their people to campaign on either side in a referendum on it versus Remain. It's the Wilson precedent. Clearly the vast majority would be for Remain so why strong-arm Labour leavers? Just allow the split.
Neither do I think the EU would have a problem. A very closely aligned Brexit or Remain? Both are very acceptable outcomes from their point of view.
This presupposes that Lexiters would content themselves with a realistically negotiable option without the same kind of radicalisation we've seen on the right.
Corbyn's deal is just going to be May's deal + customs union. Why would the EU refuse that?
You are falling into exactly the same trap as many liberal Democrats did in 2004, arrogantly believing anyone could beat George W Bush and ignoring the support he still had in much of middle America
I could be reading this wrong, that is certainly possible, but it's not arrogance - it's faith in the American people. My belief that they are, fundamentally and on the whole, a decent bunch.
I get (just about) why they went for him over HRC in 2016. OK, it was close, and a bit flukey, but he did win and so they did get him, and by Nov 2020 they will have had him for 4 years.
If having experienced it they decide they want another 4 - well then I will have to re-assess my view of America and Americans. That would be terrible for both me and them, so let's hope it is not necessary. I don't think it will be.
The American People did no such thing. The American People voted for Hillary Clinton by a goodly margin. Trumpton won the Electoral College, but that’s not the same thing.
Boris and Priti lining up another hostage to fortune re ending free movement overnight. The deadline for applications for settled status is December. How many trust the Home Office to process the applications in an efficient, orderly, fair and consistent manner? Hands up? How many expect to see landlords, employers and employees tied up in the Courts for months and years?
What an utter shambles.
This proposal is a complete breach of the very clear promise made by the official Leave campaign during the referendum. So yet another example of them trying to do something for which they have no mandate.
Why isn’t the press picking them up on this?
The Leave campaign said there wouldn’t be an end to freedom of movement? Or that it wouldn’t affect the people already in the UK?
So like the original referendum, when half the government campaigned one way and half the other?
I don't see a big problem with Labour negotiating a new (soft) Brexit deal and then allowing their people to campaign on either side in a referendum on it versus Remain. It's the Wilson precedent. Clearly the vast majority would be for Remain so why strong-arm Labour leavers? Just allow the split.
Neither do I think the EU would have a problem. A very closely aligned Brexit or Remain? Both are very acceptable outcomes from their point of view.
This presupposes that Lexiters would content themselves with a realistically negotiable option without the same kind of radicalisation we've seen on the right.
Corbyn's deal is just going to be May's deal + customs union. Why would the EU refuse that?
How on earth do you know?
It doesn't matter what his ideas are or what they mean. he won't be in a position to do anything about them. Which is exactly for the moment how he wants it to be.
You are falling into exactly the same trap as many liberal Democrats did in 2004, arrogantly believing anyone could beat George W Bush and ignoring the support he still had in much of middle America
I could be reading this wrong, that is certainly possible, but it's not arrogance - it's faith in the American people. My belief that they are, fundamentally and on the whole, a decent bunch.
I get (just about) why they went for him over HRC in 2016. OK, it was close, and a bit flukey, but he did win and so they did get him, and by Nov 2020 they will have had him for 4 years.
If having experienced it they decide they want another 4 - well then I will have to re-assess my view of America and Americans. That would be terrible for both me and them, so let's hope it is not necessary. I don't think it will be.
The American People did no such thing. The American People voted for Hillary Clinton by a goodly margin. Trumpton won the Electoral College, but that’s not the same thing.
He won it according to the rules, so if the rules are giving the wrong answer they need changing.
We're pretty sure now that the role of Cambridge Analytica played a big part is his success, as it did in our Referendum.
Do we know who Cummings is using now that that CA is in liquidation?
Off topic, the latest video doesn't look good for Randy Andy, does it?
Depends whether you believe in guilt by association or not.
Association with a convicted paedophile, on video, when you are a major public figure never looks good. Course Andrew never was blessed with brain power.
So like the original referendum, when half the government campaigned one way and half the other?
I don't see a big problem with Labour negotiating a new (soft) Brexit deal and then allowing their people to campaign on either side in a referendum on it versus Remain. It's the Wilson precedent. Clearly the vast majority would be for Remain so why strong-arm Labour leavers? Just allow the split.
Neither do I think the EU would have a problem. A very closely aligned Brexit or Remain? Both are very acceptable outcomes from their point of view.
This presupposes that Lexiters would content themselves with a realistically negotiable option without the same kind of radicalisation we've seen on the right.
Corbyn's deal is just going to be May's deal + customs union. Why would the EU refuse that?
How on earth do you know?
He said it publicly a few months ago
Given Corbyn's record, that would appear to be good evidence he intends to go for No Deal and torpedoing any ship that dares enter the English Channel.
(Yes, I am being slightly sarcastic. At the same time, what Corbyn says is not good evidence of anything. The real reason his deal would have to be WA+CU is because the former won't change much whoever is in charge or whatever is proposed and the latter is the only significant point ofmdifference he had with May.)
Boris and Priti lining up another hostage to fortune re ending free movement overnight. The deadline for applications for settled status is December. How many trust the Home Office to process the applications in an efficient, orderly, fair and consistent manner? Hands up? How many expect to see landlords, employers and employees tied up in the Courts for months and years?
What an utter shambles.
Just part of the plan to force a genuine choice between the realities of a no deal or a deal. Both the EU and the UK parliament are faced with a government prepared to take it to the wire in order to get a deal. Very much what TM has been criticised for not doing. It is ruthless because this level of negotiation is a ruthless game; the EU have played it thus all along. Our government is just starting. About time too. There will be a deal.
Boris and Priti lining up another hostage to fortune re ending free movement overnight. The deadline for applications for settled status is December. How many trust the Home Office to process the applications in an efficient, orderly, fair and consistent manner? Hands up? How many expect to see landlords, employers and employees tied up in the Courts for months and years?
What an utter shambles.
This proposal is a complete breach of the very clear promise made by the official Leave campaign during the referendum. So yet another example of them trying to do something for which they have no mandate.
Why isn’t the press picking them up on this?
The Leave campaign said there wouldn’t be an end to freedom of movement? Or that it wouldn’t affect the people already in the UK?
They stated that we wouldn't be leaving without a deal.
Boris and Priti lining up another hostage to fortune re ending free movement overnight. The deadline for applications for settled status is December. How many trust the Home Office to process the applications in an efficient, orderly, fair and consistent manner? Hands up? How many expect to see landlords, employers and employees tied up in the Courts for months and years?
What an utter shambles.
This proposal is a complete breach of the very clear promise made by the official Leave campaign during the referendum. So yet another example of them trying to do something for which they have no mandate.
Why isn’t the press picking them up on this?
The Leave campaign said there wouldn’t be an end to freedom of movement? Or that it wouldn’t affect the people already in the UK?
They stated that we wouldn't be leaving without a deal.
Oh, it was a more general point rather than about freedom of movement specifically. My apologies!
You are falling into exactly the same trap as many liberal Democrats did in 2004, arrogantly believing anyone could beat George W Bush and ignoring the support he still had in much of middle America
I could be reading this wrong, that is certainly possible, but it's not arrogance - it's faith in the American people. My belief that they are, fundamentally and on the whole, a decent bunch.
I get (just about) why they went for him over HRC in 2016. OK, it was close, and a bit flukey, but he did win and so they did get him, and by Nov 2020 they will have had him for 4 years.
If having experienced it they decide they want another 4 - well then I will have to re-assess my view of America and Americans. That would be terrible for both me and them, so let's hope it is not necessary. I don't think it will be.
The American People did no such thing. The American People voted for Hillary Clinton by a goodly margin. Trumpton won the Electoral College, but that’s not the same thing.
He won it according to the rules, so if the rules are giving the wrong answer they need changing.
Here have been moves to try and change that. But so far they have not got very far and what progress they have made is fragile and uncertain.
Boris and Priti lining up another hostage to fortune re ending free movement overnight. The deadline for applications for settled status is December. How many trust the Home Office to process the applications in an efficient, orderly, fair and consistent manner? Hands up? How many expect to see landlords, employers and employees tied up in the Courts for months and years?
What an utter shambles.
Just part of the plan to force a genuine choice between the realities of a no deal or a deal. Both the EU and the UK parliament are faced with a government prepared to take it to the wire in order to get a deal. Very much what TM has been criticised for not doing. It is ruthless because this level of negotiation is a ruthless game; the EU have played it thus all along. Our government is just starting. About time too. There will be a deal.
Why will there be a deal. If I was the EU - I would be letting Boris get on with it - as he is the one who will own No Deal.
Labour's brexit position is fine. Any remainer should be happy enough with it. Corbyn has clearly been forced down the remain road no matter how reluctant he is. McDonnell seems to have become an almost genuine convert to remain now (more likely he's smarter than Corbyn and sees that no brexit outcome will lead to a socialist utopia). They don't need to be as pro eu as the lib dems, they only need to be more remain than the Tories. The Wilson gambit of staying neutral after negotiating isn't really a contradiction at all. You negotiate a deal because the country voted for Brexit 3 years ago, then you put it to a vote and let the country pick a final choice now that brexit has been defined. You stay out of it because it is an issue that divides the party.
This is why Boris's election is likely to backfire. It relies not just on picking up the BXP vote but also that there is a big split opposition vote, with Lab voters going LD and not the other way round. When push comes to shove, LD inclined voters in Lab/Con battlegrounds will go Lab on the whole. Some will prefer no deal Boris to Corbyn, most won't, and everyone will be aware of the stakes.
'For The Record' is the title of the autobiography by David Cameron (pbuh)
It's all very sad - there's a reality somewhere where the Coalition is in its ninth year of Government and David Cameron and Nick Clegg are discussing the objectives for the third Coalition Government.
Seriously, the philosophical convergence of Orange Bookers and "liberal conservatives" which made the theory of Coalition possible couldn't survive the practice and the traditional pull of the comfort zones proved too strong. Cameron made the Coalition a reality and ended it by allowing the ruthless destruction of the LDs aided and abetted by Clegg. The problem was the majority he won in 2015 turned out to be a chimera when he tried to use his own personality and popularity to force through a Remain vote.
It turned out the popularity he enjoyed as Prime Minister in 2015 didn't cut into the long-developing anti-EU anti-politics feeling in many parts of the country.
Boris and Priti lining up another hostage to fortune re ending free movement overnight. The deadline for applications for settled status is December. How many trust the Home Office to process the applications in an efficient, orderly, fair and consistent manner? Hands up? How many expect to see landlords, employers and employees tied up in the Courts for months and years?
What an utter shambles.
This proposal is a complete breach of the very clear promise made by the official Leave campaign during the referendum. So yet another example of them trying to do something for which they have no mandate.
Why isn’t the press picking them up on this?
The Leave campaign said there wouldn’t be an end to freedom of movement? Or that it wouldn’t affect the people already in the UK?
They stated that we wouldn't be leaving without a deal.
Oh, it was a more general point rather than about freedom of movement specifically. My apologies!
The Leave campaign made a very specific promise that the rights of EU nationals here would not be worsened. This latest proposal seems to break that, though this may be because it is as yet so unclear.
Boris and Priti lining up another hostage to fortune re ending free movement overnight. The deadline for applications for settled status is December. How many trust the Home Office to process the applications in an efficient, orderly, fair and consistent manner? Hands up? How many expect to see landlords, employers and employees tied up in the Courts for months and years?
What an utter shambles.
This proposal is a complete breach of the very clear promise made by the official Leave campaign during the referendum. So yet another example of them trying to do something for which they have no mandate.
Why isn’t the press picking them up on this?
The Leave campaign said there wouldn’t be an end to freedom of movement? Or that it wouldn’t affect the people already in the UK?
They stated that we wouldn't be leaving without a deal.
When people voted in the referendum they knew that after two years we left with or without a deal and that any extra time was not in the UKs gift. You cannot have voted leave without embracing the possibility of no deal. It is a logical impossibility.
Boris and Priti lining up another hostage to fortune re ending free movement overnight. The deadline for applications for settled status is December. How many trust the Home Office to process the applications in an efficient, orderly, fair and consistent manner? Hands up? How many expect to see landlords, employers and employees tied up in the Courts for months and years?
What an utter shambles.
This proposal is a complete breach of the very clear promise made by the official Leave campaign during the referendum. So yet another example of them trying to do something for which they have no mandate.
Why isn’t the press picking them up on this?
The Leave campaign said there wouldn’t be an end to freedom of movement? Or that it wouldn’t affect the people already in the UK?
They stated that we wouldn't be leaving without a deal.
When people voted in the referendum they knew that after two years we left with or without a deal and that any extra time was not in the UKs gift. You cannot have voted leave without embracing the possibility of no deal. It is a logical impossibility.
You can when both Leaders of Leave explicitly dismissed the risk of No Deal every time it was mentioned by the remain side.
Boris and Priti lining up another hostage to fortune re ending free movement overnight. The deadline for applications for settled status is December. How many trust the Home Office to process the applications in an efficient, orderly, fair and consistent manner? Hands up? How many expect to see landlords, employers and employees tied up in the Courts for months and years?
What an utter shambles.
This proposal is a complete breach of the very clear promise made by the official Leave campaign during the referendum. So yet another example of them trying to do something for which they have no mandate.
Why isn’t the press picking them up on this?
The Leave campaign said there wouldn’t be an end to freedom of movement? Or that it wouldn’t affect the people already in the UK?
They stated that we wouldn't be leaving without a deal.
Oh, it was a more general point rather than about freedom of movement specifically. My apologies!
The Leave campaign made a very specific promise that the rights of EU nationals here would not be worsened. This latest proposal seems to break that, though this may be because it is as yet so unclear.
Their rights to live and work in the UK will be maintained, that’s the point of the settled status scheme. As EU nationals they will also retain the right to live and work in the EU.
On the diabetes thing and insulin - Danes will get in their cars and bring it over personally if their is any kind of risk to the supply chain - Denmark will not under any circumstances constrain deliveries of insulin to the UK - any civil servant working on Yellowhammer who doesn't understand this is a scaremongering idiot. IT WILL NOT HAPPEN.
Do they have some magic way of avoiding the probable channel ports bottleneck?
"For our personal consumption. We are visiting your Cadbury's World...."
Note I am not a doctor of philosophy but I have built up a good sized UK owned medical device company from scratch. I may not be an expert on everything like some on this board but this is my specialist subject which I live and breathe every day.
Bar codes, lot numbers?
FFS for someone in the industry you talk a lot of crap. Novo and Lilly know how to manage insulin supply and to differentiate from cheap Chinese rubbish.
quite - most of this is rubbish - Even Channel 4 FactCheck accepted Novo's stated position as being that they had no reason to expect supply disruption. Also as the Germans make more insulin than the Danes I don't see a simple market switch - as a determined remainer resident of an EU country all I see is a lot of people revelling in crisis porn for no real reason.
Indeedy-doody.
Novo Nordisk et al manage the whole supply chain into this country afaik.
The American People did no such thing. The American People voted for Hillary Clinton by a goodly margin. Trumpton won the Electoral College, but that’s not the same thing.
That's what I meant when I said his win was a bit flukey. Which gives me even more confidence that it will not be repeated.
My main concerns are (i) dirty tricks as it becomes clear he is losing, and (ii) if the result is anything but a landslide the difficulty of levering him out of the White House - legal challenges, emotive appeals to his base, smearing of the electoral process etc.
Off topic, the latest video doesn't look good for Randy Andy, does it?
Depends whether you believe in guilt by association or not.
Association with a convicted paedophile, on video, when you are a major public figure never looks good. Course Andrew never was blessed with brain power.
Boris and Priti lining up another hostage to fortune re ending free movement overnight. The deadline for applications for settled status is December. How many trust the Home Office to process the applications in an efficient, orderly, fair and consistent manner? Hands up? How many expect to see landlords, employers and employees tied up in the Courts for months and years?
What an utter shambles.
This proposal is a complete breach of the very clear promise made by the official Leave campaign during the referendum. So yet another example of them trying to do something for which they have no mandate.
Why isn’t the press picking them up on this?
The Leave campaign said there wouldn’t be an end to freedom of movement? Or that it wouldn’t affect the people already in the UK?
They stated that we wouldn't be leaving without a deal.
When people voted in the referendum they knew that after two years we left with or without a deal and that any extra time was not in the UKs gift. You cannot have voted leave without embracing the possibility of no deal. It is a logical impossibility.
Does one "embrace" possibilities? Anyway, your point is a bad one. In the rules of sport there are default provisions as to what happens if one side simply forgets to turn up, but that doesn't mean that one goes to a test match or cup final embracing it as a serious possibilty that one or the otter side will win by a walkover.
Boris and Priti lining up another hostage to fortune re ending free movement overnight. The deadline for applications for settled status is December. How many trust the Home Office to process the applications in an efficient, orderly, fair and consistent manner? Hands up? How many expect to see landlords, employers and employees tied up in the Courts for months and years?
What an utter shambles.
This proposal is a complete breach of the very clear promise made by the official Leave campaign during the referendum. So yet another example of them trying to do something for which they have no mandate.
Why isn’t the press picking them up on this?
The Leave campaign said there wouldn’t be an end to freedom of movement? Or that it wouldn’t affect the people already in the UK?
They stated that we wouldn't be leaving without a deal.
When people voted in the referendum they knew that after two years we left with or without a deal and that any extra time was not in the UKs gift. You cannot have voted leave without embracing the possibility of no deal. It is a logical impossibility.
From conversations I’ve had with reasonably intelligent people
1. They didn’t realize the NI border would be an issue 2. They had never heard of article 50 3. They believed that there were going to be no issues when we left because that’s what they chose to believe 4. The Daily Mail said it was all going to be wonderful.
From conversations I’ve had with reasonably intelligent people
1. They didn’t realize the NI border would be an issue 2. They had never heard of article 50 3. They believed that there were going to be no issues when we left because that’s what they chose to believe 4. The Daily Mail said it was all going to be wonderful.
Off topic, the latest video doesn't look good for Randy Andy, does it?
Depends whether you believe in guilt by association or not.
It’s very poor judgment. Don’t the Royals have oodles of advisors? Couldn’t one of them have said: “Your mate is a convicted sex offender. For the good of the monarchy, your Mum, if nothing else, don’t go and visit him.”
Or was he told and didn’t listen?
This stuff is not difficult. You don’t need much of a brain to work it out, surely?
Corbyn's idea of a customs union isn't the same as the EU's.
I think he would have to - and would - drop the unicorn element of it quite quickly.
And your other point, would Lexiters play up when they see it is going to be Remain or quasi-Remain? I am sure that some of them will - but that must be preferable for Labour than pissing off Remainers. There are so many more of them at every level of the party - voters, members, MPs.
What do you think is going to happen with Brexit, btw?
Off topic, the latest video doesn't look good for Randy Andy, does it?
Depends whether you believe in guilt by association or not.
It’s very poor judgment. Don’t the Royals have oodles of advisors? Couldn’t one of them have said: “Your mate is a convicted sex offender. For the good of the monarchy, your Mum, if nothing else, don’t go and visit him.”
Or was he told and didn’t listen?
This stuff is not difficult. You don’t need much of a brain to work it out, surely?
Off topic, the latest video doesn't look good for Randy Andy, does it?
Depends whether you believe in guilt by association or not.
It’s very poor judgment. Don’t the Royals have oodles of advisors? Couldn’t one of them have said: “Your mate is a convicted sex offender. For the good of the monarchy, your Mum, if nothing else, don’t go and visit him.”
Or was he told and didn’t listen?
This stuff is not difficult. You don’t need much of a brain to work it out, surely?
Some people think they can get away with just about anything because of who they are.
Comments
Think of all those poor bankers and accountants in London having to send millions of bawbees to the undeserving poor in Scotlandshire.
Sometimes malc I think your sympathies lie in the wrong place.
Although as a Catholic he wouldn't have been universally popular in Scotland.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1163423229584826368?s=19
How could you possibly have a contingency plan which didn't make clear how up to date it was - effectively what information it is based on?
1) it was a worst case scenario (it wasn't)
2) it's for planning purposes, not a working hypothesis (it's a working hypothesis - see, for example, the sections on Northern Ireland)
3) it's out of date (it's from 1 August)
4) it's been leaked by filthy treacherous Remainer politicians (this seems inherently unlikely, given when the report was produced and what the Sunday Times said about it)
"All over the place" doesn't begin to cover it.
Having said that, the opposition are no better
https://twitter.com/ayeshahazarika/status/1163427304976060417
Labour copying it is not a good thing...
Just saying.
Seemed to work!
I get (just about) why they went for him over HRC in 2016. OK, it was close, and a bit flukey, but he did win and so they did get him, and by Nov 2020 they will have had him for 4 years.
If having experienced it they decide they want another 4 - well then I will have to re-assess my view of America and Americans. That would be terrible for both me and them, so let's hope it is not necessary. I don't think it will be.
The perps were neither homophobic nor far right activists but rather were antifa people - objective being to allow Jones to get all over the media and spread his commie poison.
Shame on him if this is true. If it is, I will be burning my copy of 'Chavs: The Demonization of the Working Class'.
I think the populace in Edinburgh and Glasgow and in the lowlands would never have accepted Charles and would have forced him into the Highlands. French money would have been needed to hold the Stuart throne and system together and pay for mercenaries to control the population but France was bankrupt by the 1780s and I doubt Charles or his successors would have been enamoured of events in 1788-89.
The fall of the French monarchy would have ravaged the Scottish monarchy - perhaps, given the emerging middle class we'd have had a Scottish Revolution which would have been a huge threat to England. Would the Scottish Republic, allied with Bonaparte, have invaded England - would such an invasion have succeeded?
But - for all I have no time for Owen Jones - that strikes me as ridiculously far-fetched. I would have thought it was mos tprobably a bunch of homophobes out to duff up some people as a sick perverted way of amusing themselves. That's especially true given there have been several other such attacks in London recently.
Neither do I think the EU would have a problem. A very closely aligned Brexit or Remain? Both are very acceptable outcomes from their point of view.
It could be a vanilla homophobic attack, yes, but IMO it is more likely that he was specifically targeted by far right thugs due to his political profile.
Although it is difficult to uncouple the two motives. He is such a hate figure for the far right because he is a mouthy young leftie with a big media profile AND is noisily gay (as it were) and very active on LGBT issues.
Why isn’t the press picking them up on this?
We're pretty sure now that the role of Cambridge Analytica played a big part is his success, as it did in our Referendum.
Do we know who Cummings is using now that that CA is in liquidation?
(Yes, I am being slightly sarcastic. At the same time, what Corbyn says is not good evidence of anything. The real reason his deal would have to be WA+CU is because the former won't change much whoever is in charge or whatever is proposed and the latter is the only significant point ofmdifference he had with May.)
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-movement-to-skip-the-electoral-college-may-take-its-first-step-back/
This is why Boris's election is likely to backfire. It relies not just on picking up the BXP vote but also that there is a big split opposition vote, with Lab voters going LD and not the other way round. When push comes to shove, LD inclined voters in Lab/Con battlegrounds will go Lab on the whole. Some will prefer no deal Boris to Corbyn, most won't, and everyone will be aware of the stakes.
Seriously, the philosophical convergence of Orange Bookers and "liberal conservatives" which made the theory of Coalition possible couldn't survive the practice and the traditional pull of the comfort zones proved too strong. Cameron made the Coalition a reality and ended it by allowing the ruthless destruction of the LDs aided and abetted by Clegg. The problem was the majority he won in 2015 turned out to be a chimera when he tried to use his own personality and popularity to force through a Remain vote.
It turned out the popularity he enjoyed as Prime Minister in 2015 didn't cut into the long-developing anti-EU anti-politics feeling in many parts of the country.
Novo Nordisk et al manage the whole supply chain into this country afaik.
My main concerns are (i) dirty tricks as it becomes clear he is losing, and (ii) if the result is anything but a landslide the difficulty of levering him out of the White House - legal challenges, emotive appeals to his base, smearing of the electoral process etc.
1. They didn’t realize the NI border would be an issue
2. They had never heard of article 50
3. They believed that there were going to be no issues when we left because that’s what they chose to believe
4. The Daily Mail said it was all going to be wonderful.
https://twitter.com/fatshez/status/1163451329672556544
It’s very poor judgment. Don’t the Royals have oodles of advisors? Couldn’t one of them have said: “Your mate is a convicted sex offender. For the good of the monarchy, your Mum, if nothing else, don’t go and visit him.”
Or was he told and didn’t listen?
This stuff is not difficult. You don’t need much of a brain to work it out, surely?
And your other point, would Lexiters play up when they see it is going to be Remain or quasi-Remain? I am sure that some of them will - but that must be preferable for Labour than pissing off Remainers. There are so many more of them at every level of the party - voters, members, MPs.
What do you think is going to happen with Brexit, btw?
However, we are talking about Prince Andrew here.
Shall we compile a little list of names?