politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Bad Boys Of Brexit. A review
Comments
-
It's only the sixth one ever. It joins 1938, 1962-63, 1965-66, 1968 and 1972.TheScreamingEagles said:I'm 41 and this is the first drawn Ashes series of my lifetime.
0 -
£350 million was called out at the time. The problem was to most people the net figure of £200 million still sounds like a lot of money. Rather than saying the money would not go to the NHS remainers fell into a trap.ydoethur said:
Dunno, the £350 million a week worked OK for him. And that was a flat-out, demonstrable and proven lie rather than a just a rather foolish guess.tlg86 said:
In All Out War it’s said that Cummings reckoned that remain’s best slogan was “a leap in the dark.” Of course, that would have required discipline and not making up numbers like £4,300 a year worse off.CarlottaVance said:Thanks for the review Viewcode - sounds a lot more entertaining than I expected......meanwhile the David Cameron five minutes of hate continues unabated:
https://twitter.com/dez_holmes/status/1173202880221843456?s=210 -
How many of them would be eligible to? How many of those signing the petition were EU nationals or under 18? How many of the remainder would be make the move from signing an online petition (easy) to actually registering and going to vote (slightly more effort needed)?SandyRentool said:
Oh yes, the petition - I'd nearly forgotten about that. I guess the LibDems are banking on everyone who signed the Revoke petition will now be queueing up to vote for them.Foxy said:
The other thing is that the Remain subsection of the "Bored of Brexit" vote, like most others in the country do not relish a further conflict and lies ridden second referendum. I think the Revoke petition was driven by this vote.Torby_Fennel said:
You may well be correct. The other possibility, though, is that many Remainers only supported a 2nd referendum because it looked the most likely way to achieve the goal of remaining. Now the Lib Dems are offering a different route to the goal which may or may not be easier to achieve - this might be very attractive. I can't guess which way it will play though - I don't even know which way I would have voted had I been at conference, to be totally honest with you, as I'd love to see Brexit revoked but I have concerns about the policy which are not directly related to the issue that it's trying to solve.Morris_Dancer said:
The Lib Dems have needlessly thrown away half the ground of being the pro-EU party, for no advantage. It's strategically stupid, and obviously so.
i think it highly unlikely that there is an LD majority government with PM swinson, so the policy is more a stall being set out.0 -
Boris Johnson and Jeremy Corbyn to have exactly equal numbers so they both win!Peter_the_Punter said:
So what's your prediction for the next GE, Ydoethur? We need to know.ydoethur said:I don't see England having another breakthrough this side of the new ball. Wade's looking comfortable and Cummings is setting his stall to die in a ditch.
1 -
ydoethur said:
I was going to say Hallelujah! in response to @ydoethur.FrancisUrquhart said:
I take it you arent looking forward to the winter tours?Cyclefree said:Does the cricket season ever end? And, if so, when?
And now you go and spoil it.
0 -
Stokes SPOTY?0
-
ydoethur said:
Boris Johnson and Jeremy Corbyn to have exactly equal numbers so they both win!Peter_the_Punter said:
So what's your prediction for the next GE, Ydoethur? We need to know.ydoethur said:I don't see England having another breakthrough this side of the new ball. Wade's looking comfortable and Cummings is setting his stall to die in a ditch.
Noted with thanks. 
0 -
Jordan Henderson, Champions League winning captain.FrancisUrquhart said:Stokes SPOTY?
0 -
Has Martin Tyler just orgasmed there?0
-
Dont you have to have personality to win SPOTY?TheScreamingEagles said:
Jordan Henderson, Champions League winning captain.FrancisUrquhart said:Stokes SPOTY?
0 -
Only four cricketers have ever one SPOTY, and interestingly two of the four have been all-rounders.FrancisUrquhart said:Stokes SPOTY?
He would deserve it.0 -
Andy Murray's won a few hasn't he?FrancisUrquhart said:
Dont you have to have personality to win SPOTY?TheScreamingEagles said:
Jordan Henderson, Champions League winning captain.FrancisUrquhart said:Stokes SPOTY?
0 -
I'm guessing The Oval aren't going to refund everyone who's paying £250 to stay in the Peckham Travelodge.0
-
And so did Steve Davis.TheScreamingEagles said:
Andy Murray's won a few hasn't he?FrancisUrquhart said:
Dont you have to have personality to win SPOTY?TheScreamingEagles said:
Jordan Henderson, Champions League winning captain.FrancisUrquhart said:Stokes SPOTY?
0 -
Perfect. Job done. Thank you.....ydoethur said:
Watford overturn Arsenal's lead? You've got to be aving a giraffe. They wouldn't do that even if all of Arsenal's players were turned to stone by a passing witch!Scrapheap_as_was said:
still got it.ydoethur said:I don't see England having another breakthrough this side of the new ball. Wade's looking comfortable and Cummings is setting his stall to die in a ditch.
can you predict watford won't overturn arsenals lead next please?
(Will that do?) 0 -
-
Based on the many winners, no.FrancisUrquhart said:
Dont you have to have personality to win SPOTY?TheScreamingEagles said:
Jordan Henderson, Champions League winning captain.FrancisUrquhart said:Stokes SPOTY?
0 -
You're most welcome.Scrapheap_as_was said:
Perfect. Job done. Thank you.....ydoethur said:
Watford overturn Arsenal's lead? You've got to be aving a giraffe. They wouldn't do that even if all of Arsenal's players were turned to stone by a passing witch!Scrapheap_as_was said:
still got it.ydoethur said:I don't see England having another breakthrough this side of the new ball. Wade's looking comfortable and Cummings is setting his stall to die in a ditch.
can you predict watford won't overturn arsenals lead next please?
(Will that do?)
By the way, what was it about? Was it something to do with sport?
0 -
Did they reject it because there was gargantuan progress by any chance?Gallowgate said:0 -
You paid £250 to stay in a Travelodge?AndyJS said:I'm guessing The Oval aren't going to refund everyone who's paying £250 to stay in the Peckham Travelodge.
WORLD'S GONE MAD!0 -
In the spirit of the political times we live in I feel compelled, indeed duty bound, to reflect upon the @viewcode thread commentary and state :
It is without doubt the most complete pile of crap this side of a Boris statement of loyalty to a colleague.
It is imperative that PB reflect the lack of unity and consensus in the nation.
@viewcode - "Lock Him Up."
Nothing personal you understand ....
0 -
Good to see Priti sorting out the surge of Channel crossings by illegal migrants. The numbers this week worse than when Jav called NATIONAL EMERGENCY ahead of his leadership bid.0
-
You would have to pay me £250 to stay in a travelodge, more if it was in peckham.TheScreamingEagles said:
You paid £250 to stay in a Travelodge?AndyJS said:I'm guessing The Oval aren't going to refund everyone who's paying £250 to stay in the Peckham Travelodge.
WORLD'S GONE MAD!0 -
I know, I'm still processing that. I'm hoping it was a typo and it is £25 and not £250 he paid.FrancisUrquhart said:
You would have to pay me £250 to stay in a travelodge, more if it was in peckham.TheScreamingEagles said:
You paid £250 to stay in a Travelodge?AndyJS said:I'm guessing The Oval aren't going to refund everyone who's paying £250 to stay in the Peckham Travelodge.
WORLD'S GONE MAD!
I don't know why people think I'm an elitist and snob.0 -
I'd do it for £170.FrancisUrquhart said:
You would have to pay me £250 to stay in a travelodge, more if it was in peckham.TheScreamingEagles said:
You paid £250 to stay in a Travelodge?AndyJS said:I'm guessing The Oval aren't going to refund everyone who's paying £250 to stay in the Peckham Travelodge.
WORLD'S GONE MAD!
But I am a poor teacher.0 -
Do your students concur?ydoethur said:
I'd do it for £170.FrancisUrquhart said:
You would have to pay me £250 to stay in a travelodge, more if it was in peckham.TheScreamingEagles said:
You paid £250 to stay in a Travelodge?AndyJS said:I'm guessing The Oval aren't going to refund everyone who's paying £250 to stay in the Peckham Travelodge.
WORLD'S GONE MAD!
But I am a poor teacher.0 -
And of couse, the Single Market was Maggies policy, and we strongly favoured the Eastern countries joining.rcs1000 said:
I think the issue is that we remember our failures, and forget our successes.Gabs2 said:
The problem with "leading not leaving" the EU had been there aren't any compelling examples of the UK doing it. PMs for decades have failed to break the French-German axis at the core of it, which means we were always left to agree or diagree after they had made a decision.CarlottaVance said:Thanks for the review Viewcode - sounds a lot more entertaining than I expected......meanwhile the David Cameron five minutes of hate continues unabated:
https://twitter.com/dez_holmes/status/1173202880221843456?s=21
When we rejoin it is critical we insist on having British-German meetings ahead of each European summit, just like the French-German ones.
The EU's restrictions on state aid, that are such an anathema to Jeremy Corbyn, were an Anglo-Dutch initiative, which co-opted the Germans, and infuriated the French and the Italians. It was a UK policy success.
But we don't see it, because nothing changed for the UK. What changed was what everyone else did.
Likewise, financial services regulation across the EU is almost entirely a British creation. The "passport" inevitably results in the lowest touch regulator ending up in charge, as everyone chooses to domicile there.
Again, it was a success for the UK. But we don't see it.0 -
I do wonder what this Revoke vote (caught up!) will do to the Lib Dem seat distribution. South-West, Suburbs and Scotland?0
-
LibDems get to stay free at Auchentennach Castle - They Get Bed and Breakfast (Pie For Someone Else) - An Absolute Killing For The Yellow Peril ....ydoethur said:
I'd do it for £170.FrancisUrquhart said:
You would have to pay me £250 to stay in a travelodge, more if it was in peckham.TheScreamingEagles said:
You paid £250 to stay in a Travelodge?AndyJS said:I'm guessing The Oval aren't going to refund everyone who's paying £250 to stay in the Peckham Travelodge.
WORLD'S GONE MAD!
But I am a poor teacher.
0 -
Well, they tell me I'm not paid enough, so I suppose they do.JohnO said:
Do your students concur?ydoethur said:
I'd do it for £170.FrancisUrquhart said:
You would have to pay me £250 to stay in a travelodge, more if it was in peckham.TheScreamingEagles said:
You paid £250 to stay in a Travelodge?AndyJS said:I'm guessing The Oval aren't going to refund everyone who's paying £250 to stay in the Peckham Travelodge.
WORLD'S GONE MAD!
But I am a poor teacher. 0 -
The trouble is all these things would never appear on the front page of The Sun or the Daily Mail. Instead some sort of bollocks about bendy bananas or low powered vacuum cleaners would.Foxy said:
And of couse, the Single Market was Maggies policy, and we strongly favoured the Eastern countries joining.rcs1000 said:
I think the issue is that we remember our failures, and forget our successes.Gabs2 said:
The problem with "leading not leaving" the EU had been there aren't any compelling examples of the UK doing it. PMs for decades have failed to break the French-German axis at the core of it, which means we were always left to agree or diagree after they had made a decision.CarlottaVance said:Thanks for the review Viewcode - sounds a lot more entertaining than I expected......meanwhile the David Cameron five minutes of hate continues unabated:
https://twitter.com/dez_holmes/status/1173202880221843456?s=21
When we rejoin it is critical we insist on having British-German meetings ahead of each European summit, just like the French-German ones.
The EU's restrictions on state aid, that are such an anathema to Jeremy Corbyn, were an Anglo-Dutch initiative, which co-opted the Germans, and infuriated the French and the Italians. It was a UK policy success.
But we don't see it, because nothing changed for the UK. What changed was what everyone else did.
Likewise, financial services regulation across the EU is almost entirely a British creation. The "passport" inevitably results in the lowest touch regulator ending up in charge, as everyone chooses to domicile there.
Again, it was a success for the UK. But we don't see it.0 -
I enjoyed Healey's very much too. Roy Jenkins was pretty good. David Steel's was not so great.NickPalmer said:
Denis Healey's were pretty classy, though not especially illuminating about politics. People read these things partly for historical insights but many mainly for the "omigod is THAT what he was thinking?" moments. Cameron's sounds quite good for that, as was Blair's with his scathing attack on his own FOI policy.Byronic said:
I thought the first volume of her memoirs was superb. Lucid, fascinating, wise. I believe she did get a pro writer to help, though.rcs1000 said:
I thought Thatcher's memoirs fairly wooden, and nowhere near as interesting as (for example) Lawson'sByronic said:fpt for kle
No they're not unusual. e.g. Thatcher's memoirs are minor masterpieces. Lots of politicians, Left and Right, write very fine books, witb precious insight.
Cameron's memoirs are revealing, but not in the way he intended - if these extracts are anything to go by.
Typical of Cameron that he didn't think he needed professional assistance. Perhaps he thought "I'd be rather good as a writer".
I've heard good things about Kenneth Clarke's autobiography, but haven't read it.0 -
What your students actually say is :ydoethur said:
Well, they tell me I'm not paid enough, so I suppose they do.JohnO said:
Do your students concur?ydoethur said:
I'd do it for £170.FrancisUrquhart said:
You would have to pay me £250 to stay in a travelodge, more if it was in peckham.TheScreamingEagles said:
You paid £250 to stay in a Travelodge?AndyJS said:I'm guessing The Oval aren't going to refund everyone who's paying £250 to stay in the Peckham Travelodge.
WORLD'S GONE MAD!
But I am a poor teacher.
"How do you get away with doing it for the money"0 -
On the subject of autobiographies, Nigel Lawson's The View From Number Eleven is the best in-depth look at the job of the Chancellor, and how and why economic decisions are made. It doesn't tell you much about the man, but if you want to learn about the intersection of politics and economics, it's superb. (And probably had a substantial influence on my political and economic views.)0
-
They've never asked me that question.JackW said:
What your students actually say is :ydoethur said:
Well, they tell me I'm not paid enough, so I suppose they do.JohnO said:
Do your students concur?ydoethur said:
I'd do it for £170.FrancisUrquhart said:
You would have to pay me £250 to stay in a travelodge, more if it was in peckham.TheScreamingEagles said:
You paid £250 to stay in a Travelodge?AndyJS said:I'm guessing The Oval aren't going to refund everyone who's paying £250 to stay in the Peckham Travelodge.
WORLD'S GONE MAD!
But I am a poor teacher.
"How do you get away with doing it for the money"
Although I do remember somebody asked a prostitute that question...0 -
You can trust him to be slippery and indecisive. This is his policy:nico67 said:
Still though it’s risky . The Lib Dem message could have still been you can’t trust Corbyn on Brexit .
I'm no Remoaner but I don't want us Leaving
I support both sides, while both have me heaving
In going through life I continually find
It's a terrible business to make up one's mind
So in spite of all comments, reproach and predictions,
I firmly adhere to unsettled convictions.
(Apologies to a liberal MP of a century ago).0 -
And what did she tell you ?!? ....ydoethur said:
They've never asked me that question.JackW said:
What your students actually say is :ydoethur said:
Well, they tell me I'm not paid enough, so I suppose they do.JohnO said:
Do your students concur?ydoethur said:
I'd do it for £170.FrancisUrquhart said:
You would have to pay me £250 to stay in a travelodge, more if it was in peckham.TheScreamingEagles said:
You paid £250 to stay in a Travelodge?AndyJS said:I'm guessing The Oval aren't going to refund everyone who's paying £250 to stay in the Peckham Travelodge.
WORLD'S GONE MAD!
But I am a poor teacher.
"How do you get away with doing it for the money"
Although I do remember somebody asked a prostitute that question...
0 -
Not the worst review I've ever had...JackW said:In the spirit of the political times we live in I feel compelled, indeed duty bound, to reflect upon the @viewcode thread commentary and state :
It is without doubt the most complete pile of crap this side of a Boris statement of loyalty to a colleague.
It is imperative that PB reflect the lack of unity and consensus in the nation.
@viewcode - "Lock Him Up."
Nothing personal you understand .... 1 -
The aim of the Eastern expansion was the UK policy of widening not deepening. Unfortunately the EU did both.Foxy said:
And of couse, the Single Market was Maggies policy, and we strongly favoured the Eastern countries joining.rcs1000 said:
I think the issue is that we remember our failures, and forget our successes.Gabs2 said:
The problem with "leading not leaving" the EU had been there aren't any compelling examples of the UK doing it. PMs for decades have failed to break the French-German axis at the core of it, which means we were always left to agree or diagree after they had made a decision.CarlottaVance said:Thanks for the review Viewcode - sounds a lot more entertaining than I expected......meanwhile the David Cameron five minutes of hate continues unabated:
https://twitter.com/dez_holmes/status/1173202880221843456?s=21
When we rejoin it is critical we insist on having British-German meetings ahead of each European summit, just like the French-German ones.
The EU's restrictions on state aid, that are such an anathema to Jeremy Corbyn, were an Anglo-Dutch initiative, which co-opted the Germans, and infuriated the French and the Italians. It was a UK policy success.
But we don't see it, because nothing changed for the UK. What changed was what everyone else did.
Likewise, financial services regulation across the EU is almost entirely a British creation. The "passport" inevitably results in the lowest touch regulator ending up in charge, as everyone chooses to domicile there.
Again, it was a success for the UK. But we don't see it.0 -
I don't know, I'm rather deaf and I mis-whored it.JackW said:
And what did she tell you ?!? ....ydoethur said:
They've never asked me that question.JackW said:
What your students actually say is :ydoethur said:
Well, they tell me I'm not paid enough, so I suppose they do.JohnO said:
Do your students concur?ydoethur said:
I'd do it for £170.FrancisUrquhart said:
You would have to pay me £250 to stay in a travelodge, more if it was in peckham.TheScreamingEagles said:
You paid £250 to stay in a Travelodge?AndyJS said:I'm guessing The Oval aren't going to refund everyone who's paying £250 to stay in the Peckham Travelodge.
WORLD'S GONE MAD!
But I am a poor teacher.
"How do you get away with doing it for the money"
Although I do remember somebody asked a prostitute that question...0 -
My girl Lizzie Warren pushing a 2 for 1 deal on impeachment
https://twitter.com/ewarren/status/1173290967773982722?s=190 -
What are the latest revelations about Kavanaugh?Alistair said:My girl Lizzie Warren pushing a 2 for 1 deal on impeachment
https://twitter.com/ewarren/status/1173290967773982722?s=190 -
Spot on.Richard_Tyndall said:
The aim of the Eastern expansion was the UK policy of widening not deepening. Unfortunately the EU did both.Foxy said:
And of couse, the Single Market was Maggies policy, and we strongly favoured the Eastern countries joining.rcs1000 said:
I think the issue is that we remember our failures, and forget our successes.Gabs2 said:
The problem with "leading not leaving" the EU had been there aren't any compelling examples of the UK doing it. PMs for decades have failed to break the French-German axis at the core of it, which means we were always left to agree or diagree after they had made a decision.CarlottaVance said:Thanks for the review Viewcode - sounds a lot more entertaining than I expected......meanwhile the David Cameron five minutes of hate continues unabated:
https://twitter.com/dez_holmes/status/1173202880221843456?s=21
When we rejoin it is critical we insist on having British-German meetings ahead of each European summit, just like the French-German ones.
The EU's restrictions on state aid, that are such an anathema to Jeremy Corbyn, were an Anglo-Dutch initiative, which co-opted the Germans, and infuriated the French and the Italians. It was a UK policy success.
But we don't see it, because nothing changed for the UK. What changed was what everyone else did.
Likewise, financial services regulation across the EU is almost entirely a British creation. The "passport" inevitably results in the lowest touch regulator ending up in charge, as everyone chooses to domicile there.
Again, it was a success for the UK. But we don't see it.
It's easy to forget how intense were the debates over widening or deepening. Either would have been better than both.0 -
That, and she probably mis-spoke with her mouth full ....ydoethur said:
I don't know, I'm rather deaf and I mis-whored it.JackW said:
And what did she tell you ?!? ....ydoethur said:
They've never asked me that question.JackW said:
What your students actually say is :ydoethur said:
Well, they tell me I'm not paid enough, so I suppose they do.JohnO said:
Do your students concur?ydoethur said:
I'd do it for £170.FrancisUrquhart said:
You would have to pay me £250 to stay in a travelodge, more if it was in peckham.TheScreamingEagles said:
You paid £250 to stay in a Travelodge?AndyJS said:I'm guessing The Oval aren't going to refund everyone who's paying £250 to stay in the Peckham Travelodge.
WORLD'S GONE MAD!
But I am a poor teacher.
"How do you get away with doing it for the money"
Although I do remember somebody asked a prostitute that question...
0 -
There are two cases where he allegedly got his... errr... manhood out and forced ladies to touch it.TheScreamingEagles said:
What are the latest revelations about Kavanaugh?Alistair said:My girl Lizzie Warren pushing a 2 for 1 deal on impeachment
https://twitter.com/ewarren/status/1173290967773982722?s=19
What's worse, is that in one case there were apparently a good number of witnesses, some of whom contacted the FBI during the investigation, but they were not followed up on.0 -
Well, an eight foot horn is quite bulky.JackW said:
That, and she probably mis-spoke with her mouth full ....ydoethur said:
I don't know, I'm rather deaf and I mis-whored it.JackW said:
And what did she tell you ?!? ....ydoethur said:
They've never asked me that question.JackW said:
What your students actually say is :ydoethur said:
Well, they tell me I'm not paid enough, so I suppose they do.JohnO said:
Do your students concur?ydoethur said:
I'd do it for £170.FrancisUrquhart said:
You would have to pay me £250 to stay in a travelodge, more if it was in peckham.TheScreamingEagles said:
You paid £250 to stay in a Travelodge?AndyJS said:I'm guessing The Oval aren't going to refund everyone who's paying £250 to stay in the Peckham Travelodge.
WORLD'S GONE MAD!
But I am a poor teacher.
"How do you get away with doing it for the money"
Although I do remember somebody asked a prostitute that question...0 -
More corroboration for an allegation dismissed during his hearing as being without evidence:TheScreamingEagles said:
What are the latest revelations about Kavanaugh?Alistair said:My girl Lizzie Warren pushing a 2 for 1 deal on impeachment
https://twitter.com/ewarren/status/1173290967773982722?s=19
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/14/sunday-review/brett-kavanaugh-deborah-ramirez-yale.html0 -
Still gobsmacking the undeclared financial gifts were not disqualifyingrcs1000 said:
There are two cases where he allegedly got his... errr... manhood out and forced ladies to touch it.TheScreamingEagles said:
What are the latest revelations about Kavanaugh?Alistair said:My girl Lizzie Warren pushing a 2 for 1 deal on impeachment
https://twitter.com/ewarren/status/1173290967773982722?s=19
What's worse, is that in one case there were apparently a good number of witnesses, some of whom contacted the FBI during the investigation, but they were not followed up on.
https://twitter.com/girlsreallyrule/status/1173207629260316672?s=190 -
A big development in the prospective US/EU trade war:
https://www.politico.eu/article/trump-poised-to-hit-eu-with-billions-in-tariffs-after-airbus-win/0 -
It isn't the FBI's fault. The White House strictly limited the bounds of the investigation to proscribed witnesses.rcs1000 said:
There are two cases where he allegedly got his... errr... manhood out and forced ladies to touch it.TheScreamingEagles said:
What are the latest revelations about Kavanaugh?Alistair said:My girl Lizzie Warren pushing a 2 for 1 deal on impeachment
https://twitter.com/ewarren/status/1173290967773982722?s=19
What's worse, is that in one case there were apparently a good number of witnesses, some of whom contacted the FBI during the investigation, but they were not followed up on.0 -
ThanksNigelb said:
More corroboration for an allegation dismissed during his hearing as being without evidence:TheScreamingEagles said:
What are the latest revelations about Kavanaugh?Alistair said:My girl Lizzie Warren pushing a 2 for 1 deal on impeachment
https://twitter.com/ewarren/status/1173290967773982722?s=19
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/14/sunday-review/brett-kavanaugh-deborah-ramirez-yale.html0 -
Do you mean 'prescribed?'Gabs2 said:
It isn't the FBI's fault. The White House strictly limited the bounds of the investigation to proscribed witnesses.rcs1000 said:
There are two cases where he allegedly got his... errr... manhood out and forced ladies to touch it.TheScreamingEagles said:
What are the latest revelations about Kavanaugh?Alistair said:My girl Lizzie Warren pushing a 2 for 1 deal on impeachment
https://twitter.com/ewarren/status/1173290967773982722?s=19
What's worse, is that in one case there were apparently a good number of witnesses, some of whom contacted the FBI during the investigation, but they were not followed up on.0 -
The problem with all of these is that none of them feel like successes to the British man on the street. Tying our hands when big companies go bust, deregulating the bankers Europe-wide and letting in all the Eastern Europeans... it is hard to build a campaign round them!Foxy said:
And of couse, the Single Market was Maggies policy, and we strongly favoured the Eastern countries joining.rcs1000 said:
I think the issue is that we remember our failures, and forget our successes.Gabs2 said:
The problem with "leading not leaving" the EU had been there aren't any compelling examples of the UK doing it. PMs for decades have failed to break the French-German axis at the core of it, which means we were always left to agree or diagree after they had made a decision.CarlottaVance said:Thanks for the review Viewcode - sounds a lot more entertaining than I expected......meanwhile the David Cameron five minutes of hate continues unabated:
https://twitter.com/dez_holmes/status/1173202880221843456?s=21
When we rejoin it is critical we insist on having British-German meetings ahead of each European summit, just like the French-German ones.
The EU's restrictions on state aid, that are such an anathema to Jeremy Corbyn, were an Anglo-Dutch initiative, which co-opted the Germans, and infuriated the French and the Italians. It was a UK policy success.
But we don't see it, because nothing changed for the UK. What changed was what everyone else did.
Likewise, financial services regulation across the EU is almost entirely a British creation. The "passport" inevitably results in the lowest touch regulator ending up in charge, as everyone chooses to domicile there.
Again, it was a success for the UK. But we don't see it.0 -
Quite.Alistair said:
Still gobsmacking the undeclared financial gifts were not disqualifyingrcs1000 said:
There are two cases where he allegedly got his... errr... manhood out and forced ladies to touch it.TheScreamingEagles said:
What are the latest revelations about Kavanaugh?Alistair said:My girl Lizzie Warren pushing a 2 for 1 deal on impeachment
https://twitter.com/ewarren/status/1173290967773982722?s=19
What's worse, is that in one case there were apparently a good number of witnesses, some of whom contacted the FBI during the investigation, but they were not followed up on.
https://twitter.com/girlsreallyrule/status/1173207629260316672?s=19
Any Trump nominee should be embarrassed to be seen engaging in graft on such a petty scale.0 -
The New York Times original tweet promoting the story is also worthy of commentTheScreamingEagles said:
ThanksNigelb said:
More corroboration for an allegation dismissed during his hearing as being without evidence:TheScreamingEagles said:
What are the latest revelations about Kavanaugh?Alistair said:My girl Lizzie Warren pushing a 2 for 1 deal on impeachment
https://twitter.com/ewarren/status/1173290967773982722?s=19
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/14/sunday-review/brett-kavanaugh-deborah-ramirez-yale.html
https://nypost.com/2019/09/15/nyt-deletes-bizarre-brett-kavanaugh-tweet-about-having-a-penis-thrust-in-your-face/0 -
This is Trump’s White House. It could be either or both.ydoethur said:
Do you mean 'prescribed?'Gabs2 said:
It isn't the FBI's fault. The White House strictly limited the bounds of the investigation to proscribed witnesses.rcs1000 said:
There are two cases where he allegedly got his... errr... manhood out and forced ladies to touch it.TheScreamingEagles said:
What are the latest revelations about Kavanaugh?Alistair said:My girl Lizzie Warren pushing a 2 for 1 deal on impeachment
https://twitter.com/ewarren/status/1173290967773982722?s=19
What's worse, is that in one case there were apparently a good number of witnesses, some of whom contacted the FBI during the investigation, but they were not followed up on.0 -
Or a bicycle.FrancisUrquhart said:
Dont you have to have personality to win SPOTY?TheScreamingEagles said:
Jordan Henderson, Champions League winning captain.FrancisUrquhart said:Stokes SPOTY?
1 -
Certainly Brexiteers seem to particularly object to things we led on. It may be because our own governments weren't listening to the people, or it may be that people have changed their minds.Gabs2 said:
The problem with all of these is that none of them feel like successes to the British man on the street. Tying our hands when big companies go bust, deregulating the bankers Europe-wide and letting in all the Eastern Europeans... it is hard to build a campaign round them!Foxy said:
And of couse, the Single Market was Maggies policy, and we strongly favoured the Eastern countries joining.rcs1000 said:
I think the issue is that we remember our failures, and forget our successes.Gabs2 said:
The problem with "leading not leaving" the EU had been there aren't any compelling examples of the UK doing it. PMs for decades have failed to break the French-German axis at the core of it, which means we were always left to agree or diagree after they had made a decision.CarlottaVance said:Thanks for the review Viewcode - sounds a lot more entertaining than I expected......meanwhile the David Cameron five minutes of hate continues unabated:
https://twitter.com/dez_holmes/status/1173202880221843456?s=21
When we rejoin it is critical we insist on having British-German meetings ahead of each European summit, just like the French-German ones.
The EU's restrictions on state aid, that are such an anathema to Jeremy Corbyn, were an Anglo-Dutch initiative, which co-opted the Germans, and infuriated the French and the Italians. It was a UK policy success.
But we don't see it, because nothing changed for the UK. What changed was what everyone else did.
Likewise, financial services regulation across the EU is almost entirely a British creation. The "passport" inevitably results in the lowest touch regulator ending up in charge, as everyone chooses to domicile there.
Again, it was a success for the UK. But we don't see it.
My point though was that we had influence, indeed arguably the most influence. Pooled sovereignty indeed.0 -
The state aid rules were about stopping a situation where each European country ends up in a spiral of increasing state aid as they all try and out subsidise each other so the last remaining jobs in - for example the steel industry - are in their country.Gabs2 said:
The problem with all of these is that none of them feel like successes to the British man on the street. Tying our hands when big companies go bust, deregulating the bankers Europe-wide and letting in all the Eastern Europeans... it is hard to build a campaign round them!Foxy said:
And of couse, the Single Market was Maggies policy, and we strongly favoured the Eastern countries joining.rcs1000 said:
I think the issue is that we remember our failures, and forget our successes.Gabs2 said:
The problem with "leading not leaving" the EU had been there aren't any compelling examples of the UK doing it. PMs for decades have failed to break the French-German axis at the core of it, which means we were always left to agree or diagree after they had made a decision.CarlottaVance said:Thanks for the review Viewcode - sounds a lot more entertaining than I expected......meanwhile the David Cameron five minutes of hate continues unabated:
https://twitter.com/dez_holmes/status/1173202880221843456?s=21
When we rejoin it is critical we insist on having British-German meetings ahead of each European summit, just like the French-German ones.
The EU's restrictions on state aid, that are such an anathema to Jeremy Corbyn, were an Anglo-Dutch initiative, which co-opted the Germans, and infuriated the French and the Italians. It was a UK policy success.
But we don't see it, because nothing changed for the UK. What changed was what everyone else did.
Likewise, financial services regulation across the EU is almost entirely a British creation. The "passport" inevitably results in the lowest touch regulator ending up in charge, as everyone chooses to domicile there.
Again, it was a success for the UK. But we don't see it.
0 -
surbiton19 said:
https://twitter.com/martinboon/status/1173175020316778498
No wonder polls are all over the place. Will not the most committed group dominate a sample more than its real share would ?0 -
The EU case to the WTO re Boeing subsidies is going to be settled in December/January, and will almost certainly allow the EU to hit the US with retaliatiary tariffs. (What with both the EU and the US being extremely guilty of subsidising their domestic aircraft manufacturers. As, for that matter, are the Russians, the Chinese, the Japanese, the Brazilians and the Canadians.)Nigelb said:A big development in the prospective US/EU trade war:
https://www.politico.eu/article/trump-poised-to-hit-eu-with-billions-in-tariffs-after-airbus-win/0 -
Thanks.Alistair said:
The New York Times original tweet promoting the story is also worthy of commentTheScreamingEagles said:
ThanksNigelb said:
More corroboration for an allegation dismissed during his hearing as being without evidence:TheScreamingEagles said:
What are the latest revelations about Kavanaugh?Alistair said:My girl Lizzie Warren pushing a 2 for 1 deal on impeachment
https://twitter.com/ewarren/status/1173290967773982722?s=19
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/14/sunday-review/brett-kavanaugh-deborah-ramirez-yale.html
https://nypost.com/2019/09/15/nyt-deletes-bizarre-brett-kavanaugh-tweet-about-having-a-penis-thrust-in-your-face/0 -
The headlines for the Lib Dems are perfect. Unambiguous; no explanation needed.
If you want this nonsense to end; vote Lib Dem.0 -
Yes. It does not bode well for international trade.rcs1000 said:
The EU case to the WTO re Boeing subsidies is going to be settled in December/January, and will almost certainly allow the EU to hit the US with retaliatiary tariffs. (What with both the EU and the US being extremely guilty of subsidising their domestic aircraft manufacturers. As, for that matter, are the Russians, the Chinese, the Japanese, the Brazilians and the Canadians.)Nigelb said:A big development in the prospective US/EU trade war:
https://www.politico.eu/article/trump-poised-to-hit-eu-with-billions-in-tariffs-after-airbus-win/
(Is WTO arbitration still going to be functional by then ?)0 -
Considering that SCOTUS is for life, impeaching a Justice while your own party controls the Senate and Presidency would be interesting. But I can't see 67 Senators ever voting to impeach, but if Kavanaugh did get impeached then the GOP could regret rushing through such a flawed character when they could have gotten someone else.Nigelb said:
More corroboration for an allegation dismissed during his hearing as being without evidence:TheScreamingEagles said:
What are the latest revelations about Kavanaugh?Alistair said:My girl Lizzie Warren pushing a 2 for 1 deal on impeachment
https://twitter.com/ewarren/status/1173290967773982722?s=19
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/14/sunday-review/brett-kavanaugh-deborah-ramirez-yale.html0 -
You think revocation would be the end? That's cute!Gallowgate said:The headlines for the Lib Dems are perfect. Unambiguous; no explanation needed.
If you want this nonsense to end; vote Lib Dem.0 -
Of course it would. Then only the crazies will continue to bang on about the EU. Just like before the referendum.Philip_Thompson said:
You think revocation would be the end? That's cute!Gallowgate said:The headlines for the Lib Dems are perfect. Unambiguous; no explanation needed.
If you want this nonsense to end; vote Lib Dem.
Regardless, the Lib Dems are not going to win so there will be no revoke. This is simply to maximize their vote to hopefully hold the balance of power.0 -
I heard Arsenal actually paid Chelsea !FrancisUrquhart said:
Best bit of business chelsea have done in a long time.TheScreamingEagles said:David Luiz with a defensive mistake?
Colour me shocked.
0 -
This is the guy Trump wanted, and none of the revelations are likely to change that. Far from it.Philip_Thompson said:
Considering that SCOTUS is for life, impeaching a Justice while your own party controls the Senate and Presidency would be interesting. But I can't see 67 Senators ever voting to impeach, but if Kavanaugh did get impeached then the GOP could regret rushing through such a flawed character when they could have gotten someone else.Nigelb said:
More corroboration for an allegation dismissed during his hearing as being without evidence:TheScreamingEagles said:
What are the latest revelations about Kavanaugh?Alistair said:My girl Lizzie Warren pushing a 2 for 1 deal on impeachment
https://twitter.com/ewarren/status/1173290967773982722?s=19
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/14/sunday-review/brett-kavanaugh-deborah-ramirez-yale.html0 -
HE is Trump's backstop !Nigelb said:
This is the guy Trump wanted, and none of the revelations are likely to change that. Far from it.Philip_Thompson said:
Considering that SCOTUS is for life, impeaching a Justice while your own party controls the Senate and Presidency would be interesting. But I can't see 67 Senators ever voting to impeach, but if Kavanaugh did get impeached then the GOP could regret rushing through such a flawed character when they could have gotten someone else.Nigelb said:
More corroboration for an allegation dismissed during his hearing as being without evidence:TheScreamingEagles said:
What are the latest revelations about Kavanaugh?Alistair said:My girl Lizzie Warren pushing a 2 for 1 deal on impeachment
https://twitter.com/ewarren/status/1173290967773982722?s=19
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/14/sunday-review/brett-kavanaugh-deborah-ramirez-yale.html0 -
@surbiton19
Yep, the self selected nature of internet polling panels has always been a concern. That was why phone polls were considered more reliable. That proved wrong in 2016. Whether it is true overall is hard to say. We get few phone polls now.
0 -
There must have easily been a dozen candidates equally as partisan hard line Republican but without the baggage.Philip_Thompson said:
Considering that SCOTUS is for life, impeaching a Justice while your own party controls the Senate and Presidency would be interesting. But I can't see 67 Senators ever voting to impeach, but if Kavanaugh did get impeached then the GOP could regret rushing through such a flawed character when they could have gotten someone else.Nigelb said:
More corroboration for an allegation dismissed during his hearing as being without evidence:TheScreamingEagles said:
What are the latest revelations about Kavanaugh?Alistair said:My girl Lizzie Warren pushing a 2 for 1 deal on impeachment
https://twitter.com/ewarren/status/1173290967773982722?s=19
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/14/sunday-review/brett-kavanaugh-deborah-ramirez-yale.html
Bizarre choice.0 -
@Foxy I trust the YouGov panel the most because it is arguably the most famous online pollster that is often in these ‘earn money at home’ articles in the mainstream press. I therefore deduce they have a very large and varied panel to choose from across the spectrum from those not interested in politics at all to those who spend hours a day on political blogs...
0 -
Its not cute, it's delusional.Philip_Thompson said:
You think revocation would be the end? That's cute!Gallowgate said:The headlines for the Lib Dems are perfect. Unambiguous; no explanation needed.
If you want this nonsense to end; vote Lib Dem.0 -
The Lib Dems’ usual problem is gaining attention. The new policy is therefore a great success.Nigelb said:
Yes. It does not bode well for international trade.rcs1000 said:
The EU case to the WTO re Boeing subsidies is going to be settled in December/January, and will almost certainly allow the EU to hit the US with retaliatiary tariffs. (What with both the EU and the US being extremely guilty of subsidising their domestic aircraft manufacturers. As, for that matter, are the Russians, the Chinese, the Japanese, the Brazilians and the Canadians.)Nigelb said:A big development in the prospective US/EU trade war:
https://www.politico.eu/article/trump-poised-to-hit-eu-with-billions-in-tariffs-after-airbus-win/
(Is WTO arbitration still going to be functional by then ?)0 -
To use just one example - was not the expansion of the EU to include much of Eastern Europe driven by the UK?Gabs2 said:
The problem with "leading not leaving" the EU had been there aren't any compelling examples of the UK doing it. PMs for decades have failed to break the French-German axis at the core of it, which means we were always left to agree or diagree after they had made a decision.CarlottaVance said:Thanks for the review Viewcode - sounds a lot more entertaining than I expected......meanwhile the David Cameron five minutes of hate continues unabated:
https://twitter.com/dez_holmes/status/1173202880221843456?s=21
When we rejoin it is critical we insist on having British-German meetings ahead of each European summit, just like the French-German ones.0 -
Doesn't matter. As long as Trump is there and the GOP control the Senate he is safe, unless they decide to take an opportunity to pick someone else.Nigelb said:
This is the guy Trump wanted, and none of the revelations are likely to change that. Far from it.Philip_Thompson said:
Considering that SCOTUS is for life, impeaching a Justice while your own party controls the Senate and Presidency would be interesting. But I can't see 67 Senators ever voting to impeach, but if Kavanaugh did get impeached then the GOP could regret rushing through such a flawed character when they could have gotten someone else.Nigelb said:
More corroboration for an allegation dismissed during his hearing as being without evidence:TheScreamingEagles said:
What are the latest revelations about Kavanaugh?Alistair said:My girl Lizzie Warren pushing a 2 for 1 deal on impeachment
https://twitter.com/ewarren/status/1173290967773982722?s=19
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/14/sunday-review/brett-kavanaugh-deborah-ramirez-yale.html
Impeachment would only come into play if the Dems got close to 67 Senators and there was a smoking gun.0 -
What is anti democratic about winning a GE with a central manifesto pledge of "Revoke" and then doing it?Byronic said:
Of course more than 10% want to Remain. It's nearer 50% than 10%.stodge said:
While I'm tempted to say "you would day that, wouldn't you?" I'd note the 14% swing from Con to LD in the latest ComRes but I'm sure you'll quote Opinium back at me so fine.HYUFD said:
This policy will split the Remainer vote though, revoke with the LDs for die hard Remainers is a better option than referendum on a Labour Brexit with Corbyn.
While the Leaver vote was split between Deal with May or No Deal with the Brexit Party, Boris has largely united it behind the Tories on a Brexit with a Deal or No Deal platform.
So the main winner today under FPTP is Boris
The policy is to Revoke if the Party wins a Parliamentary majority otherwise it's to support a second vote and continue to block a No Deal which is completely consistent. Why wouldn't those wishing to Remain (more than 10% I suspect) have a clear and unambiguous voice?
The Conservatives are currently riding both the horses of No Deal AND leaving with a Deal but the time is fast approaching when they will be forced to decide which horse they are really on. With No Deal blocked, the options then become leaving with a WA (really?) or storming off in a huff with the traditional Conservative attitude of evading responsibility and leaving the tough decisions to others.
But how many want to simply Revoke, and sod democracy? 10%? 15%? And how many will be comfortable with a party that espouses the cancellation of votes?
It's a deeply stupid policy.0 -
I am on the Yougov panel. The advantage of such big panels, and so much data on them, that they don't have such problems of false recall, and can look at trends over time.Gallowgate said:@Foxy I trust the YouGov panel the most because it is arguably the most famous online pollster that is often in these ‘earn money at home’ articles in the mainstream press. I therefore deduce they have a very large and varied panel to choose from across the spectrum from those not interested in politics at all to those who spend hours a day on political blogs...
The false recall issue is a genuine one when adjusting, but alsoo the false recallers may be a particularly interesting subgroup themselves. How much is conscious and how much unconscious? How fervent are these converts?0 -
6m+ prepared to sign a petition to revoke. Labour got 13m in the 2017 election. Seems like a pretty good strategy to me.HYUFD said:
About 27% want to revoke with Opinium, that could not win the LDs a majority but it could see them beat Corbyn Labour in voteshare which is Swinson's main aim this time I thinkByronic said:
Of course more than 10% want to Remain. It's nearer 50% than 10%.stodge said:
While I'm tempted to say "you would day that, wouldn't you?" I'd note the 14% swing from Con to LD in the latest ComRes but I'm sure you'll quote Opinium back at me so fine.HYUFD said:
This policy will split the Remainer vote though, revoke with the LDs for die hard Remainers is a better option than referendum on a Labour Brexit with Corbyn.
While the Leaver vote was split between Deal with May or No Deal with the Brexit Party, Boris has largely united it behind the Tories on a Brexit with a Deal or No Deal platform.
So the main winner today under FPTP is Boris
The policy is to Revoke if the Party wins a Parliamentary majority otherwise it's to support a second vote and continue to block a No Deal which is completely consistent. Why wouldn't those wishing to Remain (more than 10% I suspect) have a clear and unambiguous voice?
The Conservatives are currently riding both the horses of No Deal AND leaving with a Deal but the time is fast approaching when they will be forced to decide which horse they are really on. With No Deal blocked, the options then become leaving with a WA (really?) or storming off in a huff with the traditional Conservative attitude of evading responsibility and leaving the tough decisions to others.
But how many want to simply Revoke, and sod democracy? 10%? 15%? And how many will be comfortable with a party that espouses the cancellation of votes?
It's a deeply stupid policy.0 -
Sir, sir, is it ‘nothing’ sir?timple said:
What is anti democratic about winning a GE with a central manifesto pledge of "Revoke" and then doing it?Byronic said:
Of course more than 10% want to Remain. It's nearer 50% than 10%.stodge said:
While I'm tempted to say "you would day that, wouldn't you?" I'd note the 14% swing from Con to LD in the latest ComRes but I'm sure you'll quote Opinium back at me so fine.HYUFD said:
This policy will split the Remainer vote though, revoke with the LDs for die hard Remainers is a better option than referendum on a Labour Brexit with Corbyn.
While the Leaver vote was split between Deal with May or No Deal with the Brexit Party, Boris has largely united it behind the Tories on a Brexit with a Deal or No Deal platform.
So the main winner today under FPTP is Boris
The policy is to Revoke if the Party wins a Parliamentary majority otherwise it's to support a second vote and continue to block a No Deal which is completely consistent. Why wouldn't those wishing to Remain (more than 10% I suspect) have a clear and unambiguous voice?
The Conservatives are currently riding both the horses of No Deal AND leaving with a Deal but the time is fast approaching when they will be forced to decide which horse they are really on. With No Deal blocked, the options then become leaving with a WA (really?) or storming off in a huff with the traditional Conservative attitude of evading responsibility and leaving the tough decisions to others.
But how many want to simply Revoke, and sod democracy? 10%? 15%? And how many will be comfortable with a party that espouses the cancellation of votes?
It's a deeply stupid policy.0 -
Whatever else happens, looking at the current wreckage of UK Politics, the £bn pissed away, I think it is safe to say the referendum was not "ignored".Byronic said:
it might not cost them votes they've already banked. It will definitely stop some wavering softy Remainers from moving to them, from Labour or the Tories.SouthamObserver said:
I can’t see it costing them any votes. People opposing No Deal will still vote LibDem if they think it will help beat a Tory. Elsewhere it doesn’t matter.Byronic said:
Of course more than 10% want to Remain. It's nearer 50% than 10%.stodge said:
While I'm tempted to say "you would day that, wouldn't you?" I'd note the 14% swing from Con to LD in the latest ComRes but I'm sure you'll quote Opinium back at me so fine.HYUFD said:
This policy will split the Remainer vote though, revoke with the LDs for die hard Remainers is a better option than referendum on a Labour Brexit with Corbyn.
While the Leaver vote was split between Deal with May or No Deal with the Brexit Party, Boris has largely united it behind the Tories on a Brexit with a Deal or No Deal platform.
So the main winner today under FPTP is Boris
The policy is to Revoke if the Party wins a Parliamentary majority otherwise it's to support a second vote and continue to block a No Deal which is completely consistent. Why wouldn't those wishing to Remain (more than 10% I suspect) have a clear and unambiguous voice?
The Conservatives are currently riding both the horses of No Deal AND leaving with a Deal but the time is fast approaching when they will be forced to decide which horse they are really on. With No Deal blocked, the options then become leaving with a WA (really?) or storming off in a huff with the traditional Conservative attitude of evading responsibility and leaving the tough decisions to others.
But how many want to simply Revoke, and sod democracy? 10%? 15%? And how many will be comfortable with a party that espouses the cancellation of votes?
It's a deeply stupid policy.
Lots of Remainers are dismayed by the idea of simply ignoring and nullifying the referendum. Rightly so.0 -
I think this is like Roe vs Wade. It was ostensibly a victory for "liberals" and resulted in abortion being legal across the US.Philip_Thompson said:
Doesn't matter. As long as Trump is there and the GOP control the Senate he is safe, unless they decide to take an opportunity to pick someone else.Nigelb said:
This is the guy Trump wanted, and none of the revelations are likely to change that. Far from it.Philip_Thompson said:
Considering that SCOTUS is for life, impeaching a Justice while your own party controls the Senate and Presidency would be interesting. But I can't see 67 Senators ever voting to impeach, but if Kavanaugh did get impeached then the GOP could regret rushing through such a flawed character when they could have gotten someone else.Nigelb said:
More corroboration for an allegation dismissed during his hearing as being without evidence:TheScreamingEagles said:
What are the latest revelations about Kavanaugh?Alistair said:My girl Lizzie Warren pushing a 2 for 1 deal on impeachment
https://twitter.com/ewarren/status/1173290967773982722?s=19
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/14/sunday-review/brett-kavanaugh-deborah-ramirez-yale.html
Impeachment would only come into play if the Dems got close to 67 Senators and there was a smoking gun.
The reality was that it was a disaster for the Democratic party. It created a Religious Right voting block, that voted principally on one thing.
Brett Kavanaugh is a one man disaster zone for the Republicans. Susan Collins, the Senator from Maine, used to have 60-70% approval ratings. She's now sub 40%.
The drip, drip of these stories hits Republicans with women. And the fact that they do nothing (and can do nothing) to get rid of him is a slow moving car crash for them.0 -
Brilliant!Alphabet_Soup said:
Or a bicycle.FrancisUrquhart said:
Dont you have to have personality to win SPOTY?TheScreamingEagles said:
Jordan Henderson, Champions League winning captain.FrancisUrquhart said:Stokes SPOTY?
0 -
Nothing, as such, but how convenient for parties previously thinking a majority of the voting public was necessary for certain types of change, deciding that it is easier to get 30-40% of the voting public in order to do it instead.timple said:
What is anti democratic about winning a GE with a central manifesto pledge of "Revoke" and then doing it?Byronic said:
Of course more than 10% want to Remain. It's nearer 50% than 10%.stodge said:
While I'm tempted to say "you would day that, wouldn't you?" I'd note the 14% swing from Con to LD in the latest ComRes but I'm sure you'll quote Opinium back at me so fine.HYUFD said:
This policy will split the Remainer vote though, revoke with the LDs for die hard Remainers is a better option than referendum on a Labour Brexit with Corbyn.
While the Leaver vote was split between Deal with May or No Deal with the Brexit Party, Boris has largely united it behind the Tories on a Brexit with a Deal or No Deal platform.
So the main winner today under FPTP is Boris
The policy is to Revoke if the Party wins a Parliamentary majority otherwise it's to support a second vote and continue to block a No Deal which is completely consistent. Why wouldn't those wishing to Remain (more than 10% I suspect) have a clear and unambiguous voice?
The Conservatives are currently riding both the horses of No Deal AND leaving with a Deal but the time is fast approaching when they will be forced to decide which horse they are really on. With No Deal blocked, the options then become leaving with a WA (really?) or storming off in a huff with the traditional Conservative attitude of evading responsibility and leaving the tough decisions to others.
But how many want to simply Revoke, and sod democracy? 10%? 15%? And how many will be comfortable with a party that espouses the cancellation of votes?
It's a deeply stupid policy.
Of course that is how most of our changes are done.0 -
Sir, what is anti-democratic about winning a GE with a central manifesto pledge of No Deal, and then doing it. Is it still "Nothing", Sir?Streeter said:
Sir, sir, is it ‘nothing’ sir?timple said:
What is anti democratic about winning a GE with a central manifesto pledge of "Revoke" and then doing it?Byronic said:
Of course more than 10% want to Remain. It's nearer 50% than 10%.stodge said:
While I'm tempted to say "you would day that, wouldn't you?" I'd note the 14% swing from Con to LD in the latest ComRes but I'm sure you'll quote Opinium back at me so fine.HYUFD said:
This policy will split the Remainer vote though, revoke with the LDs for die hard Remainers is a better option than referendum on a Labour Brexit with Corbyn.
While the Leaver vote was split between Deal with May or No Deal with the Brexit Party, Boris has largely united it behind the Tories on a Brexit with a Deal or No Deal platform.
So the main winner today under FPTP is Boris
The policy is to Revoke if the Party wins a Parliamentary majority otherwise it's to support a second vote and continue to block a No Deal which is completely consistent. Why wouldn't those wishing to Remain (more than 10% I suspect) have a clear and unambiguous voice?
The Conservatives are currently riding both the horses of No Deal AND leaving with a Deal but the time is fast approaching when they will be forced to decide which horse they are really on. With No Deal blocked, the options then become leaving with a WA (really?) or storming off in a huff with the traditional Conservative attitude of evading responsibility and leaving the tough decisions to others.
But how many want to simply Revoke, and sod democracy? 10%? 15%? And how many will be comfortable with a party that espouses the cancellation of votes?
It's a deeply stupid policy.0 -
And, to be fair to the Lib Dems, they have been in favour of PR forever, as they recognise the problem.kle4 said:
Nothing, as such, but how convenient for parties previously thinking a majority of the voting public was necessary for certain types of change, deciding that it is easier to get 30-40% of the voting public in order to do it instead.timple said:
What is anti democratic about winning a GE with a central manifesto pledge of "Revoke" and then doing it?Byronic said:
Of course more than 10% want to Remain. It's nearer 50% than 10%.stodge said:
While I'm tempted to say "you would day that, wouldn't you?" I'd note the 14% swing from Con to LD in the latest ComRes but I'm sure you'll quote Opinium back at me so fine.HYUFD said:
This policy will split the Remainer vote though, revoke with the LDs for die hard Remainers is a better option than referendum on a Labour Brexit with Corbyn.
While the Leaver vote was split between Deal with May or No Deal with the Brexit Party, Boris has largely united it behind the Tories on a Brexit with a Deal or No Deal platform.
So the main winner today under FPTP is Boris
The policy is to Revoke if the Party wins a Parliamentary majority otherwise it's to support a second vote and continue to block a No Deal which is completely consistent. Why wouldn't those wishing to Remain (more than 10% I suspect) have a clear and unambiguous voice?
The Conservatives are currently riding both the horses of No Deal AND leaving with a Deal but the time is fast approaching when they will be forced to decide which horse they are really on. With No Deal blocked, the options then become leaving with a WA (really?) or storming off in a huff with the traditional Conservative attitude of evading responsibility and leaving the tough decisions to others.
But how many want to simply Revoke, and sod democracy? 10%? 15%? And how many will be comfortable with a party that espouses the cancellation of votes?
It's a deeply stupid policy.
Of course that is how most of our changes are done.
it would be interesting to see how they actually proceeded, were they to win the next election.0 -
Yes. Nothing anti-democratic about a Corbyn government either.MarqueeMark said:
Sir, what is anti-democratic about winning a GE with a central manifesto pledge of No Deal, and then doing it. Is it still "Nothing", Sir?Streeter said:
Sir, sir, is it ‘nothing’ sir?timple said:
What is anti democratic about winning a GE with a central manifesto pledge of "Revoke" and then doing it?Byronic said:
Of course more than 10% want to Remain. It's nearer 50% than 10%.stodge said:
While I'm tempted to say "you would day that, wouldn't you?" I'd note the 14% swing from Con to LD in the latest ComRes but I'm sure you'll quote Opinium back at me so fine.HYUFD said:
This policy will split the Remainer vote though, revoke with the LDs for die hard Remainers is a better option than referendum on a Labour Brexit with Corbyn.
While the Leaver vote was split between Deal with May or No Deal with the Brexit Party, Boris has largely united it behind the Tories on a Brexit with a Deal or No Deal platform.
So the main winner today under FPTP is Boris
The policy is to Revoke if the Party wins a Parliamentary majority otherwise it's to support a second vote and continue to block a No Deal which is completely consistent. Why wouldn't those wishing to Remain (more than 10% I suspect) have a clear and unambiguous voice?
The Conservatives are currently riding both the horses of No Deal AND leaving with a Deal but the time is fast approaching when they will be forced to decide which horse they are really on. With No Deal blocked, the options then become leaving with a WA (really?) or storming off in a huff with the traditional Conservative attitude of evading responsibility and leaving the tough decisions to others.
But how many want to simply Revoke, and sod democracy? 10%? 15%? And how many will be comfortable with a party that espouses the cancellation of votes?
It's a deeply stupid policy.
Both very very bad for the country, mind.0 -
This isn't true. The anti-abortion voting block only came about in the 80s long after Roe vs Wade. It came as the Southern Baptists suffered numerous defeats over their overt racism in segregated schooling and needed a new cultural wedge issue to sieze on to maintain power.rcs1000 said:
I think this is like Roe vs Wade. It was ostensibly a victory for "liberals" and resulted in abortion being legal across the US.Philip_Thompson said:
Doesn't matter. As long as Trump is there and the GOP control the Senate he is safe, unless they decide to take an opportunity to pick someone else.Nigelb said:
This is the guy Trump wanted, and none of the revelations are likely to change that. Far from it.Philip_Thompson said:
Considering that SCOTUS is for life, impeaching a Justice while your own party controls the Senate and Presidency would be interesting. But I can't see 67 Senators ever voting to impeach, but if Kavanaugh did get impeached then the GOP could regret rushing through such a flawed character when they could have gotten someone else.Nigelb said:
More corroboration for an allegation dismissed during his hearing as being without evidence:TheScreamingEagles said:
What are the latest revelations about Kavanaugh?Alistair said:My girl Lizzie Warren pushing a 2 for 1 deal on impeachment
https://twitter.com/ewarren/status/1173290967773982722?s=19
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/14/sunday-review/brett-kavanaugh-deborah-ramirez-yale.html
Impeachment would only come into play if the Dems got close to 67 Senators and there was a smoking gun.
The reality was that it was a disaster for the Democratic party. It created a Religious Right voting block, that voted principally on one thing.
.
Indeed 2 years before Roe vs Wade the Southern Baptist Convention settled on an abortion position pretty much as liberal as the Supreme Court decision went for. Four years after Roe vs Wade the SBC affirmed the legality and morality of Roe vs Wade.0 -
It’s the perfect question to destroy the lib dems with from this moment on, so what exactly do you think happens after you revoke?Philip_Thompson said:
You think revocation would be the end? That's cute!Gallowgate said:The headlines for the Lib Dems are perfect. Unambiguous; no explanation needed.
If you want this nonsense to end; vote Lib Dem.0 -
I made that precise argument on here in the weeks leading up to the vote. That that is exactly what the British electorate were intending to achieve.AndyJS said:There's an argument that the best result would have been Remain 50.1%, Leave 49.9% because then the EU may have had to realise how serious things were getting, not just with regard to the UK but also with other countries like Italy, Hungary, Greece, etc.
And I was complemented on it by....SeanT.0 -
Floater said:
Its not cute, it's delusional.Philip_Thompson said:
You think revocation would be the end? That's cute!Gallowgate said:The headlines for the Lib Dems are perfect. Unambiguous; no explanation needed.
If you want this nonsense to end; vote Lib Dem.
We need political leadership to steer the UK out of this political crisis, not glib, self promoting gimmicks that would actually make it worse.0 -
I'm for brexit but if the LDs manage to gain 308 seats and form a majority government then revoke away. Never going to happen.0
-
Catching up on Cameron in The Times. It’s tragic. He had no idea of the country he led. And he knows he will be remembered for just one thing. His only consolation is that he did not, quite, mess up the Scottish independence referendum. One day we may get passed Brexit, but the break-up of the UK would have been forever. That will be Johnson’s legacy instead.0
-
If ever there was a politician known for his glib, self promoting gimmicks it is BoZo the Incredible Hulk!egg said:Floater said:
Its not cute, it's delusional.Philip_Thompson said:
You think revocation would be the end? That's cute!Gallowgate said:The headlines for the Lib Dems are perfect. Unambiguous; no explanation needed.
If you want this nonsense to end; vote Lib Dem.
We need political leadership to steer the UK out of this political crisis, not glib, self promoting gimmicks that would actually make it worse.0 -
-
Easy. We stop wasting all this money on ghost ferry contracts, medicine stockpiling, charter flights, etc. and spend it on making this country better such as NHS and infrastructure investments.egg said:
It’s the perfect question to destroy the lib dems with from this moment on, so what exactly do you think happens after you revoke?Philip_Thompson said:
You think revocation would be the end? That's cute!Gallowgate said:The headlines for the Lib Dems are perfect. Unambiguous; no explanation needed.
If you want this nonsense to end; vote Lib Dem.0
