Queen Elizabeth II ‘dismayed’ by Brexit referendum, book claims
David Cameron should not have called the vote on leaving the EU, the late monarch is said to have told Barack Obama
Queen Elizabeth was “dismayed” about David Cameron’s handling of Brexit and confided in Barack Obama about her concerns over calling a referendum, according to a book.
The late Queen, who as monarch could not take a public stance on the issue, is said to have made her views known to the US president over lunch during his visit to Windsor Castle in April 2016.
The claims are made in a book, The Queen and Her Presidents: The Hidden Hand That Shaped History, by the American journalist Susan Page.
Obama, who was interviewed for the book about the Queen’s relationship with America, said she did not believe that as big a decision as the UK leaving the European Union “should have been decided by plebiscite”.
Page said the lunch, which took place two months after Cameron called the referendum, was a “very rare royal critique of a prime minister, in public or private”.
Describing the conversation, Obama said: “She said, effectively, ‘It’s hard to understand why a prime minister, who presumably understands politics, would put a public referendum forward that he didn’t know what the answer would be of such importance.’”
Well, he thought he did know what the answer would be. He was wrong, though I still put the blame on us, not him for that, he didn't invent the sentiment.
His mistake was backing Remain instead of staying aloof.
I don't buy that if I'm honest, I think it's become the convenient explanation. He wasn't surviving a loss either way, and I don't think him adopting an aloof stance would have moved the dial at all.
It wouldn't have been a loss if he'd said that he didn't get everything he wanted from the renegotiation but that it was the best form of membership available, and left the decision up to the people.
Queen Elizabeth II ‘dismayed’ by Brexit referendum, book claims
David Cameron should not have called the vote on leaving the EU, the late monarch is said to have told Barack Obama
Queen Elizabeth was “dismayed” about David Cameron’s handling of Brexit and confided in Barack Obama about her concerns over calling a referendum, according to a book.
The late Queen, who as monarch could not take a public stance on the issue, is said to have made her views known to the US president over lunch during his visit to Windsor Castle in April 2016.
The claims are made in a book, The Queen and Her Presidents: The Hidden Hand That Shaped History, by the American journalist Susan Page.
Obama, who was interviewed for the book about the Queen’s relationship with America, said she did not believe that as big a decision as the UK leaving the European Union “should have been decided by plebiscite”.
Page said the lunch, which took place two months after Cameron called the referendum, was a “very rare royal critique of a prime minister, in public or private”.
Describing the conversation, Obama said: “She said, effectively, ‘It’s hard to understand why a prime minister, who presumably understands politics, would put a public referendum forward that he didn’t know what the answer would be of such importance.’”
And yet you think Osborne was a good politican. Remember the only reason a referendum was offered was because Cameron thought there would be another coalition and it could be scrapped as part of the deal - then Osborne (accidently) won a small majority.
George was never in favour of holding the referendum.
As someone who voted remain, I am always interested in the belief that by putting off a vote and ignoring the issue, it would just go away.
The sane thing would have been to have a referendum *earlier*.
I still maintain we would still be in the EU if Blair/Brown had held their promised plebiscite on the Lisbon Treaty.
On topic this is one rare moment when I agree with Skyr. How can anyone sane go along with Donald’s latest demented idea when he’s still on about seizing Greenland. Ridic
It is actually a very sensible idea, non-violent and aimed at speeding negotiations to re-open the Strait.
Starmer won't do it because it would upset China, aka the gaffer.
All the resistance (all of it) is because people hate and despise Trump, and don't trust him.
That's it.
If it were Biden or Obama doing it, which is perfectly possible under an alternative scenario, we wouldn't hear half as much criticism.
I think that is probably right.
It's also the fallacy of sunk costs rearing its head. USA should not be where they are, as they shouldn't have started the war. However, given we are where we are, there is a need for clever tactics to re-open the strait.
I still think we should stay away because of how unreliable Trump is a partner, but sitting on our hands whilst the economy burns isn't great either.
On topic this is one rare moment when I agree with Skyr. How can anyone sane go along with Donald’s latest demented idea when he’s still on about seizing Greenland. Ridic
It is actually a very sensible idea, non-violent and aimed at speeding negotiations to re-open the Strait.
Starmer won't do it because it would upset China, aka the gaffer.
All the resistance (all of it) is because people hate and despise Trump, and don't trust him.
That's it.
If it were Biden or Obama doing it, which is perfectly possible under an alternative scenario, we wouldn't hear half as much criticism.
It's a bit more nuanced than that, whilst I acknowledge the unpopularity of Trump & Bibi, it's Trump erratic behaviour that is putting Brits off.
Queen Elizabeth II ‘dismayed’ by Brexit referendum, book claims
David Cameron should not have called the vote on leaving the EU, the late monarch is said to have told Barack Obama
Queen Elizabeth was “dismayed” about David Cameron’s handling of Brexit and confided in Barack Obama about her concerns over calling a referendum, according to a book.
The late Queen, who as monarch could not take a public stance on the issue, is said to have made her views known to the US president over lunch during his visit to Windsor Castle in April 2016.
The claims are made in a book, The Queen and Her Presidents: The Hidden Hand That Shaped History, by the American journalist Susan Page.
Obama, who was interviewed for the book about the Queen’s relationship with America, said she did not believe that as big a decision as the UK leaving the European Union “should have been decided by plebiscite”.
Page said the lunch, which took place two months after Cameron called the referendum, was a “very rare royal critique of a prime minister, in public or private”.
Describing the conversation, Obama said: “She said, effectively, ‘It’s hard to understand why a prime minister, who presumably understands politics, would put a public referendum forward that he didn’t know what the answer would be of such importance.’”
How does this remotely invalidate that theory? We know that Obama was very anti-Brexit - he campaigned for Remain. It sounds like the Queen here made a noncommittal remark on the politics of referenda that diplomatically told him what he wanted to hear. Politically, she was right. Doesn't imply an endorsement of either side.
On the leave side, the Queen's official biographer went out with the story that the Queen was asking dinner guests 'Give me three good reasons why we are in Europe'. That was an officially sanctioned story, and that is the closest you could ever get to the Queen endorsing a side. Yes, she went further in the Indyref by directly telling well-wishers that she 'hoped people would think about the future', but there was a lot more at stake there.
On topic this is one rare moment when I agree with Skyr. How can anyone sane go along with Donald’s latest demented idea when he’s still on about seizing Greenland. Ridic
It is actually a very sensible idea, non-violent and aimed at speeding negotiations to re-open the Strait.
Starmer won't do it because it would upset China, aka the gaffer.
A non-violent blockade?!? They'll just ask nicely? "Would be a shame if anything happened to your ship."
Queen Elizabeth II ‘dismayed’ by Brexit referendum, book claims
David Cameron should not have called the vote on leaving the EU, the late monarch is said to have told Barack Obama
Queen Elizabeth was “dismayed” about David Cameron’s handling of Brexit and confided in Barack Obama about her concerns over calling a referendum, according to a book.
The late Queen, who as monarch could not take a public stance on the issue, is said to have made her views known to the US president over lunch during his visit to Windsor Castle in April 2016.
The claims are made in a book, The Queen and Her Presidents: The Hidden Hand That Shaped History, by the American journalist Susan Page.
Obama, who was interviewed for the book about the Queen’s relationship with America, said she did not believe that as big a decision as the UK leaving the European Union “should have been decided by plebiscite”.
Page said the lunch, which took place two months after Cameron called the referendum, was a “very rare royal critique of a prime minister, in public or private”.
Describing the conversation, Obama said: “She said, effectively, ‘It’s hard to understand why a prime minister, who presumably understands politics, would put a public referendum forward that he didn’t know what the answer would be of such importance.’”
This is an extremely ugly poll. That such large numbers of people on the right think blockading 25% of the world’s hydrocarbons is a good idea speaks to a kind of partisanship that I thought was beneath the UK. Even most Conservatives, who by self-selection should really be sane enough to draw a line.
Not only stupid, but also about to be utterly humiliated by the Chinese when they simply waltz through.
Speaking of partisanship, your heightened emotion about what is simply equalling the terms of engagement is peculiar. You didn't show a fraction of this temper when bombs were raining down on Iran and people were being blown up, but stop China getting some oil and you're livid.
Not at all. This blockade is the best thing that’s happened for renewables in decades. Hopefully we’ll be able to extract Agent Trump, we’ve sent Thunberg over to Florida to pick him up in her yacht.
Yes at all. It has made you furious. Is it China with you too? Secret passion for the coal mining capital of the world? Odd.
Queen Elizabeth II ‘dismayed’ by Brexit referendum, book claims
David Cameron should not have called the vote on leaving the EU, the late monarch is said to have told Barack Obama
Queen Elizabeth was “dismayed” about David Cameron’s handling of Brexit and confided in Barack Obama about her concerns over calling a referendum, according to a book.
The late Queen, who as monarch could not take a public stance on the issue, is said to have made her views known to the US president over lunch during his visit to Windsor Castle in April 2016.
The claims are made in a book, The Queen and Her Presidents: The Hidden Hand That Shaped History, by the American journalist Susan Page.
Obama, who was interviewed for the book about the Queen’s relationship with America, said she did not believe that as big a decision as the UK leaving the European Union “should have been decided by plebiscite”.
Page said the lunch, which took place two months after Cameron called the referendum, was a “very rare royal critique of a prime minister, in public or private”.
Describing the conversation, Obama said: “She said, effectively, ‘It’s hard to understand why a prime minister, who presumably understands politics, would put a public referendum forward that he didn’t know what the answer would be of such importance.’”
How does this remotely invalidate that theory? We know that Obama was very anti-Brexit - he campaigned for Remain. It sounds like the Queen here made a noncommittal remark on the politics of referenda that diplomatically told him what he wanted to hear. Politically, she was right. Doesn't imply an endorsement of either side.
On the leave side, the Queen's official biographer went out with the story that the Queen was asking dinner guests 'Give me three good reasons why we are in Europe'. That was an officially sanctioned story, and that is the closest you could ever get to the Queen endorsing a side. Yes, she went further in the Indyref by directly telling well-wishers that she 'hoped people would think about the future', but there was a lot more at stake there.
I do live in an exceptionally lovely corner of London. I feed the world. Coming home from abroad via Regent’s Park and seeing the stucco of the Nash Terraces, framed by cream and blushing blossom. Wow
I hope that lifts the spirits of any depressed PBers
Where you live is shit, however much you try to polish it
Queen Elizabeth II ‘dismayed’ by Brexit referendum, book claims
David Cameron should not have called the vote on leaving the EU, the late monarch is said to have told Barack Obama
Queen Elizabeth was “dismayed” about David Cameron’s handling of Brexit and confided in Barack Obama about her concerns over calling a referendum, according to a book.
The late Queen, who as monarch could not take a public stance on the issue, is said to have made her views known to the US president over lunch during his visit to Windsor Castle in April 2016.
The claims are made in a book, The Queen and Her Presidents: The Hidden Hand That Shaped History, by the American journalist Susan Page.
Obama, who was interviewed for the book about the Queen’s relationship with America, said she did not believe that as big a decision as the UK leaving the European Union “should have been decided by plebiscite”.
Page said the lunch, which took place two months after Cameron called the referendum, was a “very rare royal critique of a prime minister, in public or private”.
Describing the conversation, Obama said: “She said, effectively, ‘It’s hard to understand why a prime minister, who presumably understands politics, would put a public referendum forward that he didn’t know what the answer would be of such importance.’”
And yet you think Osborne was a good politican. Remember the only reason a referendum was offered was because Cameron thought there would be another coalition and it could be scrapped as part of the deal - then Osborne (accidently) won a small majority.
George was never in favour of holding the referendum.
And yet he allowed it in the manifesto - and then focussed on winning Lib Dem seats..
Technically that was Sir Lynton Crosby's idea.
Both Dave & George (like me) thought the Lib Dems would do better than winning 8 seats.
It was all Jo Swinson's fault, she convinced everybody in Lib Dem held seats the Lib Dem votes would go up.
In her defence, in her own seat it did.
There was all those Ashcroft polls showing the Lib Dems holding on outside of North Britain.
One of my favourite facts is that of the 8 seats the LDs held in 2015, which you might assume would be their absolute core seats, they at one point lost 6 of them later. In some they get around 10-15%.
I believe they are now back up to 4 of them, but considering that is at a parliamentary high point for them that is still surprisingly low.
Queen Elizabeth II ‘dismayed’ by Brexit referendum, book claims
David Cameron should not have called the vote on leaving the EU, the late monarch is said to have told Barack Obama
Queen Elizabeth was “dismayed” about David Cameron’s handling of Brexit and confided in Barack Obama about her concerns over calling a referendum, according to a book.
The late Queen, who as monarch could not take a public stance on the issue, is said to have made her views known to the US president over lunch during his visit to Windsor Castle in April 2016.
The claims are made in a book, The Queen and Her Presidents: The Hidden Hand That Shaped History, by the American journalist Susan Page.
Obama, who was interviewed for the book about the Queen’s relationship with America, said she did not believe that as big a decision as the UK leaving the European Union “should have been decided by plebiscite”.
Page said the lunch, which took place two months after Cameron called the referendum, was a “very rare royal critique of a prime minister, in public or private”.
Describing the conversation, Obama said: “She said, effectively, ‘It’s hard to understand why a prime minister, who presumably understands politics, would put a public referendum forward that he didn’t know what the answer would be of such importance.’”
How does this remotely invalidate that theory? We know that Obama was very anti-Brexit - he campaigned for Remain. It sounds like the Queen here made a noncommittal remark on the politics of referenda that diplomatically told him what he wanted to hear. Politically, she was right. Doesn't imply an endorsement of either side.
On the leave side, the Queen's official biographer went out with the story that the Queen was asking dinner guests 'Give me three good reasons why we are in Europe'. That was an officially sanctioned story, and that is the closest you could ever get to the Queen endorsing a side. Yes, she went further in the Indyref by directly telling well-wishers that she 'hoped people would think about the future', but there was a lot more at stake there.
I mean everything Obama said came to pass.
He said we'd be at the back of the queue for a US trade deal. We got our US trade deal (personally I never wanted one, but there you go).
I've decided to join the Greens after the local elections (not being held in my area), unless those elections prompt a major rethink. That's after over 50 years in Labour and 13 in Parliament as a Labour MP, Like you [Maxh], I'm sceptical about aspects of Green policy but they have a positive, fairly consistent approach, which contrasts with the negative and erratic approach of the traditional parties. The parting has been amicable (I handed over the post of CLP Chair earlier this year) and I'm not interested in slagging anyone off, but a stronger Green voice in Parliament seems to me very desirable. Like you I expect any Green government to be unhelpful personally but better for the country and the future.
In my neck of the woods the Lib Dem canvassers are observing that they are leaking quite a few voters to the Greens.
A reminder whilst Corbyn wasn’t popular Corbyn’s policies are.
Or, the Greens are simply a fresher/more interesting NOTA choice.
There was a piece earlier in day in Politico or PoliticsHome (I forget which) about Ed Davey thinking the Liberals could nibble away at Greens via the more traditional ecology-minded green voters.
Section 4 of the 25 Amendment allows for a determination of presidential disability by the VP and a majority of a congressionally appointed panel (“such other body as Congress may by law provide”). This removes the presidentially appointed cabinet from the process.
I've decided to join the Greens after the local elections (not being held in my area), unless those elections prompt a major rethink. That's after over 50 years in Labour and 13 in Parliament as a Labour MP, Like you [Maxh], I'm sceptical about aspects of Green policy but they have a positive, fairly consistent approach, which contrasts with the negative and erratic approach of the traditional parties. The parting has been amicable (I handed over the post of CLP Chair earlier this year) and I'm not interested in slagging anyone off, but a stronger Green voice in Parliament seems to me very desirable. Like you I expect any Green government to be unhelpful personally but better for the country and the future.
In my neck of the woods the Lib Dem canvassers are observing that they are leaking quite a few voters to the Greens.
A reminder whilst Corbyn wasn’t popular Corbyn’s policies are.
Or, the Greens are simply a fresher/more interesting NOTA choice.
There was a piece earlier in day in Politico or PoliticsHome (I forget which) about Ed Davey thinking the Liberals could nibble away at Greens via the more traditional ecology-minded green voters.
Nah, Greens are flavour of the moment. The LDs will nibble at disaffected Tories who cannot stomach either losing to Farage or joining Farage (their two likely options).
On topic this is one rare moment when I agree with Skyr. How can anyone sane go along with Donald’s latest demented idea when he’s still on about seizing Greenland. Ridic
It is actually a very sensible idea, non-violent and aimed at speeding negotiations to re-open the Strait.
Starmer won't do it because it would upset China, aka the gaffer.
A non-violent blockade?!? They'll just ask nicely? "Would be a shame if anything happened to your ship."
Yes. Of course force is threatened, but why would civilian crews challenge the blockade? You'd prefer a bombing campaign?
I've decided to join the Greens after the local elections (not being held in my area), unless those elections prompt a major rethink. That's after over 50 years in Labour and 13 in Parliament as a Labour MP, Like you [Maxh], I'm sceptical about aspects of Green policy but they have a positive, fairly consistent approach, which contrasts with the negative and erratic approach of the traditional parties. The parting has been amicable (I handed over the post of CLP Chair earlier this year) and I'm not interested in slagging anyone off, but a stronger Green voice in Parliament seems to me very desirable. Like you I expect any Green government to be unhelpful personally but better for the country and the future.
A bunch of Trots riddled with antisemites who no longer give a toss about the environment.
Good luck!
That’s the spirit. Greens normally repost that flavour of thingy So …
On topic this is one rare moment when I agree with Skyr. How can anyone sane go along with Donald’s latest demented idea when he’s still on about seizing Greenland. Ridic
It is actually a very sensible idea, non-violent and aimed at speeding negotiations to re-open the Strait.
Starmer won't do it because it would upset China, aka the gaffer.
All the resistance (all of it) is because people hate and despise Trump, and don't trust him.
That's it.
If it were Biden or Obama doing it, which is perfectly possible under an alternative scenario, we wouldn't hear half as much criticism.
Perhaps this is a masterstroke, miracles do happen, but anybody opposing what Donald Trump has done throughout this shambles, starting with breaking off talks on a nuclear deal to replace the one he petulantly tore up (cos Obama did it) and instead launching a war with no thought for the consequences, has a pretty impeccable track record tbf.
On topic this is one rare moment when I agree with Skyr. How can anyone sane go along with Donald’s latest demented idea when he’s still on about seizing Greenland. Ridic
It is actually a very sensible idea, non-violent and aimed at speeding negotiations to re-open the Strait.
Starmer won't do it because it would upset China, aka the gaffer.
All the resistance (all of it) is because people hate and despise Trump, and don't trust him.
That's it.
If it were Biden or Obama doing it, which is perfectly possible under an alternative scenario, we wouldn't hear half as much criticism.
I think that is probably right.
It's also the fallacy of sunk costs rearing its head. USA should not be where they are, as they shouldn't have started the war. However, given we are where we are, there is a need for clever tactics to re-open the strait.
I still think we should stay away because of how unreliable Trump is a partner, but sitting on our hands whilst the economy burns isn't great either.
But exactly what can we do with the equipment we have to fix things.
That is the biggest problem here - how exactly do you protect ships going down a strait when a drone from virtually anywhere could attack them from any direction at any second...
Section 4 of the 25 Amendment allows for a determination of presidential disability by the VP and a majority of a congressionally appointed panel (“such other body as Congress may by law provide”). This removes the presidentially appointed cabinet from the process.
On topic this is one rare moment when I agree with Skyr. How can anyone sane go along with Donald’s latest demented idea when he’s still on about seizing Greenland. Ridic
It is actually a very sensible idea, non-violent and aimed at speeding negotiations to re-open the Strait.
Starmer won't do it because it would upset China, aka the gaffer.
A non-violent blockade?!? They'll just ask nicely? "Would be a shame if anything happened to your ship."
Yes. Of course force is threatened, but why would civilian crews challenge the blockade? You'd prefer a bombing campaign?
Desperation and starvation may cause it eventually. There are something like 20k seafarers stranded in the Gulf.
This is an extremely ugly poll. That such large numbers of people on the right think blockading 25% of the world’s hydrocarbons is a good idea speaks to a kind of partisanship that I thought was beneath the UK. Even most Conservatives, who by self-selection should really be sane enough to draw a line.
Not only stupid, but also about to be utterly humiliated by the Chinese when they simply waltz through.
Speaking of partisanship, your heightened emotion about what is simply equalling the terms of engagement is peculiar. You didn't show a fraction of this temper when bombs were raining down on Iran and people were being blown up, but stop China getting some oil and you're livid.
Not at all. This blockade is the best thing that’s happened for renewables in decades. Hopefully we’ll be able to extract Agent Trump, we’ve sent Thunberg over to Florida to pick him up in her yacht.
Yes at all. It has made you furious. Is it China with you too? Secret passion for the coal mining capital of the world? Odd.
You’ve suddenly accused me of being some sort of Chinese/Iranian super asset, but also accused me of supporting the Americans when they were bombing Iranian primary schools? And of supporting Chinese coal?
What an odd lie. Putting myself in his shoes I'd have just said yes I did, but whilst I am greatest president there ever was, many people are saying that, Jesus is something else, if I knew him we'd be great friends. Etc etc. Fox would lap it up.
Instead he's claiming to be stupid to get out of it, which is very unlike him. Since if he took it down he cannot push back and say it was unreasonable people thought it depicted him as Jesus.
Did he really say this? And not as a joke?? (He does - or did - have a good sense of humour with a touch of surrealism)
If he said this sincerely it is more evidence he is in rapid cognitive decline. I can see Vance taking power this year
When's the cutoff that gives JDV the chance of ten years in office instead of six?
(Not that I think he would. Whatever Vance's talents, building a followership that cheer him on even when he behaves appallingly isn't one of them.)
The Twenty-Second Amendment says
No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.
So as the inaugaration is on January 20 2029 that means January 21 2027 is the first day Vance has the possibility of 10 years
Lucky JDV would ever get a leap day flung in his 'first term'
Queen Elizabeth II ‘dismayed’ by Brexit referendum, book claims
David Cameron should not have called the vote on leaving the EU, the late monarch is said to have told Barack Obama
Queen Elizabeth was “dismayed” about David Cameron’s handling of Brexit and confided in Barack Obama about her concerns over calling a referendum, according to a book.
The late Queen, who as monarch could not take a public stance on the issue, is said to have made her views known to the US president over lunch during his visit to Windsor Castle in April 2016.
The claims are made in a book, The Queen and Her Presidents: The Hidden Hand That Shaped History, by the American journalist Susan Page.
Obama, who was interviewed for the book about the Queen’s relationship with America, said she did not believe that as big a decision as the UK leaving the European Union “should have been decided by plebiscite”.
Page said the lunch, which took place two months after Cameron called the referendum, was a “very rare royal critique of a prime minister, in public or private”.
Describing the conversation, Obama said: “She said, effectively, ‘It’s hard to understand why a prime minister, who presumably understands politics, would put a public referendum forward that he didn’t know what the answer would be of such importance.’”
There's a common misapprehension that Trump just needs to back down and we can go back to normal. But we can't. Why is Iran going to give up control of Hormuz unless it is forced to?
There's a common misapprehension that Trump just needs to back down and we can go back to normal. But we can't. Why is Iran going to give up control of Hormuz unless it is forced to?
There are downsides to them too, but having already pulled the trigger on this issue, it's a bit hard to just pinky promise they won't use their location to blackmail using the strait if they feel they should.
Queen Elizabeth II ‘dismayed’ by Brexit referendum, book claims
David Cameron should not have called the vote on leaving the EU, the late monarch is said to have told Barack Obama
Queen Elizabeth was “dismayed” about David Cameron’s handling of Brexit and confided in Barack Obama about her concerns over calling a referendum, according to a book.
The late Queen, who as monarch could not take a public stance on the issue, is said to have made her views known to the US president over lunch during his visit to Windsor Castle in April 2016.
The claims are made in a book, The Queen and Her Presidents: The Hidden Hand That Shaped History, by the American journalist Susan Page.
Obama, who was interviewed for the book about the Queen’s relationship with America, said she did not believe that as big a decision as the UK leaving the European Union “should have been decided by plebiscite”.
Page said the lunch, which took place two months after Cameron called the referendum, was a “very rare royal critique of a prime minister, in public or private”.
Describing the conversation, Obama said: “She said, effectively, ‘It’s hard to understand why a prime minister, who presumably understands politics, would put a public referendum forward that he didn’t know what the answer would be of such importance.’”
And yet you think Osborne was a good politican. Remember the only reason a referendum was offered was because Cameron thought there would be another coalition and it could be scrapped as part of the deal - then Osborne (accidently) won a small majority.
George was never in favour of holding the referendum.
And yet he allowed it in the manifesto - and then focussed on winning Lib Dem seats..
Technically that was Sir Lynton Crosby's idea.
Both Dave & George (like me) thought the Lib Dems would do better than winning 8 seats.
It was all Jo Swinson's fault, she convinced everybody in Lib Dem held seats the Lib Dem votes would go up.
In her defence, in her own seat it did.
There was all those Ashcroft polls showing the Lib Dems holding on outside of North Britain.
One of my favourite facts is that of the 8 seats the LDs held in 2015, which you might assume would be their absolute core seats, they at one point lost 6 of them later. In some they get around 10-15%.
I believe they are now back up to 4 of them, but considering that is at a parliamentary high point for them that is still surprisingly low.
Out of those 8 seats they won, I'm guessing the two they've held continuously before 2015 are Orkney and Tim Farrons seat. I was in the Lake District the day of the 2024 GE, there were Lib Dem diamonds everywhere
As the Hungarian example confirms, and the Polish one before that, the key to large turnout in actual practice is prior long-term, grass-roots organizational labor that helps people to understand how their single vote is a dignified part of a larger transformation.
Queen Elizabeth II ‘dismayed’ by Brexit referendum, book claims
David Cameron should not have called the vote on leaving the EU, the late monarch is said to have told Barack Obama
Queen Elizabeth was “dismayed” about David Cameron’s handling of Brexit and confided in Barack Obama about her concerns over calling a referendum, according to a book.
The late Queen, who as monarch could not take a public stance on the issue, is said to have made her views known to the US president over lunch during his visit to Windsor Castle in April 2016.
The claims are made in a book, The Queen and Her Presidents: The Hidden Hand That Shaped History, by the American journalist Susan Page.
Obama, who was interviewed for the book about the Queen’s relationship with America, said she did not believe that as big a decision as the UK leaving the European Union “should have been decided by plebiscite”.
Page said the lunch, which took place two months after Cameron called the referendum, was a “very rare royal critique of a prime minister, in public or private”.
Describing the conversation, Obama said: “She said, effectively, ‘It’s hard to understand why a prime minister, who presumably understands politics, would put a public referendum forward that he didn’t know what the answer would be of such importance.’”
Queen Elizabeth II ‘dismayed’ by Brexit referendum, book claims
David Cameron should not have called the vote on leaving the EU, the late monarch is said to have told Barack Obama
Queen Elizabeth was “dismayed” about David Cameron’s handling of Brexit and confided in Barack Obama about her concerns over calling a referendum, according to a book.
The late Queen, who as monarch could not take a public stance on the issue, is said to have made her views known to the US president over lunch during his visit to Windsor Castle in April 2016.
The claims are made in a book, The Queen and Her Presidents: The Hidden Hand That Shaped History, by the American journalist Susan Page.
Obama, who was interviewed for the book about the Queen’s relationship with America, said she did not believe that as big a decision as the UK leaving the European Union “should have been decided by plebiscite”.
Page said the lunch, which took place two months after Cameron called the referendum, was a “very rare royal critique of a prime minister, in public or private”.
Describing the conversation, Obama said: “She said, effectively, ‘It’s hard to understand why a prime minister, who presumably understands politics, would put a public referendum forward that he didn’t know what the answer would be of such importance.’”
It's an issue that will finally destroy the Tory Party in the next 4 years.
They will split as under, half to Reform, and the rest to parties on the centre left most likely LD, some Labour
A small "whig" party may survive.
The only chance they have is to make one last bid for the centre ground this summer and stop trying to out Reform Reform.
Following a chat with a longstanding Tory friend in Lichfield at the weekend I'm seeking a bet on Andy Street as a future Tory Leader.
Plans I'm told are afoot to parachute him in to a Seat in the Midlands that has a sitting Tory MP.
More like 2/3 of current Tory voters would go Reform, about 1/3 LD, near 0 Labour or Green.
They do need to win more centre ground swing voters though to beat Reform as you say, whichever of Reform or the Tories wins more seats at the next general election will likely take over the other eventually, unless we get PR
Frankly that may be to their advantage. It'd be hard to find a jury not inclined to convict on their guilty faces alone.
Indeed, Andew and Mandelson are 2 of the most despised men in Britain at the moment, most of the jury would likely say 'guilty' before they even got into the dock. A judge would at least be sure to judge them solely on the law and the facts of their cases
Queen Elizabeth II ‘dismayed’ by Brexit referendum, book claims
David Cameron should not have called the vote on leaving the EU, the late monarch is said to have told Barack Obama
Queen Elizabeth was “dismayed” about David Cameron’s handling of Brexit and confided in Barack Obama about her concerns over calling a referendum, according to a book.
The late Queen, who as monarch could not take a public stance on the issue, is said to have made her views known to the US president over lunch during his visit to Windsor Castle in April 2016.
The claims are made in a book, The Queen and Her Presidents: The Hidden Hand That Shaped History, by the American journalist Susan Page.
Obama, who was interviewed for the book about the Queen’s relationship with America, said she did not believe that as big a decision as the UK leaving the European Union “should have been decided by plebiscite”.
Page said the lunch, which took place two months after Cameron called the referendum, was a “very rare royal critique of a prime minister, in public or private”.
Describing the conversation, Obama said: “She said, effectively, ‘It’s hard to understand why a prime minister, who presumably understands politics, would put a public referendum forward that he didn’t know what the answer would be of such importance.’”
And yet you think Osborne was a good politican. Remember the only reason a referendum was offered was because Cameron thought there would be another coalition and it could be scrapped as part of the deal - then Osborne (accidently) won a small majority.
George was never in favour of holding the referendum.
And yet he allowed it in the manifesto - and then focussed on winning Lib Dem seats..
Technically that was Sir Lynton Crosby's idea.
Both Dave & George (like me) thought the Lib Dems would do better than winning 8 seats.
It was all Jo Swinson's fault, she convinced everybody in Lib Dem held seats the Lib Dem votes would go up.
In her defence, in her own seat it did.
There was all those Ashcroft polls showing the Lib Dems holding on outside of North Britain.
One of my favourite facts is that of the 8 seats the LDs held in 2015, which you might assume would be their absolute core seats, they at one point lost 6 of them later. In some they get around 10-15%.
I believe they are now back up to 4 of them, but considering that is at a parliamentary high point for them that is still surprisingly low.
Out of those 8 seats they won, I'm guessing the two they've held continuously before 2015 are Orkney and Tim Farrons seat. I was in the Lake District the day of the 2024 GE, there were Lib Dem diamonds everywhere
Quite so. They've regained North Norfolk and Carshalton after losing both in 2019.
Frankly that may be to their advantage. It'd be hard to find a jury not inclined to convict on their guilty faces alone.
Indeed, Andew and Mandelson are 2 of the most despised men in Britain at the moment, most of the jury would likely say 'guilty' before they even got into the dock. A judge would at least be sure to judge them solely on the law and the facts of their cases
Given the widespread opinion that Prince Andrew may have done far far worse than the crime he was arrested for, it would be a real test of juror integrity to put that out of mind, to be sure.
So Labour or Tories are around 7 points below Reform.
Doesn’t really ring as a landslide majority incoming for Reform to me.
Perhaps I am mistaken?
I think they'll get a bump after a good Locals (albeit not as amazing as they might hope), but really with numbers as they are there's so much uncertainty.
Can we be perfectly clear that it was Iran that effectively blockaded the Strait by targeting the shipping? All Trump is doing is stopping the small number of vessels that are still passing through.
There's a common misapprehension that Trump just needs to back down and we can go back to normal. But we can't. Why is Iran going to give up control of Hormuz unless it is forced to?
Hardly anybody thinks that. It's about least bad options from here. And one of those in the conversation is Trump withdraws and stops talking, leaving other players with more ability to focus (a long list) to start the arduous work of putting together a sustainable resolution.
Queen Elizabeth II ‘dismayed’ by Brexit referendum, book claims
David Cameron should not have called the vote on leaving the EU, the late monarch is said to have told Barack Obama
Queen Elizabeth was “dismayed” about David Cameron’s handling of Brexit and confided in Barack Obama about her concerns over calling a referendum, according to a book.
The late Queen, who as monarch could not take a public stance on the issue, is said to have made her views known to the US president over lunch during his visit to Windsor Castle in April 2016.
The claims are made in a book, The Queen and Her Presidents: The Hidden Hand That Shaped History, by the American journalist Susan Page.
Obama, who was interviewed for the book about the Queen’s relationship with America, said she did not believe that as big a decision as the UK leaving the European Union “should have been decided by plebiscite”.
Page said the lunch, which took place two months after Cameron called the referendum, was a “very rare royal critique of a prime minister, in public or private”.
Describing the conversation, Obama said: “She said, effectively, ‘It’s hard to understand why a prime minister, who presumably understands politics, would put a public referendum forward that he didn’t know what the answer would be of such importance.’”
And yet you think Osborne was a good politican. Remember the only reason a referendum was offered was because Cameron thought there would be another coalition and it could be scrapped as part of the deal - then Osborne (accidently) won a small majority.
Cameron had won 2 referendums, on AV in 2011 and Scottish independence in 2014 and thought it would be third time lucky in 2016.
Ignoring the declining margin each time, from the 67% for his No side in 2011, to 55% in 2014 and so it was always likely he would eventually come a cropper.
Sensible PMs like Thatcher and Churchill and Attlee never held a referendum on anything as they knew Crown in Parliament is supposed to be sovereign
There's a common misapprehension that Trump just needs to back down and we can go back to normal. But we can't. Why is Iran going to give up control of Hormuz unless it is forced to?
Hardly anybody thinks that. It's about least bad options from here. And one in the conversation is Trump withdraws and stops talking, leaving other players with more ability to focus (a long list) to start the arduous work of putting together a sustainable resolution.
They don't have the US's military might. The only reason we have something close to freedom of navigation around the whole world is the US navy.
One cause for optimism is that China may not want to side so openly with Iran against the Gulf countries.
Can we be perfectly clear that it was Iran that effectively blockaded the Strait by targeting the shipping? All Trump is doing is stopping the small number of vessels that are still passing through.
Except the majority of the ships still passing through are Chinese and the Chinese have said stopping those ships would be acted upon..
As the Hungarian example confirms, and the Polish one before that, the key to large turnout in actual practice is prior long-term, grass-roots organizational labor that helps people to understand how their single vote is a dignified part of a larger transformation.
Can we be perfectly clear that it was Iran that effectively blockaded the Strait by targeting the shipping? All Trump is doing is stopping the small number of vessels that are still passing through.
Except the majority of the ships still passing through are Chinese and the Chinese have said stopping those ships would be acted upon..
The same China which opposed taking any measures to open Hormuz ?
So Labour or Tories are around 7 points below Reform.
Doesn’t really ring as a landslide majority incoming for Reform to me.
Perhaps I am mistaken?
The latest MRP put Reform on 324 seats, not a landslide majority, so you're right.
Farage's problem is that a Reform government would need a landslide majority to be viable given the inexperience and flakiness of any potential Reform MPs.
So Labour or Tories are around 7 points below Reform.
Doesn’t really ring as a landslide majority incoming for Reform to me.
Perhaps I am mistaken?
The latest MRP put Reform on 324 seats, not a landslide majority, so you're right.
However, MRP doesn't adjust for local parties getting a "it's a two horse race" message across. It can do local demographics (which is why they picked up the Labour wave in student towns in 2017), but that's it.
That probably means it systematically underestimates Lib Dem seats and overestimates Reform.
There's a common misapprehension that Trump just needs to back down and we can go back to normal. But we can't. Why is Iran going to give up control of Hormuz unless it is forced to?
Hardly anybody thinks that. It's about least bad options from here. And one in the conversation is Trump withdraws and stops talking, leaving other players with more ability to focus (a long list) to start the arduous work of putting together a sustainable resolution.
They don't have the US's military might. The only reason we have something close to freedom of navigation around the whole world is the US navy.
One cause for optimism is that China may not want to side so openly with Iran against the Gulf countries.
There's a solid deal to be done but I don't think the functionality exists in this deeply dysfunctional Trump2 administration to do it. I hope I'm wrong. But given I think I'm not what I'm rooting for is a 'declare victory, withdraw, leave the mess for others to sort out' development. It's a poor outcome but imo simultaneously the best realistic one.
There's a common misapprehension that Trump just needs to back down and we can go back to normal. But we can't. Why is Iran going to give up control of Hormuz unless it is forced to?
Hardly anybody thinks that. It's about least bad options from here. And one in the conversation is Trump withdraws and stops talking, leaving other players with more ability to focus (a long list) to start the arduous work of putting together a sustainable resolution.
They don't have the US's military might. The only reason we have something close to freedom of navigation around the whole world is the US navy.
One cause for optimism is that China may not want to side so openly with Iran against the Gulf countries.
But they have been unable to provide freedom of navigation. So that option is out.
The most likely option and probably least worst is what you describe - the Iranians control the strait and there is some kind of deal. That’s why the initial ceasefire took that form too, because it reflects the new reality.
But first, the Chinese haven’t blinked so we’ll have to endure yet another TACO. I guess there is small chance Trump actually seizes their tankers.
So Labour or Tories are around 7 points below Reform.
Doesn’t really ring as a landslide majority incoming for Reform to me.
Perhaps I am mistaken?
The latest MRP put Reform on 324 seats, not a landslide majority, so you're right.
Farage's problem is that a Reform government would need a landslide majority to be viable given the inexperience and flakiness of any potential Reform MPs.
True, but SKS got a thumping majority and couldn’t get basic stuff through.
Even if Reform matched it I’d expect the same problems.
MPs now see themselves as social workers now. Not willing to take a tough decision or say no to people.
Queen Elizabeth II ‘dismayed’ by Brexit referendum, book claims
David Cameron should not have called the vote on leaving the EU, the late monarch is said to have told Barack Obama
Queen Elizabeth was “dismayed” about David Cameron’s handling of Brexit and confided in Barack Obama about her concerns over calling a referendum, according to a book.
The late Queen, who as monarch could not take a public stance on the issue, is said to have made her views known to the US president over lunch during his visit to Windsor Castle in April 2016.
The claims are made in a book, The Queen and Her Presidents: The Hidden Hand That Shaped History, by the American journalist Susan Page.
Obama, who was interviewed for the book about the Queen’s relationship with America, said she did not believe that as big a decision as the UK leaving the European Union “should have been decided by plebiscite”.
Page said the lunch, which took place two months after Cameron called the referendum, was a “very rare royal critique of a prime minister, in public or private”.
Describing the conversation, Obama said: “She said, effectively, ‘It’s hard to understand why a prime minister, who presumably understands politics, would put a public referendum forward that he didn’t know what the answer would be of such importance.’”
Well, he thought he did know what the answer would be. He was wrong, though I still put the blame on us, not him for that, he didn't invent the sentiment.
His mistake was backing Remain instead of staying aloof.
I think it's quite clear that his mistake was not backing Leave. Everything about what he's said since the referendum suggests he would have been happy to lead Britain out of the EU, but he was persuaded otherwise.
If he'd won the referendum on a prospectus for Leave then it would have made his legacy and put a spanner in Johnson's plan to become PM.
Queen Elizabeth II ‘dismayed’ by Brexit referendum, book claims
David Cameron should not have called the vote on leaving the EU, the late monarch is said to have told Barack Obama
Queen Elizabeth was “dismayed” about David Cameron’s handling of Brexit and confided in Barack Obama about her concerns over calling a referendum, according to a book.
The late Queen, who as monarch could not take a public stance on the issue, is said to have made her views known to the US president over lunch during his visit to Windsor Castle in April 2016.
The claims are made in a book, The Queen and Her Presidents: The Hidden Hand That Shaped History, by the American journalist Susan Page.
Obama, who was interviewed for the book about the Queen’s relationship with America, said she did not believe that as big a decision as the UK leaving the European Union “should have been decided by plebiscite”.
Page said the lunch, which took place two months after Cameron called the referendum, was a “very rare royal critique of a prime minister, in public or private”.
Describing the conversation, Obama said: “She said, effectively, ‘It’s hard to understand why a prime minister, who presumably understands politics, would put a public referendum forward that he didn’t know what the answer would be of such importance.’”
Well, he thought he did know what the answer would be. He was wrong, though I still put the blame on us, not him for that, he didn't invent the sentiment.
His mistake was backing Remain instead of staying aloof.
I think it's quite clear that his mistake was not backing Leave. Everything about what he's said since the referendum suggests he would have been happy to lead Britain out of the EU, but he was persuaded otherwise.
If he'd won the referendum on a prospectus for Leave then it would have made his legacy and put a spanner in Johnson's plan to become PM.
I disagree with the notion that he would have been unable to govern after a Leave victory. Leaving the EU was an earthquake, and it would have been better for the incumbent to negotiate the choppy waters it caused, rather than add to the chaos by resigning. It's not as if Leave voters were huge fans of Theresa May, who was also a Remainer. He must have known he was lying to parliament when replying to Douglas Carswell asking him the question directly
Queen Elizabeth II ‘dismayed’ by Brexit referendum, book claims
David Cameron should not have called the vote on leaving the EU, the late monarch is said to have told Barack Obama
Queen Elizabeth was “dismayed” about David Cameron’s handling of Brexit and confided in Barack Obama about her concerns over calling a referendum, according to a book.
The late Queen, who as monarch could not take a public stance on the issue, is said to have made her views known to the US president over lunch during his visit to Windsor Castle in April 2016.
The claims are made in a book, The Queen and Her Presidents: The Hidden Hand That Shaped History, by the American journalist Susan Page.
Obama, who was interviewed for the book about the Queen’s relationship with America, said she did not believe that as big a decision as the UK leaving the European Union “should have been decided by plebiscite”.
Page said the lunch, which took place two months after Cameron called the referendum, was a “very rare royal critique of a prime minister, in public or private”.
Describing the conversation, Obama said: “She said, effectively, ‘It’s hard to understand why a prime minister, who presumably understands politics, would put a public referendum forward that he didn’t know what the answer would be of such importance.’”
That's not to say she wanted Remain to win; Peter Hitchens is a long standing Eurosceptic, but played no part in the referendum and thought using that mechanism in order to leave was a huge mistake, it should have been the manifesto commitment of an elected government
Queen Elizabeth II ‘dismayed’ by Brexit referendum, book claims
David Cameron should not have called the vote on leaving the EU, the late monarch is said to have told Barack Obama
Queen Elizabeth was “dismayed” about David Cameron’s handling of Brexit and confided in Barack Obama about her concerns over calling a referendum, according to a book.
The late Queen, who as monarch could not take a public stance on the issue, is said to have made her views known to the US president over lunch during his visit to Windsor Castle in April 2016.
The claims are made in a book, The Queen and Her Presidents: The Hidden Hand That Shaped History, by the American journalist Susan Page.
Obama, who was interviewed for the book about the Queen’s relationship with America, said she did not believe that as big a decision as the UK leaving the European Union “should have been decided by plebiscite”.
Page said the lunch, which took place two months after Cameron called the referendum, was a “very rare royal critique of a prime minister, in public or private”.
Describing the conversation, Obama said: “She said, effectively, ‘It’s hard to understand why a prime minister, who presumably understands politics, would put a public referendum forward that he didn’t know what the answer would be of such importance.’”
Queen Elizabeth II ‘dismayed’ by Brexit referendum, book claims
David Cameron should not have called the vote on leaving the EU, the late monarch is said to have told Barack Obama
Queen Elizabeth was “dismayed” about David Cameron’s handling of Brexit and confided in Barack Obama about her concerns over calling a referendum, according to a book.
The late Queen, who as monarch could not take a public stance on the issue, is said to have made her views known to the US president over lunch during his visit to Windsor Castle in April 2016.
The claims are made in a book, The Queen and Her Presidents: The Hidden Hand That Shaped History, by the American journalist Susan Page.
Obama, who was interviewed for the book about the Queen’s relationship with America, said she did not believe that as big a decision as the UK leaving the European Union “should have been decided by plebiscite”.
Page said the lunch, which took place two months after Cameron called the referendum, was a “very rare royal critique of a prime minister, in public or private”.
Describing the conversation, Obama said: “She said, effectively, ‘It’s hard to understand why a prime minister, who presumably understands politics, would put a public referendum forward that he didn’t know what the answer would be of such importance.’”
Well, he thought he did know what the answer would be. He was wrong, though I still put the blame on us, not him for that, he didn't invent the sentiment.
His mistake was backing Remain instead of staying aloof.
I think it's quite clear that his mistake was not backing Leave. Everything about what he's said since the referendum suggests he would have been happy to lead Britain out of the EU, but he was persuaded otherwise.
If he'd won the referendum on a prospectus for Leave then it would have made his legacy and put a spanner in Johnson's plan to become PM.
I disagree with the notion that he would have been unable to govern after a Leave victory. Leaving the EU was an earthquake, and it would have been better for the incumbent to negotiate the choppy waters it caused, rather than add to the chaos by resigning. It's not as if Leave voters were huge fans of Theresa May, who was also a Remainer. He must have known he was lying to parliament when replying to Douglas Carswell asking him the question directly
IIRC, Mr Cameron actually said he would not resign if the vote went for Brexit. What must surely have forced his resignation was the fact that he'd ordered Civil Servants not to prepare any contingency plans.
Queen Elizabeth II ‘dismayed’ by Brexit referendum, book claims
David Cameron should not have called the vote on leaving the EU, the late monarch is said to have told Barack Obama
Queen Elizabeth was “dismayed” about David Cameron’s handling of Brexit and confided in Barack Obama about her concerns over calling a referendum, according to a book.
The late Queen, who as monarch could not take a public stance on the issue, is said to have made her views known to the US president over lunch during his visit to Windsor Castle in April 2016.
The claims are made in a book, The Queen and Her Presidents: The Hidden Hand That Shaped History, by the American journalist Susan Page.
Obama, who was interviewed for the book about the Queen’s relationship with America, said she did not believe that as big a decision as the UK leaving the European Union “should have been decided by plebiscite”.
Page said the lunch, which took place two months after Cameron called the referendum, was a “very rare royal critique of a prime minister, in public or private”.
Describing the conversation, Obama said: “She said, effectively, ‘It’s hard to understand why a prime minister, who presumably understands politics, would put a public referendum forward that he didn’t know what the answer would be of such importance.’”
Well, he thought he did know what the answer would be. He was wrong, though I still put the blame on us, not him for that, he didn't invent the sentiment.
His mistake was backing Remain instead of staying aloof.
I think it's quite clear that his mistake was not backing Leave. Everything about what he's said since the referendum suggests he would have been happy to lead Britain out of the EU, but he was persuaded otherwise.
If he'd won the referendum on a prospectus for Leave then it would have made his legacy and put a spanner in Johnson's plan to become PM.
I disagree with the notion that he would have been unable to govern after a Leave victory. Leaving the EU was an earthquake, and it would have been better for the incumbent to negotiate the choppy waters it caused, rather than add to the chaos by resigning. It's not as if Leave voters were huge fans of Theresa May, who was also a Remainer. He must have known he was lying to parliament when replying to Douglas Carswell asking him the question directly
IIRC, Mr Cameron actually said he would not resign if the vote went for Brexit. What must surely have forced his resignation was the fact that he'd ordered Civil Servants not to prepare any contingency plans.
He could have governed on legally and technically, but politically it was not going to be infeasible, I don't buy for a second that the Tory ranks would have put up with it, no matter that Cameron and they said otherwise.
Queen Elizabeth II ‘dismayed’ by Brexit referendum, book claims
David Cameron should not have called the vote on leaving the EU, the late monarch is said to have told Barack Obama
Queen Elizabeth was “dismayed” about David Cameron’s handling of Brexit and confided in Barack Obama about her concerns over calling a referendum, according to a book.
The late Queen, who as monarch could not take a public stance on the issue, is said to have made her views known to the US president over lunch during his visit to Windsor Castle in April 2016.
The claims are made in a book, The Queen and Her Presidents: The Hidden Hand That Shaped History, by the American journalist Susan Page.
Obama, who was interviewed for the book about the Queen’s relationship with America, said she did not believe that as big a decision as the UK leaving the European Union “should have been decided by plebiscite”.
Page said the lunch, which took place two months after Cameron called the referendum, was a “very rare royal critique of a prime minister, in public or private”.
Describing the conversation, Obama said: “She said, effectively, ‘It’s hard to understand why a prime minister, who presumably understands politics, would put a public referendum forward that he didn’t know what the answer would be of such importance.’”
With all due respect to our former Queen, a plebiscite is the only way to resolve such issues. She was wrong on this.
I think the key sense I got from that quote is that Dave asked the question way too casually. Perhaps he did expect to win, because winning is what he did, so it didn't matter what losing would look like.
But then I'm a boring centrist dad who still takes the view that, had those in power actually thought about the downside risks, they wouldn't have dreamt of asking the question in the first place,
Trump deletes post depicting him as Jesus-like figure after backlash
"This goes too far. It crosses the line," wrote David Brody, a journalist with the Christian Broadcasting Network."
An AI image-gen is what took it over the line? All the rest has been a-ok with the devout?
Well, in fairness, his father has some serious previous for that in Sodom and Gomorrah, the great flood, the plagues of Egypt, the plague on the Assyrian host etc etc.
Trump deletes post depicting him as Jesus-like figure after backlash
"This goes too far. It crosses the line," wrote David Brody, a journalist with the Christian Broadcasting Network."
An AI image-gen is what took it over the line? All the rest has been a-ok with the devout?
Well, in fairness, his father has some serious previous for that in Sodom and Gomorrah, the great flood, the plagues of Egypt, the plague on the Assyrian host etc etc.
He got his shit together when he became a father, it's what we all hope for with violent shizophrenics with anger issues.
Queen Elizabeth II ‘dismayed’ by Brexit referendum, book claims
David Cameron should not have called the vote on leaving the EU, the late monarch is said to have told Barack Obama
Queen Elizabeth was “dismayed” about David Cameron’s handling of Brexit and confided in Barack Obama about her concerns over calling a referendum, according to a book.
The late Queen, who as monarch could not take a public stance on the issue, is said to have made her views known to the US president over lunch during his visit to Windsor Castle in April 2016.
The claims are made in a book, The Queen and Her Presidents: The Hidden Hand That Shaped History, by the American journalist Susan Page.
Obama, who was interviewed for the book about the Queen’s relationship with America, said she did not believe that as big a decision as the UK leaving the European Union “should have been decided by plebiscite”.
Page said the lunch, which took place two months after Cameron called the referendum, was a “very rare royal critique of a prime minister, in public or private”.
Describing the conversation, Obama said: “She said, effectively, ‘It’s hard to understand why a prime minister, who presumably understands politics, would put a public referendum forward that he didn’t know what the answer would be of such importance.’”
Well, he thought he did know what the answer would be. He was wrong, though I still put the blame on us, not him for that, he didn't invent the sentiment.
His mistake was backing Remain instead of staying aloof.
I think it's quite clear that his mistake was not backing Leave. Everything about what he's said since the referendum suggests he would have been happy to lead Britain out of the EU, but he was persuaded otherwise.
If he'd won the referendum on a prospectus for Leave then it would have made his legacy and put a spanner in Johnson's plan to become PM.
I disagree with the notion that he would have been unable to govern after a Leave victory. Leaving the EU was an earthquake, and it would have been better for the incumbent to negotiate the choppy waters it caused, rather than add to the chaos by resigning. It's not as if Leave voters were huge fans of Theresa May, who was also a Remainer. He must have known he was lying to parliament when replying to Douglas Carswell asking him the question directly
IIRC, Mr Cameron actually said he would not resign if the vote went for Brexit. What must surely have forced his resignation was the fact that he'd ordered Civil Servants not to prepare any contingency plans.
Oft-overplayed, that point. It was silly, but the two year Art.50 process, and the fact that nothing could be even informally agreed until Art.50 was declared, makes it mostly moot.
(The main reason it was silly is that the remainer civil servants would have produced some excellent fearmongering in their contingency plans, and that would have helped him.)
Queen Elizabeth II ‘dismayed’ by Brexit referendum, book claims
David Cameron should not have called the vote on leaving the EU, the late monarch is said to have told Barack Obama
Queen Elizabeth was “dismayed” about David Cameron’s handling of Brexit and confided in Barack Obama about her concerns over calling a referendum, according to a book.
The late Queen, who as monarch could not take a public stance on the issue, is said to have made her views known to the US president over lunch during his visit to Windsor Castle in April 2016.
The claims are made in a book, The Queen and Her Presidents: The Hidden Hand That Shaped History, by the American journalist Susan Page.
Obama, who was interviewed for the book about the Queen’s relationship with America, said she did not believe that as big a decision as the UK leaving the European Union “should have been decided by plebiscite”.
Page said the lunch, which took place two months after Cameron called the referendum, was a “very rare royal critique of a prime minister, in public or private”.
Describing the conversation, Obama said: “She said, effectively, ‘It’s hard to understand why a prime minister, who presumably understands politics, would put a public referendum forward that he didn’t know what the answer would be of such importance.’”
Well, he thought he did know what the answer would be. He was wrong, though I still put the blame on us, not him for that, he didn't invent the sentiment.
His mistake was backing Remain instead of staying aloof.
I think it's quite clear that his mistake was not backing Leave. Everything about what he's said since the referendum suggests he would have been happy to lead Britain out of the EU, but he was persuaded otherwise.
If he'd won the referendum on a prospectus for Leave then it would have made his legacy and put a spanner in Johnson's plan to become PM.
I disagree with the notion that he would have been unable to govern after a Leave victory. Leaving the EU was an earthquake, and it would have been better for the incumbent to negotiate the choppy waters it caused, rather than add to the chaos by resigning. It's not as if Leave voters were huge fans of Theresa May, who was also a Remainer. He must have known he was lying to parliament when replying to Douglas Carswell asking him the question directly
IIRC, Mr Cameron actually said he would not resign if the vote went for Brexit. What must surely have forced his resignation was the fact that he'd ordered Civil Servants not to prepare any contingency plans.
He could have governed on legally and technically, but politically it was not going to be infeasible, I don't buy for a second that the Tory ranks would have put up with it, no matter that Cameron and they said otherwise.
Queen Elizabeth II ‘dismayed’ by Brexit referendum, book claims
David Cameron should not have called the vote on leaving the EU, the late monarch is said to have told Barack Obama
Queen Elizabeth was “dismayed” about David Cameron’s handling of Brexit and confided in Barack Obama about her concerns over calling a referendum, according to a book.
The late Queen, who as monarch could not take a public stance on the issue, is said to have made her views known to the US president over lunch during his visit to Windsor Castle in April 2016.
The claims are made in a book, The Queen and Her Presidents: The Hidden Hand That Shaped History, by the American journalist Susan Page.
Obama, who was interviewed for the book about the Queen’s relationship with America, said she did not believe that as big a decision as the UK leaving the European Union “should have been decided by plebiscite”.
Page said the lunch, which took place two months after Cameron called the referendum, was a “very rare royal critique of a prime minister, in public or private”.
Describing the conversation, Obama said: “She said, effectively, ‘It’s hard to understand why a prime minister, who presumably understands politics, would put a public referendum forward that he didn’t know what the answer would be of such importance.’”
With all due respect to our former Queen, a plebiscite is the only way to resolve such issues. She was wrong on this.
It isn't. Not even in this case, as the plebiscite did not resolve the issue, we did not Leave the EU the day after the referendum, indeed MPs and peers consistently voted down all terms for leaving the EU and we were still in the EU 3 years after the 2016 referendum result.
Only the Conservative majority at the 2019 general election delivered Brexit, not the referendum
Queen Elizabeth II ‘dismayed’ by Brexit referendum, book claims
David Cameron should not have called the vote on leaving the EU, the late monarch is said to have told Barack Obama
Queen Elizabeth was “dismayed” about David Cameron’s handling of Brexit and confided in Barack Obama about her concerns over calling a referendum, according to a book.
The late Queen, who as monarch could not take a public stance on the issue, is said to have made her views known to the US president over lunch during his visit to Windsor Castle in April 2016.
The claims are made in a book, The Queen and Her Presidents: The Hidden Hand That Shaped History, by the American journalist Susan Page.
Obama, who was interviewed for the book about the Queen’s relationship with America, said she did not believe that as big a decision as the UK leaving the European Union “should have been decided by plebiscite”.
Page said the lunch, which took place two months after Cameron called the referendum, was a “very rare royal critique of a prime minister, in public or private”.
Describing the conversation, Obama said: “She said, effectively, ‘It’s hard to understand why a prime minister, who presumably understands politics, would put a public referendum forward that he didn’t know what the answer would be of such importance.’”
Well, he thought he did know what the answer would be. He was wrong, though I still put the blame on us, not him for that, he didn't invent the sentiment.
His mistake was backing Remain instead of staying aloof.
I think it's quite clear that his mistake was not backing Leave. Everything about what he's said since the referendum suggests he would have been happy to lead Britain out of the EU, but he was persuaded otherwise.
If he'd won the referendum on a prospectus for Leave then it would have made his legacy and put a spanner in Johnson's plan to become PM.
I disagree with the notion that he would have been unable to govern after a Leave victory. Leaving the EU was an earthquake, and it would have been better for the incumbent to negotiate the choppy waters it caused, rather than add to the chaos by resigning. It's not as if Leave voters were huge fans of Theresa May, who was also a Remainer. He must have known he was lying to parliament when replying to Douglas Carswell asking him the question directly
IIRC, Mr Cameron actually said he would not resign if the vote went for Brexit. What must surely have forced his resignation was the fact that he'd ordered Civil Servants not to prepare any contingency plans.
Oft-overplayed, that point. It was silly, but the two year Art.50 process, and the fact that nothing could be even informally agreed until Art.50 was declared, makes it mostly moot.
(The main reason it was silly is that the remainer civil servants would have produced some excellent fearmongering in their contingency plans, and that would have helped him.)
Having been at one time a (scientific) civil servant myself, albeit a very lowly one, I cling to the hope that there is still the remnant of impartiality with those ranks.
Queen Elizabeth II ‘dismayed’ by Brexit referendum, book claims
David Cameron should not have called the vote on leaving the EU, the late monarch is said to have told Barack Obama
Queen Elizabeth was “dismayed” about David Cameron’s handling of Brexit and confided in Barack Obama about her concerns over calling a referendum, according to a book.
The late Queen, who as monarch could not take a public stance on the issue, is said to have made her views known to the US president over lunch during his visit to Windsor Castle in April 2016.
The claims are made in a book, The Queen and Her Presidents: The Hidden Hand That Shaped History, by the American journalist Susan Page.
Obama, who was interviewed for the book about the Queen’s relationship with America, said she did not believe that as big a decision as the UK leaving the European Union “should have been decided by plebiscite”.
Page said the lunch, which took place two months after Cameron called the referendum, was a “very rare royal critique of a prime minister, in public or private”.
Describing the conversation, Obama said: “She said, effectively, ‘It’s hard to understand why a prime minister, who presumably understands politics, would put a public referendum forward that he didn’t know what the answer would be of such importance.’”
With all due respect to our former Queen, a plebiscite is the only way to resolve such issues. She was wrong on this.
It isn't. Not even in this case, as the plebiscite did not resolve the issue, we did not Leave the EU the day after the referendum, indeed MPs and peers consistently voted down all terms for leaving the EU and we were still in the EU 3 years after the 2016 referendum result.
Only the Conservative majority at the 2019 general election delivered Brexit, not the referendum
Yes, but that is because the Remainer Parliament from 2015 to 2019 was an utter disgrace that made Trump look like a democrat. Thankfully all of the main offenders lost their seats.
Trump deletes post depicting him as Jesus-like figure after backlash
"This goes too far. It crosses the line," wrote David Brody, a journalist with the Christian Broadcasting Network."
An AI image-gen is what took it over the line? All the rest has been a-ok with the devout?
Well, in fairness, his father has some serious previous for that in Sodom and Gomorrah, the great flood, the plagues of Egypt, the plague on the Assyrian host etc etc.
He got his shit together when he became a father, it's what we all hope for with violent shizophrenics with anger issues.
Are you getting confused with Star Wars? Easily done I will admit.
Section 4 of the 25 Amendment allows for a determination of presidential disability by the VP and a majority of a congressionally appointed panel (“such other body as Congress may by law provide”). This removes the presidentially appointed cabinet from the process.
So Labour or Tories are around 7 points below Reform.
Doesn’t really ring as a landslide majority incoming for Reform to me.
Perhaps I am mistaken?
The latest MRP put Reform on 324 seats, not a landslide majority, so you're right.
Farage's problem is that a Reform government would need a landslide majority to be viable given the inexperience and flakiness of any potential Reform MPs.
The current government has an enormous majority....and has had to give way and U-turn so many times. In reality a modest majority concentrates everyone's minds from day one.
Queen Elizabeth II ‘dismayed’ by Brexit referendum, book claims
David Cameron should not have called the vote on leaving the EU, the late monarch is said to have told Barack Obama
Queen Elizabeth was “dismayed” about David Cameron’s handling of Brexit and confided in Barack Obama about her concerns over calling a referendum, according to a book.
The late Queen, who as monarch could not take a public stance on the issue, is said to have made her views known to the US president over lunch during his visit to Windsor Castle in April 2016.
The claims are made in a book, The Queen and Her Presidents: The Hidden Hand That Shaped History, by the American journalist Susan Page.
Obama, who was interviewed for the book about the Queen’s relationship with America, said she did not believe that as big a decision as the UK leaving the European Union “should have been decided by plebiscite”.
Page said the lunch, which took place two months after Cameron called the referendum, was a “very rare royal critique of a prime minister, in public or private”.
Describing the conversation, Obama said: “She said, effectively, ‘It’s hard to understand why a prime minister, who presumably understands politics, would put a public referendum forward that he didn’t know what the answer would be of such importance.’”
With all due respect to our former Queen, a plebiscite is the only way to resolve such issues. She was wrong on this.
I think the key sense I got from that quote is that Dave asked the question way too casually. Perhaps he did expect to win, because winning is what he did, so it didn't matter what losing would look like.
But then I'm a boring centrist dad who still takes the view that, had those in power actually thought about the downside risks, they wouldn't have dreamt of asking the question in the first place,
A lot has changed in 10 years in respect of how we make assumptions about elite and governing capability to do the obvious. In 2016 I pretty much took for granted that the referendum could go either way, and that Cameron's government had a detailed plan as to how to proceed on the two - only two which makes it easy - possible referendum eventualities. It was shocking to discover that no serious thought had been applied, and that Cameron was not prepared to carry through the choice he had given us, whichever it was. He had not told us this.
Fast forward to Starmer's assumption that policy 2024-2029 was either self evident or someone else's job and the most astonishing and abject political failure to plan for government since the last government.
No surprise really that the two great governing parties now poll about 37% between them. The non governing parties 63%. I wonder how ready any of them are?
This is an extremely ugly poll. That such large numbers of people on the right think blockading 25% of the world’s hydrocarbons is a good idea speaks to a kind of partisanship that I thought was beneath the UK. Even most Conservatives, who by self-selection should really be sane enough to draw a line.
Not only stupid, but also about to be utterly humiliated by the Chinese when they simply waltz through.
Speaking of partisanship, your heightened emotion about what is simply equalling the terms of engagement is peculiar. You didn't show a fraction of this temper when bombs were raining down on Iran and people were being blown up, but stop China getting some oil and you're livid.
Not at all. This blockade is the best thing that’s happened for renewables in decades. Hopefully we’ll be able to extract Agent Trump, we’ve sent Thunberg over to Florida to pick him up in her yacht.
Yes at all. It has made you furious. Is it China with you too? Secret passion for the coal mining capital of the world? Odd.
You’ve suddenly accused me of being some sort of Chinese/Iranian super asset, but also accused me of supporting the Americans when they were bombing Iranian primary schools? And of supporting Chinese coal?
Are you ok?
Have I? I don't think I've done anything of the kind. I merely pointed out that I haven't seen you fuming like this at any of the other US attacks, though they were considerably more harmful to life. This response is frankly even more odd.
Queen Elizabeth II ‘dismayed’ by Brexit referendum, book claims
David Cameron should not have called the vote on leaving the EU, the late monarch is said to have told Barack Obama
Queen Elizabeth was “dismayed” about David Cameron’s handling of Brexit and confided in Barack Obama about her concerns over calling a referendum, according to a book.
The late Queen, who as monarch could not take a public stance on the issue, is said to have made her views known to the US president over lunch during his visit to Windsor Castle in April 2016.
The claims are made in a book, The Queen and Her Presidents: The Hidden Hand That Shaped History, by the American journalist Susan Page.
Obama, who was interviewed for the book about the Queen’s relationship with America, said she did not believe that as big a decision as the UK leaving the European Union “should have been decided by plebiscite”.
Page said the lunch, which took place two months after Cameron called the referendum, was a “very rare royal critique of a prime minister, in public or private”.
Describing the conversation, Obama said: “She said, effectively, ‘It’s hard to understand why a prime minister, who presumably understands politics, would put a public referendum forward that he didn’t know what the answer would be of such importance.’”
That's not to say she wanted Remain to win; Peter Hitchens is a long standing Eurosceptic, but played no part in the referendum and thought using that mechanism in order to leave was a huge mistake, it should have been the manifesto commitment of an elected government
I would agree with that.
I think referendums are an example of power without responsibility. A political party being elected has a commitment to the policy and to see it through that referendums do not.
So Labour or Tories are around 7 points below Reform.
Doesn’t really ring as a landslide majority incoming for Reform to me.
Perhaps I am mistaken?
The latest MRP put Reform on 324 seats, not a landslide majority, so you're right.
Farage's problem is that a Reform government would need a landslide majority to be viable given the inexperience and flakiness of any potential Reform MPs.
The current government has an enormous majority....and has had to give way and U-turn so many times. In reality a modest majority concentrates everyone's minds from day one.
Definitely there is a sweet spot. Too small and the uncontrollable loons in your ranks will prevent you from getting things done. Too big and even casual rebels will feel emboldened, knowing it often won't matter, but they then get into the habit and it starts to matter.
Queen Elizabeth II ‘dismayed’ by Brexit referendum, book claims
David Cameron should not have called the vote on leaving the EU, the late monarch is said to have told Barack Obama
Queen Elizabeth was “dismayed” about David Cameron’s handling of Brexit and confided in Barack Obama about her concerns over calling a referendum, according to a book.
The late Queen, who as monarch could not take a public stance on the issue, is said to have made her views known to the US president over lunch during his visit to Windsor Castle in April 2016.
The claims are made in a book, The Queen and Her Presidents: The Hidden Hand That Shaped History, by the American journalist Susan Page.
Obama, who was interviewed for the book about the Queen’s relationship with America, said she did not believe that as big a decision as the UK leaving the European Union “should have been decided by plebiscite”.
Page said the lunch, which took place two months after Cameron called the referendum, was a “very rare royal critique of a prime minister, in public or private”.
Describing the conversation, Obama said: “She said, effectively, ‘It’s hard to understand why a prime minister, who presumably understands politics, would put a public referendum forward that he didn’t know what the answer would be of such importance.’”
Well, he thought he did know what the answer would be. He was wrong, though I still put the blame on us, not him for that, he didn't invent the sentiment.
His mistake was backing Remain instead of staying aloof.
I think it's quite clear that his mistake was not backing Leave. Everything about what he's said since the referendum suggests he would have been happy to lead Britain out of the EU, but he was persuaded otherwise.
If he'd won the referendum on a prospectus for Leave then it would have made his legacy and put a spanner in Johnson's plan to become PM.
I disagree with the notion that he would have been unable to govern after a Leave victory. Leaving the EU was an earthquake, and it would have been better for the incumbent to negotiate the choppy waters it caused, rather than add to the chaos by resigning. It's not as if Leave voters were huge fans of Theresa May, who was also a Remainer. He must have known he was lying to parliament when replying to Douglas Carswell asking him the question directly
IIRC, Mr Cameron actually said he would not resign if the vote went for Brexit. What must surely have forced his resignation was the fact that he'd ordered Civil Servants not to prepare any contingency plans.
Oft-overplayed, that point. It was silly, but the two year Art.50 process, and the fact that nothing could be even informally agreed until Art.50 was declared, makes it mostly moot.
(The main reason it was silly is that the remainer civil servants would have produced some excellent fearmongering in their contingency plans, and that would have helped him.)
I think it's fairly clear that Cameron's big mistake was the timing of his resignation. He should have gone in 2015 just before the GE then Milliband would probably have been elected and we'd have been spared the near decade long Tory total clusterfuck from 2015-24. Still in the EU, still with the much smaller pre-brexit civil service you all want, still able to get a competent trade at affordable rates, work across the EU, get through immigration in minutes, buy and sell goods without huge paperwork....
Queen Elizabeth II ‘dismayed’ by Brexit referendum, book claims
David Cameron should not have called the vote on leaving the EU, the late monarch is said to have told Barack Obama
Queen Elizabeth was “dismayed” about David Cameron’s handling of Brexit and confided in Barack Obama about her concerns over calling a referendum, according to a book.
The late Queen, who as monarch could not take a public stance on the issue, is said to have made her views known to the US president over lunch during his visit to Windsor Castle in April 2016.
The claims are made in a book, The Queen and Her Presidents: The Hidden Hand That Shaped History, by the American journalist Susan Page.
Obama, who was interviewed for the book about the Queen’s relationship with America, said she did not believe that as big a decision as the UK leaving the European Union “should have been decided by plebiscite”.
Page said the lunch, which took place two months after Cameron called the referendum, was a “very rare royal critique of a prime minister, in public or private”.
Describing the conversation, Obama said: “She said, effectively, ‘It’s hard to understand why a prime minister, who presumably understands politics, would put a public referendum forward that he didn’t know what the answer would be of such importance.’”
With all due respect to our former Queen, a plebiscite is the only way to resolve such issues. She was wrong on this.
It isn't. Not even in this case, as the plebiscite did not resolve the issue, we did not Leave the EU the day after the referendum, indeed MPs and peers consistently voted down all terms for leaving the EU and we were still in the EU 3 years after the 2016 referendum result.
Only the Conservative majority at the 2019 general election delivered Brexit, not the referendum
Yes, but that is because the Remainer Parliament from 2015 to 2019 was an utter disgrace that made Trump look like a democrat. Thankfully all of the main offenders lost their seats.
Article 50 was triggered on 29th March 2017. At that point the UK had no right to avoid falling out of the EU on 29th March 2019.
Queen Elizabeth II ‘dismayed’ by Brexit referendum, book claims
David Cameron should not have called the vote on leaving the EU, the late monarch is said to have told Barack Obama
Queen Elizabeth was “dismayed” about David Cameron’s handling of Brexit and confided in Barack Obama about her concerns over calling a referendum, according to a book.
The late Queen, who as monarch could not take a public stance on the issue, is said to have made her views known to the US president over lunch during his visit to Windsor Castle in April 2016.
The claims are made in a book, The Queen and Her Presidents: The Hidden Hand That Shaped History, by the American journalist Susan Page.
Obama, who was interviewed for the book about the Queen’s relationship with America, said she did not believe that as big a decision as the UK leaving the European Union “should have been decided by plebiscite”.
Page said the lunch, which took place two months after Cameron called the referendum, was a “very rare royal critique of a prime minister, in public or private”.
Describing the conversation, Obama said: “She said, effectively, ‘It’s hard to understand why a prime minister, who presumably understands politics, would put a public referendum forward that he didn’t know what the answer would be of such importance.’”
With all due respect to our former Queen, a plebiscite is the only way to resolve such issues. She was wrong on this.
It isn't. Not even in this case, as the plebiscite did not resolve the issue, we did not Leave the EU the day after the referendum, indeed MPs and peers consistently voted down all terms for leaving the EU and we were still in the EU 3 years after the 2016 referendum result.
Only the Conservative majority at the 2019 general election delivered Brexit, not the referendum
Yes, but that is because the Remainer Parliament from 2015 to 2019 was an utter disgrace that made Trump look like a democrat. Thankfully all of the main offenders lost their seats.
Article 50 was triggered on 29th March 2017. At that point the UK had no right to avoid falling out of the EU on 29th March 2019.
That's not true. It was determined that Article 50 is unilaterally revocable.
Comments
It's also the fallacy of sunk costs rearing its head. USA should not be where they are, as they shouldn't have started the war. However, given we are where we are, there is a need for clever tactics to re-open the strait.
I still think we should stay away because of how unreliable Trump is a partner, but sitting on our hands whilst the economy burns isn't great either.
Biden & Obama never insulted British troops.
On the leave side, the Queen's official biographer went out with the story that the Queen was asking dinner guests 'Give me three good reasons why we are in Europe'. That was an officially sanctioned story, and that is the closest you could ever get to the Queen endorsing a side. Yes, she went further in the Indyref by directly telling well-wishers that she 'hoped people would think about the future', but there was a lot more at stake there.
I believe they are now back up to 4 of them, but considering that is at a parliamentary high point for them that is still surprisingly low.
George Conway ⚖️🇺🇸 reposted
Jonathan Reiner
@JReinerMD
Section 4 of the 25 Amendment allows for a determination of presidential disability by the VP and a majority of a congressionally appointed panel (“such other body as Congress may by law provide”). This removes the presidentially appointed cabinet from the process.
https://x.com/JReinerMD/status/2043656578872512623
===
Suppose Vance realises the only way he is going to be POTUS is a 25th in next few months?
Greens normally repost that flavour of thingy
So …
That is the biggest problem here - how exactly do you protect ships going down a strait when a drone from virtually anywhere could attack them from any direction at any second...
https://x.com/TheSun/status/2043630271854231847
Moment drunk mum tells van full of kids ‘I’m not responsible if you die’ before crashing
You’ve suddenly accused me of being some sort of Chinese/Iranian super asset, but also accused me of supporting the Americans when they were bombing Iranian primary schools? And of supporting Chinese coal?
Are you ok?
@TimothyDSnyder
As the Hungarian example confirms, and the Polish one before that, the key to large turnout in actual practice is prior long-term, grass-roots organizational labor that helps people to understand how their single vote is a dignified part of a larger transformation.
https://x.com/TimothyDSnyder/status/2043730618513596497
Until he wasn't.
They do need to win more centre ground swing voters though to beat Reform as you say, whichever of Reform or the Tories wins more seats at the next general election will likely take over the other eventually, unless we get PR
Doesn’t really ring as a landslide majority incoming for Reform to me.
Perhaps I am mistaken?
Ignoring the declining margin each time, from the 67% for his No side in 2011, to 55% in 2014 and so it was always likely he would eventually come a cropper.
Sensible PMs like Thatcher and Churchill and Attlee never held a referendum on anything as they knew Crown in Parliament is supposed to be sovereign
Man Utd 0
10 mins
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/live/c2lwv150jwwt
One cause for optimism is that China may not want to side so openly with Iran against the Gulf countries.
One pattern that does appear time and time again is that governments lose when enough people think they have failed.
That probably means it systematically underestimates Lib Dem seats and overestimates Reform.
The most likely option and probably least worst is what you describe - the Iranians control the strait and there is some kind of deal. That’s why the initial ceasefire took that form too, because it reflects the new reality.
But first, the Chinese haven’t blinked so we’ll have to endure yet another TACO. I guess there is small chance Trump actually seizes their tankers.
Even if Reform matched it I’d expect the same problems.
MPs now see themselves as social workers now. Not willing to take a tough decision or say no to people.
Great to catch up with my friend @JDVance today in DC following his talks in Pakistan.
It is vital that the ceasefire continues and we get shipping flowing freely again through the Straits of Hormuz.
We continue to work together towards a just and lasting peace in Ukraine.
https://spectator.com/article/liz-trusss-husband-to-stand-for-tories/
% of British people who no longer recognise Britain because of immigration
ALL voters 51%
Black & minority Brits 31%
Labour voters 39%
English voters 52%
White voters 55%
Non-graduates 58%
Tory voters 62%
Reform voters 86%
https://x.com/GoodwinMJ/status/2043673859505770879?s=20
If he'd won the referendum on a prospectus for Leave then it would have made his legacy and put a spanner in Johnson's plan to become PM.
➡️ Ref: 37 (+37)
🟢 Grn: 8 (+8)
🔴 Lab: 3 (-40)
🔵 Con: 3 (-6)
🟠 Lib: 2 (+1)
⚪️ Ind: 1 (=)
Projection based on rolling average of polls🗳️
(+/- vs GE2024)
https://x.com/LeftieStats/status/2043747041059451065?s=20
RFM: 28% (+1)
LAB: 21% (+1)
CON: 18% (-2)
GRN: 14% (=)
LDM: 11% (-1)
Via
@JLPartnersPolls
, 8-9 Apr.
Changes w/ 2-5 Mar.
https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/2043736738703831548?s=20
Disappointed the ex Paisley politician Truss didnt make it to the stage in her ex hometown for the Scot leaders debate, as a sort of native buddy.
https://youtu.be/id4bkW6g4T4
The other contender for me is Huey ‘Piano’ Smith and the Clowns - Don’t You Just Know It
https://youtu.be/6sxnXO2RjVg
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c17v8y0z9z2o
Trump deletes post depicting him as Jesus-like figure after backlash
"This goes too far. It crosses the line," wrote David Brody, a journalist with the Christian Broadcasting Network."
An AI image-gen is what took it over the line? All the rest has been a-ok with the devout?
But then I'm a boring centrist dad who still takes the view that, had those in power actually thought about the downside risks, they wouldn't have dreamt of asking the question in the first place,
Although in America's case, that might be stretching the term.
(The main reason it was silly is that the remainer civil servants would have produced some excellent fearmongering in their contingency plans, and that would have helped him.)
Only the Conservative majority at the 2019 general election delivered Brexit, not the referendum
Congress has not by law provided any such committee.
If Congress were to attempt to pass a law to do so, then that would both require a non-supine Congress and the President could veto it.
Fast forward to Starmer's assumption that policy 2024-2029 was either self evident or someone else's job and the most astonishing and abject political failure to plan for government since the last government.
No surprise really that the two great governing parties now poll about 37% between them. The non governing parties 63%. I wonder how ready any of them are?
I think referendums are an example of power without responsibility. A political party being elected has a commitment to the policy and to see it through that referendums do not.
It’s a genuine question. Why is the justice secretary not the foreign secretary having a meeting with the US VP on this topic?
He should have gone in 2015 just before the GE then Milliband would probably have been elected and we'd have been spared the near decade long Tory total clusterfuck from 2015-24.
Still in the EU, still with the much smaller pre-brexit civil service you all want, still able to get a competent trade at affordable rates, work across the EU, get through immigration in minutes, buy and sell goods without huge paperwork....
Martinez sent off for pulling Calvert-Lewins mini pony tail .