politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If it’s Farage versus Carswell then there can only be one o
Comments
-
I assume so but without an earthly chance of winningWanderer said:
UKIP would stand against him too, no?blackburn63 said:
No doubt Douglas is popular enough but funding a campaign as an indy would be hugely difficult, especially considering what the tories will throw at it.Pulpstar said:
Surely he just runs in 2020 as an independent. No need to force a by-election over it all, I think he probably has enough personal vote to win there.AlastairMeeks said:Anyone speculating on a redefection should ponder the following tweet:
@DouglasCarswell · 15h15 hours ago
Osborne will campaign to stay in the EU – his future depends on it <- Vote Leave and get rid of George too! Bonus https://t.co/IH1qojxXoi</p>
0 -
Well, we can be 100% sure that whatever he comes back with, his opponents will say it's nothing significant.Indigo said:
I imagine we will find out who is right in due course, seems a bit premature at the moment. SO is rather nearer the mark, Cam conspicuous has no interest in the EU and wishes the whole thing would go away, the referendum has done it's job (help get him re-elected) now he just wants to win it a quietly and inexpensively as possible and go on his way.Richard_Nabavi said:
You haven't AFAIK, but it's a very common point, made here and elsewhere. Every time there is a press report to the effect that Angela Merkel or some Polish politician or some minor EU bureaucrat doesn't agree with Cameron's demands, we get a chorus of 'Told you so' from the usual suspects.runnymede said:'and so unacceptable to our EU friends that there's not a hope in hell of him achieving them'
When have I ever said that? You could do with dialling back the smugness a bit.
As for smugness, accusing me of smugness is simply accusing me of being right.
f Cam eventually comes back with real curbs on migrant benefits over a significant duration, his big claim to fame, many will see that as a win, although many will also see it as hugely inadequate, and if that is combined with some solid support for protecting the City you might claim to be right. If he comes back with some sort of "emergency break with EU permission if we ask really nicely and in exchange for significantly increased contributions" and the protection for the City is a figleaf, or rapidly circumvented or killed in the ECJ, I think it would be fair to say you are wrong.
As I've always said, his negotiating position is weak, because of the idiotic throwing away of most of the bargaining chips by previous governments (especially Blair and Brown). We can't do anything about that, it's a disagreeable fact from which we have to start. Anything he does get, therefore, will be a bonus, and certainly won't make the situation worse than the status quo.
In the end the decision will be made by voters, and TBH I don't think they'll care very much about the renegotiation; talk of Eurozone qualified majorities and protection of the City won't be a factor for most people (they will however be important to me). The Benefits argument might have some effect but he'll win that; it's hardly a matter of great principle, and some means will be found.0 -
Read the whole article.Pulpstar said:
Well the "long term" might not happen till after New Hampshire, and by then it'll all be too late for anyone except possibly Ted Cruz.MTimT said:Here's a very long and fascinating piece, using military theory - Boyd's OODA loop, to analyze why Trump has been so successful to date and yet is vulnerable in the longer-term:
http://thefederalist.com/2015/12/16/military-strategist-explains-why-donald-trump-leads-and-how-he-will-fail/
It also shows that, aside from the obvious starting point of angry and dissatisfied selectorates, comparisons between Trump's campaign and Corbyn's are completely off-base.0 -
The EU will not reform for the UK
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5h_WlyV27k
"If it is this hard to get an accommodation with the EU when their second largest member is very close to leaving, imagine how hard it will be to get an accommodation with them the day after the referendum"0 -
I don't know why you say his negotiating position is weak, he has set the terms and above all else wants to stay in.Richard_Nabavi said:
Well, we can be 100% sure that whatever he comes back with, his opponents will say it's nothing significant.Indigo said:
I imagine we will find out who is right in due course, seems a bit premature at the moment. SO is rather nearer the mark, Cam conspicuous has no interest in the EU and wishes the whole thing would go away, the referendum has done it's job (help get him re-elected) now he just wants to win it a quietly and inexpensively as possible and go on his way.Richard_Nabavi said:
You haven't AFAIK, but it's a very common point, made here and elsewhere. Every time there is a press report to the effect that Angela Merkel or some Polish politician or some minor EU bureaucrat doesn't agree with Cameron's demands, we get a chorus of 'Told you so' from the usual suspects.runnymede said:'and so unacceptable to our EU friends that there's not a hope in hell of him achieving them'
When have I ever said that? You could do with dialling back the smugness a bit.
As for smugness, accusing me of smugness is simply accusing me of being right.
f Cam eventually comes back with real curbs on migrant benefits over a significant duration, his big claim to fame, many will see that as a win, although many will also see it as hugely inadequate, and if that is combined with some solid support for protecting the City you might claim to be right. If he comes back with some sort of "emergency break with EU permission if we ask really nicely and in exchange for significantly increased contributions" and the protection for the City is a figleaf, or rapidly circumvented or killed in the ECJ, I think it would be fair to say you are wrong.
As I've always said, his negotiating position is weak, because of the idiotic throwing away of most of the bargaining chips by previous governments (especially Blair and Brown). We can't do anything about that, it's a disagreeable fact from which we have to start. Anything he does get, therefore, will be a bonus, and certainly won't make the situation worse than the status quo.
In the end the decision will be made by voters, and TBH I don't think they'll care very much about the renegotiation; talk of Eurozone qualified majorities and protection of the City won't be a factor for most people (they will however be important to me). The Benefits argument might have some effect but he'll win that; it's hardly a matter of great principle, and some means will be found.
0 -
Dave hasn't played them for fools, they have screwed up. As I said three years ago, as soon as the referendum became Tory policy, they should have started putting together the arguments and building the campaign, in collaboration with UKIP. UKIP should have stopped trying to pretend to be a full-service political party and instead recommended voting Tory to get the referendum. As Dan Hannan said, what part of Yes did they not understand?SouthamObserver said:The Tory BOOers are in a lather because they realise - rather belatedly - that Dave has played them for fools (and they clearly are fools for not having realised what he was doing before when it was so obvious). UKIPers are in a lather because they always are.
Unfortunately they didn't take my advice!0 -
Cameron's demands are incredibly feeble but will be wrapped up in an offer of associate membership with the promise of treaty change at some point in the future. There will be an argument with EU leaders to allow Cameron his chance to claim a great victory. It may be that restricting benefits to EU migrants is not possible. Even if it is not, there will be a compromise, whether it means restricting it for UK citizens who have not made 4 years worth of NI contributions or something else remains to be seen.Richard_Nabavi said:
I've been trying to believe six impossible things before breakfast, but still can't manage it. In particular, I struggle with the concept that Cameron's demands are simultaneously so feeble that they are purely cosmetic, and so unacceptable to our EU friends that there's not a hope in hell of him achieving them.runnymede said:'since the Foreign Office didn't want a referendum'
Not originally, no, of course.
But once there was going to be one it's pretty clear what the approach has been - water down the UK's demands to a homeopathic consistency then try to win the referendum through dissembling and use that as a mandate forever.
0 -
Richard_Nabavi said:
You haven't AFAIK, but it's a very common point, made here and elsewhere. Every time there is a press report to the effect that Angela Merkel or some Polish politician or some minor EU bureaucrat doesn't agree with Cameron's demands, we get a chorus of 'Told you so' from the usual suspects.runnymede said:'and so unacceptable to our EU friends that there's not a hope in hell of him achieving them'
When have I ever said that? You could do with dialling back the smugness a bit.
As for smugness, accusing me of smugness is simply accusing me of being right.
No, it's smugness. And you are not necessarily right.
For someone with your background, I would have thought you'd be aware of the concept of 'exchange rates' in negotiations. What has extreme value to one side can have no value to the other. So it is entirely possible that Cameron is seeking something that is valueless to the British public, but of prime importance to our European partners.0 -
Not for people who rely on pension payments, healthcare, etc ie ordinary folk. 'Substantial renegotiations' are like beauty - in the eye of the beholder. Many kippers told us repeatedly we'd get no referendum - now they're running scared in case they lose it - even though they claim the case is unarguable. Fairyland!MP_SE said:
It is not about most people, it is about Carswell's reasons for defecting. Many were confused as to why he defected but he was completely clear in that he thought Cameron would not attempt a substantial renegotiation.felix said:
Maybe you're missing the point that for most people these are matters about which they care little. There is however scepticism about governments which extends in spades to the unelected bureaucrats in Brussels. However, overall that is probably not sufficient to persuade people that we should leave. The world has changed much in the last 30 years and for the young things like free movement and 'Europeanism' are not dirty words. I'm not young but value enormously the fact that I've been able to retire abroad with relative ease within the EU.MP_SE said:I think many people are missing the point as to why Carswell defected. He had no faith in Cameron who had privately admitted to negotiating the bare minimum to win the remain vote.
With no one to hold his feet to the fire he is free to make his four demands. It is truly depressing to think of how little he is asking for. Three of his four demands are meaningless and the fourth of benefits is a minor expense in the grand scheme of things.
Where is the CAP reform, the CFP reform, demanding one site for the EU Parliament, a red card for unwanted legislation, an end to judicial activism by the ECJ, more accountability, less waste, returning powers to member countries, sign our own FTAs... The list is endless.
Presuming remain wins we will have to wait 20, 30 years before another chance of a referendum.
Being able to retire to countries in Europe with relative ease happened long before the EU ever existed.0 -
His negotiation position is weak because before he sat at the negotiation table he told everyone that he could not conceive of a circumstance in which he would countenance leaving the EU. The ONLY card he had which the other member states cared about, the possibility that he would campaign to take us out, was discarded before the negotiations started.Richard_Nabavi said:As I've always said, his negotiating position is weak, because of the idiotic throwing away of most of the bargaining chips by previous governments (especially Blair and Brown). We can't do anything about that, it's a disagreeable fact from which we have to start. Anything he does get, therefore, will be a bonus, and certainly won't make the situation worse than the status quo.
0 -
Indeed - and his majority was slashed last time. How quickly people forget how good the Tory campaign was.OldKingCole said:
Is he THAT good a constituency MP? Just asking. After all, lots of good LD consituency MP's went down last time in the face of a relentless and targeted campaign.felix said:
I think he would lose. His majority was slashed last time and after a while eccentricity just becomes a bit boring.Pulpstar said:
Surely he just runs in 2020 as an independent. No need to force a by-election over it all, I think he probably has enough personal vote to win there.AlastairMeeks said:Anyone speculating on a redefection should ponder the following tweet:
@DouglasCarswell · 15h15 hours ago
Osborne will campaign to stay in the EU – his future depends on it <- Vote Leave and get rid of George too! Bonus https://t.co/IH1qojxXoi</p>0 -
He wants to stay in but wind back a lot of Lisbon. Unfortunately he has no veto power (thanks, Gordon). Unlike Maggie, he can't swing a handbag, the handbag has already been given away.blackburn63 said:I don't know why you say his negotiating position is weak, he has set the terms and above all else wants to stay in.
0 -
BY-ELECTION AT CHRISTMAS
Following the unexpected death in October of the Conservative District Councillor for Grendon & Brill in Buckinghamshire, UKIP have called the by-election for 23rd December.
Note that the election is on a Wednesday.
Had the election been held on Thursday as normal, then the count would have been on Christmas Eve and likely carried over into the early hours of Christmas Day.
Not sure what UKIP's tactics were intended to achieve but they and Conservatives could only come up with candidates from outside the ward.
The Lib Dem candidate lives in the ward in Brill High Street and was formerly Chair of the Aylesbury Town Council when he lived in Aylesbury.
CANDIDATES
Cameron Branston - Conservative
Gary Good - UKIP
Julian Alexander Newman - Liberal Democrats
No Labour or Green
May 2015: Tory 1068/UKIP 427/Green 246/Lib Dem 213
0 -
What 2020 TV debates?TheScreamingEagles said:If Farage were to remove the whip from Carswell and they don't win any by-elections then UKIP may not be in the 2020 TV debates
Where the last lot significant?0 -
People who really believe in a cause are prepared to work with people they dislike as a means to an end.. And subordinate personal publicity and work for others to gain that result.Richard_Nabavi said:
Dave hasn't played them for fools, they have screwed up. As I said three years ago, as soon as the referendum became Tory policy, they should have started putting together the arguments and building the campaign, in collaboration with UKIP. UKIP should have stopped trying to pretend to be a full-service political party and instead recommended voting Tory to get the referendum. As Dan Hannan said, what part of Yes did they not understand?SouthamObserver said:The Tory BOOers are in a lather because they realise - rather belatedly - that Dave has played them for fools (and they clearly are fools for not having realised what he was doing before when it was so obvious). UKIPers are in a lather because they always are.
Unfortunately they didn't take my advice!
All I see of the BOO cause is a bunch of overinflated egos and no compromise - with people who share the same goals.
So I suspect BOO are likely to fail miserably..
Voters tend not to like overinflated egos in the UK,,,0 -
Not so and he is an honourable man who will walk away from the EU if necessary.Indigo said:
His negotiation position is weak because before he sat at the negotiation table he told everyone that he could not conceive of a circumstance in which he would countenance leaving the EU. The ONLY card he had which the other member states cared about, the possibility that he would campaign to take us out, was discarded before the negotiations started.Richard_Nabavi said:As I've always said, his negotiating position is weak, because of the idiotic throwing away of most of the bargaining chips by previous governments (especially Blair and Brown). We can't do anything about that, it's a disagreeable fact from which we have to start. Anything he does get, therefore, will be a bonus, and certainly won't make the situation worse than the status quo.
0 -
I wonder if the day will come when tories stop blaming labour.Richard_Nabavi said:
He wants to stay in but wind back a lot of Lisbon. Unfortunately he has no veto power (thanks, Gordon). Unlike Maggie, he can't swing a handbag, the handbag has already been given away.blackburn63 said:I don't know why you say his negotiating position is weak, he has set the terms and above all else wants to stay in.
What parts of Lisbon does he want to wind back?
0 -
This is akin to the question of why Carswell defected.Richard_Nabavi said:UKIP should have stopped trying to pretend to be a full-service political party and instead recommended voting Tory to get the referendum. As Dan Hannan said, what part of Yes did they not understand?
Unfortunately they didn't take my advice!
It appears UKIP are we "we hate Cameron" party, rather than an effective Out of Europe campaigning force.
Happy Days...0 -
Chortlefelix said:
Not so and he is an honourable man who will walk away from the EU if necessary.Indigo said:
His negotiation position is weak because before he sat at the negotiation table he told everyone that he could not conceive of a circumstance in which he would countenance leaving the EU. The ONLY card he had which the other member states cared about, the possibility that he would campaign to take us out, was discarded before the negotiations started.Richard_Nabavi said:As I've always said, his negotiating position is weak, because of the idiotic throwing away of most of the bargaining chips by previous governments (especially Blair and Brown). We can't do anything about that, it's a disagreeable fact from which we have to start. Anything he does get, therefore, will be a bonus, and certainly won't make the situation worse than the status quo.
0 -
I called this a couple of weeks ago (or maybe a week?). I said that UKIP needed to amicably split from Douglas Carswell. Now the only option seems to be to un-amicably split from him.0
-
Never. Labour were still occasionally blaming the Tories 13 years into being in power, and I have no doubt the Tories will be the same.blackburn63 said:
I wonder if the day will come when tories stop blaming labour.Richard_Nabavi said:
He wants to stay in but wind back a lot of Lisbon. Unfortunately he has no veto power (thanks, Gordon). Unlike Maggie, he can't swing a handbag, the handbag has already been given away.blackburn63 said:I don't know why you say his negotiating position is weak, he has set the terms and above all else wants to stay in.
0 -
Critical. Ed saying the last Labour government hadn't overspent did wonders for the blues.flightpath01 said:
What 2020 TV debates?TheScreamingEagles said:If Farage were to remove the whip from Carswell and they don't win any by-elections then UKIP may not be in the 2020 TV debates
Where the last lot significant?0 -
Assuming you discount Blair.madasafish said:Voters tend not to like overinflated egos in the UK,,,
0 -
I wonder if the day will come when you will stop blaming Cameron. You don't really get this politics lark do you?blackburn63 said:
I wonder if the day will come when tories stop blaming labour.Richard_Nabavi said:
He wants to stay in but wind back a lot of Lisbon. Unfortunately he has no veto power (thanks, Gordon). Unlike Maggie, he can't swing a handbag, the handbag has already been given away.blackburn63 said:I don't know why you say his negotiating position is weak, he has set the terms and above all else wants to stay in.
What parts of Lisbon does he want to wind back?0 -
It was a Labour government which signed Lisbon, and which reneged on the referendum promise. Who do you blame? The tooth fairy?blackburn63 said:I wonder if the day will come when tories stop blaming labour.
What parts of Lisbon does he want to wind back?
Edit: Silly me: Of course you blame David Cameron
0 -
Must have been my imagination then... oh wait...felix said:
Not so and he is an honourable man who will walk away from the EU if necessary.Indigo said:
His negotiation position is weak because before he sat at the negotiation table he told everyone that he could not conceive of a circumstance in which he would countenance leaving the EU. The ONLY card he had which the other member states cared about, the possibility that he would campaign to take us out, was discarded before the negotiations started.Richard_Nabavi said:As I've always said, his negotiating position is weak, because of the idiotic throwing away of most of the bargaining chips by previous governments (especially Blair and Brown). We can't do anything about that, it's a disagreeable fact from which we have to start. Anything he does get, therefore, will be a bonus, and certainly won't make the situation worse than the status quo.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/9410061/David-Cameron-Ill-never-campaign-to-take-us-out-of-Europe.htmlBut Mr Cameron will not countenance leaving the EU and says he would never campaign for an “out” vote in a referendum.
0 -
I wondered which moron would bite first - pity I don't betblackburn63 said:
Chortlefelix said:
Not so and he is an honourable man who will walk away from the EU if necessary.Indigo said:
His negotiation position is weak because before he sat at the negotiation table he told everyone that he could not conceive of a circumstance in which he would countenance leaving the EU. The ONLY card he had which the other member states cared about, the possibility that he would campaign to take us out, was discarded before the negotiations started.Richard_Nabavi said:As I've always said, his negotiating position is weak, because of the idiotic throwing away of most of the bargaining chips by previous governments (especially Blair and Brown). We can't do anything about that, it's a disagreeable fact from which we have to start. Anything he does get, therefore, will be a bonus, and certainly won't make the situation worse than the status quo.
0 -
'He wants to stay in but wind back a lot of Lisbon'
OK...and you are then implying that he can't wind back anything much at all.
So you agree essentially that this renegotiation is a cosmetic exercise, and yet you come on here day after day smugly poking fun at other posters for saying so.
I do wish you would just argue the case for Remain on some serious points, Richard, instead of all this childish point scoring. Why are EU supporters like yourself so afraid of expressing their views in a positive way?
0 -
Although you dont bet, would you be willing to offer odds on Cameron backing remain? Could go all the way up to 4 figures.felix said:
I wondered which moron would bite first - pity I don't betblackburn63 said:
Chortlefelix said:
Not so and he is an honourable man who will walk away from the EU if necessary.Indigo said:
His negotiation position is weak because before he sat at the negotiation table he told everyone that he could not conceive of a circumstance in which he would countenance leaving the EU. The ONLY card he had which the other member states cared about, the possibility that he would campaign to take us out, was discarded before the negotiations started.Richard_Nabavi said:As I've always said, his negotiating position is weak, because of the idiotic throwing away of most of the bargaining chips by previous governments (especially Blair and Brown). We can't do anything about that, it's a disagreeable fact from which we have to start. Anything he does get, therefore, will be a bonus, and certainly won't make the situation worse than the status quo.
0 -
Richard,
The two sides of the In /Out debate are not reconcilable. For some a few scraps of meat will be enough. For others (incl me) the bottom line is about sovereignty. I find the EU an undemocratic monster. You can't kick out directly those who govern us and you can't ever change policy because 'the project' is written in stone. It's faux democracy. And even if it wasn't I don't think there is a pan-European 'demos' to have a democracy. I simply don't feel European enough to accept being outvoted in a real election by Germans and French etc. I like the possibility of real, visceral change that true democracy gives (Corbyn vs Osborne is a very stark offering of alternatives) and most of all I want potential change in the UK to be decided only by UK voters. So for me it's a firm OUT whatever crappy 'success' story Dave comes up with. Delighted to be very friendly and trade with the EU. Have zero desire to be governed by them.0 -
Yes yes yes, now which parts of the treaty is he trying to wind back?Richard_Nabavi said:
It was a Labour government which signed Lisbon, and which reneged on the referendum promise. Who do you blame? The tooth fairy?blackburn63 said:I wonder if the day will come when tories stop blaming labour.
What parts of Lisbon does he want to wind back?
Edit: Silly me: Of course you blame David Cameron
Bear in mind I'm asking you as an undecided.
0 -
Perhaps you can help with the parts of the Lisbon treaty he's trying to wind back.felix said:
I wonder if the day will come when you will stop blaming Cameron. You don't really get this politics lark do you?blackburn63 said:
I wonder if the day will come when tories stop blaming labour.Richard_Nabavi said:
He wants to stay in but wind back a lot of Lisbon. Unfortunately he has no veto power (thanks, Gordon). Unlike Maggie, he can't swing a handbag, the handbag has already been given away.blackburn63 said:I don't know why you say his negotiating position is weak, he has set the terms and above all else wants to stay in.
What parts of Lisbon does he want to wind back?0 -
That was 3 and a half years ago and he has subsequently made it clear that if the deal isn't there he would walk away.Indigo said:
Must have been my imagination then... oh wait...felix said:
Not so and he is an honourable man who will walk away from the EU if necessary.Indigo said:
His negotiation position is weak because before he sat at the negotiation table he told everyone that he could not conceive of a circumstance in which he would countenance leaving the EU. The ONLY card he had which the other member states cared about, the possibility that he would campaign to take us out, was discarded before the negotiations started.Richard_Nabavi said:As I've always said, his negotiating position is weak, because of the idiotic throwing away of most of the bargaining chips by previous governments (especially Blair and Brown). We can't do anything about that, it's a disagreeable fact from which we have to start. Anything he does get, therefore, will be a bonus, and certainly won't make the situation worse than the status quo.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/9410061/David-Cameron-Ill-never-campaign-to-take-us-out-of-Europe.htmlBut Mr Cameron will not countenance leaving the EU and says he would never campaign for an “out” vote in a referendum.
0 -
There is a dislike of David Cameron because he has co-opted a centre-right party to be his electoral machine, and installed a statist left wing cadre at the top of his Government that has no solutions (especially not right wing ones) to any of the issues facing our country. Despite which he continues to attempt to wrap himself in the flag when it suits him in a way which is utterly patronising and mendacious. That seems fairly logical to me.AlastairMeeks said:
It seems to have been fuelled primarily by a visceral dislike of David Cameron. It's curious just how many UKIP activists seem to feel the same motivation.Richard_Nabavi said:It's baffling to me why Carswell defected in the first place. As Cameron pointed out at PMQs, he was a Conservative when there wasn't a commitment to a referendum, and left when there was.
He's always struck me as quite hard to dislike, but obviously he presses some buttons with some people that I just don't have.
Are your own warm feelings toward Cameron not based on his soothing voice? It seems if anyone's buttons are being pressed...0 -
Right Fantasy Footballers.
Do I drop Pelle and bring back Aguero this weekend?0 -
I don't bet because I barely understand evens let alone oddsMP_SE said:
Although you dont bet, would you be willing to offer odds on Cameron backing remain? Could go all the way up to 4 figures.felix said:
I wondered which moron would bite first - pity I don't betblackburn63 said:
Chortlefelix said:
Not so and he is an honourable man who will walk away from the EU if necessary.Indigo said:
His negotiation position is weak because before he sat at the negotiation table he told everyone that he could not conceive of a circumstance in which he would countenance leaving the EU. The ONLY card he had which the other member states cared about, the possibility that he would campaign to take us out, was discarded before the negotiations started.Richard_Nabavi said:As I've always said, his negotiating position is weak, because of the idiotic throwing away of most of the bargaining chips by previous governments (especially Blair and Brown). We can't do anything about that, it's a disagreeable fact from which we have to start. Anything he does get, therefore, will be a bonus, and certainly won't make the situation worse than the status quo.
I expect him to get a good deal and to lead the Remain campaign. 0 -
Absolutely spot on sir.Patrick said:Richard,
The two sides of the In /Out debate are not reconcilable. For some a few scraps of meat will be enough. For others (incl me) the bottom line is about sovereignty. I find the EU an undemocratic monster. You can't kick out directly those who govern us and you can't ever change policy because 'the project' is written in stone. It's faux democracy. And even if it wasn't I don't think there is a pan-European 'demos' to have a democracy. I simply don't feel European enough to accept being outvoted in a real election by Germans and French etc. I like the possibility of real, visceral change that true democracy gives (Corbyn vs Osborne is a very stark offering of alternatives) and most of all I want potential change in the UK to be decided only by UK voters. So for me it's a firm OUT whatever crappy 'success' story Dave comes up with. Delighted to be very friendly and trade with the EU. Have zero desire to be governed by them.
I don't want any negotiation, I don't want treaties wound back, I don't want concessions, I want out.
0 -
That was 3 and a half years ago and he has subsequently made it clear that if the deal isn't there he would walk away.felix said:Indigo said:
Must have been my imagination then... oh wait...felix said:
Not so and he is an honourable man who will walk away from the EU if necessary.Indigo said:
His negotiation position is weak because before he sat at the negotiation table he told everyone that he could not conceive of a circumstance in which he would countenance leaving the EU. The ONLY card he had which the other member states cared about, the possibility that he would campaign to take us out, was discarded before the negotiations started.Richard_Nabavi said:As I've always said, his negotiating position is weak, because of the idiotic throwing away of most of the bargaining chips by previous governments (especially Blair and Brown). We can't do anything about that, it's a disagreeable fact from which we have to start. Anything he does get, therefore, will be a bonus, and certainly won't make the situation worse than the status quo.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/9410061/David-Cameron-Ill-never-campaign-to-take-us-out-of-Europe.htmlBut Mr Cameron will not countenance leaving the EU and says he would never campaign for an “out” vote in a referendum.
Yes yes, we all know how it goes, its like cutting immigration to 10's of thousands wasn't a promise, it was an aspiration. Cameron's reputation for truthfulness and keeping his promises goes before him.0 -
I have always said, again and again, that his negotiating position is weak. So, yes, you are right in the sense that the amount he can wind back is limited. I've always said that. I have repeatedly said that the time to get this right was before Lisbon, when we still had veto powers. Of course it was too late by the time he became PM, but we have to deal with reality, not fantasy.runnymede said:'He wants to stay in but wind back a lot of Lisbon'
OK...and you are then implying that he can't wind back anything much at all.
So you agree essentially that this renegotiation is a cosmetic exercise, and yet you come on here day after day smugly poking fun at other posters for saying so.
I do wish you would just argue the case for Remain on some serious points, Richard, instead of all this childish point scoring. Why are EU supporters like yourself so afraid of expressing their views in a positive way?
All that being the case, there were three options: 1. Do nothing and accept the status quo and ever-closer union, 2. Stay in but try to improve things as best we can, 3. Leave altogether (although the last of these is extremely ill-defined). He's going for 2. One reason for that, and I think it's a conclusive reason, is that a referendum to leave is not winnable for the Leave side.
As for my personal view, I've no idea why anyone thinks I'm arguing for Remain. I've mostly been trying to see if there's a coherent case for leaving, which obviously means trying to understand what leaving would actually entail. But those arguing for Leave seem to have an aversion to talking about what exactly they are proposing, and when cornered they give vague but totally inconsistent answers (such as 'Join the EEA' and 'Control EU immigration').0 -
Cameron was not in that debate was he? Cameron only took part in a pointless multi sided debate, one which was very early in the campaign. Would Labour be keen to press for debates with Corbyn as leader?TheScreamingEagles said:
Critical. Ed saying the last Labour government hadn't overspent did wonders for the blues.flightpath01 said:
What 2020 TV debates?TheScreamingEagles said:If Farage were to remove the whip from Carswell and they don't win any by-elections then UKIP may not be in the 2020 TV debates
Where the last lot significant?0 -
I haven't discussed Lisbon - which as everyone knows was pushed through by the Labour government and makes the current renegotiation more difficult. I am content with the points laid out by DC and will be happy if he succeeds. I suspect you're not overly interested in any answers nor indeed can be all that serious even about Brexit or you'd be out campaigning instead of wasting your time on here raging against the machine.blackburn63 said:
Perhaps you can help with the parts of the Lisbon treaty he's trying to wind back.felix said:
I wonder if the day will come when you will stop blaming Cameron. You don't really get this politics lark do you?blackburn63 said:
I wonder if the day will come when tories stop blaming labour.Richard_Nabavi said:
He wants to stay in but wind back a lot of Lisbon. Unfortunately he has no veto power (thanks, Gordon). Unlike Maggie, he can't swing a handbag, the handbag has already been given away.blackburn63 said:I don't know why you say his negotiating position is weak, he has set the terms and above all else wants to stay in.
What parts of Lisbon does he want to wind back?0 -
He wasflightpath01 said:
Cameron was not in that debate was he? Cameron only took part in a pointless multi sided debate, one which was very early in the campaign. Would Labour be keen to press for debates with Corbyn as leader?TheScreamingEagles said:
Critical. Ed saying the last Labour government hadn't overspent did wonders for the blues.flightpath01 said:
What 2020 TV debates?TheScreamingEagles said:If Farage were to remove the whip from Carswell and they don't win any by-elections then UKIP may not be in the 2020 TV debates
Where the last lot significant?0 -
I challenge anybody to beat this statement from Richard Nabavi for sheer chutzpah by the end of 2015
As for my view, I've no idea why anyone thinks I'm arguing for Remain
Priceless :-)
0 -
Here you go:blackburn63 said:Perhaps you can help with the parts of the Lisbon treaty he's trying to wind back.
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/eu-speech-at-bloomberg
0 -
There are many potential futures, outside the EU, as there are inside it.Richard_Nabavi said:
I have always said, again and again, that his negotiating position is weak. So, yes, you are right in the sense that the amount he can wind back is limited. I've always said that. I have repeatedly said that the time to get this right was before Lisbon, when we still had veto powers. Of course it was too late by the time he became PM, but we have to deal with reality, not fantasy.runnymede said:'He wants to stay in but wind back a lot of Lisbon'
OK...and you are then implying that he can't wind back anything much at all.
So you agree essentially that this renegotiation is a cosmetic exercise, and yet you come on here day after day smugly poking fun at other posters for saying so.
I do wish you would just argue the case for Remain on some serious points, Richard, instead of all this childish point scoring. Why are EU supporters like yourself so afraid of expressing their views in a positive way?
All that being the case, there were three options: 1. Do nothing and accept the status quo and ever-closer union, 2. Stay in but try to improve things as best we can, 3. Leave altogether (although the last of these is extremely ill-defined). He's going for 2. One reason for that, and I think it's a conclusive reason, is that a referendum to leave is not winnable for the Leave side.
As for my personal view, I've no idea why anyone thinks I'm arguing for Remain. I've mostly been trying to see if there's a coherent case for leaving, which obviously means trying to understand what leaving would actually entail. But those arguing for Leave seem to have an aversion to talking about what exactly they are proposing, and when cornered they give vague but totally inconsistent answers (such as 'Join the EEA' and 'Control EU immigration').0 -
Man Citeh have a decent run of opponents after the Arse game - but will he start on Monday ? If not this week then next is my thinking - Kane needs punting out of my team.TheScreamingEagles said:Right Fantasy Footballers.
Do I drop Pelle and bring back Aguero this weekend?0 -
Perhaps you could tell us what you think Remain means, over say the next five years ?Richard_Nabavi said:As for my personal view, I've no idea why anyone thinks I'm arguing for Remain. I've mostly been trying to see if there's a coherent case for leaving, which obviously means trying to understand what leaving would actually entail. But those arguing for Leave seem to have an aversion to talking about what exactly they are proposing, and when cornered they give vague but totally inconsistent answers (such as 'Join the EEA' and 'Control EU immigration').
0 -
Coal mining in the UK is uneconomic in a world where natural gas is sub $10/mmbtu irrespective of any green policies.taffys said:If you want something to marvel at, the Guardian's crocodile tears over the closure of the last UK deep coal mine is something to behold.
As is the complete absence of a link between their own green agenda and the destruction of the industry.0 -
'1. Do nothing and accept the status quo and ever-closer union, 2. Stay in but try to improve things as best we can, 3. Leave altogether '
But as we now agree that 1. and 2. are essentially the same, the real choice is between 1. and 3.
It's ever-closer union or an entirely new relationship.
I'm glad we are slowly getting towards a sensible framework for discussion, even if the rest of your post again repeats what are becoming very tired spin lines.
0 -
A new PB game. Read the comments from the bottom scrolling up so that you can see what was said but not the author's name. Then judge who wrote the comment before scrolling up to see.0
-
Of course there are but we have no clue from the Booers of what they are, how they'd work, what they'd cost...... When you want a big change you have to convince people it's worth the bother. Instead most of what I hear are simply personal attacks on Cameron and Osborne which no doubt is good fun if you don't like them but....Sean_F said:
There are many potential futures, outside the EU, as there are inside it.Richard_Nabavi said:
I have always said, again and again, that his negotiating position is weak. So, yes, you are right in the sense that the amount he can wind back is limited. I've always said that. I have repeatedly said that the time to get this right was before Lisbon, when we still had veto powers. Of course it was too late by the time he became PM, but we have to deal with reality, not fantasy.runnymede said:'He wants to stay in but wind back a lot of Lisbon'
OK...and you are then implying that he can't wind back anything much at all.
So you agree essentially that this renegotiation is a cosmetic exercise, and yet you come on here day after day smugly poking fun at other posters for saying so.
I do wish you would just argue the case for Remain on some serious points, Richard, instead of all this childish point scoring. Why are EU supporters like yourself so afraid of expressing their views in a positive way?
All that being the case, there were three options: 1. Do nothing and accept the status quo and ever-closer union, 2. Stay in but try to improve things as best we can, 3. Leave altogether (although the last of these is extremely ill-defined). He's going for 2. One reason for that, and I think it's a conclusive reason, is that a referendum to leave is not winnable for the Leave side.
As for my personal view, I've no idea why anyone thinks I'm arguing for Remain. I've mostly been trying to see if there's a coherent case for leaving, which obviously means trying to understand what leaving would actually entail. But those arguing for Leave seem to have an aversion to talking about what exactly they are proposing, and when cornered they give vague but totally inconsistent answers (such as 'Join the EEA' and 'Control EU immigration').0 -
"That is why we need fundamental, far-reaching change."Richard_Nabavi said:
Here you go:blackburn63 said:Perhaps you can help with the parts of the Lisbon treaty he's trying to wind back.
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/eu-speech-at-bloomberg
Yep.0 -
All of those knowledgeable posters on PB who post incessantly about Cameron and claim he is a ..dunmbfuck..a creep..a liar..a toff..an ignorant tosser..a know nowt...out of touch..just in it for his mates..etc..et al..ad infinitum..don't seem to realise that he has been the leader of one of the most hard nosed and aggressive political party,s in Europe for the last ten years and been PM for five of them...that must be because he is a...dumbfu...etc...0
-
How much is our future within the EU going to cost? I'm all ears. Get the crystal ball fired up and report on my desk by Monday please.felix said:
Of course there are but we have no clue from the Booers of what they are, how they'd work, what they'd cost...... When you want a big change you have to convince people it's worth the bother. Instead most of what I hear are simply personal attacks on Cameron and Osborne which no doubt is good fun if you don't like them but....Sean_F said:
There are many potential futures, outside the EU, as there are inside it.Richard_Nabavi said:
I have always said, again and again, that his negotiating position is weak. So, yes, you are right in the sense that the amount he can wind back is limited. I've always said that. I have repeatedly said that the time to get this right was before Lisbon, when we still had veto powers. Of course it was too late by the time he became PM, but we have to deal with reality, not fantasy.runnymede said:'He wants to stay in but wind back a lot of Lisbon'
OK...and you are then implying that he can't wind back anything much at all.
So you agree essentially that this renegotiation is a cosmetic exercise, and yet you come on here day after day smugly poking fun at other posters for saying so.
I do wish you would just argue the case for Remain on some serious points, Richard, instead of all this childish point scoring. Why are EU supporters like yourself so afraid of expressing their views in a positive way?
All that being the case, there were three options: 1. Do nothing and accept the status quo and ever-closer union, 2. Stay in but try to improve things as best we can, 3. Leave altogether (although the last of these is extremely ill-defined). He's going for 2. One reason for that, and I think it's a conclusive reason, is that a referendum to leave is not winnable for the Leave side.
As for my personal view, I've no idea why anyone thinks I'm arguing for Remain. I've mostly been trying to see if there's a coherent case for leaving, which obviously means trying to understand what leaving would actually entail. But those arguing for Leave seem to have an aversion to talking about what exactly they are proposing, and when cornered they give vague but totally inconsistent answers (such as 'Join the EEA' and 'Control EU immigration').0 -
No. All party members care about is winning elections, for the vast majority, principles and values are what is known as an optional extra. Most Tory MPs and members would vote for a donkey in a blue rosette if it won elections, from the look of some candidates, some CCP's did.richardDodd said:All of those knowledgeable posters on PB who post incessantly about Cameron and claim he is a ..dunmbfuck..a creep..a liar..a toff..an ignorant tosser..a know nowt...out of touch..just in it for his mates..etc..et al..ad infinitum..don't seem to realise that he has been the leader of one of the most hard nosed and aggressive political party,s in Europe for the last ten years and been PM for five of them...that must be because he is a...dumbfu...etc...
0 -
No, 2 is not the same as 1. It is better than 1.runnymede said:'1. Do nothing and accept the status quo and ever-closer union, 2. Stay in but try to improve things as best we can, 3. Leave altogether '
But as we now agree that 1. and 2. are essentially the same, the real choice is between 1. and 3.
It's ever-closer union or an entirely new relationship.
I'm glad we are slowly getting towards a sensible framework for discussion, even if the rest of your post again repeats what are becoming very tired spin lines.
I'm a simple chap. Faced with three alternatives, one of which is probably unattainable and which in any case is extremely ill-defined, I would go for the better of the other two.
Now, the BOOers have had several years to put together a case for option 3, and to tell me what it might be. I accept that there are uncertainties - there always are - but some broad outline would be nice.0 -
That's my thinking but Pelle has been shite for a while.TGOHF said:
Man Citeh have a decent run of opponents after the Arse game - but will he start on Monday ? If not this week then next is my thinking - Kane needs punting out of my team.TheScreamingEagles said:Right Fantasy Footballers.
Do I drop Pelle and bring back Aguero this weekend?0 -
Actually I think Dave is overall an excellent PM and an excellent politician. As PM in a coalition he achieved an awful lot both socially and economically and has seen off any number of other parties' leaders. We're a successful, free(ish) country that is heading towards a surplus. The only thing I really don't like in the broad scheme of things is his Europhilia. But that one thing is a big thing - for me anyway. All Europhilia smells of de-haut-en-bas paternalism and elitist self interest. If he went under a bus tomorrow though history would remember him as one of the better PMs.richardDodd said:All of those knowledgeable posters on PB who post incessantly about Cameron and claim he is a ..dunmbfuck..a creep..a liar..a toff..an ignorant tosser..a know nowt...out of touch..just in it for his mates..etc..et al..ad infinitum..don't seem to realise that he has been the leader of one of the most hard nosed and aggressive political party,s in Europe for the last ten years and been PM for five of them...that must be because he is a...dumbfu...etc...
0 -
Errr - the onus is on the Booers to show why we should leave. If you don't get that you're wasting your time.Luckyguy1983 said:
How much is our future within the EU going to cost? I'm all ears. Get the crystal ball fired up and report on my desk by Monday please.felix said:
Of course there are but we have no clue from the Booers of what they are, how they'd work, what they'd cost...... When you want a big change you have to convince people it's worth the bother. Instead most of what I hear are simply personal attacks on Cameron and Osborne which no doubt is good fun if you don't like them but....Sean_F said:
There are many potential futures, outside the EU, as there are inside it.Richard_Nabavi said:
I have always said, again and again, that his negotiating position is weak. So, yes, you are right in the sense that the amount he can wind back is limited. I've always said that. I have repeatedly said that the time to get this right was before Lisbon, when we still had veto powers. Of course it was too late by the time he became PM, but we have to deal with reality, not fantasy.runnymede said:'He wants to stay in but wind back a lot of Lisbon'
OK...and you are then implying that he can't wind back anything much at all.
So you agree essentially that this renegotiation is a cosmetic exercise, and yet you come on here day after day smugly poking fun at other posters for saying so.
I do wish you would just argue the case for Remain on some serious points, Richard, instead of all this childish point scoring. Why are EU supporters like yourself so afraid of expressing their views in a positive way?
All that being the case, there were three options: 1. Do nothing and accept the status quo and ever-closer union, 2. Stay in but try to improve things as best we can, 3. Leave altogether (although the last of these is extremely ill-defined). He's going for 2. One reason for that, and I think it's a conclusive reason, is that a referendum to leave is not winnable for the Leave side.
As for my personal view, I've no idea why anyone thinks I'm arguing for Remain. I've mostly been trying to see if there's a coherent case for leaving, which obviously means trying to understand what leaving would actually entail. But those arguing for Leave seem to have an aversion to talking about what exactly they are proposing, and when cornered they give vague but totally inconsistent answers (such as 'Join the EEA' and 'Control EU immigration').0 -
You're being serious that this speech from early 2013 is what he's using as negotiation now?Richard_Nabavi said:
Here you go:blackburn63 said:Perhaps you can help with the parts of the Lisbon treaty he's trying to wind back.
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/eu-speech-at-bloomberg
This is extraordinary
0 -
Get Lukaku if you haven't, not Aguero, yet.TheScreamingEagles said:
That's my thinking but Pelle has been shite for a while.TGOHF said:
Man Citeh have a decent run of opponents after the Arse game - but will he start on Monday ? If not this week then next is my thinking - Kane needs punting out of my team.TheScreamingEagles said:Right Fantasy Footballers.
Do I drop Pelle and bring back Aguero this weekend?0 -
Ahhh how pleasant it must be up there in the clouds looking down upon the ordinary people who live real lives in the real world making the best of things. So how do we differentiate between say Con and UKIP party members or are the latter such saints of virtue that they deliberately lose all those elections while holding on the their purity - twould explain the tone of bitterness so evident today.Indigo said:
No. All party members care about is winning elections, for the vast majority, principles and values are what is known as an optional extra. Most Tory MPs and members would vote for a donkey in a blue rosette if it won elections, from the look of some candidates, some CCP's did.richardDodd said:All of those knowledgeable posters on PB who post incessantly about Cameron and claim he is a ..dunmbfuck..a creep..a liar..a toff..an ignorant tosser..a know nowt...out of touch..just in it for his mates..etc..et al..ad infinitum..don't seem to realise that he has been the leader of one of the most hard nosed and aggressive political party,s in Europe for the last ten years and been PM for five of them...that must be because he is a...dumbfu...etc...
0 -
'No, 2 is not the same as 1. It is better than 1.'
Ah you are shifting awkwardly already. Please tell us how exactly any of the PM's current 'demands' - even if implemented - will make 2. better than 1. in any significant way.
I'd particularly love to know how you think demands 1-3 make your option 2. 'better' than option 1.
0 -
Apparently that speech is gospel, but a speech the year before when he said he would not countenance leaving the EU, or leading the out campaign isn't. I wonder what magic happened in at Christmas 2012 ...blackburn63 said:
You're being serious that this speech from early 2013 is what he's using as negotiation now?Richard_Nabavi said:
Here you go:blackburn63 said:Perhaps you can help with the parts of the Lisbon treaty he's trying to wind back.
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/eu-speech-at-bloomberg
This is extraordinary0 -
Eh?blackburn63 said:You're being serious that this speech from early 2013 is what he's using as negotiation now?
This is extraordinary0 -
Early day motion:
"That this House believes that Kevin Sinfield MBE is a fantastic and deserving contender for the 2015 BBC Sports Personality of the Year Award; feels Sinfield deserves this recognition this year in particular due to his superb leadership of Leeds Rhinos, who he led to win the treble for the first time, winning the Super League Grand Final, the Challenge Cup Final, and the League Leader's Shield; recognises Sinfield's success and loyalty to his club, playing for Leeds Rhinos throughout his career and becoming their top points scorer, Super League's top points scorer and is in the top three for points scorers of all time, with 86 tries, 1,792 goals and 40 drop goals; recognises the former England captain, who played for England 26 times and Great Britain 14 times, has been a core part of the British and English rugby for many years, and is deserving of this accolade; notes that Sinfield is the first rugby league player to be nominated for this award, a testament to both Sinfield's excellence and how rugby league has been overlooked in the past; praises Sinfield's modesty, determination and positive attitude, which have been a core part of his fantastic captaincy of Leeds Rhinos, leading them not only to the treble this year, but to 7 Super League titles, 3 Challenge Cups, 3 League Leaders' Shields and 3 World Club Challenge successes; and believes that Sinfield is a truly deserving recipient of this award."0 -
What's your drinking nationality? - It’s that time again when the Booze calculator makes an appearance. Anyone brave enough to admit they drink like a Frenchman?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-30500372
0 -
Ah yes, but that was not a 'proper' debate though was it. Cameron Clegg and Miliband just answered questions from a QT audience for 30 minutes.TheScreamingEagles said:
He wasflightpath01 said:
Cameron was not in that debate was he? Cameron only took part in a pointless multi sided debate, one which was very early in the campaign. Would Labour be keen to press for debates with Corbyn as leader?TheScreamingEagles said:
Critical. Ed saying the last Labour government hadn't overspent did wonders for the blues.flightpath01 said:
What 2020 TV debates?TheScreamingEagles said:If Farage were to remove the whip from Carswell and they don't win any by-elections then UKIP may not be in the 2020 TV debates
Where the last lot significant?
30 minutes of Corbyn in front of a QT audience?
0 -
The key one is dealing with the question of Eurozone hegemony. The others are obviously improvements as well. What more is there to say? Better is better.runnymede said:'No, 2 is not the same as 1. It is better than 1.'
Ah you are shifting awkwardly already. Please tell us how exactly any of the PM's current 'demands' - even if implemented - will make 2. better than 1. in any significant way.
I'd particularly love to know how you think demands 1-3 make your option 2. 'better' than option 1.
Incidentally the problem of Eurozone hegemony is also a worry if we leave, very likely a greater worry. This is one of the crucial points which the Leave side seem completely unwilling or unable to address.0 -
UKIP have managed to achieve the amazing feat of having a split with one MP!! Its harder to work out who is more incorrect... is it Carswell thinking they can be successful as a libertarian party? ...or Farage thinking he is the right man to lead the Out canpaign? Find out next time on Kipper Wars!!!0
-
I refer you to Mr indigo at 3.25.Richard_Nabavi said:
Eh?blackburn63 said:You're being serious that this speech from early 2013 is what he's using as negotiation now?
This is extraordinary
0 -
But Richard the PM's 'demand' will do nothing at all to remove your spectre of Eurozone hegemony, it's just an empty form of words. The original demands for concrete changes to voting rules have long since been discarded.
And you know this but still you bluster on.
0 -
It might seem that way to you, I am not sure the voters will see it that way. Staying in means more EU, more four pillars, less trade with the world outside the EU, more immigration, more centralisation, less democracy, less sovereignty, less control over our borders - so less security. It means being outvoted by the Eurozone. It means ever closer union. It means votes for prisoners. It means a hundred and one annoying laws foisted on us from Brussels, which it doesn't matter who we elect, we cant stop. It means endlessly paying benefits to various criminals and extremists we will be unable to chuck out of our country. Rapidly it will mean being the UK District Council in an essential federal EU. How much will all that cost.felix said:
Errr - the onus is on the Booers to show why we should leave. If you don't get that you're wasting your time.Luckyguy1983 said:
How much is our future within the EU going to cost? I'm all ears. Get the crystal ball fired up and report on my desk by Monday please.felix said:
Of course there are but we have no clue from the Booers of what they are, how they'd work, what they'd cost...... When you want a big change you have to convince people it's worth the bother. Instead most of what I hear are simply personal attacks on Cameron and Osborne which no doubt is good fun if you don't like them but....Sean_F said:
There are many potential futures, outside the EU, as there are inside it.
Dave is a lucky man with events, lets all hope he stays lucky, if that Paris attack had been in London, leave would be at 70%0 -
Lol, when it comes to patronising invective I am but a poor student crouched at your knee. I used to be a Conservative member, when they actually had centre right policies, with the heir to Blair, not so much, but neither am I a kipper, although a Hannan or Carswell as leader might tempt me, which seems unlikely at the moment!felix said:
Ahhh how pleasant it must be up there in the clouds looking down upon the ordinary people who live real lives in the real world making the best of things. So how do we differentiate between say Con and UKIP party members or are the latter such saints of virtue that they deliberately lose all those elections while holding on the their purity - twould explain the tone of bitterness so evident today.Indigo said:
No. All party members care about is winning elections, for the vast majority, principles and values are what is known as an optional extra. Most Tory MPs and members would vote for a donkey in a blue rosette if it won elections, from the look of some candidates, some CCP's did.richardDodd said:All of those knowledgeable posters on PB who post incessantly about Cameron and claim he is a ..dunmbfuck..a creep..a liar..a toff..an ignorant tosser..a know nowt...out of touch..just in it for his mates..etc..et al..ad infinitum..don't seem to realise that he has been the leader of one of the most hard nosed and aggressive political party,s in Europe for the last ten years and been PM for five of them...that must be because he is a...dumbfu...etc...
0 -
@indigo I think you're mixing up the way an average PBer might see it with the average voter.Indigo said:
It might seem that way to you, I am not sure the voters will see it that way.felix said:
Errr - the onus is on the Booers to show why we should leave. If you don't get that you're wasting your time.
The voter who decides the referendum at 50%+/-0.0001 will most likely need to be swayed by "Out" making their case. No matter how much Dave doesn't renegotiate with the EU.0 -
Who is blustering?runnymede said:But Richard the PM's 'demand' will do nothing at all to remove your spectre of Eurozone hegemony, it's just an empty form of words. The original demands for concrete changes to voting rules have long since been discarded.
And you know this but still you bluster on.
We don't know what the outcome will be, but let's assume for the sake of argument that it's a weak improvement, so no worse than doing nothing and maybe a bit better. Even if we elide 1 and 2 completely, and assume that the choice is between the status quo ante renegotiation, and leaving, that doesn't decide the question for me, nor for voters generally. The Leave side still need to make the case for leaving. Not the case for moaning about the EU, or bitching about David Cameron, or complaining that immigration is damaging the country, but the case for something else.
What is that something else? We are probably a few months from the referendum, and there is not even the faintest outline of what it might be.
The BOOers and UKIP can't blame anyone but themselves for that.0 -
Out, especially given the current cluster-fuck with the kippers would probably be best served doing their own Operation Fear and advertising all the probable implications of an IN vote in terms for federalism, loss of sovereignty, lose of control of our borders etc.Pulpstar said:
@indigo I think you're mixing up the way an average PBer might see it with the average voter.Indigo said:
It might seem that way to you, I am not sure the voters will see it that way.felix said:
Errr - the onus is on the Booers to show why we should leave. If you don't get that you're wasting your time.
The voter who decides the referendum at 50%+/-0.0001 will most likely need to be swayed by "Out" making their case. No matter how much Dave doesn't renegotiate with the EU.
Carswell will hate it, but it seems to be the closed season for open and positive views on anything!0 -
You put it so much better than I sir.Pulpstar said:
@indigo I think you're mixing up the way an average PBer might see it with the average voter.Indigo said:
It might seem that way to you, I am not sure the voters will see it that way.felix said:
Errr - the onus is on the Booers to show why we should leave. If you don't get that you're wasting your time.
The voter who decides the referendum at 50%+/-0.0001 will most likely need to be swayed by "Out" making their case. No matter how much Dave doesn't renegotiate with the EU.0 -
It's the case that dare not speak its name.Richard_Nabavi said:
Who is blustering?runnymede said:But Richard the PM's 'demand' will do nothing at all to remove your spectre of Eurozone hegemony, it's just an empty form of words. The original demands for concrete changes to voting rules have long since been discarded.
And you know this but still you bluster on.
We don't know what the outcome will be, but let's assume for the sake of argument that it's a weak improvement, so no worse than doing nothing and maybe a bit better. Even if we elide 1 and 2 completely, and assume that the choice is between the status quo ante renegotiation, and leaving, that doesn't decide the question for me, nor for voters generally. The Leave side still need to make the case for leaving. Not the case for moaning about the EU, or bitching about David Cameron, or complaining that immigration is damaging the country, but the case for something else.
What is that something else? We are probably a few months from the referendum, and there is not even the faintest outline of what it might be.
The BOOers and UKIP can't blame anyone but themselves for that.0 -
I'm not sure when the official OUT group is confirmed but Vote Leave must be strong favourites. They're essentially a conservative group with Dan Hannan playing a leading role, he is a very impressive man who will woo tories with great effect.Indigo said:
Out, especially given the current cluster-fuck with the kippers would probably be best served doing their own Operation Fear and advertising all the probable implications of an IN vote in terms for federalism, loss of sovereignty, lose of control of our borders etc.Pulpstar said:
@indigo I think you're mixing up the way an average PBer might see it with the average voter.Indigo said:
It might seem that way to you, I am not sure the voters will see it that way.felix said:
Errr - the onus is on the Booers to show why we should leave. If you don't get that you're wasting your time.
The voter who decides the referendum at 50%+/-0.0001 will most likely need to be swayed by "Out" making their case. No matter how much Dave doesn't renegotiate with the EU.
Carswell will hate it, but it seems to be the closed season for open and positive views on anything!
I spent some time campaigning with him recently, I'm looking forward to seeing the pb tories debunk his presentation. None have commented on his link below where as usual he is measured and forthright.
0 -
If you elide 1 and 2 completely then Cameron will be leading OUT, he said that he would if the EU didn't give us anything... or maybe that is a bit optimistic.Richard_Nabavi said:
Who is blustering?runnymede said:But Richard the PM's 'demand' will do nothing at all to remove your spectre of Eurozone hegemony, it's just an empty form of words. The original demands for concrete changes to voting rules have long since been discarded.
And you know this but still you bluster on.
We don't know what the outcome will be, but let's assume for the sake of argument that it's a weak improvement, so no worse than doing nothing and maybe a bit better. Even if we elide 1 and 2 completely, and assume that the choice is between the status quo ante renegotiation, and leaving, that doesn't decide the question for me, nor for voters generally. The Leave side still need to make the case for leaving. Not the case for moaning about the EU, or bitching about David Cameron, or complaining that immigration is damaging the country, but the case for something else.
What is that something else? We are probably a few months from the referendum, and there is not even the faintest outline of what it might be.
The BOOers and UKIP can't blame anyone but themselves for that.0 -
Balls. The choice is a simple binary one between two alternative courses, proposed by different groups. Why on earth is one of those required to give chapter and verse on their vision for the future and one not? It would appear from your reply that you're not prepared to give a clue what form the EU will take, how comitting to the EU will work, how much this will cost.....etc.felix said:
Errr - the onus is on the Booers to show why we should leave. If you don't get that you're wasting your time.
Beyond the superficial mask of familiarity, we have no idea what our future within the EU will hold, only that we won't be in control of it.
0 -
He is an eloquent speaker and quite popular with activists. Very few voters will even have heard of him. You're falling into the Labour trap of confusing party activists with voters.blackburn63 said:
I'm not sure when the official OUT group is confirmed but Vote Leave must be strong favourites. They're essentially a conservative group with Dan Hannan playing a leading role, he is a very impressive man who will woo tories with great effect.Indigo said:
Out, especially given the current cluster-fuck with the kippers would probably be best served doing their own Operation Fear and advertising all the probable implications of an IN vote in terms for federalism, loss of sovereignty, lose of control of our borders etc.Pulpstar said:
@indigo I think you're mixing up the way an average PBer might see it with the average voter.Indigo said:
It might seem that way to you, I am not sure the voters will see it that way.felix said:
Errr - the onus is on the Booers to show why we should leave. If you don't get that you're wasting your time.
The voter who decides the referendum at 50%+/-0.0001 will most likely need to be swayed by "Out" making their case. No matter how much Dave doesn't renegotiate with the EU.
Carswell will hate it, but it seems to be the closed season for open and positive views on anything!
I spent some time campaigning with him recently, I'm looking forward to seeing the pb tories debunk his presentation. None have commented on his link below where as usual he is measured and forthright.0 -
Its clear that right or wrong tribalism will play a big part in people's voting intentions. As I said previously I'm looking forward to the pb tories agreeing with Brown, Blair and Mandy when they get wheeled out.0
-
I'm confusing nothing, I'm saying he makes an eloquent case for leaving.felix said:
He is an eloquent speaker and quite popular with activists. Very few voters will even have heard of him. You're falling into the Labour trap of confusing party activists with voters.blackburn63 said:
I'm not sure when the official OUT group is confirmed but Vote Leave must be strong favourites. They're essentially a conservative group with Dan Hannan playing a leading role, he is a very impressive man who will woo tories with great effect.Indigo said:
Out, especially given the current cluster-fuck with the kippers would probably be best served doing their own Operation Fear and advertising all the probable implications of an IN vote in terms for federalism, loss of sovereignty, lose of control of our borders etc.Pulpstar said:
@indigo I think you're mixing up the way an average PBer might see it with the average voter.Indigo said:
It might seem that way to you, I am not sure the voters will see it that way.felix said:
Errr - the onus is on the Booers to show why we should leave. If you don't get that you're wasting your time.
The voter who decides the referendum at 50%+/-0.0001 will most likely need to be swayed by "Out" making their case. No matter how much Dave doesn't renegotiate with the EU.
Carswell will hate it, but it seems to be the closed season for open and positive views on anything!
I spent some time campaigning with him recently, I'm looking forward to seeing the pb tories debunk his presentation. None have commented on his link below where as usual he is measured and forthright.
My point is the bad news for Inners is leave.eu will soon be sidelined
0 -
Errr - we're already in the EU and pretty well know it warts and all. The worst outcome of the negotiations would be 'as you were'. Under those circumstances voters need to know what the Booers offering is since we are currently in. People tend to 'stick with nurse rather than something worse' - were you not around for the last GE?Luckyguy1983 said:
Balls. The choice is a simple binary one between two alternative courses, proposed by different groups. Why on earth is one of those required to give chapter and verse on their vision for the future and one not? It would appear from your reply that you're not prepared to give a clue what form the EU will take, how comitting to the EU will work, how much this will cost.....etc.felix said:
Errr - the onus is on the Booers to show why we should leave. If you don't get that you're wasting your time.
Beyond the superficial mask of familiarity, we have no idea what our future within the EU will hold, only that we won't be in control of it.0 -
I'll be most likely voting "out".Luckyguy1983 said:
Balls. The choice is a simple binary one between two alternative courses, proposed by different groups. Why on earth is one of those required to give chapter and verse on their vision for the future and one not? It would appear from your reply that you're not prepared to give a clue what form the EU will take, how comitting to the EU will work, how much this will cost.....etc.felix said:
Errr - the onus is on the Booers to show why we should leave. If you don't get that you're wasting your time.
Beyond the superficial mask of familiarity, we have no idea what our future within the EU will hold, only that we won't be in control of it.
But the reality is that "Out" has a far higher bar to jump than "in". It was the same with SINDY, "out/Yes" there had the higher bar. The perceived status quo after the vote will forever more be the current status quo. It might not be fair, but it is political reality.0 -
CheersTheWhiteRabbit said:
Get Lukaku if you haven't, not Aguero, yet.TheScreamingEagles said:
That's my thinking but Pelle has been shite for a while.TGOHF said:
Man Citeh have a decent run of opponents after the Arse game - but will he start on Monday ? If not this week then next is my thinking - Kane needs punting out of my team.TheScreamingEagles said:Right Fantasy Footballers.
Do I drop Pelle and bring back Aguero this weekend?0 -
There is no "as you were", there hasn't been since 1972, the EU isn't a position, it's a direction, ever closer union.felix said:
Errr - we're already in the EU and pretty well know it warts and all. The worst outcome of the negotiations would be 'as you were'. Under those circumstances voters need to know what the Booers offering is since we are currently in. People tend to 'stick with nurse rather than something worse' - were you not around for the last GE?Luckyguy1983 said:
Balls. The choice is a simple binary one between two alternative courses, proposed by different groups. Why on earth is one of those required to give chapter and verse on their vision for the future and one not? It would appear from your reply that you're not prepared to give a clue what form the EU will take, how comitting to the EU will work, how much this will cost.....etc.felix said:
Errr - the onus is on the Booers to show why we should leave. If you don't get that you're wasting your time.
Beyond the superficial mask of familiarity, we have no idea what our future within the EU will hold, only that we won't be in control of it.0 -
If tribalism triumphs you're stuffed before you start - and you know it. UKIP and some hard-line Tories ain't gonna bring it home... unless Cameron walks away.blackburn63 said:Its clear that right or wrong tribalism will play a big part in people's voting intentions. As I said previously I'm looking forward to the pb tories agreeing with Brown, Blair and Mandy when they get wheeled out.
0 -
A question for Inners:
I imagine there'll be IN/OUT debates before the referendum like when Nigel took on Cleggy.
Who do you want batting for your side?0 -
In that case why are you worried - No would win by a country mile, there'd be no referendum and we'd be spending Euros..oh wait...Indigo said:
There is no "as you were", there hasn't been since 1972, the EU isn't a position, it's a direction, ever closer union.felix said:
Errr - we're already in the EU and pretty well know it warts and all. The worst outcome of the negotiations would be 'as you were'. Under those circumstances voters need to know what the Booers offering is since we are currently in. People tend to 'stick with nurse rather than something worse' - were you not around for the last GE?Luckyguy1983 said:
Balls. The choice is a simple binary one between two alternative courses, proposed by different groups. Why on earth is one of those required to give chapter and verse on their vision for the future and one not? It would appear from your reply that you're not prepared to give a clue what form the EU will take, how comitting to the EU will work, how much this will cost.....etc.felix said:
Errr - the onus is on the Booers to show why we should leave. If you don't get that you're wasting your time.
Beyond the superficial mask of familiarity, we have no idea what our future within the EU will hold, only that we won't be in control of it.0 -
If Cameron has to trade no migrant benefits for four year with the same applying to young British citizens, so that no 18-22 year olds can claim benefits, it is going to be interesting to see what the left does, I somehow doubt they are going to support a IN vote on those terms.felix said:
If tribalism triumphs you're stuffed before you start - and you know it. UKIP and some hard-line Tories ain't gonna bring it home... unless Cameron walks away.blackburn63 said:Its clear that right or wrong tribalism will play a big part in people's voting intentions. As I said previously I'm looking forward to the pb tories agreeing with Brown, Blair and Mandy when they get wheeled out.
0 -
Neither Carswell's mild mannered intellectualism, nor Dan Hannan's eloquent arguments will win it for out.
Only a completely shameless campaign on Britain being flooded with forever more refugees, probably with a few racist overtones is going to work. Bear in mind the ASA does not regulate political advertising, so pretty much anything goes. Out needs to take it to the brink and beyond to win.0 -
That's not strictly true though is it, I wonder how many tories will be put off by Mandy gurning down the camera celebrating his EU pension fund.felix said:
If tribalism triumphs you're stuffed before you start - and you know it. UKIP and some hard-line Tories ain't gonna bring it home... unless Cameron walks away.blackburn63 said:Its clear that right or wrong tribalism will play a big part in people's voting intentions. As I said previously I'm looking forward to the pb tories agreeing with Brown, Blair and Mandy when they get wheeled out.
0 -
All the polling on benefits tends to support the contributory principle. I suspect Labour would take the view that they could change the law when they are next in power. That's the beauty of democracy but the party as a whole will support Remain.Indigo said:
If Cameron has to trade no migrant benefits for four year with the same applying to young British citizens, so that no 18-22 year olds can claim benefits, it is going to be interesting to see what the left does, I somehow doubt they are going to support a IN vote on those terms.felix said:
If tribalism triumphs you're stuffed before you start - and you know it. UKIP and some hard-line Tories ain't gonna bring it home... unless Cameron walks away.blackburn63 said:Its clear that right or wrong tribalism will play a big part in people's voting intentions. As I said previously I'm looking forward to the pb tories agreeing with Brown, Blair and Mandy when they get wheeled out.
0 -
How much cash do the "Out" and "In" campaigns have behind them each btw ?
Also is spending capped ? 'Out' will need a serious billboard, bus and online campaign full of stuff better than the current batch of 'Santa Junker' crap.0 -
EU leaders have offered David Cameron a limited "emergency break", allowing Britain to stop migrants claiming benefits if they are harming public services.
Hallelujah we are saved!0 -
In the greater scheme of things it would make little difference. Mandy knows his limitations and his strenghts - it's a relief to me that the Labour party don't appreciate his strengths.blackburn63 said:
That's not strictly true though is it, I wonder how many tories will be put off by Mandy gurning down the camera celebrating his EU pension fund.felix said:
If tribalism triumphs you're stuffed before you start - and you know it. UKIP and some hard-line Tories ain't gonna bring it home... unless Cameron walks away.blackburn63 said:Its clear that right or wrong tribalism will play a big part in people's voting intentions. As I said previously I'm looking forward to the pb tories agreeing with Brown, Blair and Mandy when they get wheeled out.
0 -
Hallelujah we are saved!Indigo said:EU leaders have offered David Cameron a limited "emergency break", allowing Britain to stop migrants claiming benefits if they are harming public services.
Who decides if they are hurting public services? The EU?0
![[Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/d2ea526b1b06ed109333f390c7ae956b_100.png)
