politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New LAB member polling highlights huge gulf between them, p
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New LAB member polling highlights huge gulf between them, party voters and electorate as a whole
There’s a huge amount in the data and the two charts above are the most striking. There’s a mismatch between those who select the leader and party voters and the electorate as a whole.
Comments
-
If you're not already laying Hilary Benn as next Labour leader, you should be.0
-
@tombradby: Preparing for the @agendaitv tonight, encountered this; When Greenland left in 1982, it spent 3 years negotiating a trade deal with the EEC.
@tombradby: The country had a population of 50,000 - a quarter of the size of the London Borough of Camden. And the deal was over 1 industry; fishing.0 -
I would just like to say, as I tuck into a Tunnock's Tea Cake, I am most definitely pro cake, and pro eating it.0
-
Yes, it bollocks on both sides, and in most cases not a deeply held view, Leave people are just trying to justify Boris's rather loose use of words when it really doesn't matter, because vast swathes of voters will neither have noticed not cared. Of course they might also just be enjoying arguing the toss.AlastairMeeks said:There does seem something rather odd about a group of people who have moaned for decades about how the EU doesn't respect the public's votes in referenda and makes them vote again arguing passionately that they should be given a second vote in the event that the vote goes the way that they want it to go.
It's also a load of old confectioned bollox by the more excitable part of the Remain camp, Boris was quite clear that a double referendum was what he would do "in an ideal world" and last time I looked we are not in one of those. He then spent the next several paragraphs talking about negotiating free trade deals, not something you would do if you were rejoining, but that is being hand-waved away by the same people.
Out is quite clearly out, even Boris can see that, he is just in his rhetorical way pining for a more agreeable solution, which should not be confused for him thinking such is either available or achievable.0 -
How apt that the bar charts are in the colours of the Palestinian flag...
0 -
I fail to see the parallels here. Greenland wasn't important and carried no trading heft.Scott_P said:
@tombradby: Preparing for the @agendaitv tonight, encountered this; When Greenland left in 1982, it spent 3 years negotiating a trade deal with the EEC.
@tombradby: The country had a population of 50,000 - a quarter of the size of the London Borough of Camden. And the deal was over 1 industry; fishing.0 -
This poll is required reading for anyone interested in where the Labour party is going next. Jeremy Corbyn has support where he needs it. He's going nowhere any time in the near future, unless he decides for himself that he wants to step down. And why would he?0
-
He clearly thinks it would be both available and achievable, if he were PM instead of Dave...Indigo said:Out is quite clearly out, even Boris can see that, he is just in his rhetorical way pining for a more agreeable solution, which should not be confused for him thinking such is either available or achievable.
0 -
@tombradby: Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty stipulates that, after pulling the exit chord, a membership ceases after 2 years.Plato_Says said:I fail to see the parallels here. Greenland wasn't important and carried no trading heft.
@tombradby: That can be extended if unanimously agreed. Given that it would be in everyone's interests for the UK to leave with a deal in place...
@tombradby: ...I think a sensible time frame might be five to ten years. Don't you think?
@tombradby: Or to put it another way; whatever we decide, nothing is likely to happen quickly.0 -
Many BMW's sold in Greenland ?Scott_P said:@tombradby: Preparing for the @agendaitv tonight, encountered this; When Greenland left in 1982, it spent 3 years negotiating a trade deal with the EEC.
@tombradby: The country had a population of 50,000 - a quarter of the size of the London Borough of Camden. And the deal was over 1 industry; fishing.0 -
Scott's retreat to the timidity of thinking a la GO has been "surprising".Plato_Says said:I fail to see the parallels here. Greenland wasn't important and carried no trading heft.
Scott_P said:@tombradby: Preparing for the @agendaitv tonight, encountered this; When Greenland left in 1982, it spent 3 years negotiating a trade deal with the EEC.
@tombradby: The country had a population of 50,000 - a quarter of the size of the London Borough of Camden. And the deal was over 1 industry; fishing.0 -
The Labour Party membership appear to want to turn into a party that makes the Monster Raving Loon lot look sensible and rational.0
-
On the basis of what evidence ? Or did you just pull that out of your @rse ?Scott_P said:
He clearly thinks it would be both available and achievable, if he were PM instead of Dave...Indigo said:Out is quite clearly out, even Boris can see that, he is just in his rhetorical way pining for a more agreeable solution, which should not be confused for him thinking such is either available or achievable.
0 -
-
In tiny country which no one cares about because no one trades with it worth a damn, you really are talking cobblers this evening, can't you find more Twitter to cut and paste its less painful. Companies like BMW are going to be desparate for the German government to do a deal, and using all lobbying clout to make it happen.Scott_P said:
That's the point.TGOHF said:Many BMW's sold in Greenland ?
If 1 tiny country takes 3 years to negotiate 1 industry, how long will Brexit actually take?0 -
@tombradby: Switzerland took 7 years to negotiate two bilateral sets of trade deals. The 2nd lot (agreed between 2001- 4) have not all been enacted.
Cos nobody gives a crap about Switzerland, right?0 -
-
Both sides will want to conclude the terms of Brexit as soon as possible. The uncertainty will be damaging to both sides, and our EU friends have lots of other problems they need to address.
However, it's going to be extremely complex. Two years looks tight, I wouldn't be surprised if there's an extension to the Article 50 period. But it won't be as long as five years.
(assuming a Leave result, of course!)0 -
I think if we are negotiating seven different deals with the EU - a la Switzerland - then it's quite likely to stretch beyond two years. Although I doubt it'd take more than three, three and a half.Plato_Says said:
If, on the other hand, we rejoin EFTA and the EEA, then it could probably be done in 18 months.0 -
@Scott_P is making the same point I made on the last thread in a different way. There is a confusion between important and urgent.
The EU will see it as important to conclude exit terms with Britain. It almost certainly will not see it as particularly urgent as compared with the other things in its lap at any given moment.
Britain is not going to get a clear idea of its agreed exit terms for a considerable time.0 -
So as bears repeating again and again, Labour's problem in 2015 was NOT being too left wing, except in the eyes of a tiny minority of (presumably intractable) right wingers. It's problem was being too crap.0
-
PB's fascination with the electoral woes of Labour seems to be somewhat in abeyance.0
-
FPP:
Good afternoon all. After a few months away from PB.com post-General Election, I return to this site when another huge moment arrives for the country. This website really is superb for discussing the big issues.
Could anyone direct me to where I can download the actual final agreement Cameron got from last week's summit? Also I heard an excellent extract from a comment Tony Benn made about the EC (as was) severing the umbilical cord of democracy - anyone know this quotation? Thanks in advance.0 -
I think the public can accept moderate amounts of leftie-ism or baby-eating if the government is competent. The problem for Labour at the moment is it is definitely both too left wing AND too crap, even more a lot of former Labour voters.JWisemann said:So as bears repeating again and again, Labour's problem in 2015 was NOT being too left wing, except in the eyes of a tiny minority of (presumably intractable) right wingers. It's problem was being too crap.
The other problem is that most Leftie-ism involves spending other people's money, which becomes a problem when they don't have any left. It also needs to not to involve fantasies about dropping huge levels of tax on to highly mobile corporations or high net worth individuals.
Finally, for a lot of voters, running up large amounts of debt to fund public spending = crap, which is why Osborne's light is getting tarnished rather fast.0 -
I'm expecting 3yrs. It's the ridiculous comparison with Greenland I'm laughing at.
The dafter the claims, the more convincing Leave becomes.rcs1000 said:
I think if we are negotiating seven different deals with the EU - a la Switzerland - then it's quite likely to stretch beyond two years. Although I doubt it'd take more than three, three and a half.Plato_Says said:
If, on the other hand, we rejoin EFTA and the EEA, then it could probably be done in 18 months.0 -
Evidence of madness amongst Corbynistas? Not especially in the polling here:
GB and Lab voters choose Health / Immigration / The Economy as top 3
Lab members choose Health / Housing / The Economy
And even housing and immigration are different proxies for expressing quite similar underlying concerns.0 -
@Scott_P
'@tombradby: Preparing for the @agendaitv tonight, encountered this; When Greenland left in 1982, it spent 3 years negotiating a trade deal with the EEC.
Is Greenland a major importer of German cars ?0 -
Some have said the EFTA make it easier to sign trade deals than the EU so I have a simple question:
What countries, if any, does the EFTA have a trade deal with that the EU doesn't?
What countries, if any, does the EU have a trade deal with that the EFTA doesn't?0 -
'I think a sensible time frame might be five to ten years. Don't you think?'
More silly hand waving0 -
Some pretty daft claims from the Leave side as well, the most recent one at the end of the last thread being the utterly bonkers suggestion that the fall in sterling over the last few months is unrelated to Brexit fears.Plato_Says said:I'm expecting 3yrs. It's the ridiculous comparison with Greenland I'm laughing at.
The dafter the claims, the more convincing Leave becomes.0 -
"These three aces we hold in our hand are totally irrelevant" (c) the Tory wimps.john_zims said:@Scott_P
'@tombradby: Preparing for the @agendaitv tonight, encountered this; When Greenland left in 1982, it spent 3 years negotiating a trade deal with the EEC.
Is Greenland a major importer of German cars ?0 -
Education in Wales http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-35625843
Fears for 26,000 11-year-olds 'unable to read properly'
0 -
EFTA has deals with the GCC, Hong Kong, Canada and Ukraine that the EU does not have.Philip_Thompson said:Some have said the EFTA make it easier to sign trade deals than the EU so I have a simple question:
What countries, if any, does the EFTA have a trade deal with that the EU doesn't?
What countries, if any, does the EU have a trade deal with that the EU doesn't?
Ukraine is largely an irrelevancy; Canada is likely to be resolved by the much bigger EU-Canada bi-lateral deal.
0 -
Labour was not too left wing at the last election. It was indeed too crap and (this may amount to the same thing) left wing in a unconvincing way.JWisemann said:So as bears repeating again and again, Labour's problem in 2015 was NOT being too left wing, except in the eyes of a tiny minority of (presumably intractable) right wingers. It's problem was being too crap.
Right now Labour is both too left wing and too crap.0 -
And who would you put in control of the negotiations?Plato_Says said:I'm expecting 3yrs. It's the ridiculous comparison with Greenland I'm laughing at.
The dafter the claims, the more convincing Leave becomes.rcs1000 said:
I think if we are negotiating seven different deals with the EU - a la Switzerland - then it's quite likely to stretch beyond two years. Although I doubt it'd take more than three, three and a half.Plato_Says said:
If, on the other hand, we rejoin EFTA and the EEA, then it could probably be done in 18 months.
A businessman? Stuart Rose? Richard Branson?
A Civil Servant? GOD? ??
Politician? Micheal Gove? Boris Johnston? Nick Clegg?
Other? Eddie Izzard? Gordon Brown? Hogan-Howe? Kieth Richard?0 -
Health, Education, etc etc etc all better under a Labour government...oh wait...Plato_Says said:Education in Wales http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-35625843
Fears for 26,000 11-year-olds 'unable to read properly'
0 -
EFTA doesn't make trade deals, it just doesn't stop countries from making their own trade deals like the EU does.Philip_Thompson said:Some have said the EFTA make it easier to sign trade deals than the EU so I have a simple question:
What countries, if any, does the EFTA have a trade deal with that the EU doesn't?
What countries, if any, does the EU have a trade deal with that the EFTA doesn't?
Switzerland as a result has a FTA deal with China , Hong Kong, Japan and most of South America, which the EU does not.
http://www.seco.admin.ch/themen/00513/00515/01330/04619/?lang=en0 -
Health, Education, etc etc etc all better under a Labour government...oh wait...FrancisUrquhart said:Plato_Says said:Education in Wales http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-35625843
Fears for 26,000 11-year-olds 'unable to read properly'
It's ok, they'll be unable to read and write in two languages.
0 -
EFTA does do trade deals: see http://www.efta.int/free-trade/free-trade-agreementsIndigo said:
EFTA doesn't make trade deals, it just doesn't stop countries from making their own trade deals like the EU does.Philip_Thompson said:Some have said the EFTA make it easier to sign trade deals than the EU so I have a simple question:
What countries, if any, does the EFTA have a trade deal with that the EU doesn't?
What countries, if any, does the EU have a trade deal with that the EFTA doesn't?
Switzerland as a result has a FTA deal with China , Hong Kong, Japan and most of South America, which the EU does not.
http://www.seco.admin.ch/themen/00513/00515/01330/04619/?lang=en
I wouldn't point to the Swiss-Chinese deal personally; it was massively lopsided in favour of the Chinese.0 -
Are you suggesting we embargo imports of German cars?TGOHF said:"These three aces we hold in our hand are totally irrelevant" (c) the Tory wimps.
And shut the mini, Rolls Royce, Bentley and Vauxhall factories in the UK.
"Hey, let's play Russian Roulette with a 9mm automatic..."0 -
Paul Kirkby
Inventors & scientists move to lower tax places. And vice versa. https://t.co/UX5HsVYb7G
HT @JimRose69872629 https://t.co/WyTJu7E0St0 -
Oh FFS, and what happened to Sterling and GDP during the last Labour government, and we managed to survive that, with nothing return. Its idiotic to bang on like a few percent fall in GDP or Sterling will be anything more than a bit uncomfortable, and will open the possibilities of many more trading markets.Richard_Nabavi said:
Some pretty daft claims from the Leave side as well, the most recent one at the end of the last thread being the utterly bonkers suggestion that the fall in sterling over the last few months is unrelated to Brexit fears.Plato_Says said:I'm expecting 3yrs. It's the ridiculous comparison with Greenland I'm laughing at.
The dafter the claims, the more convincing Leave becomes.0 -
@IanDunt: Devastating critique of Boris: "A jobbing actor who can play any part convincingly except himself" https://t.co/eFnFCueEHC0
-
We've been waiting over 40 years, the British are a pretty patient bunch.AlastairMeeks said:@Scott_P is making the same point I made on the last thread in a different way. There is a confusion between important and urgent.
The EU will see it as important to conclude exit terms with Britain. It almost certainly will not see it as particularly urgent as compared with the other things in its lap at any given moment.
Britain is not going to get a clear idea of its agreed exit terms for a considerable time.0 -
While its problem now is it is too crap and too left wing.JWisemann said:So as bears repeating again and again, Labour's problem in 2015 was NOT being too left wing, except in the eyes of a tiny minority of (presumably intractable) right wingers. It's problem was being too crap.
0 -
No we are suggesting your posts are getting completely deranged in your newly found Remain fervour and we actually have no idea what you are banging on about. Might be time to take a break and make a cup or tea.. or two.Scott_P said:
Are you suggesting we embargo imports of German cars?TGOHF said:"These three aces we hold in our hand are totally irrelevant" (c) the Tory wimps.
And shut the mini, Rolls Royce, Bentley and Vauxhall factories in the UK.
"Hey, let's play Russian Roulette with a 9mm automatic..."0 -
Because they have the same problem with the Chinese as the Greenlanders have with the EU.rcs1000 said:
EFTA does do trade deals: see http://www.efta.int/free-trade/free-trade-agreementsIndigo said:
EFTA doesn't make trade deals, it just doesn't stop countries from making their own trade deals like the EU does.Philip_Thompson said:Some have said the EFTA make it easier to sign trade deals than the EU so I have a simple question:
What countries, if any, does the EFTA have a trade deal with that the EU doesn't?
What countries, if any, does the EU have a trade deal with that the EFTA doesn't?
Switzerland as a result has a FTA deal with China , Hong Kong, Japan and most of South America, which the EU does not.
http://www.seco.admin.ch/themen/00513/00515/01330/04619/?lang=en
I wouldn't point to the Swiss-Chinese deal personally; it was massively lopsided in favour of the Chinese.0 -
Some PBers seem awfully spooked today.
It's really rather weird. And it's not wearing off.
Boris vs Cameron at 1530. Will ketamine be required?
0 -
Scott would be in favour of nuclear disarmament in case one of our missiles fired itself at London by accident.Scott_P said:
Are you suggesting we embargo imports of German cars?TGOHF said:"These three aces we hold in our hand are totally irrelevant" (c) the Tory wimps.
And shut the mini, Rolls Royce, Bentley and Vauxhall factories in the UK.
"Hey, let's play Russian Roulette with a 9mm automatic..."
0 -
Yep, I'm utterly unsure which way I will vote but anyone using utterly flawed examples will only lead me to vote the other way...Plato_Says said:I'm expecting 3yrs. It's the ridiculous comparison with Greenland I'm laughing at.
The dafter the claims, the more convincing Leave becomes.rcs1000 said:
I think if we are negotiating seven different deals with the EU - a la Switzerland - then it's quite likely to stretch beyond two years. Although I doubt it'd take more than three, three and a half.Plato_Says said:
If, on the other hand, we rejoin EFTA and the EEA, then it could probably be done in 18 months.0 -
"the massive challenge facing those within LAB who want to win elections."
Which is a dwindling number by the looks of things.0 -
But then with EFTA/EEA we'd be signing for free movement of people. While this has benefited the UK, a significant chunk of the potential Leave electorate will not see it that way. Once this is explained to them enough of them will revert to In to sink the refendum for Out. Why do you think DC majored on it straightaway following his return from negotiations?rcs1000 said:
I think if we are negotiating seven different deals with the EU - a la Switzerland - then it's quite likely to stretch beyond two years. Although I doubt it'd take more than three, three and a half.Plato_Says said:
If, on the other hand, we rejoin EFTA and the EEA, then it could probably be done in 18 months.0 -
It was described as a Free Trade Area, but (for example) it restricted Swiss ownership of Chinese financial services firms to 49%, and did not allow Swiss companies to sell financial services products to Chinese. By contrast Chinese firms were allowed to own Swiss banks and to sell financial servives to the Swiss.Pulpstar said:
Like Hinkley Pointrcs1000 said:
I wouldn't point to the Swiss-Chinese deal personally; it was massively lopsided in favour of the Chinese.
?
Likewise, for the crucial issue of Swiss watches, the concession... da da... was to take tariffs down from 12.5% to 7.5% over ten years!
In return for which, the Swiss basically allowed pretty much all Chinese goods in without tariff.
0 -
Hey: I'm an EFTA/EEA fan. I think we would be able to basically allow free movement of people, while having no benefits for immigrants. (Which is what Switzerland has, by the way.)RobC said:
But then with EFTA/EEA we'd be signing for free movement of people. While this has benefited the UK, a significant chunk of the potential Leave electorate will not see it that way. Once this is explained to them enough of them will revert to In to sink the refendum for Out. Why do you think DC majored on it straightaway following his return from negotiations?rcs1000 said:
I think if we are negotiating seven different deals with the EU - a la Switzerland - then it's quite likely to stretch beyond two years. Although I doubt it'd take more than three, three and a half.Plato_Says said:
If, on the other hand, we rejoin EFTA and the EEA, then it could probably be done in 18 months.0 -
'Once this is explained to them enough'
You mean once this falsehood is repeated enough times0 -
Obviously pro 'ever closer union' with the tea cake.FrancisUrquhart said:I would just like to say, as I tuck into a Tunnock's Tea Cake, I am most definitely pro cake, and pro eating it.
0 -
Health, Education, etc etc etc all better under a Labour government...oh wait..
re Health, "no difference between England and Wales according to the OECD"
http://www.healthbusinessuk.net/news/12022016/nhs-wales-no-better-or-worse-england-says-oecd
0 -
0
-
The Swiss system is incredibly hardnosed and sensible, and I would favour it being adopted by the UK, but the Guardianistas, the LDs and the wishy-washy end of the Tory Party would have complete fit about it.rcs1000 said:Hey: I'm an EFTA/EEA fan. I think we would be able to basically allow free movement of people, while having no benefits for immigrants. (Which is what Switzerland has, by the way.)
1. Swingeing penalties for companies that employ people without correct paperwork, ie directors going to jail.
2. Big incentives for illegal immigrants to shop employers that offer them illegal work, such as a work permit.
3. Complete ban on rough sleeping, balanced by a lot of free hostels and other sleeping places opening
4. No benefits for people that do not have the correct paperwork.
So if you apply properly, play by the rules, turn up, obey the law, and work, you get treated just like everyone else. If you take the piss, break the law, or try and bend the rules, it goes hard for you.
0 -
Does it matter, especially, if Sterling rises or falls. Since we exited ERM, the government, sensibly, hasn't tried to fix Sterling's level.Richard_Nabavi said:
Some pretty daft claims from the Leave side as well, the most recent one at the end of the last thread being the utterly bonkers suggestion that the fall in sterling over the last few months is unrelated to Brexit fears.Plato_Says said:I'm expecting 3yrs. It's the ridiculous comparison with Greenland I'm laughing at.
The dafter the claims, the more convincing Leave becomes.0 -
The chinese seem good at negotiating.rcs1000 said:
Hey: I'm an EFTA/EEA fan. I think we would be able to basically allow free movement of people, while having no benefits for immigrants. (Which is what Switzerland has, by the way.)RobC said:
But then with EFTA/EEA we'd be signing for free movement of people. While this has benefited the UK, a significant chunk of the potential Leave electorate will not see it that way. Once this is explained to them enough of them will revert to In to sink the refendum for Out. Why do you think DC majored on it straightaway following his return from negotiations?rcs1000 said:
I think if we are negotiating seven different deals with the EU - a la Switzerland - then it's quite likely to stretch beyond two years. Although I doubt it'd take more than three, three and a half.Plato_Says said:
If, on the other hand, we rejoin EFTA and the EEA, then it could probably be done in 18 months.0 -
Indeed, as someone fairly centrist I find the major challenges of the 97-10 era come mainly from the left of my position not the right:Wanderer said:
Labour was not too left wing at the last election. It was indeed too crap and (this may amount to the same thing) left wing in a unconvincing way.JWisemann said:So as bears repeating again and again, Labour's problem in 2015 was NOT being too left wing, except in the eyes of a tiny minority of (presumably intractable) right wingers. It's problem was being too crap.
Right now Labour is both too left wing and too crap.
- What should intervention look like given successes (eventually) like ex-Yugoslavia and conspicuous failures like Iraq? (answer to be found somewhere on the cautious left)
- Any government system obviously means redistribution of some form, but given 97-10 increased inequality, what is the optimal amount of that? (answer on the left somewhere)
- Business (de)regulation failed badly in the crash, but what should sensible regulated capitalism look like (answer in the moderate left and in history)
- The long-term blight of high economic inactivity triggered and the role of monetarism and globalisation in that (traditionally left, but willing to consider that the right may have some answers here)
The main challenge from the right is:
- Did government spend too much - Brown spent on the toppish end from a low-debt base, in a way that would have been very manageable in a 2% 2yr downturn, but was very difficult and we are just about squeaking it in a 6% 6yr downturn. (the challenge may come from the right, but I've not come to the same conclusions as the right)
The trouble was the answers from Labour were too piecemeal, not that they too left wing, but that there was no narrative thread.0 -
Err, whoever said that a fall in sterling was a bad thing in itself? Not me, and not anyone else as far as I knowIndigo said:Oh FFS, and what happened to Sterling and GDP during the last Labour government, and we managed to survive that, with nothing return. Its idiotic to bang on like a few percent fall in GDP or Sterling will be anything more than a bit uncomfortable, and will open the possibilities of many more trading markets.
However, only a half-wit would fail to ask what is behind sterling being marked down on Brexit fears.
Really, Plato was complaining about daft arguments. The argument that there is no likelihood of short- to medium-term economic damage on a Leave result is utterly bonkers. Sane Leavers should accept it and move on, arguing that it's an acceptable cost. They could even argue with some credibility that it would be a temporary effect only, and that we'd recover the lost ground in a couple of years' time.
But arguing that there won't be any effect over the transition period is just silly.0 -
Indeed, Sterling has moved 30+% in the last 7-8 years, and here we are crying about where it might move 3-6% in the next three years. Some people need to get a grip.Sean_F said:
Does it matter, especially, if Sterling rises or falls. Since we exited ERM, the government, sensibly, hasn't tried to fix Sterling's level.Richard_Nabavi said:
Some pretty daft claims from the Leave side as well, the most recent one at the end of the last thread being the utterly bonkers suggestion that the fall in sterling over the last few months is unrelated to Brexit fears.Plato_Says said:I'm expecting 3yrs. It's the ridiculous comparison with Greenland I'm laughing at.
The dafter the claims, the more convincing Leave becomes.0 -
On topic.
If you want to be popular in the Labour party you need to confront Benn and Kendall.
On europe.
A free trade deal is easy due to the massive goods deficit, put the squeeze on Ireland and you get your way on free movement of people and agriculture goods.
The big battle will be on services, where every EU capital will imagine it's self being the new financial capital, though there is an obvious opportunity for divide and conquer.
On the GOP race.
New poll out from Massachusetts (voting in 9 days) by Emerson:
https://twitter.com/EmersonPolling/status/701597982194540544
0 -
True, currencies rise and fall all the time.Indigo said:
Indeed, Sterling has moved 30+% in the last 7-8 years, and here we are crying about where it might move 3-6% in the next three years. Some people need to get a grip.Sean_F said:
Does it matter, especially, if Sterling rises or falls. Since we exited ERM, the government, sensibly, hasn't tried to fix Sterling's level.Richard_Nabavi said:
Some pretty daft claims from the Leave side as well, the most recent one at the end of the last thread being the utterly bonkers suggestion that the fall in sterling over the last few months is unrelated to Brexit fears.Plato_Says said:I'm expecting 3yrs. It's the ridiculous comparison with Greenland I'm laughing at.
The dafter the claims, the more convincing Leave becomes.0 -
O/T Bizarre that Rubio is now clear 2nd favourite to Clinton to be next POTUS.
Not won a contest and is the proud possessor of 10 delegates out of the 103 decided so far...0 -
Did anyone get back to you?JamesM said:FPP:
Good afternoon all. After a few months away from PB.com post-General Election, I return to this site when another huge moment arrives for the country. This website really is superb for discussing the big issues.
Could anyone direct me to where I can download the actual final agreement Cameron got from last week's summit? Also I heard an excellent extract from a comment Tony Benn made about the EC (as was) severing the umbilical cord of democracy - anyone know this quotation? Thanks in advance.
politico.eu/article/full-text-of-deal-changing-britain-eu-membership-brexit-referendum/0 -
No one is making any such argument. The argument is that its an insignificant amount compared to how much it has moved in the last 7-8 years, and it didnt result in massive changes for the country, so suggesting that these relatively minor changes of (using your numbers 1-2% of GDP/Value) per year are not going to be more than inconvenient in national terms.Richard_Nabavi said:
Err, whoever said that a fall in sterling was a bad thing in itself? Not me, and not anyone else as far as I knowIndigo said:Oh FFS, and what happened to Sterling and GDP during the last Labour government, and we managed to survive that, with nothing return. Its idiotic to bang on like a few percent fall in GDP or Sterling will be anything more than a bit uncomfortable, and will open the possibilities of many more trading markets.
However, only a half-wit would fail to ask what is behind sterling being marked down on Brexit fears.
Really, Plato was complaining about daft arguments. The argument that there is no likelihood of short- to medium-term economic damage on a Leave result is utterly bonkers. Sane Leavers should accept it and move on, arguing that it's an acceptable cost. They could even argue with some credibility that it would be a temporary effect only, and that we'd recover the lost ground in a couple of years' time.
But arguing that there won't be any effect over the transition period is just silly.
If Labour win in 2025 the economy will get screwed by probably more than an order of magnitude more than the projected change for BrExit, and we will get nothing for it. Yet you are quibbling about a economic cost of a fraction of that amount for the ability to open new markets and trade with new partners. I find you lack of faith (in your country) disturbing
0 -
True but your argument is to some extent predicated up the assumption the EU not only survives but proceeds with its snail's pace growth for that period.Richard_Nabavi said:
Err, whoever said that a fall in sterling was a bad thing in itself? Not me, and not anyone else as far as I knowIndigo said:Oh FFS, and what happened to Sterling and GDP during the last Labour government, and we managed to survive that, with nothing return. Its idiotic to bang on like a few percent fall in GDP or Sterling will be anything more than a bit uncomfortable, and will open the possibilities of many more trading markets.
However, only a half-wit would fail to ask what is behind sterling being marked down on Brexit fears.
Really, Plato was complaining about daft arguments. The argument that there is no likelihood of short- to medium-term economic damage on a Leave result is utterly bonkers. Sane Leavers should accept it and move on, arguing that it's an acceptable cost. They could even argue with some credibility that it would be a temporary effect only, and that we'd recover the lost ground in a couple of years' time.
But arguing that there won't be any effect over the transition period is just silly.
Right now, that is a pretty big assumption.0 -
@bbclaurak: PM statement at 3.30- will be lots of huffing and puffing in Chamber about whether an Out vote would trigger immediate mechanism to leave
Which part of this are Boris and his fans struggling with?0 -
Not as good as they would be if Jiangsu, Xinjiang and Sichuan all had their own bilateral deals.Pulpstar said:
The chinese seem good at negotiating.rcs1000 said:
Hey: I'm an EFTA/EEA fan. I think we would be able to basically allow free movement of people, while having no benefits for immigrants. (Which is what Switzerland has, by the way.)RobC said:
But then with EFTA/EEA we'd be signing for free movement of people. While this has benefited the UK, a significant chunk of the potential Leave electorate will not see it that way. Once this is explained to them enough of them will revert to In to sink the refendum for Out. Why do you think DC majored on it straightaway following his return from negotiations?rcs1000 said:
I think if we are negotiating seven different deals with the EU - a la Switzerland - then it's quite likely to stretch beyond two years. Although I doubt it'd take more than three, three and a half.Plato_Says said:
If, on the other hand, we rejoin EFTA and the EEA, then it could probably be done in 18 months. 0 -
Ignoring completely the fact that almost the entirety of this negotiation was over how to continue unrestricted free trade with Denmark - of which Greenland remained a part - particularly regarding fishing, whilst having a separate FTA with the EU of which Denmark was now a part.Scott_P said:@tombradby: Preparing for the @agendaitv tonight, encountered this; When Greenland left in 1982, it spent 3 years negotiating a trade deal with the EEC.
@tombradby: The country had a population of 50,000 - a quarter of the size of the London Borough of Camden. And the deal was over 1 industry; fishing.
0 -
His nomination price is even more baffling, at least he was a healthy implied 2.40 or so to beat the Dems last time I checked.RodCrosby said:O/T Bizarre that Rubio is now clear 2nd favourite to Clinton to be next POTUS.
Not won a contest and is the proud possessor of 10 delegates out of the 103 decided so far...
Trump's POTUS price is huge.0 -
Fine, you concede the point. We are getting somewhere. We are agreed that:Indigo said:
No one is making any such argument. The argument is that its an insignificant amount compared to how much it has moved in the last 7-8 years, and it didnt result in massive changes for the country, so suggesting that these relatively minor changes of (using your numbers 1-2% of GDP/Value) per year are not going to be more than inconvenient in national terms.Richard_Nabavi said:
Err, whoever said that a fall in sterling was a bad thing in itself? Not me, and not anyone else as far as I knowIndigo said:Oh FFS, and what happened to Sterling and GDP during the last Labour government, and we managed to survive that, with nothing return. Its idiotic to bang on like a few percent fall in GDP or Sterling will be anything more than a bit uncomfortable, and will open the possibilities of many more trading markets.
However, only a half-wit would fail to ask what is behind sterling being marked down on Brexit fears.
Really, Plato was complaining about daft arguments. The argument that there is no likelihood of short- to medium-term economic damage on a Leave result is utterly bonkers. Sane Leavers should accept it and move on, arguing that it's an acceptable cost. They could even argue with some credibility that it would be a temporary effect only, and that we'd recover the lost ground in a couple of years' time.
But arguing that there won't be any effect over the transition period is just silly.
If Labour win in 2025 the economy will get screwed by probably more than an order of magnitude more than the projected change for BrExit, and we will get nothing for it. Yet you are quibbling about a economic cost of a fraction of that amount for the ability to open new markets and trade with new partners. I find you lack of faith (in your country) disturbing
(a) Sterling is falling partly because of Brexit fears
(b) That is because of concerns that the economy will be damaged by Brexit in the short- to medium-term.
So can we all now stop pretending otherwise?0 -
'Sane Leavers should accept it and move on, arguing that it's an acceptable cost. They could even argue with some credibility that it would be a temporary effect only, and that we'd recover the lost ground in a couple of years' time.'
zzzz Richard this really is a very old rhetorical trick you are trying you know. Stake out a position that's not quite as extreme as the one your side is pushing and invite 'reasonable' people to join you in the 'centre' which you yourself have defined.
Then you tell us 'aha they accept xx billion of economic damage is likely'.
Sorry not playing that silly game0 -
If he wins second place in Nevada tomorrow, expect his price to tighten.RodCrosby said:O/T Bizarre that Rubio is now clear 2nd favourite to Clinton to be next POTUS.
Not won a contest and is the proud possessor of 10 delegates out of the 103 decided so far...0 -
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/12168329/The-BBC-thinks-all-Eurosceptics-are-frothing-extremists.-How-can-we-trust-it-to-be-neutral.html
They don’t mean it, of course, but the BBC bias against the Leave camp starts long before even the first question is asked on air.
I know from first-hand experience the look of horrified pity that I get from BBC producers when I say that I am a Eurosceptic, which is something akin to the mixture of revulsion and bemusement they would feel if I had just confessed to a secret passion for killing puppies while listening to Barry Manilow’s greatest hits.
I say this more in sorrow than in anger, as a staunch admirer and supporter of the BBC as a world-class British institution, but the truth is that many BBC employees, like those of the Guardian newspaper, move in a world where they rarely come across people with different views from their own.0 -
Completely off topic: I have come from a pensions seminar on the various decisions which need to be taken re my pension.
The summary is that, having done the right thing and saved and saved, I am going to be screwed over by the government if my savings do well and taxed at penal rates. Even so the amount that the government will allow me will not bring me untold riches in retirement. Meanwhile MPs get a fantastic pension not subject to any of the restrictions or penal taxation inflicted on us plebs.
And there is also the risk that Osborne will hammer pensions even more in next month's Budget.
As always, those who try and do the right thing get screwed over in this country.
At this precise moment, I could not care less about the arguments, ishoos or personalities. What I intend doing with my vote at whatever opportunity comes my way is to use it to send a rocket up the arse of the smug, self-satisfied, plundering, ignorant political class.0 -
@RuthDavidsonMSP: Now, let me think, where have I heard this referendum trope before.... https://t.co/TiRgEnpn5v0
-
But has Fox onside - that is worth millions in campaigning time. Depends on when the others drop out.RodCrosby said:O/T Bizarre that Rubio is now clear 2nd favourite to Clinton to be next POTUS.
Not won a contest and is the proud possessor of 10 delegates out of the 103 decided so far...0 -
There is a massive disconnect between the betting markets and polling reality, it was evidenced in the past with Christie and Jeb.RodCrosby said:O/T Bizarre that Rubio is now clear 2nd favourite to Clinton to be next POTUS.
Not won a contest and is the proud possessor of 10 delegates out of the 103 decided so far...
Bush was polling for months in single digits even going down bellow 5% but the betting markets still had him as the favourite until late October.0 -
The whole output today can be summarized by the main headline on the front page...Plato_Says said:They don’t mean it, of course, but the BBC bias against the Leave camp starts long before even the first question is asked on air.
I know from first-hand experience the look of horrified pity that I get from BBC producers when I say that I am a Eurosceptic, which is something akin to the mixture of revulsion and bemusement they would feel if I had just confessed to a secret passion for killing puppies while listening to Barry Manilow’s greatest hits.
I say this more in sorrow than in anger, as a staunch admirer and supporter of the BBC as a world-class British institution, but the truth is that many BBC employees, like those of the Guardian newspaper, move in a world where they rarely come across people with different views from their own.
Leaving EU 'big gamble'...
And it will be this for another 100 days.0 -
I'm not sure quite what you mean by that. My expectation is that the Eurozone would also be hit by the uncertainty and turmoil following a Leave vote. Some people have argued that it would be hit more than us. I don't go that far, but I'd expect a fair amount of damage on top of what is already a pretty poor performance. Of course that in itself affects us as well.taffys said:True but your argument is to some extent predicated up the assumption the EU not only survives but proceeds with its snail's pace growth for that period.
Right now, that is a pretty big assumption.
This is one reason why I think both sides would want to put in place a new deal as soon as possible.0 -
How about providing some evidence it's a falsehood? Certainly Dave seems to believe it - as I said it was his opening gambit following conclusion of the deal. He knows it works.runnymede said:'Once this is explained to them enough'
You mean once this falsehood is repeated enough times0 -
'Most Popular' on the BBC news stories.. 'Johnson admits 'i wasn't good person''
Maybe the BBC should be more careful when there's two high profile Johnson's in the news..0 -
Good afternoon all. I read that report. Thoroughly. The primary finding was that it is very hard to do a comparative study of the three major health services because of the paucity of data and the different sampling methods used.llef said:Health, Education, etc etc etc all better under a Labour government...oh wait..
re Health, "no difference between England and Wales according to the OECD"
http://www.healthbusinessuk.net/news/12022016/nhs-wales-no-better-or-worse-england-says-oecd
The conclusion that there is not a huge difference between the health services was based on life expectancy, where England leads Wales by a year or two, who in turn leads Scotland by a year or two.
There are some useful NHS Wales reports in the public domain which highlight the real issues for the Welsh health system.
As a user of the Welsh system, it's (as you might expect) a curate's egg.0 -
'Certainly Dave seems to believe it '
Oh well that proves it then.
Please...0 -
Where did I pretend otherwise. Stop cherry picking.Richard_Nabavi said:
Fine, you concede the point. We are getting somewhere. We are agreed that:Indigo said:
No one is making any such argument. The argument is that its an insignificant amount compared to how much it has moved in the last 7-8 years, and it didnt result in massive changes for the country, so suggesting that these relatively minor changes of (using your numbers 1-2% of GDP/Value) per year are not going to be more than inconvenient in national terms.Richard_Nabavi said:
Err, whoever said that a fall in sterling was a bad thing in itself? Not me, and not anyone else as far as I knowIndigo said:Oh FFS, and what happened to Sterling and GDP during the last Labour government, and we managed to survive that, with nothing return. Its idiotic to bang on like a few percent fall in GDP or Sterling will be anything more than a bit uncomfortable, and will open the possibilities of many more trading markets.
However, only a half-wit would fail to ask what is behind sterling being marked down on Brexit fears.
Really, Plato was complaining about daft arguments. The argument that there is no likelihood of short- to medium-term economic damage on a Leave result is utterly bonkers. Sane Leavers should accept it and move on, arguing that it's an acceptable cost. They could even argue with some credibility that it would be a temporary effect only, and that we'd recover the lost ground in a couple of years' time.
But arguing that there won't be any effect over the transition period is just silly.
If Labour win in 2025 the economy will get screwed by probably more than an order of magnitude more than the projected change for BrExit, and we will get nothing for it. Yet you are quibbling about a economic cost of a fraction of that amount for the ability to open new markets and trade with new partners. I find you lack of faith (in your country) disturbing
(a) Sterling is falling partly because of Brexit fears
(b) That is because of concerns that the economy will be damaged by Brexit in the short- to medium-term.
So can we all now stop pretending otherwise?
The fall is insignificant, utterly insignificant, Sterling has move 4 cents against the dollar this week, three of those four happened before Boris.
Sterling has moved 9% in the last year, so you will forgive me if I don't get that excited about your projections of losing 1-2% per year.
UK GDP got completely shafted by Labour for no return, and that is going to happen periodically because fortunes rise and fall, and yet you quibbled about a much smaller short term hit on GDP with the prospect of substantial increases later.
Your scare story isn't very scary, and your timidity is selling your country and your grand children short.
0 -
Terribly unfortunate accident I am sure....Slackbladder said:'Most Popular' on the BBC news stories.. 'Johnson admits 'i wasn't good person''
Maybe the BBC should be more careful when there's two high profile Johnson's in the news..0 -
If the full process is dragging, could we join EFTA as an interim measure?rcs1000 said:
I think if we are negotiating seven different deals with the EU - a la Switzerland - then it's quite likely to stretch beyond two years. Although I doubt it'd take more than three, three and a half.Plato_Says said:
If, on the other hand, we rejoin EFTA and the EEA, then it could probably be done in 18 months.
0
