Nine years ago today, I went to the Gielgud Theatre and discovered that Daniel Radcliffe is Jewish.
Surely what you discovered is that DR is circumcised; you inferred he is Jewish.
Interestingly Daniel Radcliffe appeared to appear in Sacha Baron Cohen's Film 'Grimsby' catching aids after sitting next to an aids sufferer who was shot and whose blood he accidentally swallowed.
At the end of the film the credits announced 'Daniel Radcliffe was played by a look alike' which answered the question which puzzled me for the second half of the film. Why would he accept a bit part in the most vulgar and tasteless film ever made? And raised another question; Don't actors have a copywrite on themselves?
Made the mistake of going to see this last night. A huge comic potential squandered. Just way too crass and unfunny for most of the time.
Definitly NOT recommended
The night before however I saw Deadpool which is a genuinely funny film and we'll worth watching.
Deadpool was awesome. I have never heard a cinema audience laugh so much during one film.
Right from the opening credits too, a hilarious film throughout.
I've seen it several times, and it just keeps on getting better.
I'm going to have to see it again and change the habit of a lifetime and see it with an open mind!
"He also called for the EU to introduce stronger employment rights to stop the exploitation of migrant workers undercutting wage rates."
Really looking forward to hearing the detail on how that works, Jeremy. Seems migrant workers have to be paid the full wage rates that would apply if there weren't migrants prepared to undercut those rates, huh?
Well, that will stick a nought on the number of migrants looking to come to the EU for a start....
Remember though that it's on public record that the Labour leadership (ie Corbyn and McDonnell) don't believe in borders and think everyone should be allowed to move anywhere.
OK, lets have fifty thousand Tories move to each of Islington North and Hayes and Harlington - and see how sanguine they are about borders then...
Iain Duncan Smith is gabbling and looking manic. To make his case he needs to slow down and seem more measured. He is no doubt firing up true believers but he's looking very off putting for anyone not completely signed up for Leave.
VoteLeave We are delighted that respected MP Gisela Stuart has agreed to join our board
Vote Leave have the major players on the Leave side, now.
And still a month in which to poach a few of the Grassroots players, before the EC decision. Some must surely be thinking "oooooops....." Farage and Galloway off in their own little play pen would be the ideal outcome.
I don't understand what happened with Kate Hoey - she's always struck me as a sensible sort of person.
VoteLeave We are delighted that respected MP Gisela Stuart has agreed to join our board
Vote Leave have the major players on the Leave side, now.
Is Gisela Stuart a major player? Doesn't it show the paucity for the leavers that she even merits a mention? As I remember apart from her bizarre decision to be the ONLY Labour MP to support W's re election she is rather less well known than our own Nick Palmer
@edmundintokyo The turnout figures are pretty much a reverse of 2008 though.
Right, since the sample is mainly South Carolina this would suggest that there was something unprecedented going on in the Dem race in 2008 that was particularly interesting to the demographics there. For example, maybe there are lots of SC voters with surnames beginning with "O", and it was the first time a candidate with a surname beginning with "O" had been a plausible contender for president. Or something like that anyway.
Ian Duncan Smith says on Marr that once we are out the EU will agree a trade deal allowing us to ristrict free movement of labour but cannot show any evidence of this. This is wing and a prayer stuff
It looks like a sound argument on the balance of probabilities.
There is an EU trade surplus of £61bn sitting in Leave's pocket.
I am stunned how bad Ian Duncan Smith was on Marr. I have said that I will vote leave if leave can provide a convincing argument that we will have a trade deal without free movement and all he could say to Marr was that will happen with absolutely no evidence. This is ' a leap in the dark' stuff
Ian Duncan Smith says on Marr that once we are out the EU will agree a trade deal allowing us to ristrict free movement of labour but cannot show any evidence of this. This is wing and a prayer stuff
With other countries they have accepted free movement of labour *where you have a confirmed job offer* (ie no work permits) but given up on the right to move to the partner country to (a) look for work or (b) to claim benefits. I don't know what the position is on forcing all applications to be considered across the EU pool before you can offer it to a non-EU citizen.
If we can achieve that it would be a real result for those who suffer most from uncontrolled immigration
Ian Duncan Smith says on Marr that once we are out the EU will agree a trade deal allowing us to ristrict free movement of labour but cannot show any evidence of this. This is wing and a prayer stuff
It looks like a sound argument on the balance of probabilities.
There is an EU trade surplus of £61bn sitting in Leave's pocket.
Do you think the trade surplus will vanish without a deal ?
VoteLeave We are delighted that respected MP Gisela Stuart has agreed to join our board
That's potentially very significant for the decision which Leave team gets official status.
They're getting all the grown ups
Which means that GO will get the nomination - just so that the acrimony between the two organisations will dominate the press between April and a week in May.
Ian Duncan Smith says on Marr that once we are out the EU will agree a trade deal allowing us to ristrict free movement of labour but cannot show any evidence of this. This is wing and a prayer stuff
It looks like a sound argument on the balance of probabilities.
There is an EU trade surplus of £61bn sitting in Leave's pocket.
It's loopy. Proportionately the EU makes up a far greater portion of British exports than the UK makes up of EU exports. Britain is in no position to be imposing preconditions.
I am stunned how bad Ian Duncan Smith was on Marr. I have said that I will vote leave if leave can provide a convincing argument that we will have a trade deal without free movement and all he could say to Marr was that will happen with absolutely no evidence. This is ' a leap in the dark' stuff
This is why IDS was removed as Leader. IDS is fighting yesterdays battles like many tories. A battle for self justification, not for what is best for the UK or the tories. Labour are laughing their socks off. Speaking of which I take due note of Dr Sox's somewhat happy tone at the dimness of tory outers
VoteLeave We are delighted that respected MP Gisela Stuart has agreed to join our board
Vote Leave have the major players on the Leave side, now.
And still a month in which to poach a few of the Grassroots players, before the EC decision. Some must surely be thinking "oooooops....." Farage and Galloway off in their own little play pen would be the ideal outcome.
I don't understand what happened with Kate Hoey - she's always struck me as a sensible sort of person.
@edmundintokyo The turnout figures are pretty much a reverse of 2008 though.
Right, since the sample is mainly South Carolina this would suggest that there was something unprecedented going on in the Dem race in 2008 that was particularly interesting to the demographics there. For example, maybe there are lots of SC voters with surnames beginning with "O", and it was the first time a candidate with a surname beginning with "O" had been a plausible contender for president. Or something like that anyway.
GOP ahead on turnout if you exclude South Carolina. Right, since the sample is NH, IA, NV this would suggest that there was something unprecedented going on in the Rep race in 2016 that was particularly interesting to the demographics there. For example, maybe there are lots of NH, IA, NV voters with surnames beginning with "T", and it was the first time a candidate with a surname beginning with "T" had been a plausible contender for president. Or something like that anyway.
I am stunned how bad Ian Duncan Smith was on Marr. I have said that I will vote leave if leave can provide a convincing argument that we will have a trade deal without free movement and all he could say to Marr was that will happen with absolutely no evidence. This is ' a leap in the dark' stuff
You have the choice between a leap on the dark - or more accurately a stroll on the shadows of certainty - and the absolute garauntee of closer union and more EU control. That is the choice you are making
Ian Duncan Smith says on Marr that once we are out the EU will agree a trade deal allowing us to ristrict free movement of labour but cannot show any evidence of this. This is wing and a prayer stuff
It looks like a sound argument on the balance of probabilities.
There is an EU trade surplus of £61bn sitting in Leave's pocket.
Do not talk cobblers. A free trade deal will involve free movement of labour, unless you want to tow the UK to just offshore Connecticut.
Ian Duncan Smith says on Marr that once we are out the EU will agree a trade deal allowing us to ristrict free movement of labour but cannot show any evidence of this. This is wing and a prayer stuff
It looks like a sound argument on the balance of probabilities.
There is an EU trade surplus of £61bn sitting in Leave's pocket.
It's loopy. Proportionately the EU makes up a far greater portion of British exports than the UK makes up of EU exports. Britain is in no position to be imposing preconditions.</blockquo
Voters want immigration controlled. Trade for them is a whatever, small print issue. They'll take what they can get. Ifn they can't get much, they will live with it.
Ian Duncan Smith says on Marr that once we are out the EU will agree a trade deal allowing us to ristrict free movement of labour but cannot show any evidence of this. This is wing and a prayer stuff
It looks like a sound argument on the balance of probabilities.
There is an EU trade surplus of £61bn sitting in Leave's pocket.
It's loopy. Proportionately the EU makes up a far greater portion of British exports than the UK makes up of EU exports. Britain is in no position to be imposing preconditions.
That's one of those occasions where "voters" means "I" and "they" means "I" also.
I am stunned how bad Ian Duncan Smith was on Marr. I have said that I will vote leave if leave can provide a convincing argument that we will have a trade deal without free movement and all he could say to Marr was that will happen with absolutely no evidence. This is ' a leap in the dark' stuff
This is why IDS was removed as Leader. IDS is fighting yesterdays battles like many tories. A battle for self justification, not for what is best for the UK or the tories. Labour are laughing their socks off. Speaking of which I take due note of Dr Sox's somewhat happy tone at the dimness of tory outers
I doubt if there's much laughter in the Labour Party, right now.
Ian Duncan Smith says on Marr that once we are out the EU will agree a trade deal allowing us to ristrict free movement of labour but cannot show any evidence of this. This is wing and a prayer stuff
It looks like a sound argument on the balance of probabilities.
There is an EU trade surplus of £61bn sitting in Leave's pocket.
It's loopy. Proportionately the EU makes up a far greater portion of British exports than the UK makes up of EU exports. Britain is in no position to be imposing preconditions.
Yet another lunatic Europhile who thinks the EU will cut their own throats to spite the UK. If you think they are that malicious and vindictive why do you want to stay with them? It is utter stupidity.
If it is Osborne, he might not get many votes in 2020.
Corbyn will get even less.
9 mill vs 7.5 mill coming up.
Not sure about Osbo, but convinced no more than 6.5m would wake up on polling day and think 'well, I know he is fond of dubious organisations, can't do up his tie, wants to think about giving away British territories, talks about joining up with other hard left European parties, refuses to sing the national anthem, is more concerned about launching nuclear subs without missiles and is basically the political branch of the STWC, but I'll vote for him today'.
This may be my Sion Simon moment, of course.....
Pol Pot & Hitler's love child would get 6.5 million with a red rosette.
We'll see the hard minima for Labour's vote anyhow.
Not necessarily. SLAB thought they always had a large vote in Scotland. Things are changing.
@tnewtondunn: IDS sets down "red lines" to the EU under Brexit, no trade deals unless UK can hinder freedom of movement. Bold, minister. #Marr
Iain Duncan Smith reminding us why he is considered the worst Tory leader of recent times
And from what I read in the supermarket headlines the tory faithful - sorry, lunatic dipstick cretins - are lining up for the second time to sack their best leader ever. Its not leaders that go bonkers after 10 years its the dimwit morons in the membership. Corbynism seconds that.
I am stunned how bad Ian Duncan Smith was on Marr. I have said that I will vote leave if leave can provide a convincing argument that we will have a trade deal without free movement and all he could say to Marr was that will happen with absolutely no evidence. This is ' a leap in the dark' stuff
You have the choice between a leap on the dark - or more accurately a stroll on the shadows of certainty - and the absolute garauntee of closer union and more EU control. That is the choice you are making
You seem to tacitly accept that leave is a leap in the dark. As far as remain is concerned the EU is in meltdown and it is facing many challenges. That is why my decision will be neutral until much nearer the time
Ian Duncan Smith says on Marr that once we are out the EU will agree a trade deal allowing us to ristrict free movement of labour but cannot show any evidence of this. This is wing and a prayer stuff
It looks like a sound argument on the balance of probabilities.
There is an EU trade surplus of £61bn sitting in Leave's pocket.
It's loopy. Proportionately the EU makes up a far greater portion of British exports than the UK makes up of EU exports. Britain is in no position to be imposing preconditions.
Yet another lunatic Europhile who thinks the EU will cut their own throats to spite the UK. If you think they are that malicious and vindictive why do you want to stay with them? It is utter stupidity.
Ian Duncan Smith says on Marr that once we are out the EU will agree a trade deal allowing us to ristrict free movement of labour but cannot show any evidence of this. This is wing and a prayer stuff
It looks like a sound argument on the balance of probabilities.
There is an EU trade surplus of £61bn sitting in Leave's pocket.
It's loopy. Proportionately the EU makes up a far greater portion of British exports than the UK makes up of EU exports. Britain is in no position to be imposing preconditions.
Yet another lunatic Europhile who thinks the EU will cut their own throats to spite the UK. If you think they are that malicious and vindictive why do you want to stay with them? It is utter stupidity.
Read what I wrote.
I do not suggest that the EU wouldn't agree to a free trade deal. I do suggest that it won't agree to the moonbeams, unicorn and pixie dust type of deal that too many Leavers advocate.
Ian Duncan Smith says on Marr that once we are out the EU will agree a trade deal allowing us to ristrict free movement of labour but cannot show any evidence of this. This is wing and a prayer stuff
It looks like a sound argument on the balance of probabilities.
There is an EU trade surplus of £61bn sitting in Leave's pocket.
Do not talk cobblers. A free trade deal will involve free movement of labour, unless you want to tow the UK to just offshore Connecticut.
Will it involve the unfettered right to come to the UK to look for work?
If it is Osborne, he might not get many votes in 2020.
Corbyn will get even less.
9 mill vs 7.5 mill coming up.
Not sure about Osbo, but convinced no more than 6.5m would wake up on polling day and think 'well, I know he is fond of dubious organisations, can't do up his tie, wants to think about giving away British territories, talks about joining up with other hard left European parties, refuses to sing the national anthem, is more concerned about launching nuclear subs without missiles and is basically the political branch of the STWC, but I'll vote for him today'.
This may be my Sion Simon moment, of course.....
Pol Pot & Hitler's love child would get 6.5 million with a red rosette.
We'll see the hard minima for Labour's vote anyhow.
Not necessarily. SLAB thought they always had a large vote in Scotland. Things are changing.
Hmm there is no serious left wing party in England though, so it is Labour by default for alot of people.
SC confirms that HRC is still struggling to win over the all important white vote as shes loses that crucial demographic again. Low turnout again too for the Democrats, only in NH, where it was driven by Sanders, was there a respectable turnout.
Regarding LePage's endorsement of Trump there is a lot of Trump in LePage. LePage is one of the least politically correct elected officials that you will find, all while doing it in Maine. He told the NAACP to kiss his butt a few years back among other comments (http://edition.cnn.com/2016/01/07/politics/paul-lepage-maine-heroin/).
LePage’s 2014 Re-election was a surprise and to some extent one can draw similarities to Trump’s campaign this year. LePage’s approval ratings were supposedly low (low 40′s) and like Trump today, so were his favorability ratings. He was supposed to lose close in a three way race to the Democrat, but instead nearly hit 50% and won by 5 points.
The Jan Brewer endorsement for Trump is also a very important one.
Ian Duncan Smith says on Marr that once we are out the EU will agree a trade deal allowing us to ristrict free movement of labour but cannot show any evidence of this. This is wing and a prayer stuff
It looks like a sound argument on the balance of probabilities.
There is an EU trade surplus of £61bn sitting in Leave's pocket.
Do not talk cobblers. A free trade deal will involve free movement of labour, unless you want to tow the UK to just offshore Connecticut.
Its not cobblers when both Canada and South Korea have free trade without free movement in reality. Remain supporters never address this.
"He also called for the EU to introduce stronger employment rights to stop the exploitation of migrant workers undercutting wage rates."
Really looking forward to hearing the detail on how that works, Jeremy. Seems migrant workers have to be paid the full wage rates that would apply if there weren't migrants prepared to undercut those rates, huh?
Well, that will stick a nought on the number of migrants looking to come to the EU for a start....
Remember though that it's on public record that the Labour leadership (ie Corbyn and McDonnell) don't believe in borders and think everyone should be allowed to move anywhere.
OK, lets have fifty thousand Tories move to each of Islington North and Hayes and Harlington - and see how sanguine they are about borders then...
Well, interesting you mention constituency borders - Labour are of course fixated (as in, dogmatically opposed, for vested interest) with the idea that they should or can be redrawn to reflect more equal electorates.
Some borders are clearly more equal than others (national borders ungood, Labour-held constituency borders doubleplusgood). Classic socialist mindset!
Paul Kirkby Interested in #Brexit ? This is a fascinating history of the UK's entry into the EU, 1971-73. Balanced & eye-opening https://t.co/Zg6x3gQHhl
Ian Duncan Smith says on Marr that once we are out the EU will agree a trade deal allowing us to ristrict free movement of labour but cannot show any evidence of this. This is wing and a prayer stuff
It looks like a sound argument on the balance of probabilities.
There is an EU trade surplus of £61bn sitting in Leave's pocket.
It's loopy. Proportionately the EU makes up a far greater portion of British exports than the UK makes up of EU exports. Britain is in no position to be imposing preconditions.
That's one of those occasions where "voters" means "I" and "they" means "I" also.
Yes well you go ahead and assume that trade is the most important thing to voters if you want. Its your money.
David Smiths column in the ST today which can be read on his blog has some interesting stats on UK growth both before and after the UK joined the EEC. Basically our relative growth was much better after we joined even if our absolute growth wasn't.
It's worth a look but for me the important message is that in or out of the EU membership of the single market is key to our current and future prosperity.
One other startling fact. Apparently our exports of services doubled between 2006 and 2014. Doubled. Our economy is changing faster than we realise.
@edmundintokyo The turnout figures are pretty much a reverse of 2008 though.
Right, since the sample is mainly South Carolina this would suggest that there was something unprecedented going on in the Dem race in 2008 that was particularly interesting to the demographics there. For example, maybe there are lots of SC voters with surnames beginning with "O", and it was the first time a candidate with a surname beginning with "O" had been a plausible contender for president. Or something like that anyway.
GOP ahead on turnout if you exclude South Carolina. Right, since the sample is NH, IA, NV this would suggest that there was something unprecedented going on in the Rep race in 2016 that was particularly interesting to the demographics there. For example, maybe there are lots of NH, IA, NV voters with surnames beginning with "T", and it was the first time a candidate with a surname beginning with "T" had been a plausible contender for president. Or something like that anyway.
Of course turnout is down. Its a race between one realistic candidate and one no hoper. In 2008 it was a battle to wire with two strong candidates.
"He also called for the EU to introduce stronger employment rights to stop the exploitation of migrant workers undercutting wage rates."
Really looking forward to hearing the detail on how that works, Jeremy. Seems migrant workers have to be paid the full wage rates that would apply if there weren't migrants prepared to undercut those rates, huh?
Well, that will stick a nought on the number of migrants looking to come to the EU for a start....
Remember though that it's on public record that the Labour leadership (ie Corbyn and McDonnell) don't believe in borders and think everyone should be allowed to move anywhere.
OK, lets have fifty thousand Tories move to each of Islington North and Hayes and Harlington - and see how sanguine they are about borders then...
Well, interesting you mention constituency borders - Labour are of course fixated (as in, dogmatically opposed, for vested interest) with the idea that they should or can be redrawn to reflect more equal electorates.
Some borders are clearly more equal than others. Classic socialist mindset!
Equalisation is not something I oppose. Cutting the numbers of MPs from 650 to 600 increases the constituency size.
I am stunned how bad Ian Duncan Smith was on Marr. I have said that I will vote leave if leave can provide a convincing argument that we will have a trade deal without free movement and all he could say to Marr was that will happen with absolutely no evidence. This is ' a leap in the dark' stuff
This is why IDS was removed as Leader. IDS is fighting yesterdays battles like many tories. A battle for self justification, not for what is best for the UK or the tories. Labour are laughing their socks off. Speaking of which I take due note of Dr Sox's somewhat happy tone at the dimness of tory outers
I may have been a little intoxicated, but cannot recall a happy tone over Tory outers. Remind me what I said.
Mind you, those Leavers wanting free access to the EU market but close off free movement do have a tough circle to square.
And on a happy note - a rare day for me to cheer on Man U, and Swansea too.
SC confirms that HRC is still struggling to win over the all important white vote as shes loses that crucial demographic again. Low turnout again too for the Democrats, only in NH, where it was driven by Sanders, was there a respectable turnout.
Regarding LePage's endorsement of Trump there is a lot of Trump in LePage. LePage is one of the least politically correct elected officials that you will find, all while doing it in Maine. He told the NAACP to kiss his butt a few years back among other comments (http://edition.cnn.com/2016/01/07/politics/paul-lepage-maine-heroin/).
LePage’s 2014 Re-election was a surprise and to some extent one can draw similarities to Trump’s campaign this year. LePage’s approval ratings were supposedly low (low 40′s) and like Trump today, so were his favorability ratings. He was supposed to lose close in a three way race to the Democrat, but instead nearly hit 50% and won by 5 points.
The Jan Brewer endorsement for Trump is also a very important one.
Clinton won the white vote in South Carolina. I still haven't heard you refer to my offer on Nevada.
@edmundintokyo The turnout figures are pretty much a reverse of 2008 though.
Right, since the sample is mainly South Carolina this would suggest that there was something unprecedented going on in the Dem race in 2008 that was particularly interesting to the demographics there. For example, maybe there are lots of SC voters with surnames beginning with "O", and it was the first time a candidate with a surname beginning with "O" had been a plausible contender for president. Or something like that anyway.
GOP ahead on turnout if you exclude South Carolina. Right, since the sample is NH, IA, NV this would suggest that there was something unprecedented going on in the Rep race in 2016 that was particularly interesting to the demographics there. For example, maybe there are lots of NH, IA, NV voters with surnames beginning with "T", and it was the first time a candidate with a surname beginning with "T" had been a plausible contender for president. Or something like that anyway.
You'd certainly expect Trump would drive turnout, since he's interesting and controversial and you'd think lots of new people would turn out both for and against him. But there's not much of that in the Dem vs Rep numbers. (Maybe it shows up if you compare with previous GOP races.)
Non-SC turnout is basically NH, since the others are caucuses, which is pretty much the quintessential swing state (barely better for Obama in 2012 than his national margin) but that came out at 284,120 vs 250,983, which is a lead for the Republicans, but not by much.
@edmundintokyo The turnout figures are pretty much a reverse of 2008 though.
Right, since the sample is mainly South Carolina this would suggest that there was something unprecedented going on in the Dem race in 2008 that was particularly interesting to the demographics there. For example, maybe there are lots of SC voters with surnames beginning with "O", and it was the first time a candidate with a surname beginning with "O" had been a plausible contender for president. Or something like that anyway.
GOP ahead on turnout if you exclude South Carolina. Right, since the sample is NH, IA, NV this would suggest that there was something unprecedented going on in the Rep race in 2016 that was particularly interesting to the demographics there. For example, maybe there are lots of NH, IA, NV voters with surnames beginning with "T", and it was the first time a candidate with a surname beginning with "T" had been a plausible contender for president. Or something like that anyway.
Of course turnout is down. Its a race between one realistic candidate and one no hoper. In 2008 it was a battle to wire with two strong candidates.
The no hoper that won the bellwether of New Hampshire. Great news for Hillary that...
IDS has moved me towards Remain after that performance.
Leave needs to use more Gove and less IDS in the future.
What rabbit can Gove pull out of the hat? Does he really believe in Leave anyway? I am thinking that at best he wants to be in the EEA which would not make an hap'th of difference to the screaming nutjob anti immigrant buffoons in the green ties. Bleating about sovereignty is not much good when your jobs and inward investment has been exported to Eastern Europe. And who is left after Gove? Who is the last credible believable beacon of coherent sanity standing in Leave. I'll tell you who it is and read his name and weep - its George Galloway. And if he is giving the answer there is something wrong with the question.
I am stunned how bad Ian Duncan Smith was on Marr. I have said that I will vote leave if leave can provide a convincing argument that we will have a trade deal without free movement and all he could say to Marr was that will happen with absolutely no evidence. This is ' a leap in the dark' stuff
This is why IDS was removed as Leader. IDS is fighting yesterdays battles like many tories. A battle for self justification, not for what is best for the UK or the tories. Labour are laughing their socks off. Speaking of which I take due note of Dr Sox's somewhat happy tone at the dimness of tory outers
I may have been a little intoxicated, but cannot recall a happy tone over Tory outers. Remind me what I said.
Mind you, those Leavers wanting free access to the EU market but close off free movement do have a tough circle to square.
And on a happy note - a rare day for me to cheer on Man U, and Swansea too.
IDS has moved me towards Remain after that performance.
Leave needs to use more Gove and less IDS in the future.
I think the interview on Marr with Ian Duncan Smith demonstrates the major problem leave have because his interview will now be the benchmark for leave's case and it is not credible. I would have thought that leave should have agreed a single verifiable position by now and surely Ian Duncan Smith's cannot be that position. Leave need to get their act together
@edmundintokyo The turnout figures are pretty much a reverse of 2008 though.
Right, since the sample is mainly South Carolina this would suggest that there was something unprecedented going on in the Dem race in 2008 that was particularly interesting to the demographics there. For example, maybe there are lots of SC voters with surnames beginning with "O", and it was the first time a candidate with a surname beginning with "O" had been a plausible contender for president. Or something like that anyway.
GOP ahead on turnout if you exclude South Carolina. Right, since the sample is NH, IA, NV this would suggest that there was something unprecedented going on in the Rep race in 2016 that was particularly interesting to the demographics there. For example, maybe there are lots of NH, IA, NV voters with surnames beginning with "T", and it was the first time a candidate with a surname beginning with "T" had been a plausible contender for president. Or something like that anyway.
Of course turnout is down. Its a race between one realistic candidate and one no hoper. In 2008 it was a battle to wire with two strong candidates.
The no hoper that won the bellwether of New Hampshire. Great news for Hillary that...
Its not a bellwether when he is from the state next door.
@edmundintokyo The turnout figures are pretty much a reverse of 2008 though.
Right, since the sample is mainly South Carolina this would suggest that there was something unprecedented going on in the Dem race in 2008 that was particularly interesting to the demographics there. For example, maybe there are lots of SC voters with surnames beginning with "O", and it was the first time a candidate with a surname beginning with "O" had been a plausible contender for president. Or something like that anyway.
GOP ahead on turnout if you exclude South Carolina. Right, since the sample is NH, IA, NV this would suggest that there was something unprecedented going on in the Rep race in 2016 that was particularly interesting to the demographics there. For example, maybe there are lots of NH, IA, NV voters with surnames beginning with "T", and it was the first time a candidate with a surname beginning with "T" had been a plausible contender for president. Or something like that anyway.
You'd certainly expect Trump would drive turnout, since he's interesting and controversial and you'd think lots of new people would turn out both for and against him. But there's not much of that in the Dem vs Rep numbers. (Maybe it shows up if you compare with previous Rep racs.)
Non-SC turnout is basically NH, since the others are caucuses, which is pretty much the quintessential swing state (barely better for Obama in 2012 than his national margin) but that came out at 284,120 vs 250,983, which is a lead for the Republicans, but not by much.
We'll have more data points come Super Tuesday. I'm keeping an eye on it all:
I am stunned how bad Ian Duncan Smith was on Marr. I have said that I will vote leave if leave can provide a convincing argument that we will have a trade deal without free movement and all he could say to Marr was that will happen with absolutely no evidence. This is ' a leap in the dark' stuff
You have the choice between a leap on the dark - or more accurately a stroll on the shadows of certainty - and the absolute garauntee of closer union and more EU control. That is the choice you are making
You seem to tacitly accept that leave is a leap in the dark. As far as remain is concerned the EU is in meltdown and it is facing many challenges. That is why my decision will be neutral until much nearer the time
All life is uncertain. You could walk out of the house and be struck by lightening tomorrow. But you don't spend your life inside.
We know the EU is extremely challenged. And the likely cure is to further integrate which - I personally believe - is something for which there is limited appetite in the UK.
In contrast, for Leave, of course there is a degree of uncertainty. It's the the EU's interest to agree a sensible partnership. But if they don't want to, then the UK will do just fine. We are the world's 5th largest economy, with a wealth of talented people and the resources to exploit the opportunities the world offers us
Mr. Flightpath, Gove's the closest thing to a true believer Cameroon there is. He wouldn't've gone for Leave if he didn't genuinely believe it was in the UK's interest.
Ian Duncan Smith says on Marr that once we are out the EU will agree a trade deal allowing us to ristrict free movement of labour but cannot show any evidence of this. This is wing and a prayer stuff
It looks like a sound argument on the balance of probabilities.
There is an EU trade surplus of £61bn sitting in Leave's pocket.
It's loopy. Proportionately the EU makes up a far greater portion of British exports than the UK makes up of EU exports. Britain is in no position to be imposing preconditions.
Yet another lunatic Europhile who thinks the EU will cut their own throats to spite the UK. If you think they are that malicious and vindictive why do you want to stay with them? It is utter stupidity.
Read what I wrote.
I do not suggest that the EU wouldn't agree to a free trade deal. I do suggest that it won't agree to the moonbeams, unicorn and pixie dust type of deal that too many Leavers advocate.
The trade deficit with the EU is nearly entirely made up of German, Spanish and Dutch components as I recall. The other 25 EU nations may not be that bothered, and may well prioritise free movement over free trade.
@edmundintokyo The turnout figures are pretty much a reverse of 2008 though.
Right, since the sample is mainly South Carolina this would suggest that there was something unprecedented going on in the Dem race in 2008 that was particularly interesting to the demographics there. For example, maybe there are lots of SC voters with surnames beginning with "O", and it was the first time a candidate with a surname beginning with "O" had been a plausible contender for president. Or something like that anyway.
GOP ahead on turnout if you exclude South Carolina. Right, since the sample is NH, IA, NV this would suggest that there was something unprecedented going on in the Rep race in 2016 that was particularly interesting to the demographics there. For example, maybe there are lots of NH, IA, NV voters with surnames beginning with "T", and it was the first time a candidate with a surname beginning with "T" had been a plausible contender for president. Or something like that anyway.
Of course turnout is down. Its a race between one realistic candidate and one no hoper. In 2008 it was a battle to wire with two strong candidates.
The no hoper that won the bellwether of New Hampshire. Great news for Hillary that...
Its not a bellwether when he is from the state next door.
No such love for the Illinois girl next door in sub 50% Iowa
Ian Duncan Smith says on Marr that once we are out the EU will agree a trade deal allowing us to ristrict free movement of labour but cannot show any evidence of this. This is wing and a prayer stuff
It looks like a sound argument on the balance of probabilities.
There is an EU trade surplus of £61bn sitting in Leave's pocket.
Do not talk cobblers. A free trade deal will involve free movement of labour, unless you want to tow the UK to just offshore Connecticut.
Will it involve the unfettered right to come to the UK to look for work?
A so called free trade deal with the EU for any remaining non EU country in Europe will involve free movement of labour. As it stands right now any new non EU European country attempting a deal with the EU would have to sign up to Schengen.
IDS has moved me towards Remain after that performance.
Leave needs to use more Gove and less IDS in the future.
I think the interview on Marr with Ian Duncan Smith demonstrates the major problem leave have because his interview will now be the benchmark for leave's case and it is not credible. I would have thought that leave should have agreed a single verifiable position by now and surely Ian Duncan Smith's cannot be that position. Leave need to get their act together
I did not see it. What was not credible? Any position based arounda bilateral trade agreement?
IDS has moved me towards Remain after that performance.
Leave needs to use more Gove and less IDS in the future.
I think the interview on Marr with Ian Duncan Smith demonstrates the major problem leave have because his interview will now be the benchmark for leave's case and it is not credible. I would have thought that leave should have agreed a single verifiable position by now and surely Ian Duncan Smith's cannot be that position. Leave need to get their act together
I fail to see how the British people being allowed to decide their own immigration policy is 'not credible'. Most nations on earth do it.
Ian Duncan Smith says on Marr that once we are out the EU will agree a trade deal allowing us to ristrict free movement of labour but cannot show any evidence of this. This is wing and a prayer stuff
It looks like a sound argument on the balance of probabilities.
There is an EU trade surplus of £61bn sitting in Leave's pocket.
It's loopy. Proportionately the EU makes up a far greater portion of British exports than the UK makes up of EU exports. Britain is in no position to be imposing preconditions.
Yet another lunatic Europhile who thinks the EU will cut their own throats to spite the UK. If you think they are that malicious and vindictive why do you want to stay with them? It is utter stupidity.
Read what I wrote.
I do not suggest that the EU wouldn't agree to a free trade deal. I do suggest that it won't agree to the moonbeams, unicorn and pixie dust type of deal that too many Leavers advocate.
The trade deficit with the EU is nearly entirely made up of German, Spanish and Dutch components as I recall. The other 25 EU nations may not be that bothered, and may well prioritise free movement over free trade.
Oh shush. It's not as though such an agreement would need all EU countries to agree to it, is it?
@tnewtondunn: IDS sets down "red lines" to the EU under Brexit, no trade deals unless UK can hinder freedom of movement. Bold, minister. #Marr
Iain Duncan Smith reminding us why he is considered the worst Tory leader of recent times
And from what I read in the supermarket headlines the tory faithful - sorry, lunatic dipstick cretins - are lining up for the second time to sack their best leader ever. Its not leaders that go bonkers after 10 years its the dimwit morons in the membership. Corbynism seconds that.
I've never considered that unthinking loyalty to a Leader - or any individual - is a virtue.
We have a referendum. Let's vote according to what we believe to be in the national interest, not in the interest of the PM.
@edmundintokyo The turnout figures are pretty much a reverse of 2008 though.
Right, since the sample is mainly South Carolina this would suggest that there was something unprecedented going on in the Dem race in 2008 that was particularly interesting to the demographics there. For example, maybe there are lots of SC voters with surnames beginning with "O", and it was the first time a candidate with a surname beginning with "O" had been a plausible contender for president. Or something like that anyway.
GOP ahead on turnout if you exclude South Carolina. Right, since the sample is NH, IA, NV this would suggest that there was something unprecedented going on in the Rep race in 2016 that was particularly interesting to the demographics there. For example, maybe there are lots of NH, IA, NV voters with surnames beginning with "T", and it was the first time a candidate with a surname beginning with "T" had been a plausible contender for president. Or something like that anyway.
Of course turnout is down. Its a race between one realistic candidate and one no hoper. In 2008 it was a battle to wire with two strong candidates.
The no hoper that won the bellwether of New Hampshire. Great news for Hillary that...
Its not a bellwether when he is from the state next door.
No such love for the Illinois girl next door in sub 50% Iowa
Clinton has not been senator for Illinois for the last few decades.
@HillaryClinton: "We don’t need to make America great again. America never stopped being great. But we do need to make America whole again." —Hillary in SC
Nice article debunking the bizarre claims Trump hasn't been a successful businessman and that he would have been better off investing in an index tracker. Trump bet big on NY right at the bottom, kudos to Mr Trump.
Ian Duncan Smith says on Marr that once we are out the EU will agree a trade deal allowing us to ristrict free movement of labour but cannot show any evidence of this. This is wing and a prayer stuff
It looks like a sound argument on the balance of probabilities.
There is an EU trade surplus of £61bn sitting in Leave's pocket.
It's loopy. Proportionately the EU makes up a far greater portion of British exports than the UK makes up of EU exports. Britain is in no position to be imposing preconditions.
Yet another lunatic Europhile who thinks the EU will cut their own throats to spite the UK. If you think they are that malicious and vindictive why do you want to stay with them? It is utter stupidity.
If there are any cretins around here - its you. See I said it again. Bit you keep talking bollocks so there. And saying Mr Meeks is a europhile lunatic is bollocks.
What trade arrangement does Canada have with the EU ? I'd have thought being a much bigger economy and having a larger trade deficit we could negotiate something at least as good.
Leave campaign are making the same mistakes of Tories failed campaigns of the past, every day something different and / or nuanced. In campaign is simple, it is "leap in the dark / risk". Just like the way Tory GE 2015 was basically "Ed is weak useless lefty idiot and will be in the pocket of SNP".
At the moment, Leave, one day it is terrorists, then new deal isn't legally binding, then trying to curb unrestricted migration etc etc etc.
David Smiths column in the ST today which can be read on his blog has some interesting stats on UK growth both before and after the UK joined the EEC. Basically our relative growth was much better after we joined even if our absolute growth wasn't.
It's worth a look but for me the important message is that in or out of the EU membership of the single market is key to our current and future prosperity.
One other startling fact. Apparently our exports of services doubled between 2006 and 2014. Doubled. Our economy is changing faster than we realise.
Don't forget that in the 1970s we were a basketcase, so I can see that the uplift from EU membership helped a lot. It's less critical now that the EU is declining and other markets are more substantial.
But, yes, membership of a free trading partnership with EU would be beneficial to the economy. The question is what is the cost of that membership (in all terms, not just financial)
Ian Duncan Smith says on Marr that once we are out the EU will agree a trade deal allowing us to ristrict free movement of labour but cannot show any evidence of this. This is wing and a prayer stuff
It looks like a sound argument on the balance of probabilities.
There is an EU trade surplus of £61bn sitting in Leave's pocket.
It's loopy. Proportionately the EU makes up a far greater portion of British exports than the UK makes up of EU exports. Britain is in no position to be imposing preconditions.
Yet another lunatic Europhile who thinks the EU will cut their own throats to spite the UK. If you think they are that malicious and vindictive why do you want to stay with them? It is utter stupidity.
Read what I wrote.
I do not suggest that the EU wouldn't agree to a free trade deal. I do suggest that it won't agree to the moonbeams, unicorn and pixie dust type of deal that too many Leavers advocate.
The trade deficit with the EU is nearly entirely made up of German, Spanish and Dutch components as I recall. The other 25 EU nations may not be that bothered, and may well prioritise free movement over free trade.
Oh shush. It's not as though such an agreement would need all EU countries to agree to it, is it?
Good job a recession in Germany wouldn't affect the rest of the EU economies then.
IDS has moved me towards Remain after that performance.
Leave needs to use more Gove and less IDS in the future.
I think the interview on Marr with Ian Duncan Smith demonstrates the major problem leave have because his interview will now be the benchmark for leave's case and it is not credible. I would have thought that leave should have agreed a single verifiable position by now and surely Ian Duncan Smith's cannot be that position. Leave need to get their act together
I did not see it. What was not credible? Any position based arounda bilateral trade agreement?
He said that leave would agree a trade agreement that precluded free movement of labour without any evidence
Ian Duncan Smith says on Marr that once we are out the EU will agree a trade deal allowing us to ristrict free movement of labour but cannot show any evidence of this. This is wing and a prayer stuff
It looks like a sound argument on the balance of probabilities.
There is an EU trade surplus of £61bn sitting in Leave's pocket.
It's loopy. Proportionately the EU makes up a far greater portion of British exports than the UK makes up of EU exports. Britain is in no position to be imposing preconditions.
Yet another lunatic Europhile who thinks the EU will cut their own throats to spite the UK. If you think they are that malicious and vindictive why do you want to stay with them? It is utter stupidity.
Read what I wrote.
I do not suggest that the EU wouldn't agree to a free trade deal. I do suggest that it won't agree to the moonbeams, unicorn and pixie dust type of deal that too many Leavers advocate.
The trade deficit with the EU is nearly entirely made up of German, Spanish and Dutch components as I recall. The other 25 EU nations may not be that bothered, and may well prioritise free movement over free trade.
Oh shush. It's not as though such an agreement would need all EU countries to agree to it, is it?
Good job a recession in Germany wouldn't affect the rest of the EU economies then.
You might want to investigate the ratification glitches for the EU deal with Canada.
Ian Duncan Smith says on Marr that once we are out the EU will agree a trade deal allowing us to ristrict free movement of labour but cannot show any evidence of this. This is wing and a prayer stuff
It looks like a sound argument on the balance of probabilities.
There is an EU trade surplus of £61bn sitting in Leave's pocket.
It's loopy. Proportionately the EU makes up a far greater portion of British exports than the UK makes up of EU exports. Britain is in no position to be imposing preconditions.
Yet another lunatic Europhile who thinks the EU will cut their own throats to spite the UK. If you think they are that malicious and vindictive why do you want to stay with them? It is utter stupidity.
If there are any cretins around here - its you. See I said it again. Bit you keep talking bollocks so there. And saying Mr Meeks is a europhile lunatic is bollocks.
I love the way some posters like to characterise themselves as reasonable undecideds when in fact they are just as rabid in their remain beliefs as the outiest outer.
IDS has moved me towards Remain after that performance.
Leave needs to use more Gove and less IDS in the future.
I think the interview on Marr with Ian Duncan Smith demonstrates the major problem leave have because his interview will now be the benchmark for leave's case and it is not credible. I would have thought that leave should have agreed a single verifiable position by now and surely Ian Duncan Smith's cannot be that position. Leave need to get their act together
I did not see it. What was not credible? Any position based arounda bilateral trade agreement?
He said that leave would agree a trade agreement that precluded free movement of labour without any evidence
So his failure was not to point to EU-Canada deal or EU-Korea deal.
I'm getting a bit bored of the oft repeated Remain statistic the 50% of our exports go to EU and only 10(or whatever)% of EU exports come here.
Here's a different stat for you: Germany exports to us over 230% of what we export to them. That means their trade surplus with us is over 130% of our exports to them; will Germany be prepared to lose that because we've left the EU?
Ian Duncan Smith says on Marr that once we are out the EU will agree a trade deal allowing us to ristrict free movement of labour but cannot show any evidence of this. This is wing and a prayer stuff
It looks like a sound argument on the balance of probabilities.
There is an EU trade surplus of £61bn sitting in Leave's pocket.
It's loopy. Proportionately the EU makes up a far greater portion of British exports than the UK makes up of EU exports. Britain is in no position to be imposing preconditions.
Yet another lunatic Europhile who thinks the EU will cut their own throats to spite the UK. If you think they are that malicious and vindictive why do you want to stay with them? It is utter stupidity.
Read what I wrote.
I do not suggest that the EU wouldn't agree to a free trade deal. I do suggest that it won't agree to the moonbeams, unicorn and pixie dust type of deal that too many Leavers advocate.
The trade deficit with the EU is nearly entirely made up of German, Spanish and Dutch components as I recall. The other 25 EU nations may not be that bothered, and may well prioritise free movement over free trade.
Oh shush. It's not as though such an agreement would need all EU countries to agree to it, is it?
Good job a recession in Germany wouldn't affect the rest of the EU economies then.
You might want to investigate the ratification glitches for the EU deal with Canada.
I can see 'ratification glitches' becoming a real meme with the average voter.
IDS has moved me towards Remain after that performance.
Leave needs to use more Gove and less IDS in the future.
I think the interview on Marr with Ian Duncan Smith demonstrates the major problem leave have because his interview will now be the benchmark for leave's case and it is not credible. I would have thought that leave should have agreed a single verifiable position by now and surely Ian Duncan Smith's cannot be that position. Leave need to get their act together
I did not see it. What was not credible? Any position based arounda bilateral trade agreement?
He said that leave would agree a trade agreement that precluded free movement of labour without any evidence
So his failure was not to point to EU-Canada deal or EU-Korea deal.
The EU Canada deal does increase include provisions for increased freedom of movement, but clearly not to EEA levels.
David Smiths column in the ST today which can be read on his blog has some interesting stats on UK growth both before and after the UK joined the EEC. Basically our relative growth was much better after we joined even if our absolute growth wasn't.
It's worth a look but for me the important message is that in or out of the EU membership of the single market is key to our current and future prosperity.
One other startling fact. Apparently our exports of services doubled between 2006 and 2014. Doubled. Our economy is changing faster than we realise.
Don't forget that in the 1970s we were a basketcase, so I can see that the uplift from EU membership helped a lot. It's less critical now that the EU is declining and other markets are more substantial.
But, yes, membership of a free trading partnership with EU would be beneficial to the economy. The question is what is the cost of that membership (in all terms, not just financial)
The paradox is that we joined the EEC to take advantage of higher growth rates, just at the point that EEC nations stopped growing faster than us.
Cameron and Osborne saying how risky and terrible leaving the EU would be makes me wonder why a journalist hasn't asked why, if it's such a risk to the UK, it was in the Conservative manifesto, and something they're allowing a vote on?
[The obvious answer is to outflank UKIP, but they probably won't say that].
Because the EZ had made the situation different and Cameron Osborne and most sane rational people in the country recognize that they have renegotiated our position to reflect that.
I'm getting a bit bored of the oft repeated Remain statistic the 50% of our exports go to EU and only 10(or whatever)% of EU exports come here.
Here's a different stat for you: Germany exports to us over 230% of what we export to them. That means their trade surplus with us is over 130% of our exports to them; will Germany be prepared to lose that because we've left the EU?
What trade arrangement does Canada have with the EU ? I'd have thought being a much bigger economy and having a larger trade deficit we could negotiate something at least as good.
EFTA has a free trade deal with Canada. If we joined EFTA we could piggy back theirs.
I'm getting a bit bored of the oft repeated Remain statistic the 50% of our exports go to EU and only 10(or whatever)% of EU exports come here.
Here's a different stat for you: Germany exports to us over 230% of what we export to them. That means their trade surplus with us is over 130% of our exports to them; will Germany be prepared to lose that because we've left the EU?
Their business lobby is already getting very restive. Something else the remainers choose to ignore.
Ian Duncan Smith says on Marr that once we are out the EU will agree a trade deal allowing us to ristrict free movement of labour but cannot show any evidence of this. This is wing and a prayer stuff
It looks like a sound argument on the balance of probabilities.
There is an EU trade surplus of £61bn sitting in Leave's pocket.
It's loopy. Proportionately the EU makes up a far greater portion of British exports than the UK makes up of EU exports. Britain is in no position to be imposing preconditions.
Yet another lunatic Europhile who thinks the EU will cut their own throats to spite the UK. If you think they are that malicious and vindictive why do you want to stay with them? It is utter stupidity.
Read what I wrote.
I do not suggest that the EU wouldn't agree to a free trade deal. I do suggest that it won't agree to the moonbeams, unicorn and pixie dust type of deal that too many Leavers advocate.
The trade deficit with the EU is nearly entirely made up of German, Spanish and Dutch components as I recall. The other 25 EU nations may not be that bothered, and may well prioritise free movement over free trade.
Oh shush. It's not as though such an agreement would need all EU countries to agree to it, is it?
Good job a recession in Germany wouldn't affect the rest of the EU economies then.
You might want to investigate the ratification glitches for the EU deal with Canada.
I am on mobile and that search term does not come up with much. Could you mention glitches you think would happen??
IDS has moved me towards Remain after that performance.
Leave needs to use more Gove and less IDS in the future.
I think the interview on Marr with Ian Duncan Smith demonstrates the major problem leave have because his interview will now be the benchmark for leave's case and it is not credible. I would have thought that leave should have agreed a single verifiable position by now and surely Ian Duncan Smith's cannot be that position. Leave need to get their act together
I did not see it. What was not credible? Any position based arounda bilateral trade agreement?
He said that leave would agree a trade agreement that precluded free movement of labour without any evidence
So his failure was not to point to EU-Canada deal or EU-Korea deal.
The EU Canada deal does increase include provisions for increased freedom of movement, but clearly not to EEA levels.
So we can expect Toronto to be chock full of romanian beggars any day now?
Mr. Urquhart, I entirely agree. The lack of a designated chief campaign doesn't help, (the EC taking a quarter of the campaigning period to decide is ridiculous).
Watched IDS in despair - if LEAVE don't have a credible answer to the free trade/ free movement of labour issue by now then heaven help them. We are also in the middle of negotiating the most important trade agreement for years (TTIP) between US & EU. I genuinely would like a very clear answer of where UK stands in relation to TTIP if we BREXIT.
Ian Duncan Smith says on Marr that once we are out the EU will agree a trade deal allowing us to ristrict free movement of labour but cannot show any evidence of this. This is wing and a prayer stuff
It looks like a sound argument on the balance of probabilities.
There is an EU trade surplus of £61bn sitting in Leave's pocket.
It's loopy. Proportionately the EU makes up a far greater portion of British exports than the UK makes up of EU exports. Britain is in no position to be imposing preconditions.
Yet another lunatic Europhile who thinks the EU will cut their own throats to spite the UK. If you think they are that malicious and vindictive why do you want to stay with them? It is utter stupidity.
Read what I wrote.
I do not suggest that the EU wouldn't agree to a free trade deal. I do suggest that it won't agree to the moonbeams, unicorn and pixie dust type of deal that too many Leavers advocate.
The trade deficit with the EU is nearly entirely made up of German, Spanish and Dutch components as I recall. The other 25 EU nations may not be that bothered, and may well prioritise free movement over free trade.
Don't forget that the Netherlands surplus with is almost certainly all trans-shipments from Rotterdam.
IDS has moved me towards Remain after that performance.
Leave needs to use more Gove and less IDS in the future.
I think the interview on Marr with Ian Duncan Smith demonstrates the major problem leave have because his interview will now be the benchmark for leave's case and it is not credible. I would have thought that leave should have agreed a single verifiable position by now and surely Ian Duncan Smith's cannot be that position. Leave need to get their act together
I did not see it. What was not credible? Any position based arounda bilateral trade agreement?
He said that leave would agree a trade agreement that precluded free movement of labour without any evidence
So his failure was not to point to EU-Canada deal or EU-Korea deal.
What trade arrangement does Canada have with the EU ? I'd have thought being a much bigger economy and having a larger trade deficit we could negotiate something at least as good.
EFTA has a free trade deal with Canada. If we joined EFTA we could piggy back theirs.
But EEA status would not address migration concerns. Better to get 99% free trade and controlled immigration.
Mr. Flightpath, the new deal is worse than the status quo ante.
More importantly, that's not the reason. UKIP were riding high and the Conservative leadership was pressured into making concessions to try and head that threat off.
I'm getting a bit bored of the oft repeated Remain statistic the 50% of our exports go to EU and only 10(or whatever)% of EU exports come here.
Here's a different stat for you: Germany exports to us over 230% of what we export to them. That means their trade surplus with us is over 130% of our exports to them; will Germany be prepared to lose that because we've left the EU?
We could always try banning BMW's Mercedes or VW's if the British are going to be happy with that
Ian Duncan Smith says on Marr that once we are out the EU will agree a trade deal allowing us to ristrict free movement of labour but cannot show any evidence of this. This is wing and a prayer stuff
It looks like a sound argument on the balance of probabilities.
There is an EU trade surplus of £61bn sitting in Leave's pocket.
Do not talk cobblers. A free trade deal will involve free movement of labour, unless you want to tow the UK to just offshore Connecticut.
Will it involve the unfettered right to come to the UK to look for work?
A so called free trade deal with the EU for any remaining non EU country in Europe will involve free movement of labour. As it stands right now any new non EU European country attempting a deal with the EU would have to sign up to Schengen.
Ian Duncan Smith says on Marr that once we are out the EU will agree a trade deal allowing us to ristrict free movement of labour but cannot show any evidence of this. This is wing and a prayer stuff
It looks like a sound argument on the balance of probabilities.
There is an EU trade surplus of £61bn sitting in Leave's pocket.
Do not talk cobblers. A free trade deal will involve free movement of labour, unless you want to tow the UK to just offshore Connecticut.
Will it involve the unfettered right to come to the UK to look for work?
A so called free trade deal with the EU for any remaining non EU country in Europe will involve free movement of labour. As it stands right now any new non EU European country attempting a deal with the EU would have to sign up to Schengen.
You've not event attempted to answer the question.
Free movement of labour (in the sense of people) can comprise 3 elements:
(I) The right to move to accept a confirmed job offer (ie no work permits) (Ii) The right to move to a country to look for work + the right of preference in job seeking vs any individual who is not a citizen of the trading bloc (Iii) The right to move to a country and claim benefits
At the moment we have all 3. I'd be fine with (1) and - although 3 is irritating - it is 2 that causes the most damage to those Brits with less differentiated skillsets.
Where do you think the EU would draw the line in a trade deal - at what point would they walk away?
David Smiths column in the ST today which can be read on his blog has some interesting stats on UK growth both before and after the UK joined the EEC. Basically our relative growth was much better after we joined even if our absolute growth wasn't.
It's worth a look but for me the important message is that in or out of the EU membership of the single market is key to our current and future prosperity.
One other startling fact. Apparently our exports of services doubled between 2006 and 2014. Doubled. Our economy is changing faster than we realise.
Don't forget that in the 1970s we were a basketcase, so I can see that the uplift from EU membership helped a lot. It's less critical now that the EU is declining and other markets are more substantial.
But, yes, membership of a free trading partnership with EU would be beneficial to the economy. The question is what is the cost of that membership (in all terms, not just financial)
The paradox is that we joined the EEC to take advantage of higher growth rates, just at the point that EEC nations stopped growing faster than us.
Is being in the EU hindering German exports to the world? It has car factories in America and China. German pharmaceuticals is the 4th largest in the world. With a market share of over 11 percent, Germany was the world’s largest exporter of chemical products in 2013. The country exported chemical products with a total value of €166 billion. Over 90 percent of Germany’s more than 2,000 chemical companies are small and medium-sized enterprises. They are competitive and employ nearly half a million workers. It invested €10.5 billion in the year 2013' Poor hamstrung Germany hobbled to the EU.
I'm getting a bit bored of the oft repeated Remain statistic the 50% of our exports go to EU and only 10(or whatever)% of EU exports come here.
Here's a different stat for you: Germany exports to us over 230% of what we export to them. That means their trade surplus with us is over 130% of our exports to them; will Germany be prepared to lose that because we've left the EU?
We could always try banning BMW's Mercedes or VW's if the British are going to be happy with that
If remain have it right it would be the EU doing the banning because they wouldn;'t agree a trade deal.
VoteLeave We are delighted that respected MP Gisela Stuart has agreed to join our board
Vote Leave have the major players on the Leave side, now.
And still a month in which to poach a few of the Grassroots players, before the EC decision. Some must surely be thinking "oooooops....." Farage and Galloway off in their own little play pen would be the ideal outcome.
I don't understand what happened with Kate Hoey - she's always struck me as a sensible sort of person.
Comments
PB ahead of the game as always.
There is an EU trade surplus of £61bn sitting in Leave's pocket.
If we can achieve that it would be a real result for those who suffer most from uncontrolled immigration
IDS is fighting yesterdays battles like many tories. A battle for self justification, not for what is best for the UK or the tories.
Labour are laughing their socks off. Speaking of which I take due note of Dr Sox's somewhat happy tone at the dimness of tory outers
Right, since the sample is NH, IA, NV this would suggest that there was something unprecedented going on in the Rep race in 2016 that was particularly interesting to the demographics there. For example, maybe there are lots of NH, IA, NV voters with surnames beginning with "T", and it was the first time a candidate with a surname beginning with "T" had been a plausible contender for president. Or something like that anyway.
@elliotttimes: IDS - a decent footballer - would claim that he got the ball. But agree it was, er, a committed tackle https://t.co/d9xPCdMDo7
Its not leaders that go bonkers after 10 years its the dimwit morons in the membership. Corbynism seconds that.
I do not suggest that the EU wouldn't agree to a free trade deal. I do suggest that it won't agree to the moonbeams, unicorn and pixie dust type of deal that too many Leavers advocate.
Leave needs to use more Gove and less IDS in the future.
Regarding LePage's endorsement of Trump there is a lot of Trump in LePage. LePage is one of the least politically correct elected officials that you will find, all while doing it in Maine. He told the NAACP to kiss his butt a few years back among other comments (http://edition.cnn.com/2016/01/07/politics/paul-lepage-maine-heroin/).
LePage’s 2014 Re-election was a surprise and to some extent one can draw similarities to Trump’s campaign this year. LePage’s approval ratings were supposedly low (low 40′s) and like Trump today, so were his favorability ratings. He was supposed to lose close in a three way race to the Democrat, but instead nearly hit 50% and won by 5 points.
The Jan Brewer endorsement for Trump is also a very important one.
Some borders are clearly more equal than others (national borders ungood, Labour-held constituency borders doubleplusgood). Classic socialist mindset!
Interested in #Brexit ? This is a fascinating history of the UK's entry into the EU, 1971-73. Balanced & eye-opening https://t.co/Zg6x3gQHhl
It's worth a look but for me the important message is that in or out of the EU membership of the single market is key to our current and future prosperity.
One other startling fact. Apparently our exports of services doubled between 2006 and 2014. Doubled. Our economy is changing faster than we realise.
Mind you, those Leavers wanting free access to the EU market but close off free movement do have a tough circle to square.
And on a happy note - a rare day for me to cheer on Man U, and Swansea too.
Non-SC turnout is basically NH, since the others are caucuses, which is pretty much the quintessential swing state (barely better for Obama in 2012 than his national margin) but that came out at 284,120 vs 250,983, which is a lead for the Republicans, but not by much.
Flightpath and cobblers.
Does he really believe in Leave anyway?
I am thinking that at best he wants to be in the EEA which would not make an hap'th of difference to the screaming nutjob anti immigrant buffoons in the green ties.
Bleating about sovereignty is not much good when your jobs and inward investment has been exported to Eastern Europe.
And who is left after Gove? Who is the last credible believable beacon of coherent sanity standing in Leave. I'll tell you who it is and read his name and weep - its George Galloway. And if he is giving the answer there is something wrong with the question.
City losing the final could derail their season.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/112R0zDRQLC2cxE1op0TY-IBq_PTtcxpwgfbu87DI45w/edit?usp=sharing
We know the EU is extremely challenged. And the likely cure is to further integrate which - I personally believe - is something for which there is limited appetite in the UK.
In contrast, for Leave, of course there is a degree of uncertainty. It's the the EU's interest to agree a sensible partnership. But if they don't want to, then the UK will do just fine. We are the world's 5th largest economy, with a wealth of talented people and the resources to exploit the opportunities the world offers us
As it stands right now any new non EU European country attempting a deal with the EU would have to sign up to Schengen.
We have a referendum. Let's vote according to what we believe to be in the national interest, not in the interest of the PM.
@HillaryClinton: "We don’t need to make America great again. America never stopped being great. But we do need to make America whole again." —Hillary in SC
Nice article debunking the bizarre claims Trump hasn't been a successful businessman and that he would have been better off investing in an index tracker. Trump bet big on NY right at the bottom, kudos to Mr Trump.
See I said it again. Bit you keep talking bollocks so there. And saying Mr Meeks is a europhile lunatic is bollocks.
I'd have thought being a much bigger economy and having a larger trade deficit we could negotiate something at least as good.
At the moment, Leave, one day it is terrorists, then new deal isn't legally binding, then trying to curb unrestricted migration etc etc etc.
But, yes, membership of a free trading partnership with EU would be beneficial to the economy. The question is what is the cost of that membership (in all terms, not just financial)
Oh and the insults of course.
Here's a different stat for you: Germany exports to us over 230% of what we export to them. That means their trade surplus with us is over 130% of our exports to them; will Germany be prepared to lose that because we've left the EU?
More importantly, that's not the reason. UKIP were riding high and the Conservative leadership was pressured into making concessions to try and head that threat off.
Free movement of labour (in the sense of people) can comprise 3 elements:
(I) The right to move to accept a confirmed job offer (ie no work permits)
(Ii) The right to move to a country to look for work + the right of preference in job seeking vs any individual who is not a citizen of the trading bloc
(Iii) The right to move to a country and claim benefits
At the moment we have all 3. I'd be fine with (1) and - although 3 is irritating - it is 2 that causes the most damage to those Brits with less differentiated skillsets.
Where do you think the EU would draw the line in a trade deal - at what point would they walk away?
German pharmaceuticals is the 4th largest in the world. With a market share of over 11 percent, Germany was the world’s largest exporter of chemical products in 2013. The country exported chemical products with a total value of €166 billion.
Over 90 percent of Germany’s more than 2,000 chemical companies are small and medium-sized enterprises. They are competitive and employ nearly half a million workers. It invested €10.5 billion in the year 2013'
Poor hamstrung Germany hobbled to the EU.
New Thread New Thread