politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » For someone who’s got reputation for laziness Cameron’s run

First.....again!

Off topic - thanks to Cycle Free for an interesting thread FPT - if only the LEAVE Campaigns were quite as forensic we might have a better informed debate.

Morning all

Mr Meeks does exceptionally good clickbait.

tlg86 said:

"He has been focussed all of the year so far on securing his deal with the EU, personally criss-crossing the continent to secure the agreement of heads of state. Whatever one thinks of the deal, the Prime Minister cannot be faulted for lack of effort or commitment."

You should not confuse action with getting things done. Cameron did not need to rush this, he could have taken more time to negotiate a more substantive deal.

The timetabling of this is interesting, but I'm not sure taking more time would have got us a 'better' deal, or been (from his view) in the interests of the Conservative Party. The EU may not have liked it either: they've got other things to concentrate on.

Some people now seem to think Cameron rushed things, which is odd. But Leave face questions as well. People have been calling for a referendum for decades, and Cameron's been saying he'll hold one for years. How come the leave campaigners (and especially the Leave establishment) are so utterly ill-prepared now one has been called?

It's almost as if they'd convinced themselves Cameron wouldn't hold one (perhaps because he wouldn't win the 2015 election). Or perhaps it's because some of them really don't want to win ...

JosiasJessop said:

It's almost as if they'd convinced themselves Cameron wouldn't hold one (perhaps because he wouldn't win the 2015 election). Or perhaps it's because some of them really don't want to win ...

That is perhaps the most fascinating part of this whole pantomime.

"Cameron said he would hold a referendum. He is holding a referendum.

The Bastard, we'll get him for that..."

JosiasJessop said:

tlg86 said:

"He has been focussed all of the year so far on securing his deal with the EU, personally criss-crossing the continent to secure the agreement of heads of state. Whatever one thinks of the deal, the Prime Minister cannot be faulted for lack of effort or commitment."

You should not confuse action with getting things done. Cameron did not need to rush this, he could have taken more time to negotiate a more substantive deal.

The timetabling of this is interesting, but I'm not sure taking more time would have got us a 'better' deal, or been (from his view) in the interests of the Conservative Party. The EU may not have liked it either: they've got other things to concentrate on.

Some people now seem to think Cameron rushed things, which is odd. But Leave face questions as well. People have been calling for a referendum for decades, and Cameron's been saying he'll hold one for years. How come the leave campaigners (and especially the Leave establishment) are so utterly ill-prepared now one has been called?

It's almost as if they'd convinced themselves Cameron wouldn't hold one (perhaps because he wouldn't win the 2015 election). Or perhaps it's because some of them really don't want to win ...

Indeed, Mr J. It’s surprising, and worrying, that those who would Leave seem to have no coherent idea of what Britain will look like like, economically speaking, after Leaving.

Hope you’re feeling better, by the way.

OldKingCole said:

JosiasJessop said:

tlg86 said:

"He has been focussed all of the year so far on securing his deal with the EU, personally criss-crossing the continent to secure the agreement of heads of state. Whatever one thinks of the deal, the Prime Minister cannot be faulted for lack of effort or commitment."

You should not confuse action with getting things done. Cameron did not need to rush this, he could have taken more time to negotiate a more substantive deal.

The timetabling of this is interesting, but I'm not sure taking more time would have got us a 'better' deal, or been (from his view) in the interests of the Conservative Party. The EU may not have liked it either: they've got other things to concentrate on.

Some people now seem to think Cameron rushed things, which is odd. But Leave face questions as well. People have been calling for a referendum for decades, and Cameron's been saying he'll hold one for years. How come the leave campaigners (and especially the Leave establishment) are so utterly ill-prepared now one has been called?

It's almost as if they'd convinced themselves Cameron wouldn't hold one (perhaps because he wouldn't win the 2015 election). Or perhaps it's because some of them really don't want to win ...

Indeed, Mr J. It’s surprising, and worrying, that those who would Leave seem to have no coherent idea of what Britain will look like like, economically speaking, after Leaving.

Hope you’re feeling better, by the way.

Other than the pound dropping in the immediate aftermath slightly which helps exporters it is very difficult to tell.

We won't be out the EU overnight, it will take a while to decouple and negotiations will be critical.

surbiton said:

"His bruising style of campaigning is going to leave many party members furious with him, particularly as the subject of Britain’s EU membership is bafflingly so incredibly important to them"

They already are furious ! Apparently, peace will break out on the 24th June.

So, the guy who accused the Prime Minister of coming out with a "dodgy dossier" will stay in his cabinet ?

If Cameron stays on after a Remain vote, surely there will be 35 names to trigger a Leadership election. If Dave opts to fight that one too, I would put money on him winning. He has a taste for victory.

Oh - and IMHO he'll be gone in 2016 regardless of the result.

Mortimer said:

Oh - and IMHO he'll be gone in 2016 regardless of the result.

Are you a Kipper now?

Meanwhile, away from the tiresomely repetitive clickbait, the now ex-BCC head says

'It is highly irresponsible of the government of the country to be peddling hyperbole'


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/12185448/BCC-head-quits-in-Brexit-row.html

runnymede said:

Meanwhile, away from the tiresomely repetitive clickbait, the now ex-BCC head says

'It is highly irresponsible of the government of the country to be peddling hyperbole'


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/12185448/BCC-head-quits-in-Brexit-row.html

@GeneralBoles: Saint Sebastian may have been shot with arrows and beaten to death but he never resigned from the BCC so who's really the martyr here?

CarlottaVance said:

Off topic - thanks to Cycle Free for an interesting thread FPT - if only the LEAVE Campaigns were quite as forensic we might have a better informed debate.

Yes it was a very useful thread for honing the debate. I thought ScottP's post was interesting in that as an arch Conservative he saw it as a battle against petty nationalism and Faragist xenophobia. Alastaire as a neutral doesn't want to hitch his wagon to the 'Little Englanders'.

From the left I see the EU as a civilizer and a safety net. I like for example the idea that even if Priti Patel becomes Tory leader we can still be assured the death penalty can never be reintroduced while we are members of the EU.

And this I think is the bottom line. Most of us never think about the nuts and bolts of the EU or even know it's responsibilities. This will come down to a visceral choice of how we individually see ourselves. The internationalists on one side the nationalists on the other

SimonStClare said:

The guy was a loose cannon, now he’s a sour grape…!

Journo's on Twitter last night were amazed at the fuss over this guy.

Imagine if the director of the Soft Drinks Association had said "I think there should be a sugar tax. Personally"

Longworth should have resigned before he made his speech if that is how he felt.

runnymede said:

Meanwhile, away from the tiresomely repetitive clickbait, the now ex-BCC head says

'It is highly irresponsible of the government of the country to be peddling hyperbole'


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/12185448/BCC-head-quits-in-Brexit-row.html

And yet your monomaniac posting continues. One of the food here is terrible and the portions are so small school of thought, I guess.

nigel4england said:

Disagreeing with someone is being disloyal?

You could look at the opposite side of that, someone who has gone against his stated views and decided to be "loyal".

Javid for example, who looks so uncomfortable talking about this subject he will be well down the batting order when Remain wheel out Cabinet ministers to bolster their campaign.

In fact I wouldn't be surprised if his conscience gets the better of him and he changes sides.

Disagreeing of course not. It's how one expresses oneself. For example, Duncan-Smith gives the impression of being both obnoxious and more than a touch simple. Gove does not.

Roger,

"From the left I see the EU as a civilizer and a safety net."

The key reason why left-leaning people like the EU. It isn't democratic in that you can't vote them out, but if it fits your definition of "progressive", then democracy can go to hell. You are right and the majority are wrong. So if it circumvents people making fools of themselves by voting wrongly, then that's all to the good.

Left to our own devices, we often vote for the wrong government.

The other bloc vote are the Europeans. They regards themselves as citizens of Europe rather than the UK. I don't, but I respect their point of view.

All the talk of minutiae like trade agreements is just flim-flam.

The Cameron is lazy, doesn't do detail, is disorganised and has no clear idea where he is going or even is stupid memes have always been ridiculous and have consistently underestimated one of our best PMs since the war.

I am an admirer of Cameron. He has modernised the Tory party and made it fit for the modern world. He has, with Osborne, kept a ship that was right on the rocks steady and gently steered it to less scary waters, if not yet to safety. He has allowed Gove and even IDS to make important long term reforms that will improve this country. He won nearly 100 seats in 2010 and then an absolute majority in 2015. There have been disappointments too but the idea that someone achieved all of this without being very good at politics is self indulgent twaddle.

On the EU I respectfully disagree with him but I do agree with Alastair that those who have to date got the benefit of his efforts are finding what it is like to be on the other side. Not many in the Labour or Lib Dem parties have ever believed in his genial persona. Like all winners he plays to win and he generally does.

The price of winning this time will be a lot of bruises on his own side and I think his leadership is coming to an end. It seems a little premature as there is still much to do and I don't see anyone with anything like his skills to take his place. Just as the sea gets more turbulent again we are about to lose our captain. It is unfortunate.

And a nice article by Roger Bootle on the winners and losers from Brexit. Among other things it provides this useful explanation of why we shouldn't place too much weight on the hand waving of some big businesses.

'Companies that might lose from Brexit would be primarily those that export heavily into the European Union, do not import that much from the rest of the world and do not do that much business in the UK. To continue to sell into the European single market, they would have to comply with European regulations, even if those regulations were rescinded by the UK.

The gainers from Brexit would be consumers – with lower tariff-free and CAP-free prices for food and other goods – and a whole raft of businesses that don’t do any exporting to the EU, most likely small and medium-sized enterprises. Neither of these groups will figure in the deliberations of big business leaders.'

Only one explanation, but an important one - the voice of the consumer is rarely heard in this debate, but for a proper calculation of the net costs and benefits, it is essential.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/03/06/exactly-why-is-big-business-so-in-favourof-the-eu/

MarkHopkins said:

Then Cameron should also resign.

The Government is not officially neutral. The BCC is, or was.

Charles said:

Roger said:

CarlottaVance said:

Off topic - thanks to Cycle Free for an interesting thread FPT - if only the LEAVE Campaigns were quite as forensic we might have a better informed debate.

Yes it was a very useful thread for honing the debate. I thought ScottP's post was interesting in that as an arch Conservative he saw it as a battle against petty nationalism and Faragist xenophobia. Alastaire as a neutral doesn't want to hitch his wagon to the 'Little Englanders'.

From the left I see the EU as a civilizer and a safety net. I like for example the idea that even if Priti Patel becomes Tory leader we can still be assured the death penalty can never be reintroduced while we are members of the EU.

And this I think is the bottom line. Most of us never think about the nuts and bolts of the EU or even know it's responsibilities. This will come down to a visceral choice of how we individually see ourselves. The internationalists on one side the nationalists on the other

I'm an internationalist for Out.

Which box would you put me in?

The "you could have fooled me" box, perhaps?

Good morning, everyone.

Just my luck to miss the only pro-Leave thread yesterday.

Cameron also has the inherent advantage of not having to wait for 3/8 of the campaigning period for him or his movement to be designated the official Remain campaign.

Scott_P said:

MarkHopkins said:

Then Cameron should also resign.

The Government is not officially neutral. The BCC is, or was.

Only because Cameron is taking advantage of his position!

Tory MPs overall are fairly evenly divided.

Charles said:

CarlottaVance said:

On topic - agree Mr Meeks - and LEAVE are not going to have an officially anointed lead campaign for another five and a half weeks - unless they can coalesce and appoint one themselves, which, given their track record, looks unlikely.

As Wellington said; Hard pounding this, gentlemen; let's see who will pound longest.

It is slightly troubling how willing Cameron has been to use all the advantages of being the ruler-setter to tilt the field.

This is a critically important decision for the country (whether or not Mr Meeks thinks it is significant) that is likely to map out our direct of travel for 20 years. It's fine for him to have an opinion and to fight hard for it, but this procedural malarkey is somewhat distasteful

Unless I misunderstand you the "procedural malarkey " over the appointment of the lead LEAVE campaign has been delayed two weeks, presumably at the request of one or both of the LEAVE campaigns, so hardly can be laid at Cameron's door.

CD13 said:

Roger,

"From the left I see the EU as a civilizer and a safety net."

The key reason why left-leaning people like the EU. It isn't democratic in that you can't vote them out, but if it fits your definition of "progressive", then democracy can go to hell. You are right and the majority are wrong. So if it circumvents people making fools of themselves by voting wrongly, then that's all to the good.

Left to our own devices, we often vote for the wrong government.

The other bloc vote are the Europeans. They regards themselves as citizens of Europe rather than the UK. I don't, but I respect their point of view.

All the talk of minutiae like trade agreements is just flim-flam.

I don't think untrammelled democracy is always a good thing. I wouldn't for example like the residents of the Paulsgrove estate to decide on the fate of paedophiles in their area. We have plenty of checks and balances within the EU. More I suspect than we have within the UK

Roger makes the case that the EU is a good thing because it stands in the way of democracy.

I don't see that as a strength.

If we elect a government with a manifesto commitment to hold a referendum on the death penalty or to renationalise the power industry, then no external body should be standing in the government's way to enact its manifesto.

The UK’s problem with democracy in the EU is that, for whatever reason, the majority of our elected members of the Parliament are only interested in the expenses.

Possibly a tad unfair, but they certainly aren’t intereted in co-operating with anyone else.

Dr. Foxinsox, disliking a political institution isn't the same thing as hating a continent or several dozen peoples/countries. That's unworthy of you.

foxinsoxuk said:

Alanbrooke said:

@AlastairMeeks

Ho hum

as one of PBs leading Remainers your constant feed of clickbait is just getting tedious.

Yesterday in response to Cyclefree you say someone needs to be putting the positive case for REMAIN. Today once again it's rile up the LEAVERS for your own personal amusement.

As ever it's not what you say, it's what you do.

The campaign for Leave is a highly negative one too, based on hatred of eveything European or foreign. Hardly a positive one...

"The campaign for Leave is a highly negative one too, based on hatred of eveything European or foreign."

You have to substantiate that line.

Personally I love Europe. Completely separate to whether the Eurocracy is good for us though.

foxinsoxuk said:

Alanbrooke said:

@AlastairMeeks

Ho hum

as one of PBs leading Remainers your constant feed of clickbait is just getting tedious.

Yesterday in response to Cyclefree you say someone needs to be putting the positive case for REMAIN. Today once again it's rile up the LEAVERS for your own personal amusement.

As ever it's not what you say, it's what you do.

The campaign for Leave is a highly negative one too, based on hatred of eveything European or foreign. Hardly a positive one...

Total tosh.

There are enough Leavers on the board with friends, relatives, business contacts to put your xenophobia argument to the sword a dozen times over. It's horseshit and you should really just grow up.

Ive spent most of my working life in pan European roles been MD, CEO and chairman of European companies. I don't hate anyone.

But I do think we would be better off outside

1. EU wants to integrate and we don't
2. We'd have better longterm economic prospects if we were;nt chained to a giant which wants to go in a different direction than we do.

I will vote Leave and am resigned to the fact I will be voting on the losing side.

But just because you lose doesn't mean you were wrong.

surbiton said:

"His bruising style of campaigning is going to leave many party members furious with him, particularly as the subject of Britain’s EU membership is bafflingly so incredibly important to them"

They already are furious ! Apparently, peace will break out on the 24th June.

So, the guy who accused the Prime Minister of coming out with a "dodgy dossier" will stay in his cabinet ?

Of course! Somehow. And with sides who say the other risks our security. That's not a difficult thing to overcome at all.

foxinsoxuk said:

surbiton said:

"His bruising style of campaigning is going to leave many party members furious with him, particularly as the subject of Britain’s EU membership is bafflingly so incredibly important to them"

They already are furious ! Apparently, peace will break out on the 24th June.

So, the guy who accused the Prime Minister of coming out with a "dodgy dossier" will stay in his cabinet ?

If Cameron stays on after a Remain vote, surely there will be 35 names to trigger a Leadership election. If Dave opts to fight that one too, I would put money on him winning. He has a taste for victory.

Maybe, but a victory over ones own side surely is a bit hollow, it's hard to see how he will not be diminished as even if he wins, the awkward squad who rebel frequently will gave increased, and his majority effectively taken away.

I think this is a fair piece. Leave are angry with Cameron, and will remain so, but most people will not be as furious as they. They might, line me, see Cameron's deal as crappy, but be put off by the whinging about him being unfair or mean. And is true he is called lazy and yet has put in loads of effort, that's one thing leave are complaining about, that he is hitting them hard. It's like the brief period when the Tories tries saying ed m was both weak and useless but also malevolently competent.

I think this piece recognises Cameron is in trouble even if he wins, as leavers have insisted, while pointing out done of the flaws in the conplaints some in leave have had as they play the man not the ball, but Ineffectively.

FrancisUrquhart said:

oxfordsimon said:

Sanders is a dreadful debater - he can scarcely get a sentence out before pivoting back to a prepared sound-bite line from his talking points. His wild gesticulations don't help when it comes to appearing on screen. Add to that his only answer being rich-bashing and spending more and more cash, it is amazing he has got this far.

The real reason is this feeling by some of wanting an anti-establishment candidate, which has manifested itself in people rallying behind people who are basically not a very good politicians.

I second that.

SandyRentool said:

Roger makes the case that the EU is a good thing because it stands in the way of democracy.

I don't see that as a strength.

If we elect a government with a manifesto commitment to hold a referendum on the death penalty or to renationalise the power industry, then no external body should be standing in the government's way to enact its manifesto.

Do you think that if I vote for Party X, that I have read its manifesto? Which bit of outer space do you live in?

Cameron's backing for the EU is his equivalent of Blair's backing for the Iraq War, he will likely just about get it through but at the cost of alienating his activists and base. Just as Blair got more support from the Tories than Labour backbenchers over Iraq, so Cameron will have more support from Labour than Tory backbenchers during EU ref

HYUFD said:

Cameron's backing for the EU is his equivalent of Blair's backing for the Iraq War, he will likely just about get it through but at the cost of alienating his activists and base. Just as Blair got more support from the Tories than Labour backbenchers over Iraq, so Cameron will have more support from Labour than Tory backbenchers during EU ref

And it will define his legacy in most people's minds. As with Blair there will be an increasing recognition that he was less than honest in his dealings with the British people.

Alanbrooke said:

@AlastairMeeks

Ho hum

as one of PBs leading Remainers your constant feed of clickbait is just getting tedious.

Yesterday in response to Cyclefree you say someone needs to be putting the positive case for REMAIN. Today once again it's rile up the LEAVERS for your own personal amusement.

As ever it's not what you say, it's what you do.

It's not my fault if Leavers get only as far as reading the two words of my name.

Most of this post is about the personal qualities of David Cameron rather than the referendum itself. In my judgement he is currently proving to be a highly effective politician, head and shoulders ahead of his current opponents (many of whom have pretensions to succeed him) put together.

If the reaction of some Leavers to me expressing this view is to grumble about me, that's their right. But to use a Dad's Army reference, since those seem popular on the Leave side, they don't like it up 'em.

AlastairMeeks said:

In my judgement he is currently proving to be a highly effective politician, head and shoulders ahead of his current opponents (many of whom have pretensions to succeed him) put together.

Not just you

@rosschawkins: Ouch https://t.co/TEdD48HPiZ

Plato_Says said:

What piffle. And insulting piffle at that. Does you no credit.

foxinsoxuk said:

Alanbrooke said:

@AlastairMeeks

Ho hum

as one of PBs leading Remainers your constant feed of clickbait is just getting tedious.

Yesterday in response to Cyclefree you say someone needs to be putting the positive case for REMAIN. Today once again it's rile up the LEAVERS for your own personal amusement.

As ever it's not what you say, it's what you do.

The campaign for Leave is a highly negative one too, based on hatred of eveything European or foreign. Hardly a positive one...

Is there going to be a catfight? Damn - I've got an outpatients' appointment - I'll miss it

SandyRentool said:

Roger makes the case that the EU is a good thing because it stands in the way of democracy.

I don't see that as a strength.

If we elect a government with a manifesto commitment to hold a referendum on the death penalty or to renationalise the power industry, then no external body should be standing in the government's way to enact its manifesto.

Sometimes we need to be protected from our worst instincts. In the case of the death penalty the EU aren't saying we can't reintroduce it just that it's against club rules. If we want to be international pariahs we can leave the club and do what we like. My point is that I'm glad the club exists to at least give us pause for thought. The US shows us what happens when the devil is allowed to take the hindmost

AlastairMeeks said:

Alanbrooke said:

@AlastairMeeks

Ho hum

as one of PBs leading Remainers your constant feed of clickbait is just getting tedious.

Yesterday in response to Cyclefree you say someone needs to be putting the positive case for REMAIN. Today once again it's rile up the LEAVERS for your own personal amusement.

As ever it's not what you say, it's what you do.

It's not my fault if Leavers get only as far as reading the two words of my name.

Most of this post is about the personal qualities of David Cameron rather than the referendum itself. In my judgement he is currently proving to be a highly effective politician, head and shoulders ahead of his current opponents (many of whom have pretensions to succeed him) put together.

If the reaction of some Leavers to me expressing this view is to grumble about me, that's their right. But to use a Dad's Army metaphor, since those seem popular on the Leave side, they don't like it up 'em.

A lawyerly response Alistair but lets face it in the dozen or so articles you've placed in the last forthnight or so most of them have been an attempt to give half of MIkes' bloggers high blood pressure.

Now while it's fair to say Leave haven't got their act together - they haven't - after a while it becomes about as novel as my views on Osborne.

So if you're worried that no-one is penning the positive case for REMAIN, if you're not going to do it who then is ?

Roger said:

SandyRentool said:

Roger makes the case that the EU is a good thing because it stands in the way of democracy.

I don't see that as a strength.

If we elect a government with a manifesto commitment to hold a referendum on the death penalty or to renationalise the power industry, then no external body should be standing in the government's way to enact its manifesto.

Sometimes we need to be protected from our worst instincts. In the case of the death penalty the EU aren't saying we can't reintroduce it just that it's against club rules. If we want to be international pariahs we can leave the club and do what we like. My point is that I'm glad the club exists to at least give us pause for thought. The US shows us what happens when the devil is allowed to take the hindmost

And the same club rules work to prevent a future Labour government from enacting radical socialist policies such as renationalisation of the power sector. I'd rather have the CEGB reincarnate than the mess EDF are making of keeping the lights on.

foxinsoxuk said:

Alanbrooke said:

@AlastairMeeks

Ho hum

as one of PBs leading Remainers your constant feed of clickbait is just getting tedious.

Yesterday in response to Cyclefree you say someone needs to be putting the positive case for REMAIN. Today once again it's rile up the LEAVERS for your own personal amusement.

As ever it's not what you say, it's what you do.

The campaign for Leave is a highly negative one too, based on hatred of eveything European or foreign. Hardly a positive one...

That's the problem with the remainers approach pedalling the BOO's hatred of other nations, races and now even more hysterically even " everything foreign". Mr Meeks was doing the same in a post the other day he might just as well have shouted "racist" and be done with it just like this post you have similarly made. The negative message is what you have just written and the remainers keep shouting. This dislike of nations and races approach is total bull of course but you all know that it's again a nasty , underhand and vindictive message to be putting across.

I have pointed out many times I love Europe and the people. I travel there every other week and work with people across Europe daily. I just utterly loathe the political EU and how it's structured and set up including the bureaucracy that comes with it. When you have travelled and lived in as many "foreign" countries as I have then throw that insult at me but not before.

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. kle4, not seen the US House of Cards, but avoiding dream sequences as an intro is some decent advice for books too [I heard it after I'd rewritten a start to include one, chopped off the dream itself and kept the waking, and it works pretty well as an abrupt start].

Probably a pet peeve of mine - it ruined several episodes of the sopranos which were essentially nothing but dream sequences. Because it's often clear the creator thinks they are being clever artsy, it's more annoying than other tropes I hate, like precocious child charcters and 'was the entire series real?' Episodes where someone tries to convince the protagonists they're insane.

Good day all.

Richard_Tyndall said:

HYUFD said:

Cameron's backing for the EU is his equivalent of Blair's backing for the Iraq War, he will likely just about get it through but at the cost of alienating his activists and base. Just as Blair got more support from the Tories than Labour backbenchers over Iraq, so Cameron will have more support from Labour than Tory backbenchers during EU ref

And it will define his legacy in most people's minds. As with Blair there will be an increasing recognition that he was less than honest in his dealings with the British people.

It will likely have a similarly great influence on his party too

I'd add in retro episodes shot in 40/50s black and white aping films of the era. And any with dance sequences.

Agent Carter spends 20% of one with the cast prancing round a dream sequence stage - I've no idea what it added bar a warm glow for the writer.

kle4 said:

Plato_Says said:

Watched House of Cards yesterday. I gave it 7/10. Too much LSD in the middle and a bit slow.

Must do S3 again.

That pretty much matches my view. Some great moments, but that middke portion dragged.

And a personal plea to tv writers - stop and think hard before you do extended sessions of dream sequences or hallucinations. It's rarely as clever as you think as you get surreal and metaphorical, and is usually just self indulgent, pretentious, slow and irritating.

Charles said:

OldKingCole said:

JosiasJessop said:

tlg86 said:

"He has been focussed all of the year so far on securing his deal with the EU, personally criss-crossing the continent to secure the agreement of heads of state. Whatever one thinks of the deal, the Prime Minister cannot be faulted for lack of effort or commitment."

You should not confuse action with getting things done. Cameron did not need to rush this, he could have taken more time to negotiate a more substantive deal.

The timetabling of this is interesting, but I'm not sure taking more time would have got us a 'better' deal, or been (from his view) in the interests of the Conservative Party. The EU may not have liked it either: they've got other things to concentrate on.

Some people now seem to think Cameron rushed things, which is odd. But Leave face questions as well. People have been calling for a referendum for decades, and Cameron's been saying he'll hold one for years. How come the leave campaigners (and especially the Leave establishment) are so utterly ill-prepared now one has been called?

It's almost as if they'd convinced themselves Cameron wouldn't hold one (perhaps because he wouldn't win the 2015 election). Or perhaps it's because some of them really don't want to win ...

Indeed, Mr J. It’s surprising, and worrying, that those who would Leave seem to have no coherent idea of what Britain will look like like, economically speaking, after Leaving.

Hope you’re feeling better, by the way.

It's very clear.

Britain, economically speaking, will look very much like it looks at the moment.

We will be a mid-sized, prosperous nation that makes our living by trading with the world. We may have slightly higher tariff barriers with Europe (personally I am sceptical) but we'll do just fine, thank you very much.

And we'll have about £5-7bn net contribution back from the EU that we are able to reduce the deficit/cut taxes/increase government spending (delete as appropriate).

It's very unclear IMO. It *may* be as you say above, but there are many other scenarios.

As well as the question of whether we go for the cut-off-the-UK-from-Europe approach to give full control over migration or the EEA approach, there is the question of the negotiations themselves and their tone.

I can only hope that if Leave win (and I will be voting that way) that moderately sane people are behind the negotiations on the UK's side. One of my biggest concerns is that the tone of the 'leave' debate (because of the question above) becomes so poisonous that it annoys the people we are negotiating with.

Your certainty in your post above is somewhat perplexing given the situation. It seems more based in faith than fact.

The lucid reaction to a dream is much more interesting than some 2001 biology slide visual.

I'd a very strange one last week, awoke convinced it was true, overcome with anxiety then realised it was impossible. It still hangs over me and that's pretty unnerving.

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. kle4, not seen the US House of Cards, but avoiding dream sequences as an intro is some decent advice for books too [I heard it after I'd rewritten a start to include one, chopped off the dream itself and kept the waking, and it works pretty well as an abrupt start].