The chances of a Tory majority or a hung parliament are probably now more dependent on EU ref and the size of any potential increase in the UKIP vote, especially after a narrow Remain, than anything Labour does now
The Ukip vote won't rise under any circumstances.
If it is a narrow Remain it almost certainly will, there are bound to be Leave voters shifting to UKIP especially from the Tories if not to the same extent as Yes voters went to the SNP
We have wall to wall EU at the moment and that's UKIP's subject. Yet they have lost six out of the eight council seats they were defending since the GE, so I'm doubtful.
So the EU are bribing Turkey to keep out swarms of unwanted immigrants, all sounds a bit racist to me.
The Remainers on here are pro freedom of movement as am I, I'm surprised they support an organisation that is so blatantly xenophobic.
It's hardly a bribe though, is it? Turkey has spent billions over the last five years housing up to two million refugees, mainly from Syria and Iraq. Some estimates have this cost at around 8 billion dollars, on top of which are the other costs of the conflict to the country. It is also an ongoing cost to them, both fiscally and socially.
If we were in that situation, we'd be pleading the international community for help as well. And we're a much richer economy.
But we need to be doing more to tackle the people and organisations behind the people smuggling. Even if they lead to significant personages in surrounding countries.
Bribe might be strong, but the fact is the EU is paying Turkey so it doesn't have to deal with them.
I'm interested to hear what those espousing freedom of movement have to say. Very little I suspect.
Turkey still has to deal with them. The fiscal costs of doing so will be spread about more (and hopefully lead to better conditions for the refugees), but I doubt that the number in Turkey will be reduced much. I got it wrong earlier: some reports say Turkey is housing 2.2 or even 2.7 million refugees now.
Peace in Syria and Iraq is what is needed, and the conditions where people can safely return home without fear. Cue the old arguments ...
It's a massive problem for Turkey, and one they coped with admirably for a few years with little outside help or consideration.
But I'd like to see fiscal help for Lebanon and Jordan as well. They're being ignored now, as Turkey was a couple of years ago.
On Turkey, it seems to me that the EU countries are - horribly late - adapting some of the much more policies practised my Mr Cameron over the last years, starting with funding the keeping of refugees in region and discouraging economic migrants.
Are they going to admit that Frau Merkel's monumental pratfalls have been disastrous, and work out how many refugees she has caused to drown at the hands of traffickers?
This should be written on Merkel's political grave.
So the EU are bribing Turkey to keep out swarms of unwanted immigrants, all sounds a bit racist to me.
The Remainers on here are pro freedom of movement as am I, I'm surprised they support an organisation that is so blatantly xenophobic.
Do you really support freedom of movement of the migrants entering the EU, and presumably those at Calais?
The deal with Turkey to help it with the refugee crisis and suppress people smuggling seems a good example of what the countries of Europe can do together. Far better to act collectively rather than unilaterally in these things. Perhaps this sort of deal should have been sorted sooner; but it is good to see it happen nontheless.
Yes I absolutely support the freedom of movement, but like your revered EU I'd insist on caveats.
If you come to the UK you are very welcome, however you must first prove to us that you are able to support yourself and your family. In your utopian world your beloved suburban Leicester would very soon look like Soweto, I'm fairly sure thats not what you have in mind.
We still need action against the people smugglers: my suggestion is for the UN to create a special court to try the smugglers, and try to get not just the people on the ground, but the people higher up in the organisations as well.
People smuggling is an evil crime that exploits peoples' hardship.
this deal stinks. for every illegal migrant sent back to Turkey, a "legitimate" migrant will be absorbed by the EU, so the net effect is the same number coming into the EU anyway. This is not stopping mass immigration into Europe, and then on top of that Turks will be given free access to travel to the EU as well without any Visa requirement. So how many of the Syrian refugees will be given Turkish passports it will be an easy way for them to cross the border to the EU. Also Cameron is saying we will not take part in any resettlement of legal migrants is a complete smoke screen, because once they are give EU citizenship they can travel to the UK under free movement anyway. Europe is in danger of collapse, and the UK needs to get out ASAP.
We are much bigger of course but it is indicative of the sorts of problems that Brexit would have to negotiate. It is also indicative that those negotiations would take place in a context where the EU had a lot more things to think about in the negotiations than their unilateral relationship with the UK. There is food for thought on both sides of the argument in this piece.
Miss Plato, indeed, the Romans remain immensely important, in a cultural/historical sense.
Of course, they conquered by the sword, had few laws and asked for little taxation. As long as provinces paid up, they were largely left to get on with it. I think the civil service was shockingly small (a few hundred or thousand only).
No, it's the equivalent of the Krays popping round and offering "protection". If you choose not to pay, those little boats will increase in number.
Rubbish. See what Turkey's been doing to help refugees for the last five years within Turkey, and ask how we'd react if we were trying to house to million refugees with an active warzone right next door.
Fortunately, as an island on the edge of a continent we're somewhat isolated from such eventualities.
Turkey's at breaking point and also somewhat scared. Not a good combination, especially with the leadership it has.
On democracy, certainly it could be more democratic but objectively, is it any less democratic than, say, the UK government?
Yes, for two reasons.
One, there is no European demos - and there can't be a democracy without a demos.
Two, insofar as the electorates (plural) of the EU get a vote, their parties promptly form EU-level groups in the Parliament in which 90% of MEPs agree with each other on everything.
We still need action against the people smugglers: my suggestion is for the UN to create a special court to try the smugglers, and try to get not just the people on the ground, but the people higher up in the organisations as well.
People smuggling is an evil crime that exploits peoples' hardship.
this deal stinks. for every illegal migrant sent back to Turkey, a "legitimate" migrant will be absorbed by the EU, so the net effect is the same number coming into the EU anyway. This is not stopping mass immigration into Europe, and then on top of that Turks will be given free access to travel to the EU as well without any Visa requirement. So how many of the Syrian refugees will be given Turkish passports it will be an easy way for them to cross the border to the EU. Also Cameron is saying we will not take part in any resettlement of legal migrants is a complete smoke screen, because once they are give EU citizenship they can travel to the UK under free movement anyway. Europe is in danger of collapse, and the UK needs to get out ASAP.
Corbyn put his politics before his kids and his marriage.
Laurie Penny will be writing poetry about it when she's 60 and there is likely some Marxist admiration to be had, but I doubt it sits well with the vast majority of normal mothers and grandmothers.
Kasich has shortened to single figure odds for the first time, with the likes of Bet365 offering him at just 15/2. to gain the GOP nomination. How is he managing to defy gravity, when less than 5 days ago I was able to back him at 100/1? Can anyone seriously see a pathway which would enable him to win? As I suggested last night, if 10/1 is a sensible price for his GOP nomination, then Hills' 40/1 against him becoming POTUS has to be a steal. DYOR
The anti-Rubio ad is probably effective though disgusting in tone - real mud-wrestling stuff, and would get them sued in Britain. The anti-Trump ad seems a bit meh - merely says he's been caught using some swear words and is over the top.
It was the auld wifies who did for SINDYREF (and may yet do for REMAIN unless the REMAINIANS can get their young supporters out from behind their mobile phones and laptops and into the polling booths).....there is a distinct generational thing too - these women had mothers or grandmothers who didn't have a vote, so take their voting very seriously as a civic duty - I remember asking my grandmother if she was going to vote, and she looked at me as if I'd grown two heads.....
Women actually tend to be slightly more for Remain than men
I wonder how that splits by age - 'Older' are much more 'LEAVE' than 'Younger' - and 'Older' vote.......so unless there's a huge gender skew among older voters, it may be less voting younger women evening out more voting older ones.....either way, both sides need to GOTV.....is Mick Pork available?
So the EU are bribing Turkey to keep out swarms of unwanted immigrants, all sounds a bit racist to me.
The Remainers on here are pro freedom of movement as am I, I'm surprised they support an organisation that is so blatantly xenophobic.
Do you really support freedom of movement of the migrants entering the EU, and presumably those at Calais?
The deal with Turkey to help it with the refugee crisis and suppress people smuggling seems a good example of what the countries of Europe can do together. Far better to act collectively rather than unilaterally in these things. Perhaps this sort of deal should have been sorted sooner; but it is good to see it happen nontheless.
Yes I absolutely support the freedom of movement, but like your revered EU I'd insist on caveats.
If you come to the UK you are very welcome, however you must first prove to us that you are able to support yourself and your family. In your utopian world your beloved suburban Leicester would very soon look like Soweto, I'm fairly sure thats not what you have in mind.
Older women grew up in an age when personal cleanliness was more de-rigeur than is the case today. Corbyn is an utter tramp. He looks like he may have the odd baked bean lost somewhere in his beard and black fingernails. Never underestimate the power of the personal 'eeeew' factor in politics. Maybe this is one reason why lefties always do worse among the older voters. They need to find the soap.
In Mike's little snippet from Yougov, the number of women calling for Jezza to go either now or later is very little different from men. The major part of the difference is the % saying don't know, which is higher in women. I wouldn't read too much into this as DK's are higher in females generally across the board.
Not much evidence of Tories for Corbyn or Kippers for Corbyn either.
Agreed on both points. Also, in any poll one finds that men or women think one thing more than the other - unlesss repeated in a series of polls, it's unsafe to draw conclusions.
Winning is a challenge, as Corbynistas generally accept. But not especially because of older women.
How dare a publicly elected REMAIN LEAVE official use his office to stop his staff speaking out on behalf of LEAVE REMAIN...?
I expect we'll never hear the end of it from the LEAVErs REMAINians
Did you even bother to read the story? They are being allowed to speak out openly in a private capacity, which is more than Cameron allowed for months.
Lol - Boris was always more of a liability and the smart 'leavers' knew it.
Boris is a good match for Farage. Neither seem able to tolerate workers who do not participate in the personality cult.
Given that Cameron demanded much more restrictive terms for those on other side, I guess this applies to Cameron too then?? Or is this only a criticism that can ever be held towards Leavers??
Except it isn't true. Cameron has permitted govt ministers to oppose Remain publically, while Boris (according to the email) is gagging opponents publically.
Not that the court politics of the Tories bother me. The sooner they break up into warring gangs the sooner the whole government collapses. It is a pity though that Corbyn couldn't organise a bunfight in a bakery and so will not take advantage. There really needs to be a summer Labour leadership contest.
There won't be though. The Conservative infighting will take all the pressure off Labour and tend to reassure nerves among those who are wavering, and lead MPs who are willing to strike to conclude that the time isn't right. The EU Ref may well give Labour an indirect boost in the polls / May elections.
Labour moderates would, however, be wrong to wait. By this time next year they could be playing to a different set of rules with their current trump card - the 15% nominations rule - taken away.
The chances of a Tory majority or a hung parliament are probably now more dependent on EU ref and the size of any potential increase in the UKIP vote, especially after a narrow Remain, than anything Labour does now
The Ukip vote won't rise under any circumstances.
If it is a narrow Remain it almost certainly will, there are bound to be Leave voters shifting to UKIP especially from the Tories if not to the same extent as Yes voters went to the SNP
Much to my disappointment Ukip is dead, no money, no structure, factions, disarray. In no state whatsoever to fight a national campaign.
If any of the PB hierarchy are interested I'd be happy to write a header about this and the impact of the referendum on Ukip regardless of the outcome.
UKIP need do nothing if it is a narrow Remain furious Leave voters will come to them
The chances of a Tory majority or a hung parliament are probably now more dependent on EU ref and the size of any potential increase in the UKIP vote, especially after a narrow Remain, than anything Labour does now
The Ukip vote won't rise under any circumstances.
If it is a narrow Remain it almost certainly will, there are bound to be Leave voters shifting to UKIP especially from the Tories if not to the same extent as Yes voters went to the SNP
We have wall to wall EU at the moment and that's UKIP's subject. Yet they have lost six out of the eight council seats they were defending since the GE, so I'm doubtful.
They will of course get no boost until the result most likely in the event of a narrow Remain
We still need action against the people smugglers: my suggestion is for the UN to create a special court to try the smugglers, and try to get not just the people on the ground, but the people higher up in the organisations as well.
People smuggling is an evil crime that exploits peoples' hardship.
this deal stinks. for every illegal migrant sent back to Turkey, a "legitimate" migrant will be absorbed by the EU, so the net effect is the same number coming into the EU anyway. This is not stopping mass immigration into Europe, and then on top of that Turks will be given free access to travel to the EU as well without any Visa requirement. So how many of the Syrian refugees will be given Turkish passports it will be an easy way for them to cross the border to the EU. Also Cameron is saying we will not take part in any resettlement of legal migrants is a complete smoke screen, because once they are give EU citizenship they can travel to the UK under free movement anyway. Europe is in danger of collapse, and the UK needs to get out ASAP.
It really will break Europe. Thank the Lord for the Hungarians who know a pup when they see it and are prepared for the rest of Europe to think they're frightful. But I fear they won't be able to hold it back forever.
It was the auld wifies who did for SINDYREF (and may yet do for REMAIN unless the REMAINIANS can get their young supporters out from behind their mobile phones and laptops and into the polling booths).....there is a distinct generational thing too - these women had mothers or grandmothers who didn't have a vote, so take their voting very seriously as a civic duty - I remember asking my grandmother if she was going to vote, and she looked at me as if I'd grown two heads.....
Women actually tend to be slightly more for Remain than men
I wonder how that splits by age - 'Older' are much more 'LEAVE' than 'Younger' - and 'Older' vote.......so unless there's a huge gender skew among older voters, it may be less voting younger women evening out more voting older ones.....either way, both sides need to GOTV.....is Mick Pork available?
Middle-class women are also more likely to vote than working class women and they back Remain
Ian Katz Suspect Remain campaign won't be thrilled by prospect of Turkey's EU membership being expedited as part of migrant deal
Of course we retain a veto, but our current position is to support membership. Thats crazy when they just shut down the biggest paper in the country due to govt criticism.
The chances of a Tory majority or a hung parliament are probably now more dependent on EU ref and the size of any potential increase in the UKIP vote, especially after a narrow Remain, than anything Labour does now
The Ukip vote won't rise under any circumstances.
If it is a narrow Remain it almost certainly will, there are bound to be Leave voters shifting to UKIP especially from the Tories if not to the same extent as Yes voters went to the SNP
Much to my disappointment Ukip is dead, no money, no structure, factions, disarray. In no state whatsoever to fight a national campaign.
If any of the PB hierarchy are interested I'd be happy to write a header about this and the impact of the referendum on Ukip regardless of the outcome.
I'd be interested.
I agree with you that UKIP is dead, sunk by Farage's ego. I truly believe that politics will look completely different after the referendum, more so if as expected Remain win.
The Tory right will break off, the Labour left will go their way, with a huge centreground to be occupied by the wet Tories like Soubry and the Lib Dems.
It is the Tory right which will be the interesting as I believe they will have to either take over Ukip or start again, led by either Gove or Rees-Mogg.
If Leave win I expect something similar but it will be the Tory wets that break off to form some sort of alliance with the Lib Dems.
Older women grew up in an age when personal cleanliness was more de-rigeur than is the case today. Corbyn is an utter tramp. He looks like he may have the odd baked bean lost somewhere in his beard and black fingernails. Never underestimate the power of the personal 'eeeew' factor in politics. Maybe this is one reason why lefties always do worse among the older voters. They need to find the soap.
I just had an image of Corbyn morphing into Ben Gunn!
So the EU are bribing Turkey to keep out swarms of unwanted immigrants, all sounds a bit racist to me.
The Remainers on here are pro freedom of movement as am I, I'm surprised they support an organisation that is so blatantly xenophobic.
Do you really support freedom of movement of the migrants entering the EU, and presumably those at Calais?
The deal with Turkey to help it with the refugee crisis and suppress people smuggling seems a good example of what the countries of Europe can do together. Far better to act collectively rather than unilaterally in these things. Perhaps this sort of deal should have been sorted sooner; but it is good to see it happen nontheless.
Yes I absolutely support the freedom of movement, but like your revered EU I'd insist on caveats.
If you come to the UK you are very welcome, however you must first prove to us that you are able to support yourself and your family. In your utopian world your beloved suburban Leicester would very soon look like Soweto, I'm fairly sure thats not what you have in mind.
Glad you are coming round to the EU position!
Actually its the opposite, you have no response to the ridiculous and hypocritical EU stance.
I know Calais very well, I've seen the jungle, it is a hell hole for those living there and the long term Calais residents. Worse still, it has been entirely created by the EU and its fingers in its ears approach to immigration/people movement. They are now living in shipping containers. Did Ukip create that? Was Farage prodding them with a stick? Would you allow these document less people into the country?
You Sir, from your gated community in the leafy suburbs, are the very epitome of ignorance.
Kasich has shortened to single figure odds for the first time, with the likes of Bet365 offering him at just 15/2. to gain the GOP nomination. How is he managing to defy gravity, when less than 5 days ago I was able to back him at 100/1? Can anyone seriously see a pathway which would enable him to win? As I suggested last night, if 10/1 is a sensible price for his GOP nomination, then Hills' 40/1 against him becoming POTUS has to be a steal. DYOR
It has to involve a brokered convention, and Cruz and Trump both standing down in favour of a unity candidate i.e. him.
That's the route but it sure as hell ain't a 10/1 shot.
For reference, the latest poll (PPP, March 4-6) in Ohio has Trump three points clear of Kasich, 38-35, with Cruz at 15 and Rubio 5. He should probably be odds against to win his home state and a failure there should be terminal to his prospects (in practice, even if he doesn't withdraw immediately).
So the EU are bribing Turkey to keep out swarms of unwanted immigrants, all sounds a bit racist to me.
The Remainers on here are pro freedom of movement as am I, I'm surprised they support an organisation that is so blatantly xenophobic.
Do you really support freedom of movement of the migrants entering the EU, and presumably those at Calais?
The deal with Turkey to help it with the refugee crisis and suppress people smuggling seems a good example of what the countries of Europe can do together. Far better to act collectively rather than unilaterally in these things. Perhaps this sort of deal should have been sorted sooner; but it is good to see it happen nontheless.
Yes I absolutely support the freedom of movement, but like your revered EU I'd insist on caveats.
If you come to the UK you are very welcome, however you must first prove to us that you are able to support yourself and your family. In your utopian world your beloved suburban Leicester would very soon look like Soweto, I'm fairly sure thats not what you have in mind.
Glad you are coming round to the EU position!
Actually its the opposite, you have no response to the ridiculous and hypocritical EU stance.
I know Calais very well, I've seen the jungle, it is a hell hole for those living there and the long term Calais residents. Worse still, it has been entirely created by the EU and its fingers in its ears approach to immigration/people movement. They are now living in shipping containers. Did Ukip create that? Was Farage prodding them with a stick? Would you allow these document less people into the country?
You Sir, from your gated community in the leafy suburbs, are the very epitome of ignorance.
I support our govt's position and it is perfectly possible to keep the migrants out with Remain.
Are you going to have another "prolier than thou" meltdown?
So the EU are bribing Turkey to keep out swarms of unwanted immigrants, all sounds a bit racist to me.
The Remainers on here are pro freedom of movement as am I, I'm surprised they support an organisation that is so blatantly xenophobic.
Do you really support freedom of movement of the migrants entering the EU, and presumably those at Calais?
The deal with Turkey to help it with the refugee crisis and suppress people smuggling seems a good example of what the countries of Europe can do together. Far better to act collectively rather than unilaterally in these things. Perhaps this sort of deal should have been sorted sooner; but it is good to see it happen nontheless.
Yes I absolutely support the freedom of movement, but like your revered EU I'd insist on caveats.
If you come to the UK you are very welcome, however you must first prove to us that you are able to support yourself and your family. In your utopian world your beloved suburban Leicester would very soon look like Soweto, I'm fairly sure thats not what you have in mind.
Glad you are coming round to the EU position!
Mr. Fox, Alastair was hoping for someone to do a thread header promoting the positives of the case for Remain. He seems incapable of doing it himself, why don't you have a go?
So the EU are bribing Turkey to keep out swarms of unwanted immigrants, all sounds a bit racist to me.
The Remainers on here are pro freedom of movement as am I, I'm surprised they support an organisation that is so blatantly xenophobic.
Thats not what is happening. The EU will accept a refugee from Turkey for every one they send back. And they'll pay Turkey for this one to one swap.
And when push comes to shove they'll have a visa agreement that means they can just give all the ones they took back Turkish citizenship and point them in the direction of the UK, all perfectly legal. You really would have to have a death wish to stay in the EU.
We still need action against the people smugglers: my suggestion is for the UN to create a special court to try the smugglers, and try to get not just the people on the ground, but the people higher up in the organisations as well.
People smuggling is an evil crime that exploits peoples' hardship.
this deal stinks. for every illegal migrant sent back to Turkey, a "legitimate" migrant will be absorbed by the EU, so the net effect is the same number coming into the EU anyway. This is not stopping mass immigration into Europe, and then on top of that Turks will be given free access to travel to the EU as well without any Visa requirement. So how many of the Syrian refugees will be given Turkish passports it will be an easy way for them to cross the border to the EU. Also Cameron is saying we will not take part in any resettlement of legal migrants is a complete smoke screen, because once they are give EU citizenship they can travel to the UK under free movement anyway. Europe is in danger of collapse, and the UK needs to get out ASAP.
The attraction for the EU is that it would take away the incentive to cross illegally (as you would be sent back). There is then a 1-for-1 swap with legal migrants but once the existing illegals have been returned there would be no more swaps either (as people would stop making the rather dangerous journey if it was almost certain to end in being returned to Turkey anyway). Essentially it's a way of getting Turkey to accept the return of illegal migrants.
This is obviously very desirable for the EU and Greece in particular. There is going to be a price for Turkish cooperation. I guess the disagreement, at present, is over what that should be.
The price that Turkey, a Muslim majority nation, appears to be demanding in order to help us reduce the flow into Europe of Muslim refugees is to accelerate its own entry into the EU. And we're going along with it! It's like Rotherham, Cologne, Swedish swimming pools all never happened. We are truly governed by pondlife. Here in the UK and in Brussels.
It is odd just how little is heard from Labour over the referendum. Has the Shadow Cabinet been locked in a basement?
"Another Labour figure agrees Britain should remain in the EU" doesn't get many headlines. At the moment Labour would only get in the news in one of two ways: aggressively pro-Remain campaigning, which would simply be a repeat of the process of losing more voters by doing Cameron's dirty work for him (see Indyref) or through internal controversy about who is allowed to express what view where in a public, private, or semi-public capacity. That would just fuel even more "Labour party divided" headlines.
To misquote, it's better to remain fairly quiet and be thought divided than to carpet-bomb the news cycle and prove it.
That's right. However, widespread abstention among Labour voters would be a problem for Remain. Remain needs to ensure that Alan Johnson gets a decent share of the referendum broadcasts and any debates.
On democracy, certainly it could be more democratic but objectively, is it any less democratic than, say, the UK government?
Yes, for two reasons.
One, there is no European demos - and there can't be a democracy without a demos.
Two, insofar as the electorates (plural) of the EU get a vote, their parties promptly form EU-level groups in the Parliament in which 90% of MEPs agree with each other on everything.
Your two points are contradictory unless you start at your assertion (there is no European demos) and work backwards.
The very fact that there are EU-wide groups shows that there is a European demos at at least one level. That's unsurprising given that ideology will invariably trump nationality on matters of policy. Unless there is some unusual overriding local interest, socialists will tend to work together for what they believe in, whether they come from Sweden or Spain; Conservatives will work together to deliver Conservative policies from Latvia to London; Christian Democrats will work together from Belgium to Bologna; and so on.
It's true that the EP to some extent forces parties to work together across national lines but the reality is that they would tend to do so anyway simply because of shared objectives.
Is there widespread public interest in the EP? No, of course not. There isn't any interest in the UK parliament either beyond the theatrics.
Kasich has shortened to single figure odds for the first time, with the likes of Bet365 offering him at just 15/2. to gain the GOP nomination. How is he managing to defy gravity, when less than 5 days ago I was able to back him at 100/1? Can anyone seriously see a pathway which would enable him to win? As I suggested last night, if 10/1 is a sensible price for his GOP nomination, then Hills' 40/1 against him becoming POTUS has to be a steal. DYOR
It has to involve a brokered convention, and Cruz and Trump both standing down in favour of a unity candidate i.e. him.
That's the route but it sure as hell ain't a 10/1 shot.
For reference, the latest poll (PPP, March 4-6) in Ohio has Trump three points clear of Kasich, 38-35, with Cruz at 15 and Rubio 5. He should probably be odds against to win his home state and a failure there should be terminal to his prospects (in practice, even if he doesn't withdraw immediately).
That's pretty much the way I see it ...... think I'll keep laying him on betfair. It seems like money for old rope.
The Stay campaign’s habit of conflating ‘Europe’ and ‘the EU’ means that those who are anti-EU can be easily depicted as anti-Europe, as xenophobic or nationalistic. These people’s political outlook — their dislike of the way Brussels can impose its writ on nation states — is reduced to a prejudiced outlook, a simple case of being anti-Europe. Their politics is pathologised, turned from opposition to a political system into opposition to a whole continent and its cultures and peoples.
...The true instinct behind the Brussels machine is not to bring Europe together. It is to absolve national governments of the burden of having to consult us, the plebs, about important political and social matters, in favour of allowing various experts and cliques in Brussels to discuss and shape such matters on our behalf. The EU’s fuel is not cosmopolitanism — it’s democracy-dodging.
Behind the rhetoric, is there any evidence for this?
The EU is the political manifestation of Europe. There is no alternative. People might not like what the EU looks like but that is a different point. The great majority of Europe's countries are eitherin the EU or want to be. This is, across the continent, not simply a practical policy of trade but an assertion of shared values.
On democracy, certainly it could be more democratic but objectively, is it any less democratic than, say, the UK government? The EP is involved in most legislation and EU member governments form a second tier. What exactly is it that O'Neill wants?
Of course there's an alternative, there is always an alternative.
And it is?
Britain can leave. Of course it can. But the EU will still be the only political expression of 'Europe'. We tried an alternative fifty years ago in EFTA. It didn't work and is now nothing more than an EU satellite, which tends to the same conclusion.
Does anyone really believe that Turkey is going to deport all these migrants back to Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Tunisia and wherever else they've come from?
Kasich has shortened to single figure odds for the first time, with the likes of Bet365 offering him at just 15/2. to gain the GOP nomination. How is he managing to defy gravity, when less than 5 days ago I was able to back him at 100/1? Can anyone seriously see a pathway which would enable him to win? As I suggested last night, if 10/1 is a sensible price for his GOP nomination, then Hills' 40/1 against him becoming POTUS has to be a steal. DYOR
It has to involve a brokered convention, and Cruz and Trump both standing down in favour of a unity candidate i.e. him.
That's the route but it sure as hell ain't a 10/1 shot.
For reference, the latest poll (PPP, March 4-6) in Ohio has Trump three points clear of Kasich, 38-35, with Cruz at 15 and Rubio 5. He should probably be odds against to win his home state and a failure there should be terminal to his prospects (in practice, even if he doesn't withdraw immediately).
I suspect some punters have been reading tweets like this:
This is lifted from the comments section on Guido, I have posted it because to me it sums the situation up perfectly;
This is pure and simple a mugging of the dimwits that run the EU. Erdogan can see that Europe is up shit creek and that the paddles were thrown away a long time ago. He holds the trump cards and Europe has well and truly been shown up to be holding a dummy hand. The flow of migrants across to Lesbos and Kos will not stop and very few will ever get sent back. Just imagine the riots that will break out when trying to round them up. Meanwhile Turkey gets to trouser £4.5 billion of which £0.5 billion is ours and gets to shift a whole bunch of undesirables out of their country. Meanwhile the underhand buying and selling of ISIL oil, the destruction of the Kurds and the ability to further infiltrate Europe with a religion based on the destruction of Western civilisation goes on unabated. LEAVE is the only answer to save the UK. The rest of Europe is lost.
Behind the rhetoric, is there any evidence for this?
The EU is the political manifestation of Europe. There is no alternative. People might not like what the EU looks like but that is a different point. The great majority of Europe's countries are eitherin the EU or want to be. This is, across the continent, not simply a practical policy of trade but an assertion of shared values.
On democracy, certainly it could be more democratic but objectively, is it any less democratic than, say, the UK government? The EP is involved in most legislation and EU member governments form a second tier. What exactly is it that O'Neill wants?
Yes - that's the point I raised in response to Cyclefree. The EU is, basically, Europe - the idea that we can embrace an alternative superior Europe is a complete fantasy. Leaving is a punt on the idea that we don't need to be deeply involved in our own continent in a globalised world, which is more true than it used to be, but still a bold assumption.
Older women grew up in an age when personal cleanliness was more de-rigeur than is the case today. Corbyn is an utter tramp. He looks like he may have the odd baked bean lost somewhere in his beard and black fingernails. Never underestimate the power of the personal 'eeeew' factor in politics. Maybe this is one reason why lefties always do worse among the older voters. They need to find the soap.
I just had an image of Corbyn morphing into Ben Gunn!
Equally, they may have strong memories of what Bennite politics looks like and how successful it is at getting Tories out.
The Stay campaign’s habit of conflating ‘Europe’ and ‘the EU’ means that those who are anti-EU can be easily depicted as anti-Europe, as xenophobic or nationalistic. These people’s political outlook — their dislike of the way Brussels can impose its writ on nation states — is reduced to a prejudiced outlook, a simple case of being anti-Europe. Their politics is pathologised, turned from opposition to a political system into opposition to a whole continent and its cultures and peoples.
...The true instinct behind the Brussels machine is not to bring Europe together. It is to absolve national governments of the burden of having to consult us, the plebs, about important political and social matters, in favour of allowing various experts and cliques in Brussels to discuss and shape such matters on our behalf. The EU’s fuel is not cosmopolitanism — it’s democracy-dodging.
Behind the rhetoric, is there any evidence for this?
The EU is the political manifestation of Europe. There is no alternative. People might not like what the EU looks like but that is a different point. The great majority of Europe's countries are eitherin the EU or want to be. This is, across the continent, not simply a practical policy of trade but an assertion of shared values.
On democracy, certainly it could be more democratic but objectively, is it any less democratic than, say, the UK government? The EP is involved in most legislation and EU member governments form a second tier. What exactly is it that O'Neill wants?
Of course there's an alternative, there is always an alternative.
And it is?
Britain can leave. Of course it can. But the EU will still be the only political expression of 'Europe'. We tried an alternative fifty years ago in EFTA. It didn't work and is now nothing more than an EU satellite, which tends to the same conclusion.
Does anyone really believe that Turkey is going to deport all these migrants back to Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Tunisia and wherever else they've come from?
Does anyone really believe that Turkey is going to deport all these migrants back to Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Tunisia and wherever else they've come from?
The scenes for that will make the jungle look like a 5 star luxury resort.
It is odd just how little is heard from Labour over the referendum. Has the Shadow Cabinet been locked in a basement?
"Another Labour figure agrees Britain should remain in the EU" doesn't get many headlines. At the moment Labour would only get in the news in one of two ways: aggressively pro-Remain campaigning, which would simply be a repeat of the process of losing more voters by doing Cameron's dirty work for him (see Indyref) or through internal controversy about who is allowed to express what view where in a public, private, or semi-public capacity. That would just fuel even more "Labour party divided" headlines.
To misquote, it's better to remain fairly quiet and be thought divided than to carpet-bomb the news cycle and prove it.
That's right. However, widespread abstention among Labour voters would be a problem for Remain. Remain needs to ensure that Alan Johnson gets a decent share of the referendum broadcasts and any debates.
Alan Johnson does not come across to me as a person interested in hard work.
But the EU will still be the only political expression of 'Europe'
Well there are a few of points to make about that -
1. You might have said similar things about the Hapsburg monarchy, Napoleon's empire or even the Third Reich at various points - and some UK politicians did.
2. So what? Why do we need to be involved in a 'political expression of 'Europe''?
3. Your expression 'political expression of Europe' is a euphemism fora United States of Europe, which is where the EU is ultimately going. 'Political expression' sounds fuzzy and warm and non-threatening. United States of Europe doesn't - and the voters don't want it.
Reports over the weekend gave some comfort to those in Labour who recognise that the party’s current trajectory is taking it towards well‑deserved extinction. Watson, we hear, is arranging for Corbyn to suffer a nasty accident. Meanwhile, Dan Jarvis, the moderates’ Great White Hope, is busy denying having leadership ambitions, while giving big speeches outlining his political vision – a sure sign that something is moving.
I fear, however, that optimists will have their hopes dashed.
The price that Turkey, a Muslim majority nation, appears to be demanding in order to help us reduce the flow into Europe of Muslim refugees is to accelerate its own entry into the EU. And we're going along with it! It's like Rotherham, Cologne, Swedish swimming pools all never happened. We are truly governed by pondlife. Here in the UK and in Brussels.
I suspect there is some diplomatic realpolitik going on there. The migrant crisis is a short-term problem that needs a short-term solution. Turkey's EU accession talks have been ongoing for 50 years and more, in one form or another.
Turkey is a very long way off gaining EU membership because its internal policies are incompatible and growing more so - see the recent state takeover of a newspaper, for example. On top of which, Cyprus and Greece would probably veto even without the other issues that have arisen over the last two years.
However, as Britain doesn't have a dog in this fight, it helps to play the good European, particularly as the solution that the EU has finally come round to is that which Cameron advocated about a year ago and which, if implemented at the time, would have done a lot to prevent the problem getting as bad as it has.
I see Boris has now reversed the position on his staff speaking their minds - says it was a cock-up. It's an illustration both of his strength and his weakness. He can get away with it because people can easily imagine him cocking up, and tend to forgive him when he owns up to being a bit shambolic. But equally, they do think he's a bit shambolic, and that makes it hard to be taken seriously.
People like him, but arguably he's not really persuasive - that's a slightly different thing.
The Stay campaign’s habit of conflating ‘Europe’ and ‘the EU’ means that those who are anti-EU can be easily depicted as anti-Europe, as xenophobic or nationalistic. These people’s political outlook — their dislike of the way Brussels can impose its writ on nation states — is reduced to a prejudiced outlook, a simple case of being anti-Europe. Their politics is pathologised, turned from opposition to a political system into opposition to a whole continent and its cultures and peoples.
...The true instinct behind the Brussels machine is not to bring Europe together. It is to absolve national governments of the burden of having to consult us, the plebs, about important political and social matters, in favour of allowing various experts and cliques in Brussels to discuss and shape such matters on our behalf. The EU’s fuel is not cosmopolitanism — it’s democracy-dodging.
Behind the rhetoric, is there any evidence for this?
The EU is the political manifestation of Europe. There is no alternative. People might not like what the EU looks like but that is a different point. The great majority of Europe's countries are eitherin the EU or want to be. This is, across the continent, not simply a practical policy of trade but an assertion of shared values.
On democracy, certainly it could be more democratic but objectively, is it any less democratic than, say, the UK government? The EP is involved in most legislation and EU member governments form a second tier. What exactly is it that O'Neill wants?
Of course there's an alternative, there is always an alternative.
And it is?
Britain can leave. Of course it can. But the EU will still be the only political expression of 'Europe'. We tried an alternative fifty years ago in EFTA. It didn't work and is now nothing more than an EU satellite, which tends to the same conclusion.
But there lies the problem for LEAVE.
What is the alternative future? or more accurately which of the competing visions has the traction to carry the vote? .... I haven't the faintest idea.
Presently LEAVE are a mess - Project TITTER. At least with Project FEAR we know the devil we're being ask to vote for, even if it isn't the most appetizing of prospects.
How dare a publicly elected REMAIN LEAVE official use his office to stop his staff speaking out on behalf of LEAVE REMAIN...?
I expect we'll never hear the end of it from the LEAVErs REMAINians
Did you even bother to read the story? They are being allowed to speak out openly in a private capacity, which is more than Cameron allowed for months.
Lol - Boris was always more of a liability and the smart 'leavers' knew it.
He hasn't done anything other tha have City Hall's official position be for Leave. In the same way the Govt has an official position for Remain and no one on Leave side has criticised that as being unfair. A claim of hypocrisy is either people not being very bright or being disingenuous.
Hypocrisy would be is Boris forced all Remain members to not speak out for months on end, threatened their careers or denied them official documents. None of that has happened.
Has Boris sacked anyone for espousing their personal opinion?? I've come to conclusion some people on here are just playing dumb is pretending this is equivalent, because I refuse to believe anyone capable of using a computer can be this stupid.
As well as being a labour voter who thought multiculturalism and immigration was a good idea, I also used to think the EU was an exciting project. Now I don't see anyone enthusiastically outlining why it is exciting or positive for us to be in the EU, they just moan about how difficult it would be to leave
Kasich has shortened to single figure odds for the first time, with the likes of Bet365 offering him at just 15/2. to gain the GOP nomination. How is he managing to defy gravity, when less than 5 days ago I was able to back him at 100/1? Can anyone seriously see a pathway which would enable him to win? As I suggested last night, if 10/1 is a sensible price for his GOP nomination, then Hills' 40/1 against him becoming POTUS has to be a steal. DYOR
It has to involve a brokered convention, and Cruz and Trump both standing down in favour of a unity candidate i.e. him.
That's the route but it sure as hell ain't a 10/1 shot.
For reference, the latest poll (PPP, March 4-6) in Ohio has Trump three points clear of Kasich, 38-35, with Cruz at 15 and Rubio 5. He should probably be odds against to win his home state and a failure there should be terminal to his prospects (in practice, even if he doesn't withdraw immediately).
I suspect some punters have been reading tweets like this:
Then they should look at the detail. Yes, Kasich has been gaining ground but the three Michigan polls this week that put him in second still give Trump leads of 13, 22 and 18 points. Distant seconds are of little value at this stage to someone who has yet to gain a win.
It is odd just how little is heard from Labour over the referendum. Has the Shadow Cabinet been locked in a basement?
"Another Labour figure agrees Britain should remain in the EU" doesn't get many headlines. At the moment Labour would only get in the news in one of two ways: aggressively pro-Remain campaigning, which would simply be a repeat of the process of losing more voters by doing Cameron's dirty work for him (see Indyref) or through internal controversy about who is allowed to express what view where in a public, private, or semi-public capacity. That would just fuel even more "Labour party divided" headlines.
To misquote, it's better to remain fairly quiet and be thought divided than to carpet-bomb the news cycle and prove it.
That's right. However, widespread abstention among Labour voters would be a problem for Remain. Remain needs to ensure that Alan Johnson gets a decent share of the referendum broadcasts and any debates.
Alan Johnson does not come across to me as a person interested in hard work.
He wouldn’t have got from where he was to where he is without considerable effort, ability and hunger to improve.
The price that Turkey, a Muslim majority nation, appears to be demanding in order to help us reduce the flow into Europe of Muslim refugees is to accelerate its own entry into the EU. And we're going along with it! It's like Rotherham, Cologne, Swedish swimming pools all never happened. We are truly governed by pondlife. Here in the UK and in Brussels.
Agreed. Thinking about the current high-level meeting in Europe, it seems to me that the incentives are - as is typical with EU politico-legal-economy - back-to-front: Turkey gets more Danegeld and more sweet-talk the more unsuccessful it is in holding back migrants.
The Stay campaign’s habit of conflating ‘Europe’ and ‘the EU’ means that those who are anti-EU can be easily depicted as anti-Europe, as xenophobic or nationalistic. These people’s political outlook — their dislike of the way Brussels can impose its writ on nation states — is reduced to a prejudiced outlook, a simple case of being anti-Europe. Their politics is pathologised, turned from opposition to a political system into opposition to a whole continent and its cultures and peoples.
...The true instinct behind the Brussels machine is not to bring Europe together. It is to absolve national governments of the burden of having to consult us, the plebs, about important political and social matters, in favour of allowing various experts and cliques in Brussels to discuss and shape such matters on our behalf. The EU’s fuel is not cosmopolitanism — it’s democracy-dodging.
Behind the rhetoric, is there any evidence for this?
The EU is the political manifestation of Europe. There is no alternative. People might not like what the EU looks like but that is a different point. The great majority of Europe's countries are eitherin the EU or want to be. This is, across the continent, not simply a practical policy of trade but an assertion of shared values.
On democracy, certainly it could be more democratic but objectively, is it any less democratic than, say, the UK government? The EP is involved in most legislation and EU member governments form a second tier. What exactly is it that O'Neill wants?
Of course there's an alternative, there is always an alternative.
And it is?
Britain can leave. Of course it can. But the EU will still be the only political expression of 'Europe'. We tried an alternative fifty years ago in EFTA. It didn't work and is now nothing more than an EU satellite, which tends to the same conclusion.
There is certainly a possibility that the EU might break up in the next ten years. If it does, it will be much more down to the election of populist-nationalist governments / presidents (e.g. Le Pen) than an orderly transition to a different kind of mainstream political order.
Britain leaving would be a serious blow to the EU project, both for the symbolism in itself and for the succour that would give to other anti-EU groups on the continent. However, the idea that the EU could ever again be an EEC is a fantasy as long as the Euro exists.
Behind the rhetoric, is there any evidence for this?
The EU is the political manifestation of Europe. There is no alternative. People might not like what the EU looks like but that is a different point. The great majority of Europe's countries are eitherin the EU or want to be. This is, across the continent, not simply a practical policy of trade but an assertion of shared values.
On democracy, certainly it could be more democratic but objectively, is it any less democratic than, say, the UK government? The EP is involved in most legislation and EU member governments form a second tier. What exactly is it that O'Neill wants?
Yes - that's the point I raised in response to Cyclefree. The EU is, basically, Europe - the idea that we can embrace an alternative superior Europe is a complete fantasy. Leaving is a punt on the idea that we don't need to be deeply involved in our own continent in a globalised world, which is more true than it used to be, but still a bold assumption.
This is nonsense. The EU is a political institution within Europe. Even if we accepted arguable claim that it will be the only international European instiution, that doesn't make it synonymous with Europe.
And even if we left we'd still be involved in trading agreements, NATO, Eastern Europe rapid reaction force, policing the Med from migrants etc etc.
'However, the idea that the EU could ever again be an EEC is a fantasy as long as the Euro exists'
Which is why Major, if he had been following the supposed strategy for which the UK joined the EU - be inside to influence it in a direction that benefits Britain's interest - should have vetoed Maastricht.
Instead he colluded with the bullying of the Danes into a second referendum and then forced the wretched treaty through the UK parliament as well, denying UK voters a say.
From which I think it is safe to conclude that Major is in fact a supporter of a United States of Europe - and should not be listened to on this topic.
The destiny of the Eurozone is now set I think - either the UK joins that proto-USE or it finds its own way in the world and reaches the best modus vivendi it can with the new organisation. The latter option is by far the more appealing.
The Stay campaign’s habit of conflating ‘Europe’ and ‘the EU’ means that those who are anti-EU can be easily depicted as anti-Europe, as xenophobic or nationalistic. These people’s political outlook — their dislike of the way Brussels can impose its writ on nation states — is reduced to a prejudiced outlook, a simple case of being anti-Europe. Their politics is pathologised, turned from opposition to a political system into opposition to a whole continent and its cultures and peoples.
snip The EU’s fuel is not cosmopolitanism — it’s democracy-dodging.
Behind the rhetoric, is there any evidence for this?
The EU is the political manifestation of Europe. There is no alternative. People might not like what the EU looks like but that is a different point. The great majority of Europe's countries are eitherin the EU or want to be. This is, across the continent, not simply a practical policy of trade but an assertion of shared values.
On democracy, certainly it could be more democratic but objectively, is it any less democratic than, say, the UK government? The EP is involved in most legislation and EU member governments form a second tier. What exactly is it that O'Neill wants?
Of course there's an alternative, there is always an alternative.
And it is?
Britain can leave. Of course it can. But the EU will still be the only political expression of 'Europe'. We tried an alternative fifty years ago in EFTA. It didn't work and is now nothing more than an EU satellite, which tends to the same conclusion.
There is certainly a possibility that the EU might break up in the next ten years. If it does, it will be much more down to the election of populist-nationalist governments / presidents (e.g. Le Pen) than an orderly transition to a different kind of mainstream political order.
Britain leaving would be a serious blow to the EU project, both for the symbolism in itself and for the succour that would give to other anti-EU groups on the continent. However, the idea that the EU could ever again be an EEC is a fantasy as long as the Euro exists.
The price that Turkey, a Muslim majority nation, appears to be demanding in order to help us reduce the flow into Europe of Muslim refugees is to accelerate its own entry into the EU. And we're going along with it! It's like Rotherham, Cologne, Swedish swimming pools all never happened. We are truly governed by pondlife. Here in the UK and in Brussels.
Which of Rotherham, Cologne, Swedish swimming pools etc were done by Turks?
But the EU will still be the only political expression of 'Europe'
Well there are a few of points to make about that -
1. You might have said similar things about the Hapsburg monarchy, Napoleon's empire or even the Third Reich at various points - and some UK politicians did.
2. So what? Why do we need to be involved in a 'political expression of 'Europe''?
3. Your expression 'political expression of Europe' is a euphemism fora United States of Europe, which is where the EU is ultimately going. 'Political expression' sounds fuzzy and warm and non-threatening. United States of Europe doesn't - and the voters don't want it.
1. No you couldn't. Firstly, none was even close to being an expression of 'Europe', simply a powerful entity on it; secondly, the democratic base of the EU renders those comparisons absurd. Every member is a democracy and each one continually elects governments committed to continued membership (alternatives are available); EU policy is largely determined by those governments together with the elected EP. Bringing Hitler into it simply Godwins your case in the usual way.
2. We don't; that's what the referendum is about. But the EU will still be there on June 24 if Britain votes to leave and will still be the overriding theatre within which Europe's politics is determined.
3. It's not a euphemism. It's a practical recognition that all the meaningful European political institutions are EU-based, including the EEA.
This is lifted from the comments section on Guido, I have posted it because to me it sums the situation up perfectly;
This is pure and simple a mugging of the dimwits that run the EU. Erdogan can see that Europe is up shit creek and that the paddles were thrown away a long time ago. He holds the trump cards and Europe has well and truly been shown up to be holding a dummy hand. The flow of migrants across to Lesbos and Kos will not stop and very few will ever get sent back. Just imagine the riots that will break out when trying to round them up. Meanwhile Turkey gets to trouser £4.5 billion of which £0.5 billion is ours and gets to shift a whole bunch of undesirables out of their country. Meanwhile the underhand buying and selling of ISIL oil, the destruction of the Kurds and the ability to further infiltrate Europe with a religion based on the destruction of Western civilisation goes on unabated. LEAVE is the only answer to save the UK. The rest of Europe is lost.
It's rubbish. If this was real, he'd have been doing it five years ago when the crisis started.
As for the money: it doesn't cover what Turkey's already spent on housing refugees, yet alone the other costs. It also discounts all the other routes (not involving Turkey) by which migrants are entering the EU, such as the central and western Med and Balkan routes. It's cost Turkey a massive amount, both fiscally and socially.
If Erdogan and Turkey was in it for the money, they'd have done a much better job of it.
Project Leave is really turning into Project Paranoia.
This is lifted from the comments section on Guido, I have posted it because to me it sums the situation up perfectly;
This is pure and simple a mugging of the dimwits that run the EU. Erdogan can see that Europe is up shit creek and that the paddles were thrown away a long time ago. He holds the trump cards and Europe has well and truly been shown up to be holding a dummy hand. The flow of migrants across to Lesbos and Kos will not stop and very few will ever get sent back. Just imagine the riots that will break out when trying to round them up. Meanwhile Turkey gets to trouser £4.5 billion of which £0.5 billion is ours and gets to shift a whole bunch of undesirables out of their country. Meanwhile the underhand buying and selling of ISIL oil, the destruction of the Kurds and the ability to further infiltrate Europe with a religion based on the destruction of Western civilisation goes on unabated. LEAVE is the only answer to save the UK. The rest of Europe is lost.
Plato is bad enough with her long quotes from columnists we've never heard of, but posting random rants from Guido's comments section is really scraping the barrel - much as though we started posted readers' letters from the Morning Star. You're often interesting, so speak for yourself, you don't need this guy.
The Stay campaign’s habit of conflating ‘Europe’ and ‘the EU’ means that those who are anti-EU can be easily depicted as anti-Europe, as xenophobic or nationalistic. These people’s political outlook — their dislike of the way Brussels can impose its writ on nation states — is reduced to a prejudiced outlook, a simple case of being anti-Europe. Their politics is pathologised, turned from opposition to a political system into opposition to a whole continent and its cultures and peoples.
snip The EU’s fuel is not cosmopolitanism — it’s democracy-dodging.
Behind the rhetoric, is there any evidence for this?
The EU is the political manifestation of Europe. There is no alternative. People might not like what the EU looks like but that is a different point. The great majority of Europe's countries are eitherin the EU or want to be. This is, across the continent, not simply a practical policy of trade but an assertion of shared values.
On democracy, certainly it could be more democratic but objectively, is it any less democratic than, say, the UK government? The EP is involved in most legislation and EU member governments form a second tier. What exactly is it that O'Neill wants?
Of course there's an alternative, there is always an alternative.
And it is?
Britain can leave. Of course it can. But the EU will still be the only political expression of 'Europe'. We tried an alternative fifty years ago in EFTA. It didn't work and is now nothing more than an EU satellite, which tends to the same conclusion.
There is certainly a possibility that the EU might break up in the next ten years. If it does, it will be much more down to the election of populist-nationalist governments / presidents (e.g. Le Pen) than an orderly transition to a different kind of mainstream political order.
Britain leaving would be a serious blow to the EU project, both for the symbolism in itself and for the succour that would give to other anti-EU groups on the continent. However, the idea that the EU could ever again be an EEC is a fantasy as long as the Euro exists.
There is certainly a possibility that the EU might break up in the next ten years. If it does, it will be much more down to the election of populist-nationalist governments / presidents (e.g. Le Pen) than an orderly transition to a different kind of mainstream political order.
Britain leaving would be a serious blow to the EU project, both for the symbolism in itself and for the succour that would give to other anti-EU groups on the continent. However, the idea that the EU could ever again be an EEC is a fantasy as long as the Euro exists.
We came very close to accepting it to and while we'd never accept it now the same could not be said at the height of Blair. At one point Britain joining the Euro genuinely felt a matter of time and the right entry conditions. Thankfully we dodged that bullet.
It is odd just how little is heard from Labour over the referendum. Has the Shadow Cabinet been locked in a basement?
"Another Labour figure agrees Britain should remain in the EU" doesn't get many headlines. At the moment Labour would only get in the news in one of two ways: aggressively pro-Remain campaigning, which would simply be a repeat of the process of losing more voters by doing Cameron's dirty work for him (see Indyref) or through internal controversy about who is allowed to express what view where in a public, private, or semi-public capacity. That would just fuel even more "Labour party divided" headlines.
To misquote, it's better to remain fairly quiet and be thought divided than to carpet-bomb the news cycle and prove it.
That's right. However, widespread abstention among Labour voters would be a problem for Remain. Remain needs to ensure that Alan Johnson gets a decent share of the referendum broadcasts and any debates.
Alan Johnson does not come across to me as a person interested in hard work.
Alan Johnson is giving Alistair Darling a run for his money as 'worst Labour leader in a referendum campaign'.
The price that Turkey, a Muslim majority nation, appears to be demanding in order to help us reduce the flow into Europe of Muslim refugees is to accelerate its own entry into the EU. And we're going along with it! It's like Rotherham, Cologne, Swedish swimming pools all never happened. We are truly governed by pondlife. Here in the UK and in Brussels.
I suspect there is some diplomatic realpolitik going on there. The migrant crisis is a short-term problem that needs a short-term solution. Turkey's EU accession talks have been ongoing for 50 years and more, in one form or another.
Turkey is a very long way off gaining EU membership because its internal policies are incompatible and growing more so - see the recent state takeover of a newspaper, for example. On top of which, Cyprus and Greece would probably veto even without the other issues that have arisen over the last two years.
However, as Britain doesn't have a dog in this fight, it helps to play the good European, particularly as the solution that the EU has finally come round to is that which Cameron advocated about a year ago and which, if implemented at the time, would have done a lot to prevent the problem getting as bad as it has.
The migrant crisis is a short term problem
That assertion is based on what fact?
There are tens of millions in Asia, Africa and the Middle East who are mobile, oppressed, in real poverty and know of the Utopia of Europe.
This is lifted from the comments section on Guido, I have posted it because to me it sums the situation up perfectly;
This is pure and simple a mugging of the dimwits that run the EU. Erdogan can see that Europe is up shit creek and that the paddles were thrown away a long time ago. He holds the trump cards and Europe has well and truly been shown up to be holding a dummy hand. The flow of migrants across to Lesbos and Kos will not stop and very few will ever get sent back. Just imagine the riots that will break out when trying to round them up. Meanwhile Turkey gets to trouser £4.5 billion of which £0.5 billion is ours and gets to shift a whole bunch of undesirables out of their country. Meanwhile the underhand buying and selling of ISIL oil, the destruction of the Kurds and the ability to further infiltrate Europe with a religion based on the destruction of Western civilisation goes on unabated. LEAVE is the only answer to save the UK. The rest of Europe is lost.
It's rubbish. If this was real, he'd have been doing it five years ago when the crisis started.
As for the money: it doesn't cover what Turkey's already spent on housing refugees, yet alone the other costs. It also discounts all the other routes (not involving Turkey) by which migrants are entering the EU, such as the central and western Med and Balkan routes. It's cost Turkey a massive amount, both fiscally and socially.
If Erdogan and Turkey was in it for the money, they'd have done a much better job of it.
Project Leave is really turning into Project Paranoia.
This is lifted from the comments section on Guido, I have posted it because to me it sums the situation up perfectly;
This is pure and simple a mugging of the dimwits that run the EU. Erdogan can see that Europe is up shit creek and that the paddles were thrown away a long time ago. He holds the trump cards and Europe has well and truly been shown up to be holding a dummy hand. The flow of migrants across to Lesbos and Kos will not stop and very few will ever get sent back. Just imagine the riots that will break out when trying to round them up. Meanwhile Turkey gets to trouser £4.5 billion of which £0.5 billion is ours and gets to shift a whole bunch of undesirables out of their country. Meanwhile the underhand buying and selling of ISIL oil, the destruction of the Kurds and the ability to further infiltrate Europe with a religion based on the destruction of Western civilisation goes on unabated. LEAVE is the only answer to save the UK. The rest of Europe is lost.
Plato is bad enough with her long quotes from columnists we've never heard of, but posting random rants from Guido's comments section is really scraping the barrel - much as though we started posted readers' letters from the Morning Star. You're often interesting, so speak for yourself, you don't need this guy.
The reason I posted it was because I pretty much agree with every word, but point taken in the spirit it was meant.
There is certainly a possibility that the EU might break up in the next ten years. If it does, it will be much more down to the election of populist-nationalist governments / presidents (e.g. Le Pen) than an orderly transition to a different kind of mainstream political order.
Britain leaving would be a serious blow to the EU project, both for the symbolism in itself and for the succour that would give to other anti-EU groups on the continent. However, the idea that the EU could ever again be an EEC is a fantasy as long as the Euro exists.
We came very close to accepting it to and while we'd never accept it now the same could not be said at the height of Blair. At one point Britain joining the Euro genuinely felt a matter of time and the right entry conditions. Thankfully we dodged that bullet.
Kasich has shortened to single figure odds for the first time, with the likes of Bet365 offering him at just 15/2. to gain the GOP nomination. How is he managing to defy gravity, when less than 5 days ago I was able to back him at 100/1? Can anyone seriously see a pathway which would enable him to win? As I suggested last night, if 10/1 is a sensible price for his GOP nomination, then Hills' 40/1 against him becoming POTUS has to be a steal. DYOR
It has to involve a brokered convention, and Cruz and Trump both standing down in favour of a unity candidate i.e. him.
That's the route but it sure as hell ain't a 10/1 shot.
For reference, the latest poll (PPP, March 4-6) in Ohio has Trump three points clear of Kasich, 38-35, with Cruz at 15 and Rubio 5. He should probably be odds against to win his home state and a failure there should be terminal to his prospects (in practice, even if he doesn't withdraw immediately).
I suspect some punters have been reading tweets like this:
Then they should look at the detail. Yes, Kasich has been gaining ground but the three Michigan polls this week that put him in second still give Trump leads of 13, 22 and 18 points. Distant seconds are of little value at this stage to someone who has yet to gain a win.
Perhaps some have been reading Speedy's tip from a couple of days ago that Katich was going to win Michigan
This is lifted from the comments section on Guido, I have posted it because to me it sums the situation up perfectly;
This is pure and simple a mugging of the dimwits that run the EU. Erdogan can see that Europe is up shit creek and that the paddles were thrown away a long time ago. He holds the trump cards and Europe has well and truly been shown up to be holding a dummy hand. The flow of migrants across to Lesbos and Kos will not stop and very few will ever get sent back. Just imagine the riots that will break out when trying to round them up. Meanwhile Turkey gets to trouser £4.5 billion of which £0.5 billion is ours and gets to shift a whole bunch of undesirables out of their country. Meanwhile the underhand buying and selling of ISIL oil, the destruction of the Kurds and the ability to further infiltrate Europe with a religion based on the destruction of Western civilisation goes on unabated. LEAVE is the only answer to save the UK. The rest of Europe is lost.
It's rubbish. If this was real, he'd have been doing it five years ago when the crisis started.
As for the money: it doesn't cover what Turkey's already spent on housing refugees, yet alone the other costs. It also discounts all the other routes (not involving Turkey) by which migrants are entering the EU, such as the central and western Med and Balkan routes. It's cost Turkey a massive amount, both fiscally and socially.
If Erdogan and Turkey was in it for the money, they'd have done a much better job of it.
Project Leave is really turning into Project Paranoia.
And you've every right to be wary. But you do need to look at it from Turkey's point of view as well, and perhaps, just perhaps, appreciate all that they've done already. Can you imagine how much worse the situation would be if they hadn't housed that two million+ refugees?
In computing terms they've been a buffer. And now that buffer is full and overflowing. As all good programmers know, buffer overflows are rarely good news.
Of course there's an alternative, there is always an alternative.
And it is?
Britain can leave. Of course it can. But the EU will still be the only political expression of 'Europe'. We tried an alternative fifty years ago in EFTA. It didn't work and is now nothing more than an EU satellite, which tends to the same conclusion.
There is certainly a possibility that the EU might break up in the next ten years. If it does, it will be much more down to the election of populist-nationalist governments / presidents (e.g. Le Pen) than an orderly transition to a different kind of mainstream political order.
Britain leaving would be a serious blow to the EU project, both for the symbolism in itself and for the succour that would give to other anti-EU groups on the continent. However, the idea that the EU could ever again be an EEC is a fantasy as long as the Euro exists.
That is true, is being formalised in Cameron's negotiations and recognised by the senior EU bods.
It also answers Runnymede's point about Major. Yes, he could have vetoed Maastricht, not put it through parliament or stood with the Danish electorate (though not the Danish government), but had he done so he'd have been standing against the express will of most of the EC members who wanted the Euro. They could have created it outside the formal EU structure anyway and then practical politics would almost certainly have brought it inside.
It's also worth remembering that one of the reasons that France and others were so keen to embrace the Euro was that it was seen as a means of controlling an only very recently reunited Germany. History might not be kind on that view (FWIW, we should consider the alternative before disdaining and dismissing the original judgement), but the end of the Cold War and the reunification of Germany changed the continent in a way that politicians who still remembered WWII were uneasy about. Suggesting that vetoing Maastricht would have ended the Euro-project misremembers how strong the desire was to handle that new situation through super-national solutions.
There is certainly a possibility that the EU might break up in the next ten years. If it does, it will be much more down to the election of populist-nationalist governments / presidents (e.g. Le Pen) than an orderly transition to a different kind of mainstream political order.
Britain leaving would be a serious blow to the EU project, both for the symbolism in itself and for the succour that would give to other anti-EU groups on the continent. However, the idea that the EU could ever again be an EEC is a fantasy as long as the Euro exists.
We came very close to accepting it to and while we'd never accept it now the same could not be said at the height of Blair. At one point Britain joining the Euro genuinely felt a matter of time and the right entry conditions. Thankfully we dodged that bullet.
I do wonder if, when the history of the EU is written in a century's time, whether the UK's decision not to join the Eurozone in the early 2000s will be seen as the start of the end of the EU.
It meant that one of the EU's largest countries was outside and acting as a brake on where the EU's high wallahs wanted to go. From their view we're outside the tent pi*ing in continuously, preventing the EZ countries from doing some of the things they need to do wrt integration.
And if we leave, it sets a massive precedent for other countries. Some may threaten to leave in order to get better deals, creating chaos and delaying progress.
However, it doesn't mean we wrong to stay out, though. Or that we'd be wrong to leave.
(I do think it's unlikely that the EU will end, but there is a possibility).
This is lifted from the comments section on Guido, I have posted it because to me it sums the situation up perfectly;
This is pure and simple a mugging of the dimwits that run the EU. Erdogan can see that Europe is up shit creek and that the paddles were thrown away a long time ago. He holds the trump cards and Europe has well and truly been shown up to be holding a dummy hand. The flow of migrants across to Lesbos and Kos will not stop and very few will ever get sent back. Just imagine the riots that will break out when trying to round them up. Meanwhile Turkey gets to trouser £4.5 billion of which £0.5 billion is ours and gets to shift a whole bunch of undesirables out of their country. Meanwhile the underhand buying and selling of ISIL oil, the destruction of the Kurds and the ability to further infiltrate Europe with a religion based on the destruction of Western civilisation goes on unabated. LEAVE is the only answer to save the UK. The rest of Europe is lost.
Plato is bad enough with her long quotes from columnists we've never heard of, but posting random rants from Guido's comments section is really scraping the barrel - much as though we started posted readers' letters from the Morning Star. You're often interesting, so speak for yourself, you don't need this guy.
I think an interesting question to ask (and I'm sure nobody will agree with me) is:
What is the future of Globalisation?
I believe there are definite signs that the cycle is changing direction.
If you accept the unproven premise that politics follows the basic rule of physics that every action has a reaction that is equal and opposite, then at some stage the direction of travel has to change.
I would suggest the rise in Nationalism and the anti politics movements in many developed democratic nations is an early indication of this. How it will manifest itself over the medium term is questionable.
'will still be the overriding theatre within which Europe's politics is determined.'
You are still dealing in these rather airy concepts. What is meant by 'Europe's politics'? and 'meaningful political institutions'? Meaningful to what end?
I am going to answer the question for you because I think from your previous posts I know what you mean. You are looking for an integrated United States of Europe that can throw its weight around in the world and you want the UK to be part of that.
In fact, you are the closest we have on this board to an old-fashioned Clarke or Gilmour-style Europhile.
Now that point of view is a respectable one and in a way is a refreshing change from the dissembling we get from most Remain supporters.
But most of the British people do not agree with it, and it is quite misleading to claim this is somehow the only possible future for this country.
What is the alternative future? or more accurately which of the competing visions has the traction to carry the vote? .... I haven't the faintest idea.
Presently LEAVE are a mess - Project TITTER. At least with Project FEAR we know the devil we're being ask to vote for, even if it isn't the most appetizing of prospects.
Of course the problem lies in your final sentence. You have no idea what you are voting for with Remain. You think it is business as usual when in fact that is the one option that is not open to the UK. The smokescreen about new wording regarding closer union is just so much rubbish.
A vote for in is a vote for far more EU involvement in UK affairs. The success of the Remain campaign so far is to make people like you think something else is on offer.
Kasich has shortened to single figure odds for the first time, with the likes of Bet365 offering him at just 15/2. to gain the GOP nomination. How is he managing to defy gravity, when less than 5 days ago I was able to back him at 100/1? Can anyone seriously see a pathway which would enable him to win? As I suggested last night, if 10/1 is a sensible price for his GOP nomination, then Hills' 40/1 against him becoming POTUS has to be a steal. DYOR
It has to involve a brokered convention, and Cruz and Trump both standing down in favour of a unity candidate i.e. him.
That's the route but it sure as hell ain't a 10/1 shot.
For reference, the latest poll (PPP, March 4-6) in Ohio has Trump three points clear of Kasich, 38-35, with Cruz at 15 and Rubio 5. He should probably be odds against to win his home state and a failure there should be terminal to his prospects (in practice, even if he doesn't withdraw immediately).
I suspect some punters have been reading tweets like this:
Then they should look at the detail. Yes, Kasich has been gaining ground but the three Michigan polls this week that put him in second still give Trump leads of 13, 22 and 18 points. Distant seconds are of little value at this stage to someone who has yet to gain a win.
Perhaps some have been reading Speedy's tip from a couple of days ago that Katich was going to win Michigan
If Kasich does win Michigan his nomination odds will come in sharply but he will still have only a very slight chance and be even more layable than he is now.
I wonder if there is potential for Kasich to replace Rubio as the candidate who stubbornly sticks at daft odds, at least for a couple of weeks. There are clearly people reasoning that "It can't be Trump or Cruz so who is there?"
The Broxtowe Candidate calls this a "random rant", but it's an analysis which is pure gold.
This is pure and simple a mugging of the dimwits that run the EU. Erdogan can see that Europe is up shit creek and that the paddles were thrown away a long time ago. He holds the trump cards and Europe has well and truly been shown up to be holding a dummy hand. The flow of migrants across to Lesbos and Kos will not stop and very few will ever get sent back. Just imagine the riots that will break out when trying to round them up. Meanwhile Turkey gets to trouser £4.5 billion of which £0.5 billion is ours and gets to shift a whole bunch of undesirables out of their country. Meanwhile the underhand buying and selling of ISIL oil, the destruction of the Kurds and the ability to further infiltrate Europe with a religion based on the destruction of Western civilisation goes on unabated. LEAVE is the only answer to save the UK. The rest of Europe is lost.
Can someone call the GOP and ask them what the plan is if Cruz is behind Trump on delegates with Rubio 3rd, with Kasich 4th heading into a brokered convention ?
This is lifted from the comments section on Guido, I have posted it because to me it sums the situation up perfectly;
This is pure and simple a mugging of the dimwits that run the EU. Erdogan can see that Europe is up shit creek and that the paddles were thrown away a long time ago. He holds the trump cards and Europe has well and truly been shown up to be holding a dummy hand. The flow of migrants across to Lesbos and Kos will not stop and very few will ever get sent back. Just imagine the riots that will break out when trying to round them up. Meanwhile Turkey gets to trouser £4.5 billion of which £0.5 billion is ours and gets to shift a whole bunch of undesirables out of their country. Meanwhile the underhand buying and selling of ISIL oil, the destruction of the Kurds and the ability to further infiltrate Europe with a religion based on the destruction of Western civilisation goes on unabated. LEAVE is the only answer to save the UK. The rest of Europe is lost.
It's rubbish. If this was real, he'd have been doing it five years ago when the crisis started.
As for the money: it doesn't cover what Turkey's already spent on housing refugees, yet alone the other costs. It also discounts all the other routes (not involving Turkey) by which migrants are entering the EU, such as the central and western Med and Balkan routes. It's cost Turkey a massive amount, both fiscally and socially.
If Erdogan and Turkey was in it for the money, they'd have done a much better job of it.
Project Leave is really turning into Project Paranoia.
And you've every right to be wary. But you do need to look at it from Turkey's point of view as well, and perhaps, just perhaps, appreciate all that they've done already. Can you imagine how much worse the situation would be if they hadn't housed that two million+ refugees?
In computing terms they've been a buffer. And now that buffer is full and overflowing. As all good programmers know, buffer overflows are rarely good news.
(I've stretched that poor analogy far enough).
You have stretched but it was a good analogy at first
The Broxtowe Candidate calls this a "random rant", but it's an analysis which is pure gold.
This is pure and simple a mugging of the dimwits that run the EU. Erdogan can see that Europe is up shit creek and that the paddles were thrown away a long time ago. He holds the trump cards and Europe has well and truly been shown up to be holding a dummy hand. The flow of migrants across to Lesbos and Kos will not stop and very few will ever get sent back. Just imagine the riots that will break out when trying to round them up. Meanwhile Turkey gets to trouser £4.5 billion of which £0.5 billion is ours and gets to shift a whole bunch of undesirables out of their country. Meanwhile the underhand buying and selling of ISIL oil, the destruction of the Kurds and the ability to further infiltrate Europe with a religion based on the destruction of Western civilisation goes on unabated. LEAVE is the only answer to save the UK. The rest of Europe is lost.
One MP told me: “I have never briefed after PLP but that was a fucking disgrace. I feel sorry for Jeremy because he is so clearly struggling and out if his depth. They lined up a load of people to try and pre-emptively brief that if we do badly in May it's because of a divided PLP. But it's so obvious that we are losing because Jeremy is shit, the party is floundering.”
Comments
Peace in Syria and Iraq is what is needed, and the conditions where people can safely return home without fear. Cue the old arguments ...
It's a massive problem for Turkey, and one they coped with admirably for a few years with little outside help or consideration.
But I'd like to see fiscal help for Lebanon and Jordan as well. They're being ignored now, as Turkey was a couple of years ago.
Are they going to admit that Frau Merkel's monumental pratfalls have been disastrous, and work out how many refugees she has caused to drown at the hands of traffickers?
This should be written on Merkel's political grave.
If you come to the UK you are very welcome, however you must first prove to us that you are able to support yourself and your family. In your utopian world your beloved suburban Leicester would very soon look like Soweto, I'm fairly sure thats not what you have in mind.
We are much bigger of course but it is indicative of the sorts of problems that Brexit would have to negotiate. It is also indicative that those negotiations would take place in a context where the EU had a lot more things to think about in the negotiations than their unilateral relationship with the UK. There is food for thought on both sides of the argument in this piece.
UKIP has become a Fuhrerpartei I'm afraid.
Of course, they conquered by the sword, had few laws and asked for little taxation. As long as provinces paid up, they were largely left to get on with it. I think the civil service was shockingly small (a few hundred or thousand only).
The EU is almost exactly the opposite.
Fortunately, as an island on the edge of a continent we're somewhat isolated from such eventualities.
Turkey's at breaking point and also somewhat scared. Not a good combination, especially with the leadership it has.
https://m.oddschecker.com/t/tips/tv-and-specials/20160307-us-election:-and-then-there-were-four-or-were-there-more
One, there is no European demos - and there can't be a democracy without a demos.
Two, insofar as the electorates (plural) of the EU get a vote, their parties promptly form EU-level groups in the Parliament in which 90% of MEPs agree with each other on everything.
Why would the rest of the EU agree to this?
Laurie Penny will be writing poetry about it when she's 60 and there is likely some Marxist admiration to be had, but I doubt it sits well with the vast majority of normal mothers and grandmothers.
Can anyone seriously see a pathway which would enable him to win? As I suggested last night, if 10/1 is a sensible price for his GOP nomination, then Hills' 40/1 against him becoming POTUS has to be a steal.
DYOR
Winning is a challenge, as Corbynistas generally accept. But not especially because of older women.
Labour moderates would, however, be wrong to wait. By this time next year they could be playing to a different set of rules with their current trump card - the 15% nominations rule - taken away.
Suspect Remain campaign won't be thrilled by prospect of Turkey's EU membership being expedited as part of migrant deal
I agree with you that UKIP is dead, sunk by Farage's ego. I truly believe that politics will look completely different after the referendum, more so if as expected Remain win.
The Tory right will break off, the Labour left will go their way, with a huge centreground to be occupied by the wet Tories like Soubry and the Lib Dems.
It is the Tory right which will be the interesting as I believe they will have to either take over Ukip or start again, led by either Gove or Rees-Mogg.
If Leave win I expect something similar but it will be the Tory wets that break off to form some sort of alliance with the Lib Dems.
I know Calais very well, I've seen the jungle, it is a hell hole for those living there and the long term Calais residents. Worse still, it has been entirely created by the EU and its fingers in its ears approach to immigration/people movement. They are now living in shipping containers. Did Ukip create that? Was Farage prodding them with a stick? Would you allow these document less people into the country?
You Sir, from your gated community in the leafy suburbs, are the very epitome of ignorance.
That's the route but it sure as hell ain't a 10/1 shot.
For reference, the latest poll (PPP, March 4-6) in Ohio has Trump three points clear of Kasich, 38-35, with Cruz at 15 and Rubio 5. He should probably be odds against to win his home state and a failure there should be terminal to his prospects (in practice, even if he doesn't withdraw immediately).
Some EU politicians and bureaucrats probably secretly rather admire that
Are you going to have another "prolier than thou" meltdown?
This is obviously very desirable for the EU and Greece in particular. There is going to be a price for Turkish cooperation. I guess the disagreement, at present, is over what that should be.
Can someone tells me where this ranks in the scale between "no ifs, no buts" and "cast iron guarantee"?
The very fact that there are EU-wide groups shows that there is a European demos at at least one level. That's unsurprising given that ideology will invariably trump nationality on matters of policy. Unless there is some unusual overriding local interest, socialists will tend to work together for what they believe in, whether they come from Sweden or Spain; Conservatives will work together to deliver Conservative policies from Latvia to London; Christian Democrats will work together from Belgium to Bologna; and so on.
It's true that the EP to some extent forces parties to work together across national lines but the reality is that they would tend to do so anyway simply because of shared objectives.
Is there widespread public interest in the EP? No, of course not. There isn't any interest in the UK parliament either beyond the theatrics.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/lust-for-destruction
And it is?
Britain can leave. Of course it can. But the EU will still be the only political expression of 'Europe'. We tried an alternative fifty years ago in EFTA. It didn't work and is now nothing more than an EU satellite, which tends to the same conclusion.
NYT Politics @nytpolitics 13h13 hours ago
Michigan poll shows John Kasich gaining ground on Donald Trump http://nyti.ms/1TEUxfT
This is pure and simple a mugging of the dimwits that run the EU. Erdogan can see that Europe is up shit creek and that the paddles were thrown away a long time ago. He holds the trump cards and Europe has well and truly been shown up to be holding a dummy hand. The flow of migrants across to Lesbos and Kos will not stop and very few will ever get sent back. Just imagine the riots that will break out when trying to round them up. Meanwhile Turkey gets to trouser £4.5 billion of which £0.5 billion is ours and gets to shift a whole bunch of undesirables out of their country. Meanwhile the underhand buying and selling of ISIL oil, the destruction of the Kurds and the ability to further infiltrate Europe with a religion based on the destruction of Western civilisation goes on unabated.
LEAVE is the only answer to save the UK. The rest of Europe is lost.
And others may feel an alternative future was possible. And it is?
Britain can leave. Of course it can. But the EU will still be the only political expression of 'Europe'. We tried an alternative fifty years ago in EFTA. It didn't work and is now nothing more than an EU satellite, which tends to the same conclusion.
Well there are a few of points to make about that -
1. You might have said similar things about the Hapsburg monarchy, Napoleon's empire or even the Third Reich at various points - and some UK politicians did.
2. So what? Why do we need to be involved in a 'political expression of 'Europe''?
3. Your expression 'political expression of Europe' is a euphemism fora United States of Europe, which is where the EU is ultimately going. 'Political expression' sounds fuzzy and warm and non-threatening. United States of Europe doesn't - and the voters don't want it.
Turkey is a very long way off gaining EU membership because its internal policies are incompatible and growing more so - see the recent state takeover of a newspaper, for example. On top of which, Cyprus and Greece would probably veto even without the other issues that have arisen over the last two years.
However, as Britain doesn't have a dog in this fight, it helps to play the good European, particularly as the solution that the EU has finally come round to is that which Cameron advocated about a year ago and which, if implemented at the time, would have done a lot to prevent the problem getting as bad as it has.
People like him, but arguably he's not really persuasive - that's a slightly different thing.
But there lies the problem for LEAVE.
What is the alternative future? or more accurately which of the competing visions has the traction to carry the vote? .... I haven't the faintest idea.
Presently LEAVE are a mess - Project TITTER. At least with Project FEAR we know the devil we're being ask to vote for, even if it isn't the most appetizing of prospects.
There is certainly a possibility that the EU might break up in the next ten years. If it does, it will be much more down to the election of populist-nationalist governments / presidents (e.g. Le Pen) than an orderly transition to a different kind of mainstream political order.
Britain leaving would be a serious blow to the EU project, both for the symbolism in itself and for the succour that would give to other anti-EU groups on the continent. However, the idea that the EU could ever again be an EEC is a fantasy as long as the Euro exists.
HK v Zim - Sky Sports 2
Over 40% of the electorate, and 35% of Labour voters, say they don't know what Labour's position is on the EU https://t.co/X4vCnWO7nl
And even if we left we'd still be involved in trading agreements, NATO, Eastern Europe rapid reaction force, policing the Med from migrants etc etc.
Which is why Major, if he had been following the supposed strategy for which the UK joined the EU - be inside to influence it in a direction that benefits Britain's interest - should have vetoed Maastricht.
Instead he colluded with the bullying of the Danes into a second referendum and then forced the wretched treaty through the UK parliament as well, denying UK voters a say.
From which I think it is safe to conclude that Major is in fact a supporter of a United States of Europe - and should not be listened to on this topic.
The destiny of the Eurozone is now set I think - either the UK joins that proto-USE or it finds its own way in the world and reaches the best modus vivendi it can with the new organisation. The latter option is by far the more appealing.
Yet the Germans and French did. Our national mindset isn't on the same wavelength. And never will be. There is certainly a possibility that the EU might break up in the next ten years. If it does, it will be much more down to the election of populist-nationalist governments / presidents (e.g. Le Pen) than an orderly transition to a different kind of mainstream political order.
Britain leaving would be a serious blow to the EU project, both for the symbolism in itself and for the succour that would give to other anti-EU groups on the continent. However, the idea that the EU could ever again be an EEC is a fantasy as long as the Euro exists.
2. We don't; that's what the referendum is about. But the EU will still be there on June 24 if Britain votes to leave and will still be the overriding theatre within which Europe's politics is determined.
3. It's not a euphemism. It's a practical recognition that all the meaningful European political institutions are EU-based, including the EEA.
As for the money: it doesn't cover what Turkey's already spent on housing refugees, yet alone the other costs. It also discounts all the other routes (not involving Turkey) by which migrants are entering the EU, such as the central and western Med and Balkan routes. It's cost Turkey a massive amount, both fiscally and socially.
If Erdogan and Turkey was in it for the money, they'd have done a much better job of it.
Project Leave is really turning into Project Paranoia.
That assertion is based on what fact?
There are tens of millions in Asia, Africa and the Middle East who are mobile, oppressed, in real poverty and know of the Utopia of Europe.
That is also involves a lot of cash, and visa free travel is the price of a strong hand.
I'm exceptionally wary.
In computing terms they've been a buffer. And now that buffer is full and overflowing. As all good programmers know, buffer overflows are rarely good news.
(I've stretched that poor analogy far enough).
It also answers Runnymede's point about Major. Yes, he could have vetoed Maastricht, not put it through parliament or stood with the Danish electorate (though not the Danish government), but had he done so he'd have been standing against the express will of most of the EC members who wanted the Euro. They could have created it outside the formal EU structure anyway and then practical politics would almost certainly have brought it inside.
It's also worth remembering that one of the reasons that France and others were so keen to embrace the Euro was that it was seen as a means of controlling an only very recently reunited Germany. History might not be kind on that view (FWIW, we should consider the alternative before disdaining and dismissing the original judgement), but the end of the Cold War and the reunification of Germany changed the continent in a way that politicians who still remembered WWII were uneasy about. Suggesting that vetoing Maastricht would have ended the Euro-project misremembers how strong the desire was to handle that new situation through super-national solutions.
It meant that one of the EU's largest countries was outside and acting as a brake on where the EU's high wallahs wanted to go. From their view we're outside the tent pi*ing in continuously, preventing the EZ countries from doing some of the things they need to do wrt integration.
And if we leave, it sets a massive precedent for other countries. Some may threaten to leave in order to get better deals, creating chaos and delaying progress.
However, it doesn't mean we wrong to stay out, though. Or that we'd be wrong to leave.
(I do think it's unlikely that the EU will end, but there is a possibility).
What is the future of Globalisation?
I believe there are definite signs that the cycle is changing direction.
If you accept the unproven premise that politics follows the basic rule of physics that every action has a reaction that is equal and opposite, then at some stage the direction of travel has to change.
I would suggest the rise in Nationalism and the anti politics movements in many developed democratic nations is an early indication of this. How it will manifest itself over the medium term is questionable.
You are still dealing in these rather airy concepts. What is meant by 'Europe's politics'? and 'meaningful political institutions'? Meaningful to what end?
I am going to answer the question for you because I think from your previous posts I know what you mean. You are looking for an integrated United States of Europe that can throw its weight around in the world and you want the UK to be part of that.
In fact, you are the closest we have on this board to an old-fashioned Clarke or Gilmour-style Europhile.
Now that point of view is a respectable one and in a way is a refreshing change from the dissembling we get from most Remain supporters.
But most of the British people do not agree with it, and it is quite misleading to claim this is somehow the only possible future for this country.
A vote for in is a vote for far more EU involvement in UK affairs. The success of the Remain campaign so far is to make people like you think something else is on offer.
I wonder if there is potential for Kasich to replace Rubio as the candidate who stubbornly sticks at daft odds, at least for a couple of weeks. There are clearly people reasoning that "It can't be Trump or Cruz so who is there?"
Osborne now falling into the pack of other REMAINERS.
http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2016/03/boris-powers-into-a-double-digit-lead-in-our-next-party-leader-survey.html
This is pure and simple a mugging of the dimwits that run the EU. Erdogan can see that Europe is up shit creek and that the paddles were thrown away a long time ago. He holds the trump cards and Europe has well and truly been shown up to be holding a dummy hand. The flow of migrants across to Lesbos and Kos will not stop and very few will ever get sent back. Just imagine the riots that will break out when trying to round them up. Meanwhile Turkey gets to trouser £4.5 billion of which £0.5 billion is ours and gets to shift a whole bunch of undesirables out of their country. Meanwhile the underhand buying and selling of ISIL oil, the destruction of the Kurds and the ability to further infiltrate Europe with a religion based on the destruction of Western civilisation goes on unabated.
LEAVE is the only answer to save the UK. The rest of Europe is lost.
Quoting them on here means it's terminal.