Amber Rudd's infamous brother @RolandRudd Zac Goldsmith just ensured he will lose London Mayor election by opting for Out when vast majority of City want to remain in EU
I would recommend Private Eye over the Spectator.
I'd recommend Standpoint over both. The Daily Mash is far funnier than Private Eye these days. And you can read most of the stuff worth reading on the Spectator on the internet. For free.
The last two GOP runs have proved very profitable, but this time I've been struggling to find a way in.
My very early nomination money (well over a year ago) went on Christie then more recently it went on Rubio. Christie is a write off and I had a feeling so was Rubio, but now I'm not so sure.
The GOP grandees can work with Trump, to a point, they can't work with Cruz. That won't stop them trying to bring Trump down (the assumption is that Cruz will eventually wither). Given Rubio's team was sounded out by Bush donors some time ago in case Jeb did drop out, Marco should have resources. More importantly he is perhaps the main fairly middle of the road candidate that still holds a decent block within the GOP voter base.
Seems to me now that the only viable 'stop trump' candidate is Rubio. Cruz is too reliant on evangelicals and these voters are in states that offer only proportional delegates. Looking increasingly like no one can stop Trump, but I remain on Rubio for both GOP and POTUS. Hoping to make up for early losses on Bush.
SC turnout in the GOP primary was enormous: 27.1% of all registered voters (737,917 of 2,722,280).
Broken down by 'track', it was:
Rebel = 32.5% Evangelist = 22.3% Establishment = 37.9% Carson (don't see his remaining voters going either Trump or Cruz, maybe abstain or Kasich)
So, it boils down to how much of the Bush and Kasich vote Rubio can mop up now he is the clear anti-Trump/Cruz, when Kasich moves out of the way and how much damage he does to Rubio before he does.
Carson's supporters are more likely to go for Trump and Cruz than Bush and Kasich's. With Super Tuesday in just a fortnight if Kasich stays in there that will hamper Rubio and he has to win some states then as Cruz will likely win Texas, Arkansas and a few others. If he fails and Trump wins Florida on 15th March Rubio will then be out leaving a Trump v Cruz battle
Which can only be won by Trump.
Question:
What is the route to Trump not winning the nomination at this point?
Because his price being better than evens seems seriously wrong at the moment.
I had breakfast with a fairly senior Spanish politician last week who poured ice cold water on your EU inviting Scotland to secede. He basically said that no Spanish government, unless it was run by Podemos, would ever support any secessionist moves in Europe, and that it would be vetoed by Spain.
Automatic membership would definitely be blocked by Spain and other EU member states. An independent Scotland would be made to apply for EU membership on terms applicable to any other country and over the normal timeframe. This has been the clear Spanish - and EU - position for many years. Only the SNP has pretended otherwise.
Given Scotland exports four times as much to rUK as it does to the EU (excluding oil & gas), it would be pretty bizarre abandoning the 'Union' which is your major trading partner in favour of the 'Union' one quarter of the size.....in any case, Nicola is not promising SINDYREF2 if the vote is for BREXIT.....
To be fair that is a false argument. No one is saying that leaving the UK would end trade between Scotland and the rUK anymore than it would between the UK and the EU if we left. Such arguments really have no credence at all.
It's more the case that the arguments Sturgeon makes for not leaving the EU apply equally - if not more - to Scotland not leaving the UK.
Well yes I agree with you there. It works both ways which is why I have such trouble with the concept of Eurosceptics arguing about sovereignty whilst at the same time being anti Scots Independence. The same arguments apply across the board to both issues. I suppose the only clinching argument for me at the moment is that the UK financially is in a better position to be independent than Scotland. But even there I am sure Scotland will not have that problem for ever.
British people see themselves as European much less than Scots see themselves as British, I would imagine.
I think you imagine wrong. I know very few who count themselves British
I don't know anyone in England who regards themselves as European.
I do whenever I am in the US.
Indeed, it took about 20 years of living here before that ceased to be the case for me. Now I feel like a stranger in London.
The older partners may well be more pro Remain as you say which directs the discussion but regardless of why they are making the decision the big firms will still back Remain. As for the next generation who knows, it may be the younger generation in the City are more sceptical, though nationally the younger generation is more pro Remain but as the referendum is held in 4 months we can only go on the position now
"We can only go on the position now" - unless you have differentiated understanding. But you go with what you read in the press; I'll go with what my cousins and I are told over coffee and lunch.
Few of these firms - other than those with a particular axe to grind (Gerry!), close links to politicos (JP), or talking their own book (GS, Tosca) will take a particularly strong stance because of the splits.
The position now is none of the big firms will back Brexit, they will all be for Remain ie JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs, HSBC, Clifford Chance etc
I hope for Cameron's sake we don't get a terrorist attack in Britain before the referendum.
I hope, for the sake of those who would suffer in such an attack, that we don't get a terrorist attack. The impact on Cameron is neither here not there, frankly.
Anyway, my thoughts FWTW are these:-
1. The negotiated deal is a crock of shit.
2. Gove's statement is a superb statement of what liberal democracy means and what it means for Britain. That and Benn's speech during the Syrian debate are two speeches/statements worth keeping and referring to. Gove admirably sets out what the real issues are not this piffling "How much are these peas?" approach to benefits which Cameron has been peddling - and not very effectively either.
3. Galloway is still an unmentionable - as is Farage for thinking he should be given centre stage - but I am not letting either of those two ghastly people determine my life or decisions, other than a determination never to vote for them.
4. If Boris goes for Leave he should concentrate on how Cameron has failed to ensure a proper balance between Britain's interests and those of the eurozone and that as a consequence a major industry in Britain and for London and the South-East in particular is at risk.
And - in other news and if Southam Observer is around - this article is rather good if depressing and, sadly, accurate.
Just to be clear, I hope nothing happens. What I was getting at is that Cameron's telling people that our security is dependent upon on our membership of the EU. I think this makes Cameron fair game for criticism should something happen that is in part related to the 'refugee' crisis.
I disagree with you on Farage. I certainly don't want him to lead the Leave campaign, but I think he has a role to play. He puts his case across very well and connects a sizeable chunk of the electorate. Hopefully others like Gove can connect with those who are not so keen on Farage.
Agree that Farage will likely play a role. But if he makes it all about him he will do Leave no favours at all.
He just doesn't float my boat, at all. Quite the opposite. There is too much of a whiff of "Aren't all foreigners ghastly" about him, maybe unfairly. And I consider his judgment flaky.
He is married to one; he can't think they're that ghastly.
I had breakfast with a fairly senior Spanish politician last week who poured ice cold water on your EU inviting Scotland to secede. He basically said that no Spanish government, unless it was run by Podemos, would ever support any secessionist moves in Europe, and that it would be vetoed by Spain.
Automatic membership would definitely be blocked by Spain and other EU member states. An independent Scotland would be made to apply for EU membership on terms applicable to any other country and over the normal timeframe. This has been the clear Spanish - and EU - position for many years. Only the SNP has pretended otherwise.
Given Scotland exports four times as much to rUK as it does to the EU (excluding oil & gas), it would be pretty bizarre abandoning the 'Union' which is your major trading partner in favour of the 'Union' one quarter of the size.....in any case, Nicola is not promising SINDYREF2 if the vote is for BREXIT.....
To be fair that is a false argument. No one is saying that leaving the UK would end trade between Scotland and the rUK anymore than it would between the UK and the EU if we left. Such arguments really have no credence at all.
It's more the case that the arguments Sturgeon makes for not leaving the EU apply equally - if not more - to Scotland not leaving the UK.
Well yes I agree with you there. It works both ways which is why I have such trouble with the concept of Eurosceptics arguing about sovereignty whilst at the same time being anti Scots Independence. The same arguments apply across the board to both issues. I suppose the only clinching argument for me at the moment is that the UK financially is in a better position to be independent than Scotland. But even there I am sure Scotland will not have that problem for ever.
British people see themselves as European much less than Scots see themselves as British, I would imagine.
I think you imagine wrong. I know very few who count themselves British
I don't know anyone in England who regards themselves as European.
I think of myself as European in many respects. But to be honest I find the whole "what is my identify" stuff absurd and, when I start doing it myself, embarrassing. The first thing to understand about how you see yourself is that no one else cares.
Amber Rudd's infamous brother @RolandRudd Zac Goldsmith just ensured he will lose London Mayor election by opting for Out when vast majority of City want to remain in EU
There is nothing average or lacking in intellectual curiosity about a mind properly engaging with Locke, Paine, Burke, Mill, etc.
Clearly the PPEs with a curious minds don't go into politics, just as largely the engineers and scientists don't, the drones end up in government.
There seems to be a surfeit of mediocrity in the Commons these days, there are a few rising stars, but so many dull timer servers. Even the supposed rising starts largely seem to be called such because they are media performers, rather than because they can see far or think deeply.
Agree but I think it's because a lot of them are relatively so young. So they have not developed courage. The courage to think for themselves. The courage not to care about trivial matters. The courage to say what they think. The courage to say what needs to be said. The courage that comes from knowing that you have less time ahead of you than behind you.
People talk about age giving you wisdom but I think it gives you courage. Well, to some people it does.
The media stars never strike me as particularly good communicators. But I tend to think that's because they are focused on how they say something rather than on what they are saying.
There are only two things needed for good communication:-
(1) Having something to say. (2) Having something you want to say to this audience.
Substance and authenticity. That's it. All the rest is detail.
Look at say the Labour cabinet Wilson/Callaghan, look at how many big names there were in it, how many serious minds and powerful figures (Healey, Jenkins, Foot, Benn, Castle, Williams, Hattersley, Owen)... how many people can remember half a dozen people in Brown's cabinet, and how many of those are for the wrong reasons!
How many of the current cabinet will be remembered in 40 years! Never mind the shadow cabinet
I hope for Cameron's sake we don't get a terrorist attack in Britain before the referendum.
I hope, for the sake of those who would suffer in such an attack, that we don't get a terrorist attack. The impact on Cameron is neither here not there, frankly.
Anyway, my thoughts FWTW are these:-
1. The negotiated deal is a crock of shit.
2. Gove's statement is a superb statement of what liberal democracy means and what it means for Britain. That and Benn's speech during the Syrian debate are two speeches/statements worth keeping and referring to. Gove admirably sets out what the real issues are not this piffling "How much are these peas?" approach to benefits which Cameron has been peddling - and not very effectively either.
3. Galloway is still an unmentionable - as is Farage for thinking he should be given centre stage - but I am not letting either of those two ghastly people determine my life or decisions, other than a determination never to vote for them.
4. If Boris goes for Leave he should concentrate on how Cameron has failed to ensure a proper balance between Britain's interests and those of the eurozone and that as a consequence a major industry in Britain and for London and the South-East in particular is at risk.
And - in other news and if Southam Observer is around - this article is rather good if depressing and, sadly, accurate.
Just to be clear, I hope nothing happens. What I was getting at is that Cameron's telling people that our security is dependent upon on our membership of the EU. I think this makes Cameron fair game for criticism should something happen that is in part related to the 'refugee' crisis.
I disagree with you on Farage. I certainly don't want him to lead the Leave campaign, but I think he has a role to play. He puts his case across very well and connects a sizeable chunk of the electorate. Hopefully others like Gove can connect with those who are not so keen on Farage.
Agree that Farage will likely play a role. But if he makes it all about him he will do Leave no favours at all.
He just doesn't float my boat, at all. Quite the opposite. There is too much of a whiff of "Aren't all foreigners ghastly" about him, maybe unfairly. And I consider his judgment flaky.
He is married to one; he can't think they're that ghastly. err tempted to ask if that has influenced him....(just joking kippers)
Bitch of the day? @BBCWorldatOne Alan Johnson: "Let's be kind, they're not the six most astute politicians that I've ever met in the Cabinet" #tw2 pic.twitter.com/lwuqT9ep0d Retweeted by Nick Sutton
I hope for Cameron's sake we don't get a terrorist attack in Britain before the referendum.
I hope, for the sake of those who would suffer in such an attack, that we don't get a terrorist attack. The impact on Cameron is neither here not there, frankly.
Anyway, my thoughts FWTW are these:-
1. The negotiated deal is a crock of shit.
2. Gove's statement is a superb statement of what liberal democracy means and what it means for Britain. That and Benn's speech during the Syrian debate are two speeches/statements worth keeping and referring to. Gove admirably sets out what the real issues are not this piffling "How much are these peas?" approach to benefits which Cameron has been peddling - and not very effectively either.
3. Galloway is still an unmentionable - as is Farage for thinking he should be given centre stage - but I am not letting either of those two ghastly people determine my life or decisions, other than a determination never to vote for them.
4. If Boris goes for Leave he should concentrate on how Cameron has failed to ensure a proper balance between Britain's interests and those of the eurozone and that as a consequence a major industry in Britain and for London and the South-East in particular is at risk.
And - in other news and if Southam Observer is around - this article is rather good if depressing and, sadly, accurate.
Just to be clear, I hope nothing happens. What I was getting at is that Cameron's telling people that our security is dependent upon on our membership of the EU. I think this makes Cameron fair game for criticism should something happen that is in part related to the 'refugee' crisis.
I disagree with you on Farage. I certainly don't want him to lead the Leave campaign, but I think he has a role to play. He puts his case across very well and connects a sizeable chunk of the electorate. Hopefully others like Gove can connect with those who are not so keen on Farage.
Agree that Farage will likely play a role. But if he makes it all about him he will do Leave no favours at all.
He just doesn't float my boat, at all. Quite the opposite. There is too much of a whiff of "Aren't all foreigners ghastly" about him, maybe unfairly. And I consider his judgment flaky.
He is married to one; he can't think they're that ghastly.
Agreed. It's a perception issue. He may well be more thoughtful in person. I can only go on what I see of him on TV.
And, as I've said before, I think it's to his credit that he does not use his personal situation for political gain. That speaks well of him personally.
What is the route to Trump not winning the nomination at this point?
Because his price being better than evens seems seriously wrong at the moment.
The non-Trump vote is still over 60%. So, two possible routes: - the field whittling down to it being Trump vs acceptable non-Trump (effectively either Rubio or Kasich would do, but Rubio has the claim at this point) - the field stays at 3 (Trump, Cruz, Rubio or Kasich not both), Cruz' vote in the states with relatively few evangelicals collapses, letting the non-Trump win those states, Cruz picks up some states in the South, Trump gets the rest, we go to Conference without a winner. The party coalesces around the non-Trump.
That said, the non-Trump victory still requires a lot of stars to align just so.
Sounds horribly like ObamaCare. "We have to pass [it] so that you can find out what is in it."
If I was advising one of the LEAVE groups i would push the line of asking if this EC "renegotiation" is a leap in the dark by Cameron if details such as the welfare rules are not settled?
I had breakfast with a fairly senior Spanish politician last week who poured ice cold water on your EU inviting Scotland to secede. He basically said that no Spanish government, unless it was run by Podemos, would ever support any secessionist moves in Europe, and that it would be vetoed by Spain.
Automatic membership would definitely be blocked by Spain and other EU member states. An independent Scotland would be made to apply for EU membership on terms applicable to any other country and over the normal timeframe. This has been the clear Spanish - and EU - position for many years. Only the SNP has pretended otherwise.
Given Scotland exports four times as much to rUK as it does to the EU (excluding oil & gas), it would be pretty bizarre abandoning the 'Union' which is your major trading partner in favour of the 'Union' one quarter of the size.....in any case, Nicola is not promising SINDYREF2 if the vote is for BREXIT.....
To be fair that is a false argument. No one is saying that leaving the UK would end trade between Scotland and the rUK anymore than it would between the UK and the EU if we left. Such arguments really have no credence at all.
It's more the case that the arguments Sturgeon makes for not leaving the EU apply equally - if not more - to Scotland not leaving the UK.
Well yes I agree with you there. It works both ways which is why I have such trouble with the concept of Eurosceptics arguing about sovereignty whilst at the same time being anti Scots Independence. The same arguments apply across the board to both issues. I suppose the only clinching argument for me at the moment is that the UK financially is in a better position to be independent than Scotland. But even there I am sure Scotland will not have that problem for ever.
British people see themselves as European much less than Scots see themselves as British, I would imagine.
I think you imagine wrong. I know very few who count themselves British
And yet your anti-British movement was rejected by the sovereign will of the Scottish people. Still waiting for your promised emigration in the case of a No vote. In the name of God, go.
still spouting lies Monica, when will you call me a foreigner , immigrant and have a full house. Jog on loser.
Amber Rudd's infamous brother @RolandRudd Zac Goldsmith just ensured he will lose London Mayor election by opting for Out when vast majority of City want to remain in EU
I had breakfast with a fairly senior Spanish politician last week who poured ice cold water on your EU inviting Scotland to secede. He basically said that no Spanish government, unless it was run by Podemos, would ever support any secessionist moves in Europe, and that it would be vetoed by Spain.
Automatic membership would definitely be blocked by Spain and other EU member states. An independent Scotland would be made to apply for EU membership on terms applicable to any other country and over the normal timeframe. This has been the clear Spanish - and EU - position for many years. Only the SNP has pretended otherwise.
Given Scotland exports four times as much to rUK as it does to the EU (excluding oil & gas), it would be pretty bizarre abandoning the 'Union' which is your major trading partner in favour of the 'Union' one quarter of the size.....in any case, Nicola is not promising SINDYREF2 if the vote is for BREXIT.....
To be fair that is a false argument. No one is saying that leaving the UK would end trade between Scotland and the rUK anymore than it would between the UK and the EU if we left. Such arguments really have no credence at all.
It's more the case that the arguments Sturgeon makes for not leaving the EU apply equally - if not more - to Scotland not leaving the UK.
Well yes I agree with you there. It works both ways which is why I have such trouble with the concept of Eurosceptics arguing about sovereignty whilst at the same time being anti Scots Independence. The same arguments apply across the board to both issues. I suppose the only clinching argument for me at the moment is that the UK financially is in a better position to be independent than Scotland. But even there I am sure Scotland will not have that problem for ever.
British people see themselves as European much less than Scots see themselves as British, I would imagine.
I think you imagine wrong. I know very few who count themselves British
I don't know anyone in England who regards themselves as European.
Surely the views of your fellow Unionists should be of interest? Project Global UK is going to look a wee bit diminished if it almost immediately loses a third of its land mass and half its territorial waters.
The older partners may well be more pro Remain as you say which directs the discussion but regardless of why they are making the decision the big firms will still back Remain. As for the next generation who knows, it may be the younger generation in the City are more sceptical, though nationally the younger generation is more pro Remain but as the referendum is held in 4 months we can only go on the position now
"We can only go on the position now" - unless you have differentiated understanding. But you go with what you read in the press; I'll go with what my cousins and I are told over coffee and lunch.
Few of these firms - other than those with a particular axe to grind (Gerry!), close links to politicos (JP), or talking their own book (GS, Tosca) will take a particularly strong stance because of the splits.
The position now is none of the big firms will back Brexit, they will all be for Remain ie JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs, HSBC, Clifford Chance etc
Yes. As I said.
Try adding more value than regurgitating the same point monomanaically.
I had breakfast with a fairly senior Spanish politician last week who poured ice cold water on your EU inviting Scotland to secede. He basically said that no Spanish government, unless it was run by Podemos, would ever support any secessionist moves in Europe, and that it would be vetoed by Spain.
Automatic membership would definitely be blocked by Spain and other EU member states. An independent Scotland would be made to apply for EU membership on terms applicable to any other country and over the normal timeframe. This has been the clear Spanish - and EU - position for many years. Only the SNP has pretended otherwise.
Given Scotland exports four times as much to rUK as it does to the EU (excluding oil & gas), it would be pretty bizarre abandoning the 'Union' which is your major trading partner in favour of the 'Union' one quarter of the size.....in any case, Nicola is not promising SINDYREF2 if the vote is for BREXIT.....
To be fair that is a false argument. No one is saying that leaving the UK would end trade between Scotland and the rUK anymore than it would between the UK and the EU if we left. Such arguments really have no credence at all.
It's more the case that the arguments Sturgeon makes for not leaving the EU apply equally - if not more - to Scotland not leaving the UK.
Well yes I agree with you there. It works both ways which is why I have such trouble with the concept of Eurosceptics arguing about sovereignty whilst at the same time being anti Scots Independence. The same arguments apply across the board to both issues. I suppose the only clinching argument for me at the moment is that the UK financially is in a better position to be independent than Scotland. But even there I am sure Scotland will not have that problem for ever.
British people see themselves as European much less than Scots see themselves as British, I would imagine.
I think you imagine wrong. I know very few who count themselves British
You move in very narrow circles - only 23% of Scots see themselves as "Scottish not British " with the rest on a sliding scale - the most popular of which is "Equally Scottish and British "
What is the route to Trump not winning the nomination at this point?
Because his price being better than evens seems seriously wrong at the moment.
The non-Trump vote is still over 60%. So, two possible routes: - the field whittling down to it being Trump vs acceptable non-Trump (effectively either Rubio or Kasich would do, but Rubio has the claim at this point) - the field stays at 3 (Trump, Cruz, Rubio or Kasich not both), Cruz' vote in the states with relatively few evangelicals collapses, letting the non-Trump win those states, Cruz picks up some states in the South, Trump gets the rest, we go to Conference without a winner. The party coalesces around the non-Trump.
That said, the non-Trump victory still requires a lot of stars to align just so.
What is the attrition like during this process. Are primary voters pretty mobile in their loyalties, I can see moving to another candidate with similar views, but presumably there comes a point where they lose interest. How many California republicans when its their primary will shrug and stay at home if it is down to Trump/Cruz by then.
Bitch of the day? @BBCWorldatOne Alan Johnson: "Let's be kind, they're not the six most astute politicians that I've ever met in the Cabinet" #tw2 pic.twitter.com/lwuqT9ep0d Retweeted by Nick Sutton
Given how dim Johnson is (a nice man but dim) how would he know?
The older partners may well be more pro Remain as you say which directs the discussion but regardless of why they are making the decision the big firms will still back Remain. As for the next generation who knows, it may be the younger generation in the City are more sceptical, though nationally the younger generation is more pro Remain but as the referendum is held in 4 months we can only go on the position now
"We can only go on the position now" - unless you have differentiated understanding. But you go with what you read in the press; I'll go with what my cousins and I are told over coffee and lunch.
Few of these firms - other than those with a particular axe to grind (Gerry!), close links to politicos (JP), or talking their own book (GS, Tosca) will take a particularly strong stance because of the splits.
The position now is none of the big firms will back Brexit, they will all be for Remain ie JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs, HSBC, Clifford Chance etc
I have been dealing with EU Directives affecting financial regulation (and others before then) for decades and have probably forgotten more Directives than others have even read. My contact with EU authorities, the process of EU decision making and some of the decisions themselves (as well as some of the individual authorities in other EU countries) is one reason why I have become more eurosceptic as I've got older.
Had Cameron really got a deal which dealt adequately with the proper balance between the eurozone and Britain I would be much more likely to be on the Remain side. That for me is the crux. He - like Brown - seems to have given up what little influence we had in return for nothing.
He has put us in an unprotected minority position in a union where a majority want to create one powerful state with a very significant say in our laws and our economy. How he has the nerve to say that this is in Britain's interests beats me.
The older partners may well be more pro Remain as you say which directs the discussion but regardless of why they are making the decision the big firms will still back Remain. As for the next generation who knows, it may be the younger generation in the City are more sceptical, though nationally the younger generation is more pro Remain but as the referendum is held in 4 months we can only go on the position now
"We can only go on the position now" - unless you have differentiated understanding. But you go with what you read in the press; I'll go with what my cousins and I are told over coffee and lunch.
Few of these firms - other than those with a particular axe to grind (Gerry!), close links to politicos (JP), or talking their own book (GS, Tosca) will take a particularly strong stance because of the splits.
The position now is none of the big firms will back Brexit, they will all be for Remain ie JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs, HSBC, Clifford Chance etc
The senior management of large, publicly-traded firms don't want political events to occur which might depress the value of their share options in the short term. What a surprise!
David Frum 1) Trump beat Rubio in SC by 11 points among self-described moderates. https://t.co/yJYTvwKI2M How can that be?
2) Try this: instead of using immigration as your ideological lodestone, use healthcare instead.
3) Trump is the only GOP candidate who regularly endorses the idea of universal health care coverage - and praises Medicare
David Frum's comments are interesting, but he is hardly the voice of the GOP these days. He is way to the left of Giuliani.
I agree that opposition to ObamaCare is waning, but it is still nationally around 52/43 against, so even more so in the GOP ranks. Medicare and Medicaid are different though, and it is indeed possible that the GOP are hurting themselves in some states by refusing federal money for these programmes as part of their ideological battle against ObamaCare.
Final thought - while there may be some overlap, opposition to ObamaCare was never the same as opposition to universal healthcare. It is more a proxy for the opposition to government control over healthcare provision. I know, the details, but that's the big picture.
I had breakfast with a fairly senior Spanish politician last week who poured ice cold water on your EU inviting Scotland to secede. He basically said that no Spanish government, unless it was run by Podemos, would ever support any secessionist moves in Europe, and that it would be vetoed by Spain.
Automatic membership would definitely be blocked by Spain and other EU member states. An independent Scotland would be made to apply for EU membership on terms applicable to any other country and over the normal timeframe. This has been the clear Spanish - and EU - position for many years. Only the SNP has pretended otherwise.
Given Scotland exports four times as much to rUK as it does to the EU (excluding oil & gas), it would be pretty bizarre abandoning the 'Union' which is your major trading partner in favour of the 'Union' one quarter of the size.....in any case, Nicola is not promising SINDYREF2 if the vote is for BREXIT.....
To be fair that is a false argument. No one is saying that leaving the UK would end trade between Scotland and the rUK anymore than it would between the UK and the EU if we left. Such arguments really have no credence at all.
It's more the case that the arguments Sturgeon makes for not leaving the EU apply equally - if not more - to Scotland not leaving the UK.
Well yes I agree with you there. It works both ways which is why I have such trouble with the concept of Eurosceptics arguing about sovereignty whilst at the same time being anti Scots Independence. The same arguments apply across the board to both issues. I suppose the only clinching argument for me at the moment is that the UK financially is in a better position to be independent than Scotland. But even there I am sure Scotland will not have that problem for ever.
British people see themselves as European much less than Scots see themselves as British, I would imagine.
I think you imagine wrong. I know very few who count themselves British
You move in very narrow circles - only 23% of Scots see themselves as "Scottish not British " with the rest on a sliding scale - the most popular of which is "Equally Scottish and British "
David Cameron is “much more Eurosceptic” than other senior Conservatives and anyone who thinks he would never argue in favour of leaving the European Union is “radically and dangerously misreading” the Prime Minister, Boris Johnson has claimed.
Boris Johnson, the politician with more knee jerks than Riverdance.
What is the route to Trump not winning the nomination at this point?
Because his price being better than evens seems seriously wrong at the moment.
The non-Trump vote is still over 60%. So, two possible routes: - the field whittling down to it being Trump vs acceptable non-Trump (effectively either Rubio or Kasich would do, but Rubio has the claim at this point) - the field stays at 3 (Trump, Cruz, Rubio or Kasich not both), Cruz' vote in the states with relatively few evangelicals collapses, letting the non-Trump win those states, Cruz picks up some states in the South, Trump gets the rest, we go to Conference without a winner. The party coalesces around the non-Trump.
That said, the non-Trump victory still requires a lot of stars to align just so.
What is the attrition like during this process. Are primary voters pretty mobile in their loyalties, I can see moving to another candidate with similar views, but presumably there comes a point where they lose interest. How many California republicans when its their primary will shrug and stay at home if it is down to Trump/Cruz by then.
Some will stay home, others will chose the least bad option.
Sounds horribly like ObamaCare. "We have to pass [it] so that you can find out what is in it."
If I was advising one of the LEAVE groups i would push the line of asking if this EC "renegotiation" is a leap in the dark by Cameron if details such as the welfare rules are not settled?
Spot on. Cameron couldn't answer Marr's question on it this morning. Goodness only knows what else we'd find out if Cameron got a proper grilling from Andrew Neil.
Surely the views of your fellow Unionists should be of interest? Project Global UK is going to look a wee bit diminished if it almost immediately loses a third of its land mass and half its territorial waters.
Surely the views of your fellow Unionists should be of interest? Project Global UK is going to look a wee bit diminished if it almost immediately loses a third of its land mass and half its territorial waters.
I have been dealing with EU Directives affecting financial regulation (and others before then) for decades and have probably forgotten more Directives than others have even read. My contact with EU authorities, the process of EU decision making and some of the decisions themselves (as well as some of the individual authorities in other EU countries) is one reason why I have become more eurosceptic as I've got older.
Had Cameron really got a deal which dealt adequately with the proper balance between the eurozone and Britain I would be much more likely to be on the Remain side. That for me is the crux. He - like Brown - seems to have given up what little influence we had in return for nothing.
He has put us in an unprotected minority position in a union where a majority want to create one powerful state with a very significant say in our laws and our economy. How he has the nerve to say that this is in Britain's interests beats me.
I must admit from reading the text and the interpretation by Open Europe that is exactly the way it seems to me. He has not secured any safeguards and all he has is a statement that if we disagree with something there will be discussions before it goes through anyway. There is nothing at all there about being able to prevent legislation which adversely affects the city. And as has been pointed out that has now been extended to the whole financial sector.
I would be genuinely interested to hear if Richard Nabavi has a different take on this. The text seems absolutely clear to me.
Surely the views of your fellow Unionists should be of interest? Project Global UK is going to look a wee bit diminished if it almost immediately loses a third of its land mass and half its territorial waters.
and 8% of its population
And less than 8% of its GDP.
We would lose Europe's only live bombing range (Cape Wrath). That would be a pity.
It would be very hard for a PM who has advocated leaving, and then negotiated the UK's exit from, the EU to veto a second Scottish independence referendum.
I know that there are a lot of direct costs to an independence referendum, and even bigger indirect costs to the economy, but this is the sort of issue where I depart company from most other unionists. I would think that a referendum should be held whenever there is a genuinely large groundswell for one. Otherwise the issue festers (worse than it does after a close result).
If the SNP are still riding high in the polls and in actual electoral results, and they call for another referendum, I think it would be both politically foolish and morally wrong to deny it.
I completely agree. If Scots want independence they should be able to have it.
I don't think it's logical to be a BOOer and not support Scottish independence. I appreciate that we have a shared history, culture and heavily intertwined economy, and that this is on a scale that far outweighs England's brief dalliance with the EEC.
However, for the Goveists amongst us, his argument about democratic accountability has to be universal; if the Scottish people wish to be independent, why shouldn't they?
I have to add that independence as a member of the EU strikes me as odd (Scotland is ~ Finland or Croatia in terms of population), but if that's their wish, then it really has little to do with me.
Surely the views of your fellow Unionists should be of interest? Project Global UK is going to look a wee bit diminished if it almost immediately loses a third of its land mass and half its territorial waters.
and 8% of its population
And less than 8% of its GDP.
We would lose Europe's only live bombing range (Cape Wrath). That would be a pity.
Bitch of the day? @BBCWorldatOne Alan Johnson: "Let's be kind, they're not the six most astute politicians that I've ever met in the Cabinet" #tw2 pic.twitter.com/lwuqT9ep0d Retweeted by Nick Sutton
Right Alan. Because the last Labour Cabinet was chock full of intellectual heavyweights....
Bitch of the day? @BBCWorldatOne Alan Johnson: "Let's be kind, they're not the six most astute politicians that I've ever met in the Cabinet" #tw2 pic.twitter.com/lwuqT9ep0d Retweeted by Nick Sutton
Given how dim Johnson is (a nice man but dim) how would he know?
The older partners may well be more pro Remain as you say which directs the discussion but regardless of why they are making the decision the big firms will still back Remain. As for the next generation who knows, it may be the younger generation in the City are more sceptical, though nationally the younger generation is more pro Remain but as the referendum is held in 4 months we can only go on the position now
"We can only go on the position now" - unless you have differentiated understanding. But you go with what you read in the press; I'll go with what my cousins and I are told over coffee and lunch.
Few of these firms - other than those with a particular axe to grind (Gerry!), close links to politicos (JP), or talking their own book (GS, Tosca) will take a particularly strong stance because of the splits.
The position now is none of the big firms will back Brexit, they will all be for Remain ie JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs, HSBC, Clifford Chance etc
I have been dealing with EU Directives affecting financial regulation (and others before then) for decades and have probably forgotten more Directives than others have even read. My contact with EU authorities, the process of EU decision making and some of the decisions themselves (as well as some of the individual authorities in other EU countries) is one reason why I have become more eurosceptic as I've got older.
Had Cameron really got a deal which dealt adequately with the proper balance between the eurozone and Britain I would be much more likely to be on the Remain side. That for me is the crux. He - like Brown - seems to have given up what little influence we had in return for nothing.
He has put us in an unprotected minority position in a union where a majority want to create one powerful state with a very significant say in our laws and our economy. How he has the nerve to say that this is in Britain's interests beats me.
A bloody rude remark by AJohnson and totally unnecessary. Just proves that Labour (In Campaign) have absolutely nothing to say.
Bitch of the day? @BBCWorldatOne Alan Johnson: "Let's be kind, they're not the six most astute politicians that I've ever met in the Cabinet" #tw2 pic.twitter.com/lwuqT9ep0d Retweeted by Nick Sutton
Postman Pat, the man who was too thick to be able to do the shadow chancellors job. Deficit, Debt, its all the same to me. I am not sure he should go around casting aspersions on the intellectual capacities of other politicians.
It would be very hard for a PM who has advocated leaving, and then negotiated the UK's exit from, the EU to veto a second Scottish independence referendum.
I know that there are a lot of direct costs to an independence referendum, and even bigger indirect costs to the economy, but this is the sort of issue where I depart company from most other unionists. I would think that a referendum should be held whenever there is a genuinely large groundswell for one. Otherwise the issue festers (worse than it does after a close result).
If the SNP are still riding high in the polls and in actual electoral results, and they call for another referendum, I think it would be both politically foolish and morally wrong to deny it.
I completely agree. If Scots want independence they should be able to have it.
I don't think it's logical to be a BOOer and not support Scottish independence. I appreciate that we have a shared history, culture and heavily intertwined economy, and that this is on a scale that far outweighs England's brief dalliance with the EEC.
However, for the Goveists amongst us, his argument about democratic accountability has to be universal; if the Scottish people wish to be independent, why shouldn't they?
I have to add that independence as a member of the EU strikes me as odd (Scotland is ~ Finland or Croatia in terms of population), but if that's their wish, then it really has little to do with me.
I had breakfast with a fairly senior Spanish politician last week who poured ice cold water on your EU inviting Scotland to secede. He basically said that no Spanish government, unless it was run by Podemos, would ever support any secessionist moves in Europe, and that it would be vetoed by Spain.
Given Scotland exports four times as much to rUK as it does to the EU (excluding oil & gas), it would be pretty bizarre abandoning the 'Union' which is your major trading partner in favour of the 'Union' one quarter of the size.....in any case, Nicola is not promising SINDYREF2 if the vote is for BREXIT.....
To be fair that is a false argument. No one is saying that leaving the UK would end trade between Scotland and the rUK anymore than it would between the UK and the EU if we left. Such arguments really have no credence at all.
It's more the case that the arguments Sturgeon makes for not leaving the EU apply equally - if not more - to Scotland not leaving the UK.
Well yes I agree with you there. It works both ways which is why I have such trouble with the concept of Eurosceptics arguing about sovereignty whilst at the same time being anti Scots Independence. The same arguments apply across the board to both issues. I suppose the only clinching argument for me at the moment is that the UK financially is in a better position to be independent than Scotland. But even there I am sure Scotland will not have that problem for ever.
British people see themselves as European much less than Scots see themselves as British, I would imagine.
I think you imagine wrong. I know very few who count themselves British
You move in very narrow circles - only 23% of Scots see themselves as "Scottish not British " with the rest on a sliding scale - the most popular of which is "Equally Scottish and British "
THE cameron interview this morning nearly made me puke,to think this man conned us to believe that he was non other than Euro-Sceptic.
The project fear coming from his gob and everything pro EU that even weeks ago he wouldn't have dared said.
The sooner he's gone,the better.
When did he exactly give you the impression that he was Euro-sceptic ? Or, did you allow yourself to view him as such ?
He managed to persuade Sean Gabb he was a Eurosceptic when he was seeking Parliamentary selection. Indeed he described his views and said "If that's being a Europhile then I'm a banana".
I would be genuinely interested to hear if Richard Nabavi has a different take on this. The text seems absolutely clear to me.
The renegotiation was so threadbare and embarrassing that most of the Cameron loyalists quickly swept it under the rug when no one was looking and decided that it wasn't really necessary because we should all remain in the EU anyway, because of "reasons"
The older partners may well be more pro Remain as you say which directs the discussion but regardless of why they are making the decision the big firms will still back Remain. As for the next generation who knows, it may be the younger generation in the City are more sceptical, though nationally the younger generation is more pro Remain but as the referendum is held in 4 months we can only go on the position now
"We can only go on the position now" - unless you have differentiated understanding. But you go with what you read in the press; I'll go with what my cousins and I are told over coffee and lunch.
Few of these firms - other than those with a particular axe to grind (Gerry!), close links to politicos (JP), or talking their own book (GS, Tosca) will take a particularly strong stance because of the splits.
The position now is none of the big firms will back Brexit, they will all be for Remain ie JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs, HSBC, Clifford Chance etc
Yes. As I said.
Try adding more value than regurgitating the same point monomanaically.
It is the point I was trying to make in the first place so glad we agree
Surely the views of your fellow Unionists should be of interest? Project Global UK is going to look a wee bit diminished if it almost immediately loses a third of its land mass and half its territorial waters.
The UK would still be bigger than Spain, Canada and South Africa even without Scotland. Scotland would have the diplomatic and political clout of Denmark
Surely the views of your fellow Unionists should be of interest? Project Global UK is going to look a wee bit diminished if it almost immediately loses a third of its land mass and half its territorial waters.
and 8% of its population
I'm glad to see you true Brits have now given up on any silly sentimentalism about 300 years of history and the 'greatness' of the UK. Number crunching is what Rump UK should be all about.
Surely the views of your fellow Unionists should be of interest? Project Global UK is going to look a wee bit diminished if it almost immediately loses a third of its land mass and half its territorial waters.
and 8% of its population
I'm glad to see you true Brits have now given up on any silly sentimentalism about 300 years of history and the 'greatness' of the UK. Number crunching is what Rump UK should be all about.
As I said the UK would be barely affected in global terms, it would still be the third largest economy in the Europe and in the top 10 globally and on the UN Security Council. Scotland would be a minor power at the lower end of global influence, nice enough but of no relevance ie Denmark or New Zealand on a good day!
Surely the views of your fellow Unionists should be of interest? Project Global UK is going to look a wee bit diminished if it almost immediately loses a third of its land mass and half its territorial waters.
and 8% of its population
I'm glad to see you true Brits have now given up on any silly sentimentalism about 300 years of history and the 'greatness' of the UK. Number crunching is what Rump UK should be all about.
As I said the UK would be barely affected in global terms, it would still be the third largest economy in the EU and in the top 10 globally and on the UN Security Council. Scotland would be a minor power at the lower end of global influence, nice enough but of no relevance ie Denmark or New Zealand on a good day!
If we start winning rugbu World Cups like NZ then I'd take that.
Surely the views of your fellow Unionists should be of interest? Project Global UK is going to look a wee bit diminished if it almost immediately loses a third of its land mass and half its territorial waters.
and 8% of its population
I'm glad to see you true Brits have now given up on any silly sentimentalism about 300 years of history and the 'greatness' of the UK. Number crunching is what Rump UK should be all about.
As I said the UK would be barely affected in global terms, it would still be the third largest economy in the EU and in the top 10 globally and on the UN Security Council. Scotland would be a minor power at the lower end of global influence, nice enough but of no relevance ie Denmark or New Zealand on a good day!
Boris Johnson to reveal stance on EU referendum in Telegraph column as David Cameron urges him not to back Brexit - live All eyes are on Boris Johnson as he prepares to reveal his EU referendum views in his Telegraph column as David Cameron urges voters to back his EU deal after Cabinet splits - latest updates
He is not coming well out of this. Such barefaced opportunism and pursuit of self interest is not a good look.
"Having weighed up all the pros and cons I will support Leave because I steadfastly believe it is the best way for me to be the next Prime Minister," says Johnson, 48 hours after the referendum was announced.
Oh put a sock in it. Bojo's taking his time: we only learned about the deal yesterday, and this is a decision which will change the history of the UK.
Sure he's using his media profile and fame to maximise publicity and impact, but that's what politicians DO. It is indeed their JOB.
Would you have preferred it if David Cameron had announced the referendum down a sidestreet in Swindon, to three local journalists and a spayed cat, rather than in front of number 10 with a dramatic lectern?
Was David Cameron guilty of bare-faced opportunism and pursuit of self interest?
Pfft.
Cameron deliberately did the cabinet meeting on a Saturday so that the ungagging of Leave ministers would be on a day where people don't follow the news. Thats why BoJo is waiting.
Um, wasn't it because the deal only got agreed the night before? Unless you think Cameron cannot get the other leaders to agree to the smallest of requests, but was able to convince them to keep up the masquerade for another half day they could spend on matters more essential to their own electorates, all for the sake of an advantage that confers virtually no advantage.
Boris Johnson to reveal stance on EU referendum in Telegraph column as David Cameron urges him not to back Brexit - live All eyes are on Boris Johnson as he prepares to reveal his EU referendum views in his Telegraph column as David Cameron urges voters to back his EU deal after Cabinet splits - latest updates
He is not coming well out of this. Such barefaced opportunism and pursuit of self interest is not a good look.
"Having weighed up all the pros and cons I will support Leave because I steadfastly believe it is the best way for me to be the next Prime Minister," says Johnson, 48 hours after the referendum was announced.
The large part of the country that see membership of the EU as a second order issue will consider that entirely reasonable. It might even reassure them to know that not every Leaver is a zealot.Heaven forbid.
Although in all seriousness the wailing of some Leavers puts me right off, particularly when focused on the evil of opposing politicians acting like politicians and talk of stitch ups and the like, none of which cannot be overcome by the Leave campaign and which comes across as preparing excuses for any potential defeat. Cumulative weight of dissatisfaction with the EU was what swayed me in the end, the over the top cries of betrayal from the most vocal Leavers, not so much.
Surely the views of your fellow Unionists should be of interest? Project Global UK is going to look a wee bit diminished if it almost immediately loses a third of its land mass and half its territorial waters.
and 8% of its population
I'm glad to see you true Brits have now given up on any silly sentimentalism about 300 years of history and the 'greatness' of the UK. Number crunching is what Rump UK should be all about.
As I said the UK would be barely affected in global terms, it would still be the third largest economy in the EU and in the top 10 globally and on the UN Security Council. Scotland would be a minor power at the lower end of global influence, nice enough but of no relevance ie Denmark or New Zealand on a good day!
'Third largest economy in the EU' despite just having left it in this scenario? How does that work? And of course your free pass to the security council, Trident, would be on a very shoogly peg.
Give me Miss Denmark over some beery old pub bore going on about still being a contender any day.
Surely the views of your fellow Unionists should be of interest? Project Global UK is going to look a wee bit diminished if it almost immediately loses a third of its land mass and half its territorial waters.
and 8% of its population
I'm glad to see you true Brits have now given up on any silly sentimentalism about 300 years of history and the 'greatness' of the UK. Number crunching is what Rump UK should be all about.
As I said the UK would be barely affected in global terms, it would still be the third largest economy in the EU and in the top 10 globally and on the UN Security Council. Scotland would be a minor power at the lower end of global influence, nice enough but of no relevance ie Denmark or New Zealand on a good day!
Ha Ha Ha , the delusion is unbelievable.
Well notice you did not make any arguments in response!
Surely the views of your fellow Unionists should be of interest? Project Global UK is going to look a wee bit diminished if it almost immediately loses a third of its land mass and half its territorial waters.
and 8% of its population
I'm glad to see you true Brits have now given up on any silly sentimentalism about 300 years of history and the 'greatness' of the UK. Number crunching is what Rump UK should be all about.
As I said the UK would be barely affected in global terms, it would still be the third largest economy in the EU and in the top 10 globally and on the UN Security Council. Scotland would be a minor power at the lower end of global influence, nice enough but of no relevance ie Denmark or New Zealand on a good day!
If we start winning rugbu World Cups like NZ then I'd take that.
Surely the views of your fellow Unionists should be of interest? Project Global UK is going to look a wee bit diminished if it almost immediately loses a third of its land mass and half its territorial waters.
and 8% of its population
I'm glad to see you true Brits have now given up on any silly sentimentalism about 300 years of history and the 'greatness' of the UK. Number crunching is what Rump UK should be all about.
As I said the UK would be barely affected in global terms, it would still be the third largest economy in the EU and in the top 10 globally and on the UN Security Council. Scotland would be a minor power at the lower end of global influence, nice enough but of no relevance ie Denmark or New Zealand on a good day!
'Third largest economy in the EU' despite just having left it in this scenario? How does that work? And of course your free pass to the security council, Trident, would be on a very shoogly peg.
Give me Miss Denmark over some beery old pub bore going on about still being a contender any day.
In Europe then but it holds true whether the UK remains in the EU or not but Scotland leaves. The UK's place on the Security Council depends on more than Trident but without Scotland of course the UK would be even more certain to keep Trident.
As for being a contendor well it was you who were making the points the UK would be a global irrelevance if Scotland left, if you wish to be Denmark fine but you will have a bit of catching up to do to reach their gdp per capita!
Amber Rudd's infamous brother @RolandRudd Zac Goldsmith just ensured he will lose London Mayor election by opting for Out when vast majority of City want to remain in EU
Comments
What is the route to Trump not winning the nomination at this point?
Because his price being better than evens seems seriously wrong at the moment.
Sounds horribly like ObamaCare. "We have to pass [it] so that you can find out what is in it."
General Boles
***** BREAKING *****
My sources at the Telegraph (hi Chris) have leaked the first part of Boris's column https://t.co/VFL9tKdpj3
People talk about age giving you wisdom but I think it gives you courage. Well, to some people it does.
The media stars never strike me as particularly good communicators. But I tend to think that's because they are focused on how they say something rather than on what they are saying.
There are only two things needed for good communication:-
(1) Having something to say.
(2) Having something you want to say to this audience.
Substance and authenticity. That's it. All the rest is detail.
How many of the current cabinet will be remembered in 40 years! Never mind the shadow cabinet
1) Trump beat Rubio in SC by 11 points among self-described moderates. https://t.co/yJYTvwKI2M How can that be?
2) Try this: instead of using immigration as your ideological lodestone, use healthcare instead.
3) Trump is the only GOP candidate who regularly endorses the idea of universal health care coverage - and praises Medicare
err tempted to ask if that has influenced him....(just joking kippers)
@BBCWorldatOne
Alan Johnson: "Let's be kind, they're not the six most astute politicians that I've ever met in the Cabinet" #tw2 pic.twitter.com/lwuqT9ep0d
Retweeted by Nick Sutton
And, as I've said before, I think it's to his credit that he does not use his personal situation for political gain. That speaks well of him personally.
- the field whittling down to it being Trump vs acceptable non-Trump (effectively either Rubio or Kasich would do, but Rubio has the claim at this point)
- the field stays at 3 (Trump, Cruz, Rubio or Kasich not both), Cruz' vote in the states with relatively few evangelicals collapses, letting the non-Trump win those states, Cruz picks up some states in the South, Trump gets the rest, we go to Conference without a winner. The party coalesces around the non-Trump.
That said, the non-Trump victory still requires a lot of stars to align just so.
Jog on loser.
Try adding more value than regurgitating the same point monomanaically.
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/there-was-no-rise-in-scottish-nationalism-understanding-the-snp-victory/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/35620560
Had Cameron really got a deal which dealt adequately with the proper balance between the eurozone and Britain I would be much more likely to be on the Remain side. That for me is the crux. He - like Brown - seems to have given up what little influence we had in return for nothing.
He has put us in an unprotected minority position in a union where a majority want to create one powerful state with a very significant say in our laws and our economy. How he has the nerve to say that this is in Britain's interests beats me.
I agree that opposition to ObamaCare is waning, but it is still nationally around 52/43 against, so even more so in the GOP ranks. Medicare and Medicaid are different though, and it is indeed possible that the GOP are hurting themselves in some states by refusing federal money for these programmes as part of their ideological battle against ObamaCare.
Final thought - while there may be some overlap, opposition to ObamaCare was never the same as opposition to universal healthcare. It is more a proxy for the opposition to government control over healthcare provision. I know, the details, but that's the big picture.
PS: you ever been in Scotland?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-referendum-dont-misread-eurosceptic-david-cameron-over-brexit-boris-johnson-warns-a6772006.html Boris Johnson, the politician with more knee jerks than Riverdance.
I would be genuinely interested to hear if Richard Nabavi has a different take on this. The text seems absolutely clear to me.
We would lose Europe's only live bombing range (Cape Wrath). That would be a pity.
However, for the Goveists amongst us, his argument about democratic accountability has to be universal; if the Scottish people wish to be independent, why shouldn't they?
I have to add that independence as a member of the EU strikes me as odd (Scotland is ~ Finland or Croatia in terms of population), but if that's their wish, then it really has little to do with me.
Most woeful interviewee today = Hilary Benn.
It's the SCOTTISH Social Attitudes survey......conducted over many years.
But I know you and facts are strangers......
There last year, as it happens, scattering my fathers ashes.
http://www.seangabb.co.uk/candidlist/thelist/camerond.htm
New Thread New Thread
Um, wasn't it because the deal only got agreed the night before? Unless you think Cameron cannot get the other leaders to agree to the smallest of requests, but was able to convince them to keep up the masquerade for another half day they could spend on matters more essential to their own electorates, all for the sake of an advantage that confers virtually no advantage.
Although in all seriousness the wailing of some Leavers puts me right off, particularly when focused on the evil of opposing politicians acting like politicians and talk of stitch ups and the like, none of which cannot be overcome by the Leave campaign and which comes across as preparing excuses for any potential defeat. Cumulative weight of dissatisfaction with the EU was what swayed me in the end, the over the top cries of betrayal from the most vocal Leavers, not so much. What? Just as I have to go? For shame.
And of course your free pass to the security council, Trident, would be on a very shoogly peg.
Give me Miss Denmark over some beery old pub bore going on about still being a contender any day.
As for being a contendor well it was you who were making the points the UK would be a global irrelevance if Scotland left, if you wish to be Denmark fine but you will have a bit of catching up to do to reach their gdp per capita!