Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » As doctors stage their 3rd strike Ipsos-MORI finds that th

1246

Comments

  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 10,466
    The ever-readable Labour List has this gem:

    "A Labour fundraiser last night auctioned off a chance to go swimming with sharks... and Shadow Leader of the House Chris Bryant. It's not clear how much the prize went for, but the ominous description of the event as "once in a lifetime" may have depressed the final price somewhat."
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 28,617
    Alistair said:

    [SNP] MPs rebelled against their leadership over a deal done with Osborne. It reports the quid pro quo for Sunday trading abstention wasn’t just on the financial settlement, but on a Privy Council seat for Stewart Hosie and an extra, controlling seat on the Scottish Affairs Committee. Stewart Hosie laughed and said this was ‘nonsense’ last night. But that’s another denial that could get more scrutiny.

    Nicola Sturgeon faces a bad day at the office today as the GERS figures, Gov Expenditure and Revenue in Scotland, deliver a hammer blow to the case for independence. The slump will reflect the 54 per cent fall in UK oil revenues that will show the growing gulf between Scotland's public finances and the rest of the U.K.


    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2016/03/09/the-waugh-zone-march-9-20_n_9415488.html

    I'm feel sorry for you that the GERS don't show a massive financial blackhole crushing vortex from which Scotland will never escape.
    So FFA now then?

    Thought not.......
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    edited March 2016
    I give you Stuart Rose and Korski. Remain are nothing without Cameron.

    Whilst I'm all for not whining, when the other side is playing unfair - it's legitimate to point it out. Otherwise they win.

    Turning the other cheek doesn't win the war in politics. That's not whining - it's rebuttal.

    That's wrong. The key to succcess is not to get into the mindset of even thinking to yourself that the other side are being 'unfair'. Instead the Leave side should be anticipating the attacks and putting in place solid defences, or, where that's not possible (and frankly it's a bit late now), trying to change the narrative to more favourable ground.

    They are making such a hash of it that it's almost painful to watch.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 13,975
    Pulpstar said:

    I've done some modelling on the Democratic race. Polls change, but racial demographics don't !

    If Sanders keeps HRC's delegate lead to less than 255 (It is 233 at the moment), then he can close the gap... (With a big push in California !)

    Now he still probably doesn't win. But it requires a superdelegate robbery to deny him the nomination if he gets it back to level. We'll see if Michigan was an outlier next tuesday - although the biggest polling miss thus far was actually Minnesota (Was using January polls).

    The combined indication is that Sanders is strong in the midwest, he is outperforming his polls slightly and that he is gaining ground on Hilary nationally.

    Of course its still a total mountain, but he needs to:

    Keep Florida and North Carolina below 60% (Florida HRC may well outperform my racial demographic model relative to NC due to the staggering number of old people there)
    Keep Illinois competitive (Could see a home state effect for HRC here ?)
    Win Ohio and Missouri. Without question he certainly needs to win BOTH of these.

    That's the checklist to stay in the game so to speak.

    He's currently trailing in all the states up next Tuesday. But then of course he was trailing in Michigan too. I agree he needs wins in Missouri and Ohio but those states he's already won suggest at least a possibility there.

    Clinton, by contrast, needs to meaningfully break out of the South. So far she's demonstrated little strength beyond a surprise win in Massachusetts.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 44,330

    Sanders will give Clinton a generous endorsement

    Providing he isn't robbed. We'll know if that's a possibility after next Tuesday. 255 delegate lead is my estimate for what Hillary needs to win. The polls forecast 411.
  • john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    @AlastairMeeks



    'This is an appalling story. How could any normal person want to be in the same party as this fool? http://order-order.com/2016/03/09/911-apologist-reinstated-as-full-labour-member/ …'


    Labour clearly desperate for the 'Nasty' party accolade,game.set & match.

  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 1,665
    Re David HerdsonT

    The white collar liberals comment was in response to MaxPB saying Clinton was in trouble with them.

    There could be remnants of Reagan Democrats out there but the demographics have changed dramatically in the intervening 30 years and they are not as important as they were. I also really wonder how many of the type of blue collars that might go for Trump voted for Obama in 2008/2012.

    I think Clinton is going to hold a much larger percentage of the Obama vote than Trump will of the Romney vote. The unknown is the number of extra voters each brings to the ticket - I would say few for Clinton and much more for Trump but I don't think it will be enough.

    Seeing a lot of comment re the GOP VP - any tips on who thinks Hilary would go for?

    Being relatively new to the site when I respond to a comment that is in a chain I am often told that my response is too long , perhaps some one can tell me how to get round this
  • JackWJackW Posts: 13,349
    MaxPB said:

    JackW said:

    MaxPB said:

    JackW said:

    @MaxPB

    I do so enjoy your fantasy musing on the upcoming President Trump.

    Much like I did with other PBers with Presidents McCain and Romney and Prime Minister Miliband.

    And I enjoy the complete lack of understanding you have of Bernie supporters, maybe you're just too old!
    Clearly with Trump's attitudes on Hispanics, AA and women he's going to appeal to Sander's supporters. It's obvious that Donald's empathy plays well to the Bernie base there .... Well, it's a view.

    Somewhat like Jezza's mob taking a kindly view of Nigel Farage and thus opting not to vote for Ed last year. It certainly has novelty value, I'll give you that.
    You have just shown how little you understand Bernie supporters with that post Jack. Hillary already has the groups you mention on board. She doesn't have blue collar and white collar whites. Trump appeals to them on a very basic level that Hillary doesn't.
    I heard it all before. "JackW doesn't understand US politics ... blah blah ...." and yet it's remarkable how accurate I've been over the years on POTUS much to the financial benefit of PBers.

    It's certainly true that Trump appeals to WWC but so did Romney, McCain Bush etc .. each taking a little over 60% of the vote. It was just enough for Bush Jnr but now even expanding that number in a diminishing market isn't enough.

    Trump needed to expand his reach significantly. Look at the Hispanic vote. Romney pulled in 27% and now Trump's looking at 16% of an increasing demographic so important in swing states.

    Little wonder the GOP establishment is having a collective nervous breakdown. They know Trump will blow it for them in November.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    America Elects
    New Ohio poll:

    Trump 41
    Kasich 35
    Cruz 15
    Rubio 7

    (CNN)
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 13,975

    MaxPB is increasingly and curiously insistent that he has a direct line to how all Sanders supporters think. So far as I know, we all have only anecdotal evidence, but although there are of course examples of every combination, I'd expect the vast majority of Sanders supporters to fall in line assuming the campaign stays as friendly as it has up to now. Sanders will give Clinton a generous endorsement, Clinton will acknowledge that Sanders has taught her things, and people will look at Trump/Cruz and rally round. Certainly the Sanders supporters that I know will vote Clinton vs Trump in a heartbeat.

    The two weak points that Max identifies are foreign interventionism and blue-collar anti-establishment feeling. I agree that the former is a problem for middle-class liberals (I think it's a worry about Clinton myself), but when push comes to shove we mostly get over it, as Blair demonstrated in 2005. The latter is IMO going to be a bit marginal as a motivation to vote Republican. But we don't really know for sure.

    The converse, whether Hillary supporters would vote for Bernie, is also uncertain. Most would, but quite a few establishment types would be very dubious after a few months of attack ads portraying him as the son of Brezhnev.

    If the convention ends up really close with Sanders coming on like an express train but falling just short of victory, it's interesting to speculate what Hillary can offer him. VP hasn't been ruled out by either side, but it'd be odd to lavish a VP nomination on Vermont with its 3 electoral votes. A pledge of a leading role in a Clinton administration may be as good as it gets.

    Sanders would do his cause more good bargaining for policy than position. Is there a post that could be offered him that would much advance the things that people are voting for? VP is just an honourable siding unless the president dies or resigns (though Hillary might like that as insurance against potential impeachments!).
  • nigel4englandnigel4england Posts: 4,800
    DavidL said:

    MaxPB said:

    On Mark Carney. I really don't understand the problem. He was asked questions by the committee and gave pretty straightforward answers. Nothing he said wasn't true or made up, it's the manner of the uphill argument we face in the Leave camp. Instead of lashing out at Carney we should have concentrated on what he actually said and, more importantly, didn't say.

    He said "the EU has been good for us". That statement is, without any shadow of a doubt, true. What he didn't say, maybe because he wasn't asked, is whether it would be good for us in the future. We should be making the argument that the good times for the EU are over, our RoW trade is growing by 4% long run and our EU trade is falling by 2% long run. It is no longer in our interest to be in the EU as it was when it was "good for us".

    He said "leaving would cause uncertainty". Well of course it would, but again, we need to work on the message. Not all uncertainty is bad. We had 10 years of certainty under Brown, investment fell, the state became bloated and we lost our entrepreneurial spirit as a nation. Yes there will be uncertainty, but out of that we will get new activity, new opportunities to trade with the rest of the world which is growing a lot faster than the EU.

    As for HMQ, honestly, who cares if some unelected person is in favour of leaving or remaining. I highly doubt that the Queen being in favour of Brexit is going to convince an IT worker who likes going on holiday in Italy to vote to leave.

    I agree with this absolutely. It really is long, long past time that those for Leave started to make the positive case for it and stopped the whining. It is getting dangerously close to too late.
    I'm still waiting for someone to make a positive case for Remain.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 20,367
    The GERS figures are indeed truly horrible, far, far worse than anything the supposed "project fear" campaigners dared to forecast during the referendum. If the uncertainty and damage occasioned by potential independence and the transfer south of what is left of our financial services industry had been added we would have been looking at Greece in admiration at their fiscal sanity.

    Sturgeon's response to this is frankly disgraceful: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-35757787 Apparently, "This shows the foundations of Scotland's economy are strong and that we have a strong base to build our future progress upon."

    It also explains why the absolute priority of the Scottish government in the recent negotiations was that the new fiscal autonomy rules would not make Scotland worse off. The tax base north of the border is, unfortunately, collapsing with the oil price and the drift of financial services southwards. We are left with a bureaucratic state that in terms of its dominance of the economy would put East Germany to shame.

    We desperately need a government and an opposition that is focussed on running the country and making good some of the damage. But who believes that these terrible figures will move any votes?
  • nigel4englandnigel4england Posts: 4,800

    The ever-readable Labour List has this gem:

    "A Labour fundraiser last night auctioned off a chance to go swimming with sharks... and Shadow Leader of the House Chris Bryant. It's not clear how much the prize went for, but the ominous description of the event as "once in a lifetime" may have depressed the final price somewhat."

    Excellent!
  • JackWJackW Posts: 13,349
    JohnO said:

    MaxPB said:

    JackW said:

    MaxPB said:

    JackW said:

    @MaxPB

    I do so enjoy your fantasy musing on the upcoming President Trump.

    Much like I did with other PBers with Presidents McCain and Romney and Prime Minister Miliband.

    And I enjoy the complete lack of understanding you have of Bernie supporters, maybe you're just too old!
    Clearly with Trump's attitudes on Hispanics, AA and women he's going to appeal to Sander's supporters. It's obvious that Donald's empathy plays well to the Bernie base there .... Well, it's a view.

    Somewhat like Jezza's mob taking a kindly view of Nigel Farage and thus opting not to vote for Ed last year. It certainly has novelty value, I'll give you that.
    You have just shown how little you understand Bernie supporters with that post Jack. Hillary already has the groups you mention on board. She doesn't have blue collar and white collar whites. Trump appeals to them on a very basic level that Hillary doesn't.
    The Young Pretender takes on the Mighty ARSE.

    One of them is going to be covered in confusion in November.
    This Old Jacobite doesn't much like the anal-ogy .... :smile:

  • JonCisBackJonCisBack Posts: 756
    edited March 2016
    runnymede said:

    'He said "the EU has been good for us". That statement is, without any shadow of a doubt, true'

    If you look at the Bank's research on this, it is actually a bit thin. A lot of it is little more than a (slightly skewed) literature review and the crucial section where the Bank does argue that 'openness has increased ergo EU has been good' suffers from the major flaw of not really examining possible counterfactuals e.g. would 'openness' have increased anyway, perhaps even by more? The concept of 'openness' itself is also rather loosely defined.

    And you are right that it is quite backward-looking overall. It is clearly designed to support the status quo (albeit not stridently) but doesn't make a very strong case for it.


    Being in the single market has unquestionably benefited us.

    A re-running of history where we had joined the common market in 1975, agreed to the rules around the single market in 1990s but NOTHING ELSE would be fascinating but impossible of course.

    The key q for this whole referendum is whether we can hope to either be in the EU and not sign up to anything further, or leave and still get the benefits of the single market.

    Probably neither is true, so neither of the referendum options appeals to me much :-(

    So which is worse - isolation or sliding inexorably into a closer and closer political union? Arguments so far from both sides are deeply unedifying.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    .@halfon4harlowMP: Number of civil servants based in London has reduced by 7,500 with savings of £2.8 billion for the taxpayer #COquestions
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 14,751
    OllyT said:

    Re David HerdsonT

    The white collar liberals comment was in response to MaxPB saying Clinton was in trouble with them.

    There could be remnants of Reagan Democrats out there but the demographics have changed dramatically in the intervening 30 years and they are not as important as they were. I also really wonder how many of the type of blue collars that might go for Trump voted for Obama in 2008/2012.

    I think Clinton is going to hold a much larger percentage of the Obama vote than Trump will of the Romney vote. The unknown is the number of extra voters each brings to the ticket - I would say few for Clinton and much more for Trump but I don't think it will be enough.

    Seeing a lot of comment re the GOP VP - any tips on who thinks Hilary would go for?

    Being relatively new to the site when I respond to a comment that is in a chain I am often told that my response is too long , perhaps some one can tell me how to get round this

    Delete all but the comment you are replying to.

    Hillary needs to go for someone who appeals to whites. A liberal white professor type from one of the New England states.
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    edited March 2016
    With this doctor's dispute being ratcheted up, Cameron's UK wide ratings and those of the Govt look likely to fall. If it is still going on into the referendum then Cameron's "trust" with the voters is likely to drop and REMAIN will lose some support. For these reasons I expect a move by the Govt with better terms, but is there a timetable that requires action by a certain date?
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Ditto

    DavidL said:

    MaxPB said:

    On Mark Carney. I really don't understand the problem. He was asked questions by the committee and gave pretty straightforward answers. Nothing he said wasn't true or made up, it's the manner of the uphill argument we face in the Leave camp. Instead of lashing out at Carney we should have concentrated on what he actually said and, more importantly, didn't say.

    He said "the EU has been good for us". That statement is, without any shadow of a doubt, true. What he didn't say, maybe because he wasn't asked, is whether it would be good for us in the future. We should be making the argument that the good times for the EU are over, our RoW trade is growing by 4% long run and our EU trade is falling by 2% long run. It is no longer in our interest to be in the EU as it was when it was "good for us".

    He said "leaving would cause uncertainty". Well of course it would, but again, we need to work on the message. Not all uncertainty is bad. We had 10 years of certainty under Brown, investment fell, the state became bloated and we lost our entrepreneurial spirit as a nation. Yes there will be uncertainty, but out of that we will get new activity, new opportunities to trade with the rest of the world which is growing a lot faster than the EU.

    As for HMQ, honestly, who cares if some unelected person is in favour of leaving or remaining. I highly doubt that the Queen being in favour of Brexit is going to convince an IT worker who likes going on holiday in Italy to vote to leave.

    I agree with this absolutely. It really is long, long past time that those for Leave started to make the positive case for it and stopped the whining. It is getting dangerously close to too late.
    I'm still waiting for someone to make a positive case for Remain.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 13,349

    The ever-readable Labour List has this gem:

    "A Labour fundraiser last night auctioned off a chance to go swimming with sharks... and Shadow Leader of the House Chris Bryant. It's not clear how much the prize went for, but the ominous description of the event as "once in a lifetime" may have depressed the final price somewhat."

    :smiley: Swimming with Chis Bryant or the sharks ?!?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 14,751
    JackW said:

    MaxPB said:

    JackW said:

    MaxPB said:

    JackW said:

    @MaxPB

    I do so enjoy your fantasy musing on the upcoming President Trump.

    Much like I did with other PBers with Presidents McCain and Romney and Prime Minister Miliband.

    And I enjoy the complete lack of understanding you have of Bernie supporters, maybe you're just too old!
    Clearly with Trump's attitudes on Hispanics, AA and women he's going to appeal to Sander's supporters. It's obvious that Donald's empathy plays well to the Bernie base there .... Well, it's a view.

    Somewhat like Jezza's mob taking a kindly view of Nigel Farage and thus opting not to vote for Ed last year. It certainly has novelty value, I'll give you that.
    You have just shown how little you understand Bernie supporters with that post Jack. Hillary already has the groups you mention on board. She doesn't have blue collar and white collar whites. Trump appeals to them on a very basic level that Hillary doesn't.
    I heard it all before. "JackW doesn't understand US politics ... blah blah ...." and yet it's remarkable how accurate I've been over the years on POTUS much to the financial benefit of PBers.

    It's certainly true that Trump appeals to WWC but so did Romney, McCain Bush etc .. each taking a little over 60% of the vote. It was just enough for Bush Jnr but now even expanding that number in a diminishing market isn't enough.

    Trump needed to expand his reach significantly. Look at the Hispanic vote. Romney pulled in 27% and now Trump's looking at 16% of an increasing demographic so important in swing states.

    Little wonder the GOP establishment is having a collective nervous breakdown. They know Trump will blow it for them in November.
    Jack, I'm going to have to agree to disagree with you on this, the dynamic in the US has changed since the entrance of Trump and Bernie. If it was just Trump then I would be in absolute agreement with you.

    Trump appeals to WWC voters on both the right and left, Romney, McCain and Dubya didn't. He's not increasing his share of WWC voters marginally, it is going to be a huge increase in share, plus he will do better than expected with integrated second and third gen immigrants.
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    edited March 2016

    I give you Stuart Rose and Korski. Remain are nothing without Cameron.

    Whilst I'm all for not whining, when the other side is playing unfair - it's legitimate to point it out. Otherwise they win.

    Turning the other cheek doesn't win the war in politics. That's not whining - it's rebuttal.

    That's wrong. The key to succcess is not to get into the mindset of even thinking to yourself that the other side are being 'unfair'. Instead the Leave side should be anticipating the attacks and putting in place solid defences, or, where that's not possible (and frankly it's a bit late now), trying to change the narrative to more favourable ground.

    They are making such a hash of it that it's almost painful to watch.
    For all the disunity in the various LEAVE camps, if this is the best that REMAIN can do with a single unified campaign enormous finances and the Govt machinery behind them, it does not auger well if LEAVE can pull together.

    I also expect Cameron's rating to be dropping due to the backlash amongst Conervatives and the doctors strikes,
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341

    Hello Plato
    Stats....
    77% of car industry favours continued membership of EU.
    Over 75% of cars built went to export with nearly 60% going to the EU. The motor industry accounts for nearly 12% of all exports ... £15 billion.
    800,000 people employed by the industry.
    SMMT Chief says the EU is 'vital for the future' and 'leaving would put many of these jobs at risk'
    Toyota deputy managing director say leaving would 'open up a very uncertain future of technical difficulties and increased costs'
    (Autocar survey)
    So carry on Miss Plato (and others) carry on campaining to 'put many of these jobs at risk' .

    You can see what forms Carney's opinions.

    PS
    Peter Bone has a nerve... he was happy to be jovial sharing a platform with Galloway. (And some people wonder why I use the word 'odious'.) This is before you get to Farage.

    Someone had better tell the mugs that are investing £2billion in the UK car industry then.

    How has the UK car industry performed since the doomsday scenario of not joining the Euro?
    Mugs earning the nation a fortune. The car industry is an amazing (foreign owned) success. Massive investment based on it being in the EU.
    You just carry on 'putting all these jobs at risk'. Your cavalier attitude to reality is shameful.
    We sell Europe 680,000 - they sell us over a million.

    Do the maths.
  • glwglw Posts: 4,236
    DavidL said:

    We desperately need a government and an opposition that is focussed on running the country and making good some of the damage. But who believes that these terrible figures will move any votes?

    They should change minds, but let's face it if someone already bought the SNP's argument they weren't paying any attention to the economics in the first place.
  • PongPong Posts: 4,693
    What the feck?

    Someone just bet £975 at *EVENS* on Nikki Haley for the GOP nominee.

    I didn't lay it, sadly.
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 20,589
    DavidL said:

    The GERS figures are indeed truly horrible, far, far worse than anything the supposed "project fear" campaigners dared to forecast during the referendum. If the uncertainty and damage occasioned by potential independence and the transfer south of what is left of our financial services industry had been added we would have been looking at Greece in admiration at their fiscal sanity.

    Sturgeon's response to this is frankly disgraceful: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-35757787 Apparently, "This shows the foundations of Scotland's economy are strong and that we have a strong base to build our future progress upon."

    It also explains why the absolute priority of the Scottish government in the recent negotiations was that the new fiscal autonomy rules would not make Scotland worse off. The tax base north of the border is, unfortunately, collapsing with the oil price and the drift of financial services southwards. We are left with a bureaucratic state that in terms of its dominance of the economy would put East Germany to shame.

    We desperately need a government and an opposition that is focussed on running the country and making good some of the damage. But who believes that these terrible figures will move any votes?

    How long will English voters tolerate Scots getting £1400 more per head AND a fiscal deal where England has to bail the Scots out if they screw up, but not the other way round?

  • nigel4englandnigel4england Posts: 4,800

    runnymede said:

    'He said "the EU has been good for us". That statement is, without any shadow of a doubt, true'

    If you look at the Bank's research on this, it is actually a bit thin. A lot of it is little more than a (slightly skewed) literature review and the crucial section where the Bank does argue that 'openness has increased ergo EU has been good' suffers from the major flaw of not really examining possible counterfactuals e.g. would 'openness' have increased anyway, perhaps even by more? The concept of 'openness' itself is also rather loosely defined.

    And you are right that it is quite backward-looking overall. It is clearly designed to support the status quo (albeit not stridently) but doesn't make a very strong case for it.


    Being in the single market has unquestionably benefited us.

    A re-running of history where we had joined the common market in 1975, agreed to the rules around the single market in 1990s but NOTHING ELSE would be fascinating but impossible of course.

    The key q for this whole referendum is whether we can hope to either be in the EU and not sign up to anything further, or leave and still get the benefits of the single market.

    Probably neither is true, so neither of the referendum options appeals to me much :-(

    So which is worse - isolation or sliding inexorably into a closer and closer political union? Arguments so far from both sides are deeply unedifying.
    Isolation from what exactly?
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 15,158

    .@halfon4harlowMP: Number of civil servants based in London has reduced by 7,500 with savings of £2.8 billion for the taxpayer #COquestions

    I would be interested to know what period that saving is over as that equates to £373,000 per person.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 14,751
    SeanT said:

    DavidL said:

    The GERS figures are indeed truly horrible, far, far worse than anything the supposed "project fear" campaigners dared to forecast during the referendum. If the uncertainty and damage occasioned by potential independence and the transfer south of what is left of our financial services industry had been added we would have been looking at Greece in admiration at their fiscal sanity.

    Sturgeon's response to this is frankly disgraceful: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-35757787 Apparently, "This shows the foundations of Scotland's economy are strong and that we have a strong base to build our future progress upon."

    It also explains why the absolute priority of the Scottish government in the recent negotiations was that the new fiscal autonomy rules would not make Scotland worse off. The tax base north of the border is, unfortunately, collapsing with the oil price and the drift of financial services southwards. We are left with a bureaucratic state that in terms of its dominance of the economy would put East Germany to shame.

    We desperately need a government and an opposition that is focussed on running the country and making good some of the damage. But who believes that these terrible figures will move any votes?

    How long will English voters tolerate Scots getting £1400 more per head AND a fiscal deal where England has to bail the Scots out if they screw up, but not the other way round?

    Another reason to support Leave! Vote Leave so Scotland gets its independence and let the EU subsidise them.
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 1,665

    Whilst I'm all for not whining, when the other side is playing unfair - it's legitimate to point it out. Otherwise they win.

    Turning the other cheek doesn't win the war in politics. That's not whining - it's rebuttal.

    DavidL said:

    MaxPB said:

    On Mark Carney. I really don't understand the problem. He was asked questions by the committee and gave pretty straightforward answers. Nothing he said wasn't true or made up, it's the manner of the uphill argument we face in the Leave camp. Instead of lashing out at Carney we should have concentrated on what he actually said and, more importantly, didn't say.

    He said "the EU has been good for us". That statement is, without any shadow of a doubt, true. What he didn't say, maybe because he wasn't asked, is whether it would be good for us in the future. We should be making the argument that the good times for the EU are over, our RoW trade is growing by 4% long run and our EU trade is falling by 2% long run. It is no longer in our interest to be in the EU as it was when it was "good for us".

    He said "leaving would cause uncertainty". Well of course it would, but again, we need to work on the message. Not all uncertainty is bad. We had 10 years of certainty under Brown, investment fell, the state became bloated and we lost our entrepreneurial spirit as a nation. Yes there will be uncertainty, but out of that we will get new activity, new opportunities to trade with the rest of the world which is growing a lot faster than the EU.

    As for HMQ, honestly, who cares if some unelected person is in favour of leaving or remaining. I highly doubt that the Queen being in favour of Brexit is going to convince an IT worker who likes going on holiday in Italy to vote to leave.

    I agree with this absolutely. It really is long, long past time that those for Leave started to make the positive case for it and stopped the whining. It is getting dangerously close to too late.
    LEAVERS are already split on what BREXIT means, now they starting to argue about the strategy to get there even though they can't agree on where they are going1 It does not bode well
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 36,518
    @FraserNelson: The Scottish government’s own figures demolish the economic case for independence, says @AlexMassie: https://t.co/g2FZDTcJYE
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    YouGov
    The honeymoon is over: government approval is back in decline – https://t.co/GFLXWK4vvu https://t.co/NrEaRDXdQA
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 16,813

    DavidL said:

    MaxPB said:

    On Mark Carney. I really don't understand the problem. He was asked questions by the committee and gave pretty straightforward answers. Nothing he said wasn't true or made up, it's the manner of the uphill argument we face in the Leave camp. Instead of lashing out at Carney we should have concentrated on what he actually said and, more importantly, didn't say.

    He said "the EU has been good for us". That statement is, without any shadow of a doubt, true. What he didn't say, maybe because he wasn't asked, is whether it would be good for us in the future. We should be making the argument that the good times for the EU are over, our RoW trade is growing by 4% long run and our EU trade is falling by 2% long run. It is no longer in our interest to be in the EU as it was when it was "good for us".

    He said "leaving would cause uncertainty". Well of course it would, but again, we need to work on the message. Not all uncertainty is bad. We had 10 years of certainty under Brown, investment fell, the state became bloated and we lost our entrepreneurial spirit as a nation. Yes there will be uncertainty, but out of that we will get new activity, new opportunities to trade with the rest of the world which is growing a lot faster than the EU.

    As for HMQ, honestly, who cares if some unelected person is in favour of leaving or remaining. I highly doubt that the Queen being in favour of Brexit is going to convince an IT worker who likes going on holiday in Italy to vote to leave.

    I agree with this absolutely. It really is long, long past time that those for Leave started to make the positive case for it and stopped the whining. It is getting dangerously close to too late.
    I'm still waiting for someone to make a positive case for Remain.
    Vote remain and the British Isles will not be consumed by the wrathful Atlantic.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 10,466
    OllyT said:



    Being relatively new to the site when I respond to a comment that is in a chain I am often told that my response is too long , perhaps some one can tell me how to get round this

    When you click on "reply" you get all the previous discussion rapped in blockqoute and slash(endf)blockquote bracketing. If there are several comments you'll see two or three blockquotes with the matching slash blockquote lower down. The trick is to delete them in pairs. Alternatively,just take out a bunch of text without touching the blockquotes. That's what I've done in replying to you here - I've deleted everything you said except the last para, because I'm only replying to the last para in this post.

    I expect I've made that sound more complicated than it is, sorry, but it's fairly easy when you've done it a few times.
  • If David Cameron is stuck for anything to say at this Prime Minister's Questions, there's a fair chance that this will make an appearance:

    JohnRentoul · 32m32 minutes ago

    This is an appalling story. How could any normal person want to be in the same party as this fool? http://order-order.com/2016/03/09/911-apologist-reinstated-as-full-labour-member/

    Second thing he mentioned.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,637

    .@halfon4harlowMP: Number of civil servants based in London has reduced by 7,500 with savings of £2.8 billion for the taxpayer #COquestions

    Average cost of £375,000 each!!

    What cost-allocation loading have the Treasury been doing to come up with those numbers?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 14,751

    .@halfon4harlowMP: Number of civil servants based in London has reduced by 7,500 with savings of £2.8 billion for the taxpayer #COquestions

    I would be interested to know what period that saving is over as that equates to £373,000 per person.

    .@halfon4harlowMP: Number of civil servants based in London has reduced by 7,500 with savings of £2.8 billion for the taxpayer #COquestions

    I would be interested to know what period that saving is over as that equates to £373,000 per person.
    I would guess since 2010 which works out to £60k per year, makes sense if you include pension contributions and employer's NI.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 16,813
    OllyT said:

    Whilst I'm all for not whining, when the other side is playing unfair - it's legitimate to point it out. Otherwise they win.

    Turning the other cheek doesn't win the war in politics. That's not whining - it's rebuttal.

    DavidL said:

    MaxPB said:

    On Mark Carney. I really don't understand the problem. He was asked questions by the committee and

    As for HMQ, honestly, who cares if some unelected person is in favour of leaving or remaining. I highly doubt that the Queen being in favour of Brexit is going to convince an IT worker who likes going on holiday in Italy to vote to leave.

    I agree with this absolutely. It really is long, long past time that those for Leave started to make the positive case for it and stopped the whining. It is getting dangerously close to too late.
    LEAVERS are already split on what BREXIT means, now they starting to argue about the strategy to get there even though they can't agree on where they are going1 It does not bode well
    Lol remainers are split on what remain means, they're just better at hiding it.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 15,158

    runnymede said:

    'He said "the EU has been good for us". That statement is, without any shadow of a doubt, true'

    If you look at the Bank's research on this, it is actually a bit thin. A lot of it is little more than a (slightly skewed) literature review and the crucial section where the Bank does argue that 'openness has increased ergo EU has been good' suffers from the major flaw of not really examining possible counterfactuals e.g. would 'openness' have increased anyway, perhaps even by more? The concept of 'openness' itself is also rather loosely defined.

    And you are right that it is quite backward-looking overall. It is clearly designed to support the status quo (albeit not stridently) but doesn't make a very strong case for it.


    Being in the single market has unquestionably benefited us.

    A re-running of history where we had joined the common market in 1975, agreed to the rules around the single market in 1990s but NOTHING ELSE would be fascinating but impossible of course.

    The key q for this whole referendum is whether we can hope to either be in the EU and not sign up to anything further, or leave and still get the benefits of the single market.

    Probably neither is true, so neither of the referendum options appeals to me much :-(

    So which is worse - isolation or sliding inexorably into a closer and closer political union? Arguments so far from both sides are deeply unedifying.
    I still don't get the idea that being outside of a 28 country bloc along with the other 168 non EU countries including the biggest players in the world counts as 'isolation'.
  • DavidL said:

    MaxPB said:

    On Mark Carney. I really don't understand the problem. He was asked questions by the committee and gave pretty straightforward answers. Nothing he said wasn't true or made up, it's the manner of the uphill argument we face in the Leave camp. Instead of lashing out at Carney we should have concentrated on what he actually said and, more importantly, didn't say.

    He said "the EU has been good for us". That statement is, without any shadow of a doubt, true. What he didn't say, maybe because he wasn't asked, is whether it would be good for us in the future. We should be making the argument that the good times for the EU are over, our RoW trade is growing by 4% long run and our EU trade is falling by 2% long run. It is no longer in our interest to be in the EU as it was when it was "good for us".

    He said "leaving would cause uncertainty". Well of course it would, but again, we need to work on the message. Not all uncertainty is bad. We had 10 years of certainty under Brown, investment fell, the state became bloated and we lost our entrepreneurial spirit as a nation. Yes there will be uncertainty, but out of that we will get new activity, new opportunities to trade with the rest of the world which is growing a lot faster than the EU.

    As for HMQ, honestly, who cares if some unelected person is in favour of leaving or remaining. I highly doubt that the Queen being in favour of Brexit is going to convince an IT worker who likes going on holiday in Italy to vote to leave.

    I agree with this absolutely. It really is long, long past time that those for Leave started to make the positive case for it and stopped the whining. It is getting dangerously close to too late.
    I'm still waiting for someone to make a positive case for Remain.
    Vote remain and the British Isles will not be consumed by the wrathful Atlantic.
    Vote Remain and we'll continue to annoy the French by being in the EU. Why do you think De Gaulle kept on vetoing our entry.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 11,267

    DavidL said:

    MaxPB said:

    On Mark Carney. I really don't understand the problem. He was asked questions by the committee and gave pretty straightforward answers. Nothing he said wasn't true or made up, it's the manner of the uphill argument we face in the Leave camp. Instead of lashing out at Carney we should have concentrated on what he actually said and, more importantly, didn't say.

    He said "the EU has been good for us". That statement is, without any shadow of a doubt, true. What he didn't say, maybe because he wasn't asked, is whether it would be good for us in the future. We should be making the argument that the good times for the EU are over, our RoW trade is growing by 4% long run and our EU trade is falling by 2% long run. It is no longer in our interest to be in the EU as it was when it was "good for us".

    He said "leaving would cause uncertainty". Well of course it would, but again, we need to work on the message. Not all uncertainty is bad. We had 10 years of certainty under Brown, investment fell, the state became bloated and we lost our entrepreneurial spirit as a nation. Yes there will be uncertainty, but out of that we will get new activity, new opportunities to trade with the rest of the world which is growing a lot faster than the EU.

    As for HMQ, honestly, who cares if some unelected person is in favour of leaving or remaining. I highly doubt that the Queen being in favour of Brexit is going to convince an IT worker who likes going on holiday in Italy to vote to leave.

    I agree with this absolutely. It really is long, long past time that those for Leave started to make the positive case for it and stopped the whining. It is getting dangerously close to too late.
    I'm still waiting for someone to make a positive case for Remain.
    Vote remain and the British Isles will not be consumed by the wrathful Atlantic.
    Somehow it'll work it's way round Ireland. Or at least most of it!
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 44,330
    Pong said:

    What the feck?

    Someone just bet £975 at *EVENS* on Nikki Haley for the GOP nominee.

    I didn't lay it, sadly.

    Bloody hell. Some person with two accounts looking to create some fake prices ?
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 1,665
    MaxPB said:

    OllyT said:

    Re David HerdsonT

    The white collar liberals comment was in response to MaxPB saying Clinton was in trouble with them.

    There could be remnants of Reagan Democrats out there but the demographics have changed dramatically in the intervening 30 years and they are not as important as they were. I also really wonder how many of the type of blue collars that might go for Trump voted for Obama in 2008/2012.

    I think Clinton is going to hold a much larger percentage of the Obama vote than Trump will of the Romney vote. The unknown is the number of extra voters each brings to the ticket - I would say few for Clinton and much more for Trump but I don't think it will be enough.

    Seeing a lot of comment re the GOP VP - any tips on who thinks Hilary would go for?

    Being relatively new to the site when I respond to a comment that is in a chain I am often told that my response is too long , perhaps some one can tell me how to get round this

    Delete all but the comment you are replying to.

    Hillary needs to go for someone who appeals to whites. A liberal white professor type from one of the New England states.
    Thanks, is Howard Dean still around?
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 7,470
    Pong said:

    What the feck?

    Someone just bet £975 at *EVENS* on Nikki Haley for the GOP nominee.

    I didn't lay it, sadly.

    Typo? Or meant for the vice-presidential?
  • OllyT said:

    MaxPB said:

    OllyT said:

    Re David HerdsonT

    The white collar liberals comment was in response to MaxPB saying Clinton was in trouble with them.

    There could be remnants of Reagan Democrats out there but the demographics have changed dramatically in the intervening 30 years and they are not as important as they were. I also really wonder how many of the type of blue collars that might go for Trump voted for Obama in 2008/2012.

    I think Clinton is going to hold a much larger percentage of the Obama vote than Trump will of the Romney vote. The unknown is the number of extra voters each brings to the ticket - I would say few for Clinton and much more for Trump but I don't think it will be enough.

    Seeing a lot of comment re the GOP VP - any tips on who thinks Hilary would go for?

    Being relatively new to the site when I respond to a comment that is in a chain I am often told that my response is too long , perhaps some one can tell me how to get round this

    Delete all but the comment you are replying to.

    Hillary needs to go for someone who appeals to whites. A liberal white professor type from one of the New England states.
    Thanks, is Howard Dean still around?
    Yeeeeeeeeaaaaaaahhhhhh
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 16,813

    DavidL said:

    MaxPB said:

    On Mark Carney. I really don't understand the problem. He was asked questions by the committee and gave pretty straightforward answers. Nothing he said wasn't true or made up, it's the manner of the uphill argument we face in the Leave camp. Instead of lashing out at Carney we should have concentrated on what he actually said and, more importantly, didn't say.

    He said "the EU has been good for us". That statement is, without any shadow of a doubt, true. What he didn't say, maybe because he wasn't asked, is whether it would be good for us in the future. We should be making the argument that the good times for the EU are over, our RoW trade is growing by 4% long run and our EU trade is falling by 2% long run. It is no longer in our interest to be in the EU as it was when it was "good for us".

    He said "leaving would cause uncertainty". Well of course it would, but again, we need to work on the message. Not all uncertainty is bad. We had 10 years of certainty under Brown, investment fell, the state became bloated and we lost our entrepreneurial spirit as a nation. Yes there will be uncertainty, but out of that we will get new activity, new opportunities to trade with the rest of the world which is growing a lot faster than the EU.

    As for HMQ, honestly, who cares if some unelected person is in favour of leaving or remaining. I highly doubt that the Queen being in favour of Brexit is going to convince an IT worker who likes going on holiday in Italy to vote to leave.

    I agree with this absolutely. It really is long, long past time that those for Leave started to make the positive case for it and stopped the whining. It is getting dangerously close to too late.
    I'm still waiting for someone to make a positive case for Remain.
    Vote remain and the British Isles will not be consumed by the wrathful Atlantic.
    Vote Remain and we'll continue to annoy the French by being in the EU. Why do you think De Gaulle kept on vetoing our entry.
    That's old hat Mr Eagles, today it's Leave and the french will be forever be second string to Germany.

    " look Hollande, when I want to know your opinion I'll ask Angela"
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Yup, it's not being Little EUers

    runnymede said:

    'He said "the EU has been good for us". That statement is, without any shadow of a doubt, true'

    If you look at the Bank's research on this, it is actually a bit thin. A lot of it is little more than a (slightly skewed) literature review and the crucial section where the Bank does argue that 'openness has increased ergo EU has been good' suffers from the major flaw of not really examining possible counterfactuals e.g. would 'openness' have increased anyway, perhaps even by more? The concept of 'openness' itself is also rather loosely defined.

    And you are right that it is quite backward-looking overall. It is clearly designed to support the status quo (albeit not stridently) but doesn't make a very strong case for it.


    Being in the single market has unquestionably benefited us.

    A re-running of history where we had joined the common market in 1975, agreed to the rules around the single market in 1990s but NOTHING ELSE would be fascinating but impossible of course.

    The key q for this whole referendum is whether we can hope to either be in the EU and not sign up to anything further, or leave and still get the benefits of the single market.

    Probably neither is true, so neither of the referendum options appeals to me much :-(

    So which is worse - isolation or sliding inexorably into a closer and closer political union? Arguments so far from both sides are deeply unedifying.
    I still don't get the idea that being outside of a 28 country bloc along with the other 168 non EU countries including the biggest players in the world counts as 'isolation'.
  • nigel4englandnigel4england Posts: 4,800

    Hello Plato
    Stats....
    77% of car industry favours continued membership of EU.
    Over 75% of cars built went to export with nearly 60% going to the EU. The motor industry accounts for nearly 12% of all exports ... £15 billion.
    800,000 people employed by the industry.
    SMMT Chief says the EU is 'vital for the future' and 'leaving would put many of these jobs at risk'
    Toyota deputy managing director say leaving would 'open up a very uncertain future of technical difficulties and increased costs'
    (Autocar survey)
    So carry on Miss Plato (and others) carry on campaining to 'put many of these jobs at risk' .

    You can see what forms Carney's opinions.

    PS
    Peter Bone has a nerve... he was happy to be jovial sharing a platform with Galloway. (And some people wonder why I use the word 'odious'.) This is before you get to Farage.

    Someone had better tell the mugs that are investing £2billion in the UK car industry then.

    How has the UK car industry performed since the doomsday scenario of not joining the Euro?
    Mugs earning the nation a fortune. The car industry is an amazing (foreign owned) success. Massive investment based on it being in the EU.
    You just carry on 'putting all these jobs at risk'. Your cavalier attitude to reality is shameful.
    Oh dear, perhaps you should have reread this before you posted it.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 20,367
    SeanT said:

    DavidL said:

    The GERS figures are indeed truly horrible, far, far worse than anything the supposed "project fear" campaigners dared to forecast during the referendum. If the uncertainty and damage occasioned by potential independence and the transfer south of what is left of our financial services industry had been added we would have been looking at Greece in admiration at their fiscal sanity.

    Sturgeon's response to this is frankly disgraceful: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-35757787 Apparently, "This shows the foundations of Scotland's economy are strong and that we have a strong base to build our future progress upon."

    It also explains why the absolute priority of the Scottish government in the recent negotiations was that the new fiscal autonomy rules would not make Scotland worse off. The tax base north of the border is, unfortunately, collapsing with the oil price and the drift of financial services southwards. We are left with a bureaucratic state that in terms of its dominance of the economy would put East Germany to shame.

    We desperately need a government and an opposition that is focussed on running the country and making good some of the damage. But who believes that these terrible figures will move any votes?

    How long will English voters tolerate Scots getting £1400 more per head AND a fiscal deal where England has to bail the Scots out if they screw up, but not the other way round?

    I don't know. It is consistent with the Barnett formula and Scots would point out that there have been many, many years over the last few decades where Scotland has contributed substantially more than its share but in a world where public spending is under such pressure it is remarkable that more is not made of this.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 11,267
    MaxPB said:

    OllyT said:

    Re David HerdsonT

    The white collar liberals comment was in response to MaxPB saying Clinton was in trouble with them.

    There could be remnants of Reagan Democrats out there but the demographics have changed dramatically in the intervening 30 years and they are not as important as they were. I also really wonder how many of the type of blue collars that might go for Trump voted for Obama in 2008/2012.

    I think Clinton is going to hold a much larger percentage of the Obama vote than Trump will of the Romney vote. The unknown is the number of extra voters each brings to the ticket - I would say few for Clinton and much more for Trump but I don't think it will be enough.

    Seeing a lot of comment re the GOP VP - any tips on who thinks Hilary would go for?

    Being relatively new to the site when I respond to a comment that is in a chain I am often told that my response is too long , perhaps some one can tell me how to get round this

    Delete all but the comment you are replying to.

    Hillary needs to go for someone who appeals to whites. A liberal white professor type from one of the New England states.

    Someone from Silicon Valley?
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    Corbyn shows absolutely no sign of growing into his role.

  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 7,568

    If David Cameron is stuck for anything to say at this Prime Minister's Questions, there's a fair chance that this will make an appearance:

    JohnRentoul · 32m32 minutes ago

    This is an appalling story. How could any normal person want to be in the same party as this fool? http://order-order.com/2016/03/09/911-apologist-reinstated-as-full-labour-member/

    Second thing he mentioned.
    Only surprise was that he didn't use the phrase "terrorist sympathiser".
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 18,311
    Pong said:

    What the feck?

    Someone just bet £975 at *EVENS* on Nikki Haley for the GOP nominee.

    I didn't lay it, sadly.

    Could this be someone using the Cashout button?

  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 15,158

    DavidL said:

    MaxPB said:

    On Mark Carney. I really don't understand the problem. He was asked questions by the committee and gave pretty straightforward answers. Nothing he said wasn't true or made up, it's the manner of the uphill argument we face in the Leave camp. Instead of lashing out at Carney we should have concentrated on what he actually said and, more importantly, didn't say.

    He said "the EU has been good for us". That statement is, without any shadow of a doubt, true. What he didn't say, maybe because he wasn't asked, is whether it would be good for us in the future. We should be making the argument that the good times for the EU are over, our RoW trade is growing by 4% long run and our EU trade is falling by 2% long run. It is no longer in our interest to be in the EU as it was when it was "good for us".

    He said "leaving would cause uncertainty". Well of course it would, but again, we need to work on the message. Not all uncertainty is bad. We had 10 years of certainty under Brown, investment fell, the state became bloated and we lost our entrepreneurial spirit as a nation. Yes there will be uncertainty, but out of that we will get new activity, new opportunities to trade with the rest of the world which is growing a lot faster than the EU.

    As for HMQ, honestly, who cares if some unelected person is in favour of leaving or remaining. I highly doubt that the Queen being in favour of Brexit is going to convince an IT worker who likes going on holiday in Italy to vote to leave.

    I agree with this absolutely. It really is long, long past time that those for Leave started to make the positive case for it and stopped the whining. It is getting dangerously close to too late.
    I'm still waiting for someone to make a positive case for Remain.
    Vote remain and the British Isles will not be consumed by the wrathful Atlantic.
    Vote Remain and we'll continue to annoy the French by being in the EU. Why do you think De Gaulle kept on vetoing our entry.
    That's old hat Mr Eagles, today it's Leave and the french will be forever be second string to Germany.

    " look Hollande, when I want to know your opinion I'll ask Angela"
    Vote Remain and we'll let you win the Eurovision song contest next time.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 16,813

    Hello Plato
    Stats....
    77% of car industry favours continued membership of EU.
    Over 75% of cars built went to export with nearly 60% going to the EU. The motor industry accounts for nearly 12% of all exports ... £15 billion.
    800,000 people employed by the industry.
    SMMT Chief says the EU is 'vital for the future' and 'leaving would put many of these jobs at risk'
    Toyota deputy managing director say leaving would 'open up a very uncertain future of technical difficulties and increased costs'
    (Autocar survey)
    So carry on Miss Plato (and others) carry on campaining to 'put many of these jobs at risk' .

    You can see what forms Carney's opinions.

    PS
    Peter Bone has a nerve... he was happy to be jovial sharing a platform with Galloway. (And some people wonder why I use the word 'odious'.) This is before you get to Farage.

    Someone had better tell the mugs that are investing £2billion in the UK car industry then.

    How has the UK car industry performed since the doomsday scenario of not joining the Euro?
    Mugs earning the nation a fortune. The car industry is an amazing (foreign owned) success. Massive investment based on it being in the EU.
    You just carry on 'putting all these jobs at risk'. Your cavalier attitude to reality is shameful.
    Oh dear, perhaps you should have reread this before you posted it.
    iI used to have a Cavalier attiitude but then GM transferred all the production to Germany.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Cameron unsurprisingly walloping Corbyn.
  • If David Cameron is stuck for anything to say at this Prime Minister's Questions, there's a fair chance that this will make an appearance:

    JohnRentoul · 32m32 minutes ago

    This is an appalling story. How could any normal person want to be in the same party as this fool? http://order-order.com/2016/03/09/911-apologist-reinstated-as-full-labour-member/

    Second thing he mentioned.
    Only surprise was that he didn't use the phrase "terrorist sympathiser".
    Give it time.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 7,568
    chestnut said:

    Corbyn shows absolutely no sign of growing into his role.

    His 100th question was a beautiful microcosm.
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 1,665

    OllyT said:



    Being relatively new to the site when I respond to a comment that is in a chain I am often told that my response is too long , perhaps some one can tell me how to get round this

    When you click on "reply" you get all the previous discussion rapped in blockqoute and slash(endf)blockquote bracketing. If there are several comments you'll see two or three blockquotes with the matching slash blockquote lower down. The trick is to delete them in pairs. Alternatively,just take out a bunch of text without touching the blockquotes. That's what I've done in replying to you here - I've deleted everything you said except the last para, because I'm only replying to the last para in this post.

    I expect I've made that sound more complicated than it is, sorry, but it's fairly easy when you've done it a few times.
    Thanks - technology not my strongest but but I'll give it a go
  • JackWJackW Posts: 13,349
    MaxPB said:

    JackW said:

    MaxPB said:

    JackW said:

    MaxPB said:

    JackW said:

    @MaxPB

    I do so enjoy your fantasy musing on the upcoming President Trump.

    Much like I did with other PBers with Presidents McCain and Romney and Prime Minister Miliband.

    And I enjoy the complete lack of understanding you have of Bernie supporters, maybe you're just too old!
    Clearly with Trump's attitudes on Hispanics, AA and women he's going to appeal to Sander's supporters. It's obvious that Donald's empathy plays well to the Bernie base there .... Well, it's a view.

    Somewhat like Jezza's mob taking a kindly view of Nigel Farage and thus opting not to vote for Ed last year. It certainly has novelty value, I'll give you that.
    Trump appeals to them on a very basic level that Hillary doesn't.
    I heard it all before. "JackW doesn't understand US politics ... blah blah ...." and yet it's remarkable how accurate I've been over the years on POTUS much to the financial benefit of PBers.

    Little wonder the GOP establishment is having a collective nervous breakdown. They know Trump will blow it for them in November.
    Jack, I'm going to have to agree to disagree with you on this, the dynamic in the US has changed since the entrance of Trump and Bernie. If it was just Trump then I would be in absolute agreement with you.

    Trump appeals to WWC voters on both the right and left, Romney, McCain and Dubya didn't. He's not increasing his share of WWC voters marginally, it is going to be a huge increase in share, plus he will do better than expected with integrated second and third gen immigrants.
    You think Obama appealed to WWC? it was a demographic that Clinton won comfortably in the 08 nominee race and that McCain and Romney exploited and kept Obama's numbers there low. Even then the GOP failed.

    The evidence that Trump appeals to "second and third gen immigrants" doesn't exist. Indeed he's polling worse with them than any GOP nominee in living memory.

    Trump has to offset his vastly worse numbers with the increasing minority demographic and women voters with such a vast share of the diminishing white vote and also attract a huge share of the swing voters. And all that in the swing states that are trending away from the GOP too.

    You think Trump can. I know he'll fail.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 16,813

    Hello Plato
    Stats....
    77% of car industry favours continued membership of EU.
    Over 75% of cars built went to export with nearly 60% going to the EU. The motor industry accounts for nearly 12% of all exports ... £15 billion.
    800,000 people employed by the industry.
    SMMT Chief says the EU is 'vital for the future' and 'leaving would put many of these jobs at risk'
    Toyota deputy managing director say leaving would 'open up a very uncertain future of technical difficulties and increased costs'
    (Autocar survey)
    So carry on Miss Plato (and others) carry on campaining to 'put many of these jobs at risk' .

    You can see what forms Carney's opinions.

    PS
    Peter Bone has a nerve... he was happy to be jovial sharing a platform with Galloway. (And some people wonder why I use the word 'odious'.) This is before you get to Farage.

    Someone had better tell the mugs that are investing £2billion in the UK car industry then.

    How has the UK car industry performed since the doomsday scenario of not joining the Euro?
    Mugs earning the nation a fortune. The car industry is an amazing (foreign owned) success. Massive investment based on it being in the EU.
    You just carry on 'putting all these jobs at risk'. Your cavalier attitude to reality is shameful.
    Oh dear, perhaps you should have reread this before you posted it.
    I used to have a Cavalier attiitude but then GM transferred all the production to Germany to safeguard our jobs
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    The ever-readable Labour List has this gem:

    "A Labour fundraiser last night auctioned off a chance to go swimming with sharks... and Shadow Leader of the House Chris Bryant. It's not clear how much the prize went for, but the ominous description of the event as "once in a lifetime" may have depressed the final price somewhat."

    I saw this excursion to swim with Great White Sharks in Capetown. I was not tempted...

    http://www.sharkcagediving.net/the-trip/
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 20,589

    YouGov
    The honeymoon is over: government approval is back in decline – https://t.co/GFLXWK4vvu https://t.co/NrEaRDXdQA

    That will worry REMAIN. If the referendum is seen by Labour, Nat and Lib voters as a chance to kick Cameron, then it is lost. This becomes more likely as his popularity fades.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 36,518
    @IsabelHardman: This is Corbyn's worst PMQs yet
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Opel My God

    Hello Plato
    Stats....
    77% of car industry favours continued membership of EU.
    Over 75% of cars built went to export with nearly 60% going to the EU. The motor industry accounts for nearly 12% of all exports ... £15 billion.
    800,000 people employed by the industry.
    SMMT Chief says the EU is 'vital for the future' and 'leaving would put many of these jobs at risk'
    Toyota deputy managing director say leaving would 'open up a very uncertain future of technical difficulties and increased costs'
    (Autocar survey)
    So carry on Miss Plato (and others) carry on campaining to 'put many of these jobs at risk' .

    You can see what forms Carney's opinions.

    PS
    Peter Bone has a nerve... he was happy to be jovial sharing a platform with Galloway. (And some people wonder why I use the word 'odious'.) This is before you get to Farage.

    Someone had better tell the mugs that are investing £2billion in the UK car industry then.

    How has the UK car industry performed since the doomsday scenario of not joining the Euro?
    Mugs earning the nation a fortune. The car industry is an amazing (foreign owned) success. Massive investment based on it being in the EU.
    You just carry on 'putting all these jobs at risk'. Your cavalier attitude to reality is shameful.
    Oh dear, perhaps you should have reread this before you posted it.
    iI used to have a Cavalier attiitude but then GM transferred all the production to Germany.
  • DavidL said:

    MaxPB said:

    On Mark Carney. I really don't understand the problem. He was asked questions by the committee and gave pretty straightforward answers. Nothing he said wasn't true or made up, it's the manner of the uphill argument we face in the Leave camp. Instead of lashing out at Carney we should have concentrated on what he actually said and, more importantly, didn't say.

    He said "the EU has been good for us". That statement is, without any shadow of a doubt, true. What he didn't say, maybe because he wasn't asked, is whether it would be good for us in the future. We should be making the argument that the good times for the EU are over, our RoW trade is growing by 4% long run and our EU trade is falling by 2% long run. It is no longer in our interest to be in the EU as it was when it was "good for us".

    He said "leaving would cause uncertainty". Well of course it would, but again, we need to work on the message. Not all uncertainty is bad. We had 10 years of certainty under Brown, investment fell, the state became bloated and we lost our entrepreneurial spirit as a nation. Yes there will be uncertainty, but out of that we will get new activity, new opportunities to trade with the rest of the world which is growing a lot faster than the EU.

    As for HMQ, honestly, who cares if some unelected person is in favour of leaving or remaining. I highly doubt that the Queen being in favour of Brexit is going to convince an IT worker who likes going on holiday in Italy to vote to leave.

    I agree with this absolutely. It really is long, long past time that those for Leave started to make the positive case for it and stopped the whining. It is getting dangerously close to too late.
    I'm still waiting for someone to make a positive case for Remain.
    Vote remain and the British Isles will not be consumed by the wrathful Atlantic.
    Vote Remain and we'll continue to annoy the French by being in the EU. Why do you think De Gaulle kept on vetoing our entry.
    Vote Remain and have the EU welcome 74 million Muslims in a few years time.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 18,311
    Jeremy Corbyn's tactic of reminding everyone that he's asked 100 ineffectual questions in PMQs is innovative.
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Does Corbyn and his aides actually do any research before PMQs..
  • MaxPB said:

    .@halfon4harlowMP: Number of civil servants based in London has reduced by 7,500 with savings of £2.8 billion for the taxpayer #COquestions

    I would be interested to know what period that saving is over as that equates to £373,000 per person.

    .@halfon4harlowMP: Number of civil servants based in London has reduced by 7,500 with savings of £2.8 billion for the taxpayer #COquestions

    I would be interested to know what period that saving is over as that equates to £373,000 per person.
    I would guess since 2010 which works out to £60k per year, makes sense if you include pension contributions and employer's NI.
    and office costs with support etc... so the starting point may not all need to be 2010. I would estimate that the average charge per bod would be closer to £80k per year per person.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    I'm unclear about the Turkish visas. I presume they're work ones = EU membership ones, otherwise they're tourists.

    What level of trade does Turkey have with the EU now?

    It appears that Turkey are getting the biggest advantage of membership without getting it formalised.

    DavidL said:

    MaxPB said:

    On Mark Carney. I really don't understand the problem. He was asked questions by the committee and gave pretty straightforward answers. Nothing he said wasn't true or made up, it's the manner of the uphill argument we face in the Leave camp. Instead of lashing out at Carney we should have concentrated on what he actually said and, more importantly, didn't say.

    He said "the EU has been good for us". That statement is, without any shadow of a doubt, true. What he didn't say, maybe because he wasn't asked, is whether it would be good for us in the future. We should be making the argument that the good times for the EU are over, our RoW trade is growing by 4% long run and our EU trade is falling by 2% long run. It is no longer in our interest to be in the EU as it was when it was "good for us".

    He said "leaving would cause uncertainty". Well of course it would, but again, we need to work on the message. Not all uncertainty is bad. We had 10 years of certainty under Brown, investment fell, the state became bloated and we lost our entrepreneurial spirit as a nation. Yes there will be uncertainty, but out of that we will get new activity, new opportunities to trade with the rest of the world which is growing a lot faster than the EU.

    As for HMQ, honestly, who cares if some unelected person is in favour of leaving or remaining. I highly doubt that the Queen being in favour of Brexit is going to convince an IT worker who likes going on holiday in Italy to vote to leave.

    I agree with this absolutely. It really is long, long past time that those for Leave started to make the positive case for it and stopped the whining. It is getting dangerously close to too late.
    I'm still waiting for someone to make a positive case for Remain.
    Vote remain and the British Isles will not be consumed by the wrathful Atlantic.
    Vote Remain and we'll continue to annoy the French by being in the EU. Why do you think De Gaulle kept on vetoing our entry.
    Vote Remain and have the EU welcome 74 million Muslims in a few years time.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Just follow @JeremyCorbyn4PM on Twitter...

    Does Corbyn and his aides actually do any research before PMQs..

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 44,330

    Pong said:

    What the feck?

    Someone just bet £975 at *EVENS* on Nikki Haley for the GOP nominee.

    I didn't lay it, sadly.

    Typo? Or meant for the vice-presidential?
    Someone just made a VERY expensive mistake with the back and lay buttons I think...
  • Richard Burgon "the farting commie" asked a smart question which Labour can build attacks upon.
    "If people vote LEAVE will the PM Resign?"
    Answer = No.
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    NO...Cameron will not resign if it is Out..
  • JackWJackW Posts: 13,349
    Scott_P said:

    @IsabelHardman: This is Corbyn's worst PMQs yet

    We are rather spoiled for choice though.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 14,751

    Richard Burgon "the farting commie" asked a smart question which Labour can build attacks upon.
    "If people vote LEAVE will the PM Resign?"
    Answer = No.

    Good. The one thing that might have dragged me, kicking and screaming, into the remain camp would be the party having a bout of regicide and removing Cameron. He is the only choice for PM, there is no one else.
  • LondonBobLondonBob Posts: 467
    I am sorry that is all utter nonsense, Romney performed terribly amongst blue collar whites, Romney won at least 45 percent of the vote in Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Iowa, and Minnesota, but still lost all 80 of their electoral votes. Why? Because Romney carried only 52 percent of the white vote in these six states, and a terrible 47 percent of white voters who hadn’t been to college. Trump policies and persona will perform much better.

    For VP I think Corey Booker has replaced Julian Castro for HRC. She won't get either the turnout nor percentage of black voters that Obama got, especially if she is up against Trump, this endangers Rustbelt seats as well as Virginia.

    For Trump I still go with as favourite Kasich with Kobach a dark horse.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 16,813
    MaxPB said:

    Richard Burgon "the farting commie" asked a smart question which Labour can build attacks upon.
    "If people vote LEAVE will the PM Resign?"
    Answer = No.

    Good. The one thing that might have dragged me, kicking and screaming, into the remain camp would be the party having a bout of regicide and removing Cameron. He is the only choice for PM, there is no one else.
    and Nicola Sturgeon for Chancellor
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    edited March 2016
    Generally speaking, most office bods are costed at 100k per year.

    So with pensions and redundancy...

    Getting rid of the most expensive isn't desired by the Civil Service IME as it costs department management a fortune. But if the goal is shedding numbers, that's another case.

    I've closed down several Whitehall teams and it's a tricky balance

    MaxPB said:

    .@halfon4harlowMP: Number of civil servants based in London has reduced by 7,500 with savings of £2.8 billion for the taxpayer #COquestions

    I would be interested to know what period that saving is over as that equates to £373,000 per person.

    .@halfon4harlowMP: Number of civil servants based in London has reduced by 7,500 with savings of £2.8 billion for the taxpayer #COquestions

    I would be interested to know what period that saving is over as that equates to £373,000 per person.
    I would guess since 2010 which works out to £60k per year, makes sense if you include pension contributions and employer's NI.
    and office costs with support etc... so the starting point may not all need to be 2010. I would estimate that the average charge per bod would be closer to £80k per year per person.
  • MaxPB said:

    Richard Burgon "the farting commie" asked a smart question which Labour can build attacks upon.
    "If people vote LEAVE will the PM Resign?"
    Answer = No.

    Good. The one thing that might have dragged me, kicking and screaming, into the remain camp would be the party having a bout of regicide and removing Cameron. He is the only choice for PM, there is no one else.
    So long as Cameron continues to use the Govt machinery in the way he has been doing for REMAIN, a move against Cameron after the referendum will become inevitable. Just as Osborne's chances of taking over get buried deeper with each stunt. If they want a different outcome they need to be seen to be acting fairly.
  • LucyJonesLucyJones Posts: 614

    I'm unclear about the Turkish visas. I presume they're work ones = EU membership ones, otherwise they're tourists.

    What level of trade does Turkey have with the EU now?

    It appears that Turkey are getting the biggest advantage of membership without getting it formalised.

    DavidL said:

    MaxPB said:

    On Mark Carney. I really don't understand the problem. He was asked questions by the committee and gave pretty straightforward answers. Nothing he said wasn't true or made up, it's the manner of the uphill argument we face in the Leave camp. Instead of lashing out at Carney we should have concentrated on what he actually said and, more importantly, didn't say.

    He said "the EU has been good for us". That statement is, without any shadow of a doubt, true. What he didn't say, maybe because he wasn't asked, is whether it would be good for us in the future. We should be making the argument that the good times for the EU are over, our RoW trade is growing by 4% long run and our EU trade is falling by 2% long run. It is no longer in our interest to be in the EU as it was when it was "good for us".

    He said "leaving would cause uncertainty". Well of course it would, but again, we need to work on the message. Not all uncertainty is bad. We had 10 years of certainty under Brown, investment fell, the state became bloated and we lost our entrepreneurial spirit as a nation. Yes there will be uncertainty, but out of that we will get new activity, new opportunities to trade with the rest of the world which is growing a lot faster than the EU.

    As for HMQ, honestly, who cares if some unelected person is in favour of leaving or remaining. I highly doubt that the Queen being in favour of Brexit is going to convince an IT worker who likes going on holiday in Italy to vote to leave.

    I agree with this absolutely. It really is long, long past time that those for Leave started to make the positive case for it and stopped the whining. It is getting dangerously close to too late.
    I'm still waiting for someone to make a positive case for Remain.
    Vote remain and the British Isles will not be consumed by the wrathful Atlantic.
    Vote Remain and we'll continue to annoy the French by being in the EU. Why do you think De Gaulle kept on vetoing our entry.
    Vote Remain and have the EU welcome 74 million Muslims in a few years time.
    I believe there is an emergency question about the Turkey/EU deal straight after PMQs.



  • NO...Cameron will not resign if it is Out..

    That does look to be something he will not have a say in.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,822
    MaxPB said:

    Richard Burgon "the farting commie" asked a smart question which Labour can build attacks upon.
    "If people vote LEAVE will the PM Resign?"
    Answer = No.

    Good. The one thing that might have dragged me, kicking and screaming, into the remain camp would be the party having a bout of regicide and removing Cameron. He is the only choice for PM, there is no one else.
    There is no earthly way that David Cameron will stay Prime Minister for any length of time after a Leave vote. How on earth could he negotiate leaving terms? His credibility would be zero and he in any case would presumably have not the slightest appetite for the task.
  • PongPong Posts: 4,693

    Pong said:

    What the feck?

    Someone just bet £975 at *EVENS* on Nikki Haley for the GOP nominee.

    I didn't lay it, sadly.

    Could this be someone using the Cashout button?

    Who knows.

    I can't understand how a cashout would result in a back bet of that size at those odds.

    99% likely to be unintentional, IMO.
  • nigel4englandnigel4england Posts: 4,800

    NO...Cameron will not resign if it is Out..

    He might be sacked though, who would want him leading the negotiations on our behalf?
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 7,470
    Pulpstar said:

    Pong said:

    What the feck?

    Someone just bet £975 at *EVENS* on Nikki Haley for the GOP nominee.

    I didn't lay it, sadly.

    Typo? Or meant for the vice-presidential?
    Someone just made a VERY expensive mistake with the back and lay buttons I think...
    But, if they'd been green on Haley, and wanted to lay, they wouldn't need 975 in their account (I keep my balance to a minimum for this reason, ever since I lost £5.64 in a finger error).
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 14,751
    JackW said:

    You think Obama appealed to WWC? it was a demographic that Clinton won comfortably in the 08 nominee race and that McCain and Romney exploited and kept Obama's numbers there low. Even then the GOP failed.

    The evidence that Trump appeals to "second and third gen immigrants" doesn't exist. Indeed he's polling worse with them than any GOP nominee in living memory.

    Trump has to offset his vastly worse numbers with the increasing minority demographic and women voters with such a vast share of the diminishing white vote and also attract a huge share of the swing voters. And all that in the swing states that are trending away from the GOP too.

    You think Trump can. I know he'll fail.

    Again, it was the establishment asking their supporters to back the insurgent. That's an easy thing to do. The opposite is not easy to achieve.

    As for immigrants, it won't be in the evidence. It's just a gut feeling. The same gut feeling about Tories and second/third gen minority votes in 2015. The polling said Labour would win overwhelmingly with all minorities, I thought otherwise and that the better integrated would vote Tory. I was right then, and while I don't think it is the same situation, the support will be higher than is currently predicted for Trump.
  • I'm unclear about the Turkish visas. I presume they're work ones = EU membership ones, otherwise they're tourists.

    What level of trade does Turkey have with the EU now?

    It appears that Turkey are getting the biggest advantage of membership without getting it formalised.

    DavidL said:

    MaxPB said:

    On Mark Carney. I really don't understand the problem. He was asked questions by the committee and gave pretty straightforward answers. Nothing he said wasn't true or made up, it's the manner of the uphill argument we face in the Leave camp. Instead of lashing out at Carney we should have concentrated on what he actually said and, more importantly, didn't say.

    He said "the EU has been good for us". That statement is, without any shadow of a doubt, true. What he didn't say, maybe because he wasn't asked, is whether it would be good for us in the future. We should be making the argument that the good times for the EU are over, our RoW trade is growing by 4% long run and our EU trade is falling by 2% long run. It is no longer in our interest to be in the EU as it was when it was "good for us".

    He said "leaving would cause uncertainty". Well of course it would, but again, we need to work on the message. Not all uncertainty is bad. We had 10 years of certainty under Brown, investment fell, the state became bloated and we lost our entrepreneurial spirit as a nation. Yes there will be uncertainty, but out of that we will get new activity, new opportunities to trade with the rest of the world which is growing a lot faster than the EU.

    As for HMQ, honestly, who cares if some unelected person is in favour of leaving or remaining. I highly doubt that the Queen being in favour of Brexit is going to convince an IT worker who likes going on holiday in Italy to vote to leave.

    I agree with this absolutely. It really is long, long past time that those for Leave started to make the positive case for it and stopped the whining. It is getting dangerously close to too late.
    I'm still waiting for someone to make a positive case for Remain.
    Vote remain and the British Isles will not be consumed by the wrathful Atlantic.
    Vote Remain and we'll continue to annoy the French by being in the EU. Why do you think De Gaulle kept on vetoing our entry.
    Vote Remain and have the EU welcome 74 million Muslims in a few years time.
    Yes i should have said that Turkey may get a form of free movement within Schengen in a few weeks time and in a few years time access to non-Schengen countries such as the UK. If we REMAIN.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Kapow

    No more segregated meetings, Cameron to Labour
  • Excellent point from Cameron about segregated meetings. One disgusting aspect of the Labour party.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,637

    Opel My God

    Hello Plato
    Stats....
    77% of car industry favours continued membership of EU.
    Over 75% of cars built went to export with nearly 60% going to the EU. The motor industry accounts for nearly 12% of all exports ... £15 billion.
    800,000 people employed by the industry.
    SMMT Chief says the EU is 'vital for the future' and 'leaving would put many of these jobs at risk'
    Toyota deputy managing director say leaving would 'open up a very uncertain future of technical difficulties and increased costs'
    (Autocar survey)
    So carry on Miss Plato (and others) carry on campaining to 'put many of these jobs at risk' .

    You can see what forms Carney's opinions.

    PS
    Peter Bone has a nerve... he was happy to be jovial sharing a platform with Galloway. (And some people wonder why I use the word 'odious'.) This is before you get to Farage.

    Someone had better tell the mugs that are investing £2billion in the UK car industry then.

    How has the UK car industry performed since the doomsday scenario of not joining the Euro?
    Mugs earning the nation a fortune. The car industry is an amazing (foreign owned) success. Massive investment based on it being in the EU.
    You just carry on 'putting all these jobs at risk'. Your cavalier attitude to reality is shameful.
    Oh dear, perhaps you should have reread this before you posted it.
    iI used to have a Cavalier attiitude but then GM transferred all the production to Germany.
    Think he Nayl-ored it. Quite a Triumph (although only really a Minor one). You can Reliant on @Alanbrooke though
  • Richard Burgon - a walking 'own goal'.

    Tony McNulty ‎@Tony_McNulty
    Entirely stupid question from Richard Burgon - no thought at all just chance to unite Tories in incredulity. Great cringes from Labour MPs.

    George Eaton ✔ ‎@georgeeaton
    Richard Burgon foolishly turns EU referendum into vote on Cameron. Good way to help Out win. #PMQs

    George Eaton ✔ ‎@georgeeaton
    Most Labour MPs will despair at that mindless tribalism. #PMQs
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Another leisurely stroll in the park for Cameron..ho hum..
  • NO...Cameron will not resign if it is Out..

    He might be sacked though, who would want him leading the negotiations on our behalf?
    The EU?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 36,518
    Useful idiot SNP MP queues up GERS at PMQs
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Spitfires Herald the Anglia way.
    Charles said:

    Opel My God

    Hello Plato
    Stats....
    77% of car industry favours continued membership of EU.
    Over 75% of cars built went to export with nearly 60% going to the EU. The motor industry accounts for nearly 12% of all exports ... £15 billion.
    800,000 people employed by the industry.
    SMMT Chief says the EU is 'vital for the future' and 'leaving would put many of these jobs at risk'
    Toyota deputy managing director say leaving would 'open up a very uncertain future of technical difficulties and increased costs'
    (Autocar survey)
    So carry on Miss Plato (and others) carry on campaining to 'put many of these jobs at risk' .

    You can see what forms Carney's opinions.

    PS
    Peter Bone has a nerve... he was happy to be jovial sharing a platform with Galloway. (And some people wonder why I use the word 'odious'.) This is before you get to Farage.

    Someone had better tell the mugs that are investing £2billion in the UK car industry then.

    How has the UK car industry performed since the doomsday scenario of not joining the Euro?
    Mugs earning the nation a fortune. The car industry is an amazing (foreign owned) success. Massive investment based on it being in the EU.
    You just carry on 'putting all these jobs at risk'. Your cavalier attitude to reality is shameful.
    Oh dear, perhaps you should have reread this before you posted it.
    iI used to have a Cavalier attiitude but then GM transferred all the production to Germany.
    Think he Nayl-ored it. Quite a Triumph (although only really a Minor one). You can Reliant on @Alanbrooke though
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 17,815

    MaxPB said:

    Richard Burgon "the farting commie" asked a smart question which Labour can build attacks upon.
    "If people vote LEAVE will the PM Resign?"
    Answer = No.

    Good. The one thing that might have dragged me, kicking and screaming, into the remain camp would be the party having a bout of regicide and removing Cameron. He is the only choice for PM, there is no one else.
    There is no earthly way that David Cameron will stay Prime Minister for any length of time after a Leave vote. How on earth could he negotiate leaving terms? His credibility would be zero and he in any case would presumably have not the slightest appetite for the task.
    Now the Queen has put the black spot on his pusillanimous approach he is a dead man walking.

    Giving away her sovereignty - disgraceful.
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 20,589

    MaxPB said:

    Richard Burgon "the farting commie" asked a smart question which Labour can build attacks upon.
    "If people vote LEAVE will the PM Resign?"
    Answer = No.

    Good. The one thing that might have dragged me, kicking and screaming, into the remain camp would be the party having a bout of regicide and removing Cameron. He is the only choice for PM, there is no one else.
    and Nicola Sturgeon for Chancellor
    Sturgeon has a major problem now. The GERS figures are so horrible, indy is surely off the agenda for the foreseeable.

    Yet she has 50,000 new members who want a second referendum NOW (like Dair of this parish), and she will theoretically be able to deliver it with her majority at Holyrood in May. But the idea of calling a vote will horrify her, given that it is bound to be lost, badly, which means indy is over for 30 years.

    I wonder if this May will see Peak SNP, then a slow but inevitable decline, as the party fights and fissures - and finally has to take responsibility for taxes.
  • watford30watford30 Posts: 3,474
    edited March 2016

    NO...Cameron will not resign if it is Out..

    He might be sacked though, who would want him leading the negotiations on our behalf?
    Definitely not Cameron. It's painfully obvious that he's completely inept at negotiating. He'd concede everything to the other sides advantage, and think he'd cooked up the deal of the century again.
This discussion has been closed.