This is why she should have resigned. By supporting her Corbyn has blown it up into something much bigger.
A Labour MP is going to address the Commons and personally apologise for being an anti-Semite.
I mean, how much worse can it get? Can't they see how damaging it is?
Damaging from who's point of view though? From a point of view which gets 10-15% of their total votes from Muslims, probably not. There is going to be a lot more handwringing and acceptance of disturbing views by Labour in the coming years as they become more dependent on inner cities. Ask surbiton of this parish, Muslim vote harvesting is a Labour policy, he has said as much time and again.
Damaging to Labour in two ways: it angers the Jewish community, deeply, and they are articulate and often influential. Look at ex-BBC head Danny Cohen's remarks on Labour, the other day. In future, Labour will get a much more sceptical reaction from Jewish journalists, academics, businessmen.
Also it alienates the white working class vote, even further, as Labour is perceived to pander to the Islamic vote to such an extent it openly tolerates racism.
Anti-Semitism is virtually non-existent in WWC Britain.
I think the equation that Labour have made is that there are 400,000 Jews eligible to vote in Britain and about 2.5m Muslims, the former group is shrinking and the latter is the fastest growing demographic in Britain.
I think they figure that even if they lose some votes they get more out of motivating Muslims to vote for them.
I wouldn't say "Labour" as a whole. Many Labour activists have nothing but contempt for anti-Semitism.
But, I think some members of the Party have made that calculation.
Yes, of course, I don't doubt that there are activists in Labour who abhor it and are 100% against it, but I fear the leadership has looked at the sums and decided that the numbers make sense to pursue a policy platform which attracts Muslim voters.
I think it isn't immigration specifically, but the effect of immigration on public service and pay which is going to be a big factor. As TSE said, the NHS is a massive vote mover.
Is it possible to have a quota on the number of articles in which Alastair Meeks editorialises against the Leave campaign? Whatever his personal views, Mike used to focus on the betting.
I think it isn't immigration specifically, but the effect of immigration on public service and pay which is going to be a big factor. As TSE said, the NHS is a massive vote mover.
I've written a piece for Sunday about why using the NHS might cause Leave some problems.
Is all about nuance. Anyone who considers immigration such an important issue is already voting Leave.
One of the reasons the Tories didn't talk much about immigration during the election was that it put off floating voters.
No Alistair it really isn't. Every aspect of EU membership is still up for debate and challenge and the idea that Leave gave already lost on any of these points is just fanciful wishful thinking.
I think it isn't immigration specifically, but the effect of immigration on public service and pay which is going to be a big factor. As TSE said, the NHS is a massive vote mover.
I've written a piece for Sunday about why using the NHS might cause Leave some problems.
Is all about nuance. Anyone who considers immigration such an important issue is already voting Leave.
One of the reasons the Tories didn't talk much about immigration during the election was that it put off floating voters.
Again, I don't disagree which is why there can't just be a single platform for Leave, but it is all about turnout and getting lazy Labour WWC voters to turn out means getting the immigration message out there. I don't much like the idea of campaigning on an immigration platform, but there is no doubt that it will motivate people to turn out.
I've been working on a post-Brexit strategy for a piece of political analysis at work btw, I wish I could forward it to Vote Leave!
No Alistair it really isn't. Every aspect of EU membership is still up for debate and challenge and the idea that Leave gave already lost on any of these points is just fanciful wishful thinking.
Among the public, Immigration/sovereignty/public services favour Leave, while economics and British influence favour Remain.
I think it isn't immigration specifically, but the effect of immigration on public service and pay which is going to be a big factor. As TSE said, the NHS is a massive vote mover.
I've written a piece for Sunday about why using the NHS might cause Leave some problems.
Is all about nuance. Anyone who considers immigration such an important issue is already voting Leave.
One of the reasons the Tories didn't talk much about immigration during the election was that it put off floating voters.
Again, I don't disagree which is why there can't just be a single platform for Leave, but it is all about turnout and getting lazy Labour WWC voters to turn out means getting the immigration message out there. I don't much like the idea of campaigning on an immigration platform, but there is no doubt that it will motivate people to turn out.
I've been working on a post-Brexit strategy for a piece of political analysis at work btw, I wish I could forward it to Vote Leave!
If you want PB to consider it for publication, send it to me.
I should be meeting someone from Vote Leave in a couple of weeks too.
"The Remain side has started the fight at a furious pace, leaving Leave gasping for air after two blows to its solar plexus"
That's why LEAVE is 20 points behind then, and all the polls show the gap widening. Oh... wait....
What is the effing point in writing this garbage when everyone on pb knows it is clearly untrue?
I genuinely don't understand. Alistair Meeks is an intelligent person. Does he think we don't read polls?
*baffled*
I always finding it amusing when someone who is dyed-in-the-wool for policy A considers themselves fit to write about the motivations and strategy of people who are for the diametrically opposed policy B.
Alistair Meeks may be intelligent, but why anyone would rate his thoughts on the Leave campaign, I do not understand.
The Naz Shah thing can only be good for Remain. The very word 'anti-Semitism' summons up one thing: a bloke with a silly moustache stomping around Europe raising hell. Like it or loathe it, the plodding EU with its mundane rules, its trivial preoccupations and its political correctness is in absolute contrast to the horrors that preceded its existence. Shah has given us a glimpse of humanity's dark past. Reminded of that, people will opt to stick with what's familiar and boring.
No Alistair it really isn't. Every aspect of EU membership is still up for debate and challenge and the idea that Leave gave already lost on any of these points is just fanciful wishful thinking.
Among the public, Immigration/sovereignty/public services favour Leave, while economics and British influence favour Remain.
Why would the issue of public services favour Leave, given the dependence of many of our public services on immigrant staff?
I think it isn't immigration specifically, but the effect of immigration on public service and pay which is going to be a big factor. As TSE said, the NHS is a massive vote mover.
I've written a piece for Sunday about why using the NHS might cause Leave some problems.
Is all about nuance. Anyone who considers immigration such an important issue is already voting Leave.
One of the reasons the Tories didn't talk much about immigration during the election was that it put off floating voters.
I thought that it might be beyond the pale to offer the Labour candidate a cup of tea in that Labour Controls On Immigration Mug which I bought 2 weeks earlier.
But it repels white voters. That's the point. Labour is in danger of becoming the "Muslim" party, which is a fast track to total self-destruction.
Well that is the danger, look at the Congress Party in India as an example of where that can lead to in the long term. Modi has absolutely destroyed Congress and nailed them as the "party of Muslims" for the foreseeable future. I have no doubt that the Tories wouldn't hesitate at doing the same.
However, and this is a big one, in the long term how is it going to look when there are 10-11m Muslims in Britain and Labour pick up 80-90% of their votes?
The Naz Shah thing can only be good for Remain. The very word 'anti-Semitism' summons up one thing: a bloke with a silly moustache stomping around Europe raising hell. Like it or loathe it, the plodding EU with its mundane rules, its trivial preoccupations and its political correctness is in absolute contrast to the horrors that preceded its existence. Shah has given us a glimpse of humanity's dark past. Reminded of that, people will opt to stick with what's familiar and boring.
How odd, Naz Shah is FOR Remain, she is getting unanimously caned and that is good for Remain.
There are still some committed Trump deniers out there. This piece comically likens Trump to a middle-distance runner who has now hit the wall and will stagger to the finish as his rivals sprint past him.
But it repels white voters. That's the point. Labour is in danger of becoming the "Muslim" party, which is a fast track to total self-destruction.
Well that is the danger, look at the Congress Party in India as an example of where that can lead to in the long term. Modi has absolutely destroyed Congress and nailed them as the "party of Muslims" for the foreseeable future. I have no doubt that the Tories wouldn't hesitate at doing the same.
However, and this is a big one, in the long term how is it going to look when there are 10-11m Muslims in Britain and Labour pick up 80-90% of their votes?
When people say they are worried about immigration, I think it is this they are really referring to, in their heart of hearts.
I think it isn't immigration specifically, but the effect of immigration on public service and pay which is going to be a big factor. As TSE said, the NHS is a massive vote mover.
I've written a piece for Sunday about why using the NHS might cause Leave some problems.
Is all about nuance. Anyone who considers immigration such an important issue is already voting Leave.
One of the reasons the Tories didn't talk much about immigration during the election was that it put off floating voters.
Again, I don't disagree which is why there can't just be a single platform for Leave, but it is all about turnout and getting lazy Labour WWC voters to turn out means getting the immigration message out there. I don't much like the idea of campaigning on an immigration platform, but there is no doubt that it will motivate people to turn out.
I've been working on a post-Brexit strategy for a piece of political analysis at work btw, I wish I could forward it to Vote Leave!
If you want PB to consider it for publication, send it to me.
I should be meeting someone from Vote Leave in a couple of weeks too.
Unfortunately I can't because it is not my property.
I think it isn't immigration specifically, but the effect of immigration on public service and pay which is going to be a big factor. As TSE said, the NHS is a massive vote mover.
I've written a piece for Sunday about why using the NHS might cause Leave some problems.
Is all about nuance. Anyone who considers immigration such an important issue is already voting Leave.
One of the reasons the Tories didn't talk much about immigration during the election was that it put off floating voters.
Again, I don't disagree which is why there can't just be a single platform for Leave, but it is all about turnout and getting lazy Labour WWC voters to turn out means getting the immigration message out there. I don't much like the idea of campaigning on an immigration platform, but there is no doubt that it will motivate people to turn out.
I've been working on a post-Brexit strategy for a piece of political analysis at work btw, I wish I could forward it to Vote Leave!
If you want PB to consider it for publication, send it to me.
I should be meeting someone from Vote Leave in a couple of weeks too.
Unfortunately I can't because it is not my property.
The Naz Shah thing can only be good for Remain. The very word 'anti-Semitism' summons up one thing: a bloke with a silly moustache stomping around Europe raising hell. Like it or loathe it, the plodding EU with its mundane rules, its trivial preoccupations and its political correctness is in absolute contrast to the horrors that preceded its existence. Shah has given us a glimpse of humanity's dark past. Reminded of that, people will opt to stick with what's familiar and boring.
How odd, Naz Shah is FOR Remain, she is getting unanimously caned and that is good for Remain.
Superb spin, albeit total bollox.
Angela Merkel is letting in millions who might very well think our Naz is a bit of a wet liberal.
There are still some committed Trump deniers out there. This piece comically likens Trump to a middle-distance runner who has now hit the wall and will stagger to the finish as his rivals sprint past him.
LOL But the link is to a very good article. The growing tribalism in politics means that both sides are listening to ever narrower segments of the electorate, and that is a problem for us all.
You might not like the diagnosis and suggested treatment but if anyone bothered to read it instead of wanting to be the first to dismiss it as crap they'd realize he's got it just about dead right.
'Leave' need to start concentrating on their strengths which is without a doubt immigration and they need to make it credible. I would add that they need to remove Farage from the airways because though his specialist subject his attitude makes many feel uncomfotable.
The Naz Shah thing can only be good for Remain. The very word 'anti-Semitism' summons up one thing: a bloke with a silly moustache stomping around Europe raising hell. Like it or loathe it, the plodding EU with its mundane rules, its trivial preoccupations and its political correctness is in absolute contrast to the horrors that preceded its existence. Shah has given us a glimpse of humanity's dark past. Reminded of that, people will opt to stick with what's familiar and boring.
How odd, Naz Shah is FOR Remain, she is getting unanimously caned and that is good for Remain.
Superb spin, albeit total bollox.
Angela Merkel is letting in millions who might very well think our Naz is a bit of a wet liberal.
And this is good for remain.....Right.
Well quite, perhaps Remain could appoint the fragrant Naz as their official spokesperson.
There are still some committed Trump deniers out there. This piece comically likens Trump to a middle-distance runner who has now hit the wall and will stagger to the finish as his rivals sprint past him.
I'm not sure I agree with this. Anyone who rates immigration as more important than anything else is already voting Leave.
It's those that are worried about immigration but even more worried about the economy that Leave need to win over.
For that they need to put a compelling economic case forward for Leave, and get Remain talking on their turf and not the other way round. Ergo campaign efforts should be focussed on offering positive options if we Leave on laws and immigration *and* the economic opportunities.
That might neutralise some of Remain's advantages and give them a chance.
No Alistair it really isn't. Every aspect of EU membership is still up for debate and challenge and the idea that Leave gave already lost on any of these points is just fanciful wishful thinking.
Among the public, Immigration/sovereignty/public services favour Leave, while economics and British influence favour Remain.
Why would the issue of public services favour Leave, given the dependence of many of our public services on immigrant staff?
People take the view that immigration is placing pressure on public services. Look how big Leave's lead is on whether the NHS would benefit from Brexit.
You might not like the diagnosis and suggested treatment but if anyone bothered to read it instead of wanting to be the first to dismiss it as crap they'd realize he's got it just about dead right.
'Leave' need to start concentrating on their strengths which is without a doubt immigration and they need to make it credible. I would add that they need to remove Farage from the airways because though his specialist subject his attitude makes many feel uncomfotable.
Bloody good of you for breaking off from lunch with your Remaining stockbroker to offer Leave advice.
Could be institute some form of penalty system for people who get Alistair/Alastair wrong?
I get very confused when skimming comments.
LOL. As someone who, as TimT, is constantly confused with TimB, I should perhaps be more sensitive to the Alistair/Alastair point, but I did add the familial name too, so there should have been no confusion. Unless Alistair is also a Meeks.
No Alistair it really isn't. Every aspect of EU membership is still up for debate and challenge and the idea that Leave gave already lost on any of these points is just fanciful wishful thinking.
Among the public, Immigration/sovereignty/public services favour Leave, while economics and British influence favour Remain.
Favour does not equate with being a slam dunk which is what Alastair is suggesting in his thread header.
The Naz Shah thing can only be good for Remain. The very word 'anti-Semitism' summons up one thing: a bloke with a silly moustache stomping around Europe raising hell. Like it or loathe it, the plodding EU with its mundane rules, its trivial preoccupations and its political correctness is in absolute contrast to the horrors that preceded its existence. Shah has given us a glimpse of humanity's dark past. Reminded of that, people will opt to stick with what's familiar and boring.
I'm not sure I agree with this. Anyone who rates immigration as more important than anything else is already voting Leave.
It's those that are worried about immigration but even more worried about the economy that Leave need to win over.
For that they need to put a compelling economic case forward for Leave, and get Remain talking on their turf and not the other way round. Ergo campaign efforts should be focussed on offering positive options if we Leave on laws and immigration *and* the economic opportunities.
That might neutralise some of Remain's advantages and give them a chance.
Oh come on surely you can see through this, if somebody says they're voting Leave because of immigration Meeks calls them a xenophobic racist.
I'm not sure I agree with this. Anyone who rates immigration as more important than anything else is already voting Leave.
It's those that are worried about immigration but even more worried about the economy that Leave need to win over.
For that they need to put a compelling economic case forward for Leave, and get Remain talking on their turf and not the other way round. Ergo campaign efforts should be focussed on offering positive options if we Leave on laws and immigration *and* the economic opportunities.
That might neutralise some of Remain's advantages and give them a chance.
Oh come on surely you can see through this, if somebody says they're voting Leave because of immigration Meeks calls them a xenophobic racist.
I'm not sure I agree with this. Anyone who rates immigration as more important than anything else is already voting Leave.
It's those that are worried about immigration but even more worried about the economy that Leave need to win over.
For that they need to put a compelling economic case forward for Leave, and get Remain talking on their turf and not the other way round. Ergo campaign efforts should be focussed on offering positive options if we Leave on laws and immigration *and* the economic opportunities.
That might neutralise some of Remain's advantages and give them a chance.
Oh come on surely you can see through this, if somebody says they're voting Leave because of immigration Meeks calls them a xenophobic racist.
Its all part of him sticking to the grid.
What grid?
The one that Remainers refer to when discussing their campaign.
Part 1 was pretending to be open minded/undecided.
I'm not sure I agree with this. Anyone who rates immigration as more important than anything else is already voting Leave.
It's those that are worried about immigration but even more worried about the economy that Leave need to win over.
For that they need to put a compelling economic case forward for Leave, and get Remain talking on their turf and not the other way round. Ergo campaign efforts should be focussed on offering positive options if we Leave on laws and immigration *and* the economic opportunities.
That might neutralise some of Remain's advantages and give them a chance.
Oh come on surely you can see through this, if somebody says they're voting Leave because of immigration Meeks calls them a xenophobic racist.
Its all part of him sticking to the grid.
I think Leave will get 35-40% as a bedrock without doing anything else.
To get to 50.01% they need to win over the 10-15% of voters who worry about immigration but about their pockets even more.
I wouldn't dispute that Remain has run the better campaign. The reason why things are so close is because people don't like Remain's message.
Quite possibly, Mr Fear. The problem that I have is that both campaigns are headed by Tories: Cameron, Osborne, Corbyn etc versus Gove, Johnson, IDS, Farage etc. So they all couch their arguments to win over the Tory faithful.
All their arguments appall me. I am not moved by the interests of the disgustingly rich on the one hand, nor do I wish to excercise control over other human beings, which amounts to the same thing, of course.
So it is that, while I dislike Remain`s message (as you say), I also dislike Leave`s message.
If this referendum is to have any sense at all, which is most unlikely, given its real purpose, the Tories must stop talking to just other Tories.
No Alistair it really isn't. Every aspect of EU membership is still up for debate and challenge and the idea that Leave gave already lost on any of these points is just fanciful wishful thinking.
Among the public, Immigration/sovereignty/public services favour Leave, while economics and British influence favour Remain.
Why would the issue of public services favour Leave, given the dependence of many of our public services on immigrant staff?
People take the view that immigration is placing pressure on public services. Look how big Leave's lead is on whether the NHS would benefit from Brexit.
Surely that could be easily countered by a Remain campaign pointing out that, for example, almost a third of our doctors are foreign-born.
There are still some committed Trump deniers out there. This piece comically likens Trump to a middle-distance runner who has now hit the wall and will stagger to the finish as his rivals sprint past him.
No Alistair it really isn't. Every aspect of EU membership is still up for debate and challenge and the idea that Leave gave already lost on any of these points is just fanciful wishful thinking.
Among the public, Immigration/sovereignty/public services favour Leave, while economics and British influence favour Remain.
Why would the issue of public services favour Leave, given the dependence of many of our public services on immigrant staff?
People take the view that immigration is placing pressure on public services. Look how big Leave's lead is on whether the NHS would benefit from Brexit.
Surely that could be easily countered by a Remain campaign pointing out that, for example, almost a third of our doctors are foreign-born.
But are they EU born? And for that matter, who is saying that all immigration from the EU would stop? This is about the right for this country to decide who comes here.
I am hoping someone has reported Shah to the police for her truly revolting posts on social media.
What does it have to do with the police? She has the right of free speech - all the more so as an MP.
As a strong advocate of true free speech, not the heavily proscribed version available in the UK, I would agree except that outside of the privileges of the HoC, I don't see why MPs should have greater rights to free speech than citizens. If anything, it should be the other way around so that the citizenry can hold their elected representatives accountable.
However, if the police have investigated less as hate speech in others, then the same interpretation of the law must be applied in this case. Otherwise, it is one law for us, and another for Labour MPs.
I'm not sure I agree with this. Anyone who rates immigration as more important than anything else is already voting Leave.
It's those that are worried about immigration but even more worried about the economy that Leave need to win over.
For that they need to put a compelling economic case forward for Leave, and get Remain talking on their turf and not the other way round. Ergo campaign efforts should be focussed on offering positive options if we Leave on laws and immigration *and* the economic opportunities.
That might neutralise some of Remain's advantages and give them a chance.
The economic case paper penned by Ryan Bourne et al and published tomorrow looks like a good read.
I'm not sure I agree with this. Anyone who rates immigration as more important than anything else is already voting Leave.
It's those that are worried about immigration but even more worried about the economy that Leave need to win over.
For that they need to put a compelling economic case forward for Leave, and get Remain talking on their turf and not the other way round. Ergo campaign efforts should be focussed on offering positive options if we Leave on laws and immigration *and* the economic opportunities.
That might neutralise some of Remain's advantages and give them a chance.
Oh come on surely you can see through this, if somebody says they're voting Leave because of immigration Meeks calls them a xenophobic racist.
Its all part of him sticking to the grid.
I think Leave will get 35-40% as a bedrock without doing anything else.
To get to 50.01% they need to win over the 10-15% of voters who worry about immigration but about their pockets even more.
Dan Hannan is very good at this.
I've been fortunate enough to discuss this with Dan Hannan. He makes the case very persuasively, far better than anybody else.
There are millions who, rightly or wrongly, connect the EU with immigration, they'll vote Leave without hesitation. Meeks is 100% Remain, he is tempting people into making mistakes, saying things they really shouldn't so he can jump up and down and cry racist.
No Alistair it really isn't. Every aspect of EU membership is still up for debate and challenge and the idea that Leave gave already lost on any of these points is just fanciful wishful thinking.
Among the public, Immigration/sovereignty/public services favour Leave, while economics and British influence favour Remain.
Why would the issue of public services favour Leave, given the dependence of many of our public services on immigrant staff?
People take the view that immigration is placing pressure on public services. Look how big Leave's lead is on whether the NHS would benefit from Brexit.
Surely that could be easily countered by a Remain campaign pointing out that, for example, almost a third of our doctors are foreign-born.
Well, it's not a message that seems to be getting through.
No Alistair it really isn't. Every aspect of EU membership is still up for debate and challenge and the idea that Leave gave already lost on any of these points is just fanciful wishful thinking.
Among the public, Immigration/sovereignty/public services favour Leave, while economics and British influence favour Remain.
Why would the issue of public services favour Leave, given the dependence of many of our public services on immigrant staff?
People take the view that immigration is placing pressure on public services. Look how big Leave's lead is on whether the NHS would benefit from Brexit.
Surely that could be easily countered by a Remain campaign pointing out that, for example, almost a third of our doctors are foreign-born.
Well, it's not a message that seems to be getting through.
There are still some committed Trump deniers out there. This piece comically likens Trump to a middle-distance runner who has now hit the wall and will stagger to the finish as his rivals sprint past him.
There are still some committed Trump deniers out there. This piece comically likens Trump to a middle-distance runner who has now hit the wall and will stagger to the finish as his rivals sprint past him.
No Alistair it really isn't. Every aspect of EU membership is still up for debate and challenge and the idea that Leave gave already lost on any of these points is just fanciful wishful thinking.
Among the public, Immigration/sovereignty/public services favour Leave, while economics and British influence favour Remain.
Why would the issue of public services favour Leave, given the dependence of many of our public services on immigrant staff?
People take the view that immigration is placing pressure on public services. Look how big Leave's lead is on whether the NHS would benefit from Brexit.
Surely that could be easily countered by a Remain campaign pointing out that, for example, almost a third of our doctors are foreign-born.
What a bizarre line of argument. Brexit doesn't = zero immigration. It's deciding who we let in.
No Alistair it really isn't. Every aspect of EU membership is still up for debate and challenge and the idea that Leave gave already lost on any of these points is just fanciful wishful thinking.
Among the public, Immigration/sovereignty/public services favour Leave, while economics and British influence favour Remain.
Why would the issue of public services favour Leave, given the dependence of many of our public services on immigrant staff?
People take the view that immigration is placing pressure on public services. Look how big Leave's lead is on whether the NHS would benefit from Brexit.
Surely that could be easily countered by a Remain campaign pointing out that, for example, almost a third of our doctors are foreign-born.
That is not evident. Leaving would allow the UK to design its immigration policy to its national needs, including the need to allow work visas to those needed to staff vital functions for which we have a national skills shortage, such as the NHS.
Thus Leave could argue that Brexit would both reduce the demand pressures on the NHS and facilitate its adequate and qualified staffing.
There's been a lot from Remainers recently recommending Leave play the immigration card.
One can only assume they're slavering at the chance to jump on Leave as a bunch of unsavoury racists desperately playing the 'johnny foreigner out' card.
I suspect they think this will 'fire up' Leave's left wing base, who seem to have stayed very muted throughout the campaign, whilst not really delivering any more voters to Leave, because immigration is factored in.
No Alistair it really isn't. Every aspect of EU membership is still up for debate and challenge and the idea that Leave gave already lost on any of these points is just fanciful wishful thinking.
Among the public, Immigration/sovereignty/public services favour Leave, while economics and British influence favour Remain.
Why would the issue of public services favour Leave, given the dependence of many of our public services on immigrant staff?
People take the view that immigration is placing pressure on public services. Look how big Leave's lead is on whether the NHS would benefit from Brexit.
Surely that could be easily countered by a Remain campaign pointing out that, for example, almost a third of our doctors are foreign-born.
Well, it's not a message that seems to be getting through.
I wouldn't dispute that Remain has run the better campaign. The reason why things are so close is because people don't like Remain's message.
Quite possibly, Mr Fear. The problem that I have is that both campaigns are headed by Tories: Cameron, Osborne, Corbyn etc versus Gove, Johnson, IDS, Farage etc. So they all couch their arguments to win over the Tory faithful.
All their arguments appall me. I am not moved by the interests of the disgustingly rich on the one hand, nor do I wish to excercise control over other human beings, which amounts to the same thing, of course.
So it is that, while I dislike Remain`s message (as you say), I also dislike Leave`s message.
If this referendum is to have any sense at all, which is most unlikely, given its real purpose, the Tories must stop talking to just other Tories.
It's true that both sides need high-profile left-wing voices.
I wouldn't dispute that Remain has run the better campaign. The reason why things are so close is because people don't like Remain's message.
Quite possibly, Mr Fear. The problem that I have is that both campaigns are headed by Tories: Cameron, Osborne, Corbyn etc versus Gove, Johnson, IDS, Farage etc. So they all couch their arguments to win over the Tory faithful.
All their arguments appall me. I am not moved by the interests of the disgustingly rich on the one hand, nor do I wish to excercise control over other human beings, which amounts to the same thing, of course.
So it is that, while I dislike Remain`s message (as you say), I also dislike Leave`s message.
If this referendum is to have any sense at all, which is most unlikely, given its real purpose, the Tories must stop talking to just other Tories.
It's true that both sides need high-profile left-wing voices.
Vote Leave should ask the RMT to speak up more - they are in favour of Leave.
I'm not sure I agree with this. Anyone who rates immigration as more important than anything else is already voting Leave.
It's those that are worried about immigration but even more worried about the economy that Leave need to win over.
For that they need to put a compelling economic case forward for Leave, and get Remain talking on their turf and not the other way round. Ergo campaign efforts should be focussed on offering positive options if we Leave on laws and immigration *and* the economic opportunities.
That might neutralise some of Remain's advantages and give them a chance.
I read Alastair's article as suggesting you can tie the economy into immigration if you press the point that immigration costs jobs. As he says, the whys and wherefores won't matter much. The argument will seem plausible and will be hard for Remain to counter. If you are lucky Remain will get sucked into lengthy debate on the subject which will just confirm the linkage in the minds of voters.
I think it has some hope of getting you to the 50.000001% you need.
@lindayueh: Cruz will be making a "major announcement"& proclaimed he will keep on fighting despite Donald Trump's decisive wins https://t.co/mAjDpIwbuM
"The Remain side has started the fight at a furious pace, leaving Leave gasping for air after two blows to its solar plexus"
That's why LEAVE is 20 points behind then, and all the polls show the gap widening. Oh... wait....
What is the effing point in writing this garbage when everyone on pb knows it is clearly untrue?
I genuinely don't understand. Alistair Meeks is an intelligent person. Does he think we don't read polls?
*baffled*
O/T I've just finished a book which I think would appeal to you, called The Loney, by Andrew Michael Hurley. Sort of a cross between Thomas Hardy and HP Lovecraft.
I wouldn't dispute that Remain has run the better campaign. The reason why things are so close is because people don't like Remain's message.
Quite possibly, Mr Fear. The problem that I have is that both campaigns are headed by Tories: Cameron, Osborne, Corbyn etc versus Gove, Johnson, IDS, Farage etc. So they all couch their arguments to win over the Tory faithful.
All their arguments appall me. I am not moved by the interests of the disgustingly rich on the one hand, nor do I wish to excercise control over other human beings, which amounts to the same thing, of course.
So it is that, while I dislike Remain`s message (as you say), I also dislike Leave`s message.
If this referendum is to have any sense at all, which is most unlikely, given its real purpose, the Tories must stop talking to just other Tories.
It's true that both sides need high-profile left-wing voices.
You have to wonder what has happened to Alan Johnson. Isn't he supposed to be leading the Labour campaign?
You also have to wonder what has happened to Hilary Benn. Shadow Foreign Secretary so his portfolio, did his impressive Syria speech but now hasn't been seen for months.
At least for the leave side Field and Stuart have been out and about in the media.
The two sides appear to be just about neck and neck in the polls. This could well be illusory, and Remain could win with a handsome margin, but we no evidence that that will happen.
So why all the pages and pages of diagnosis and advice on where it's all gone wrong for Leave? If you told me before this campaign started that Leave would be in the position they are now, I wouldn't have believed you.
If anything, is it not more interesting to consider why Remain aren't at least 10 points clear, and why they seem to be underperforming expectations so markedly? What can Remain do to turn things around? That might be an interesting thread.
No Alistair it really isn't. Every aspect of EU membership is still up for debate and challenge and the idea that Leave gave already lost on any of these points is just fanciful wishful thinking.
Among the public, Immigration/sovereignty/public services favour Leave, while economics and British influence favour Remain.
Why would the issue of public services favour Leave, given the dependence of many of our public services on immigrant staff?
People take the view that immigration is placing pressure on public services. Look how big Leave's lead is on whether the NHS would benefit from Brexit.
Surely that could be easily countered by a Remain campaign pointing out that, for example, almost a third of our doctors are foreign-born.
Leave is based on the idea of controlled flows and skills profiling, not a complete ban as Remain seem to comically infer.
It is basically applying the same rules that we apply to every one from outside the EU.
@lindayueh: Cruz will be making a "major announcement"& proclaimed he will keep on fighting despite Donald Trump's decisive wins https://t.co/mAjDpIwbuM
Undefined discussion subject.
Comments
Tweet of the day
https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/725315632066088960
Talking about the economy, Remain will always win. It's their game. It's about business, not people.
Talking about immigration is all about people, and communities, streets and households. Leave will always win.
Don't change the rules, change the game.
3 million more migrants in Britain by 2030..
Ball back in Jezza court...or is he too busy heading to BHS to stock up on bargain basement new suits?
Theresa May pays tribute to Hillsborough families
May made a powerful statement to the House on the Hillsborough disaster.
Makes her case to replace cameron a near certainty.
Is all about nuance. Anyone who considers immigration such an important issue is already voting Leave.
One of the reasons the Tories didn't talk much about immigration during the election was that it put off floating voters.
Osborne needs 60+% remain, May doesn't I think - and no matter the outcome, May is LIVE.
No Alistair it really isn't. Every aspect of EU membership is still up for debate and challenge and the idea that Leave gave already lost on any of these points is just fanciful wishful thinking.
I've been working on a post-Brexit strategy for a piece of political analysis at work btw, I wish I could forward it to Vote Leave!
I should be meeting someone from Vote Leave in a couple of weeks too.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2016/04/26/trumps-sweep-is-another-humiliating-defeat-for-media-and-political-elites/
Naz Shah MP @NazShahBfd Apr 15
I don't think your being sensitive, your just calling a spade a spade @ayeshahazarika, good piece, keep it up.
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2016/04/can-we-afford-be-colourblind-left-wing-politics …
Alistair Meeks may be intelligent, but why anyone would rate his thoughts on the Leave campaign, I do not understand.
http://order-order.com/2016/04/27/naz-shahs-parliamentary-aide-suspended-by-labour/
However, and this is a big one, in the long term how is it going to look when there are 10-11m Muslims in Britain and Labour pick up 80-90% of their votes?
Superb spin, albeit total bollox.
I get very confused when skimming comments.
http://theresurgent.com/why-todays-romp-by-trump-doesnt-matter/
Why a different approach?
And this is good for remain.....Right.
'Leave' need to start concentrating on their strengths which is without a doubt immigration and they need to make it credible. I would add that they need to remove Farage from the airways because though his specialist subject his attitude makes many feel uncomfotable.
I have tipped in my proposed thread header to Mike but I don't know if he wants to run it / whether it will still be offered.
It's those that are worried about immigration but even more worried about the economy that Leave need to win over.
For that they need to put a compelling economic case forward for Leave, and get Remain talking on their turf and not the other way round. Ergo campaign efforts should be focussed on offering positive options if we Leave on laws and immigration *and* the economic opportunities.
That might neutralise some of Remain's advantages and give them a chance.
Thanks.
Its all part of him sticking to the grid.
Part 1 was pretending to be open minded/undecided.
To get to 50.01% they need to win over the 10-15% of voters who worry about immigration but about their pockets even more.
Dan Hannan is very good at this.
All their arguments appall me. I am not moved by the interests of the disgustingly rich on the one hand, nor do I wish to excercise control over other human beings, which amounts to the same thing, of course.
So it is that, while I dislike Remain`s message (as you say), I also dislike Leave`s message.
If this referendum is to have any sense at all, which is most unlikely, given its real purpose, the Tories must stop talking to just other Tories.
27-07-2016 22:00
Republican Convention Special
Yes @ 1/2
Your Bets
Win
Single: Yes @ 1/2
1 line at £77.86 per line
That one ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aM3ElTvF52I
'If this referendum is to have any sense at all, which is most unlikely, given its real purpose, the Tories must stop talking to just other Tories.'
Nick Clegg was live at the London Palladium last night,did you miss it it?
However, if the police have investigated less as hate speech in others, then the same interpretation of the law must be applied in this case. Otherwise, it is one law for us, and another for Labour MPs.
There are millions who, rightly or wrongly, connect the EU with immigration, they'll vote Leave without hesitation. Meeks is 100% Remain, he is tempting people into making mistakes, saying things they really shouldn't so he can jump up and down and cry racist.
Thus Leave could argue that Brexit would both reduce the demand pressures on the NHS and facilitate its adequate and qualified staffing.
One can only assume they're slavering at the chance to jump on Leave as a bunch of unsavoury racists desperately playing the 'johnny foreigner out' card.
I suspect they think this will 'fire up' Leave's left wing base, who seem to have stayed very muted throughout the campaign, whilst not really delivering any more voters to Leave, because immigration is factored in.
I think it has some hope of getting you to the 50.000001% you need.
The same game plan - currency, pensions etc - simply will not play here.
In fact, key issues for the status quo in Scotland (welfare security, defence, ) are all strong arguments for Leave.
@DPJHodges: So now we know Labour doesn't have a zero tolerance approach to racism, what is it. 20% tolerance? 30%? 40% pushing it a bit?
Naz Shah there, tweeting congratulations to the new NUS president..... https://t.co/nJGC6ozTqO
You also have to wonder what has happened to Hilary Benn. Shadow Foreign Secretary so his portfolio, did his impressive Syria speech but now hasn't been seen for months.
At least for the leave side Field and Stuart have been out and about in the media.
So why all the pages and pages of diagnosis and advice on where it's all gone wrong for Leave? If you told me before this campaign started that Leave would be in the position they are now, I wouldn't have believed you.
If anything, is it not more interesting to consider why Remain aren't at least 10 points clear, and why they seem to be underperforming expectations so markedly? What can Remain do to turn things around? That might be an interesting thread.
It is basically applying the same rules that we apply to every one from outside the EU.