David Cameron recorded a “frank” monthly audio diary throughout his time as prime minister to keep a historical record of his time in office.
Mr Cameron made digital recordings of 53 hours of conversations with his friend Lord Finkelstein, The Times columnist, covering his foreign and domestic encounters and describing his government as it unfolded.
The pair would meet each month in secrecy for about an hour. The encounters would normally take place in the evening in the Downing Street flat, although sometimes they met for lunch.
It's very telling to see what campaigns are actually doing, rather than what they say.
The first time I knew that Remain were in real trouble (rather than just hoping for Leave) was when the pattern of campaigning became clear in the final weeks - Northern Ireland, Gibraltar and deriding 'Little Englanders'.
Team Hillary occupying 97% of advertising slots and Trump getting $100m in donations under $200 speaks volumes.
I think he's going to do it - incredible as that is.
I'd no idea he was so interested in politics until this campaign - I thought he was a total media celeb, his Alky Ada comments re 911 were a real surprise.
Mr. Meeks, sorry, I thought your comment was regarding people who voted Leave and the Lib Dem conference. I missed the tidal aspect (and hadn't, at the time, read Carswell's).
I think USA elections, more than any, go to lowest common denominator stuff..... It's about charisma stupid/ the beer test....you have to go along way to find the least charismatic elected POTUS...
Considering Hillary possesses the charm of a used tea bag.......Trump's supporters are just going to be more motivated, and he'll win. And it's not the campaign, or the policies, or competence, or his wall that'll do it. It's the fact that Hillary fails the beer test miserably.
What's Trump's path to 270?
Florida, Ohio, Colorado, Nevada. He's winning the toss ups in all 4. He's even got an outside chance in Michigan.
I don't think he is winning Colorado at the moment and it is essential if he can't get Pennsylvania. RCP have Clinton +3.7 but the polling is thin.
There are still far more ways for Clinton to win this and that remains the most likely outcome but Trump needs to break through into a national lead to get the level of swing he needs in the battleground states.
The debates will do for Hillary, the more people she of her the more they dislike her. She's politics' Yoko Ono.
Maybe. I liked this in the Washington Post:
"Today, the American people agree. A recent NBC News poll found that just 11 percent of Americans say Clinton is honest and trustworthy. To put that in perspective, 14 percent of American voters believe in Bigfoot. In other words, more Americans believe that a large, hairy, hominoid creature inhabits the forest of North America than believe that Hillary Clinton tells the truth."
I think USA elections, more than any, go to lowest common denominator stuff..... It's about charisma stupid/ the beer test....you have to go along way to find the least charismatic elected POTUS...
Considering Hillary possesses the charm of a used tea bag.......Trump's supporters are just going to be more motivated, and he'll win. And it's not the campaign, or the policies, or competence, or his wall that'll do it. It's the fact that Hillary fails the beer test miserably.
What's Trump's path to 270?
Florida, Ohio, Colorado, Nevada. He's winning the toss ups in all 4. He's even got an outside chance in Michigan.
I don't think he is winning Colorado at the moment and it is essential if he can't get Pennsylvania. RCP have Clinton +3.7 but the polling is thin.
There are still far more ways for Clinton to win this and that remains the most likely outcome but Trump needs to break through into a national lead to get the level of swing he needs in the battleground states.
The debates will do for Hillary, the more people she of her the more they dislike her. She's politics' Yoko Ono.
I think USA elections, more than any, go to lowest common denominator stuff..... It's about charisma stupid/ the beer test....you have to go along way to find the least charismatic elected POTUS...
Considering Hillary possesses the charm of a used tea bag.......Trump's supporters are just going to be more motivated, and he'll win. And it's not the campaign, or the policies, or competence, or his wall that'll do it. It's the fact that Hillary fails the beer test miserably.
Trump is an obnoxious, racist bully. His fails the beer test even more than Hillary does.
Yeah, we get it.
Please tell me you are a senior adviser to Labour?
@Morris_Dancer Still, at least we can add Newton to the list of experts that Leavers are tired of. Perhaps once we leave the EU, they'll abolish the law of gravity.
It's very telling to see what campaigns are actually doing, rather than what they say.
The first time I knew that Remain were in real trouble (rather than just hoping for Leave) was when the pattern of campaigning became clear in the final weeks - Northern Ireland, Gibraltar and deriding 'Little Englanders'.
Team Hillary occupying 97% of advertising slots and Trump getting $100m in donations under $200 speaks volumes.
I think he's going to do it - incredible as that is.
I'd no idea he was so interested in politics until this campaign - I thought he was a total media celeb, his Alky Ada comments re 911 were a real surprise.
"I think he's going to do it "
Via what route?
I just gave you the most likely one which is being taken seriously by Nate Silver. Florida, Ohio, Colorado, Nevada with an outside chance in Michigan.
@Morris_Dancer Still, at least we can add Newton to the list of experts that Leavers are tired of. Perhaps once we leave the EU, they'll abolish the law of gravity.
I think they have already abolished Newton's 3rd law.
I think USA elections, more than any, go to lowest common denominator stuff..... It's about charisma stupid/ the beer test....you have to go along way to find the least charismatic elected POTUS...
Considering Hillary possesses the charm of a used tea bag.......Trump's supporters are just going to be more motivated, and he'll win. And it's not the campaign, or the policies, or competence, or his wall that'll do it. It's the fact that Hillary fails the beer test miserably.
What's Trump's path to 270?
Florida, Ohio, Colorado, Nevada. He's winning the toss ups in all 4. He's even got an outside chance in Michigan.
I don't think he is winning Colorado at the moment and it is essential if he can't get Pennsylvania. RCP have Clinton +3.7 but the polling is thin.
There are still far more ways for Clinton to win this and that remains the most likely outcome but Trump needs to break through into a national lead to get the level of swing he needs in the battleground states.
FWIW I think Trump is value at his current odds (as much as the prospect of his being president is sickening)
But he has a very narrow path. He won't win PA, he is too far behind there, even at Hillary's nadir, so he probably needs all of the following to sneak it.
CO, OH, FL, NC, NV
The big Hispanic population in CO might be to much for him, he ships that, Hillary sneaks it 273 to 265.
It's very telling to see what campaigns are actually doing, rather than what they say.
The first time I knew that Remain were in real trouble (rather than just hoping for Leave) was when the pattern of campaigning became clear in the final weeks - Northern Ireland, Gibraltar and deriding 'Little Englanders'.
Team Hillary occupying 97% of advertising slots and Trump getting $100m in donations under $200 speaks volumes.
I think he's going to do it - incredible as that is.
I'd no idea he was so interested in politics until this campaign - I thought he was a total media celeb, his Alky Ada comments re 911 were a real surprise.
"I think he's going to do it "
Via what route?
I just gave you the most likely one which is being taken seriously by Nate Silver. Florida, Ohio, Colorado, Nevada with an outside chance in Michigan.
He won't win Michigan but otherwise I agree, see my post below.
I think it's perfectly obvious that the terrorist activity will tend to benefit Trump - I'm not a natural supporter, but even I don't get people whinging about his calling a bomb a bomb before it's 100% proved. As Paul Waugh says today, Clinton looks wonkish and anaemic on the issue. She needs to be careful that this isn't a "Dukakis moment" - Dukakis was IMO a good candidate who would have made a good President, but fell short when expected to sound sufficiently fierce.
Her best card is the debates, in which I think Trump will still struggle to look Presidential.
As I've said before, Trump's problem in the debates is going to be striking the right tone against Hillary. Her people will be looking to shout out from Twitter "Look! The Nasty Man said Nasty Things about Hillary in a Nasty Way. Misogynist!!!!!" I'm not sure Trump has enough variety in his approach to disarm that attack line against him, whether it is fair on the night or not.
But that's of limited profitability for Clinton because so many people find her nasty as well.
Trump's main task should be to reassure female voters (so criticising Clinton is ok so long as it doesn't roll over into misogynism)
If he can get that balance right, he wins.
But it's the first time out in a Man v Woman Presidential debate. On one level, they should be equally up for the sledging - it's what equality is all about. But I still think many will find it as distasteful as a guy boxing a gal....
I think USA elections, more than any, go to lowest common denominator stuff..... It's about charisma stupid/ the beer test....you have to go along way to find the least charismatic elected POTUS...
Considering Hillary possesses the charm of a used tea bag.......Trump's supporters are just going to be more motivated, and he'll win. And it's not the campaign, or the policies, or competence, or his wall that'll do it. It's the fact that Hillary fails the beer test miserably.
What's Trump's path to 270?
Florida, Ohio, Colorado, Nevada. He's winning the toss ups in all 4. He's even got an outside chance in Michigan.
I don't think he is winning Colorado at the moment and it is essential if he can't get Pennsylvania. RCP have Clinton +3.7 but the polling is thin.
There are still far more ways for Clinton to win this and that remains the most likely outcome but Trump needs to break through into a national lead to get the level of swing he needs in the battleground states.
Polling is thin in the ground but the later polls are moving in Trump's direction in Colorado. I think there was something in that theory about union organisation in PA vs MI since the latter has right to work status and much less union activity.
Surely Donald Trump is going to start the first presidential debate by asking solicitously whether Hillary Clinton is alright and offering her a chair?
Good stuff. I agree with the logic even if I don't agree with what Farron would want per se.
It's perfectly respectable to say a future Govt might want to have another look at the position in the circumstances that then prevail. Farron and others (it's not just him, though he seems to have a bad dose of it, as does Clegg) just seem (to me at least) to be not handling the collapse of one of the apparent pillars of their world view at all well, and it doesn't strike me as a sensible thing to be quite so blatant in effectively telling the voters they got it wrong.
"Hillary’s motivations were clear. She flunked her first pseudo debate with Trump on NBC’s Commander in Chief forum earlier this month, placed herself in hot water when she declared half of Trump’s supporters were in a basket of deplorables, and further sowed seeds of mistrust when she lied about her health. She had to change the narrative. "
She flunked the commander in chief forum so badly opinion polling said she won 42-to-40?
Is that right? NBC Twitter poll gave it to trump 63-37
2 that polling vs anecdote stuff was a bit of sleight of hand from the late Tim; the idea is it maps to the controlled experiment vs anecdote distinction in medical science. It was wrong then, as I pointed out then, and that was before the twin polling disasters of 2015 & 2016. You trotting it out now has a sweetly nostalgic feel about it but doesn't make you look like the sharpest knife in the drawer.
Surely Donald Trump is going to start the first presidential debate by asking solicitously whether Hillary Clinton is alright and offering her a chair?
Why not, Trump’s reaction to Clinton’s 9/11 memorial health scare was simply “get well soon” - He can be a gent when he tries…!
I think USA elections, more than any, go to lowest common denominator stuff..... It's about charisma stupid/ the beer test....you have to go along way to find the least charismatic elected POTUS...
Considering Hillary possesses the charm of a used tea bag.......Trump's supporters are just going to be more motivated, and he'll win. And it's not the campaign, or the policies, or competence, or his wall that'll do it. It's the fact that Hillary fails the beer test miserably.
What's Trump's path to 270?
Florida, Ohio, Colorado, Nevada. He's winning the toss ups in all 4. He's even got an outside chance in Michigan.
I don't think he is winning Colorado at the moment and it is essential if he can't get Pennsylvania. RCP have Clinton +3.7 but the polling is thin.
There are still far more ways for Clinton to win this and that remains the most likely outcome but Trump needs to break through into a national lead to get the level of swing he needs in the battleground states.
FWIW I think Trump is value at his current odds (as much as the prospect of his being president is sickening)
But he has a very narrow path. He won't win PA, he is too far behind there, even at Hillary's nadir, so he probably needs all of the following to sneak it.
CO, OH, FL, NC, NV
The big Hispanic population in CO might be to much for him, he ships that, Hillary sneaks it 273 to 265.
Its really hard to find a way for Trump. Virginia is looking closer than Colorado at the moment but not that close.
I think it's perfectly obvious that the terrorist activity will tend to benefit Trump - I'm not a natural supporter, but even I don't get people whinging about his calling a bomb a bomb before it's 100% proved. As Paul Waugh says today, Clinton looks wonkish and anaemic on the issue. She needs to be careful that this isn't a "Dukakis moment" - Dukakis was IMO a good candidate who would have made a good President, but fell short when expected to sound sufficiently fierce.
Her best card is the debates, in which I think Trump will still struggle to look Presidential.
As I've said before, Trump's problem in the debates is going to be striking the right tone against Hillary. Her people will be looking to shout out from Twitter "Look! The Nasty Man said Nasty Things about Hillary in a Nasty Way. Misogynist!!!!!" I'm not sure Trump has enough variety in his approach to disarm that attack line against him, whether it is fair on the night or not.
But that's of limited profitability for Clinton because so many people find her nasty as well.
Trump's main task should be to reassure female voters (so criticising Clinton is ok so long as it doesn't roll over into misogynism)
If he can get that balance right, he wins.
But it's the first time out in a Man v Woman Presidential debate. On one level, they should be equally up for the sledging - it's what equality is all about. But I still think many will find it as distasteful as a guy boxing a gal....
TBH, I equate Hillary with Thatcher - they're both men here.
She can play the female victim card, but it's pathetic weakling stuff. A candidate can't claim to be strong blah blah and also say they're a victim when anyone with eyes can see the media bias towards her. It just doesn't work at all.
Surely Donald Trump is going to start the first presidential debate by asking solicitously whether Hillary Clinton is alright and offering her a chair?
Maybe Hillary will enter the chamber on Strangelove wheels.
I think USA elections, more than any, go to lowest common denominator stuff..... It's about charisma stupid/ the beer test....you have to go along way to find the least charismatic elected POTUS...
Considering Hillary possesses the charm of a used tea bag.......Trump's supporters are just going to be more motivated, and he'll win. And it's not the campaign, or the policies, or competence, or his wall that'll do it. It's the fact that Hillary fails the beer test miserably.
What's Trump's path to 270?
Florida, Ohio, Colorado, Nevada. He's winning the toss ups in all 4. He's even got an outside chance in Michigan.
I don't think he is winning Colorado at the moment and it is essential if he can't get Pennsylvania. RCP have Clinton +3.7 but the polling is thin.
There are still far more ways for Clinton to win this and that remains the most likely outcome but Trump needs to break through into a national lead to get the level of swing he needs in the battleground states.
Polling is thin in the ground but the later polls are moving in Trump's direction in Colorado. I think there was something in that theory about union organisation in PA vs MI since the latter has right to work status and much less union activity.
But both teams have allegedly cut right back on their marketing spend in Co, which suggests they both think it is a done deal.
I think it's perfectly obvious that the terrorist activity will tend to benefit Trump - I'm not a natural supporter, but even I don't get people whinging about his calling a bomb a bomb before it's 100% proved. As Paul Waugh says today, Clinton looks wonkish and anaemic on the issue. She needs to be careful that this isn't a "Dukakis moment" - Dukakis was IMO a good candidate who would have made a good President, but fell short when expected to sound sufficiently fierce.
Her best card is the debates, in which I think Trump will still struggle to look Presidential.
As I've said before, Trump's problem in the debates is going to be striking the right tone against Hillary. Her people will be looking to shout out from Twitter "Look! The Nasty Man said Nasty Things about Hillary in a Nasty Way. Misogynist!!!!!" I'm not sure Trump has enough variety in his approach to disarm that attack line against him, whether it is fair on the night or not.
But that's of limited profitability for Clinton because so many people find her nasty as well.
Trump's main task should be to reassure female voters (so criticising Clinton is ok so long as it doesn't roll over into misogynism)
If he can get that balance right, he wins.
But it's the first time out in a Man v Woman Presidential debate. On one level, they should be equally up for the sledging - it's what equality is all about. But I still think many will find it as distasteful as a guy boxing a gal....
TBH, I equate Hillary with Thatcher - they're both men here.
She can play the female victim card, but it's pathetic weakling stuff. A candidate can't claim to be strong blah blah and also say they're a victim when anyone with eyes can see the media bias towards her. It just doesn't work at all.
She didn't win the New Hampshire primary 8 years ago until she burst into tears.....
Surely Donald Trump is going to start the first presidential debate by asking solicitously whether Hillary Clinton is alright and offering her a chair?
Why not, Trump’s reaction to Clinton’s 9/11 memorial health scare was simply “get well soon” - He can be a gent when he tries…!
His handlers are doing a pretty solid job - I saw his reaction to Hillary health as respect for 911 victim families and not distracting from them.
"Hillary’s motivations were clear. She flunked her first pseudo debate with Trump on NBC’s Commander in Chief forum earlier this month, placed herself in hot water when she declared half of Trump’s supporters were in a basket of deplorables, and further sowed seeds of mistrust when she lied about her health. She had to change the narrative. "
She flunked the commander in chief forum so badly opinion polling said she won 42-to-40?
Is that right? NBC Twitter poll gave it to trump 63-37
2 that polling vs anecdote stuff was a bit of sleight of hand from the late Tim; the idea is it maps to the controlled experiment vs anecdote distinction in medical science. It was wrong then, as I pointed out then, and that was before the twin polling disasters of 2015 & 2016. You trotting it out now has a sweetly nostalgic feel about it but doesn't make you look like the sharpest knife in the drawer.
Well it was you that quoted a Twitter poll on this forum – you should know better Ishmael!
Apologies for assuming you were a Trumper. Everyone else seems to be on here –including several weirdo Corbynite Leaver Trumpers (the worst kind of Trumper).
I think it's perfectly obvious that the terrorist activity will tend to benefit Trump - I'm not a natural supporter, but even I don't get people whinging about his calling a bomb a bomb before it's 100% proved. As Paul Waugh says today, Clinton looks wonkish and anaemic on the issue. She needs to be careful that this isn't a "Dukakis moment" - Dukakis was IMO a good candidate who would have made a good President, but fell short when expected to sound sufficiently fierce.
Her best card is the debates, in which I think Trump will still struggle to look Presidential.
As I've said before, Trump's problem in the debates is going to be striking the right tone against Hillary. Her people will be looking to shout out from Twitter "Look! The Nasty Man said Nasty Things about Hillary in a Nasty Way. Misogynist!!!!!" I'm not sure Trump has enough variety in his approach to disarm that attack line against him, whether it is fair on the night or not.
But that's of limited profitability for Clinton because so many people find her nasty as well.
Trump's main task should be to reassure female voters (so criticising Clinton is ok so long as it doesn't roll over into misogynism)
If he can get that balance right, he wins.
But it's the first time out in a Man v Woman Presidential debate. On one level, they should be equally up for the sledging - it's what equality is all about. But I still think many will find it as distasteful as a guy boxing a gal....
TBH, I equate Hillary with Thatcher - they're both men here.
She can play the female victim card, but it's pathetic weakling stuff. A candidate can't claim to be strong blah blah and also say they're a victim when anyone with eyes can see the media bias towards her. It just doesn't work at all.
She didn't win the New Hampshire primary 8 years ago until she burst into tears.....
Golly, what dismal sympathy grubbing. Didn't get her into the big chair then either. I quite respected her Good Wife attitude way back then - nowadays, I think she's the epitome of everything that's wrong.
"It is important to remember that Labour is not now and has never been a socialist party."
In a nutshell, the civil war that is engulfing Labour.
As I understand it, it was the self-interested trade unionists who always made sure that the party was ideology-lite. Once they were diminished there was the space for new Labour who in turn withered on the vine. Now the socialists are all that is left.
I think USA elections, more than any, go to lowest common denominator stuff..... It's about charisma stupid/ the beer test....you have to go along way to find the least charismatic elected POTUS...
Considering Hillary possesses the charm of a used tea bag.......Trump's supporters are just going to be more motivated, and he'll win. And it's not the campaign, or the policies, or competence, or his wall that'll do it. It's the fact that Hillary fails the beer test miserably.
What's Trump's path to 270?
Florida, Ohio, Colorado, Nevada. He's winning the toss ups in all 4. He's even got an outside chance in Michigan.
I don't think he is winning Colorado at the moment and it is essential if he can't get Pennsylvania. RCP have Clinton +3.7 but the polling is thin.
There are still far more ways for Clinton to win this and that remains the most likely outcome but Trump needs to break through into a national lead to get the level of swing he needs in the battleground states.
Polling is thin in the ground but the later polls are moving in Trump's direction in Colorado. I think there was something in that theory about union organisation in PA vs MI since the latter has right to work status and much less union activity.
But both teams have allegedly cut right back on their marketing spend in Co, which suggests they both think it is a done deal.
I don't know who is doing Trump's maths then. I can't see how he wins without CO!
GMP Police Central Unusual robbery report from early hours. Man robbed of phone Canal St, but offender hands phone back as apparently "not impressed with it"
GMP Police Central Unusual robbery report from early hours. Man robbed of phone Canal St, but offender hands phone back as apparently "not impressed with it"
Tell me it wasn't a One plus 3 that was being advertised on here only yesterday.
I see that Leavers, led by Douglas Carswell, are spending this morning arguing that tides aren't caused by the moon.
Well, if you think the sun revolves round a flat earth..
Shouldn't an 'open seas' Brexiteer know this stuff?
Won any referenda recently chaps?
Perhaps it's time for a referendum on the value of pi. I've had enough of experts and their irrational numbers. What was wrong with 22/7 that our parents used? Bring back the Great British improper fraction, I say!
"Hillary’s motivations were clear. She flunked her first pseudo debate with Trump on NBC’s Commander in Chief forum earlier this month, placed herself in hot water when she declared half of Trump’s supporters were in a basket of deplorables, and further sowed seeds of mistrust when she lied about her health. She had to change the narrative. "
She flunked the commander in chief forum so badly opinion polling said she won 42-to-40?
Is that right? NBC Twitter poll gave it to trump 63-37
I think USA elections, more than any, go to lowest common denominator stuff..... It's about charisma stupid/ the beer test....you have to go along way to find the least charismatic elected POTUS...
Considering Hillary possesses the charm of a used tea bag.......Trump's supporters are just going to be more motivated, and he'll win. And it's not the campaign, or the policies, or competence, or his wall that'll do it. It's the fact that Hillary fails the beer test miserably.
What's Trump's path to 270?
Florida, Ohio, Colorado, Nevada. He's winning the toss ups in all 4. He's even got an outside chance in Michigan.
I don't think he is winning Colorado at the moment and it is essential if he can't get Pennsylvania. RCP have Clinton +3.7 but the polling is thin.
There are still far more ways for Clinton to win this and that remains the most likely outcome but Trump needs to break through into a national lead to get the level of swing he needs in the battleground states.
Polling is thin in the ground but the later polls are moving in Trump's direction in Colorado. I think there was something in that theory about union organisation in PA vs MI since the latter has right to work status and much less union activity.
But both teams have allegedly cut right back on their marketing spend in Co, which suggests they both think it is a done deal.
I don't know who is doing Trump's maths then. I can't see how he wins without CO!
I was bemused. Michigan and Virginia are both real outside possibilities but Co looked the best bet to me.
Merkel said that she would like to turn back the clock “many years” so that Germany and Europe were better prepared to handle the pressure of migrants fleeing war zones and poverty.
I see that Leavers, led by Douglas Carswell, are spending this morning arguing that tides aren't caused by the moon.
Well, if you think the sun revolves round a flat earth..
Shouldn't an 'open seas' Brexiteer know this stuff?
Won any referenda recently chaps?
Perhaps it's time for a referendum on the value of pi. I've had enough of experts and their irrational numbers. What was wrong with 22/7 that our parents used? Bring back the Great British improper fraction, I say!
I'd be open to re-imperialisation (with a z if you prefer). For the simple reason that I can't add up in my head for shit (nor can most of my generation - I'd give you stats if I could count), and that system forced people. Obviously in the intervening period it would cause chaos with generation thick.
It feels like peculiar politics over the last year.
The Democrats are doing their best to lose by picking someone that few voters trust. Labour pick a Trot and to complete the farce, they pick the MP for Pontypandy who wants to sit down and debate with IS ... How many virgins do you want this year?
And I may have mentioned the referendum, but I think I got away with it.
Just seen footage on Sky of rat and dog that's had spinal cord refused and mobile again.
Amazing.
"Curing" spinal injuries will be one of this Centuries major medical breakthroughs IMO (along with most Cancer becoming a manageable, chronic conditions)
I see that Leavers, led by Douglas Carswell, are spending this morning arguing that tides aren't caused by the moon.
Well, if you think the sun revolves round a flat earth..
Shouldn't an 'open seas' Brexiteer know this stuff?
Won any referenda recently chaps?
We've done this a thousand times before and it's getting tiring with you lot.
It's referendums.
Doesn't it depend upon the issue at stake?
EG the 1975 and 2016 referendums were both on the issue of EU membership, like the two Quebec referendums.
On the other hand someone who wanted Euro membership (but it never went to the polls as it would have lost), regional government in England, Scottish independence and EU membership in 16 would have lost all those referenda - as they were all different issues referred to a ballot.
"Gladstonian liberalism consisted of limited government expenditure and low taxation whilst making sure government had balanced budgets and the classical liberal stress on self-help and freedom of choice.
Gladstonian liberalism also emphasised free trade, little government intervention in the economy and equality of opportunity through institutional reform."
I see that Leavers, led by Douglas Carswell, are spending this morning arguing that tides aren't caused by the moon.
Well, if you think the sun revolves round a flat earth..
Shouldn't an 'open seas' Brexiteer know this stuff?
Won any referenda recently chaps?
We've done this a thousand times before and it's getting tiring with you lot.
It's referendums.
Making that correction must be of great solace to you. Glad to have been of some small help.
I never take solace in people's ignorance.
My comment didn't suggest you did - merely in the satisfaction of correcting it. The difference is quite nuanced but I'm surprised you didn't spot it. No doubt too busy weeping into your morning coffee about being a big referenda loser.
I see that Leavers, led by Douglas Carswell, are spending this morning arguing that tides aren't caused by the moon.
Well, if you think the sun revolves round a flat earth..
Shouldn't an 'open seas' Brexiteer know this stuff?
Won any referenda recently chaps?
We've done this a thousand times before and it's getting tiring with you lot.
It's referendums.
Making that correction must be of great solace to you. Glad to have been of some small help.
I never take solace in people's ignorance.
My comment didn't suggest you did - merely in the satisfaction of correcting it. The difference is quite nuanced but I'm surprised you didn't spot it. No doubt too busy weeping into your morning coffee about being a big referenda loser.
Good stuff. I agree with the logic even if I don't agree with what Farron would want per se.
It's perfectly respectable to say a future Govt might want to have another look at the position in the circumstances that then prevail. Farron and others (it's not just him, though he seems to have a bad dose of it, as does Clegg) just seem (to me at least) to be not handling the collapse of one of the apparent pillars of their world view at all well, and it doesn't strike me as a sensible thing to be quite so blatant in effectively telling the voters they got it wrong.
You seem to be putting words into his mouth, it only takes a little searching to find:
Farron "is not pushing for a “re-run” of June’s vote – and would only support another referendum once the negotiations are done.
“We demand that the British people should have their say on the final deal in a referendum and in the meantime we will hold the Conservative Brexit Government to account and fight for the best possible deal for Britain,” the Lib Dem leader will say.
“Voting for departure is not the same as voting for a destination."
Though it was the remain voters of 75 who voted leave in 16 that swung the result so decisively ...
A 4% lead is decisive?
Okay.
Yes decisively. Check the definition of the word, the answer has been decided and we are leaving, therefore the result was decisive. It would only have been indecisive if were now going to have a second referendum, Irish style.
"Gladstonian liberalism consisted of limited government expenditure and low taxation whilst making sure government had balanced budgets and the classical liberal stress on self-help and freedom of choice.
Gladstonian liberalism also emphasised free trade, little government intervention in the economy and equality of opportunity through institutional reform."
So who has defected more times, Ivan Massow or Winston McKenzie?
Which one's gone where?
Ivan, he's left the Tories, again, and joined the Lib Dems.
“They are really nice people. It is such a change from the Tory party,” said Mr Massow, whose business successes included offering financial services to gay people. “[Theresa May’s plans for] grammar schools make me a little bit angry … I’ve always been a centrist at heart.”
It reminds me of that fantastic piece in the Daily Mash where they alleged that Corbyn was being as bad as he could be just to show up what an epically crap opponent Owen Smith was.
I see that Leavers, led by Douglas Carswell, are spending this morning arguing that tides aren't caused by the moon.
Well, if you think the sun revolves round a flat earth..
Shouldn't an 'open seas' Brexiteer know this stuff?
Won any referenda recently chaps?
We've done this a thousand times before and it's getting tiring with you lot.
It's referendums.
Doesn't it depend upon the issue at stake?
EG the 1975 and 2016 referendums were both on the issue of EU membership, like the two Quebec referendums.
On the other hand someone who wanted Euro membership (but it never went to the polls as it would have lost), regional government in England, Scottish independence and EU membership in 16 would have lost all those referenda - as they were all different issues referred to a ballot.
I'd always wondered how languages naturally develop complex grammars (e.g. Latin, German) before simplifying them through pidginisation (e.g. English, French). Now I have an inkling!
So who has defected more times, Ivan Massow or Winston McKenzie?
Which one's gone where?
Ivan, he's left the Tories, again, and joined the Lib Dems.
“They are really nice people. It is such a change from the Tory party,” said Mr Massow, whose business successes included offering financial services to gay people. “[Theresa May’s plans for] grammar schools make me a little bit angry … I’ve always been a centrist at heart.”
So who has defected more times, Ivan Massow or Winston McKenzie?
Which one's gone where?
Ivan, he's left the Tories, again, and joined the Lib Dems.
“They are really nice people. It is such a change from the Tory party,” said Mr Massow, whose business successes included offering financial services to gay people. “[Theresa May’s plans for] grammar schools make me a little bit angry … I’ve always been a centrist at heart.”
A very good friend of mine (my branch deputy chair at university) has just defected to the LDs in recent weeks.
He has always been pro-EU and a bit wet, and a Clarkite-like Remainer. But he became a teacher three years ago, and married a staunch socialist last year, so not a total surprise.
So who has defected more times, Ivan Massow or Winston McKenzie?
Which one's gone where?
Ivan, he's left the Tories, again, and joined the Lib Dems.
“They are really nice people. It is such a change from the Tory party,” said Mr Massow, whose business successes included offering financial services to gay people. “[Theresa May’s plans for] grammar schools make me a little bit angry … I’ve always been a centrist at heart.”
Comments
Choo Chooooooooooooo
Via what route?
"Today, the American people agree. A recent NBC News poll found that just 11 percent of Americans say Clinton is honest and trustworthy. To put that in perspective, 14 percent of American voters believe in Bigfoot. In other words, more Americans believe that a large, hairy, hominoid creature inhabits the forest of North America than believe that Hillary Clinton tells the truth."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/hillary-clinton-who-tells-dreadful-lies/2016/09/19/cd38412e-7e6a-11e6-9070-5c4905bf40dc_story.html?utm_term=.f98a43b2c2e3
Please tell me you are a senior adviser to Labour?
23% of Leavers think a trade deal with the EU should be a top priority.
YouGov poll:
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/wp3fw1uioo/InternalResults_160908_Trade_W.pdf
Australia has a population of 23m and accounts for 1.6% of UK exports.
The EU has a population of 500m and accounts for 44% of our exports.
What is it about Leavers? Can any Leaver defend seriously defend this?
But he has a very narrow path. He won't win PA, he is too far behind there, even at Hillary's nadir, so he probably needs all of the following to sneak it.
CO, OH, FL, NC, NV
The big Hispanic population in CO might be to much for him, he ships that, Hillary sneaks it 273 to 265.
Good stuff. I agree with the logic even if I don't agree with what Farron would want per se.
It's perfectly respectable to say a future Govt might want to have another look at the position in the circumstances that then prevail. Farron and others (it's not just him, though he seems to have a bad dose of it, as does Clegg) just seem (to me at least) to be not handling the collapse of one of the apparent pillars of their world view at all well, and it doesn't strike me as a sensible thing to be quite so blatant in effectively telling the voters they got it wrong.
2 that polling vs anecdote stuff was a bit of sleight of hand from the late Tim; the idea is it maps to the controlled experiment vs anecdote distinction in medical science. It was wrong then, as I pointed out then, and that was before the twin polling disasters of 2015 & 2016. You trotting it out now has a sweetly nostalgic feel about it but doesn't make you look like the sharpest knife in the drawer.
"Makes a change from them howling at the moon."
Who cares? Check the referendum result. They can be as crazy as shithouse rats now. It's done and dusted.
So we can't call it yet !
She can play the female victim card, but it's pathetic weakling stuff. A candidate can't claim to be strong blah blah and also say they're a victim when anyone with eyes can see the media bias towards her. It just doesn't work at all.
The people have spoken, unlike the undemocratic sore losers of 1975, I accept the will of the people.
It's interesting how perceptions vary.
"I accept the will of the people."
A noble thought.
I know little about US politics, but can Trump really win? I still believe he'll change tack quickly if he does win, but who can tell?
Apologies for assuming you were a Trumper. Everyone else seems to be on here –including several weirdo Corbynite Leaver Trumpers (the worst kind of Trumper).
It's referendums.
Unusual robbery report from early hours. Man robbed of phone Canal St, but offender hands phone back as apparently "not impressed with it"
Clinton 50/Trump 45 LV
Clinton 49/Trump 43 RV
Last week for Clinton 48/Trump 44 RV so small shift to Clinton
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/a348d908-7e7b-11e6-8d70-b369ed513749?CMP=Spklr-_-Editorial-_-TWITTER-_-thetimes-_-20160920-_-World-_-591446522&linkId=28982687
The Democrats are doing their best to lose by picking someone that few voters trust. Labour pick a Trot and to complete the farce, they pick the MP for Pontypandy who wants to sit down and debate with IS ... How many virgins do you want this year?
And I may have mentioned the referendum, but I think I got away with it.
Okay.
Donald Trump Jnr
This image says it all. Let's end the politically correct agenda that doesn't put America first. #trump2016 https://t.co/9fHwog7ssN
EG the 1975 and 2016 referendums were both on the issue of EU membership, like the two Quebec referendums.
On the other hand someone who wanted Euro membership (but it never went to the polls as it would have lost), regional government in England, Scottish independence and EU membership in 16 would have lost all those referenda - as they were all different issues referred to a ballot.
(And I'll get a touch of liquidity/profit from the result
See Wikipedia
"Gladstonian liberalism consisted of limited government expenditure and low taxation whilst making sure government had balanced budgets and the classical liberal stress on self-help and freedom of choice.
Gladstonian liberalism also emphasised free trade, little government intervention in the economy and equality of opportunity through institutional reform."
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/778178249495023618
Channel 4 is already in public ownership.
:-)
"A 4% lead is decisive?"
It decided the result.
'Won any referenda recently chaps? '
You need experts to do that.
Farron "is not pushing for a “re-run” of June’s vote – and would only support another referendum once the negotiations are done.
“We demand that the British people should have their say on the final deal in a referendum and in the meantime we will hold the Conservative Brexit Government to account and fight for the best possible deal for Britain,” the Lib Dem leader will say.
“Voting for departure is not the same as voting for a destination."
Which one's gone where?
“They are really nice people. It is such a change from the Tory party,” said Mr Massow, whose business successes included offering financial services to gay people. “[Theresa May’s plans for] grammar schools make me a little bit angry … I’ve always been a centrist at heart.”
https://www.ft.com/content/aeefbae4-7b4a-11e6-ae24-f193b105145e
Grammarians will enjoy this week's #ChallengeTuesday question from our 1892 scholarship exam paper https://t.co/vZo6oUgzcB
He tricked me by writing the rest of his post in English.
He has always been pro-EU and a bit wet, and a Clarkite-like Remainer. But he became a teacher three years ago, and married a staunch socialist last year, so not a total surprise.
Still, I'm quite upset about it, to be honest.
Didums.
We'll put the issue on the agendums.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/20/get-serious-labour-rebels-deal-with-brexit-catastrophe
I'm back to my 2001-03 days, and being a critic of the leadership.