politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Trump the Time magazine “Person of the Year” – it is hard to d

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Trump the Time magazine “Person of the Year” – it is hard to disagree

Donald Trump is TIME's Person of the Year 2016 #TIMEPOY https://t.co/5pTGOksevE pic.twitter.com/N8BtqTu9Nl

Read the full story here

TheScreamingEagles

‪From 2015‬

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/674587800835092480

kle4

TheScreamingEagles said:

‪From 2015‬

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/674587800835092480

Donald misunderstanding it's not necessarily an 'award' or just that he wants to be seen to be huuuge, regardless of whether it is for good or bad reasons?

TheScreamingEagles

Big thank you to Paddy Power 1/2 when Shadsy was offering 1/5

Morris_Dancer

FPT: Mr. Eagles, you can't discount the events of 2016 when looking at earlier concepts. It's like when RTD buggered up Who canon with the Time War or when the new trilogy threw out the Star Wars Expanded Universe.

Alas, poor Grand Admiral Thrawn.

On-topic: could make a case for Farage, given the EU vote and his intervention for Trump.

Pulpstar

TheScreamingEagles said:

Big thank you to Paddy Power 1/5 when Shadsy was offering 1/10

Paddy was 1-2, Ladbrokes was 1-5.

Richard_Nabavi

I can't help feeling that, had she won, Hillary would equally have been president of the 'Divided States of America', although I suspect that Time magazine would not have made the point.

I wonder whom they would have chosen if Hillary had won?

williamglenn

TheScreamingEagles said:

‪From 2015‬

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/674587800835092480

The chemistry between Trump and Merkel will be fascinating.

He's said far harsher things about people he's subsequently given jobs to so no-one should read into his tweets that he really is a convinced opponent of anything Merkel stands for.

TheScreamingEagles

Pulpstar said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Big thank you to Paddy Power 1/5 when Shadsy was offering 1/10

Paddy was 1-2, Ladbrokes was 1-5.

Yeah fixed now.

Pulpstar

So, how much was everyone able to get on ?

TheScreamingEagles

Richard_Nabavi said:

I can't help feeling that, had she won, Hillary would equally have been president of the 'Divided States of America', although I suspect that Time magazine would not have made the point.

I wonder whom they would have chosen if Hillary had won?

Hasn't every new POTUS in the last 40 years has won except George Bush Senior who lost out to the endangered Earth.

kle4

williamglenn said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

‪From 2015‬

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/674587800835092480

The chemistry between Trump and Merkel will be fascinating.

He's said far harsher things about people he's subsequently given jobs to so no-one should read into his tweets that he really is a convinced opponent of anything Merkel stands for.

She stands for bettering Germany, he stands for bettering the USA - they may both do good or bad jobs of it, and in very different styles, but I'm sure they can appreciate putting your country above all else.

TheScreamingEagles

Pulpstar said:

So, how much was everyone able to get on ?

£20 in shop.

TGOHF

Time - another sore loser with butthurt.

Richard_Nabavi

Pulpstar said:

So, how much was everyone able to get on ?

Paddy allowed me the same as they allowed you.

williamglenn

kle4 said:

williamglenn said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

‪From 2015‬

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/674587800835092480

The chemistry between Trump and Merkel will be fascinating.

He's said far harsher things about people he's subsequently given jobs to so no-one should read into his tweets that he really is a convinced opponent of anything Merkel stands for.

She stands for bettering Germany, he stands for bettering the USA - they may both do good or bad jobs of it, and in very different styles, but I'm sure they can appreciate putting your country above all else.

I meant, to use a term du jour, on the international plane. A lot of Eurosceptics are convinced that Trump hates the EU, simply on the basis that he was happy to associate himself with the Brexit vote. It ain't necessarily so.

Richard_Nabavi

TheScreamingEagles said:

Hasn't every new POTUS in the last 40 years has won except George Bush Senior who lost out to the endangered Earth.

Something like that, which is one reason why I was sure it would be Trump.

FrancisUrquhart

5...4...3...2...1....Trump tweets he hates the picture.

Sandpit

Yay, 1/2 from yesterday comes in. Thanks Paddy!

williamglenn

Keir Starmer: This motion does not give authority to trigger Article 50.

Pulpstar

Clinton will probably pass Obama's '12 vote total !

Trump's needle:

Margin/(Swing*2)

FL: 0.9%/2.1%
MI: 9.5%/9.7%
PA: 5.4%/6.1%
WI: 6.9%/7.7%

david_herdson

Richard_Nabavi said:

I can't help feeling that, had she won, Hillary would equally have been president of the 'Divided States of America', although I suspect that Time magazine would not have made the point.

I wonder whom they would have chosen if Hillary had won?

Her, almost certainly. "Madam President".

Morris_Dancer

Anyway, time for me to be off. Cheers to Mr. Slackbladder for his comment on tax on the other thread (and Miss Plato).

TGOHF

williamglenn said:

Keir Starmer: This motion does not give authority to trigger Article 50.

(but we will support that one too..)

Richard_Tyndall

Quick OT public service announcement.

If like me you keep chickens, ducks or other birds, even if only a few, please be aware that as of this morning there is now a country wide prevention zone in force across England. All birds must be kept under cover/indoors and separated from any possible contact with wild birds.

This is due to the very nasty (for birds) avian flu outbreak on the continent. It is not yet present in the UK but the fear is it is only a matter of time.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-measures-to-protect-poultry-against-avian-flu

TheScreamingEagles

https://twitter.com/DPRK_News/status/806487021938241536

PlatoSaid

Basks in Trump sun-lamp rays.

williamglenn

PlatoSaid said:

Basks in Trump sun-lamp rays.

Careful you don't turn orange.

Scott_P

@JoeWatts_: Tory MP Crispin Blunt just described the EU as "the enemy" #brexit

dr_spyn

Any presidential vote in The USA results in a divided state.

PlatoSaid

williamglenn said:

PlatoSaid said:

Basks in Trump sun-lamp rays.

Careful you don't turn orange.

I resemble Pocahontas when tanned - my nickname as a kid as I'd plaits too. I even had a very Rachel Welch chamois leather dress back in the 80s....

david_herdson

dr_spyn said:

Any presidential vote in The USA results in a divided state.

There are degrees of division though. 2016 was certainly the most divisive in my lifetime. When was the last that was as bad? 1968 would be one contender? If not that, then which?

TheScreamingEagles

david_herdson said:

dr_spyn said:

Any presidential vote in The USA results in a divided state.

There are degrees of division though. 2016 was certainly the most divisive in my lifetime. When was the last that was as bad? 1968 would be one contender? If not that, then which?

2000, although that was due to the post vote situation.

Stark_Dawning

David Davis: 'I don't know what "Hard Brexit" means'

Really?

dr_spyn

david_herdson said:

dr_spyn said:

Any presidential vote in The USA results in a divided state.

There are degrees of division though. 2016 was certainly the most divisive in my lifetime. When was the last that was as bad? 1968 would be one contender? If not that, then which?

Goldwater 1964, hard to consider a more divisive candidate other than George Wallace. Ronald Reagan was almost portrayed as the devil incarnate, but as you say there are different degrees of division.

TGOHF

re Labour's new customs union policy - does that mean they don't want new free trade deals with the rest of the world ?

http://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2016/11/26/what-are-the-negotiating-aims-of-the-eu-27/

"The UK’s position is very easy to grasp for anyone who read the referendum ballot paper or has listened to the Prime Minister. The UK is going to leave the EU. There is no such thing as a single market we can remain in on leaving, and no-one on the Vote Leave campaign suggested there was. As the Uk wishes outside the EU to negotiate trade agreements with non EU countries we clearly will not be in the Customs union. The PM has ruled out EEA membership. This means there is not a lot to negotiate. We will not negotiate our independence with the rest of the EU – that is an absurd contradiction. We will offer them no new barriers to their trade with us, and I expect after a lot of huffing and puffing they will want to accept that offer. If they don’t we will trade with them as most favoured nation under WTO rules, and they will be the big losers on tariffs as a result."

foxinsoxuk

TheScreamingEagles said:

‪From 2015‬

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/674587800835092480

They did pick Adolf Hitler twice and Stalin also twice too, in 1938 the POTY was described as the greatest ever threat to democracy...

TheWhiteRabbit

Stark_Dawning said:

David Davis: 'I don't know what "Hard Brexit" means'

Really?

I don't know what it means either.

PlatoSaid

That's put the cat amongst the pigeons

Paul Joseph Watson
Buzzfeed is close to becoming the left-wing Stormfront. https://t.co/8PGo1vaEr8

TGOHF

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Stark_Dawning said:

David Davis: 'I don't know what "Hard Brexit" means'

Really?

I don't know what it means either.

It means "Brexit".

TheScreamingEagles

Should I take the 10/1 on Chris Grayling as next to leave the cabinet in light of the below?

https://twitter.com/JoeMurphyLondon/status/806481461864001536
https://twitter.com/daily_politics/status/806484087024263168

Richard_Nabavi

TGOHF said:

re Labour's new customs union policy - does that mean they don't want new free trade deals with the rest of the world ?

It means that they, probably rightly, consider that the minor disadvantage of not being able to negotiate our own trade deals is outweighed by the humongous advantage of not wrecking our car industry.

foxinsoxuk

Stark_Dawning said:

David Davis: 'I don't know what "Hard Brexit" means'

Really?

Surely Hard Brexit means Hard Brexit means red, white and blue Brexit?

Richard_Nabavi

TheScreamingEagles said:

Should I take the 10/1 on Chris Grayling as next to leave the cabinet in light of the below?

I don't see anything wrong in his position.

CarlottaVance

Scott_P said:

@JoeWatts_: Tory MP Crispin Blunt just described the EU as "the enemy" #brexit

He was using the military metaphor that 'no plan survives intact first contact with the enemy'....

Not the happiest of metaphors, but he didn't really call the EU 'the enemy'.....

Pulpstar

TheScreamingEagles said:

Should I take the 10/1 on Chris Grayling as next to leave the cabinet in light of the below?

It's a decision only you can make, anything under ~ 18-1 you need a damned good reason to though. I've made an exception once on this general rule for Dr Fox @10-1, because he is a) Liam Fox and b) it was a free bet from the Sun.

Whats yr cumulative book on the contenders so far.

I am 25s Greening, 10s Fox.

I think adding too many feels a bit muggy.

Theuniondivvie

Stark_Dawning said:

David Davis: 'I don't know what "Hard Brexit" means'

Really?

At least we know what colours it'll be.

TGOHF

Richard_Nabavi said:

TGOHF said:

re Labour's new customs union policy - does that mean they don't want new free trade deals with the rest of the world ?

It means that they, probably rightly, consider that the minor disadvantage of not being able to negotiate our own trade deals is outweighed by the humongous advantage of not wrecking our car industry.

Under what circumstances would the EU invoke tariffs on our car industry that wouldn't result in the mutual destruction of a multitude of their industries ?

Be realistic..

Richard_Nabavi

TGOHF said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

TGOHF said:

re Labour's new customs union policy - does that mean they don't want new free trade deals with the rest of the world ?

It means that they, probably rightly, consider that the minor disadvantage of not being able to negotiate our own trade deals is outweighed by the humongous advantage of not wrecking our car industry.

Under what circumstances would the EU invoke tariffs on our car industry that wouldn't result in the mutual destruction of a multitude of their industries ?

Be realistic..

Who said anything about tariffs?

Pulpstar

Richard_Nabavi said:

TGOHF said:

re Labour's new customs union policy - does that mean they don't want new free trade deals with the rest of the world ?

It means that they, probably rightly, consider that the minor disadvantage of not being able to negotiate our own trade deals is outweighed by the humongous advantage of not wrecking our car industry.

I think its definitely something we want to end up with, but I'm not sure the government pre-agreeing to it strengthens their negotiation hand with the EU. It might be a poor, potentially massively backfiring bargaining chip but a shown two of clubs on the table is inferior to one kept in hand.

TheScreamingEagles

Pulpstar said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Should I take the 10/1 on Chris Grayling as next to leave the cabinet in light of the below?

It's a decision only you can make, anything under ~ 18-1 you need a damned good reason to though. I've made an exception once on this general rule for Dr Fox @10-1, because he is a) Liam Fox and b) it was a free bet from the Sun.

Whats yr cumulative book on the contenders so far.

I am 25s Greening, 10s Fox.

I think adding too many feels a bit muggy.

I think I'm on Fox at 10/1 and Hammond at 25/1

williamglenn

foxinsoxuk said:

Stark_Dawning said:

David Davis: 'I don't know what "Hard Brexit" means'

Really?

Surely Hard Brexit means Hard Brexit means red, white and blue Brexit?

John Galliano Brexit as opposed to the softer Christian Dior Brexit.

Pulpstar

Or to put it another way, Verhofstadt (I think ?) sits down

"So you want to stay in the customs union, indeed need to do so to pass this through your parliament. What are you prepared to offer in return for that ?"

Laudable as it may be we don't want to hand all our 'twos' to strengthen the EU's hand.

TheScreamingEagles

Oh Lord, Louise Mensch is opining on the Supreme Court case

Richard_Nabavi

Pulpstar said:

Or to put it another way, Verhofstadt (I think ?) sits down

"So you want to stay in the customs union, indeed need to do so to pass this through your parliament. What are you prepared to offer in return for that ?"

Laudable as it may be we don't want to hand all our 'twos' to strengthen the EU's hand.

As TGOHF point out, our EU friends will be just as keen as us not to wreck their car-industry supply-chains. The German car industry alone uses parts from over 100 UK manufacturing sites. So it could be a logical outcome, and one which could be presented to domestic audiences rather neatly:

EU politicians: "See! We said no cherry-picking, and the UK is no longer in the Single Market! It is reduced to the status of Turkey!"

UK politicians: "See! We said we could protect out exporters, and this gives us tariff-free, zero paperwork access to the Single Market! And without having to concede control of our borders or submit to the jurisdiction of the ECJ."

So there could be a basis of part of a deal there. Services would remain the big stumbling-block, of course.

Theuniondivvie

williamglenn said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Stark_Dawning said:

David Davis: 'I don't know what "Hard Brexit" means'

Really?

Surely Hard Brexit means Hard Brexit means red, white and blue Brexit?

John Galliano Brexit as opposed to the softer Christian Dior Brexit.

Even then, is that earlier drunken, anti-semite Galliano, or later cleaned-up, penitent JG?

CarlottaVance

Interestingly Thornberry committed Labour to staying inside the customs union—which would mean that the UK could not do any comprehensive free-trade deals post Brexit. Indeed, if Britain stays inside the customs union, it really won’t be Brexit in the proper sense of the word.

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/12/pmqs-emily-thornberrys-battle-customs-union/

williamglenn

TheScreamingEagles said:

Oh Lord, Louise Mensch is opining on the Supreme Court case

https://twitter.com/LouiseMensch/status/806493370419998721

foxinsoxuk

Richard_Nabavi said:

Pulpstar said:

Or to put it another way, Verhofstadt (I think ?) sits down

"So you want to stay in the customs union, indeed need to do so to pass this through your parliament. What are you prepared to offer in return for that ?"

Laudable as it may be we don't want to hand all our 'twos' to strengthen the EU's hand.

As TGOHF point out, our EU friends will be just as keen not to wreck their car-industry supply-chains. So it could be a logical outcome, and one which could be presented to domestic audiences rather neatly:

EU politicians: "See! We said no cherry-picking, and the UK is no longer in the Single Market! It is reduced to the status of Turkey!"

UK politicians: "See! We said we could protect out exporters, and this gives us tariff-free, zero paperwork access to the Single Market! And without having to concede control of our borders or submit to the jurisdiction of the ECJ."

So there could be a basis of part of a deal there. Services would remain the big stumbling-block, of course.

The general rule of a good deal is that both parties agree it is a good deal.

In practice I think trade in manufactured goods and agricultural produce will be tarrif and barrier free, but services and other parts will be outside the single market. Hard Brexit plus cars and food in other words.

TOPPING

CarlottaVance said:

Interestingly Thornberry committed Labour to staying inside the customs union—which would mean that the UK could not do any comprehensive free-trade deals post Brexit. Indeed, if Britain stays inside the customs union, it really won’t be Brexit in the proper sense of the word.

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/12/pmqs-emily-thornberrys-battle-customs-union/

No single market no customs union or a large number of Brexiters will feel it is not their kind of Brexit.

(They will be the same people of course who constantly whined about how it was "up to the government" to determine Brexit.)

It's fair game for the moderate bit of Labour to have a go at it.

Andy_Cooke

CarlottaVance said:

Interestingly Thornberry committed Labour to staying inside the customs union—which would mean that the UK could not do any comprehensive free-trade deals post Brexit. Indeed, if Britain stays inside the customs union, it really won’t be Brexit in the proper sense of the word.

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/12/pmqs-emily-thornberrys-battle-customs-union/

Oh, goody, someone else confusing their opinion with the meaning of words.

Would the UK remain a member of the European Union if we did this?
If "yes", it isn't Brexit.
If "no", it is Brexit.

Anything else is personal opinion and wasn't on the ballot paper.

Sandpit

Pulpstar said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

TGOHF said:

re Labour's new customs union policy - does that mean they don't want new free trade deals with the rest of the world ?

It means that they, probably rightly, consider that the minor disadvantage of not being able to negotiate our own trade deals is outweighed by the humongous advantage of not wrecking our car industry.

I think its definitely something we want to end up with, but I'm not sure the government pre-agreeing to it strengthens their negotiation hand with the EU. It might be a poor, potentially massively backfiring bargaining chip but a shown two of clubs on the table is inferior to one kept in hand.

That's the whole point that a lot of people don't get - that specific details of desired outcomes from negotiations publicly stated in advance of them starting, is sending our troops into battle with one hand tied behind their back.

TheScreamingEagles

NSFW

https://twitter.com/SheldanKeay/status/806495834548346880

Richard_Nabavi

foxinsoxuk said:

In practice I think trade in manufactured goods and agricultural produce will be tarrif and barrier free, but services and other parts will be outside the single market. Hard Brexit plus cars and food in other words.

That's certainly what would make sense. However, 'barrier-free' means customs union, otherwise you have to have customs checks, certificates of origin and all that dross. That's a pain if you're running a tight supply chain, or if you're a small company without the necessary customs-documentation expertise.

Theuniondivvie

TheScreamingEagles said:

NSFW

https://twitter.com/SheldanKeay/status/806495834548346880

More handbags than an Hermès store.

Luckyguy1983

TOPPING said:

CarlottaVance said:

Interestingly Thornberry committed Labour to staying inside the customs union—which would mean that the UK could not do any comprehensive free-trade deals post Brexit. Indeed, if Britain stays inside the customs union, it really won’t be Brexit in the proper sense of the word.

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/12/pmqs-emily-thornberrys-battle-customs-union/

No single market no customs union or a large number of Brexiters will feel it is not their kind of Brexit.

(They will be the same people of course who constantly whined about how it was "up to the government" to determine Brexit.)

It's fair game for the moderate bit of Labour to have a go at it.

Which will totally prove our point then, won't it?

TheScreamingEagles

Theuniondivvie said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

NSFW

https://twitter.com/SheldanKeay/status/806495834548346880

More handbags than an Hermès store.

Less realistic than a WWE bout

DavidL

Yep that was not one of the difficult ones was it?

Slightly more difficult, and relevant to the last thread, is the Supreme Court decision on Brexit. I was gainfully employed this morning and didn't see it but the chat at lunch was that Pannick got a bit of a doing this morning. Is there value in the government winning? Maybe there is.

CarlottaVance

Andy_Cooke said:

CarlottaVance said:

Interestingly Thornberry committed Labour to staying inside the customs union—which would mean that the UK could not do any comprehensive free-trade deals post Brexit. Indeed, if Britain stays inside the customs union, it really won’t be Brexit in the proper sense of the word.

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/12/pmqs-emily-thornberrys-battle-customs-union/

Oh, goody, someone else confusing their opinion with the meaning of words.

Would the UK remain a member of the European Union if we did this?
If "yes", it isn't Brexit.
If "no", it is Brexit.

Anything else is personal opinion and wasn't on the ballot paper.

There is already precedent in the British Isles - the Channel Islands are in the Customs Union, but are not in the EU and have controls on immigration.....

nunu

williamglenn said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

‪From 2015‬

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/674587800835092480

The chemistry between Trump and Merkel will be fascinating.

He's said far harsher things about people he's subsequently given jobs to so no-one should read into his tweets that he really is a convinced opponent of anything Merkel stands for.

Yes, yes, yes, we know we shouldn't take him seriously or literally.

One day someone will.........

DecrepitJohnL

TheScreamingEagles said:

Oh Lord, Louise Mensch is opining on the Supreme Court case

If Louise Mensch's opinion is that the Supreme Court should caption the barrister or judge speaking, and mute the microphones of everyone else (especially if they have a hacking cough) then she is entirely correct.

Pulpstar

Richard_Nabavi said:

Pulpstar said:

Or to put it another way, Verhofstadt (I think ?) sits down

"So you want to stay in the customs union, indeed need to do so to pass this through your parliament. What are you prepared to offer in return for that ?"

Laudable as it may be we don't want to hand all our 'twos' to strengthen the EU's hand.

As TGOHF point out, our EU friends will be just as keen as us not to wreck their car-industry supply-chains. The German car industry alone uses parts from over 100 UK manufacturing sites. So it could be a logical outcome, and one which could be presented to domestic audiences rather neatly:

EU politicians: "See! We said no cherry-picking, and the UK is no longer in the Single Market! It is reduced to the status of Turkey!"

UK politicians: "See! We said we could protect out exporters, and this gives us tariff-free, zero paperwork access to the Single Market! And without having to concede control of our borders or submit to the jurisdiction of the ECJ."

So there could be a basis of part of a deal there. Services would remain the big stumbling-block, of course.

Our being in the customs union is "bigger" to us than it is to Europe. Even if this isn't the case, you shouldn't explicitly state that you 'need' to be in it.

All stems from Cameron's decision not to make the referendum legally binding anyhow...

Who was advising him on that ?

nunu

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/DPRK_News/status/806487021938241536

Is that real? I mean is the North korean government really putiing that out.

Pulpstar

DavidL said:

Yep that was not one of the difficult ones was it?

Slightly more difficult, and relevant to the last thread, is the Supreme Court decision on Brexit. I was gainfully employed this morning and didn't see it but the chat at lunch was that Pannick got a bit of a doing this morning. Is there value in the government winning? Maybe there is.

Which of the judges was doing the doing ?

Stark_Dawning

TOPPING said:

CarlottaVance said:

Interestingly Thornberry committed Labour to staying inside the customs union—which would mean that the UK could not do any comprehensive free-trade deals post Brexit. Indeed, if Britain stays inside the customs union, it really won’t be Brexit in the proper sense of the word.

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/12/pmqs-emily-thornberrys-battle-customs-union/

No single market no customs union or a large number of Brexiters will feel it is not their kind of Brexit.

(They will be the same people of course who constantly whined about how it was "up to the government" to determine Brexit.)

It's fair game for the moderate bit of Labour to have a go at it.

At what point, in the minds of some, did 'Brexit' become a synonym for 'Farageism'? It certainly wasn't during the campaign - in fact Leave were at great pains to assert that Farageism was merely a scare tactic of Project Fear. Yet, thereafter Farageism acquired the status of Leave orthodoxy. It would interesting to pinpoint where and how this came about.

Scott_P

@paulwaugh: IDS in Brexit motion debate: "I'd rather stay in [the EU], than stay in the Customs Union..."

Theuniondivvie

Someone on Twitter just suggested that the M above the Don's napper resembles horns and Time are on the troll. Is it really obvious and are my visual sensibilities somewhat blunt today?

Innocent_Abroad

Stark_Dawning said:

TOPPING said:

CarlottaVance said:

Interestingly Thornberry committed Labour to staying inside the customs union—which would mean that the UK could not do any comprehensive free-trade deals post Brexit. Indeed, if Britain stays inside the customs union, it really won’t be Brexit in the proper sense of the word.

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/12/pmqs-emily-thornberrys-battle-customs-union/

No single market no customs union or a large number of Brexiters will feel it is not their kind of Brexit.

(They will be the same people of course who constantly whined about how it was "up to the government" to determine Brexit.)

It's fair game for the moderate bit of Labour to have a go at it.

At what point, in the minds of some, did 'Brexit' become a synonym for 'Farageism'? It certainly wasn't during the campaign - in fact Leave were at great pains to assert that Farageism was merely a scare tactic of Project Fear. Yet, thereafter Farageism acquired the status of Leave orthodoxy. It would interesting to pinpoint where and how this came about.

In Farage's mind - while he was in his mama's womb. Of course.

TheScreamingEagles

nunu said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/DPRK_News/status/806487021938241536

Is that real? I mean is the North korean government really putiing that out.

No, a very funny spoof account

TheScreamingEagles

Theuniondivvie said:

Someone on Twitter just suggested that the M above the Don's napper resembles horns and Time are on the troll. Is it really obvious and are my visual sensibilities somewhat blunt today?

Not obvious to me either.

TheScreamingEagles

How am I in the same party as IDS?

PAW

Hmm...

"Boldly, JLR says the new TRANSCEND project, which is partly funded by the UK government, will help “rebuild the UK’s transmission production”. Jaguar Land Rover currently uses an eight-speed automatic gearbox supplied by German firm ZF; many of its manual gearboxes come from Germany’s Getrag."

"ULTRAN has been a three-year research initiative led by Jaguar Land Rover in a consortium including Ricardo, Tata Steel, Lubrizol, GRM Consulting Ltd, American Axle & Manufacturing and the Universities of Southampton, Newcastle and Warwick – with the support of the UK’s innovation agency, InnovateUK."

"GKN’s integrated electric drive system could transform the EV market. UK firm's integrated drive system produces up to 1475lb ft and will make production in 2019. The company that created the all-wheel drive systems of the BMW i8 and Porsche 918 has produced an innovative electric drive system that can produce up to 1475lb ft of torque."

I get the feeling that things are looking up for reshoring.

AlastairMeeks

Theuniondivvie said:

Someone on Twitter just suggested that the M above the Don's napper resembles horns and Time are on the troll. Is it really obvious and are my visual sensibilities somewhat blunt today?

Like the FedEx arrow, once you see it you can't unsee it.

TOPPING

Luckyguy1983 said:

TOPPING said:

CarlottaVance said:

Interestingly Thornberry committed Labour to staying inside the customs union—which would mean that the UK could not do any comprehensive free-trade deals post Brexit. Indeed, if Britain stays inside the customs union, it really won’t be Brexit in the proper sense of the word.

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/12/pmqs-emily-thornberrys-battle-customs-union/

No single market no customs union or a large number of Brexiters will feel it is not their kind of Brexit.

(They will be the same people of course who constantly whined about how it was "up to the government" to determine Brexit.)

It's fair game for the moderate bit of Labour to have a go at it.

Which will totally prove our point then, won't it?

That Brexiters' strategy here also is have cake and eat it? Yep

TheScreamingEagles

AlastairMeeks said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Someone on Twitter just suggested that the M above the Don's napper resembles horns and Time are on the troll. Is it really obvious and are my visual sensibilities somewhat blunt today?

Like the FedEx arrow, once you see it you can't unsee it.

What's the FedEx arrow thing?

Is it like Colonel Sanders' tie actually being little arms and legs?

Richard_Nabavi

Pulpstar said:

Our being in the customs union is "bigger" to us than it is to Europe. Even if this isn't the case, you shouldn't explicitly state that you 'need' to be in it.

I'm not sure it is bigger to us. I agree that nothing should be conceded in advance, which is why Theresa May is right to try to suppress MP interference in the negotiations. Her mistake is to be taking too long over it - I think that she has a tendency to act as though the position is static, whereas in politics, as in war, your adversaries are always shifting around and may regroup before you've executed your plan.

Theuniondivvie

TheScreamingEagles said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Someone on Twitter just suggested that the M above the Don's napper resembles horns and Time are on the troll. Is it really obvious and are my visual sensibilities somewhat blunt today?

Not obvious to me either.

Time to start a meme...

williamglenn

Scott_P said:

@paulwaugh: IDS in Brexit motion debate: "I'd rather stay in [the EU], than stay in the Customs Union..."

The 70% solution really is remaining!

AlastairMeeks

The FedEx arrow:

http://www.more.com/entertainment/fun/its-arrow-famous-logos-hidden-images/fedex

nunu

They just give this title to anyone then.....

http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,760539,00.html

Andy_Cooke

TheScreamingEagles said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Someone on Twitter just suggested that the M above the Don's napper resembles horns and Time are on the troll. Is it really obvious and are my visual sensibilities somewhat blunt today?

Like the FedEx arrow, once you see it you can't unsee it.

What's the FedEx arrow thing?

Is it like Colonel Sanders' tie actually being little arms and legs?

Look at the white space between the last E and the X
It makes a rightwards pointing arrow (and this is deliberate)

Pulpstar

Question: If a Justice thinks Miller/Pannick is technically right in law, but the government with the backing of 17.4 million voters (Or NET 1-2 millionish if you prefer) is "naturally just" are they still obliged to rule in favour of Miller/Pannick ?

perdix

Scott_P said:

@paulwaugh: IDS in Brexit motion debate: "I'd rather stay in [the EU], than stay in the Customs Union..."

Because being in a Customs Union would prohibit us from entering into free trade deals with other countries. IDS said that the US Congress has already produced preliminary legislation to enable a UK-US trade agreement.

Innocent_Abroad

Pulpstar said:

Question: If a Justice thinks Miller/Pannick is technically right in law, but the government with the backing of 17.4 million voters (Or NET 1-2 millionish if you prefer) is "naturally just" are they still obliged to rule in favour of Miller/Pannick ?

Don't forget the 16 million traitors

Something should be done about them, don't you think?

AlastairMeeks

Pulpstar said:

Question: If a Justice thinks Miller/Pannick is technically right in law, but the government with the backing of 17.4 million voters (Or NET 1-2 millionish if you prefer) is "naturally just" are they still obliged to rule in favour of Miller/Pannick ?

The Supreme Court can develop the law. So it is open to it to establish a new legal principle if it thinks appropriate. In a case as controversial as this, it would want to have a clear rationale for doing so.

MaxPB

The Amazon smile from A->Z is also another can't under logo

Pulpstar

Innocent_Abroad said:

Pulpstar said:

Question: If a Justice thinks Miller/Pannick is technically right in law, but the government with the backing of 17.4 million voters (Or NET 1-2 millionish if you prefer) is "naturally just" are they still obliged to rule in favour of Miller/Pannick ?

Don't forget the 16 million traitors

Something should be done about them, don't you think?

We're undeniably in a minority.

On tinder dry technical legal grounds we should win the case - but "justice" is the governments' potential out I feel. I have no idea if law trumps justice or vice versa though.

Edit: Alastair has answered my point eloquently below.

TheScreamingEagles

AlastairMeeks said:

The FedEx arrow:

http://www.more.com/entertainment/fun/its-arrow-famous-logos-hidden-images/fedex

Andy_Cooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Someone on Twitter just suggested that the M above the Don's napper resembles horns and Time are on the troll. Is it really obvious and are my visual sensibilities somewhat blunt today?

Like the FedEx arrow, once you see it you can't unsee it.

What's the FedEx arrow thing?

Is it like Colonel Sanders' tie actually being little arms and legs?

Look at the white space between the last E and the X
It makes a rightwards pointing arrow (and this is deliberate)

Thanks

Pulpstar

AlastairMeeks said:

Pulpstar said:

Question: If a Justice thinks Miller/Pannick is technically right in law, but the government with the backing of 17.4 million voters (Or NET 1-2 millionish if you prefer) is "naturally just" are they still obliged to rule in favour of Miller/Pannick ?

The Supreme Court can develop the law. So it is open to it to establish a new legal principle if it thinks appropriate. In a case as controversial as this, it would want to have a clear rationale for doing so.

Thanks, I was wondering why you thought the odds should be 4-6 / 6-4, I think that explains it

rcs1000

TGOHF said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

TGOHF said:

re Labour's new customs union policy - does that mean they don't want new free trade deals with the rest of the world ?

It means that they, probably rightly, consider that the minor disadvantage of not being able to negotiate our own trade deals is outweighed by the humongous advantage of not wrecking our car industry.

Under what circumstances would the EU invoke tariffs on our car industry that wouldn't result in the mutual destruction of a multitude of their industries ?

Be realistic..

Umnmm: unfortunately, I don't think that's true. Because the auto industry has multi-country supply chains, cutting us 'out' would harm us far more than them. Simply, we don't have enough of an auto component industry in the UK.

MaxPB

The Amazon logo.