Had dinner with the chair of a big Labour CLP last night. Fascinating stuff. I wish I could share the insights. Labour is in deep trouble if what I was told is representative.
Is this related to what Jonathan was describing in Sussex about an internal neo-marxist takeover? Or, at least, new members openly enthusing about marxism?
Yep - but in a seat that actually matters. Very wealthy Marxists intent on a power grab and gaining significant ground via Momentum. If this one goes it’s game over. I can’t say anymore, I’m afraid.
It should be pointed out however that this is one reason why we found suggestions Corbyn might get somewhere in the high 30s even touching 40% of the vote in the election risible. His support was from non-voters. Ergo, he would not get their votes.
Yet for once, they turned out, and somehow he got to 39.99%.
One potentially interesting question is whether they will turn out again at the next election. That is what current Labour strategy seems to be assuming, but if it was a personal vote for Corbyn and he doesn't last until the next election that could be up in the air.
The referendum and election turnout were linked, I think - quite a lot of young people didn't bother to vote in the former, felt a massive change in their futures had slipped past without their noticing, and decided they'd better get involved next time. I'd guess that a large chunk of that 80% of non-voters who would now vote Remain are young and in that camp.
But unless someone has quietly changed the polling methodology, it's a shift from previous polls.
There is a bounce for May, but not for the Tories.
We are more optimistic about the economics of Brexit, but increasingly turning against it. (In fact, there hasn’t been a majority in favour of Brexit since Feb 17).
Most Governments are unpopular in their mid-terms, whilst implementing policy. That's why they are judged at four-five yearly General Elections, in the round, when a real decision needs to be made about the best future course for the country.
The polls tell me that - what little is left of - the non-aligned, non-voting public have noticed the costs of Brexit, but are yet to see the benefits. A plurality still expect it to turn out positively in the long-term, even if some of the same think that perhaps it's been a little more trouble than it's worth, so far, and, if they'd had their term again, might have just voted Remain. Maybe.
Meanwhile, amongst those who did pick a side in 2016, attitudes have hardened.
You know, I'd feel much, much better if Ed Miliband were leader of the Labour Party. My concern now is that my prediction about Labour's run of ever worsening leaders won't end up with Corbyn, and a return to sanity, but we'll end up with another far left lunatic, perhaps even worse, leading the reds.
Had dinner with the chair of a big Labour CLP last night. Fascinating stuff. I wish I could share the insights. Labour is in deep trouble if what I was told is representative.
Is this related to what Jonathan was describing in Sussex about an internal neo-marxist takeover? Or, at least, new members openly enthusing about marxism?
Yep - but in a seat that actually matters. Very wealthy Marxists intent on a power grab and gaining significant ground via Momentum. If this one goes it’s game over. I can’t say anymore, I’m afraid.
There is a bounce for May, but not for the Tories.
We are more optimistic about the economics of Brexit, but increasingly turning against it. (In fact, there hasn’t been a majority in favour of Brexit since Feb 17).
Not really contradictory. The data seems merely to show some relief at May reaching an accommodation in the negotiations with the EU, and credit being given to her for it.
It should be pointed out however that this is one reason why we found suggestions Corbyn might get somewhere in the high 30s even touching 40% of the vote in the election risible. His support was from non-voters. Ergo, he would not get their votes.
Yet for once, they turned out, and somehow he got to 39.99%.
One potentially interesting question is whether they will turn out again at the next election. That is what current Labour strategy seems to be assuming, but if it was a personal vote for Corbyn and he doesn't last until the next election that could be up in the air.
The referendum and election turnout were linked, I think - quite a lot of young people didn't bother to vote in the former, felt a massive change in their futures had slipped past without their noticing, and decided they'd better get involved next time. I'd guess that a large chunk of that 80% of non-voters who would now vote Remain are young and in that camp.
But unless someone has quietly changed the polling methodology, it's a shift from previous polls.
A democrat should view both positively.
A lot of the forgottens and left-behinds voted in the EU referendum who felt ignored about immigration, social change and economic opportunity. They are no longer ignored.
A lot of young people voted in GE2017 because they felt their needs and concerns were ignored by Government. They are no longer ignored.
You know, I'd feel much, much better if Ed Miliband were leader of the Labour Party. My concern now is that my prediction about Labour's run of ever worsening leaders won't end up with Corbyn, and a return to sanity, but we'll end up with another far left lunatic, perhaps even worse, leading the reds.
I'm surprised Remainers haven't got even more excited over that poll than usual, they usually do - it's driven by non-voters in the 2016 EU referendum. Those that did are still unchanged in their view:
"“However, readers should note that digging deeper into the data reveals that this shift has come predominantly from those who did not actually vote in the 2016 referendum, with around nine in ten Leave and Remain voters still unchanged in their view.
“Our polling suggests that about a year ago, those who did not vote in the referendum were broadly split, but today’s poll shows that they are now overwhelmingly in favour of remaining in the EU, by a margin of more than four to one.”
Normally new policies when adopted get a boost in popularity. The opposite has happened to Brexit, it seems.
Leavers seem wholly uninterested in the implications of following through on a course of action if that has lost popular support.
I think you're being a bit selective in your choice of evidence, there. Not something you're usually prone to. The ORB poll (only one week old) showed a very different story.
So far, the Brexit process has been all about tolerating the costs without being in a position to yield any benefits. It will not be so, in full, for over another 3 years.
The slightest excuse which Remainers clutch to in order to try and obstruct, frustrate and reverse Brexit explains why Leavers fundamentally distrust them.
They are rather desperate because they know it's their last chance because, once Brexit is complete, and the new powers become popular, they will have nothing left to cling to.
BMG's final poll in the campaign had Remain 6.6% ahead.
I'm surprised Remainers haven't got even more excited over that poll than usual, they usually do - it's driven by non-voters in the 2016 EU referendum. Those that did are still unchanged in their view:
"“However, readers should note that digging deeper into the data reveals that this shift has come predominantly from those who did not actually vote in the 2016 referendum, with around nine in ten Leave and Remain voters still unchanged in their view.
“Our polling suggests that about a year ago, those who did not vote in the referendum were broadly split, but today’s poll shows that they are now overwhelmingly in favour of remaining in the EU, by a margin of more than four to one.”
Normally new policies when adopted get a boost in popularity. The opposite has happened to Brexit, it seems.
Leavers seem wholly uninterested in the implications of following through on a course of action if that has lost popular support.
I think you're being a bit selective in your choice of evidence, there. Not something you're usually prone to. The ORB poll (only one week old) showed a very different story.
So far, the Brexit process has been all about tolerating the costs without being in a position to yield any benefits. It will not be so, in full, for over another 3 years.
The slightest excuse which Remainers clutch to in order to try and obstruct, frustrate and reverse Brexit explains why Leavers fundamentally distrust them.
They are rather desperate because they know it's their last chance because, once Brexit is complete, and the new powers become popular, they will have nothing left to cling to.
It is you being selective with your evidence. Find me a recent poll where, when asked directly, the public thought the Brexit vote went the right way.
I am not trying to obstruct Brexit. While I consider it wrong, stupid, inspired by xenophobia and led by malevolent clowns, it has a democratic mandate that must be honoured. It's a disaster for the country but one that must be pursued until the public has decided otherwise.
However, if the public decide that Brexit is a bad idea and it is pursued to the bitter end, that does not bode well for the next few years, either for those advocating it or for the country as a whole. Leavers seem wholly uninterested in that. Strange.
Had dinner with the chair of a big Labour CLP last night. Fascinating stuff. I wish I could share the insights. Labour is in deep trouble if what I was told is representative.
Is this related to what Jonathan was describing in Sussex about an internal neo-marxist takeover? Or, at least, new members openly enthusing about marxism?
Yep - but in a seat that actually matters. Very wealthy Marxists intent on a power grab and gaining significant ground via Momentum. If this one goes it’s game over. I can’t say anymore, I’m afraid.
I do like the PBtories getting so excited about the Marxists of Momentum, everybody else is fully aware of the Neo-liberalists in the Tories (and certain sections of Labour) who are total acolytes of Ayn Rand.... And just as true, I don't think....
Mr. Recidivist, calling all those who support departing the EU 'phobes' is about as sensible as calling those who support remaining within the EU 'traitors'. It's inaccurate and antagonistic.
But Brexiter and Europhobe don't mean the same thing. Brexit is a specific thing that has arisen as a result of the aftermath of the 2016 referendum. It's like the difference between 'right wing' and 'Tory'. There is quite a big overlap but one represents a general set of values and priorities, while the other refers to a specific organisation with a history and a policy programme.
You can support the current Brexit project as a Europhile. Indeed that is what I do. As things stand at the moment it has a democratic mandate. So in that sense I am a Brexiter myself. There are people who dislike the EU who think the Brexit project is flawed, for example Peter Hitchens, and who would be very happy to see a completely different approach to getting out taken.
As it happens I have moved from a phobic to philic position over my life. I don't regard either as pejorative and would happily have accepted either. They are just descriptive.
Had dinner with the chair of a big Labour CLP last night. Fascinating stuff. I wish I could share the insights. Labour is in deep trouble if what I was told is representative.
Is this related to what Jonathan was describing in Sussex about an internal neo-marxist takeover? Or, at least, new members openly enthusing about marxism?
Yep - but in a seat that actually matters. Very wealthy Marxists intent on a power grab and gaining significant ground via Momentum. If this one goes it’s game over. I can’t say anymore, I’m afraid.
I do think often that comrades need to reminded that the enemy are the Tory party, and not fellow travellers. What does entertain me though about some of the shall we say newer more zealous members is the although they claim to be working g towards a Corbyn hegemony, their views are usually pretty diametrically opposed to His.
And that is why I take the "marxist" takeover talk with a pinch of salt. We are a 117 year old democratic socialist party. Even when there has been an actual international communist movement looking to subvert western democracies and parties like ours we remained firmly wedded to the democratic model and I can't see that changing.
Perhaps there are too many long established and overly comfortable members of CLP execs feeling threatened by others challenging their authority...
I'm surprised Remainers haven't got even more excited over that poll than usual, they usually do - it's driven by non-voters in the 2016 EU referendum. Those that did are still unchanged in their view:
"“However, readers should note that digging deeper into the data reveals that this shift has come predominantly from those who did not actually vote in the 2016 referendum, with around nine in ten Leave and Remain voters still unchanged in their view.
“Our polling suggests that about a year ago, those who did not vote in the referendum were broadly split, but today’s poll shows that they are now overwhelmingly in favour of remaining in the EU, by a margin of more than four to one.”
Normally new policies when adopted get a boost in popularity. The opposite has happened to Brexit, it seems.
Leavers seem wholly uninterested in the implications of following through on a course of action if that has lost popular support.
I think you're being a bit selective in your choice of evidence, there. Not something you're usually prone to. The ORB poll (only one week old) showed a very different story.
So far, the Brexit process has been all about tolerating the costs without being in a position to yield any benefits. It will not be so, in full, for over another 3 years.
The slightest excuse which Remainers clutch to in order to try and obstruct, frustrate and reverse Brexit explains why Leavers fundamentally distrust them.
They are rather desperate because they know it's their last chance because, once Brexit is complete, and the new powers become popular, they will have nothing left to cling to.
BMG's final poll in the campaign had Remain 6.6% ahead.
As usual, the trend is of more interest. In the last year, there has been a big swing away from Leave with BMG.
I'm surprised Remainers haven't got even more excited over that poll than usual, they usually do - it's driven by non-voters in the 2016 EU referendum. Those that did are still unchanged in their view:
"“However, readers should note that digging deeper into the data reveals that this shift has come predominantly from those who did not actually vote in the 2016 referendum, with around nine in ten Leave and Remain voters still unchanged in their view.
“Our polling suggests that about a year ago, those who did not vote in the referendum were broadly split, but today’s poll shows that they are now overwhelmingly in favour of remaining in the EU, by a margin of more than four to one.”
Normally new policies when adopted get a boost in popularity. The opposite has happened to Brexit, it seems.
Leavers seem wholly uninterested in the implications of following through on a course of action if that has lost popular support.
I think you're being a bit selective in your choice of evidence, there. Not something you're usually prone to. The ORB poll (only one week old) showed a very different story.
So far, the Brexit process has been all about tolerating the costs without being in a position to yield any benefits. It will not be so, in full, for over another 3 years.
The slightest excuse which Remainers clutch to in order to try and obstruct, frustrate and reverse Brexit explains why Leavers fundamentally distrust them.
They are rather desperate because they know it's their last chance because, once Brexit is complete, and the new powers become popular, they will have nothing left to cling to.
BMG's final poll in the campaign had Remain 6.6% ahead.
As usual, the trend is of more interest. In the last year, there has been a big swing away from Leave with BMG.
Had dinner with the chair of a big Labour CLP last night. Fascinating stuff. I wish I could share the insights. Labour is in deep trouble if what I was told is representative.
Is this related to what Jonathan was describing in Sussex about an internal neo-marxist takeover? Or, at least, new members openly enthusing about marxism?
Yep - but in a seat that actually matters. Very wealthy Marxists intent on a power grab and gaining significant ground via Momentum. If this one goes it’s game over. I can’t say anymore, I’m afraid.
I do like the PBtories getting so excited about the Marxists of Momentum, everybody else is fully aware of the Neo-liberalists in the Tories (and certain sections of Labour) who are total acolytes of Ayn Rand.... And just as true, I don't think....
There are probably more neo-liberals in the LDs than Labour now, most of the sandal wearing LDs are now voting for Corbyn Labour.
Most of the major neoliberal players of the past few years, Blair, Mandelson, Osborne, Letwin, Laws etc are no longer at the top level of UK politics or even MPs.
Mr. Recidivist, alas, no. 'Phobe/phobia' is now used commonly in the same vein as 'denier', which is to say pejorative. The fictional nonsense of 'Islamophobia' is a prime example of such. Given the widespread use of 'xenophobia' to describe those who oppose the political institution of the EU, 'phobe' is not a neutral descriptor.
I'm surprised Remainers haven't got even more excited over that poll than usual, they usually do - it's driven by non-voters in the 2016 EU referendum. Those that did are still unchanged in their view:
"“However, readers should note that digging deeper into the data reveals that this shift has come predominantly from those who did not actually vote in the 2016 referendum, with around nine in ten Leave and Remain voters still unchanged in their view.
“Our polling suggests that about a year ago, those who did not vote in the referendum were broadly split, but today’s poll shows that they are now overwhelmingly in favour of remaining in the EU, by a margin of more than four to one.”
Normally new policies when adopted get a boost in popularity. The opposite has happened to Brexit, it seems.
Leavers seem wholly uninterested in the implications of following through on a course of action if that has lost popular support.
I think you're being a bit selective in your choice of evidence, there. Not something you're usually prone to. The ORB poll (only one week old) showed a very different story.
So far, the Brexit process has been all about tolerating the costs without being in a position to yield any benefits. It will not be so, in full, for over another 3 years.
The slightest excuse which Remainers clutch to in order to try and obstruct, frustrate and reverse Brexit explains why Leavers fundamentally distrust them.
They are rather desperate because they know it's their last chance because, once Brexit is complete, and the new powers become popular, they will have nothing left to cling to.
BMG's final poll in the campaign had Remain 6.6% ahead.
As usual, the trend is of more interest. In the last year, there has been a big swing away from Leave with BMG.
Exactly. And in any case, although you can't rule anything out, a rerun of 2016 is not particularly likely. A party winning a general election on a cancel Brexit/rejoin EU manifesto is all it needs. And poring over the details of a particular poll isn't as important as where public opinion is actually heading.
Mr. Recidivist, alas, no. 'Phobe/phobia' is now used commonly in the same vein as 'denier', which is to say pejorative. The fictional nonsense of 'Islamophobia' is a prime example of such. Given the widespread use of 'xenophobia' to describe those who oppose the political institution of the EU, 'phobe' is not a neutral descriptor.
I'm surprised Remainers haven't got even more excited over that poll than usual, they usually do - it's driven by non-voters in the 2016 EU referendum. Those that did are still unchanged in their view:
"“However, readers should note that digging deeper into the data reveals that this shift has come predominantly from those who did not actually vote in the 2016 referendum, with around nine in ten Leave and Remain voters still unchanged in their view.
“Our polling suggests that about a year ago, those who did not vote in the referendum were broadly split, but today’s poll shows that they are now overwhelmingly in favour of remaining in the EU, by a margin of more than four to one.”
Normally new policies when adopted get a boost in popularity. The opposite has happened to Brexit, it seems.
Leavers seem wholly uninterested in the implications of following through on a course of action if that has lost popular support.
I think you'r.
BMG's final poll in the campaign had Remain 6.6% ahead.
As usual, the trend is of more interest. In the last year, there has been a big swing away from Leave with BMG.
Exactly. And in any case, although you can't rule anything out, a rerun of 2016 is not particularly likely. A party winning a general election on a cancel Brexit/rejoin EU manifesto is all it needs. And poring over the details of a particular poll isn't as important as where public opinion is actually heading.
The only major party officially committed to a referendum on the Brexit deal/rejoining the EU is the LDs, who got 7% at the general election and are still on 7% with today's ICM poll.
I'm surprised Remainers haven't got even more excited over that poll than usual, they usually do - it's driven by non-voters in the 2016 EU referendum. Those that did are still unchanged in their view:
"“However, readers should note that digging deeper into the data reveals that this
“Our polling suggests that about a year ago, those who did not vote in the referendum were broadly split, but today’s poll shows that they are now overwhelmingly in favour of remaining in the EU, by a margin of more than four to one.”
Normally new policies when adopted get a boost in popularity. The opposite has happened to Brexit, it seems.
Leavers seem wholly uninterested in the implications of following through on a course of action if that has lost popular support.
I think you're being a bit selective in your choice of evidence, there. Not something you're usually prone to. The ORB poll (only one week old) showed a very different story.
So far, the Brexit process has been all about tolerating the costs without being in a position to yield any benefits. It will not be so, in full, for over another 3 years.
The slightest excuse which Remainers clutch to in order to try and obstruct, frustrate and reverse Brexit explains why Leavers fundamentally distrust them.
They are rather desperate because they know it's their last chance because, once Brexit is complete, and the new powers become popular, they will have nothing left to cling to.
BMG's final poll in the campaign had Remain 6.6% ahead.
As usual, the trend is of more interest. In the last year, there has been a big swing away from Leave with BMG.
Exactly. And in any case, although you can't rule anything out, a rerun of 2016 is not particularly likely. A party winning a general election on a cancel Brexit/rejoin EU manifesto is all it needs. And poring over the details of a particular poll isn't as important as where public opinion is actually heading.
The only party that might win on such a manifesto is a very distant third.
Cook's loss of form is unfortunate although somewhat predictable. Apart from his annus mirabalis he has a poor record in Australia. Nevertheless he had to be picked and persisted with because of his great record overall. It may be time for him to go now.
Vince was a speculative choice in the first place - and that's putting it kindly. He would have gone already if they had a decent back-up but it's Ballance whose record is as bad as Vince's.
England do have a decent spinner. His name is Rashid. Apparently he bowls too many four balls, which made him an inferior choice to Crane, who doesn't bowl at all.
Had dinner with the chair of a big Labour CLP last night. Fascinating stuff. I wish I could share the insights. Labour is in deep trouble if what I was told is representative.
Is this related to what Jonathan was describing in Sussex about an internal neo-marxist takeover? Or, at least, new members openly enthusing about marxism?
Yep - but in a seat that actually matters. Very wealthy Marxists intent on a power grab and gaining significant ground via Momentum. If this one goes it’s game over. I can’t say anymore, I’m afraid.
I do think often that comrades need to reminded that the enemy are the Tory party, and not fellow travellers. What does entertain me though about some of the shall we say newer more zealous members is the although they claim to be working g towards a Corbyn hegemony, their views are usually pretty diametrically opposed to His.
And that is why I take the "marxist" takeover talk with a pinch of salt. We are a 117 year old democratic socialist party. Even when there has been an actual international communist movement looking to subvert western democracies and parties like ours we remained firmly wedded to the democratic model and I can't see that changing.
Perhaps there are too many long established and overly comfortable members of CLP execs feeling threatened by others challenging their authority...
Well, my friend has been in the local party for around 10 years and chair for one. The influx of new, active members has been very recent, with many newcomers previously members of the SWP, Communist party and other similar outfits. What my friend says is that they are using Momentum, but are not representative of its much younger membership. But because they focus on rules and process and are willing to attend meetings, their influence is much greater than their numbers. The silver lining is that they cannot survive a Corbyn departure. Of course, that’s the reason why we can expect him to go on and on.
I'm surprised Remainers haven't got even more excited over that poll than usual, they usually do - it's driven by non-voters in the 2016 EU referendum. Those that did are still unchanged in their view:
"“However, readers should note that digging deeper into the data reveals that this shift has come predominantly from those who did not actually vote in the 2016 referendum, with around nine in ten Leave and Remain voters still unchanged in their view.
“Our polling suggests that about a year ago, those who did not vote in the referendum were broadly split, but today’s poll shows that they are now overwhelmingly in favour of remaining in the EU, by a margin of more than four to one.”
Normally new policies when adopted get a boost in popularity. The opposite has happened to Brexit, it seems.
Leavers seem wholly uninterested in the implications of following through on a course of action if that has lost popular support.
I think you're being a bit selective in your choice of evidence, there. Not something you're usually prone to. The ORB poll (only one week old) showed a very different story.
So far, the Brexit process has been all about tolerating the costs without being in a position to yield any benefits. It will not be so, in full, for over another 3 years.
The slightest excuse which Remainers clutch to in order to try and obstruct, frustrate and reverse Brexit explains why Leavers fundamentally distrust them.
They are rather desperate because they know it's their last chance because, once Brexit is complete, and the new powers become popular, they will have nothing left to cling to.
It is you being selective with your evidence. Find me a recent poll where, when asked directly, the public thought the Brexit vote went the right way.
I am not trying to obstruct Brexit. While I consider it wrong, stupid, inspired by xenophobia and led by malevolent clowns, it has a democratic mandate that must be honoured. It's a disaster for the country but one that must be pursued until the public has decided otherwise.
However, if the public decide that Brexit is a bad idea and it is pursued to the bitter end, that does not bode well for the next few years, either for those advocating it or for the country as a whole. Leavers seem wholly uninterested in that. Strange.
In the long-term most Brits think it will be good for the UK:
Normally new policies when adopted get a boost in popularity. The opposite has happened to Brexit, it seems.
Leavers seem wholly uninterested in the implications of following through on a course of action if that has lost popular support.
I think you're being a bit selective in your choice of evidence, there. Not something you're usually prone to. The ORB poll (only one week old) showed a very different story.
So far, the Brexit process has been all about tolerating the costs without being in a position to yield any benefits. It will not be so, in full, for over another 3 years.
The slightest excuse which Remainers clutch to in order to try and obstruct, frustrate and reverse Brexit explains why Leavers fundamentally distrust them.
They are rather desperate because they know it's their last chance because, once Brexit is complete, and the new powers become popular, they will have nothing left to cling to.
It is you being selective with your evidence. Find me a recent poll where, when asked directly, the public thought the Brexit vote went the right way.
I am not trying to obstruct Brexit. While I consider it wrong, stupid, inspired by xenophobia and led by malevolent clowns, it has a democratic mandate that must be honoured. It's a disaster for the country but one that must be pursued until the public has decided otherwise.
However, if the public decide that Brexit is a bad idea and it is pursued to the bitter end, that does not bode well for the next few years, either for those advocating it or for the country as a whole. Leavers seem wholly uninterested in that. Strange.
Yet the disaster for the country which you so assuredly proclaim hasn't included that recession you so confidently predicted.
The one with the dark cloak, skeletal finger and a voice which speaks in block capitals.
While all the claims about attacks on foreigners and crops rotting unpicked in the fields have been filed under fake news.
In fact if someone looked at the UK without knowledge of the political turmoil of the past 18 months would see very little change beyond the beginnings of a long overdue and very necessary economic rebalancing.
I'm surprised Remainers haven't got even more excited over that poll than usual, they usually do - it's driven by non-voters in the 2016 EU referendum. Those that did are still unchanged in their view:
"“However, readers should note that digging deeper into the data reveals that this shift has come predominantly from those who did not actually vote in the 2016 referendum, with around nine in ten Leave and Remain voters still unchanged in their view.
“Our polling suggests that about a year ago, those who did not vote in the referendum were broadly split, but today’s poll shows that they are now overwhelmingly in favour of remaining in the EU, by a margin of more than four to one.”
Normally new policies when adopted get a boost in popularity. The opposite has happened to Brexit, it seems.
Leavers seem wholly uninterested in the implications of following through on a course of action if that has lost popular support.
I think you're being a bit selective in your choice of evidence, there. Not something you're usually prone to. The ORB poll (only one week old) showed a very different story.
So far, the Brexit process has been all about tolerating the costs without being in a position to yield any benefits. It will not be so, in full, for over another 3 years.
The slightest excuse which Remainers clutch to in order to try and obstruct, frustrate and reverse Brexit explains why Leavers fundamentally distrust them.
They are rather desperate because they know it's their last chance because, once Brexit is complete, and the new powers become popular, they will have nothing left to cling to.
BMG's final poll in the campaign had Remain 6.6% ahead.
As usual, the trend is of more interest. In the last year, there has been a big swing away from Leave with BMG.
There has not been a big swing, however you might wish for one.
Mr. P, distrust in the political class over the EU is nothing new. Multiple votes have been lost only to be either ignored or re-run, and in this country every major party promised a referendum on Lisbon and Brown reneged upon it.
The level of bitterness and polarisation is new, and it's alarming (and not one way). I suspect we'll just have to get through it and, if the deal is sustainable, things will gradually cool off.
Had dinner with the chair of a big Labour CLP last night. Fascinating stuff. I wish I could share the insights. Labour is in deep trouble if what I was told is representative.
Is this related to what Jonathan was describing in Sussex about an internal neo-marxist takeover? Or, at least, new members openly enthusing about marxism?
Yep - but in a seat that actually matters. Very wealthy Marxists intent on a power grab and gaining significant ground via Momentum. If this one goes it’s game over. I can’t say anymore, I’m afraid.
I do think often that comrades need to reminded that the enemy are the Tory party, and not fellow travellers. What does entertain me though about some of the shall we say newer more zealous members is the although they claim to be working g towards a Corbyn hegemony, their views are usually pretty diametrically opposed to His.
And that is why I take the "marxist" takeover talk with a pinch of salt. We are a 117 year old democratic socialist party. Even when there has been an actual international communist movement looking to subvert western democracies and parties like ours we remained firmly wedded to the democratic model and I can't see that changing.
Perhaps there are too many long established and overly comfortable members of CLP execs feeling threatened by others challenging their authority...
I was more peed off by the fact that the Corbynites who were initially elected into the top posts in our CLP had nothing to qualify them for the role other than saying 'I support Jezza'. Unsurprisingly they were then crap at the job, left their posts and had to be replaced. I am much happier now that while our CLP officers are from the left of the party they are good at the jobs that they have been elected to do and I would happily support their reelection.
Cook's loss of form is unfortunate although somewhat predictable. Apart from his annus mirabalis he has a poor record in Australia. Nevertheless he had to be picked and persisted with because of his great record overall. It may be time for him to go now.
Vince was a speculative choice in the first place - and that's putting it kindly. He would have gone already if they had a decent back-up but it's Ballance whose record is as bad as Vince's.
England do have a decent spinner. His name is Rashid. Apparently he bowls too many four balls, which made him an inferior choice to Crane, who doesn't bowl at all.
Yes, I too would have selected Rashid, whose development as a test player has been seriously hindered by the lack of trust shown in him. (Incidentally the economy obsession is one of the things which prevents our developing quick bowlers, too.)
Vince, I'm not sure. He can play brilliantly - and looked as though he might just have found his test feet in the extraordinarily difficult circumstances of the second innings, until he got that unplayable ball which would have done for Bradman.
Which is exactly why the serious work going on behind the scenes is being kept very close to the chests of those involved - even if the occasional embarrassing headline results, such as Davis’ select committee appearance a couple of weeks ago.
I'm surprised Remainers haven't got even more excited over that poll than usual, they usually do - it's driven by non-voters in the 2016 EU referendum. Those that did are still unchanged in their view:
"“However, readers should note that digging deeper into the data reveals that this shift has come predominantly from those who did not actually vote in the 2016 referendum, with around nine in ten Leave and Remain voters still unchanged in their view.
“Our polling suggests that about a year ago, those who did not vote in the referendum were broadly split, but today’s poll shows that they are now overwhelmingly in favour of remaining in the EU, by a margin of more than four to one.”
Normally new policies when adopted get a boost in popularity. The opposite has happened to Brexit, it seems.
Leavers seem wholly uninterested in the implications of following through on a course of action if that has lost popular support.
I think you'r.
BMG's final poll in the campaign had Remain 6.6% ahead.
As usual, the trend is of more interest. In the last year, there has been a big swing away from Leave with BMG.
Exactly. And in any case, although you can't rule anything out, a rerun of 2016 is not particularly likely. A party winning a general election on a cancel Brexit/rejoin EU manifesto is all it needs. And poring over the details of a particular poll isn't as important as where public opinion is actually heading.
The only major party officially committed to a referendum on the Brexit deal/rejoining the EU is the LDs, who got 7% at the general election and are still on 7% with today's ICM poll.
I also dont think Tory rebels would be prepared to help put Corbyn in Downing Street (assuming he wins a general election). The difference with the past is that there were less extreme Labour leaders.
I'm surprised Remainers haven't got even more excited over that poll than usual, they usually do - it's driven by non-voters in the 2016 EU referendum. Those that did are still unchanged in their view:
"“However, readers should note that digging deeper into the data reveals that this shift has come predominantly from those who did not actually vote in the 2016 referendum, with around nine in ten Leave and Remain voters still unchanged in their view.
“Our polling suggests that about a year ago, those who did not vote in the referendum were broadly split, but today’s poll shows that they are now overwhelmingly in favour of remaining in the EU, by a margin of more than four to one.”
Normally new policies when adopted get a boost in popularity. The opposite has happened to Brexit, it seems.
Leavers seem wholly uninterested in the implications of following through on a course of action if that has lost popular support.
I think you'r.
BMG's final poll in the campaign had Remain 6.6% ahead.
As usual, the trend is of more interest. In the last year, there has been a big swing away from Leave with BMG.
Exactly. And in any case, although you can't rule anything out, a rerun of 2016 is not particularly likely. A party winning a general election on a cancel Brexit/rejoin EU manifesto is all it needs. And poring over the details of a particular poll isn't as important as where public opinion is actually heading.
The only major party officially committed to a referendum on the Brexit deal/rejoining the EU is the LDs, who got 7% at the general election and are still on 7% with today's ICM poll.
I know.
The only way we will reverse Brexit or even stay permanently in the single market is either for the LDs to see a huge jump in support or for Labour to replace Corbyn with someone like Chuka Umunna who was a more passionate Remainer and is committed to the single market as Corbyn is not
Had dinner with the chair of a big Labour CLP last night. Fascinating stuff. I wish I could share the insights. Labour is in deep trouble if what I was told is representative.
Is this related to what Jonathan was describing in Sussex about an internal neo-marxist takeover? Or, at least, new members openly enthusing about marxism?
Yep - but in a seat that actually matters. Very wealthy Marxists intent on a power grab and gaining significant ground via Momentum. If this one goes it’s game over. I can’t say anymore, I’m afraid.
I do think often that comrades need to reminded that the enemy are the Tory party, and not fellow travellers. What does entertain me though about some of the shall we say newer more zealous members is the although they claim to be working g towards a Corbyn hegemony, their views are usually pretty diametrically opposed to His.
And that is why I take the "marxist" takeover talk with a pinch of salt. We are a 117 year old democratic socialist party. Even when there has been an actual international communist movement looking to subvert western democracies and parties like ours we remained firmly wedded to the democratic model and I can't see that changing.
Perhaps there are too many long established and overly comfortable members of CLP execs feeling threatened by others challenging their authority...
Well, my friend has been in the local party for around 10 years and chair for one. The influx of new, active members has been very recent, with many newcomers previously members of the SWP, Communist party and other similar outfits. What my friend says is that they are using Momentum, but are not representative of its much younger membership. But because they focus on rules and process and are willing to attend meetings, their influence is much greater than their numbers. The silver lining is that they cannot survive a Corbyn departure. Of course, that’s the reason why we can expect him to go on and on.
If they are SWP/CPGB etc then they should have failed their provisional membership and been screened out. Failure by your membership officer. Though if their behaviour is disruptive and aims contrary to the rule booklet them suspended and removed.
@SandyRentool I've seen that as well. Though to be fair we 've had other officers from elsewhere in the party who have similarly been crap. My view is that we're a broad church, if you're here to advance the cause I don't care who you support. And support for the leader is hardly a hanging offence.
Which is exactly why the serious work going on behind the scenes is being kept very close to the chests of those involved - even if the occasional embarrassing headline results, such as Davis’ select committee appearance a couple of weeks ago.
The TM departure is an interesting one. I don’t see a coup happening in 2018: for better or worse I think she’s the Brexit PM and until a deal is struck she is in place, unless she wants to go (and there’s no sign of that yet). Similarly a lot of us have assumed that once March 2019 rolls around and Brexit is done, that will be the natural time to leave the stage. Again, I’m starting to doubt that. If TM wants to go immediately post-Brexit, that will be her choice not her party’s. I am doubtful that the Tories will want to mount a coup as soon as the ink has dried on the Brexit deal - doesn’t give off much of a good vibe about Brexit of the first action of the party is to try and axe the PM that delivered it.
What I think is more likely is a whispering campaign that starts around Brexit (ie “it’s time for her to go soon”) that builds in intensity until summer 2019 when the option is presented as the party conference being a last hurrah and a new PM in place for Christmas. This would give TM three years or so in power which isn’t an embarrassingly short tenure and historically about par for PMs taking over from a party colleague mid-term. Then gives a new leader about 2.5 years to bed in, if the parliament runs to 2022, which is again an acceptable period in office if the Tories should lose 2022.
Lots of what ifs, I appreciate, but I am starting to feel TMay is a little more secure now then she was in autumn.
Which is exactly why the serious work going on behind the scenes is being kept very close to the chests of those involved - even if the occasional embarrassing headline results, such as Davis’ select committee appearance a couple of weeks ago.
Welcome back Tapestry
So remind me, how much taxpayers’ money did Eck Salmond spend to hide the fact that he had no legal advice?
It is you being selective with your evidence. Find me a recent poll where, when asked directly, the public thought the Brexit vote went the right way.
I am not trying to obstruct Brexit. While I consider it wrong, stupid, inspired by xenophobia and led by malevolent clowns, it has a democratic mandate that must be honoured. It's a disaster for the country but one that must be pursued until the public has decided otherwise.
However, if the public decide that Brexit is a bad idea and it is pursued to the bitter end, that does not bode well for the next few years, either for those advocating it or for the country as a whole. Leavers seem wholly uninterested in that. Strange.
Yet the disaster for the country which you so assuredly proclaim hasn't included that recession you so confidently predicted.
The one with the dark cloak, skeletal finger and a voice which speaks in block capitals.
While all the claims about attacks on foreigners and crops rotting unpicked in the fields have been filed under fake news.
In fact if someone looked at the UK without knowledge of the political turmoil of the past 18 months would see very little change beyond the beginnings of a long overdue and very necessary economic rebalancing.
1) during the referendum campaign I made no predictions of my own of economic fallout, because I'm not qualified to do so. In the immediate aftermath I reported received wisdom. I'm glad my words were so memorable for you.
I have been consistent since I came off the fence that my reason for opposing Leave was the xenophobia that it was whipping up and the damage that would cause the country. Leavers are, I realise, entirely comfortable with that, seeing it as collateral damage (or in some cases, the whole point). However, I regard it as a disaster that is set to lead to other disasters, some of which Leavers will hate.
Cook's loss of form is unfortunate although somewhat predictable. Apart from his annus mirabalis he has a poor record in Australia. Nevertheless he had to be picked and persisted with because of his great record overall. It may be time for him to go now.
Vince was a speculative choice in the first place - and that's putting it kindly. He would have gone already if they had a decent back-up but it's Ballance whose record is as bad as Vince's.
I don't rate Ballance but his record is markedly superior to that of Vince:
Mr. Recidivist, alas, no. 'Phobe/phobia' is now used commonly in the same vein as 'denier', which is to say pejorative. The fictional nonsense of 'Islamophobia' is a prime example of such. Given the widespread use of 'xenophobia' to describe those who oppose the political institution of the EU, 'phobe' is not a neutral descriptor.
Yes it is.
Phobia means irrational fear, I had a very real fear that the EU would subsume the UK into a superstate. A fear once again confirmed by Martin Schulz just a few days ago. However you want to dress it up a federal EU is the final destination, people within the EU on disagree on the journey. I've heard from many that they don't disagree with Schulz, but that 2025 is too aggressive and risks breaking up the EU. They want nothing more than to plant their shite flag all over currently sovereign nations and do in in the least objectionable manner. It is not a phobia, but a real fear, given the stated aim of the EU and their ultimate aim of "ever closer union".
I'm sure you will have a glib one line/word answer but you're absolutely wrong to equate xenophobia with a very rational fear of the EU's ultimate direction.
Cook's loss of form is unfortunate although somewhat predictable. Apart from his annus mirabalis he has a poor record in Australia. Nevertheless he had to be picked and persisted with because of his great record overall. It may be time for him to go now.
Vince was a speculative choice in the first place - and that's putting it kindly. He would have gone already if they had a decent back-up but it's Ballance whose record is as bad as Vince's.
I don't rate Ballance but his record is markedly superior to that of Vince:
An average of 15 high er Test level and 10 higher in first class matches.
The real tragedy of this series is we're going to force some genuine talent in to retirement, and start of 2 year process of the selectors having to learn Vince and Malan are nowhere near good enough
Cook's loss of form is unfortunate although somewhat predictable. Apart from his annus mirabalis he has a poor record in Australia. Nevertheless he had to be picked and persisted with because of his great record overall. It may be time for him to go now.
Vince was a speculative choice in the first place - and that's putting it kindly. He would have gone already if they had a decent back-up but it's Ballance whose record is as bad as Vince's.
England do have a decent spinner. His name is Rashid. Apparently he bowls too many four balls, which made him an inferior choice to Crane, who doesn't bowl at all.
Yes, I too would have selected Rashid, whose development as a test player has been seriously hindered by the lack of trust shown in him. (Incidentally the economy obsession is one of the things which prevents our developing quick bowlers, too.)
Vince, I'm not sure. He can play brilliantly - and looked as though he might just have found his test feet in the extraordinarily difficult circumstances of the second innings, until he got that unplayable ball which would have done for Bradman.
I'm not anti-Vince, Nigel. I am pro form. But above all I favour a coherent process in which individuals are held acountable for their results, and obliged to explain themselves from time to time.
Which is exactly why the serious work going on behind the scenes is being kept very close to the chests of those involved - even if the occasional embarrassing headline results, such as Davis’ select committee appearance a couple of weeks ago.
Welcome back Tapestry
So remind me, how much taxpayers’ money did Eck Salmond spend to hide the fact that he had no legal advice?
Zero. The whole point was that Government do not give out legal advice guidance to any toerag that asks for it. Lying Tories do not change the fact.
Mr. Recidivist, alas, no. 'Phobe/phobia' is now used commonly in the same vein as 'denier', which is to say pejorative. The fictional nonsense of 'Islamophobia' is a prime example of such. Given the widespread use of 'xenophobia' to describe those who oppose the political institution of the EU, 'phobe' is not a neutral descriptor.
Yes it is.
Phobia means irrational fear, I had a very real fear that the EU would subsume the UK into a superstate. A fear once again confirmed by Martin Schulz just a few days ago. However you want to dress it up a federal EU is the final destination, people within the EU on disagree on the journey. I've heard from many that they don't disagree with Schulz, but that 2025 is too aggressive and risks breaking up the EU. They want nothing more than to plant their shite flag all over currently sovereign nations and do in in the least objectionable manner. It is not a phobia, but a real fear, given the stated aim of the EU and their ultimate aim of "ever closer union".
I'm sure you will have a global one line/word answer but you're absolutely wrong to equate xenophobia with a very rational fear of the EU's ultimate direction.
Mr. P, distrust in the political class over the EU is nothing new. Multiple votes have been lost only to be either ignored or re-run, and in this country every major party promised a referendum on Lisbon and Brown reneged upon it.
The level of bitterness and polarisation is new, and it's alarming (and not one way). I suspect we'll just have to get through it and, if the deal is sustainable, things will gradually cool off.
The country was a good deal more polarised during the 70's and 80's than it is today.
Cook's loss of form is unfortunate although somewhat predictable. Apart from his annus mirabalis he has a poor record in Australia. Nevertheless he had to be picked and persisted with because of his great record overall. It may be time for him to go now.
Vince was a speculative choice in the first place - and that's putting it kindly. He would have gone already if they had a decent back-up but it's Ballance whose record is as bad as Vince's.
I don't rate Ballance but his record is markedly superior to that of Vince:
An average of 15 high er Test level and 10 higher in first class matches.
Yes, but stats don't tell the whole story, and players do improve. Ballance seems to have been found out technically at test level, and while I never write players off,appears to have gone backwards after his promising start.
I wasn't a believer in Vince, but his batting in the second innings was remarkable, and he had shown the odd sign (his 83 earlier in the tour) of developing a sense of purpose. He certainly has the technique and skills - though whether he's a natural number three is questionable.
Cook's loss of form is unfortunate although somewhat predictable. Apart from his annus mirabalis he has a poor record in Australia. Nevertheless he had to be picked and persisted with because of his great record overall. It may be time for him to go now.
Vince was a speculative choice in the first place - and that's putting it kindly. He would have gone already if they had a decent back-up but it's Ballance whose record is as bad as Vince's.
England do have a decent spinner. His name is Rashid. Apparently he bowls too many four balls, which made him an inferior choice to Crane, who doesn't bowl at all.
Yes, I too would have selected Rashid, whose development as a test player has been seriously hindered by the lack of trust shown in him. (Incidentally the economy obsession is one of the things which prevents our developing quick bowlers, too.)
Vince, I'm not sure. He can play brilliantly - and looked as though he might just have found his test feet in the extraordinarily difficult circumstances of the second innings, until he got that unplayable ball which would have done for Bradman.
I'm not anti-Vince, Nigel. I am pro form. But above all I favour a coherent process in which individuals are held acountable for their results, and obliged to explain themselves from time to time.
Cook's loss of form is unfortunate although somewhat predictable. Apart from his annus mirabalis he has a poor record in Australia. Nevertheless he had to be picked and persisted with because of his great record overall. It may be time for him to go now.
Vince was a speculative choice in the first place - and that's putting it kindly. He would have gone already if they had a decent back-up but it's Ballance whose record is as bad as Vince's.
I don't rate Ballance but his record is markedly superior to that of Vince:
An average of 15 high er Test level and 10 higher in first class matches.
Yes, but stats don't tell the whole story, and players do improve. Ballance seems to have been found out technically at test level, and while I never write players off,appears to have gone backwards after his promising start.
I wasn't a believer in Vince, but his batting in the second innings was remarkable, and he had shown the odd sign (his 83 earlier in the tour) of developing a sense of purpose. He certainly has the technique and skills - though whether he's a natural number three is questionable.
He doesn't have the technique or the skill - he's built his first class record in division 2 and been found out at division 1 level, let alone Tests.
Given a large enough sample size, his test average will trend towards low 30s
Cook's loss of form is unfortunate although somewhat predictable. Apart from his annus mirabalis he has a poor record in Australia. Nevertheless he had to be picked and persisted with because of his great record overall. It may be time for him to go now.
Vince was a speculative choice in the first place - and that's putting it kindly. He would have gone already if they had a decent back-up but it's Ballance whose record is as bad as Vince's.
I don't rate Ballance but his record is markedly superior to that of Vince:
An average of 15 high er Test level and 10 higher in first class matches.
The real tragedy of this series is we're going to force some genuine talent in to retirement, and start of 2 year process of the selectors having to learn Vince and Malan are nowhere near good enough
In earlier posts I have pointed out that Dawid Malan would struggle to be picked in the successful Essex batting line-up of Cook, Browne, Westley, Lawrence and Bopara, all of whom are of course eligible for England. This has to be corrected now following his maiden Test century. He would get in just ahead of Westley, but not the other four (although Cook is starting to look a bit wobbly.)
It is scandalous that Browne and Lawrence remain uncapped. Bopara has, allegedly, been found wanting too often in the past. But what about Vince and Ballance?
That's my real grouse with the selectors - no logic, no consistency.
Mr. Recidivist, alas, no. 'Phobe/phobia' is now used commonly in the same vein as 'denier', which is to say pejorative. The fictional nonsense of 'Islamophobia' is a prime example of such. Given the widespread use of 'xenophobia' to describe those who oppose the political institution of the EU, 'phobe' is not a neutral descriptor.
Yes it is.
Phobia means irrational fear, I had a very real fear that the EU would subsume the UK into a superstate. A fear once again confirmed by Martin Schulz just a few days ago. However you want to dress it up a federal EU is the final destination, people within the EU on disagree on the journey. I've heard from many that they don't disagree with Schulz, but that 2025 is too aggressive and risks breaking up the EU. They want nothing more than to plant their shite flag all over currently sovereign nations and do in in the least objectionable manner. It is not a phobia, but a real fear, given the stated aim of the EU and their ultimate aim of "ever closer union".
I'm sure you will have a glib one line/word answer but you're absolutely wrong to equate xenophobia with a very rational fear of the EU's ultimate direction.
So what word would you choose to describe someone who dislikes the EU? Hater sounds a lot uglier in my ears.
On topic, Jacob Cream Crackers has a point. Brexit may well be the first time in history that a nation enters into an entirely voluntary satrapy as the subject. A unique example of Gorean statecraft.
Mr. Meeks, aren't those stats related to reported crime, whereas the number of court cases and successful prosecutions have stayed pretty much as is?
Indeed. The key note from the report cited by the BBC:
For recording purposes, the perception of the victim, or any other person, is the defining factor in determining whether an incident is a hate incident, or in recognising the hostility element of a hate crime. The victim does not have to justify or provide evidence of their belief, and police officers or staff should not directly challenge this perception. Evidence of the hostility is not required for an incident or crime to be recorded as a hate crime or hate incident. (http://www.report-it.org.uk/files/hate_crime_operational_guidance.pdf)
I did email Full Fact about the conflation of hate incidents and hate crimes, but funnily enough, I never got a response.
The TM departure is an interesting one. I don’t see a coup happening in 2018: for better or worse I think she’s the Brexit PM and until a deal is struck she is in place, unless she wants to go (and there’s no sign of that yet). Similarly a lot of us have assumed that once March 2019 rolls around and Brexit is done, that will be the natural time to leave the stage. Again, I’m starting to doubt that. If TM wants to go immediately post-Brexit, that will be her choice not her party’s. I am doubtful that the Tories will want to mount a coup as soon as the ink has dried on the Brexit deal - doesn’t give off much of a good vibe about Brexit of the first action of the party is to try and axe the PM that delivered it.
The other thing about this is that if Theresa May gets to stay until Brexit is sorted, and she wants to stay, doesn't that give her a reason to take a really long time sorting Brexit? Once you've got a transitional agreement that's basically the same as the status quo except the UK doesn't get to vote on things any more, the EU won't mind kicking the can down the road, so who's going to be trying to make things happen in a hurry?
Cook's loss of form is unfortunate although somewhat predictable. Apart from his annus mirabalis he has a poor record in Australia. Nevertheless he had to be picked and persisted with because of his great record overall. It may be time for him to go now.
Vince was a speculative choice in the first place - and that's putting it kindly. He would have gone already if they had a decent back-up but it's Ballance whose record is as bad as Vince's.
I don't rate Ballance but his record is markedly superior to that of Vince:
An average of 15 high er Test level and 10 higher in first class matches.
The real tragedy of this series is we're going to force some genuine talent in to retirement, and start of 2 year process of the selectors having to learn Vince and Malan are nowhere near good enough
In earlier posts I have pointed out that Dawid Malan would struggle to be picked in the successful Essex batting line-up of Cook, Browne, Westley, Lawrence and Bopara, all of whom are of course eligible for England. This has to be corrected now following his maiden Test century. He would get in just ahead of Westley, but not the other four (although Cook is starting to look a bit wobbly.)
It is scandalous that Browne and Lawrence remain uncapped. Bopara has, allegedly, been found wanting too often in the past. But what about Vince and Ballance?
That's my real grouse with the selectors - no logic, no consistency.
Malan wouldn't get in most div 1 teams - he's borderline at Middlesex, and it'd be gutted if Lancashire signed him.
Lawrence had a poor run of form at the wrong time, but is the obvious next 10 year stay in England's middle-order as long as they don't get stuck on Malan for too long.
Stoneman down to 3, Hameed back in if he can stop breaking his hands and then hope Cook ignores the fools who want a retirement.
I gave up on this series as soon as I saw the squad, but it's hard too care too much - winning home series is pretty easy nowadays, so only an away win has real merit - it's been a long time since the Aussies have won over here, and their current team isn't good enough to do it regardless of the result on their home tracks.
Mr. Recidivist, alas, no. 'Phobe/phobia' is now used commonly in the same vein as 'denier', which is to say pejorative. The fictional nonsense of 'Islamophobia' is a prime example of such. Given the widespread use of 'xenophobia' to describe those who oppose the political institution of the EU, 'phobe' is not a neutral descriptor.
Yes it is.
Phobia means irrational fear, I had a very real fear that the EU would subsume the UK into a superstate. A fear once again confirmed by Martin Schulz just a few days ago. However you want to dress it up a federal EU is the final destination, people within the EU on disagree on the journey. I've heard from many that they don't disagree with Schulz, but that 2025 is too aggressive and risks breaking up the EU. They want nothing more than to plant their shite flag all over currently sovereign nations and do in in the least objectionable manner. It is not a phobia, but a real fear, given the stated aim of the EU and their ultimate aim of "ever closer union".
I'm sure you will have a glib one line/word answer but you're absolutely wrong to equate xenophobia with a very rational fear of the EU's ultimate direction.
So what word would you choose to describe someone who dislikes the EU? Hater sounds a lot uglier in my ears.
Sceptic - "a person inclined to question or doubt accepted opinions."
Mr. Recidivist, alas, no. 'Phobe/phobia' is now used commonly in the same vein as 'denier', which is to say pejorative. The fictional nonsense of 'Islamophobia' is a prime example of such. Given the widespread use of 'xenophobia' to describe those who oppose the political institution of the EU, 'phobe' is not a neutral descriptor.
Yes it is.
Phobia means irrational fear, I had a very real fear that the EU would subsume the UK into a superstate. A fear once again confirmed by Martin Schulz just a few days ago. However you want to dress it up a federal EU is the final destination, people within the EU on disagree on the journey. I've heard from many that they don't disagree with Schulz, but that 2025 is too aggressive and risks breaking up the EU. They want nothing more than to plant their shite flag all over currently sovereign nations and do in in the least objectionable manner. It is not a phobia, but a real fear, given the stated aim of the EU and their ultimate aim of "ever closer union".
I'm sure you will have a glib one line/word answer but you're absolutely wrong to equate xenophobia with a very rational fear of the EU's ultimate direction.
So what word would you choose to describe someone who dislikes the EU? Hater sounds a lot uglier in my ears.
Sceptic - "a person inclined to question or doubt accepted opinions."
But Brexit is the accepted opinion now. We had a referendum.
it's been a long time since the Aussies have won over here, and their current team isn't good enough to do it regardless of the result on their home tracks.
I posted it last night, but most of the people who don't like to be called phobes but don't have a better word for themselves are still in denial. So post away.
Yet the disaster for the country which you so assuredly proclaim hasn't included that recession you so confidently predicted.
The one with the dark cloak, skeletal finger and a voice which speaks in block capitals.
While all the claims about attacks on foreigners and crops rotting unpicked in the fields have been filed under fake news.
In fact if someone looked at the UK without knowledge of the political turmoil of the past 18 months would see very little change beyond the beginnings of a long overdue and very necessary economic rebalancing.
1) during the referendum campaign I made no predictions of my own of economic fallout, because I'm not qualified to do so. In the immediate aftermath I reported received wisdom. I'm glad my words were so memorable for you.
I have been consistent since I came off the fence that my reason for opposing Leave was the xenophobia that it was whipping up and the damage that would cause the country. Leavers are, I realise, entirely comfortable with that, seeing it as collateral damage (or in some cases, the whole point). However, I regard it as a disaster that is set to lead to other disasters, some of which Leavers will hate.
Perhaps you could provide some links to actual court cases and convictions.
As the murder rate in England is over ten per million you should have no trouble finding the murder of more than twenty Eastern Europeans.
Or are these reports of hate crimes any more substantive than this:
So no shortage of agricultural workers but nor is there a shortage of farmers who don't want to pay a fair wage. Or useful idiots who repeat these claims.
Your recession prediction was indeed memorable but that's the problem fine writing can bring. If you had been right you would have earned accoclades. But you weren't right, you were wrong.
You've spent 18 months predicting the UK would fall apart and it hasn't and you seem to be bitter rather than relieved about it.
The British people and indeed all the earlier immigrants and the immgrants who have arrived since June 2016 have proved you wrong.
I posted it last night, but most of the people who don't like to be called phobes but don't have a better word for themselves are still in denial. So post away.
Brexiteers are clinging to the line that last year's vote must stand inviolate for all time.
it's been a long time since the Aussies have won over here, and their current team isn't good enough to do it regardless of the result on their home tracks.
That's quite a bold comment.
The last team to white-wash us over there couldn't win here the next time round, and this Aussie team is clearly weaker than that. In English conditions our bowling line up is better than theirs - in Australia they're light years ahead on that front this time round.
I'm working on the assumption our selectors go back to trying to pick our best players rather than people they've seen in T20 games who have poor first class records.
I posted it last night, but most of the people who don't like to be called phobes but don't have a better word for themselves are still in denial. So post away.
Brexiteers are clinging to the line that last year's vote must stand inviolate for all time.
Like every other vote. Oh, wait...
No. I want the result of the vote implemented. You can then start campaigning to take us back in if that's what you think is best and we can go through the whole song and dance again if you win a majority at a GE.
On topic, aside from the specific argument in the lead, the nature of his comments are further evidence of his unsuitability of character and temperament for high office. Which is doubtless why he himself has said he is not seeking it.
Off topic, Brexit is and is likely to continue falling out favour. Which won't make it or the government's position any easier in 2018.
Mr. Recidivist, alas, no. 'Phobe/phobia' is now used commonly in the same vein as 'denier', which is to say pejorative. The fictional nonsense of 'Islamophobia' is a prime example of such. Given the widespread use of 'xenophobia' to describe those who oppose the political institution of the EU, 'phobe' is not a neutral descriptor.
Yes it is.
Phobia means irrational fear, I had a very real fear that the EU would subsume the UK into a superstate. A fear once again confirmed by Martin Schulz just a few days ago. However you want to dress it up a federal EU is the final destination, people within the EU on disagree on the journey. I've heard from many that they don't disagree with Schulz, but that 2025 is too aggressive and risks breaking up the EU. They want nothing more than to plant their shite flag all over currently sovereign nations and do in in the least objectionable manner. It is not a phobia, but a real fear, given the stated aim of the EU and their ultimate aim of "ever closer union".
I'm sure you will have a glib one line/word answer but you're absolutely wrong to equate xenophobia with a very rational fear of the EU's ultimate direction.
So what word would you choose to describe someone who dislikes the EU? Hater sounds a lot uglier in my ears.
Eurosceptic or EUsceptic has worked fine for decades. It's only since the leave vote that your lot tried to ramp up the rhetoric.
I posted it last night, but most of the people who don't like to be called phobes but don't have a better word for themselves are still in denial. So post away.
Brexiteers are clinging to the line that last year's vote must stand inviolate for all time.
Like every other vote. Oh, wait...
No. I want the result of the vote implemented. You can then start campaigning to take us back in if that's what you think is best and we can go through the whole song and dance again if you win a majority at a GE.
So during a standstill transition it would be legitimate, but not now?
I posted it last night, but most of the people who don't like to be called phobes but don't have a better word for themselves are still in denial. So post away.
Brexiteers are clinging to the line that last year's vote must stand inviolate for all time.
Like every other vote. Oh, wait...
And who says that ?
Once the UK has left the EU anyone is free to campaign to rejoin.
Or are you saying that the vote to Leave should not be put into application.
Mr. Recidivist, alas, no. 'Phobe/phobia' is now used commonly in the same vein as 'denier', which is to say pejorative. The fictional nonsense of 'Islamophobia' is a prime example of such. Given the widespread use of 'xenophobia' to describe those who oppose the political institution of the EU, 'phobe' is not a neutral descriptor.
Yes it is.
Phobia means irrational fear, I had a very real fear that the EU would subsume the UK into a superstate. A fear once again confirmed by Martin Schulz just a few days ago. However you want to dress it up a federal EU is the final destination, people within the EU on disagree on the journey. I've heard from many that they don't disagree with Schulz, but that 2025 is too aggressive and risks breaking up the EU. They want nothing more than to plant their shite flag all over currently sovereign nations and do in in the least objectionable manner. It is not a phobia, but a real fear, given the stated aim of the EU and their ultimate aim of "ever closer union".
I'm sure you will have a glib one line/word answer but you're absolutely wrong to equate xenophobia with a very rational fear of the EU's ultimate direction.
So what word would you choose to describe someone who dislikes the EU? Hater sounds a lot uglier in my ears.
Eurosceptic or EUsceptic has worked fine for decades. It's only since the leave vote that your lot tried to ramp up the rhetoric.
Do you still believe that anyone against Brexit is a traitor ?
I posted it last night, but most of the people who don't like to be called phobes but don't have a better word for themselves are still in denial. So post away.
Brexiteers are clinging to the line that last year's vote must stand inviolate for all time.
Like every other vote. Oh, wait...
No. I want the result of the vote implemented. You can then start campaigning to take us back in if that's what you think is best and we can go through the whole song and dance again if you win a majority at a GE.
So during a standstill transition it would be legitimate, but not now?
Cook's loss of form is unfortunate although somewhat predictable. Apart from his annus mirabalis he has a poor record in Australia. Nevertheless he had to be picked and persisted with because of his great record overall. It may be time for him to go now.
Vince was a speculative choice in the first place - and that's putting it kindly. He would have gone already if they had a decent back-up but it's Ballance whose record is as bad as Vince's.
I don't rate Ballance but his record is markedly superior to that of Vince:
An average of 15 high er Test level and 10 higher in first class matches.
The real tragedy of this series is we're going to force some genuine talent in to retirement, and start of 2 year process of the selectors having to learn Vince and Malan are nowhere near good enough
In earlier posts I have pointed out that Dawid Malan would struggle to be picked in the successful Essex batting line-up of Cook, Browne, Westley, Lawrence and Bopara, all of whom are of course eligible for England. This has to be corrected now following his maiden Test century. He would get in just ahead of Westley, but not the other four (although Cook is starting to look a bit wobbly.)
It is scandalous that Browne and Lawrence remain uncapped. Bopara has, allegedly, been found wanting too often in the past. But what about Vince and Ballance?
That's my real grouse with the selectors - no logic, no consistency.
The TM departure is an interesting one. I don’t see a coup happening in 2018: for better or worse I think she’s the Brexit PM and until a deal is struck she is in place, unless she wants to go (and there’s no sign of that yet). Similarly a lot of us have assumed that once March 2019 rolls around and Brexit is done, that will be the natural time to leave the stage. Again, I’m starting to doubt that. If TM wants to go immediately post-Brexit, that will be her choice not her party’s. I am doubtful that the Tories will want to mount a coup as soon as the ink has dried on the Brexit deal - doesn’t give off much of a good vibe about Brexit of the first action of the party is to try and axe the PM that delivered it.
The other thing about this is that if Theresa May gets to stay until Brexit is sorted, and she wants to stay, doesn't that give her a reason to take a really long time sorting Brexit? Once you've got a transitional agreement that's basically the same as the status quo except the UK doesn't get to vote on things any more, the EU won't mind kicking the can down the road, so who's going to be trying to make things happen in a hurry?
An interesting point. Although I suspect the point at which the next GE campaign starts to loom is a hard backstop on her term of office, as the party won't want her in charge for another election and indeed she probably doesn't want to fight one. Since Brexit is likely to take some time to complete and because the next election is unlikely to be much before 2022, she could well stay through to 2021. Although I agree with the OP that the point at which we move into the transition period in 2019 represents the most likely earlier point at which she might have to step down, the counter-argument being that it remains unclear who might possibly emerge as a credible and popular lead challenger during the next eighteen months.
Mr. Recidivist, alas, no. 'Phobe/phobia' is now used commonly in the same vein as 'denier', which is to say pejorative. The fictional nonsense of 'Islamophobia' is a prime example of such. Given the widespread use of 'xenophobia' to describe those who oppose the political institution of the EU, 'phobe' is not a neutral descriptor.
Yes it is.
Phobia means irrational fear, I had a very real fear that the EU would subsume the UK into a superstate. A fear once again confirmed by Martin Schulz just a few days ago. However you want to dress it up a federal EU is the final destination, people within the EU on disagree on the journey. I've heard from many that they don't disagree with Schulz, but that 2025 is too aggressive and risks breaking up the EU. They want nothing more than to plant their shite flag all over currently sovereign nations and do in in the least objectionable manner. It is not a phobia, but a real fear, given the stated aim of the EU and their ultimate aim of "ever closer union".
I'm sure you will have a glib one line/word answer but you're absolutely wrong to equate xenophobia with a very rational fear of the EU's ultimate direction.
So what word would you choose to describe someone who dislikes the EU? Hater sounds a lot uglier in my ears.
Eurosceptic or EUsceptic has worked fine for decades. It's only since the leave vote that your lot tried to ramp up the rhetoric.
I don't have a lot. I'm just a guy. The sceptic label implies being openminded. It was picked up on by europhobes to make themselves sound more mainstream.
Comments
But unless someone has quietly changed the polling methodology, it's a shift from previous polls.
The polls tell me that - what little is left of - the non-aligned, non-voting public have noticed the costs of Brexit, but are yet to see the benefits. A plurality still expect it to turn out positively in the long-term, even if some of the same think that perhaps it's been a little more trouble than it's worth, so far, and, if they'd had their term again, might have just voted Remain. Maybe.
Meanwhile, amongst those who did pick a side in 2016, attitudes have hardened.
You know, I'd feel much, much better if Ed Miliband were leader of the Labour Party. My concern now is that my prediction about Labour's run of ever worsening leaders won't end up with Corbyn, and a return to sanity, but we'll end up with another far left lunatic, perhaps even worse, leading the reds.
The data seems merely to show some relief at May reaching an accommodation in the negotiations with the EU, and credit being given to her for it.
A lot of the forgottens and left-behinds voted in the EU referendum who felt ignored about immigration, social change and economic opportunity. They are no longer ignored.
A lot of young people voted in GE2017 because they felt their needs and concerns were ignored by Government. They are no longer ignored.
I'd argue our democracy is working very well.
I am not trying to obstruct Brexit. While I consider it wrong, stupid, inspired by xenophobia and led by malevolent clowns, it has a democratic mandate that must be honoured. It's a disaster for the country but one that must be pursued until the public has decided otherwise.
However, if the public decide that Brexit is a bad idea and it is pursued to the bitter end, that does not bode well for the next few years, either for those advocating it or for the country as a whole. Leavers seem wholly uninterested in that. Strange.
You can support the current Brexit project as a Europhile. Indeed that is what I do. As things stand at the moment it has a democratic mandate. So in that sense I am a Brexiter myself. There are people who dislike the EU who think the Brexit project is flawed, for example Peter Hitchens, and who would be very happy to see a completely different approach to getting out taken.
As it happens I have moved from a phobic to philic position over my life. I don't regard either as pejorative and would happily have accepted either. They are just descriptive.
And that is why I take the "marxist" takeover talk with a pinch of salt. We are a 117 year old democratic socialist party. Even when there has been an actual international communist movement looking to subvert western democracies and parties like ours we remained firmly wedded to the democratic model and I can't see that changing.
Perhaps there are too many long established and overly comfortable members of CLP execs feeling threatened by others challenging their authority...
Most of the major neoliberal players of the past few years, Blair, Mandelson, Osborne, Letwin, Laws etc are no longer at the top level of UK politics or even MPs.
"You'll leak it"
"No we won't"
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15777793._I_ve_seen_secret_Brexit_impact_assessment_papers_and_they_re_an_embarrassment_to_the_UK___says_SNP_MP_Gethins/
Thanks Nigel.
Cook's loss of form is unfortunate although somewhat predictable. Apart from his annus mirabalis he has a poor record in Australia. Nevertheless he had to be picked and persisted with because of his great record overall. It may be time for him to go now.
Vince was a speculative choice in the first place - and that's putting it kindly. He would have gone already if they had a decent back-up but it's Ballance whose record is as bad as Vince's.
England do have a decent spinner. His name is Rashid. Apparently he bowls too many four balls, which made him an inferior choice to Crane, who doesn't bowl at all.
https://whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/do-you-think-leaving-the-european-union-will-ultimately-be-good-or-bad-for-the-uk-in-10-20-years-time/
https://whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/in-highsight-do-you-think-britain-was-right-or-wrong-to-vote-to-leave-the-eu/
The trend over the last year has really been MoE stuff.
The one with the dark cloak, skeletal finger and a voice which speaks in block capitals.
While all the claims about attacks on foreigners and crops rotting unpicked in the fields have been filed under fake news.
In fact if someone looked at the UK without knowledge of the political turmoil of the past 18 months would see very little change beyond the beginnings of a long overdue and very necessary economic rebalancing.
The level of bitterness and polarisation is new, and it's alarming (and not one way). I suspect we'll just have to get through it and, if the deal is sustainable, things will gradually cool off.
https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/942332593407692800
https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/942333545657307137
Vince, I'm not sure. He can play brilliantly - and looked as though he might just have found his test feet in the extraordinarily difficult circumstances of the second innings, until he got that unplayable ball which would have done for Bradman.
I also dont think Tory rebels would be prepared to help put Corbyn in Downing Street (assuming he wins a general election). The difference with the past is that there were less extreme Labour leaders.
1. He may not be able to
2. Even if he does, its not going to matter in the end up
As I posted earlier this week, notable developments are likely before Christmas
@SandyRentool I've seen that as well. Though to be fair we 've had other officers from elsewhere in the party who have similarly been crap. My view is that we're a broad church, if you're here to advance the cause I don't care who you support. And support for the leader is hardly a hanging offence.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-42383436
https://www.emptywheel.net/2017/12/16/trump-transition-team-outraged-to-be-treated-as-transition-team/
That his lawyer is spinning such palpable nonsense is more likely an indication of his being seriously rattled.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/dec/17/boris-johnson-breaks-ranks-with-brexit-vassal-state-warning
What I think is more likely is a whispering campaign that starts around Brexit (ie “it’s time for her to go soon”) that builds in intensity until summer 2019 when the option is presented as the party conference being a last hurrah and a new PM in place for Christmas. This would give TM three years or so in power which isn’t an embarrassingly short tenure and historically about par for PMs taking over from a party colleague mid-term. Then gives a new leader about 2.5 years to bed in, if the parliament runs to 2022, which is again an acceptable period in office if the Tories should lose 2022.
Lots of what ifs, I appreciate, but I am starting to feel TMay is a little more secure now then she was in autumn.
2) fake news? Hate crime is sharply up:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-41648865
and the farmers seem to disagree with you:
https://www.farminguk.com/News/-Food-is-rotting-in-the-fields-and-still-we-see-no-_47804.html
I have been consistent since I came off the fence that my reason for opposing Leave was the xenophobia that it was whipping up and the damage that would cause the country. Leavers are, I realise, entirely comfortable with that, seeing it as collateral damage (or in some cases, the whole point). However, I regard it as a disaster that is set to lead to other disasters, some of which Leavers will hate.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/england/content/player/232438.html
http://www.espncricinfo.com/england/content/player/296597.html
An average of 15 high er Test level and 10 higher in first class matches.
I'm sure you will have a glib one line/word answer but you're absolutely wrong to equate xenophobia with a very rational fear of the EU's ultimate direction.
Ballance seems to have been found out technically at test level, and while I never write players off,appears to have gone backwards after his promising start.
I wasn't a believer in Vince, but his batting in the second innings was remarkable, and he had shown the odd sign (his 83 earlier in the tour) of developing a sense of purpose. He certainly has the technique and skills - though whether he's a natural number three is questionable.
Amazingly the Trump admin thinks emails to and from .gov addresses are private correspondence.
Given a large enough sample size, his test average will trend towards low 30s
It is scandalous that Browne and Lawrence remain uncapped. Bopara has, allegedly, been found wanting too often in the past. But what about Vince and Ballance?
That's my real grouse with the selectors - no logic, no consistency.
For recording purposes, the perception of the victim, or any other person, is the defining factor in determining whether an incident is a hate incident, or in recognising the hostility element of a hate crime. The victim does not have to justify or provide evidence of their belief, and police officers or staff should not directly challenge this perception. Evidence of the hostility is not required for an incident or crime to be recorded as a hate crime or hate incident. (http://www.report-it.org.uk/files/hate_crime_operational_guidance.pdf)
I did email Full Fact about the conflation of hate incidents and hate crimes, but funnily enough, I never got a response.
Lawrence had a poor run of form at the wrong time, but is the obvious next 10 year stay in England's middle-order as long as they don't get stuck on Malan for too long.
Stoneman down to 3, Hameed back in if he can stop breaking his hands and then hope Cook ignores the fools who want a retirement.
I gave up on this series as soon as I saw the squad, but it's hard too care too much - winning home series is pretty easy nowadays, so only an away win has real merit - it's been a long time since the Aussies have won over here, and their current team isn't good enough to do it regardless of the result on their home tracks.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-second-referendum-latest-poll-remain-ten-points-leave-bmg-a8114406.html
As the murder rate in England is over ten per million you should have no trouble finding the murder of more than twenty Eastern Europeans.
Or are these reports of hate crimes any more substantive than this:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1353757/suspected-post-brexit-attack-on-polish-migrants-is-now-being-treated-as-drunken-punch-up/
As to agricultural employment it so happens to be at its highest level for twenty years - see page 6 on the linked spreadsheet:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/datasets/summaryoflabourmarketstatistics
So no shortage of agricultural workers but nor is there a shortage of farmers who don't want to pay a fair wage. Or useful idiots who repeat these claims.
Your recession prediction was indeed memorable but that's the problem fine writing can bring. If you had been right you would have earned accoclades. But you weren't right, you were wrong.
You've spent 18 months predicting the UK would fall apart and it hasn't and you seem to be bitter rather than relieved about it.
The British people and indeed all the earlier immigrants and the immgrants who have arrived since June 2016 have proved you wrong.
Like every other vote. Oh, wait...
I'm working on the assumption our selectors go back to trying to pick our best players rather than people they've seen in T20 games who have poor first class records.
Off topic, Brexit is and is likely to continue falling out favour. Which won't make it or the government's position any easier in 2018.
Once the UK has left the EU anyone is free to campaign to rejoin.
Or are you saying that the vote to Leave should not be put into application.
The one where Tezza asked for a mandate for hard Brexit, and the great British public told here where to stick it
I suspect he might replace Cook next year.