Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A third pollster now reports that TMay’s Tories are in the lea

2»

Comments

  • viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    TGOHF said:

    Mortimer said:

    Hahahahahaha.

    No cherry picking they said.

    Strong and United they said.

    What, we have a 10bn hole in the budget?
    Boris talking about a second channel crossing.

    EU talking about building hard borders.

    Sad.
    Get Boris to genuinely build a crosschannel bridge (or, even better, this one) and I'll agree with you. Given Boris's past history, simply speaking about it is not sufficient.
    Seems Eurotunnel are serious in wanting a second crossing but I would imagine a tunnel would be more practical than a bridge.

    We will need it in the future as all these EU countries decide to open their HQ in the UK to benefit from our new dynamic economy outside the EU
    From memory, a bridge was considered before the final decision was made on a tunnel, but they pose different challenges. For a bridge the problem is building the (many) legs in such (relatively) deep water. The tunnel was conceptually simple and could be done with known technology.

    Incidentally another option was kind of a compromise: a tunnel laid on the seabed. But then you're looking at stability issues.
    The Conwy river crossing is laid on the river bed
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    TGOHF said:

    Foxy said:

    TGOHF said:

    Mortimer said:

    Hahahahahaha.

    No cherry picking they said.

    Strong and United they said.

    What, we have a 10bn hole in the budget?
    There are 28 EU countries. I wonder which one would have a diplomat likely to say something like that?
    If you are an EU country with trade surplus with the Uk you have to be fuming about all this tariff and hard border bluster from Barnier.

    Nobody on the Uk side wants tariffs or hard borders.
    The old German Car maker gambit? Is that still going?
    Shrugs,

    Telegraph :

    “French figures had expressed particular anger at the “lack of consultation” on a draft document published by Mr Barnier on Wednesday which included a so-called punishment clause that would allow Brussels to ground aircraft and block trade if the UK failed to obey EU rules during the transition period.”
    You've inexplicably left off the first part of that sentence which says, "A Whitehall source said that..."
    It must be a given that some EU countries view Barnier's bluster with alarm as they want a fair deal as we do.
    Yet to hear a good reason as to why a country would like to sabotage a balance of payment surplus...

    Hint there aren’t any.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,234

    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    TGOHF said:

    Mortimer said:

    Hahahahahaha.

    No cherry picking they said.

    Strong and United they said.

    What, we have a 10bn hole in the budget?
    Boris talking about a second channel crossing.

    EU talking about building hard borders.

    Sad.
    Get Boris to genuinely build a crosschannel bridge (or, even better, this one) and I'll agree with you. Given Boris's past history, simply speaking about it is not sufficient.
    Seems Eurotunnel are serious in wanting a second crossing but I would imagine a tunnel would be more practical than a bridge.

    We will need it in the future as all these EU countries decide to open their HQ in the UK to benefit from our new dynamic economy outside the EU
    From memory, a bridge was considered before the final decision was made on a tunnel, but they pose different challenges. For a bridge the problem is building the (many) legs in such (relatively) deep water. The tunnel was conceptually simple and could be done with known technology.

    Incidentally another option was kind of a compromise: a tunnel laid on the seabed. But then you're looking at stability issues.
    The Conwy river crossing is laid on the river bed
    I learn something new every day, thank you.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789
    TGOHF said:

    Yet to hear a good reason as to why a country would like to sabotage a balance of payment surplus...

    Hint there aren’t any.

    So they'll be keen to keep us in the single market and customs union then?
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    TGOHF said:

    Yet to hear a good reason as to why a country would like to sabotage a balance of payment surplus...

    Hint there aren’t any.

    So they'll be keen to keep us in the single market and customs union then?
    French wine sellers don’t care whether we are in the student or the miners union - they don’t want a tariff that puts them at a further disadvantage to Australian, Chilean or South African vintners.

    They don’t give a toss about your “project”.

  • viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    TGOHF said:

    Mortimer said:

    Hahahahahaha.

    No cherry picking they said.

    Strong and United they said.

    What, we have a 10bn hole in the budget?
    Boris talking about a second channel crossing.

    EU talking about building hard borders.

    Sad.
    Get Boris to genuinely build a crosschannel bridge (or, even better, this one) and I'll agree with you. Given Boris's past history, simply speaking about it is not sufficient.
    Seems Eurotunnel are serious in wanting a second crossing but I would imagine a tunnel would be more practical than a bridge.

    We will need it in the future as all these EU countries decide to open their HQ in the UK to benefit from our new dynamic economy outside the EU
    From memory, a bridge was considered before the final decision was made on a tunnel, but they pose different challenges. For a bridge the problem is building the (many) legs in such (relatively) deep water. The tunnel was conceptually simple and could be done with known technology.

    Incidentally another option was kind of a compromise: a tunnel laid on the seabed. But then you're looking at stability issues.
    I am not sure the water depth is the issue. Certainly a few weeks ago when this was being discussed there were plenty of bridge people saying it was not an issue at all. I think the issue is rather the business of the shipping lanes and protecting against collision.
  • RhubarbRhubarb Posts: 359
    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    TGOHF said:

    Mortimer said:

    Hahahahahaha.

    No cherry picking they said.

    Strong and United they said.

    What, we have a 10bn hole in the budget?
    Boris talking about a second channel crossing.

    EU talking about building hard borders.

    Sad.
    Get Boris to genuinely build a crosschannel bridge (or, even better, this one) and I'll agree with you. Given Boris's past history, simply speaking about it is not sufficient.
    Seems Eurotunnel are serious in wanting a second crossing but I would imagine a tunnel would be more practical than a bridge.

    We will need it in the future as all these EU countries decide to open their HQ in the UK to benefit from our new dynamic economy outside the EU
    From memory, a bridge was considered before the final decision was made on a tunnel, but they pose different challenges. For a bridge the problem is building the (many) legs in such (relatively) deep water. The tunnel was conceptually simple and could be done with known technology.

    Incidentally another option was kind of a compromise: a tunnel laid on the seabed. But then you're looking at stability issues.
    That's what the Turks are doing in Istanbul. Supposedly it's going to be earthquake-proof.
  • viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    TGOHF said:

    Mortimer said:

    Hahahahahaha.

    No cherry picking they said.

    Strong and United they said.

    What, we have a 10bn hole in the budget?
    Boris talking about a second channel crossing.

    EU talking about building hard borders.

    Sad.
    Get Boris to genuinely build a crosschannel bridge (or, even better, this one) and I'll agree with you. Given Boris's past history, simply speaking about it is not sufficient.
    Seems Eurotunnel are serious in wanting a second crossing but I would imagine a tunnel would be more practical than a bridge.

    We will need it in the future as all these EU countries decide to open their HQ in the UK to benefit from our new dynamic economy outside the EU
    From memory, a bridge was considered before the final decision was made on a tunnel, but they pose different challenges. For a bridge the problem is building the (many) legs in such (relatively) deep water. The tunnel was conceptually simple and could be done with known technology.

    Incidentally another option was kind of a compromise: a tunnel laid on the seabed. But then you're looking at stability issues.
    The Conwy river crossing is laid on the river bed
    I learn something new every day, thank you.
    Yes - it was amazing - they dropped sectional units onto the river bed, sealed and joined them together to create the two two lane tunnels
  • rkrkrk said:

    Is there anything decent and worthwhile to have ever come out of Oxford?

    Oxfam faces fresh claims that staff used prostitutes in Chad

    New scandal emerges as charity battles revelations that employees in Haiti paid for sex

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/feb/10/oxfam-faces-allegations-staff-paid-prostitutes-in-chad?CMP=share_btn_tw

    Didn’t Cambridge come out of Oxford?
    And as remained second rate ever since.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,234

    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    TGOHF said:

    Mortimer said:

    Hahahahahaha.

    No cherry picking they said.

    Strong and United they said.

    What, we have a 10bn hole in the budget?
    Boris talking about a second channel crossing.

    EU talking about building hard borders.

    Sad.
    Get Boris to genuinely build a crosschannel bridge (or, even better, this one) and I'll agree with you. Given Boris's past history, simply speaking about it is not sufficient.
    Seems Eurotunnel are serious in wanting a second crossing but I would imagine a tunnel would be more practical than a bridge.

    We will need it in the future as all these EU countries decide to open their HQ in the UK to benefit from our new dynamic economy outside the EU
    From memory, a bridge was considered before the final decision was made on a tunnel, but they pose different challenges. For a bridge the problem is building the (many) legs in such (relatively) deep water. The tunnel was conceptually simple and could be done with known technology.

    Incidentally another option was kind of a compromise: a tunnel laid on the seabed. But then you're looking at stability issues.
    I am not sure the water depth is the issue. Certainly a few weeks ago when this was being discussed there were plenty of bridge people saying it was not an issue at all. I think the issue is rather the business of the shipping lanes and protecting against collision.
    I see, thank you
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Mail on Sunday front page is er interesting..
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408

    TGOHF said:

    Foxy said:

    TGOHF said:

    Mortimer said:

    Hahahahahaha.

    No cherry picking they said.

    Strong and United they said.

    What, we have a 10bn hole in the budget?
    There are 28 EU countries. I wonder which one would have a diplomat likely to say something like that?
    If you are an EU country with trade surplus with the Uk you have to be fuming about all this tariff and hard border bluster from Barnier.

    Nobody on the Uk side wants tariffs or hard borders.
    The old German Car maker gambit? Is that still going?
    Shrugs,

    Telegraph :

    “French figures had expressed particular anger at the “lack of consultation” on a draft document published by Mr Barnier on Wednesday which included a so-called punishment clause that would allow Brussels to ground aircraft and block trade if the UK failed to obey EU rules during the transition period.”
    You've inexplicably left off the first part of that sentence which says, "A Whitehall source said that..."
    It must be a given that some EU countries view Barnier's bluster with alarm as they want a fair deal as we do.
    He works for them. If they were alarmed they wouldn't be relaying it to the Telegraph.
    I'm sure we will always be sure to treat reports regarding the UK side with the same level of dismissal.
  • rkrkrk said:

    Is there anything decent and worthwhile to have ever come out of Oxford?

    Oxfam faces fresh claims that staff used prostitutes in Chad

    New scandal emerges as charity battles revelations that employees in Haiti paid for sex

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/feb/10/oxfam-faces-allegations-staff-paid-prostitutes-in-chad?CMP=share_btn_tw

    Didn’t Cambridge come out of Oxford?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_Scholastica_Day_riot
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    kle4 said:

    TGOHF said:

    Foxy said:

    TGOHF said:

    Mortimer said:

    Hahahahahaha.

    No cherry picking they said.

    Strong and United they said.

    What, we have a 10bn hole in the budget?
    There are 28 EU countries. I wonder which one would have a diplomat likely to say something like that?
    If you are an EU country with trade surplus with the Uk you have to be fuming about all this tariff and hard border bluster from Barnier.

    Nobody on the Uk side wants tariffs or hard borders.
    The old German Car maker gambit? Is that still going?
    Shrugs,

    Telegraph :

    “French figures had expressed particular anger at the “lack of consultation” on a draft document published by Mr Barnier on Wednesday which included a so-called punishment clause that would allow Brussels to ground aircraft and block trade if the UK failed to obey EU rules during the transition period.”
    You've inexplicably left off the first part of that sentence which says, "A Whitehall source said that..."
    It must be a given that some EU countries view Barnier's bluster with alarm as they want a fair deal as we do.
    He works for them. If they were alarmed they wouldn't be relaying it to the Telegraph.
    I'm sure we will always be sure to treat reports regarding the UK side with the same level of dismissal.
    Don't be absurd!
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,774

    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    TGOHF said:

    Mortimer said:

    Hahahahahaha.

    No cherry picking they said.

    Strong and United they said.

    What, we have a 10bn hole in the budget?
    Boris talking about a second channel crossing.

    EU talking about building hard borders.

    Sad.
    Get Boris to genuinely build a crosschannel bridge (or, even better, this one) and I'll agree with you. Given Boris's past history, simply speaking about it is not sufficient.
    Seems Eurotunnel are serious in wanting a second crossing but I would imagine a tunnel would be more practical than a bridge.

    We will need it in the future as all these EU countries decide to open their HQ in the UK to benefit from our new dynamic economy outside the EU
    From memory, a bridge was considered before the final decision was made on a tunnel, but they pose different challenges. For a bridge the problem is building the (many) legs in such (relatively) deep water. The tunnel was conceptually simple and could be done with known technology.

    Incidentally another option was kind of a compromise: a tunnel laid on the seabed. But then you're looking at stability issues.
    I am not sure the water depth is the issue. Certainly a few weeks ago when this was being discussed there were plenty of bridge people saying it was not an issue at all. I think the issue is rather the business of the shipping lanes and protecting against collision.
    Maintenance costs on the bridge would also presumably be much higher, as it would be subject to a great deal of corrosion.
  • TGOHF said:

    Mail on Sunday front page is er interesting..

    And inside on page 4
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,725

    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    TGOHF said:

    Mortimer said:

    Hahahahahaha.

    No cherry picking they said.

    Strong and United they said.

    What, we have a 10bn hole in the budget?
    Boris talking about a second channel crossing.

    EU talking about building hard borders.

    Sad.
    Get Boris to genuinely build a crosschannel bridge (or, even better, this one) and I'll agree with you. Given Boris's past history, simply speaking about it is not sufficient.
    Seems Eurotunnel are serious in wanting a second crossing but I would imagine a tunnel would be more practical than a bridge.

    We will need it in the future as all these EU countries decide to open their HQ in the UK to benefit from our new dynamic economy outside the EU
    From memory, a bridge was considered before the final decision was made on a tunnel, but they pose different challenges. For a bridge the problem is building the (many) legs in such (relatively) deep water. The tunnel was conceptually simple and could be done with known technology.

    Incidentally another option was kind of a compromise: a tunnel laid on the seabed. But then you're looking at stability issues.
    The Conwy river crossing is laid on the river bed
    I am off to our bed.

    You coming?

    xxxx
  • viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    TGOHF said:

    Mortimer said:

    Hahahahahaha.

    No cherry picking they said.

    Strong and United they said.

    What, we have a 10bn hole in the budget?
    Boris talking about a second channel crossing.

    EU talking about building hard borders.

    Sad.
    Get Boris to genuinely build a crosschannel bridge (or, even better, this one) and I'll agree with you. Given Boris's past history, simply speaking about it is not sufficient.
    Seems Eurotunnel are serious in wanting a second crossing but I would imagine a tunnel would be more practical than a bridge.

    We will need it in the future as all these EU countries decide to open their HQ in the UK to benefit from our new dynamic economy outside the EU
    From memory, a bridge was considered before the final decision was made on a tunnel, but they pose different challenges. For a bridge the problem is building the (many) legs in such (relatively) deep water. The tunnel was conceptually simple and could be done with known technology.

    Incidentally another option was kind of a compromise: a tunnel laid on the seabed. But then you're looking at stability issues.
    The Conwy river crossing is laid on the river bed
    I am off to our bed.

    You coming?

    xxxx
    Yes but we need to keep this quiet
  • saddosaddo Posts: 534

    TGOHF said:

    Mail on Sunday front page is er interesting..

    And inside on page 4
    Cox has been playing with fire. He would have known this happened & could come out and what he did to get kicked out of Save the Children is unlikely to stay under wraps for ever, and yet he sticks himself in the public eye as some kind of wise sage of left wing causes.

    Not clever at all.
  • AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900


    I am not sure the water depth is the issue. Certainly a few weeks ago when this was being discussed there were plenty of bridge people saying it was not an issue at all. I think the issue is rather the business of the shipping lanes and protecting against collision.


    Would probably be done like the Sweden-Denmark connection: bridge to an artificial island, then a tunnel built in a trench on the seabed. Means no problems with container ships bashing into bridges.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,722
    saddo said:

    TGOHF said:

    Mail on Sunday front page is er interesting..

    And inside on page 4
    Cox has been playing with fire. He would have known this happened & could come out and what he did to get kicked out of Save the Children is unlikely to stay under wraps for ever, and yet he sticks himself in the public eye as some kind of wise sage of left wing causes.

    Not clever at all.
    Daft b@£%r. A period of silence would now be appropriate.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,722
    Andrew said:


    I am not sure the water depth is the issue. Certainly a few weeks ago when this was being discussed there were plenty of bridge people saying it was not an issue at all. I think the issue is rather the business of the shipping lanes and protecting against collision.


    Would probably be done like the Sweden-Denmark connection: bridge to an artificial island, then a tunnel built in a trench on the seabed. Means no problems with container ships bashing into bridges.
    If ships can run into Southend Pier...... about halfway along it as happened a few years ago ...... then the longer the spans the better.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840
    I think there was also a problem with weather making crossing dangerous at times. An interview I watched seemed to indicate that (at the time anyway) a tunnel was cheaper and more useful.

    As for Brexit I think the Labour play is pretty much to stay (even if only in appearance) a bit more pro EU than the Tories, many remain voters don't see, looking to re run the referendum or completely reverse the decision, many leavers still seem to be behind the decision to leave. I think the interests of most labour voters is in other things which is probably where the party is best placed to concentrate on.

    As for the Corbyn won it for Brexit line it seems a bit unlikely given that the levels of remain/leave support for Labour voters wasn't that different to SNP or Lib Dem voters.

    70/30 Lib Dems
    64/36 SNP
    63/37 Labour

    Quite impressive when you consider the Lib Dems are generally a more pro EU party and Scotland was a much better place for remain.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789
    Gove wants to be the Conchita Wurst of the Conservative party.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5376527/No10-fears-Michael-Gove-set-mount-new-leadership-bid.html

    Suspicions have been raised among Theresa May’s allies that Michael Gove is ‘on manoeuvres’ for a new Tory leadership bid.

    The news comes after his inner circle were revealed to have formed a WhatsApp group called Phoenix – apparently named after the mythical bird that rises from the ashes.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    New thread...
  • A little late but I think infighting might be helping Tories in polling for now..

    https://www.abitleftandabitlost.com/posts/labours-poll-dip-genuine-drop-or-tory-have-cake-and-eat-it-related
This discussion has been closed.