Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » NEW EMERGENCY PB / POLLING MATTERS PODCAST: Bye Bye Boris and

124

Comments

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    Scott_P said:

    Also I think what Boris does next is key as well. If he tours the studio's and writes articles saying this is a bad deal and he articulates a positive future for the UK on a simple FTA then the Govt is in trouble. Because 1) there is no person in the Cabinet that can do "vision" like Boris, they are the Glum family. 2) Even though London peeps may detest Boris for his role in the the leave campaign, the actual leave voters throughout the country still listen to him and will make time for him.
    There are a lot of Tory MP's in leave areas or areas with large leave votes that would have Boris campaign with them in an instant and refuse to have May, Hammond, Clarke et al any where near their campaign.

    Resigning in an effort to further his career may have been, by accident, the single greatest contribution to good governance BoZo has made since becoming an MP

    Now that they no longer have to keep him onside, cabinet colleagues are free to be much more vocal, and realistic, about the dangers of Fuck Business Brexit.
    There are a heck of a lot of voters out there that see big business as crony business, even May recognises this. They have lived with posted workers under cutting wages, etc, etc.
    F business will be OK with them, it is one reason why Corbyn got a hearing.
    Good point. Which of the Fuck Business parties should people vote for next time round?
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,877

    Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.

    https://twitter.com/DanielBShapiro/status/1016435137708544001

    Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.

    Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
    Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.

    Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.

    The US pulling out of Europe would be a monumental act of self-harm. It would also run entirely counter to British interests. Trump’s policies are the most explicitly hostile to the UK’s foreign policy and trade aims and objectives than those pursued by any other US president since at least the19th century. It is genuinely amazing how much leeway the British right give him. If the half African Obama was doing it they would be up in arms.

    Self-harm to the USA or harm to Europe?

    America's interests have changed and Europe just isn't that important for the USA now. Their big rival isn't the USSR, it's China. Their most likely battleground isn't Europe, it's the Pacific.

    It may not be pleasant for Europeans that have gotten used to being protected effectively for free by the Americans while simultaneously mocking America's 'Military Industrial Complex' but the reality is that regardless of who is President the Pacific is now more important than the Atlantic for America. That was true under Obama and it's true now.

    Read the original Twitter thread that sparked this exchange. Or this one:

    https://twitter.com/claireberlinski/status/1015872007521603585?s=21
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,877

    Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.

    https://twitter.com/DanielBShapiro/status/1016435137708544001

    Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.

    Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
    Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.

    Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.

    The US pulling out of Europe would be a monumental act of self-harm. It would also run entirely counter to British interests. Trump’s policies are the most explicitly hostile to the UK’s foreign policy and trade aims and objectives than those pursued by any other US president since at least the19th century. It is genuinely amazing how much leeway the British right give him. If the half African Obama was doing it they would be up in arms.

    Self-harm to the USA or harm to Europe?

    America's interests have changed and Europe just isn't that important for the USA now. Their big rival isn't the USSR, it's China. Their most likely battleground isn't Europe, it's the Pacific.

    It may not be pleasant for Europeans that have gotten used to being protected effectively for free by the Americans while simultaneously mocking America's 'Military Industrial Complex' but the reality is that regardless of who is President the Pacific is now more important than the Atlantic for America. That was true under Obama and it's true now.
    Europe has been taking a peace dividend while Putin has been doing his land grabs. Only piggy backing off the yanks has allowed the Europeans to do this.

    The Americans have done very well indeed out of the last 70 years.

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559

    Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.

    https://twitter.com/DanielBShapiro/status/1016435137708544001

    Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.

    Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
    Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.

    Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.

    The US pulling out of Europe would be a monumental act of self-harm. It would also run entirely counter to British interests. Trump’s policies are the most explicitly hostile to the UK’s foreign policy and trade aims and objectives than those pursued by any other US president since at least the19th century. It is genuinely amazing how much leeway the British right give him. If the half African Obama was doing it they would be up in arms.

    Self-harm to the USA or harm to Europe?

    America's interests have changed and Europe just isn't that important for the USA now. Their big rival isn't the USSR, it's China. Their most likely battleground isn't Europe, it's the Pacific.

    It may not be pleasant for Europeans that have gotten used to being protected effectively for free by the Americans while simultaneously mocking America's 'Military Industrial Complex' but the reality is that regardless of who is President the Pacific is now more important than the Atlantic for America. That was true under Obama and it's true now.
    Europe has been taking a peace dividend while Putin has been doing his land grabs. Only piggy backing off the yanks has allowed the Europeans to do this.
    Also with Merkel and the rest of the EU (with the exception of Poland) buying Russian gas in huge quantities, they are proving the hard currency for Putin's military expansion, then bleating you must protect us, you must protect us. No wonder the sherman taxpayer is hacked off.
    or you can look at the parasite economies like Luxemburg which spend 0.9% on defence become tax havens for big corporates and hide behind the defence capabilities of others.
  • GreenHeronGreenHeron Posts: 148

    Scott_P said:

    Also I think what Boris does next is key as well. If he tours the studio's and writes articles saying this is a bad deal and he articulates a positive future for the UK on a simple FTA then the Govt is in trouble. Because 1) there is no person in the Cabinet that can do "vision" like Boris, they are the Glum family. 2) Even though London peeps may detest Boris for his role in the the leave campaign, the actual leave voters throughout the country still listen to him and will make time for him.
    There are a lot of Tory MP's in leave areas or areas with large leave votes that would have Boris campaign with them in an instant and refuse to have May, Hammond, Clarke et al any where near their campaign.

    Resigning in an effort to further his career may have been, by accident, the single greatest contribution to good governance BoZo has made since becoming an MP

    Now that they no longer have to keep him onside, cabinet colleagues are free to be much more vocal, and realistic, about the dangers of Fuck Business Brexit.
    There are a heck of a lot of voters out there that see big business as crony business, even May recognises this. They have lived with posted workers under cutting wages, etc, etc.
    F business will be OK with them, it is one reason why Corbyn got a hearing.
    There is a lot of difference between big business and SMEs. Big business in general.is anti-competition, pro-regulation and not unsupportive of high taxes (as they kill off competitors) whereas SMEs are the opposite in those three factors. Most of my SME clients (though by no means all) are pro Brexit as they feel that the EU is built to protect the biggest companies and outside the EU there will be more opportunities.

    Therefore it is not surprising that big business wants to stay in the EU - and indeed is in favour of further integration, it made similar noises about joining the Euro. Whether big business is more important than the hundreds of thousands of SMEs is more open to question.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786
    edited July 2018
    TOPPING said:

    Didn't I answer? If the EU accepts Chequers (big if), then Chequers.

    What if the EU accepts Chequers and polls show 60%+ support for Remain versus Chequers? (And minimal support for No Deal.) It seems to me the PM can't lose from that scenario if she calls a referendum.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559
    TOPPING said:

    Scott_P said:

    Also I think what Boris does next is key as well. If he tours the studio's and writes articles saying this is a bad deal and he articulates a positive future for the UK on a simple FTA then the Govt is in trouble. Because 1) there is no person in the Cabinet that can do "vision" like Boris, they are the Glum family. 2) Even though London peeps may detest Boris for his role in the the leave campaign, the actual leave voters throughout the country still listen to him and will make time for him.
    There are a lot of Tory MP's in leave areas or areas with large leave votes that would have Boris campaign with them in an instant and refuse to have May, Hammond, Clarke et al any where near their campaign.

    Resigning in an effort to further his career may have been, by accident, the single greatest contribution to good governance BoZo has made since becoming an MP

    Now that they no longer have to keep him onside, cabinet colleagues are free to be much more vocal, and realistic, about the dangers of Fuck Business Brexit.
    There are a heck of a lot of voters out there that see big business as crony business, even May recognises this. They have lived with posted workers under cutting wages, etc, etc.
    F business will be OK with them, it is one reason why Corbyn got a hearing.
    Good point. Which of the Fuck Business parties should people vote for next time round?
    or we could ask how did business get itself in to this position ?
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,877

    Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.

    https://twitter.com/DanielBShapiro/status/1016435137708544001

    Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.

    Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
    Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.

    Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.

    The US pulling out of Europe would be a monumental act of self-harm. It would also run entirely counter to British interests. Trump’s policies are the most explicitly hostile to the UK’s foreign policy and trade aims and objectives than those pursued by any other US president since at least the19th century. It is genuinely amazing how much leeway the British right give him. If the half African Obama was doing it they would be up in arms.

    Obama the Pacific president was doing it and nobody left or right batted an eye lid

    Must admit I missed the stuff about Obama threatening to pull the US out of NATO and imposing sanctions on British goods. I did notice a big fuss about a Churchill bust though.

  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143

    Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.

    https://twitter.com/DanielBShapiro/status/1016435137708544001

    Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.

    Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
    Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.

    Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.
    This could be the making of the EU. Every country needs an enemy to define itself against. Abandoned by Trump, with Putin ascendant, the opportunity for the EU to establish itself, to make some creation myths, is there.
    Putin isn't ascendant, Russia is a joke on the verge of bankruptcy.
    The appearance of a thing is not the same as the reality of a thing, and that's just as well in this case, but Putin would certainly appear ascendant if Trump withdraws from NATO, recognises the annexation of the Crimea and withdraws troops from Europe.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    TOPPING said:



    Didn't I answer? If the EU accepts Chequers (big if), then Chequers.

    If the EU accepts Chequers (and I agree it's a big if), I think Parliament will fall in line. Enough people see it as a first step. There will be die hards on both sides that think it gives away too much or too little, but there will be majority cross party support IMO.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559

    Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.

    https://twitter.com/DanielBShapiro/status/1016435137708544001

    Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.

    Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
    Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.

    Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.

    The US pulling out of Europe would be a monumental act of self-harm. It would also run entirely counter to British interests. Trump’s policies are the most explicitly hostile to the UK’s foreign policy and trade aims and objectives than those pursued by any other US president since at least the19th century. It is genuinely amazing how much leeway the British right give him. If the half African Obama was doing it they would be up in arms.

    Self-harm to the USA or harm to Europe?

    America's interests have changed and Europe just isn't that important for the USA now. Their big rival isn't the USSR, it's China. Their most likely battleground isn't Europe, it's the Pacific.

    It may not be pleasant for Europeans that have gotten used to being protected effectively for free by the Americans while simultaneously mocking America's 'Military Industrial Complex' but the reality is that regardless of who is President the Pacific is now more important than the Atlantic for America. That was true under Obama and it's true now.
    Europe has been taking a peace dividend while Putin has been doing his land grabs. Only piggy backing off the yanks has allowed the Europeans to do this.

    The Americans have done very well indeed out of the last 70 years.

    So have the Europeans. But now things have changed.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786

    Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.

    https://twitter.com/DanielBShapiro/status/1016435137708544001

    Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.

    Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
    Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.

    Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.

    The US pulling out of Europe would be a monumental act of self-harm. It would also run entirely counter to British interests. Trump’s policies are the most explicitly hostile to the UK’s foreign policy and trade aims and objectives than those pursued by any other US president since at least the19th century. It is genuinely amazing how much leeway the British right give him. If the half African Obama was doing it they would be up in arms.

    Self-harm to the USA or harm to Europe?

    America's interests have changed and Europe just isn't that important for the USA now. Their big rival isn't the USSR, it's China. Their most likely battleground isn't Europe, it's the Pacific.

    It may not be pleasant for Europeans that have gotten used to being protected effectively for free by the Americans while simultaneously mocking America's 'Military Industrial Complex' but the reality is that regardless of who is President the Pacific is now more important than the Atlantic for America. That was true under Obama and it's true now.

    Read the original Twitter thread that sparked this exchange. Or this one:

    https://twitter.com/claireberlinski/status/1015872007521603585?s=21
    However the person who wrote that thread seems to share a lot of Trump's beliefs about Europe. She wrote a book over a decade ago caricaturing Europe as a scary and violent powder keg.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menace_in_Europe
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,957
    Ukip are on 5% with YouGov.

    Up 2% on the last poll.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,877

    Scott_P said:

    Also I think what Boris does next is key as well. If he tours the studio's and writes articles saying this is a bad deal and he articulates a positive future for the UK on a simple FTA then the Govt is in trouble. Because 1) there is no person in the Cabinet that can do "vision" like Boris, they are the Glum family. 2) Even though London peeps may detest Boris for his role in the the leave campaign, the actual leave voters throughout the country still listen to him and will make time for him.
    There are a lot of Tory MP's in leave areas or areas with large leave votes that would have Boris campaign with them in an instant and refuse to have May, Hammond, Clarke et al any where near their campaign.

    Resigning in an effort to further his career may have been, by accident, the single greatest contribution to good governance BoZo has made since becoming an MP

    Now that they no longer have to keep him onside, cabinet colleagues are free to be much more vocal, and realistic, about the dangers of Fuck Business Brexit.
    There are a heck of a lot of voters out there that see big business as crony business, even May recognises this. They have lived with posted workers under cutting wages, etc, etc.
    F business will be OK with them, it is one reason why Corbyn got a hearing.
    There is a lot of difference between big business and SMEs. Big business in general.is anti-competition, pro-regulation and not unsupportive of high taxes (as they kill off competitors) whereas SMEs are the opposite in those three factors. Most of my SME clients (though by no means all) are pro Brexit as they feel that the EU is built to protect the biggest companies and outside the EU there will be more opportunities.

    Therefore it is not surprising that big business wants to stay in the EU - and indeed is in favour of further integration, it made similar noises about joining the Euro. Whether big business is more important than the hundreds of thousands of SMEs is more open to question.

    What opportunities do they see outside the EU thst aren’t there now? We’re an SME (or were until last week) that did well over 50% of its business outside the EU. The UK’s membership never stopped us.

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559

    Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.

    https://twitter.com/DanielBShapiro/status/1016435137708544001

    Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.

    Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
    Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.

    Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.

    The US pulling out of Europe would be a monumental act of self-harm. It would also run entirely counter to British interests. Trump’s policies are the most explicitly hostile to the UK’s foreign policy and trade aims and objectives than those pursued by any other US president since at least the19th century. It is genuinely amazing how much leeway the British right give him. If the half African Obama was doing it they would be up in arms.

    Obama the Pacific president was doing it and nobody left or right batted an eye lid

    Must admit I missed the stuff about Obama threatening to pull the US out of NATO and imposing sanctions on British goods. I did notice a big fuss about a Churchill bust though.

    Well you always look at the small stuff.

    Obama on the other hand made quite clear that US focus would shift to the Pacific especially given the rise of China. Europe was simply an area declining in importance and where he thought Mrs Merkel could hold the line.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,001
    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:



    Didn't I answer? If the EU accepts Chequers (big if), then Chequers.

    If the EU accepts Chequers (and I agree it's a big if), I think Parliament will fall in line. Enough people see it as a first step. There will be die hards on both sides that think it gives away too much or too little, but there will be majority cross party support IMO.
    The problem will be if the EU does not accept it.

    TM has no room to water it down and a hard Brexit becomes a very real prospect. It is good to see she has ordered more work on preparation for a hard Brexit
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,877

    Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.

    https://twitter.com/DanielBShapiro/status/1016435137708544001

    Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.

    Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
    Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.

    Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.

    The US pulling out of Europe would be a monumental act of self-harm. It would also run entirely counter to British interests. Trump’s policies are the most explicitly hostile to the UK’s foreign policy and trade aims and objectives than those pursued by any other US president since at least the19th century. It is genuinely amazing how much leeway the British right give him. If the half African Obama was doing it they would be up in arms.

    Self-harm to the USA or harm to Europe?

    America's interests have changed and Europe just isn't that important for the USA now. Their big rival isn't the USSR, it's China. Their most likely battleground isn't Europe, it's the Pacific.

    It may not be pleasant for Europeans that have gotten used to being protected effectively for free by the Americans while simultaneously mocking America's 'Military Industrial Complex' but the reality is that regardless of who is President the Pacific is now more important than the Atlantic for America. That was true under Obama and it's true now.
    Europe has been taking a peace dividend while Putin has been doing his land grabs. Only piggy backing off the yanks has allowed the Europeans to do this.

    The Americans have done very well indeed out of the last 70 years.

    So have the Europeans. But now things have changed.

    Not really. A settled Europe has allowed the US to look elsewhere.

  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,001
    If he goes a whole new ball game opens up
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Capitano, she needn't worry. Gove is known for never stabbing anyone in the back.

    ....
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    edited July 2018

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:



    Didn't I answer? If the EU accepts Chequers (big if), then Chequers.

    If the EU accepts Chequers (and I agree it's a big if), I think Parliament will fall in line. Enough people see it as a first step. There will be die hards on both sides that think it gives away too much or too little, but there will be majority cross party support IMO.
    The problem will be if the EU does not accept it.

    TM has no room to water it down and a hard Brexit becomes a very real prospect. It is good to see she has ordered more work on preparation for a hard Brexit
    I think the resignations put that into sharp focus and probably helps the government avoid big concessions.

    Theresa can (rightly) say that, if you don't like this, then wait until Gove and Javid put their hard/WTO brexit forwards.

    I think @AlastairMeeks had a thread on this aspect a few months ago.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,877

    Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.

    https://twitter.com/DanielBShapiro/status/1016435137708544001

    Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.

    Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
    Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.

    Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.

    The US pulling out of Europe would be a monumental act of self-harm. It would also run entirely counter to British interests. Trump’s policies are the most explicitly hostile to the UK’s foreign policy and trade aims and objectives than those pursued by any other US president since at least the19th century. It is genuinely amazing how much leeway the British right give him. If the half African Obama was doing it they would be up in arms.

    Self-harm to the USA or harm to Europe?

    America's interests have changed and Europe just isn't that important for the USA now. Their big rival isn't the USSR, it's China. Their most likely battleground isn't Europe, it's the Pacific.

    It may not be pleasant for Europeans that have gotten used to being protected effectively for free by the Americans while simultaneously mocking America's 'Military Industrial Complex' but the reality is that regardless of who is President the Pacific is now more important than the Atlantic for America. That was true under Obama and it's true now.

    Read the original Twitter thread that sparked this exchange. Or this one:

    https://twitter.com/claireberlinski/status/1015872007521603585?s=21
    However the person who wrote that thread seems to share a lot of Trump's beliefs about Europe. She wrote a book over a decade ago caricaturing Europe as a scary and violent powder keg.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menace_in_Europe

    The point is that Pax Americana has been a bipartisan issue. Both sides see the huge benefits to the US it has delivered - and continues to deliver.

    Anyone who thinks Putin is only interested in what happens to Russia’s West really hasn’t been paying much attention.

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    TOPPING said:

    Scott_P said:

    Also I think what Boris does next is key as well. If he tours the studio's and writes articles saying this is a bad deal and he articulates a positive future for the UK on a simple FTA then the Govt is in trouble. Because 1) there is no person in the Cabinet that can do "vision" like Boris, they are the Glum family. 2) Even though London peeps may detest Boris for his role in the the leave campaign, the actual leave voters throughout the country still listen to him and will make time for him.
    There are a lot of Tory MP's in leave areas or areas with large leave votes that would have Boris campaign with them in an instant and refuse to have May, Hammond, Clarke et al any where near their campaign.

    Resigning in an effort to further his career may have been, by accident, the single greatest contribution to good governance BoZo has made since becoming an MP

    Now that they no longer have to keep him onside, cabinet colleagues are free to be much more vocal, and realistic, about the dangers of Fuck Business Brexit.
    There are a heck of a lot of voters out there that see big business as crony business, even May recognises this. They have lived with posted workers under cutting wages, etc, etc.
    F business will be OK with them, it is one reason why Corbyn got a hearing.
    Good point. Which of the Fuck Business parties should people vote for next time round?
    or we could ask how did business get itself in to this position ?
    What position? Every PB Leaver is queuing up to tell us how wonderfully we are doing.
  • FensterFenster Posts: 2,115
    edited July 2018
    I'm a Brexiteer (a liberal, sovereignty, anti-elitism based one...) and I have to admit I've lost. I'm pretty sure we will be remaining in the EU in all but name: paying into it, accepting its laws, doing as we are told.

    The fear for me was that the UK was too immersed in managerial elitism to accept the revolutionary change Brexit offered. For every ideas-man like Gove there are twenty suits who resist change. Big businesses, career politicians, corporatists, lawyers and civil servants run the show in the UK, as they do everywhere, and the UK has surrendered to the comfort of it. There's fuck all us working class provincial folk can do. Brexit was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for us but our politicians have shown they are not up to the hugeness of it and my fear that we'd be quietly, cleverly shunted towards remaining as an EU-member is being realised.

    I think the EU is a great idea but I fear that its current function will lead to a rise in extremism across the EU. It is magnificent at pissing off the dispossessed and looking after the elites. That won't end well. I always hoped we could change it, use our democratic clout to push it in a better direction but the EU has proved it's more powerful than us and we've lost.

    Theresa May was always the perfect politician to do their bidding. She's boring and managerial, lacking in ideas, guile and curiosity and was never broad enough in her horizons to lead a movement.

    Not the end of the world, but a shame.

    ps - a great opportunity for Corbyn too. He can now actively go after all the blue collar voters by positioning himself as the pure anti-elite choice.
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506

    Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.

    https://twitter.com/DanielBShapiro/status/1016435137708544001

    Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.

    Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
    Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.

    Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.

    The US pulling out of Europe would be a monumental act of self-harm. It would also run entirely counter to British interests. Trump’s policies are the most explicitly hostile to the UK’s foreign policy and trade aims and objectives than those pursued by any other US president since at least the19th century. It is genuinely amazing how much leeway the British right give him. If the half African Obama was doing it they would be up in arms.

    Self-harm to the USA or harm to Europe?

    America's interests have changed and Europe just isn't that important for the USA now. Their big rival isn't the USSR, it's China. Their most likely battleground isn't Europe, it's the Pacific.

    It may not be pleasant for Europeans that have gotten used to being protected effectively for free by the Americans while simultaneously mocking America's 'Military Industrial Complex' but the reality is that regardless of who is President the Pacific is now more important than the Atlantic for America. That was true under Obama and it's true now.

    Read the original Twitter thread that sparked this exchange. Or this one:

    https://twitter.com/claireberlinski/status/1015872007521603585?s=21
    And the United States is a British creation.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559

    Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.

    https://twitter.com/DanielBShapiro/status/1016435137708544001

    Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.

    Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
    Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.

    Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.

    The US pulling out of Europe would be a monumental act of self-harm. It would also run entirely counter to British interests. Trump’s policies are the most explicitly hostile to the UK’s foreign policy and trade aims and objectives than those pursued by any other US president since at least the19th century. It is genuinely amazing how much leeway the British right give him. If the half African Obama was doing it they would be up in arms.

    Self-harm to the USA or harm to Europe?

    America's interests have changed and Europe just isn't that important for the USA now. Their big rival isn't the USSR, it's China. Their most likely battleground isn't Europe, it's the Pacific.

    It may not be pleasant for Europeans that have gotten used to being protected effectively for free by the Americans while simultaneously mocking America's 'Military Industrial Complex' but the reality is that regardless of who is President the Pacific is now more important than the Atlantic for America. That was true under Obama and it's true now.
    Europe has been taking a peace dividend while Putin has been doing his land grabs. Only piggy backing off the yanks has allowed the Europeans to do this.

    The Americans have done very well indeed out of the last 70 years.

    So have the Europeans. But now things have changed.

    Not really. A settled Europe has allowed the US to look elsewhere.

    I suspect people in Poland and Ukraine might not agree with your call of settled.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:



    Didn't I answer? If the EU accepts Chequers (big if), then Chequers.

    If the EU accepts Chequers (and I agree it's a big if), I think Parliament will fall in line. Enough people see it as a first step. There will be die hards on both sides that think it gives away too much or too little, but there will be majority cross party support IMO.
    Agree.

    And @williamglenn I don't dispute that all things being equal there is an argument for a second referndum. However, things are most decidedly not equal and I just find it very difficult to get my head around there being a second referendum. I am not 100% sure I want one or it would do any good. The nation has told the government to seek a new settlement with the EU and the government seems to be trying to do that. It is of course a choice between bad options, but I don't see how this can be changed.

    As someone once said, wisely: now is not the time for logic.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Fenster, you may be right.

    That could lead to the rise of the far right here. I know keep banging on about it, and hope I'm wrong, but when voters decide the mainstream parties can't be trusted to deliver what they want the only options available are disengagement from politics and moving to the fringes.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,765

    No houses are built? I wonder what all those buildings with 3-5 bedrooms that have been getting built around here are then?
    House-building rose 7% in May.

    Adonis comes out with some very odd comments (see eg The Secret Barrister).
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,001
    edited July 2018
    Fenster said:

    I'm a Brexiteer (a liberal, sovereignty, anti-elitism based one...) and I have to admit I've lost. I'm pretty sure we will be remaining in the EU in all but name: paying into it, accepting its laws, doing as we are told.

    The fear for me was that the UK was too immersed in managerial elitism to accept the revolutionary change Brexit offered. For every ideas-man like Gove there are twenty suits who resist change. Big businesses, career politicians, corporatists, lawyers and civil servants run the show in the UK, as they do everywhere, and the UK has surrendered to the comfort of it. There's fuck all us working class provincial folk can do. Brexit was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for us but our politicians have shown they are not up to the hugeness of it and my fear that we'd be quietly, cleverly shunted towards remaining as an EU-member is being realised.

    I think the EU is a great idea but I fear that its current function will lead to a rise in extremism across the EU. It is magnificent as pissing off the dispossessed and looking after the elites. That won't end well. I always hoped we could change it, use our democratic clout to pish it in a better direction but it's proved it's more powerful than us and we've lost.

    Theresa May was always the perfect politician to do their bidding. She's boring and managerial, lacking in ideas, guile and curiosity and was never broad enough in her horizons to lead a movement.

    Not the end of the world, but a shame.

    She is more of a pragmatist and your comments do seem the direction of travel.

    However, remain has gone now and it is still not certain that a hard Brexit will follow if more conservatives rebel or the EU tries to get more from her. This is it for both UK and the EU

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Scott_P said:

    Also I think what Boris does next is key as well. If he tours the studio's and writes articles saying this is a bad deal and he articulates a positive future for the UK on a simple FTA then the Govt is in trouble. Because 1) there is no person in the Cabinet that can do "vision" like Boris, they are the Glum family. 2) Even though London peeps may detest Boris for his role in the the leave campaign, the actual leave voters throughout the country still listen to him and will make time for him.
    There are a lot of Tory MP's in leave areas or areas with large leave votes that would have Boris campaign with them in an instant and refuse to have May, Hammond, Clarke et al any where near their campaign.

    Resigning in an effort to further his career may have been, by accident, the single greatest contribution to good governance BoZo has made since becoming an MP

    Now that they no longer have to keep him onside, cabinet colleagues are free to be much more vocal, and realistic, about the dangers of Fuck Business Brexit.
    There are a heck of a lot of voters out there that see big business as crony business, even May recognises this. They have lived with posted workers under cutting wages, etc, etc.
    F business will be OK with them, it is one reason why Corbyn got a hearing.
    Good point. Which of the Fuck Business parties should people vote for next time round?
    or we could ask how did business get itself in to this position ?
    What position? Every PB Leaver is queuing up to tell us how wonderfully we are doing.
    ah, I thought you were advancing the proposition that business now has no party to speak in its favour.

    whereas you were just trolling werent you ?
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506

    If he goes a whole new ball game opens up
    Gove is too wounded by the reaction to his turning on Boris. Gove is still in rehab.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786
    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:



    Didn't I answer? If the EU accepts Chequers (big if), then Chequers.

    If the EU accepts Chequers (and I agree it's a big if), I think Parliament will fall in line. Enough people see it as a first step. There will be die hards on both sides that think it gives away too much or too little, but there will be majority cross party support IMO.
    Agree.

    And @williamglenn I don't dispute that all things being equal there is an argument for a second referndum. However, things are most decidedly not equal and I just find it very difficult to get my head around there being a second referendum. I am not 100% sure I want one or it would do any good. The nation has told the government to seek a new settlement with the EU and the government seems to be trying to do that. It is of course a choice between bad options, but I don't see how this can be changed.

    As someone once said, wisely: now is not the time for logic.
    It depends how opinion shifts over the next few weeks. If there is a genuine backlash against Chequers then I agree it could be dangerous, but if not then it could be cathartic and give us a chance to avoid the interminable debate that would follow if the Chequers settlement were imposed on us.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Evershed, is he?

    If anything, I'd guess people are more likely to be grateful to Gove for knifing Boris last time.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,765

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Scott_P said:

    Also I think what Boris does next is key as well. If he tours the studio's and writes articles saying this is a bad deal and he articulates a positive future for the UK on a simple FTA then the Govt is in trouble. Because 1) there is no person in the Cabinet that can do "vision" like Boris, they are the Glum family. 2) Even though London peeps may detest Boris for his role in the the leave campaign, the actual leave voters throughout the country still listen to him and will make time for him.
    There are a lot of Tory MP's in leave areas or areas with large leave votes that would have Boris campaign with them in an instant and refuse to have May, Hammond, Clarke et al any where near their campaign.

    Resigning in an effort to further his career may have been, by accident, the single greatest contribution to good governance BoZo has made since becoming an MP

    Now that they no longer have to keep him onside, cabinet colleagues are free to be much more vocal, and realistic, about the dangers of Fuck Business Brexit.
    There are a heck of a lot of voters out there that see big business as crony business, even May recognises this. They have lived with posted workers under cutting wages, etc, etc.
    F business will be OK with them, it is one reason why Corbyn got a hearing.
    Good point. Which of the Fuck Business parties should people vote for next time round?
    or we could ask how did business get itself in to this position ?
    What position? Every PB Leaver is queuing up to tell us how wonderfully we are doing.
    ah, I thought you were advancing the proposition that business now has no party to speak in its favour.

    whereas you were just trolling werent you ?
    The behaviour of Pub Cos. shows what is wrong with quite a lot of big business in this country,
  • No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 3,701

    Mr. Fenster, you may be right.

    That could lead to the rise of the far right here. I know keep banging on about it, and hope I'm wrong, but when voters decide the mainstream parties can't be trusted to deliver what they want the only options available are disengagement from politics and moving to the fringes.

    The problem is to deliver what the voters want without delivering the consequences of what they want.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891

    Mr. Palmer, if the 'culture war' (I dislike the term) has not been fed recently then it's because you and the Westminster bubble haven't been paying attention. Rape gangs in Newcastle and Oxford have been sent down relatively recently, the Telford situation appears unresolved, and Westminster types are more comfortable talking about Julia Hartley-Brewer's knee.

    There was surprisingly open and honest reporting about the Rotherham scandal at the time but there's been a shameful reticence since.

    This hasn't gone away, it's just being downplayed. Cressida Dick (whose name suits her well) wibbled the following some months ago.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOA9n3QdpFw

    The comment from just after 2.40 is particularly ridiculous. In the same way men commit far more murders than women, and women are more likely to be shoplifters, the notion there's no discernible pattern is palpable politically correct bullshit. From 4.25 is particularly depressing.

    Who was the man who was asking the questions? I thought Cressida Dick was both reasonable and correct. The questioner on the other hand seemed to have a very unwholesome agenda
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Alan, to be fair, the voters also wanted a referendum on Lisbon. And never had a say on the EU's creation. Or the absence of migration controls on new accession countries, the surrender of half the rebate, or Cameron's feeble renegotiation effort.

    A pro-EU political class drove us so far along the road, making sceptical noises in opposition and EU-phile moves in government to try and bind us to the EU, that we're significantly entangled.

    None of that is the fault of the electorate, nor is May's utterly cackhanded negotiation approach of prevarication and capitulation.

    If the electorate had been asked sooner (ie Lisbon, when we were promised a vote and denied it) the situation would be far better.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,279
    https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/1016617865292677120

    Tom Watson fires off, into his own feet once again.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603

    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:



    Didn't I answer? If the EU accepts Chequers (big if), then Chequers.

    If the EU accepts Chequers (and I agree it's a big if), I think Parliament will fall in line. Enough people see it as a first step. There will be die hards on both sides that think it gives away too much or too little, but there will be majority cross party support IMO.
    Agree.

    And @williamglenn I don't dispute that all things being equal there is an argument for a second referndum. However, things are most decidedly not equal and I just find it very difficult to get my head around there being a second referendum. I am not 100% sure I want one or it would do any good. The nation has told the government to seek a new settlement with the EU and the government seems to be trying to do that. It is of course a choice between bad options, but I don't see how this can be changed.

    As someone once said, wisely: now is not the time for logic.
    It depends how opinion shifts over the next few weeks. If there is a genuine backlash against Chequers then I agree it could be dangerous, but if not then it could be cathartic and give us a chance to avoid the interminable debate that would follow if the Chequers settlement were imposed on us.
    I'm going to keep saying this until it penetrates your block head, no conservative government would ever put remain back on a ballot paper, it would mean the end of our party for at least a generation, possibly forever. You may be wedded to the EU, the party is not and has never been.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 12,741
    Morning all :)

    To lighten the mood slightly, yesterday in the office, one of my colleagues who I shall simply say is a man of the Left, shouted across at me "your mate Boris has resigned".

    My response was as follows "first, Boris isn't my friend. I simply live in a city where he used to be Mayor. I admit we do have one thing in common - we've both got stuck on a zip wire but that's another story".
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559
    edited July 2018
    Sean_F said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Scott_P said:

    Also I think what Boris does next is key as well. If he tours the studio's and writes articles saying this is a bad deal and he articulates a positive future for the UK on a simple FTA then the Govt is in trouble. Because 1) there is no person in the Cabinet that can do "vision" like Boris, they are the Glum family. 2) Even though London peeps may detest Boris for his role in the the leave campaign, the actual leave voters throughout the country still listen to him and will make time for him.
    There are a lot of Tory MP's in leave areas or areas with large leave votes that would have Boris campaign with them in an instant and refuse to have May, Hammond, Clarke et al any where near their campaign.

    Resigning in an effort to further his career may have been, by accident, the single greatest contribution to good governance BoZo has made since becoming an MP

    Now that they no longer have to keep him onside, cabinet colleagues are free to be much more vocal, and realistic, about the dangers of Fuck Business Brexit.
    There are a heck of a lot of voters out there that see big business as crony business, even May recognises this. They have lived with posted workers under cutting wages, etc, etc.
    F business will be OK with them, it is one reason why Corbyn got a hearing.
    Good point. Which of the Fuck Business parties should people vote for next time round?
    or we could ask how did business get itself in to this position ?
    What position? Every PB Leaver is queuing up to tell us how wonderfully we are doing.
    ah, I thought you were advancing the proposition that business now has no party to speak in its favour.

    whereas you were just trolling werent you ?
    The behaviour of Pub Cos. shows what is wrong with quite a lot of big business in this country,
    my brother has a lovely saying

    if youre dealing with a company that has an ethics policy, shouldn't you first ask why they need one ?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    In lighter news, Vettel seems pleased with his new car:
    https://twitter.com/SeenThruGlass/status/1016255780180430848
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,695
    Theresa's in Germany isn't she?

    While the cat's away... ;)
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.

    https://twitter.com/DanielBShapiro/status/1016435137708544001

    Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.

    Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
    Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.

    Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.

    The US pulling out of Europe would be a monumental act of self-harm. It would also run entirely counter to British interests. Trump’s policies are the most explicitly hostile to the UK’s foreign policy and trade aims and objectives than those pursued by any other US president since at least the19th century. It is genuinely amazing how much leeway the British right give him. If the half African Obama was doing it they would be up in arms.

    Self-harm to the USA or harm to Europe?

    America's interests have changed and Europe just isn't that important for the USA now. Their big rival isn't the USSR, it's China. Their most likely battleground isn't Europe, it's the Pacific.

    It may not be pleasant for Europeans that have gotten used to being protected effectively for free by the Americans while simultaneously mocking America's 'Military Industrial Complex' but the reality is that regardless of who is President the Pacific is now more important than the Atlantic for America. That was true under Obama and it's true now.

    Read the original Twitter thread that sparked this exchange. Or this one:

    https://twitter.com/claireberlinski/status/1015872007521603585?s=21
    What that misses is that past European conflicts were not simply because Europe is in itself a violent place, but because global power was concentrated in neighbouring European nations. Europe ruled the world and fought each other for control.

    That isn't true now. Even if America pulled out of Europe completely overnight the old status quo ante no longer exists. Europe is simply not as important as it was.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,535

    No houses are built? I wonder what all those buildings with 3-5 bedrooms that have been getting built around here are then?
    It's nonsense by Adonis. Housing starts are about 40k per quarter, double what they were at the trough, and almost back to where they were before the financial crisis. Do we need to do a lot more? Yes, but things have been steadily improving year by year.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,841
    Nonsense. Loads of houses are being built near me - the Gov't might well be dangerously exposed to a fall in prices with the help to buy stuff but that's a different matter.
  • archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:



    And as I keep pointing out, that is the very nub of the whole Brexit process. Who knew? Well that man Dave did.

    And as we can see it is what is driving all the rest of it.

    And also as you note, there are only two options, the entire UK remains regulatorily aligned, or some kind of high-fandangled super smart technology and process. The likes of which you described recently.

    As it stands, the one looking more doable is the former.

    You are not really answering the question. The UK remaining aligned may solve the problem in your eyes, but as I pointed out, this would be part of a separate trade agreement, not the withdrawal agreement. And since this agreement is not legally binding until it is signed way in the future, May still needs to agree the backstop text.

    So, what can the backstop text say that will pass the HoC? Because I am absolutely certain that the EU backstop text cannot pass.
    What was the question? What will the HoC tolerate? Well the Chequers agreement neatly squares the NI circle and if you exclude the tail of Brex-o-loons, I believe that they will tolerate that.

    "Not what people voted for" is disingenous bolleaux.
    The question is very simple. What text for the NI backstop will be in the WA that can pass in the HoC. Do you have an answer or just more insults? Because this is a Remainer plan, would be a bit embarrassing if it doesn't actually work.
    Didn't I answer? If the EU accepts Chequers (big if), then Chequers.
    Not close to an answer. What does that mean? Chequers is an approach to a trade agreement, it does not provide an answer on the backstop which needs to be in the withdrawal agreement, if you think it does, say what it is.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    Perhaps there has been more scheming and planning than first thought?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    MaxPB said:

    I'm going to keep saying this until it penetrates your block head, no conservative government would ever put remain back on a ballot paper, it would mean the end of our party for at least a generation, possibly forever.

    The closure of any iconic British manufacturer (Airbus, JLR) as a result of Brexit would mean the end of your party for at least a generation, possibly forever.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,880

    Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.

    https://twitter.com/DanielBShapiro/status/1016435137708544001

    Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.

    Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
    Trump gives every indication of having already decided NATO is over.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Urquhart, scheming? In the Conservative Party?!

    Sacre bleu!
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 3,870
    Gove denies everything, apparently.
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506
    How much importance do you think the PM is giving to the gender balance when she is making Cabinet appointments - and how much importance should she give to gender balance?

    Just asking.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    If he goes a whole new ball game opens up
    Another prominent Brexiteer runs away because Brexit is a steaming pile of shit and he knows it?

    Not entirely clear that is bad news for the PM.

    It's bad news for Brexit...
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    Scott_P said:

    MaxPB said:

    I'm going to keep saying this until it penetrates your block head, no conservative government would ever put remain back on a ballot paper, it would mean the end of our party for at least a generation, possibly forever.

    The closure of any iconic British manufacturer (Airbus, JLR) as a result of Brexit would mean the end of your party for at least a generation, possibly forever.
    No it wouldn't. The voters would blame the company and or the EU.

    As always, don't try original thought, it doesn't work for you single brain cell.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382

    If he goes a whole new ball game opens up
    May would be wise not to trust the duplicitous sod.

    As he did with Boris he will back you one day and condemn you the next.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,535

    Gove denies everything, apparently.

    That's exactly what a plotter would say!
  • rural_voterrural_voter Posts: 2,038
    Dura_Ace said:

    Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.

    https://twitter.com/DanielBShapiro/status/1016435137708544001

    Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.

    Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
    Trump gives every indication of having already decided NATO is over.
    About time. It may have noticed that its former adversary the Warsaw Pact dissolved itself 25 years ago.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786
    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:



    Didn't I answer? If the EU accepts Chequers (big if), then Chequers.

    If the EU accepts Chequers (and I agree it's a big if), I think Parliament will fall in line. Enough people see it as a first step. There will be die hards on both sides that think it gives away too much or too little, but there will be majority cross party support IMO.
    Agree.

    And @williamglenn I don't dispute that all things being equal there is an argument for a second referndum. However, things are most decidedly not equal and I just find it very difficult to get my head around there being a second referendum. I am not 100% sure I want one or it would do any good. The nation has told the government to seek a new settlement with the EU and the government seems to be trying to do that. It is of course a choice between bad options, but I don't see how this can be changed.

    As someone once said, wisely: now is not the time for logic.
    It depends how opinion shifts over the next few weeks. If there is a genuine backlash against Chequers then I agree it could be dangerous, but if not then it could be cathartic and give us a chance to avoid the interminable debate that would follow if the Chequers settlement were imposed on us.
    I'm going to keep saying this until it penetrates your block head, no conservative government would ever put remain back on a ballot paper, it would mean the end of our party for at least a generation, possibly forever. You may be wedded to the EU, the party is not and has never been.
    The party is wedded to power. Giving Corbyn the opportunity to bring down the government over Brexit is not in its short term interests, and imposing a controversial settlement without a specific mandate is not in its long term interests.

    The danger for the Conservatives comes from *not* putting Remain back on a ballot paper.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    The next poll on Brexit should be interesting. Even the residents of Hartlepool must now realise that there's a little more to it than putting a cross on a piece of paper and all foreigners will disappear
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:



    Didn't I answer? If the EU accepts Chequers (big if), then Chequers.

    If the EU accepts Chequers (and I agree it's a big if), I think Parliament will fall in line. Enough people see it as a first step. There will be die hards on both sides that think it gives away too much or too little, but there will be majority cross party support IMO.
    Agree.

    And @williamglenn I don't dispute that all things being equal there is an argument for a second referndum. However, things are most decidedly not equal and I just find it very difficult to get my head around there being a second referendum. I am not 100% sure I want one or it would do any good. The nation has told the government to seek a new settlement with the EU and the government seems to be trying to do that. It is of course a choice between bad options, but I don't see how this can be changed.

    As someone once said, wisely: now is not the time for logic.
    It depends how opinion shifts over the next few weeks. If there is a genuine backlash against Chequers then I agree it could be dangerous, but if not then it could be cathartic and give us a chance to avoid the interminable debate that would follow if the Chequers settlement were imposed on us.
    I'm going to keep saying this until it penetrates your block head, no conservative government would ever put remain back on a ballot paper, it would mean the end of our party for at least a generation, possibly forever. You may be wedded to the EU, the party is not and has never been.
    The party is wedded to power. Giving Corbyn the opportunity to bring down the government over Brexit is not in its short term interests, and imposing a controversial settlement without a specific mandate is not in its long term interests.

    The danger for the Conservatives comes from *not* putting Remain back on a ballot paper.
    Lol, the contortions you go through are actually becoming funny, though a little bit sad.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    MaxPB said:

    The voters would blame the company and or the EU.

    LOL

    Airbus issues a press release blaming Brexit. "The voters won't blame Brexit..."

    Keep taking the tablets. Or not. They don't appear to be working.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559
    Scott_P said:

    MaxPB said:

    I'm going to keep saying this until it penetrates your block head, no conservative government would ever put remain back on a ballot paper, it would mean the end of our party for at least a generation, possibly forever.

    The closure of any iconic British manufacturer (Airbus, JLR) as a result of Brexit would mean the end of your party for at least a generation, possibly forever.
    guff

    iconic british manufacturers have been closing for years

    GKN which is 259 years old, has revenues of £10bn and employs 58,000 people is about to get asset stripped and sold off

    nobody's even mentioning it.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,881
    Yorkcity said:

    If he goes a whole new ball game opens up
    May would be wise not to trust the duplicitous sod.

    As he did with Boris he will back you one day and condemn you the next.
    Gove might be a bit ticked off at not getting FS? May broke with her traditional balance between leavers and remainers.

    Personally I buy the idea that Gove belatedly realised that Boris wasn't up to it, and then realised he had to stop him. More poor judgement originally than duplicitous, although I'm just speculating really.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:



    Didn't I answer? If the EU accepts Chequers (big if), then Chequers.

    If the EU accepts Chequers (and I agree it's a big if), I think Parliament will fall in line. Enough people see it as a first step. There will be die hards on both sides that think it gives away too much or too little, but there will be majority cross party support IMO.
    Agree.

    And @williamglenn I don't dispute that all things being equal there is an argument for a second referndum. However, things are most decidedly not equal and I just find it very difficult to get my head around there being a second referendum. I am not 100% sure I want one or it would do any good. The nation has told the government to seek a new settlement with the EU and the government seems to be trying to do that. It is of course a choice between bad options, but I don't see how this can be changed.

    As someone once said, wisely: now is not the time for logic.
    It depends how opinion shifts over the next few weeks. If there is a genuine backlash against Chequers then I agree it could be dangerous, but if not then it could be cathartic and give us a chance to avoid the interminable debate that would follow if the Chequers settlement were imposed on us.
    I'm going to keep saying this until it penetrates your block head, no conservative government would ever put remain back on a ballot paper, it would mean the end of our party for at least a generation, possibly forever. You may be wedded to the EU, the party is not and has never been.
    The party is wedded to power. Giving Corbyn the opportunity to bring down the government over Brexit is not in its short term interests, and imposing a controversial settlement without a specific mandate is not in its long term interests.

    The danger for the Conservatives comes from *not* putting Remain back on a ballot paper.
    Lol, the contortions you go through are actually becoming funny, though a little bit sad.
    "The Brexit dream is dying."

    Trust Boris to turn what could have been a day of rebellion into a day of mourning.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,957
    MaxPB said:

    Scott_P said:

    MaxPB said:

    I'm going to keep saying this until it penetrates your block head, no conservative government would ever put remain back on a ballot paper, it would mean the end of our party for at least a generation, possibly forever.

    The closure of any iconic British manufacturer (Airbus, JLR) as a result of Brexit would mean the end of your party for at least a generation, possibly forever.
    No it wouldn't. The voters would blame the company and or the EU.

    As always, don't try original thought, it doesn't work for you single brain cell.
    I’ve been told by one very prominent Leaver that ‘It started in Bruxelles’ will be as successful as ‘It started in America’ because there’s enough comments from Leavers prior to the referendum saying it was all Project Fear which will be Leave’s ‘We abolished boom and bust’
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:



    Didn't I answer? If the EU accepts Chequers (big if), then Chequers.

    If the EU accepts Chequers (and I agree it's a big if), I think Parliament will fall in line. Enough people see it as a first step. There will be die hards on both sides that think it gives away too much or too little, but there will be majority cross party support IMO.
    The problem will be if the EU does not accept it.

    TM has no room to water it down and a hard Brexit becomes a very real prospect. It is good to see she has ordered more work on preparation for a hard Brexit
    I think the resignations put that into sharp focus and probably helps the government avoid big concessions.

    Theresa can (rightly) say that, if you don't like this, then wait until Gove and Javid put their hard/WTO brexit forwards.

    I think @AlastairMeeks had a thread on this aspect a few months ago.
    I did indeed:

    http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2017/07/01/everything-is-negotiable-how-the-election-result-may-have-improved-britains-negotiating-position-in-the-brexit-talks/
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143

    Conservative voters:

    twitter.com/goodwinmj/status/1016601113091592192?s=21

    twitter.com/goodwinmj/status/1016603486442663936?s=21

    Unfortunately, he misreads some of the data he is using (which is not entirely his fault, it is confusingly presented).

    He says, "..when given the option -- 'free movement for free trade?' -- an overwhelming majority say no. Most want free movement to stop."

    He appears to be misreading the percentages as percentages of Conservative voters, in which case 59% easily beats 33%, but it is actually that 59% of those who would not trade free movement for free trade support the Conservatives, while only 33% of those who would make that trade do so.

    Since more voters overall would make that trade (1053 vs 527 in the unweighted base) then the balance for Conservative voters is pretty close (347 vs 311), but actually slightly in favour of allowing free movement of people in return for free trade, not overwhelmingly against.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559
    Roger said:

    The next poll on Brexit should be interesting. Even the residents of Hartlepool must now realise that there's a little more to it than putting a cross on a piece of paper and all foreigners will disappear

    they put a cross on a piece of paper, elected Perter Mandelson and then all the foreigners started to appear. Theyre going for doubles or quits
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
    Scott_P said:

    If he goes a whole new ball game opens up
    Another prominent Brexiteer runs away because Brexit is a steaming pile of shit and he knows it?

    Not entirely clear that is bad news for the PM.

    It's bad news for Brexit...
    He was first out of the traps to back her on Sunday.

    Which in the scheme of things means bugger all .
  • glwglw Posts: 9,535
    Scott_P said:

    MaxPB said:

    The voters would blame the company and or the EU.

    LOL

    Airbus issues a press release blaming Brexit. "The voters won't blame Brexit..."

    Keep taking the tablets. Or not. They don't appear to be working.
    Just because they say something it doesn't make it true. Ever since BAE Systems sold its stake to EADS about a decade ago the writing has been on the wall for future UK investment by Airbus, their political masters would rather the work was done at home.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603

    Scott_P said:

    MaxPB said:

    I'm going to keep saying this until it penetrates your block head, no conservative government would ever put remain back on a ballot paper, it would mean the end of our party for at least a generation, possibly forever.

    The closure of any iconic British manufacturer (Airbus, JLR) as a result of Brexit would mean the end of your party for at least a generation, possibly forever.
    guff

    iconic british manufacturers have been closing for years

    GKN which is 259 years old, has revenues of £10bn and employs 58,000 people is about to get asset stripped and sold off

    nobody's even mentioning it.
    By a British company, Melrose. Also, the GKN management plan was to sell the largest division to an American outfit for a huge knockdown price. I'm not sure this is a good example.
  • currystarcurrystar Posts: 1,171

    No houses are built? I wonder what all those buildings with 3-5 bedrooms that have been getting built around here are then?
    South Hampshire is currently one big house building site, it really is quite extraordinairy the number of houses that are being built
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603

    MaxPB said:

    Scott_P said:

    MaxPB said:

    I'm going to keep saying this until it penetrates your block head, no conservative government would ever put remain back on a ballot paper, it would mean the end of our party for at least a generation, possibly forever.

    The closure of any iconic British manufacturer (Airbus, JLR) as a result of Brexit would mean the end of your party for at least a generation, possibly forever.
    No it wouldn't. The voters would blame the company and or the EU.

    As always, don't try original thought, it doesn't work for you single brain cell.
    I’ve been told by one very prominent Leaver that ‘It started in Bruxelles’ will be as successful as ‘It started in America’ because there’s enough comments from Leavers prior to the referendum saying it was all Project Fear which will be Leave’s ‘We abolished boom and bust’
    Maybe, the difference is that if the party is seen to be undoing the public vote then we will be finished, for good. What is it the Bible says, shame for 99 generations? We'd be lucky to escape with just 99.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,232
    I never thought I'd say this, but Theresa seems to have come out of the last few days as a woman reborn. Her government seems refreshed, she relaxed yet emboldened, the nation as one. (DD and Boris meanwhile just feel like so much dead wood, to be hacked away and merrily chucked in the skip.)
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506
    currystar said:

    No houses are built? I wonder what all those buildings with 3-5 bedrooms that have been getting built around here are then?
    South Hampshire is currently one big house building site, it really is quite extraordinairy the number of houses that are being built
    North Oxon and South Northants the same.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074
    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:



    I
    Agree.

    And @williamglenn I don't dispute that all things being equal there is an argument for a second referndum. However, things are most decidedly not equal and I just find it very difficult to get my head around there being a second referendum. I am not 100% sure I want one or it would do any good. The nation has told the government to seek a new settlement with the EU and the government seems to be trying to do that. It is of course a choice between bad options, but I don't see how this can be changed.

    As someone once said, wisely: now is not the time for logic.
    It depends how opinion shifts over the next few weeks. If there is a genuine backlash against Chequers then I agree it could be dangerous, but if not then it could be cathartic and give us a chance to avoid the interminable debate that would follow if the Chequers settlement were imposed on us.
    I'm going to keep saying this until it penetrates your block head, no conservative government would ever put remain back on a ballot paper, it would mean the end of our party for at least a generation, possibly forever. You may be wedded to the EU, the party is not and has never been.
    Really? The Tory party has never been wedded to the EU? The Tory party has until very recently always been pro-the EU. It is the UKIP tendency within it which has turned a party which understood the value of engagement with Europe into one which apparently sees the EU as an enemy.

    It is possible to be sceptical, even highly sceptical, of the EU's structures, political direction and bureaucracy while still recognising that, overall, the positives for Europe as a whole and for Britain, outweigh the negatives. The Tory party used to understand that. It was why one of the best achievements of the EU - the Single Market - was to a very significant extent the brainchild of Britain, a Britain run by a Tory government that would never have had senior politicians saying "Fuck business". It was Labour (see its 1983 manifesto) which was stupid over Europe. Corbyn may still be stuck in 1983 as far as the EU is concerned but the Tory party is now behaving utterly stupidly over the EU - and is doing so in a manner which is detrimental to itself but, more importantly, utterly detrimental to the country's interests.

    That is not - and has not - been the M.O. of the Tory party in most of my lifetime. Still, every so often parties are taken over by their militant tendency. We saw this over Maastricht. We are seeing it now. Tories need to grow up and behave like adults.

    If the facts change - and lots of facts in the world have changed since 23 June 2016 - sensible people reconsider and some may even change their mind.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Scott_P said:

    MaxPB said:

    I'm going to keep saying this until it penetrates your block head, no conservative government would ever put remain back on a ballot paper, it would mean the end of our party for at least a generation, possibly forever.

    The closure of any iconic British manufacturer (Airbus, JLR) as a result of Brexit would mean the end of your party for at least a generation, possibly forever.
    Only if the jobs weren't replaced elsewhere which seems unlikely while we still have full employment.

    Its not just the mines that closed under Thatcher but also "iconic British manufacturers" like British Leyland went defunct too. The party survived that.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,695

    Gove denies everything, apparently.

    Doesn't he always... :D
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559
    MaxPB said:

    Scott_P said:

    MaxPB said:

    I'm going to keep saying this until it penetrates your block head, no conservative government would ever put remain back on a ballot paper, it would mean the end of our party for at least a generation, possibly forever.

    The closure of any iconic British manufacturer (Airbus, JLR) as a result of Brexit would mean the end of your party for at least a generation, possibly forever.
    guff

    iconic british manufacturers have been closing for years

    GKN which is 259 years old, has revenues of £10bn and employs 58,000 people is about to get asset stripped and sold off

    nobody's even mentioning it.
    By a British company, Melrose. Also, the GKN management plan was to sell the largest division to an American outfit for a huge knockdown price. I'm not sure this is a good example.
    Max you appear to think I don't know this. You are looking at this solely from a City view and that simply means sell for the highest price. Melrose have no history of developing businesses or products, they are simply the BTR of our generation. And eventually BTR ran out of things to break up and left a pile of shit behind them.


    It's deja vu all over again.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    GIN1138 said:

    Gove denies everything, apparently.

    Doesn't he always... :D
    As does May. Birds of a feather ... :D
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,001

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:



    Didn't I answer? If the EU accepts Chequers (big if), then Chequers.

    If the EU accepts Chequers (and I agree it's a big if), I think Parliament will fall in line. Enough people see it as a first step. There will be die hards on both sides that think it gives away too much or too little, but there will be majority cross party support IMO.
    Agree.

    And @williamglenn I don't dispute that all things being equal there is an argument for a second referndum. However, things are most decidedly not equal and I just find it very difficult to get my head around there being a second referendum. I am not 100% sure I want one or it would do any good. The nation has told the government to seek a new settlement with the EU and the government seems to be trying to do that. It is of course a choice between bad options, but I don't see how this can be changed.

    As someone once said, wisely: now is not the time for logic.
    It depends how opinion shifts over the next few weeks. If there is a genuine backlash against Chequers then I agree it could be dangerous, but if not then it could be cathartic and give us a chance to avoid the interminable debate that would follow if the Chequers settlement were imposed on us.
    I'm going to keep saying this until it penetrates your block head, no conservative government would ever put remain back on a ballot paper, it would mean the end of our party for at least a generation, possibly forever. You may be wedded to the EU, the party is not and has never been.
    The party is wedded to power. Giving Corbyn the opportunity to bring down the government over Brexit is not in its short term interests, and imposing a controversial settlement without a specific mandate is not in its long term interests.

    The danger for the Conservatives comes from *not* putting Remain back on a ballot paper.
    Right now that would be the danger for the party. There would be a riot
  • FensterFenster Posts: 2,115

    I never thought I'd say this, but Theresa seems to have come out of the last few days as a woman reborn. Her government seems refreshed, she relaxed yet emboldened, the nation as one. (DD and Boris meanwhile just feel like so much dead wood, to be hacked away and merrily chucked in the skip.)

    And it will be lovely for her MPs to knock on voters' doors explaining the greatness of her Brexit deal when the leading Brexiteers in her government have resigned due to betrayal.

    I suppose the EU was always destined to tear the Tories apart. Great opportunity for Corbyn now.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:



    Didn't I answer? If the EU accepts Chequers (big if), then Chequers.

    If the EU accepts Chequers (and I agree it's a big if), I think Parliament will fall in line. Enough people see it as a first step. There will be die hards on both sides that think it gives away too much or too little, but there will be majority cross party support IMO.
    Agree.

    And @williamglenn I don't dispute that all things being equal there is an argument for a second referndum. However, things are most decidedly not equal and I just find it very difficult to get my head around there being a second referendum. I am not 100% sure I want one or it would do any good. The nation has told the government to seek a new settlement with the EU and the government seems to be trying to do that. It is of course a choice between bad options, but I don't see how this can be changed.

    As someone once said, wisely: now is not the time for logic.
    It depends how opinion shifts over the next few weeks. If there is a genuine backlash against Chequers then I agree it could be dangerous, but if not then it could be cathartic and give us a chance to avoid the interminable debate that would follow if the Chequers settlement were imposed on us.
    I'm going to keep saying this until it penetrates your block head, no conservative government would ever put remain back on a ballot paper, it would mean the end of our party for at least a generation, possibly forever. You may be wedded to the EU, the party is not and has never been.
    The party is wedded to power. Giving Corbyn the opportunity to bring down the government over Brexit is not in its short term interests, and imposing a controversial settlement without a specific mandate is not in its long term interests.

    The danger for the Conservatives comes from *not* putting Remain back on a ballot paper.
    Right now that would be the danger for the party. There would be a riot
    Timing is everything. We need to see where things stand in October when the anger has subsided.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,001
    Scott_P said:

    MaxPB said:

    The voters would blame the company and or the EU.

    LOL

    Airbus issues a press release blaming Brexit. "The voters won't blame Brexit..."

    Keep taking the tablets. Or not. They don't appear to be working.
    Airbus have already written to all their workers and frankly they will not be sanguine with the Government if Airbus go.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,695

    GIN1138 said:

    Gove denies everything, apparently.

    Doesn't he always... :D
    As does May. Birds of a feather ... :D
    They'll both scheme themselves to their political doom in the end...
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,038

    Roger said:

    The next poll on Brexit should be interesting. Even the residents of Hartlepool must now realise that there's a little more to it than putting a cross on a piece of paper and all foreigners will disappear

    they put a cross on a piece of paper, elected Perter Mandelson and then all the foreigners started to appear. Theyre going for doubles or quits
    Except all the foreigners didn't start to appear in Hartlepool. 3% non-uk born according to Office of Nat Stats.
  • MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:



    Didn't I answer? If the EU accepts Chequers (big if), then Chequers.

    If the EU accepts Chequers (and I agree it's a big if), I think Parliament will fall in line. Enough people see it as a first step. There will be die hards on both sides that think it gives away too much or too little, but there will be majority cross party support IMO.
    Agree.

    And @williamglenn I don't dispute that all things being equal there is an argument for a second referndum. However, things are most decidedly not equal and I just find it very difficult to get my head around there being a second referendum. I am not 100% sure I want one or it would do any good. The nation has told the government to seek a new settlement with the EU and the government seems to be trying to do that. It is of course a choice between bad options, but I don't see how this can be changed.

    As someone once said, wisely: now is not the time for logic.
    It depends how opinion shifts over the next few weeks. If there is a genuine backlash against Chequers then I agree it could be dangerous, but if not then it could be cathartic and give us a chance to avoid the interminable debate that would follow if the Chequers settlement were imposed on us.
    I'm going to keep saying this until it penetrates your block head, no conservative government would ever put remain back on a ballot paper, it would mean the end of our party for at least a generation, possibly forever. You may be wedded to the EU, the party is not and has never been.
    The party is wedded to power. Giving Corbyn the opportunity to bring down the government over Brexit is not in its short term interests, and imposing a controversial settlement without a specific mandate is not in its long term interests.

    The danger for the Conservatives comes from *not* putting Remain back on a ballot paper.
    Right now that would be the danger for the party. There would be a riot
    Timing is everything. We need to see where things stand in October when the anger has subsided.
    I fear that anger will not subside, it will build
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,232
    Fenster said:

    I never thought I'd say this, but Theresa seems to have come out of the last few days as a woman reborn. Her government seems refreshed, she relaxed yet emboldened, the nation as one. (DD and Boris meanwhile just feel like so much dead wood, to be hacked away and merrily chucked in the skip.)

    And it will be lovely for her MPs to knock on voters' doors explaining the greatness of her Brexit deal when the leading Brexiteers in her government have resigned due to betrayal.

    I suppose the EU was always destined to tear the Tories apart. Great opportunity for Corbyn now.
    It's vital now that Theresa spins her EU deal as an unmitigated triumph. That shouldn't be too difficult - the EU will be helpful with that, and the Cabinet should be able to speak with a single, enthusiastic voice now that the moaning minnies have slouched off. Thereafter if Boris or DD criticise it'll just sound like sour grapes - from a pair of losers who weren't up to the task themselves.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 12,741
    Scott_P said:
    What's the "Hmmmm" for ?

    Sky Sports Racing is the re-brand of At The Races that will launch next year. Ascot was shown on ATR until Racing UK poached the media rights three or four years ago.

    None of this affects the ITV Racing Contract so the arrangement basically will be:

    Sky if you want detailed racing coverage
    ITV if you want racing with fashion, frippery and royals.

    Currently ATR isn't part of the Sky Sports package so you don't need an extra subscription if you have the basic package.

  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,001

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:



    Didn't I answer? If the EU accepts Chequers (big if), then Chequers.

    If the EU accepts Chequers (and I agree it's a big if), I think Parliament will fall in line. Enough people see it as a first step. There will be die hards on both sides that think it gives away too much or too little, but there will be majority cross party support IMO.
    Agree.

    And @williamglenn I don't dispute that all things being equal there is an argument for a second referndum. However, things are most decidedly not equal and I just find it very difficult to get my head around there being a second referendum. I am not 100% sure I want one or it would do any good. The nation has told the government to seek a new settlement with the EU and the government seems to be trying to do that. It is of course a choice between bad options, but I don't see how this can be changed.

    As someone once said, wisely: now is not the time for logic.
    It depends how opinion shifts over the next few weeks. If there is a genuine backlash against Chequers then I agree it could be dangerous, but if not then it could be cathartic and give us a chance to avoid the interminable debate that would follow if the Chequers settlement were imposed on us.
    I'm going to keep saying this until it penetrates your block head, no conservative government would ever put remain back on a ballot paper, it would mean the end of our party for at least a generation, possibly forever. You may be wedded to the EU, the party is not and has never been.
    The party is wedded to power. Giving Corbyn the opportunity to bring down the government over Brexit is not in its short term interests, and imposing a controversial settlement without a specific mandate is not in its long term interests.

    The danger for the Conservatives comes from *not* putting Remain back on a ballot paper.
    Right now that would be the danger for the party. There would be a riot
    Timing is everything. We need to see where things stand in October when the anger has subsided.
    Why would it subside if the EU start making conditions. For the EU it is this deal or no deal (sadly)
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    stodge said:

    None of this affects the ITV Racing Contract

    That's what the hmmm was for. Wasn't clear
This discussion has been closed.