Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » On his first day as a member of the US Senate WH2012 GOP nomin

12357

Comments

  • Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Can someone direct me to a tally of MPs who have changed their minds about Theresa May's deal since the vote was pulled last month?

    If there are any (and I have no idea) I doubt they will say publicly. What’s the upside?
    A knighthood/damehood?
    you need the agonised speech about serious concerns but, with a heavy heart and in consultation with my constituents, I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that this is the right thing for Britain... any connection or the appearance of a connection to a knighthood is purely coincidental.
    This is definitely a market where there is first mover advantage. Yet no one has made the first move yet. Curious.
    Why do you think there's a first-mover advantage here? I'd have thought the converse, any MPs thinking of changing their minds would be looking for cover in numbers.

    Also, they need some vaguely-plausible hook to hang their U-turn on. Some flim-flam from the EU is presumably being lined up for this purpose.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,841
    eek said:

    dixiedean said:

    Anorak said:

    Stupid question (but I've been away for the last 2 weeks): why do we suddenly need loads of extra ferry capacity, when the existing capacity serves our needs perfectly well? What aspect of No Deal means we are suddenly importing and exporting more stuff?

    The same thought occurred to me. AIUI Dover will be blocked due to extra customs checks. However, won't the same checks be needed at Ramsgate, Poole, Hull, etc.? There is still a finite, and presumably reasonably stable, predictable amount of passengers and goods needing to be transported. More ferry capacity is the answer to a question not asked. Extra Processing capacity at Customs is.
    Extra processing capacity at landlocked and full beyond capacity Dover?
    More, or indeed some, processing capacity at other places. More ferries to and from other ports. Fewer into and out of Dover.
    But, no more ferry capacity in total is needed.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,589
    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Anorak said:

    Thread for Grabcoque, in the hope of arresting his maritime derangement: https://twitter.com/ShipBrief/status/1080406268215476224

    He's certainly been all at sea this morning.
    Holed below the waterline...
    On might even mention bilge.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Can someone direct me to a tally of MPs who have changed their minds about Theresa May's deal since the vote was pulled last month?

    If there are any (and I have no idea) I doubt they will say publicly. What’s the upside?
    A knighthood/damehood?
    you need the agonised speech about serious concerns but, with a heavy heart and in consultation with my constituents, I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that this is the right thing for Britain... any connection or the appearance of a connection to a knighthood is purely coincidental.
    This is definitely a market where there is first mover advantage. Yet no one has made the first move yet. Curious.
    Why do you think there's a first-mover advantage here? I'd have thought the converse, any MPs thinking of changing their minds would be looking for cover in numbers.

    Also, they need some vaguely-plausible hook to hang their U-turn on. Some flim-flam from the EU is presumably being lined up for this purpose.
    If you want the knighthood, you have to be a Leader Of Men. (Sexism intended, it'll normally be men who this idea appeals to more.)
  • Back on the Dem side, Harry Enten rated the various presidential options compared to a theoretical generic candidate:

    https://edition.cnn.com/2019/01/02/politics/democrats-2020-electability-elizabeth-warren-amy-klobuchar-sherrod-brown/index.html?utm_medium=social&utm_term=image&utm_content=2019-01-02T12:31:03&utm_source=twCNNp


    Amy Klobuchar: +13
    Sherrod Brown: +12
    Kirsten Gillibrand,: +5
    Beto O'Rourke: +3
    Bernie Sanders: -3
    Elizabeth Warren: -12

    So, lump on Elizabeth Warren?
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,401
    Pulpstar said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Can someone direct me to a tally of MPs who have changed their minds about Theresa May's deal since the vote was pulled last month?

    If there are any (and I have no idea) I doubt they will say publicly. What’s the upside?
    A knighthood/damehood?
    you need the agonised speech about serious concerns but, with a heavy heart and in consultation with my constituents, I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that this is the right thing for Britain... any connection or the appearance of a connection to a knighthood is purely coincidental.
    This is definitely a market where there is first mover advantage. Yet no one has made the first move yet. Curious.
    Most Tory MPs that are either hardcore remainers or ultra-Brexiteers don't seem to think things through much. Witness the recent confidence vote in favour of May where they'd have been better off switching their votes.
    However, most Tory MPs are neither hardcore remainers nor ultra-Brexiteers. The list of potential rebels in December went well beyond those groups and it's from outside those two groups that MPs will start to peel off the rebellion - though not yet, I think.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    edited January 2019
    tlg86 said:

    eek said:

    dixiedean said:

    Anorak said:

    Stupid question (but I've been away for the last 2 weeks): why do we suddenly need loads of extra ferry capacity, when the existing capacity serves our needs perfectly well? What aspect of No Deal means we are suddenly importing and exporting more stuff?

    The same thought occurred to me. AIUI Dover will be blocked due to extra customs checks. However, won't the same checks be needed at Ramsgate, Poole, Hull, etc.? There is still a finite, and presumably reasonably stable, predictable amount of passengers and goods needing to be transported. More ferry capacity is the answer to a question not asked. Extra Processing capacity at Customs is.
    Extra processing capacity at landlocked and full beyond capacity Dover?
    Logically, would it not make sense to move some of the ferries from Dover to Ramsgate? If the limiting factor is processing before boarding, then you won't need so many ferries on Dover-Calais/Dunkirk - or will the existing services be running half empty?
    Dover is not the problem. Calais is. Or any other European port where ferries are parked for days while waiting for the one assigned French customs officer to inspect it. This could rapidly reduce the number of working ferries to zero, should our erstwhile EU partners decide to play silly buggers, or even if they do not but have taken our own government's woeful approach to planning extra capacity for Brexit. At the Dover end, we could just wave everything through (including stowaways) if a crisis loomed. At the French, German, Belgian and Dutch ends, we cannot.

    Edit: and note that using alternative ports makes things worse, not better.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,769
    edited January 2019
    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Anorak said:

    Thread for Grabcoque, in the hope of arresting his maritime derangement: https://twitter.com/ShipBrief/status/1080406268215476224

    He's certainly been all at sea this morning.
    Holed below the waterline...
    He's certainly handed his credibility over on a plate. It's been riveting though.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,236
    Charles said:

    viewcode said:

    Charles said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    I imagine I can hear Orff's O Fortuna in the background when I read this.

    I do like that piece
    "...[Arthur] Ready my knights for battle; they will ride with their King once more. I have lived through others far too long: Lancelot carried my honor and Guinevere my guilt; my knights have fought my causes and Mordred carries my sins. Now, at last, I will rule. [Aide] Guards. Knights. Squires. Prepare for battle..." (Excalibur, John Boorman, 1981)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16Y_as3nHUY

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=iiE5mE0ZorA

    Temple of Doom
    The guy who used to do (but no longer does) "Every Frame A Painting" did a sideproject called "Sounds Like Temp". When editing a film the editor may overlay an existing piece of music (the "temp track") to help with the beats. An original tune is then recomposed to prevent a copyright claim. But because the beats are now set, the new tune may sound uncannily like the old one.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,136
    tlg86 said:

    eek said:

    dixiedean said:

    Anorak said:

    Stupid question (but I've been away for the last 2 weeks): why do we suddenly need loads of extra ferry capacity, when the existing capacity serves our needs perfectly well? What aspect of No Deal means we are suddenly importing and exporting more stuff?

    The same thought occurred to me. AIUI Dover will be blocked due to extra customs checks. However, won't the same checks be needed at Ramsgate, Poole, Hull, etc.? There is still a finite, and presumably reasonably stable, predictable amount of passengers and goods needing to be transported. More ferry capacity is the answer to a question not asked. Extra Processing capacity at Customs is.
    Extra processing capacity at landlocked and full beyond capacity Dover?
    Logically, would it not make sense to move some of the ferries from Dover to Ramsgate? If the limiting factor is processing before boarding, then you won't need so many ferries on Dover-Calais/Dunkirk - or will the existing services be running half empty?
    Speaking as a cross-channel ferry expert (well, I have twitter) I would opine that the berths at Ramsgate will be too narrow to accommodate the Dover ferries, which have developed a broader girth due to millions of years of evolution in the lower-Kent ecosystem.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Can someone direct me to a tally of MPs who have changed their minds about Theresa May's deal since the vote was pulled last month?

    If there are any (and I have no idea) I doubt they will say publicly. What’s the upside?
    A knighthood/damehood?
    you need the agonised speech about serious concerns but, with a heavy heart and in consultation with my constituents, I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that this is the right thing for Britain... any connection or the appearance of a connection to a knighthood is purely coincidental.
    This is definitely a market where there is first mover advantage. Yet no one has made the first move yet. Curious.
    First mover gets publicly laughed at

    Either it’s happening privately or it’s bit happening IMV
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,961
    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Anorak said:

    Thread for Grabcoque, in the hope of arresting his maritime derangement: https://twitter.com/ShipBrief/status/1080406268215476224

    He's certainly been all at sea this morning.
    Holed below the waterline...
    He's certainly handed his credibility over on a plate. It's been riveting though.
    The puns just roll on, roll off.....
  • Which elections does 2019 bring (except a potential UK one)?

    Australia
    Canada
    Denmark
    EU
    Greece

    India if you're feeling brave?

    ?
  • Harris_TweedHarris_Tweed Posts: 1,300

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Can someone direct me to a tally of MPs who have changed their minds about Theresa May's deal since the vote was pulled last month?

    If there are any (and I have no idea) I doubt they will say publicly. What’s the upside?
    A knighthood/damehood?
    you need the agonised speech about serious concerns but, with a heavy heart and in consultation with my constituents, I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that this is the right thing for Britain... any connection or the appearance of a connection to a knighthood is purely coincidental.
    This is definitely a market where there is first mover advantage. Yet no one has made the first move yet. Curious.
    Why do you think there's a first-mover advantage here? I'd have thought the converse, any MPs thinking of changing their minds would be looking for cover in numbers.

    Also, they need some vaguely-plausible hook to hang their U-turn on. Some flim-flam from the EU is presumably being lined up for this purpose.
    Agreed. No advantage in being the backbencher from Dunny-on-the-Wold being called a traitor on the front of the Express. Far better to be the nth one three days later when everyone's bored with the "crmbling rebellion" story.

    I think the hook, absent any actual changes to the deal, could be something like "we must remember that the detail of the future relationship is still up for grabs and I'll be fighting to make it look more Brexity/Remainy*, rather than risking a no deal/no Brexit* at this stage of the process." (*delete as appropriate)
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    Back on the Dem side, Harry Enten rated the various presidential options compared to a theoretical generic candidate:

    https://edition.cnn.com/2019/01/02/politics/democrats-2020-electability-elizabeth-warren-amy-klobuchar-sherrod-brown/index.html?utm_medium=social&utm_term=image&utm_content=2019-01-02T12:31:03&utm_source=twCNNp


    Amy Klobuchar: +13
    Sherrod Brown: +12
    Kirsten Gillibrand,: +5
    Beto O'Rourke: +3
    Bernie Sanders: -3
    Elizabeth Warren: -12

    So, lump on Elizabeth Warren?
    At this stage it is all about name recognition which is why the septuagenarians on both sides who fought the time before, and the time before that, are getting all the attention here -- Warren, Biden and, yes, Mitt Romney.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,136

    Back on the Dem side, Harry Enten rated the various presidential options compared to a theoretical generic candidate:

    https://edition.cnn.com/2019/01/02/politics/democrats-2020-electability-elizabeth-warren-amy-klobuchar-sherrod-brown/index.html?utm_medium=social&utm_term=image&utm_content=2019-01-02T12:31:03&utm_source=twCNNp


    Amy Klobuchar: +13
    Sherrod Brown: +12
    Kirsten Gillibrand,: +5
    Beto O'Rourke: +3
    Bernie Sanders: -3
    Elizabeth Warren: -12

    So, lump on Elizabeth Warren?
    They picked an unpopular lady who was shit at politics last time and she won the popular vote, I can't see why they'd change the formula.
  • eekeek Posts: 24,797

    tlg86 said:

    eek said:

    dixiedean said:

    Anorak said:

    Stupid question (but I've been away for the last 2 weeks): why do we suddenly need loads of extra ferry capacity, when the existing capacity serves our needs perfectly well? What aspect of No Deal means we are suddenly importing and exporting more stuff?

    The same thought occurred to me. AIUI Dover will be blocked due to extra customs checks. However, won't the same checks be needed at Ramsgate, Poole, Hull, etc.? There is still a finite, and presumably reasonably stable, predictable amount of passengers and goods needing to be transported. More ferry capacity is the answer to a question not asked. Extra Processing capacity at Customs is.
    Extra processing capacity at landlocked and full beyond capacity Dover?
    Logically, would it not make sense to move some of the ferries from Dover to Ramsgate? If the limiting factor is processing before boarding, then you won't need so many ferries on Dover-Calais/Dunkirk - or will the existing services be running half empty?
    Dover is not the problem. Calais is. Or any other European port where ferries are parked for days while waiting for the one assigned French customs officer to inspect it. This could rapidly reduce the number of working ferries to zero, should our erstwhile EU partners decide to play silly buggers, or even if they do not but have taken our own government's woeful approach to planning extra capacity for Brexit. At the Dover end, we could just wave everything through (including stowaways) if a crisis loomed. At the French, German, Belgian and Dutch ends, we cannot.

    Edit: and note that using alternative ports makes things worse, not better.
    True but we would end up playing the same game immediately at Fishguard - which would definitely cause problems for Ireland....
  • Back on the Dem side, Harry Enten rated the various presidential options compared to a theoretical generic candidate:

    https://edition.cnn.com/2019/01/02/politics/democrats-2020-electability-elizabeth-warren-amy-klobuchar-sherrod-brown/index.html?utm_medium=social&utm_term=image&utm_content=2019-01-02T12:31:03&utm_source=twCNNp


    Amy Klobuchar: +13
    Sherrod Brown: +12
    Kirsten Gillibrand,: +5
    Beto O'Rourke: +3
    Bernie Sanders: -3
    Elizabeth Warren: -12

    So, lump on Elizabeth Warren?
    I am yet to understand a single sort of voter who did not vote for Clinton but would vote for Warren, that would not do so for the generic Democrat.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    edited January 2019
    Paging @Edmundintokyo

    Klobuchar is with Betway at 40-1 for POTUS.

    They allowed me all the £40 I asked for too.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,769

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Anorak said:

    Thread for Grabcoque, in the hope of arresting his maritime derangement: https://twitter.com/ShipBrief/status/1080406268215476224

    He's certainly been all at sea this morning.
    Holed below the waterline...
    He's certainly handed his credibility over on a plate. It's been riveting though.
    The puns just roll on, roll off.....
    You're ramping things up...
  • Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Can someone direct me to a tally of MPs who have changed their minds about Theresa May's deal since the vote was pulled last month?

    If there are any (and I have no idea) I doubt they will say publicly. What’s the upside?
    A knighthood/damehood?
    you need the agonised speech about serious concerns but, with a heavy heart and in consultation with my constituents, I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that this is the right thing for Britain... any connection or the appearance of a connection to a knighthood is purely coincidental.
    This is definitely a market where there is first mover advantage. Yet no one has made the first move yet. Curious.
    First mover gets publicly laughed at

    Either it’s happening privately or it’s bit happening IMV
    The likely candidates should be pretty much inured to the laughter of the public, no?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,094
    eek said:

    tlg86 said:

    eek said:

    dixiedean said:

    Anorak said:

    Stupid question (but I've been away for the last 2 weeks): why do we suddenly need loads of extra ferry capacity, when the existing capacity serves our needs perfectly well? What aspect of No Deal means we are suddenly importing and exporting more stuff?

    The same thought occurred to me. AIUI Dover will be blocked due to extra customs checks. However, won't the same checks be needed at Ramsgate, Poole, Hull, etc.? There is still a finite, and presumably reasonably stable, predictable amount of passengers and goods needing to be transported. More ferry capacity is the answer to a question not asked. Extra Processing capacity at Customs is.
    Extra processing capacity at landlocked and full beyond capacity Dover?
    Logically, would it not make sense to move some of the ferries from Dover to Ramsgate? If the limiting factor is processing before boarding, then you won't need so many ferries on Dover-Calais/Dunkirk - or will the existing services be running half empty?
    Dover is not the problem. Calais is. Or any other European port where ferries are parked for days while waiting for the one assigned French customs officer to inspect it. This could rapidly reduce the number of working ferries to zero, should our erstwhile EU partners decide to play silly buggers, or even if they do not but have taken our own government's woeful approach to planning extra capacity for Brexit. At the Dover end, we could just wave everything through (including stowaways) if a crisis loomed. At the French, German, Belgian and Dutch ends, we cannot.

    Edit: and note that using alternative ports makes things worse, not better.
    True but we would end up playing the same game immediately at Fishguard - which would definitely cause problems for Ireland....
    I don't think that's a very constructive way to be looking at international relations.
  • Harris_TweedHarris_Tweed Posts: 1,300
    IanB2 said:

    eek said:

    tlg86 said:

    eek said:

    dixiedean said:

    Anorak said:

    Stupid question (but I've been away for the last 2 weeks): why do we suddenly need loads of extra ferry capacity, when the existing capacity serves our needs perfectly well? What aspect of No Deal means we are suddenly importing and exporting more stuff?

    The same thought occurred to me. AIUI Dover will be blocked due to extra customs checks. However, won't the same checks be needed at Ramsgate, Poole, Hull, etc.? There is still a finite, and presumably reasonably stable, predictable amount of passengers and goods needing to be transported. More ferry capacity is the answer to a question not asked. Extra Processing capacity at Customs is.
    Extra processing capacity at landlocked and full beyond capacity Dover?
    Logically, would it not make sense to move some of the ferries from Dover to Ramsgate? If the limiting factor is processing before boarding, then you won't need so many ferries on Dover-Calais/Dunkirk - or will the existing services be running half empty?
    Dover is not the problem. Calais is. Or any other European port where ferries are parked for days while waiting for the one assigned French customs officer to inspect it. This could rapidly reduce the number of working ferries to zero, should our erstwhile EU partners decide to play silly buggers, or even if they do not but have taken our own government's woeful approach to planning extra capacity for Brexit. At the Dover end, we could just wave everything through (including stowaways) if a crisis loomed. At the French, German, Belgian and Dutch ends, we cannot.

    Edit: and note that using alternative ports makes things worse, not better.
    True but we would end up playing the same game immediately at Fishguard - which would definitely cause problems for Ireland....
    I don't think that's a very constructive way to be looking at international relations.
    Quaint :)
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    eek said:

    tlg86 said:

    eek said:

    dixiedean said:

    Anorak said:

    Stupid question (but I've been away for the last 2 weeks): why do we suddenly need loads of extra ferry capacity, when the existing capacity serves our needs perfectly well? What aspect of No Deal means we are suddenly importing and exporting more stuff?

    The same thought occurred to me. AIUI Dover will be blocked due to extra customs checks. However, won't the same checks be needed at Ramsgate, Poole, Hull, etc.? There is still a finite, and presumably reasonably stable, predictable amount of passengers and goods needing to be transported. More ferry capacity is the answer to a question not asked. Extra Processing capacity at Customs is.
    Extra processing capacity at landlocked and full beyond capacity Dover?
    Logically, would it not make sense to move some of the ferries from Dover to Ramsgate? If the limiting factor is processing before boarding, then you won't need so many ferries on Dover-Calais/Dunkirk - or will the existing services be running half empty?
    Dover is not the problem. Calais is. Or any other European port where ferries are parked for days while waiting for the one assigned French customs officer to inspect it. This could rapidly reduce the number of working ferries to zero, should our erstwhile EU partners decide to play silly buggers, or even if they do not but have taken our own government's woeful approach to planning extra capacity for Brexit. At the Dover end, we could just wave everything through (including stowaways) if a crisis loomed. At the French, German, Belgian and Dutch ends, we cannot.

    Edit: and note that using alternative ports makes things worse, not better.
    True but we would end up playing the same game immediately at Fishguard - which would definitely cause problems for Ireland....
    We'd not want to, as it would harm us. Even without game-playing, the new regime would need extra capacity that is just not there. Using alternative ports makes things worse, because that too would need more capacity.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,858

    We had a funny moment a few months back when some leavers pointed at some undeveloped land right by the Eurotunnel terminal that they said could be used to store lorries. They'd checked Google Maps.

    If they'd actually have used their brains they'd have realised that undeveloped land was actually a very steep slope leading up onto the North Downs ...

    No Deal 'planning' is fiendishly difficult to get right. Too much and it's project fear and/or a terrible waste of money. Too little and it is either spiking our negotiating position or it's complacency verging on the criminal.

    No doubt there is a sweet spot, a goldilocks level of NDP that is just bang on the button, but finding it would be a challenge for the most artful and accomplished of politicians.

    No surprise, then, that Chris Grayling is struggling.

    Let's cut him some slack.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,589

    Back on the Dem side, Harry Enten rated the various presidential options compared to a theoretical generic candidate:

    https://edition.cnn.com/2019/01/02/politics/democrats-2020-electability-elizabeth-warren-amy-klobuchar-sherrod-brown/index.html?utm_medium=social&utm_term=image&utm_content=2019-01-02T12:31:03&utm_source=twCNNp


    Amy Klobuchar: +13
    Sherrod Brown: +12
    Kirsten Gillibrand,: +5
    Beto O'Rourke: +3
    Bernie Sanders: -3
    Elizabeth Warren: -12

    So, lump on Elizabeth Warren?
    At this stage it is all about name recognition which is why the septuagenarians on both sides who fought the time before, and the time before that, are getting all the attention here -- Warren, Biden and, yes, Mitt Romney.
    Except that people actually quite like Biden.
  • Just seen this in the comments under the Beeb story about Seaborne
    1644. Posted by Anti Brexit BBC is the why we cannot trust the BBC on
    14 minutes ago
    So

    There it is

    Too late Remainers....the Dye is Caste

    We've crossed the Rubicon

    Deal or no Deal with the EU

    It is a pity the BBC does not investigate the EU migrants in dinghies who arrive from France

    The BBC are shameless in their skewed anti brexit stories, like Khan, they deliberately undermine ....and are a sad reflection on how low progressives have sunk
    Sort of thing that makes me proud to be a died in the wall leaver.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,961
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Anorak said:

    Thread for Grabcoque, in the hope of arresting his maritime derangement: https://twitter.com/ShipBrief/status/1080406268215476224

    He's certainly been all at sea this morning.
    Holed below the waterline...
    He's certainly handed his credibility over on a plate. It's been riveting though.
    The puns just roll on, roll off.....
    You're ramping things up...
    But this ferry pun could be terminal.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Can someone direct me to a tally of MPs who have changed their minds about Theresa May's deal since the vote was pulled last month?

    If there are any (and I have no idea) I doubt they will say publicly. What’s the upside?
    A knighthood/damehood?
    you need the agonised speech about serious concerns but, with a heavy heart and in consultation with my constituents, I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that this is the right thing for Britain... any connection or the appearance of a connection to a knighthood is purely coincidental.
    This is definitely a market where there is first mover advantage. Yet no one has made the first move yet. Curious.
    First mover gets publicly laughed at

    Either it’s happening privately or it’s bit happening IMV
    The likely candidates should be pretty much inured to the laughter of the public, no?
    Better to be day 3 as someone else posted upthread
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Anorak said:

    Thread for Grabcoque, in the hope of arresting his maritime derangement: https://twitter.com/ShipBrief/status/1080406268215476224

    He's certainly been all at sea this morning.
    Holed below the waterline...
    He's certainly handed his credibility over on a plate. It's been riveting though.
    The puns just roll on, roll off.....
    You're ramping things up...
    But this ferry pun could be terminal.
    Nah. It’s the herald of free enterprise
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,589

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Anorak said:

    Thread for Grabcoque, in the hope of arresting his maritime derangement: https://twitter.com/ShipBrief/status/1080406268215476224

    He's certainly been all at sea this morning.
    Holed below the waterline...
    He's certainly handed his credibility over on a plate. It's been riveting though.
    The puns just roll on, roll off.....
    You're ramping things up...
    But this ferry pun could be terminal.
    In dire straits, certainly.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,589
    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Anorak said:

    Thread for Grabcoque, in the hope of arresting his maritime derangement: https://twitter.com/ShipBrief/status/1080406268215476224

    He's certainly been all at sea this morning.
    Holed below the waterline...
    He's certainly handed his credibility over on a plate. It's been riveting though.
    The puns just roll on, roll off.....
    You're ramping things up...
    But this ferry pun could be terminal.
    Nah. It’s the herald of free enterprise
    You exaggerate - more of a pilot program.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,769
    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Anorak said:

    Thread for Grabcoque, in the hope of arresting his maritime derangement: https://twitter.com/ShipBrief/status/1080406268215476224

    He's certainly been all at sea this morning.
    Holed below the waterline...
    He's certainly handed his credibility over on a plate. It's been riveting though.
    The puns just roll on, roll off.....
    You're ramping things up...
    But this ferry pun could be terminal.
    Nah. It’s the herald of free enterprise
    That one merits astern rebuke.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,858
    Pulpstar said:

    Paging @Edmundintokyo

    Klobuchar is with Betway at 40-1 for POTUS.

    They allowed me all the £40 I asked for too.

    That looks like value. 25 on BF.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,589
    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Anorak said:

    Thread for Grabcoque, in the hope of arresting his maritime derangement: https://twitter.com/ShipBrief/status/1080406268215476224

    He's certainly been all at sea this morning.
    Holed below the waterline...
    He's certainly handed his credibility over on a plate. It's been riveting though.
    The puns just roll on, roll off.....
    You're ramping things up...
    But this ferry pun could be terminal.
    Nah. It’s the herald of free enterprise
    That one merits astern rebuke.
    We bow to your ingenuity.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,136

    Back on the Dem side, Harry Enten rated the various presidential options compared to a theoretical generic candidate:

    https://edition.cnn.com/2019/01/02/politics/democrats-2020-electability-elizabeth-warren-amy-klobuchar-sherrod-brown/index.html?utm_medium=social&utm_term=image&utm_content=2019-01-02T12:31:03&utm_source=twCNNp


    Amy Klobuchar: +13
    Sherrod Brown: +12
    Kirsten Gillibrand,: +5
    Beto O'Rourke: +3
    Bernie Sanders: -3
    Elizabeth Warren: -12

    So, lump on Elizabeth Warren?
    I am yet to understand a single sort of voter who did not vote for Clinton but would vote for Warren, that would not do so for the generic Democrat.
    Warren has this whole anti-corporatist thing, whereas one of Hillary's problems was that she was thought to be corrupt for trousering humungous speaking fees from banks. These were some of the people Trump was aiming for with the "crooked Hillary" line and by saying "Bernie Sanders" a lot, and he definitely got some while others abstained, so there's definitely a constituency there. However, it's complicated by an intersectional turf war between Warren and the Bernie Bro's.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    edited January 2019
    Off the chart mental (Lilico, that is!)
    https://twitter.com/andrew_lilico/status/1080446162962911232
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,769
    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Anorak said:

    Thread for Grabcoque, in the hope of arresting his maritime derangement: https://twitter.com/ShipBrief/status/1080406268215476224

    He's certainly been all at sea this morning.
    Holed below the waterline...
    He's certainly handed his credibility over on a plate. It's been riveting though.
    The puns just roll on, roll off.....
    You're ramping things up...
    But this ferry pun could be terminal.
    Nah. It’s the herald of free enterprise
    That one merits astern rebuke.
    We bow to your ingenuity.
    I had a feeling somebody would deck me for that one.

    But let's try and funnel our discussion more productively.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    kinabalu said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Paging @Edmundintokyo

    Klobuchar is with Betway at 40-1 for POTUS.

    They allowed me all the £40 I asked for too.

    That looks like value. 25 on BF.
    Good luck but I fear ending up with a dozen or more losers, even if I have the winner. Last time, Hillary scared off the other challengers as she had it sewn up. This year it will be more like the Republicans were four years ago, with more than a dozen fighting it out.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,401
    Anorak said:
    Not especially so (this is from 2016 but things won't have changed that much):

    https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/study-finds-uk-is-second-most-powerful-country-in-the-world/
  • eekeek Posts: 24,797
    The difference between what is an economic migrant and a refugee seems to be far more complex than I would have thought it was. Surely someone sat anywhere in Europe has already successfully fled the persecution they were fleeing...
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842

    kinabalu said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Paging @Edmundintokyo

    Klobuchar is with Betway at 40-1 for POTUS.

    They allowed me all the £40 I asked for too.

    That looks like value. 25 on BF.
    Good luck but I fear ending up with a dozen or more losers, even if I have the winner. Last time, Hillary scared off the other challengers as she had it sewn up. This year it will be more like the Republicans were four years ago, with more than a dozen fighting it out.
    If we can back a dozen losers and the winner at 40-1, then we are ahead are we not ?
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Nigelb said:

    Back on the Dem side, Harry Enten rated the various presidential options compared to a theoretical generic candidate:

    https://edition.cnn.com/2019/01/02/politics/democrats-2020-electability-elizabeth-warren-amy-klobuchar-sherrod-brown/index.html?utm_medium=social&utm_term=image&utm_content=2019-01-02T12:31:03&utm_source=twCNNp


    Amy Klobuchar: +13
    Sherrod Brown: +12
    Kirsten Gillibrand,: +5
    Beto O'Rourke: +3
    Bernie Sanders: -3
    Elizabeth Warren: -12

    So, lump on Elizabeth Warren?
    At this stage it is all about name recognition which is why the septuagenarians on both sides who fought the time before, and the time before that, are getting all the attention here -- Warren, Biden and, yes, Mitt Romney.
    Except that people actually quite like Biden.
    Biden has twice run for POTUS and flopped both times. He is also now 76 years old.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621

    Anorak said:
    Not especially so (this is from 2016 but things won't have changed that much):

    https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/study-finds-uk-is-second-most-powerful-country-in-the-world/
    "Only 2 global powers". I give you China, which demolishes his argument all on its own. Also arguably Russia and France.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    Anorak said:
    Not especially so (this is from 2016 but things won't have changed that much):

    https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/study-finds-uk-is-second-most-powerful-country-in-the-world/
    It’s a bit like saying Dopey is the second prettiest of Snow White and the Seven Dwarves.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,405

    eek said:

    Rexel56 said:

    Lots of talk about the man from the Hull Council estate... a city I know well having been born there and lived until I was 18, family live their including a son who moved from leafy Berkshire to take a Physics degree and has stayed there to teach in an outstanding Academy school...

    ... the city did have a substantial majority for leave and I’ve no doubt that this was driven by a combination of (1) a sense that the city had been neglected by successive governments since the collapse of fishing, automation of the docks and the loss of industry such as Imperial Typewriters... all in the 1970s... and (2) levels of East European immigration, especially from Poland (though the city has had a Polich community since WWII).

    The City has improved a great deal in the past few years, the City of Culture events in 2017 were a significant boost and these have continued. The waterfront and Old Town are thriving with restaurants, bars and both residential and commercial property available at reasonable rent... out of the centre, a family member has just bought a beautifully restored Edwardian, 4 bed terrace for £190k.

    What the city suffers from is its remoteness and the challenge of attracting major employers who will be put off by the limited pool of skilled labour and difficulty of persuading staff to relocate. Channel 4 HQ would have been a brilliant win for the city, but it was never going to happen. What would help? Rail upgrades to Leeds, Manchester and Liverpool certainly. Public Sector organisations to be relocated. Most of all, IMHO, a major, sustained campaign to incentivise commerce and industry into the city backed by promotion that it can be a great place to live. And a rocket up the local education authority or rapid academisation of all schools.

    What will Brexit do for the man in the housing authority property? Not a lot. If he had skills now he would be employed and well paid, even in Hull. If there is a rapid exodus of the Polish community it will be dreadful for the local economy.

    I chose Hull as an example of somewhere that voted Leave and someone recently told me it had one of the largest council estates in Britain. It sounds like it is on the up but it does seem geographically isolated.
    It's a shame you picked Hull. Stoke, Crewe, Preston, Darlington all have similar problems without the isolation issue....
    Crewe? It's one of the busiest train stations in the UK with no less than six railway lines converging on it.
    Train station?!?

    Train station?!?

    It is a Railway Station!!!!!!!!!
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840

    Back on the Dem side, Harry Enten rated the various presidential options compared to a theoretical generic candidate:

    https://edition.cnn.com/2019/01/02/politics/democrats-2020-electability-elizabeth-warren-amy-klobuchar-sherrod-brown/index.html?utm_medium=social&utm_term=image&utm_content=2019-01-02T12:31:03&utm_source=twCNNp


    Amy Klobuchar: +13
    Sherrod Brown: +12
    Kirsten Gillibrand,: +5
    Beto O'Rourke: +3
    Bernie Sanders: -3
    Elizabeth Warren: -12

    So, lump on Elizabeth Warren?
    I am yet to understand a single sort of voter who did not vote for Clinton but would vote for Warren, that would not do so for the generic Democrat.
    Warren has this whole anti-corporatist thing, whereas one of Hillary's problems was that she was thought to be corrupt for trousering humungous speaking fees from banks. These were some of the people Trump was aiming for with the "crooked Hillary" line and by saying "Bernie Sanders" a lot, and he definitely got some while others abstained, so there's definitely a constituency there. However, it's complicated by an intersectional turf war between Warren and the Bernie Bro's.
    I haven't really looked into her that much TBH but from the little I've seen she would appeal to me more than Hillary and what I imagine a generic democrat would look like, although I feel the Democrat party is shifting more in a direction I would be comfortable with so I'm judging that generic candidate as not a left of the party.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Anorak said:

    Thread for Grabcoque, in the hope of arresting his maritime derangement: https://twitter.com/ShipBrief/status/1080406268215476224

    He's certainly been all at sea this morning.
    Holed below the waterline...
    He's certainly handed his credibility over on a plate. It's been riveting though.
    The puns just roll on, roll off.....
    You're ramping things up...
    But this ferry pun could be terminal.
    Nah. It’s the herald of free enterprise
    That one merits astern rebuke.
    I’d make you a marchioness if you’d change your vote
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,769
    edited January 2019
    Anorak said:

    Anorak said:
    Not especially so (this is from 2016 but things won't have changed that much):

    https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/study-finds-uk-is-second-most-powerful-country-in-the-world/
    "Only 2 global powers". I give you China, which demolishes his argument all on its own. Also arguably Russia and France.
    The argument is that for all the size of China's military it doesn't have the capability to deploy it outside the immediate area. Britain does. Therefore Britain can act globally and China only regionally.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,236
    Anorak said:
    It depresses me that Andrew is so well thought of, since (as I've gone off about before on here, possibly more than once) he doesn't understand numbers.
  • eek said:

    The difference between what is an economic migrant and a refugee seems to be far more complex than I would have thought it was. Surely someone sat anywhere in Europe has already successfully fled the persecution they were fleeing...
    Yes, you are "required" to seek asylum in the first safe country.

    The question is, what happens if you don't.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,236

    Anorak said:
    Not especially so (this is from 2016 but things won't have changed that much):

    https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/study-finds-uk-is-second-most-powerful-country-in-the-world/
    1) Take the numbers in that table
    2) Cut-and-paste them into Excel
    3) Do a bar chart.

    Then have a think about whether their cutoff points were reasonable.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,769
    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Anorak said:

    Thread for Grabcoque, in the hope of arresting his maritime derangement: https://twitter.com/ShipBrief/status/1080406268215476224

    He's certainly been all at sea this morning.
    Holed below the waterline...
    He's certainly handed his credibility over on a plate. It's been riveting though.
    The puns just roll on, roll off.....
    You're ramping things up...
    But this ferry pun could be terminal.
    Nah. It’s the herald of free enterprise
    That one merits astern rebuke.
    I’d make you a marchioness if you’d change your vote
    My goodness, you are sinking to some titanic clangers this afternoon.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    ydoethur said:

    Anorak said:

    Anorak said:
    Not especially so (this is from 2016 but things won't have changed that much):

    https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/study-finds-uk-is-second-most-powerful-country-in-the-world/
    "Only 2 global powers". I give you China, which demolishes his argument all on its own. Also arguably Russia and France.
    The argument is that for all the size of China's military it doesn't have the capability to deploy it outside the immediate area. Britain does. Therefore Britain can act globally and China only regionally.
    You're confusing Global Power with Global Military Power.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,589
    ydoethur said:

    Anorak said:

    Anorak said:
    Not especially so (this is from 2016 but things won't have changed that much):

    https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/study-finds-uk-is-second-most-powerful-country-in-the-world/
    "Only 2 global powers". I give you China, which demolishes his argument all on its own. Also arguably Russia and France.
    The argument is that for all the size of China's military it doesn't have the capability to deploy it outside the immediate area. Britain does. Therefore Britain can act globally and China only regionally.
    That is beginning to be untrue. For example:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_People's_Liberation_Army_Support_Base_in_Djibouti
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,236
    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Anorak said:

    Thread for Grabcoque, in the hope of arresting his maritime derangement: https://twitter.com/ShipBrief/status/1080406268215476224

    He's certainly been all at sea this morning.
    Holed below the waterline...
    He's certainly handed his credibility over on a plate. It's been riveting though.
    The puns just roll on, roll off.....
    You're ramping things up...
    But this ferry pun could be terminal.
    Nah. It’s the herald of free enterprise
    That one merits astern rebuke.
    I’d make you a marchioness if you’d change your vote
    My goodness, you are sinking to some titanic clangers this afternoon.
    I think you're Lusing it, Tania.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Would you also say that about @Cyclefree

    She made the same point yesterday (and I agree with her)

    We have a moral duty to assist asylum seekers. We may be interested in economic migrants. We are not interested in law breakers.

    Are any of those views unethical?

    It does not help to conflate the categories
  • eek said:

    The difference between what is an economic migrant and a refugee seems to be far more complex than I would have thought it was. Surely someone sat anywhere in Europe has already successfully fled the persecution they were fleeing...
    The prickish aspect is that the complexities shouldn't even be considered just to encourager les autres, particularly in the context of this kind of crap currying favour with other pricks who may help his leadership bid.
  • eek said:

    The difference between what is an economic migrant and a refugee seems to be far more complex than I would have thought it was. Surely someone sat anywhere in Europe has already successfully fled the persecution they were fleeing...
    Yes, you are "required" to seek asylum in the first safe country.

    The question is, what happens if you don't.
    The EU is borderless so the asylum seekers should be free to seek asylum in any EU country as soon as they reach the safety of the EU.
  • Back on the Dem side, Harry Enten rated the various presidential options compared to a theoretical generic candidate:

    https://edition.cnn.com/2019/01/02/politics/democrats-2020-electability-elizabeth-warren-amy-klobuchar-sherrod-brown/index.html?utm_medium=social&utm_term=image&utm_content=2019-01-02T12:31:03&utm_source=twCNNp


    Amy Klobuchar: +13
    Sherrod Brown: +12
    Kirsten Gillibrand,: +5
    Beto O'Rourke: +3
    Bernie Sanders: -3
    Elizabeth Warren: -12

    So, lump on Elizabeth Warren?
    I am yet to understand a single sort of voter who did not vote for Clinton but would vote for Warren, that would not do so for the generic Democrat.
    Warren has this whole anti-corporatist thing, whereas one of Hillary's problems was that she was thought to be corrupt for trousering humungous speaking fees from banks. These were some of the people Trump was aiming for with the "crooked Hillary" line and by saying "Bernie Sanders" a lot, and he definitely got some while others abstained, so there's definitely a constituency there. However, it's complicated by an intersectional turf war between Warren and the Bernie Bro's.
    OK, thanks. I *sort* of see it. I doubt it is enough though.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,769
    Anorak said:

    ydoethur said:

    Anorak said:

    Anorak said:
    Not especially so (this is from 2016 but things won't have changed that much):

    https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/study-finds-uk-is-second-most-powerful-country-in-the-world/
    "Only 2 global powers". I give you China, which demolishes his argument all on its own. Also arguably Russia and France.
    The argument is that for all the size of China's military it doesn't have the capability to deploy it outside the immediate area. Britain does. Therefore Britain can act globally and China only regionally.
    You're confusing Global Power with Global Military Power.
    That's what we're talking about, if you read the original post.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,094
    viewcode said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Anorak said:

    Thread for Grabcoque, in the hope of arresting his maritime derangement: https://twitter.com/ShipBrief/status/1080406268215476224

    He's certainly been all at sea this morning.
    Holed below the waterline...
    He's certainly handed his credibility over on a plate. It's been riveting though.
    The puns just roll on, roll off.....
    You're ramping things up...
    But this ferry pun could be terminal.
    Nah. It’s the herald of free enterprise
    That one merits astern rebuke.
    I’d make you a marchioness if you’d change your vote
    My goodness, you are sinking to some titanic clangers this afternoon.
    I think you're Lusing it, Tania.
    I suggest that this exchange has hit the iceberg already. And sunk. Enough.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,589

    Nigelb said:

    Back on the Dem side, Harry Enten rated the various presidential options compared to a theoretical generic candidate:

    https://edition.cnn.com/2019/01/02/politics/democrats-2020-electability-elizabeth-warren-amy-klobuchar-sherrod-brown/index.html?utm_medium=social&utm_term=image&utm_content=2019-01-02T12:31:03&utm_source=twCNNp


    Amy Klobuchar: +13
    Sherrod Brown: +12
    Kirsten Gillibrand,: +5
    Beto O'Rourke: +3
    Bernie Sanders: -3
    Elizabeth Warren: -12

    So, lump on Elizabeth Warren?
    At this stage it is all about name recognition which is why the septuagenarians on both sides who fought the time before, and the time before that, are getting all the attention here -- Warren, Biden and, yes, Mitt Romney.
    Except that people actually quite like Biden.
    Biden has twice run for POTUS and flopped both times. He is also now 76 years old.
    Some people take a while to mature...

    He was (a perhaps surprising) success as vice president, is widely liked within the Democratic party, and (for now) polls better than anyone against Trump.

    Whether he'll even run is an interesting question, but as a candidate, he is way ahead of either Warren or Romney.
  • eekeek Posts: 24,797

    eek said:

    The difference between what is an economic migrant and a refugee seems to be far more complex than I would have thought it was. Surely someone sat anywhere in Europe has already successfully fled the persecution they were fleeing...
    Yes, you are "required" to seek asylum in the first safe country.

    The question is, what happens if you don't.
    Then surely as you cross the border from say Hungary to Austria you move from being a refugee to an economic migrant.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,405
    All of these boat puns are fun(nel)

    Sorry, it is the best I can manage.

    Maybe I could do better after a couple of glasses of port.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,769
    viewcode said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Anorak said:

    Thread for Grabcoque, in the hope of arresting his maritime derangement: https://twitter.com/ShipBrief/status/1080406268215476224

    He's certainly been all at sea this morning.
    Holed below the waterline...
    He's certainly handed his credibility over on a plate. It's been riveting though.
    The puns just roll on, roll off.....
    You're ramping things up...
    But this ferry pun could be terminal.
    Nah. It’s the herald of free enterprise
    That one merits astern rebuke.
    I’d make you a marchioness if you’d change your vote
    My goodness, you are sinking to some titanic clangers this afternoon.
    I think you're Lusing it, Tania.
    That was a bold effort, but it still sank without a trace.
  • eek said:

    The difference between what is an economic migrant and a refugee seems to be far more complex than I would have thought it was. Surely someone sat anywhere in Europe has already successfully fled the persecution they were fleeing...
    Yes, you are "required" to seek asylum in the first safe country.

    The question is, what happens if you don't.
    The EU is borderless so the asylum seekers should be free to seek asylum in any EU country as soon as they reach the safety of the EU.
    Not under the Dublin II

    https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=LEGISSUM:l33153
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,136
    edited January 2019

    eek said:

    The difference between what is an economic migrant and a refugee seems to be far more complex than I would have thought it was. Surely someone sat anywhere in Europe has already successfully fled the persecution they were fleeing...
    Yes, you are "required" to seek asylum in the first safe country.

    The question is, what happens if you don't.
    I don't think that's right? Someone mentioned the Dublin Convention the other day but it didn't seem to be about requirements for asylum seekers - what it said was that a country where you do request asylum is within its rights to shunt you back to a previous safe country that you've passed through. But that's a statement about responsibilities for states, not responsibilities for asylum seekers.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,769
    edited January 2019

    eek said:

    The difference between what is an economic migrant and a refugee seems to be far more complex than I would have thought it was. Surely someone sat anywhere in Europe has already successfully fled the persecution they were fleeing...
    Yes, you are "required" to seek asylum in the first safe country.

    The question is, what happens if you don't.
    The EU is borderless so the asylum seekers should be free to seek asylum in any EU country as soon as they reach the safety of the EU.
    That's what makes a nonsense of their case. If they are able to successfully gain residency in France, they can then move to Britain anyway. OK, so that won't be true for much longer, but still...
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,589
    IanB2 said:

    viewcode said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Anorak said:

    Thread for Grabcoque, in the hope of arresting his maritime derangement: https://twitter.com/ShipBrief/status/1080406268215476224

    He's certainly been all at sea this morning.
    Holed below the waterline...
    He's certainly handed his credibility over on a plate. It's been riveting though.
    The puns just roll on, roll off.....
    You're ramping things up...
    But this ferry pun could be terminal.
    Nah. It’s the herald of free enterprise
    That one merits astern rebuke.
    I’d make you a marchioness if you’d change your vote
    My goodness, you are sinking to some titanic clangers this afternoon.
    I think you're Lusing it, Tania.
    I suggest that this exchange has hit the iceberg already. And sunk. Enough.
    Quite - I'm going to give it a wide berth from now on.
  • eek said:

    The difference between what is an economic migrant and a refugee seems to be far more complex than I would have thought it was. Surely someone sat anywhere in Europe has already successfully fled the persecution they were fleeing...
    Yes, you are "required" to seek asylum in the first safe country.

    The question is, what happens if you don't.
    I don't think that's right? Someone mentioned the Dublin Convention the other day but it didn't seem to be about requirements for asylum seeks - what it said was that a country where you do request asylum is within its rights to shunt you back to a previous safe country that you've passed through. But that's a statement about responsibilities for states, not responsibilities for asylum seeks.
    Yes, my post was a little inaccurate in that regard. The UK is however allowed to deport asylum seekers to France (or another EU safe country) on the grounds it was their place of entry into the UK.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/libertycentral/2010/sep/21/claim-asylum-uk-legal-position
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,769

    All of these boat puns are fun(nel)

    Sorry, it is the best I can manage.

    Maybe I could do better after a couple of glasses of port.

    That was definitely a rum effort.
  • eek said:

    eek said:

    The difference between what is an economic migrant and a refugee seems to be far more complex than I would have thought it was. Surely someone sat anywhere in Europe has already successfully fled the persecution they were fleeing...
    Yes, you are "required" to seek asylum in the first safe country.

    The question is, what happens if you don't.
    Then surely as you cross the border from say Hungary to Austria you move from being a refugee to an economic migrant.
    Which no doubt helps to explain why the number of people crossing the Med is 100k+ whereas the number of people crossing the Channel is 100+
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,724
    Income tax return done and (small amount of) money sent!
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 7,979

    Which elections does 2019 bring (except a potential UK one)?

    Australia
    Canada
    Denmark
    EU
    Greece

    India if you're feeling brave?

    ?

    Israel
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    ydoethur said:

    Anorak said:

    ydoethur said:

    Anorak said:

    Anorak said:
    Not especially so (this is from 2016 but things won't have changed that much):

    https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/study-finds-uk-is-second-most-powerful-country-in-the-world/
    "Only 2 global powers". I give you China, which demolishes his argument all on its own. Also arguably Russia and France.
    The argument is that for all the size of China's military it doesn't have the capability to deploy it outside the immediate area. Britain does. Therefore Britain can act globally and China only regionally.
    You're confusing Global Power with Global Military Power.
    That's what we're talking about, if you read the original post.
    Fair. A revealing window into the Brexiteer mentality, nevertheless.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,589
    ydoethur said:

    All of these boat puns are fun(nel)

    Sorry, it is the best I can manage.

    Maybe I could do better after a couple of glasses of port.

    That was definitely a rum effort.
    Enough.
    We're beyond groggy; I'm pooped.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,547
    viewcode said:

    Anorak said:

    Stupid question (but I've been away for the last 2 weeks): why do we suddenly need loads of extra ferry capacity, when the existing capacity serves our needs perfectly well? What aspect of No Deal means we are suddenly importing and exporting more stuff?

    It's not the "more stuff", it's the "longer time to process it due to increased bureaucracy", which means a port can handle fewer ships a day.

    As I pointed out to LuckyGuy1983 the other day, mitigation processes are being put into place and hopefully thay will cope and a no-deal Brexit will be undramatic (the problems will be un-newsworthy IMHO). But at the moment uncertainty rules.
    No Deal Brexit effects will be highly newsworthy. However Corbyn seems to be manoeuvring towards a May Deal with figleaves, to preempt any No Brexit move by his party. So I guess May's Deal is more likely to happen. And, frankly, the only sensible form of No Deal planning is to make sure you have a Deal. Whatever its faults, May's Deal is a deal and it's available.
  • Charles said:

    Would you also say that about @Cyclefree

    She made the same point yesterday (and I agree with her)

    We have a moral duty to assist asylum seekers. We may be interested in economic migrants. We are not interested in law breakers.

    Are any of those views unethical?

    It does not help to conflate the categories
    Is Cyclefree a candidate for leadership of the Tory party? Did she say that the UK should be able to reject asylum applications out of hand without any due process, regardless of the circumstances of the case?
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,136
    eek said:

    eek said:

    The difference between what is an economic migrant and a refugee seems to be far more complex than I would have thought it was. Surely someone sat anywhere in Europe has already successfully fled the persecution they were fleeing...
    Yes, you are "required" to seek asylum in the first safe country.

    The question is, what happens if you don't.
    Then surely as you cross the border from say Hungary to Austria you move from being a refugee to an economic migrant.
    No, you don't stop being a refugee in either law or common sense; You'd still be a refugee if you were living in Hungary, and you don't stop being a refugee by leaving Hungary. I guess in plain English you could say you're an economic migrant as well as a refugee, but note that there are non-economic reasons to want to be in a different "safe" country; For instance, wanting to be somewhere where you speak the language, or where you have friends or family, isn't economic. (Although those things could in turn have economic motivations.)
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    Barnesian said:

    Which elections does 2019 bring (except a potential UK one)?

    Australia
    Canada
    Denmark
    EU
    Greece

    India if you're feeling brave?

    ?

    Israel
    Will Bibi be getting votes from people embarrassed to admit they're voting for him even to anonymous exit pollsters again ?
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Back on the Dem side, Harry Enten rated the various presidential options compared to a theoretical generic candidate:

    https://edition.cnn.com/2019/01/02/politics/democrats-2020-electability-elizabeth-warren-amy-klobuchar-sherrod-brown/index.html?utm_medium=social&utm_term=image&utm_content=2019-01-02T12:31:03&utm_source=twCNNp


    Amy Klobuchar: +13
    Sherrod Brown: +12
    Kirsten Gillibrand,: +5
    Beto O'Rourke: +3
    Bernie Sanders: -3
    Elizabeth Warren: -12

    So, lump on Elizabeth Warren?
    At this stage it is all about name recognition which is why the septuagenarians on both sides who fought the time before, and the time before that, are getting all the attention here -- Warren, Biden and, yes, Mitt Romney.
    Except that people actually quite like Biden.
    Biden has twice run for POTUS and flopped both times. He is also now 76 years old.
    Some people take a while to mature...

    He was (a perhaps surprising) success as vice president, is widely liked within the Democratic party, and (for now) polls better than anyone against Trump.

    Whether he'll even run is an interesting question, but as a candidate, he is way ahead of either Warren or Romney.
    Yes, and indeed Biden, like all the others, is said to be pondering a run, but at the moment he wins on name recognition because he was Obama's Vice-President for eight years. It is like the next Tory leader polls show that people have seen Boris and JRM on the telly.

    Look back four years at how many GOP runners made the primaries, and the Democrats are not even at that stage yet. The chances are the eventual candidate will be someone we'd not recognise. You could have named your own price for Trump.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,769
    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    All of these boat puns are fun(nel)

    Sorry, it is the best I can manage.

    Maybe I could do better after a couple of glasses of port.

    That was definitely a rum effort.
    Enough.
    We're beyond groggy; I'm pooped.
    Well, I'm also ferry busy this afternoon. So I shall leave you to it.

    Enjoy.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 12,745
    Afternoon all :)

    Belated New Year greetings.

    As a diversion from the dreadful puns, something slightly more serious:

    https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/declassified-files-dublin-now-lagging-six-years-behind-uk-in-revealing-state-papers-1-8751795

    Who gets to write the history ? Answer, the side which gets its version out there first.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,724
    FF43 said:

    viewcode said:

    Anorak said:

    Stupid question (but I've been away for the last 2 weeks): why do we suddenly need loads of extra ferry capacity, when the existing capacity serves our needs perfectly well? What aspect of No Deal means we are suddenly importing and exporting more stuff?

    It's not the "more stuff", it's the "longer time to process it due to increased bureaucracy", which means a port can handle fewer ships a day.

    As I pointed out to LuckyGuy1983 the other day, mitigation processes are being put into place and hopefully thay will cope and a no-deal Brexit will be undramatic (the problems will be un-newsworthy IMHO). But at the moment uncertainty rules.
    No Deal Brexit effects will be highly newsworthy. However Corbyn seems to be manoeuvring towards a May Deal with figleaves, to preempt any No Brexit move by his party. So I guess May's Deal is more likely to happen. And, frankly, the only sensible form of No Deal planning is to make sure you have a Deal. Whatever its faults, May's Deal is a deal and it's available.
    That's my view, too. Suspect May's Deal will in fact make it, if only because it effectively kicks the Article 50 can down the road. It also has the merit of turning off the UKIP funding tap.

    Whether or not we will actually LEAVE completely at the end of 2020 is another matter entirely, and will I suspect gives us considerable entertaining discussion until at least this time next year!
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    Would you also say that about @Cyclefree

    She made the same point yesterday (and I agree with her)

    We have a moral duty to assist asylum seekers. We may be interested in economic migrants. We are not interested in law breakers.

    Are any of those views unethical?

    It does not help to conflate the categories
    Is Cyclefree a candidate for leadership of the Tory party? Did she say that the UK should be able to reject asylum applications out of hand without any due process, regardless of the circumstances of the case?
    She would be a compelling candidate (to the extent that desiring the job doesn’t automatically make you unqualified)

    She said that all asylum seekers who arrived from France should be rejected. Presumably after a process.
  • eekeek Posts: 24,797
    edited January 2019
    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Would you also say that about @Cyclefree

    She made the same point yesterday (and I agree with her)

    We have a moral duty to assist asylum seekers. We may be interested in economic migrants. We are not interested in law breakers.

    Are any of those views unethical?

    It does not help to conflate the categories
    Is Cyclefree a candidate for leadership of the Tory party? Did she say that the UK should be able to reject asylum applications out of hand without any due process, regardless of the circumstances of the case?
    She would be a compelling candidate (to the extent that desiring the job doesn’t automatically make you unqualified)

    She said that all asylum seekers who arrived from France should be rejected. Presumably after a process.
    But isn't that in light of a desire to avoid people risking life travelling across the channel in an overloaded dingy...

    as I was going to post in answer to edmundintokyo - the issue is that the people crossing the channel are no longer just a refugee and the idea that they should continue to risk their life seems rather surprising...
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 3,949
    edited January 2019



    Yes, and indeed Biden, like all the others, is said to be pondering a run, but at the moment he wins on name recognition because he was Obama's Vice-President for eight years. It is like the next Tory leader polls show that people have seen Boris and JRM on the telly.

    Look back four years at how many GOP runners made the primaries, and the Democrats are not even at that stage yet. The chances are the eventual candidate will be someone we'd not recognise. You could have named your own price for Trump.

    True, but his run was exceptional in many ways.

    For 2016: Clinton lead in every poll with her name in throughout early 2015 and was presumptive nominee in the media.
    For 2012: Romney was a widely discussed candidate and led many polls in early 2011 (interestingly so did Trump in a couple of polls, though he didn't in early 2015).
    For 2008: McCain was in the top 2 or 3 of most polls in Jan 2007 and lead some.
    For 2008: Obama likewise was second in most polls and a widely discussed candidate in the press.

    This time the nationwide leader for the Dem polls is Biden - maybe he should be favourite over Harris/O'Rourke (definitely over the latter, imho). The other thing which jumps out at me is that Harris is polling surprisingly low in many polls, basically the same as Warren (who perhaps deserves more credit than she's getting, though I'm not convinced since name recognition surely makes Harris' high single figures more impressive).

    Primaries certainly aren't easy to predict, even at this point, but the eventual winner has tended to be very much on the radar by this point.

    All figures from the relevant Wikipedia pages.
  • Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Would you also say that about @Cyclefree

    She made the same point yesterday (and I agree with her)

    We have a moral duty to assist asylum seekers. We may be interested in economic migrants. We are not interested in law breakers.

    Are any of those views unethical?

    It does not help to conflate the categories
    Is Cyclefree a candidate for leadership of the Tory party? Did she say that the UK should be able to reject asylum applications out of hand without any due process, regardless of the circumstances of the case?
    She would be a compelling candidate (to the extent that desiring the job doesn’t automatically make you unqualified)

    She said that all asylum seekers who arrived from France should be rejected. Presumably after a process.
    I strongly agree. How can one argue someone is a genuine asylum seeker if they have already passed through a "free" country such as France, or any other EU country? Once they pass through another country that could offer them asylum they become a de facto economic migrant
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,858

    Good luck but I fear ending up with a dozen or more losers, even if I have the winner. Last time, Hillary scared off the other challengers as she had it sewn up. This year it will be more like the Republicans were four years ago, with more than a dozen fighting it out.

    Yes, I thought about the arb 40 vs 25 but it doesn't compute. At first sight it looks juicy but when you factor in the interest cost on the cash you're tying up, no, not a goer. Only way to make it work is if you build up a portfolio of lays, so then it becomes a 'free' addition to that. My knowledge of American politics is better than the man on the Clapham omnibus but it's not good enough for me to contemplate doing that at this stage. Like you say, the Dem nomination will likely be a dog fight with much fighting and many a dog.
  • viewcode said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Anorak said:

    Thread for Grabcoque, in the hope of arresting his maritime derangement: https://twitter.com/ShipBrief/status/1080406268215476224

    He's certainly been all at sea this morning.
    Holed below the waterline...
    He's certainly handed his credibility over on a plate. It's been riveting though.
    The puns just roll on, roll off.....
    You're ramping things up...
    But this ferry pun could be terminal.
    Nah. It’s the herald of free enterprise
    That one merits astern rebuke.
    I’d make you a marchioness if you’d change your vote
    My goodness, you are sinking to some titanic clangers this afternoon.
    I think you're Lusing it, Tania.
    I think we need to give all these watery puns Das Boot!
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,961
    stodge said:

    Afternoon all :)

    Belated New Year greetings.

    As a diversion from the dreadful puns, something slightly more serious:

    https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/declassified-files-dublin-now-lagging-six-years-behind-uk-in-revealing-state-papers-1-8751795

    Who gets to write the history ? Answer, the side which gets its version out there first.

    A diversion from the dreadful puns? I'll have you know, Sir, these puns are a diversion from the dread of reality!
  • viewcode said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Anorak said:

    Thread for Grabcoque, in the hope of arresting his maritime derangement: https://twitter.com/ShipBrief/status/1080406268215476224

    He's certainly been all at sea this morning.
    Holed below the waterline...
    He's certainly handed his credibility over on a plate. It's been riveting though.
    The puns just roll on, roll off.....
    You're ramping things up...
    But this ferry pun could be terminal.
    Nah. It’s the herald of free enterprise
    That one merits astern rebuke.
    I’d make you a marchioness if you’d change your vote
    My goodness, you are sinking to some titanic clangers this afternoon.
    I think you're Lusing it, Tania.
    I think we need to give all these watery puns Das Boot!
    I think you should all take a bow
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,547
    edited January 2019
    Interesting "thinking" by ambitious ministers on Britain's global post Brexit ole. The latest from Hunt is that the UK will be the invisible chain linking the world's liberal democracies. After Chris Williamson's global moral leadership got laughed out of court perhaps invisible is more realistic, albeit a synonym for non-existent.

    https://twitter.com/foreignoffice/status/1080416493211389952

    Nitpick question: is Singapore actually a liberal democracy?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,961
    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Would you also say that about @Cyclefree

    She made the same point yesterday (and I agree with her)

    We have a moral duty to assist asylum seekers. We may be interested in economic migrants. We are not interested in law breakers.

    Are any of those views unethical?

    It does not help to conflate the categories
    Is Cyclefree a candidate for leadership of the Tory party? Did she say that the UK should be able to reject asylum applications out of hand without any due process, regardless of the circumstances of the case?
    She would be a compelling candidate (to the extent that desiring the job doesn’t automatically make you unqualified)

    She said that all asylum seekers who arrived from France should be rejected. Presumably after a process.
    The only compelling case for accepting these migrants is that they are fleeing tyranny in France.

    But then we'd have 60m heading to Dover.....
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,401
    Anorak said:

    Anorak said:
    Not especially so (this is from 2016 but things won't have changed that much):

    https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/study-finds-uk-is-second-most-powerful-country-in-the-world/
    "Only 2 global powers". I give you China, which demolishes his argument all on its own. Also arguably Russia and France.
    In many ways, China is a superpower, and in other ways it is developing as one. However, there is an argument that as an embryonic superpower, it's still treading warily in establishing a global footprint - how often do they send ships into the Atlantic? As such, it is arguably not yet a truly global power in a way that Britain, despite its smaller resources and economy, is.

    Now, that's not an argument that I'd push too far but there is some merit to it.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    kinabalu said:

    Good luck but I fear ending up with a dozen or more losers, even if I have the winner. Last time, Hillary scared off the other challengers as she had it sewn up. This year it will be more like the Republicans were four years ago, with more than a dozen fighting it out.

    Yes, I thought about the arb 40 vs 25 but it doesn't compute. At first sight it looks juicy but when you factor in the interest cost on the cash you're tying up, no, not a goer. Only way to make it work is if you build up a portfolio of lays, so then it becomes a 'free' addition to that. My knowledge of American politics is better than the man on the Clapham omnibus but it's not good enough for me to contemplate doing that at this stage. Like you say, the Dem nomination will likely be a dog fight with much fighting and many a dog.
    Simply back the 40 and 'take the value'. Not worth arbing at this point, unless you're trying to build a portfolio of losers; but its not obvious she's poor value even at 25s.
    Am on the premium charge for Betfair anyway so I'm certainly not laying the 25s there right now.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,961

    viewcode said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Anorak said:

    Thread for Grabcoque, in the hope of arresting his maritime derangement: https://twitter.com/ShipBrief/status/1080406268215476224

    He's certainly been all at sea this morning.
    Holed below the waterline...
    He's certainly handed his credibility over on a plate. It's been riveting though.
    The puns just roll on, roll off.....
    You're ramping things up...
    But this ferry pun could be terminal.
    Nah. It’s the herald of free enterprise
    That one merits astern rebuke.
    I’d make you a marchioness if you’d change your vote
    My goodness, you are sinking to some titanic clangers this afternoon.
    I think you're Lusing it, Tania.
    I think we need to give all these watery puns Das Boot!
    I think you should all take a bow
    Can't we just give them a wake?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,724

    stodge said:

    Afternoon all :)

    Belated New Year greetings.

    As a diversion from the dreadful puns, something slightly more serious:

    https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/declassified-files-dublin-now-lagging-six-years-behind-uk-in-revealing-state-papers-1-8751795

    Who gets to write the history ? Answer, the side which gets its version out there first.

    A diversion from the dreadful puns? I'll have you know, Sir, these puns are a diversion from the dread of reality!
    You mean they act as a lifeboat?
This discussion has been closed.