Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Trump facing right-wing backlash for caving in on the shut dow

13

Comments

  • CD13 said:

    I've just realised I've made 5,000 contributions. I think I need a holiday.

    Maybe try to get to 10,000 first.

    So much craziness going on, this is the first port of call for news as it happens with lots of great contributions (some maybe not so) that adds or maybe doesn't to our understanding of all things political !!!!
  • kinabalu said:

    Perhaps I was wrong about the cricket. A lot to do from here.

    Ye of little faith...
  • Good of our batsmen to try and avoid playing tomorrow.... must be Spurs fans!
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    CD13 said:

    I've just realised I've made 5,000 contributions. I think I need a holiday.

    Lightweight.
  • Good of our batsmen to try and avoid playing tomorrow.... must be Spurs fans!

    Free day in Barbados, I can think of many better things to do than watch spurs on the gogglebox.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,761
    tlg86 said:

    WTF was that from Moeen Ali?

    How on earth does he still come in ahead of Anderson?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,847
    HYUFD said:

    No, as I said if competence was pivotal in winning US elections Romney would have won a landslide in 2012 not lost. Romney was a far more successful and competent businessman than Trump but lacked Trump's populist appeal.
    It is he who best appeals to blue collar voters in the rustbelt and their fears and concerns that is pivotal

    You are making me work!

    But that's OK. Let me express the point in a slightly different way.

    I am saying that an integral part of Brand Trump is his being - or believed by sufficient people to be - a hard nosed consummate deal maker, a guy who, whilst maybe lacking in table manners, sure knows how to get things done, in sharp contrast to your typical ineffectual establishment politician.

    And if during the course of his first term he loses this aspect of his brand, i.e. if he is revealed to sufficient people to be not that at all, but rather an incompetent blowhard who cannot negotiate his way out of paper bag, then that, unfortunately for him but very fortunately for the rest of us, means he will almost certainly not be winning a second term.

    Phew.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,847

    It’s time Humphries was retired off. He is increasingly addled and has no place on what is supposed to be an agenda-setting current affairs show.

    Agree. But Snow on CH4 is worse. Early onset there, I fear.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709

    HYUFD said:

    Spain, Germany, France and the UK have warned Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro that he must call elections within eight days - or they will officially recognise the opposition.

    Fine but China, Russia, Turkey and Mexico have all backed Maduro and said there must be no outside interference in Venezuela. There is a clear Security Council split on this, Russia and China behind Maduro, the USA, UK and France behind the opposition and also a split in Latin America with Brazil, Argentina and Chile behind the opposition and Mexico and Bolivia behind Maduro so in the end I expect nothing will happen
    Not a good place for Corbyn's views and politics to be in
    A Corbyn premiership would certainly see a seachange in UK foreign policy
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited January 2019
    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:

    No, as I said if competence was pivotal in winning US elections Romney would have won a landslide in 2012 not lost. Romney was a far more successful and competent businessman than Trump but lacked Trump's populist appeal.
    It is he who best appeals to blue collar voters in the rustbelt and their fears and concerns that is pivotal

    You are making me work!

    But that's OK. Let me express the point in a slightly different way.

    I am saying that an integral part of Brand Trump is his being - or believed by sufficient people to be - a hard nosed consummate deal maker, a guy who, whilst maybe lacking in table manners, sure knows how to get things done, in sharp contrast to your typical ineffectual establishment politician.

    And if during the course of his first term he loses this aspect of his brand, i.e. if he is revealed to sufficient people to be not that at all, but rather an incompetent blowhard who cannot negotiate his way out of paper bag, then that, unfortunately for him but very fortunately for the rest of us, means he will almost certainly not be winning a second term.

    Phew.
    I am afraid I have to disagree, again.

    Trump did not win the US presidency because he was seen as a brilliantly successful hard nosed CEO like Romney, he won because culturally he was far closer to blue collar swing voters in the Midwest in opposing globalisation at the expense of US workers and taking a tough line on immigration.

    As long as he sticks to that message he will likely win again, especially if the Democrats again pick another coastal, liberal elitist who does not connect with the rustbelt
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,008
    HYUFD said:

    Mortimer said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mortimer said:

    Scott_P said:
    A permanent customs union is nuts.
    No self-respecting Brexiter would vote for that.
    The EU want a customs union really bad, in large part because of their huge trade surplus with us. It isn’t acceptable to MPs as has been demonstrated 6 times in the HoC.

    We’ve proposed something really similar, that’s gives them what they want (tariff and friction free access to our markets) and they’ve rejected it.






    MPs voted just 307 to 301 against a Customs Union last July, more MPs have voted for permanent Customs Union than any other Brexit proposal so far
    And more voted against it...
    Just 307 MPs voted against permanent Customs Union to 432 against May's Deal, it would be ironic if by voting down May's Deal the ERG ended up seeing a Commons majority for the more BINO permanent Customs Union.

    The latter might also be acceptable to the DUP as it would apply to the whole UK
    That’s where I think we’re heading.

    The ERG will be furious and blame anyone but themselves.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,733
    DavidL said:

    tlg86 said:

    WTF was that from Moeen Ali?

    How on earth does he still come in ahead of Anderson?
    How does Jennings?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited January 2019

    HYUFD said:

    Mortimer said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mortimer said:

    Scott_P said:
    A permanent customs union is nuts.
    No self-respecting Brexiter would vote for that.
    The EU want a customs union really bad, in large part because of their huge trade surplus with us. It isn’t acceptable to MPs as has been demonstrated 6 times in the HoC.

    We’ve proposed something really similar, that’s gives them what they want (tariff and friction free access to our markets) and they’ve rejected it.






    MPs voted just 307 to 301 against a Customs Union last July, more MPs have voted for permanent Customs Union than any other Brexit proposal so far
    And more voted against it...
    Just 307 MPs voted against permanent Customs Union to 432 against May's Deal, it would be ironic if by voting down May's Deal the ERG ended up seeing a Commons majority for the more BINO permanent Customs Union.

    The latter might also be acceptable to the DUP as it would apply to the whole UK
    That’s where I think we’re heading.

    The ERG will be furious and blame anyone but themselves.
    Poetic justice for the ERG but would also be a win for Corbyn as he would have set the direction for Brexit, though he still has to keep People's Vote Remainers on board
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    HYUFD said:

    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:

    No, as I said if competence was pivotal in winning US elections Romney would have won a landslide in 2012 not lost. Romney was a far more successful and competent businessman than Trump but lacked Trump's populist appeal.
    It is he who best appeals to blue collar voters in the rustbelt and their fears and concerns that is pivotal

    You are making me work!

    But that's OK. Let me express the point in a slightly different way.

    I am saying that an integral part of Brand Trump is his being - or believed by sufficient people to be - a hard nosed consummate deal maker, a guy who, whilst maybe lacking in table manners, sure knows how to get things done, in sharp contrast to your typical ineffectual establishment politician.

    And if during the course of his first term he loses this aspect of his brand, i.e. if he is revealed to sufficient people to be not that at all, but rather an incompetent blowhard who cannot negotiate his way out of paper bag, then that, unfortunately for him but very fortunately for the rest of us, means he will almost certainly not be winning a second term.

    Phew.
    I am afraid I have to disagree, again.

    Trump did not win the US presidency because he was seen as a brilliantly successful hard nosed CEO like Romney, he won because culturally he was far closer to blue collar swing voters in the Midwest in opposing globalisation at the expense of US workers and taking a tough line on immigration.

    As long as he sticks to that message he will likely win again, especially if the Democrats again pick another coastal, liberal elitist who does not connect with the rustbelt
    He won by a scant handful of votes in key States where he currently is down.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    A slightly unusual taunt really, since the problem for the PV crowd is that Corbyn has in a way shown too much spine on Brexit by not bending to what so many of his MPs, members and voters appear to want.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,008

    The Today Show lost more than 10% of its audience 17 to 18. I suspect the haemorrhage has continued.

    The problem is, Humphreys is undoubtedly popular with a majority - let’s say 52% - of the audience. The rest are voting with their feet.
    I would guess that the 48% who voted remain are overrepresented among BBC current affairs presenters and reporters.
    No doubt. But they manage to hold their opinion without foreigner-baiting and random misogyny.

    It’s time Humphries was retired off. He is increasingly addled and has no place on what is supposed to be an agenda-setting current affairs show.
    Translation: Today isn’t partisan enough for my liking.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,230

    The Government consists of elected members of Parliament. Therefore it is still at least a subsection of the elected chamber. The same is not true of the European Parliament. It is you who are suffering under a misconception

    The Government does not have to consist of MPs - it's a habit, not a rule. Ministers who are not MPs are referred to as "Ministers [From] Outside Parliament", or more rudely "Goats" (the acronym comes from the inferred "Government Of All the Talents". People considered to be GOATS are listed in the next post: most are Lords, but some were not. Two were members of other countries' Parliaments (Jan Smuts and Richard Casey), and one (Frank Cousins) was for some (but not all) of his tenure neither a Lord nor a MP.

    READING LIST
    =========
    * https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmpubadm/330/330.pdf
    * https://www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/sites/constitution-unit/files/151-cover.pdf
    * https://www.quora.com/Do-UK-Ministers-have-to-be-MPs-or-Lords
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,008
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mortimer said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mortimer said:

    Scott_P said:
    A permanent customs union is nuts.
    No self-respecting Brexiter would vote for that.
    The EU want a customs union really bad, in large part because of their huge trade surplus with us. It isn’t acceptable to MPs as has been demonstrated 6 times in the HoC.

    We’ve proposed something really similar, that’s gives them what they want (tariff and friction free access to our markets) and they’ve rejected it.






    MPs voted just 307 to 301 against a Customs Union last July, more MPs have voted for permanent Customs Union than any other Brexit proposal so far
    And more voted against it...
    Just 307 MPs voted against permanent Customs Union to 432 against May's Deal, it would be ironic if by voting down May's Deal the ERG ended up seeing a Commons majority for the more BINO permanent Customs Union.

    The latter might also be acceptable to the DUP as it would apply to the whole UK
    That’s where I think we’re heading.

    The ERG will be furious and blame anyone but themselves.
    Poetic justice for the ERG but would also be a win for Corbyn as he would have set the direction for Brexit, though he still has to keep People's Vote Remainers on board
    I suspect he’s much more interested in exiting the single market than the customs union.
  • kle4 said:

    A slightly unusual taunt really, since the problem for the PV crowd is that Corbyn has in a way shown too much spine on Brexit by not bending to what so many of his MPs, members and voters appear to want.
    Aye, also not sure political backbone is necessarily the most favourable battlefield for them to be fighting upon.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,230
    edited January 2019
    (cont...)

    GOATS
    ====
    * Lord Maclay of Glasgow. Minister of Shipping (1916-21). Maclay refused to sit in either Houses of Parliament while taking the office, as he held Parliament in such low esteem.
    * Sir Eric Geddes. First Lord of the Admiralty (1917-1919), Minister of Transport (1919-1921).
    * Jan Smuts. Minister without Portfolio (1917-1918?). Became Prime Minister of South Africa in 1919.
    * Lord Beaverbrook, Minister of Information (1918), Minister for Aircraft Production (1940–41), Minister of Supply (1941–42?), Lord Privy Seal (1942?-1945)
    * John Blake Powell, Solicitor-General for Ireland (1918).
    * Richard Casey. Minister Resident in the Middle East (1942-?). Responding to questions in the House Churchill argued that it was unnecessary to make Casey a member of the Commons.
    * Frank Cousins. Minister of Technology (Oct. 1964–July 1966). Became MP for Nuneaton in January 1965.
    * Lord Young of Graffham. Minister without Portfolio (1984-1985), Secretary of State for Employment (1985-1987), Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (1987-1989).
    * Lord Falconer of Thoroton. Solicitor-General (1997-?), Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs and Justice (?-?), Lord Chancellor (2003-07).
    * Lord Adonis of Camden Town. Parliamentary Under-Secretary for the Department for Education and Skills/Children, Schools and Families (2005-08) Minister of State for Transport (2008-09), Secretary of State for Transport (2009-10).
    * Lord Darzi of Denham. Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health and Government Spokesperson (2007-2008)
    * Lord Jones of Birmingham. Minister for Trade and Investment in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (2007-2008).
    * Lord Malloch-Brown of St Leonard's Forest. Minister of State for Africa, Asia and UN in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (2007-09)
    * Lord Mandelson of Foy. Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform/Business, Innovation and Skills (2008-10), First Secretary of State (2009-10), Lord President of the Council (2009-10).
    * Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead. Minister for Europe (June 2009-October 2009), Minister for Africa and UN (October 2009-?)
    * Lord Hill of Oareford. Parliamentary UnderSecretary of State for Schools, Department for Education (2010-?)
    * Lord Sassoon of Ashley Park Commercial Secretary (2010-?).
    * Lord Green of Hurstpierpoint (2011-?).

    Some people also count John Davies as a GOAT, but I don't.
    * John Davies. Minister Without Portfolio (1969?-1970?), Minister of Technology (1970-?). He was bought into Government in 1969 but not given a Ministry until after becoming a MP in 1970
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:

    No, as I said if competence was pivotal in winning US elections Romney would have won a landslide in 2012 not lost. Romney was a far more successful and competent businessman than Trump but lacked Trump's populist appeal.
    It is he who best appeals to blue collar voters in the rustbelt and their fears and concerns that is pivotal

    You are making me work!

    But that's OK. Let me express the point in a slightly different way.

    I am saying that an integral part of Brand Trump is his being - or believed by sufficient people to be - a hard nosed consummate deal maker, a guy who, whilst maybe lacking in table manners, sure knows how to get things done, in sharp contrast to your typical ineffectual establishment politician.

    And if during the course of his first term he loses this aspect of his brand, i.e. if he is revealed to sufficient people to be not that at all, but rather an incompetent blowhard who cannot negotiate his way out of paper bag, then that, unfortunately for him but very fortunately for the rest of us, means he will almost certainly not be winning a second term.

    Phew.
    I am afraid I have to disagree, again.

    Trump did not win the US presidency because he was seen as a brilliantly successful hard nosed CEO like Romney, he won because culturally he was far closer to blue collar swing voters in the Midwest in opposing globalisation at the expense of US workers and taking a tough line on immigration.

    As long as he sticks to that message he will likely win again, especially if the Democrats again pick another coastal, liberal elitist who does not connect with the rustbelt
    He won by a scant handful of votes in key States where he currently is down.
    He won the largest GOP victory in the Electoral College since 1988 because he swept the rustbelt and the vast majority of the upper Midwest by appealing to blue collar voters.

    He is not down because we do not know yet who his Democrat opponent will be, if it is another coastal, elitist liberal Trump will likely win the Midwest and the Electoral College again
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mortimer said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mortimer said:

    Scott_P said:
    A permanent customs union is nuts.
    No self-respecting Brexiter would vote for that.
    The EU want a customs union really bad, in large part because of their huge trade surplus with us. It isn’t acceptable to MPs as has been demonstrated 6 times in the HoC.

    We’ve proposed something really similar, that’s gives them what they want (tariff and friction free access to our markets) and they’ve rejected it.






    MPs voted just 307 to 301 against a Customs Union last July, more MPs have voted for permanent Customs Union than any other Brexit proposal so far
    And more voted against it...
    Just 307 MPs voted against permanent Customs Union to 432 against May's Deal, it would be ironic if by voting down May's Deal the ERG ended up seeing a Commons majority for the more BINO permanent Customs Union.

    The latter might also be acceptable to the DUP as it would apply to the whole UK
    That’s where I think we’re heading.

    The ERG will be furious and blame anyone but themselves.
    Poetic justice for the ERG but would also be a win for Corbyn as he would have set the direction for Brexit, though he still has to keep People's Vote Remainers on board
    I suspect he’s much more interested in exiting the single market than the customs union.
    Would you still support May's deal if it's explicitly based on a permanent customs union?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mortimer said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mortimer said:

    Scott_P said:
    A permanent customs union is nuts.
    No self-respecting Brexiter would vote for that.
    The EU want a customs union really bad, in large part because of their huge trade surplus with us. It isn’t acceptable to MPs as has been demonstrated 6 times in the HoC.

    We’ve proposed something really similar, that’s gives them what they want (tariff and friction free access to our markets) and they’ve rejected it.






    MPs voted just 307 to 301 against a Customs Union last July, more MPs have voted for permanent Customs Union than any other Brexit proposal so far
    And more voted against it...
    Just 307 MPs voted against permanent Customs Union to 432 against May's Deal, it would be ironic if by voting down May's Deal the ERG ended up seeing a Commons majority for the more BINO permanent Customs Union.

    The latter might also be acceptable to the DUP as it would apply to the whole UK
    That’s where I think we’re heading.

    The ERG will be furious and blame anyone but themselves.
    Poetic justice for the ERG but would also be a win for Corbyn as he would have set the direction for Brexit, though he still has to keep People's Vote Remainers on board
    I suspect he’s much more interested in exiting the single market than the customs union.
    Given the Commons voted 322 to 101 against staying in the Single Market and Customs Union last June Corbyn is actually closer to prevailing Commons opinion on that
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,733
    edited January 2019
    viewcode said:

    (cont...)

    GOATS
    ====
    * Lord Maclay of Glasgow. Minister of Shipping (1916-21). Maclay refused to sit in either Houses of Parliament while taking the office, as he held Parliament in such low esteem.
    * Sir Eric Geddes. First Lord of the Admiralty (1917-1919), Minister of Transport (1919-1921).
    * Jan Smuts. Minister without Portfolio (1917-1918?). Became Prime Minister of South Africa in 1919.
    * Lord Beaverbrook, Minister of Information (1918), Minister for Aircraft Production (1940–41), Minister of Supply (1941–42?), Lord Privy Seal (1942?-1945)
    * John Blake Powell, Solicitor-General for Ireland (1918).
    * Richard Casey. Minister Resident in the Middle East (1942-?). Responding to questions in the House Churchill argued that it was unnecessary to make Casey a member of the Commons.
    * Frank Cousins. Minister of Technology (Oct. 1964–July 1966). Became MP for Nuneaton in January 1965.
    * Lord Young of Graffham. Minister without Portfolio (1984-1985), Secretary of State for Employment (1985-1987), Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (1987-1989).
    * Lord Falconer of Thoroton. Solicitor-General (1997-?), Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs and Justice (?-?), Lord Chancellor (2003-07).
    * Lord Adonis of Camden Town. Parliamentary Under-Secretary for the Department for Education and Skills/Children, Schools and Families (2005-08) Minister of State for Transport (2008-09), Secretary of State for Transport (2009-10).
    * Lord Darzi of Denham. Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health and Government Spokesperson (2007-2008)
    * Lord Jones of Birmingham. Minister for Trade and Investment in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (2007-2008).
    * Lord Malloch-Brown of St Leonard's Forest. Minister of State for Africa, Asia and UN in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (2007-09)
    * Lord Mandelson of Foy. Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform/Business, Innovation and Skills (2008-10), First Secretary of State (2009-10), Lord President of the Council (2009-10).
    * Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead. Minister for Europe (June 2009-October 2009), Minister for Africa and UN (October 2009-?)
    * Lord Hill of Oareford. Parliamentary UnderSecretary of State for Schools, Department for Education (2010-?)
    * Lord Sassoon of Ashley Park Commercial Secretary (2010-?).
    * Lord Green of Hurstpierpoint (2011-?).

    Some people also count John Davies as a GOAT, but I don't.
    * John Davies. Minister Without Portfolio (1969?-1970?), Minister of Technology (1970-?). He was bought into Government in 1969 but not given a Ministry until after becoming a MP in 1970

    Lords are still members of parliament whether or not they agree to take questions. And Adonis is still the only person in the last 75 years to do more damage to education than Gove, Cummings and Spielmann.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited January 2019

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mortimer said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mortimer said:

    Scott_P said:
    A permanent customs union is nuts.
    No self-respecting Brexiter would vote for that.
    The EU want a customs union really bad, in large part because of their huge trade surplus with us. It isn’t acceptable to MPs as has been demonstrated 6 times in the HoC.

    We’ve proposed something really similar, that’s gives them what they want (tariff and friction free access to our markets) and they’ve rejected it.






    MPs voted just 307 to 301 against a Customs Union last July, more MPs have voted for permanent Customs Union than any other Brexit proposal so far
    And more voted against it...
    Just 307 MPs voted against permanent Customs Union to 432 against May's Deal, it would be ironic if by voting down May's Deal the ERG ended up seeing a Commons majority for the more BINO permanent Customs Union.

    The latter might also be acceptable to the DUP as it would apply to the whole UK
    That’s where I think we’re heading.

    The ERG will be furious and blame anyone but themselves.
    Poetic justice for the ERG but would also be a win for Corbyn as he would have set the direction for Brexit, though he still has to keep People's Vote Remainers on board
    I suspect he’s much more interested in exiting the single market than the customs union.
    Would you still support May's deal if it's explicitly based on a permanent customs union?
    It would no longer be May's Deal but the Commons Deal if MPs voted for it ahead of the PM's plan given the EU have now made clear both May's Deal and permanent Customs Union are acceptable to them
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 3,949
    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:

    No, as I said if competence was pivotal in winning US elections Romney would have won a landslide in 2012 not lost. Romney was a far more successful and competent businessman than Trump but lacked Trump's populist appeal.
    It is he who best appeals to blue collar voters in the rustbelt and their fears and concerns that is pivotal

    You are making me work!

    But that's OK. Let me express the point in a slightly different way.

    I am saying that an integral part of Brand Trump is his being - or believed by sufficient people to be - a hard nosed consummate deal maker, a guy who, whilst maybe lacking in table manners, sure knows how to get things done, in sharp contrast to your typical ineffectual establishment politician.

    And if during the course of his first term he loses this aspect of his brand, i.e. if he is revealed to sufficient people to be not that at all, but rather an incompetent blowhard who cannot negotiate his way out of paper bag, then that, unfortunately for him but very fortunately for the rest of us, means he will almost certainly not be winning a second term.

    Phew.
    I am afraid I have to disagree, again.

    Trump did not win the US presidency because he was seen as a brilliantly successful hard nosed CEO like Romney, he won because culturally he was far closer to blue collar swing voters in the Midwest in opposing globalisation at the expense of US workers and taking a tough line on immigration.

    As long as he sticks to that message he will likely win again, especially if the Democrats again pick another coastal, liberal elitist who does not connect with the rustbelt
    He won by a scant handful of votes in key States where he currently is down.
    The narrowness of Trump's victory in 2016 is far too often forgotten when discussing 2020.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,230
    ydoethur said:

    Lords are still members of parliament whether or not they agree to take questions. And Adonis is still the only person in the last 75 years to do more damage to education than Gove, Cummings and Spielmann.

    Yes, but not elected ones (at least not popularly elected). And IIRC Adonis has never been elected to anything.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,733
    England lose by 381 runs.

    Roston Chase 8-60.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited January 2019
    Quincel said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:

    No, as I said if competence was pivotal in winning US elections Romney would have won a landslide in 2012 not lost. Romney was a far more successful and competent businessman than Trump but lacked Trump's populist appeal.
    It is he who best appeals to blue collar voters in the rustbelt and their fears and concerns that is pivotal

    You are making me work!

    But that's OK. Let me express the point in a slightly different way.

    I am saying that an integral part of Brand Trump is his being - or believed by sufficient people to be - a hard nosed consummate deal maker, a guy who, whilst maybe lacking in table manners, sure knows how to get things done, in sharp contrast to your typical ineffectual establishment politician.

    And if during the course of his first term he loses this aspect of his brand, i.e. if he is revealed to sufficient people to be not that at all, but rather an incompetent blowhard who cannot negotiate his way out of paper bag, then that, unfortunately for him but very fortunately for the rest of us, means he will almost certainly not be winning a second term.

    Phew.
    I am afraid I have to disagree, again.

    Trump did not win the US presidency because he was seen as a brilliantly successful hard nosed CEO like Romney, he won because culturally he was far closer to blue collar swing voters in the Midwest in opposing globalisation at the expense of US workers and taking a tough line on immigration.

    As long as he sticks to that message he will likely win again, especially if the Democrats again pick another coastal, liberal elitist who does not connect with the rustbelt
    He won by a scant handful of votes in key States where he currently is down.
    The narrowness of Trump's victory in 2016 is far too often forgotten when discussing 2020.
    Trump won a bigger victory in the Electoral College than George W Bush did in either 2000 or 2004, the rustbelt and key swing states are not going to fall back into the Democrats lap without the right candidate.

    If they pick Kerry or Hillary 2 they will lose again
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,733
    viewcode said:

    ydoethur said:

    Lords are still members of parliament whether or not they agree to take questions. And Adonis is still the only person in the last 75 years to do more damage to education than Gove, Cummings and Spielmann.

    Yes, but not elected ones (at least not popularly elected). And IIRC Adonis has never been elected to anything.
    He was elected 'Most Hated Man in Education' for a number of years. He was then dethroned by a bloke called Gove...
  • AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900
    HYUFD said:


    Trump won a bigger victory in the Electoral College than George W Bush did in either 2000 or 2004, the rustbelt and key swing states are not going to fall back into the Democrats lap without the right candidate.

    Bush at this stage of his first term was at +18.5 approval. Trump is at -17 and falling fast.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    ydoethur said:

    England lose by 381 runs.

    Roston Chase 8-60.

    Well England did avoid falling as badly as the 46 all out they got in Trinidad in 1994 but well done West Indies
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:

    No, as I said if competence was pivotal in winning US elections Romney would have won a landslide in 2012 not lost. Romney was a far more successful and competent businessman than Trump but lacked Trump's populist appeal.
    It is he who best appeals to blue collar voters in the rustbelt and their fears and concerns that is pivotal

    You are making me work!

    But that's OK. Let me express the point in a slightly different way.

    I am saying that an integral part of Brand Trump is his being - or believed by sufficient people to be - a hard nosed consummate deal maker, a guy who, whilst maybe lacking in table manners, sure knows how to get things done, in sharp contrast to your typical ineffectual establishment politician.

    And if during the course of his first term he loses this aspect of his brand, i.e. if he is revealed to sufficient people to be not that at all, but rather an incompetent blowhard who cannot negotiate his way out of paper bag, then that, unfortunately for him but very fortunately for the rest of us, means he will almost certainly not be winning a second term.

    Phew.
    I am afraid I have to disagree, again.

    Trump did not win the US presidency because he was seen as a brilliantly successful hard nosed CEO like Romney, he won because culturally he was far closer to blue collar swing voters in the Midwest in opposing globalisation at the expense of US workers and taking a tough line on immigration.

    As long as he sticks to that message he will likely win again, especially if the Democrats again pick another coastal, liberal elitist who does not connect with the rustbelt
    He won by a scant handful of votes in key States where he currently is down.
    He won the largest GOP victory in the Electoral College since 1988 because he swept the rustbelt and the vast majority of the upper Midwest by appealing to blue collar voters.

    He is not down because we do not know yet who his Democrat opponent will be, if it is another coastal, elitist liberal Trump will likely win the Midwest and the Electoral College again
    EC scores mean nothing when it comes to counting vote swing.
  • dotsdots Posts: 615
    kinabalu said:

    It’s time Humphries was retired off. He is increasingly addled and has no place on what is supposed to be an agenda-setting current affairs show.

    Agree. But Snow on CH4 is worse. Early onset there, I fear.
    And both shows have some decent presenters who can step up.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    viewcode said:

    (cont...)

    GOATS
    ====
    * Lord Maclay of Glasgow. Minister of Shipping (1916-21). Maclay refused to sit in either Houses of Parliament while taking the office, as he held Parliament in such low esteem.
    * Sir Eric Geddes. First Lord of the Admiralty (1917-1919), Minister of Transport (1919-1921).
    * Jan Smuts. Minister without Portfolio (1917-1918?). Became Prime Minister of South Africa in 1919.
    * Lord Beaverbrook, Minister of Information (1918), Minister for Aircraft Production (1940–41), Minister of Supply (1941–42?), Lord Privy Seal (1942?-1945)
    * John Blake Powell, Solicitor-General for Ireland (1918).
    * Richard Casey. Minister Resident in the Middle East (1942-?). Responding to questions in the House Churchill argued that it was unnecessary to make Casey a member of the Commons.
    * Frank Cousins. Minister of Technology (Oct. 1964–July 1966). Became MP for Nuneaton in January 1965.
    * Lord Young of Graffham. Minister without Portfolio (1984-1985), Secretary of State for Employment (1985-1987), Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (1987-1989).
    * Lord Falconer of Thoroton. Solicitor-General (1997-?), Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs and Justice (?-?), Lord Chancellor (2003-07).
    * Lord Adonis of Camden Town. Parliamentary Under-Secretary for the Department for Education and Skills/Children, Schools and Families (2005-08) Minister of State for Transport (2008-09), Secretary of State for Transport (2009-10).
    * Lord Darzi of Denham. Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health and Government Spokesperson (2007-2008)
    * Lord Jones of Birmingham. Minister for Trade and Investment in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (2007-2008).
    * Lord Malloch-Brown of St Leonard's Forest. Minister of State for Africa, Asia and UN in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (2007-09)
    * Lord Mandelson of Foy. Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform/Business, Innovation and Skills (2008-10), First Secretary of State (2009-10), Lord President of the Council (2009-10).
    * Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead. Minister for Europe (June 2009-October 2009), Minister for Africa and UN (October 2009-?)
    * Lord Hill of Oareford. Parliamentary UnderSecretary of State for Schools, Department for Education (2010-?)
    * Lord Sassoon of Ashley Park Commercial Secretary (2010-?).
    * Lord Green of Hurstpierpoint (2011-?).

    Some people also count John Davies as a GOAT, but I don't.
    * John Davies. Minister Without Portfolio (1969?-1970?), Minister of Technology (1970-?). He was bought into Government in 1969 but not given a Ministry until after becoming a MP in 1970

    John Davies did not enter Government until elected MP for Knutsford in 1970. Labour was still in office in 1969.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited January 2019
    Andrew said:

    HYUFD said:


    Trump won a bigger victory in the Electoral College than George W Bush did in either 2000 or 2004, the rustbelt and key swing states are not going to fall back into the Democrats lap without the right candidate.

    Bush at this stage of his first term was at +18.5 approval. Trump is at -17 and falling fast.
    Only because of 9/11 and that had faded by 2004.

    Reagan was on an identical approval rating to Trump now in January 1983 and comfortably beat Walter Mondale in 1984, Bill Clinton was also under 50% approval in January 1995 as was Obama in January 2011 and both beat Bob Dole and Mitt Romney respectively the following year

    https://news.gallup.com/interactives/185273/r.aspx?g_source=WWWV7HP&g_medium=topic&g_campaign=tiles
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Quincel said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:

    No, as I said if competence was pivotal in winning US elections Romney would have won a landslide in 2012 not lost. Romney was a far more successful and competent businessman than Trump but lacked Trump's populist appeal.
    It is he who best appeals to blue collar voters in the rustbelt and their fears and concerns that is pivotal

    You are making me work!

    But that's OK. Let me express the point in a slightly different way.

    I am saying that an integral part of Brand Trump is his being - or believed by sufficient people to be - a hard nosed consummate deal maker, a guy who, whilst maybe lacking in table manners, sure knows how to get things done, in sharp contrast to your typical ineffectual establishment politician.

    And if during the course of his first term he loses this aspect of his brand, i.e. if he is revealed to sufficient people to be not that at all, but rather an incompetent blowhard who cannot negotiate his way out of paper bag, then that, unfortunately for him but very fortunately for the rest of us, means he will almost certainly not be winning a second term.

    Phew.
    I am afraid I have to disagree, again.

    Trump did not win the US presidency because he was seen as a brilliantly successful hard nosed CEO like Romney, he won because culturally he was far closer to blue collar swing voters in the Midwest in opposing globalisation at the expense of US workers and taking a tough line on immigration.

    As long as he sticks to that message he will likely win again, especially if the Democrats again pick another coastal, liberal elitist who does not connect with the rustbelt
    He won by a scant handful of votes in key States where he currently is down.
    The narrowness of Trump's victory in 2016 is far too often forgotten when discussing 2020.
    The narrowness of Obama's 2012 victory is also often missed. It was the initial reason why I thought Hillary was certain to lose. Until I realised Trump was the nominee then I thought she was certain to win.

    More fool me.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,230
    edited January 2019
    Anyhoo, if I may crave the indulgence of PB for the moment. I have a question for you...

    I'm after placing a bet on Brexit for insurance purposes. The event I wish to insure against is a no-deal Brexit. For previously expressed reasons (see previous posts) I don't bet online, so high-street shops only. To me the best option seems to be Betfred's 11/4 on leaving the EU by March 29 (deal or no deal), which is a nice compromise compared to the others. But it is still date-dependent.

    So. Can anybody indicate a good high-street odds on a no-deal departure that isn't date-dependent?
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,812
    edited January 2019

    The Today Show lost more than 10% of its audience 17 to 18. I suspect the haemorrhage has continued.

    The problem is, Humphreys is undoubtedly popular with a majority - let’s say 52% - of the audience. The rest are voting with their feet.
    I would guess that the 48% who voted remain are overrepresented among BBC current affairs presenters and reporters.
    No doubt. But they manage to hold their opinion without foreigner-baiting and random misogyny.

    It’s time Humphries was retired off. He is increasingly addled and has no place on what is supposed to be an agenda-setting current affairs show.
    Translation: Today isn’t partisan enough for my liking.
    Admittedly, Humphries is less shit-brained than you. Hopefully your career is not in broadcasting.
  • not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 4,340
    edited January 2019
    HYUFD said:

    Quincel said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:

    No, as I said if competence was pivotal in winning US elections Romney would have won a landslide in 2012 not lost. Romney was a far more successful and competent businessman than Trump but lacked Trump's populist appeal.
    It is he who best appeals to blue collar voters in the rustbelt and their fears and concerns that is pivotal

    You are making me work!

    But that's OK. Let me express the point in a slightly different way.

    I am saying that an integral part of Brand Trump is his being - or believed by sufficient people to be - a hard nosed consummate deal maker, a guy who, whilst maybe lacking in table manners, sure knows how to get things done, in sharp contrast to your typical ineffectual establishment politician.

    And if during the course of his first term he loses this aspect of his brand, i.e. if he is revealed to sufficient people to be not that at all, but rather an incompetent blowhard who cannot negotiate his way out of paper bag, then that, unfortunately for him but very fortunately for the rest of us, means he will almost certainly not be winning a second term.

    Phew.
    I am afraid I have to disagree, again.

    Trump did not win the US presidency because he was seen as a brilliantly successful hard nosed CEO like Romney, he won because culturally he was far closer to blue collar swing voters in the Midwest in opposing globalisation at the expense of US workers and taking a tough line on immigration.

    As long as he sticks to that message he will likely win again, especially if the Democrats again pick another coastal, liberal elitist who does not connect with the rustbelt
    He won by a scant handful of votes in key States where he currently is down.
    The narrowness of Trump's victory in 2016 is far too often forgotten when discussing 2020.
    Trump won a bigger victory in the Electoral College than George W Bush did in either 2000 or 2004, the rustbelt and key swing states are not going to fall back into the Democrats lap without the right candidate.

    If they pick Kerry or Hillary 2 they will lose again
    Trump won 75 electoral votes from states he won by less than 1.5% (FL, MI, WI, PA.). From an electoral college standpoint he is very vulnerable to a small swing against him.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786
  • kjohnwkjohnw Posts: 1,456
    If we end up in a permanent CU to avoid a backstop ( the very reason why we didn’t want the backstop was so we weren’t permanently tied to EU rules and tariffs etc.) then the Tory party is finished , it will self destruct and the whole reason we left the EU to become an independent trading nation again will not happen , we will be a permanent vassal state of the EU . If that is what it comes to we may as well remain and give up whatever sovereignty we have left to become part of the USE . It really seems that it is truly impossible to leave the EU and clearly democracy is finished in the UK . Our political masters were never going to allow the peasants to leave their gravy train
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited January 2019
    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:

    No, as I said if competence was pivotal in winning US elections Romney would have won a landslide in 2012 not lost. Romney was a far more successful and competent businessman than Trump but lacked Trump's populist appeal.
    It is he who best appeals to blue collar voters in the rustbelt and their fears and concerns that is pivotal

    You are making me work!

    But that's OK. Let me express the point in a slightly different way.

    I am saying that an integral part of Brand Trump is his being - or believed by sufficient people to be - a hard nosed consummate deal maker, a guy who, whilst maybe lacking in table manners, sure knows how to get things done, in sharp contrast to your typical ineffectual establishment politician.

    And if during the course of his first term he loses this aspect of his brand, i.e. if he is revealed to sufficient people to be not that at all, but rather an incompetent blowhard who cannot negotiate his way out of paper bag, then that, unfortunately for him but very fortunately for the rest of us, means he will almost certainly not be winning a second term.

    Phew.
    I am afraid I have to disagree, again.

    Trump did not win the US presidency because he was seen as a brilliantly successful hard nosed CEO like Romney, he won because culturally he was far closer to blue collar swing voters in the Midwest in opposing globalisation at the expense of US workers and taking a tough line on immigration.

    As long as he sticks to that message he will likely win again, especially if the Democrats again pick another coastal, liberal elitist who does not connect with the rustbelt
    He won by a scant handful of votes in key States where he currently is down.
    He won the largest GOP victory in the Electoral College since 1988 because he swept the rustbelt and the vast majority of the upper Midwest by appealing to blue collar voters.

    He is not down because we do not know yet who his Democrat opponent will be, if it is another coastal, elitist liberal Trump will likely win the Midwest and the Electoral College again
    EC scores mean nothing when it comes to counting vote swing.
    Of course they do as there is no point racking up further gains in California if you fail to make gains in the rustbelt swing states
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,008

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mortimer said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mortimer said:

    Scott_P said:
    A permanent customs union is nuts.
    No self-respecting Brexiter would vote for that.
    The EU want a customs union really bad, in large part because of their huge trade surplus with us. It isn’t acceptable to MPs as has been demonstrated 6 times in the HoC.

    We’ve proposed something really similar, that’s gives them what they want (tariff and friction free access to our markets) and they’ve rejected it.






    MPs voted just 307 to 301 against a Customs Union last July, more MPs have voted for permanent Customs Union than any other Brexit proposal so far
    And more voted against it...
    Just 307 MPs voted against permanent Customs Union to 432 against May's Deal, it would be ironic if by voting down May's Deal the ERG ended up seeing a Commons majority for the more BINO permanent Customs Union.

    The latter might also be acceptable to the DUP as it would apply to the whole UK
    That’s where I think we’re heading.

    The ERG will be furious and blame anyone but themselves.
    Poetic justice for the ERG but would also be a win for Corbyn as he would have set the direction for Brexit, though he still has to keep People's Vote Remainers on board
    I suspect he’s much more interested in exiting the single market than the customs union.
    Would you still support May's deal if it's explicitly based on a permanent customs union?
    I very much doubt it.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,230
    justin124 said:

    John Davies did not enter Government until elected MP for Knutsford in 1970. Labour was still in office in 1969.

    I did say some people count him but I don't. Although looking at the dates I may have misunderstood. I shall check.

  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    oh dear......
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,812
    Andrew Neil is another one whose reputation has taken a battering since he started bothering Twitter.

    For some reason he just looooves to Tweet about French and German misadventures.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    kjohnw said:

    If we end up in a permanent CU to avoid a backstop ( the very reason why we didn’t want the backstop was so we weren’t permanently tied to EU rules and tariffs etc.) then the Tory party is finished , it will self destruct and the whole reason we left the EU to become an independent trading nation again will not happen , we will be a permanent vassal state of the EU . If that is what it comes to we may as well remain and give up whatever sovereignty we have left to become part of the USE . It really seems that it is truly impossible to leave the EU and clearly democracy is finished in the UK . Our political masters were never going to allow the peasants to leave their gravy train

    Rubbish. If the Commons votes for permanent Customs Union most Tory MPs will still have voted against it, most Leave voters in any case voted to regain sovereignty and reduce immigration not for chlorinated chicken deals with the US.

    Permanent Customs Union is also still Brexit so Corbyn will also still have issues with Remainers who want EUref2
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709

    HYUFD said:

    Quincel said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:

    No, as I said if competence was pivotal in winning US elections Romney would have won a landslide in 2012 not lost. Romney was a far more successful and competent businessman than Trump but lacked Trump's populist appeal.
    It is he who best appeals to blue collar voters in the rustbelt and their fears and concerns that is pivotal

    You are making me work!

    But that's OK. Let me express the point in a slightly different way.

    I am saying that an integral part of Brand Trump is his being - or believed by sufficient people to be - a hard nosed consummate deal maker, a guy who, whilst maybe lacking in table manners, sure knows how to get things done, in sharp contrast to your typical ineffectual establishment politician.

    And if during the course of his first term he loses this aspect of his brand, i.e. if he is revealed to sufficient people to be not that at all, but rather an incompetent blowhard who cannot negotiate his way out of paper bag, then that, unfortunately for him but very fortunately for the rest of us, means he will almost certainly not be winning a second term.

    Phew.
    I am afraid I have to disagree, again.

    Trump did not win the US presidency because he was seen as a brilliantly successful hard nosed CEO like Romney, he won because culturally he was far closer to blue collar swing voters in the Midwest in opposing globalisation at the expense of US workers and taking a tough line on immigration.

    As long as he sticks to that message he will likely win again, especially if the Democrats again pick another coastal, liberal elitist who does not connect with the rustbelt
    He won by a scant handful of votes in key States where he currently is down.
    The narrowness of Trump's victory in 2016 is far too often forgotten when discussing 2020.
    Trump won a bigger victory in the Electoral College than George W Bush did in either 2000 or 2004, the rustbelt and key swing states are not going to fall back into the Democrats lap without the right candidate.

    If they pick Kerry or Hillary 2 they will lose again
    Trump won 75 electoral votes from states he won by less than 1.5% (FL, MI, WI, PA.). From an electoral college standpoint he is very vulnerable to a small swing against him.
    Only with the right Democratic candidate who can appeal to blue collar voters
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Spain, Germany, France and the UK have warned Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro that he must call elections within eight days - or they will officially recognise the opposition.

    Fine but China, Russia, Turkey and Mexico have all backed Maduro and said there must be no outside interference in Venezuela. There is a clear Security Council split on this, Russia and China behind Maduro, the USA, UK and France behind the opposition and also a split in Latin America with Brazil, Argentina and Chile behind the opposition and Mexico and Bolivia behind Maduro so in the end I expect nothing will happen
    Not a good place for Corbyn's views and politics to be in
    A Corbyn premiership would certainly see a seachange in UK foreign policy
    Certainly would - but not to worry - he will talk to anyone in the name of peace.........


  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,008

    The Today Show lost more than 10% of its audience 17 to 18. I suspect the haemorrhage has continued.

    The problem is, Humphreys is undoubtedly popular with a majority - let’s say 52% - of the audience. The rest are voting with their feet.
    I would guess that the 48% who voted remain are overrepresented among BBC current affairs presenters and reporters.
    No doubt. But they manage to hold their opinion without foreigner-baiting and random misogyny.

    It’s time Humphries was retired off. He is increasingly addled and has no place on what is supposed to be an agenda-setting current affairs show.
    Translation: Today isn’t partisan enough for my liking.
    Admittedly, Humphries is less shit-brained than you. Hopefully your career is not in broadcasting.
    Aw, poor baby doesn’t have the single-angle propaganda station he wants.

    Bless. That must be hard for you.
  • kjohnwkjohnw Posts: 1,456
    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    If we end up in a permanent CU to avoid a backstop ( the very reason why we didn’t want the backstop was so we weren’t permanently tied to EU rules and tariffs etc.) then the Tory party is finished , it will self destruct and the whole reason we left the EU to become an independent trading nation again will not happen , we will be a permanent vassal state of the EU . If that is what it comes to we may as well remain and give up whatever sovereignty we have left to become part of the USE . It really seems that it is truly impossible to leave the EU and clearly democracy is finished in the UK . Our political masters were never going to allow the peasants to leave their gravy train

    Rubbish. If the Commons votes for permanent Customs Union most Tory MPs will still have voted against it, most Leave voters in any case voted to regain sovereignty and reduce immigration not for chlorinated chicken deals with the US.

    Permanent Customs Union is also still Brexit so Corbyn will also still have issues with Remainers who want EUref2
    How is being tied into a permanent customs union regaining sovereignty?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited January 2019
    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    If we end up in a permanent CU to avoid a backstop ( the very reason why we didn’t want the backstop was so we weren’t permanently tied to EU rules and tariffs etc.) then the Tory party is finished , it will self destruct and the whole reason we left the EU to become an independent trading nation again will not happen , we will be a permanent vassal state of the EU . If that is what it comes to we may as well remain and give up whatever sovereignty we have left to become part of the USE . It really seems that it is truly impossible to leave the EU and clearly democracy is finished in the UK . Our political masters were never going to allow the peasants to leave their gravy train

    Rubbish. If the Commons votes for permanent Customs Union most Tory MPs will still have voted against it, most Leave voters in any case voted to regain sovereignty and reduce immigration not for chlorinated chicken deals with the US.

    Permanent Customs Union is also still Brexit so Corbyn will also still have issues with Remainers who want EUref2
    How is being tied into a permanent customs union regaining sovereignty?
    As it is out of the EU and single market and ends free movement.

    Both Leave means Leavers and People's Vote Remainers will still not be happy with permanent Customs Union but in the end we are going to have to compromise and if not May's Deal then permanent Customs Union it is likely to be
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    edited January 2019

    Andrew Neil is another one whose reputation has taken a battering since he started bothering Twitter.

    For some reason he just looooves to Tweet about French and German misadventures.
    I'd be more concerned that he feels the need to engage with people trolling him on twitter in the first place. Comes with the territory I'd have thought, better to just ignore it, merited or not, than seem obsessed with responding all the time.
  • kjohnwkjohnw Posts: 1,456
    edited January 2019
    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    If we end up in a permanent CU to avoid a backstop ( the very reason why we didn’t want the backstop was so we weren’t permanently tied to EU rules and tariffs etc.) then the Tory party is finished , it will self destruct and the whole reason we left the EU to become an independent trading nation again will not happen , we will be a permanent vassal state of the EU . If that is what it comes to we may as well remain and give up whatever sovereignty we have left to become part of the USE . It really seems that it is truly impossible to leave the EU and clearly democracy is finished in the UK . Our political masters were never going to allow the peasants to leave their gravy train

    Rubbish. If the Commons votes for permanent Customs Union most Tory MPs will still have voted against it, most Leave voters in any case voted to regain sovereignty and reduce immigration not for chlorinated chicken deals with the US.

    Permanent Customs Union is also still Brexit so Corbyn will also still have issues with Remainers who want EUref2
    How is being tied into a permanent customs union regaining sovereignty?
    As it is put of the EU and single market and ends free movement
    But still being aligned to their regulations and tariffs and unable to forge independent trade deals , thus being unable to compete with them for trade. We may as well remain , and go whole hog and have a seat at the table . Permanent CU is the worst of all worlds
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,960
    viewcode said:

    Anyhoo, if I may crave the indulgence of PB for the moment. I have a question for you...

    I'm after placing a bet on Brexit for insurance purposes. The event I wish to insure against is a no-deal Brexit. For previously expressed reasons (see previous posts) I don't bet online, so high-street shops only. To me the best option seems to be Betfred's 11/4 on leaving the EU by March 29 (deal or no deal), which is a nice compromise compared to the others. But it is still date-dependent.

    So. Can anybody indicate a good high-street odds on a no-deal departure that isn't date-dependent?

    This doesn't really answer your question (at all, in fact) but it sounds to me as though your goals might be better served by shorting the pound.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited January 2019
    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    If we end up in a permanent CU to avoid a backstop ( the very reason why we didn’t want the backstop was so we weren’t permanently tied to EU rules and tariffs etc.) then the Tory party is finished , it will self destruct and the whole reason we left the EU to become an independent trading nation again will not happen , we will be a permanent vassal state of the EU . If that is what it comes to we may as well remain and give up whatever sovereignty we have left to become part of the USE . It really seems that it is truly impossible to leave the EU and clearly democracy is finished in the UK . Our political masters were never going to allow the peasants to leave their gravy train

    Rubbish. If the Commons votes for permanent Customs Union most Tory MPs will still have voted against it, most Leave voters in any case voted to regain sovereignty and reduce immigration not for chlorinated chicken deals with the US.

    Permanent Customs Union is also still Brexit so Corbyn will also still have issues with Remainers who want EUref2
    How is being tied into a permanent customs union regaining sovereignty?
    As it is put of the EU and single market and ends free movement
    But still being aligned to their regulations and tariffs and unable to forge independent trade deals , this unable to compete with them for trade. We may as well remain , and go whole hog and have a seat at the table . Permanent CU is the worst of all worlds
    Yes I know, Leave means Leavers like you will have a tantrum and throw your toys out of the pram if you do not get everything you want but tough I am afraid, if you rejected May's Deal do not be surprised if the eventual compromise option that gets through Parliament is even less to your liking
  • dotsdots Posts: 615
    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:

    No, as I said if competence was pivotal in winning US elections Romney would have won a landslide in 2012 not lost. Romney was a far more successful and competent businessman than Trump but lacked Trump's populist appeal.
    It is he who best appeals to blue collar voters in the rustbelt and their fears and concerns that is pivotal

    I am afraid I have to disagree, again.

    Trump did not win the US presidency because he was seen as a brilliantly successful hard nosed CEO like Romney, he won because culturally he was far closer to blue collar swing voters in the Midwest in opposing globalisation at the expense of US workers and taking a tough line on immigration.

    As long as he sticks to that message he will likely win again, especially if the Democrats again pick another coastal, liberal elitist who does not connect with the rustbelt
    He won by a scant handful of votes in key States where he currently is down.
    He won the largest GOP victory in the Electoral College since 1988 because he swept the rustbelt and the vast majority of the upper Midwest by appealing to blue collar voters.

    He is not down because we do not know yet who his Democrat opponent will be, if it is another coastal, elitist liberal Trump will likely win the Midwest and the Electoral College again
    is there not an argument regardless what he’s up against, voters know for sure this time what they will be getting? Do you think this increases or decreases his voters?

    Personally, like you, I don’t think the game is entirely up for him. I think I can link this discussion with the Today one. I have just seen a report on Sky by Hannah Thomas-Peter. IMO she is the best up and coming journalist there is. She was in Trump country finding support for the border wall because voters equate it to doing something about the damage drugs is doing in their community and families. voters see Trump as trying to do something about the drug problem, whilst his opponents simply trying to do something about him. 🤔
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    edited January 2019
    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:

    No, as I said if competence was pivotal in winning US elections Romney would have won a landslide in 2012 not lost. Romney was a far more successful and competent businessman than Trump but lacked Trump's populist appeal.
    It is he who best appeals to blue collar voters in the rustbelt and their fears and concerns that is pivotal

    You are making me work!

    But that's OK. Let me express the point in a slightly different way.

    I am saying that an integral part of Brand Trump is his being - or believed by sufficient people to be - a hard nosed consummate deal maker, a guy who, whilst maybe lacking in table manners, sure knows how to get things done, in sharp contrast to your typical ineffectual establishment politician.

    And if during the course of his first term he loses this aspect of his brand, i.e. if he is revealed to sufficient people to be not that at all, but rather an incompetent blowhard who cannot negotiate his way out of paper bag, then that, unfortunately for him but very fortunately for the rest of us, means he will almost certainly not be winning a second term.

    Phew.
    I am afraid I have to disagree, again.

    Trump did not win the US presidency because he was seen as a brilliantly successful hard nosed CEO like Romney, he won because culturally he was far closer to blue collar swing voters in the Midwest in opposing globalisation at the expense of US workers and taking a tough line on immigration.

    As long as he sticks to that message he will likely win again, especially if the Democrats again pick another coastal, liberal elitist who does not connect with the rustbelt
    He won by a scant handful of votes in key States where he currently is down.
    He won the largest GOP victory in the Electoral College since 1988 because he swept the rustbelt and the vast majority of the upper Midwest by appealing to blue collar voters.

    He is not down because we do not know yet who his Democrat opponent will be, if it is another coastal, elitist liberal Trump will likely win the Midwest and the Electoral College again
    EC scores mean nothing when it comes to counting vote swing.
    Of course they do as there is no point racking up further gains in California if you fail to make gains in the rustbelt swing states
    A candidate could clean sweep the electoral college but be vulnerable to a 0.0001% vote swing to lose the EC in a reverse clean sweep for their opponent.

    Likewise they could squeek the EC by a single Electoral vote but require massive voter swing to unseat them.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,812

    The Today Show lost more than 10% of its audience 17 to 18. I suspect the haemorrhage has continued.

    The problem is, Humphreys is undoubtedly popular with a majority - let’s say 52% - of the audience. The rest are voting with their feet.
    I would guess that the 48% who voted remain are overrepresented among BBC current affairs presenters and reporters.
    No doubt. But they manage to hold their opinion without foreigner-baiting and random misogyny.

    It’s time Humphries was retired off. He is increasingly addled and has no place on what is supposed to be an agenda-setting current affairs show.
    Translation: Today isn’t partisan enough for my liking.
    Admittedly, Humphries is less shit-brained than you. Hopefully your career is not in broadcasting.
    Aw, poor baby doesn’t have the single-angle propaganda station he wants.

    Bless. That must be hard for you.
    If I wanted “single angle propaganda” I’d consider reading your oeuvre.
  • ydoethur said:

    England lose by 381 runs.

    Roston Chase 8-60.

    It’s a good job England bat deep (as sky keep saying)....losing 8 of those wickets to a part time spinner!
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    If we end up in a permanent CU to avoid a backstop ( the very reason why we didn’t want the backstop was so we weren’t permanently tied to EU rules and tariffs etc.) then the Tory party is finished , it will self destruct and the whole reason we left the EU to become an independent trading nation again will not happen , we will be a permanent vassal state of the EU . If that is what it comes to we may as well remain and give up whatever sovereignty we have left to become part of the USE . It really seems that it is truly impossible to leave the EU and clearly democracy is finished in the UK . Our political masters were never going to allow the peasants to leave their gravy train

    Rubbish. If the Commons votes for permanent Customs Union most Tory MPs will still have voted against it, most Leave voters in any case voted to regain sovereignty and reduce immigration not for chlorinated chicken deals with the US.

    Permanent Customs Union is also still Brexit so Corbyn will also still have issues with Remainers who want EUref2
    How is being tied into a permanent customs union regaining sovereignty?
    As it is put of the EU and single market and ends free movement
    But still being aligned to their regulations and tariffs and unable to forge independent trade deals , thus being unable to compete with them for trade. We may as well remain , and go whole hog and have a seat at the table . Permanent CU is the worst of all worlds
    Well it may be the only leave on offer, if the deal is not acceptable, so you had best hope enough Leave MPs feel as you do and switch to backing remain.
  • kjohnwkjohnw Posts: 1,456
    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    If we end up in a permanent CU to avoid a backstop ( the very reason why we didn’t want the backstop was so we weren’t permanently tied to EU rules and tariffs etc.) then the Tory party is finished , it will self destruct and the whole reason we left the EU to become an independent trading nation again will not happen , we will be a permanent vassal state of the EU . If that is what it comes to we may as well remain and give up whatever sovereignty we have left to become part of the USE . It really seems that it is truly impossible to leave the EU and clearly democracy is finished in the UK . Our political masters were never going to allow the peasants to leave their gravy train

    Rubbish. If the Commons votes for permanent Customs Union most Tory MPs will still have voted against it, most Leave voters in any case voted to regain sovereignty and reduce immigration not for chlorinated chicken deals with the US.

    Permanent Customs Union is also still Brexit so Corbyn will also still have issues with Remainers who want EUref2
    How is being tied into a permanent customs union regaining sovereignty?
    As it is put of the EU and single market and ends free movement
    But still being aligned to their regulations and tariffs and unable to forge independent trade deals , this unable to compete with them for trade. We may as well remain , and go whole hog and have a seat at the table . Permanent CU is the worst of all worlds
    Yes I know, Leave means Leavers like you will have a tantrum and throw your toys out of the pram if you do not get everything you want but tough I am afraid, if you rejected May's Deal do not be surprised if the eventual compromise option is even less to your liking
    The whole backstop issue has been an EU trap from the start to get us to remain or at least neutralise us from being competitive against them and TM fell right into it. It’s what happens when you put a remainer in charge of exiting the EU.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited January 2019
    dots said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:

    No, as I said if competence was pivotal in winning US elections Romney would have won a landslide in 2012 not lost. Romney was a far more successful and competent businessman than Trump but lacked Trump's populist appeal.
    It is he who best appeals to blue collar voters in the rustbelt and their fears and concerns that is pivotal

    I am afraid I have to disagree, again.

    Trump did not win the US presidency because he was seen as a brilliantly successful hard nosed CEO like Romney, he won because culturally he was far closer to blue collar swing voters in the Midwest in opposing globalisation at the expense of US workers and taking a tough line on immigration.

    As long as he sticks to that message he will likely win again, especially if the Democrats again pick another coastal, liberal elitist who does not connect with the rustbelt
    He won by a scant handful of votes in key States where he currently is down.
    He won the largest GOP victory in the Electoral College since 1988 because he swept the rustbelt and the vast majority of the upper Midwest by appealing to blue collar voters.

    He is not down because we do not know yet who his Democrat opponent will be, if it is another coastal, elitist liberal Trump will likely win the Midwest and the Electoral College again
    is there not an argument regardless what he’s up against, voters know for sure this time what they will be getting? Do you think this increases or decreases his voters?

    Personally, like you, I don’t think the game is entirely up for him. I think I can link this discussion with the Today one. I have just seen a report on Sky by Hannah Thomas-Peter. IMO she is the best up and coming journalist there is. She was in Trump country finding support for the border wall because voters equate it to doing something about the damage drugs is doing in their community and families. voters see Trump as trying to do something about the drug problem, whilst his opponents simply trying to do something about him. 🤔
    I think his coalition from 2016 is still largely holding form, as he showed then he does not even need to win the popular vote as long as he wins the rustbelt
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,960

    The Today Show lost more than 10% of its audience 17 to 18. I suspect the haemorrhage has continued.

    The problem is, Humphreys is undoubtedly popular with a majority - let’s say 52% - of the audience. The rest are voting with their feet.
    I would guess that the 48% who voted remain are overrepresented among BBC current affairs presenters and reporters.
    No doubt. But they manage to hold their opinion without foreigner-baiting and random misogyny.

    It’s time Humphries was retired off. He is increasingly addled and has no place on what is supposed to be an agenda-setting current affairs show.
    Translation: Today isn’t partisan enough for my liking.
    Admittedly, Humphries is less shit-brained than you. Hopefully your career is not in broadcasting.
    Aw, poor baby doesn’t have the single-angle propaganda station he wants.

    Bless. That must be hard for you.
    If I wanted “single angle propaganda” I’d consider reading your oeuvre.
    Unhelpful aside: "single angle propaganda" is very close to being one of those phrases that's really hard to say five times in a row.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,230
    Endillion said:

    viewcode said:

    Anyhoo, if I may crave the indulgence of PB for the moment. I have a question for you...

    I'm after placing a bet on Brexit for insurance purposes. The event I wish to insure against is a no-deal Brexit. For previously expressed reasons (see previous posts) I don't bet online, so high-street shops only. To me the best option seems to be Betfred's 11/4 on leaving the EU by March 29 (deal or no deal), which is a nice compromise compared to the others. But it is still date-dependent.

    So. Can anybody indicate a good high-street odds on a no-deal departure that isn't date-dependent?

    This doesn't really answer your question (at all, in fact) but it sounds to me as though your goals might be better served by shorting the pound.
    Possibly, but my late-adopter personality (cash not online credit, no apps on smartphone except when forced by family) makes that difficult. People have recommended Revolut but it's an app, so no. High-street betting shops are cheap, comprehensible and there's no audit trail, so i'm comfortable with them.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited January 2019
    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    If we end up in a permanent CU to avoid a backstop ( the very reason why we didn’t want the backstop was so we weren’t permanently tied to EU rules and tariffs etc.) then the Tory party is finished , it will self destruct and the whole reason we left the EU to become an independent trading nation again will not happen , we will be a permanent vassal state of the EU . If that is what it comes to we may as well remain and give up whatever sovereignty we have left to become part of the USE . It really seems that it is truly impossible to leave the EU and clearly democracy is finished in the UK . Our political masters were never going to allow the peasants to leave their gravy train

    Rubbish. If the Commons votes for permanent Customs Union most Tory MPs will still have voted against it, most Leave voters in any case voted to regain sovereignty and reduce immigration not for chlorinated chicken deals with the US.

    Permanent Customs Union is also still Brexit so Corbyn will also still have issues with Remainers who want EUref2
    How is being tied into a permanent customs union regaining sovereignty?
    As it is put of the EU and single market and ends free movement
    But still being aligned to their regulations and tariffs and unable to forge independent trade deals , this unable to compete with them for trade. We may as well remain , and go whole hog and have a seat at the table . Permanent CU is the worst of all worlds
    Yes I know, Leave means Leavers like you will have a tantrum and throw your toys out of the pram if you do not get everything you want but tough I am afraid, if you rejected May's Deal do not be surprised if the eventual compromise option is even less to your liking
    The whole backstop issue has been an EU trap from the start to get us to remain or at least neutralise us from being competitive against them and TM fell right into it. It’s what happens when you put a remainer in charge of exiting the EU.
    The EU were always going to offer a less than perfect Deal or No Deal, they were not going to do us any favours. Since most MPs will not accept No Deal if we are still to Brexit a less then perfect Deal it will have to be
  • dotsdots Posts: 615

    dots said:

    I am not going along with bigging up of Pelosi. Trump took a big mouthful of something he couldn’t chew and swallow, the result plopped into Pelosi’s lap.

    Wiki leaks clearly an intermediary in a heinous crime. Is it time for wiki leaks defenders to see not freedom fighters but anarchists and traitor to liberal and libertarian cause?

    what heinous crime?
    The Russian State illegally obtained information on US politicians. Wiki leaks acted as the conduit passing this information onto the Trump campaign. Are you helpfully correcting me by saying I got that wrong?
  • West Ham giving England a run for their money in playing shit.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,008

    The Today Show lost more than 10% of its audience 17 to 18. I suspect the haemorrhage has continued.

    The problem is, Humphreys is undoubtedly popular with a majority - let’s say 52% - of the audience. The rest are voting with their feet.
    I would guess that the 48% who voted remain are overrepresented among BBC current affairs presenters and reporters.
    No doubt. But they manage to hold their opinion without foreigner-baiting and random misogyny.

    It’s time Humphries was retired off. He is increasingly addled and has no place on what is supposed to be an agenda-setting current affairs show.
    Translation: Today isn’t partisan enough for my liking.
    Admittedly, Humphries is less shit-brained than you. Hopefully your career is not in broadcasting.
    Aw, poor baby doesn’t have the single-angle propaganda station he wants.

    Bless. That must be hard for you.
    If I wanted “single angle propaganda” I’d consider reading your oeuvre.
    Or you could just talk into a mirror. You’d probably enjoy it more too.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,230
    Endillion said:

    The Today Show lost more than 10% of its audience 17 to 18. I suspect the haemorrhage has continued.

    The problem is, Humphreys is undoubtedly popular with a majority - let’s say 52% - of the audience. The rest are voting with their feet.
    I would guess that the 48% who voted remain are overrepresented among BBC current affairs presenters and reporters.
    No doubt. But they manage to hold their opinion without foreigner-baiting and random misogyny.

    It’s time Humphries was retired off. He is increasingly addled and has no place on what is supposed to be an agenda-setting current affairs show.
    Translation: Today isn’t partisan enough for my liking.
    Admittedly, Humphries is less shit-brained than you. Hopefully your career is not in broadcasting.
    Aw, poor baby doesn’t have the single-angle propaganda station he wants.

    Bless. That must be hard for you.
    If I wanted “single angle propaganda” I’d consider reading your oeuvre.
    Unhelpful aside: "single angle propaganda" is very close to being one of those phrases that's really hard to say five times in a row.
    But you can work it into a song really easily: "ge-e-e-e-t single angle propaganda, take your nation to the station, wipe it off for revolution, make a stand for elocution, mother-fucking Testarossa, you want money we've got lotsa....[thinks for a minute]...Wonderwall!"

    I'm wasted in this burgh, I really am... :)
  • kjohnwkjohnw Posts: 1,456
    edited January 2019
    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    If we end up in a permanent CU to avoid a backstop ( the very reason why we didn’t want the backstop was so we weren’t permanently tied to EU rules and tariffs etc.) then the Tory party is finished , it will self destruct and the whole reason we left the EU to become an independent trading nation again will not happen , we will be a permanent vassal state of the EU . If that is what it comes to we may as well remain and give up whatever sovereignty we have left to become part of the USE . It really seems that it is truly impossible to leave the EU and clearly democracy is finished in the UK . Our political masters were never going to allow the peasants to leave their gravy train

    Rubbish. If the Commons votes for permanent Customs Union most Tory MPs will still have voted against it, most Leave voters in any case voted to regain sovereignty and reduce immigration not for chlorinated chicken deals with the US.

    Permanent Customs Union is also still Brexit so Corbyn will also still have issues with Remainers who want EUref2
    How is being tied into a permanent customs union regaining sovereignty?
    As it is put of the EU and single market and ends free movement
    But still being aligned to their regulations and tariffs and unable to forge independent trade deals , this unable to compete with them for trade. We may as well remain , and go whole hog and have a seat at the table . Permanent CU is the worst of all worlds
    Yes I know, Leave means Leavers like you will have a tantrum and throw your toys out of the pram if you do not get everything you want but tough I am afraid, if you rejected May's Deal do not be surprised if the eventual compromise option is even less to your liking
    The whole backstop issue has been an EU trap from the start to get us to remain or at least neutralise us from being competitive against them and TM fell right into it. It’s what happens when you put a remainer in charge of exiting the EU.
    The EU were always going to offer a less thsn perfect Deal or No Deal, they were not going to do us any favours. Since most MPs will not accept No Deal if we are still to Brexit a less then perfect Deal it will have to be
    Remain or no deal are the only two options worth pursuing but remain would destroy all faith in democracy, so no deal it has to be - reset all the levers of taxation to make us competitive, Subsidise vulnerable industries until bilateral deals are established and only pay EU all we are legally obligated to until March 29th. Short term pain for long term gain
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,812

    The Today Show lost more than 10% of its audience 17 to 18. I suspect the haemorrhage has continued.

    The problem is, Humphreys is undoubtedly popular with a majority - let’s say 52% - of the audience. The rest are voting with their feet.
    I would guess that the 48% who voted remain are overrepresented among BBC current affairs presenters and reporters.
    No doubt. But they manage to hold their opinion without foreigner-baiting and random misogyny.

    It’s time Humphries was retired off. He is increasingly addled and has no place on what is supposed to be an agenda-setting current affairs show.
    Translation: Today isn’t partisan enough for my liking.
    Admittedly, Humphries is less shit-brained than you. Hopefully your career is not in broadcasting.
    Aw, poor baby doesn’t have the single-angle propaganda station he wants.

    Bless. That must be hard for you.
    If I wanted “single angle propaganda” I’d consider reading your oeuvre.
    Or you could just talk into a mirror. You’d probably enjoy it more too.
    Oh, the burn. What are you, 12?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,847
    edited January 2019
    HYUFD said:

    I am afraid I have to disagree, again.

    Trump did not win the US presidency because he was seen as a brilliantly successful hard nosed CEO like Romney, he won because culturally he was far closer to blue collar swing voters in the Midwest in opposing globalisation at the expense of US workers and taking a tough line on immigration.

    As long as he sticks to that message he will likely win again, especially if the Democrats again pick another coastal, liberal elitist who does not connect with the rustbelt

    You're disagreeing with a misunderstanding of what I'm saying.

    We try again:

    1. Brand Trump has two integral parts to his blue collar appeal, (a) that they think he shares their values, and (b) that they think he is a kick-ass, get-results kind of guy.

    2. He needs to retain both of these selling points in order to win again in 2020. Losing either will shoot his goose.

    3. It is easier for him to retain (a) than (b), i.e. there is more of a risk that during the course of his first term he will lose (b) rather than (a).

    4. And if he does, lose (b) but retain (a), he will not win.

    Overall Conclusion:

    Trump will not win a second term based purely on blue collar voters thinking he has blue collar values. Neither will he win based purely on blue collar voters thinking he is a tough guy who gets results. To win again he needs BOTH of those perceptions to remain substantially intact.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,695
    You'd think he'd have better things to do on a Saturday night...
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,230
    edited January 2019
    [deleted]
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited January 2019
    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    If we end up in a permanent CU to avoid a backstop ( the very reason why we didn’t want the backstop was so we weren’t permanently tied to EU rules and tariffs etc.) then the Tory party is finished , it will self destruct and the whole reason we left the EU to become an independent trading nation again will not happen , we will be a permanent vassal state of the EU . If that is what it comes to we may as well remain and give up whatever sovereignty we have left to become part of the USE . It really seems that it is truly impossible to leave the EU and clearly democracy is finished in the UK . Our political masters were never going to allow the peasants to leave their gravy train

    Rubbish. If the Commons votes for permanent Customs Union most Uref2
    How is being tied into a permanent customs union regaining sovereignty?
    As it is put of the EU and single market and ends free movement
    But still being aligned to their regulations and tariffs and unable to forge independent trade deals , this unable to compete with them for trade. We may as well remain , and go whole hog and have a seat at the table . Permanent CU is the worst of all worlds
    Yes I know, Leave means Leavers like you will have a tant liking
    The whole backstop issue has been an EU trap from the start to get us to remain or at least neutralise us from being competitive against them and TM fell right into it. It’s what happens when you put a remainer in charge of exiting the EU.
    The EU were always going to offer a less thsn perfect Deal or No Deal, they were not going to do us any favours. Since most MPs will not accept No Deal if we are still to Brexit a less then perfect Deal it will have to be
    Remain or no deal are the only two options worth pursuing...
    Nope. Remain or No Deal are only the two options worth pursuing for fanatics who have no interest in compromise.

    For the average voter according to ICM No Deal has a net rating of -33%, Remain +1%. Even May's Chequers Deal had a net rating of +5%.

    Indeed on first preferences for Brexit the same percentage, 19%, preferred staying in the Customs Union to No Deal with 38% having No Deal as their least favoured option to 29% for stayjng in a Customs Union, although a Canada style FTA was most favoured that is not on the table for the UK from the EU

    https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/libleave_brexit_spectrum.html
  • kjohnwkjohnw Posts: 1,456
    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    If we end up in a permanent CU to avoid a backstop ( the very reason why we didn’t want the backstop was so we weren’t permanently tied to EU rules and tariffs etc.) then the Tory party is finished , it will self destruct and the whole reason we left the EU to become an independent trading nation again will not happen , we will be a permanent vassal state of the EU . If that is what it comes to we may as well remain and give up whatever sovereignty we have left to become part of the USE . It really seems that it is truly impossible to leave the EU and clearly democracy is finished in the UK . Our political masters were never going to allow the peasants to leave their gravy train

    Rubbish. If the Commons votes for permanent Customs Union most Uref2
    How is being tied into a permanent customs union regaining sovereignty?
    As it is put of the EU and single market and ends free movement
    But still being aligned to their regulations and tariffs and unable to forge independent trade deals , this unable to compete with them for trade. We may as well remain , and go whole hog and have a seat at the table . Permanent CU is the worst of all worlds
    Yes I know, Leave means Leavers like you will have a tant liking
    The whole backstop issue has been an EU trap from the start to get us to remain or at least neutralise us from being competitive against them and TM fell right into it. It’s what happens when you put a remainer in charge of exiting the EU.
    The EU were always going to offer a less thsn perfect Deal or No Deal, they were not going to do us any favours. Since most MPs will not accept No Deal if we are still to Brexit a less then perfect Deal it will have to be
    Remain or no deal are the only two options worth pursuing...
    Nope. Remain or No Deal are only the two options worth pursuing for fanatics who have no interest in compromise.

    For the average voter according to ICM No Deal has a net rating of -33%, Remain +1%. Even May's Chequers Deal had a net rating of +5%.

    Indeed on first preferences for Brexit the same percentage, 19%, preferred staying in the Customs Union to No Deal with 38% having No Deal as their least favoured option tp 29% for stsying in a Customs Union, although a Canada style FTA was most favoured that is not on the table for the UK from the EU

    https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/libleave_brexit_spectrum.html
    https://order-order.com/2019/01/18/massive-cheer-no-deal-question-time-audience/
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,847
    dots said:

    And both shows have some decent presenters who can step up.

    Very much so. JS used to be excellent, but not now sadly.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited January 2019
    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:

    I am afraid I have to disagree, again.

    Trump did not win the US presidency because he was seen as a brilliantly successful hard nosed CEO like Romney, he won because culturally he was far closer to blue collar swing voters in the Midwest in opposing globalisation at the expense of US workers and taking a tough line on immigration.

    As long as he sticks to that message he will likely win again, especially if the Democrats again pick another coastal, liberal elitist who does not connect with the rustbelt

    You're disagreeing with a misunderstanding of what I'm saying.

    We try again:

    1. Brand Trump has two integral parts to his blue collar appeal, (a) that they think he shares their values, and (b) that they think he is a kick-ass, get-results kind of guy.

    2. He needs to retain both of these selling points in order to win again in 2020. Losing either will shoot his goose.

    3. It is easier for him to retain (a) than (b), i.e. there is more of a risk that during the course of his first term he will lose (b) rather than (a).

    4. And if he does, lose (b) but retain (a), he will not win.

    Overall Conclusion:

    Trump will not win a second term based purely on blue collar voters thinking he has blue collar values. Neither will he win based purely on blue collar voters thinking he is a tough guy who gets results. To win again he needs BOTH of those perceptions to remain substantially intact.
    It was the fact he shared their values that was key to Trump's win not because he was some brilliant Romney style executive (and in any case given his immigrant ban from Muslim nations, his ban on Guatamalan migration, his tariffs on China, his successful SC nomination etc it is not as if he has not done anything anyway).

    Trump will win a second term provided he is seen as sharing blue collar values more than his Democratic opponent
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    dots said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:

    No, as I said if competence was pivotal in winning US elections Romney would have won a landslide in 2012 not lost. Romney was a far more successful and competent businessman than Trump but lacked Trump's populist appeal.
    It is he who best appeals to blue collar voters in the rustbelt and their fears and concerns that is pivotal

    I am afraid I have to disagree, again.

    Trump did not win the US presidency because he was seen as a brilliantly successful hard nosed CEO like Romney, he won because culturally he was far closer to blue collar swing voters in the Midwest in opposing globalisation at the expense of US workers and taking a tough line on immigration.

    As long as he sticks to that message he will likely win again, especially if the Democrats again pick another coastal, liberal elitist who does not connect with the rustbelt
    He won by a scant handful of votes in key States where he currently is down.
    He won the largest GOP victory in the Electoral College since 1988 because he swept the rustbelt and the vast majority of the upper Midwest by appealing to blue collar voters.

    He is not down because we do not know yet who his Democrat opponent will be, if it is another coastal, elitist liberal Trump will likely win the Midwest and the Electoral College again
    is there not an argument regardless what he’s up against, voters know for sure this time what they will be getting? Do you think this increases or decreases his voters?

    Personally, like you, I don’t think the game is entirely up for him. I think I can link this discussion with the Today one. I have just seen a report on Sky by Hannah Thomas-Peter. IMO she is the best up and coming journalist there is. She was in Trump country finding support for the border wall because voters equate it to doing something about the damage drugs is doing in their community and families. voters see Trump as trying to do something about the drug problem, whilst his opponents simply trying to do something about him. 🤔
    Reporting from "Trump country" is the dumbest shit. Nixon retained big support (for, you know, a criminal) and it was a staple of American journalism of the time to report from "Nixon country" and matvel at how well he was retaining support.

    Where they need to be reporting from is suburbia which Trump took in 2016 and then started to bleed support from almost immediately.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    If we end up in a permanent CU to avoid a backstop ( the very reason why we didn’t want the backstop was so we weren’t permanently tied to EU rules and tariffs etc.) then the Tory party is finished , it will self destruct and the whole reason we left the EU to become an independent trading nation again will not happen , we will be a permanent vassal state of the EU . If that is what it comes to we may as well remain and give up whatever sovereignty we have left to become part of the USE . It really seems that it is truly impossible to leave the EU and clearly democracy is finished in the UK . Our political masters were never going to allow the peasants to leave their gravy train

    Rubbish. If the Commons votes for permanent Customs Union most Uref2
    How is being tied into a permanent customs union regaining sovereignty?
    As it is put of the EU and single market and ends free movement
    But still being aligned to their regulations and tariffs and unable to forge iof all worlds
    Yes I know, Leave means Leavers like you will have a tant liking
    The whole backstop issue has been an EU trap from the start to get us to remain or at least neutralise us from being competitive against them and TM fell right into it. It’s what happens when you put a remainer in charge of exiting the EU.
    The EU were always going to offer a less thsn perfect Deal or No Deal, they were not going to do us any favours. Since most MPs will not accept No Deal if we are still to Brexit a less then perfect Deal it will have to be
    Remain or no deal are the only two options worth pursuing...
    Nope. Remain or No Deal are only the two options worth pursuing for fanatics who have no interest in compromise.

    For the average voter according to ICM No Deal has a net rating of -33%, Remain +1%. Even May's Chequers Deal had a net rating of +5%.

    Indeed on first preferences for Brexit the same percentage, 19%, preferred staying in the Customs Union to No Deal with 38% having No Deal as their least favoured option tp 29% for stsying in a Customs Union, although a Canada style FTA was most favoured that is not on the table for the UK from the EU

    https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/libleave_brexit_spectrum.html
    https://order-order.com/2019/01/18/massive-cheer-no-deal-question-time-audience/
    First, that is not a scientific poll, second QT that week was from heavily Leave Derby
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    If we end up in a permanent CU to avoid a backstop ( the very reason why we didn’t want the backstop was so we weren’t permanently tied to EU rules and tariffs etc.) then the Tory party is finished , it will self destruct and the whole reason we left the EU to become an independent trading nation again will not happen , we will be a permanent vassal state of the EU . If that is what it comes to we may as well remain and give up whatever sovereignty we have left to become part of the USE . It really seems that it is truly impossible to leave the EU and clearly democracy is finished in the UK . Our political masters were never going to allow the peasants to leave their gravy train

    Rubbish. If the Commons votes for permanent Customs Union most Uref2
    How is being tied into a permanent customs union regaining sovereignty?
    As it is put of the EU and single market and ends free movement
    But still being aligned to their regulations and tariffs and unable to forge independent trade deals , this unable to compete with them for trade. We may as well remain , and go whole hog and have a seat at the table . Permanent CU is the worst of all worlds
    Yes I know, Leave means Leavers like you will have a tant liking
    The whole backstop issue has been an EU trap from the start to get us to remain or at least neutralise us from being competitive against them and TM fell right into it. It’s what happens when you put a remainer in charge of exiting the EU.
    The EU were always going to offer a less thsn perfect Deal or No Deal, they were not going to do us any favours. Since most MPs will not accept No Deal if we are still to Brexit a less then perfect Deal it will have to be
    Remain or no deal are the only two options worth pursuing...
    Nope. Remain or No Deal are only the two options worth pursuing for fanatics who have no interest in compromise.
    Which means they are the only two options realistically to be pursued, given parliament is being driven by the fanatics and those interested in compromise are outnumbered.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,835
    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:

    I am afraid I have to disagree, again.

    Trump did not win the US presidency because he was seen as a brilliantly successful hard nosed CEO like Romney, he won because culturally he was far closer to blue collar swing voters in the Midwest in opposing globalisation at the expense of US workers and taking a tough line on immigration.

    As long as he sticks to that message he will likely win again, especially if the Democrats again pick another coastal, liberal elitist who does not connect with the rustbelt

    You're disagreeing with a misunderstanding of what I'm saying.

    We try again:

    1. Brand Trump has two integral parts to his blue collar appeal, (a) that they think he shares their values, and (b) that they think he is a kick-ass, get-results kind of guy.

    2. He needs to retain both of these selling points in order to win again in 2020. Losing either will shoot his goose.

    3. It is easier for him to retain (a) than (b), i.e. there is more of a risk that during the course of his first term he will lose (b) rather than (a).

    4. And if he does, lose (b) but retain (a), he will not win.

    Overall Conclusion:

    Trump will not win a second term based purely on blue collar voters thinking he has blue collar values. Neither will he win based purely on blue collar voters thinking he is a tough guy who gets results. To win again he needs BOTH of those perceptions to remain substantially intact.
    True. But, at the risk of confusing matters, he can keep ALL of this group and still lose. If he loses a small fraction of the college educated voters from 2016. It is these, particularly in the suburbs, and especially women who are deserting him.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    edited January 2019
    I thought you were a firm believer that the EU will not tweak anything, so how is it plausible? Yes, if that part is overcome the rest is not implausible, but the deal or similar passing remains the big holdup.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786
    HYUFD said:

    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:

    I am afraid I have to disagree, again.

    Trump did not win the US presidency because he was seen as a brilliantly successful hard nosed CEO like Romney, he won because culturally he was far closer to blue collar swing voters in the Midwest in opposing globalisation at the expense of US workers and taking a tough line on immigration.

    As long as he sticks to that message he will likely win again, especially if the Democrats again pick another coastal, liberal elitist who does not connect with the rustbelt

    You're disagreeing with a misunderstanding of what I'm saying.

    We try again:

    1. Brand Trump has two integral parts to his blue collar appeal, (a) that they think he shares their values, and (b) that they think he is a kick-ass, get-results kind of guy.

    2. He needs to retain both of these selling points in order to win again in 2020. Losing either will shoot his goose.

    3. It is easier for him to retain (a) than (b), i.e. there is more of a risk that during the course of his first term he will lose (b) rather than (a).

    4. And if he does, lose (b) but retain (a), he will not win.

    Overall Conclusion:

    Trump will not win a second term based purely on blue collar voters thinking he has blue collar values. Neither will he win based purely on blue collar voters thinking he is a tough guy who gets results. To win again he needs BOTH of those perceptions to remain substantially intact.
    It was the fact he shared their values that was key to Trump's win not because he was some brilliant Romney style executive
    He flew into his rallies in a plane with his name on it and told everyone how "stupid" the people in charge were because they didn't know how to do deals... Of course he didn't present himself as a "Romney style executive" but as someone much smarter than that.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited January 2019
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    If we end up in a permanent CU to avoid a backstop ( the very reason why we didn’t want the backstop was so we weren’t permanently tied to EU rules and tariffs etc.) then the Tory party is finished , it will self destruct and the whole reason we left the EU to become an independent trading nation again will not happen , we will be a permanent vassal state of the EU . If that is what it comes to we may as well remain and give up whatever sovereignty we have left to become part of the USE . It really seems that it is truly impossible to leave the EU and clearly democracy is finished in the UK . Our political masters were never going to allow the peasants to leave their gravy train

    Rubbish. If the Commons votes for permanent Customs Union most Uref2
    How is being tied into a permanent customs union regaining sovereignty?
    As it is put of the EU and single market and ends free movement
    But still being aligned to their regulations and tariffs and unable to forge independent trade deals , this unable to compete with them for trade. We may as well remain , and go whole hog and have a seat at the table . Permanent CU is the worst of all worlds
    Yes I know, Leave means Leavers like you will have a tant liking
    The whole backstop issue has been an EU trap from the start to get us to remain or at least neutralise us from being competitive against them and TM fell right into it. It’s what happens when you put a remainer in charge of exiting the EU.
    The EU were always going to offer a less thsn perfect Deal or No Deal, they were not going to do us any favours. Since most MPs will not accept No Deal if we are still to Brexit a less then perfect Deal it will have to be
    Remain or no deal are the only two options worth pursuing...
    Nope. Remain or No Deal are only the two options worth pursuing for fanatics who have no interest in compromise.
    Which means they are the only two options realistically to be pursued, given parliament is being driven by the fanatics and those interested in compromise are outnumbered.
    Except that is not true either given 301 MPs have already voted for permanent Customs Union and even 202 MPs voted for May's Deal which is far more than the 100 to 150 MPs who want No Deal or indeed the 122 MPs who voted against invoking Article 50
  • kjohnwkjohnw Posts: 1,456
    edited January 2019

    First, that is not a scientific poll, second QT that week was from heavily Leave Derby


    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/04/most-tory-members-would-choose-no-deal-over-may-brexit-plan
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    If we end up in a permanent CU to avoid a backstop ( the very reason why we didn’t want the backstop was so we weren’t permanently tied to EU rules and tal masters were never going to allow the peasants to leave their gravy train

    Rubbish. If the Commons votes for permanent Customs Union most Uref2
    How is being tied into a permanent customs union regaining sovereignty?
    As it is put of the EU and single market and ends free movement
    But still being aligned to their regulations and tariffs and unable to forge independent trade deals , this unable to compete with them for trade. We may as well remain , and go whole hog and have a seat at the table . Permanent CU is the worst of all worlds
    Yes I know, Leave means Leavers like you will have a tant liking
    The whole backstop issue has been an EU trap from the start to get us to remain or at least neutralise us from being competitive against them and TM fell right into it. It’s what happens when you put a remainer in charge of exiting the EU.
    The EU were always going to offer a less thsn perfect Deal or No Deal, they were not going to do us any favours. Since most MPs will not accept No Deal if we are still to Brexit a less then perfect Deal it will have to be
    Remain or no deal are the only two options worth pursuing...
    Nope. Remain or No Deal are only the two options worth pursuing for fanatics who have no interest in compromise.
    Which means they are the only two options realistically to be pursued, given parliament is being driven by the fanatics and those interested in compromise are outnumbered.
    Except that is not true either given 301 MPs have already voted for permanent Customs Union and even 202 MPs voted for May's Deal which is far more than the 100 to 150 MPs who want No Deal or indeed the 122 who voted against invoking Article 50
    I said parliament was bring driven by the fanatics though. No dealers like Rees-Mogg and remainers (of the honest and by stealth variety) like Grieve and Cooper have dominated direction.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited January 2019
    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:

    I am afraid I have to disagree, again.

    Trump did not win the US presidency because he was seen as a brilliantly successful hard nosed CEO like Romney, he won because culturally he was far closer to blue collar swing voters in the Midwest in opposing globalisation at the expense of US workers and taking a tough line on immigration.

    As long as he sticks to that message he will likely win again, especially if the Democrats again pick another coastal, liberal elitist who does not connect with the rustbelt

    You're disagreeing with a misunderstanding of what I'm saying.

    We try again:

    1. Brand Trump has two integral parts to his blue collar appeal, (a) that they think he shares their values, and (b) that they think he is a kick-ass, get-results kind of guy.

    2. He needs to retain both of these selling points in order to win again in 2020. Losing either will shoot his goose.

    3. It is easier for him to retain (a) than (b), i.e. there is more of a risk that during the course of his first term he will lose (b) rather than (a).

    4. And if he does, lose (b) but retain (a), he will not win.

    Overall Conclusion:

    Trump will not win a second term based purely on blue collar voters thinking he has blue collar values. Neither will he win based purely on blue collar voters thinking he is a tough guy who gets results. To win again he needs BOTH of those perceptions to remain substantially intact.
    True. But, at the risk of confusing matters, he can keep ALL of this group and still lose. If he loses a small fraction of the college educated voters from 2016. It is these, particularly in the suburbs, and especially women who are deserting him.
    Trump lost college educated voters in 2016 and indeed the popular vote, he won because of winning enough blue collar voters in the rustbelt swing states to win the Electoral College.

    Plus the more liberal elitist the Democratic candidate the less likely they are to appeal beyond the big cities to suburbia too
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    kjohnw said:





    First, that is not a scientific poll, second QT that week was from heavily Leave Derby


    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/04/most-tory-members-would-choose-no-deal-over-may-brexit-plan

    It is Parliament which will decide on Brexit now not the Tory membership
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited January 2019
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjohnw said:

    If we end up in a permanent CU to avoid a backstop ( the very reason why we didn’t want the backstop was so we weren’t permanently tied to EU rules and tal masters were never going to allow the peasants to leave their gravy train

    Rubbish. If the Commons votes for permanent Customs Union most Uref2
    How is being tied into a permanent customs union regaining sovereignty?
    As it is put of the EU and single market and ends free movement
    But still being aligned to their regulations and tariffs and unable to forge independent trade deals , this unable to compete with them for trade. We may as well remain , and go whole hog and have a seat at the table . Permanent CU is the worst of all worlds
    Yes I know, Leave means Leavers like you will have a tant liking
    The whole backstop issue has been an EU trap from the start to get us to remain or at least neutralise us from being competitive against them and TM fell right into it. It’s what happens when you put a remainer in charge of exiting the EU.
    The EU were always going to offer a less thsn perfect Deal or No Deal, they were not going to do us any favours. Since most MPs will not accept No Deal if we are still to Brexit a less then perfect Deal it will have to be
    Remain or no deal are the only two options worth pursuing...
    Nope. Remain or No Deal are only the two options worth pursuing for fanatics who have no interest in compromise.
    Which means they are the only two options realistically to be pursued, given parliament is being driven by the fanatics and those interested in compromise are outnumbered.
    Except that is not true either given 301 MPs have already voted for permanent Customs Union and even 202 MPs voted for May's Deal which is far more than the 100 to 150 MPs who want No Deal or indeed the 122 who voted against invoking Article 50
    I said parliament was bring driven by the fanatics though. No dealers like Rees-Mogg and remainers (of the honest and by stealth variety) like Grieve and Cooper have dominated direction.
    Yes but it is votes that count and permanent Customs Union is less than 10 votes away from a Commons majority
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,733
    I do love the hypocrisy of Putin's Russia criticising somebody else for interfering in foreign countries.

    It's like Adolf Hitler accusing somebody of being a bit racist. Or Grabcocque criticising somebody for being rude.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Last night someone on PB was promising an extraordinary opinion poll today. Has it appeared yet?
  • stodgestodge Posts: 12,741
    HYUFD said:


    Except that is not true either given 301 MPs have already voted for permanent Customs Union and even 202 MPs voted for May's Deal which is far more than the 100 to 150 MPs who want No Deal or indeed the 122 MPs who voted against invoking Article 50

    There seem to be two strands of thinking out there at the moment:

    1) May persuades ERG and DUP to support a WDA that includes no backstop. She then goes to the EU who, seeing the potential impact of a No Deal exit for the UK, agree to shaft the Irish, drop the backstop and as a result the revised WDA passes the Commons.

    2) May tells the EU the WDA is dead in the water as it stands and it looks like No Deal. The EU offer a permanent CU which May reluctantly supports to avoid No Deal and that passes the Commons despite a large Conservative rebellion.

    I find huge flaws and contradictions in both these scenarios foremost among which is they start from the EU agreeing to change the WDA - they have shown no sign of doing so.

    We are therefore left to see which side will blink first.

This discussion has been closed.