Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Going back to your constituencies. Alastair Meeks on not takin

1356

Comments

  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    edited June 2019
    eek said:



    Given that the remain vote is currently the Lib Dems whatever became of Chuk and the green party I can easily see a pact between them if a forthcoming election.

    Scotland it doesn't matter as the SNP will win there anyway and Plaid will do the same in Wales.

    The big question is what does Labour do (and remember Labour can't win a majority as the SNP have destroyed that option)..

    It is wrong to look at a general election as just Remain versus Leave -- that is why the parties won't support each other.

    For Chrissake, we've just seen a small party of 11 Remainer MPs split into 2 groups of 5 and 6.

    I voted Leave. At the Euro elections, I voted for an ostensibly Remain party.

    Many other things are important at GEs.

    Only for absolute fanatics on both sides is the division into Remain and Leave the be-all and end-all of politics.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    eek said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:


    @AlastairMeeks what do you reckon to my scenario. Checkmate in three moves for the no deal Brexiteers?

    First the No Dealer has to get to be Prime Minister. One unnoticed part of the 1922 Committee's timetable is that the new Conservative leader gets to test support while Parliament is still sitting. But let's assume that step is passed.

    The EU is not going to be able to negotiate before 31 October because the new administration after the EU elections will not yet be in place. This simple objection has not yet been put to any of the Fantasy Island candidates claiming that it can all be done by then, so what they are saying in effect is No Deal. You would hope one of the journalists could manage to elicit an answer on this point.

    But let's assume that question goes unasked. The Brexit party so far have indicated that they will not be standing aside from fighting the Conservatives. Nigel Farage has a long history of going back on his word, so I accept that might happen, but it's not particularly to be expected. Nor could any Conservative leader rely on him keeping his word if he changed it again.

    Moreover, there are large numbers of Conservative MPs who do not accept No Deal as an acceptable outcome. They won't stay silent. The election will be dominated by stories of the Conservative party riven by splits.

    Further, if the right unites, the Remain vote will unite too. Last time it happened behind Labour. It might again, or it might this time coalesce behind the Lib Dems, as in the EU elections. Saboteurs don't want to be crushed.

    So no, I don't expect this particularly. Though everything is possible.
    Noise from MPs during the election is managed by the manifesto, public statements to avoid a BXP challenger and MPs keeping quiet to save their own necks. MPs do not like to lose their seats.

    The remain vote is unlikely to unite in my opinion.
    Given that the remain vote is currently the Lib Dems whatever became of Chuk and the green party I can easily see a pact between them if a forthcoming election.

    Scotland it doesn't matter as the SNP will win there anyway and Plaid will do the same in Wales.

    The big question is what does Labour do (and remember Labour can't win a majority as the SNP have destroyed that option)..
    Plaid may lead the Remain vote in Wales but the Brexit Party leads in Wales overall as the European elections showed
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039

    Penny Mordaunt on Sky just now sidestepped the question of her ambition to stand for election

    If she had no intention I would have expected her to say no

    Penny Mordaunt topped that ConHome poll the other day (although I do not think Boris was included) so a challenge would have some legitimacy.
    Given her price, I am expecting her to stand and have quite a few MPs. I am also expecting her to defer this until Friday, so as not to have clashed with the D-Day events which she will be attending as Defence Secretary. This will be a good look for her ("I did not want to distract from our veterans.")
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,959
    JackW said:

    Sky News - Antoinette Sandbach MP to support Rory Stewart.

    Inching towards enough support to be a candidate.....
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172



    Indeed. Critics of "Brexit history" have it the wrong way round. It is not that Brexit is appealing because of hankering for an idealised past. It is that we never suffered what the EU has ensured never returned. We alone (pace the Channel Islands) were not invaded or ruled by either a Nazi or communist dictatorship within living memory.

    Sweden, Ireland, and arguably Portugal are immediate EU counter-examples.
    Ireland was occupied by the British. Portugal had Salazar.
    You said "invaded or ruled by either a Nazi or communist dictatorship within living memory."
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    Mr. Topping, ha.

    There's monetary union (enacted or planned for the majority of members), loss of vetoes to QMV (due to Labour reneging upon a manifesto commitment to a referendum), banking union, and repeated murmurings about introducing EU-level taxes and/or tax harmonisation.

    The answer of the Brussels bureaucrat to every question is 'more Europe'.

    But identities are not swiftly dissolved in bureaucratic soup. Scotland, Yorkshire, Cornwall, all retain distinct identities despite centuries as part of a larger country. And sooner or later that tension will snap, and snap hard.

    Wrong Morris.

    It has been a principle of the EU to devolve powers down to member states.

    "repeated murmurings" - is that what you based your vote on?
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,387
    Scott_P said:
    That's her chucking the kitchen sink isn't it? her last and final play?
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,165

    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    On topic and a bit random, but if there were an election in the not too distant future, do we think Stephen Lloyd would hold on to Eastbourne as an independent?

    That would depend on whether (a) the Conservatives or (b) the Lib Dems stood aside for him. On the assumption that neither of them did, my expectation is that he would lose his seat, but who to would be unclear.
    Obviously I'm prejudiced, but I'd like to think the good people of Eastbourne would reward him for his honesty. It's interesting to wonder just how much attention people pay to the actions of their own MP.
    Wouldn't both Tory and Lib Dem supporters regard him as a Judas, but for different reasons?
    Politically engaged people might do. But his pitch in 2017 was "I'll vote for the government's deal." He did just that and that's probably enough for most voters. Of course, if Brexit hasn't happened by the time of the next election, he will have to give a view on the state of play.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Mark, I wonder if Boris would lend him support, to try and diminish the prospects of Hunt and Gove.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    What do Corbyn and Cameron have in common? They've both said insulting things about the Donald, as has his new BFF Boris.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hsiuEEcGTo
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Foxy said:

    kjohnw said:

    Trump backtracks on NHS comments on good morning Britain this morning according to SKY.

    NHS is no longer part of trade deal

    Consistency not part of the Donalds belief system.

    Can he be trusted in any negotiations when he tears up agreements on a whim?

    The one thing we know for certain about a trade deal with the US is that it will only happen on terms set by the US. In that way, it’s exactly the same as any trade deal that will be done with the EU, China and any other major economic power. We need them more than they need us. None of this is a surprise. The choice for Johnson will be a series of no deals or doing as he’s told. Either way, he’s buggered - though I suspect he’d just about beat Corbyn in a general election, so it will be rolling humiliation over a period of time for him rather than a sudden one.

    Except...at some point perhaps sooner perhaps later people will remember that they actually don't give a fuck about trade deals.

    All those which will be concluded at disadvantageous terms will pass unnoticed.

    Few will really know that they are worse off than they could have been.

    Then the deals are entirely pointless and so won’t be done. Which makes the current situation even more ridiculous.

    Deals will be done because they have to be done that's how the modern world works. Even in a "No Deal" scenario (No Deal Leaver ****s please note).

    But they will be sub-optimal to say the least. But that's fine because no one will notice they are less rich than they would have been (which latter is really all the so called Project Fear forecasts said pre-Ref).
    No, we were told that there would be an immediate and guaranteed year long recession after a Leave vote.

    Page 46 of this report gives the quarterly forecasts:

    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/524967/hm_treasury_analysis_the_immediate_economic_impact_of_leaving_the_eu_web.pdf
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    felix said:

    Roger said:

    Being in the South of France at the moment with people of all nationalities including Germans and Italians and an unusually high number of Americans this wall-to -wall D-Day stuff in and on the British media feels so anachronistic. The war's over! Even Millwall fans have stopped singing about it. It REALLY is time to move on.

    An unsurprising sentiment from those living in Vichy France - a time the French would love to forget not to say erase.
    I'm sure your contribution was enormous and you are not like so many others trying to bask in the reflected glory of people with whom you happen to share a nationality
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Topping, that's literally incredible.

    How does devolving powers tally with removing vetoes in favour of QMV?

    Is the EU today more or less integrated than 10 years ago?

    As for 'murmuring', you'll recall there was similar about an EU Army. "A fantasy" Clegg said. Now a reality.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,084

    Scott_P said:
    That's her chucking the kitchen sink isn't it? her last and final play?

    Penny Mordaunt on Sky just now sidestepped the question of her ambition to stand for election

    If she had no intention I would have expected her to say no

    Penny Mordaunt topped that ConHome poll the other day (although I do not think Boris was included) so a challenge would have some legitimacy.
    Given her price, I am expecting her to stand and have quite a few MPs. I am also expecting her to defer this until Friday, so as not to have clashed with the D-Day events which she will be attending as Defence Secretary. This will be a good look for her ("I did not want to distract from our veterans.")
    As she said earlier on the radio
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517
    HYUFD said:

    dr_spyn said:

    America's President who was a womanising war monger and serial drug abuser visits London was warmly greeted by The PM, press and people.

    The fake news was that a clean cut, war hero with a beautiful wife was beyond reproach. JFK's mythology wiped out the difficult bitss.

    JFK's electioneering also got us damned near to nuclear oblivion. He was an incredibly poor president.
    JFK navigated the Cuban Missile Crisis successfully and it was under Johnson the US got really trapped in Vietnam with large loss of lives, Johnson was a poor foreign policy President despite domestic success
    It can be argued that JFK caused the Cuban Missile Crisis. His electioneering about the non-existent 'missile gap' led to a massive distrust of him by Khrushchev.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    JackW said:

    Sky News - Antoinette Sandbach MP to support Rory Stewart.

    Inching towards enough support to be a candidate.....
    Rory only strides towards .... :smile:
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    edited June 2019

    Alastair is absolutely right about UNS. When the LibDems in the lead poss was UNS'd it had Labour losing Stockton North & South, Darlington, Hartlepool and Redcar to the Brexit Party, but regaining Middlesbrough South & East Cleveland from the Tories.

    As Simon Clarke the MSEC MP is screamingly Brexit this feels unlikely. Once we smash the old two party duopoly I am certain that all kinds of odd results will happen that will have Prof Curtice giggling away in the BBC Election Night Studio trying to explain it.

    Individual politician's positions don't matter so much in elections - there are exceptions.. Norman Lamb should by rights have lost his seat, he's obviously very well liked as an MP in his constituency and a donkey with a red rosette would have had 40,000ish votes in Vauxhall compared to Hoey's 30k. But the effects are small and rarer than people think.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300



    Indeed. Critics of "Brexit history" have it the wrong way round. It is not that Brexit is appealing because of hankering for an idealised past. It is that we never suffered what the EU has ensured never returned. We alone (pace the Channel Islands) were not invaded or ruled by either a Nazi or communist dictatorship within living memory.

    Sweden, Ireland, and arguably Portugal are immediate EU counter-examples.
    Ireland was occupied by the British. Portugal had Salazar.
    You said "invaded or ruled by either a Nazi or communist dictatorship within living memory."
    Oh FFS. Salazar was a fascist not a Nazi. The point remains the same. We alone do not see the EU as a bastion of peace and democracy because we never lost those things. It is not hankering for an imperial past that drives Brexit, it is that we do not value the EU for delivering a settled peace.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 39,748
    When a great white hope for the Union has lost Kenny Farq, they've definitely moved on to 'coulda been a contender' status.

    https://twitter.com/markdiffley1/status/1136188724876906496

    'The truth is that Project Ruth has been holed below the waterline by Operation Arse. Whereas previously her task was to reach out to Remainers and social democrats and build a new base beyond traditional Conservatism, now her task is to pander to the third of her voters who abandoned the Tories last month and embraced Mr Farage.

    For Ruth Davidson the moment has passed when she could have changed the game. And if Boris Johnson becomes prime minister the game is up.'

  • TomsToms Posts: 2,478
    nunuone said:

    Jonathan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Trump tells Piers Morgan the NHS itself would not be part of FTA talks 'as that is not trade'

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48522401


    Well that's all ok then. If there is one thing we know about Trump is that he is consistent. His word is his bond.
    The guys is nuts. And only has power because of inherited wealth.
    I suspect that one reason he doesn't want to release his tax record is that it would show what a bad businessman (deal-maker) he is.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517

    Mr. Streeter, you're upset that someone is remembering D-Day?

    It should be remembered. If it had failed, then Europe today would be in a far worse state.

    I don't think that's actually true.

    D-Day was in June 1944. By this time, Germany was in retreat in the south through Italy and the east from Russia. It had already essentially lost the war - as had Japan.

    So what would have happened if D-Day had failed for the Allies in the worst possible way: say we'd got a massive amount of men and material over there, and then faced another Dunkirk?

    Aside from the tragic loss of life, not much. The Allies had enough men and material to fight on three fronts, the Italian and eastern fronts were still open - and Germany would still be losing, and still need to defend France and the French coastline in case we tried again.

    And then the US would have dropped the first nuclear bomb on Berlin, not Hiroshima.

    Mid-1944 was far too late for Germany - they'd already lost the war. Even without nukes, they wouldn't have lasted much past 1946, unless Hitler somehow came to a pact with Stalin - and it's hard to see that happening.

    Even if the whole of Germany ended up under Russian control, I don't think Europe now, 75 years later, would be in a 'far worse' state.
    If the whole of Germany ended up under Soviet Control it would have meant no EEC but also changed the Cold War. It would have meant Gulags extending further west. Though would it have stopped at Germany? France could have ended up under Soviet rule too. The Channel could have been the location of the Iron Curtain.
    But that's quite a conditional. Firstly, there's the nuclear weapons aspect: the US's access to those within a year of D-Day was a real gamechanger. Then there's the issue of the allied troops fighting up through France from Italy.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    Penny Mordaunt on Sky just now sidestepped the question of her ambition to stand for election

    If she had no intention I would have expected her to say no

    Penny Mordaunt topped that ConHome poll the other day (although I do not think Boris was included) so a challenge would have some legitimacy.
    Given her price, I am expecting her to stand and have quite a few MPs. I am also expecting her to defer this until Friday, so as not to have clashed with the D-Day events which she will be attending as Defence Secretary. This will be a good look for her ("I did not want to distract from our veterans.")
    That and she will be all over the telly! (The papers will crop her out and just show the Trumps and the Royals.)
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039

    Penny Mordaunt on Sky just now sidestepped the question of her ambition to stand for election

    If she had no intention I would have expected her to say no

    Penny Mordaunt topped that ConHome poll the other day (although I do not think Boris was included) so a challenge would have some legitimacy.
    Given her price, I am expecting her to stand and have quite a few MPs. I am also expecting her to defer this until Friday, so as not to have clashed with the D-Day events which she will be attending as Defence Secretary. This will be a good look for her ("I did not want to distract from our veterans.")
    That and she will be all over the telly! (The papers will crop her out and just show the Trumps and the Royals.)
    https://twitter.com/Marthakearney/status/1136172376264183808
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Foxy said:

    kjohnw said:

    Trump backtracks on NHS comments on good morning Britain this morning according to SKY.

    NHS is no longer part of trade deal

    Consistency not part of the Donalds belief system.

    Can he be trusted in any negotiations when he tears up agreements on a whim?

    The one thing we know for certain about a trade deal with the US is that it will only happen on terms set by the US. In that way, it’s exactly the same as any trade deal that will be done with the EU, China and any other major economic power. We need them more than they need us. None of this is a surprise. The choice for Johnson will be a series of no deals or doing as he’s told. Either way, he’s buggered - though I suspect he’d just about beat Corbyn in a general election, so it will be rolling humiliation over a period of time for him rather than a sudden one.

    Except...at some point perhaps sooner perhaps later people will remember that they actually don't give a fuck about trade deals.

    All those which will be concluded at disadvantageous terms will pass unnoticed.

    Few will really know that they are worse off than they could have been.

    Then the deals are entirely pointless and so won’t be done. Which makes the current situation even more ridiculous.

    Deals will be done because they have to be done that's how the modern world works. Even in a "No Deal" scenario (No Deal Leaver ****s please note).

    But they will be sub-optimal to say the least. But that's fine because no one will notice they are less rich than they would have been (which latter is really all the so called Project Fear forecasts said pre-Ref).
    No, we were told that there would be an immediate and guaranteed year long recession after a Leave vote.

    Page 46 of this report gives the quarterly forecasts:

    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/524967/hm_treasury_analysis_the_immediate_economic_impact_of_leaving_the_eu_web.pdf
    Which is why Mark Carney made a statement and then moved on interest rates.

    Such forecasts are always made ceteris paribus and Carney moved to ensure that the situation didn't remain paribus for long.
  • Historically uniform swing 'has worked better than the more intuitive proportional swing (where each parties’ share of the vote would move proportionately in each seat).'

    Proportionate swing is not intuitive; it's nonsense. It means that the safer the seat the higher the hostile swing, ending up with every seat featuring a dead heat (try a numerical example and see).
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    Mr. Topping, that's literally incredible.

    How does devolving powers tally with removing vetoes in favour of QMV?

    Is the EU today more or less integrated than 10 years ago?

    As for 'murmuring', you'll recall there was similar about an EU Army. "A fantasy" Clegg said. Now a reality.

    We now have an EU army?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,959
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Foxy said:

    kjohnw said:

    Trump backtracks on NHS comments on good morning Britain this morning according to SKY.

    NHS is no longer part of trade deal

    Consistency not part of the Donalds belief system.

    Can he be trusted in any negotiations when he tears up agreements on a whim?

    The one thing we know for certain about a trade deal with the US is that it will only happen on terms set by the US. In that way, it’s exactly the same as any trade deal that will be done with the EU, China and any other major economic power. We need them more than they need us. None of this is a surprise. The choice for Johnson will be a series of no deals or doing as he’s told. Either way, he’s buggered - though I suspect he’d just about beat Corbyn in a general election, so it will be rolling humiliation over a period of time for him rather than a sudden one.

    Except...at some point perhaps sooner perhaps later people will remember that they actually don't give a fuck about trade deals.

    All those which will be concluded at disadvantageous terms will pass unnoticed.

    Few will really know that they are worse off than they could have been.

    Then the deals are entirely pointless and so won’t be done. Which makes the current situation even more ridiculous.

    Deals will be done because they have to be done that's how the modern world works. Even in a "No Deal" scenario (No Deal Leaver ****s please note).

    But they will be sub-optimal to say the least. But that's fine because no one will notice they are less rich than they would have been (which latter is really all the so called Project Fear forecasts said pre-Ref).
    No, we were told that there would be an immediate and guaranteed year long recession after a Leave vote.

    Page 46 of this report gives the quarterly forecasts:

    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/524967/hm_treasury_analysis_the_immediate_economic_impact_of_leaving_the_eu_web.pdf
    Which is why Mark Carney made a statement and then moved on interest rates.

    Such forecasts are always made ceteris paribus and Carney moved to ensure that the situation didn't remain paribus for long.
    Did the Chancellor make this clear at the time of his End of The World doomsaying?

    Nah.

    Perhaps someone should take him to court.
  • RH1992RH1992 Posts: 788
    edited June 2019
    TOPPING said:



    No, we were told that there would be an immediate and guaranteed year long recession after a Leave vote.

    Page 46 of this report gives the quarterly forecasts:

    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/524967/hm_treasury_analysis_the_immediate_economic_impact_of_leaving_the_eu_web.pdf

    Which is why Mark Carney made a statement and then moved on interest rates.

    Such forecasts are always made ceteris paribus and Carney moved to ensure that the situation didn't remain paribus for long.
    I agree. Just because something didn't happen at the time doesn't mean it won't or can't happen eventually. Brexit could still yet cause severe economic harm. Parliament right now is dancing very close to a live grenade and while it probably won't go off, the risk is there.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172



    Indeed. Critics of "Brexit history" have it the wrong way round. It is not that Brexit is appealing because of hankering for an idealised past. It is that we never suffered what the EU has ensured never returned. We alone (pace the Channel Islands) were not invaded or ruled by either a Nazi or communist dictatorship within living memory.

    Sweden, Ireland, and arguably Portugal are immediate EU counter-examples.
    Ireland was occupied by the British. Portugal had Salazar.
    You said "invaded or ruled by either a Nazi or communist dictatorship within living memory."
    Oh FFS. Salazar was a fascist not a Nazi. The point remains the same. We alone do not see the EU as a bastion of peace and democracy because we never lost those things. It is not hankering for an imperial past that drives Brexit, it is that we do not value the EU for delivering a settled peace.
    I said possibly Portugal to acknowledge the ambiguous position of Salazar.

    Your argument is incorrect -- Sweden and Ireland never suffered Nazi or fascist dictatorship.

    I think different countries do see something appealing in the EU based on their history, but it is not the simple "we were never invaded by the Nazis & Soviets argument" that you are spinning. It is much more complicated.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789

    loss of vetoes to QMV (due to Labour reneging upon a manifesto commitment to a referendum),

    Thatcher extended QMV as part of the Single European Act. It makes for more democratic decision making if minor things can't be blocked by a single state.


    As for 'murmuring', you'll recall there was similar about an EU Army. "A fantasy" Clegg said. Now a reality.

    It's still a fantasy in the form peddled by Eurosceptics of a single army controlled by the Commission, and as @Dura_Ace will tall you, further defence integration will happen anyway.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Foxy said:

    kjohnw said:

    Trump backtracks on NHS comments on good morning Britain this morning according to SKY.

    NHS is no longer part of trade deal

    Consistency not part of the Donalds belief system.

    Can he be trusted in any negotiations when he tears up agreements on a whim?

    The one thing we know for certain about a trade deal with the US is that it will only happen on terms set by the US. In that way, it’s exactly the same as any trade deal that will be done with the EU, China and any other major economic power. We need them more than they need us. None of this is a surprise. The choice for Johnson will be a series of no deals or doing as he’s told. Either way, he’s buggered - though I suspect he’d just about beat Corbyn in a general election, so it will be rolling humiliation over a period of time for him rather than a sudden one.

    Except...at some point perhaps sooner perhaps later people will remember that they actually don't give a fuck about trade deals.

    All those which will be concluded at disadvantageous terms will pass unnoticed.

    Few will really know that they are worse off than they could have been.

    Then the deals are entirely pointless and so won’t be done. Which makes the current situation even more ridiculous.

    Deals will be done because they have to be done that's how the modern world works. Even in a "No Deal" scenario (No Deal Leaver ****s please note).

    But they will be sub-optimal to say the least. But that's fine because no one will notice they are less rich than they would have been (which latter is really all the so called Project Fear forecasts said pre-Ref).
    No, we were told that there would be an immediate and guaranteed year long recession after a Leave vote.

    Page 46 of this report gives the quarterly forecasts:

    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/524967/hm_treasury_analysis_the_immediate_economic_impact_of_leaving_the_eu_web.pdf
    Which is why Mark Carney made a statement and then moved on interest rates.

    Such forecasts are always made ceteris paribus and Carney moved to ensure that the situation didn't remain paribus for long.
    So we can have a No Deal exit without difficulties as long as Mark Carney 'makes a statement' and reduces interest rates by 0.25%.
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 4,793

    tlg86 said:

    On topic and a bit random, but if there were an election in the not too distant future, do we think Stephen Lloyd would hold on to Eastbourne as an independent?

    That would depend on whether (a) the Conservatives or (b) the Lib Dems stood aside for him. On the assumption that neither of them did, my expectation is that he would lose his seat, but who to would be unclear.
    I'd expect that the Lib Dems would stand aside for him. I'd further expect that after the Withdrawal Deal (any possible version of it) is completely dead and there is no alternative between No Deal and No Brexit, that he'd reapply for the Lib Dem whip and be accepted back.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    Interesting given the cv of the Peterborough TBP(Ltd) candidate
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,879
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Foxy said:

    kjohnw said:

    Trump backtracks on NHS comments on good morning Britain this morning according to SKY.

    NHS is no longer part of trade deal

    Consistency not part of the Donalds belief system.

    Can he be trusted in any negotiations when he tears up agreements on a whim?

    The one thing we know for certain about a trade deal with the US is that it will only happen on terms set by the US. In that way, it’s exactly the same as any trade deal that will be done with the EU, China and any other major economic power. We need them more than they need us. None of this is a surprise. The choice for Johnson will be a series of no deals or doing as he’s told. Either way, he’s buggered - though I suspect he’d just about beat Corbyn in a general election, so it will be rolling humiliation over a period of time for him rather than a sudden one.

    Except...at some point perhaps sooner perhaps later people will remember that they actually don't give a fuck about trade deals.

    All those which will be concluded at disadvantageous terms will pass unnoticed.

    Few will really know that they are worse off than they could have been.

    Then the deals are entirely pointless and so won’t be done. Which makes the current situation even more ridiculous.

    Deals will be done because they have to be done that's how the modern world works. Even in a "No Deal" scenario (No Deal Leaver ****s please note).

    But they will be sub-optimal to say the least. But that's fine because no one will notice they are less rich than they would have been (which latter is really all the so called Project Fear forecasts said pre-Ref).

    Deals of a certain kind will be done. They’ll be small-scale and off-radar, designed almost exclusively to fill Brexit-created gaps. The history of full-scale FTA negotiations the US has been involved in show they are extremely contentious and very high on the public agenda.

  • RH1992RH1992 Posts: 788

    Scott_P said:
    That's her chucking the kitchen sink isn't it? her last and final play?
    She's toast. Every time she seems to open her mouth it seems to turn off more Tories than she turns on. Her husband Philip Davies is one of her few backers and he's associated with Christopher Chope's blocking of private members bills and is pretty heavily disliked across the Commons so I can't see her or her supporters drumming up much more support for her.

    In fact, I think we're more likely to see Rory advance to the next stage than her. He's only one behind her in backers but seems to be much more adept at reading the mood.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    Scott_P said:

    That would obviously be one of “all the talents” then
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,124
    Roger said:

    felix said:

    Roger said:

    Being in the South of France at the moment with people of all nationalities including Germans and Italians and an unusually high number of Americans this wall-to -wall D-Day stuff in and on the British media feels so anachronistic. The war's over! Even Millwall fans have stopped singing about it. It REALLY is time to move on.

    An unsurprising sentiment from those living in Vichy France - a time the French would love to forget not to say erase.
    I'm sure your contribution was enormous and you are not like so many others trying to bask in the reflected glory of people with whom you happen to share a nationality
    Not at all but I do honour my dad's contribution. I'd say you and your home are admirably siuted
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    My Great uncle Adolf fought in WWII - he had dreams of a united Europe and it would sicken him to his stomach to see these Brexiteers preening themselves today and not kowtowing to Berlin er Brussels.

  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 8,480
    edited June 2019



    Indeed. Critics of "Brexit history" have it the wrong way round. It is not that Brexit is appealing because of hankering for an idealised past. It is that we never suffered what the EU has ensured never returned. We alone (pace the Channel Islands) were not invaded or ruled by either a Nazi or communist dictatorship within living memory.

    Sweden, Ireland, and arguably Portugal are immediate EU counter-examples.
    Ireland was occupied by the British. Portugal had Salazar.
    You said "invaded or ruled by either a Nazi or communist dictatorship within living memory."
    Oh FFS. Salazar was a fascist not a Nazi. The point remains the same. We alone do not see the EU as a bastion of peace and democracy because we never lost those things. It is not hankering for an imperial past that drives Brexit, it is that we do not value the EU for delivering a settled peace.
    I said possibly Portugal to acknowledge the ambiguous position of Salazar.

    Your argument is incorrect -- Sweden and Ireland never suffered Nazi or fascist dictatorship.

    I think different countries do see something appealing in the EU based on their history, but it is not the simple "we were never invaded by the Nazis & Soviets argument" that you are spinning. It is much more complicated.
    Yes. The latter argument suggests an identification with the EU that is entirely negative, based on fear, or insufficiency. As I mentioned, Continental Europeans could just as easily say that Brexit is seen as a positive because we've drawn a positive, self-aggrandising lesson from not being invaded. The history of World War II is not politically neutral, either in Britain or on the continent.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    An actual lesser spotted TBP policy.

    twitter.com/TiceRichard/status/1135871551931408384

    And for the oldsters (me)..

    twitter.com/aewjan1965/status/1136164715992899584

    Nicked from the Americans but I've long advocated we copy the American approach of invoking spurious national security grounds as a cover for naked protectionism.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,881
    Buttegieg looks to be joint 2nd favourite on betfair now for Dem nominee.
    I think he's a lay at 6.8.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679
    tlg86 said:

    On topic and a bit random, but if there were an election in the not too distant future, do we think Stephen Lloyd would hold on to Eastbourne as an independent?

    I've no idea, but he's a bit of an unusual MP. He works really hard, much harder than any other MP I've come across. But he doesn't really do much in the way of politics. I'd say the fact that he is a Liberal Democrat is simply that they were the party that were most likely to select him - I don't think he is committed to their cause. I don't know if he would be able to sustain his post as an independent, but I would say that if anyone could it would be someone like him.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    edited June 2019

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Foxy said:

    kjohnw said:

    Trump backtracks on NHS comments on good morning Britain this morning according to SKY.

    NHS is no longer part of trade deal

    Consistency not part of the Donalds belief system.

    Can he be trusted in any negotiations when he tears up agreements on a whim?

    The one thing we know for certain about a tan a sudden one.

    Except...at some point perhaps sooner perhaps later people will remember that they actually don't give a fuck about trade deals.

    All those which will be concluded at disadvantageous terms will pass unnoticed.

    Few will really know that they are worse off than they could have been.

    Then the deals are entirely pointless and so won’t be done. Which makes the current situation even more ridiculous.

    Deals will be done because they have to be done that's how the modern world works. Even in a "No Deal" scenario (No Deal Leaver ****s please note).

    But they will be sub-optimal to say the least. But that's fine because no one will notice they are less rich than they would have been (which latter is really all the so called Project Fear forecasts said pre-Ref).
    No, we were told that there would be an immediate and guaranteed year long recession after a Leave vote.

    Page 46 of this report gives the quarterly forecasts:

    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/524967/hm_treasury_analysis_the_immediate_economic_impact_of_leaving_the_eu_web.pdf
    Which is why Mark Carney made a statement and then moved on interest rates.

    Such forecasts are always made ceteris paribus and Carney moved to ensure that the situation didn't remain paribus for long.
    Did the Chancellor make this clear at the time of his End of The World doomsaying?

    Nah.

    Perhaps someone should take him to court.
    They are (were) central case forecasts. It's all a chancellor has. He couldn't foresee what the BoE would or wouldn't do and endless public scenario analysis would have been confusing and equally criticised.

    Of course he will have discussed it and the basis of a plan formed. But he commissioned forecasts and relayed the output of those forecasts.

    Look on it as a warning to Leavers about the fire they were playing with.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    edited June 2019

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Foxy said:

    kjohnw said:

    Trump backtracks on NHS comments on good morning Britain this morning according to SKY.

    NHS is no longer part of trade deal

    Consistency not part of the Donalds belief system.

    Can he be trusted in any negotiations when he tears up agreements on a whim?

    The one thing we know for certain about a trade deal with the US is that it will only happen on terms set by the US. In that way, it’s exactly the same as any trade deal that will be done with the EU, China and any other major economic power. We need them more than they need us. None of this is a surprise. The choice for Johnson will be a series of no deals or doing as he’s told. Either way, he’s buggered - though I suspect he’d just about beat Corbyn in a general election, so it will be rolling humiliation over a period of time for him rather than a sudden one.

    Except...at some point perhaps sooner perhaps later people will remember that they actually don't give a fuck about trade deals.

    All those which will be concluded at disadvantageous terms will pass unnoticed.

    Few will really know that they are worse off than they could have been.

    Then the deals are entirely pointless and so won’t be done. Which makes the current situation even more ridiculous.

    Deals will be done because they have to be done that's how the modern world works. Even in a "No Deal" scenario (No Deal Leaver ****s please note).

    But they will be sub-optimal to say the least. But that's fine because no one will notice they are less rich than they would have been (which latter is really all the so called Project Fear forecasts said pre-Ref).

    Deals of a certain kind will be done. They’ll be small-scale and off-radar, designed almost exclusively to fill Brexit-created gaps. The history of full-scale FTA negotiations the US has been involved in show they are extremely contentious and very high on the public agenda.

    I'm not sure pre-Ref I could have given you details of any of the trade deals which affected us over the past 10 years. Although we have of course all become international trade deal experts now.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 39,748
    edited June 2019
    TGOHF said:

    My Great uncle Adolf fought in WWII - he had dreams of a united Europe and it would sicken him to his stomach to see these Brexiteers preening themselves today and not kowtowing to Berlin er Brussels.

    We Are Die Volke

    https://twitter.com/e67_m/status/926087509771259904
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,002
    nichomar said:

    Scott_P said:

    That would obviously be one of “all the talents” then
    And just how does that solve the problem. The lack of awareness among brexiteers is breathtaking
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Foxy said:

    kjohnw said:

    Trump backtracks on NHS comments on good morning Britain this morning according to SKY.

    NHS is no longer part of trade deal

    Consistency not part of the Donalds belief system.

    Can he be trusted in any negotiations when he tears up agreements on a whim?

    The one thing we know for certain about a trade deal with the US is that it will only happen on terms set by the US. In that way, it’s exactly the same as any trade deal that will be done with the EU, China and any other major economic power. We need them more than they need us. None of this is a surprise. The choice for Johnson will be a series of no deals or doing as he’s told. Either way, he’s buggered - though I suspect he’d just about beat Corbyn in a general election, so it will be rolling humiliation over a period of time for him rather than a sudden one.

    Except...at some point perhaps sooner perhaps later people will remember that they actually don't give a fuck about trade deals.

    All those which will be concluded at disadvantageous terms will pass unnoticed.

    Few will really know that they are worse off than they could have been.

    Then the deals are entirely pointless and so won’t be done. Which makes the current situation even more ridiculous.

    Deals will be done because they have to be done that's how the modern world works. Even in a "No Deal" scenario (No Deal Leaver ****s please note).

    But they will be sub-optimal to say the least. But that's fine because no one will notice they are less rich than they would have been (which latter is really all the so called Project Fear forecasts said pre-Ref).
    No, we were told that there would be an immediate and guaranteed year long recession after a Leave vote.

    Page 46 of this report gives the quarterly forecasts:

    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/524967/hm_treasury_analysis_the_immediate_economic_impact_of_leaving_the_eu_web.pdf
    Which is why Mark Carney made a statement and then moved on interest rates.

    Such forecasts are always made ceteris paribus and Carney moved to ensure that the situation didn't remain paribus for long.
    So we can have a No Deal exit without difficulties as long as Mark Carney 'makes a statement' and reduces interest rates by 0.25%.
    He will be caught between very limited scope to introduce liquidity and a need to protect sterling.
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 8,480
    edited June 2019

    Penny Mordaunt on Sky just now sidestepped the question of her ambition to stand for election

    If she had no intention I would have expected her to say no

    Penny Mordaunt topped that ConHome poll the other day (although I do not think Boris was included) so a challenge would have some legitimacy.
    Given her price, I am expecting her to stand and have quite a few MPs. I am also expecting her to defer this until Friday, so as not to have clashed with the D-Day events which she will be attending as Defence Secretary. This will be a good look for her ("I did not want to distract from our veterans.")
    That and she will be all over the telly! (The papers will crop her out and just show the Trumps and the Royals.)
    https://twitter.com/Marthakearney/status/1136172376264183808
    A rare beauty for a modern Tory lady, but... ahem, back on topic.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    rkrkrk said:

    Buttegieg looks to be joint 2nd favourite on betfair now for Dem nominee.
    I think he's a lay at 6.8.

    RCP average 6.0... ! I've laid him back to the Harris line

    Value in the Dem race is probably with Biden, Sanders and Warren right now.

    On the GOP race, I note Mike Pence is 180/200 for president whilst Trump is 1.12/1.13 for the GOP nomination. Don't see how Trump isn't the GOP nominee unless his 239 lb 6'3 body decides to give up the ghost. In which case it'll be Pence. The Nikki Hayley 23/48 price is pure fantasy still.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,232

    nichomar said:

    Scott_P said:

    That would obviously be one of “all the talents” then
    And just how does that solve the problem. The lack of awareness among brexiteers is breathtaking
    All this should be seen through the lens of 'Will this utterance make the membership like me more?'. (Brexit and its implementation is now mostly irrelevant.) Making herself sound so intellectually pure that she's not prepared to be in the same room as the contaminated may have a certain appeal.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    rkrkrk said:

    Buttegieg looks to be joint 2nd favourite on betfair now for Dem nominee.
    I think he's a lay at 6.8.

    You are probably right but at this distance, I'd be inclined to wait for the debates rather than put in the effort to follow developments Stateside. One of them has got to win and I think the oldies are too short because of name recognition. Mind you, Betfair has just emailed to ask if I know what the hell I'm doing!
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    I always had a feeling that the Tory MPs would stop a moment to reflect on the last year and wonder whether they really want to identify with Boris and J R-M and Gove and Fox and McVey and the rest of the crackpots that most people identify as the post Cameron Tory Party....

    They must think back longingly to the halcyon days when Cameron and Hilton humanised them. When they could walk the streets without a brown paper bag over their heads.

    What can they dothey must be thinking? They need a new face. None of the 13 are it. Someone none of us have heard of but looks in the Cameron mould. Someone who looks human but without a recent past. I think I've just seen a picture of her posted by Decrepit.John........

    Pen...


  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146

    I have just turned 55 and I think Boris Johnson will be the last Tory PM of my lifetime. I also think I’ll die a citizen of England, not of the UK. But the good news is that I think our trading relationship with the Faeroe Islands will be better than it has been since the 12th century.

    Don’t be glum. You can also trade with the Palestinian Authority, Peru and the Pacific Islanders.
  • brendan16brendan16 Posts: 2,315
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Foxy said:

    kjohnw said:

    Trump backtracks on NHS comments on good morning Britain this morning according to SKY.

    NHS is no longer part of trade deal

    Consistency not part of the Donalds belief system.

    Can he be trusted in any negotiations when he tears up agreements on a whim?

    The one thing we know for certain about a trade deal with the US is that it will only happen on terms set by the US. In that way, it’s exactly the same as any trade deal that will be done with the EU, China and any other major economic power. We need them more than they need us. None of this is a surprise. The choice for Johnson will be a series of no deals or doing as he’s told. Either way, he’s buggered - though I suspect he’d just about beat Corbyn in a general election, so it will be rolling humiliation over a period of time for him rather than a sudden one.

    Except...at some point perhaps sooner perhaps later people will remember that they actually don't give a fuck about trade deals.

    All those which will be concluded at disadvantageous terms will pass unnoticed.

    Few will really know that they are worse off than they could have been.

    Then the deals are entirely pointless and so won’t be done. Which makes the current situation even more ridiculous.

    Deals will be done because they have to be done that's how the modern world works. Even in a "No Deal" scenario (No Deal Leaver ****s please note).

    But they will be sub-optimal to say the least. But that's fine because no one will notice they are less rich than they would have been (which latter is really all the so called Project Fear forecasts said pre-Ref).
    No, we were told that there would be an immediate and guaranteed year long recession after a Leave vote.

    Page 46 of this report gives the quarterly forecasts:

    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/524967/hm_treasury_analysis_the_immediate_economic_impact_of_leaving_the_eu_web.pdf
    Which is why Mark Carney made a statement and then moved on interest rates.

    Such forecasts are always made ceteris paribus and Carney moved to ensure that the situation didn't remain paribus for long.
    So a 0.25% interest rate cut saved us from a year long recession. Really?

    Shouldn't the forecasts not have thought the Bank of England might take such dramatic step? Mystic Meg could do as good a job!

  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    TOPPING said:


    Which is why Mark Carney made a statement and then moved on interest rates.

    Such forecasts are always made ceteris paribus and Carney moved to ensure that the situation didn't remain paribus for long.

    That's categorically not true. Ceteris Paribus is used in economic modelling to measure the impact of one variable without adjusting others but the governments modelling wasn't so simplistic. It included the levers of the state and said there would be tax rises and a necessary governmental tightening of the economy if there was a vote.

    If the governmental report said instead "in the case of a vote for Brexit there will be interest rate cuts to stimulate the economy resulting in record employment and no recession" instead of "tax rises, recession and unemployment" which was forecast then that would have had a very different impact.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Roger, had they thrown May out late last year, that would've preceded the rise of BP and the ground would've been a lot better for what we might call a centrist (Hunt etc). By delaying, the situation has developed to the advantage of Boris and those more inclined towards no deal.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842

    rkrkrk said:

    Buttegieg looks to be joint 2nd favourite on betfair now for Dem nominee.
    I think he's a lay at 6.8.

    You are probably right but at this distance, I'd be inclined to wait for the debates rather than put in the effort to follow developments Stateside. One of them has got to win and I think the oldies are too short because of name recognition. Mind you, Betfair has just emailed to ask if I know what the hell I'm doing!
    Order
    ----
    Biden
    Sanders
    Warren
    Harris
    Buttigieg
    O'Rourke
    Booker
    Klobuchar
    Castro
    Yang
    Gabbard
    Ryan
    Inslee

    RCP Average 5/11 - 6/2 34.9 16.9 8.4 7.3 6.0 3.9 2.7 1.6 1.1 0.9 0.7 0.6 0.6 Biden +18.0
    CNN 5/28 - 5/31 32 18 7 8 5 5 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 Biden +14
    The Hill/HarrisX 6/1 - 6/2 35 16 5 4 8 4 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 Biden +19
    Morning Consult 5/27 - 6/2 38 19 10 7 7 4 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 Biden +19
    Harvard-Harris 5/29 - 5/30 36 17 5 8 5 4 3 0 1 1 0 1 1 Biden +19
    Quinnipiac 5/16 - 5/20 35 16 13 8 5 2 3 2 1 1 1 0 0 Biden +19
    Monmouth 5/16 - 5/20 33 15 10 11 6 4 1 3 1 1 1 0 0 Biden +18
    FOX News 5/11 - 5/14 35 17 9 5 6 4 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 Biden +18

    On any measure 6.8 is a hell of a stretch for someone on 6%.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,881
    Pulpstar said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Buttegieg looks to be joint 2nd favourite on betfair now for Dem nominee.
    I think he's a lay at 6.8.

    RCP average 6.0... ! I've laid him back to the Harris line

    Value in the Dem race is probably with Biden, Sanders and Warren right now.

    On the GOP race, I note Mike Pence is 180/200 for president whilst Trump is 1.12/1.13 for the GOP nomination. Don't see how Trump isn't the GOP nominee unless his 239 lb 6'3 body decides to give up the ghost. In which case it'll be Pence. The Nikki Hayley 23/48 price is pure fantasy still.
    Thanks for the Hayley tip. I was one of those who thought Trump would be in big trouble this year, that helps reduce the damage a little.

    I'm green on Biden, Warren and the long-odds long shots. Am red on Harris, Sanders and Buttegieg. Sanders makes me nervous, but still doubt he will be able to attract support as other candidates drop out.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 14,912

    Jonathan said:

    ‪75 years ago today a million troops from the UK, the US, Canada and countless other countries were preparing to sacrifice everything for the noblest cause the world has ever known. Men the age my boys are now were hours away from death. Heroes is not an adequate enough word for them.‬ The least we can do is honour their memory now and always.

    My grandfather was in his very early twenties, he went to Normandy and later found himself liberating Bergen-Belsen. I remember him fondly today.

    Incidentally, whilst he never had much time for Germans after that, he like so many of his generation saw the EU/UN/NATO as critical to 'never again'. I remember that ,whenever Brexit descends into jingoism.

    This is one lesson from British History.

    Very much like Churchill. The Brexiter understanding of history carries hallmarks of the "Ladybird Books" version.
    That is an insult to Ladybird Books, which are excellent. I think Brexiteers' understanding of history is pulled directly from their own arse.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    edited June 2019
    rkrkrk said:

    Pulpstar said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Buttegieg looks to be joint 2nd favourite on betfair now for Dem nominee.
    I think he's a lay at 6.8.

    RCP average 6.0... ! I've laid him back to the Harris line

    Value in the Dem race is probably with Biden, Sanders and Warren right now.

    On the GOP race, I note Mike Pence is 180/200 for president whilst Trump is 1.12/1.13 for the GOP nomination. Don't see how Trump isn't the GOP nominee unless his 239 lb 6'3 body decides to give up the ghost. In which case it'll be Pence. The Nikki Hayley 23/48 price is pure fantasy still.
    Thanks for the Hayley tip. I was one of those who thought Trump would be in big trouble this year, that helps reduce the damage a little.

    I'm green on Biden, Warren and the long-odds long shots. Am red on Harris, Sanders and Buttegieg. Sanders makes me nervous, but still doubt he will be able to attract support as other candidates drop out.
    If you look at the betting shape of the Tory contest it follows if the polling is sustained (Hey it might not be !) then Biden would be ~ 1.5 or so, Sanders 6.0 and everyone else over 10.0.
    To be clear on Hayley I think it's a lay at 48 still.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:



    Which is why Mark Carney made a statement and then moved on interest rates.

    Such forecasts are always made ceteris paribus and Carney moved to ensure that the situation didn't remain paribus for long.

    So we can have a No Deal exit without difficulties as long as Mark Carney 'makes a statement' and reduces interest rates by 0.25%.
    He will be caught between very limited scope to introduce liquidity and a need to protect sterling.
    No need to protect Sterling. Not when a 0.25% cut is enough to avoid a year long recession, turn hundreds of thousands becoming unemployed into record employment and avoid sweeping tax rises. Oh an interest rates are higher now so he has more room to act. When all that can be done on a 0.25% change just imagine what he could do with a statement and a 0.5% change!
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 8,480
    edited June 2019

    Jonathan said:

    ‪75 years ago today a million troops from the UK, the US, Canada and countless other countries were preparing to sacrifice everything for the noblest cause the world has ever known. Men the age my boys are now were hours away from death. Heroes is not an adequate enough word for them.‬ The least we can do is honour their memory now and always.

    My grandfather was in his very early twenties, he went to Normandy and later found himself liberating Bergen-Belsen. I remember him fondly today.

    Incidentally, whilst he never had much time for Germans after that, he like so many of his generation saw the EU/UN/NATO as critical to 'never again'. I remember that ,whenever Brexit descends into jingoism.

    This is one lesson from British History.

    Very much like Churchill. The Brexiter understanding of history carries hallmarks of the "Ladybird Books" version.
    That is an insult to Ladybird Books, which are excellent. I think Brexiteers' understanding of history is pulled directly from their own arse.
    I suppose I mean more a Ladybird Books version of history digested and misinterpreted by an adult, rather than on their own terms for children. I remember bring mesmerised by some of those books.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    edited June 2019
    brendan16 said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Foxy said:

    kjohnw said:

    Trump backtracks on NHS comments on good morning Britain this morning according to SKY.

    NHS is no longer part of trade deal

    Consistency not part of the Donalds belief system.

    Can he be trusted in any negotiations when he tears up agreements on a whim?

    The one thing we know for certain about a trade deal with the US is that it will only happen on terms set by the US. In that way, it’s exactly the same as any trade deal that will be done with the EU, China and any other major economic power. We need them more than they need us. None of this is a surprise. The choice for Johnson will be a series of no deals or doing as he’s told. Either way, he’s buggered - though I suspect he’d just about beat Corbyn in a general election, so it will be rolling humiliation over a period of time for him rather than a sudden one.

    Except...at some point perhaps sooner perhaps later people will remember that they actually don't give a fuck about trade deals.

    All those which will be concluded at disadvantageous terms will pass unnoticed.

    Few will really know that they are worse off than they could have been.

    Then the deals are entirely pointless and so won’t be done. Which makes the current situation even more ridiculous.

    Deals will be done because they have to be done that's how the modern world works. Even in a "No Deal" scenario (No Deal Leaver ****s please note).

    But they will be sub-optimal to say the least. But that's fine because no one will notice they are less rich than they would have been (which latter is really all the so called Project Fear forecasts said pre-Ref).
    No, we were told that there would be an immediate and guaranteed year long recession after a Leave vote.

    Page 46 of this report gives the quarterly forecasts:

    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/524967/hm_treasury_analysis_the_immediate_economic_impact_of_leaving_the_eu_web.pdf
    Which is why Mark Carney made a statement and then moved on interest rates.

    Such forecasts are always made ceteris paribus and Carney moved to ensure that the situation didn't remain paribus for long.
    So a 0.25% interest rate cut saved us from a year long recession. Really?

    Shouldn't the forecasts not have thought the Bank of England might take such dramatic step? Mystic Meg could do as good a job!

    He signalled he was ready to act. It's all about confidence.

    Like the Fed in 1987.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:



    Which is why Mark Carney made a statement and then moved on interest rates.

    Such forecasts are always made ceteris paribus and Carney moved to ensure that the situation didn't remain paribus for long.

    So we can have a No Deal exit without difficulties as long as Mark Carney 'makes a statement' and reduces interest rates by 0.25%.
    He will be caught between very limited scope to introduce liquidity and a need to protect sterling.
    No need to protect Sterling. Not when a 0.25% cut is enough to avoid a year long recession, turn hundreds of thousands becoming unemployed into record employment and avoid sweeping tax rises. Oh an interest rates are higher now so he has more room to act. When all that can be done on a 0.25% change just imagine what he could do with a statement and a 0.5% change!

    See my reply to Brendan.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    malcolmg said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Boris' odds back down to 1.72 on Ladbrokes.

    Ruthie better get back on the blower.
    A complete about turn speech re Boris being great and her best pal will have been written weeks ago, we got phase one recently.
    Two faces suffices for most Tories, but Ruthie must be well on her way to a thousand. And all mounted on that fine brass neck.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    TOPPING said:


    Which is why Mark Carney made a statement and then moved on interest rates.

    Such forecasts are always made ceteris paribus and Carney moved to ensure that the situation didn't remain paribus for long.

    That's categorically not true. Ceteris Paribus is used in economic modelling to measure the impact of one variable without adjusting others but the governments modelling wasn't so simplistic. It included the levers of the state and said there would be tax rises and a necessary governmental tightening of the economy if there was a vote.

    If the governmental report said instead "in the case of a vote for Brexit there will be interest rate cuts to stimulate the economy resulting in record employment and no recession" instead of "tax rises, recession and unemployment" which was forecast then that would have had a very different impact.

    As I've said the economic forecasts he was given were for a central case. No decision tree.
  • mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    RH1992 said:

    TOPPING said:



    No, we were told that there would be an immediate and guaranteed year long recession after a Leave vote.

    Page 46 of this report gives the quarterly forecasts:

    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/524967/hm_treasury_analysis_the_immediate_economic_impact_of_leaving_the_eu_web.pdf

    Which is why Mark Carney made a statement and then moved on interest rates.

    Such forecasts are always made ceteris paribus and Carney moved to ensure that the situation didn't remain paribus for long.
    I agree. Just because something didn't happen at the time doesn't mean it won't or can't happen eventually. Brexit could still yet cause severe economic harm. Parliament right now is dancing very close to a live grenade and while it probably won't go off, the risk is there.
    A significant number of MPs don't believe it's a grenade. They think its a piñata and have the sticks in their hands and ready....
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,674
    More Tory leadership candidates lies........................
    What nonsense! @MattHancock says best thing he did as UK Culture Secretary was get Union Flag on Edinburgh International Festivals!! 1.He didn't 2. It would be completely wrong for UK Gov or indeed any Gov incl @scotgov to try and hi-jack/ appropriate independent arts Festivals!
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,232
    Spock is getting quite emotional of late. Earlier this week wasn't he all for bringing Nigel and his merry men into the government's Brexit discussions to help troubleshoot?
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891

    Mr. Roger, had they thrown May out late last year, that would've preceded the rise of BP and the ground would've been a lot better for what we might call a centrist (Hunt etc). By delaying, the situation has developed to the advantage of Boris and those more inclined towards no deal.

    As far as the Tory Party goes I don't think the deal matters. That is not in the leader's hands. What matters is having the ability to win the next eletion. With someone civilised and if Corbyn stays in place I'd say they're in with a chance. With Boris or any of the rest of them them I'd say they're doomed
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Steve Baker has published a policy paper on how to Brexit on 31st October

    https://twitter.com/SteveBakerHW/status/1136201522126176256
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851
    Mordaunt must surely be standing?

    And if we are going down the 'comment on female politicians' looks route - which it would appear that we are - I refuse to stand idly by and not mention Labour's Caroline Flint.

    Phew what a scorcher!

    I'd take a Blind Brexit from her any day of the week.

    I'd ... no, must leave it, I can hear the kettle boiling.
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 8,480
    edited June 2019
    Roger said:

    Mr. Roger, had they thrown May out late last year, that would've preceded the rise of BP and the ground would've been a lot better for what we might call a centrist (Hunt etc). By delaying, the situation has developed to the advantage of Boris and those more inclined towards no deal.

    As far as the Tory Party goes I don't think the deal matters. That is not in the leader's hands. What matters is having the ability to win the next eletion. With someone civilised and if Corbyn stays in place I'd say they're in with a chance. With Boris or any of the rest of them them I'd say they're doomed
    I wonder if the pattern could be crowd-pleasing Boris, and then a complete consensualist opposite like Rory or the mysteriously beautiful Penny.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,575
    TGOHF said:

    Steve Baker has published a policy paper on how to Brexit on 31st October

    https://twitter.com/SteveBakerHW/status/1136201522126176256

    "additional £39 billion spent in the UK economy and not transferred to the EU over the next two years..."

    Apart from any likely damage to the UK's international position should we renege, Baker is counting that money as both a bargaining chip and and immediate cash injection to the UK economy.

    Even accommodating his fantasy, the money was not going to be transferred "over the next two years":
    https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/CBP-8039

    The man is dishonest, an idiot, or both.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    The new slogan to dupe the plebs .

    Clean Managed Brexit.

    Most of the ERG need to be sectioned , utter nutjobs .
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    Spock is getting quite emotional of late. Earlier this week wasn't he all for bringing Nigel and his merry men into the government's Brexit discussions to help troubleshoot?
    Be more successful than bringing Hammond, Gaucke and Rudd.

    We should go to the EU and say their deal is dead, the backstop is dead now either give us a deal on terms we can agree including cross party Brexiteers like the DUP and BXP or it's No Deal.

    Anything else leaves us as supplicants begging for crumbs.
  • One thing that might help us out of this whole fucking disaster is if both sides stop with the broad generalisations they use to denigrate their evil opponents, and stop throwing insults generated by trying to interpret Brexit from historical events and eras. PB is one of the worst places for it, full of armchair warriors and experts. The place is barely fucking habitable at the minute.
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    TGOHF said:
    Clean Managed Brexit Paper

    ... sounds to me like competition for Andrex
  • Animal_pbAnimal_pb Posts: 608
    Roger said:

    Mr. Roger, had they thrown May out late last year, that would've preceded the rise of BP and the ground would've been a lot better for what we might call a centrist (Hunt etc). By delaying, the situation has developed to the advantage of Boris and those more inclined towards no deal.

    As far as the Tory Party goes I don't think the deal matters. That is not in the leader's hands. What matters is having the ability to win the next eletion. With someone civilised and if Corbyn stays in place I'd say they're in with a chance. With Boris or any of the rest of them them I'd say they're doomed
    If you were the bit of the electorate they were (should be?) aiming at, that would be a fair assessment, Roger. But you aren't, really.

    Interestingly, a convergence of opinion of non-Tories (Yanis Varoufakis, Alistair Meeks to name but two) does seem to recommend the BoJo route for the Tory party, in its own best interests.
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 3,949
    Pulpstar said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Pulpstar said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Buttegieg looks to be joint 2nd favourite on betfair now for Dem nominee.
    I think he's a lay at 6.8.

    RCP average 6.0... ! I've laid him back to the Harris line

    Value in the Dem race is probably with Biden, Sanders and Warren right now.

    On the GOP race, I note Mike Pence is 180/200 for president whilst Trump is 1.12/1.13 for the GOP nomination. Don't see how Trump isn't the GOP nominee unless his 239 lb 6'3 body decides to give up the ghost. In which case it'll be Pence. The Nikki Hayley 23/48 price is pure fantasy still.
    Thanks for the Hayley tip. I was one of those who thought Trump would be in big trouble this year, that helps reduce the damage a little.

    I'm green on Biden, Warren and the long-odds long shots. Am red on Harris, Sanders and Buttegieg. Sanders makes me nervous, but still doubt he will be able to attract support as other candidates drop out.
    If you look at the betting shape of the Tory contest it follows if the polling is sustained (Hey it might not be !) then Biden would be ~ 1.5 or so, Sanders 6.0 and everyone else over 10.0.
    To be clear on Hayley I think it's a lay at 48 still.
    Mayor Pete is way too short, it's nuts. Quite aside from his modest polling, he's on virtually 0% amongst black voters and doesn't seem to be fixing that. Unless he does so it's a fatal flaw in his campaign.

    Warren is mystifyingly long. She's polling basically the same as Harris both nationally and in early states. Warren should maybe be a bit longer than her given Harris has attractive fundamentals, but not much longer.
  • tpfkartpfkar Posts: 1,545
    TGOHF said:

    Steve Baker has published a policy paper on how to Brexit on 31st October

    https://twitter.com/SteveBakerHW/status/1136201522126176256

    I have clean managed toilet trips...I suspect the best use for this paper having given it a once-over. There's no real solution here.

    I haven't been able to post for technical reasons for a couple of weeks, frustrating as I've followed very closely through the EU elections as I was out of the country.

    One big thought: why oh why didn't the Tories sit the EU elections out, like Richmond Park? They would have delegitimised Lib Dem and Brexit Party progress, would have been far clearer about their message that the elections were an irrelevance as we are leaving, and all their sitting MEPs were expecting to go. Instead it's brought the PM down and taken the in-fighting to new levels. What were they thinking?

  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    TGOHF said:

    Steve Baker has published a policy paper on how to Brexit on 31st October

    https://twitter.com/SteveBakerHW/status/1136201522126176256

    Question for journalists to ask Mr Baker: did he vote for the Conservative party in the EU elections (and endorse the withdrawal agreement)?
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,263
    rkrkrk said:

    tlg86 said:

    On topic and a bit random, but if there were an election in the not too distant future, do we think Stephen Lloyd would hold on to Eastbourne as an independent?

    Broxtowe looks like an interesting fight between Soubry, Tories and Labour also.
    I may be biased but IMO Soubry's personal vote is small - she specialises in taking people on at a very personal level, which onlookers enjoy more than the targets. She is liked for her undoubted courage on social issues by people who won't actually vote for her (hardcore Labour Guardianstas).
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    edited June 2019
    A few sprinkles of added spice to add to the uncertainties.

    1. Boris wins. Many Tory MPs decide enough is enough and press nuclear. Government falls.

    2. Boris wins but fails to command the House of Commons (very likely). Government ends up in worse mess than now.

    3. Boris loses the court case precipitating John Bercow to allow a recall petition = certain end of Boris as a sitting MP.

    4. Boris goes to the country, pumped by news that he leads over Corbyn. Wins the General Election but loses his own seat.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,881

    One thing that might help us out of this whole fucking disaster is if both sides stop with the broad generalisations they use to denigrate their evil opponents, and stop throwing insults generated by trying to interpret Brexit from historical events and eras. PB is one of the worst places for it, full of armchair warriors and experts. The place is barely fucking habitable at the minute.

    Fair point, well made.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    TGOHF said:

    Steve Baker has published a policy paper on how to Brexit on 31st October

    https://twitter.com/SteveBakerHW/status/1136201522126176256

    Question for journalists to ask Mr Baker: did he vote for the Conservative party in the EU elections (and endorse the withdrawal agreement)?
    He was asked that on the radio last week and he said he voted Conservative in the Euro elections.

  • stodgestodge Posts: 12,745
    Morning all :)

    On topic, I suspect as far as UNS or any other measure is concerned, East Ham stays Labour. Yes, only 51% in the European Parliamentary elections but I suspect Stephen Timms will still cling on despite his hyper marginal 40,000 majority.

    D-Day counterfactuals - go off to alternatehistory.com to discuss those. It's the Point of Divergence (POD) for "Fatherland" for example. So much would depend on the scale of the defeat - would Dragoon have been launched in July as was originally intended and on a larger scale?

    As far as the Conservative leadership is concerned, the strongly pro-Boris poll in the Mail on Saturday has been backed up (to a more limited extent) by the YouGov though the choppy waters of UNS suggest gambling on a majority with 29% of the vote seems as foolhardy as betting odds on in novice chases,.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,263
    The first professional though biased assessment of the Peterborough situation that I've seen (there's a Waughzone report too but that's very anecdotal - basically "I've seen a lot of Brexit supporters"). This one also sounds like 1. Brexit 2. Labour, though.

    https://labourlist.org/2019/06/an-afternoon-in-peterborough-brexit-party-vs-labour/
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,674
    Look at the state of your average unionist in Scotland , beggars belief. Beware if you are of a sensitive nature it is not for before the watershed
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2&v=Vmt9T-WrsvQ
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,232

    FF43 said:

    Here’s one widely-bruited Brexit theory shot down in flames:

    https://twitter.com/proftimbale/status/1135875064447066112?s=21

    The interesting finding in that survey is that Remainers DON'T associate more with the Western and global worlds. The EU is both a globalist and a protectionist construct. It looks like Remainers are more attracted by the protectionist element.
    Point of order - the survey does show that Remainers associate much more with the global community than Leavers. It's still a minority but the difference is marked. As they don't associate more with the Western world, I assume this is mostly the Guardianistas like me, who feel closer to, say, an intellectual socialist in India than to Donald Trump, and who in principle doesn't think nationality is a very useful guide and personal type is more important.
    Point of order right back atcha. That conclusion may be truebut you can't draw it without being more specific. Stating that 'a likes X' significantly more than 'b likes X' is not enough to say that 'a likes X and b does not like X'. For example, if 20% of a likes X and 10% of b likes X, the there is obviously a significant difference but neither like X overall.

    Numbers, percentages, thresholds. I'll train y'all if it kills me... :)

  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851
    Roger said:

    As far as the Tory Party goes I don't think the deal matters. That is not in the leader's hands. What matters is having the ability to win the next election. With someone civilised and if Corbyn stays in place I'd say they're in with a chance. With Boris or any of the rest of them them I'd say they're doomed

    Johnson or Corbyn, that will be a tough choice for many millions. I wonder which way they will break?

    It's an important question because the answer will determine which of two starkly different futures lie ahead.

    Large state tax & spend, inside the European Union, or
    Small deregulated state, market primacy, outside the European Union.

    I can't call it.
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688

    rkrkrk said:

    tlg86 said:

    On topic and a bit random, but if there were an election in the not too distant future, do we think Stephen Lloyd would hold on to Eastbourne as an independent?

    Broxtowe looks like an interesting fight between Soubry, Tories and Labour also.
    I may be biased but IMO Soubry's personal vote is small - she specialises in taking people on at a very personal level, which onlookers enjoy more than the targets. She is liked for her undoubted courage on social issues by people who won't actually vote for her (hardcore Labour Guardianstas).
    She's disliked by so many people. Very acerbic, especially when she has been at the bottle.

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842

    The first professional though biased assessment of the Peterborough situation that I've seen (there's a Waughzone report too but that's very anecdotal - basically "I've seen a lot of Brexit supporters"). This one also sounds like 1. Brexit 2. Labour, though.

    https://labourlist.org/2019/06/an-afternoon-in-peterborough-brexit-party-vs-labour/

    2nd whilst not great is important to Labour in Peterborough, a drop to 3rd below the Lib Dems/Tories or some such would be very bad news indeed.
This discussion has been closed.