The Brexit Party and UKIP combined got 35% of the vote in the European elections, and of course most Tories prefer No Deal to revoke too and add them to the mix and that makes 44%.
Oi! You most certainly can't add this Tory to the No Deal madness mix.
Nor this Corbynite leaver
Maybe not too but again according to YouGov 26% of 2017 Labour voters, over a quarter, would still vote for No Deal over Revoke
I feel like observing HYUFD working his polling referencing is like watching a magician at work, all flash and with the feeling I am missing seeing the actual trick.
He uses polls like a drunk uses a lamppost: for support not illumination
That said, now that Biden is in the race KLOBUCHAR is getting big-footed for the whole electable moderate thing, so she really needs Biden to eat his own head to be in with a chance.
Yeah, but Biden (after a strong start) is stuttering hard. And Klobuchar is not benefiting because, although she's not a bad candidate, she doesn't have (errr) IT.
IT is a very hard to define thing. Has a candidate ever made the hairs on the back of your neck ever stood on end? (As Obama did with "there are no red states and blue states" speech.) Or has the candidate done something which (for positive reasons) get replayed and replayed and replayed on YouTube?
Klobuchar is competent. And moderate. And electable. But she doesn't excite.
In this race, there are two exciters: Elizabeth Warren, who is super bright and a policy wonk, and who is going down a storm. And Pete Buttigieg, who is incredibly engaging and (yes) makes the hairs stand up on the back of your neck when you hear him talk.
Sanders was an exciter. But his time has passed. Biden was never an exciter. He's just a name that people remember from the Obama era.
I suspect Iowa will be a four way tie between Buttigieg, Warren, Biden and Sanders. And that will be a deathknell for the old white guys. They were only up there because people thought they were winners. Once the "winner" mantle is removed, they are nothing.
Who will win between Buttigieg and Warren? I don't know. But those are the guys I'd tip to be fighting it out past Super Tuesday.
Apart from the last bit, sounds about right. Too early to tell who’ll be fighting it out past Super Tuesday, though, and Iowa isn’t exactly the whole game so perhaps best not to over interpret a single state poll.
This sort of thing isn’t going to help Biden in Iowa: https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/09/warren-booker-democrats-iowa-2020-1358526 Front-runner Joe Biden, who led the crowded Democratic presidential field in the Des Moines Register/CNN/Mediacom poll, had virtually no presence at the party event. His campaign said the former vice president missed the dinner due to his granddaughter‘s high school graduation...
Bless your total ignorance. The Irish American lobby is incredibly powerful across the North East of the US, as well as the Mid-West. And is strong in both parties. There are a number of Congressional districts in red and blue states where you don’t get elected if it opposes you.
No it isn't, of the 9 US states with over 15% Irish American population every one was in the North East and every one bar Pennsylvania voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016.
The Jewish, Hispanic, African American, Christian evangelical lobbies are now more powerful than the Irish American lobby and the Commerce and gun and evangelical lobbies certainly more influential with Republicans.
Indeed Trump was so unconcerned about the Irish fears over a hard border he told Varadkar last week that he wished him well with his country's border wall after Brexit
* Them voting for Hilary Clinton is a non sequitur in this context. * Trump's unconcern is a non sequitur in this context. * 9 states may have 15% or more Irish Americans, but 30-odd have 10% or more.
All this ignores the fact that Parliament is not going to pass any FTA that is acceptable to the US.
I might also point out that the US has not, of late, treated its FTA partners with much in the way of respect.
You are Mr Chirpy Cheerful tonight, I think... Where are you moving to, btw? Staying in LA or somewhere else?
Still in LA. Still in sunny Brentwood. I was at the beach yesterday, and the kids were hanging out by the pool today.
How's the weather in London?
Actually very nice. We feasted on freshly picked strawberries and newly gathered eggs yesterday
Kamala Harris on a good day? Watching her video clips, she seems the most variable. Like a skilled boxer with no knockout punch. Or like the skilled lawyer she is, a better metaphor is building up a case in cross-examination but then stopping short to save something for her final summing up to the jury.
She looks good on paper but I don't think she's got the sparkle. She's the dullest person in my entire twitter feed.
There was a time when you could have won by being solidly competent and ticking the right boxes, but I don't think that time is now. You need a certain amount of spikiness to compete in a social-media-driven environment.
That's something I think KLOBUCHAR *does* have, but it's hard to get people excited from the centre, unless you're Barack Obama.
Essentially a bunch of well off mostly middle aged and pensioners of the Tory Membership will be deciding the future PM.
They can gamble with the futures of others as they have little to lose . Their attitude is fuck everyone else as long as they get to play Empire 2.0 .
I have never ever seen or heard a leaver talk about “Empire 2.0”
It’s just a remainer fantasy
Empire 2.0 has a specific meaning. It was the idea of prioritising the Commonwealth post-Brexit. It fell into disfavour once Leavers eventually realised that no one in the Commonwealth had the slightest interest in it.
Leavers also abandoned Canzuk for the same reason, have gone cold on the idea of a NAFTA-type arrangement since they realised that the USA would like to asset strip the NHS and have lurking doubts about whether Britain’s coastline would get them into the TPP. So right now all they have is a visceral emotional hatred of the EU, a surly insularity and reheated folk memories of taking on Nazi Germany. The idea of a positive vision of Brexit has now been completely forgotten.
According to Today, Boris will raise threshold for the higher tax rate but increase NI upper limit to pay for it. Over 65 earners do not pay NI.
1. I thought it was the money he'd not going to pay the EU and 2. Who is going to be voting in the forthcoming Tory leadership elections? Other than higher rate taxpayers who are older than the average.
Essentially a bunch of well off mostly middle aged and pensioners of the Tory Membership will be deciding the future PM.
They can gamble with the futures of others as they have little to lose . Their attitude is fuck everyone else as long as they get to play Empire 2.0 .
I have never ever seen or heard a leaver talk about “Empire 2.0”
It’s just a remainer fantasy
Empire 2.0 has a specific meaning. It was the idea of prioritising the Commonwealth post-Brexit. It fell into disfavour once Leavers eventually realised that no one in the Commonwealth had the slightest interest in it.
Leavers also abandoned Canzuk for the same reason, have gone cold on the idea of a NAFTA-type arrangement since they realised that the USA would like to asset strip the NHS and have lurking doubts about whether Britain’s coastline would get them into the TPP. So right now all they have is a visceral emotional hatred of the EU, a surly insularity and reheated folk memories of taking on Nazi Germany. The idea of a positive vision of Brexit has now been completely forgotten.
The Times saying we're about to put pen to paper with South Korea. A few more of these and suddenly no deal becomes viable.
As I've said time and again, it's not the 40% of trade we do with the EU that is holding back business investment, it's the 25% of preferential trade we do elsewhere that needs to be clarified.
Having that 25% in the bank before leaving will change the game IMO which is why giving the job to Liam Fox was such an error.
Essentially a bunch of well off mostly middle aged and pensioners of the Tory Membership will be deciding the future PM.
They can gamble with the futures of others as they have little to lose . Their attitude is fuck everyone else as long as they get to play Empire 2.0 .
I have never ever seen or heard a leaver talk about “Empire 2.0”
It’s just a remainer fantasy
Empire 2.0 has a specific meaning. It was the idea of prioritising the Commonwealth post-Brexit. It fell into disfavour once Leavers eventually realised that no one in the Commonwealth had the slightest interest in it.
Leavers also abandoned Canzuk for the same reason, have gone cold on the idea of a NAFTA-type arrangement since they realised that the USA would like to asset strip the NHS and have lurking doubts about whether Britain’s coastline would get them into the TPP. So right now all they have is a visceral emotional hatred of the EU, a surly insularity and reheated folk memories of taking on Nazi Germany. The idea of a positive vision of Brexit has now been completely forgotten.
Yawn. Dude. Get over yourself.
I was correcting your customarily ignorant statement that Empire 2.0 was a Remainer fantasy. It’s an old Leaver fantasy and like all old Leaver fantasies never to be spoken of again.
Essentially a bunch of well off mostly middle aged and pensioners of the Tory Membership will be deciding the future PM.
They can gamble with the futures of others as they have little to lose . Their attitude is fuck everyone else as long as they get to play Empire 2.0 .
I have never ever seen or heard a leaver talk about “Empire 2.0”
It’s just a remainer fantasy
Empire 2.0 has a specific meaning. It was the idea of prioritising the Commonwealth post-Brexit. It fell into disfavour once Leavers eventually realised that no one in the Commonwealth had the slightest interest in it.
Leavers also abandoned Canzuk for the same reason, have gone cold on the idea of a NAFTA-type arrangement since they realised that the USA would like to asset strip the NHS and have lurking doubts about whether Britain’s coastline would get them into the TPP. So right now all they have is a visceral emotional hatred of the EU, a surly insularity and reheated folk memories of taking on Nazi Germany. The idea of a positive vision of Brexit has now been completely forgotten.
The Canadian Conservatives have passed a policy that amounts to Canzuk if they win the next federal election.
It's fair to say that India doesn't see the UK in quite the same way as the UK sees India.
I see Elizabeth Warren has shortened today on BF to under 10, presumably because of her strong Iowa poll (though it wasn't that impressive). I think she should be same odds as Buttigieg and close to Harris, so fair play there.
Should Sanders really be the same as Harris/Buttigieg? His fundraising was much stronger in Q1 and his polling is much better. I get he is seen as having less room to grow due to his sky-high recognition already, but I think that's a bit harsh. I also think people keep making useless comparisons to his 2016 numbers which ignore the fact that he was one of two (or three) candidates then - not one of 20.
Personally, I think Iowa is showing up the weaknesses of both Biden and Sanders. Iowans are seeing more of both than anywhere else, and in both cases, they're polling less well than nationally.
The polling yesterday which showed that Biden was the choice of people who "hadn't been paying much attention" to the election also should really concern his team. (Both him and Sanders scored highly with people who haven't been paying much attention. Warren scored really highly with those paying a lot of attention, and Buttigieg and Harris were in the middle.) As we get nearer to the primaries, there are far fewer unengaged voters, which is good for Warren (and therefore Trump), and bad for Biden and Sanders.
So where
This is why I've put more money on Warren. Primary voters are "paying attention voters" Warren has momentum amongst paying attention voters.
NP hinted over the weekend that we should expect some new revelation today. I hope it is something more interesting than tax cuts for Boris supporters, or that nominations close (and officially open) today. But not so interesting as to destroy my existing bets.
A high stakes game, increasing his standing among Tory members (where by all accounts he doesn't need to bother) but increasing the likelihood of counter-reaction against him, should he (try to) become PM
Yeah, but Biden (after a strong start) is stuttering hard. And Klobuchar is not benefiting because, although she's not a bad candidate, she doesn't have (errr) IT.
IT is a very hard to define thing. Has a candidate ever made the hairs on the back of your neck ever stood on end? (As Obama did with "there are no red states and blue states" speech.) Or has the candidate done something which (for positive reasons) get replayed and replayed and replayed on YouTube?
Klobuchar is competent. And moderate. And electable. But she doesn't excite.
In this race, there are two exciters: Elizabeth Warren, who is super bright and a policy wonk, and who is going down a storm. And Pete Buttigieg, who is incredibly engaging and (yes) makes the hairs stand up on the back of your neck when you hear him talk.
Is Biden stuttering? If you stand back from individual polls and look at the overall picture, it's here:
I'm not much impressed by Biden, and my Sanders-backing friends in the States are scornful of him ("boring centrist with a creepy interest in hair"), but he seems to be cruising well ahead of the pack. The Iowa poll is interesting as for the first time it shows Warren and Buttigieg in the leading bunch, but I'd like to see more polls to confirm it. Warren is aggressive without being left-wing, which may be a bad combination for the Democratic selectorate; Buttigieg is neither, though he's pleasant and fluent - the American Rory Stewart.
A high stakes game, increasing his standing among Tory members (where by all accounts he doesn't need to bother) but increasing the likelihood of counter-reaction against him, should he (try to) become PM
The new Conservative leader will automatically become prime minister.
ETA: how long the new PM remains in office depends on surviving the confidence vote Labour will no doubt shortly call but that will happen after we have a new PM, not before.
I see Elizabeth Warren has shortened today on BF to under 10, presumably because of her strong Iowa poll (though it wasn't that impressive). I think she should be same odds as Buttigieg and close to Harris, so fair play there.
Should Sanders really be the same as Harris/Buttigieg? His fundraising was much stronger in Q1 and his polling is much better. I get he is seen as having less room to grow due to his sky-high recognition already, but I think that's a bit harsh. I also think people keep making useless comparisons to his 2016 numbers which ignore the fact that he was one of two (or three) candidates then - not one of 20.
Personally, I think Iowa is showing up the weaknesses of both Biden and Sanders. Iowans are seeing more of both than anywhere else, and in both cases, they're polling less well than nationally.
The polling yesterday which showed that Biden was the choice of people who "hadn't been paying much attention" to the election also should really concern his team. (Both him and Sanders scored highly with people who haven't been paying much attention. Warren scored really highly with those paying a lot of attention, and Buttigieg and Harris were in the middle.) As we get nearer to the primaries, there are far fewer unengaged voters, which is good for Warren (and therefore Trump), and bad for Biden and Sanders.
So where
This is why I've put more money on Warren. Primary voters are "paying attention voters" Warren has momentum amongst paying attention voters.
Biden is also three gaffes away from a disaster.
If they pick Warren they are mad. So they probably will.
I am afraid there is also no getting around the fact that if a Deal does not prove possible and further extension is denied by the EU in October then polling shows that voters may prefer No Deal to revoke or remain if that is the only way to achieve Brexit
If the Conservative Government goes for "No Deal", it will not be long before the voters realise that "No Deal" means total surrender to absolutely everybody. No Deal is just a Con Trick.
According to Today, Boris will raise threshold for the higher tax rate but increase NI upper limit to pay for it. Over 65 earners do not pay NI.
1. I thought it was the money he'd not going to pay the EU and 2. Who is going to be voting in the forthcoming Tory leadership elections? Other than higher rate taxpayers who are older than the average.
Yes - people like that (including me) will be £6000/year better off under that proposal. I'm bemused to learn that helping people like us is Britain's highest priority right now, but I can see its appeal to the selectorate. It's that sort of thing that makes switching PMs without recourse to the general electorate so dubious. (Yes, I know, Gordon Brown...)
Yeah, but Biden (after a strong start) is stuttering hard. And Klobuchar is not benefiting because, although she's not a bad candidate, she doesn't have (errr) IT.
IT is a very hard to define thing. Has a candidate ever made the hairs on the back of your neck ever stood on end? (As Obama did with "there are no red states and blue states" speech.) Or has the candidate done something which (for positive reasons) get replayed and replayed and replayed on YouTube?
Klobuchar is competent. And moderate. And electable. But she doesn't excite.
In this race, there are two exciters: Elizabeth Warren, who is super bright and a policy wonk, and who is going down a storm. And Pete Buttigieg, who is incredibly engaging and (yes) makes the hairs stand up on the back of your neck when you hear him talk.
Is Biden stuttering? If you stand back from individual polls and look at the overall picture, it's here:
I'm not much impressed by Biden, and my Sanders-backing friends in the States are scornful of him ("boring centrist with a creepy interest in hair"), but he seems to be cruising well ahead of the pack. The Iowa poll is interesting as for the first time it shows Warren and Buttigieg in the leading bunch, but I'd like to see more polls to confirm it. Warren is aggressive without being left-wing, which may be a bad combination for the Democratic selectorate; Buttigieg is neither, though he's pleasant and fluent - the American Rory Stewart.
Buttigieg starts off well in Iowa and New Hampshire, heads backwards rapidly in South Carolina
Two of of the main reasons the Betfair Exchange is so often quoted as being the best current indicator of odds in a particular market is firstly that it is very active, often far more so than any individual or even grouping of bookmakers, secondly it is often far more responsive to events. Currently its "Next Prime Minister after May" market has more than £1.1 million of matched bets and its odds of 30 (29/1 in old money) is considerably greater than most bookies who in the main offer odds of between 15/1 and 25/1. It's not difficult to arrive at odds of 30 ... put simply, this equates to Gove having say a 5/1 chance (or 16.7% probability) of making the final 2 candidates to be selected by the Tory faithful, coupled with say a 4/1 chance (or 20% probabiity) of him going on to win the contest outright. Taken together, these two hurdles, applying the odds suggested, work out to be ... yes ... a 29/1 shot.
Today sees the main campaign launches - probably wise to see how they go before plunging deep.
That said, now that Biden is in the race KLOBUCHAR is getting big-footed for the whole electable moderate thing, so she really needs Biden to eat his own head to be in with a chance.
Yeah, but Biden (after a strong start) is stuttering hard. And Klobuchar is not benefiting because, although she's not a bad candidate, she doesn't have (errr) IT.
IT is a very hard to define thing. Has a candidate ever made the hairs on the back of your neck ever stood on end? (As Obama did with "there are no red states and blue states" speech.) Or has the candidate done something which (for positive reasons) get replayed and replayed and replayed on YouTube?
Klobuchar is competent. And moderate. And electable. But she doesn't excite.
In this race, there are two exciters: Elizabeth Warren, who is super bright and a policy wonk, and who is going down a storm. And Pete Buttigieg, who is incredibly engaging and (yes) makes the hairs stand up on the back of your neck when you hear him talk.
Sanders was an exciter. But his time has passed. Biden was never an exciter. He's just a name that people remember from the Obama era.
I suspect Iowa will be a four way tie between Buttigieg, Warren, Biden and Sanders. And that will be a deathknell for the old white guys. They were only up there because people thought they were winners. Once the "winner" mantle is removed, they are nothing.
Who will win between Buttigieg and Warren? I don't know. But those are the guys I'd tip to be fighting it out past Super Tuesday.
Apart from the last bit, sounds about right. Too early to tell who’ll be fighting it out past Super Tuesday, though, and Iowa isn’t exactly the whole game so perhaps best not to over interpret a single state poll.
This sort of thing isn’t going to help Biden in Iowa: https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/09/warren-booker-democrats-iowa-2020-1358526 Front-runner Joe Biden, who led the crowded Democratic presidential field in the Des Moines Register/CNN/Mediacom poll, had virtually no presence at the party event. His campaign said the former vice president missed the dinner due to his granddaughter‘s high school graduation...
Quite frankly that endears me to him.
Of course, and no doubt that is how it will be spun.
And for any one event like this, of course it seems like the human choice. But the demands of a presidential race, and the presidency itself, don’t allow it to be treated as a part time job (Trump’s example notwithstanding).
It’s not the choice to skip events like this which will damage his chances, so much as his resulting absence.
Bless your total ignorance. The Irish American lobby is incredibly powerful across the North East of the US, as well as the Mid-West. And is strong in both parties. There are a number of Congressional districts in red and blue states where you don’t get elected if it opposes you.
No it isn't, of the 9 US states with over 15% Irish American population every one was in the North East and every one bar Pennsylvania voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016.
The Jewish, Hispanic, African American, Christian evangelical lobbies are now more powerful than the Irish American lobby and the Commerce and gun and evangelical lobbies certainly more influential with Republicans.
Indeed Trump was so unconcerned about the Irish fears over a hard border he told Varadkar last week that he wished him well with his country's border wall after Brexit
* Them voting for Hilary Clinton is a non sequitur in this context. * Trump's unconcern is a non sequitur in this context. * 9 states may have 15% or more Irish Americans, but 30-odd have 10% or more.
All this ignores the fact that Parliament is not going to pass any FTA that is acceptable to the US.
I might also point out that the US has not, of late, treated its FTA partners with much in the way of respect.
You are Mr Chirpy Cheerful tonight, I think... Where are you moving to, btw? Staying in LA or somewhere else?
Still in LA. Still in sunny Brentwood. I was at the beach yesterday, and the kids were hanging out by the pool today.
How's the weather in London?
Actually very nice. We feasted on freshly picked strawberries and newly gathered eggs yesterday
My very extensive patch of wild strawberries is just at the point of harvesting. Lord knows how many you'd need for a punnet, but flavour bombs, each and every one.
Turkeys voting for Christmas . Of course the government won’t match current funding levels . Well done sw and Wales , don’t come bleating now . It’s only fair that the areas that chose to leave should enjoy the rewards of that stupid decision !
A high stakes game, increasing his standing among Tory members (where by all accounts he doesn't need to bother) but increasing the likelihood of counter-reaction against him, should he (try to) become PM
The new Conservative leader will automatically become prime minister.
ETA: how long the new PM remains in office depends on surviving the confidence vote Labour will no doubt shortly call but that will happen after we have a new PM, not before.
From a betting perspective, fair enough. In terms of political impact, not so much.
Yeah, but Biden (after a strong start) is stuttering hard. And Klobuchar is not benefiting because, although she's not a bad candidate, she doesn't have (errr) IT.
IT is a very hard to define thing. Has a candidate ever made the hairs on the back of your neck ever stood on end? (As Obama did with "there are no red states and blue states" speech.) Or has the candidate done something which (for positive reasons) get replayed and replayed and replayed on YouTube?
Klobuchar is competent. And moderate. And electable. But she doesn't excite.
In this race, there are two exciters: Elizabeth Warren, who is super bright and a policy wonk, and who is going down a storm. And Pete Buttigieg, who is incredibly engaging and (yes) makes the hairs stand up on the back of your neck when you hear him talk.
Is Biden stuttering? If you stand back from individual polls and look at the overall picture, it's here:
I'm not much impressed by Biden, and my Sanders-backing friends in the States are scornful of him ("boring centrist with a creepy interest in hair"), but he seems to be cruising well ahead of the pack. The Iowa poll is interesting as for the first time it shows Warren and Buttigieg in the leading bunch, but I'd like to see more polls to confirm it. Warren is aggressive without being left-wing, which may be a bad combination for the Democratic selectorate...
There again, it might not. Those who vote in the Democratic primaries are not, in the main, particularly left wing either. One could equally cast her as unabashedly progressive, but not a socialist.
Yeah, but Biden (after a strong start) is stuttering hard. And Klobuchar is not benefiting because, although she's not a bad candidate, she doesn't have (errr) IT.
IT is a very hard to define thing. Has a candidate ever made the hairs on the back of your neck ever stood on end? (As Obama did with "there are no red states and blue states" speech.) Or has the candidate done something which (for positive reasons) get replayed and replayed and replayed on YouTube?
Klobuchar is competent. And moderate. And electable. But she doesn't excite.
In this race, there are two exciters: Elizabeth Warren, who is super bright and a policy wonk, and who is going down a storm. And Pete Buttigieg, who is incredibly engaging and (yes) makes the hairs stand up on the back of your neck when you hear him talk.
Is Biden stuttering? If you stand back from individual polls and look at the overall picture, it's here:
I'm not much impressed by Biden, and my Sanders-backing friends in the States are scornful of him ("boring centrist with a creepy interest in hair"), but he seems to be cruising well ahead of the pack. The Iowa poll is interesting as for the first time it shows Warren and Buttigieg in the leading bunch, but I'd like to see more polls to confirm it. Warren is aggressive without being left-wing, which may be a bad combination for the Democratic selectorate; Buttigieg is neither, though he's pleasant and fluent - the American Rory Stewart.
Buttigieg starts off well in Iowa and New Hampshire, heads backwards rapidly in South Carolina
Too early to say, I think. If Biden does really badly in the first two (by no means a foregone conclusion), then there will be a lot of SC voters looking for a new choice (though I’d agree that it’s less likely to be Buttigieg unless he is the actual front runner). The majority of likely primary voters have yet to settle on a preferred candidate.
There again, it might not. Those who vote in the Democratic primaries are not, in the main, particularly left wing either. One could equally cast her as unabashedly progressive, but not a socialist.
True. As a mild-mannered socialist, an aggressive centrist is exactly wrong for me, but I'm not the target audience.
NP hinted over the weekend that we should expect some new revelation today. I hope it is something more interesting than tax cuts for Boris supporters, or that nominations close (and officially open) today. But not so interesting as to destroy my existing bets.
Not a revelation, just the serious campaign launches.We've had the phoney war up to now.
I am afraid there is also no getting around the fact that if a Deal does not prove possible and further extension is denied by the EU in October then polling shows that voters may prefer No Deal to revoke or remain if that is the only way to achieve Brexit
If the Conservative Government goes for "No Deal", it will not be long before the voters realise that "No Deal" means total surrender to absolutely everybody. No Deal is just a Con Trick.
It is revoke and remain which is total surrender to Brussels, if the Commons refuses to pass the Withdrawal Agreement then No Deal ultimately it will have to be
I see Elizabeth Warren has shortened today on BF to under 10, presumably because of her strong Iowa poll (though it wasn't that impressive). I think she should be same odds as Buttigieg and close to Harris, so fair play there.
Should Sanders really be the same as Harris/Buttigieg? His fundraising was much stronger in Q1 and his polling is much better. I get he is seen as having less room to grow due to his sky-high recognition already, but I think that's a bit harsh. I also think people keep making useless comparisons to his 2016 numbers which ignore the fact that he was one of two (or three) candidates then - not one of 20.
Personally, I think Iowa is showing up the weaknesses of both Biden and Sanders. Iowans are seeing more of both than anywhere else, and in both cases, they're polling less well than nationally.
The polling yesterday which showed that Biden was the choice of people who "hadn't been paying much attention" to the election also should really concern his team. (Both him and Sanders scored highly with people who haven't been paying much attention. Warren scored really highly with those paying a lot of attention, and Buttigieg and Harris were in the middle.) As we get nearer to the primaries, there are far fewer unengaged voters, which is good for Warren (and therefore Trump), and bad for Biden and Sanders.
So where
This is why I've put more money on Warren. Primary voters are "paying attention voters" Warren has momentum amongst paying attention voters.
Biden is also three gaffes away from a disaster.
If they pick Warren they are mad. So they probably will.
Warren I think is Trump's favoured Democratic candidate, Biden is the one he most fears
Essentially a bunch of well off mostly middle aged and pensioners of the Tory Membership will be deciding the future PM.
They can gamble with the futures of others as they have little to lose . Their attitude is fuck everyone else as long as they get to play Empire 2.0 .
I have never ever seen or heard a leaver talk about “Empire 2.0”
It’s just a remainer fantasy
Empire 2.0 has a specific meaning. It was the idea of prioritising the Commonwealth post-Brexit. It fell into disfavour once Leavers eventually realised that no one in the Commonwealth had the slightest interest in it.
Leavers also abandoned Canzuk for the same reason, have gone cold on the idea of a NAFTA-type arrangement since they realised that the USA would like to asset strip the NHS and have lurking doubts about whether Britain’s coastline would get them into the TPP. So right now all they have is a visceral emotional hatred of the EU, a surly insularity and reheated folk memories of taking on Nazi Germany. The idea of a positive vision of Brexit has now been completely forgotten.
The Canadian Conservatives have passed a policy that amounts to Canzuk if they win the next federal election.
It's fair to say that India doesn't see the UK in quite the same way as the UK sees India.
Indeed, the victory of Scott Morrison over Bill Shorten in Australia and Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton in the US put two pro Brexit leaders in power in the Canzuk nations. If Scheer beats Trudeau in Canada in the Autumn that would be 3 out of 4 Canzuk leaders pro Brexit (though even Trudeau has said he will do a FTA with the UK).
The only leader less supportive of Brexit is Jacinda Ardern in New Zealand but even she has a pro Brexit coalition partner in Winston Peters
Turkeys voting for Christmas . Of course the government won’t match current funding levels . Well done sw and Wales , don’t come bleating now . It’s only fair that the areas that chose to leave should enjoy the rewards of that stupid decision !
Thankfully the face of the leave is about to become PM and will deliver the unicorns he promised everyone...
Johnson spent eight years as London mayor avoiding scrutiny. He almost never did press conferences, only did interviews with compliant journalists and gave speeches that did not involve Q&A.
I am afraid there is also no getting around the fact that if a Deal does not prove possible and further extension is denied by the EU in October then polling shows that voters may prefer No Deal to revoke or remain if that is the only way to achieve Brexit
If the Conservative Government goes for "No Deal", it will not be long before the voters realise that "No Deal" means total surrender to absolutely everybody. No Deal is just a Con Trick.
It is revoke and remain which is total surrender to Brussels, if the Commons refuses to pass the Withdrawal Agreement then No Deal ultimately it will have to be
So you are prepared to surrender to everybody, accept all their demands and just lie down and take whatever they choose to do to you, Mr HY?
Brussels does at least protect the interests of ordinary people.
Essentially a bunch of well off mostly middle aged and pensioners of the Tory Membership will be deciding the future PM.
They can gamble with the futures of others as they have little to lose . Their attitude is fuck everyone else as long as they get to play Empire 2.0 .
I have never ever seen or heard a leaver talk about “Empire 2.0”
It’s just a remainer fantasy
Empire 2.0 has a specific meaning. It was the idea of prioritising the Commonwealth post-Brexit. It fell into disfavour once Leavers eventually realised that no one in the Commonwealth had the slightest interest in it.
Leavers also abandoned Canzuk for the same reason, have gone cold on the idea of a NAFTA-type arrangement since they realised that the USA would like to asset strip the NHS and have lurking doubts about whether Britain’s coastline would get them into the TPP. So right now all they have is a visceral emotional hatred of the EU, a surly insularity and reheated folk memories of taking on Nazi Germany. The idea of a positive vision of Brexit has now been completely forgotten.
The Canadian Conservatives have passed a policy that amounts to Canzuk if they win the next federal election.
It's fair to say that India doesn't see the UK in quite the same way as the UK sees India.
Indeed, the victory of Scott Morrison over Bill Shorten in Australia and Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton in the US put two pro Brexit leaders in power in the Canzuk nations. If Scheer beats Trudeau in Canada in the Autumn that would be 3 out of 4 Canzuk leaders pro Brexit (though even Trudeau has said he will do a FTA with the UK).
The only leader less supportive of Brexit is Jacinda Ardern in New Zealand but even she has a pro Brexit coalition partner in Winston Peters
Has it never occurred to you that foreign leaders liking Brexit doesn't necessarily mean it would be good news for us?
The tree planted by Donald Trump and his French counterpart, Emmanuel Macron, at the White House as a symbol of their countries’ ties has died, according to multiple media reports in France.
According to Today, Boris will raise threshold for the higher tax rate but increase NI upper limit to pay for it. Over 65 earners do not pay NI.
The NI upper limit applies only to those earning over £962 per week anyway so raising tgat would hit fewer voters then raising the 40% income tax rate to £80 000 would benefit
Essentially a bunch of well off mostly middle aged and pensioners of the Tory Membership will be deciding the future PM.
They can gamble with the futures of others as they have little to lose . Their attitude is fuck everyone else as long as they get to play Empire 2.0 .
I have never ever seen or heard a leaver talk about “Empire 2.0”
It’s just a remainer fantasy
Empire 2.0 has a specific meaning. It was the idea of prioritising the Commonwealth post-Brexit. It fell into disfavour once Leavers eventually realised that no one in the Commonwealth had the slightest interest in it.
Leavers also abandoned Canzuk for the same reason, have gone cold on the idea of a NAFTA-type arrangement since they realised that the USA would like to asset strip the NHS and have lurking doubts about whether Britain’s coastline would get them into the TPP. So right now all they have is a visceral emotional hatred of the EU, a surly insularity and reheated folk memories of taking on Nazi Germany. The idea of a positive vision of Brexit has now been completely forgotten.
The Canadian Conservatives have passed a policy that amounts to Canzuk if they win the next federal election.
It's fair to say that India doesn't see the UK in quite the same way as the UK sees India.
Indeed, the victory of Scott Morrison over Bill Shorten in Australia and Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton in the US put two pro Brexit leaders in power in the Canzuk nations. If Scheer beats Trudeau in Canada in the Autumn that would be 3 out of 4 Canzuk leaders pro Brexit (though even Trudeau has said he will do a FTA with the UK).
The only leader less supportive of Brexit is Jacinda Ardern in New Zealand but even she has a pro Brexit coalition partner in Winston Peters
Why wouldn't any foreign leader be pro-Brexit? It means you get to dictate trade deals to a desperate UK. After you've done one with the EU, of course.
I am afraid there is also no getting around the fact that if a Deal does not prove possible and further extension is denied by the EU in October then polling shows that voters may prefer No Deal to revoke or remain if that is the only way to achieve Brexit
If the Conservative Government goes for "No Deal", it will not be long before the voters realise that "No Deal" means total surrender to absolutely everybody. No Deal is just a Con Trick.
It is revoke and remain which is total surrender to Brussels, if the Commons refuses to pass the Withdrawal Agreement then No Deal ultimately it will have to be
So you are prepared to surrender to everybody, accept all their demands and just lie down and take whatever they choose to do to you, Mr HY?
Brussels does at least protect the interests of ordinary people.
You are quite clearly unwilling to implement the Leave vote, as I said if the Commons refuses to pass the Withdrawal Agreement then it has to be No Deal until either they do or it can be renegotiated in a way the Commons will pass, at the moment the only way that will be is with the backstop amended or removed hence why only the Brady amendment has got a Commons majority
Essentially a bunch of well off mostly middle aged and pensioners of the Tory Membership will be deciding the future PM.
They can gamble with the futures of others as they have little to lose . Their attitude is fuck everyone else as long as they get to play Empire 2.0 .
I have never ever seen or heard a leaver talk about “Empire 2.0”
It’s just a remainer fantasy
Empire 2.0 has a specific meaning. It was the idea of prioritising the Commonwealth post-Brexit. It fell into disfavour once Leavers eventually realised that no one in the Commonwealth had the slightest interest in it.
Leavers also abandoned Canzuk for the same reason, have gone cold on the idea of a NAFTA-type arrangement since they realised that the USA would like to asset strip the NHS and have lurking doubts about whether Britain’s coastline would get them into the TPP. So right now all they have is a visceral emotional hatred of the EU, a surly insularity and reheated folk memories of taking on Nazi Germany. The idea of a positive vision of Brexit has now been completely forgotten.
The Canadian Conservatives have passed a policy that amounts to Canzuk if they win the next federal election.
It's fair to say that India doesn't see the UK in quite the same way as the UK sees India.
Indeed, the victory of Scott Morrison over Bill Shorten in Australia and Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton in the US put two pro Brexit leaders in power in the Canzuk nations. If Scheer beats Trudeau in Canada in the Autumn that would be 3 out of 4 Canzuk leaders pro Brexit (though even Trudeau has said he will do a FTA with the UK).
The only leader less supportive of Brexit is Jacinda Ardern in New Zealand but even she has a pro Brexit coalition partner in Winston Peters
Why wouldn't any foreign leader be pro-Brexit? It means you get to dictate trade deals to a desperate UK. After you've done one with the EU, of course.
Australia, Canada and New Zealand are not going to dictate terms to the UK as they are smaller economies but it is in both their end our interests to have a good FTA
Essentially a bunch of well off mostly middle aged and pensioners of the Tory Membership will be deciding the future PM.
They can gamble with the futures of others as they have little to lose . Their attitude is fuck everyone else as long as they get to play Empire 2.0 .
I have never ever seen or heard a leaver talk about “Empire 2.0”
It’s just a remainer fantasy
Empire 2.0 has a specific meaning. It was the idea of prioritising the Commonwealth post-Brexit. It fell into disfavour once Leavers eventually realised that no one in the Commonwealth had the slightest interest in it.
Leavers also abandoned Canzuk for the same reason, have gone cold on the idea of a NAFTA-type arrangement since they realised that the USA would like to asset strip the NHS and have lurking doubts about whether Britain’s coastline would get them into the TPP. So right now all they have is a visceral emotional hatred of the EU, a surly insularity and reheated folk memories of taking on Nazi Germany. The idea of a positive vision of Brexit has now been completely forgotten.
The Canadian Conservatives have passed a policy that amounts to Canzuk if they win the next federal election.
It's fair to say that India doesn't see the UK in quite the same way as the UK sees India.
Indeed, the victory of Scott Morrison over Bill Shorten in Australia and Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton in the US put two pro Brexit leaders in power in the Canzuk nations. If Scheer beats Trudeau in Canada in the Autumn that would be 3 out of 4 Canzuk leaders pro Brexit (though even Trudeau has said he will do a FTA with the UK).
The only leader less supportive of Brexit is Jacinda Ardern in New Zealand but even she has a pro Brexit coalition partner in Winston Peters
Why wouldn't any foreign leader be pro-Brexit? It means you get to dictate trade deals to a desperate UK. After you've done one with the EU, of course.
So countries like Canada and Australia, both a fraction of our size, get to dictate trade to us.
Seems like independent countries can have good trade policies, why can't we?
Essentially a bunch of well off mostly middle aged and pensioners of the Tory Membership will be deciding the future PM.
They can gamble with the futures of others as they have little to lose . Their attitude is fuck everyone else as long as they get to play Empire 2.0 .
I have never ever seen or heard a leaver talk about “Empire 2.0”
It’s just a remainer fantasy
Empire 2.0 has a specific meaning. It was the idea of prioritising the Commonwealth post-Brexit. It fell into disfavour once Leavers eventually realised that no one in the Commonwealth had the slightest interest in it.
Leavers also abandoned Canzuk for the same reason, have gone cold on the idea of a NAFTA-type arrangement since they realised that the USA would like to asset strip the NHS and have lurking doubts about whether Britain’s coastline would get them into the TPP. So right now all they have is a visceral emotional hatred of the EU, a surly insularity and reheated folk memories of taking on Nazi Germany. The idea of a positive vision of Brexit has now been completely forgotten.
The Canadian Conservatives have passed a policy that amounts to Canzuk if they win the next federal election.
It's fair to say that India doesn't see the UK in quite the same way as the UK sees India.
Indeed, the victory of Scott Morrison over Bill Shorten in Australia and Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton in the US put two pro Brexit leaders in power in the Canzuk nations. If Scheer beats Trudeau in Canada in the Autumn that would be 3 out of 4 Canzuk leaders pro Brexit (though even Trudeau has said he will do a FTA with the UK).
The only leader less supportive of Brexit is Jacinda Ardern in New Zealand but even she has a pro Brexit coalition partner in Winston Peters
Has it never occurred to you that foreign leaders liking Brexit doesn't necessarily mean it would be good news for us?
Gosh, I never thought of that, Mr B2. I bet Mr HY never thought of that either!
I am afraid there is also no getting around the fact that if a Deal does not prove possible and further extension is denied by the EU in October then polling shows that voters may prefer No Deal to revoke or remain if that is the only way to achieve Brexit
If the Conservative Government goes for "No Deal", it will not be long before the voters realise that "No Deal" means total surrender to absolutely everybody. No Deal is just a Con Trick.
It is revoke and remain which is total surrender to Brussels, if the Commons refuses to pass the Withdrawal Agreement then No Deal ultimately it will have to be
So you are prepared to surrender to everybody, accept all their demands and just lie down and take whatever they choose to do to you, Mr HY?
Brussels does at least protect the interests of ordinary people.
You are quite clearly unwilling to implement the Leave vote, as I said if the Commons refuses to pass the Withdrawal Agreement then it has to be No Deal until either they do or it can be renegotiated in a way the Commons will pass, at the moment the only way that will be is with the backstop amended or removed hence why only the Brady amendment has got a Commons majority
Revoke and remain the only sane way forward then we can get on with dealing with real problems.
Essentially a bunch of well off mostly middle aged and pensioners of the Tory Membership will be deciding the future PM.
They can gamble with the futures of others as they have little to lose . Their attitude is fuck everyone else as long as they get to play Empire 2.0 .
I have never ever seen or heard a leaver talk about “Empire 2.0”
It’s just a remainer fantasy
Empire 2.0 has a specific meaning. It was the idea of prioritising the Commonwealth post-Brexit. It fell into disfavour once Leavers eventually realised that no one in the Commonwealth had the slightest interest in it.
Leavers also abandoned Canzuk for the same reason, have gone cold on the idea of a NAFTA-type arrangement since they realised that the USA would like to asset strip the NHS and have lurking doubts about whether Britain’s coastline would get them into the TPP. So right now all they have is a visceral emotional hatred of the EU, a surly insularity and reheated folk memories of taking on Nazi Germany. The idea of a positive vision of Brexit has now been completely forgotten.
The Canadian Conservatives have passed a policy that amounts to Canzuk if they win the next federal election.
It's fair to say that India doesn't see the UK in quite the same way as the UK sees India.
Indeed, the victory of Scott Morrison over Bill Shorten in Australia and Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton in the US put two pro Brexit leaders in power in the Canzuk nations. If Scheer beats Trudeau in Canada in the Autumn that would be 3 out of 4 Canzuk leaders pro Brexit (though even Trudeau has said he will do a FTA with the UK).
The only leader less supportive of Brexit is Jacinda Ardern in New Zealand but even she has a pro Brexit coalition partner in Winston Peters
Why wouldn't any foreign leader be pro-Brexit? It means you get to dictate trade deals to a desperate UK. After you've done one with the EU, of course.
So countries like Canada and Australia, both a fraction of our size, get to dictate trade to us.
Seems like independent countries can have good trade policies, why can't we?
Because other independent countries are not in the process of making it harder and more expensive to trade with their biggest export markets.
Essentially a bunch of well off mostly middle aged and pensioners of the Tory Membership will be deciding the future PM.
They can gamble with the futures of others as they have little to lose . Their attitude is fuck everyone else as long as they get to play Empire 2.0 .
I have never ever seen or heard a leaver talk about “Empire 2.0”
It’s just a remainer fantasy
Empire 2.0 has a specific meaning. It was the idea of prioritising the Commonwealth post-Brexit. It fell into disfavour once Leavers eventually realised that no one in the Commonwealth had the slightest interest in it.
Leavers also abandoned Canzuk for the same reason, have gone cold on the idea of a NAFTA-type arrangement since they realised that the USA would like to asset strip the NHS and have lurking doubts about whether Britain’s coastline would get them into the TPP. So right now all they have is a visceral emotional hatred of the EU, a surly insularity and reheated folk memories of taking on Nazi Germany. The idea of a positive vision of Brexit has now been completely forgotten.
The Canadian Conservatives have passed a policy that amounts to Canzuk if they win the next federal election.
It's fair to say that India doesn't see the UK in quite the same way as the UK sees India.
Indeed, the victory of Scott Morrison over Bill Shorten in Australia and Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton in the US put two pro Brexit leaders in power in the Canzuk nations. If Scheer beats Trudeau in Canada in the Autumn that would be 3 out of 4 Canzuk leaders pro Brexit (though even Trudeau has said he will do a FTA with the UK).
The only leader less supportive of Brexit is Jacinda Ardern in New Zealand but even she has a pro Brexit coalition partner in Winston Peters
Why wouldn't any foreign leader be pro-Brexit? It means you get to dictate trade deals to a desperate UK. After you've done one with the EU, of course.
Australia, Canada and New Zealand are not going to dictate terms to the UK as they are smaller economies but it is in both their end our interests to have a good FTA
To get trade deals with them we have to offer better trading terms than they have now.
I am afraid there is also no getting around the fact that if a Deal does not prove possible and further extension is denied by the EU in October then polling shows that voters may prefer No Deal to revoke or remain if that is the only way to achieve Brexit
If the Conservative Government goes for "No Deal", it will not be long before the voters realise that "No Deal" means total surrender to absolutely everybody. No Deal is just a Con Trick.
It is revoke and remain which is total surrender to Brussels, if the Commons refuses to pass the Withdrawal Agreement then No Deal ultimately it will have to be
So you are prepared to surrender to everybody, accept all their demands and just lie down and take whatever they choose to do to you, Mr HY?
Brussels does at least protect the interests of ordinary people.
You are quite clearly unwilling to implement the Leave vote, as I said if the Commons refuses to pass the Withdrawal Agreement then it has to be No Deal until either they do or it can be renegotiated in a way the Commons will pass, at the moment the only way that will be is with the backstop amended or removed hence why only the Brady amendment has got a Commons majority
Revoke and remain the only sane way forward then we can get on with dealing with real problems.
Revoke and Remain is only the same way forward for a minority of diehard Remainer metropolitan, the rest of the country would be furious their Leave vote has been ignored
I am afraid there is also no getting around the fact that if a Deal does not prove possible and further extension is denied by the EU in October then polling shows that voters may prefer No Deal to revoke or remain if that is the only way to achieve Brexit
If the Conservative Government goes for "No Deal", it will not be long before the voters realise that "No Deal" means total surrender to absolutely everybody. No Deal is just a Con Trick.
It is revoke and remain which is total surrender to Brussels, if the Commons refuses to pass the Withdrawal Agreement then No Deal ultimately it will have to be
So you are prepared to surrender to everybody, accept all their demands and just lie down and take whatever they choose to do to you, Mr HY?
Brussels does at least protect the interests of ordinary people.
You are quite clearly unwilling to implement the Leave vote, as I said if the Commons refuses to pass the Withdrawal Agreement then it has to be No Deal until either they do or it can be renegotiated in a way the Commons will pass, at the moment the only way that will be is with the backstop amended or removed hence why only the Brady amendment has got a Commons majority
Revoke and remain the only sane way forward then we can get on with dealing with real problems.
Personally, I’d just exile anyone with strong views on Britain leaving the EU to the Isle of Man. All of them.
Essentially a bunch of well off mostly middle aged and pensioners of the Tory Membership will be deciding the future PM.
They can gamble with the futures of others as they have little to lose . Their attitude is fuck everyone else as long as they get to play Empire 2.0 .
I have never ever seen or heard a leaver talk about “Empire 2.0”
It’s just a remainer fantasy
Empire 2.0 has a specific meaning. It was the idea of prioritising the Commonwealth post-Brexit. It fell into disfavour once Leavers eventually realised that no one in the Commonwealth had the slightest interest in it.
Leavers also abandoned Canzuk for the same reason, have gone cold on the idea of a NAFTA-type arrangement since they realised that the USA would like to asset strip the NHS and have lurking doubts about whether Britain’s coastline would get them into the TPP. So right now all they have is a visceral emotional hatred of the EU, a surly insularity and reheated folk memories of taking on Nazi Germany. The idea of a positive vision of Brexit has now been completely forgotten.
The Canadian Conservatives have passed a policy that amounts to Canzuk if they win the next federal election.
It's fair to say that India doesn't see the UK in quite the same way as the UK sees India.
Indeed, the victory of Scott Morrison over Bill Shorten in Australia and Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton in the US put two pro Brexit leaders in power in the Canzuk nations. If Scheer beats Trudeau in Canada in the Autumn that would be 3 out of 4 Canzuk leaders pro Brexit (though even Trudeau has said he will do a FTA with the UK).
The only leader less supportive of Brexit is Jacinda Ardern in New Zealand but even she has a pro Brexit coalition partner in Winston Peters
Why wouldn't any foreign leader be pro-Brexit? It means you get to dictate trade deals to a desperate UK. After you've done one with the EU, of course.
So countries like Canada and Australia, both a fraction of our size, get to dictate trade to us.
Seems like independent countries can have good trade policies, why can't we?
Because other independent countries are not in the process of making it harder and more expensive to trade with their biggest export markets.
Perhaps you could remind us when the UK last had a trade surplus with its biggest export market ?
Essentially a bunch of well off mostly middle aged and pensioners of the Tory Membership will be deciding the future PM.
They can gamble with the futures of others as they have little to lose . Their attitude is fuck everyone else as long as they get to play Empire 2.0 .
I have never ever seen or heard a leaver talk about “Empire 2.0”
It’s just a remainer fantasy
Empire 2.0 has a specific meaning. It was the idea of prioritising the Commonwealth post-Brexit. It fell into disfavour once Leavers eventually realised that no one in the Commonwealth had the slightest interest in it.
Leavers also abandoned Canzuk for the same reason, have gone cold on the idea of a NAFTA-type arrangement since they realised that the USA would like to asset strip the NHS and have lurking doubts about whether Britain’s coastline would get them into the TPP. So right now all they have is a visceral emotional hatred of the EU, a surly insularity and reheated folk memories of taking on Nazi Germany. The idea of a positive vision of Brexit has now been completely forgotten.
The Canadian Conservatives have passed a policy that amounts to Canzuk if they win the next federal election.
It's fair to say that India doesn't see the UK in quite the same way as the UK sees India.
Indeed, the victory of Scott Morrison over Bill Shorten in Australia and Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton in the US put two pro Brexit leaders in power in the Canzuk nations. If Scheer beats Trudeau in Canada in the Autumn that would be 3 out of 4 Canzuk leaders pro Brexit (though even Trudeau has said he will do a FTA with the UK).
The only leader less supportive of Brexit is Jacinda Ardern in New Zealand but even she has a pro Brexit coalition partner in Winston Peters
Why wouldn't any foreign leader be pro-Brexit? It means you get to dictate trade deals to a desperate UK. After you've done one with the EU, of course.
Australia, Canada and New Zealand are not going to dictate terms to the UK as they are smaller economies but it is in both their end our interests to have a good FTA
To get trade deals with them we have to offer better trading terms than they have now.
No, we have to offer mutually beneficial trading terms
Essentially a bunch of well off mostly middle aged and pensioners of the Tory Membership will be deciding the future PM.
They can gamble with the futures of others as they have little to lose . Their attitude is fuck everyone else as long as they get to play Empire 2.0 .
I have never ever seen or heard a leaver talk about “Empire 2.0”
It’s just a remainer fantasy
Empire 2.0 has a specific meaning. It was the idea of prioritising the Commonwealth post-Brexit. It fell into disfavour once Leavers eventually realised that no one in the Commonwealth had the slightest interest in it.
Leavers also abandoned Canzuk for the same reason, have gone cold on the idea of a NAFTA-type arrangement since they realised that the USA would like to asset strip the NHS and have lurking doubts about whether Britain’s coastline would get them into the TPP. So right now all they have is a visceral emotional hatred of the EU, a surly insularity and reheated folk memories of taking on Nazi Germany. The idea of a positive vision of Brexit has now been completely forgotten.
The Canadian Conservatives have passed a policy that amounts to Canzuk if they win the next federal election.
It's fair to say that India doesn't see the UK in quite the same way as the UK sees India.
Indeed, the victory of Scott Morrison over Bill Shorten in Australia and Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton in the US put two pro Brexit leaders in power in the Canzuk nations. If Scheer beats Trudeau in Canada in the Autumn that would be 3 out of 4 Canzuk leaders pro Brexit (though even Trudeau has said he will do a FTA with the UK).
The only leader less supportive of Brexit is Jacinda Ardern in New Zealand but even she has a pro Brexit coalition partner in Winston Peters
Why wouldn't any foreign leader be pro-Brexit? It means you get to dictate trade deals to a desperate UK. After you've done one with the EU, of course.
Australia, Canada and New Zealand are not going to dictate terms to the UK as they are smaller economies but it is in both their end our interests to have a good FTA
It doesn't matter how small their economies are. They are not in the process of making it harder and more expensive to trade with their biggest export market. We need trade deals a lot more than they do.
It does piss me off when raising the 40p threshold to £80k is described as "tax cuts for the better off".
That's exactly where the 40p threshold would be had it been raised with inflation since it was introduced, rather than continually eroded through fiscal drag, and £60-70k doesn't go far in London and the South East for professionals who are working their arses off to pay commuting fees and heavy mortgages.
Is this the best the former GP and disgraced ex Defence Secretary can do. He has had all this time and this is trumpeted by Brexit apologists as something impressive. We already have a better trade deal with S Korea. It is called via the EU
It does piss me off when raising the 40p threshold to £80k is described as "tax cuts for the better off".
That's exactly where the 40p threshold would be had it been raised with inflation since it was introduced, rather than continually eroded through fiscal drag, and £60-70k doesn't go far in London and the South East for professionals who are working their arses off to pay commuting fees and heavy mortgages.
But it's not just a cut for people earning £60-70k, it's also a cut for people earning £300k
I do feel that I’m overtaxed and I am already looking forward to an extra £500 a month net, but most high income earners live - like myself - in London and the SE.
This policy further widens regional inequality.
Let’s remember that the next time there is a provincial PB Tory wankfest about the lack of interest from “Islington elites” in the rest of the country.
I am afraid there is also no getting around the fact that if a Deal does not prove possible and further extension is denied by the EU in October then polling shows that voters may prefer No Deal to revoke or remain if that is the only way to achieve Brexit
If the Conservative Government goes for "No Deal", it will not be long before the voters realise that "No Deal" means total surrender to absolutely everybody. No Deal is just a Con Trick.
It is revoke and remain which is total surrender to Brussels, if the Commons refuses to pass the Withdrawal Agreement then No Deal ultimately it will have to be
So you are prepared to surrender to everybody, accept all their demands and just lie down and take whatever they choose to do to you, Mr HY?
Brussels does at least protect the interests of ordinary people.
You are quite clearly unwilling to implement the Leave vote, as I said if the Commons refuses to pass the Withdrawal Agreement then it has to be No Deal until either they do or it can be renegotiated in a way the Commons will pass, at the moment the only way that will be is with the backstop amended or removed hence why only the Brady amendment has got a Commons majority
Revoke and remain the only sane way forward then we can get on with dealing with real problems.
Revoke and Remain is only the same way forward for a minority of diehard Remainer metropolitan, the rest of the country would be furious their Leave vote has been ignored
I very much doubt it, they would be glad it’s all over and something that was all about a group of politicians either feathering their own nests or improving their careers. Yes a few would be upset but hey ho can’t keep everybody happy.
Essentially a bunch of well off mostly middle aged and pensioners of the Tory Membership will be deciding the future PM.
They can gamble with the futures of others as they have little to lose . Their attitude is fuck everyone else as long as they get to play Empire 2.0 .
I have never ever seen or heard a leaver talk about “Empire 2.0”
It’s just a remainer fantasy
Empire 2.0 has a specific meaning. It was the idea of prioritising the Commonwealth post-Brexit. It fell into disfavour once Leavers eventually realised that no one in the Commonwealth had the slightest interest in it.
Leavers been completely forgotten.
The Canadian Conservatives have passed a policy that amounts to Canzuk if they win the next federal election.
It's fair to say that India doesn't see the UK in quite the same way as the UK sees India.
Indeed, the victory of Scott Morrison over Bill Shorten in Australia and Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton in the US put two pro Brexit leaders in power in the Canzuk nations. If Scheer beats Trudeau in Canada in the Autumn that would be 3 out of 4 Canzuk leaders pro Brexit (though even Trudeau has said he will do a FTA with the UK).
The only leader less supportive of Brexit is Jacinda Ardern in New Zealand but even she has a pro Brexit coalition partner in Winston Peters
Why wouldn't any foreign leader be pro-Brexit? It means you get to dictate trade deals to a desperate UK. After you've done one with the EU, of course.
So countries like Canada and Australia, both a fraction of our size, get to dictate trade to us.
Seems like independent countries can have good trade policies, why can't we?
Because other independent countries are not in the process of making it harder and more expensive to trade with their biggest export markets.
Perhaps you could remind us when the UK last had a trade surplus with its biggest export market ?
Perhaps you could explain how making it harder and more expensive to trade with our biggest export market is going to benefit the UK.
On topic, this story probably is terminal for Michael Gove's leadership hopes.
It's not just the crime or the hypocrisy, though they don't help. It's the unlikelihood, in the same way that David Mellor didn't get away with an affair when Boris Johnson and Stephen Norris did. It's as though Walter the Softy had been exposed for doing crystal meth.
I do feel that I’m overtaxed and I am already looking forward to an extra £500 a month net, but most high income earners live - like myself - in London and the SE.
This policy further widens regional inequality.
Let’s remember that the next time there is a provincial PB Tory wankfest about the lack of interest from “Islington elites” in the rest of the country.
On topic, this story probably is terminal for Michael Gove's leadership hopes.
It's not just the crime or the hypocrisy, though they don't help. It's the unlikelihood, in the same way that David Mellor didn't get away with an affair when Boris Johnson and Stephen Norris did. It's as though Walter the Softy had been exposed for doing crystal meth.
It does piss me off when raising the 40p threshold to £80k is described as "tax cuts for the better off".
That's exactly where the 40p threshold would be had it been raised with inflation since it was introduced, rather than continually eroded through fiscal drag, and £60-70k doesn't go far in London and the South East for professionals who are working their arses off to pay commuting fees and heavy mortgages.
But it's not just a cut for people earning £60-70k, it's also a cut for people earning £300k
There's probably a better case for tax cuts for people earning £300k than there is for people earning £60-70k. The former are far more likely to be able to take flight than the latter are.
Not that I think that tax cuts for either group should be the priority right now.
I am afraid there is also no getting around the fact that if a Deal does not prove possible and further extension is denied by the EU in October then polling shows that voters may prefer No Deal to revoke or remain if that is the only way to achieve Brexit
If the Conservative Government goes for "No Deal", it will not be long before the voters realise that "No Deal" means total surrender to absolutely everybody. No Deal is just a Con Trick.
It is revoke and remain which is total surrender to Brussels, if the Commons refuses to pass the Withdrawal Agreement then No Deal ultimately it will have to be
So you are prepared to surrender to everybody, accept all their demands and just lie down and take whatever they choose to do to you, Mr HY?
Brussels does at least protect the interests of ordinary people.
You are quite clearly unwilling to implement the Leave vote, as I said if the Commons refuses to pass the Withdrawal Agreement then it has to be No Deal until either they do or it can be renegotiated in a way the Commons will pass, at the moment the only way that will be is with the backstop amended or removed hence why only the Brady amendment has got a Commons majority
No it does not have to be No Deal you ninny. There is no mandate for no deal. To follow true logic rather than the pre-adolescent type beloved of Leavers, then the logical argument would say a further referendum with the full fat maximum self harm option on the ballot paper. It is quite possible that there are enough people dumb enough to vote for it and destroy their own economy, but they do need to be consulted first. As a reminder, the electorate, in their stupidity, voted, by small margin to leave, and they were clearly told that it would be with a deal. That was the effective leave manifesto.
It does piss me off when raising the 40p threshold to £80k is described as "tax cuts for the better off".
That's exactly where the 40p threshold would be had it been raised with inflation since it was introduced, rather than continually eroded through fiscal drag, and £60-70k doesn't go far in London and the South East for professionals who are working their arses off to pay commuting fees and heavy mortgages.
Good luck with that. The vast majority of people living in London and the SE who do not earn close to £60,000 a year may not feel a huge surge of sympathy. They may feel that giving Boris Johnson a nice big tax cut should not be the priority right now.
On topic, this story probably is terminal for Michael Gove's leadership hopes.
It's not just the crime or the hypocrisy, though they don't help. It's the unlikelihood, in the same way that David Mellor didn't get away with an affair when Boris Johnson and Stephen Norris did. It's as though Walter the Softy had been exposed for doing crystal meth.
I do feel that I’m overtaxed and I am already looking forward to an extra £500 a month net, but most high income earners live - like myself - in London and the SE.
This policy further widens regional inequality.
Let’s remember that the next time there is a provincial PB Tory wankfest about the lack of interest from “Islington elites” in the rest of the country.
I am afraid there is also no getting around the fact that if a Deal does not prove possible and further extension is denied by the EU in October then polling shows that voters may prefer No Deal to revoke or remain if that is the only way to achieve Brexit
If the Conservative Government goes for "No Deal", it will not be long before the voters realise that "No Deal" means total surrender to absolutely everybody. No Deal is just a Con Trick.
It is revoke and remain which is total surrender to Brussels, if the Commons refuses to pass the Withdrawal Agreement then No Deal ultimately it will have to be
So you are prepared to surrender to everybody, accept all their demands and just lie down and take whatever they choose to do to you, Mr HY?
Brussels does at least protect the interests of ordinary people.
You are quite clearly unwilling to implement the Leave vote, as I said if the Commons refuses to pass the Withdrawal Agreement then it has to be No Deal until either they do or it can be renegotiated in a way the Commons will pass, at the moment the only way that will be is with the backstop amended or removed hence why only the Brady amendment has got a Commons majority
Revoke and remain the only sane way forward then we can get on with dealing with real problems.
Revoke and Remain is only the same way forward for a minority of diehard Remainer metropolitan, the rest of the country would be furious their Leave vote has been ignored
I very much doubt it, they would be glad it’s all over and something that was all about a group of politicians either feathering their own nests or improving their careers. Yes a few would be upset but hey ho can’t keep everybody happy.
On topic, this story probably is terminal for Michael Gove's leadership hopes.
It's not just the crime or the hypocrisy, though they don't help. It's the unlikelihood, in the same way that David Mellor didn't get away with an affair when Boris Johnson and Stephen Norris did. It's as though Walter the Softy had been exposed for doing crystal meth.
Depends how long the campaign lasts I guess - the story is now moving onto Boris remaining in hiding.
Comments
It’s just a remainer fantasy
There was a time when you could have won by being solidly competent and ticking the right boxes, but I don't think that time is now. You need a certain amount of spikiness to compete in a social-media-driven environment.
That's something I think KLOBUCHAR *does* have, but it's hard to get people excited from the centre, unless you're Barack Obama.
Leavers also abandoned Canzuk for the same reason, have gone cold on the idea of a NAFTA-type arrangement since they realised that the USA would like to asset strip the NHS and have lurking doubts about whether Britain’s coastline would get them into the TPP. So right now all they have is a visceral emotional hatred of the EU, a surly insularity and reheated folk memories of taking on Nazi Germany. The idea of a positive vision of Brexit has now been completely forgotten.
and
2. Who is going to be voting in the forthcoming Tory leadership elections? Other than higher rate taxpayers who are older than the average.
As I've said time and again, it's not the 40% of trade we do with the EU that is holding back business investment, it's the 25% of preferential trade we do elsewhere that needs to be clarified.
Having that 25% in the bank before leaving will change the game IMO which is why giving the job to Liam Fox was such an error.
It's fair to say that India doesn't see the UK in quite the same way as the UK sees India.
He's full of shit.
Biden is also three gaffes away from a disaster.
Cluck cluck cluck ....
https://twitter.com/jessbrammar/status/1137954294798397441?s=21
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html
I'm not much impressed by Biden, and my Sanders-backing friends in the States are scornful of him ("boring centrist with a creepy interest in hair"), but he seems to be cruising well ahead of the pack. The Iowa poll is interesting as for the first time it shows Warren and Buttigieg in the leading bunch, but I'd like to see more polls to confirm it. Warren is aggressive without being left-wing, which may be a bad combination for the Democratic selectorate; Buttigieg is neither, though he's pleasant and fluent - the American Rory Stewart.
ETA: how long the new PM remains in office depends on surviving the confidence vote Labour will no doubt shortly call but that will happen after we have a new PM, not before.
And for any one event like this, of course it seems like the human choice. But the demands of a presidential race, and the presidency itself, don’t allow it to be treated as a part time job (Trump’s example notwithstanding).
It’s not the choice to skip events like this which will damage his chances, so much as his resulting absence.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wugu-2SmHJg
But I'm not saying it because I'm a Tory (wild horses etc) but because it's so predictable, common and depressing.
If Biden does really badly in the first two (by no means a foregone conclusion), then there will be a lot of SC voters looking for a new choice (though I’d agree that it’s less likely to be Buttigieg unless he is the actual front runner).
The majority of likely primary voters have yet to settle on a preferred candidate.
It's futile.
In other news...
https://twitter.com/rupertevelyn/status/1137973383264702465
23. That’s a paper by a lobbying group stuffed with assumptions.
56. It would have happened anyway.
72. After No Deal, Ireland will join us outside the Single Market (haven't seen that one for a while)
99. Believe in Britain.
The only leader less supportive of Brexit is Jacinda Ardern in New Zealand but even she has a pro Brexit coalition partner in Winston Peters
Brussels does at least protect the interests of ordinary people.
Now, when all those protections are trashed, the Brexiteer cry is "Well, you voted for it...:
Seems like independent countries can have good trade policies, why can't we?
Has Gove pulled out yet?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48577667
That's exactly where the 40p threshold would be had it been raised with inflation since it was introduced, rather than continually eroded through fiscal drag, and £60-70k doesn't go far in London and the South East for professionals who are working their arses off to pay commuting fees and heavy mortgages.
Tick tock.
This policy further widens regional inequality.
Let’s remember that the next time there is a provincial PB Tory wankfest about the lack of interest from “Islington elites” in the rest of the country.
It's not just the crime or the hypocrisy, though they don't help. It's the unlikelihood, in the same way that David Mellor didn't get away with an affair when Boris Johnson and Stephen Norris did. It's as though Walter the Softy had been exposed for doing crystal meth.
Because you wont be getting it.
Not that I think that tax cuts for either group should be the priority right now.
It is quite possible that there are enough people dumb enough to vote for it and destroy their own economy, but they do need to be consulted first. As a reminder, the electorate, in their stupidity, voted, by small margin to leave, and they were clearly told that it would be with a deal. That was the effective leave manifesto.
Hey ho, as I'm sure you'll learn to say.....
He can't even Brexit his own flat.