The last para is flintily realistic, apart from mentioning the possibility of a stupid bandit.
'In the classic essay “The Basic Laws of Human Stupidity”, the late Italian economic historian Carlo Cipolla warned: “A stupid person is more dangerous than a bandit.” He explained: “Stupid people cause losses to other people with no counterpart of gains on their own account. Thus society as a whole is impoverished.” Let’s hope the next prime minister is merely a bandit.'
We don't have a coalition government *just because* one part of the country voted for a different party. The same applies to UK referendum results.
So it's the "will of the province" when it suits you and then an imperialistic land grab when it also suits?
So you're quite happy to hand over parts of the country in return for FTAs? So Scotland under SCOTUS for an FTA, the Falklands under the Argentinian courts for an FTA, Dover to the King of Morocco for an FTA...
Absurd. No other country is forced to carve itself up in return for a Free Trade Agreement. We shouldn't subject our country to it. The EU can shove it.
You're throwing a tantrum because you've discovered the true power balance of our relationship with the EU.
America is the most powerful country in the world.
Should we submit to their courts for an FTA? Don't be so ridiculous.
If they were to insist on that, what would you do? Trade with no one? Throw another tantrum?
If they were to insist that, i'd trade on WTO terms with them.
LIKE. WE. DO. NOW.
Grow a spine for god's sake and get off your knees.
What do WTO terms offer on financial services? What do FTAs offer on financial services, for example Australia's FTAs with China and the USA?
What do the EUs FTAs offer on Financial Services. Or is it not a priority for them?
Independent we can prioritise that.
We currently have a trade surplus with the EU27 on services. That will disappear post-Brexit, of course, as UK-domiciled entities will be excluded from many markets they currently have access to. One small one in my area, for example. Following Brexit, UK-based trademark attorneys will no longer be able to file TM applications at the EU IP Office in Alicante. It is currently a large source of work for them. How will that be replaced?
We don't have a coalition government *just because* one part of the country voted for a different party. The same applies to UK referendum results.
So it's the "will of the province" when it suits you and then an imperialistic land grab when it also suits?
So you're quite happy to hand over parts of the country in return for FTAs? So Scotland under SCOTUS for an FTA, the Falklands under the Argentinian courts for an FTA, Dover to the King of Morocco for an FTA...
Absurd. No other country is forced to carve itself up in return for a Free Trade Agreement. We shouldn't subject our country to it. The EU can shove it.
You're throwing a tantrum because you've discovered the true power balance of our relationship with the EU.
America is the most powerful country in the world.
Should we submit to their courts for an FTA? Don't be so ridiculous.
If they were to insist on that, what would you do? Trade with no one? Throw another tantrum?
If they were to insist that, i'd trade on WTO terms with them.
LIKE. WE. DO. NOW.
Grow a spine for god's sake and get off your knees.
What do WTO terms offer on financial services? What do FTAs offer on financial services, for example Australia's FTAs with China and the USA?
What do the EUs FTAs offer on Financial Services. Or is it not a priority for them?
Independent we can prioritise that.
The EU single market is the deepest example of services liberalisation anywhere in the world. You want to tear it up.
I don't want to tear it up. I want to leave it, then sign a free trade agreement to access it. Then be free to pass a FTA with others.
From the Telegraph, under Boris, and this is their best result: the [Conservative] party retaining almost seven in 10 of their 2017 voters
70 per cent. Perhaps they should keep Theresa May!
It's not immediately obvious how losing 30% of their 2017 vote gains them 140 seats...
It's the collapse of the Labour vote, isn't it?
Yes, just like in 2017...
Oh, I don't think the Labour vote will collapse if Johnson is PM. I think he is Labour's very best chance of keeping its 2017 coalition together. I use myself as an example here. I didn't actually vote Labour in 2017. I would do so to stop Johnson, who is every bit as racist as Corbyn and likely to align the UK closely with Trump. And I live in a marginal.
If I lived in a seat where Labour stood a chance, and Boris was the Tory leader, I’d consider it too. And I can’t imagine any other circumstances when I would.
You must be bonkers.. you'd rather have Corbyn?
Corbyn as PM will be just fine and infinitely preferable to Boris. Corbo won't be able to enact the madder parts of his program due to the limitations of the inevitable hung parliament and his own laziness/stupidity/incompetence.
+1
This is absolutely true and a point missed by the PB-Tory Venezuela conspiracy-theorists.
John McDonnell isn't stupid or lazy. He will be the engine of new government.
Also true of Milne. The more of a vacuum Corbyn creates the easier it is to fill.
We don't have a coalition government *just because* one part of the country voted for a different party. The same applies to UK referendum results.
So it's the "will of the province" when it suits you and then an imperialistic land grab when it also suits?
So you're quite happy to hand over parts of the country in return for FTAs? So Scotland under SCOTUS for an FTA, the Falklands under the Argentinian courts for an FTA, Dover to the King of Morocco for an FTA...
Absurd. No other country is forced to carve itself up in return for a Free Trade Agreement. We shouldn't subject our country to it. The EU can shove it.
You're throwing a tantrum because you've discovered the true power balance of our relationship with the EU.
America is the most powerful country in the world.
Should we submit to their courts for an FTA? Don't be so ridiculous.
If they were to insist on that, what would you do? Trade with no one? Throw another tantrum?
If they were to insist that, i'd trade on WTO terms with them.
LIKE. WE. DO. NOW.
Grow a spine for god's sake and get off your knees.
What do WTO terms offer on financial services? What do FTAs offer on financial services, for example Australia's FTAs with China and the USA?
What do the EUs FTAs offer on Financial Services. Or is it not a priority for them?
Independent we can prioritise that.
The EU single market is the deepest example of services liberalisation anywhere in the world. You want to tear it up.
I don't want to tear it up. I want to leave it, then sign a free trade agreement to access it. Then be free to pass a FTA with others.
They understand, but don't want it to be true because that would mean admitting their European project is not inevitable. Totally detached from reality.
Mr. Pointer, and yet, the electorate was never asked about that integration. We were dragged closer to the EU, and vetoes surrendered, without any public consultation, even when promised in a manifesto. You can't force people to have an identity, or to abandon one. It's why Yorkshiremen still have a strong sense of county-based identity. The political class being pro-EU doesn't make the nation one that sees itself as European first and foremost, or equally alongside the British identity.
And, whatever happens, this will be a problem for the future. The born again Europeans won't forget the great and terrible woe done to them by the electorate, should we leave. Should we remain, the sceptics will not relinquish their British identity or fall in love with Brussels.
The last para is flintily realistic, apart from mentioning the possibility of a stupid bandit.
'In the classic essay “The Basic Laws of Human Stupidity”, the late Italian economic historian Carlo Cipolla warned: “A stupid person is more dangerous than a bandit.” He explained: “Stupid people cause losses to other people with no counterpart of gains on their own account. Thus society as a whole is impoverished.” Let’s hope the next prime minister is merely a bandit.'
I like the bit about how most people can't explain the workings of a toilet. Probably very true. Yet everyone is now an expert on the abstruse intricacies of global trading arrangements.
We don't have a coalition government *just because* one part of the country voted for a different party. The same applies to UK referendum results.
Do you disagree with Farage's support for a federal UK?
Someone on here also said that the Brexit Party is “neutral” on the Scottish independence question. Interestinger and interestinger.
(Has anyone got a decent link to support this neutrality?)
As far as I'm aware it doesn't have ANY policies apart from Brexit and I'm not sure whether that's Deal or No Deal.
I think that it was the new Brexit Party MEP from Scotland (name escapes me). He stated at a public meeting in Edinburgh (?) that his party was “neutral” on the Scottish independence question. No media outlet seems to have recorded his words.
Probably just a blatant lie to try to lure pro-Brexit SNP supporters. UKIP/BRX have zero history on neutrality regarding the Union.
Thanks. The 'best' evidence of anything approaching a policy eh!
I think nationalizing British Steel has been mentioned, but only in a soundbitey, throwaway, we'll never have to enact it sort of way.
We don't have a coalition government *just because* one part of the country voted for a different party. The same applies to UK referendum results.
So it's the "will of the province" when it suits you and then an imperialistic land grab when it also suits?
So you're quite happy to hand over parts of the country in return for FTAs? So Scotland under SCOTUS for an FTA, the Falklands under the Argentinian courts for an FTA, Dover to the King of Morocco for an FTA...
Absurd. No other country is forced to carve itself up in return for a Free Trade Agreement. We shouldn't subject our country to it. The EU can shove it.
You're throwing a tantrum because you've discovered the true power balance of our relationship with the EU.
America is the most powerful country in the world.
Should we submit to their courts for an FTA? Don't be so ridiculous.
If they were to insist on that, what would you do? Trade with no one? Throw another tantrum?
If they were to insist that, i'd trade on WTO terms with them.
LIKE. WE. DO. NOW.
Grow a spine for god's sake and get off your knees.
What do WTO terms offer on financial services? What do FTAs offer on financial services, for example Australia's FTAs with China and the USA?
What do the EUs FTAs offer on Financial Services. Or is it not a priority for them?
Independent we can prioritise that.
The EU single market is the deepest example of services liberalisation anywhere in the world. You want to tear it up.
I don't want to tear it up. I want to leave it, then sign a free trade agreement to access it. Then be free to pass a FTA with others.
The agreement that would give you equivalent access is called the EEA. By definition you can't get the kind of access that depends on regulatory alignment by disaligning.
We don't have a coalition government *just because* one part of the country voted for a different party. The same applies to UK referendum results.
So it's the "will of the province" when it suits you and then an imperialistic land grab when it also suits?
So you're quite happy to hand over parts of the country in return for FTAs? So Scotland under SCOTUS for an FTA, the Falklands under the Argentinian courts for an FTA, Dover to the King of Morocco for an FTA...
Absurd. No other country is forced to carve itself up in return for a Free Trade Agreement. We shouldn't subject our country to it. The EU can shove it.
You're throwing a tantrum because you've discovered the true power balance of our relationship with the EU.
America is the most powerful country in the world.
Should we submit to their courts for an FTA? Don't be so ridiculous.
If they were to insist on that, what would you do? Trade with no one? Throw another tantrum?
If they were to insist that, i'd trade on WTO terms with them.
LIKE. WE. DO. NOW.
Grow a spine for god's sake and get off your knees.
What do WTO terms offer on financial services? What do FTAs offer on financial services, for example Australia's FTAs with China and the USA?
What do the EUs FTAs offer on Financial Services. Or is it not a priority for them?
Independent we can prioritise that.
Funnily enough, I bet you a vast majority of Brexit Party voters in small towns in the North and the Midlands couldn't give two shits about financial services.
We don't have a coalition government *just because* one part of the country voted for a different party. The same applies to UK referendum results.
So it's the "will of the province" when it suits you and then an imperialistic land grab when it also suits?
So you're quite happy to hand over parts of the country in return for FTAs? So Scotland under SCOTUS for an FTA, the Falklands under the Argentinian courts for an FTA, Dover to the King of Morocco for an FTA...
Absurd. No other country is forced to carve itself up in return for a Free Trade Agreement. We shouldn't subject our country to it. The EU can shove it.
You're throwing a tantrum because you've discovered the true power balance of our relationship with the EU.
America is the most powerful country in the world.
Should we submit to their courts for an FTA? Don't be so ridiculous.
If they were to insist on that, what would you do? Trade with no one? Throw another tantrum?
If they were to insist that, i'd trade on WTO terms with them.
LIKE. WE. DO. NOW.
Grow a spine for god's sake and get off your knees.
Everything is some weird war/submission fantasy to you. You should see a therapist.
To answer your point, you'd happily trade on the fallacy of "WTO terms" with everyone, despite no other country in the world being happy with that arrangement?
Delusional.
Yet another militaristic war obsessed leaver. They really are bordering on psychopathic. I blame the war comics they read as children. Hande hock Tommy.
I'm in my mid-twenties dear.
If we were all colonel blimps in the shire, we'd have never won 52%
I have met a few weird young extremists like you when I was still in the Tory party as an activist; they looked and behaved just like Harry Enfield's character. Don't worry, one day you will grow up. Or possibly not. By the way, having a picture of a racist on your profile is not very cool, even if you think it a little edgy!
Can't you raise the bar a bit? Honestly the Brexiteers aren't helping their cause at the moment by continuing to shout trite soundbites from the touchline. We had all this in 2016 and people have begun to see right through it. Simply shouting that things are 'project fear' or airily that 'we will make trade deals' doesn't make them true.
What do the EUs FTAs offer on Financial Services. Or is it not a priority for them?
Independent we can prioritise that.
We currently have a trade surplus with the EU27 on services. That will disappear post-Brexit, of course, as UK-domiciled entities will be excluded from many markets they currently have access to. One small one in my area, for example. Following Brexit, UK-based trademark attorneys will no longer be able to file TM applications at the EU IP Office in Alicante. It is currently a large source of work for them. How will that be replaced?
It largely won't need to be. For much of it, there will be EU registered postboxes while the real work gets done in the UK. Otherwise people will use their ingenuity to find new work.
We don't have a coalition government *just because* one part of the country voted for a different party. The same applies to UK referendum results.
So it's the "will of the province" when it suits you and then an imperialistic land grab when it also suits?
So you're quite happy to hand over parts of the country in return for FTAs? So Scotland under SCOTUS for an FTA, the Falklands under the Argentinian courts for an FTA, Dover to the King of Morocco for an FTA...
Absurd. No other country is forced to carve itself up in return for a Free Trade Agreement. We shouldn't subject our country to it. The EU can shove it.
You're throwing a tantrum because you've discovered the true power balance of our relationship with the EU.
America is the most powerful country in the world.
Should we submit to their courts for an FTA? Don't be so ridiculous.
If they were to insist on that, what would you do? Trade with no one? Throw another tantrum?
If they were to insist that, i'd trade on WTO terms with them.
LIKE. WE. DO. NOW.
Grow a spine for god's sake and get off your knees.
Everything is some weird war/submission fantasy to you. You should see a therapist.
To answer your point, you'd happily trade on the fallacy of "WTO terms" with everyone, despite no other country in the world being happy with that arrangement?
Delusional.
Yet another militaristic war obsessed leaver. They really are bordering on psychopathic. I blame the war comics they read as children. Hande hock Tommy.
I'm in my mid-twenties dear.
If we were all colonel blimps in the shire, we'd have never won 52%
I have met a few weird young extremists like you when I was still in the Tory party as an activist; they looked and behaved just like Harry Enfield's character. Don't worry, one day you will grow up. Or possibly not. By the way, having a picture of a racist on your profile is not very cool, even if you think it a little edgy!
The last para is flintily realistic, apart from mentioning the possibility of a stupid bandit.
'In the classic essay “The Basic Laws of Human Stupidity”, the late Italian economic historian Carlo Cipolla warned: “A stupid person is more dangerous than a bandit.” He explained: “Stupid people cause losses to other people with no counterpart of gains on their own account. Thus society as a whole is impoverished.” Let’s hope the next prime minister is merely a bandit.'
The problem for you is that there is very little difference between the Little Englanders that now have come to dominate the Conservative Party and the Little Scotlanders that make up the SNP, except that right wing Tories generally don't put bricks through peoples' windows that disagree with them .
5 years of Corbyn's Marxism will be a small price to pay compared to 50 years of Brexit disaster.
I fear that you are seriously underestimating the damage Corbyn will do.
That said there's not a lot to be optimistic about. Boris or Corbyn will both be worse than any goverment we have had in living memory.
Yep but I still think it's a small price to pay. Assuming Corbyn won't pull us out of the EU he will be regulated by them (which is what he hates) and there's a good chance the more social democratic elements will rein him in.
By contrast Brexit will send this country to the back of the WTO queue and it will take us 50 years to recover, if we ever do.
Not that the ERG lot care. Their offshore funds are all safe.
Not sure about all this about Boris and nuclear codes. He may be many things but I don't think he is clinically mentally ill like Trump and liable to just wake up and fire a couple off.
Nice poster - with the slight quibble that it is 100% wrong. Boris is the only one who slays Farage and his Brexit Party. Any other contender will in reality be the one peering out of Farage's pocket.
Shows what a kind man Dave was. He owed Boris and the Leavers nothing yet still couldn't bring himself to hurt their feelings. Dave was just too good for this world!
Can't you raise the bar a bit? Honestly the Brexiteers aren't helping their cause at the moment by continuing to shout trite soundbites from the touchline. We had all this in 2016 and people have begun to see right through it. Simply shouting that things are 'project fear' or airily that 'we will make trade deals' doesn't make them true.
Even if there is only a 10% chance of these things happening, they are bad enough to not take the risk. The way to leave the EU is via a deal, anything else is insane.
5 years of Corbyn's Marxism will be a small price to pay compared to 50 years of Brexit disaster.
I fear that you are seriously underestimating the damage Corbyn will do.
That said there's not a lot to be optimistic about. Boris or Corbyn will both be worse than any goverment we have had in living memory.
Yep but I still think it's a small price to pay. Assuming Corbyn won't pull us out of the EU he will be regulated by them (which is what he hates) and there's a good chance the more social democratic elements will rein him in.
By contrast Brexit will send this country to the back of the WTO queue and it will take us 50 years to recover, if we ever do.
Not that the ERG lot care. Their offshore funds are all safe.
That’s all it was ever about, EU demanding transparency of all investments wherever they are held was going to hurt a few very rich powerful people.
Mr. Pointer, and yet, the electorate was never asked about that integration. We were dragged closer to the EU, and vetoes surrendered, without any public consultation, even when promised in a manifesto. You can't force people to have an identity, or to abandon one. It's why Yorkshiremen still have a strong sense of county-based identity. The political class being pro-EU doesn't make the nation one that sees itself as European first and foremost, or equally alongside the British identity.
And, whatever happens, this will be a problem for the future. The born again Europeans won't forget the great and terrible woe done to them by the electorate, should we leave. Should we remain, the sceptics will not relinquish their British identity or fall in love with Brussels.
A few points:
The 'political class' cannot be treated as an homogenous group on the EU. Some are pro, many are clearly anti.
Most Yorkshire people have a strong sense of Yorkshire identity but most feel strongly British too. And they've never had a referednum on being British.
Regarding your last point - time will be the great healer should we Remain. The young are largely pro-EU and will not become anti as they age. Many of my generation are anti and will die before they are reconciled to the EU but we all die eventually.
Mr. Pointer, I agree on Yorkshire/Britain, but that's my point. There's no split there. A large number of voters were never asked and never believed in the EU or being European in any way beyond a basic geographical description.
We may find out if you're right on time being a healer, if we Remain.
Not sure about all this about Boris and nuclear codes. He may be many things but I don't think he is clinically mentally ill like Trump and liable to just wake up and fire a couple off.
Or am I living under a delusion?
Could we ever fire off 'our' nuclear warheads without US permission?
Mr. Pointer, I agree on Yorkshire/Britain, but that's my point. There's no split there. A large number of voters were never asked and never believed in the EU or being European in any way beyond a basic geographical description.
We may find out if you're right on time being a healer, if we Remain.
Not sure about all this about Boris and nuclear codes. He may be many things but I don't think he is clinically mentally ill like Trump and liable to just wake up and fire a couple off.
Or am I living under a delusion?
Could we ever fire off 'our' nuclear warheads without US permission?
Not sure about all this about Boris and nuclear codes. He may be many things but I don't think he is clinically mentally ill like Trump and liable to just wake up and fire a couple off.
Or am I living under a delusion?
Could we ever fire off 'our' nuclear warheads without US permission?
Ah, good point. Now I see the problem. Boris is perhaps more likely to take a call from Trump and not stand up to him and agree to joint nuke attack on someone or other.
Not sure about all this about Boris and nuclear codes. He may be many things but I don't think he is clinically mentally ill like Trump and liable to just wake up and fire a couple off.
Or am I living under a delusion?
Could we ever fire off 'our' nuclear warheads without US permission?
Not sure about all this about Boris and nuclear codes. He may be many things but I don't think he is clinically mentally ill like Trump and liable to just wake up and fire a couple off.
Or am I living under a delusion?
Could we ever fire off 'our' nuclear warheads without US permission?
Can't you raise the bar a bit? Honestly the Brexiteers aren't helping their cause at the moment by continuing to shout trite soundbites from the touchline. We had all this in 2016 and people have begun to see right through it. Simply shouting that things are 'project fear' or airily that 'we will make trade deals' doesn't make them true.
Not sure what you mean by helping our cause.
In 2016 we labelled it project fear, and it resonated because nobody took seriously the absurd claims from the Remain campaign. And we were thus proven right. Today, the same scare stories are being told and we're labelling them project fear again, except this time we're laughing even harder at them.
If we didn't believe George Osborne in 2016, we're hardly all going to believe Philip Hammond in 2019.
Not sure about all this about Boris and nuclear codes. He may be many things but I don't think he is clinically mentally ill like Trump and liable to just wake up and fire a couple off.
Or am I living under a delusion?
Could we ever fire off 'our' nuclear warheads without US permission?
Myth.
America has no veto on British nuclear weapons.
How do you know?
Get off your knees and believe, man!
Forgive me Father, for I have sinned the sin of desiring... evidence.
Not sure about all this about Boris and nuclear codes. He may be many things but I don't think he is clinically mentally ill like Trump and liable to just wake up and fire a couple off.
Or am I living under a delusion?
Could we ever fire off 'our' nuclear warheads without US permission?
Myth.
America has no veto on British nuclear weapons.
How do you know?
Read about it and did part of my degree on it.
Britain's nuclear system is actually very decentralised to the point that commanders of Royal Navy submarines have the discretion whether to fire in certain circumstances. Unlike America's with the nuclear football.
Not sure about all this about Boris and nuclear codes. He may be many things but I don't think he is clinically mentally ill like Trump and liable to just wake up and fire a couple off.
Or am I living under a delusion?
Could we ever fire off 'our' nuclear warheads without US permission?
Myth.
America has no veto on British nuclear weapons.
How do you know?
It is very unlikely that the Americans have a veto on operation use. The first question you have to ask is how that veto would work, politically, systematically and technically. The nearest the US has is the Permissive Action Link system, and according to a FOI our warheads aren't equipped.
Not sure about all this about Boris and nuclear codes. He may be many things but I don't think he is clinically mentally ill like Trump and liable to just wake up and fire a couple off.
Or am I living under a delusion?
Could we ever fire off 'our' nuclear warheads without US permission?
Whether we could sustain a continuous at sea ICBM deterrent without USN technical support is another question to which the answer is no.
Absolutely true; for one thing, the Trident missiles are maintained and obtained from a common pool in the US. That means the US could, if they wanted, stop us from simply getting or repairing/maintaining the missiles.
However from my understanding, stopping operational use of missiles and warheads we have on our subs is a very different matter.
It's going to go two ways with Boris. Either his admirers with be so off their heads on Borisism that they'll be hailing his very action as a political miracle or he'll disappoint on an epic scale.
"What my husband Michael's drug confession has taught me about trust...and true friendship"
Ooh! Ooh! Can I play as well? I wanna column in which I write "What your husband Michael's drug confession has taught me about corruption and the class system, with one law for the rich and another for the poor". Oh go on Daily Mail, I can gob off on cue just like your other columnists. Oh go on, go on, go on....
If we could ensure that the handwaving leavers are the ones which suffer, I frankly wouldn't give a shit. In fact a degree of choices have consequences would be a good thing. Unfortunately their pensions won't be reduced.
If we could ensure that the handwaving leavers are the ones which suffer, I frankly wouldn't give a shit. In fact a degree of choices have consequences would be a good thing. Unfortunately their pensions won't be reduced.
If they were going to suffer (or suffer more than they would be pleased, if you see what I mean) they wouldn't have voted Leave. In some cases they thought Leaving would not imperil others, in others they thought Leaving would imperil others but it was a price worth paying, and for others they thought Leaving would imperil others and that's why they voted Leave. Leavers have a variety of motives.
Just deluded. Seriously when are the men in white coats going to be called? Tory MPs all seem to believe if they wish it hard enough then Brexit will happen.
Forgetting that nothing has changed and their ultra wing were the ones who stopped us leaving.
Run by me again, how did the relatively small number of ERG nutters prevent the WA passing? You imbue them with the reputation of the 300 Spartans, such were their deeds relative to their numbers.
The Conservative Party completley untied would still have faield to dleiver Brexit. It is - thanks to the Wisdom of May - a minority Govt. We have not left because May could not devise a means to get the DUP on board. Nor stop the Remainer wing of her party siding with Labour/leaving to form a new party.
I'm sure the ERG are grateful for you bigging them up. After all, they did get May's scalp (years too late to be of much consequence to the Brexit negotaitions, mind.) But it is risible to suggest that if the ERG had lined up as one to approve May's Shit Deal, that Woolaston, Soubry, Grieve etc would have joind the the DUP in implementing Brexit.
Rory Stewart absolutely bombing with Conservative MPs, Conservative members and members of the public who would consider voting Conservative. (ComRes) Indeed, if that poll is anything to go by, there wouldn't be much of a Conservative Party left to lead for Rory Stewart. Him, Grieve and Letwin? Ha ha ha.
Could the people on these forums and Twitter *be* anymore out of touch? It's just hilarious to see the analysis/bile on here directed at Boris, McVey and Raab by rabid Remainers and then the reaction of everyone else. Just like the referendum itself I guess.
I know both Boris and Rory. Rory is a good man. Boris is not.
Good men rarely prosper in politics.
Or much else, for that matter. They usually lose the woman of their dreams to right bastards.
Not in my case...
Intelligent, well-educated, kind, generous and beautiful works for me 😊
The vagaries of universal swing calculations on Electoral Calculus seem to be being used as a convenient distraction from the main message of that ComRes poll. And that message was that the Conservatives could poll around 37% with Johnson as leader, compared to 23% now and a mere 19% with Stewart as leader. How Electoral Calculus subsequently mashes up those figures into seats is irrelevant.
No, I don't believe that the Conservatives will get a 140 seat majority at the next GE with Johnson as leader. However, they have a good chance of getting a workable majority better than that which May gave up. And in anticipation of that possibility, the EU would then have to mull over whether it is better to make some limited concessions now rather than going down a road which would most likely force a general election leading to a workable majority for any form of Brexit including No Deal.
As for Stewart, the ComRes polling does show a higher percentage of undecided DKs (31%) as would be expected for someone little known until now. However, 236 of those DKs voted Leave in 2016, compared to 218 who voted Remain. The balance for Leave does not suggest that Stewart could do markedly better if his arch Remainer views became known amongst undecided voters.
Stewart isn’t an “arch Remainer”
He voted Remain, but supported May’s deal vocally. He’s said that he’d prefer to leave with no deal than revoke
Rory Stewart absolutely bombing with Conservative MPs, Conservative members and members of the public who would consider voting Conservative. (ComRes) Indeed, if that poll is anything to go by, there wouldn't be much of a Conservative Party left to lead for Rory Stewart. Him, Grieve and Letwin? Ha ha ha.
Could the people on these forums and Twitter *be* anymore out of touch? It's just hilarious to see the analysis/bile on here directed at Boris, McVey and Raab by rabid Remainers and then the reaction of everyone else. Just like the referendum itself I guess.
I know both Boris and Rory. Rory is a good man. Boris is not.
Good men rarely prosper in politics.
Or much else, for that matter. They usually lose the woman of their dreams to right bastards.
Not in my case...
Intelligent, well-educated, kind, generous and beautiful works for me 😊
Comments
https://twitter.com/simon_brooke/status/1138737359464402944
The last para is flintily realistic, apart from mentioning the possibility of a stupid bandit.
'In the classic essay “The Basic Laws of Human Stupidity”, the late Italian economic historian Carlo Cipolla warned: “A stupid person is more dangerous than a bandit.” He explained: “Stupid people cause losses to other people with no counterpart of gains on their own account. Thus society as a whole is impoverished.” Let’s hope the next prime minister is merely a bandit.'
And, whatever happens, this will be a problem for the future. The born again Europeans won't forget the great and terrible woe done to them by the electorate, should we leave. Should we remain, the sceptics will not relinquish their British identity or fall in love with Brussels.
We will be drinking rainwater out of gourds.
That said there's not a lot to be optimistic about. Boris or Corbyn will both be worse than any goverment we have had in living memory.
By contrast Brexit will send this country to the back of the WTO queue and it will take us 50 years to recover, if we ever do.
Not that the ERG lot care. Their offshore funds are all safe.
Or am I living under a delusion?
The 'political class' cannot be treated as an homogenous group on the EU. Some are pro, many are clearly anti.
Most Yorkshire people have a strong sense of Yorkshire identity but most feel strongly British too. And they've never had a referednum on being British.
Regarding your last point - time will be the great healer should we Remain. The young are largely pro-EU and will not become anti as they age. Many of my generation are anti and will die before they are reconciled to the EU but we all die eventually.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/06/11/rory-stewart-just-gave-speech-blew-tory-leadership-rivals-water/
We may find out if you're right on time being a healer, if we Remain.
LOLlll!!!!!!!!!
https://twitter.com/bloombergasia/status/1138727611050233857?s=21
America has no veto on British nuclear weapons.
* a lawyer corrects: "was"
In 2016 we labelled it project fear, and it resonated because nobody took seriously the absurd claims from the Remain campaign. And we were thus proven right. Today, the same scare stories are being told and we're labelling them project fear again, except this time we're laughing even harder at them.
If we didn't believe George Osborne in 2016, we're hardly all going to believe Philip Hammond in 2019.
Britain's nuclear system is actually very decentralised to the point that commanders of Royal Navy submarines have the discretion whether to fire in certain circumstances. Unlike America's with the nuclear football.
HOW HOW HOW
The official line: https://ams3.digitaloceanspaces.com/ukdj/2017/12/UK-Nuclear-Deterrent-FOI-Response.pdf
However from my understanding, stopping operational use of missiles and warheads we have on our subs is a very different matter.
It's like you think 2007 never happened.
Just like this website.
Candidate for typo of the week...
Intelligent, well-educated, kind, generous and beautiful works for me 😊
He voted Remain, but supported May’s deal vocally. He’s said that he’d prefer to leave with no deal than revoke
https://twitter.com/bbcpolitics/status/1138784761495851008?s=21