The EU referendum has made for strange bedfellows, but in this case the Greens in this country are more interested in furthering leftism than green policies. The EU is the ultimate leftist organisation in their eyes.
A spectacularly blind comment. This is the Green Party's position on Europe:
We recognise the value of the original goal of the founders of the European Communities, who sought to remove the threat of another war between European states. This has been distorted by vested political and economic interests into a union dominated by economic interests, which lacks democratic control, and promotes the goals of multinational corporations which are interested in profit not people, and which runs counter to the professed core values of the Union.
So they stood down and endorsed the Lib Dems because?
Lucas has an idea about a progressive alliance. Pretty sure not all Greens are in favour of how far she is pushing this, but anyway Corbyn isn't interested.
The sage of Leavistan, John Harris, is keen on it, though I guess that would probably butter no parsnips with Corbyn.
It's bullshit. What does such an 'alliance stand' *for*? What would it do if elected? Who would lead it?
Could just not put up candidates, a la unionists, in seats where the party is way off the pace. Let the LD compete in the rural SW, east Anglia, kent, etc, and Labour in the most of the midlands and parts of Wales.
David is right that it would need a single issue - which potentially it already has, except for Labour's panic and indecision on which way to face - or a platform based on a world view and some principles. Down the ages thinkers have only come up with (on the centre/left) Communism, Socialism, or Liberalism (and I guess you could add Environmentalism as an offshoot of socialism); the first is historically bust and the other two (three) are spoken for, with the Labour moderates floundering about trying to work out where they are between the second and third.
If Brexit runs into serious trouble or even the buffers, a 2020 (or earlier) 'coupon election' isn't an impossibility.
Boy does Cameron have a lot to answer for. Only a handful of years ago only a small minority of the population was remotely interested in the EU or getting out of it (I forget the exact figures from the social surveys, maybe 20% tops?). Now everything is seen through the prism of Remain or Leave. The country is totally divided. Ten minutes watching QT last night makes clear how angry and irrational both sides are becoming over this - an issue that few really cared about until Cameron opened pandora's box.
Meanwhile, the number one issue facing Britain goes totally ignored. How on earth are we going to deal with an ageing population and the horrendous social care costs this is going to demand in next thirty years?
This is why in the end there can only be one outcome. If Europe isn't going away we will have to learn to embrace it or risk destroying the country.
More and more people will come to the conclusion, not only that we're better off in, but that we're better off never again thinking otherwise. This moment is Euroscepticism's last hurrah before it's carried off to its political grave.
Really? We joined in 1973, there was a referendum two years later with a large majority in favour of remaining in the EU. 43 years later that large majority in favour of the EU has been turned into a majority in favour of leaving the EU.
If 43 years experience of the EU leads to this result, why would you think that this is Euroscepticism's last hurrah?
Because the malcontents have been stoking resentment and myths for 40 years. Now is their moment in the sun and they are tasked with reversing decades of British policy with no-one else they can credibly blame.
If they don't have any better answers, or even any answers at all then their whole credo will be discredited. Not only will Brexit not be delivered, but in future anyone who suggests that the answer to our problems is to leave the EU will be dismissed as a crank.
Opposing is a lot easier than proposing, as is criticising than doing.
Sometimes in politics, as in life, the last thing you want is your dream actually coming true.
Rosberg leaves an interesting hole to fill. Can't see them wanting to poach Vettel or Raikkonen from Ferrari, they won't get Ricciardo or especially Verstappen (Can see Horner now saying "from my cold dead hands"). Bottas quick enough?
They can hardly scream and rant. Read between the lines: "This is a brave decision by Nico ..." "For the team, this is an unexpected situation but also an exciting one."
Teams like Mercedes don't like unexpected situations. They are to be avoided.
Toto: "a cockpit" will be available. Hamilton's position is now secure and he will presumably get his original engineering team back too. Probably makes him a very good bet for world champion next year.
Hot on the decision by World Champ Rosberg to retire from F1 with immediate effect, I've backed Alonso to replace him as Lewis Hamilton's co-driver at Mercedes. The German team will only want the very best available which narrows the field very considerably - so that there are realistically only 3 drivers in the frame. Alonso is surely ready, willing and able and great value at 22 (i.e. 20/1 net in old money) to win next season's F1 Championship. There will be a good opportunity to trade this out at a profit should Alonso get the gig.
Hamilton's position is now secure and he will presumably get his original engineering team back too. Probably makes him a very good bet for world champion next year.
Hot on the decision by World Champ Rosberg to retire from F1 with immediate effect, I've backed Alonso to replace him as Lewis Hamilton's co-driver at Mercedes. The German team will only want the very best available which narrows the field very considerably - so that there are realistically only 3 drivers in the frame. Alonso is surely ready, willing and able and great value at 22 (i.e. 20/1 net in old money) to win next season's F1 Championship.
DYOR
I considered Alonso. An instant unretirement for Jenson if that happens?
Hamilton's position is now secure and he will presumably get his original engineering team back too. Probably makes him a very good bet for world champion next year.
Boy does Cameron have a lot to answer for. Only a handful of years ago only a small minority of the population was remotely interested in the EU or getting out of it (I forget the exact figures from the social surveys, maybe 20% tops?). Now everything is seen through the prism of Remain or Leave. The country is totally divided. Ten minutes watching QT last night makes clear how angry and irrational both sides are becoming over this - an issue that few really cared about until Cameron opened pandora's box.
Meanwhile, the number one issue facing Britain goes totally ignored. How on earth are we going to deal with an ageing population and the horrendous social care costs this is going to demand in next thirty years?
This is why in the end there can only be one outcome. If Europe isn't going away we will have to learn to embrace it or risk destroying the country.
More and more people will come to the conclusion, not only that we're better off in, but that we're better off never again thinking otherwise. This moment is Euroscepticism's last hurrah before it's carried off to its political grave.
Really? We joined in 1973, there was a referendum two years later with a large majority in favour of remaining in the EU. 43 years later that large majority in favour of the EU has been turned into a majority in favour of leaving the EU.
If 43 years experience of the EU leads to this result, why would you think that this is Euroscepticism's last hurrah?
Because the malcontents have been stoking resentment and myths for 40 years. Now is their moment in the sun and they are tasked with reversing decades of British policy with no-one else they can credibly blame.
If they don't have any better answers, or even any answers at all then their whole credo will be discredited. Not only will Brexit not be delivered, but in future anyone who suggests that the answer to our problems is to leave the EU will be dismissed as a crank.
That's a spectacularly ignorant post, which completely fails to learn the lessons of the Brexit vote (or of the Trump election, or of any of the other revolts against the elite). Indeed, which fails to even recognise that Brexit is happening. It's attitudes like that which enabled Leave to win in the first place.
I try not to link too many random articles, but I include this one just for the quote:
Will the “Canada-plus” model work for the UK? No, says [Jason Langrish, architect of CETA], who has advised the UK government in what he calls “their efforts to find a silver lining to this nightmare that they have unleashed on Britain. They continue to search for a trade unicorn that will solve all.”
"Max Verstappen is ready to fight for the F1 World title in 2017, he just “needs the right car” according to Red Bull motorsport advisor Helmut Marko."
The EU referendum has made for strange bedfellows, but in this case the Greens in this country are more interested in furthering leftism than green policies. The EU is the ultimate leftist organisation in their eyes.
A spectacularly blind comment. This is the Green Party's position on Europe:
We recognise the value of the original goal of the founders of the European Communities, who sought to remove the threat of another war between European states. This has been distorted by vested political and economic interests into a union dominated by economic interests, which lacks democratic control, and promotes the goals of multinational corporations which are interested in profit not people, and which runs counter to the professed core values of the Union.
Why people like me voted Leave.
I thought you voted Leave so you could entertain yourself by knowingly peddling bare-faced flat lies about NHS funding to people that relied on the service, then bragging about it on here?
You've got it in for me today Mr Boobjob. It was a campaign full of BS on both sides (end of western civilisation, ffs), but I was working for a noble socialist cause.
Mr Rentool,where I live ,loads of working class labour supporters voted leave,it't the middle classes of the party that are out of touch with they base like jobabob.
I'm not a member of the Labour Party, nor a Labour voter. If you want to know out of touch, look no further than the Labour leadership.
Because the malcontents have been stoking resentment and myths for 40 years. Now is their moment in the sun and they are tasked with reversing decades of British policy with no-one else they can credibly blame.
If they don't have any better answers, or even any answers at all then their whole credo will be discredited. Not only will Brexit not be delivered, but in future anyone who suggests that the answer to our problems is to leave the EU will be dismissed as a crank.
That's a spectacularly ignorant post, which completely fails to learn the lessons of the Brexit vote (or of the Trump election, or of any of the other revolts against the elite). Indeed, which fails to even recognise that Brexit is happening. It's attitudes like that which enabled Leave to win in the first place.
Bracketing Trump and Brexit together is problematic for many reasons, but if we accept that premise for a moment, which part of the British political spectrum currently finds itself as the most vulnerable target of this wave of popular revolt? It's the leading Brexiteers themselves! The people who are busy trying to find a way to leave the European Union without any substantive change to anything that people care about. The Daily Mail already is full of comments calling for the heads of David Davis and Boris Johnson... The revolution will eat its children, just as they always do.
Hot on the decision by World Champ Rosberg to retire from F1 with immediate effect, I've backed Alonso to replace him as Lewis Hamilton's co-driver at Mercedes. The German team will only want the very best available which narrows the field very considerably - so that there are realistically only 3 drivers in the frame. Alonso is surely ready, willing and able and great value at 22 (i.e. 20/1 net in old money) to win next season's F1 Championship.
DYOR
I considered Alonso. An instant unretirement for Jenson if that happens?
Alonso's still got a year to run of his three-year contract, and he's said McLaren will be his last team. McLaren would want a fair penny to get out of that contract, especially as they'll be gifting a major competitor with a world-class driver. And if Honda deliver an engine that hasn't come out of a second-hand Jazz next year then McLaren might do very well. For Alonso, jumping would be an expensive risk. And Mercedes will be paying for a driver who, whilst still excellent, is past his peak. Schuey brought none of his magic to Mercedes when he unretired.
With the rule changes next year, Mercedes needed this like a hole in the head. All the development testing will fall upon Hammy, who'll have to tell them how the car compares with this years - if they'd known they were losing a driver they could have run some sessions with a new, up and coming driver.
Here's a long-odds guess: Button. He's a good development driver, he's relatively free, and would probably jump at the chance at a swansong in what is essentially his old team. He also got on very well with Hammy when they raced together. He would be cheaper to buy off McLaren. However Aonso beat him this year.
Another alternative is to bring in a new-to-F1 driver, but that's a little risky given the timescales and the fact next year's car will be new. The new driver will have to give feedback on a car that they cannot compare to last years.
Every way I look at it, Mercedes will be privately fuming.
The EU referendum has made for strange bedfellows, but in this case the Greens in this country are more interested in furthering leftism than green policies. The EU is the ultimate leftist organisation in their eyes.
A spectacularly blind comment. This is the Green Party's position on Europe:
We recognise the value of the original goal of the founders of the European Communities, who sought to remove the threat of another war between European states. This has been distorted by vested political and economic interests into a union dominated by economic interests, which lacks democratic control, and promotes the goals of multinational corporations which are interested in profit not people, and which runs counter to the professed core values of the Union.
Why people like me voted Leave.
I thought you voted Leave so you could entertain yourself by knowingly peddling bare-faced flat lies about NHS funding to people that relied on the service, then bragging about it on here?
You've got it in for me today Mr Boobjob. It was a campaign full of BS on both sides (end of western civilisation, ffs), but I was working for a noble socialist cause.
Total shite. You willingly, knowingly peddled mendacious lies about the NHS to get a one-off sugar rush against the 'elite'. You should hang your head in shame.
I really didn't think Sarah Olney could overturn the incumbent Zac Goldsmith's considerbale 2015 majority but she was aided by a number of factors, two of which would be the considerable ground war led, I believe, by veterans of such from Kingston, Richmond and elsewhere and a large abstention by previously Conservative voters.
The possibility now exists of the LDs recapturing both Kingston and Richmond at the 2018 local elections but that's a long way off.
I said on the day Zac resigned this by-election was still a win-win for the Prime Minister. Had Zac prevailed, it would have change nothing except for blunting the LD "fightback". The LD victory also changes nothing but removes the irritant from the Conservative scene and will allow the selection of a pro-LHR3 Conservative candidate next time. That candidate may still lose but IF, as seems likely, the Conservatives comfortably see off Labour, this one seat won;t matter if May picks up 15-20 marginals from Corbyn.
For the LDs, Sarah has given Tim Farron his battle honours - Paddy had Eastbourne, Charles had Romsey and Sir Menzies had Dunfermline. It has put the party back in the game and in the limelight to some degree but as with the spider climbing up the bowl, it gets tougher from here.
Easy though it is to criticise May and her Government for not seeming to have or at least not articulating a plan for A50 and Brexit, the pro-EU dissidents have a similar problem. Holding a second referendum on the terms of withdrawal is one thing but what if the treaty is rejected - what would a "No" vote mean ?
Presumably, it will be much easier (for May) if she can deliver a plan that will satisfy as many as possible but what is that plan ? I hear a lot of talk about eating cake but there has to be more to it than that. Freedom of Movement ? Access to the Single Market ? Continuing payments ?
The EU referendum has made for strange bedfellows, but in this case the Greens in this country are more interested in furthering leftism than green policies. The EU is the ultimate leftist organisation in their eyes.
A spectacularly blind comment. This is the Green Party's position on Europe:
We recognise the value of the original goal of the founders of the European Communities, who sought to remove the threat of another war between European states. This has been distorted by vested political and economic interests into a union dominated by economic interests, which lacks democratic control, and promotes the goals of multinational corporations which are interested in profit not people, and which runs counter to the professed core values of the Union.
Why people like me voted Leave.
I thought you voted Leave so you could entertain yourself by knowingly peddling bare-faced flat lies about NHS funding to people that relied on the service, then bragging about it on here?
You've got it in for me today Mr Boobjob. It was a campaign full of BS on both sides (end of western civilisation, ffs), but I was working for a noble socialist cause.
Total shite. You willingly, knowingly peddled mendacious lies about the NHS to get a one-off sugar rush against the 'elite'. You should hang your head in shame.
If you want mendacious lies about the NHS, how about "No top-down reorganisation" peddled by the Conservatives pre-2010 election?
And what is wrong with giving the elite a kick up the backside on one of the rare occasions we get given a chance?
Rosberg leaves an interesting hole to fill. Can't see them wanting to poach Vettel or Raikkonen from Ferrari, they won't get Ricciardo or especially Verstappen (Can see Horner now saying "from my cold dead hands"). Bottas quick enough?
The other name suggested was Wehrlein. Really?
Surely Mercedes will select a German , Austrian or Dutchman?
Rosberg leaves an interesting hole to fill. Can't see them wanting to poach Vettel or Raikkonen from Ferrari, they won't get Ricciardo or especially Verstappen (Can see Horner now saying "from my cold dead hands"). Bottas quick enough?
The other name suggested was Wehrlein. Really?
Surely Mercedes will select a German , Austrian or Dutchman?
Rosberg leaves an interesting hole to fill. Can't see them wanting to poach Vettel or Raikkonen from Ferrari, they won't get Ricciardo or especially Verstappen (Can see Horner now saying "from my cold dead hands"). Bottas quick enough?
The other name suggested was Wehrlein. Really?
Surely Mercedes will select a German , Austrian or Dutchman?
Their current German's mucked them about something rotten. Nationality will be a minor consideration now, but if everything else is equal, it will count. If.
"I was covered on the LDs so made a tiny fiver but thought Zac would squeeze it and so lost out a decent profit on that." This was just another case of needing to beware of the polls. The fundamentals overwhelming favoured the Lib Dems.
In all fairness, the polls made public by the Lib Dems were, as it turns out, spot on.
The trouble was all the dismal jonnies on PB who moaned on and on about expectations management. They were - and are - the ones to beware of.
Rosberg leaves an interesting hole to fill. Can't see them wanting to poach Vettel or Raikkonen from Ferrari, they won't get Ricciardo or especially Verstappen (Can see Horner now saying "from my cold dead hands"). Bottas quick enough?
The other name suggested was Wehrlein. Really?
Surely Mercedes will select a German , Austrian or Dutchman?
I'm ruling myself out.
Me too. If I tried to drive an F1 car they'd have to send someone out to investigate the strange brown stain all along the track (and frequently off it). Oil? No. Water? No. Whatever you do, don't do the taste test ...
The EU referendum has made for strange bedfellows, but in this case the Greens in this country are more interested in furthering leftism than green policies. The EU is the ultimate leftist organisation in their eyes.
A spectacularly blind comment. This is the Green Party's position on Europe:
We recognise the value of the original goal of the founders of the European Communities, who sought to remove the threat of another war between European states. This has been distorted by vested political and economic interests into a union dominated by economic interests, which lacks democratic control, and promotes the goals of multinational corporations which are interested in profit not people, and which runs counter to the professed core values of the Union.
So they stood down and endorsed the Lib Dems because?
Lucas has an idea about a progressive alliance. Pretty sure not all Greens are in favour of how far she is pushing this, but anyway Corbyn isn't interested.
The sage of Leavistan, John Harris, is keen on it, though I guess that would probably butter no parsnips with Corbyn.
The EU referendum has made for strange bedfellows, but in this case the Greens in this country are more interested in furthering leftism than green policies. The EU is the ultimate leftist organisation in their eyes.
A spectacularly blind comment. This is the Green Party's position on Europe:
We recognise the value of the original goal of the founders of the European Communities, who sought to remove the threat of another war between European states. This has been distorted by vested political and economic interests into a union dominated by economic interests, which lacks democratic control, and promotes the goals of multinational corporations which are interested in profit not people, and which runs counter to the professed core values of the Union.
Why people like me voted Leave.
I thought you voted Leave so you could entertain yourself by knowingly peddling bare-faced flat lies about NHS funding to people that relied on the service, then bragging about it on here?
You've got it in for me today Mr Boobjob. It was a campaign full of BS on both sides (end of western civilisation, ffs), but I was working for a noble socialist cause.
Total shite. You willingly, knowingly peddled mendacious lies about the NHS to get a one-off sugar rush against the 'elite'. You should hang your head in shame.
The EU referendum has made for strange bedfellows, but in this case the Greens in this country are more interested in furthering leftism than green policies. The EU is the ultimate leftist organisation in their eyes.
A spectacularly blind comment. This is the Green Party's position on Europe:
We recognise the value of the original goal of the founders of the European Communities, who sought to remove the threat of another war between European states. This has been distorted by vested political and economic interests into a union dominated by economic interests, which lacks democratic control, and promotes the goals of multinational corporations which are interested in profit not people, and which runs counter to the professed core values of the Union.
So they stood down and endorsed the Lib Dems because?
Lucas has an idea about a progressive alliance. Pretty sure not all Greens are in favour of how far she is pushing this, but anyway Corbyn isn't interested.
The sage of Leavistan, John Harris, is keen on it, though I guess that would probably butter no parsnips with Corbyn.
It's bullshit. What does such an 'alliance stand' *for*? What would it do if elected? Who would lead it?
Could just not put up candidates, a la unionists, in seats where the party is way off the pace. Let the LD compete in the rural SW, east Anglia, kent, etc, and Labour in the most of the midlands and parts of Wales.
Of course they could. And then what? What if they somehow avoid falling apart over who stands where, avoid coming a cropper with all their internal contradictions and win a majority. What does the new Progressive Alliance do in government.
(And if the parties did retreat to their heartlands, it would be an admission of their inability to win ever again, not to mention writing off Scotland forever).
Stodge 2.46pm. I suggest the government drops the Brexit nonsense and spells it out direct to the public, that we are better off in Europe, commercially, legally and security wise. This whole business is taking up so much government time and effort that is ineffective and , uneconomic use of theirs and our time. A referendum is after all only advisory and several people I know are now worried they voted leave on the basis of the £350 million a week to the Health Service some have regrets. We must not let our heart rule our head.
"I was covered on the LDs so made a tiny fiver but thought Zac would squeeze it and so lost out a decent profit on that." This was just another case of needing to beware of the polls. The fundamentals overwhelming favoured the Lib Dems.
In all fairness, the polls made public by the Lib Dems were, as it turns out, spot on.
The trouble was all the dismal jonnies on PB who moaned on and on about expectations management. They were - and are - the ones to beware of.
Isn’t that a tad discourteous to the site proprietor?
The EU referendum has made for strange bedfellows, but in this case the Greens in this country are more interested in furthering leftism than green policies. The EU is the ultimate leftist organisation in their eyes.
A spectacularly blind comment. This is the Green Party's position on Europe:
We recognise the value of the original goal of the founders of the European Communities, who sought to remove the threat of another war between European states. This has been distorted by vested political and economic interests into a union dominated by economic interests, which lacks democratic control, and promotes the goals of multinational corporations which are interested in profit not people, and which runs counter to the professed core values of the Union.
Why people like me voted Leave.
I thought you voted Leave so you could entertain yourself by knowingly peddling bare-faced flat lies about NHS funding to people that relied on the service, then bragging about it on here?
If you were the head of a multi national corporation the E.U is what you would come up with to protect your interests. There is no institution that is as right wing as the E.U.
Because the malcontents have been stoking resentment and myths for 40 years. Now is their moment in the sun and they are tasked with reversing decades of British policy with no-one else they can credibly blame.
If they don't have any better answers, or even any answers at all then their whole credo will be discredited. Not only will Brexit not be delivered, but in future anyone who suggests that the answer to our problems is to leave the EU will be dismissed as a crank.
That's a spectacularly ignorant post, which completely fails to learn the lessons of the Brexit vote (or of the Trump election, or of any of the other revolts against the elite). Indeed, which fails to even recognise that Brexit is happening. It's attitudes like that which enabled Leave to win in the first place.
Bracketing Trump and Brexit together is problematic for many reasons, but if we accept that premise for a moment, which part of the British political spectrum currently finds itself as the most vulnerable target of this wave of popular revolt? It's the leading Brexiteers themselves! The people who are busy trying to find a way to leave the European Union without any substantive change to anything that people care about. The Daily Mail already is full of comments calling for the heads of David Davis and Boris Johnson... The revolution will eat its children, just as they always do.
Perhaps it will, but it will eat a lot more than that as well.
Wow, the outgoing president of the Gambia took over in a coup aged 29. I'm just about to turn 30, I have clearly been wasting my time compared to that precocious youth.
I don't think shit posting on Pb.com can be considered time wasting.
Wow, the outgoing president of the Gambia took over in a coup aged 29. I'm just about to turn 30, I have clearly been wasting my time compared to that precocious youth.
I don't think shit posting on Pb.com can be considered time wasting.
Stodge 2.46pm. I suggest the government drops the Brexit nonsense and spells it out direct to the public, that we are better off in Europe, commercially, legally and security wise. This whole business is taking up so much government time and effort that is ineffective and , uneconomic use of theirs and our time. A referendum is after all only advisory and several people I know are now worried they voted leave on the basis of the £350 million a week to the Health Service some have regrets. We must not let our heart rule our head.
We should just dissolve the People and elect another.
The EU referendum has made for strange bedfellows, but in this case the Greens in this country are more interested in furthering leftism than green policies. The EU is the ultimate leftist organisation in their eyes.
A spectacularly blind comment. This is the Green Party's position on Europe:
We recognise the value of the original goal of the founders of the European Communities, who sought to remove the threat of another war between European states. This has been distorted by vested political and economic interests into a union dominated by economic interests, which lacks democratic control, and promotes the goals of multinational corporations which are interested in profit not people, and which runs counter to the professed core values of the Union.
Why people like me voted Leave.
I thought you voted Leave so you could entertain yourself by knowingly peddling bare-faced flat lies about NHS funding to people that relied on the service, then bragging about it on here?
If you were the head of a multi national corporation the E.U is what you would come up with to protect your interests. There is no institution that is as right wing as the E.U.
It's a CEO's wet dream.
Although the best performing large country in the EU is Germany. And Germany has very few large companies compared to its size.
Here we go again. This is the spin of the MSM. What Markit Economics actually said was:
"Increased volumes of construction output were underpinned by a solid upturn in new work during November. The latest rise in incoming new business was the strongest since March and contrasted with a sustained decline in sales through the summer. Some construction firms noted that their workloads had been boosted by a resumption of projects that were delayed after the Brexit vote."
Presumably this did not fit the narrative.
Positive news "despite Brexit", negative news "because Brexit", neutral news spun as negative and the "because Brexit". Rinse, repeat.
Wow, the outgoing president of the Gambia took over in a coup aged 29. I'm just about to turn 30, I have clearly been wasting my time compared to that precocious youth.
I don't think shit posting on Pb.com can be considered time wasting.
He won the DTM for Mercedes, is their current test driver, young, and German. One season's experience of F1 for Manor. Manor use Mercedes engines, so they have a lever there to prise him away.
However he wasn't much better than Ocon after the latter joined the team midway through the season. He's an obvious choice, and it's a great opportunity for him. But ... but for some reason I can see Mercedes looking elsewhere.
Stodge 2.46pm. I suggest the government drops the Brexit nonsense and spells it out direct to the public, that we are better off in Europe, commercially, legally and security wise. This whole business is taking up so much government time and effort that is ineffective and , uneconomic use of theirs and our time. A referendum is after all only advisory and several people I know are now worried they voted leave on the basis of the £350 million a week to the Health Service some have regrets. We must not let our heart rule our head.
The primary motivation of "Progressive Alliance" voters is, to put it simply, to keep the fecking Tories out. Six years ago the LibDems broke the informal deal, and they still need to do a lot of convincing to reassure a lot of other Progressives that they have repented for their sins and won't stray again.
I think Riccardo will want the Mercedes seat. He's being muscled out of RBR by Verstapen and Mercedes will want an exciting driver to replace boring Rosberg.
The primary motivation of "Progressive Alliance" voters is, to put it simply, to keep the fecking Tories out. Six years ago the LibDems broke the informal deal, and they still need to do a lot of convincing to reassure a lot of other Progressives that they have repented for their sins and won't stray again.
The dirty work of keeping the Tories from untrammelled power in 2010 (to which they were so so close) was however necessary and worthwhile, even if there is no credit or reward for it.
Here we go again. This is the spin of the MSM. What Markit Economics actually said was:
"Increased volumes of construction output were underpinned by a solid upturn in new work during November. The latest rise in incoming new business was the strongest since March and contrasted with a sustained decline in sales through the summer. Some construction firms noted that their workloads had been boosted by a resumption of projects that were delayed after the Brexit vote."
Presumably this did not fit the narrative.
Positive news "despite Brexit", negative news "because Brexit", neutral news spun as negative and the "because Brexit". Rinse, repeat.
Whereas you do the exact opposite.
Please show me examples of that. I've posted that I think hard Brexit will be economically sub-optimal.
Stodge 2.46pm. I suggest the government drops the Brexit nonsense and spells it out direct to the public, that we are better off in Europe, commercially, legally and security wise. This whole business is taking up so much government time and effort that is ineffective and , uneconomic use of theirs and our time. A referendum is after all only advisory and several people I know are now worried they voted leave on the basis of the £350 million a week to the Health Service some have regrets. We must not let our heart rule our head.
I think that a) most unlikely and b) unwise. We are dealing with a Conservative Government and a pillar of Conservative ideology is people should be responsible for their actions and shouldn't rely on the State to sort things out for them.
That said, the Government has to go into the A50 negotiations and to paraphrase Ernest Bevin nobody thinks Theresa May "is going naked into the debating chamber".
(This will get a fair few responses from the usual suspects but we should expect nothing less regrettably).
OTOH, this isn't Las Vegas poker and giving a hint of your hand isn't a bad move necessarily. The EU probably has a pretty good idea of what we would like and what we are prepared to accept (back to cake) and more importantly the much vaunted "red lines". In the same way, we probably know (or we ought to) what the EU wants - part of it will be punishment pour ne pas encourager les autres as it were.
A50 is about the details based on trying to line up what works (is least unsatisfactory) for both sides. It will be astonishing if, like Munich, one side gets all they want and more. May's task will be to sell a compromise which will have good bits and bad bits. The extreme Europhobes and Europhiles will find the whole thing distasteful.
More rational and analytical may argue the deal will be the best we could have achieved or perhaps not and then judge whether it's the basis for Britain's long term relationship with the EU and perhaps further afield. For their sake, Conservative MPs will be hoping May's deal will fool enough of the people for long enough to ensure re-election in 2020 - if the deal unravels quickly, it may be a very difficult campaign for the Government even against Corbyn.
If Olney had been sharper (or more awake) she should have dealt with the first gotcha by saying the election would be rerun at the latest in 2020 which would have shut down her line of hostile questioning.
The statistic was carefully cited - and goes to the heart of a lot of the confusion around immigration, which too many people confuse with ethnicity (hence all the British Asians being told to 'go home' after the referendum). Our large Asian populations in London and South Yorkshire have been here long enough to have children, and start having grandchildren, that are British born. If the difference in average family size persists, the ethnic mix of many of our cities will continue to change even if immigration was banned entirely tomorrow. This is evident if you visit east London schools and see the difference between the ethnic mix of the local schools and the mix of adults within the communities in which they are located.
That may well all be true but that doesn't mean that people may not feel that the immigration which led to these changes was imposed on them without their consent and that, consequently, they don't want any more of it. Or they want less of it.
Nor does it mean that when people drive to the nearest Tesco's or railway station they don't pass two or three former petrol stations that are now carwash places run by recently-arrived gangs from countries such as Romania who keep chickens out the back and who have reached an "understanding" with native criminals on "security". That's what things are like now in many British cities.
The reason people don't want any more immigration isn't just that it was imposed on them without their consent. It's that in many areas it has made their lives even crapper.
And @IanB, the richer members of many British Pakistani families do have homes in Pakistan even if they have had children and grandchildren here. Similarly many "BBC" ("British Born Chinese") people - and the intersection of British and Chinese identities is too complex for me to go into here - believe that they are "living in a foreign country". Even some who don't speak Chinese think that.
Then people hear opinion channellers on the TV talk about "our cities".
It has been a bad week for Conservative Eurosceptics, their worst since their EU referendum victory in June. The sight of Zac Goldsmith, a leading Brexiter, losing his 23,000 majority in a by-election to the pro-European Liberal Democrats capped it.
This week has seen David Davis, the thoughtful Brexit minister, admitting that Britain might have to carry on paying into the EU budget after it leaves the club as an entry fee to the single market.
Mr Davis also said that any restrictions of freedom of movement after Brexit would be designed to avoid any “labour shortages”, a comment which suggests EU workers will carry on picking British strawberries as well as working in City banks.
But the result does confirm that the Conservatives could pay a heavy political price if Mrs May mishandles the exit talks or if Brexit results in a crash landing for the economy. The Lib Dems could be among the beneficiaries.
And we're definitely Leaving, because, for a start, there is no feasible political route to Remaining.
Sorry, guys.
There is no feasible political route to leaving either without massive cost, as May and Brexiteers are now realising
And that will not sit well with either the headbangers who are already muttering, or the £350m for the NHS crowd who will be active at the ballot box.
Sorry, guys.
Of course there is a route. We leave. Outside the Single Market; outside the CJEU; outside the Commission's regulations; outside freedom of movement. We then aim for mutual recognition of as much as possible and mutual minimisation of trade impediments. If the EU doesn't want to play ball, well, there's a lot of the rest of the world out there that's growing a lot faster than the EU is and Britain ought to get on and engage with it rather more than we are. And the EU has a trade deficit (and funding deficit) with the UK, so it does have an incentive to do a deal.
Some will no doubt scream about Single Market access but as long as Britain is an attractive place to do business, there won't be too many difficulties.
So HOW do you do it? We know you want to subvert the vote, but HOW?
The how gets easier if the Supreme Court rules that the devolution settlement, as constituted, means that Hollyrood needs to approve Article 50. Then it becomes a Mexican standoff where neither side can act without causing irreparable harm to themselves.
If not, then you simply tie it up with strings in Westminster until the Tories are totally committed to the softest of Brexits, and wait for political pressure from the hard Brexiteers to destroy the very thing they wanted.
I really didn't think Sarah Olney could overturn the incumbent Zac Goldsmith's considerbale 2015 majority but she was aided by a number of factors, two of which would be the considerable ground war led, I believe, by veterans of such from Kingston, Richmond and elsewhere and a large abstention by previously Conservative voters.
The possibility now exists of the LDs recapturing both Kingston and Richmond at the 2018 local elections but that's a long way off.
I said on the day Zac resigned this by-election was still a win-win for the Prime Minister. Had Zac prevailed, it would have change nothing except for blunting the LD "fightback". The LD victory also changes nothing but removes the irritant from the Conservative scene and will allow the selection of a pro-LHR3 Conservative candidate next time. That candidate may still lose but IF, as seems likely, the Conservatives comfortably see off Labour, this one seat won;t matter if May picks up 15-20 marginals from Corbyn.
For the LDs, Sarah has given Tim Farron his battle honours - Paddy had Eastbourne, Charles had Romsey and Sir Menzies had Dunfermline. It has put the party back in the game and in the limelight to some degree but as with the spider climbing up the bowl, it gets tougher from here.
Easy though it is to criticise May and her Government for not seeming to have or at least not articulating a plan for A50 and Brexit, the pro-EU dissidents have a similar problem. Holding a second referendum on the terms of withdrawal is one thing but what if the treaty is rejected - what would a "No" vote mean ?
Presumably, it will be much easier (for May) if she can deliver a plan that will satisfy as many as possible but what is that plan ? I hear a lot of talk about eating cake but there has to be more to it than that. Freedom of Movement ? Access to the Single Market ? Continuing payments ?
Good summary. We have two basic options for Brexit, in my assessment:
(1) Trading with everyone including the EU on an equal "Most Favoured Nation" basis. Also referred to as "WTO rules". (2) EEA or an equivalent minimal change arrangement with the EU that retains the SM, FoM, solidarity payments and ECJ oversight. We then trade with the rest of the world as if we were an EU country.
Forget about preferential trade deals. They take forever to sort out and the world's more or less stopped doing them. The EU doesn't have any great motivation to sign one (ie Canada +) with us either.
The Government is unwilling to face up to this basic choice or to present it to the public, I suspect, because the WTO Rules option is clearly a poor outcome - everyone else has the preferential trade agreements that are already in the system - while the minimal change option raises the question of why are we are leaving the EU only to have LESS control - except for the fact we voted for it, of course.
But HOW do you stop Brexit? Practically? I honestly can't see a way.
Brexit will collapse into a tangled pile of its own contradictions as more red lines are crossed and the cries of Betrayal drown out the "traitors"
It's an epic fuck up, you voted for. It requires nothing more than time to fail utterly and completely on its own terms, and for people like you to be baying for Boris
The 3 Brexiteers are already signalling freedom of movement and EU payments. That's "not Brexit" for many.
It has been a bad week for Conservative Eurosceptics, their worst since their EU referendum victory in June. The sight of Zac Goldsmith, a leading Brexiter, losing his 23,000 majority in a by-election to the pro-European Liberal Democrats capped it.
This week has seen David Davis, the thoughtful Brexit minister, admitting that Britain might have to carry on paying into the EU budget after it leaves the club as an entry fee to the single market.
Mr Davis also said that any restrictions of freedom of movement after Brexit would be designed to avoid any “labour shortages”, a comment which suggests EU workers will carry on picking British strawberries as well as working in City banks.
But the result does confirm that the Conservatives could pay a heavy political price if Mrs May mishandles the exit talks or if Brexit results in a crash landing for the economy. The Lib Dems could be among the beneficiaries.
So HOW do you do it? We know you want to subvert the vote, but HOW?
The how gets easier if the Supreme Court rules that the devolution settlement, as constituted, means that Hollyrood needs to approve Article 50. Then it becomes a Mexican standoff where neither side can act without causing irreparable harm to themselves.
They could pay the Jocks 200 leading SNP-linked grant-grabbers in Scotland off on condition they keep quiet about it.
Can all the pb-ers demanding that the referendum be reversed or ignored explain, in simple words to a jetlagged thriller writer, exactly how they intend to achieve that?
Setting aside the pros and cons, what is the practical route to this end? How do you get there?
The Tory party is Leave, and will lynch any leader who backtracks. The Labour party is in disarray, incapable of winning an election, and led by a Leave voter anyhow. The only parties who will openly call for a 2nd vote are tiny and meaningless.
So HOW do you do it? We know you want to subvert the vote, but HOW?
Get the courts to force a bill to be needed to enable A50.
Tie it up in knots in Commons and Lords.
Wait for some economic or other event to move public perception.
Demand that everything has changed and we need a new referendum.
If the courts seriously block it May will go to the people in a Brexit election, and she will win on a manifesto to force through the changes. So we still Leave.
No
Not sure she would win a Brexit GE anyway, but she would need a manifesto that spelled out things like 'single market, in or out?'
So HOW do you do it? We know you want to subvert the vote, but HOW?
The how gets easier if the Supreme Court rules that the devolution settlement, as constituted, means that Hollyrood needs to approve Article 50. Then it becomes a Mexican standoff where neither side can act without causing irreparable harm to themselves.
If not, then you simply tie it up with strings in Westminster until the Tories are totally committed to the softest of Brexits, and wait for political pressure from the hard Brexiteers to destroy the very thing they wanted.
If the courts seriously block it May will go to the people in a Brexit election, and she will win on a manifesto to force through the changes. So we still Leave.
If she'd called an election a couple of months ago she could have got a big pro-Brexit majority and that plan would have worked, but it gets harder with every week that passes as more and more of the Leave campaign's claims come back to haunt them and people see the fundamental contradictions.
I am neither bleating nor moaning. I am enjoying the discomfort of the Brexiteers growing on a daily basis
Having gone through a polarising referendum and secured an unlikely victory, those on the winning side are still angry, angrier even than they were before.
I think Riccardo will want the Mercedes seat. He's being muscled out of RBR by Verstapen and Mercedes will want an exciting driver to replace boring Rosberg.
I think that's right. Ricci would love a Merc drive. Even better, he'd be an exciting Mrecedes driver.
However don't look past Pascal Werhlein, especially after my post below where I said I thought Mercedes *wouldn't* go for him...
Another thing to note: Hamilton will have some say in who drives alongside him. Maybe not a big say, and certainly not a casting vote. But it will be a say.
PS: where is this "epic fuck up"? It's all in the minds of Remoaners. The economy is growing, inflation is subdued, we have record employment, the £ is now gently rising again. Apocalypse When?
You could have said all that about the post Black Wednesday economy. John Major still got wiped out in the next election...
Theresa May is being flattered by the fact that the Lib Dems have only just got up off their knees, and Labour is led by a Marxist. It's very early days to tell which way the country is headed.
But HOW do you stop Brexit? Practically? I honestly can't see a way.
Brexit will collapse into a tangled pile of its own contradictions as more red lines are crossed and the cries of Betrayal drown out the "traitors"
It's an epic fuck up, you voted for. It requires nothing more than time to fail utterly and completely on its own terms, and for people like you to be baying for Boris
The 3 Brexiteers are already signalling freedom of movement and EU payments. That's "not Brexit" for many.
I voted for soft Brexit. EFTA or EEA. At the moment it looks like this is what will happen, even if it is called something else. Economic logic will prevail. We leave in the least painful way possible (for us and for them).
I'm happy. You're the one bleating and moaning.
PS: where is this "epic fuck up"? It's all in the minds of Remoaners. The economy is growing, inflation is subdued, we have record employment, the £ is now gently rising again. Apocalypse When?
When we leave. It hasn't happened yet, I'm surprised you haven't noticed.
I doubt you Sean would be at your best having been up all night. Nevertheless the electors of Richmond Park have seen sense.
Bollocks ,the people of Richmond have voted in someone who can't think on her feet,God help when she has to make her case in parliament on things -lol
Let's be honest - how many Conservative and Labour MPs could also be torn out by interviewers like Hartley-Brewer or Neil ?
450 ? 500 ? All of them ?
And she was totally exhausted. Her handlers shouldn't have put her up for that interview. Big risk, little gain. But she is resilient and a fast learner and can handle Andrew Neil as we've seen.
It's tempting to suggest "media training" but if badly done, there is a danger that she would lose the honest freshness that is very appealing and become another robotic repeater of prepared lines and avoiding the question. Remember little Rubio and his robot lines. That would be a disaster.
Can all the pb-ers demanding that the referendum be reversed or ignored explain, in simple words to a jetlagged thriller writer, exactly how they intend to achieve that?
Setting aside the pros and cons, what is the practical route to this end? How do you get there?
The Tory party is Leave, and will lynch any leader who backtracks. The Labour party is in disarray, incapable of winning an election, and led by a Leave voter anyhow. The only parties who will openly call for a 2nd vote are tiny and meaningless.
So HOW do you do it? We know you want to subvert the vote, but HOW?
No one is calling for the referendum to be reversed or ignored.
But as we are told at length, all that was voted for was to leave the EU.
PB Leavers in their farsightedness would be happy to continue with freedom of movement (so they kept telling us pre-June 23rd) and the more important point is, just like the 350m was not serious, they would presumably be happy with any and every agreement (including not only free movement, but payment into the EU, and membership f the single market) as long as we're "out of the EU".
Some Labour muppet on BBC News saying that it's an indictment of May's government and the state of the economy.
Leaving aside the oddness of that view, I wish the interviewer would ask: "And what does the ludicrously low vote for the Labour candidate say about Corbyn's leadership of the Labour Party?"
Mr. Jessop, my understanding it that Ricciardo's contract is rather more watertight than Vettel's was when he left for Ferrari. Also, Newey's designing next year's car and tends to be good at aero stuff, so now might be a bad time to leave Red Bull.
Mr. Jessop, my understanding it that Ricciardo's contract is rather more watertight than Vettel's was when he left for Ferrari. Also, Newey's designing next year's car and tends to be good at aero stuff, so now might be a bad time to leave Red Bull.
Yep. Red Bull's one of the three teams you'd want to be in. But they're also very fickle with their drivers, and Verstappen's now their main man.
I'd love to be a fly on the wall of Toto Woolf's office. I bet he's fuming.
Alonso would be a very exciting alternative. However, for a team that's had increasing inter-driver tension, putting together Alonso and Hamilton (again) would be a brave decision.
So HOW do you do it? We know you want to subvert the vote, but HOW?
The how gets easier if the Supreme Court rules that the devolution settlement, as constituted, means that Hollyrood needs to approve Article 50. Then it becomes a Mexican standoff where neither side can act without causing irreparable harm to themselves.
If not, then you simply tie it up with strings in Westminster until the Tories are totally committed to the softest of Brexits, and wait for political pressure from the hard Brexiteers to destroy the very thing they wanted.
If the courts seriously block it May will go to the people in a Brexit election, and she will win on a manifesto to force through the changes. So we still Leave.
May can't force an early election. She doesn't have the votes required by the FTPA.
So HOW do you do it? We know you want to subvert the vote, but HOW?
The how gets easier if the Supreme Court rules that the devolution settlement, as constituted, means that Hollyrood needs to approve Article 50. Then it becomes a Mexican standoff where neither side can act without causing irreparable harm to themselves.
If not, then you simply tie it up with strings in Westminster until the Tories are totally committed to the softest of Brexits, and wait for political pressure from the hard Brexiteers to destroy the very thing they wanted.
If the courts seriously block it May will go to the people in a Brexit election, and she will win on a manifesto to force through the changes. So we still Leave.
May can't force an early election. She doesn't have the votes required by the FTPA.
Of course there is a route. We leave. Outside the Single Market; outside the CJEU; outside the Commission's regulations; outside freedom of movement.
No government could survive that amount of economic loss.
You have cut off my comment half way through, which I hope was unintentional. I did then go on to say that we should then aim for the best low/no-tariff/restriction access to the Single Market. And of course Britain could implement unilateral measures to import labour where necessary e.g. fruit-pickers.
But frankly, I think you're jumping at shadows. Both the economic benefits and downsides to EU membership have been greatly overstated. The European project has always been political first. And in any case, implementing what the people voted for gives a huge amount of political cover.
Leaving aside the oddness of that view, I wish the interviewer would ask: "And what does the ludicrously low vote for the Labour candidate say about Corbyn's leadership of the Labour Party?"
It doesn't say anything, tbh. Why would you vote Labour there?
Labour have fought five and held five seats since 2015 GE.
So HOW do you do it? We know you want to subvert the vote, but HOW?
The how gets easier if the Supreme Court rules that the devolution settlement, as constituted, means that Hollyrood needs to approve Article 50. Then it becomes a Mexican standoff where neither side can act without causing irreparable harm to themselves.
If not, then you simply tie it up with strings in Westminster until the Tories are totally committed to the softest of Brexits, and wait for political pressure from the hard Brexiteers to destroy the very thing they wanted.
If the courts seriously block it May will go to the people in a Brexit election, and she will win on a manifesto to force through the changes. So we still Leave.
May can't force an early election. She doesn't have the votes required by the FTPA.
Comments
If Brexit runs into serious trouble or even the buffers, a 2020 (or earlier) 'coupon election' isn't an impossibility.
Sometimes in politics, as in life, the last thing you want is your dream actually coming true.
The other name suggested was Wehrlein. Really?
Hot on the decision by World Champ Rosberg to retire from F1 with immediate effect, I've backed Alonso to replace him as Lewis Hamilton's co-driver at Mercedes. The German team will only want the very best available which narrows the field very considerably - so that there are realistically only 3 drivers in the frame. Alonso is surely ready, willing and able and great value at 22 (i.e. 20/1 net in old money) to win next season's F1 Championship.
There will be a good opportunity to trade this out at a profit should Alonso get the gig.
DYOR
Will the “Canada-plus” model work for the UK? No, says [Jason Langrish, architect of CETA], who has advised the UK government in what he calls “their efforts to find a silver lining to this nightmare that they have unleashed on Britain. They continue to search for a trade unicorn that will solve all.”
The Brexiters want a ‘Canada-plus’ trade deal. They won’t get one
Yes, about that.
With the rule changes next year, Mercedes needed this like a hole in the head. All the development testing will fall upon Hammy, who'll have to tell them how the car compares with this years - if they'd known they were losing a driver they could have run some sessions with a new, up and coming driver.
Here's a long-odds guess: Button. He's a good development driver, he's relatively free, and would probably jump at the chance at a swansong in what is essentially his old team. He also got on very well with Hammy when they raced together. He would be cheaper to buy off McLaren. However Aonso beat him this year.
Another alternative is to bring in a new-to-F1 driver, but that's a little risky given the timescales and the fact next year's car will be new. The new driver will have to give feedback on a car that they cannot compare to last years.
Every way I look at it, Mercedes will be privately fuming.
Well, I was wrong
I really didn't think Sarah Olney could overturn the incumbent Zac Goldsmith's considerbale 2015 majority but she was aided by a number of factors, two of which would be the considerable ground war led, I believe, by veterans of such from Kingston, Richmond and elsewhere and a large abstention by previously Conservative voters.
The possibility now exists of the LDs recapturing both Kingston and Richmond at the 2018 local elections but that's a long way off.
I said on the day Zac resigned this by-election was still a win-win for the Prime Minister. Had Zac prevailed, it would have change nothing except for blunting the LD "fightback". The LD victory also changes nothing but removes the irritant from the Conservative scene and will allow the selection of a pro-LHR3 Conservative candidate next time. That candidate may still lose but IF, as seems likely, the Conservatives comfortably see off Labour, this one seat won;t matter if May picks up 15-20 marginals from Corbyn.
For the LDs, Sarah has given Tim Farron his battle honours - Paddy had Eastbourne, Charles had Romsey and Sir Menzies had Dunfermline. It has put the party back in the game and in the limelight to some degree but as with the spider climbing up the bowl, it gets tougher from here.
Easy though it is to criticise May and her Government for not seeming to have or at least not articulating a plan for A50 and Brexit, the pro-EU dissidents have a similar problem. Holding a second referendum on the terms of withdrawal is one thing but what if the treaty is rejected - what would a "No" vote mean ?
Presumably, it will be much easier (for May) if she can deliver a plan that will satisfy as many as possible but what is that plan ? I hear a lot of talk about eating cake but there has to be more to it than that. Freedom of Movement ? Access to the Single Market ? Continuing payments ?
And what is wrong with giving the elite a kick up the backside on one of the rare occasions we get given a chance?
The trouble was all the dismal jonnies on PB who moaned on and on about expectations management. They were - and are - the ones to beware of.
I am *not* an adenaline junkie.
(And if the parties did retreat to their heartlands, it would be an admission of their inability to win ever again, not to mention writing off Scotland forever).
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/11/30/the-lib-dems-could-be-making-a-massive-mistake-claiming-theyre-on-target-to-win-richmond-park-tomorrow/
It's a CEO's wet dream.
However he wasn't much better than Ocon after the latter joined the team midway through the season. He's an obvious choice, and it's a great opportunity for him. But ... but for some reason I can see Mercedes looking elsewhere.
And that will not sit well with either the headbangers who are already muttering, or the £350m for the NHS crowd who will be active at the ballot box.
Sorry, guys.
That said, the Government has to go into the A50 negotiations and to paraphrase Ernest Bevin nobody thinks Theresa May "is going naked into the debating chamber".
(This will get a fair few responses from the usual suspects but we should expect nothing less regrettably).
OTOH, this isn't Las Vegas poker and giving a hint of your hand isn't a bad move necessarily. The EU probably has a pretty good idea of what we would like and what we are prepared to accept (back to cake) and more importantly the much vaunted "red lines". In the same way, we probably know (or we ought to) what the EU wants - part of it will be punishment pour ne pas encourager les autres as it were.
A50 is about the details based on trying to line up what works (is least unsatisfactory) for both sides. It will be astonishing if, like Munich, one side gets all they want and more. May's task will be to sell a compromise which will have good bits and bad bits. The extreme Europhobes and Europhiles will find the whole thing distasteful.
More rational and analytical may argue the deal will be the best we could have achieved or perhaps not and then judge whether it's the basis for Britain's long term relationship with the EU and perhaps further afield. For their sake, Conservative MPs will be hoping May's deal will fool enough of the people for long enough to ensure re-election in 2020 - if the deal unravels quickly, it may be a very difficult campaign for the Government even against Corbyn.
450 ? 500 ? All of them ?
The reason people don't want any more immigration isn't just that it was imposed on them without their consent. It's that in many areas it has made their lives even crapper.
And @IanB, the richer members of many British Pakistani families do have homes in Pakistan even if they have had children and grandchildren here. Similarly many "BBC" ("British Born Chinese") people - and the intersection of British and Chinese identities is too complex for me to go into here - believe that they are "living in a foreign country". Even some who don't speak Chinese think that.
Then people hear opinion channellers on the TV talk about "our cities".
This week has seen David Davis, the thoughtful Brexit minister, admitting that Britain might have to carry on paying into the EU budget after it leaves the club as an entry fee to the single market.
Mr Davis also said that any restrictions of freedom of movement after Brexit would be designed to avoid any “labour shortages”, a comment which suggests EU workers will carry on picking British strawberries as well as working in City banks.
But the result does confirm that the Conservatives could pay a heavy political price if Mrs May mishandles the exit talks or if Brexit results in a crash landing for the economy. The Lib Dems could be among the beneficiaries.
https://www.ft.com/content/302b03a4-b86b-11e6-ba85-95d1533d9a62
Some will no doubt scream about Single Market access but as long as Britain is an attractive place to do business, there won't be too many difficulties.
If not, then you simply tie it up with strings in Westminster until the Tories are totally committed to the softest of Brexits, and wait for political pressure from the hard Brexiteers to destroy the very thing they wanted.
(1) Trading with everyone including the EU on an equal "Most Favoured Nation" basis. Also referred to as "WTO rules".
(2) EEA or an equivalent minimal change arrangement with the EU that retains the SM, FoM, solidarity payments and ECJ oversight. We then trade with the rest of the world as if we were an EU country.
Forget about preferential trade deals. They take forever to sort out and the world's more or less stopped doing them. The EU doesn't have any great motivation to sign one (ie Canada +) with us either.
The Government is unwilling to face up to this basic choice or to present it to the public, I suspect, because the WTO Rules option is clearly a poor outcome - everyone else has the preferential trade agreements that are already in the system - while the minimal change option raises the question of why are we are leaving the EU only to have LESS control - except for the fact we voted for it, of course.
It's an epic fuck up, you voted for. It requires nothing more than time to fail utterly and completely on its own terms, and for people like you to be baying for Boris
The 3 Brexiteers are already signalling freedom of movement and EU payments. That's "not Brexit" for many.
The FT's europhilia is a bit embarrassing at times.
Hide her away until 2020,like we ever noticed anyway the lib dens had women MP's ;-)
Get the courts to force a bill to be needed to enable A50.
Tie it up in knots in Commons and Lords.
Wait for some economic or other event to move public perception.
Demand that everything has changed and we need a new referendum.
(I presume that's their plan, anyway).
Not sure she would win a Brexit GE anyway, but she would need a manifesto that spelled out things like 'single market, in or out?'
Rosberg's retired.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/38185846
Having gone through a polarising referendum and secured an unlikely victory, those on the winning side are still angry, angrier even than they were before.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/dec/02/brexit-trump-populists-sore-winners-play-victim
However don't look past Pascal Werhlein, especially after my post below where I said I thought Mercedes *wouldn't* go for him...
Another thing to note: Hamilton will have some say in who drives alongside him. Maybe not a big say, and certainly not a casting vote. But it will be a say.
Theresa May is being flattered by the fact that the Lib Dems have only just got up off their knees, and Labour is led by a Marxist. It's very early days to tell which way the country is headed.
Anyway.
Wehrlein's favourite at 3 (Ladbrokes) to get the seat. That's probably right. I've put a small sum on.
inflation is subdued - it really isn't
we have record employment - while we still have freedom of movement
the £ is now gently rising again - while we are still in the EU
So all the good stuff you are gloating about are due to our continued EU membership
Apocalypse When? - When we leave.
It's tempting to suggest "media training" but if badly done, there is a danger that she would lose the honest freshness that is very appealing and become another robotic repeater of prepared lines and avoiding the question. Remember little Rubio and his robot lines. That would be a disaster.
Oh...
But as we are told at length, all that was voted for was to leave the EU.
PB Leavers in their farsightedness would be happy to continue with freedom of movement (so they kept telling us pre-June 23rd) and the more important point is, just like the 350m was not serious, they would presumably be happy with any and every agreement (including not only free movement, but payment into the EU, and membership f the single market) as long as we're "out of the EU".
Leaving aside the oddness of that view, I wish the interviewer would ask: "And what does the ludicrously low vote for the Labour candidate say about Corbyn's leadership of the Labour Party?"
I'd love to be a fly on the wall of Toto Woolf's office. I bet he's fuming.
For those less financially secure, it is real life. It is jobs and quality of life and so forth. Nothing that you would understand these days.
In fact he wasn't.
He was at the top of a party list. His party got 12.5% of the vote, you needed only ~4% to be elected.
There's no practical way to kick him out - he doesn't have to face the music every 5 years like Goldsmith or Ed Balls, or whomever.
Con 39 (-2)
Lab 27 (-1)
LD 9 (nc)
UKIP 14 (+2)
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/12/02/voting-intention-conservatives-39-labour-27/
Alonso would be a very exciting alternative. However, for a team that's had increasing inter-driver tension, putting together Alonso and Hamilton (again) would be a brave decision.
Some things just happen to take years to work through.
But frankly, I think you're jumping at shadows. Both the economic benefits and downsides to EU membership have been greatly overstated. The European project has always been political first. And in any case, implementing what the people voted for gives a huge amount of political cover.
https://twitter.com/15DavidSullivan/status/804693108134969344
It doesn't say anything, tbh. Why would you vote Labour there?
Labour have fought five and held five seats since 2015 GE.