Paisley Jnr's absence when it comes to 'ping pong' could prove crucial re-several of the ammendments voted on Monday given that both Cable and Farron will be sure to vote next time. The 3 vote margins would become ties!
Swinson too.
I believe Swinson was paired on Monday. No suggestion of cheating.
Paisley Jnr's absence when it comes to 'ping pong' could prove crucial re-several of the ammendments voted on Monday given that both Cable and Farron will be sure to vote next time. The 3 vote margins would become ties!
Swinson too.
I believe Swinson was paired on Monday. No suggestion of cheating.
He just inadvertently forgot, how opportune.
TBF I don't think he's the only one who forgets the Lib Dems exist..?
During a Marr interview Corbyn praised China under Mao for having reduced poverty, completely ignoring the millions murdered by that tyrant. Then he smirked as if he had made some worthwhile point.
Imagine if May had praised Mr Hitler for reducing unemployment in pre-war Germany.
I have heard intelligent well-educated people handwave away Cuba's total lack of democracy, locking up of opponents etc on the basis that they had good healthcare. There's a moral blindness there which is quite sickening. Proof - if proof were needed - that education is no bar to being a moral nitwit.
It's interesting why this is so. I can think of four reasons:-
1. To condemn Communism would make it all too easy for opponents to condemn socialism. At what point does socialism turn into communism, for instance? And remember that socialism was the term used by Stalin & others. Amongst some it must feel like attacking a family member. 2. Wilful blindness. 3. A misplaced feeling that because of Russia's suffering during WW2 & because she was our ally somehow her crimes ought to be excused. This is made easier by pointing to the fact that there were a significant number of people in places like Ukraine & the Baltic states who collaborated with the Nazis, which damns them for all eternity, all context/history to be ignored. 4. Russia's and China's crimes were far away, were not filmed, the victims - with only a few exceptions - have no voice so we do not have the harrowing images or elderly people speaking about what happened that we have with Nazism's crimes. Communism's crimes were in a far away land of which we know nothing. All too easy for those who want to to overlook them.
It is an oddity that despite the fact that Fascism & Nazism were pretty comprehensively defeated & because, fortunately, being a fascist or a Nazi is something that is a complete no-no in any sort of polite civilised company, people still seem to see Fascists everywhere. Meanwhile it is perfectly possible for people to call themselves Communists without others showing the same degree of horror at their moral barbarity. E.g Eric Hobsbawm.
Personally I think anyone who seeks to handwave away or excuse or justify the gulags & the unspeakable evil that was done in them & in Ukraine& elsewhere is simply not someone who should be given a moment's attention, much as I would not give a moment's attention to someone like a David Irving or a Jean-Marie Le Pen who tried to excuse or minimise the Holocaust.
And yet excusing the crimes of Communist China or Communist Russia or denying the evils of the Nazi holocaust is something which is increasingly common &, sadly, in the case of some on the Left, they manage - in the sort of political analysis of which Houdini might have been proud - to do it for all three regimes at the same time.
The Good Ship Maybot and her army of Mogglodyte tugs are going over the Brexit falls with the entire country in tow.
Bring it on.
I'm looking forward to it.
Make the plebs suffer for voting for economic ruin. That's democracy folk.
It'll destroy the reputations of so many leavers permanently, like the appeasers of the 1930s.
If "democracy" contains too many syllables for you, the political system in this country is: thick proles get to vote. It is the job of competent politicians to work with and round that problem. The sole architect of all this is sitting in the shepherd's hut polishing his forehead and writing his memoirs while you tell us that the sun shines out of his fundament because he went to Eton and won an election.
But he was rather good at his job and a policeman got married because of him, so that's fine. Give the man an earldom.
unlike the current mandate based on illegality and micro targeting which is totally bombproof
That's the point though, isn't it? Replacing one marginal win based on iffy assertions and dodgy accounting, with another even more marginal win, probably also based on iffy assertions, is not going to settle the question but would add a toxic sense of betrayal to an already toxic mix.
Paisley Jnr's absence when it comes to 'ping pong' could prove crucial re-several of the ammendments voted on Monday given that both Cable and Farron will be sure to vote next time. The 3 vote margins would become ties!
Swinson too.
I believe Swinson was paired on Monday. No suggestion of cheating.
He just inadvertently forgot, how opportune.
If he just 'forgot' then it is a high level of sheer incompetence.
I don't know how pairing should work, and I suppose there's a possibility that the whips misinformed him of when he should and should not vote; but that just shifts the blame onto the whips.
Anyone know how the Conservatives organise pairing?
May in all sorts of trouble about tariff collection.
Edit: although probably about 20 people are actually watching this so the fact that her tariff scheme is simply fantasy la-la land will be missed I'm sure.
Been looking at the private rental index today. Zero evidence that landlords can raise rents whenever they want as they continually threaten to do in the face of higher taxes. In London the average rent fell by 0.2%, the first fall since 2010. I hope that when the residential landlords association bangs on about how landlords will just raise rents they are asked why that isn't currently the case. Tbh, it does look as though there has been a minor shift away from landlords towards owner occupiers in the last few months. I think if it continues we may see a significant change by the end of 2022, I'd guess at around 800-900k new owner occupiers. If the government pushes even harder by removing basic rate relief on mortgage interest that figure could be even higher, helping to resolve one of the existential threats to the party (falling home ownership rates).
I think you're getting confused with an entirely different poll from Opinium which asked a different question.
No, the poll Faisal tweeted about who definitely YouGov. As usual he's been selective with his information in the hope of getting retweets from his cultish FBPE followers.
I gave you the figures from the YouGov poll. The number you're quoting comes from a different poll with a different question.
I'm actually on the YouGov website looking at the data tables! It clearly says only 36% want a referendum question including Remain as an option. Data taken from past 2 days, so even more recent than that Opinium one. It's the same YouGov that Faisal has selectively taken his info from.
So in the space of a few posts you've gone from unanimous opposition, to 25% support, to 36% support (which is 43% removing don't knows)...
The fact that it's same YouGov poll that gives Remain a clear win doesn't strengthen your case.
It doesn't give Remain a clear win. It gives it a knife-edge position on the first vote, with the Leave options split, and then a 55-45 lead on reallocations. That's exactly the same as the lead that Populus gave Remain the day before the actual poll in 2016. For Remain to win based on second-preference votes from people who actually want to Leave would be a pretty sketchy mandate.
Given that Remain got 50% on first preferences, the reallocation is academic.
Also, this is the state of play today and just gives a snapshot of opinion. In a real vote, No Deal wouldn't get anything like this level of support.
The Good Ship Maybot and her army of Mogglodyte tugs are going over the Brexit falls with the entire country in tow.
I don’t think May wants no deal. Why would she bother with Chequers if so?
Boris has trashed Chequers. TINA to no deal if the party go with him.
Big if but it's there for the taking if they fancy it. If not, then as @TSE notes, it's a damp squib.
Maybe, but that doesn’t mean May wants a no deal outcome.
I'm sure she doesn't want a no deal and she seems to have now fixed upon Chequers.
But she is facing, as of today, one of the biggest beasts saying he doesn't like Chequers.
I listened to Boris and I thought it was a good speech full of the good ship UK but like so much in Brexit it collides with reality.
Re TM at PMQ's she made Corbyn look a dunce and does seem to have a huge grasp of the technical details, indeed I would suggest far greater than most on here, but we can only let this develop over the Summer. If anyone thinks Boris is the answer well I am afraid he is not
Miss Cyclefree, I agree with that but would add a fifth point:
we defeated Nazism in a war. There was and has since been a great deal of contrition. We did not defeat socialism/communism in a hot war, as it were. I think that makes a difference. We have a literal history of fighting against the Nazis but no equal comparison regarding the Soviet Union, allowing revisionists and the wilfully blind to try and rewrite history.
May in all sorts of trouble about tariff collection.
Edit: although probably about 20 people are actually watching this so the fact that her tariff scheme is simply fantasy la-la land will be missed I'm sure.
May in all sorts of trouble about tariff collection.
Edit: although probably about 20 people are actually watching this so the fact that her tariff scheme is simply fantasy la-la land will be missed I'm sure.
Do the questioners even have a clue
Yes Big G because she (Yvette Cooper) used a sneaky, underhand, duplicitous strategy: she read to Theresa May verbatim from Theresa May's White Paper.
May in all sorts of trouble about tariff collection.
Edit: although probably about 20 people are actually watching this so the fact that her tariff scheme is simply fantasy la-la land will be missed I'm sure.
Do the questioners even have a clue
Yes Big G because she (Yvette Cooper) used a sneaky, underhand, duplicitous strategy: she read to Theresa May verbatim from Theresa May's White Paper.
But that does not mean she has a clue. You only need to look at HIPS for that
I think you're getting confused with an entirely different poll from Opinium which asked a different question.
No, the poll Faisal tweeted about who definitely YouGov. As usual he's been selective with his information in the hope of getting retweets from his cultish FBPE followers.
I gave you the figures from the YouGov poll. The number you're quoting comes from a different poll with a different question.
I'm actually on the YouGov website looking at the data tables! It clearly says only 36% want a referendum question including Remain as an option. Data taken from past 2 days, so even more recent than that Opinium one. It's the same YouGov that Faisal has selectively taken his info from. So essentially though it seems both the YouGov and Opinium polls show no majority for remain as an option.
This why referenda are so toxic - there are about a dozen ways of presenting that data depending on the bias you wish to apply to it. If there were to be another referendum (which I don't think the political class will ever allow), it should be Remain, EEA or hard Brexit with a transferable vote. The wisdom of the crowd would probably go EEA with considerable majority would be my biased guess
EEA probably beats Remain or hard Brexit hands down one-on-one, but it would come last out of the three. There is no cuddly way out of such a polarised situation. It is a political fight to the death.
The Good Ship Maybot and her army of Mogglodyte tugs are going over the Brexit falls with the entire country in tow.
Bring it on.
I'm looking forward to it.
Make the plebs suffer for voting for economic ruin. That's democracy folk.
It'll destroy the reputations of so many leavers permanently, like the appeasers of the 1930s.
If "democracy" contains too many syllables for you, the political system in this country is: thick proles get to vote. It is the job of competent politicians to work with and round that problem. The sole architect of all this is sitting in the shepherd's hut polishing his forehead and writing his memoirs while you tell us that the sun shines out of his fundament because he went to Eton and won an election.
But he was rather good at his job and a policeman got married because of him, so that's fine. Give the man an earldom.
I know, I'm happy for the proles. The proles will never be able inaccurately say that their vote doesn't count thanks to the referendum.
The Good Ship Maybot and her army of Mogglodyte tugs are going over the Brexit falls with the entire country in tow.
Bring it on.
I'm looking forward to it.
Make the plebs suffer for voting for economic ruin. That's democracy folk.
It'll destroy the reputations of so many leavers permanently, like the appeasers of the 1930s.
If "democracy" contains too many syllables for you, the political system in this country is: thick proles get to vote. It is the job of competent politicians to work with and round that problem. The sole architect of all this is sitting in the shepherd's hut polishing his forehead and writing his memoirs while you tell us that the sun shines out of his fundament because he went to Eton and won an election.
But he was rather good at his job and a policeman got married because of him, so that's fine. Give the man an earldom.
Cameron had no alternative but to call a referendum - and as many Brexiteers pointed out time and time again before the vote, he delayed it as much as he could, e.g. throughout the coalition. If he not called one, he would have been deposed and whichever leaver replaced him would have called one.
An EU referendum was inevitable given the politics.
What's more, one was needed given how the EU had changed and become disconnected from the electorate. Heck, I wanted one and ended up voting remain. And I don't regret having had the referendum, even if I do regret the low level of intelligent discourse during - and after - it.
The political chaos that has followed is not Cameron's fault or responsibility; it is down to the same people who caused chaos in several previous governments in their one-eyed masturbatory search for Brexit purity.
I'm actually on the YouGov website looking at the data tables! It clearly says only 36% want a referendum question including Remain as an option. Data taken from past 2 days, so even more recent than that Opinium one. It's the same YouGov that Faisal has selectively taken his info from.
So in the space of a few posts you've gone from unanimous opposition, to 25% support, to 36% support (which is 43% removing don't knows)...
The fact that it's same YouGov poll that gives Remain a clear win doesn't strengthen your case.
It doesn't give Remain a clear win. It gives it a knife-edge position on the first vote, with the Leave options split, and then a 55-45 lead on reallocations. That's exactly the same as the lead that Populus gave Remain the day before the actual poll in 2016. For Remain to win based on second-preference votes from people who actually want to Leave would be a pretty sketchy mandate.
Given that Remain got 50% on first preferences, the reallocation is academic.
Also, this is the state of play today and just gives a snapshot of opinion. In a real vote, No Deal wouldn't get anything like this level of support.
Remain is almost certainly just short of 50%. If you look at the table at the bottomg of p4, you can see from where DKs/WNVs are included, that the combined Leave vote (15+28=43) is less than Remain's 42. Now it is just possible that the rounding effects could be 14.6+27.6=42.2, vs Remain at 42.4, but the likelihood is pretty low. On the figures as published, it'd be extremely likely to go to a second vote - and critically, it would mean that Leave had outpolled Remain.
And do you have any evidence for your assertion, because it looks to me like wishful thinking?
May in all sorts of trouble about tariff collection.
Edit: although probably about 20 people are actually watching this so the fact that her tariff scheme is simply fantasy la-la land will be missed I'm sure.
Do the questioners even have a clue
Yes Big G because she (Yvette Cooper) used a sneaky, underhand, duplicitous strategy: she read to Theresa May verbatim from Theresa May's White Paper.
But that does not mean she has a clue. You only need to look at HIPS for that
The White Paper says we will not require the EU to collect tariffs on our behalf.
The amendment passed this week says we are not allowed in law to collect tariffs on the EU's behalf unless they collect tariffs on our behalf.
It doesn't take a huge intellect to master the dichotomy therein.
The Good Ship Maybot and her army of Mogglodyte tugs are going over the Brexit falls with the entire country in tow.
Bring it on.
I'm looking forward to it.
Make the plebs suffer for voting for economic ruin. That's democracy folk.
It'll destroy the reputations of so many leavers permanently, like the appeasers of the 1930s.
If "democracy" contains too many syllables for you, the political system in this country is: thick proles get to vote. It is the job of competent politicians to work with and round that problem. The sole architect of all this is sitting in the shepherd's hut polishing his forehead and writing his memoirs while you tell us that the sun shines out of his fundament because he went to Eton and won an election.
But he was rather good at his job and a policeman got married because of him, so that's fine. Give the man an earldom.
I know, I'm happy for the proles. The proles will never be able inaccurately say that their vote doesn't count thanks to the referendum.
And do you have any evidence for your assertion, because it looks to me like wishful thinking?
Only deductive reasoning, which is not the same as wishful thinking:
- Are the effects of No Deal fully understood by the public at this point? - Will the effects of No Deal become better understood as we get closer to the time? - Will this have a positive or negative effect on people's willingness to countenance No Deal? - Will people who give up on No Deal all swing behind Chequers or will a meaningful number of them (as Boris has said privately) decide that remaining would be better than leaving with that kind of deal?
Also, on the YouGov poll, bear in mind that it is GB only and NI has swung even more against Brexit so you need to make a polling adjustment to project what these figures mean for a second referendum.
The Good Ship Maybot and her army of Mogglodyte tugs are going over the Brexit falls with the entire country in tow.
Bring it on.
I'm looking forward to it.
Make the plebs suffer for voting for economic ruin. That's democracy folk.
It'll destroy the reputations of so many leavers permanently, like the appeasers of the 1930s.
If "democracy" contains too many syllables for you, the political system in this country is: thick proles get to vote. It is the job of competent politicians to work with and round that problem. The sole architect of all this is sitting in the shepherd's hut polishing his forehead and writing his memoirs while you tell us that the sun shines out of his fundament because he went to Eton and won an election.
But he was rather good at his job and a policeman got married because of him, so that's fine. Give the man an earldom.
I know, I'm happy for the proles. The proles will never be able inaccurately say that their vote doesn't count thanks to the referendum.
The country was indeed ruined by the voters.
In 2015.
Don't blame me!
I voted Labour (Ed Milliband) in 2015! If only others had followed, we would not be in this mess now!
For anyone who wants rocket fun, Blue Origin might be doing a suborbital hop of their rocket at 16.00. It's an in-flight abort test, which might mean it ends up being rather spectacular.
The Good Ship Maybot and her army of Mogglodyte tugs are going over the Brexit falls with the entire country in tow.
Bring it on.
I'm looking forward to it.
Make the plebs suffer for voting for economic ruin. That's democracy folk.
It'll destroy the reputations of so many leavers permanently, like the appeasers of the 1930s.
If "democracy" contains too many syllables for you, the political system in this country is: thick proles get to vote. It is the job of competent politicians to work with and round that problem. The sole architect of all this is sitting in the shepherd's hut polishing his forehead and writing his memoirs while you tell us that the sun shines out of his fundament because he went to Eton and won an election.
But he was rather good at his job and a policeman got married because of him, so that's fine. Give the man an earldom.
I know, I'm happy for the proles. The proles will never be able inaccurately say that their vote doesn't count thanks to the referendum.
The country was indeed ruined by the voters.
In 2015.
I think to be fair the plebs' lives were first partly ruined by That Bloody Woman and her scorched earth economic policy. They now seem to blame the EU for their lot in life.
Make the plebs suffer for voting for economic ruin. That's democracy folk.
TSE = Goebbels!
"I feel no sympathy. I repeat, I feel no sympathy! The German people chose their fate. That may surprise some people. Don't fool yourself. We didn't force the German people. They gave us the mandate. And now their little throats are being cut."
Comments
Brexit=a calamity!
Brexiteers=xenophobes/little Englanders/thickos (delete as appropriate).
But she is facing, as of today, one of the biggest beasts saying he doesn't like Chequers.
The good ship Maybot is trundling towards the Brexit falls, and her party have removed the rudder.
May struggling big style.
During a Marr interview Corbyn praised China under Mao for having reduced poverty, completely ignoring the millions murdered by that tyrant. Then he smirked as if he had made some worthwhile point.
Imagine if May had praised Mr Hitler for reducing unemployment in pre-war Germany.
I have heard intelligent well-educated people handwave away Cuba's total lack of democracy, locking up of opponents etc on the basis that they had good healthcare. There's a moral blindness there which is quite sickening. Proof - if proof were needed - that education is no bar to being a moral nitwit.
It's interesting why this is so. I can think of four reasons:-
1. To condemn Communism would make it all too easy for opponents to condemn socialism. At what point does socialism turn into communism, for instance? And remember that socialism was the term used by Stalin & others. Amongst some it must feel like attacking a family member.
2. Wilful blindness.
3. A misplaced feeling that because of Russia's suffering during WW2 & because she was our ally somehow her crimes ought to be excused. This is made easier by pointing to the fact that there were a significant number of people in places like Ukraine & the Baltic states who collaborated with the Nazis, which damns them for all eternity, all context/history to be ignored.
4. Russia's and China's crimes were far away, were not filmed, the victims - with only a few exceptions - have no voice so we do not have the harrowing images or elderly people speaking about what happened that we have with Nazism's crimes. Communism's crimes were in a far away land of which we know nothing. All too easy for those who want to to overlook them.
It is an oddity that despite the fact that Fascism & Nazism were pretty comprehensively defeated & because, fortunately, being a fascist or a Nazi is something that is a complete no-no in any sort of polite civilised company, people still seem to see Fascists everywhere. Meanwhile it is perfectly possible for people to call themselves Communists without others showing the same degree of horror at their moral barbarity. E.g Eric Hobsbawm.
Personally I think anyone who seeks to handwave away or excuse or justify the gulags & the unspeakable evil that was done in them & in Ukraine& elsewhere is simply not someone who should be given a moment's attention, much as I would not give a moment's attention to someone like a David Irving or a Jean-Marie Le Pen who tried to excuse or minimise the Holocaust.
And yet excusing the crimes of Communist China or Communist Russia or denying the evils of the Nazi holocaust is something which is increasingly common &, sadly, in the case of some on the Left, they manage - in the sort of political analysis of which Houdini might have been proud - to do it for all three regimes at the same time.
But he was rather good at his job and a policeman got married because of him, so that's fine. Give the man an earldom.
I don't know how pairing should work, and I suppose there's a possibility that the whips misinformed him of when he should and should not vote; but that just shifts the blame onto the whips.
Anyone know how the Conservatives organise pairing?
Edit: although probably about 20 people are actually watching this so the fact that her tariff scheme is simply fantasy la-la land will be missed I'm sure.
Afternoon Malc.
Nice to see you back....
Re TM at PMQ's she made Corbyn look a dunce and does seem to have a huge grasp of the technical details, indeed I would suggest far greater than most on here, but we can only let this develop over the Summer. If anyone thinks Boris is the answer well I am afraid he is not
we defeated Nazism in a war. There was and has since been a great deal of contrition. We did not defeat socialism/communism in a hot war, as it were. I think that makes a difference. We have a literal history of fighting against the Nazis but no equal comparison regarding the Soviet Union, allowing revisionists and the wilfully blind to try and rewrite history.
https://twitter.com/jarmodj/status/1019589824406261761
Fake News...
An EU referendum was inevitable given the politics.
What's more, one was needed given how the EU had changed and become disconnected from the electorate. Heck, I wanted one and ended up voting remain. And I don't regret having had the referendum, even if I do regret the low level of intelligent discourse during - and after - it.
The political chaos that has followed is not Cameron's fault or responsibility; it is down to the same people who caused chaos in several previous governments in their one-eyed masturbatory search for Brexit purity.
And do you have any evidence for your assertion, because it looks to me like wishful thinking?
The amendment passed this week says we are not allowed in law to collect tariffs on the EU's behalf unless they collect tariffs on our behalf.
It doesn't take a huge intellect to master the dichotomy therein.
In 2015.
Disingenuous duplicitous LIAR. Anyway he is history now (Thank God!)
I remember HYUFD declaring Jeremy Hunt was doomed because he had been referred for a breach too.
- Are the effects of No Deal fully understood by the public at this point?
- Will the effects of No Deal become better understood as we get closer to the time?
- Will this have a positive or negative effect on people's willingness to countenance No Deal?
- Will people who give up on No Deal all swing behind Chequers or will a meaningful number of them (as Boris has said privately) decide that remaining would be better than leaving with that kind of deal?
Also, on the YouGov poll, bear in mind that it is GB only and NI has swung even more against Brexit so you need to make a polling adjustment to project what these figures mean for a second referendum.
I voted Labour (Ed Milliband) in 2015! If only others had followed, we would not be in this mess now!
NEW THREAD
For anyone who wants rocket fun, Blue Origin might be doing a suborbital hop of their rocket at 16.00. It's an in-flight abort test, which might mean it ends up being rather spectacular.
You can watch it here:
https://www.blueorigin.com/#youtube
On the last such test, they expected the rocket to blow up. It didn't, and landed for reuse. It'll be interesting to see if the same happens again.
"I feel no sympathy. I repeat, I feel no sympathy! The German people chose their fate. That may surprise some people. Don't fool yourself. We didn't force the German people. They gave us the mandate. And now their little throats are being cut."
- Joseph Goebbels, 1945.