Westministenders: Its time to fire the starting gun. At our own heads.

[RedToothBrush]

Its time for the suicide. The note will say simply, "The EU made us do it".

David Davies, says that despite May’s assertion that no deal is better than a bad deal for the UK, that actually we don’t know this as he hasn’t got round to quantifying the impact of no deal.

He still has no answers for anything apart from “I dunno” and “I’ll do it later”. I can’t wait for when the dog ate my homework excuse.

After 9 months. That’s how far we’ve got. Brexit negotiation skills will have 18 months (not 2 years as it’ll need to be ratified). We are still hiring people for the Brexit department. What about all these EU agencies that the UK will have to replicate and hire and train up in 2 years time?

I’m still waiting for Davies to tell me what all these potential benefits he keeps going on about are too. Benefits for who exactly? Ah yes we know the answer to this one too, even if its not being said. Its political elites and elites with lots of money who can consolidate power and enslave the population through debt and desperation. Goodie. Just what I’ve always wanted. As long as I can wave my Union Jack. Oh. Shit. Bugger.

Nicola Sturgeon, has been doing a good job of showing Brexiteers exactly what they look like to Remainers by holding up the mirror of irony to the Vampires of the 19th Century State. The sight of them tripping over themselves saying its irrational to hold a ‘blind vote’ and that the economic argument is flawed is hilarious. If you are not British.

Hammond has been forced to u-turn on NIC budget announcement as it was not in the spirit of the manifesto. What happened to the manifesto pledge to the protect interests in the Single Market. Lets be honest, the New Tory Manifesto read simply: “We’ll wing it and see what we can get away with”. I wonder how many people would vote for that.

Its Brexit at all costs. No matter what. We must keep the foreigners out. Even though Davis hasn’t done an assessment on the financial impact of migration. Just think about that for a second. Actually don’t because you might actually want to shoot yourself in the head.

At best the government are still relying on Game Theory as a basis for their negotiations and the EU are already going, “Er we don’t think so”.

Perhaps this is the intention of May’s tour to build consensus. She’s handing out guns and bullets to anyone who displays rational thought, to blow their own brains out.

May’s weakness is her manner and her chip on her shoulder for the law. Her own party are not immune to it. She seems to think trade deals are not done based on goodwill. May’s weakness is Britain’s folly.

Pass the blindfolds round, and get on your knees and await our own execution by our own hands.

Bang.

RIP The United Kingdom and Northern Ireland. I will remember you with nostalgic fondness but equally with bitterness and shame. Our finest hours are long since passed (and were tainted with the excesses of exploitation anyway) and we must accept this as part of the process of ‘accepting Brexit’.

Now its time for the empty hand to start being shown and the blame game to begin in earnest. The politics of hate have only just begun and the divorce has not started yet. Scotland, Northern Ireland and Gibraltar are the kids we might not get custody of.

We’ll be blacking up again, running around groping women like Benny Hill and pushing people back into the closet as we hit the off switch before you know it. As well as having nice shiny new ID cards we’ll have to pay for the privilege of owning and carrying at all times, to prove we aren’t nasty illegal immigrants or those equally nasty legal ones clogging up our NHS (by working for it).

Don’t worry though. Uncle Donny will save us. If he doesn’t die suddenly after eating a bowl of Russia soup or have a fatal heart attack after accidentally falling out of a tenth story window.

That'll teach him not to shake hands like a sulky schoolboy

They are having a field day with that photo!

www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/photoshop-battle-donald-trump-angela-merkel_us_58ccf5a0e4b00705db4fd3e7?

I've said this all along: the apparent surge from Labour to UKIP was nothing of the kind. The collapse of the Liberal vote meant that losses from Conservative to UKIP were masked by the number of Liberals who voted Conservative.

Disagree slightly.

There was a Labour surge to UKIP, but its already happened. It was masked by LDs going left as well as them going right to the Conservatives. LDs masked the collapse of both the Con and Lab vote to UKIP.

Now we are seeing The right wing blue Kippers are going back to the Conservative. The left wing red kippers are generally staying purple or not voting at all. They are not going blue.

What you tend to see is that are either Blue Kippers or Red Kippers. Most places are not both, and have a tendency to be one or the other.

Labour's challenge is to motivate core voters, to regain those lost red kippers and stop centrists slipping back to the LDs. They are making a hash of it, and that's why there is a collapse, but on the whole they are not losing votes to UKIP as that's now passed.

The idea that Labour have not had a collapse in the vote to UKIP is wrong though. They definitely have. It will feed apathy more than an appeal to Conservatives or return to Labour though, in a reversal.

You Gov did a survey a couple of weeks ago that election-data reported on. It was of Labour Party members and how they thought. The results were telling and showed there were two distinct groups within Labour - the left and the centre. Which comes as no great surprise at all, but it was interesting to see come up so strongly in responses to questions. The current strategy is not helping this distinct divide.

In contrast the Conservatives grew in 2015 because they gained more liberals than they lost to UKIP in 2015.

With the reverse happening this poses a greater threat to Conservatives than the press suggests (in part because the press are trying not to press this issue). The Conservatives have to press the issue of trust with Yellow Tories over issues such as tuition fees and otherwise keep this idea of being the more responsible pair of hands over the LDs. This could prove tricky in the long run.

The challenge for the Tories is to stop this, to regain Blue Kippers and gain red kippers. The Tories are succeeding on getting back the blue kippers but are having mixed success with stopping former LDs going yellow again. They don't seem to be having success in winning over red kippers despite what is being suggested.

The pattern is being repeatedly over and over again at local elections and is exaggerated by turnout differences. The return a general election is less likely to have such a dramatic effect is because more people turnout out and tend to be more tribal whereas the swing voters are much more likely to show up for locals. Different parties are also varied in concentration - the LDs and UKIP come out differently in FPTP with it favouring the LDs who have much more patchy but concentrated support.

The Tory Election Expenses thing, really supports this and highlights just how afraid the Tories were and still are about LDs. I don't believe the LDs have reached the 2015 high watermark but it remains to be seen what happens next.

As soon as a50 is triggered the chances of an early GE before 2020 becomes more remote unless there is a complete collapse of talks and May is ousted. In some respects a later, rather than earlier election works for the LDs, but the proposed boundary changes are not good for that. That is one battle that has yet to hit parliament and one I don't expect to go without incident. There are plenty of Tories with a vested personal interest who will be asked to vote themselves out of a job. That will be a site to behold, because what loyalty do people have when it comes to their own personal futures; especially if they can argue that its not in the best interests of their constituency or democracy? May's ability to bully to get what she wants is rather diminished in that scenario. And don't expect the Lords to roll over either.

I don't believe the LDs have reached the 2015 high watermark but it remains to be seen what happens next.

Do you mean 2015, or 2010? The big selling point for the Lib Dems at present is that they are the major National Remain party. Green are too, but their support is very concentrated, and SNP and PC are tied to their respective countries. Membership for the Lib Dems is up, with much coming from discontented Labour voters but it's estimated to be about 15% from disaffected Tories, and then some old LibDems returning to the fold.

The non handshake is fun, but fake.

Bored, I don't think there was any suggestion that he never shook her hand, but rather that he refused to shake it when she offered it in the press conference, as you can clearly see in the video. Not fake at all.

He refused to comply with the beckoning of the press. That is different.

She didn't offer her hand for it to be refused, she motioned to him in response to press requests but he stared the press down.

This whole Trump hand thing, my God, small hands, gesturing hands, holding hands, not shaking hands.

Not just food imports though is it?

No, of course not (though food would be affected first, because it's perishable so stocks are lower, and under this scenario tariffs on agricultural produce will be higher than on most other goods; the agrifood business might also be affected by issues like veterinary and phytosanitary checks).

My point was that people generally find it easier to understand that they will be directly affected by more expensive flights or foreign currency, whereas trade tends to be more abstract (unless it's your job) and it is hard for people to know how they personally will be affected.

Loving all the Merkel gifs esp the one in which she appears to shake her head and roll her eyes almost imperceptibly, before smiling slightly. She probably hates the idea that she has been become, by default, the leader of the free world...

Yes Merkel's sideways look was spectacular.

Bored, she really did offer, and he ignored her.

Not the greatest of his crimes, I'll grant you. Just another small indicator of his lack of statesmanship. A drop in the ocean of his general unfitness to govern.

Bored Yes it is worrying that President Trump is weirdly and obsessively defensive about his small hands as well as one of those white male businessmen who feel that crushing your hand is some sort of show of strength (to be fair that is very common, I have yet to have a bone crushing handshake from a female businesswoman though) . It does not really manifest good mental health / judgement.

"In an editor’s letter in "Vanity Fair" last November, Carter said that he wrote the Sky magazine comment in 1988 "just to drive him a little bit crazy."

And according to Carter, it still does.

"Like so many bullies, Trump has skin of gossamer," Carter wrote in November.

"To this day, I receive the occasional envelope from Trump. There is always a photo of him—generally a tear sheet from a magazine. On all of them he has circled his hand in gold Sharpie in a valiant effort to highlight the length of his fingers," Carter wrote. "I almost feel sorry for the poor fellow because, to me, the fingers still look abnormally stubby."

"The most recent offering arrived earlier this year, before his decision to go after the Republican presidential nomination," Carter continued. "Like the other packages, this one included a circled hand and the words, also written in gold Sharpie: 'See, not so short!' I sent the picture back by return mail with a note attached, saying, 'Actually, quite short.'"

abcnews.go.com/Politics/history-donald-trump-small-hands-insult/story?id=37395515

As you were then.

ron My instant reaction was
but actually that's isn't funny, it's worrying that Trump's obession about his small fingers takes him to such extremes.

He does have a low of quirks, frightened of slopes too

All that bluster & agression hides a very frightened neurotic man

a lot of quirks

Richard North, a rare example of facts & expertise from the Leave side

http://www.eureferendum.com/default.aspx

"The take-home point here is that modern trade deals are complex affairs, covering a wide range of issues.

There are no short cuts and they are always going to involve long and complex negotiations."

"Thus, the UK expectations that a swift agreement with the EU can be reached, purely on the basis of notional regulatory convergence, is entirely unrealistic.

Much as the "hard brexiteers" would wish otherwise therefore – to say nothing of the Government – there are no reasonable grounds for expecting a trade agreement to be reached within two years.

No amount of fantasising or manipulation by the likes of Matt Ridley will make any difference to that.

In actuality,
only by resorting to distortions and self-delusion can any case be made for achieving a trade deal within a two year period, other than one involving a craven surrender which would leave us considerably worse off than we are now.
Even Lamy's estimate looks generous.

That then leaves us with the idea of a transitional deal, but we are no further in our pursuit of clarity than we are with other issues.

A Government which continuously tells us that it is possible to reach a deal in two years is not one that can be relied upon to craft a workable interim solution.

When we add to this the latest intelligence, that the EU will seek a resolution to the financial issues before moving on, things start to look extremely grim.

But still we get idiots such as Jacob Rees Moggg prattling about the merits of the WTO option,^ insisting that countries such as China and the United States work exclusively under WTO rules.

We have reached a situation, though, where facts no longer seem to have relevance.

When people like Rees Mogg, and Ridley, Peter Lilley, John Mills, John Redwood and many others, are confronted with facts that contradict their beliefs, or pose obstacles to their desired solutions, they simply ignore them.

In other respects,
we see either an inability to tease out the facts, or a culpable ignorance, where people do not seek out facts they might not want to hear.

When you have people who are ignorant because they prefer it that way, wilfully ignoring good evidence because they don't like what they are hearing, it changes the dynamics of the debate.

It's no longer a question of the best arguments.

It becomes an issue of who can should the loudest, who has best access to the media, or who has the most "prestige".

Another not so cheery article on the tangible impact Brexit has had on the NHS. here from the guardian This is what happens when you try & use EU nationals as a bargaining chip. Looks like the HoL really were looking at things more closely than HoC. Remind me again why having a second chamber is a bad thing? rhetorical question

Big peaceful demo in London. 'Love music, hate racism' and the music was brilliant. Sister demos all over Britain and Europe.
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/march-against-racism-london-protest-anti-racism-donald-trump-brexit-stand-up-to-un-anti-racism-day-a7636696.html
Fun to see the teenage girls, including lots of moslem girls and mums, who had been on the Women's march are back, this time leading chants. In fact, leading chants which a few boys with their wee anarchist t shirts on followed.
More coverage in papers than I would have expected.
www.standard.co.uk/news/london/march-against-racism-hundreds-in-london-protest-against-brexit-and-trump-antimigrant-hysteria-a3493216.html

I was thinking about whether moving to Scotland would eventually mean you could remain in the EU. But maybe the Scots wouldn't really want an influx of refugees from England...

But no. Good old Nicola is as welcoming as ever:
www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nicola-sturgeon-snp-conference-come-to-scotland-independence-brexit-a7637106.html%3Famp

Touching story on EU 'migrant':
www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-39305860

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/march-against-racism-london-protest-anti-racism-donald-trump-brexit-stand-up-to-un-anti-racism-day-a7636696.html

The above article has a lead picture of the demonstration starting outside the BBC at Portland Place.

The roads were closed, it was packed, for about 2hours. I've no idea how BBC staff were getting in and out.

The demonstration is no where on BBC news web site, bit like the NI elections, it's a case of magical disappearing news. But Will and Kate and did go to a rugby match, to be fair.

Demo sounds good, woman. Sorry not to have been there. Will be there next Sat.

New cartoon:

I enjoyed it, thanks Kaija. I go to demos for selfish reasons.
I wonder what the route will be next week. It's good walking through through London, with by standers cheering and joining in.

Reminds you that most people are nice.

Good cliff cartoon and nice ones on the rudeness of that man to nice Mrs Merkel.

Yes will need to figure out route - not sure whether I will be able to make it for 11 so might have to join along the way. I have a feeling it's going to be a big one.

woman Well done for going. I was on the NHS march and I will be on the Brexit one. I know some people say it won't do any good but not protesting gives the impression that everybody's happy with what's happening. I totally understand why so many Americans feel the need to protest about Trump to show the rest of the world that more than half of them don't agree with him.
My experience is that the media shows very little interest in peaceful protests, however large they are. I think the one exception was the march against the Iraq war which was so big, they could hardly ignore it.
I went on the march against the cuts in 2010 and there were over a million people there - far more than the organisers expected. It was completely peaceful with a lovely atmosphere but the BBC footage focused almost entirely on the actions of a handful of violent anarchists who were nowhere near the actual march.

That sounds brilliant woman Did you fly the flag with a Westministenders placard ?