In article ,
RJH wrote:
Plenty of people in the UK who *could* *have*, if they'd been of a mind
to. Plenty of Remainer MEPs. And nothing to stop the meeja inviting EU
people to comment. And then there was £9M of our dosh spent on Gumment
Remain propaganda.

The pronblem with the EU, is thast stripped down to the bare minimum,
you have to ask the question 'what can the EU do that 27 countries
acting together could not, at far less cost?'


Bargaining power

And just when do 27 or whatever countries act together except when forced
to by mutual agreement?

--
*7up is good for you, signed snow white*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
In which other UK elections is this taken into account? People knew
what the rules were.

Which other UK election is as important as this one?

Parliament saw fit to impose a greater than simple majority rule on a vote
to change the fixed term parliament. Saw fit to vote on how union strike
ballots etc are conducted. Now either a simple majority of those who can
be bothered to vote is jut fine for everything - or it's not.

Thank you for your content-free post. You should go far.

Thanks for failing to understand what you post. Let alone any replies. No
wonder you were conned into voting leave.

--
*INDECISION is the key to FLEXIBILITY *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
Why would the Mail or Express invite an 'EU person' to comment on their
lies?

I see you still obsess about the Mail and now the Express, as if they
are the only meeja outlets. Meanwhile, the BBC might have invited some
people on. Perhaps, even, it did.

Thanks for confirming you have zero understanding of how the popular press
influences some.

--
*A day without sunshine is like... night.*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
The vast majority of the popular press just loved any stories that
showed the EU in a poor light. True or false didn't matter. And unlike
such things about UK politics, the EU wasn't really in any position to
refute them.

Plenty of people in the UK who *could* *have*, if they'd been of a mind
to.

Just how? Set up their own newspaper in competition with all the popular
anti EU press?

Plenty of Remainer MEPs. And nothing to stop the meeja inviting EU
people to comment.

Why would the Mail or Express invite an 'EU person' to comment on their
lies?

And then there was £9M of our dosh spent on Gumment
Remain propaganda.

The anti EU press had been telling their lies for years. Not something
that can be discredited overnight.


The way you sell a successful newspaper is to tell people what they
want to hear. If the newspaper is popular then it's readers think the
same way as the editors. So if you think that enough people were
deluded, setting up your own newspaper would obviously be a success.
Strange, it doesn't happen. I see the Guardian and the Independent are
both failing operations, I wonder why?

dennis@home wrote:
On 22/04/2017 11:38, Tim Streater wrote:
In article . com,
dennis@home wrote:

On 22/04/2017 06:31, Handsome Jack wrote:
Roger Hayter posted
Tim Streater wrote:
The Irish had a referendum. There was a result. That should have been
the end of the matter.

Why? I can see why the winners of the first one would prefer that
but
I can't see any logical or democratic reason why it shouldn't be
repeated if a government feels that an ill-advised decision has been
made.

If a second referendum is permitted, then some members of the
political elite have to take the decision as to whether it is going
to happen, and that decision will be influenced by those person's
political views. This defeats the object of the referendum, which is
to guide policy by the people's political views, not those of an elite.

If the establishment is going to disallow referendum outcomes with
which they disagree there is no point in having a referendum at all.

I can't understand how this isn't completely obvious to anyone.


You have a referendum where the outcome is split near 50/50 where
lies were told by both parties and where it was expected that one
side would win whatever happened so its completely obvious that a lot
of the votes would be cast as protest votes by people that didn't
actually expect them to count just as is done in by-elections.

If lies are told by both parties what are you complaining about. And
you are talking cock about what is obvious and what is not.


What is obvious to an intelligent person may not be obvious to you.


Written by Mr Dense!

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Handsome Jack wrote:
If a second referendum is permitted, then some members of the political
elite have to take the decision as to whether it is going to happen, and
that decision will be influenced by those person's political views. This
defeats the object of the referendum, which is to guide policy by the
people's political views, not those of an elite.

If the establishment is going to disallow referendum outcomes with which
they disagree there is no point in having a referendum at all.

I can't understand how this isn't completely obvious to anyone.

Because the referendum didn't have a majority of those eligible to vote.
Just a rather small majority of those who did.

You don't get the choice of paying a council tax bill etc. So why is
something so important as this voluntary?


Still Remoaning Dave!

On 22/04/2017 17:47, Capitol wrote:

Written by Mr Dense!

Written by crapitall.

On 22/04/2017 17:27, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
RJH wrote:
Plenty of people in the UK who *could* *have*, if they'd been of a mind
to. Plenty of Remainer MEPs. And nothing to stop the meeja inviting EU
people to comment. And then there was £9M of our dosh spent on Gumment
Remain propaganda.

The pronblem with the EU, is thast stripped down to the bare minimum,
you have to ask the question 'what can the EU do that 27 countries
acting together could not, at far less cost?'


Bargaining power

And just when do 27 or whatever countries act together except when forced
to by mutual agreement?


Quite - that's what the EU does, much like any federation of states.
When one state leaves an established cartel, well, good luck.

--
Cheers, Rob

On 21/04/2017 13:27, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

It would be good to hear
about all those killer products made in the UK that other countries can't
wait to get their hands on.


And which "killer produces" are the rest of the EU taking from us?

--
mailto: news {at} admac {dot] myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On 21/04/2017 11:57, dennis@home wrote:



Like it already had before brexit you mean!

Yep, didn't we have the recent referendum on the major changes to the
UKs position in the EU that Cameron negotiated?

--
mailto: news {at} admac {dot] myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

In article ,
alan_m wrote:
On 21/04/2017 13:27, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

It would be good to hear
about all those killer products made in the UK that other countries can't
wait to get their hands on.


And which "killer produces" are the rest of the EU taking from us?

Generally financial products. Unlike what some seem to think it is not all
about BMW and Jaguar.

--
*One nice thing about egotists: they don't talk about other people.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 23/04/17 13:46, alan_m wrote:
On 21/04/2017 13:27, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

It would be good to hear
about all those killer products made in the UK that other countries can't
wait to get their hands on.


And which "killer produces" are the rest of the EU taking from us?

Corbyn style socialism?


I bet it will go down a storm In N Korea...



--
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as
foolish, and by the rulers as useful.

(Seneca the Younger, 65 AD)

On 20/04/2017 09:04, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 20/04/17 08:22, Broadback wrote:

Its a totalitarian takeover by the tories, UKIP smashed by tory moles,
liberal democrats smashed bu Cleggless' ambition.. Labour smashed by
hard left lunacy, and you will elect only candidates chosen by The Party.

I would be surprised now if Brexit will ever be achieved.

Democracy in Britain is probably dead.



if you think the Labour party is now a hard left party, then you know
**** all about politics, but most know that, don't they?.

On 23/04/2017 16:11, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/04/17 13:46, alan_m wrote:
On 21/04/2017 13:27, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

It would be good to hear
about all those killer products made in the UK that other countries
can't
wait to get their hands on.


And which "killer produces" are the rest of the EU taking from us?

Corbyn style socialism?


I bet it will go down a storm In N Korea...



you still know **** all

On 21/04/2017 23:24, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 21/04/17 22:37, Tim Watts wrote:
On 20/04/17 08:22, Broadback wrote:
It has hardly been declared, already I am bored with it, the "pundits"
telling us, over and over, what is going to happen. In fact I was bored
with it an hour after I heard. Surely I am not alone?

I'm not a betting man, but I just got onto Betfair and put a few quid on
various outcomes relating to how few seats labour will get.
The trouble with that is iobe is tempted to be unrealistically mean to
Corbyn.

Betting should IMHO only be done on things whose outcome is of purely
academic interest, like who will wind the Boat race. I mean, who gives a
****? Even though I went to one of the universities.

have your arse smacked regular then did you son?

On 23/04/17 18:36, critcher wrote:
On 20/04/2017 09:04, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 20/04/17 08:22, Broadback wrote:

Its a totalitarian takeover by the tories, UKIP smashed by tory moles,
liberal democrats smashed bu Cleggless' ambition.. Labour smashed by
hard left lunacy, and you will elect only candidates chosen by The Party.

I would be surprised now if Brexit will ever be achieved.

Democracy in Britain is probably dead.



if you think the Labour party is now a hard left party, then you know
**** all about politics, but most know that, don't they?.

Why is it that lefty****s have so much trouble with the English language?

I said, if you look, that Labour had been smashed by the hard left.

Not that it was the hard left. Which is of course debatable.


--
To ban Christmas, simply give turkeys the vote.

On 23/04/17 18:39, critcher wrote:
On 23/04/2017 16:11, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/04/17 13:46, alan_m wrote:
On 21/04/2017 13:27, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

It would be good to hear
about all those killer products made in the UK that other countries
can't
wait to get their hands on.


And which "killer produces" are the rest of the EU taking from us?

Corbyn style socialism?


I bet it will go down a storm In N Korea...



you still know **** all

But that still a few thousand percent more than you do.
Troll.

Buzz off and have your ovaltine.


--
The biggest threat to humanity comes from socialism, which has utterly
diverted our attention away from what really matters to our existential
survival, to indulging in navel gazing and faux moral investigations
into what the world ought to be, whilst we fail utterly to deal with
what it actually is.

On 23/04/17 18:41, critcher wrote:
On 21/04/2017 23:24, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 21/04/17 22:37, Tim Watts wrote:
On 20/04/17 08:22, Broadback wrote:
It has hardly been declared, already I am bored with it, the "pundits"
telling us, over and over, what is going to happen. In fact I was bored
with it an hour after I heard. Surely I am not alone?

I'm not a betting man, but I just got onto Betfair and put a few quid on
various outcomes relating to how few seats labour will get.
The trouble with that is iobe is tempted to be unrealistically mean to
Corbyn.

Betting should IMHO only be done on things whose outcome is of purely
academic interest, like who will wind the Boat race. I mean, who gives
a ****? Even though I went to one of the universities.

have your arse smacked regular then did you son?

Oh dear.

Your ignorance is showing again, little boy.

--
Gun Control: The law that ensures that only criminals have guns.

On Saturday, 22 April 2017 14:08:10 UTC+1, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
any or all of the EU nations can agree quickly on anything that is to
everyone's advantage like e.g., a common standard for TV transmission

Didn't know we had that

or electrical voltages

well sort of, but Europe never got round to adopting a proper polarised fused plug like what we use, and harmonising black cable to neutral was a really good euroidea.

or sharing police and security information. Or even
respecting each others driving licenses

Obviously we should be allowed to drive in Italy, Greece, Romania etc but I'm not sure that having an Italian, Greek or Romanian licence adequately prepares someone for driving here

In other words, if its good to cooperate, nothing post brexit stops us.
If its bad, we now don't have to.

But we probably will because all the opposition parties will want to derail the government regardless of whether the matter is Brexit or anything else.

Owain

In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
Most of the world manages it. There's nothing magic about having such
an agreement.

Most of the world hasn't just left a long standing partnership.

So what.

Jesus H Christ. Most developed countries - ie those large enough to be a
worthwhile trading partner to us after we leave the EU - are already in
agreements with other countries. Those agreements can make it very
difficult for the likes of us to muscle in. In exactly the same way as the
US etc can't reach an agreement with the EU.

Perhaps you've not noticed the distinct lack of countries indicating their
desire to form a trade etc agreement with the UK after we've finally left
the EU and are free to enter one?

But carry on believing in your fantasies.

And you continue with your total ignorance of how trade agreements work.
--
bert

In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
Most of the world manages it. There's nothing magic about having such
an agreement.

Most of the world hasn't just left a long standing partnership.

So what.

Jesus H Christ. Most developed countries - ie those large enough to be a
worthwhile trading partner to us after we leave the EU - are already in
agreements with other countries.

But not with the EU.

Thanks for confirming you simply don't understand the implications of
leaving the EU to our economy. Sincerely hope getting back 'sovereignty'
pays the bills. Perhaps someone would explain just how.

By trading with other countries with or without specific trade deals
--
bert

In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
You're one of those who thinks the money needed to run a country grows
on trees, then? And you can be pretty certain all those Tories in rural
areas will seek to protect their local agriculture.

The rural areas are already competing with imports. And I don't know of
any farmers who are producing French wine, italian cheese, etc etc, all
of which avoid tariffs at the moment and which the meeja was saying
would suddenly have large tariffs on them.

Are those what you consider 'food'? French wine part of your basic
sustenance? Italian cheese the only type you'll eat?

Meanwhile NZ lamb and Aussie wines, which have substantial tariffs on
them now, could be made cheaper if *we* chose to make them so -
something we can't do at the minute since these are subject to the EU
external tariff.

You seem to have moved the goalposts to lamb now. Something you obviously
think not produced in the UK.

But yet again you've totally missed the bigger picture. Of course we can
import anything we want from anywhere, tarrif free, after leaving the EU.
But to earn the money to do so means exporting things, goods or services.
And the quid pro quo would be the country we import from tarrif free
taking (some of) our exports tarrif free too. It would be good to hear
about all those killer products made in the UK that other countries can't
wait to get their hands on.

Bentleys range rovers airbus wings JCB excavators etc etc
--
bert

In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
The vast majority of the popular press just loved any stories that
showed the EU in a poor light. True or false didn't matter. And unlike
such things about UK politics, the EU wasn't really in any position to
refute them.

Plenty of people in the UK who *could* *have*, if they'd been of a mind
to.

Just how? Set up their own newspaper in competition with all the popular
anti EU press?

Plenty of Remainer MEPs. And nothing to stop the meeja inviting EU
people to comment.

Why would the Mail or Express invite an 'EU person' to comment on their
lies?

And then there was £9M of our dosh spent on Gumment
Remain propaganda.

The anti EU press had been telling their lies for years. Not something
that can be discredited overnight.

Ah so you DO read the press after all. Another of your lies.
--
bert

In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
Handsome Jack wrote:
If a second referendum is permitted, then some members of the political
elite have to take the decision as to whether it is going to happen, and
that decision will be influenced by those person's political views. This
defeats the object of the referendum, which is to guide policy by the
people's political views, not those of an elite.

If the establishment is going to disallow referendum outcomes with which
they disagree there is no point in having a referendum at all.

I can't understand how this isn't completely obvious to anyone.

Because the referendum didn't have a majority of those eligible to vote.
Just a rather small majority of those who did.

The rules were set by parliament before the referendum.
You don't get the choice of paying a council tax bill etc. So why is
something so important as this voluntary?

Different subject altogether.
--
bert

In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

In article ,
Handsome Jack wrote:
If a second referendum is permitted, then some members of the
political elite have to take the decision as to whether it is going
to happen, and that decision will be influenced by those person's
political views. This defeats the object of the referendum, which is
to guide policy by the people's political views, not those of an
elite.

If the establishment is going to disallow referendum outcomes with
which they disagree there is no point in having a referendum at all.

I can't understand how this isn't completely obvious to anyone.

Because the referendum didn't have a majority of those eligible to vote.
Just a rather small majority of those who did.

In which other UK elections is this taken into account? People knew
what the rules were.

Which other UK election is as important as this one?

Parliament saw fit to impose a greater than simple majority rule on a vote
to change the fixed term parliament. Saw fit to vote on how union strike
ballots etc are conducted. Now either a simple majority of those who can
be bothered to vote is jut fine for everything - or it's not.

So write to your MP about it.
--
bert

On 20/04/2017 08:22, Broadback wrote:
Surely I am not alone?

Nope. and I will now ignore the rest of this thread!

What gets me is that they decide a really important news item should
have 20 minutes of the news - even when they only have 1 minutes worth
of data on it.

Andy

"alan_m" wrote in message
...
On 21/04/2017 13:27, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

It would be good to hear
about all those killer products made in the UK that other countries can't
wait to get their hands on.


And which "killer produces" are the rest of the EU taking from us?

Airbus wings, aircraft engines, docos, scotch, docos, financial stuff etc
etc etc.

On 23/04/17 19:24, wrote:
On Saturday, 22 April 2017 14:08:10 UTC+1, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
any or all of the EU nations can agree quickly on anything that is
to everyone's advantage like e.g., a common standard for TV
transmission

Didn't know we had that

or electrical voltages

well sort of, but Europe never got round to adopting a proper
polarised fused plug like what we use, and harmonising black cable to
neutral was a really good euroidea.

its arguable. but power sockets are really not international things.

And in any case its amazing what people will fit. Ive seen expat houses
in S Africa wired entirely with German /scandinavian sockets, rather
than the standard 15A legacy plugs. When I visit I take 13A extension
strips with 15A plugs fitted :-)



or sharing police and security information. Or even respecting each
others driving licenses

Obviously we should be allowed to drive in Italy, Greece, Romania etc
but I'm not sure that having an Italian, Greek or Romanian licence
adequately prepares someone for driving here

Anymore than a UK driving test does...

I take it you have never driven in Italy...


In other words, if its good to cooperate, nothing post brexit stops
us. If its bad, we now don't have to.

But we probably will because all the opposition parties will want to
derail the government regardless of whether the matter is Brexit or
anything else.

Oh, if we actually do brexit, I think that it oill all become a storm in
a teacup as everybody realises what a blindingly obviously good idea it
was, and the EU sinks beneath the waves of gimmegrants...just as
happened with Britain and te Euro. No one today has even remotely
suggested we join that, for YEARS.

In the end the people are always conned by the establishment, but
occasionally they wake up and kick back.


I think this is one such 'coffee moment'

Let's see what the Frogs do with their president. If Frex-zit happens
the EU looks pointless.




Owain



--
"When one man dies it's a tragedy. When thousands die it's statistics."

Josef Stalin

On 23/04/17 20:34, bert wrote:
In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
Most of the world manages it. There's nothing magic about having such
an agreement.

Most of the world hasn't just left a long standing partnership.

So what.

Jesus H Christ. Most developed countries - ie those large enough to be a
worthwhile trading partner to us after we leave the EU - are already in
agreements with other countries. Those agreements can make it very
difficult for the likes of us to muscle in. In exactly the same way as
the
US etc can't reach an agreement with the EU.

Perhaps you've not noticed the distinct lack of countries indicating
their
desire to form a trade etc agreement with the UK after we've finally left
the EU and are free to enter one?

But carry on believing in your fantasies.

And you continue with your total ignorance of how trade agreements work.

...and the countries queueing up to form trade agreements with the UK..


--
€œSome people like to travel by train because it combines the slowness of
a car with the cramped public exposure of €¨an airplane.€�

Dennis Miller

On 23/04/2017 21:08, Rod Speed wrote:


"alan_m" wrote in message
...
On 21/04/2017 13:27, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

It would be good to hear
about all those killer products made in the UK that other countries
can't
wait to get their hands on.


And which "killer produces" are the rest of the EU taking from us?

Airbus wings, aircraft engines, docos, scotch, docos, financial stuff
etc etc etc.

Financial stuff requires the EU passport which comes with membership and
May may not get one in her negotiations. Hence the reason the banks
setting up branches in other EU countries so they can shift all the jobs
to the EU if she doesn't get one.

The EU will want cash and free movement for it so the brexiteers will be
upset.

lid posted
On 23/04/2017 21:08, Rod Speed wrote:
"alan_m" wrote in message
...
On 21/04/2017 13:27, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

It would be good to hear
about all those killer products made in the UK that other countries
can't
wait to get their hands on.


And which "killer produces" are the rest of the EU taking from us?
Airbus wings, aircraft engines, docos, scotch, docos, financial
stuff etc etc etc.

Financial stuff requires the EU passport which comes with membership
and May may not get one in her negotiations. Hence the reason the banks
setting up branches in other EU countries so they can shift all the
jobs to the EU if she doesn't get one.


Rubbish.
--
Jack

In article ,
Bod writes:
From what I've read and heard, most Labour voters ARE like sheep. I
hear it all of the time "I vote labour because all my family have always
voted for Labour".

I think there's been a lot of truth in that, but a lot of people
who had always voted Labour for decades have abandoned the party
in last couple of years for two different reasons, Brexit, and the
party's recent move towards the far left (popular with Labour
members, but less so with the bulk of voters they need to attract).

Both Conservative and Labour voters were split on Brexit - it
wasn't a hard left/right issue. Now the Conservatives have come
out heavily for Brexit, they've pulled in lots of Labour Brexiters,
and I think they'll pull in all 5M UKIP voters (UKIP will be dead
in 8 weeks). Conservatives will lose some Remainers to Lib/Dems, but
that will be small compared with their gains from Labour and UKIP.

I think the most significant thing historically will be the number
of traditional left wing voters who've moved well to the right just
to ensure Brexit goes through. They'll probably move back a few
years after Brexit, but for now, they regard Brexit as more important
than left/right politics.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

In article , Andrew Gabriel
wrote:
In article , Bod
writes:
From what I've read and heard, most Labour voters ARE like sheep. I
hear it all of the time "I vote labour because all my family have
always voted for Labour".

I think there's been a lot of truth in that, but a lot of people who had
always voted Labour for decades have abandoned the party in last couple
of years for two different reasons, Brexit, and the party's recent move
towards the far left (popular with Labour members, but less so with the
bulk of voters they need to attract).

Both Conservative and Labour voters were split on Brexit - it wasn't a
hard left/right issue. Now the Conservatives have come out heavily for
Brexit, they've pulled in lots of Labour Brexiters, and I think they'll
pull in all 5M UKIP voters (UKIP will be dead in 8 weeks). Conservatives
will lose some Remainers to Lib/Dems, but that will be small compared
with their gains from Labour and UKIP.

I think the "orpington man" might re-appear - in other areas than Orpington.

I think the most significant thing historically will be the number of
traditional left wing voters who've moved well to the right just to
ensure Brexit goes through. They'll probably move back a few years after
Brexit, but for now, they regard Brexit as more important than left/right
politics.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England

bert wrote:
In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
The vast majority of the popular press just loved any stories that
showed the EU in a poor light. True or false didn't matter. And unlike
such things about UK politics, the EU wasn't really in any position to
refute them.

Plenty of people in the UK who *could* *have*, if they'd been of a mind
to.

Just how? Set up their own newspaper in competition with all the popular
anti EU press?

Plenty of Remainer MEPs. And nothing to stop the meeja inviting EU
people to comment.

Why would the Mail or Express invite an 'EU person' to comment on their
lies?

And then there was £9M of our dosh spent on Gumment
Remain propaganda.

The anti EU press had been telling their lies for years. Not something
that can be discredited overnight.

Ah so you DO read the press after all. Another of your lies.

He may be able to read, but his comprehension is sadly lacking!

"dennis@home" wrote in message
web.com...
On 23/04/2017 21:08, Rod Speed wrote:


"alan_m" wrote in message
...
On 21/04/2017 13:27, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

It would be good to hear
about all those killer products made in the UK that other countries
can't
wait to get their hands on.


And which "killer produces" are the rest of the EU taking from us?

Airbus wings, aircraft engines, docos, scotch, docos, financial stuff etc
etc etc.

Financial stuff requires the EU passport

Nope, not when you don’t bother to show up in person.

which comes with membership and May may not get one in her negotiations.
Hence the reason the banks setting up branches in other EU countries

**** all of them are.

so they can shift all the jobs to the EU if she doesn't get one.

Don’t need to shift anyone. They stay in Britain and communicate
electronically with their nominal branch in the EU.

The EU will want cash and free movement for it

Doesn’t matter what they want, no real need for EU passports.

so the brexiteers will be upset.

Nope, you watch.

In article ,
charles writes:
In article , Andrew Gabriel
wrote:
In article , Bod
writes:
From what I've read and heard, most Labour voters ARE like sheep. I
hear it all of the time "I vote labour because all my family have
always voted for Labour".

I think there's been a lot of truth in that, but a lot of people who had
always voted Labour for decades have abandoned the party in last couple
of years for two different reasons, Brexit, and the party's recent move
towards the far left (popular with Labour members, but less so with the
bulk of voters they need to attract).

Both Conservative and Labour voters were split on Brexit - it wasn't a
hard left/right issue. Now the Conservatives have come out heavily for
Brexit, they've pulled in lots of Labour Brexiters, and I think they'll
pull in all 5M UKIP voters (UKIP will be dead in 8 weeks). Conservatives
will lose some Remainers to Lib/Dems, but that will be small compared
with their gains from Labour and UKIP.

I think the "orpington man" might re-appear - in other areas than Orpington.

Is "orpington man" a remainer or a brexiter?
Who do you think "orpington man" will vote for this time?

I think the most significant thing historically will be the number of
traditional left wing voters who've moved well to the right just to
ensure Brexit goes through. They'll probably move back a few years after
Brexit, but for now, they regard Brexit as more important than left/right
politics.


--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

On 23/04/17 21:47, Andrew Gabriel wrote:
In article ,
Bod writes:
From what I've read and heard, most Labour voters ARE like sheep. I
hear it all of the time "I vote labour because all my family have always
voted for Labour".

I think there's been a lot of truth in that, but a lot of people
who had always voted Labour for decades have abandoned the party
in last couple of years for two different reasons, Brexit, and the
party's recent move towards the far left (popular with Labour
members, but less so with the bulk of voters they need to attract).

Both Conservative and Labour voters were split on Brexit - it
wasn't a hard left/right issue. Now the Conservatives have come
out heavily for Brexit, they've pulled in lots of Labour Brexiters,
and I think they'll pull in all 5M UKIP voters (UKIP will be dead
in 8 weeks). Conservatives will lose some Remainers to Lib/Dems, but
that will be small compared with their gains from Labour and UKIP.

I think the most significant thing historically will be the number
of traditional left wing voters who've moved well to the right just
to ensure Brexit goes through. They'll probably move back a few
years after Brexit, but for now, they regard Brexit as more important
than left/right politics.

Labour hasn't been a party of the working class - the white working
class for two decades or more. Not since Thatcher really.
Its the party of the nouveau rich middle class, you know 'me grandad
were a milkman but I am a sound engineer at the beeb, and own me own
house' sort.

Working class are way right of Labour.


--
No Apple devices were knowingly used in the preparation of this post.

On 24/04/17 02:58, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Labour hasn't been a party of the working class - the white working
class for two decades or more. Not since Thatcher really.
Its the party of the nouveau rich middle class, you know 'me grandad
were a milkman but I am a sound engineer at the beeb, and own me own
house' sort.

Working class are way right of Labour.



My grandad was a proper London wheelwright, then a bus conductor and I
work for a university, so in theory I am an ideal candidate.

Except my other grandad was a barrister's clerk and a freemason. I guess
that side won over

On 23/04/17 22:40, Andrew Gabriel wrote:

I think the "orpington man" might re-appear - in other areas than Orpington.

Is "orpington man" a remainer or a brexiter?
Who do you think "orpington man" will vote for this time?


I could ask one when they get on the train this morning

All I know about "Orpington Man" is they are poor *******s who never get
a seat on the train because we all got on half an hour earlier :-o

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher writes:
On 23/04/17 21:47, Andrew Gabriel wrote:
In article ,
Bod writes:
From what I've read and heard, most Labour voters ARE like sheep. I
hear it all of the time "I vote labour because all my family have always
voted for Labour".

I think there's been a lot of truth in that, but a lot of people
who had always voted Labour for decades have abandoned the party
in last couple of years for two different reasons, Brexit, and the
party's recent move towards the far left (popular with Labour
members, but less so with the bulk of voters they need to attract).

Both Conservative and Labour voters were split on Brexit - it
wasn't a hard left/right issue. Now the Conservatives have come
out heavily for Brexit, they've pulled in lots of Labour Brexiters,
and I think they'll pull in all 5M UKIP voters (UKIP will be dead
in 8 weeks). Conservatives will lose some Remainers to Lib/Dems, but
that will be small compared with their gains from Labour and UKIP.

I think the most significant thing historically will be the number
of traditional left wing voters who've moved well to the right just
to ensure Brexit goes through. They'll probably move back a few
years after Brexit, but for now, they regard Brexit as more important
than left/right politics.

Labour hasn't been a party of the working class - the white working
class for two decades or more. Not since Thatcher really.
Its the party of the nouveau rich middle class, you know 'me grandad
were a milkman but I am a sound engineer at the beeb, and own me own
house' sort.

Working class are way right of Labour.

I see where you're coming from, but I tend to think of it slightly
differently. Prior to Thatcher, there was a large working class in
the UK. The 1980's saw phenominal growth and improvement in living
standards, and enabled a large number of working class to move into
the middle class, with the middle class outnumbering the working
class by 1990.

However, in spite of this, there wasn't a significant political
party for the middle class. They ended up voting for whichever left
or right party was nearer the centre, and they had become large
enough to carry the swing vote. It wasn't until Labour realised this
that they got back into power, and then served their longest term
ever.

For now, voting is pretty much all about Brexit, and might even
remain so for one more general election after Brexit. Even if
Labour moved back more towards centre, I don't think it will help
them at the moment, although it may do after Brexit.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]