The UK Politics and EU Referendum thread - merged

[TightEnd]

I like this Rory Stewart guy.

His videos are endearing and I like the language he uses.

Purposefully not looking at his past voting record as assume he voted to kill poor people or something. He seems nice. Does he have a chance?

The type of Conservative that appeals to non conservatives. The new Ruth Davidson

I like him, refreshingly different approach. Surely can't win but who knows

[TightEnd]

Ladbrokes

[ripple11]

Tory leadership candidates so far fall into two camps on Brexit:

those advocating the catastrophic (No Deal Brexit) & those advocating the impossible (renegotiation).

especially once you listen to this

"I was crystal clear. There will be no renegotiation"

Outgoing EU Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker says Brexit talks will not be reopened

http://bbc.in/2EDso65

....so are we back to the EU deal !!?

We respect the Brexit vote and understand No Deal is almost certainly highly damaging.

Accept the Withdrawal agreement (yes not perfect)........and get the vital transition period started. Then the real decisions on the Political Declaration can be discussed.

........if only 30 MP's had voted the other way on the last vote we would be on our way to some sort of normallity ? 

[ripple11]

I like this Rory Stewart guy.

His videos are endearing and I like the language he uses.

Purposefully not looking at his past voting record as assume he voted to kill poor people or something. He seems nice. Does he have a chance?

The type of Conservative that appeals to non conservatives. The new Ruth Davidson

I like him, refreshingly different approach. Surely can't win but who knows

We like Rory


Later he tells an anecdote from Afghanistan. He was in a blizzard following 9/11, “completely lost.” “Suddenly I saw bumping towards me two big Toyota Land Cruisers. The electric window came down, and there was an SAS guy who served with me in the Balkans. He stuck his head out and said: ‘You are a f**king nutter.’ And then wound up the window and drove off.”

[BigAdz]

Tory leadership candidates so far fall into two camps on Brexit:

those advocating the catastrophic (No Deal Brexit) & those advocating the impossible (renegotiation).

especially once you listen to this

"I was crystal clear. There will be no renegotiation"

Outgoing EU Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker says Brexit talks will not be reopened

http://bbc.in/2EDso65

Sure to be shot down, but the highlighted word give us any chance to get a more flexible replacement?

[TightEnd]

here are the runners and riders

https://www.euronews.com/2019/05/27/who-s-winning-the-race-to-be-the-next-european-commission-president

Juncker leaves on 1st Nov, the day after our extension runs out

so its him a new PM is going back to in July/August

[MANTIS01]

What’s the point in being in any team if you aren’t going to respect a team decision?

party politics is breaking down, individuals voting leave/remain rather than sticking to older tribal loyalties. It follows that voting patterns are more fluid.

we are in a transition stage to a more European style multi party coalition government being the norm

So how credible will manifestos be moving forward?

And if you can’t trust what a party sets out as policy how will people ever make an informed voting decision?

[RED-DOG]

I like this Rory Stewart guy.

His videos are endearing and I like the language he uses.

Purposefully not looking at his past voting record as assume he voted to kill poor people or something. He seems nice. Does he have a chance?

The type of Conservative that appeals to non conservatives. The new Ruth Davidson

I like him, refreshingly different approach. Surely can't win but who knows

We like Rory


Later he tells an anecdote from Afghanistan. He was in a blizzard following 9/11, “completely lost.” “Suddenly I saw bumping towards me two big Toyota Land Cruisers. The electric window came down, and there was an SAS guy who served with me in the Balkans. He stuck his head out and said: ‘You are a f**king nutter.’ And then wound up the window and drove off.”

I worked on a project with Rory Stewart in 2013/14-ish.

Very down to earth and easy going, gave the impression that he was just one of the lads, which in my book is the mark of a true aristocrat

I would vote for him

[Jon MW]

Disagree and ‘‘tis why democracy works so well. Who gave the logical people superiority over the emotional ones? An emotional vote is equally valid and it’s the leaders who capture hearts and minds that excel. Every one of us chooses to offer our whole life to a partner we love not one who is logically correct.
...

Yes - leaders who capture hearts and minds do excel.

That's precisely the point - the leaders who are good at technical details and knowledge and strategy concerning diplomacy, the law and economics should be the ones who excel.

It's the job of the Government - to govern.

You don't need warm, fuzzy feelings for that. You need facts, analysis and expertise.

That's part of the central problem with democracy - illustrated perfectly by every metaphor and analogy to relationships and families and anything where emotion is meant to play a part.

But those wise logical leaders better not implement policy that is merely logical to them and their sagely nodding friends.

They better implement policy that makes the people happy. Cos a happy workforce is a more productive one that grows the economy.

They did some research in Newcastle where productivity rose by 30% the week after the magpies won. Funny how the economic performance of the region rested upon emotion. Probably because the world is full of people like.

If a policy makes people happy, and that makes people more productive, and that boosts the economy - the logical, rational choice is to implement it.

For example. Having an extra Bank Holiday would make a lot of people happy.
Some politicians would want to do this because it would win them votes - the emotional flaw at the core of democracy.

Rational politicians would want to know - does the extra holiday and boost to general wellbeing mean that people go back to work after with increased productivity?
Or does the disruption just have a negative effect on the economy? - and then they should respond as appropriate.

It doesn't necessarily have to be an economic benefit - an extra Bank Holiday on General Election day, for example, could boost turnout and make people engage more with politics. It would also make a lot of people happy just having the extra  holiday.

The effect of government action might well be emotional - but the instigation of it shouldn't be, and doesn't have to be.

[kukushkin88]

Disagree and ‘‘tis why democracy works so well. Who gave the logical people superiority over the emotional ones? An emotional vote is equally valid and it’s the leaders who capture hearts and minds that excel. Every one of us chooses to offer our whole life to a partner we love not one who is logically correct.
...

Yes - leaders who capture hearts and minds do excel.

That's precisely the point - the leaders who are good at technical details and knowledge and strategy concerning diplomacy, the law and economics should be the ones who excel.

It's the job of the Government - to govern.

You don't need warm, fuzzy feelings for that. You need facts, analysis and expertise.

That's part of the central problem with democracy - illustrated perfectly by every metaphor and analogy to relationships and families and anything where emotion is meant to play a part.

But those wise logical leaders better not implement policy that is merely logical to them and their sagely nodding friends.

They better implement policy that makes the people happy. Cos a happy workforce is a more productive one that grows the economy.

They did some research in Newcastle where productivity rose by 30% the week after the magpies won. Funny how the economic performance of the region rested upon emotion. Probably because the world is full of people like.

If a policy makes people happy, and that makes people more productive, and that boosts the economy - the logical, rational choice is to implement it.

For example. Having an extra Bank Holiday would make a lot of people happy.
Some politicians would want to do this because it would win them votes - the emotional flaw at the core of democracy.

Rational politicians would want to know - does the extra holiday and boost to general wellbeing mean that people go back to work after with increased productivity?
Or does the disruption just have a negative effect on the economy? - and then they should respond as appropriate.

It doesn't necessarily have to be an economic benefit - an extra Bank Holiday on General Election day, for example, could boost turnout and make people engage more with politics. It would also make a lot of people happy just having the extra  holiday.

The effect of government action might well be emotional - but the instigation of it shouldn't be, and doesn't have to be.

Bank Holiday for a General Election sounds great.

It just seems fundamentally flawed to think happy people work harder, especially when nearly all of them are only making someone else richer by working harder. I like to think happy people have better things to do.

[Jon MW]

...

It just seems fundamentally flawed to think happy people work harder, especially when nearly all of them are only making someone else richer by working harder. I like to think happy people have better things to do.

Factory workers work harder if the radio is on (for example) - there is a correlation between happiness and productivity, but the more variables that get added (I suspect) the less relevant it becomes.

[nirvana]

Disagree and ‘‘tis why democracy works so well. Who gave the logical people superiority over the emotional ones? An emotional vote is equally valid and it’s the leaders who capture hearts and minds that excel. Every one of us chooses to offer our whole life to a partner we love not one who is logically correct.
...

Yes - leaders who capture hearts and minds do excel.

That's precisely the point - the leaders who are good at technical details and knowledge and strategy concerning diplomacy, the law and economics should be the ones who excel.

It's the job of the Government - to govern.

You don't need warm, fuzzy feelings for that. You need facts, analysis and expertise.

That's part of the central problem with democracy - illustrated perfectly by every metaphor and analogy to relationships and families and anything where emotion is meant to play a part.

But those wise logical leaders better not implement policy that is merely logical to them and their sagely nodding friends.

They better implement policy that makes the people happy. Cos a happy workforce is a more productive one that grows the economy.

They did some research in Newcastle where productivity rose by 30% the week after the magpies won. Funny how the economic performance of the region rested upon emotion. Probably because the world is full of people like.

If a policy makes people happy, and that makes people more productive, and that boosts the economy - the logical, rational choice is to implement it.

For example. Having an extra Bank Holiday would make a lot of people happy.
Some politicians would want to do this because it would win them votes - the emotional flaw at the core of democracy.

Rational politicians would want to know - does the extra holiday and boost to general wellbeing mean that people go back to work after with increased productivity?
Or does the disruption just have a negative effect on the economy? - and then they should respond as appropriate.

It doesn't necessarily have to be an economic benefit - an extra Bank Holiday on General Election day, for example, could boost turnout and make people engage more with politics. It would also make a lot of people happy just having the extra  holiday.

The effect of government action might well be emotional - but the instigation of it shouldn't be, and doesn't have to be.

Bank Holiday for a General Election sounds great.

It just seems fundamentally flawed to think happy people work harder, especially when nearly all of them are only making someone else richer by working harder. I like to think happy people have better things to do.

This is why socialism is so pernicious. All of them are making a living for themselves first and generally speaking, working harder has many many benefits to that individual. It's irrelevant if it also makes someone else richer.. Shirley?

[engy]

I like this Rory Stewart guy.

His videos are endearing and I like the language he uses.

Purposefully not looking at his past voting record as assume he voted to kill poor people or something. He seems nice. Does he have a chance?

The type of Conservative that appeals to non conservatives. The new Ruth Davidson

I like him, refreshingly different approach. Surely can't win but who knows

We like Rory


Later he tells an anecdote from Afghanistan. He was in a blizzard following 9/11, “completely lost.” “Suddenly I saw bumping towards me two big Toyota Land Cruisers. The electric window came down, and there was an SAS guy who served with me in the Balkans. He stuck his head out and said: ‘You are a f**king nutter.’ And then wound up the window and drove off.”

I worked on a project with Rory Stewart in 2013/14-ish.

Very down to earth and easy going, gave the impression that he was just one of the lads, which in my book is the mark of a true aristocrat

I would vote for him

Was the project to do with Appleby Tom?

[kukushkin88]

Disagree and ‘‘tis why democracy works so well. Who gave the logical people superiority over the emotional ones? An emotional vote is equally valid and it’s the leaders who capture hearts and minds that excel. Every one of us chooses to offer our whole life to a partner we love not one who is logically correct.
...

Yes - leaders who capture hearts and minds do excel.

That's precisely the point - the leaders who are good at technical details and knowledge and strategy concerning diplomacy, the law and economics should be the ones who excel.

It's the job of the Government - to govern.

You don't need warm, fuzzy feelings for that. You need facts, analysis and expertise.

That's part of the central problem with democracy - illustrated perfectly by every metaphor and analogy to relationships and families and anything where emotion is meant to play a part.

But those wise logical leaders better not implement policy that is merely logical to them and their sagely nodding friends.

They better implement policy that makes the people happy. Cos a happy workforce is a more productive one that grows the economy.

They did some research in Newcastle where productivity rose by 30% the week after the magpies won. Funny how the economic performance of the region rested upon emotion. Probably because the world is full of people like.

If a policy makes people happy, and that makes people more productive, and that boosts the economy - the logical, rational choice is to implement it.

For example. Having an extra Bank Holiday would make a lot of people happy.
Some politicians would want to do this because it would win them votes - the emotional flaw at the core of democracy.

Rational politicians would want to know - does the extra holiday and boost to general wellbeing mean that people go back to work after with increased productivity?
Or does the disruption just have a negative effect on the economy? - and then they should respond as appropriate.

It doesn't necessarily have to be an economic benefit - an extra Bank Holiday on General Election day, for example, could boost turnout and make people engage more with politics. It would also make a lot of people happy just having the extra  holiday.

The effect of government action might well be emotional - but the instigation of it shouldn't be, and doesn't have to be.

Bank Holiday for a General Election sounds great.

It just seems fundamentally flawed to think happy people work harder, especially when nearly all of them are only making someone else richer by working harder. I like to think happy people have better things to do.

This is why socialism is so pernicious. All of them are making a living for themselves first and generally speaking, working harder has many many benefits to that individual. It's irrelevant if it also makes someone else richer.. Shirley?

My comment is on the flippant side but I think my point is reasonable. There is plenty of room for an adjustment in the distribution of the wealth created by people’s work. We have about 4 million working people in the country who currently live in poverty.

[RED-DOG]

I like this Rory Stewart guy.

His videos are endearing and I like the language he uses.

Purposefully not looking at his past voting record as assume he voted to kill poor people or something. He seems nice. Does he have a chance?

The type of Conservative that appeals to non conservatives. The new Ruth Davidson

I like him, refreshingly different approach. Surely can't win but who knows

We like Rory


Later he tells an anecdote from Afghanistan. He was in a blizzard following 9/11, “completely lost.” “Suddenly I saw bumping towards me two big Toyota Land Cruisers. The electric window came down, and there was an SAS guy who served with me in the Balkans. He stuck his head out and said: ‘You are a f**king nutter.’ And then wound up the window and drove off.”

I worked on a project with Rory Stewart in 2013/14-ish.

Very down to earth and easy going, gave the impression that he was just one of the lads, which in my book is the mark of a true aristocrat

I would vote for him

Was the project to do with Appleby Tom?

No it wasn't Dave. Tony asked about on my diary so I explained a little bit there.

He's such a tiny scrap of a man, probably about 8 stone wet through but his presence seems to fill a room.