BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 07 Jun 19 - 12:56 PM

I look forward to seeing proof of my own misuse of statistics

You really don't.

It goes back to what I was saying that the crux of lying is intention to deceive. Any statistic reduces a complex set of numbers to a simpler set, often just a single number. So an honest statistic does so while making every effort to keep as much useful information as possible while discarding as little useful information as possible. A lying statistic, on the other hand, typically has a point of view in mind and discards inconvenient data as far as possible in order to get the result you wish to present. A classic example is whether to look at percentages, numbers or rates of growth. Many people pick which they like to enhance their view, while ignoring the equally valid statistics that don't suit them.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 07 Jun 19 - 12:35 PM

The level of misuse of statistics on the elections are quite prominent in the posts you gave, Iains.

The vital difference being that I use remainer statistics to demonstrate the mathemagic of remainers trying to convince the sane that they won the referendum.
I look forward to seeing proof of my own misuse of statistics

You mean “The alleged anti-Semite...”. As you are so fond of saying when the boot’s on the other foot, ‘innocent until proven guilty in a court of law’.

A very brief search will uncover her own words that condemn her. It is very hard to refute the strong whiff of antisemitism within them.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 07 Jun 19 - 10:56 AM

”The anti-semite socialist...”

You mean “The alleged anti-Semite...”. As you are so fond of saying when the boot’s on the other foot, ‘innocent until proven guilty in a court of law’.

And, if she is proved to have made utterances that could be construed to be anti-Semitic, that makes her worse than the racist leader of the BP who posed in front of a ‘doctored’ photo of Syrian refugees fleeing torture, rape and murder, with the caption ‘Breaking Point - The EU has failed us’, because....what???

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 07 Jun 19 - 10:39 AM

That reminds my of that joke about irregular parts of speech: I am firm, you are stubborn, he is a pig headed fool.

The level of misuse of statistics on the elections are quite prominent in the posts you gave, Iains.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 07 Jun 19 - 10:15 AM

“Facts are stubborn things, but statistics are pliable.”
? Mark Twain

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 07 Jun 19 - 09:46 AM

For an area where 60% of the voters voted to leave in the referendum I still think the less than 30% for the brexit circus (party gives them too much respectability) shows just how many people have now seen sense.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Raggytash
Date: 07 Jun 19 - 08:14 AM

Doesn't alter the fact that the margin of victory has increased since the elections of 2017!!

To paraphrase one of your number "Labour won ......deal with it!"

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 07 Jun 19 - 08:08 AM

Rumour is that private prosecution of Boris thrown out by High Court.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 07 Jun 19 - 08:02 AM

Cannot be bothered to paraphrase, so from another source:
"Ignore the Labour/Remain crowing and hubris over Peterborough. It's facile.

Labour won over TBP in Peterborough by just 2%. In Brexit terms of 3.78% that is below marginal. Time for a second Peoples Vote to make sure, eh?

Turnout was 48% and Labour's vote decreased by a whopping -17.2%. In reality Labour 'won' with a paltry 30.9% of 48% of eligible voters. Using 'Remain logic' that is a risible 14.8% of the electorate who voted for Labour. The anti-semite socialist represents less than 15% of the people there. More than 75% of the electorate did not want Labour to represent them.

On the other hand TBP, with no previous percentage to swing from gained a 28.9% swing in its favour from a standing start and without a manifesto! Not only did they relegate Tories to third place but were snapping at Labour's heels in what was probably a Labour import rigged election anyway. The outlook is sunny for TBP. For LibLabCon not so good. That is difficult for them to see with their heads planted firmly in denial"

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 07 Jun 19 - 07:40 AM

... still offer peerages...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 07 Jun 19 - 07:39 AM

Now May has officially stepped down it seems she can still peerage for the moment.

I had a slightly mad image of the bulk of the candidates to replace her being offered a seat in the Lords instead. I wonder how many would turn them down?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 07 Jun 19 - 07:38 AM

The Brexit Party don’t seem to be above employing mathermagic either. Their bloke on ‘Politics Live’ at the moment trying to dismiss the Labour majority in the Peterborough election because it was ‘marginal’. Yet, when it’s pointed out to BrexShitters that their majority in the Referendum was marginal, their response is that it was ‘a significant majority’, and represents ‘the will of the people’.

These people really are not of this world, are they? Thankfully, they will never hold enough seats to form a government or, for that matter, be the largest opposition party in Parliament.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Raggytash
Date: 07 Jun 19 - 07:35 AM

Nicely avoiding my point which was that the margin of victory has INCREASED since the election of 2017.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 07 Jun 19 - 07:26 AM

Given the reason for the by-election being called it is frankly astonishing that Labour won the seat again especially with an increased margin over the second placed candidate.

Not really for those prepared to dig a little
https://www.peterborough.gov.uk/council/about-peterborough/census-2011/

The size of the majority is irrelevant. If you don't understand how representative democracy works I suggest that you go back and re-read Burke.

So pray tell, why do lefties use mathermagic to constantly dispute the outcome of the brexit referendum mandate to leave the EU?

As Spike says:17.4million Leave voters – the largest mandate for anything in British political history

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 07 Jun 19 - 06:47 AM

A deselection call would probably be rejected because this matter was well publicised before the vote. Iains link, is three days earlier, for example. So the rationale assumption is that voters took this into account when they voted.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Raggytash
Date: 07 Jun 19 - 06:46 AM

I think I will emulate the wild claims that are made by some posters.

Given the reason for the by-election being called it is frankly astonishing that Labour won the seat again especially with an increased margin over the second placed candidate.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 07 Jun 19 - 06:40 AM

On antisemitism, I would listen to Jewish Voice for Labour, which is more open than the Jewish Labour Movement, and accuses the latter of being fixated on defending Israel.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 07 Jun 19 - 06:32 AM

The electorate elects a representative. My reading of the definition of mandate is that it is an instruction to do something. An electorate definitely does not give an MP an instruction to do something. Only to represent all of the electors of that constituency, no matter whether they voted for that person or not. The size of the majority is irrelevant. If you don't understand how representative democracy works I suggest that you go back and re-read Burke.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 07 Jun 19 - 06:20 AM

Labour doing well in the polls - Oh look, antisemitism!

When will they ever learn..?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 07 Jun 19 - 06:13 AM

Not an auspicious start:

https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/labour-party/news/104305/jewish-labour-movement-disavow-partys

Is a deselection call in the offing?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 07 Jun 19 - 06:08 AM

So you accept that you were wrong. The elctorate grants a mandate to the winner. The strength of the mandate is dictated by the size of the winning vote, as I stated.

As an aside though pertinent:
In a political first, the Labour affiliate group the Jewish Labour Movement has called for the whip to be removed from Labour’s newly elected MP for Peterborough before she has even had a chance to be sworn in as an MP.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Jun 19 - 04:56 AM

The winner has a mandate neither to promote brexit nor promote leave. The winner is entitled to follow her own predilections in that regard and will face the consequences at the next election. She can't "represent" both leavers and remainers. Her job is to act in what she regards as the best interests of her constituents. Hope this helps.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 07 Jun 19 - 04:08 AM

A mandate is the authority granted by a constituency to act as its representative.
The authority to carry out a policy, regarded as given by the electorate to a party or candidate that wins an election
early 16th century: from Latin mandatum ‘something commanded’, neuter past participle of mandare, from manus ‘hand’ + dare ‘give’

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Jun 19 - 03:48 AM

Unfortunately, individually-elected MPs don't have "mandates"... :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 07 Jun 19 - 03:29 AM

BNot at all. Peterborough has always been a swing constituency. To use your own arguments the winner has less of a mandate that the brexiteers. The referendum result was won by a larger percentage than Labour's tenuous grasp on this seat.˜ 3.7/3.3 if my maths is correct.
Mathermagic tis a wonderful thing!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Jun 19 - 03:00 AM

Your popcorn has turned into sour grapes.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 07 Jun 19 - 02:51 AM

Very close run results.
Was it a Labour "we support brexit candididate"?
or a Labour "we do not support brexit candidate"?

The acceptance speech gave no clarity

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 07 Jun 19 - 02:47 AM

Our Resident Right-Wing-Extremist-Gammon ex-Squaddie Fruitcake will be along in a minute to tell us it was a ‘magnificent result’ for the ‘valiant Mr. Farage’. I’d have loved to see him doing his square-bashing on basic training, I can hear it now - “But sergeant-major, it’s not me who’s out of step, it’s everyone else!”.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Jun 19 - 02:10 AM

He sneaked out of a back door minutes before the result was announced.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 07 Jun 19 - 02:06 AM

And how nice of the Brexit spokesman to blame houses full of Pakistanis for Labour's victory

Although Farage would have loved to win, I don't think he would be too bothered by a close result. He will, however, be furious with whoever said that. A key part of his strategy is that all the nasty racists have been left behind in UKIP and the Brexit Party is pure as the proverbial snow. Messages that show that is not the case are far more damaging than merely losing a single contest.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 07 Jun 19 - 02:02 AM

Thank heavens people are beginning to see sense. In a city where brexit polled over 60% in the referendum, the electorate seem to have given the nasty party the boot. Of course the nicotine stained toad will try to spin it as a great victory but it seems that less than half of those who voted leave are still committed to it.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Jun 19 - 12:50 AM

"Popcorn ? What a good idea !
To have while awaiting the results of the Peterborough By-election where the Brexit party is expected to give their opposition a fine drubbing. Truly a popcorn moment !"


Bwahaha! And how nice of the Brexit spokesman to blame houses full of Pakistanis for Labour's victory...

Leopards don't change their spots, do they?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Jun 19 - 02:41 PM

Makes you wonder why Aaron Banks, who made his millions in insurance, is bankrolling Farage and whatever his party of the month is. Surely he is not thinking there may be an opening in health insurance once the NHS is up for grabs. Nah, surely not ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 06 Jun 19 - 01:49 PM

The Americans know full well that the UK will be absolutely desperate for a trade agreement, and they will seek to take advantage of that. Nigel may have confidence that the government’s negotiators will resist, for instance, the inclusion of some or all of our healthcare provision, or drastic increases in the cost of drugs from the US. There are many of us though who don’t share that confidence, given the number of MPs who have vested interests in private healthcare and drug manufacturing businesses.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 06 Jun 19 - 12:53 PM

The whole paper is negotiating objectives, Nigel. We know that means that these are what will be sought but it accepts they may not all be achieved.

All the commentary I have read on this says it is very much an 'America First' stance. Which is exactly what you would expect: of course the US is putting together the objectives it thinks are in its interests - why would it not, in any circumstances, never mind under an 'America First' administration. So there are lots of phrases that must be read at a deeper level than just the obvious meaning:

Eliminate practices that unfairly decrease U.S. market access opportunities or distort agricultural markets to the detriment of the United States, including:
? Non-tariff barriers that discriminate against U.S. agricultural goods; and
? Restrictive rules in the administration of tariff rate quotas.

Those are things like making the UK accept GM foods, whether it wishes to or not, and no labelling that lets the consumer know. This is stressed elsewhere

Establish new and enforceable rules to eliminate unjustified trade restrictions or unjustified commercial requirements (including unjustified labeling) that affect new technologies.



It is obvious that in principle we can decide not to accept these terms, but once again, the question boils down to are you prepared to "no deal" to maintain your position? So far, the impression I get, Nigel, is that in principle you are prepared to trade anything if the price is right,

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 06 Jun 19 - 11:33 AM

I read the section on pharmaceuticals, and on SOEs (State owned enterprises).
I also read the introduction, which seems to be in line with my comments above:
On October 16, 2018, the Trump Administration notified Congress that the President intends to negotiate a trade agreement with the United Kingdom (UK) once it leaves the European Union (EU), in accordance with section 105(a)(l)(A) of the Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015 (the Trade Priorities and Accountability Act). Our specific objectives for this negotiation will comply with the specific objectives set forth by Congress in section 102 of the Trade Priorities and Accountability Act.
I realise that American English may differ from British English, but to me the section I've put in bold deals with 'objectives' (a 'wish list') this does not mean that failure to reach one or more 'objective' will mean no deal, just not one which meet all of the objectives.
The paperwork is even headed "Summary of specific negotiating objectives" (same implied meaning). It's just a shame our government didn't think to issue something similar before starting to negotiate with Brussels.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 06 Jun 19 - 10:50 AM

”In fact I fail to see why we need them at all, what do they produce which we need?”

WMDs and their delivery & control systems?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 06 Jun 19 - 10:48 AM

”Read the section on pharmaceuticals, for example.”

I’m sure the section on ‘State-Owned and Controlled Enterprises’ didn’t escape your attention either, DMcG.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 06 Jun 19 - 10:08 AM

"No matter what you offer us we will never allow you access to any aspects of the NHS under any circumstances."

That is not at all a ridiculous position. It should be our only position. If they don't like it they can do one. Unlike with the EU, in this case they really do need us more than we need them. In fact I fail to see why we need them at all, what do they produce which we need?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 06 Jun 19 - 09:23 AM

US negotiating objectives

Read the section on pharmaceuticals, for example.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 06 Jun 19 - 09:17 AM

We know what they are asking for Nigel. They have published a negotiating document. So that side of the equation is well known.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 06 Jun 19 - 09:01 AM

I agree with all of that Nigel but it does not address the key question. If the US insist they do get access the aspects of the NHS or they no deal, do we say ok or do we no deal?
That would have to depend on what aspects of the NHS they were asking for access to, and what we would be getting in return. As a general question, with no specifics, it makes little or no sense.
We need (once Brexit is achieved) an opening stance for any negotiations.
Two positions which would be equally ridiculous are:
We will give you full access to all aspects of NHS even if we get nothing in return.
and:
No matter what you offer us we will never allow you access to any aspects of the NHS under any circumstances.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Raggytash
Date: 06 Jun 19 - 07:56 AM

Hmmm Peterborough By-Election .........

Me: Mr Greene what is your policy on Welfare
Mr Greene: Er .. I haven't got one
Me: Mr Greene what is your policy on Housing
Mr Greene: Er .. I haven't got one
Me: Mr Greene what is your policy on the NHS
Me Greene: Er .. yet to be formulated .. I haven't got one
Me: Mr Green what is your policy on Education
Mr Greene: Er .. we have got one yet
Me: Mr Greene what is your policy on Defence
Mr Greene: Er ... what... er I haven't got one I'm fairly new to this game

I could go on.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 06 Jun 19 - 06:52 AM

I agree with all of that Nigel but it does not address the key question. If the US insist they do get access the aspects of the NHS or they no deal, do we say ok or do we no deal?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 06 Jun 19 - 05:29 AM

I'm only quoting the full post to make clear what I'm replying to:
It's been quite a long time now, and no comments on the idea that the NHS should be part of a trade deal with the NHS (and yes, I know Trump said two completely different things an hour apart. SO he could switch back to his original statement equally easily.)
Of course, the NHS is not a single thing: it would be possible to have say the mechanisms of NHS drug purchasing - which the US hate - part of the deal but not something else.
So imagine the US decides to play hard-ball. Their stance is (some aspects of the) NHS is part of the deal, or there is no deal at all.
Forget what any of the politicians say. What do our resident Brexiteers say?

The fact that some aspect of the NHS is on the table as part of the deal does not mean that anything involving the NHS will be part of a final deal.

On the table seems to be a widely misunderstood idea.

Brexit negotiations need to keep "No Deal" on the table. It doesn't mean it will be part of the final decision, but if it is not kept on the table, then it is not available as a fall back position if all we are offered is a poor deal.
Similarly, keeping NHS on the table does not mean that we are surrendering the option not to make it part of any deal.

So having the NHS on the table is not the same as saying it will be part of any trade deal. It is just keeping all options open during the opening of any negotiations.

Hopefully any negotiations would not be handled by someone with the lack of business acumen of Theresa May, who seemed to think that you open negotiations by making all possible concessions, and then expect to still have something to negotiate with.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 06 Jun 19 - 04:41 AM

Voters might do better to listen to these people. than let themselves be misled by the multi-millionaire man-frog and his sycophantic followers.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 06 Jun 19 - 03:22 AM

Popcorn ? What a good idea !
To have while awaiting the results of the Peterborough By-election where the Brexit party is expected to give their opposition a fine drubbing. Truly a popcorn moment !

I cannot wait.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 06 Jun 19 - 02:29 AM

Popcorn anyone...??

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 06 Jun 19 - 02:09 AM

It's been quite a long time now, and no comments on the idea that the NHS should be part of a trade deal with the NHS (and yes, I know Trump said two completely different things an hour apart. SO he could switch back to his original statement equally easily.)

Of course, the NHS is not a single thing: it would be possible to have say the mechanisms of NHS drug purchasing - which the US hate - part of the deal but not something else.

So imagine the US decides to play hard-ball. Their stance is (some aspects of the) NHS is part of the deal, or there is no deal at all.

Forget what any of the politicians say. What do our resident Brexiteers say?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Raggytash
Date: 05 Jun 19 - 02:29 PM

Basically Iains cannot, with any honestly, defend his "champions".

Farage, Johnson, Yaxley-Lennon Dyson, Banks et al.

At least Iains has the wit not to pursue their cause further.









Or does he!?