Well, it's not all of Bavaria, just Lower Bavaria. For some reason the NY Times chose to divide Germany along its administrative districts instead of its states, which is quite unusual. Even more so because they're using districts that were integrated into larger ones in 1999.seems weird that Mecklenburg-West Pomerania is more impacted by Brexit than effing Bavaria.
Pretty interesting article (particularly if you are currently teaching it) about how the Brexit vote mirrors the way the way the Reformation took hold in England. Worth a read even if I found some of the links a bit tenuous.
https://www.newstatesman.com/world/2019/02/europe-s-new-reformation
Well, it's not all of Bavaria, just Lower Bavaria. For some reason the NY Times chose to divide Germany along its administrative districts instead of its states, which is quite unusual. Even more so because they're using districts that were integrated into larger ones in 1999.
As for the question, I don't know the specifics, but it could be that Mecklenburg exports more agrarian products to the UK (them being at the Baltic Sea probably helps) than Lower Bavaria. The latter does have a BMW assembly though, so I really don't know why it's apparently unaffected by Brexit.
Time for a reminder that the Tories own predictions put a no deal scenario, that we are less than two months from, at around -9% GDP. And that's probably optimistic. But no, carry on how Corbyn is going to Doom us with a GDP drop.
You've missed the point the poster was replying to, which is that it would be better to have a Remain but with a Tory PM, than a no-deal with Labour PM.
You've missed the point that the Tories are the ones who got us in this mess because of a squabble in their party.
Whenever someone posits Tory remain vs Labour leave, God kills a kitten.
... I really should put you on ignore. You're basically trolling at this point.
I replied to someone else, putting the context there, which they didn't seem aware of. Why are you trying to use circular logic to try and argue that context?
I don't think a single poster has argued that we weren't in this mess because of the Tories in the first place. But that isn't the point the initial poster was making, is it? I have a feeling you already know that though.
Question - Would Remain with Tory MP be better than a No Deal Brexit with Labour MP?
Answer - Yes. As 10% GDP drop, would be catastrophic and tie the hands of any leader, no matter how much they'd want to change things. Remember spending cuts during a 2-3% drop during the last recession and the pain and misery that caused. The prospect of that happening with 3x the drop? And for a much longer period? How anyone can possibly believe the impact would be less than what we've already had is beyond me.
But again, you're aware of the context, the question, and the fact this is pretty much an entirely fantasy scenario, as neither of these outcomes are possible. Yet you'll come back with "But Labour won't No Deal" and carry on being entirely disingenuous, by acting as if anyone was arguing that in the first place.
God kills 10 kittens when someone pops into a thread without even seeking context. Don't kill the kittens!
Do what you want, man, if you can discuss in all seriousness ''Tory Remain vs Labour Leave" then there's no point in talking about this. You fundamentally can't isolate 'Tory Remain' as some kind of option because, once again:
- Tories always put party over country
- Tories don't give two shits about anything other than power
- The Tory Party will never ever be united about Europe, a mythical Tory Remain would condemn the country to even more division and there's no guarantee there wouldn't be more pressure to leave.
- The Tories have proven time and again that the party functions as a massive public debating competition and none of them consider their actions to be anything other than existing within the sphere of Westminster (see the voting record of Woke Soubz vs her public proclamations)
- Tory politicians almost never have any kind of grip on reality
So yeah, it's always worth pointing out that the Conservatives got us in this mess precisely because of those bullet points and therefore any "Tory Remain" MP should have a massive asterisk next to their name. Because ultimately, you know that if Labour put forward a proposal to stay in the EU and all it needed was Tory Remainers to rebel, they never ever would.
Put me on ignore if it makes you feel better.
You've missed the point the poster was replying to, which is that it would be better to have a Remain but with a Tory PM, than a no-deal with Labour PM.
What's the point of the "what if?", though?
Remain is better than Leave, categorically. It's not a controversial (on here, I guess) or original position, but what's the point of planting your flag in the "I'd take Tory Remain over Labour Leave" hypothetical when it has no realistic chance of happening?
Y'know, other to express some sort of support for the Tories?
It's just a dumb hypothetical, is all I'm saying. It's not worth planting a flag in as if it were a realistic position.so what, supporting Labour even if they don't want to stop Brexit, means you are a Leaver with this kind of narrative.
What's the point of the "what if?", though?
Remain is better than Leave, categorically. It's not a controversial (on here, I guess) or original position, but what's the point of planting your flag in the "I'd take Tory Remain over Labour Leave" hypothetical when it has no realistic chance of happening?
Y'know, other to express some sort of support for the Tories?
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-vote-backbencher-plan?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Back May's deal, then hold people's vote: plan to end Brexit deadlock
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-vote-backbencher-plan?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Back May's deal, then hold people's vote: plan to end Brexit deadlock
I would take that, it would take no-deal out of the equation completely. It would allow the public to ratify the decision of parliament. It would definitively seal the wound of the first referendum. I hope it happens.
Said it several times this would be a good outcome. could definitely campaign on the back of being in the EU as the best dealhttps://www.theguardian.com/politic...-vote-backbencher-plan?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Back May's deal, then hold people's vote: plan to end Brexit deadlock
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-vote-backbencher-plan?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Back May's deal, then hold people's vote: plan to end Brexit deadlock
In messages leaked to BuzzFeed News, Perry wrote that Chope and his veteran Brexiteer colleagues Peter Bone and Bernard Jenkin "don't give a toss", adding: "They are not politicians they are zealots for whom winning an argument beats winning an election". Turning the conversation to Brexit, Perry said: "It's the same with the backstop".
https://www.buzzfeed.com/amphtml/al...have-been-taken#click=https://t.co/Pa8mbFfzx8The minister also asked the group: "Is anyone else bored to sobs with fighting this posse of old buffers who have achieved their dream of taking over the party again?", before warning that the Tories would lose the next election and become an opposition party "of the white shires and shores".
She wrote: "Here's my prediction: mass exodus of Tory talent at the next election just like the last (both voluntary and involuntary) so we can retreat to being an oppo party of the white shires and Shores and we can talk to each other all day long about utter bollocks!
That's...actually a pretty good idea. No deal is taken off the table. Remainers get the second referendum and May supporters get their deal passed. Only people I see taking issue with this are the diehard brexiteers worried about giving the people another vote with an outcome they won't like.https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-vote-backbencher-plan?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Back May's deal, then hold people's vote: plan to end Brexit deadlock
Is there really any time to hold a referendum? I thought I'd read the whole process, from a purely organisational point of view, took two months or more?https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-vote-backbencher-plan?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Back May's deal, then hold people's vote: plan to end Brexit deadlock
A second ref would be enough for an extension. I think the EU would happily take it too as it's basically a win win for them.Is there really any time to hold a referendum? I thought I'd read the whole process, from a purely organisational point of view, took two months or more?
Initially I was like "Oh fuck off... more bullshit.", but yeah, this is actually pretty smart. No-one really loses face for undermining the "will of the people".That's...actually a pretty good idea. No deal is taken off the table. Remainers get the second referendum and May supporters get their deal passed. Only people I see taking issue with this are the diehard brexiteers worried about giving the people another vote with an outcome they won't like.
I'll believe it when I see it.https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-vote-backbencher-plan?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Back May's deal, then hold people's vote: plan to end Brexit deadlock
Seems like European hospitals have started their no deal preparations by stockpiling any British made medical products.
Lol so if there was a GE tomorrow the Lib Dem's would hold the 2nd largest party. Corbyn has failed as the leader of Labour as he said to May, step aside.
….no. The Lib Dems are deadLol so if there was a GE tomorrow the Lib Dem's would hold the 2nd largest party. Corbyn has failed as the leader of Labour as he said to May, step aside.
Lol so if there was a GE tomorrow the Lib Dem's would hold the 2nd largest party. Corbyn has failed as the leader of Labour as he said to May, step aside.
As long as the entire press and the BBC remain Tory propaganda, the party is shielded from any long-lasting consequence. The problem lies with the media of this country.I'm not sure a no-deal Brexit would ruin the Tories. They clearly will have a core 30-35% of voters who will always vote for them. Any negative effects of no-deal will be successfully spun as the fault of the EU, Labour, Remainers, etc.
Lol so if there was a GE tomorrow the Lib Dem's would hold the 2nd largest party. Corbyn has failed as the leader of Labour as he said to May, step aside.
No, that's leader's favourability ratings. Nothing to do with general election voting intentions. Generally it's a measure you can use to sense check how enthusiastic a party's supporters are.
lol
It tells me that voters have bizarre standards, she's an endless disaster zone, appoints idiots to jobs they shouldn't have, and like Grayling yesterday is incapable of getting rid of dangerously bad people.
She should be lower than everyone except the nutter in charge of ukip, I can only think it's the incumbency effect holding her figures up.
Eehhh...I wouldn't translate individuals' approval ratings to their respective parties. Labour would quite clearly be above LibDems.
It tells me that voters have bizarre standards, she's an endless disaster zone, appoints idiots to jobs they shouldn't have, and like Grayling yesterday is incapable of getting rid of dangerously bad people.
She should be lower than everyone except the nutter in charge of ukip, I can only think it's the incumbency effect holding her figures up.