Confidence Gives Way To Dread At Bangkok Election Party

[Rojelio]

18 hours ago, George FmplesdaCosteedback said:

Do you think Trump will have 2,500 people murdered extra-judiciously?

I don't think Trump and Toxin are alike at all.

Agree!  This is just another whining poor loser who thinks the sky is falling.  Calm down Chicken Little.

[Xircal]

19 hours ago, George FmplesdaCosteedback said:

Humm, and neither should you my friend. Come January the Supreme Court decision might not confirm the High Court, and the divorce can start as planned. If I was married to Tusk, Junker or Schulz I would be in a rush to leave, but it needs care or else, as any man knows that has been divorced, you can end up losing the house, car and dog very easily.

What the UK doesn't need is back stabbing from the "remoaners", who just don't believe in democracy, and giving the other side your game plan before kick off.

The Single Market is not some Holy Grail. Check this out:

http://uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/idUKKBN1320M6?feedType=RSS&feedName=GCA-GoogleNewsUK&google_editors_picks=true

 

Democracy has spoken, Trump has 4 years and May the same. It is a long time in politics.

 

 

That link you posted contains a reference to the need to have the correct qualifications in order to perform a certain job. It cites hairdressers, bakers and blacksmiths as an example. The problem here is that in Britain doesn't have those kind of requirements which is why it would come up against barriers when trying to compete in those fields in other EU member states. But it's not just in France. The Netherlands requires that tradesman have the correct qualifications as well. I think it's the same in Germany and in the Scandinavian countries.

 

It's not what we would call a problem since any EU member on the continent at least would be able to apply for a job in the same trade in another EU state where recognised qualifications are acceptable.

 

It's really up to Britain to raise its standards to meet those of its continental neighbours not for them to lower theirs to meet Britain's needs. Look at all the cowboys builders performing shoddy workmanship in Britain. Never happens in the Netherlands.

 

As for the Swiss and their aspirations of curbing immigration as cited in your link; it's not going to happen if they want to continue to enjoy single market access and Britain should expect the same: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/03/eu-swiss-single-market-access-no-free-movement-citizens

 

But the point I was making in my original post is that time isn't on May's side if she wants to implement an FTA with the US. She proposes to start negotiations in March next year after triggering Article 50 and if they aren't completed by 2019, she can apply for a one year extension subject to the agreement of the other 27 member states. That takes her to 2020.

 

But will Trump be willing to wait three years before starting talks? Difficult to say at the moment with all the controversy surrounding his election win. But he'll only have one more year left in office by then which may be too short to agree to one.

 

[George FmplesdaCosteedback]

3 hours ago, Xircal said:

 

That link you posted contains a reference to the need to have the correct qualifications in order to perform a certain job. It cites hairdressers, bakers and blacksmiths as an example. The problem here is that in Britain doesn't have those kind of requirements which is why it would come up against barriers when trying to compete in those fields in other EU member states. But it's not just in France. The Netherlands requires that tradesman have the correct qualifications as well. I think it's the same in Germany and in the Scandinavian countries.

 

It's not what we would call a problem since any EU member on the continent at least would be able to apply for a job in the same trade in another EU state where recognised qualifications are acceptable.

 

It's really up to Britain to raise its standards to meet those of its continental neighbours not for them to lower theirs to meet Britain's needs. Look at all the cowboys builders performing shoddy workmanship in Britain. Never happens in the Netherlands.

 

As for the Swiss and their aspirations of curbing immigration as cited in your link; it's not going to happen if they want to continue to enjoy single market access and Britain should expect the same: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/03/eu-swiss-single-market-access-no-free-movement-citizens

 

But the point I was making in my original post is that time isn't on May's side if she wants to implement an FTA with the US. She proposes to start negotiations in March next year after triggering Article 50 and if they aren't completed by 2019, she can apply for a one year extension subject to the agreement of the other 27 member states. That takes her to 2020.

 

But will Trump be willing to wait three years before starting talks? Difficult to say at the moment with all the controversy surrounding his election win. But he'll only have one more year left in office by then which may be too short to agree to one.

 

You make the usual interesting points, however:

The Grauniad, the FT and others have been pro-EU all the way, did I send you a report from the Daily Mail?

Who is to say Trump will be out in 4 years?

As for the labour force in the UK then I see little problem. Working visas for skilled people from all over the world has always been part of the leave campaign.

It is true, unfortunately, that under 13 years of Labour rule the apprenticeships and blue collar workers qualifications were ignored, leading to the shortage we see now.

The " Single Market" which was the point of my link, is abused by the other EU members as they either ignore the rules or bend them to suit. The Brits do not, and are subsequently disadvantaged.

The fact remains, MPs had a vote and decided by 6 to 1 that the people should decide.

They have!

Respect that.

I believe the Supreme Court will.

 

[Watchful]

I guess I am one of those Hillary called "deplorable" and I couldn't be happier. Trump won and you can forget the nonsense about the delegates.  These delegates are selected by the parties. There is no chance that stalwart republicans would ever vote for any Democrat, let alone Hillary.

 

As for delivering on his promises, that depends upon whether gridlock will continue in Washington. The two most partisan politicos in Washington, Harry Reid and Obama, will be gone when Trump takes over.

 

The Democrats with their terrific loss are in total melt down. So the real question is whether they'll be able to STOP Trump. I can just about guarantee they won't be able to hold their coalition together and here is why:

 

In two short years (next mid-term election), the senate contest reverses. That is the Republicans have to re-elect (defend) only 10 senators. The Dems have to re-elect 25 senators. If that isn't bad enough, 10 of those 25 will run for reelection in states that Trump won! Are these people really going to block Trump when their own people voted for him? They might just as well kiss their own ass goodbye. 

 

On top of their own people, they'd have Trump to contend with. We all saw how Trump goes after his enemies. He'd personally campaign in each of these states to get the Dem tossed out and the Repub elected.  Notice than if this happens, Trump will have achieved a super majority!!!  The Dems will become insignificant!  That is, they will have schemed against Trump to what end? To end up with zero power and allow the Repubs to do ANYTHING they want?  

 

No , the ones who have to play this very, very carefully are the Dems for if they screw this up and act like Reid and Obama, they are toast.

 

 

[yardrunner]

6 hours ago, George FmplesdaCosteedback said:

You make the usual interesting points, however:

The Grauniad, the FT and others have been pro-EU all the way, did I send you a report from the Daily Mail?

Who is to say Trump will be out in 4 years?

As for the labour force in the UK then I see little problem. Working visas for skilled people from all over the world has always been part of the leave campaign.

It is true, unfortunately, that under 13 years of Labour rule the apprenticeships and blue collar workers qualifications were ignored, leading to the shortage we see now.

The " Single Market" which was the point of my link, is abused by the other EU members as they either ignore the rules or bend them to suit. The Brits do not, and are subsequently disadvantaged.

The fact remains, MPs had a vote and decided by 6 to 1 that the people should decide.

They have!

Respect that.

I believe the Supreme Court will.

 

It is not a matter of the supreme court respecting the vote, the supreme court has to make a decision based on a point of law and according to the brexiteers they wanted a country where the UK parliament was sovereign and when the judges agree with them they throw a tantrum

[Xircal]

17 hours ago, George FmplesdaCosteedback said:

You make the usual interesting points, however:

The Grauniad, the FT and others have been pro-EU all the way, did I send you a report from the Daily Mail?

Who is to say Trump will be out in 4 years?

As for the labour force in the UK then I see little problem. Working visas for skilled people from all over the world has always been part of the leave campaign.

It is true, unfortunately, that under 13 years of Labour rule the apprenticeships and blue collar workers qualifications were ignored, leading to the shortage we see now.

The " Single Market" which was the point of my link, is abused by the other EU members as they either ignore the rules or bend them to suit. The Brits do not, and are subsequently disadvantaged.

The fact remains, MPs had a vote and decided by 6 to 1 that the people should decide.

They have!

Respect that.

I believe the Supreme Court will.

 

 

I don't think anyone in their right mind would think that Trump will be elected for a second term if he carries on the way he has so far even before taking office. It certainly won't do his stock any good when he comes up before the judge in any one of the 75 lawsuits brought against him already none of which he'll be able to claim diplomatic immunity for: http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-37956018

 

But we'll have to wait and see what happens on the home front when the Supreme Court appeal takes place next month. I'd be surprised though if they were to overturn the ruling just made given that one of the judges was the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales.