guzzi

But I thought the reasons for remaining were obvious, why did people need it pointing out to them by their leaders? If the material benefits need spelling out so graphically then it seems the whole premise for remaining isn't quite so clear cut. Both sides of the argument needed to be cogently put. The exit side did so pursusivly, notwithstanding that much of what they said was untrue. The remain side was poor, and relied too much on negatives about leaving, and failed to get the benefits of membership across clearly. Corbin, effectively, bolstered leave whilst he mouthed support for remain. But all we've heard since the vote are the negatives about leaving and nothing really about the benefits of membership. Seems to me like the argument for remaining is very flimsy if it's more focused on undermining the opposition argument than outlining the merits of it's own position. I can understand that view. But there is an alternative narrative , which is that as the UK government engages with the realities of leaving the EU, the negatives become more and more obvious, and the media, quite correctly, reports what emerges. For example, the cost of the 'divorce settlement', the Gibraltar situation and the contradiction between maintaining free market access and controlling immigration from EU countries. The leave side, understandably, didn't mention any of that in their campaign, and remain failed to get those points out effectively either. In short, the question that is emerging and becoming a herd of elephants in the room is 'why the hell are we doing this?'.

But I thought the reasons for remaining were obvious, why did people need it pointing out to them by their leaders? If the material benefits need spelling out so graphically then it seems the whole premise for remaining isn't quite so clear cut. Both sides of the argument needed to be cogently put. The exit side did so pursusivly, notwithstanding that much of what they said was untrue. The remain side was poor, and relied too much on negatives about leaving, and failed to get the benefits of membership across clearly. Corbin, effectively, bolstered leave whilst he mouthed support for remain.

it gets the point across...... .... and look how simple and versatile it is!

It's hilarious the way the barely literate populists construct insults by simply adding -tard to the object of their criticism! Poptards!

For me, one of the most inexcusable near silences was that of Labour and Corbyn. When he did eventually speak up, Corbyn spoke with such obvious insincerity that his message outshone his lukewarm words. He did very little more than say that on balance, he supported remain. He urged no one to vote remain, he did nothing to point out the material benefits that the EU brings to economically disadvantaged areas. It was exactly those Labour voting areas that were key in swinging it in favour of 'leave'. A more vigorous Labour campaign that focussed on getting the facts out would have made a difference,

You are making the common mistake of confusing England with the UK, Druid. The sovereign country is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. It consists of Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales and England. The point being made is that there might end up just being England.

OK Lxxx , I understand your logic now, but that isn't a road I want to go down.

The media, no. He's more threatened by certain sections of the media than those sections of the media are threatened by him. He provides ample grist to their mill. It is the job of the media to hold the administration up to scrutiny, something he just doesn't seem to grasp. One of the many things.

I agree with your first paragraph. But as for upsetting vested interests, then it must depend on who or what those vested interests are. Industry and of the military (the usual suspects when vested interest is mentioned) should be well content with his policies, I would have thought. If you mean career Republican politicians, then I think I would agree. But actually, I think the wider interests of the US and of the rest of the world would be served by replacing Trump with a person who is fit for office, statesmanlike and intelligent. What the Republicans fear is that Trump will bring the party and the country into such disrepute that their electoral chances will be in the bin for decades.

If this is so, then Flybe must be in a precarious situation across the board, as all their aircraft are smaller than than that. But I would have thought that 1 to 2 hour sectors on 'non sunshine' routes are exactly what machines like the Dash 8 - 400s and the Stobart's ATRs are designed to do? If they fill 'em up reasonably well, then they must be doing something else wrong to be losing money. In fact, they put a lot of the blame on IT related cost according to the statement. I wouldn't be surprised to see a network contraction, though, dropping routes where demand is too low. It's been a while since I was on Flybe (!), so I'm not sure how things are on the IoM routes.

Precisely my point. The action of his aides ultimately cost him the Presidency, though.

Of course not. Mitchell, Haldeman, Ehrilchman. For fucks sake!

Not convinced. Aviation's been around for a century and it's not happened yet. Is this true? I genuinely don't know and I'm not sure that any airline discloses profit/loss on a route by route basis. But beyond the support Poker Stars said they were putting into the BA LCY service, I'm not aware of any subsidy, although I stand to be corrected. I presume that Easyjet, for example only fly where they are making money. I've rarely been on a Gatwick flight that wasn't well filled, other than in the very early days of the service. I have seen the argument that they only do it to keep slots at at Gatwick, but I don't think that holds water because they could very quickly drop IoM and fly a sector that would be profitable. I do think we have had too much capacity on certain routes for operators to make money, but the market has pretty rapidly taken care of that.

Michael Flynn has come out and stated that he will give evidence if he is granted immunity from prosecution. The man who until recently was Trump's national security adviser presumably knows he has done something for which he would otherwise be prosecuted. If Congress grants this and takes his testimony, I think we may be moving into an early end-game for Trump. That would surely be a sign that even Republicans are despairing of him.

What an amazing planetary system. With the seven planets so closely spaced, from the surface of one, the other six planets would appear larger in the sky than our Moon when their orbits brought them into visibility. I wonder whether we could ever launch probes to such places, knowing that we could never receive data back within our lifetime? Even if we could achieve one third the speed of light, it would take 120 years to cross the necessary distance, and a further 40 years to receive any signals back. Planting oak trees for the grandchildren ....

It costs the IOMSPC £2.5 million a year to have it. They do sub-charter Arrow during the year, covering the likes of Condor and Stena and even her owners SeaTruck during the course of a year. I would assume that gets the net cost down a bit.

You meam like the Monica Lewinsky affair finished Bill Clinton...... not. There is having an affair and there is allowing yourself to be compromised by a foreign government which is overtly hostile to yours. So you're the one with the evidence then? Leaving aside the current allegation, he did openly and publicly call on Russia to hack the Democrats email system. That is a matter of record.

You meam like the Monica Lewinsky affair finished Bill Clinton...... not. Well he was impeached, and he was a sitting president. In Trump's case he has not taken the oath of office and this just comes as the latest revelation in a shit storm of revelations that impune his fitness to act as president. On top of his bizarre, labile behaviour and delusional utterances about anything that he thinks runs counter to his interests. I have never before contemplated the possibility that a US President would be better off xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx. edited because I remembered that my ESTA permission has run out!

They should certainly make the presidential election a simple count of the popular vote.

Having just watched the press conference, I really cannot see how the man can take office, He completely ignored the question about whether he or any of his campaign team was in touch with any Russian institution during the campaign. He blatantly and openly called on Russia to hack Democrat email servers. The sexual scandal, if proved true, will be the last straw.

I think the allegation is that 'reportedly' the briefing by US Security services last week referred to the compromising information the Russians hold on Trump. The US allegedly know this through covert human intelligence, rather than through hacking. I guess it all hinges on whether the 'report' can be verified as true. Please let it be true! Trump is issuing his usual 'fake news' tweets but he has so over used that phrase it is losing effectiveness, I feel. I suppose he can't really say that US Democracy must not be controlled by Russia, as that could be read as a tacit acceptance that they had something on him.

#watersportsgate Could the nightmare be over before it has begun?

Well it would be nice if they reimbursed those people who having seen the forecast a couple of days ago pre empted the Steam Packet announcement and changed their reservations with increased costs. OK, yes, that would be nice of the Packet. Or you might take the view those passengers paid a premium to get first dibs on the limited earlier places available. If it was me, I would be chuffed that I made a good call even if I had paid a few bob more.

The Packet flagged up probable disruption for Friday and Saturday on their web site this morning. They are waiving change fees for bringing crossings forward, and they are also bringing MV Arrow back from Larne in order to take trucks & trailers off the Ben, freeing up car spaces for PAX who make the change to an earlier crossing. They are indicating that Saturday daytime rotation is likely to sail as advertised to Heysham. I give them their due on this occasion. They sure won't be making money on any cancellations on Friday, especially with the added cost of operating MV Arrow.

The Electoral College meets today. From the NY Times: Do electors have to vote according to popular vote results in their states?Not necessarily. At least one elector has said he will buck his party and not vote for Mr. Trump. Nothing in the Constitution, or in federal law, binds electors to vote a particular way. There are some state laws that bind them to vote according to the popular vote outcome in that state; others are bound by more informal pledges to their party.