The Politics Thread 2019

[st albans fox]

the main justification for the length of the shutdown is the main party conferences run from 14 sept to 2 October (I could be a day or so out either side) so mp’s aren’t all there anyway

 

so he is shutting a week earlier than he needs to and re opening a week later. 

 

its clearly political opportunism - if he gets a deal through then he will argue it was justified

 

his opponents no longer have the time to get legislation through to make ‘no deal’ illegal 

 

their only option is a vote of no confidence 

 

if if they win that (unlikely put possible) then a GE will probably result rather than an emergency govt.

 

boris would probably win that with a majority with Farage likely to back him rather than risk a split in the leave vote which allows the Labour Party or some alliance to get in that would definitely have a second ref with the big risk of a remain win. 

 

The EU have to make a judgement here - a  decent majority boris led administration is likely to be able to push them into a much worse withdrawal deal than the one currently in place. Remember that the last thing Europe needs is a no deal brexit, especially with a global economic downturn taking hold.   so a fudge of the existing  agreement to remove the backstop (probably a legally binding time limit on it ) plus a few other bits tweaked that the leavers don’t like is becoming more probable imo. 

 

Boris would then challenge the Labour Party to support that in October on the basis that if they don’t, a no deal would happen on Oct 31

 

then it would be labour who would be held responsible for no deal (in the eyes of the people ) .......... yeah I know 

 

One thing that could mess up boris’ plan (if this is where he is headed)  is a solid Labour Party conference vote for a second ref whatever the situation. Then it would be impossible to approve the withdrawal agreement as the parliamentary party would surely have to follow conference instruction. 

 

Interesting times and sadly ‘Rome continues to burn’ .......

 

i hope I still have a viable business when this is all over .....

Edited 29 August 2019 by st albans fox

[Tommo220]

15 hours ago, Heathrow fox said:

FOM has had a negative impact on people’s wages.The construction industry is a great example.Wages have risen since the referendum.Mainly down to the slowdown in EU workers coming to the UK.This has been officially recognised now.

i don't doubt that FOM has had a slight impact on increases in wages, but wages have been rising in the Construction industry way before the referendum.  I was a QS for 12 years until 18 months ago, and can testify to that being the case.  Wage increases are due more linked to construction output than availability of overseas labour.  More schemes being built = more demand for skilled labour = skilled labour being able to demand higher wages.

 

The trouble is, if construction output starts to fall post brexit (which is likely to be the case if there is even a sniff of recession), you can bet your bottom dollar that wages are going to go through the floor again like they did in 08.  Then it wont matter how few European joiners aren't coming to the UK.

 

 

[Innovindil]

12 minutes ago, Tommo220 said:

i don't doubt that FOM has had a slight impact on increases in wages, but wages have been rising in the Construction industry way before the referendum.  I was a QS for 12 years until 18 months ago, and can testify to that being the case.  Wage increases are due more linked to construction output than availability of overseas labour.  More schemes being built = more demand for skilled labour = skilled labour being able to demand higher wages.

 

The trouble is, if construction output starts to fall post brexit (which is likely to be the case if there is even a sniff of recession), you can bet your bottom dollar that wages are going to go through the floor again like they did in 08.  Then it wont matter how few European joiners aren't coming to the UK.

 

 

Not just rising for construction workers though, wages have been rising at a higher rate than the last decade. People passing it off as "It's going to muh evil rich" because it doesn't suit the agenda, but last I checked household spending was up half a percent point too, showing it's going to regular Joe's (like me) too. 

 

Hard to be unhappy with it all when my bank balance has never looked so healthy tbh. 

[David Guiza]

32 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

Not just rising for construction workers though, wages have been rising at a higher rate than the last decade. People passing it off as "It's going to muh evil rich" because it doesn't suit the agenda, but last I checked household spending was up half a percent point too, showing it's going to regular Joe's (like me) too. 

 

Hard to be unhappy with it all when my bank balance has never looked so healthy tbh. 

And an average increase of 36 people every day becoming homeless and a 73% increase in food bank usage over the past 5 years. 

 

[Innovindil]

40 minutes ago, David Guiza said:

And an average increase of 36 people every day becoming homeless and a 73% increase in food bank usage over the past 5 years. 

 

Sucks to be them I guess. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Nick]

20 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

Sucks to be them I guess. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I’ve never really understood the idea of voting for your own best interests. I’ve always been on the side of a party that improves the life chances and conditions for the most polarised in society. I’m alright because I had education and aspirations and opportunities - I’d like to increase those things for more people.

[Alf Bentley]

10 hours ago, Kopfkino said:

Aye, on the front foot and outmanoeuvring the other side with skill. I don't find this move acceptable personally but from a purely short-term political strategy point of view its admirable and left himself with options. Made his opponents look mad, quickly pissed on their fire from yesterday, has dared them into a people v parliament situation, could get an election to deliver a majority to make the task of a deal 100x easier, or even bought time to possibly sort a deal and present it as deal or no deal to the existing parliament. Meanwhile, his opponents are doing the campaigning for him, every time they mention democracy and outrage I can't imagine it's doing them much favour whether they're correct or not in their musings.

 

Lest we forget, many of the most vociferous were happy to pay double or quits by rejecting the withdrawal agreement with the goal of stopping Brexit. They could of bound the hands of the then government or any future government with the backstop and a transition period whilst leaving the future relationship as a fight to be win. They preferred to take the risk and now they're kicking and screaming cos they might lose the bet. It's on them as much as its on Boris and co.

 

I agree with a lot of what you say about the cunning tactics of this move and how it could all work to Johnson's advantage. However.....

 

- Can the opposition now avoid being dared into a people v. parliament situation? Short of sitting back and daring Boris to do No Deal, they have to fight his plan, surely, which brings the risk of being depicted as "the anti-democratic parliament" thwarting the will of the people. Maybe they just need to win the public argument as to who is being democratic, not easy but not necessarily impossible: https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/08/28/47-27-brits-oppose-parliament-suspension

That's just one poll, but suggests the public is 47%-27% opposed to Boris' suspension, with even 27% of Tories & 25% of Leave voters opposed.

 

- Although a Boris majority in an election is a distinct possibility, it would still be a massive gamble. I'm pretty sure that Labour will lose seats to the Tories (Labour Leave seats, the more marginal prosperous seats they won on the Remain/youth vote surge in 2017) as well as Scottish seats to the SNP. But I'm also pretty sure that the Tories will lose Scottish seats to the SNP & seats in the SW & SE to the Lib Dems. There's also the Brexit Party factor. I'd expect some sort of Boris-Nigel electoral understanding, but it won't be easy for Farage to just back down with Brexit undone, trusting in Boris (of all people) to keep his word and not cut some sort of a deal with the EU if he gets a majority.....and not easy for the Tories to, say, back down from campaigning in certain seats to give the Brexit Party a free run. Even a limited Brexit Party election campaign could harm Tory chances of a majority.

 

- Is the EU likely to make any meaningful concessions, even if it becomes clear that Parliament cannot stop No Deal? I can see them making some juicy offerings for inclusion in the Political Declaration. But they've been unequivocal that the backstop is staying (in the absence of viable alternatives miraculously being revealed at the last minute) and that the Withdrawal Agreement will not be renegotiated. It would be a hell of a climbdown, making them look very weak, if they backed down on either of those positions. Everyone from Salvini & LePen to Putin & Trump would be licking their lips at that. Surely, beyond minor concessions, the EU is more likely to take the hit from No Deal, assuming that the hit on the UK will be much bigger & that they'll then be in a strong negotiating position post-No Deal?

 

- I take your final point about the questionable tactical wisdom of rejecting the WA. But is there some hindsight here? Some of the indicative votes came close to winning support (Ken Clarke's Customs Union proposal, the Common Market 2.0 proposal, even the second referendum option, though that was further back, as I recall). If there was a tactical gaffe by the opposition, maybe it was in not showing more flexibility at this stage, rather than in not backing the WA.

 

If we do end up with a Boris No Deal Govt, it could also be a massive own goal for the Tories, triggering a backlash against them, if things turn out as badly as the experts predict....not that that's much comfort to those of us who have to live in the country.

Who knows? Maybe it'll all be wonderful - or Boris may succeed in pinning the blame for any No Deal chaos on May, the EU, the "Remainer parliament", foreigners or whoever....

[Innovindil]

2 minutes ago, Swan Lesta said:

I’ve never really understood the idea of voting for your own best interests. I’ve always been on the side of a party that improves the life chances and conditions for the most polarised in society. I’m alright because I had education and aspirations and opportunities - I’d like to increase those things for more people.

And that's absolutely fine. I'm wired to look after number 1. I don't have anything against anyone. You won't see me stepping on someone lower to raise myself higher, but neither am I going to feel guilty for being successful. How much does a person have to beat themselves a day before they feel better? Should I be upset over the millions of destitute over in the East? What about beating myself for the homeless in France? Or Germany? Or some of the richest cities in the US? Should I be nationalistic and care more about the English homeless? Or care about them less because even English homeless are better off than most other homeless? It's all too confusing for me i fear, so yes, I choose not to commit too much of my rather limited emotional power to it. 

 

I can't save the world, but I can better myself enough to look after the people I do care about, and that's enough for me. 

[Nick]

7 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

What's to understand?

 

Some people are just sociopaths with no redeeming qualities.

I think that’s a bit much to be honest!

 

Perhaps it’s more about values and influences?

 

Many people growing up being taught family is the most important thing and to look after your own. Some run businesses which employ people and they see that as an extension of those values. If you work in cut throat industry your whole life it’s dog eat dog and outsell the person next to you in order to advance and stay solvent... If you spend your working career in public service you are exposed to different experiences, seeing families vulnerable and hungry on a daily basis and it changes you...

 

I think there’s more balance needed on both sides to be honest. Maybe some more centric experiences to broaden the understanding is required somewhere in the education system.  

[Innovindil]

20 minutes ago, Swan Lesta said:

I think that’s a bit much to be honest!

 

Perhaps it’s more about values and influences?

 

Many people growing up being taught family is the most important thing and to look after your own. Some run businesses which employ people and they see that as an extension of those values. If you work in cut throat industry your whole life it’s dog eat dog and outsell the person next to you in order to advance and stay solvent... If you spend your working career in public service you are exposed to different experiences, seeing families vulnerable and hungry on a daily basis and it changes you...

 

I think there’s more balance needed on both sides to be honest. Maybe some more centric experiences to broaden the understanding is required somewhere in the education system.  

A bit demeaning tbh. I know you mean well, but suggesting you could understand what it's like growing up destitute because you spend time around poor people is like me saying I understand what a rape victim feels because I had a chat with her. 

 

And honestly I'm not sure why you'd give old bully Buce the time of day, he's said himself he grew up in a privaledged time where he travelled the world working part time, not sure what gives him the right to pass judgement over me just because he's reached an age where he offers his thoughts and prayers to the "lessers". But then again he's been at it for days, seems a bit upset recently. 

[Donk]

You know what I think is really ridiculous about brexit.

 

Its the fact that no one, not even on the leave side, can explain any tangible benefit or improvement to our lives any more from brexit, and whats more, they don't even try to.

 

The whole issue has become an end in itself.

 

Its not got anything to do with the way we intend to run our country in the short, medium and long term.

 

The only thing is for one side to say they "beat" the other....because of the other side being lefties, or remoaners, or (insert adjective).

 

The people on the leave side are all on the record saying things that have been proved completely untrue. They have campaigned on bases that have been proved false, and they've completely contradicted each other with their personal visions for brexit.

 

It hasn't made one jot of difference to the supporters of the leave side, because any thoughts of what happened post brexit are irrelevant. Whether the economy tanks, whether people lose jobs, whether they lose THEIR job, whether farmers animals are destroyed or people sent back, it doesn't matter.

 

The just want to say " I won".

 

Look at the scruffy haired PM we have now. In the past couple of months, he has flip flopped between:

 

• we have to leave on October 31st do or die
• the odds of no deal are a million to one
• But we are going to really ramp up spending on no deal that by my own calculations should be a total waste
• Europe seem more interested in reaching a deal
• But if we get the do or die no deal I said at the start I wanted, itll be the EU's fault not ours
• I'm going to shut parliament down so no one can oppose the no deal thatll save my party and so I don't come under any scrutiny, but was also forced onto us by the EU.

You think these are the actions of a man who has any kind of coherent plan for the future?

 

Its all on a wing and a prayer.

 

3 years since the referendum. 3 Years.

 

And in 3 years, the only person that could put together a plan that "delivered" brexit and didn't bend the whole country over was Theresa May.

 

And it got thrown out because for brexiters, it wasn't "brexity" enough.

 

And this is the reason no deal came into existence. Because a coherent plan wasn't possible to achieve and would fall apart under any scrutiny. It already has.

 

So now you have the situation everyone has to pretend that ruining the country was what they wanted.

 

That project fear was true, and was the reason they voted for the total opposite.

 

You cant even quote Cameron saying we will leave the single market and customs union because he was campaigning on the REMAIN side, and using that as a reason NOT to leave the EU.

 

And now to cap it all off, we suspend parliament to force through a policy that no majority in the house of commons, who are democratically elected representatives, or majority in the public want, because 48% of people didn't want it in the first place, we have new eligible voters who we don't know what they want because we haven't asked them, and we have leavers who all share different views.

 

And yet, for some people, all they want is to say "I won" on 1st November. Nothing else matters.

[Nick]

1 minute ago, Innovindil said:

A bit demeaning tbh. I know you mean well, but suggesting you could understand what it's like growing up destitute because you spend time around poor people is like me saying I understand what a rape victim feels because I had a chat with her. 

 

And honestly I'm not sure why you'd give old bully Buce the time of day, he's said himself he grew up in a privaledged time where he travelled the world working part time, not sure what gives him the right to pass judgement over me just because he's reached an age where he offers his thoughts and prayers to the "lessers". But then again he's been at it for days, seems a bit upset recently. 

Not demeaning or intended to be demeaning. But to use your argument, if you had spent 20 years of your working life counselling or working with rape victims you definitely would know a damn site more about the issue than you would have if you’d spent the last 20 years working as a Stock broker. Now whilst my 20 years work experience has been primarily public sector orientated / themed I’m willing to bet I understand the plight of the vulnerable as well as you understand the industry you work in. And I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t have much of an understanding about what you do.

[Innovindil]

8 minutes ago, Swan Lesta said:

Not demeaning or intended to be demeaning. But to use your argument, if you had spent 20 years of your working life counselling or working with rape victims you definitely would know a damn site more about the issue than you would have if you’d spent the last 20 years working as a Stock broker. Now whilst my 20 years work experience has been primarily public sector orientated / themed I’m willing to bet I understand the plight of the vulnerable as well as you understand the industry you work in. And I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t have much of an understanding about what you do.

Reading the story isn't the same as living the story. That's all I'm saying. I really don't mean any offense and I hope you don't take it as such. 

[ozleicester]

1 hour ago, Innovindil said:

Sucks to be them I guess. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

wow

[Finnaldo]

1 hour ago, Innovindil said:

And that's absolutely fine. I'm wired to look after number 1. I don't have anything against anyone. You won't see me stepping on someone lower to raise myself higher, but neither am I going to feel guilty for being successful. How much does a person have to beat themselves a day before they feel better? Should I be upset over the millions of destitute over in the East? What about beating myself for the homeless in France? Or Germany? Or some of the richest cities in the US? Should I be nationalistic and care more about the English homeless? Or care about them less because even English homeless are better off than most other homeless? It's all too confusing for me i fear, so yes, I choose not to commit too much of my rather limited emotional power to it. 

 

I can't save the world, but I can better myself enough to look after the people I do care about, and that's enough for me. 

 

If that's your opinion that's your opinion, but it's a poor excuse as the simple fact is you have no power to fix the homelessness or suffering in those countries as, you know, you're not a constituent of those countries like you are of the British Parliament.

 

In terms of doing the best for your loved ones, that's all well and good until an indiscriminate strike of bad luck (something happens to yourself, plus a recession or economic downfall) means they're the next ones in the breadline. A general improvement on society means regardless what happens to you at least have some assurance they won't be down the food bank should the worst happen to you. That's without going into a decrease in crime and therefore a generally safer society for you and your loved ones to live in.

 

I'll never shout anyone down for their opinions (bar any particularly monstrous ones) but like Swan I can't see any positives for 'me vs everyone else'.

[Nick]

27 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

Reading the story isn't the same as living the story. That's all I'm saying. I really don't mean any offense and I hope you don't take it as such. 

No offence taken... but also being in debt doesn’t make you an insolvency expert either...

[RoboFox]

Tory voter attitude in six words or less:

 

2 hours ago, Innovindil said:

Sucks to be them I guess. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[bovril]

2 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

- Is the EU likely to make any meaningful concessions, even if it becomes clear that Parliament cannot stop No Deal? I can see them making some juicy offerings for inclusion in the Political Declaration. But they've been unequivocal that the backstop is staying (in the absence of viable alternatives miraculously being revealed at the last minute) and that the Withdrawal Agreement will not be renegotiated. It would be a hell of a climbdown, making them look very weak, if they backed down on either of those positions. Everyone from Salvini & LePen to Putin & Trump would be licking their lips at that. Surely, beyond minor concessions, the EU is more likely to take the hit from No Deal, assuming that the hit on the UK will be much bigger & that they'll then be in a strong negotiating position post-No Deal?

 

- I take your final point about the questionable tactical wisdom of rejecting the WA. But is there some hindsight here? Some of the indicative votes came close to winning support (Ken Clarke's Customs Union proposal, the Common Market 2.0 proposal, even the second referendum option, though that was further back, as I recall). If there was a tactical gaffe by the opposition, maybe it was in not showing more flexibility at this stage, rather than in not backing the WA.

 

If we do end up with a Boris No Deal Govt, it could also be a massive own goal for the Tories, triggering a backlash against them, if things turn out as badly as the experts predict....not that that's much comfort to those of us who have to live in the country.

Who knows? Maybe it'll all be wonderful - or Boris may succeed in pinning the blame for any No Deal chaos on May, the EU, the "Remainer parliament", foreigners or whoever....

The EU won't make any meaningful concessions. The Brexiters should know this, because they've been telling us for years it's a political project not an economic one, something they seem to have conveniently forgotten since early 2016. This is why I wonder if Cummings / Johnson, in their 31st October fixation, are overplaying their hand somewhat. If they continue to unite opposition against them, it becomes easier for a non-Tory coalition to get together after a post-crash out GE, who could take us in to the CU and SM anyway. 

 

The problem with that is that the opposition don't seem to know what they want either. 

[Heathrow fox]

5 hours ago, Tommo220 said:

i don't doubt that FOM has had a slight impact on increases in wages, but wages have been rising in the Construction industry way before the referendum.  I was a QS for 12 years until 18 months ago, and can testify to that being the case.  Wage increases are due more linked to construction output than availability of overseas labour.  More schemes being built = more demand for skilled labour = skilled labour being able to demand higher wages.

 

The trouble is, if construction output starts to fall post brexit (which is likely to be the case if there is even a sniff of recession), you can bet your bottom dollar that wages are going to go through the floor again like they did in 08.  Then it wont matter how few European joiners aren't coming to the UK.

 

 

We have a recession every ten years or so anyway.Nothing unsual there.The construction industry will be the first to feel it aswell.Again same old same old.Im talking about the here and now.

[ozleicester]

... "lacking consideration for other people; concerned chiefly with one's own personal profit or pleasure".

[leicsmac]

3 hours ago, Innovindil said:

And that's absolutely fine. I'm wired to look after number 1. I don't have anything against anyone. You won't see me stepping on someone lower to raise myself higher, but neither am I going to feel guilty for being successful. How much does a person have to beat themselves a day before they feel better? Should I be upset over the millions of destitute over in the East? What about beating myself for the homeless in France? Or Germany? Or some of the richest cities in the US? Should I be nationalistic and care more about the English homeless? Or care about them less because even English homeless are better off than most other homeless? It's all too confusing for me i fear, so yes, I choose not to commit too much of my rather limited emotional power to it. 

 

I can't save the world, but I can better myself enough to look after the people I do care about, and that's enough for me. 

 

1 hour ago, Finnaldo said:

 

If that's your opinion that's your opinion, but it's a poor excuse as the simple fact is you have no power to fix the homelessness or suffering in those countries as, you know, you're not a constituent of those countries like you are of the British Parliament.

 

In terms of doing the best for your loved ones, that's all well and good until an indiscriminate strike of bad luck (something happens to yourself, plus a recession or economic downfall) means they're the next ones in the breadline. A general improvement on society means regardless what happens to you at least have some assurance they won't be down the food bank should the worst happen to you. That's without going into a decrease in crime and therefore a generally safer society for you and your loved ones to live in.

 

I'll never shout anyone down for their opinions (bar any particularly monstrous ones) but like Swan I can't see any positives for 'me vs everyone else'.

This is what it comes down to, really - even if one is solely focused on self-interest, for certain big issues the interests of all become self-interest because those issues end up, in time, reaching everyone - no matter how deep they may dig or high they may build in the attempt to be an island.

 

I can understand the sentiment that Inno talks about here, but looking only after the people you care about in your line of sight, even when there is good reason to do so, sometimes, is not enough even from a practical, self-interest based mindset.

Edited 29 August 2019 by leicsmac

[Foxxed]

Boris sets up something more dangerous: playing the people against their MPs.

 

That is, against the Parliament in favour of the Leader.

 

You can cast your vote, elect your MP, but when a big decision arrives your MP will have no say.

[davieG]

Ruth Davidson quits as Scottish Conservative leader

 

Ruth Davidson has quit as leader of the Scottish Conservatives after eight years in the job.

In a statement she said it had been the "privilege of my life" to have led the party.

But she added that "much had changed" both politically and personally, which had led her to tender her resignation.

Ms Davidson had a baby last year, and has been a vocal critic of Prime Minister Boris Johnson - particularly over his approach to Brexit.

She also said her personal priorities had changed, and the prospect of spending hundreds of hours away from her son and partner during a possible election campaign now filled her with "dread".

The 40-year-old, who will continue as the MSP for Edinburgh Central, tweeted her resignation statement shortly before addressing the media at an event in Edinburgh on Thursday morning.

 

[Alf Bentley]

17 minutes ago, bovril said:

The EU won't make any meaningful concessions. The Brexiters should know this, because they've been telling us for years it's a political project not an economic one, something they seem to have conveniently forgotten since early 2016. This is why I wonder if Cummings / Johnson, in their 31st October fixation, are overplaying their hand somewhat. If they continue to unite opposition against them, it becomes easier for a non-Tory coalition to get together after a post-crash out GE, who could take us in to the CU and SM anyway. 

 

The problem with that is that the opposition don't seem to know what they want either. 

 

I share your instinct that any EU concessions will be minor. Whatever else they may be, Johnson & Cummings don't seem stupid. So, do they know something we don't and genuinely believe that major demands (ditch backstop, reopen WA) will lead to major late concessions? Or is that all PR guff while they use tactics like prorogation to provoke the opposition into triggering an election before Halloween, gambling on winning a majority via a People v. Parliament / Get Brexit Done populist campaign?

 

I agree that the opposition parties / rebel Tories urgently need to agree a strategy. But a post-No Deal non-Tory coalition won't be able to take us into the CU and SM or do anything else if Boris has won a majority at an election in the meantime.....would be a big gamble for him, but it could work. He'd then have 5 years of power ahead: deal with the chaos initially & make a few public spending give-aways, then seek a limited FTA with the EU while shifting the UK to a more deregulated, US-style economy/society?

 

I cannot see much logic in Johnson using tactics like prorogation to squeeze through to No Deal at Halloween without an election. He must know that the country would face chaos after a 31st Oct No Deal - and he'd then be effectively leading a minority govt. Under that scenario, he could easily lose a confidence vote and face a late autumn election at a time of peak unpopularity, potentially leading to a Lab/LD/SNP Govt by Christmas....

 

I also wonder how keen the EU would be to have a post-No Deal UK join the CU and SM, even if it wanted to? Maybe the EU would be happy about that - resume the benefits of free trade with a large European economy without all the hassle of the close political relationship/influence implicit in UK membership of the EU. But if No Deal has done damage to the EU as well as to the UK, maybe they wouldn't be so keen, or would set very tough terms for SM/CU membership?

[WigstonWanderer]

I suspect that if the UK tried to rejoin the CU or SM after any kind of Brexit, let alone a no deal one, they would never get such advantageous terms as now.

 

Johnson and Cummings do seem to play a much better game of poker than May, and I do actually believe Boris when he says he wants a deal. The problem is I think he’s playing with a much weaker hand than he thinks he has and the stakes are huge.