- Friedrich Merz
- Armin Laschet
- Norbert Röttgen
OK, so it's a fortnight away - the "Digital Party Conference" of the CDU to decide who the next party leader will be
And whoever wins this is going to have a good chance of being Chancellor, succeeding Merkel after the election in September this year
- Friedrich Merz
- Armin Laschet
- Norbert Röttgen
For ages it looked like Laschet was the clear front runner. Prime Minister of Nordrhein Westfalen (NRW), and with a kind of folksy-beergarten manner, it looked good for him.
Laschet's star is falling
https://t.co/24tiw4EaTm
And this trying to assess delegate intentions
https://t.co/DOWldt6u6G
More from Jon Worth
To those saying that those who have got their public health advice wrong earlier in the pandemic should put up their hands and apologise... a little cautionary lesson from another sector
A short 🧵
1/
Public health is not my thing
But Brexit is
And throughout 2019 and 2020 I have been trying to make predictions as to what will happen in that story. Lives do not depend on this, only my professional reputation (marginally) does
2/12
The three series of #BrexitDiagram I made in 2019 were extraordinarily accurate
Series 1/2
https://t.co/wOSzIXxJ2M
Series 3
https://t.co/E4fKeGoa5n
Series 4
https://t.co/yRsQ8mLGj1
Each series got that stage of Brexit right
3/12
The 2020 series was nowhere near as good - at one stage I had No Deal Brexit at 78% chance in early December - and that was not what
I own this error - I was wrong
I know *why* I was wrong - I thought the European Parliament would fight more on Provisional Application, and I thought agreeing everything in a week wouldn't work. I wasn't right
The Manston crisis / borders closing changed something too
5/12
A short 🧵
1/
Public health is not my thing
But Brexit is
And throughout 2019 and 2020 I have been trying to make predictions as to what will happen in that story. Lives do not depend on this, only my professional reputation (marginally) does
2/12
The three series of #BrexitDiagram I made in 2019 were extraordinarily accurate
Series 1/2
https://t.co/wOSzIXxJ2M
Series 3
https://t.co/E4fKeGoa5n
Series 4
https://t.co/yRsQ8mLGj1
Each series got that stage of Brexit right
3/12
The 2020 series was nowhere near as good - at one stage I had No Deal Brexit at 78% chance in early December - and that was not what
I own this error - I was wrong
I know *why* I was wrong - I thought the European Parliament would fight more on Provisional Application, and I thought agreeing everything in a week wouldn't work. I wasn't right
The Manston crisis / borders closing changed something too
5/12
A quick thread about night trains
The transport ministers from 🇩🇪🇦🇹🇫🇷🇨🇭, and the CEOs of the state-owned 🚅 operators in each (DB, ÖBB, SNCF, SBB), held a press conference about night trains today...
This slide summarises what they'd agreed
Don't get me wrong: night trains are *good*, and the trains on these routes will be ÖBB NightJet services, and ÖBB runs the best night trains there are in Europe.
I personally will be very happy to take these trains.
But so much for the good news.
Most of these routes have *already* been announced (Zürich to BCN, Rome, Amsterdam) - see https://t.co/7JnAo74tIX
Or have been even trialled (Vienna-Brussels) - see
That means only really the parts of the trains going to Paris and Berlin are in some way new - and even then we don't know how this will work (old Berlin-Paris night train went *through* Brussels)
In short: we're talking today about something like 4-6 new train services a day
In comparison: DB has 400 ICE units, SNCF 600 TGVs.
All of this is a *drop in the ocean*.
The transport ministers from 🇩🇪🇦🇹🇫🇷🇨🇭, and the CEOs of the state-owned 🚅 operators in each (DB, ÖBB, SNCF, SBB), held a press conference about night trains today...
This slide summarises what they'd agreed
Don't get me wrong: night trains are *good*, and the trains on these routes will be ÖBB NightJet services, and ÖBB runs the best night trains there are in Europe.
I personally will be very happy to take these trains.
But so much for the good news.
Most of these routes have *already* been announced (Zürich to BCN, Rome, Amsterdam) - see https://t.co/7JnAo74tIX
Or have been even trialled (Vienna-Brussels) - see
That means only really the parts of the trains going to Paris and Berlin are in some way new - and even then we don't know how this will work (old Berlin-Paris night train went *through* Brussels)
In short: we're talking today about something like 4-6 new train services a day
In comparison: DB has 400 ICE units, SNCF 600 TGVs.
All of this is a *drop in the ocean*.
More from Politics
My piece in the NY Times today: "the Trump administration is denying applications submitted to the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services at a rate 37 percent higher than the Obama administration did in 2016."
Based on this analysis: "Denials for immigration benefits—travel documents, work permits, green cards, worker petitions, etc.—increased 37 percent since FY 2016. On an absolute basis, FY 2018 will see more than about 155,000 more denials than FY 2016." https://t.co/Bl0naOO0sh
"This increase in denials cannot be credited to an overall rise in applications. In fact, the total number of applications so far this year is 2 percent lower than in 2016. It could be that the higher denial rate is also discouraging some people from applying at all.."
Thanks to @gsiskind for his insightful comments. The increase in denials, he said, is “significant enough to make one think that Congress must have passed legislation changing the requirements. But we know they have not.”
My conclusion:
Based on this analysis: "Denials for immigration benefits—travel documents, work permits, green cards, worker petitions, etc.—increased 37 percent since FY 2016. On an absolute basis, FY 2018 will see more than about 155,000 more denials than FY 2016." https://t.co/Bl0naOO0sh
"This increase in denials cannot be credited to an overall rise in applications. In fact, the total number of applications so far this year is 2 percent lower than in 2016. It could be that the higher denial rate is also discouraging some people from applying at all.."
Thanks to @gsiskind for his insightful comments. The increase in denials, he said, is “significant enough to make one think that Congress must have passed legislation changing the requirements. But we know they have not.”
My conclusion:
You May Also Like
1/“What would need to be true for you to….X”
Why is this the most powerful question you can ask when attempting to reach an agreement with another human being or organization?
A thread, co-written by @deanmbrody:
2/ First, “X” could be lots of things. Examples: What would need to be true for you to
- “Feel it's in our best interest for me to be CMO"
- “Feel that we’re in a good place as a company”
- “Feel that we’re on the same page”
- “Feel that we both got what we wanted from this deal
3/ Normally, we aren’t that direct. Example from startup/VC land:
Founders leave VC meetings thinking that every VC will invest, but they rarely do.
Worse over, the founders don’t know what they need to do in order to be fundable.
4/ So why should you ask the magic Q?
To get clarity.
You want to know where you stand, and what it takes to get what you want in a way that also gets them what they want.
It also holds them (mentally) accountable once the thing they need becomes true.
5/ Staying in the context of soliciting investors, the question is “what would need to be true for you to want to invest (or partner with us on this journey, etc)?”
Multiple responses to this question are likely to deliver a positive result.
Why is this the most powerful question you can ask when attempting to reach an agreement with another human being or organization?
A thread, co-written by @deanmbrody:
Next level tactic when closing a sale, candidate, or investment:
— Erik Torenberg (@eriktorenberg) February 27, 2018
Ask: \u201cWhat needs to be true for you to be all in?\u201d
You'll usually get an explicit answer that you might not get otherwise. It also holds them accountable once the thing they need becomes true.
2/ First, “X” could be lots of things. Examples: What would need to be true for you to
- “Feel it's in our best interest for me to be CMO"
- “Feel that we’re in a good place as a company”
- “Feel that we’re on the same page”
- “Feel that we both got what we wanted from this deal
3/ Normally, we aren’t that direct. Example from startup/VC land:
Founders leave VC meetings thinking that every VC will invest, but they rarely do.
Worse over, the founders don’t know what they need to do in order to be fundable.
4/ So why should you ask the magic Q?
To get clarity.
You want to know where you stand, and what it takes to get what you want in a way that also gets them what they want.
It also holds them (mentally) accountable once the thing they need becomes true.
5/ Staying in the context of soliciting investors, the question is “what would need to be true for you to want to invest (or partner with us on this journey, etc)?”
Multiple responses to this question are likely to deliver a positive result.
