I expect Williamson's tenure to be coming to an end following due process, and certainly it is a distraction that is not needed by Rishi
However, Bloomberg is reporting that the UK and EU are close to a break through on Northern Ireland and they attribute today's strengthining pound to this
I have sensed for some time Rishi is far more pragmatic on controversial issues , and I expect his meeting with Macron will see the channel crossings problem addressed to our mutual benefit, as I expect Macron's outer EU nation proposals to be seriously discussed and considered
When do we get the result of the investigation into the alleged bullying by Williamson?
If I have understood this correctly, I'm still slightly bemused by a Chief Whip complaining about bullying. Isn't that what they exist to do themselves?
And if the report I have seen in the Guardian documents the whole thing, such an allegation now looks to me at least in part like revenge taken cold - which dissension is perhaps more worrying for the Tories than the thing itself.
"Vile" and "threatening" seems a little overegged - he just seems pissed off, and I can't see anything that can be called "misogynistic". Unless there is a claim that a theoretical man in the same position would not have had the same reaction.
That would be sexism and would not in itself come anywhere near the bar for misogyny.
He was threatening, though. "There is a price for everything" was a threat.
Hmmm. Was he in a position to make good on a threat? Or is that unusual for politicians in the HOC?
Interesting little study on Low Traffic Neighbourhoods if anyone is following the slightly excitable debate on these.
https://twitter.com/GCHUOxford/status/1589945165883781125 "LTN implementation was found to reduce NO2 statistically significantly within both the intervention areas (5.7%) and in boundary areas (8.9%), compared to the external control sites without LTN implementation." #UrbanTransitions2022
"Similar effects were also found in traffic volumes, which were reduced by 58.2% within LTNs and by 13.4% at LTN boundary sites (without statistical significance)."
"Neighbourhood traffic reductions measures are able to reduce air pollution and traffic in target areas, without necessarily causing displacements in surrounding streets."
Tp be clear: Windows is amazing. Getting a system that runs on such a massive variety of hardware, including legacy stuff, with so few problems is a miracle. And to make it fairly user-friendly as well. This matters, as without such capabilities we would have a number of closed, walled gardens that are much more expensive.
Apple has it easy; by controlling the hardware, you fantastically reduce the number of combinations you need to support.
Without Windows, the world would be much poorer.
Which is great for people who don't know much about computers.
You sound like a petrolhead bemoaning the fact that modern cars can go a full 12 months between services without the driver ever needing to tinker under the bonnet.
Tp be clear: Windows is amazing. Getting a system that runs on such a massive variety of hardware, including legacy stuff, with so few problems is a miracle. And to make it fairly user-friendly as well. This matters, as without such capabilities we would have a number of closed, walled gardens that are much more expensive.
Apple has it easy; by controlling the hardware, you fantastically reduce the number of combinations you need to support.
Without Windows, the world would be much poorer.
Which is great for people who don't know much about computers.
You sound like a petrolhead bemoaning the fact that modern cars can go a full 12 months between services without the driver ever needing to tinker under the bonnet.
I read his comment as entirely positive! Quite the opposite.
OT today is Patch Tuesday and potentially a big one with the 22H2 updates, so beware of PCs and laptops rebooting inconveniently over the next day or two, especially if staying up late for the US mid-terms. (tbf it should be small if you are up to date anyway on Windows 10).
PCs really are shit
I love this sort of comment, as it shows people who are utterly clueless about computers.
Why? Is there something good about computers inconveniently rebooting?
You are harking back to the glory days of 30 years ago when people like you knew about computers and no one else did. Those days are gone.
Inconvenient, unscheduled rebooting seems to be a thing dating back about 25 years ago. Hasn't really been an issue with Windows, unless you have a hardware failure, since XP.
Mine always asks me first. I then say "yes" or "ask me again later" or "let's schedule for another time".
OT today is Patch Tuesday and potentially a big one with the 22H2 updates, so beware of PCs and laptops rebooting inconveniently over the next day or two, especially if staying up late for the US mid-terms. (tbf it should be small if you are up to date anyway on Windows 10).
PCs really are shit
I love this sort of comment, as it shows people who are utterly clueless about computers.
Why? Is there something good about computers inconveniently rebooting?
You are harking back to the glory days of 30 years ago when people like you knew about computers and no one else did. Those days are gone.
Inconvenient, unscheduled rebooting seems to be a thing dating back about 25 years ago. Hasn't really been an issue with Windows, unless you have a hardware failure, since XP.
Mine always asks me first. I then say "yes" or "ask me again later" or "let's schedule for another time".
PC rebooting, I mean, just to be clear.
25 years ago it would be a BSOD.
Probably on all the timetable displays at the station.
The US 1st Amendment explains why the amounts of money spent on campaigns are so large in the US. Limits on spending are seen by most courts as limits on speech, and have gradually been disappearing. For example, one of the key court cases was Citizens United: "Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310 (2010), was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States regarding campaign finance laws and free speech under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It was argued in 2009 and decided in 2010. The court held 5-4 that the free speech clause of the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting independent expenditures for political campaigns by corporations, including nonprofit corporations, labor unions, and other associations.
The case began after Citizens United, a conservative non-profit organization, sought to air and advertise a film critical of then Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton shortly before the 2008 Democratic primary elections. Broadcasting the film would have been a violation of the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, which prohibited any corporation, non-profit organization or labor union from making an "electioneering communication" within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of an election, or making any expenditure advocating the election or defeat of a candidate at any time. Citizens United challenged the constitutionality of this law, and its case reached the Supreme Court." source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC
These decisions have weakened the political influence of newspapers and our TV networks. Opinions differ on whether that is a good thing.
(One thing to remember is that US congressional districts have much larger populations than your constituencies; there are 435 House seats for a population of about 332 million, and many of the districts are quite large geographically, making door-to-door campaigning impractical.
Moreover, much TV advertising is wasted, since TV markets rarely match single-district boundaries. So, for example, most of the TV spending on House seats here in the Seattle area is wasted.)
Extending the provisions of the First Amendment from citizens to corporations always felt like a bit of a stretch to me.
Yep. This has been a bugbear of mine for many years. 'Rights' whether they are human rights or rights under the constitution should only apply to people, not to entities. I am happy with separate, limited, protections for companies but they should not be able to claim rights under the US constitution or the UK Bill of Rights or the ECHR.
Tp be clear: Windows is amazing. Getting a system that runs on such a massive variety of hardware, including legacy stuff, with so few problems is a miracle. And to make it fairly user-friendly as well. This matters, as without such capabilities we would have a number of closed, walled gardens that are much more expensive.
Apple has it easy; by controlling the hardware, you fantastically reduce the number of combinations you need to support.
Without Windows, the world would be much poorer.
Which is great for people who don't know much about computers.
You sound like a petrolhead bemoaning the fact that modern cars can go a full 12 months between services without the driver ever needing to tinker under the bonnet.
100% the opposite, this started with someone saying that complaining about windows meant you were "utterly clueless" about computers. This is a windies machine but I have a laptop running linux and 2 android devices. It is this one that's a PITA.
The US 1st Amendment explains why the amounts of money spent on campaigns are so large in the US. Limits on spending are seen by most courts as limits on speech, and have gradually been disappearing. For example, one of the key court cases was Citizens United: "Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310 (2010), was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States regarding campaign finance laws and free speech under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It was argued in 2009 and decided in 2010. The court held 5-4 that the free speech clause of the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting independent expenditures for political campaigns by corporations, including nonprofit corporations, labor unions, and other associations.
The case began after Citizens United, a conservative non-profit organization, sought to air and advertise a film critical of then Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton shortly before the 2008 Democratic primary elections. Broadcasting the film would have been a violation of the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, which prohibited any corporation, non-profit organization or labor union from making an "electioneering communication" within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of an election, or making any expenditure advocating the election or defeat of a candidate at any time. Citizens United challenged the constitutionality of this law, and its case reached the Supreme Court." source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC
These decisions have weakened the political influence of newspapers and our TV networks. Opinions differ on whether that is a good thing.
(One thing to remember is that US congressional districts have much larger populations than your constituencies; there are 435 House seats for a population of about 332 million, and many of the districts are quite large geographically, making door-to-door campaigning impractical.
Moreover, much TV advertising is wasted, since TV markets rarely match single-district boundaries. So, for example, most of the TV spending on House seats here in the Seattle area is wasted.)
This is why US democracy is screwed in its current form. The ability to spend your way to power really doesn't work in a democratic system.
Of course he could. He is PM. Sacking ministers is one of the perks of the job.
Gav = toast.
"Obviously there have been further allegations reported this morning. Those are serious allegations that have come in. It is true that no formal complaint has been made, but we want to consider proper processes before commenting further.
At another point the spokesperson said Downing Street would be “checking due process” before commenting further. Asked if the Cabinet Office’s propriety and ethics team would be involved in this, the spokesperson said he would not discuss the process.
This is serious for Williamson. No 10 could have just have said: “Williamson has denied this, there has been no formal complaint,” and left it at that. But it hasn’t."
From the discussion on the previous thread: Washington state and California both have "top-two" primary systems. The top two candidates in a single primary go on to a general election -- regardless of their party affiliations, if any. Usually in both states, the top two are a Republican and a Democrat, but there are times when voters in the general election will be choosing between two candidates of the same party.
For example, a few years ago, there were a bunch of Democrats running for state treasurer here, and just two Republicans. The two Republicans came out on top, and one of them won the general election. As far as I know he did an OK job, but he was not re-elected.
And this year, in the Washington primary for secretary of state, the top two were Democrat Steve Hobbs and Julie Anderson, who is not affiliated with any party. (The Washington secretary of state has many jobs, including supervising elections.) https://julieanderson.org/ https://www.electhobbs.com/
Proponents of top-two primaries argue that the benefit more moderate candidates. I haven't looked for studies on that question, though I suppose there must be some.
(Top-two elections are sometimes incorrectly called "jungle" primaries. As far as I know, only Louisiana uses the latter.)
Of course he could. He is PM. Sacking ministers is one of the perks of the job.
Gav = toast.
"Obviously there have been further allegations reported this morning. Those are serious allegations that have come in. It is true that no formal complaint has been made, but we want to consider proper processes before commenting further.
At another point the spokesperson said Downing Street would be “checking due process” before commenting further. Asked if the Cabinet Office’s propriety and ethics team would be involved in this, the spokesperson said he would not discuss the process.
This is serious for Williamson. No 10 could have just have said: “Williamson has denied this, there has been no formal complaint,” and left it at that. But it hasn’t."
I expect Williamson's tenure to be coming to an end following due process, and certainly it is a distraction that is not needed by Rishi
However, Bloomberg is reporting that the UK and EU are close to a break through on Northern Ireland and they attribute today's strengthining pound to this
I have sensed for some time Rishi is far more pragmatic on controversial issues , and I expect his meeting with Macron will see the channel crossings problem addressed to our mutual benefit, as I expect Macron's outer EU nation proposals to be seriously discussed and considered
When do we get the result of the investigation into the alleged bullying by Williamson?
If I have understood this correctly, I'm still slightly bemused by a Chief Whip complaining about bullying. Isn't that what they exist to do themselves?
And if the report I have seen in the Guardian documents the whole thing, such an allegation now looks to me at least in part like revenge taken cold - which dissension is perhaps more worrying for the Tories than the thing itself.
"Vile" and "threatening" seems a little overegged - he just seems pissed off, and I can't see anything that can be called "misogynistic". Unless there is a claim that a theoretical man in the same position would not have had the same reaction.
I've not commented on other party's reactions, since they would say what they are saying regardless of what actually happened.
I cannot see any mitigation for Williamson but everyone, even him, are permitted due process
There is an irony in that is reported that in 2006 Wendy Morton and 5 other conservative councillors were found guilty of bullying themselves apparently
No they aren't. In a normal job, you tell a colleague to fuck off in writing, you get fired. Just like that. None of this We must wait for Sue Wossname to report in 6 months time, and not prejudge her findings.
I am not excusing Williamson who should lose his cabinet position and I expect he will
I do think we need to wait for a series of lengthy Parliamentary enquiries to rule that SGW did nothing wrong before we pass judgement. It's all "he said, she said", and I am sure anything in writing can be excused as satire.
Don't forget, despite all the evidence to the contrary, Boris Johnson looked as guilty as hell over Partygate, but after a six month exhaustive enquiry by the Metropolitan Police's finest officers, the best they could muster was a £20 fixed penalty notice for eating cake at work. These cases are seldom what they first seem. I seem to recall you demanding Starmer's nuts after viewing Ivo Delingpole's video of "currygate".
I expect Williamson's tenure to be coming to an end following due process, and certainly it is a distraction that is not needed by Rishi
However, Bloomberg is reporting that the UK and EU are close to a break through on Northern Ireland and they attribute today's strengthining pound to this
I have sensed for some time Rishi is far more pragmatic on controversial issues , and I expect his meeting with Macron will see the channel crossings problem addressed to our mutual benefit, as I expect Macron's outer EU nation proposals to be seriously discussed and considered
When do we get the result of the investigation into the alleged bullying by Williamson?
If I have understood this correctly, I'm still slightly bemused by a Chief Whip complaining about bullying. Isn't that what they exist to do themselves?
And if the report I have seen in the Guardian documents the whole thing, such an allegation now looks to me at least in part like revenge taken cold - which dissension is perhaps more worrying for the Tories than the thing itself.
"Vile" and "threatening" seems a little overegged - he just seems pissed off, and I can't see anything that can be called "misogynistic". Unless there is a claim that a theoretical man in the same position would not have had the same reaction.
I've not commented on other party's reactions, since they would say what they are saying regardless of what actually happened.
I cannot see any mitigation for Williamson but everyone, even him, are permitted due process
There is an irony in that is reported that in 2006 Wendy Morton and 5 other conservative councillors were found guilty of bullying themselves apparently
No they aren't. In a normal job, you tell a colleague to fuck off in writing, you get fired. Just like that. None of this We must wait for Sue Wossname to report in 6 months time, and not prejudge her findings.
I am not excusing Williamson who should lose his cabinet position and I expect he will
I do think we need to wait for a series of lengthy Parliamentary enquiries to rule that SGW did nothing wrong before we pass judgement. It's all "he said, she said", and I am sure anything in writing can be excused as satire.
Don't forget, despite all the evidence to the contrary, Boris Johnson looked as guilty as hell over Partygate, but after a six month exhaustive enquiry by the Metropolitan Police's finest officers, the best they could muster was a £20 fixed penalty notice for eating cake at work. These cases are seldom what they first seem. I seem to recall you demanding Starmer's nuts after viewing Ivo Delingpole's video of "currygate".
Surely a prerequisite for any action being taken against Williamson would be a formal complaint?
I expect Williamson's tenure to be coming to an end following due process, and certainly it is a distraction that is not needed by Rishi
However, Bloomberg is reporting that the UK and EU are close to a break through on Northern Ireland and they attribute today's strengthining pound to this
I have sensed for some time Rishi is far more pragmatic on controversial issues , and I expect his meeting with Macron will see the channel crossings problem addressed to our mutual benefit, as I expect Macron's outer EU nation proposals to be seriously discussed and considered
When do we get the result of the investigation into the alleged bullying by Williamson?
If I have understood this correctly, I'm still slightly bemused by a Chief Whip complaining about bullying. Isn't that what they exist to do themselves?
And if the report I have seen in the Guardian documents the whole thing, such an allegation now looks to me at least in part like revenge taken cold - which dissension is perhaps more worrying for the Tories than the thing itself.
"Vile" and "threatening" seems a little overegged - he just seems pissed off, and I can't see anything that can be called "misogynistic". Unless there is a claim that a theoretical man in the same position would not have had the same reaction.
I've not commented on other party's reactions, since they would say what they are saying regardless of what actually happened.
I cannot see any mitigation for Williamson but everyone, even him, are permitted due process
There is an irony in that is reported that in 2006 Wendy Morton and 5 other conservative councillors were found guilty of bullying themselves apparently
No they aren't. In a normal job, you tell a colleague to fuck off in writing, you get fired. Just like that. None of this We must wait for Sue Wossname to report in 6 months time, and not prejudge her findings.
I am not excusing Williamson who should lose his cabinet position and I expect he will
I do think we need to wait for a series of lengthy Parliamentary enquiries to rule that SGW did nothing wrong before we pass judgement. It's all "he said, she said", and I am sure anything in writing can be excused as satire.
Don't forget, despite all the evidence to the contrary, Boris Johnson looked as guilty as hell over Partygate, but after a six month exhaustive enquiry by the Metropolitan Police's finest officers, the best they could muster was a £20 fixed penalty notice for eating cake at work. These cases are seldom what they first seem. I seem to recall you demanding Starmer's nuts after viewing Ivo Delingpole's video of "currygate".
Surely a prerequisite for any action being taken against Williamson would be a formal complaint?
Get with the program, boomer. Wendy has complained.
I expect Williamson's tenure to be coming to an end following due process, and certainly it is a distraction that is not needed by Rishi
However, Bloomberg is reporting that the UK and EU are close to a break through on Northern Ireland and they attribute today's strengthining pound to this
I have sensed for some time Rishi is far more pragmatic on controversial issues , and I expect his meeting with Macron will see the channel crossings problem addressed to our mutual benefit, as I expect Macron's outer EU nation proposals to be seriously discussed and considered
When do we get the result of the investigation into the alleged bullying by Williamson?
If I have understood this correctly, I'm still slightly bemused by a Chief Whip complaining about bullying. Isn't that what they exist to do themselves?
And if the report I have seen in the Guardian documents the whole thing, such an allegation now looks to me at least in part like revenge taken cold - which dissension is perhaps more worrying for the Tories than the thing itself.
"Vile" and "threatening" seems a little overegged - he just seems pissed off, and I can't see anything that can be called "misogynistic". Unless there is a claim that a theoretical man in the same position would not have had the same reaction.
I've not commented on other party's reactions, since they would say what they are saying regardless of what actually happened.
I cannot see any mitigation for Williamson but everyone, even him, are permitted due process
There is an irony in that is reported that in 2006 Wendy Morton and 5 other conservative councillors were found guilty of bullying themselves apparently
No they aren't. In a normal job, you tell a colleague to fuck off in writing, you get fired. Just like that. None of this We must wait for Sue Wossname to report in 6 months time, and not prejudge her findings.
I am not excusing Williamson who should lose his cabinet position and I expect he will
I do think we need to wait for a series of lengthy Parliamentary enquiries to rule that SGW did nothing wrong before we pass judgement. It's all "he said, she said", and I am sure anything in writing can be excused as satire.
Don't forget, despite all the evidence to the contrary, Boris Johnson looked as guilty as hell over Partygate, but after a six month exhaustive enquiry by the Metropolitan Police's finest officers, the best they could muster was a £20 fixed penalty notice for eating cake at work. These cases are seldom what they first seem. I seem to recall you demanding Starmer's nuts after viewing Ivo Delingpole's video of "currygate".
Surely a prerequisite for any action being taken against Williamson would be a formal complaint?
Indeed, but not on PB. Guilty as not charged m'lud.
The US 1st Amendment explains why the amounts of money spent on campaigns are so large in the US. Limits on spending are seen by most courts as limits on speech, and have gradually been disappearing. For example, one of the key court cases was Citizens United: "Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310 (2010), was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States regarding campaign finance laws and free speech under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It was argued in 2009 and decided in 2010. The court held 5-4 that the free speech clause of the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting independent expenditures for political campaigns by corporations, including nonprofit corporations, labor unions, and other associations.
The case began after Citizens United, a conservative non-profit organization, sought to air and advertise a film critical of then Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton shortly before the 2008 Democratic primary elections. Broadcasting the film would have been a violation of the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, which prohibited any corporation, non-profit organization or labor union from making an "electioneering communication" within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of an election, or making any expenditure advocating the election or defeat of a candidate at any time. Citizens United challenged the constitutionality of this law, and its case reached the Supreme Court." source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC
These decisions have weakened the political influence of newspapers and our TV networks. Opinions differ on whether that is a good thing.
(One thing to remember is that US congressional districts have much larger populations than your constituencies; there are 435 House seats for a population of about 332 million, and many of the districts are quite large geographically, making door-to-door campaigning impractical.
Moreover, much TV advertising is wasted, since TV markets rarely match single-district boundaries. So, for example, most of the TV spending on House seats here in the Seattle area is wasted.)
This is why US democracy is screwed in its current form. The ability to spend your way to power really doesn't work in a democratic system.
It's the payback required on your investment in the candidate that is so harmful.
The US 1st Amendment explains why the amounts of money spent on campaigns are so large in the US. Limits on spending are seen by most courts as limits on speech, and have gradually been disappearing. For example, one of the key court cases was Citizens United: "Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310 (2010), was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States regarding campaign finance laws and free speech under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It was argued in 2009 and decided in 2010. The court held 5-4 that the free speech clause of the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting independent expenditures for political campaigns by corporations, including nonprofit corporations, labor unions, and other associations.
The case began after Citizens United, a conservative non-profit organization, sought to air and advertise a film critical of then Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton shortly before the 2008 Democratic primary elections. Broadcasting the film would have been a violation of the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, which prohibited any corporation, non-profit organization or labor union from making an "electioneering communication" within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of an election, or making any expenditure advocating the election or defeat of a candidate at any time. Citizens United challenged the constitutionality of this law, and its case reached the Supreme Court." source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC
These decisions have weakened the political influence of newspapers and our TV networks. Opinions differ on whether that is a good thing.
(One thing to remember is that US congressional districts have much larger populations than your constituencies; there are 435 House seats for a population of about 332 million, and many of the districts are quite large geographically, making door-to-door campaigning impractical.
Moreover, much TV advertising is wasted, since TV markets rarely match single-district boundaries. So, for example, most of the TV spending on House seats here in the Seattle area is wasted.)
Extending the provisions of the First Amendment from citizens to corporations always felt like a bit of a stretch to me.
Yep. This has been a bugbear of mine for many years. 'Rights' whether they are human rights or rights under the constitution should only apply to people, not to entities. I am happy with separate, limited, protections for companies but they should not be able to claim rights under the US constitution or the UK Bill of Rights or the ECHR.
The original case law on this is about whether the First Amendment applies to newspapers. As in, does the First Amendment cover only your individual right to speak?
Imagine the other way - you could have complete censorship of all media. Just so long as Speaker's Corner type setups are allowed.
Driver said: "Extending the provisions of the First Amendment from citizens to corporations always felt like a bit of a stretch to me."
Four of the nine Supreme Cout justices at the time, took that position. One of the arguments that swayed the other five was this: The law could be used to prevent the publication of a book, criticizing a candidate or party.
Moreover, wealthy individuals already could spend with few limits -- and sometimes do. George Soros, for example, has been spending millions to elect prosecutors who are less tough on crime than the average.
EXCLUSIVE: Russia flew 140 million euros and a selection of captured UK and US weapons to Iran in return for dozens of deadly drones for its war in Ukraine, a security source has told @SkyNews
The US 1st Amendment explains why the amounts of money spent on campaigns are so large in the US. Limits on spending are seen by most courts as limits on speech, and have gradually been disappearing. For example, one of the key court cases was Citizens United: "Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310 (2010), was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States regarding campaign finance laws and free speech under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It was argued in 2009 and decided in 2010. The court held 5-4 that the free speech clause of the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting independent expenditures for political campaigns by corporations, including nonprofit corporations, labor unions, and other associations.
The case began after Citizens United, a conservative non-profit organization, sought to air and advertise a film critical of then Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton shortly before the 2008 Democratic primary elections. Broadcasting the film would have been a violation of the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, which prohibited any corporation, non-profit organization or labor union from making an "electioneering communication" within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of an election, or making any expenditure advocating the election or defeat of a candidate at any time. Citizens United challenged the constitutionality of this law, and its case reached the Supreme Court." source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC
These decisions have weakened the political influence of newspapers and our TV networks. Opinions differ on whether that is a good thing.
(One thing to remember is that US congressional districts have much larger populations than your constituencies; there are 435 House seats for a population of about 332 million, and many of the districts are quite large geographically, making door-to-door campaigning impractical.
Moreover, much TV advertising is wasted, since TV markets rarely match single-district boundaries. So, for example, most of the TV spending on House seats here in the Seattle area is wasted.)
This is why US democracy is screwed in its current form. The ability to spend your way to power really doesn't work in a democratic system.
Has that actually changed much since any date you care to mention?
You could date spending a route to power to almost any era since 1789, n'est-ce-pas?
Driver said: "Extending the provisions of the First Amendment from citizens to corporations always felt like a bit of a stretch to me."
Four of the nine Supreme Cout justices at the time, took that position. One of the arguments that swayed the other five was this: The law could be used to prevent the publication of a book, criticizing a candidate or party.
Moreover, wealthy individuals already could spend with few limits -- and sometimes do. George Soros, for example, has been spending millions to elect prosecutors who are less tough on crime than the average.
The Court had a chance to shape freedom of speech in favour of individuals (which would have, at the same time, respected the wishes of the legislature with regard to campaign finance restrictions). It did the complete opposite, effectively selling it to the highest bidder.
I expect Williamson's tenure to be coming to an end following due process, and certainly it is a distraction that is not needed by Rishi
However, Bloomberg is reporting that the UK and EU are close to a break through on Northern Ireland and they attribute today's strengthining pound to this
I have sensed for some time Rishi is far more pragmatic on controversial issues , and I expect his meeting with Macron will see the channel crossings problem addressed to our mutual benefit, as I expect Macron's outer EU nation proposals to be seriously discussed and considered
When do we get the result of the investigation into the alleged bullying by Williamson?
If I have understood this correctly, I'm still slightly bemused by a Chief Whip complaining about bullying. Isn't that what they exist to do themselves?
And if the report I have seen in the Guardian documents the whole thing, such an allegation now looks to me at least in part like revenge taken cold - which dissension is perhaps more worrying for the Tories than the thing itself.
"Vile" and "threatening" seems a little overegged - he just seems pissed off, and I can't see anything that can be called "misogynistic". Unless there is a claim that a theoretical man in the same position would not have had the same reaction.
I've not commented on other party's reactions, since they would say what they are saying regardless of what actually happened.
I cannot see any mitigation for Williamson but everyone, even him, are permitted due process
There is an irony in that is reported that in 2006 Wendy Morton and 5 other conservative councillors were found guilty of bullying themselves apparently
No they aren't. In a normal job, you tell a colleague to fuck off in writing, you get fired. Just like that. None of this We must wait for Sue Wossname to report in 6 months time, and not prejudge her findings.
I am not excusing Williamson who should lose his cabinet position and I expect he will
I do think we need to wait for a series of lengthy Parliamentary enquiries to rule that SGW did nothing wrong before we pass judgement. It's all "he said, she said", and I am sure anything in writing can be excused as satire.
Don't forget, despite all the evidence to the contrary, Boris Johnson looked as guilty as hell over Partygate, but after a six month exhaustive enquiry by the Metropolitan Police's finest officers, the best they could muster was a £20 fixed penalty notice for eating cake at work. These cases are seldom what they first seem. I seem to recall you demanding Starmer's nuts after viewing Ivo Delingpole's video of "currygate".
Surely a prerequisite for any action being taken against Williamson would be a formal complaint?
Get with the program, boomer. Wendy has complained.
Driver said: "Extending the provisions of the First Amendment from citizens to corporations always felt like a bit of a stretch to me."
Four of the nine Supreme Cout justices at the time, took that position. One of the arguments that swayed the other five was this: The law could be used to prevent the publication of a book, criticizing a candidate or party.
Moreover, wealthy individuals already could spend with few limits -- and sometimes do. George Soros, for example, has been spending millions to elect prosecutors who are less tough on crime than the average.
Spending by billionaires on elections: 2008: $16million 2010: $31 million (Citizens United happens this year) 2012: $231 million 2014: $231 million 2016: $682 million 2018: $611million 2020: $1.2billion (Excludes money Bloomberg spaffed on his own campaign)
FYI, Joe Ralston saying the GOP is "crushing" the Dems in Clark County (NV)
Two things
1.NV specifically, suggests the GOP will win
2:'More widely, if this represents GOP enthusiasm nationally, that's ominous for the Ds
The GOP are looking to do well enough in the Senate to see Murkowski beaten and Romney/Clark being the Gaukeward squad neutraliised. They probably need Nevada, Arizona or New Hampshire and Georgia, Murkowski to lose and Oz to hold off Fetterman to feel comfortably in control.
Driver said: "Extending the provisions of the First Amendment from citizens to corporations always felt like a bit of a stretch to me."
Four of the nine Supreme Cout justices at the time, took that position. One of the arguments that swayed the other five was this: The law could be used to prevent the publication of a book, criticizing a candidate or party.
Moreover, wealthy individuals already could spend with few limits -- and sometimes do. George Soros, for example, has been spending millions to elect prosecutors who are less tough on crime than the average.
I expect Williamson's tenure to be coming to an end following due process, and certainly it is a distraction that is not needed by Rishi
However, Bloomberg is reporting that the UK and EU are close to a break through on Northern Ireland and they attribute today's strengthining pound to this
I have sensed for some time Rishi is far more pragmatic on controversial issues , and I expect his meeting with Macron will see the channel crossings problem addressed to our mutual benefit, as I expect Macron's outer EU nation proposals to be seriously discussed and considered
When do we get the result of the investigation into the alleged bullying by Williamson?
If I have understood this correctly, I'm still slightly bemused by a Chief Whip complaining about bullying. Isn't that what they exist to do themselves?
And if the report I have seen in the Guardian documents the whole thing, such an allegation now looks to me at least in part like revenge taken cold - which dissension is perhaps more worrying for the Tories than the thing itself.
"Vile" and "threatening" seems a little overegged - he just seems pissed off, and I can't see anything that can be called "misogynistic". Unless there is a claim that a theoretical man in the same position would not have had the same reaction.
I've not commented on other party's reactions, since they would say what they are saying regardless of what actually happened.
I cannot see any mitigation for Williamson but everyone, even him, are permitted due process
There is an irony in that is reported that in 2006 Wendy Morton and 5 other conservative councillors were found guilty of bullying themselves apparently
No they aren't. In a normal job, you tell a colleague to fuck off in writing, you get fired. Just like that. None of this We must wait for Sue Wossname to report in 6 months time, and not prejudge her findings.
I am not excusing Williamson who should lose his cabinet position and I expect he will
I do think we need to wait for a series of lengthy Parliamentary enquiries to rule that SGW did nothing wrong before we pass judgement. It's all "he said, she said", and I am sure anything in writing can be excused as satire.
Don't forget, despite all the evidence to the contrary, Boris Johnson looked as guilty as hell over Partygate, but after a six month exhaustive enquiry by the Metropolitan Police's finest officers, the best they could muster was a £20 fixed penalty notice for eating cake at work. These cases are seldom what they first seem. I seem to recall you demanding Starmer's nuts after viewing Ivo Delingpole's video of "currygate".
Surely a prerequisite for any action being taken against Williamson would be a formal complaint?
Get with the program, boomer. Wendy has complained.
OT today is Patch Tuesday and potentially a big one with the 22H2 updates, so beware of PCs and laptops rebooting inconveniently over the next day or two, especially if staying up late for the US mid-terms. (tbf it should be small if you are up to date anyway on Windows 10).
PCs really are shit
I love this sort of comment, as it shows people who are utterly clueless about computers.
Why? Is there something good about computers inconveniently rebooting?
You are harking back to the glory days of 30 years ago when people like you knew about computers and no one else did. Those days are gone.
Inconvenient, unscheduled rebooting seems to be a thing dating back about 25 years ago. Hasn't really been an issue with Windows, unless you have a hardware failure, since XP.
Mine always asks me first. I then say "yes" or "ask me again later" or "let's schedule for another time".
PC rebooting, I mean, just to be clear.
25 years ago it would be a BSOD.
Probably on all the timetable displays at the station.
I expect Williamson's tenure to be coming to an end following due process, and certainly it is a distraction that is not needed by Rishi
However, Bloomberg is reporting that the UK and EU are close to a break through on Northern Ireland and they attribute today's strengthining pound to this
I have sensed for some time Rishi is far more pragmatic on controversial issues , and I expect his meeting with Macron will see the channel crossings problem addressed to our mutual benefit, as I expect Macron's outer EU nation proposals to be seriously discussed and considered
When do we get the result of the investigation into the alleged bullying by Williamson?
If I have understood this correctly, I'm still slightly bemused by a Chief Whip complaining about bullying. Isn't that what they exist to do themselves?
And if the report I have seen in the Guardian documents the whole thing, such an allegation now looks to me at least in part like revenge taken cold - which dissension is perhaps more worrying for the Tories than the thing itself.
"Vile" and "threatening" seems a little overegged - he just seems pissed off, and I can't see anything that can be called "misogynistic". Unless there is a claim that a theoretical man in the same position would not have had the same reaction.
That would be sexism and would not in itself come anywhere near the bar for misogyny.
He was threatening, though. "There is a price for everything" was a threat.
Hmmm. Was he in a position to make good on a threat? Or is that unusual for politicians in the HOC?
We'll see.
It shows what a warped hothouse SW1 can be. He probably doesn't see what the fuss is about.
I expect Williamson's tenure to be coming to an end following due process, and certainly it is a distraction that is not needed by Rishi
However, Bloomberg is reporting that the UK and EU are close to a break through on Northern Ireland and they attribute today's strengthining pound to this
I have sensed for some time Rishi is far more pragmatic on controversial issues , and I expect his meeting with Macron will see the channel crossings problem addressed to our mutual benefit, as I expect Macron's outer EU nation proposals to be seriously discussed and considered
When do we get the result of the investigation into the alleged bullying by Williamson?
If I have understood this correctly, I'm still slightly bemused by a Chief Whip complaining about bullying. Isn't that what they exist to do themselves?
And if the report I have seen in the Guardian documents the whole thing, such an allegation now looks to me at least in part like revenge taken cold - which dissension is perhaps more worrying for the Tories than the thing itself.
"Vile" and "threatening" seems a little overegged - he just seems pissed off, and I can't see anything that can be called "misogynistic". Unless there is a claim that a theoretical man in the same position would not have had the same reaction.
I've not commented on other party's reactions, since they would say what they are saying regardless of what actually happened.
I cannot see any mitigation for Williamson but everyone, even him, are permitted due process
There is an irony in that is reported that in 2006 Wendy Morton and 5 other conservative councillors were found guilty of bullying themselves apparently
The mitigation for Williamson is that there is nothing in the texts that approaches harassment or bullying in the case of the Chief Whip. Moreover he was just a backbencher and she was a senior government minister so he wasn’t abusing a power relationship. It just confirms that he is a pathetic status obsessed w*nker
The “slit your throat” comment to a civil servant - I’ve only seen the headline so know no details - is potentially much more serious both in terms of the gravity of the comment and the power relationship (he was minister at the time AIUI)
I expect Williamson's tenure to be coming to an end following due process, and certainly it is a distraction that is not needed by Rishi
However, Bloomberg is reporting that the UK and EU are close to a break through on Northern Ireland and they attribute today's strengthining pound to this
I have sensed for some time Rishi is far more pragmatic on controversial issues , and I expect his meeting with Macron will see the channel crossings problem addressed to our mutual benefit, as I expect Macron's outer EU nation proposals to be seriously discussed and considered
When do we get the result of the investigation into the alleged bullying by Williamson?
If I have understood this correctly, I'm still slightly bemused by a Chief Whip complaining about bullying. Isn't that what they exist to do themselves?
And if the report I have seen in the Guardian documents the whole thing, such an allegation now looks to me at least in part like revenge taken cold - which dissension is perhaps more worrying for the Tories than the thing itself.
"Vile" and "threatening" seems a little overegged - he just seems pissed off, and I can't see anything that can be called "misogynistic". Unless there is a claim that a theoretical man in the same position would not have had the same reaction.
I've not commented on other party's reactions, since they would say what they are saying regardless of what actually happened.
I cannot see any mitigation for Williamson but everyone, even him, are permitted due process
There is an irony in that is reported that in 2006 Wendy Morton and 5 other conservative councillors were found guilty of bullying themselves apparently
No they aren't. In a normal job, you tell a colleague to fuck off in writing, you get fired. Just like that. None of this We must wait for Sue Wossname to report in 6 months time, and not prejudge her findings.
No you don’t. You get a bollocking from your boss and told not to get caught in future
I expect Williamson's tenure to be coming to an end following due process, and certainly it is a distraction that is not needed by Rishi
However, Bloomberg is reporting that the UK and EU are close to a break through on Northern Ireland and they attribute today's strengthining pound to this
I have sensed for some time Rishi is far more pragmatic on controversial issues , and I expect his meeting with Macron will see the channel crossings problem addressed to our mutual benefit, as I expect Macron's outer EU nation proposals to be seriously discussed and considered
When do we get the result of the investigation into the alleged bullying by Williamson?
If I have understood this correctly, I'm still slightly bemused by a Chief Whip complaining about bullying. Isn't that what they exist to do themselves?
And if the report I have seen in the Guardian documents the whole thing, such an allegation now looks to me at least in part like revenge taken cold - which dissension is perhaps more worrying for the Tories than the thing itself.
"Vile" and "threatening" seems a little overegged - he just seems pissed off, and I can't see anything that can be called "misogynistic". Unless there is a claim that a theoretical man in the same position would not have had the same reaction.
I've not commented on other party's reactions, since they would say what they are saying regardless of what actually happened.
I cannot see any mitigation for Williamson but everyone, even him, are permitted due process
There is an irony in that is reported that in 2006 Wendy Morton and 5 other conservative councillors were found guilty of bullying themselves apparently
No they aren't. In a normal job, you tell a colleague to fuck off in writing, you get fired. Just like that. None of this We must wait for Sue Wossname to report in 6 months time, and not prejudge her findings.
I am not excusing Williamson who should lose his cabinet position and I expect he will
I do think we need to wait for a series of lengthy Parliamentary enquiries to rule that SGW did nothing wrong before we pass judgement. It's all "he said, she said", and I am sure anything in writing can be excused as satire.
Don't forget, despite all the evidence to the contrary, Boris Johnson looked as guilty as hell over Partygate, but after a six month exhaustive enquiry by the Metropolitan Police's finest officers, the best they could muster was a £20 fixed penalty notice for eating cake at work. These cases are seldom what they first seem. I seem to recall you demanding Starmer's nuts after viewing Ivo Delingpole's video of "currygate".
Surely a prerequisite for any action being taken against Williamson would be a formal complaint?
Indeed, but not on PB. Guilty as not charged m'lud.
Bollocks to that. He isn't denying the content of the texts, and you are not a judge directing a jury. He is guilty as fuck, never mind as charged, he deserves to be sacked, he will be, and you can quote me on that.
I expect Williamson's tenure to be coming to an end following due process, and certainly it is a distraction that is not needed by Rishi
However, Bloomberg is reporting that the UK and EU are close to a break through on Northern Ireland and they attribute today's strengthining pound to this
I have sensed for some time Rishi is far more pragmatic on controversial issues , and I expect his meeting with Macron will see the channel crossings problem addressed to our mutual benefit, as I expect Macron's outer EU nation proposals to be seriously discussed and considered
When do we get the result of the investigation into the alleged bullying by Williamson?
If I have understood this correctly, I'm still slightly bemused by a Chief Whip complaining about bullying. Isn't that what they exist to do themselves?
And if the report I have seen in the Guardian documents the whole thing, such an allegation now looks to me at least in part like revenge taken cold - which dissension is perhaps more worrying for the Tories than the thing itself.
"Vile" and "threatening" seems a little overegged - he just seems pissed off, and I can't see anything that can be called "misogynistic". Unless there is a claim that a theoretical man in the same position would not have had the same reaction.
I've not commented on other party's reactions, since they would say what they are saying regardless of what actually happened.
I cannot see any mitigation for Williamson but everyone, even him, are permitted due process
There is an irony in that is reported that in 2006 Wendy Morton and 5 other conservative councillors were found guilty of bullying themselves apparently
As yet I can't see anything he is alleged to have said that meets the claims for what he is alleged to have done. And I don't see that a backbench MP is really in any position to bully a Chief Whip. *
* If I understand the timing correctly. Given the recent games of Happy Families, Blind Man's Buff, Pass the Parcel and Musical Chairs at the top of the Tory Party, I may have got some of the three dimensional chess positions wrong.
Gavin's portfolio, even if he's said not to have one:
* Conflict Stability and Security Fund (CSSF) ("[The CSSF] enables 14 government departments and agencies to address security priorities in a collaborative way. The CSSF operates in over 80 countries and territories". * GREAT campaign ("We are a nation of creative thinkers, daring dreamers and curious scientists. A place where fresh ideas and unique perspectives are welcomed, and where exploration and curiosity pave the way for progress." ) * Supporting the Chancellor of the Duchy of *Lancaster on driving the delivery of Government’s priorities * Geospatial Commission * Office of Government Property * Government Property Agency * Places for Growth * Government Communications Service
There was snow in Victoria BC last night. When I was at school there in the mid 80's it snowed for the first time in years. It seems to be happening a few times every winter there now.
I'm quite tempted to watch these mid-term results, as they are so pivotal. But I've never done it before. How late do I have to stay up/how early should I rise, to see the most interesting results come in? And what are the best websites?
The US 1st Amendment explains why the amounts of money spent on campaigns are so large in the US. Limits on spending are seen by most courts as limits on speech, and have gradually been disappearing. For example, one of the key court cases was Citizens United: "Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310 (2010), was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States regarding campaign finance laws and free speech under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It was argued in 2009 and decided in 2010. The court held 5-4 that the free speech clause of the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting independent expenditures for political campaigns by corporations, including nonprofit corporations, labor unions, and other associations.
The case began after Citizens United, a conservative non-profit organization, sought to air and advertise a film critical of then Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton shortly before the 2008 Democratic primary elections. Broadcasting the film would have been a violation of the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, which prohibited any corporation, non-profit organization or labor union from making an "electioneering communication" within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of an election, or making any expenditure advocating the election or defeat of a candidate at any time. Citizens United challenged the constitutionality of this law, and its case reached the Supreme Court." source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC
These decisions have weakened the political influence of newspapers and our TV networks. Opinions differ on whether that is a good thing.
(One thing to remember is that US congressional districts have much larger populations than your constituencies; there are 435 House seats for a population of about 332 million, and many of the districts are quite large geographically, making door-to-door campaigning impractical.
Moreover, much TV advertising is wasted, since TV markets rarely match single-district boundaries. So, for example, most of the TV spending on House seats here in the Seattle area is wasted.)
Extending the provisions of the First Amendment from citizens to corporations always felt like a bit of a stretch to me.
Yep. This has been a bugbear of mine for many years. 'Rights' whether they are human rights or rights under the constitution should only apply to people, not to entities. I am happy with separate, limited, protections for companies but they should not be able to claim rights under the US constitution or the UK Bill of Rights or the ECHR.
What’s the philosophical difference between people acting collectively or individually?
Tp be clear: Windows is amazing. Getting a system that runs on such a massive variety of hardware, including legacy stuff, with so few problems is a miracle. And to make it fairly user-friendly as well. This matters, as without such capabilities we would have a number of closed, walled gardens that are much more expensive.
Apple has it easy; by controlling the hardware, you fantastically reduce the number of combinations you need to support.
Without Windows, the world would be much poorer.
Agreed. The flexibility we take for granted is amazing. A work colleague (she's pretty young) was talking about 'old' computer games and I mentioned I like playing old computer games. She remarked it must be really hard to get them to run, and I must need loads of different hardware to run them.
I typed 'DosBox' into the start menu, and then c: at the command prompt and asked her what game from the 1990s she'd like to play. She answered, "Yes, but you know what you're doing. I've never heard of DOS until today."
OT today is Patch Tuesday and potentially a big one with the 22H2 updates, so beware of PCs and laptops rebooting inconveniently over the next day or two, especially if staying up late for the US mid-terms. (tbf it should be small if you are up to date anyway on Windows 10).
PCs really are shit
I love this sort of comment, as it shows people who are utterly clueless about computers.
Why? Is there something good about computers inconveniently rebooting?
You are harking back to the glory days of 30 years ago when people like you knew about computers and no one else did. Those days are gone.
Inconvenient, unscheduled rebooting seems to be a thing dating back about 25 years ago. Hasn't really been an issue with Windows, unless you have a hardware failure, since XP.
I've seen a couple of people with corporate laptops have them do a forced reboot with no way to cancel it. I think it was set to something like 'you can ignore the updates N times, then we just do it anyway.'
One of them was during a sales presentation to get a quite large customer. Not sure if the policy was changed after that due to the sales exec having to sit for 20 minutes while they and the rather fed-up potential clients watched updates installing...
I expect Williamson's tenure to be coming to an end following due process, and certainly it is a distraction that is not needed by Rishi
However, Bloomberg is reporting that the UK and EU are close to a break through on Northern Ireland and they attribute today's strengthining pound to this
I have sensed for some time Rishi is far more pragmatic on controversial issues , and I expect his meeting with Macron will see the channel crossings problem addressed to our mutual benefit, as I expect Macron's outer EU nation proposals to be seriously discussed and considered
When do we get the result of the investigation into the alleged bullying by Williamson?
If I have understood this correctly, I'm still slightly bemused by a Chief Whip complaining about bullying. Isn't that what they exist to do themselves?
And if the report I have seen in the Guardian documents the whole thing, such an allegation now looks to me at least in part like revenge taken cold - which dissension is perhaps more worrying for the Tories than the thing itself.
"Vile" and "threatening" seems a little overegged - he just seems pissed off, and I can't see anything that can be called "misogynistic". Unless there is a claim that a theoretical man in the same position would not have had the same reaction.
I've not commented on other party's reactions, since they would say what they are saying regardless of what actually happened.
I cannot see any mitigation for Williamson but everyone, even him, are permitted due process
There is an irony in that is reported that in 2006 Wendy Morton and 5 other conservative councillors were found guilty of bullying themselves apparently
No they aren't. In a normal job, you tell a colleague to fuck off in writing, you get fired. Just like that. None of this We must wait for Sue Wossname to report in 6 months time, and not prejudge her findings.
No you don’t. You get a bollocking from your boss and told not to get caught in future
ProudSurvivorOfFifteenYearsOfTurfWars
Depends. I have no legal training but a quick scan through the joyous jungle of the internet shows that most definitions of gross misconduct (and therefore grounds for instant dismissal) include bullying, harassment or intimidation of colleagues or managers. That seems to fit this situation pretty well to me. And, of course, this is not even a situation where Sunak needs any legal justification. He could sack Williamson because he is wearing a stupid tie if he wanted to. Having a face so moronic that everyone wants to give it a slap seems to me to be an even better reason.
Tp be clear: Windows is amazing. Getting a system that runs on such a massive variety of hardware, including legacy stuff, with so few problems is a miracle. And to make it fairly user-friendly as well. This matters, as without such capabilities we would have a number of closed, walled gardens that are much more expensive.
Apple has it easy; by controlling the hardware, you fantastically reduce the number of combinations you need to support.
Without Windows, the world would be much poorer.
Agreed. The flexibility we take for granted is amazing. A work colleague (she's pretty young) was talking about 'old' computer games and I mentioned I like playing old computer games. She remarked it must be really hard to get them to run, and I must need loads of different hardware to run them.
I typed 'DosBox' into the start menu, and then c: at the command prompt and asked her what game from the 1990s she'd like to play. She answered, "Yes, but you know what you're doing. I've never heard of DOS until today."
Kids........
Heh. They will never know the pain of iteratively creating a boot disc. All part of the fun.
OT today is Patch Tuesday and potentially a big one with the 22H2 updates, so beware of PCs and laptops rebooting inconveniently over the next day or two, especially if staying up late for the US mid-terms. (tbf it should be small if you are up to date anyway on Windows 10).
PCs really are shit
I love this sort of comment, as it shows people who are utterly clueless about computers.
Why? Is there something good about computers inconveniently rebooting?
You are harking back to the glory days of 30 years ago when people like you knew about computers and no one else did. Those days are gone.
Inconvenient, unscheduled rebooting seems to be a thing dating back about 25 years ago. Hasn't really been an issue with Windows, unless you have a hardware failure, since XP.
Mine always asks me first. I then say "yes" or "ask me again later" or "let's schedule for another time".
PC rebooting, I mean, just to be clear.
25 years ago it would be a BSOD.
Probably on all the timetable displays at the station.
Slightly losing me here. BSOD?
Blue Screen of Death.
It was what happened to fairly early Microsoft Windows (iirc) when it had a Great Collapsing Windows disaster. Here's a piccie of one at Rome Station in 2015.
They kept happening (may still happen) because computer operating systems are used in "embedded" versions to run all kind of service systems, and they stay in use their far longer than on the PCs.
The "crushing" comes with the caveat that it is only counting in-person voting, doesn't count in-person vote-by-mail drop offs. And the GOP was also crushing Dems (to a lesser degree) in 2020 at this point.
They kept happening (may still happen) because computer operating systems are used in "embedded" versions to run all kind of service systems, and they stay in use their far longer than on the PCs.
Cash registers these days often run various flavours of Windoze underneath.
The US 1st Amendment explains why the amounts of money spent on campaigns are so large in the US. Limits on spending are seen by most courts as limits on speech, and have gradually been disappearing. For example, one of the key court cases was Citizens United: "Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310 (2010), was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States regarding campaign finance laws and free speech under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It was argued in 2009 and decided in 2010. The court held 5-4 that the free speech clause of the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting independent expenditures for political campaigns by corporations, including nonprofit corporations, labor unions, and other associations.
The case began after Citizens United, a conservative non-profit organization, sought to air and advertise a film critical of then Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton shortly before the 2008 Democratic primary elections. Broadcasting the film would have been a violation of the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, which prohibited any corporation, non-profit organization or labor union from making an "electioneering communication" within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of an election, or making any expenditure advocating the election or defeat of a candidate at any time. Citizens United challenged the constitutionality of this law, and its case reached the Supreme Court." source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC
These decisions have weakened the political influence of newspapers and our TV networks. Opinions differ on whether that is a good thing.
(One thing to remember is that US congressional districts have much larger populations than your constituencies; there are 435 House seats for a population of about 332 million, and many of the districts are quite large geographically, making door-to-door campaigning impractical.
Moreover, much TV advertising is wasted, since TV markets rarely match single-district boundaries. So, for example, most of the TV spending on House seats here in the Seattle area is wasted.)
Extending the provisions of the First Amendment from citizens to corporations always felt like a bit of a stretch to me.
Yep. This has been a bugbear of mine for many years. 'Rights' whether they are human rights or rights under the constitution should only apply to people, not to entities. I am happy with separate, limited, protections for companies but they should not be able to claim rights under the US constitution or the UK Bill of Rights or the ECHR.
The original case law on this is about whether the First Amendment applies to newspapers. As in, does the First Amendment cover only your individual right to speak?
Imagine the other way - you could have complete censorship of all media. Just so long as Speaker's Corner type setups are allowed.
Nope because one could extend the right of a named individual to make their comments in writing, being protected by the 1st amendment without extending those rights to organisations themselves. It really isn't rocket science.
I'm quite tempted to watch these mid-term results, as they are so pivotal. But I've never done it before. How late do I have to stay up/how early should I rise, to see the most interesting results come in? And what are the best websites?
Ta muchly
If it’s anything like 2020 id say it would be better to get an early start and start following it from then. I made the mistake of staying up in 2020 and then being utterly shattered in the next day or so when the actually exciting and more definitive picture was emerging. Early in the night it was pretty much “Trump has won OMG WTF NO NO NO” for quite a few hours. Entertaining discussions but not very insightful.
The US 1st Amendment explains why the amounts of money spent on campaigns are so large in the US. Limits on spending are seen by most courts as limits on speech, and have gradually been disappearing. For example, one of the key court cases was Citizens United: "Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310 (2010), was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States regarding campaign finance laws and free speech under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It was argued in 2009 and decided in 2010. The court held 5-4 that the free speech clause of the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting independent expenditures for political campaigns by corporations, including nonprofit corporations, labor unions, and other associations.
The case began after Citizens United, a conservative non-profit organization, sought to air and advertise a film critical of then Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton shortly before the 2008 Democratic primary elections. Broadcasting the film would have been a violation of the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, which prohibited any corporation, non-profit organization or labor union from making an "electioneering communication" within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of an election, or making any expenditure advocating the election or defeat of a candidate at any time. Citizens United challenged the constitutionality of this law, and its case reached the Supreme Court." source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC
These decisions have weakened the political influence of newspapers and our TV networks. Opinions differ on whether that is a good thing.
(One thing to remember is that US congressional districts have much larger populations than your constituencies; there are 435 House seats for a population of about 332 million, and many of the districts are quite large geographically, making door-to-door campaigning impractical.
Moreover, much TV advertising is wasted, since TV markets rarely match single-district boundaries. So, for example, most of the TV spending on House seats here in the Seattle area is wasted.)
This is why US democracy is screwed in its current form. The ability to spend your way to power really doesn't work in a democratic system.
Has that actually changed much since any date you care to mention?
You could date spending a route to power to almost any era since 1789, n'est-ce-pas?
I don't know the history to say one way or another but it is always possible that customs and practices that were suitable in the past when mass media and the extremes of wealth were not so ubiquitous are no longer suitable with modern technology and communications.
But even if it were the case in 1789, all that means is that the US has been a failing democratic system throughout its whole existence. I am not sure that is so far from the truth.
I expect Williamson's tenure to be coming to an end following due process, and certainly it is a distraction that is not needed by Rishi
However, Bloomberg is reporting that the UK and EU are close to a break through on Northern Ireland and they attribute today's strengthining pound to this
I have sensed for some time Rishi is far more pragmatic on controversial issues , and I expect his meeting with Macron will see the channel crossings problem addressed to our mutual benefit, as I expect Macron's outer EU nation proposals to be seriously discussed and considered
When do we get the result of the investigation into the alleged bullying by Williamson?
If I have understood this correctly, I'm still slightly bemused by a Chief Whip complaining about bullying. Isn't that what they exist to do themselves?
And if the report I have seen in the Guardian documents the whole thing, such an allegation now looks to me at least in part like revenge taken cold - which dissension is perhaps more worrying for the Tories than the thing itself.
"Vile" and "threatening" seems a little overegged - he just seems pissed off, and I can't see anything that can be called "misogynistic". Unless there is a claim that a theoretical man in the same position would not have had the same reaction.
I've not commented on other party's reactions, since they would say what they are saying regardless of what actually happened.
I cannot see any mitigation for Williamson but everyone, even him, are permitted due process
There is an irony in that is reported that in 2006 Wendy Morton and 5 other conservative councillors were found guilty of bullying themselves apparently
No they aren't. In a normal job, you tell a colleague to fuck off in writing, you get fired. Just like that. None of this We must wait for Sue Wossname to report in 6 months time, and not prejudge her findings.
No you don’t. You get a bollocking from your boss and told not to get caught in future
ProudSurvivorOfFifteenYearsOfTurfWars
Depends. I have no legal training but a quick scan through the joyous jungle of the internet shows that most definitions of gross misconduct (and therefore grounds for instant dismissal) include bullying, harassment or intimidation of colleagues or managers.
I'm quite tempted to watch these mid-term results, as they are so pivotal. But I've never done it before. How late do I have to stay up/how early should I rise, to see the most interesting results come in? And what are the best websites?
Ta muchly
If it’s anything like 2020 id say it would be better to get an early start and start following it from then. I made the mistake of staying up in 2020 and then being utterly shattered in the next day or so when the actually exciting and more definitive picture was emerging. Early in the night it was pretty much “Trump has won OMG WTF NO NO NO” for quite a few hours. Entertaining discussions but not very insightful.
Ah, thanks. That was in fact my supposition. No point in staying up til 4am. Start in the morning instead....
I'm quite tempted to watch these mid-term results, as they are so pivotal. But I've never done it before. How late do I have to stay up/how early should I rise, to see the most interesting results come in? And what are the best websites?
Tp be clear: Windows is amazing. Getting a system that runs on such a massive variety of hardware, including legacy stuff, with so few problems is a miracle. And to make it fairly user-friendly as well. This matters, as without such capabilities we would have a number of closed, walled gardens that are much more expensive.
Apple has it easy; by controlling the hardware, you fantastically reduce the number of combinations you need to support.
Without Windows, the world would be much poorer.
Which is great for people who don't know much about computers.
I hate to break this to you; but 99% of people "don't know much about computers."
I'm quite tempted to watch these mid-term results, as they are so pivotal. But I've never done it before. How late do I have to stay up/how early should I rise, to see the most interesting results come in? And what are the best websites?
The US 1st Amendment explains why the amounts of money spent on campaigns are so large in the US. Limits on spending are seen by most courts as limits on speech, and have gradually been disappearing. For example, one of the key court cases was Citizens United: "Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310 (2010), was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States regarding campaign finance laws and free speech under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It was argued in 2009 and decided in 2010. The court held 5-4 that the free speech clause of the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting independent expenditures for political campaigns by corporations, including nonprofit corporations, labor unions, and other associations.
The case began after Citizens United, a conservative non-profit organization, sought to air and advertise a film critical of then Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton shortly before the 2008 Democratic primary elections. Broadcasting the film would have been a violation of the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, which prohibited any corporation, non-profit organization or labor union from making an "electioneering communication" within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of an election, or making any expenditure advocating the election or defeat of a candidate at any time. Citizens United challenged the constitutionality of this law, and its case reached the Supreme Court." source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC
These decisions have weakened the political influence of newspapers and our TV networks. Opinions differ on whether that is a good thing.
(One thing to remember is that US congressional districts have much larger populations than your constituencies; there are 435 House seats for a population of about 332 million, and many of the districts are quite large geographically, making door-to-door campaigning impractical.
Moreover, much TV advertising is wasted, since TV markets rarely match single-district boundaries. So, for example, most of the TV spending on House seats here in the Seattle area is wasted.)
Extending the provisions of the First Amendment from citizens to corporations always felt like a bit of a stretch to me.
Yep. This has been a bugbear of mine for many years. 'Rights' whether they are human rights or rights under the constitution should only apply to people, not to entities. I am happy with separate, limited, protections for companies but they should not be able to claim rights under the US constitution or the UK Bill of Rights or the ECHR.
What’s the philosophical difference between people acting collectively or individually?
Human rights should apply to individuals. They should not apply to collectives. In doing so it undermines the whole principle of individual rights.
Although, as I noted when I posted his original tweet on his prediction a few days back, he had left himself quite a few caveats when he made that call.
OT today is Patch Tuesday and potentially a big one with the 22H2 updates, so beware of PCs and laptops rebooting inconveniently over the next day or two, especially if staying up late for the US mid-terms. (tbf it should be small if you are up to date anyway on Windows 10).
PCs really are shit
I love this sort of comment, as it shows people who are utterly clueless about computers.
Why? Is there something good about computers inconveniently rebooting?
You are harking back to the glory days of 30 years ago when people like you knew about computers and no one else did. Those days are gone.
Inconvenient, unscheduled rebooting seems to be a thing dating back about 25 years ago. Hasn't really been an issue with Windows, unless you have a hardware failure, since XP.
Mine always asks me first. I then say "yes" or "ask me again later" or "let's schedule for another time".
PC rebooting, I mean, just to be clear.
25 years ago it would be a BSOD.
Probably on all the timetable displays at the station.
Slightly losing me here. BSOD?
Blue Screen of Death.
It was what happened to fairly early Microsoft Windows (iirc) when it had a Great Collapsing Windows disaster. Here's a piccie of one at Rome Station in 2015.
They kept happening (may still happen) because computer operating systems are used in "embedded" versions to run all kind of service systems, and they stay in use their far longer than on the PCs.
That would make a really cool screensaver on my Mac.
The US 1st Amendment explains why the amounts of money spent on campaigns are so large in the US. Limits on spending are seen by most courts as limits on speech, and have gradually been disappearing. For example, one of the key court cases was Citizens United: "Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310 (2010), was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States regarding campaign finance laws and free speech under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It was argued in 2009 and decided in 2010. The court held 5-4 that the free speech clause of the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting independent expenditures for political campaigns by corporations, including nonprofit corporations, labor unions, and other associations.
The case began after Citizens United, a conservative non-profit organization, sought to air and advertise a film critical of then Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton shortly before the 2008 Democratic primary elections. Broadcasting the film would have been a violation of the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, which prohibited any corporation, non-profit organization or labor union from making an "electioneering communication" within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of an election, or making any expenditure advocating the election or defeat of a candidate at any time. Citizens United challenged the constitutionality of this law, and its case reached the Supreme Court." source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC
These decisions have weakened the political influence of newspapers and our TV networks. Opinions differ on whether that is a good thing.
(One thing to remember is that US congressional districts have much larger populations than your constituencies; there are 435 House seats for a population of about 332 million, and many of the districts are quite large geographically, making door-to-door campaigning impractical.
Moreover, much TV advertising is wasted, since TV markets rarely match single-district boundaries. So, for example, most of the TV spending on House seats here in the Seattle area is wasted.)
This is why US democracy is screwed in its current form. The ability to spend your way to power really doesn't work in a democratic system.
Has that actually changed much since any date you care to mention?
You could date spending a route to power to almost any era since 1789, n'est-ce-pas?
I don't know the history to say one way or another but it is always possible that customs and practices that were suitable in the past when mass media and the extremes of wealth were not so ubiquitous are no longer suitable with modern technology and communications.
But even if it were the case in 1789, all that means is that the US has been a failing democratic system throughout its whole existence. I am not sure that is so far from the truth.
There's enough truth in that to be uncomfortable, particularly around gerrymandering.
OT today is Patch Tuesday and potentially a big one with the 22H2 updates, so beware of PCs and laptops rebooting inconveniently over the next day or two, especially if staying up late for the US mid-terms. (tbf it should be small if you are up to date anyway on Windows 10).
PCs really are shit
I love this sort of comment, as it shows people who are utterly clueless about computers.
Why? Is there something good about computers inconveniently rebooting?
You are harking back to the glory days of 30 years ago when people like you knew about computers and no one else did. Those days are gone.
Inconvenient, unscheduled rebooting seems to be a thing dating back about 25 years ago. Hasn't really been an issue with Windows, unless you have a hardware failure, since XP.
Mine always asks me first. I then say "yes" or "ask me again later" or "let's schedule for another time".
PC rebooting, I mean, just to be clear.
25 years ago it would be a BSOD.
Probably on all the timetable displays at the station.
Slightly losing me here. BSOD?
Blue Screen of Death.
It was what happened to fairly early Microsoft Windows (iirc) when it had a Great Collapsing Windows disaster. Here's a piccie of one at Rome Station in 2015.
They kept happening (may still happen) because computer operating systems are used in "embedded" versions to run all kind of service systems, and they stay in use their far longer than on the PCs.
That would make a really cool screensaver on my Mac.
Tp be clear: Windows is amazing. Getting a system that runs on such a massive variety of hardware, including legacy stuff, with so few problems is a miracle. And to make it fairly user-friendly as well. This matters, as without such capabilities we would have a number of closed, walled gardens that are much more expensive.
Apple has it easy; by controlling the hardware, you fantastically reduce the number of combinations you need to support.
Without Windows, the world would be much poorer.
Which is great for people who don't know much about computers.
I hate to break this to you; but 99% of people "don't know much about computers."
Including, I guess, your good self.
So why your initial sneery post?
I don't know much about computers. But I set up a Web based business now turning over £5m, including making the initial website and sales and stock management systems, and I have typeset a book in LaTex. I can make html and java script and PHP do what I want them to do. Moral: everyone knows about computers these days; your self awarded guru status expired decades ago.
ETA your initial comment
"I love this sort of comment, as it shows people who are utterly clueless about computers. "
I expect Williamson's tenure to be coming to an end following due process, and certainly it is a distraction that is not needed by Rishi
However, Bloomberg is reporting that the UK and EU are close to a break through on Northern Ireland and they attribute today's strengthining pound to this
I have sensed for some time Rishi is far more pragmatic on controversial issues , and I expect his meeting with Macron will see the channel crossings problem addressed to our mutual benefit, as I expect Macron's outer EU nation proposals to be seriously discussed and considered
When do we get the result of the investigation into the alleged bullying by Williamson?
If I have understood this correctly, I'm still slightly bemused by a Chief Whip complaining about bullying. Isn't that what they exist to do themselves?
And if the report I have seen in the Guardian documents the whole thing, such an allegation now looks to me at least in part like revenge taken cold - which dissension is perhaps more worrying for the Tories than the thing itself.
"Vile" and "threatening" seems a little overegged - he just seems pissed off, and I can't see anything that can be called "misogynistic". Unless there is a claim that a theoretical man in the same position would not have had the same reaction.
I've not commented on other party's reactions, since they would say what they are saying regardless of what actually happened.
I cannot see any mitigation for Williamson but everyone, even him, are permitted due process
There is an irony in that is reported that in 2006 Wendy Morton and 5 other conservative councillors were found guilty of bullying themselves apparently
No they aren't. In a normal job, you tell a colleague to fuck off in writing, you get fired. Just like that. None of this We must wait for Sue Wossname to report in 6 months time, and not prejudge her findings.
No you don’t. You get a bollocking from your boss and told not to get caught in future
ProudSurvivorOfFifteenYearsOfTurfWars
Depends. I have no legal training but a quick scan through the joyous jungle of the internet shows that most definitions of gross misconduct (and therefore grounds for instant dismissal) include bullying, harassment or intimidation of colleagues or managers.
It would be good to have Doug opine on this as I believe this is his area of legal expertise but I have seen numerous instances of people being dismissed on the spot and the investigation and justification being undertaken post-dismissal as a means of answering any possible legal challenge. I assume you have to be very sure of your position, but I have seen it happen, usually on grounds of safety violations or physical or verbal violence.
In the offshore industry it is referred to as being run off or, if they want to avoid a direct confrontation and wait until the person has left the rig at the end of their tour then being NRB'd (Not Required Back)
I'm quite tempted to watch these mid-term results, as they are so pivotal. But I've never done it before. How late do I have to stay up/how early should I rise, to see the most interesting results come in? And what are the best websites?
Ta muchly
If it’s anything like 2020 id say it would be better to get an early start and start following it from then. I made the mistake of staying up in 2020 and then being utterly shattered in the next day or so when the actually exciting and more definitive picture was emerging. Early in the night it was pretty much “Trump has won OMG WTF NO NO NO” for quite a few hours. Entertaining discussions but not very insightful.
Ah, thanks. That was in fact my supposition. No point in staying up til 4am. Start in the morning instead....
Yes, like unless it is a blow out states like Pennsylvania won't be known until Thursday at the earliest.
OT today is Patch Tuesday and potentially a big one with the 22H2 updates, so beware of PCs and laptops rebooting inconveniently over the next day or two, especially if staying up late for the US mid-terms. (tbf it should be small if you are up to date anyway on Windows 10).
PCs really are shit
I love this sort of comment, as it shows people who are utterly clueless about computers.
Why? Is there something good about computers inconveniently rebooting?
You are harking back to the glory days of 30 years ago when people like you knew about computers and no one else did. Those days are gone.
Inconvenient, unscheduled rebooting seems to be a thing dating back about 25 years ago. Hasn't really been an issue with Windows, unless you have a hardware failure, since XP.
The major upgrade to Windows 10 (in 2016) killed off a 5 y.o. laptop of mine. Early that day I had rescheduled an update for overnight, and forgot about it. I stupidly closed the laptop at the end of my day's work (at home). The next day I woke up to find the laptop, closed but "running" and boiling hot. It had obviously caused damage to the hardware as no amount of safe reboots or attempts to install Linux got it working again at any kind of functioning speed. It had alredady had ventilation problems and 5 years is around the time I start replacing a laptop, but I was still very pissed off with Windows (and myself of course).
I'm quite tempted to watch these mid-term results, as they are so pivotal. But I've never done it before. How late do I have to stay up/how early should I rise, to see the most interesting results come in? And what are the best websites?
Ta muchly
Bit low tech for you, I suppose, but I'll be doing sofa, blanket, and the World Service special. That way I can keep tabs but it won't be visceral. Eg I won't have to actually see Kathy Lane if she wins.
Just had a quick peruse of the updated boundary review in my areas of interest.
I think in previous boundary cycles the updates have been minor, but this time the need to keep within a tight size bound means the 2021 -> 2022 updates are in many cases as substantial as the original review
So, for instance, the total clockwise rotation of the Tameside seats in 2021 (Ashton taking Stalybridge, Hyde taking Denton and the Droylsden bit that dropped from Ashton pairing with Failsworth) is very substantially reversed by the 2022 revision, such that things are back far closer to 2019 now (except Denton grabs a different bit from outside Tameside).
With another revision to come before finalisation in 2023 it feels almost pointless to calculate seats against this boundary proposal (though, no doubt, we will).
The early in person vote not looking good for the Dems in Nevada but much more encouraging turnout from NH with strong turnout and some very good numbers coming out of Dem strongholds .
FWIW I think the Dems will win PA and then it will all hinge on whether the GOP can pick up NV and GA.
It does not help that NV and GA are both glacially slow at counting. And GA has the weird runoff rule that could come into play. So I’m expecting a long wait before we know who gets the senate. Possibly a very long one.
I expect Williamson's tenure to be coming to an end following due process, and certainly it is a distraction that is not needed by Rishi
However, Bloomberg is reporting that the UK and EU are close to a break through on Northern Ireland and they attribute today's strengthining pound to this
I have sensed for some time Rishi is far more pragmatic on controversial issues , and I expect his meeting with Macron will see the channel crossings problem addressed to our mutual benefit, as I expect Macron's outer EU nation proposals to be seriously discussed and considered
When do we get the result of the investigation into the alleged bullying by Williamson?
If I have understood this correctly, I'm still slightly bemused by a Chief Whip complaining about bullying. Isn't that what they exist to do themselves?
And if the report I have seen in the Guardian documents the whole thing, such an allegation now looks to me at least in part like revenge taken cold - which dissension is perhaps more worrying for the Tories than the thing itself.
"Vile" and "threatening" seems a little overegged - he just seems pissed off, and I can't see anything that can be called "misogynistic". Unless there is a claim that a theoretical man in the same position would not have had the same reaction.
I've not commented on other party's reactions, since they would say what they are saying regardless of what actually happened.
I cannot see any mitigation for Williamson but everyone, even him, are permitted due process
There is an irony in that is reported that in 2006 Wendy Morton and 5 other conservative councillors were found guilty of bullying themselves apparently
No they aren't. In a normal job, you tell a colleague to fuck off in writing, you get fired. Just like that. None of this We must wait for Sue Wossname to report in 6 months time, and not prejudge her findings.
No you don’t. You get a bollocking from your boss and told not to get caught in future
ProudSurvivorOfFifteenYearsOfTurfWars
Depends. I have no legal training but a quick scan through the joyous jungle of the internet shows that most definitions of gross misconduct (and therefore grounds for instant dismissal) include bullying, harassment or intimidation of colleagues or managers.
It would be good to have Doug opine on this as I believe this is his area of legal expertise but I have seen numerous instances of people being dismissed on the spot and the investigation and justification being undertaken post-dismissal as a means of answering any possible legal challenge. I assume you have to be very sure of your position, but I have seen it happen, usually on grounds of safety violations or physical or verbal violence.
In the offshore industry it is referred to as being run off or, if they want to avoid a direct confrontation and wait until the person has left the rig at the end of their tour then being NRB'd (Not Required Back)
Does the normal employee stuff apply to MPs and ministers anyway? If a PM wants to, they can hire and fire pretty much at will.
The trouble with the Williamson stuff is that the rule he has broken is something like "don't embarrass the party by acting like a cock". Which isn't written down anywhere, and can't be enforced rigourously. If it were, Parliament would be a much emptier place.
Tp be clear: Windows is amazing. Getting a system that runs on such a massive variety of hardware, including legacy stuff, with so few problems is a miracle. And to make it fairly user-friendly as well. This matters, as without such capabilities we would have a number of closed, walled gardens that are much more expensive.
Apple has it easy; by controlling the hardware, you fantastically reduce the number of combinations you need to support.
Without Windows, the world would be much poorer.
Which is great for people who don't know much about computers.
I hate to break this to you; but 99% of people "don't know much about computers."
Including, I guess, your good self.
One of my friends who is blissfully un-IT-savvy needed a memory upgrade for her PC. I told her exactly what to ask for in the friendly local computer shop and the answer to a few likely questions. What I hadn't anticipated was her worriedly asking the guy if the RAM would fit in the boot of her car.
I expect Williamson's tenure to be coming to an end following due process, and certainly it is a distraction that is not needed by Rishi
However, Bloomberg is reporting that the UK and EU are close to a break through on Northern Ireland and they attribute today's strengthining pound to this
I have sensed for some time Rishi is far more pragmatic on controversial issues , and I expect his meeting with Macron will see the channel crossings problem addressed to our mutual benefit, as I expect Macron's outer EU nation proposals to be seriously discussed and considered
When do we get the result of the investigation into the alleged bullying by Williamson?
If I have understood this correctly, I'm still slightly bemused by a Chief Whip complaining about bullying. Isn't that what they exist to do themselves?
And if the report I have seen in the Guardian documents the whole thing, such an allegation now looks to me at least in part like revenge taken cold - which dissension is perhaps more worrying for the Tories than the thing itself.
"Vile" and "threatening" seems a little overegged - he just seems pissed off, and I can't see anything that can be called "misogynistic". Unless there is a claim that a theoretical man in the same position would not have had the same reaction.
I've not commented on other party's reactions, since they would say what they are saying regardless of what actually happened.
I cannot see any mitigation for Williamson but everyone, even him, are permitted due process
There is an irony in that is reported that in 2006 Wendy Morton and 5 other conservative councillors were found guilty of bullying themselves apparently
No they aren't. In a normal job, you tell a colleague to fuck off in writing, you get fired. Just like that. None of this We must wait for Sue Wossname to report in 6 months time, and not prejudge her findings.
No you don’t. You get a bollocking from your boss and told not to get caught in future
ProudSurvivorOfFifteenYearsOfTurfWars
Depends. I have no legal training but a quick scan through the joyous jungle of the internet shows that most definitions of gross misconduct (and therefore grounds for instant dismissal) include bullying, harassment or intimidation of colleagues or managers.
It would be good to have Doug opine on this as I believe this is his area of legal expertise but I have seen numerous instances of people being dismissed on the spot and the investigation and justification being undertaken post-dismissal as a means of answering any possible legal challenge. I assume you have to be very sure of your position, but I have seen it happen, usually on grounds of safety violations or physical or verbal violence.
In the offshore industry it is referred to as being run off or, if they want to avoid a direct confrontation and wait until the person has left the rig at the end of their tour then being NRB'd (Not Required Back)
Does the normal employee stuff apply to MPs and ministers anyway? If a PM wants to, they can hire and fire pretty much at will.
The trouble with the Williamson stuff is that the rule he has broken is something like "don't embarrass the party by acting like a cock". Which isn't written down anywhere, and can't be enforced rigourously. If it were, Parliament would be a much emptier place.
Yep. As I said in my earlier comment Sunak could sack him because he didn't like his tie or his face. He needs give no justification.
Tp be clear: Windows is amazing. Getting a system that runs on such a massive variety of hardware, including legacy stuff, with so few problems is a miracle. And to make it fairly user-friendly as well. This matters, as without such capabilities we would have a number of closed, walled gardens that are much more expensive.
Apple has it easy; by controlling the hardware, you fantastically reduce the number of combinations you need to support.
Without Windows, the world would be much poorer.
Which is great for people who don't know much about computers.
I hate to break this to you; but 99% of people "don't know much about computers."
Including, I guess, your good self.
One of my friends who is blissfully un-IT-savvy needed a memory upgrade for her PC. I told her exactly what to ask for in the friendly local computer shop and the answer to a few likely questions. What I hadn't anticipated was her worriedly asking the guy if the RAM would fit in the boot of her car.
Just had a quick peruse of the updated boundary review in my areas of interest.
I think in previous boundary cycles the updates have been minor, but this time the need to keep within a tight size bound means the 2021 -> 2022 updates are in many cases as substantial as the original review
So, for instance, the total clockwise rotation of the Tameside seats in 2021 (Ashton taking Stalybridge, Hyde taking Denton and the Droylsden bit that dropped from Ashton pairing with Failsworth) is very substantially reversed by the 2022 revision, such that things are back far closer to 2019 now (except Denton grabs a different bit from outside Tameside).
With another revision to come before finalisation in 2023 it feels almost pointless to calculate seats against this boundary proposal (though, no doubt, we will).
Has the reduction in the number of MPs been dropped? I lose track.
Today you can still drop your vote off in the ballot drop boxes and there’s still more mail to come in . Because of the GOP hysteria over election fraud they will always win ED vote .
Just had a quick peruse of the updated boundary review in my areas of interest.
I think in previous boundary cycles the updates have been minor, but this time the need to keep within a tight size bound means the 2021 -> 2022 updates are in many cases as substantial as the original review
So, for instance, the total clockwise rotation of the Tameside seats in 2021 (Ashton taking Stalybridge, Hyde taking Denton and the Droylsden bit that dropped from Ashton pairing with Failsworth) is very substantially reversed by the 2022 revision, such that things are back far closer to 2019 now (except Denton grabs a different bit from outside Tameside).
With another revision to come before finalisation in 2023 it feels almost pointless to calculate seats against this boundary proposal (though, no doubt, we will).
Is there a site where I can view them, without having to download the lot?
Maricopa County officials reported problems with ballot tabulators at 20% of voting centers on Tuesday morning.
"We have techs out there. We’re doing what we can to get them back online," said Maricopa County Board of Supervisors Chairman Bill Gates during an impromptu news conference Tuesday morning.
The early in person vote not looking good for the Dems in Nevada but much more encouraging turnout from NH with strong turnout and some very good numbers coming out of Dem strongholds .
Who would you say Nico is the best source for the NH voting trends?
FWIW, I think the GOP will pick up AZ just about, PA a toss up but Fetterman's suit over the ballots announced yesterday suggests he might be nervous enough this will be very close. Walker is sounding very optimistic in GA and it does sound like the D messaging has switched to making sure he doesn't get the 50% level. NV does look as though it is heading GOP's way.
Today you can still drop your vote off in the ballot drop boxes and there’s still more mail to come in . Because of the GOP hysteria over election fraud they will always win ED vote .
It took me a few seconds to realise what ED meant. I'm too used to seeing that abbreviation in spam mail.
Comments
We'll see.
https://twitter.com/GCHUOxford/status/1589945165883781125
"LTN implementation was found to reduce NO2 statistically significantly within both the intervention areas (5.7%) and in boundary areas (8.9%), compared to the external control sites without LTN implementation." #UrbanTransitions2022
"Similar effects were also found in traffic volumes, which were reduced by 58.2% within LTNs and by 13.4% at LTN boundary sites (without statistical significance)."
"Neighbourhood traffic reductions measures are able to reduce air pollution and traffic in target areas, without necessarily causing displacements in surrounding streets."
Looks like I'll be collecting fallen leaves in the dark after work!
PC rebooting, I mean, just to be clear.
Probably on all the timetable displays at the station.
"Obviously there have been further allegations reported this morning. Those are serious allegations that have come in. It is true that no formal complaint has been made, but we want to consider proper processes before commenting further.
At another point the spokesperson said Downing Street would be “checking due process” before commenting further. Asked if the Cabinet Office’s propriety and ethics team would be involved in this, the spokesperson said he would not discuss the process.
This is serious for Williamson. No 10 could have just have said: “Williamson has denied this, there has been no formal complaint,” and left it at that. But it hasn’t."
For example, a few years ago, there were a bunch of Democrats running for state treasurer here, and just two Republicans. The two Republicans came out on top, and one of them won the general election. As far as I know he did an OK job, but he was not re-elected.
And this year, in the Washington primary for secretary of state, the top two were Democrat Steve Hobbs and Julie Anderson, who is not affiliated with any party. (The Washington secretary of state has many jobs, including supervising elections.)
https://julieanderson.org/
https://www.electhobbs.com/
Proponents of top-two primaries argue that the benefit more moderate candidates. I haven't looked for studies on that question, though I suppose there must be some.
(Top-two elections are sometimes incorrectly called "jungle" primaries. As far as I know, only Louisiana uses the latter.)
Don't forget, despite all the evidence to the contrary, Boris Johnson looked as guilty as hell over Partygate, but after a six month exhaustive enquiry by the Metropolitan Police's finest officers, the best they could muster was a £20 fixed penalty notice for eating cake at work. These cases are seldom what they first seem. I seem to recall you demanding Starmer's nuts after viewing Ivo Delingpole's video of "currygate".
The social network took action against Stuart Campbell, the blogger behind the account, in 2019.
Writing online, Campbell said Twitter informed him that the move was in response to "hateful conduct" in relation to a post which included swearing.
https://www.holyrood.com/news/view,wings-over-scotland-indy-blogger-reinstated-to-twitter
Imagine the other way - you could have complete censorship of all media. Just so long as Speaker's Corner type setups are allowed.
Four of the nine Supreme Cout justices at the time, took that position. One of the arguments that swayed the other five was this: The law could be used to prevent the publication of a book, criticizing a candidate or party.
Moreover, wealthy individuals already could spend with few limits -- and sometimes do. George Soros, for example, has been spending millions to elect prosecutors who are less tough on crime than the average.
https://mobile.twitter.com/ThatsShanghai/status/1589530137082707974
Test'n'trace peaked at about 0.5% of ours, if I remember correctly.
Two things
1.NV specifically, suggests the GOP will win
2:'More widely, if this represents GOP enthusiasm nationally, that's ominous for the Ds
You could date spending a route to power to almost any era since 1789, n'est-ce-pas?
It is true that no formal complaint has been made
2008: $16million
2010: $31 million (Citizens United happens this year)
2012: $231 million
2014: $231 million
2016: $682 million
2018: $611million
2020: $1.2billion (Excludes money Bloomberg spaffed on his own campaign)
They probably need Nevada, Arizona or New Hampshire and Georgia, Murkowski to lose and Oz to hold off Fetterman to feel comfortably in control.
https://twitter.com/RalstonReports/status/1590002263996915713
The “slit your throat” comment to a civil servant - I’ve only seen the headline so know no details - is potentially much more serious both in terms of the gravity of the comment and the power relationship (he was minister at the time AIUI)
ProudSurvivorOfFifteenYearsOfTurfWars
😇
Live Clark County Nevada list of who has voted
https://elections.clarkcountynv.gov/OnlinePostingLog/log_all.aspx?lang=en-US
Want to find out everyone who has voted at WILLIAMS, WENDELL P ELEMENTARY polling place? Well you can.
When I was at school there in the mid 80's it snowed for the first time in years.
It seems to be happening a few times every winter there now.
I'm quite tempted to watch these mid-term results, as they are so pivotal. But I've never done it before. How late do I have to stay up/how early should I rise, to see the most interesting results come in? And what are the best websites?
Ta muchly
A work colleague (she's pretty young) was talking about 'old' computer games and I mentioned I like playing old computer games. She remarked it must be really hard to get them to run, and I must need loads of different hardware to run them.
I typed 'DosBox' into the start menu, and then c: at the command prompt and asked her what game from the 1990s she'd like to play.
She answered, "Yes, but you know what you're doing. I've never heard of DOS until today."
Kids........
One of them was during a sales presentation to get a quite large customer. Not sure if the policy was changed after that due to the sales exec having to sit for 20 minutes while they and the rather fed-up potential clients watched updates installing...
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2022/11/6/2134174/-This-is-big-Guru-of-Nevada-politics-Jon-Ralston-predicts-Democrats-win
It was what happened to fairly early Microsoft Windows (iirc) when it had a Great Collapsing Windows disaster. Here's a piccie of one at Rome Station in 2015.
They kept happening (may still happen) because computer operating systems are used in "embedded" versions to run all kind of service systems, and they stay in use their far longer than on the PCs.
Still, GOP are doing well.
And they reboot at awkward moments.
Like during the lunch hour
But even if it were the case in 1789, all that means is that the US has been a failing democratic system throughout its whole existence. I am not sure that is so far from the truth.
But as number12 mentioned I'd get up early rather than stay up late.
Including, I guess, your good self.
Although, as I noted when I posted his original tweet on his prediction a few days back, he had left himself quite a few caveats when he made that call.
https://twitter.com/RalstonReports/status/1590038789686034432
He's clearly going to announce he's going to run in 7 days time, and he's going to run as a Republican. DeSantis is his only real opponent.
I'd say 95% he runs, 90% he does so as a Republican and 75% shot he gets the Nom so price should be 1.55, or lower, no?
I don't know much about computers. But I set up a Web based business now turning over £5m, including making the initial website and sales and stock management systems, and I have typeset a book in LaTex. I can make html and java script and PHP do what I want them to do. Moral: everyone knows about computers these days; your self awarded guru status expired decades ago.
ETA your initial comment
"I love this sort of comment, as it shows people who are utterly clueless about computers.
Impressive.
In the offshore industry it is referred to as being run off or, if they want to avoid a direct confrontation and wait until the person has left the rig at the end of their tour then being NRB'd (Not Required Back)
I think in previous boundary cycles the updates have been minor, but this time the need to keep within a tight size bound means the 2021 -> 2022 updates are in many cases as substantial as the original review
So, for instance, the total clockwise rotation of the Tameside seats in 2021 (Ashton taking Stalybridge, Hyde taking Denton and the Droylsden bit that dropped from Ashton pairing with Failsworth) is very substantially reversed by the 2022 revision, such that things are back far closer to 2019 now (except Denton grabs a different bit from outside Tameside).
With another revision to come before finalisation in 2023 it feels almost pointless to calculate seats against this boundary proposal (though, no doubt, we will).
It does not help that NV and GA are both glacially slow at counting. And GA has the weird runoff rule that could come into play. So I’m expecting a long wait before we know who gets the senate. Possibly a very long one.
The trouble with the Williamson stuff is that the rule he has broken is something like "don't embarrass the party by acting like a cock". Which isn't written down anywhere, and can't be enforced rigourously. If it were, Parliament would be a much emptier place.
https://eu.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2022/11/08/election-day-2022-arizona-live-voting-updates-across-state/8267101001/
Maricopa County officials reported problems with ballot tabulators at 20% of voting centers on Tuesday morning.
Today you can still drop your vote off in the ballot drop boxes and there’s still more mail to come in . Because of the GOP hysteria over election fraud they will always win ED vote .
FWIW, I think the GOP will pick up AZ just about, PA a toss up but Fetterman's suit over the ballots announced yesterday suggests he might be nervous enough this will be very close. Walker is sounding very optimistic in GA and it does sound like the D messaging has switched to making sure he doesn't get the 50% level. NV does look as though it is heading GOP's way.