The fact that there was only 1 prosecution for voter impersonation does not mean that it is not a problem. The whole point is that we don't know how much it happens, or what size of problem it is, because a lot of it goes undetected. Only hysterical revolutionaries fail to understand this basic common sense fact.
So you consider the disenfranchisement of potentially hundreds of thousands of voters to be a proportional response?
This is Trumpian politics.
Noone has been disenfranchised save for those who are too stupid to have any form of ID. If they don’t have ID, why not?
Passports are £93. Driving licenses you commit a criminal offence if you don't keep the address up to date or renew your photo every 10 years - not great if you are a lodger or flat sharer changing address a couple of times a year.
Life is different for different people. The 2m are not stupid (well some are, some aren't just like the rest of us), but they have different lives to a pb regular.
More to the point, for years it was a point of pride that an Englishman (I think was a peculiarly English thing) need never present “papers” to the authorities. I like that old idea. And as noted above, there’s many ways to skin this cat without going back on it.
You can't go anything thsse days without ID of some sort.
What a complete and utter load of stinking horseshit.
You do need ID occasionally – the notion you need it daily, even weekly, is garbage.
The fact that there was only 1 prosecution for voter impersonation does not mean that it is not a problem. The whole point is that we don't know how much it happens, or what size of problem it is, because a lot of it goes undetected. Only hysterical revolutionaries fail to understand this basic common sense fact.
So you consider the disenfranchisement of potentially hundreds of thousands of voters to be a proportional response?
This is Trumpian politics.
Noone has been disenfranchised save for those who are too stupid to have any form of ID. If they don’t have ID, why not?
Passports are £93. Driving licenses you commit a criminal offence if you don't keep the address up to date or renew your photo every 10 years - not great if you are a lodger or flat sharer changing address a couple of times a year.
Life is different for different people. The 2m are not stupid (well some are, some aren't just like the rest of us), but they have different lives to a pb regular.
More to the point, for years it was a point of pride that an Englishman (I think was a peculiarly English thing) need never present “papers” to the authorities. I like that old idea. And as noted above, there’s many ways to skin this cat without going back on it.
This is the world of Waugh in 'When the going was good' and 'Scoop'. He lived through a sort of transition; from a world of no mass or rapid or cheap travel, no busy international airports, the good chaps theory of government and the maps filled with pink, to the world starting to become the post WWII one.
SFAICS the remnants of that old world mean that an unquantified number of people live within our borders having no legitimate claim to do so, and there isn't the smallest chance of anything being done about it. Some estimates make it a million.
There are pluses and minuses about the transition, as with all things.
Interesting, in the context of Zelensky's chat with Xi. Don't quite know what to make if this, but worth noting.
China will send the Special Representative of the Chinese Government on Eurasian Affairs to Ukraine and other countries to have in-depth communication with all parties on political settlement of the Ukraine crisis. https://twitter.com/SpokespersonCHN/status/1651188280946466827
China is not the most reliable of interlocutors, to put it mildly, but they do have a hefty amount of influence on Russia.
They must owe China Zillions
The Chinese are buying up Russian oil at a substantial discount, and carefully laundering it back into the global market.
To be honest I think SKS has a number of positives that have drawn me into the Labour column. He comes across as dependable, decent, hardworking, reasonable. Yes, dull, but maybe I want dull over the nutters the Tory Party have thrown at us over the last few years.
Other Labour figures might not have managed to convert me. Nandy for instance I often think overrated.
Starmer does however suffer from a slightly sanctimonious tone and a lack of clear vision which does hold him back and could still cause him problems in a GE campaign, IMHO. I do not think he is a Blair, unifying all behind him in the “Political Wing Of The British People”.
He doesn’t have to be a Blair to win. But I don’t think he’s sealed the deal fully yet.
My critique of Starmer, which is a nice problem for Labour to have compared to Corbyn, is that I can see him winning one term; but not two.
He doesn't need to. He can be replaced after three or four years, especially given his age.
His job was to salvage the party from the depths of their worst result in 84 years. If he gets them into power at all he's achieved what most of us would have sworn was impossible.
Admittedly, with a little help from his friends Johnson and Truss.
I agree with most of this, just after labour had lost badly in 2019, the thought of them forming the next government was unlikely to put it mildly, Starmer had a mountain to climb and he is still only 3/4 up it, and the weather at the top is beginning to turn
The fact that there was only 1 prosecution for voter impersonation does not mean that it is not a problem. The whole point is that we don't know how much it happens, or what size of problem it is, because a lot of it goes undetected. Only hysterical revolutionaries fail to understand this basic common sense fact.
So you consider the disenfranchisement of potentially hundreds of thousands of voters to be a proportional response?
This is Trumpian politics.
Noone has been disenfranchised save for those who are too stupid to have any form of ID. If they don’t have ID, why not?
Passports are £93. Driving licenses you commit a criminal offence if you don't keep the address up to date or renew your photo every 10 years - not great if you are a lodger or flat sharer changing address a couple of times a year.
Life is different for different people. The 2m are not stupid (well some are, some aren't just like the rest of us), but they have different lives to a pb regular.
More to the point, for years it was a point of pride that an Englishman (I think was a peculiarly English thing) need never present “papers” to the authorities. I like that old idea. And as noted above, there’s many ways to skin this cat without going back on it.
In the sense of if you're just walking along the street, yes.
That's different from having to show ID to do a particular thing, like travel abroad, drive, pick up a parcel or - yes - vote.
You don’t have to have your driving licence with you when you drive.
No, but if you're stopped by the police and you don't have it you might need to take it to a police station later, so...
I can't understand why people are getting worked up about this. People know what ID is. Voting is an important, not frivolous activity. ID is needed for a lot less important activities than voting. Those that say that Tories have used this as voter suppression are suggesting that the non-Tory vote is more stupid than the Tory one. At one time I might have agreed with that suggestion. Not so sure now.
I agree with the bit in bold.
So why is there no meaningful safeguard for postal voting, which has been the subject of the *only* widespread and serious electoral fraud in this country since the Irish constituencies of the election of 1918?
The extent to which this key question is being ignored creates a deafening silence.
The fact that there was only 1 prosecution for voter impersonation does not mean that it is not a problem. The whole point is that we don't know how much it happens, or what size of problem it is, because a lot of it goes undetected. Only hysterical revolutionaries fail to understand this basic common sense fact.
So you consider the disenfranchisement of potentially hundreds of thousands of voters to be a proportional response?
This is Trumpian politics.
Noone has been disenfranchised save for those who are too stupid to have any form of ID. If they don’t have ID, why not?
Passports are £93. Driving licenses you commit a criminal offence if you don't keep the address up to date or renew your photo every 10 years - not great if you are a lodger or flat sharer changing address a couple of times a year.
Life is different for different people. The 2m are not stupid (well some are, some aren't just like the rest of us), but they have different lives to a pb regular.
More to the point, for years it was a point of pride that an Englishman (I think was a peculiarly English thing) need never present “papers” to the authorities. I like that old idea. And as noted above, there’s many ways to skin this cat without going back on it.
In the sense of if you're just walking along the street, yes.
That's different from having to show ID to do a particular thing, like travel abroad, drive, pick up a parcel or - yes - vote.
Driver fpt - when I said:
Doing something about postal voting needed to be first, not next.
It is ludicrous to clamp down on a crime that is not committed and to ignore one that is committed regularly.
You said:
That would have been preferable - better would have been to do both at the same time.
That's still not a reason not to do this.
Well I think you are wrong. How many other procedures and wasted time and money do you want put in place for crimes that aren't committed. I'm sure we could find some medieval crimes and set up Police departments to catch non existent criminals.
The point is you are wasting time, money and resources to stop a crime that frankly doesn't happen and in the process disenfranchising lots of voters
I don't believe that it's not committed, given stories that have been told of people who have lost their vote in such circumstances yet don't appear in official statistics because the police aren't interested in recording it as a crime, let alone investigating it.
Well I have been involved in this stuff for 50 odd years and umpteen people have explained on here before how difficult it is to do without getting caught for more than a very small handful of votes and the risks involved if you do get caught is prison. You have to be mad to do it.
All parties have the right to put a polling agent into the polling station to challenge voters. Most people are not aware of this because it is never done, because it is a crime that practically never happens so parties do not waste their time on it. The only reason I am aware of it is because we did once do it, because we were aware it was going to be tried by a group of idiots. It resulted in only 2 challenges, one of which was genuine, the other resulted in the person doing a runner.
The risk of getting caught is huge and you need a different person for each single vote (or are you also supplying wigs and changes of clothing).
This is really bonkersland stuff when it is so much easier to cheat with postal votes. I mean why would you bother?
On the subject of the thread, I note that two years ago The Daily Signal surveyed 47 countries in Europe and the UK was the only one that didn't require voter ID (apart, of course, from Northern Ireland which has had voter ID for over 20 years).
The fact that prosecutions for voter impersonation are low doesn't really tell us anything. An offender can only be prosecuted when they are found out and there is adequate evidence. There may be many cases of voter impersonation that are never detected. After all, if you know that Mr Brown never votes, you are unlikely to be detected if you turn up at the polling station pretending to be him. In my view, we don't really know the size of the problem.
Maybe I am wrong, but I struggle to see voter ID as an evil voter suppression plot.
As a critic I don't think voter ID has to be a suppression plot. But the way it has been done is in line with a party trying to (marginally) suppress the vote of its opponents - there are other ways this could have been done with more fairness and consensus. The government refused to engage to gain that consensus.
What on earth is meant by "voter suppression"? Why on earth should people who can't prove who they who they say they are be allowed to cheat in voting? You need identification to pick up a parcel or rent a car, why is this any different? It's totally non-partisan and neutral, just common sense and tightening up electoral security, if you ask me.
And if the impact is 100 less dodgy votes at the price of 100,000 valid votes lost?
If there were more hoops to jump through in order to be able to vote, perhaps Leave wouldn't have won the referendum.
That Bridgen response to expulsion is full of classic guilty person tropes. I'm innocent but wont appeal, you found against me so you must be biased and corrupt, etc.
The fact that there was only 1 prosecution for voter impersonation does not mean that it is not a problem. The whole point is that we don't know how much it happens, or what size of problem it is, because a lot of it goes undetected. Only hysterical revolutionaries fail to understand this basic common sense fact.
So you consider the disenfranchisement of potentially hundreds of thousands of voters to be a proportional response?
This is Trumpian politics.
Noone has been disenfranchised save for those who are too stupid to have any form of ID. If they don’t have ID, why not?
Passports are £93. Driving licenses you commit a criminal offence if you don't keep the address up to date or renew your photo every 10 years - not great if you are a lodger or flat sharer changing address a couple of times a year.
Life is different for different people. The 2m are not stupid (well some are, some aren't just like the rest of us), but they have different lives to a pb regular.
More to the point, for years it was a point of pride that an Englishman (I think was a peculiarly English thing) need never present “papers” to the authorities. I like that old idea. And as noted above, there’s many ways to skin this cat without going back on it.
There are a lot of "points of pride for an Englishmen" that should long have been in the dustbin of history; imo this is one of those. Attachment to Agatha Christie - Bertie Wooster World is not worth the many downsides.
The novelistic world this, like other pasts, creates is a great relaxation and good fun, as a number of recent publishers are discovering to their immense profit. Just as Sherlock Holmes and Trollope is the stuff of a short and glimmering age after the coming of the railways but before the mass motor car (and before WWI and its apocalyptic horrors), so the popular novels (especially crime) of 1925 - 1955 in their own way are doing the same.
Evelyn Waugh on Wodehouse:
Mr. Wodehouse's idyllic world can never stale. He will continue to release future generations from captivity that may be more irksome than our own. He has made a world for us to live in and delight in.
The Irish republicans of Sinn Féin — who once supported Irish Republican Army attacks on British royals — announced today they will send senior representatives to the coronation of King Charles III.
What on earth is meant by "voter suppression"? Why on earth should people who can't prove who they who they say they are be allowed to cheat in voting? You need identification to pick up a parcel or rent a car, why is this any different? It's totally non-partisan and neutral, just common sense and tightening up electoral security, if you ask me.
And if the impact is 100 less dodgy votes at the price of 100,000 valid votes lost?
If there were more hoops to jump through in order to be able to vote, perhaps Leave wouldn't have won the referendum.
That's the irony. Cameron & Osborne's first attempt at rigging the system involved stacking the vote FOR Brexit. Turns out young, thrusting, Labour-leaning voters are also pro-EU, so the government not only had an emergency registration drive but even extended the registration deadlines, much to the fury of the Leave team.
The fact that there was only 1 prosecution for voter impersonation does not mean that it is not a problem. The whole point is that we don't know how much it happens, or what size of problem it is, because a lot of it goes undetected. Only hysterical revolutionaries fail to understand this basic common sense fact.
So you consider the disenfranchisement of potentially hundreds of thousands of voters to be a proportional response?
This is Trumpian politics.
Noone has been disenfranchised save for those who are too stupid to have any form of ID. If they don’t have ID, why not?
Passports are £93. Driving licenses you commit a criminal offence if you don't keep the address up to date or renew your photo every 10 years - not great if you are a lodger or flat sharer changing address a couple of times a year.
Life is different for different people. The 2m are not stupid (well some are, some aren't just like the rest of us), but they have different lives to a pb regular.
More to the point, for years it was a point of pride that an Englishman (I think was a peculiarly English thing) need never present “papers” to the authorities. I like that old idea. And as noted above, there’s many ways to skin this cat without going back on it.
In the sense of if you're just walking along the street, yes.
That's different from having to show ID to do a particular thing, like travel abroad, drive, pick up a parcel or - yes - vote.
You don’t have to have your driving licence with you when you drive.
No, but if you're stopped by the police and you don't have it you might need to take it to a police station later, so...
I can't understand why people are getting worked up about this. People know what ID is. Voting is an important, not frivolous activity. ID is needed for a lot less important activities than voting. Those that say that Tories have used this as voter suppression are suggesting that the non-Tory vote is more stupid than the Tory one. At one time I might have agreed with that suggestion. Not so sure now.
I agree with the bit in bold.
So why is there no meaningful safeguard for postal voting, which has been the subject of the *only* widespread and serious electoral fraud in this country since the Irish constituencies of the election of 1918?
Everyone knows the answer to that. Particularly the people who are protesting so much in favour of compulsory ID for voting in person.
And anyone who doesn't exercise extreme scepticism about the motivations of politicians, for doing anything whatsoever that could influence the result of an election, needs his/her head looking at.
The Irish republicans of Sinn Féin — who once supported Irish Republican Army attacks on British royals — announced today they will send senior representatives to the coronation of King Charles III.
I mean yes that's great I'm all in favour. But I like the attempted and continued "distinction" with the wording "Sinn Fein - who once supported Irish Republican Army attacks..." as though the two were wholly separate, different and on the whole disinterested (in each other) parties.
The Irish republicans of Sinn Féin — who once supported Irish Republican Army attacks on British royals — announced today they will send senior representatives to the coronation of King Charles III.
The fact that there was only 1 prosecution for voter impersonation does not mean that it is not a problem. The whole point is that we don't know how much it happens, or what size of problem it is, because a lot of it goes undetected. Only hysterical revolutionaries fail to understand this basic common sense fact.
So you consider the disenfranchisement of potentially hundreds of thousands of voters to be a proportional response?
This is Trumpian politics.
Noone has been disenfranchised save for those who are too stupid to have any form of ID. If they don’t have ID, why not?
Passports are £93. Driving licenses you commit a criminal offence if you don't keep the address up to date or renew your photo every 10 years - not great if you are a lodger or flat sharer changing address a couple of times a year.
Life is different for different people. The 2m are not stupid (well some are, some aren't just like the rest of us), but they have different lives to a pb regular.
More to the point, for years it was a point of pride that an Englishman (I think was a peculiarly English thing) need never present “papers” to the authorities. I like that old idea. And as noted above, there’s many ways to skin this cat without going back on it.
You can't go anything thsse days without ID of some sort.
What a complete and utter load of stinking horseshit.
You do need ID occasionally – the notion you need it daily, even weekly, is garbage.
If only we had a steady supply of fungible tokens, that could be used as an anonymous means of exchange?
That Bridgen response to expulsion is full of classic guilty person tropes. I'm innocent but wont appeal, you found against me so you must be biased and corrupt, etc.
Good times
To be fair to Bridgen (yes, yes) it is not clear whether he is being thrown out for antisemitism or for spreading Covid conspiracy theories, or just for being a dickhead. The correct answer, as any fule wearing a tin-foil hat know, is to pile the pressure on SKS over Diane Abbott.
The fact that there was only 1 prosecution for voter impersonation does not mean that it is not a problem. The whole point is that we don't know how much it happens, or what size of problem it is, because a lot of it goes undetected. Only hysterical revolutionaries fail to understand this basic common sense fact.
So you consider the disenfranchisement of potentially hundreds of thousands of voters to be a proportional response?
This is Trumpian politics.
Noone has been disenfranchised save for those who are too stupid to have any form of ID. If they don’t have ID, why not?
Passports are £93. Driving licenses you commit a criminal offence if you don't keep the address up to date or renew your photo every 10 years - not great if you are a lodger or flat sharer changing address a couple of times a year.
Life is different for different people. The 2m are not stupid (well some are, some aren't just like the rest of us), but they have different lives to a pb regular.
More to the point, for years it was a point of pride that an Englishman (I think was a peculiarly English thing) need never present “papers” to the authorities. I like that old idea. And as noted above, there’s many ways to skin this cat without going back on it.
In the sense of if you're just walking along the street, yes.
That's different from having to show ID to do a particular thing, like travel abroad, drive, pick up a parcel or - yes - vote.
You don’t have to have your driving licence with you when you drive.
No, but if you're stopped by the police and you don't have it you might need to take it to a police station later, so...
I can't understand why people are getting worked up about this. People know what ID is. Voting is an important, not frivolous activity. ID is needed for a lot less important activities than voting. Those that say that Tories have used this as voter suppression are suggesting that the non-Tory vote is more stupid than the Tory one. At one time I might have agreed with that suggestion. Not so sure now.
I think arguments against even the principal of voter ID can be overblown - other perfectly democratic places use it. And if you ask people should voting be more secure they will probably say yes. Showing ID for an important civic function is not inherently ridiculous.
I think the arguments it is an attempt at voter suppression have more merit due to postal voting not being touched, though the oft touted buss pass discrepancy has an explanation, and personally I'd not be surprised if its old tory voters who have but dont bring ID who will miss out more.
I think complaints about chaos when first implemented are going to be true but a new system or law seeing some transitionary issues is not itself a major issue depending on scale.
Nonetheless it has always seemed to me to be disproportionate to the scale of the issue, lacking if it is intended to combat issues by not looking at all types of voting, and at least partly motivated by perceived advantage, as most changes are.
Is it suppression? I dont think so. But it is unnecessary complication and disruption, and the implementation cack handed.
What on earth is meant by "voter suppression"? Why on earth should people who can't prove who they who they say they are be allowed to cheat in voting? You need identification to pick up a parcel or rent a car, why is this any different? It's totally non-partisan and neutral, just common sense and tightening up electoral security, if you ask me.
And if the impact is 100 less dodgy votes at the price of 100,000 valid votes lost?
If there were more hoops to jump through in order to be able to vote, perhaps Leave wouldn't have won the referendum.
It's an interesting one:
Poorer voters - more likely to back Brexit, more likely not to have ID Metropolitan voters - more likely to back Remain, more likely not to have ID Younger voters - more likely to back Remain, more likely not to have ID
My guess, fwiw, is that very few voters were disenfranchised by the Brexit vote, and that's a *good* thing.
The fact that there was only 1 prosecution for voter impersonation does not mean that it is not a problem. The whole point is that we don't know how much it happens, or what size of problem it is, because a lot of it goes undetected. Only hysterical revolutionaries fail to understand this basic common sense fact.
So you consider the disenfranchisement of potentially hundreds of thousands of voters to be a proportional response?
This is Trumpian politics.
Noone has been disenfranchised save for those who are too stupid to have any form of ID. If they don’t have ID, why not?
Passports are £93. Driving licenses you commit a criminal offence if you don't keep the address up to date or renew your photo every 10 years - not great if you are a lodger or flat sharer changing address a couple of times a year.
Life is different for different people. The 2m are not stupid (well some are, some aren't just like the rest of us), but they have different lives to a pb regular.
More to the point, for years it was a point of pride that an Englishman (I think was a peculiarly English thing) need never present “papers” to the authorities. I like that old idea. And as noted above, there’s many ways to skin this cat without going back on it.
In the sense of if you're just walking along the street, yes.
That's different from having to show ID to do a particular thing, like travel abroad, drive, pick up a parcel or - yes - vote.
You don’t have to have your driving licence with you when you drive.
No, but if you're stopped by the police and you don't have it you might need to take it to a police station later, so...
I can't understand why people are getting worked up about this. People know what ID is. Voting is an important, not frivolous activity. ID is needed for a lot less important activities than voting. Those that say that Tories have used this as voter suppression are suggesting that the non-Tory vote is more stupid than the Tory one. At one time I might have agreed with that suggestion. Not so sure now.
I agree with the bit in bold.
So why is there no meaningful safeguard for postal voting, which has been the subject of the *only* widespread and serious electoral fraud in this country since the Irish constituencies of the election of 1918?
I agree with you that there should be safeguards for postal voting. Postal votes should be extremely limited IMO. IIRC it was greatly expanded under the Blair government.
As I say, the suggestion that non-Tory voters are somehow less likely to know how to use ID than Tory ones is ludicrous. This is just a new cause celebre for Labour and LD supporters that is without any logic, and is divisive and corrosive in itself
I see the government has reached its target for 20,000 new police officers, a pledge made in the 2019 manifesto.
That's pretty shocking. Govt makes good on manifesto pledge is not something you see every day.
If only the police's reputation wasn't in the gutter this might have positive polling implications for the Cons. It still might.
They’re measuring inputs, rather than outputs.
20,000 more officers working on trivial motoring offences and policing ‘hate crime’ on Twitter - while house burglaries, car thefts and street robberies lead to little interest - isn’t going to go down well with the general public.
I'm not sure what these "trivial motoring offences" are? AFACIS they tend to be the ones that would cause a member of the public to be crippled or killed next time around or in slightly different circumstances, and it is far better to catch a selfish, dozy or dangerous motorist first time around.
The good news is that they *don't* take up resources - the Met used a tiny number of staff for the many thousands of offences they processed last year via their dashcam portal.
When antisocial parking has been effectively addressed (via trained PCSOs), it turns into an intelligence-gathering festival. See WMP Operation Parksafe for example.
The fact that there was only 1 prosecution for voter impersonation does not mean that it is not a problem. The whole point is that we don't know how much it happens, or what size of problem it is, because a lot of it goes undetected. Only hysterical revolutionaries fail to understand this basic common sense fact.
So you consider the disenfranchisement of potentially hundreds of thousands of voters to be a proportional response?
This is Trumpian politics.
Noone has been disenfranchised save for those who are too stupid to have any form of ID. If they don’t have ID, why not?
Passports are £93. Driving licenses you commit a criminal offence if you don't keep the address up to date or renew your photo every 10 years - not great if you are a lodger or flat sharer changing address a couple of times a year.
Life is different for different people. The 2m are not stupid (well some are, some aren't just like the rest of us), but they have different lives to a pb regular.
More to the point, for years it was a point of pride that an Englishman (I think was a peculiarly English thing) need never present “papers” to the authorities. I like that old idea. And as noted above, there’s many ways to skin this cat without going back on it.
This is the world of Waugh in 'When the going was good' and 'Scoop'. He lived through a sort of transition; from a world of no mass or rapid or cheap travel, no busy international airports, the good chaps theory of government and the maps filled with pink, to the world starting to become the post WWII one.
SFAICS the remnants of that old world mean that an unquantified number of people live within our borders having no legitimate claim to do so, and there isn't the smallest chance of anything being done about it. Some estimates make it a million.
There are pluses and minuses about the transition, as with all things.
I suspect the difference between you and I is that all I want to do with those folk is make them British citizens and start collecting their taxes. No one need have any papers if all are welcome.
Interesting, in the context of Zelensky's chat with Xi. Don't quite know what to make if this, but worth noting.
China will send the Special Representative of the Chinese Government on Eurasian Affairs to Ukraine and other countries to have in-depth communication with all parties on political settlement of the Ukraine crisis. https://twitter.com/SpokespersonCHN/status/1651188280946466827
China is not the most reliable of interlocutors, to put it mildly, but they do have a hefty amount of influence on Russia.
If Xi told Putin to withdraw from Ukraine, I suspect Putin would have to comply.
Not sure he has enough heft to get him out of Crimea. That would surely be Putin's eighth floor window moment.
The fact that there was only 1 prosecution for voter impersonation does not mean that it is not a problem. The whole point is that we don't know how much it happens, or what size of problem it is, because a lot of it goes undetected. Only hysterical revolutionaries fail to understand this basic common sense fact.
So you consider the disenfranchisement of potentially hundreds of thousands of voters to be a proportional response?
This is Trumpian politics.
Noone has been disenfranchised save for those who are too stupid to have any form of ID. If they don’t have ID, why not?
Passports are £93. Driving licenses you commit a criminal offence if you don't keep the address up to date or renew your photo every 10 years - not great if you are a lodger or flat sharer changing address a couple of times a year.
Life is different for different people. The 2m are not stupid (well some are, some aren't just like the rest of us), but they have different lives to a pb regular.
More to the point, for years it was a point of pride that an Englishman (I think was a peculiarly English thing) need never present “papers” to the authorities. I like that old idea. And as noted above, there’s many ways to skin this cat without going back on it.
In the sense of if you're just walking along the street, yes.
That's different from having to show ID to do a particular thing, like travel abroad, drive, pick up a parcel or - yes - vote.
Driver fpt - when I said:
Doing something about postal voting needed to be first, not next.
It is ludicrous to clamp down on a crime that is not committed and to ignore one that is committed regularly.
You said:
That would have been preferable - better would have been to do both at the same time.
That's still not a reason not to do this.
Well I think you are wrong. How many other procedures and wasted time and money do you want put in place for crimes that aren't committed. I'm sure we could find some medieval crimes and set up Police departments to catch non existent criminals.
The point is you are wasting time, money and resources to stop a crime that frankly doesn't happen and in the process disenfranchising lots of voters
I don't believe that it's not committed, given stories that have been told of people who have lost their vote in such circumstances yet don't appear in official statistics because the police aren't interested in recording it as a crime, let alone investigating it.
Well I have been involved in this stuff for 50 odd years and umpteen people have explained on here before how difficult it is to do without getting caught for more than a very small handful of votes and the risks involved if you do get caught is prison. You have to be mad to do it.
All parties have the right to put a polling agent into the polling station to challenge voters. Most people are not aware of this because it is never done, because it is a crime that practically never happens so parties do not waste their time on it. The only reason I am aware of it is because we did once do it, because we were aware it was going to be tried by a group of idiots. It resulted in only 2 challenges, one of which was genuine, the other resulted in the person doing a runner.
The risk of getting caught is huge and you need a different person for each single vote (or are you also supplying wigs and changes of clothing).
This is really bonkersland stuff when it is so much easier to cheat with postal votes. I mean why would you bother?
Scaling up your fraud to be meaningful is the key. So many things could go wrong for so little electoral gain.
It's also why just dont risk electronic voting. There are things you can do but why risk the scaling issue?
The one thing you can be sure about: any of those moaning about the vote suppression by requiring ID would be the loudest screamers if somebody had impersonated them to vote for Farage. Or Brexit.....
The fact that there was only 1 prosecution for voter impersonation does not mean that it is not a problem. The whole point is that we don't know how much it happens, or what size of problem it is, because a lot of it goes undetected. Only hysterical revolutionaries fail to understand this basic common sense fact.
So you consider the disenfranchisement of potentially hundreds of thousands of voters to be a proportional response?
This is Trumpian politics.
Noone has been disenfranchised save for those who are too stupid to have any form of ID. If they don’t have ID, why not?
Passports are £93. Driving licenses you commit a criminal offence if you don't keep the address up to date or renew your photo every 10 years - not great if you are a lodger or flat sharer changing address a couple of times a year.
Life is different for different people. The 2m are not stupid (well some are, some aren't just like the rest of us), but they have different lives to a pb regular.
More to the point, for years it was a point of pride that an Englishman (I think was a peculiarly English thing) need never present “papers” to the authorities. I like that old idea. And as noted above, there’s many ways to skin this cat without going back on it.
You can't go anything thsse days without ID of some sort.
What a complete and utter load of stinking horseshit.
You do need ID occasionally – the notion you need it daily, even weekly, is garbage.
You must live in the black economy.
I've not been asked for ID for months, even though I'm spending money like a drunken sailor building our house. I have multiple deliveries every day, I'm picking stuff up from trade counters that I've ordered online. They all say I need to provide ID to get my stuff. Not happened yet. I can't remember the last time someone asked for my papers. Voter ID is a crock of shit.
That Bridgen response to expulsion is full of classic guilty person tropes. I'm innocent but wont appeal, you found against me so you must be biased and corrupt, etc.
Good times
Maybe but anti vax information is out there and generally circulating now. David Bull on talk tv on Sunday outlined how his mother had been severely injured by the booster and he was backed up by Doctor Renee Hoenderkamp. This is a clip from talktv on sunday.
Dr David Bull "You said these side effects are rare i dont believe that"
I see the government has reached its target for 20,000 new police officers, a pledge made in the 2019 manifesto.
That's pretty shocking. Govt makes good on manifesto pledge is not something you see every day.
If only the police's reputation wasn't in the gutter this might have positive polling implications for the Cons. It still might.
They’re measuring inputs, rather than outputs.
20,000 more officers working on trivial motoring offences and policing ‘hate crime’ on Twitter - while house burglaries, car thefts and street robberies lead to little interest - isn’t going to go down well with the general public.
I'm not sure what these "trivial motoring offences" are? AFACIS they tend to be the ones that would cause a member of the public to be crippled or killed next time around or in slightly different circumstances, and it is far better to catch a selfish, dozy or dangerous motorist first time around.
The good news is that they *don't* take up resources - the Met used a tiny number of staff for the many thousands of offences they processed last year via their dashcam portal.
When antisocial parking has been effectively addressed (via trained PCSOs), it turns into an intelligence-gathering festival. See WMP Operation Parksafe for example.
Trivial motoring offences: anything I do Non-Trivial motoring offences - anything anyone else does
Also there was a double page spread in the mail yesterday about people injured by the covid vaccine. Mail has a circulation or around 1 million so this info is hitting significant numbers of people.
That Bridgen response to expulsion is full of classic guilty person tropes. I'm innocent but wont appeal, you found against me so you must be biased and corrupt, etc.
Good times
Maybe but anti vax information is out there and generally circulating now. David Bull on talk tv on Sunday outlined how his mother had been severely injured by the booster and he was backed up by Doctor Renee Hoenderkamp. This is a clip from talktv on sunday.
Dr David Bull "You said these side effects are rare i dont believe that"
The one thing you can be sure about: any of those moaning about the vote suppression by requiring ID would be the loudest screamers if somebody had impersonated them to vote for Farage. Or Brexit.....
If they did, then they'd know about it so you'd need to take your socks off to count personation cases.
Hancock yesterday was calling for antivax disinformation to be included in the online safety bill. Its a very bad look for Hancock if he doesnt want to allow free and fair debate.
The one thing you can be sure about: any of those moaning about the vote suppression by requiring ID would be the loudest screamers if somebody had impersonated them to vote for Farage. Or Brexit.....
The Irish republicans of Sinn Féin — who once supported Irish Republican Army attacks on British royals — announced today they will send senior representatives to the coronation of King Charles III.
Maybe but anti vax information is out there and generally circulating now. David Bull on talk tv on Sunday outlined how his mother had been severely injured by the booster and he was backed up by Doctor Renee Hoenderkamp. This is a clip from talktv on sunday.
Dr David Bull "You said these side effects are rare i dont believe that"
I don't see how it circulating is very relevant. Herpes circulates too, and we take action against it. He faces consequences for his words then cries about it. He wants to be hailed as a hero and is upset he is not. And he can easily say what he likes without Tory endorsement so no free speech issue.
Also there was a double page spread in the mail yesterday about people injured by the covid vaccine. Mail has a circulation or around 1 million so this info is hitting significant numbers of people.
Are these people mostly BA pilots? Great to have a new perspective on things on PB. Would love to hear your views on the whole Ukraine shebang too while you're here.
One of the key problems is Pfizer stock is trading at yearly lows as the stock market has rallied this year. Wall Street isnt renowned for sentimentality so it suggests there may be a problem as even Leon i think acknowledged a few weeks ago.
Also there was a double page spread in the mail yesterday about people injured by the covid vaccine. Mail has a circulation or around 1 million so this info is hitting significant numbers of people.
Welcome.
I hope President Xi's decision to talk to Zelensky has not resulted in too many unfortunate accidents involving windows round your way?
Also there was a double page spread in the mail yesterday about people injured by the covid vaccine. Mail has a circulation or around 1 million so this info is hitting significant numbers of people.
Welcome.
I hope President Xi's decision to talk to Zelensky has not resulted in too many unfortunate accidents involving windows round your way?
So the daily mail is part of the russian conspiracy now too is it. Ok fair enough.
Also there was a double page spread in the mail yesterday about people injured by the covid vaccine. Mail has a circulation or around 1 million so this info is hitting significant numbers of people.
Are these people mostly BA pilots? Great to have a new perspective on things on PB. Would love to hear your views on the whole Ukraine shebang too while you're here.
I doubt if it will be long. @rcs1000 is probably polishing the ban hammer as we speak...
Also there was a double page spread in the mail yesterday about people injured by the covid vaccine. Mail has a circulation or around 1 million so this info is hitting significant numbers of people.
Welcome.
I hope President Xi's decision to talk to Zelensky has not resulted in too many unfortunate accidents involving windows round your way?
So the daily mail is part of the russian conspiracy now too is it. Ok fair enough.
Well, if they're not they're missing a trick given all the millions of Russians who appear to read it.
Also there was a double page spread in the mail yesterday about people injured by the covid vaccine. Mail has a circulation or around 1 million so this info is hitting significant numbers of people.
Are these people mostly BA pilots? Great to have a new perspective on things on PB. Would love to hear your views on the whole Ukraine shebang too while you're here.
I doubt if it will be long. @rcs1000 is probably polishing the ban hammer as we speak...
You sound increasingly paranoid with seeing Russian conspiracies round every corner. Help is available you know
Also there was a double page spread in the mail yesterday about people injured by the covid vaccine. Mail has a circulation or around 1 million so this info is hitting significant numbers of people.
Are these people mostly BA pilots? Great to have a new perspective on things on PB. Would love to hear your views on the whole Ukraine shebang too while you're here.
I doubt if it will be long. @rcs1000 is probably polishing the ban hammer as we speak...
You sound increasingly paranoid with seeing Russian conspiracies round every corner. Help is available you know
Really? I sound increasingly paranoid in two posts?
Shall we go for the hat trick? I think Putin's obsession with invading other countries shows why you shouldn't have male leaders with penises less than 15mm long.
Tucker Carlson also sacked from fox news after taking on big pharma.
This - almost certainly - is the reason for the exit of Tucker Carlson from Fox News.
In this short monologue he asks the viewers to consider the level of evil that 'the networks' would have engaged in if they were actively promoting drug company products as safe and effective when the evidence (including the clinical trials) showed something else entirely i.e. that the mRNA "vaccines" were damaging (to some) and ineffective for just about everybody that received them.
Remember that it's not just the US media networks that engaged in this activity. The @BBCNews has acted as the UK government's chief propagandist for the vaccines and has played its part in refusing to allow free speech on its government funded platform. The exercise of free speech would have challenged the government's policies, questioned the authoritarianism and suspension of civil rights, and exposed the degree of vested interests in government 'health' regulatory bodies.
In the same way that @RobertKennedyJr has been the subject of character assassination in the United States, @ABridgen has been effectively de-platformed by the big-pharma-owned media and establishment here.
Also there was a double page spread in the mail yesterday about people injured by the covid vaccine. Mail has a circulation or around 1 million so this info is hitting significant numbers of people.
Glossary for anyone unfamiliar with UK processes on vaccines/pharmaceuticals: - MHRA - Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency - Yellow card system - a system by which anyone can report suspected side/adverse effects of medications/vaccines
The fact that there was only 1 prosecution for voter impersonation does not mean that it is not a problem. The whole point is that we don't know how much it happens, or what size of problem it is, because a lot of it goes undetected. Only hysterical revolutionaries fail to understand this basic common sense fact.
So you consider the disenfranchisement of potentially hundreds of thousands of voters to be a proportional response?
This is Trumpian politics.
Noone has been disenfranchised save for those who are too stupid to have any form of ID. If they don’t have ID, why not?
Passports are £93. Driving licenses you commit a criminal offence if you don't keep the address up to date or renew your photo every 10 years - not great if you are a lodger or flat sharer changing address a couple of times a year.
Life is different for different people. The 2m are not stupid (well some are, some aren't just like the rest of us), but they have different lives to a pb regular.
More to the point, for years it was a point of pride that an Englishman (I think was a peculiarly English thing) need never present “papers” to the authorities. I like that old idea. And as noted above, there’s many ways to skin this cat without going back on it.
In the sense of if you're just walking along the street, yes.
That's different from having to show ID to do a particular thing, like travel abroad, drive, pick up a parcel or - yes - vote.
Driver fpt - when I said:
Doing something about postal voting needed to be first, not next.
It is ludicrous to clamp down on a crime that is not committed and to ignore one that is committed regularly.
You said:
That would have been preferable - better would have been to do both at the same time.
That's still not a reason not to do this.
Well I think you are wrong. How many other procedures and wasted time and money do you want put in place for crimes that aren't committed. I'm sure we could find some medieval crimes and set up Police departments to catch non existent criminals.
The point is you are wasting time, money and resources to stop a crime that frankly doesn't happen and in the process disenfranchising lots of voters
I don't believe that it's not committed, given stories that have been told of people who have lost their vote in such circumstances yet don't appear in official statistics because the police aren't interested in recording it as a crime, let alone investigating it.
Well I have been involved in this stuff for 50 odd years and umpteen people have explained on here before how difficult it is to do without getting caught for more than a very small handful of votes and the risks involved if you do get caught is prison. You have to be mad to do it.
All parties have the right to put a polling agent into the polling station to challenge voters. Most people are not aware of this because it is never done, because it is a crime that practically never happens so parties do not waste their time on it. The only reason I am aware of it is because we did once do it, because we were aware it was going to be tried by a group of idiots. It resulted in only 2 challenges, one of which was genuine, the other resulted in the person doing a runner.
The risk of getting caught is huge and you need a different person for each single vote (or are you also supplying wigs and changes of clothing).
This is really bonkersland stuff when it is so much easier to cheat with postal votes. I mean why would you bother?
Just to add to a point I didn't reply to that @Driver made - he is assuming that the stories he has heard are fraud, whereas they could simply be the wrong name being struck through. They are very careful about this, but it must happen occasionally. Very annoying if you lose your vote, but it need not be because of fraud.
It will be interesting if he does join RefUK, giving them a Parliament slot. In principle that would give him more coverage than the actual leadership (just as Caroline Lucas gets more than the Green leadership), and I wonder if a mighty Budgen-Tice battle battle awaits keen punters to consider in the future?
Interestingly (well, it was to me) but whenever we approach a GE, the format of the debates always comes up and is usually difficult to define.
I have long believed that for a UK GE, there should be a main debate, and to get invited to this main debate you should:
AND: 1. Be standing in at least 326 seats across the country.
OR: 2. Have at least 1 MP at dissolution 3. Have secured at least 10% of the vote at the previous GE
On the above criteria, for GE 2024, only CON, LAB, LD and Greens would be standing. If Brigden did join RefUK, arguably he'd be allowed to.
That's if the broadcasters ever agreed to some sort of sensible rules.......
Nothing to get excited about. Some old fella is going to be driven around that there London in a gold wagon, dragging most of the armed forces around with him.
The fact that there was only 1 prosecution for voter impersonation does not mean that it is not a problem. The whole point is that we don't know how much it happens, or what size of problem it is, because a lot of it goes undetected. Only hysterical revolutionaries fail to understand this basic common sense fact.
So you consider the disenfranchisement of potentially hundreds of thousands of voters to be a proportional response?
This is Trumpian politics.
Noone has been disenfranchised save for those who are too stupid to have any form of ID. If they don’t have ID, why not?
Passports are £93. Driving licenses you commit a criminal offence if you don't keep the address up to date or renew your photo every 10 years - not great if you are a lodger or flat sharer changing address a couple of times a year.
Life is different for different people. The 2m are not stupid (well some are, some aren't just like the rest of us), but they have different lives to a pb regular.
More to the point, for years it was a point of pride that an Englishman (I think was a peculiarly English thing) need never present “papers” to the authorities. I like that old idea. And as noted above, there’s many ways to skin this cat without going back on it.
This is the world of Waugh in 'When the going was good' and 'Scoop'. He lived through a sort of transition; from a world of no mass or rapid or cheap travel, no busy international airports, the good chaps theory of government and the maps filled with pink, to the world starting to become the post WWII one.
SFAICS the remnants of that old world mean that an unquantified number of people live within our borders having no legitimate claim to do so, and there isn't the smallest chance of anything being done about it. Some estimates make it a million.
There are pluses and minuses about the transition, as with all things.
I suspect the difference between you and I is that all I want to do with those folk is make them British citizens and start collecting their taxes. No one need have any papers if all are welcome.
If all are welcome then visa free travel from anywhere would be fine. Good luck.
It is possible (as I do) to rejoice in the fact that 29% of our babies have foreign born mothers and at the same time quite like a country that had some idea of how to control its borders and which foreign nationals were in it. Reasonably open policies and the rule of law are not incompatible.
"All are welcome" is, to put it politely, a policy only for opposition parties not planning to win an election.
Hancock yesterday was calling for antivax disinformation to be included in the online safety bill. Its a very bad look for Hancock if he doesnt want to allow free and fair debate.
It's a bad look for people to be circulating anti-vax propaganda that could cost lives, but the anti-vax crazies don't seem overly concerned with their public image.
Tucker Carlson also alluded to what is developing as a spiritual battle between good and evil. An interesting perspective.
This is a well worn trope of the fascist tendency, reflecting I am sure the devil's knowledge that at some level that's just how it is; just as its left wing opposite has a more secularised language to distinguish between themselves and people like the rest of us who think in shades of grey and therefore suffer from false consciousness.
Is there a Russian version of this website we can all go and troll? Somewhere that debates whether Putin’s (published) net approval rating will be 94 or 95%
Also there was a double page spread in the mail yesterday about people injured by the covid vaccine. Mail has a circulation or around 1 million so this info is hitting significant numbers of people.
I suspect most people also know or know of actual people living locally to them whose lives have never been the same - sometimes catastrophically - after having a bout of Covid. Most know that both sets of facts may be true, and it is a matter of risk balancing.
Also there was a double page spread in the mail yesterday about people injured by the covid vaccine. Mail has a circulation or around 1 million so this info is hitting significant numbers of people.
Are these people mostly BA pilots? Great to have a new perspective on things on PB. Would love to hear your views on the whole Ukraine shebang too while you're here.
I doubt if it will be long. @rcs1000 is probably polishing the ban hammer as we speak...
You sound increasingly paranoid with seeing Russian conspiracies round every corner. Help is available you know
But not much help available for the very second rate Russian armed forces.
Just reading how the Spetsnaz (maybe there should be an i on the end) are not very special. Killing unarmed civilians is the height of their capabilities. Special forces lol.
Nota bene, this is a subsample of 174 so I wouldn't get overly excited, wait for the full Scotland polls.
Genuine questions, what is the accepted MOE for sub samples that small? Or are they so small the MOE is effectively 100% and they can be completely wrong?
The fact that there was only 1 prosecution for voter impersonation does not mean that it is not a problem. The whole point is that we don't know how much it happens, or what size of problem it is, because a lot of it goes undetected. Only hysterical revolutionaries fail to understand this basic common sense fact.
So you consider the disenfranchisement of potentially hundreds of thousands of voters to be a proportional response?
This is Trumpian politics.
Noone has been disenfranchised save for those who are too stupid to have any form of ID. If they don’t have ID, why not?
Passports are £93. Driving licenses you commit a criminal offence if you don't keep the address up to date or renew your photo every 10 years - not great if you are a lodger or flat sharer changing address a couple of times a year.
Life is different for different people. The 2m are not stupid (well some are, some aren't just like the rest of us), but they have different lives to a pb regular.
More to the point, for years it was a point of pride that an Englishman (I think was a peculiarly English thing) need never present “papers” to the authorities. I like that old idea. And as noted above, there’s many ways to skin this cat without going back on it.
There are a lot of "points of pride for an Englishmen" that should long have been in the dustbin of history; imo this is one of those. Attachment to Agatha Christie - Bertie Wooster World is not worth the many downsides.
The novelistic world this, like other pasts, creates is a great relaxation and good fun, as a number of recent publishers are discovering to their immense profit. Just as Sherlock Holmes and Trollope is the stuff of a short and glimmering age after the coming of the railways but before the mass motor car (and before WWI and its apocalyptic horrors), so the popular novels (especially crime) of 1925 - 1955 in their own way are doing the same.
Evelyn Waugh on Wodehouse:
Mr. Wodehouse's idyllic world can never stale. He will continue to release future generations from captivity that may be more irksome than our own. He has made a world for us to live in and delight in.
The ironic thing is that Waugh was speaking de haut en bas, whereas in fact Wodehouse is by far the greater writer. As posterity is beginning to prove
One of the key problems is Pfizer stock is trading at yearly lows as the stock market has rallied this year. Wall Street isnt renowned for sentimentality so it suggests there may be a problem as even Leon i think acknowledged a few weeks ago.
Blimey, @Leon, you are even famous in Putin's bot factories!
Nota bene, this is a subsample of 174 so I wouldn't get overly excited, wait for the full Scotland polls.
Genuine questions, what is the accepted MOE for sub samples that small? Or are they so small the MOE is effectively 100% and they can be completely wrong?
Pretty much the latter. There is content in even the smallest poll, but it's weak. Here for example you'd undoubtedly find enough evidence to suggest that PC won't be making a big splash in Scotland.
Whoops, Ronnie O'Sullivan. Losing seven frames of seven to lose 13-10 is never a good look.
Brecel was brilliant there. My 5/1 Selby bet looking good now.
Yep. Only two players left in the draw who have even reached a final, and one of them won't survive tonight. I wouldn't rule out Higgins making it close, but the winner of this game has to be the strong favourite on history alone.
The thing is, O'Sullivan didn't play that great in the first two sessions - definitely not in the second - but Brecel was making too many mistakes which is why he trailed overnight. Only one of the players picked up their game this afternoon.
Nota bene, this is a subsample of 174 so I wouldn't get overly excited, wait for the full Scotland polls.
Genuine questions, what is the accepted MOE for sub samples that small? Or are they so small the MOE is effectively 100% and they can be completely wrong?
Confidence interval for a proportion (under various assumptions, but let's go with it here - on sample size at least it's ok for the biggest 5) is p +/- z * (p(1-p)/n)^0.5 where p is the sample proportion, z is 1.96 for 95% CI and n is the sample size.
So for the above (95% CI from random googled calculator, rather than by hand, but supposedly using same method): Lab 35% (28-42%) Con 20% (14-26%) SNP 19% (13-25%)
I see the government has reached its target for 20,000 new police officers, a pledge made in the 2019 manifesto.
That's pretty shocking. Govt makes good on manifesto pledge is not something you see every day.
If only the police's reputation wasn't in the gutter this might have positive polling implications for the Cons. It still might.
They’re measuring inputs, rather than outputs.
20,000 more officers working on trivial motoring offences and policing ‘hate crime’ on Twitter - while house burglaries, car thefts and street robberies lead to little interest - isn’t going to go down well with the general public.
There are not 20,000 more officers. If I fire 20,000 cops, then reluctantly hire 20,000 cops over a 12 year period, that is not 20,000 more cops.
20,000 -20,000 +20,000 = 0
Basic mathematical error. The correct answer is of course 20,000
Duh yes, I meant zero increase. There are not 20k more officers however you cut it.
I see the government has reached its target for 20,000 new police officers, a pledge made in the 2019 manifesto.
That's pretty shocking. Govt makes good on manifesto pledge is not something you see every day.
If only the police's reputation wasn't in the gutter this might have positive polling implications for the Cons. It still might.
They’re measuring inputs, rather than outputs.
20,000 more officers working on trivial motoring offences and policing ‘hate crime’ on Twitter - while house burglaries, car thefts and street robberies lead to little interest - isn’t going to go down well with the general public.
There are not 20,000 more officers. If I fire 20,000 cops, then reluctantly hire 20,000 cops over a 12 year period, that is not 20,000 more cops.
20,000 -20,000 +20,000 = 0
Basic mathematical error. The correct answer is of course 20,000
Duh yes, I meant zero increase. There are not 20k more officers however you cut it.
Depends on your starting point.
Reality.
A place Braverman has at best a nodding acquaintance with…
One of the key problems is Pfizer stock is trading at yearly lows as the stock market has rallied this year. Wall Street isnt renowned for sentimentality so it suggests there may be a problem as even Leon i think acknowledged a few weeks ago.
Blimey, @Leon, you are even famous in Putin's bot factories!
Whoops, Ronnie O'Sullivan. Losing seven frames of seven to lose 13-10 is never a good look.
Brecel was brilliant there. My 5/1 Selby bet looking good now.
Yep. Only two players left in the draw who have even reached a final, and one of them won't survive tonight. I wouldn't rule out Higgins making it close, but the winner of this game has to be the strong favourite on history alone.
Seeing eye to eye on sport, you and I, as often happens. Odd carry on.
On the subject of Russian trolls, I am extremely disappointed that we've been downgraded to only rate very boring ones, who do nothing more than spout standard antivax propaganda.
A month or so ago, we had a really smart one, who - sure - had the gmx email address and posted from an ever changing blacklisted IP. But who would contribute intelligently on a range of topics, and would subtly drop in Kremlin talking points.
It really felt like we'd arrived: we'd attracted the best-of-the-best that Russian troll farms could produce.
Also there was a double page spread in the mail yesterday about people injured by the covid vaccine. Mail has a circulation or around 1 million so this info is hitting significant numbers of people.
How about BA pilots? I heard they were particularly susceptible?
Nota bene, this is a subsample of 174 so I wouldn't get overly excited, wait for the full Scotland polls.
Genuine questions, what is the accepted MOE for sub samples that small? Or are they so small the MOE is effectively 100% and they can be completely wrong?
Confidence interval for a proportion (under various assumptions, but let's go with it here - on sample size at least it's ok for the biggest 5) is p +/- z * (p(1-p)/n)^0.5 where p is the proportion, z is 1.96 for 95% CI and n is the sample size.
So for the above (95% CI from random googled calculator, rather than by hand, but supposedly using same method): Lab 35% (28-42%) Con 20% (14-26%) SNP 19% (13-25%)
Given Scotland is a different voting environment, do the assumptions allow for any differences of representativeness the subsample might have?
In other words, a 'North' (England) subsample might be thought a subset of an overall representative UK sample and come in at +/-7%, but an electorally different Scottish subsample might need to have wider margins?
Tucker Carlson also sacked from fox news after taking on big pharma.
This - almost certainly - is the reason for the exit of Tucker Carlson from Fox News.
In this short monologue he asks the viewers to consider the level of evil that 'the networks' would have engaged in if they were actively promoting drug company products as safe and effective when the evidence (including the clinical trials) showed something else entirely i.e. that the mRNA "vaccines" were damaging (to some) and ineffective for just about everybody that received them.
Remember that it's not just the US media networks that engaged in this activity. The @BBCNews has acted as the UK government's chief propagandist for the vaccines and has played its part in refusing to allow free speech on its government funded platform. The exercise of free speech would have challenged the government's policies, questioned the authoritarianism and suspension of civil rights, and exposed the degree of vested interests in government 'health' regulatory bodies.
In the same way that @RobertKennedyJr has been the subject of character assassination in the United States, @ABridgen has been effectively de-platformed by the big-pharma-owned media and establishment here.
The fact that there was only 1 prosecution for voter impersonation does not mean that it is not a problem. The whole point is that we don't know how much it happens, or what size of problem it is, because a lot of it goes undetected. Only hysterical revolutionaries fail to understand this basic common sense fact.
So you consider the disenfranchisement of potentially hundreds of thousands of voters to be a proportional response?
This is Trumpian politics.
Noone has been disenfranchised save for those who are too stupid to have any form of ID. If they don’t have ID, why not?
Passports are £93. Driving licenses you commit a criminal offence if you don't keep the address up to date or renew your photo every 10 years - not great if you are a lodger or flat sharer changing address a couple of times a year.
Life is different for different people. The 2m are not stupid (well some are, some aren't just like the rest of us), but they have different lives to a pb regular.
More to the point, for years it was a point of pride that an Englishman (I think was a peculiarly English thing) need never present “papers” to the authorities. I like that old idea. And as noted above, there’s many ways to skin this cat without going back on it.
There are a lot of "points of pride for an Englishmen" that should long have been in the dustbin of history; imo this is one of those. Attachment to Agatha Christie - Bertie Wooster World is not worth the many downsides.
The novelistic world this, like other pasts, creates is a great relaxation and good fun, as a number of recent publishers are discovering to their immense profit. Just as Sherlock Holmes and Trollope is the stuff of a short and glimmering age after the coming of the railways but before the mass motor car (and before WWI and its apocalyptic horrors), so the popular novels (especially crime) of 1925 - 1955 in their own way are doing the same.
Evelyn Waugh on Wodehouse:
Mr. Wodehouse's idyllic world can never stale. He will continue to release future generations from captivity that may be more irksome than our own. He has made a world for us to live in and delight in.
The ironic thing is that Waugh was speaking de haut en bas, whereas in fact Wodehouse is by far the greater writer. As posterity is beginning to prove
Wodehouse must have a claim to bring the finest comic novelist in the English language. I don't think there's any writer whose books are more pleasurable to read.
The fact that there was only 1 prosecution for voter impersonation does not mean that it is not a problem. The whole point is that we don't know how much it happens, or what size of problem it is, because a lot of it goes undetected. Only hysterical revolutionaries fail to understand this basic common sense fact.
So you consider the disenfranchisement of potentially hundreds of thousands of voters to be a proportional response?
This is Trumpian politics.
Noone has been disenfranchised save for those who are too stupid to have any form of ID. If they don’t have ID, why not?
Passports are £93. Driving licenses you commit a criminal offence if you don't keep the address up to date or renew your photo every 10 years - not great if you are a lodger or flat sharer changing address a couple of times a year.
Life is different for different people. The 2m are not stupid (well some are, some aren't just like the rest of us), but they have different lives to a pb regular.
More to the point, for years it was a point of pride that an Englishman (I think was a peculiarly English thing) need never present “papers” to the authorities. I like that old idea. And as noted above, there’s many ways to skin this cat without going back on it.
In the sense of if you're just walking along the street, yes.
That's different from having to show ID to do a particular thing, like travel abroad, drive, pick up a parcel or - yes - vote.
You don’t have to have your driving licence with you when you drive.
No, but if you're stopped by the police and you don't have it you might need to take it to a police station later, so...
I can't understand why people are getting worked up about this. People know what ID is. Voting is an important, not frivolous activity. ID is needed for a lot less important activities than voting. Those that say that Tories have used this as voter suppression are suggesting that the non-Tory vote is more stupid than the Tory one. At one time I might have agreed with that suggestion. Not so sure now.
I agree with the bit in bold.
So why is there no meaningful safeguard for postal voting, which has been the subject of the *only* widespread and serious electoral fraud in this country since the Irish constituencies of the election of 1918?
I agree with you that there should be safeguards for postal voting. Postal votes should be extremely limited IMO. IIRC it was greatly expanded under the Blair government.
As I say, the suggestion that non-Tory voters are somehow less likely to know how to use ID than Tory ones is ludicrous. This is just a new cause celebre for Labour and LD supporters that is without any logic, and is divisive and corrosive in itself
I don't think it's conspiritorial to note that there are three different groups who are particularly likely not to have photo ID to hand:
- the young (because they haven't need it yet) - the poor (because they can't afford a car and don't travel abroad) - the metropolitan (because they don't need to drive)
None of those demographic groups are particularly friendly to the Conservatives.
And I hate to bang this drum again, but there are lots of additional safeguards one could add if you were worried about personation, but didn't want to disenfranchise voters. One could allow provisional ballots to be cast; or one could take Polaroids of people who wished to vote without IDs. Or one could make sure that polling cards had photos on them.
All easy enough to implement, and would ensure that you don't have a situation where potentially hundreds of thousands of people will be turned away on polling day to solve a problem that there is scant evidence exists.
Hancock yesterday was calling for antivax disinformation to be included in the online safety bill. Its a very bad look for Hancock if he doesnt want to allow free and fair debate.
It's a bad look for people to be circulating anti-vax propaganda that could cost lives, but the anti-vax crazies don't seem overly concerned with their public image.
More interested in their bank balances, like John Campbell - who went from providing decent information on the pandemic in year one to leaning hard into the invermectin stuff, pushing conspiracy theories, and full-on antivaxxer disinformation since then. Well, since interest in the pandemic started waning, anyway. In doing so, he went from £152k in his profit and loss account after the first year (when he was largely accurate and interest in the pandemic was highest) to over £800k in his profit and loss account after going antivaxxer.
If you don't mind selling your soul, antivaxxing is very profitable.
One of the key problems is Pfizer stock is trading at yearly lows as the stock market has rallied this year. Wall Street isnt renowned for sentimentality so it suggests there may be a problem as even Leon i think acknowledged a few weeks ago.
Blimey, @Leon, you are even famous in Putin's bot factories!
They always seem quite keen on me. The Russian bots. “Leon always speaks sense” Etc
On the subject of Russian trolls, I am extremely disappointed that we've been downgraded to only rate very boring ones, who do nothing more than spout standard antivax propaganda.
A month or so ago, we had a really smart one, who - sure - had the gmx email address and posted from an ever changing blacklisted IP. But who would contribute intelligently on a range of topics, and would subtly drop in Kremlin talking points.
It really felt like we'd arrived: we'd attracted the best-of-the-best that Russian troll farms could produce.
But now we rate only second or third rankers.
It is truly a sad day for the site.
How do you know they are not North-West Leics trolls. Have we seen @Dartmoor and @Foxy in the same room together.
Nota bene, this is a subsample of 174 so I wouldn't get overly excited, wait for the full Scotland polls.
Genuine questions, what is the accepted MOE for sub samples that small? Or are they so small the MOE is effectively 100% and they can be completely wrong?
Confidence interval for a proportion (under various assumptions, but let's go with it here - on sample size at least it's ok for the biggest 5) is p +/- z * (p(1-p)/n)^0.5 where p is the sample proportion, z is 1.96 for 95% CI and n is the sample size.
So for the above (95% CI from random googled calculator, rather than by hand, but supposedly using same method): Lab 35% (28-42%) Con 20% (14-26%) SNP 19% (13-25%)
Brilliant, ta. The maths is WHOOSH over my head, but I get the gist
Nota bene, this is a subsample of 174 so I wouldn't get overly excited, wait for the full Scotland polls.
Genuine questions, what is the accepted MOE for sub samples that small? Or are they so small the MOE is effectively 100% and they can be completely wrong?
Confidence interval for a proportion (under various assumptions, but let's go with it here - on sample size at least it's ok for the biggest 5) is p +/- z * (p(1-p)/n)^0.5 where p is the proportion, z is 1.96 for 95% CI and n is the sample size.
So for the above (95% CI from random googled calculator, rather than by hand, but supposedly using same method): Lab 35% (28-42%) Con 20% (14-26%) SNP 19% (13-25%)
Given Scotland is a different voting environment, do the assumptions allow for any differences of representativeness the subsample might have?
In other words, a 'North' (England) subsample might be thought a subset of an overall representative UK sample and come in at +/-7%, but an electorally different Scottish subsample might need to have wider margins?
Should have said - big assumption is random/representative sample.
If the sample is UK-representative but not ensured representative for Scotland then it could be complete nonsense for Scotland.
TSE does say YouGov 'correctly weight their subsamples' but I don't know whether that's sincere or TSE being TSE, nor whether these are weighted or raw numbers (unless the weighting means at the sampling stage).
But, if it's representative, then that's a handle on uncertainty of the results. I find it hard to believe, myself, that Labour would be clearly ahead.
I see the government has reached its target for 20,000 new police officers, a pledge made in the 2019 manifesto.
That's pretty shocking. Govt makes good on manifesto pledge is not something you see every day.
If only the police's reputation wasn't in the gutter this might have positive polling implications for the Cons. It still might.
They’re measuring inputs, rather than outputs.
20,000 more officers working on trivial motoring offences and policing ‘hate crime’ on Twitter - while house burglaries, car thefts and street robberies lead to little interest - isn’t going to go down well with the general public.
There are not 20,000 more officers. If I fire 20,000 cops, then reluctantly hire 20,000 cops over a 12 year period, that is not 20,000 more cops.
20,000 -20,000 +20,000 = 0
Basic mathematical error. The correct answer is of course 20,000
Duh yes, I meant zero increase. There are not 20k more officers however you cut it.
Depends on your starting point.
Reality.
A place Braverman has at best a nodding acquaintance with…
The natural starting point would be when the pledge was made not some random date in the past.
The fact that they (sorta) acknowledged they made a mistake and pledged to reverse it is a good thing.
Don’t you prefer pupils who learn from their mistakes and put it right?
On the subject of Russian trolls, I am extremely disappointed that we've been downgraded to only rate very boring ones, who do nothing more than spout standard antivax propaganda.
A month or so ago, we had a really smart one, who - sure - had the gmx email address and posted from an ever changing blacklisted IP. But who would contribute intelligently on a range of topics, and would subtly drop in Kremlin talking points.
It really felt like we'd arrived: we'd attracted the best-of-the-best that Russian troll farms could produce.
But now we rate only second or third rankers.
It is truly a sad day for the site.
They may react to the environment.
You can cultivate a bot hareem -> top notch alpha trolls
You get short shrift here -> fast penetration attempt and run away beta trolls.
One of the key problems is Pfizer stock is trading at yearly lows as the stock market has rallied this year. Wall Street isnt renowned for sentimentality so it suggests there may be a problem as even Leon i think acknowledged a few weeks ago.
Blimey, @Leon, you are even famous in Putin's bot factories!
They always seem quite keen on me. The Russian bots. “Leon always speaks sense” Etc
I guess they have identified me as AN INFLUENCER
Sadly not old chap. I think they see you as a conspiracy theorist and therefore kindred spirit. A kind of less successful Dan Brown meets David Icke.
Comments
SFAICS the remnants of that old world mean that an unquantified number of people live within our borders having no legitimate claim to do so, and there isn't the smallest chance of anything being done about it. Some estimates make it a million.
There are pluses and minuses about the transition, as with all things.
Putin is Xi’s bitch at this point.
All parties have the right to put a polling agent into the polling station to challenge voters. Most people are not aware of this because it is never done, because it is a crime that practically never happens so parties do not waste their time on it. The only reason I am aware of it is because we did once do it, because we were aware it was going to be tried by a group of idiots. It resulted in only 2 challenges, one of which was genuine, the other resulted in the person doing a runner.
The risk of getting caught is huge and you need a different person for each single vote (or are you also supplying wigs and changes of clothing).
This is really bonkersland stuff when it is so much easier to cheat with postal votes. I mean why would you bother?
Good times
Evelyn Waugh on Wodehouse:
Mr. Wodehouse's idyllic world can never stale. He will continue to release future generations from captivity that may be more irksome than our own. He has made a world for us to live in and delight in.
This is a sign of radically changed times.
https://twitter.com/politicoeurope/status/1651234935124918274
And anyone who doesn't exercise extreme scepticism about the motivations of politicians, for doing anything whatsoever that could influence the result of an election, needs his/her head looking at.
I think the arguments it is an attempt at voter suppression have more merit due to postal voting not being touched, though the oft touted buss pass discrepancy has an explanation, and personally I'd not be surprised if its old tory voters who have but dont bring ID who will miss out more.
I think complaints about chaos when first implemented are going to be true but a new system or law seeing some transitionary issues is not itself a major issue depending on scale.
Nonetheless it has always seemed to me to be disproportionate to the scale of the issue, lacking if it is intended to combat issues by not looking at all types of voting, and at least partly motivated by perceived advantage, as most changes are.
Is it suppression? I dont think so. But it is unnecessary complication and disruption, and the implementation cack handed.
Poorer voters - more likely to back Brexit, more likely not to have ID
Metropolitan voters - more likely to back Remain, more likely not to have ID
Younger voters - more likely to back Remain, more likely not to have ID
My guess, fwiw, is that very few voters were disenfranchised by the Brexit vote, and that's a *good* thing.
As I say, the suggestion that non-Tory voters are somehow less likely to know how to use ID than Tory ones is ludicrous. This is just a new cause celebre for Labour and LD supporters that is without any logic, and is divisive and corrosive in itself
The good news is that they *don't* take up resources - the Met used a tiny number of staff for the many thousands of offences they processed last year via their dashcam portal.
When antisocial parking has been effectively addressed (via trained PCSOs), it turns into an intelligence-gathering festival. See WMP Operation Parksafe for example.
It's also why just dont risk electronic voting. There are things you can do but why risk the scaling issue?
Voter ID is a crock of shit.
Dr David Bull "You said these side effects are rare i dont believe that"
https://twitter.com/TalkTV/status/1650073304559149057?s=20
Non-Trivial motoring offences - anything anyone else does
Great to have a new perspective on things on PB. Would love to hear your views on the whole Ukraine shebang too while you're here.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12016123/Sinn-Fein-leader-Michelle-ONeill-reveals-attend-Coronation.html
I hope President Xi's decision to talk to Zelensky has not resulted in too many unfortunate accidents involving windows round your way?
Shall we go for the hat trick? I think Putin's obsession with invading other countries shows why you shouldn't have male leaders with penises less than 15mm long.
This - almost certainly - is the reason for the exit of Tucker Carlson from Fox News.
In this short monologue he asks the viewers to consider the level of evil that 'the networks' would have engaged in if they were actively promoting drug company products as safe and effective when the evidence (including the clinical trials) showed something else entirely i.e. that the mRNA "vaccines" were damaging (to some) and ineffective for just about everybody that received them.
Remember that it's not just the US media networks that engaged in this activity. The
@BBCNews
has acted as the UK government's chief propagandist for the vaccines and has played its part in refusing to allow free speech on its government funded platform. The exercise of free speech would have challenged the government's policies, questioned the authoritarianism and suspension of civil rights, and exposed the degree of vested interests in government 'health' regulatory bodies.
In the same way that
@RobertKennedyJr
has been the subject of character assassination in the United States,
@ABridgen
has been effectively de-platformed by the big-pharma-owned media and establishment here.
Watch Tucker's piece here on Rumble:
https://twitter.com/JeffreyPeel/status/1650774676623302658?s=20
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-vaccine-adverse-reactions/coronavirus-vaccine-summary-of-yellow-card-reporting
The truth is out there (and widely, publicly and transparently available)
Glossary for anyone unfamiliar with UK processes on vaccines/pharmaceuticals:
- MHRA - Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency
- Yellow card system - a system by which anyone can report suspected side/adverse effects of medications/vaccines
I have long believed that for a UK GE, there should be a main debate, and to get invited to this main debate you should:
AND:
1. Be standing in at least 326 seats across the country.
OR:
2. Have at least 1 MP at dissolution
3. Have secured at least 10% of the vote at the previous GE
On the above criteria, for GE 2024, only CON, LAB, LD and Greens would be standing.
If Brigden did join RefUK, arguably he'd be allowed to.
That's if the broadcasters ever agreed to some sort of sensible rules.......
Evil's perspective is always interesting in such cases. Especially to those of us who don't agree with it.
That was quite quick. I was hoping to troll them a bit more...
It is possible (as I do) to rejoice in the fact that 29% of our babies have foreign born mothers and at the same time quite like a country that had some idea of how to control its borders and which foreign nationals were in it. Reasonably open policies and the rule of law are not incompatible.
"All are welcome" is, to put it politely, a policy only for opposition parties not planning to win an election.
Andrew Bridgen, hero to the Russian Federation.
They tend to dart more and stick around much less these days.
Just reading how the Spetsnaz (maybe there should be an i on the end) are not very special. Killing unarmed civilians is the height of their capabilities. Special forces lol.
The thing is, O'Sullivan didn't play that great in the first two sessions - definitely not in the second - but Brecel was making too many mistakes which is why he trailed overnight. Only one of the players picked up their game this afternoon.
p +/- z * (p(1-p)/n)^0.5
where p is the sample proportion, z is 1.96 for 95% CI and n is the sample size.
So for the above (95% CI from random googled calculator, rather than by hand, but supposedly using same method):
Lab 35% (28-42%)
Con 20% (14-26%)
SNP 19% (13-25%)
A place Braverman has at best a nodding acquaintance with…
If only he’d been in charge of Brexit from the start. SIGH
A month or so ago, we had a really smart one, who - sure - had the gmx email address and posted from an ever changing blacklisted IP. But who would contribute intelligently on a range of topics, and would subtly drop in Kremlin talking points.
It really felt like we'd arrived: we'd attracted the best-of-the-best that Russian troll farms could produce.
But now we rate only second or third rankers.
It is truly a sad day for the site.
In other words, a 'North' (England) subsample might be thought a subset of an overall representative UK sample and come in at +/-7%, but an electorally different Scottish subsample might need to have wider margins?
- the young (because they haven't need it yet)
- the poor (because they can't afford a car and don't travel abroad)
- the metropolitan (because they don't need to drive)
None of those demographic groups are particularly friendly to the Conservatives.
And I hate to bang this drum again, but there are lots of additional safeguards one could add if you were worried about personation, but didn't want to disenfranchise voters. One could allow provisional ballots to be cast; or one could take Polaroids of people who wished to vote without IDs. Or one could make sure that polling cards had photos on them.
All easy enough to implement, and would ensure that you don't have a situation where potentially hundreds of thousands of people will be turned away on polling day to solve a problem that there is scant evidence exists.
In doing so, he went from £152k in his profit and loss account after the first year (when he was largely accurate and interest in the pandemic was highest) to over £800k in his profit and loss account after going antivaxxer.
If you don't mind selling your soul, antivaxxing is very profitable.
I guess they have identified me as AN INFLUENCER
If the sample is UK-representative but not ensured representative for Scotland then it could be complete nonsense for Scotland.
TSE does say YouGov 'correctly weight their subsamples' but I don't know whether that's sincere or TSE being TSE, nor whether these are weighted or raw numbers (unless the weighting means at the sampling stage).
But, if it's representative, then that's a handle on uncertainty of the results. I find it hard to believe, myself, that Labour would be clearly ahead.
The fact that they (sorta) acknowledged they made a mistake and pledged to reverse it is a good thing.
Don’t you prefer pupils who learn from their mistakes and put it right?
You can cultivate a bot hareem -> top notch alpha trolls
You get short shrift here -> fast penetration attempt and run away beta trolls.