Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The February ICM Guardian poll sees the LDs the big losers

2

Comments

  • smithersjones2013smithersjones2013 Posts: 740
    edited February 2014
    justin124 said:









    Sean_F said:

    SMukesh said:

    UKIP polled 16% in Euro 2009.It`s not even remotely believable that they`ll poll 20 this time.

    I would be interested to see how ICM adjust the figures for the Euro poll.



    ICM's first stab at Euro polling in 2009, put UKIP on 9% and Labour on 28%, compared to outcomes of 17% and 16%. 20% with ICM is a very good figure for UKIP, and certainly implies an outcome of 25-30%.
    Yes- but that fails to take account of how the Expenses scandal upset earlier polls and calculations on a massive scale in 2009. Whilst nothing can be ruled out, it seems unlikely to happen again this year.
    Well clearly these academics from Leicester University disagree with you:

    Explaining support for the UK Independence Party at the 2009 European Parliament elections

    The UK Independence Party (UKIP) achieved its best result in the 2009 European elections,
    beating the governing Labour Party into second place. Despite its recent success we still
    know relatively little about who votes for the party and how these supporters compare with
    those of UKIP’s competitors. This paper analyses support for UKIP at the 2009 European
    elections first at the aggregate level, to understand the social and economic context in which
    the party performs best, and second at the individual level using a YouGov survey of over
    32,000 voters, more than 4,000 of whom were UKIP supporters. We show that
    Euroscepticism is the biggest explanatory factor but that UKIP voters are also concerned
    about immigration and show dissatisfaction with and a lack of trust in the political system.
    Our findings add credence to the argument that views on European integration matter in voters’ decisions at European elections and we show how the balance of attitudinal
    explanations of UKIP support makes its votersdistinct from those voting for far right parties.



    https://www2.le.ac.uk/departments/politics/documents/centre-right/UKIPvoteworkingpaper-1.pdf

    I hardly think the situation has changed much when immigration is now neck nand neck with the economy as an issue according to Mori and full blown political and financial integration is now a realistic possibility for the EU. Even with expenses and the like, we now have the prospect of an 11% MPs pay rise to bolster the general view of a corrupt Westminster village (IPSA or no IPSA).
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    AndyJS said:

    Weather forecast, Walton-on-Thames:

    Tuesday: heavy rain
    Wednesday: heavy rain
    Thursday: light rain
    Friday: light rain

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/2634825?day=1

    We should consider the possibility that a Rain God has moved to the UK.

    We need to find and deport this entity pronto!
  • dodradedodrade Posts: 597
    justin124 said:

    Many people appear to have forgotten that the 2009 EuroElections coincided with when the Expenses scandal was at its most intense. UKIP - and to a lesser extent the Greens and BNP - benefitted as NOTA alternative, whilst Labour in particular suffered as the governing party at the time.Prior to the scandal UKIP had been widely expected to fall back from its 2004 performance - perhaps to below10%.Whatever happens in May,it is far from obvious that such an event will boost UKIP this year.

    I seem to remember UKIP's demise being predicted on this site by some in the months before the 2009 Euro election.
  • dodrade said:

    justin124 said:

    Many people appear to have forgotten that the 2009 EuroElections coincided with when the Expenses scandal was at its most intense. UKIP - and to a lesser extent the Greens and BNP - benefitted as NOTA alternative, whilst Labour in particular suffered as the governing party at the time.Prior to the scandal UKIP had been widely expected to fall back from its 2004 performance - perhaps to below10%.Whatever happens in May,it is far from obvious that such an event will boost UKIP this year.

    I seem to remember UKIP's demise being predicted on this site by some in the months before the 2009 Euro election.
    It was also predicted by Rumpy Pumpy's spoof Euro marketing organisation as well.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,723
    I think it's entirely possible UKIP may only get approx 20% in the Euros.

    Last time there was a big novelty aspect to UKIP and in particular I doubt many people had a very negative view about them.

    This time, UKIP are much better known to a large proportion of the population. Whilst they obviously have many more definite supporters than in 2009, there are also far, far more people who now have a definite unfavourable view of UKIP.

    This means it going to be far harder to gain lots of votes in the campaign on a sort of "bandwagon" effect - because any such "movement" is going to come up against stronger adverse forces.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    I cant see how the increased UKIP coverage and realisation that a cost-free-protest-vote-opportunity is around the corner wont benefit them in the run-up to May. I'd certainly happily take any offers of bets of evens on them getting more than 20%.
  • In the 2014 competition, did anyone predict the LDs getting as low as 10%?

    I'm already stuffed with a 12% min prediction and 10 months to go. Suspect that goes for most of us.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    wow.

    Sod UKIP, these floods are pretty brutal. Amazing, not in a good way.

    Expect a bold move from Cam to wrest back both the initiative and to stop the bickering. We will be hearing a lot about him "personally overseeing COBRA meetings", etc and I guess we will get some pretty strong visuals (army perhaps, under MACA?) to show how he and the Cons are getting a grip.

    Not to say that he will politicise it but there are plenty of communities in need and a lot of water on screen that he needs to act upon.
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    edited February 2014
    MikeL said:

    I think it's entirely possible UKIP may only get approx 20% in the Euros.

    Last time there was a big novelty aspect to UKIP and in particular I doubt many people had a very negative view about them.

    This time, UKIP are much better known to a large proportion of the population. Whilst they obviously have many more definite supporters than in 2009, there are also far, far more people who now have a definite unfavourable view of UKIP.

    This means it going to be far harder to gain lots of votes in the campaign on a sort of "bandwagon" effect - because any such "movement" is going to come up against stronger adverse forces.

    UKIP's favourable/unfavourable numbers are +27/-38.

    http://www.comres.co.uk/poll/1076/sunday-mirror-independent-on-sunday-political-poll.htm

    On an issue like the EU, where UKIP are clearly the strongest anti-EU option, I think even people that dislike UKIP might vote for them. The ambivalent certainly would.


  • IOSIOS Posts: 1,450
    As much as I would like this euro poll to be true, UKIP will almost certainly significantly increase their vote share. Mainly at the expense of Labour.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,567
    Sean_F said:


    In 2009, ICM were just out of line with other pollsters for the Euros. My guess is that their techniques don't work as well with low turnout elections under PR as they do with high turnout elections under FPTP.

    I think that's likely to be right. Their model assumes that people who don't know how they'll vote will (50%) default back to their previous vote. But in the Euros such people are just as likely to abstain, or vote in some semi-random fashion according to mood.

    AndyJS said:

    Weather forecast, Walton-on-Thames:

    Tuesday: heavy rain
    Wednesday: heavy rain
    Thursday: light rain
    Friday: light rain

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/2634825?day=1

    We should consider the possibility that a Rain God has moved to the UK.

    We need to find and deport this entity pronto!
    But is he an EU citizen? If not, does he have a rare skill?

  • smithersjones2013smithersjones2013 Posts: 740
    edited February 2014
    TOPPING said:

    wow.

    Sod UKIP, these floods are pretty brutal. Amazing, not in a good way.

    Expect a bold move from Cam to wrest back both the initiative and to stop the bickering. We will be hearing a lot about him "personally overseeing COBRA meetings", etc and I guess we will get some pretty strong visuals (army perhaps, under MACA?) to show how he and the Cons are getting a grip.

    Not to say that he will politicise it but there are plenty of communities in need and a lot of water on screen that he needs to act upon.

    He'd be better off now getting his waders on and going down to Somerset and lugging sandbags about for a week. Pissing about in a talking shop that should have been convened weeks before it actually was and hasn't managed to ensure that resources were on the ground to help Wraybury or the likes today is just adding insult to injury. The idea that having another meeting is going to impress anybody is risible,

    Better still he could jet off and go and help build a school with Taxpayers money in some god forsaken corner of Africa. That'll impress!
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046

    TOPPING said:

    wow.

    Sod UKIP, these floods are pretty brutal. Amazing, not in a good way.

    Expect a bold move from Cam to wrest back both the initiative and to stop the bickering. We will be hearing a lot about him "personally overseeing COBRA meetings", etc and I guess we will get some pretty strong visuals (army perhaps, under MACA?) to show how he and the Cons are getting a grip.

    Not to say that he will politicise it but there are plenty of communities in need and a lot of water on screen that he needs to act upon.

    He'd be better off now getting his waders on and going down to Somerset and lugging sandbags about for a week. Pissing about in a talking shop that should have been convened weeks before it actually was and hasn't managed to ensure that resources were on the ground to help Wraybury or the likes today is just adding insult to injury. The idea that having another meeting is going to impress anybody is risible,
    You don't want your leader sucked into the maelstrom (literally in this case).

    You want him orchestrating events in a cool, calm but concerned manner. Plus there are several places facing flooding; would you have him circling each one setting down, glad-handing, then heading off again immediately?

    Of course you don't.

    A leader must lead.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    IOS said:

    As much as I would like this euro poll to be true, UKIP will almost certainly significantly increase their vote share. Mainly at the expense of Labour.

    Wow,a post from you which doesn't have your usual Labour Quilt covers and matching curtains signs ;-)

  • IOSIOS Posts: 1,450
    Tyke

    I am very honest and I think fair. The difference is, I think most of what the press talk about matters not a jot. What I think matters is members, activism and campaigning eg the ground game.

    In a Lab vs Tory battle there is only one winner there.
  • IOSIOS Posts: 1,450
    Looking at the long term weather forecast - am I right in thinking it is going to be as bad as it has been for the next 14 days at least?
  • smithersjones2013smithersjones2013 Posts: 740
    edited February 2014
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    wow.

    Sod UKIP, these floods are pretty brutal. Amazing, not in a good way.

    Expect a bold move from Cam to wrest back both the initiative and to stop the bickering. We will be hearing a lot about him "personally overseeing COBRA meetings", etc and I guess we will get some pretty strong visuals (army perhaps, under MACA?) to show how he and the Cons are getting a grip.

    Not to say that he will politicise it but there are plenty of communities in need and a lot of water on screen that he needs to act upon.

    He'd be better off now getting his waders on and going down to Somerset and lugging sandbags about for a week. Pissing about in a talking shop that should have been convened weeks before it actually was and hasn't managed to ensure that resources were on the ground to help Wraybury or the likes today is just adding insult to injury. The idea that having another meeting is going to impress anybody is risible,
    You don't want your leader sucked into the maelstrom (literally in this case).

    You want him orchestrating events in a cool, calm but concerned manner. Plus there are several places facing flooding; would you have him circling each one setting down, glad-handing, then heading off again immediately?

    Of course you don't.

    A leader must lead.
    Cameron? A Leader? ROFLMAO. He couldn't lead the Tories to a party in a brewery. Have you missed the last 8 years of division and dysfunction with the biggest backbench rebellions in history?

    PS And I never suggested any 'glad-handing' (there is nothing to be glad about). I suggested he rolled his sleeves up and lent a hand in the battle against the rising waters (e.g. doing some serious work with that Sikh charity down in Somerset for example would do him no harm ) and did a bit of leading by example rather than pontificating from one of those rather squalid and dishevelled towers in Westminster that politicians love to sanctimoniously preach from.
  • IOSIOS Posts: 1,450
    Cameron is the worst Tory leader ever in my opinion. Just the fact he has destroyed the Tories membership and split the right alone should condemn him to this fate,
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick · 5 mins
    Tuesday's Daily Telegraph front page - "'Homeowners, you knew the risk'" #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers #flooding pic.twitter.com/C3IjrliEnG

    Does anyone know who said it ?
  • Sun Politics ‏@Sun_Politics 11s

    YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Labour have a six point lead: CON 33%, LAB 39%, LD 10%, UKIP 12%
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,038

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick · 5 mins
    Tuesday's Daily Telegraph front page - "'Homeowners, you knew the risk'" #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers #flooding pic.twitter.com/C3IjrliEnG

    Does anyone know who said it ?

    'Environment Agency boss'
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    edited February 2014

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick · 5 mins
    Tuesday's Daily Telegraph front page - "'Homeowners, you knew the risk'" #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers #flooding pic.twitter.com/C3IjrliEnG

    Does anyone know who said it ?

    It must be lord smith ?

  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    I think you are right. I have done well in the past betting against UKIP.

    As ALP pointed out, these elections coincide with the urban councils in particular, and not one that favours kippers.

    I suspect it may be a bit higher than 20%, but not by much.
    MikeL said:

    I think it's entirely possible UKIP may only get approx 20% in the Euros.

    Last time there was a big novelty aspect to UKIP and in particular I doubt many people had a very negative view about them.

    This time, UKIP are much better known to a large proportion of the population. Whilst they obviously have many more definite supporters than in 2009, there are also far, far more people who now have a definite unfavourable view of UKIP.

    This means it going to be far harder to gain lots of votes in the campaign on a sort of "bandwagon" effect - because any such "movement" is going to come up against stronger adverse forces.

  • CarolaCarola Posts: 1,805

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick · 5 mins
    Tuesday's Daily Telegraph front page - "'Homeowners, you knew the risk'" #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers #flooding pic.twitter.com/C3IjrliEnG

    Does anyone know who said it ?

    It must be lord smith ?

    Yep, it says Lord Smith.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    edited February 2014
    Carola said:

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick · 5 mins
    Tuesday's Daily Telegraph front page - "'Homeowners, you knew the risk'" #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers #flooding pic.twitter.com/C3IjrliEnG

    Does anyone know who said it ?

    It must be lord smith ?

    Yep, it says Lord Smith.
    Thanks,and thank God for that,I was thinking a tory minister ;-) that's all they need ;-)
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Toast

    Carola said:

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick · 5 mins
    Tuesday's Daily Telegraph front page - "'Homeowners, you knew the risk'" #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers #flooding pic.twitter.com/C3IjrliEnG

    Does anyone know who said it ?

    It must be lord smith ?

    Yep, it says Lord Smith.
    Thanks,for God for that,I was thinking a tory minister ;-) that's all they need ;-)
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    Smith we were only obeying orders...
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362

    Toast

    Carola said:

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick · 5 mins
    Tuesday's Daily Telegraph front page - "'Homeowners, you knew the risk'" #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers #flooding pic.twitter.com/C3IjrliEnG

    Does anyone know who said it ?

    It must be lord smith ?

    Yep, it says Lord Smith.
    Thanks,for God for that,I was thinking a tory minister ;-) that's all they need ;-)

    What is,lord smith or my grammar ;-)
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick · 5 mins
    Tuesday's Daily Telegraph front page - "'Homeowners, you knew the risk'" #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers #flooding pic.twitter.com/C3IjrliEnG

    Does anyone know who said it ?

    It must be lord smith ?

    Yes.

    "Lord Smith said people who bought homes on the flood plains needed to think about the "risk that property faces."

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BgJN-RDCEAAsUvq.jpg:large
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    I'm amazed the 1997-2010 Labour government didn't ban smoking in cars with children.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick · 5 mins
    Tuesday's Daily Telegraph front page - "'Homeowners, you knew the risk'" #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers #flooding pic.twitter.com/C3IjrliEnG

    Does anyone know who said it ?

    It must be lord smith ?

    Yes.

    "Lord Smith said people who bought homes on the flood plains needed to think about the "risk that property faces."

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BgJN-RDCEAAsUvq.jpg:large
    Don't see nothing wrong with what he said.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    I bought on a hill myself, taken in by those global warmists who predicted warmer wetter winters.

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick · 5 mins
    Tuesday's Daily Telegraph front page - "'Homeowners, you knew the risk'" #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers #flooding pic.twitter.com/C3IjrliEnG

    Does anyone know who said it ?

    It must be lord smith ?

    Yes.

    "Lord Smith said people who bought homes on the flood plains needed to think about the "risk that property faces."

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BgJN-RDCEAAsUvq.jpg:large
    Don't see nothing wrong with what he said.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    Hugh said:

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick · 5 mins
    Tuesday's Daily Telegraph front page - "'Homeowners, you knew the risk'" #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers #flooding pic.twitter.com/C3IjrliEnG

    Does anyone know who said it ?

    It must be lord smith ?

    Tories STILL going after the EA?

    Jeezus are they mental? *facepalm*
    Nope hugh -

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick · 7 mins
    Tuesday's Guardian front page - "PM: stop flooding blame game" #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers #flooding pic.twitter.com/FVxCi9Spk2



  • I think you are right. I have done well in the past betting against UKIP.

    As ALP pointed out, these elections coincide with the urban councils in particular, and not one that favours kippers.

    I suspect it may be a bit higher than 20%, but not by much.

    MikeL said:

    I think it's entirely possible UKIP may only get approx 20% in the Euros.

    Last time there was a big novelty aspect to UKIP and in particular I doubt many people had a very negative view about them.

    This time, UKIP are much better known to a large proportion of the population. Whilst they obviously have many more definite supporters than in 2009, there are also far, far more people who now have a definite unfavourable view of UKIP.

    This means it going to be far harder to gain lots of votes in the campaign on a sort of "bandwagon" effect - because any such "movement" is going to come up against stronger adverse forces.

    The last time the met boroughs were held on their own (2006) the turnout was 36% which is almost the same as turnout is generally for Euro elections (34% in 2010) consequently I don't think it will impact the result much at all.
  • Ha! Okay. Bizarrely there was a thread on here comparing Smuts favourably to Mandela - not the greatest day on pbc...

    No there wasn't.
  • I bought on a hill myself, taken in by those global warmists who predicted warmer wetter winters.

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick · 5 mins
    Tuesday's Daily Telegraph front page - "'Homeowners, you knew the risk'" #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers #flooding pic.twitter.com/C3IjrliEnG

    Does anyone know who said it ?

    It must be lord smith ?

    Yes.

    "Lord Smith said people who bought homes on the flood plains needed to think about the "risk that property faces."

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BgJN-RDCEAAsUvq.jpg:large
    Don't see nothing wrong with what he said.
    The last four winters have been cold and rather snowy. This winter is an extreme event but I shouldn't assume it represents a trend, more likely it's a freak.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    It may not be the same 36% though.

    I think you are right. I have done well in the past betting against UKIP.

    As ALP pointed out, these elections coincide with the urban councils in particular, and not one that favours kippers.

    I suspect it may be a bit higher than 20%, but not by much.

    MikeL said:

    I think it's entirely possible UKIP may only get approx 20% in the Euros.

    Last time there was a big novelty aspect to UKIP and in particular I doubt many people had a very negative view about them.

    This time, UKIP are much better known to a large proportion of the population. Whilst they obviously have many more definite supporters than in 2009, there are also far, far more people who now have a definite unfavourable view of UKIP.

    This means it going to be far harder to gain lots of votes in the campaign on a sort of "bandwagon" effect - because any such "movement" is going to come up against stronger adverse forces.

    The last time the met boroughs were held on their own (2006) the turnout was 36% which is almost the same as turnout is generally for Euro elections (34% in 2010) consequently I don't think it will impact the result much at all.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,711
    Well,it's not the Lennard situation itself, but the cumulative effect of that, Hancock etc which is driving lots of former LD voters away. And encouraging those of us who have moved away to stay away.

    I wonder how much Milliband is paying Clegg!!!!

    Late I know but lots happening here.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    Hugh said:

    What kind of bollox was Ed Miliband going on about today btw?

    On the bullsh!t scale it's almost up there with Cameron's Big Society.

    Name checks Thatcher, using a blue font on a light blue background...next he will be wrapping himself up in a union flag.

  • Ha! Okay. Bizarrely there was a thread on here comparing Smuts favourably to Mandela - not the greatest day on pbc...

    No there wasn't.
    I'm afraid so.
    http://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2013/12/06/bookending-the-20th-century-south-africas-gifts-to-humanity/

    Remarkably, for a relatively small country, South Africa produced two of the truly great figures of the 20th century, and for much the same reasons, even if the earlier is now rather unjustly forgotten. Mandela’s greatness lay not only in his moral leadership of the opposition to the oppression of apartheid (even if in absentia for much of that fight), but even more so in how he won without succumbing to bitterness and how, after winning that battle, he used his status to bind and unite rather than to impose a different oppression.

    Likewise, nearly a century earlier, another South African, Jan Christian Smuts, used similar vision, empathy and leadership to bring his people to accept a settlement of reconciliation – though in his case from a position of their having been defeated – both after the Boer War and in the formation of the Union of South Africa.
  • Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick · 5 mins
    Tuesday's Daily Telegraph front page - "'Homeowners, you knew the risk'" #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers #flooding pic.twitter.com/C3IjrliEnG

    Does anyone know who said it ?

    You can read it if you zoom in on the picture.

    Even better, zoom in on the Matt cartoon, which is an absolute classic.

  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Last winter was quite long and cold, but 2012 was definitely warm and wet in the run up to easter and the jubilee.

    Round here not too much flooding. A bit at Barrow on Soar.

    I bought on a hill myself, taken in by those global warmists who predicted warmer wetter winters.

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick · 5 mins
    Tuesday's Daily Telegraph front page - "'Homeowners, you knew the risk'" #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers #flooding pic.twitter.com/C3IjrliEnG

    Does anyone know who said it ?

    It must be lord smith ?

    Yes.

    "Lord Smith said people who bought homes on the flood plains needed to think about the "risk that property faces."

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BgJN-RDCEAAsUvq.jpg:large
    Don't see nothing wrong with what he said.
    The last four winters have been cold and rather snowy. This winter is an extreme event but I shouldn't assume it represents a trend, more likely it's a freak.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,684
    edited February 2014
    Hugh said:

    TOPPING said:

    wow.

    Sod UKIP, these floods are pretty brutal. Amazing, not in a good way.

    Expect a bold move from Cam to wrest back both the initiative and to stop the bickering. We will be hearing a lot about him "personally overseeing COBRA meetings", etc and I guess we will get some pretty strong visuals (army perhaps, under MACA?) to show how he and the Cons are getting a grip.

    Not to say that he will politicise it but there are plenty of communities in need and a lot of water on screen that he needs to act upon.

    Yeah you are absolutely right.

    It's been raining. A LOT. It's going to rain more. The Government can't control that, they can only show they're dealing with it best they can (and they're doing OK).

    That the Tories tried to turn it into a political / blame issue by going after the EA is astonishing.

    What idiot made that decision? Some wonky rightwing Oxbridge halfwit who thought it would be a jolly good chance to attack Labour Quangos, what ho, what larks?
    Still spouting your ill informed rubbish I see Hugh. As I pointed out earlier, the rain we are having at present is not unique. Indeed there have been higher concentrations at regular intervals in the past and we get this sort of rainfall approximately every 50 years.

    Funnily enough on previous occasions the flooding in the Somerset levels has been nowhere as bad. But of course that was because on previous occasions the rivers and flood defences had been properly maintained.

    The EA had a responsibility to maintain the rivers and flood defences. They have failed to do this and therefore should be held responsible. Actually the one person who could perhaps reasonably claim some lack of responsibility is Lord Smith since although he is now head of the EA, it was not on his watch that the decision was made to stop dredging.
  • Hugh said:

    What kind of bollox was Ed Miliband going on about today btw?

    On the bullsh!t scale it's almost up there with Cameron's Big Society.

    Indeed. Hopefully it will just fade away.
  • smithersjones2013smithersjones2013 Posts: 740
    edited February 2014

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick · 5 mins
    Tuesday's Daily Telegraph front page - "'Homeowners, you knew the risk'" #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers #flooding pic.twitter.com/C3IjrliEnG

    Does anyone know who said it ?

    It must be lord smith ?

    Yes.

    "Lord Smith said people who bought homes on the flood plains needed to think about the "risk that property faces."

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BgJN-RDCEAAsUvq.jpg:large
    Don't see nothing wrong with what he said.
    But what if these people have been living there for decades as many have? Are they supposed to be able to predict years in advance the thinking of psychotic politicians who exist hundreds of miles away too?

    I wonder what he would say if they cut the funding for the Thames barrier? Would he say that people in London should have though about the risks they might face? Politically it is the most desperately crass thing he could have said. Smith is a fool of immense proportions. I can only think he is close to being kicked out of the job.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    edited February 2014
    Yes, I remember David Herdson's superb article very well indeed. It made a very interesting comparison between two great South Africans. But it did not compare Smuts favourably to Mandela, although it's undoubtedly true that the sheer range of Smuts' extraordinary and long career on the world stage was quite remarkable.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Lord Smith vs Paxman on Newsnight shortly. Should be lively.

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick · 5 mins
    Tuesday's Daily Telegraph front page - "'Homeowners, you knew the risk'" #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers #flooding pic.twitter.com/C3IjrliEnG

    Does anyone know who said it ?

    It must be lord smith ?

    Yes.

    "Lord Smith said people who bought homes on the flood plains needed to think about the "risk that property faces."

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BgJN-RDCEAAsUvq.jpg:large
    Don't see nothing wrong with what he said.
    But what if these people have been living there for decades as many have? Are they supposed to be able to predict years in advance the thinking of psychotic politicians who exist hundreds of miles away too?

    I wonder what he would say if they cut the funding for the Thames barrier? Would he say that people in London should have though about the risks they might face? Politically it is the most desperately crass thing he could have said. Smith is a fool of immense proportions. I can only think he is close to being kicked out of the job.
  • Yes, I remember David Herdson's superb article very well indeed. It made a very interesting comparison between two great South Africans. But it did not compare Smuts favourably to Mandela, although it's undoubtedly true that the sheer range of Smuts' extraordinary and long career on the world stage was quite remarkable.
    "Likewise, nearly a century earlier, another South African, Jan Christian Smuts, used similar vision, empathy and leadership [to Mandela] to bring his people to accept a settlement of reconciliation – though in his case from a position of their having been defeated – both after the Boer War and in the formation of the Union of South Africa."

  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    Guardian write-up to the ICM:

    "a February Westminster score of just 10% – Nick Clegg's worst ever score with ICM, and a depth the party has only once hit before during the last 20 years, in September 1997 – the height of Tony Blair's honeymoon."

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/feb/10/ukip-better-2009-european-elections-guardian-icm-poll
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    edited February 2014

    "Likewise, nearly a century earlier, another South African, Jan Christian Smuts, used similar vision, empathy and leadership [to Mandela] to bring his people to accept a settlement of reconciliation – though in his case from a position of their having been defeated – both after the Boer War and in the formation of the Union of South Africa."

    That is not comparing Smuts favourably to Mandela. It is comparing Smuts with Mandela (and a very interesting comparison it is).
  • It may not be the same 36% though.

    I think you are right. I have done well in the past betting against UKIP.

    As ALP pointed out, these elections coincide with the urban councils in particular, and not one that favours kippers.

    I suspect it may be a bit higher than 20%, but not by much.

    MikeL said:

    I think it's entirely possible UKIP may only get approx 20% in the Euros.

    Last time there was a big novelty aspect to UKIP and in particular I doubt many people had a very negative view about them.

    This time, UKIP are much better known to a large proportion of the population. Whilst they obviously have many more definite supporters than in 2009, there are also far, far more people who now have a definite unfavourable view of UKIP.

    This means it going to be far harder to gain lots of votes in the campaign on a sort of "bandwagon" effect - because any such "movement" is going to come up against stronger adverse forces.

    The last time the met boroughs were held on their own (2006) the turnout was 36% which is almost the same as turnout is generally for Euro elections (34% in 2010) consequently I don't think it will impact the result much at all.
    It may or it may not and given it is your assertion that such a point is predicated upon, I'll leave you to prove that one whichever way
  • IOSIOS Posts: 1,450
    Richard Nabavi has a very amusing mind set. think he is always right, is smug about it. Then gets angry and upset and blames others (see the electorate) when his nonsense arguments are proved false.
  • @Fox

    We have wet spells - the period you cite was in spring, not winter. The last four winters have been cold and snowy. I cannot understand why people expect anything other than variable, occasionally extreme, conditions in a windy island exposed to the ravages of the North Atlantic on one side, and the continental landmass of Eurasia on the other.
  • IOS said:

    Richard Nabavi has a very amusing mind set. think he is always right, is smug about it. Then gets angry and upset and blames others (see the electorate) when his nonsense arguments are proved false.

    Which arguments of mine have been proved false?
  • Hugh said:


    Ah, evening Richard. I read the article you posted earlier, and it was actually really interesting!

    As your hydrologist author rightly pointed out, dredging would not have stopped the floods.

    He spoiled an otherwise interesting piece with a bizarre and irrelevant sentence about "air temperature" though.

    Of course, just because the Levels have flooded before has no bearing on the fact that global warming is causing more extreme weather events.

    Ah so you know better than the Met office and the NOAA both of whom have released reports recently saying there is currently no evidence that any of the extreme weather events we have seen over the last decade are linked to Global Warming.

    Indeed, since there has been no significant temperature increase in more than a decade one has to ask why we are seeing these events now and not decade ago?

    One also has to ask why higher rainfalls in the past did not produce such massive flooding?

  • Hugh said:


    It is. I'd drop this if I were you. As I said David Herdson (and Mike) got lucky.

    I will certainly not drop anything on the basis of ludicrous anonymous threats. Smuts was a very interesting figure. So was Mandela. David H made a very interesting comparison between them, though of course they lived in very different times, with very different attitudes and moral values.
  • IOSIOS Posts: 1,450
    Well your chortle at me for the use of data in future political campaigning for one. You also used to argue that Ed Miliband would never be PM. You seem to have accepted this now and hence your bitterness at the public for not seeing how "near perfect" the chancellor is.
  • "Likewise, nearly a century earlier, another South African, Jan Christian Smuts, used similar vision, empathy and leadership [to Mandela] to bring his people to accept a settlement of reconciliation – though in his case from a position of their having been defeated – both after the Boer War and in the formation of the Union of South Africa."

    That is not comparing Smuts favourably to Mandela. It is comparing Smuts with Mandela (and a very interesting comparison it is).
    What a bizarre position to hold given the wording I have just quoted at you. You may be better conceding the point.
  • Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick · 5 mins
    Tuesday's Daily Telegraph front page - "'Homeowners, you knew the risk'" #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers #flooding pic.twitter.com/C3IjrliEnG

    Does anyone know who said it ?

    It must be lord smith ?

    Yes.

    "Lord Smith said people who bought homes on the flood plains needed to think about the "risk that property faces."

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BgJN-RDCEAAsUvq.jpg:large
    Don't see nothing wrong with what he said.
    I think he ought to look at his own website.

    http://maps.environment-agency.gov.uk/wiyby/wiybyController?x=357683.0&y=355134.0&scale=1&layerGroups=default&ep=map&textonly=off&lang=_e&topic=floodmap#x=532645&y=177354&lg=1,&scale=6

    According to that map the Somerset levels are a Flood Zone 3. Exactly the same as central London including Battersea, Lambeth, Bermondsey, Barmes, Fulham and a fair part of the City including Westminster. Is he really suggesting that all those people should be reconsidering living there?

    Or is it a case of one rule for the Townies and another for the Countryside?
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    edited February 2014
    IOS said:

    You also used to argue that Ed Miliband would never be PM. .

    No I didn't. As usual, you are making things up.

    As it happens, I spent most of 2011 on PB pointing out to despondent Labour supporters, most notably Henry G, that Ed Miliband wasn't as bad and as unelectable as they thought. I also, correctly, recommended betting on Labour Most Seats at the time, when the odds were very favourable.

  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    This year an unusually wet winter, then an unusually wet spring.

    Summer 2007 was bad too as I recall:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8464717.stm

    So I bought on a hill, not such a bad move

    @Fox

    We have wet spells - the period you cite was in spring, not winter. The last four winters have been cold and snowy. I cannot understand why people expect anything other than variable, occasionally extreme, conditions in a windy island exposed to the ravages of the North Atlantic on one side, and the continental landmass of Eurasia on the other.

  • "Lord" Chris Smith has just taken a 50 cal, and blown both his feet off.
    People buy houses where builders, encouraged by local councils ( the Government in most peoples eyes), build 'em. If Smith thinks blaming people for buying house on flood plains is going to endear him to the public, he's thicker than I thought.
  • CarolaCarola Posts: 1,805
    Clegg on the front of the 'I': '100 days to stop UKIP'. Bit late with the sandbags there I reckon.
  • What a bizarre position to hold given the wording I have just quoted at you. You may be better conceding the point.

    Which bit of 'similar' do you think is comparing one favourably compared to the other?

    Here's a remedial English lesson for you. "A is similar to B in a particular respect" does not mean that A is better than B, or vice versa.
  • smithersjones2013smithersjones2013 Posts: 740
    edited February 2014

    Lord Smith vs Paxman on Newsnight shortly. Should be lively.

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick · 5 mins
    Tuesday's Daily Telegraph front page - "'Homeowners, you knew the risk'" #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers #flooding pic.twitter.com/C3IjrliEnG

    Does anyone know who said it ?

    It must be lord smith ?

    Yes.

    "Lord Smith said people who bought homes on the flood plains needed to think about the "risk that property faces."

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BgJN-RDCEAAsUvq.jpg:large
    Don't see nothing wrong with what he said.
    But what if these people have been living there for decades as many have? Are they supposed to be able to predict years in advance the thinking of psychotic politicians who exist hundreds of miles away too?

    I wonder what he would say if they cut the funding for the Thames barrier? Would he say that people in London should have though about the risks they might face? Politically it is the most desperately crass thing he could have said. Smith is a fool of immense proportions. I can only think he is close to being kicked out of the job.
    Paxo soft pedalled that one. Clearly he'd been told to treat Smith gently although the key word I kept hearing towards the end was 'retreat'. So once again we see Government and its stooges trying to choose which parts of British society its going to serve/ When Government is not willing to serve the whole country then one has to question the value of that government?
  • This year an unusually wet winter, then an unusually wet spring.

    Summer 2007 was bad too as I recall:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8464717.stm

    So I bought on a hill, not such a bad move

    @Fox

    We have wet spells - the period you cite was in spring, not winter. The last four winters have been cold and snowy. I cannot understand why people expect anything other than variable, occasionally extreme, conditions in a windy island exposed to the ravages of the North Atlantic on one side, and the continental landmass of Eurasia on the other.

    Last summer extraordinarily dry... Buying on a hill is always wise, but your original point suggested a series of warm, wet winters, which we have not had.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Smuts was a political giant of his time, and an interesting counterpoint to Mandela in the history of RSA. DH did not make him out to be better, just pointed out some similarities. It was a much more interesting slant than most of the forgetable hagiography written at that time.

    Hugh said:


    It is. I'd drop this if I were you. As I said David Herdson (and Mike) got lucky.

    I will certainly not drop anything on the basis of ludicrous anonymous threats. Smuts was a very interesting figure. So was Mandela. David H made a very interesting comparison between them, though of course they lived in very different times, with very different attitudes and moral values.
  • "Lord" Chris Smith has just taken a 50 cal, and blown both his feet off.
    People buy houses where builders, encouraged by local councils ( the Government in most peoples eyes), build 'em. If Smith thinks blaming people for buying house on flood plains is going to endear him to the public, he's thicker than I thought.

    Indeed. The Government and local council in Newark have (against the wishes of the local population) made the town a 'Growth Point' which means they have to build some 15,000 extra houses in the next 11 years. The majority of these houses are going to be built on flood plain to the south of the town.
  • IOSIOS Posts: 1,450
    You certainly directly contracted my argument that members, campaigning and data were the way political campaigning was going.
  • [Yawn] Miliband has started waffling about people power and devolution whilst still prostrating himself to his masters in Brussels. HYPOCRITE!
  • "Lord" Chris Smith has just taken a 50 cal, and blown both his feet off.
    People buy houses where builders, encouraged by local councils ( the Government in most peoples eyes), build 'em. If Smith thinks blaming people for buying house on flood plains is going to endear him to the public, he's thicker than I thought.

    Indeed. The Government and local council in Newark have (against the wishes of the local population) made the town a 'Growth Point' which means they have to build some 15,000 extra houses in the next 11 years. The majority of these houses are going to be built on flood plain to the south of the town.

    You'd be very foolish to buy one of those houses. Surely insurers and mortgage lenders would avoid them like the plague. I wouldn't go near a house on a flood plain.
  • Smuts was a political giant of his time, and an interesting counterpoint to Mandela in the history of RSA. DH did not make him out to be better, just pointed out some similarities. It was a much more interesting slant than most of the forgetable hagiography written at that time.

    Quite so. It was a very interesting comparison.

    But of course the knee-jerk 'white South African, therefore evil' reaction of the left was astonishing in its historical ignorance. Smuts even ended up as one of the founders of the United Nations - a truly remarkable figure whose career, as David pointed out, had some interesting similarities to Mandela's, albeit in a very different world.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    You must not have your comprehension badge LBS. I said I bought on a hill, taken in by warmists predicting warmer wetter winters.

    Whether this was a con, or a fortelling of the future, it was wise advice!

    Be prepared! as the late great Boer warrior might have said to Jan Smuts.

    This year an unusually wet winter, then an unusually wet spring.

    Summer 2007 was bad too as I recall:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8464717.stm

    So I bought on a hill, not such a bad move

    @Fox

    We have wet spells - the period you cite was in spring, not winter. The last four winters have been cold and snowy. I cannot understand why people expect anything other than variable, occasionally extreme, conditions in a windy island exposed to the ravages of the North Atlantic on one side, and the continental landmass of Eurasia on the other.

    Last summer extraordinarily dry... Buying on a hill is always wise, but your original point suggested a series of warm, wet winters, which we have not had.
  • What a bizarre position to hold given the wording I have just quoted at you. You may be better conceding the point.

    Which bit of 'similar' do you think is comparing one favourably compared to the other?

    Here's a remedial English lesson for you. "A is similar to B in a particular respect" does not mean that A is better than B, or vice versa.
    You are dancing on the head of a pin. The article lionised Smuts - a racist supporter of segregation - by creatng false comparisons with Mandela. If you fail to recognise that, more fool you, but I cannot help you further.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    Matthew Taylor talking about Ed Miliband's wonkery. If you recorded this and showed it to prisoners of war it would break the Geneva Conventions.
  • Why is the PB Left being beastly to the sagacious Richard Nabavi tonight? I can only assume that Dan Hodges was correct with his prediction about Ed's speech. I can think of no other reason for their gloom.
  • IOSIOS Posts: 1,450
    The Last boy Scot.

    If you read the argument David had with Tim in the argument you see that David meant it as you suggest.
  • This year an unusually wet winter, then an unusually wet spring.

    Summer 2007 was bad too as I recall:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8464717.stm

    So I bought on a hill, not such a bad move

    @Fox

    We have wet spells - the period you cite was in spring, not winter. The last four winters have been cold and snowy. I cannot understand why people expect anything other than variable, occasionally extreme, conditions in a windy island exposed to the ravages of the North Atlantic on one side, and the continental landmass of Eurasia on the other.

    The 100 yard wide gulley (30 ft high as well) gauged out of the local hills for the nearby Motorway will have flooded completely and turned into a canal and then the waters would have to rise another 20 feet or more before my house even comes close to flooding. We're talking weather of biblical proportions!

    Not so the local council offices. They're built right on the local river and their car parks flood regularly!
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    edited February 2014

    You are dancing on the head of a pin. The article lionised Smuts - a racist supporter of segregation - by creatng false comparisons with Mandela. If you fail to recognise that, more fool you, but I cannot help you further.

    So ANY comparison against the saint is, by definition, false?

    Quite so. Your prejudice and ignorance are blinding you to the most basic understanding of the English language. If you fail to understand that a comparison is not necessarily a favourable comparison, I cannot help you further, but the phenomenon is an interesting one to observe.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,713
    edited February 2014

    Smuts even ended up as one of the founders of the United Nations - a truly remarkable figure whose career, as David pointed out, had some interesting similarities to Mandela's, albeit in a very different world.

    Bit of trivia. Did you know that Smuts was the only person to have put his signature to the treaties that ended both the First and Second World Wars?
  • Hugh said:



    Of course there's no evidence linking a single storm to a long-term warming trend, that's silly. But we know almost for certain that the long-term warming trend will cause more extreme weather events.

    There has been climate warming in the last decade, it's just slowed down due to short-term weather fluctuations.

    Rainfall in the past did produce massive flooding, and it will get worse (due to the increasing severity of storms, development reducing the ability of land to naturally hold water, and so on)

    It is not just single storms. Atlantic Hurricane activity has been notably lower for several years both in numbers and in terms of the absolute total energy.

    More importantly you are wrong on warming. Overall the global temperature has stayed static or dropped slightly according to both the UAH satellite data the CRU surface temperature data set over the last decade (actually since 2001). This is now accepted by both sides of the argument with the AGW proponents having moved from denial to trying to explain why.

    You are right about development on flood plains but as I showed earlier with the link to the EA map, traditional flood plains include the homes of several million people.
  • I always enjoy Richard N's understatement.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Hugh, you seem rather ill informed. Apartheid was the policy of the National Party, which deposed Jan Smuts government United Party in 1948.

    Smuts party favoured gradual dismantling of racial barriers in SA.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_African_general_election,_1948
    Hugh said:

    Smuts was a political giant of his time, and an interesting counterpoint to Mandela in the history of RSA. DH did not make him out to be better, just pointed out some similarities. It was a much more interesting slant than most of the forgetable hagiography written at that time.

    Quite so. It was a very interesting comparison.

    But of course the knee-jerk 'white South African, therefore evil' reaction of the left was astonishing in its historical ignorance. Smuts even ended up as one of the founders of the United Nations - a truly remarkable figure whose career, as David pointed out, had some interesting similarities to Mandela's, albeit in a very different world.
    It was vile and unspeakably stupid to compare an architect of apartheid to Nelson Mandela at a sensitive time.
  • compouter2compouter2 Posts: 2,371
    Do my eyes deceive me.....does the gold standard show Labour on 38% and up 3%. John O any chance of more comments on polls, you do wonders to the Labour percentage.

    You grab one end Basil and I will grab the other....onward march!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,894
    My longshot prediction for the next election is 39% Tory, 36% Labour, 13% LD and another Tory-LD Coalition. Take 5% from the UKIP score and give it to the Tories and 2% from Labour and give it to the Liberals and you almost have it
  • "Lord" Chris Smith has just taken a 50 cal, and blown both his feet off.
    People buy houses where builders, encouraged by local councils ( the Government in most peoples eyes), build 'em. If Smith thinks blaming people for buying house on flood plains is going to endear him to the public, he's thicker than I thought.

    Indeed. The Government and local council in Newark have (against the wishes of the local population) made the town a 'Growth Point' which means they have to build some 15,000 extra houses in the next 11 years. The majority of these houses are going to be built on flood plain to the south of the town.

    You'd be very foolish to buy one of those houses. Surely insurers and mortgage lenders would avoid them like the plague. I wouldn't go near a house on a flood plain.
    The problem is that over the years the developers have developed a huge range of supposed mitigation systems which are supposed to prevent flooding of their nice shiny estates. The problem with these is that they are either stupid (in Newark they are going to dig big holes ponds and lakes in the flood plain on other side of the river from the development which will supposedly catch flood water - missing the point that the ground water level is only about 5 feet below the surface and so the ponds will immediately fill up with water naturally) or they simply transfer the problem up or downstream and so flood houses which did not previously flood.

    Of course as I mentioned yesterday, the Somerset levels are a different case since this is reclaimed land not traditional flood plain and so if properly maintained is not subject to thesame flooding pressures.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 4,240
    Hugh said:

    What idiot made that decision? Some wonky rightwing Oxbridge halfwit who thought it would be a jolly good chance to attack Labour Quangos, what ho, what larks?

    And that's the irony of it all. The EA is not a Labour quango. It was set up by John Major in the face of plentiful advice that it wouldn't work as well as its predecessor bodies.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,894
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    RE: buyer beware
    The Indy have a story of a new build house, where the owner had wanted to build the house higher (to allow for flooding) but was denied planning permission.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/a-last-stand-against-the-floods-defiant-sam-notaros-home-appears-set-to-succumb-to-water-9119525.html
  • IOSIOS Posts: 1,450
    What is an interesting in political dynamic about these floods is it is more ammo for UKIP in the south. Perfect just before the euros. Could we be about to see the Tories lose even more members and activists to UKIP?
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    "1976 drought: The reservoir in Walton-on-Thames , Surrey, is almost completely dried up":

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1388136/UK-weather-Another-scorcher-Michael-Fish-recalls-hot-summer-1976.htm
  • Hugh, you seem rather ill informed. Apartheid was the policy of the National Party, which deposed Jan Smuts government United Party in 1948.

    Smuts party favoured gradual dismantling of racial barriers in SA.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_African_general_election,_1948

    Perhaps if David had compared Mandela with slave-owner George Washington it would have been all right.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    HYUFD said:

    My longshot prediction for the next election is 39% Tory, 36% Labour, 13% LD and another Tory-LD Coalition. Take 5% from the UKIP score and give it to the Tories and 2% from Labour and give it to the Liberals and you almost have it

    Not at all clear that those figures would give us another Tory-LD Coalition. On a uniform swing Tory and Labour would be neck and neck.In addition, Labour could rely on support of SDLP and Lady Hermon.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    edited February 2014
    Surely the Smuts/Mandela comparison is an example of a shifting moral zeitgeist?

    Interesting speech by Richard Dawkins

    "Good historians don't judge statements from the past by the standards of their own time"

    http://youtu.be/uwz6B8BFkb4

  • Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664

    Smuts was a political giant of his time, and an interesting counterpoint to Mandela in the history of RSA. DH did not make him out to be better, just pointed out some similarities. It was a much more interesting slant than most of the forgetable hagiography written at that time.



    Quite so. It was a very interesting comparison.

    But of course the knee-jerk 'white South African, therefore evil' reaction of the left was astonishing in its historical ignorance. Smuts even ended up as one of the founders of the United Nations - a truly remarkable figure whose career, as David pointed out, had some interesting similarities to Mandela's, albeit in a very different world.
    I have never understood what Mandela is meant to have done other than sit in prison for 20 years while jcr common rooms were named in his honour. The biopic title The Long Walk To Freedom, boring as it is, actually overstates the interest-no walking involved.

    His wife on the other hand made a keynote speech in 1986 advocating the torture and murder of poor South African blacks by"enslaving" and was found by the Truth and Reconciliation commission to have practised what she preached. It took him 6 years to divorce her and he never spoke out against

    There is no record of Mrs Smuts making a similar speech.
  • HYUFD said:

    My longshot prediction for the next election is 39% Tory, 36% Labour, 13% LD and another Tory-LD Coalition. Take 5% from the UKIP score and give it to the Tories and 2% from Labour and give it to the Liberals and you almost have it

    Clearly you didn't bother taking on board OHG's comments the other day. The Tories need to win by 7% approximately to stand still. If they win by only 3 points effectively that is a 4 point step backwards and they would lose seats. With the Libdems losing a significant number of seats as well (there share having almost been halved) chances are the combined seat numbers could not command a majority and they would be thrown out. All it takes is for Labour to become the largest party and the Tories are gone........
  • Hugh said:

    Hugh said:



    Of course there's no evidence linking a single storm to a long-term warming trend, that's silly. But we know almost for certain that the long-term warming trend will cause more extreme weather events.

    There has been climate warming in the last decade, it's just slowed down due to short-term weather fluctuations.

    Rainfall in the past did produce massive flooding, and it will get worse (due to the increasing severity of storms, development reducing the ability of land to naturally hold water, and so on)

    It is not just single storms. Atlantic Hurricane activity has been notably lower for several years both in numbers and in terms of the absolute total energy.

    More importantly you are wrong on warming. Overall the global temperature has stayed static or dropped slightly according to both the UAH satellite data the CRU surface temperature data set over the last decade (actually since 2001). This is now accepted by both sides of the argument with the AGW proponents having moved from denial to trying to explain why.

    You are right about development on flood plains but as I showed earlier with the link to the EA map, traditional flood plains include the homes of several million people.
    Too late for global warming, but one thing. The "global temperature" has most certainly not "stayed static". It has increased, dramatically, and that staggering rate of warming has only slowed a bit recently.

    You're right that scientists are trying to explain why the climate has continued to warm when so many short term trends should be cooling it recently though.
    Wrong. Go and look at the data sets compiled by both UAH and CRU. If you are being really lazy you can even just go and look at the graphs on Wiki although I don't cite it as a source. Better to go and look at the actual data sets compiled by the people who do the measurements and see that the temperature has not risen.
  • "Lord" Chris Smith has just taken a 50 cal, and blown both his feet off.
    People buy houses where builders, encouraged by local councils ( the Government in most peoples eyes), build 'em. If Smith thinks blaming people for buying house on flood plains is going to endear him to the public, he's thicker than I thought.

    Indeed. The Government and local council in Newark have (against the wishes of the local population) made the town a 'Growth Point' which means they have to build some 15,000 extra houses in the next 11 years. The majority of these houses are going to be built on flood plain to the south of the town.

    You'd be very foolish to buy one of those houses. Surely insurers and mortgage lenders would avoid them like the plague. I wouldn't go near a house on a flood plain.
    The problem is that over the years the developers have developed a huge range of supposed mitigation systems which are supposed to prevent flooding of their nice shiny estates. The problem with these is that they are either stupid (in Newark they are going to dig big holes ponds and lakes in the flood plain on other side of the river from the development which will supposedly catch flood water - missing the point that the ground water level is only about 5 feet below the surface and so the ponds will immediately fill up with water naturally) or they simply transfer the problem up or downstream and so flood houses which did not previously flood.

    Of course as I mentioned yesterday, the Somerset levels are a different case since this is reclaimed land not traditional flood plain and so if properly maintained is not subject to thesame flooding pressures.

    I imagine insurers would run a mile. My mother-in-law can't get flood-related insurance because there is a brook at the bottom of her garden which did flood 20 years ago.

    I just don't know enough about the Levels to comment. However, flood management systems developed centuries ago for farmland might not work as well for the same land once it has become more built up. A few inches of water waiting to flow off an open field is very different to the same amount of water on land covered in housing.

  • Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664
    Enslaving is an auto correct for necklacing. And there's a her missing.
This discussion has been closed.