We are forever seeing TV chefs swanning off to some distant shore and eulogising about the 'Street Food' that they purchase from some squalid shack that nobody in their right mind would go anywhere near.
If you want street food, buy a Greggs steak bake and eat it as you walk down the pavement.
I can’t get near my local Greggs for Indonesian, Chinese and Cambodian TV chefs eulogising over steak bakes.
Can anyone point me to a link explaining how voter registration works in the USA.
I don't get this concept of needing to identify as "Republican" or "Democrat" or "Independent" in advance, and then taking part in that party's Primary, but you can also vote in the other Primary.
What is the point?
I am very uncomfortable with self-ID for voters. There should be a clear and objective set of measures that can be universally applied, to determine affiliation. Voters should not merely be able to declare "I'm a Democrat" or whatever.
I once encountered someone in a MAGA hat in the Democrat locker room. People like that should have to stick to the Republican facilities until they have had their headwear surgically removed.
The ground shifts, or at least the rural part of it appears to be:
Rural voters more likely to back Labour than the Tories Poll puts Sir Keir Starmer’s party four points ahead in countryside after promises to support farmers and tackle sewage spills
Can anyone point me to a link explaining how voter registration works in the USA.
I don't get this concept of needing to identify as "Republican" or "Democrat" or "Independent" in advance, and then taking part in that party's Primary, but you can also vote in the other Primary.
What is the point?
I am very uncomfortable with self-ID for voters. There should be a clear and objective set of measures that can be universally applied, to determine affiliation. Voters should not merely be able to declare "I'm a Democrat" or whatever.
Yes, the danger of self-ID is that you could end up with Republicans using Democrat toilets, or vice-versa.
The ground shifts, or at least the rural part of it appears to be:
Rural voters more likely to back Labour than the Tories Poll puts Sir Keir Starmer’s party four points ahead in countryside after promises to support farmers and tackle sewage spills
Can anyone point me to a link explaining how voter registration works in the USA.
I don't get this concept of needing to identify as "Republican" or "Democrat" or "Independent" in advance, and then taking part in that party's Primary, but you can also vote in the other Primary.
What is the point?
"but you can also vote in the other Primary"
Err, usually you can NOT do that. But depends on specific state law AND what it is you mean.
For example, in WA State you must pick a party in order for your presidential primary vote to count; but you are free to pick ANOTHER party at the next presidential primary.
In states with party registration, you are free to change from one to another (or neither) but there are deadlines; for example, a New Hampshire voter who is today a registered Democrat can NOT change registration and vote in 2024 Republican primary; same other way around.
However, in Iowa, voters CAN change their party registration, up to and including Caucus Night next Monday.
Also note that in states with closed party primaries (and not just presidential) dominated by one party or the other, pretty common for folks who consider themselves in one food group, to register with the opposite party, in order to vote in that party's primaries - which is where many elections are decided for practical purposes.
For example, decades ago when he lived in Louisiana, my GOPer father was a registered Democrat for just that reason. Yet he almost always voted Republican in the fall. And when he moved to another, more politially-competitive state (back then anyway) he registered as . . . wait for it . . . a Republican.
It seems then those convicted as a result of the Post Office scandal are to have their convictions overturned via legislation.
Yes, that doesn't sit well with me either. It sets a dangerous precedent and a prime example of the road to hell being paved with good intentions. Of course, we see Sunak playing to the populist crowd - he sees the public wanting "something" to be done to put right the scandal and he's decided using Parliament to overturn legal decisions is the right "something".
We can all accept and understand there was a miscarriage of justice which needs to be corrected but imagine how this could be misused in the future. Guilty people having their convictions overturned by legislation - imagine where that ends, yes, it could be another miscarriage like and innocent person wrongly convicted of murder but it could be a "friend" of a future Government convicted of a crime who uses his or her influence to get the conviction quashed.
The Courts have mechanisms to overturn convictions - let's use those and speed the process rather than invoke legislation.
1) Horizon data was presented in court - falsely and likely with perjury - as a system that could not make mistakes.
2) This was the primary evidence - no trial, let alone conviction, would have happened without it.
3) The Horizon software was full of bugs and errors.
4) Thus, if nothing else, all trials that relied on Horizon data to convict should be considered mistrials and commenced again if other evidence was also beyond reasonable doubt.
How this happens is academic. Perhaps we should have a case representing all sub postmasters going to the supreme court to invalidate the convictions. But that is seemingly not possible given the snails pace at which things have occured.
If a system fails we should compensate those failed by it. And then work out how to improve the system going forward such that these extraordinary measures weren't necessary.
We are forever seeing TV chefs swanning off to some distant shore and eulogising about the 'Street Food' that they purchase from some squalid shack that nobody in their right mind would go anywhere near.
If you want street food, buy a Greggs steak bake and eat it as you walk down the pavement.
Last year, I was two miles from the end of a marathon, and running through Croydon. I was really hungry, so I nipped into a Greggs, bought a sausage roll, and ate it as I jogged down the road.
To be quite clear: this was *not* a good idea...
Absolutely. Running a marathon is never a good idea.
We are forever seeing TV chefs swanning off to some distant shore and eulogising about the 'Street Food' that they purchase from some squalid shack that nobody in their right mind would go anywhere near.
If you want street food, buy a Greggs steak bake and eat it as you walk down the pavement.
Can anyone point me to a link explaining how voter registration works in the USA.
I don't get this concept of needing to identify as "Republican" or "Democrat" or "Independent" in advance, and then taking part in that party's Primary, but you can also vote in the other Primary.
What is the point?
I am very uncomfortable with self-ID for voters. There should be a clear and objective set of measures that can be universally applied, to determine affiliation. Voters should not merely be able to declare "I'm a Democrat" or whatever.
We are forever seeing TV chefs swanning off to some distant shore and eulogising about the 'Street Food' that they purchase from some squalid shack that nobody in their right mind would go anywhere near.
If you want street food, buy a Greggs steak bake and eat it as you walk down the pavement.
My dear old mother thought eating in the street was "common" and I still can't bring myself to do it. But I did get to sample Vietnamese street food when they set up a suspiciously clean stall in the breakfast room of our 5-star Hanoi hotel.
We are forever seeing TV chefs swanning off to some distant shore and eulogising about the 'Street Food' that they purchase from some squalid shack that nobody in their right mind would go anywhere near.
If you want street food, buy a Greggs steak bake and eat it as you walk down the pavement.
A Cornish pasty surely?
Why would one walk down a Cornish pasty? You'd slip and drop the stake bake. Which would be marginally less painful than eating it, but there y'go.
We are forever seeing TV chefs swanning off to some distant shore and eulogising about the 'Street Food' that they purchase from some squalid shack that nobody in their right mind would go anywhere near.
If you want street food, buy a Greggs steak bake and eat it as you walk down the pavement.
Last year, I was two miles from the end of a marathon, and running through Croydon. I was really hungry, so I nipped into a Greggs, bought a sausage roll, and ate it as I jogged down the road.
To be quite clear: this was *not* a good idea...
Absolutely. Running a marathon is never a good idea.
Especially as any road through Croydon with a Greggs is almost certainly a bus route.
Yes, we will take back control of the United States.
I would make an excellent Viceroy of America.
We didn't manage it in the last one, and we had a far better chance then. Arguably if we had offered the confederate states the protection of the British Empire we would have held the United States in permanent check, and been the pre-eminent world power for the 20th century at least.
I've seen some crazy fantasies from right-wing loonies, but making the Confederate States a British Protectorate in order to stymie the USA has to beat them all.
How is it a 'crazy fantasy'? I'm not proposing that this should happen, it's a historical counterfactual of the type often discussed here. Just you being an unpleasant little turd as usual I suppose.
Because the Southern states would have had even less regard for an imperial Britain holding power over them than taking their chances with the North.
Perhaps not 'crazy', but it is fantasy.
Plus, having passed the Slavery Abolition Act in 1833, Britain, under a Liberal government by 1861, would have struggled to justify to the nation's public why they should support a bunch of slave states.
Whadaya mean "would have"?
Seeing as how HMG circa 1861 in fact DID struggle to justify it's pro-Confederate policy to the British Public. In particular the textile workers of Lancashire (most of whom were denied the vote) who did NOT endorse the illiberal Liberal government, despite the "cotton famine" and resultant unemployment.
Wiki below barely scratches the surface, but still worth checking out.
We are forever seeing TV chefs swanning off to some distant shore and eulogising about the 'Street Food' that they purchase from some squalid shack that nobody in their right mind would go anywhere near.
If you want street food, buy a Greggs steak bake and eat it as you walk down the pavement.
Last year, I was two miles from the end of a marathon, and running through Croydon. I was really hungry, so I nipped into a Greggs, bought a sausage roll, and ate it as I jogged down the road.
To be quite clear: this was *not* a good idea...
Absolutely. Running a marathon is never a good idea.
I think you're supposed to call it running a snickers nowadays.
We are forever seeing TV chefs swanning off to some distant shore and eulogising about the 'Street Food' that they purchase from some squalid shack that nobody in their right mind would go anywhere near.
If you want street food, buy a Greggs steak bake and eat it as you walk down the pavement.
My dear old mother thought eating in the street was "common" and I still can't bring myself to do it. But I did get to sample Vietnamese street food when they set up a suspiciously clean stall in the breakfast room of our 5-star Hanoi hotel.
We are forever seeing TV chefs swanning off to some distant shore and eulogising about the 'Street Food' that they purchase from some squalid shack that nobody in their right mind would go anywhere near.
If you want street food, buy a Greggs steak bake and eat it as you walk down the pavement.
A Cornish pasty surely?
Isn't that what strip-tease artiste's in St Ives's burlesque houses used to wear - strategically?
Can anyone point me to a link explaining how voter registration works in the USA.
I don't get this concept of needing to identify as "Republican" or "Democrat" or "Independent" in advance, and then taking part in that party's Primary, but you can also vote in the other Primary.
What is the point?
I am very uncomfortable with self-ID for voters. There should be a clear and objective set of measures that can be universally applied, to determine affiliation. Voters should not merely be able to declare "I'm a Democrat" or whatever.
Yes, the danger of self-ID is that you could end up with Republicans using Democrat toilets, or vice-versa.
It seems then those convicted as a result of the Post Office scandal are to have their convictions overturned via legislation.
Yes, that doesn't sit well with me either. It sets a dangerous precedent and a prime example of the road to hell being paved with good intentions. Of course, we see Sunak playing to the populist crowd - he sees the public wanting "something" to be done to put right the scandal and he's decided using Parliament to overturn legal decisions is the right "something".
We can all accept and understand there was a miscarriage of justice which needs to be corrected but imagine how this could be misused in the future. Guilty people having their convictions overturned by legislation - imagine where that ends, yes, it could be another miscarriage like and innocent person wrongly convicted of murder but it could be a "friend" of a future Government convicted of a crime who uses his or her influence to get the conviction quashed.
The Courts have mechanisms to overturn convictions - let's use those and speed the process rather than invoke legislation.
1) Horizon data was presented in court - falsely and likely with perjury - as a system that could not make mistakes.
2) This was the primary evidence - no trial, let alone conviction, would have happened without it.
3) The Horizon software was full of bugs and errors.
4) Thus, if nothing else, all trials that relied on Horizon data to convict should be considered mistrials and commenced again if other evidence was also beyond reasonable doubt.
How this happens is academic. Perhaps we should have a case representing all sub postmasters going to the supreme court to invalidate the convictions. But that is seemingly not possible given the snails pace at which things have occured.
If a system fails we should compensate those failed by it. And then work out how to improve the system going forward such that these extraordinary measures weren't necessary.
I’ve got some questions about your post, Apologies if this has already been asked and answered that I’ve missed.
The same system still there today. There’s no plan to get rid of it. Are the problems with it over - is it tweaked and trustable now? Or just not used in court evidence?
So the scandal only refers to convictions between which dates?
Another good poll for Labour from Savanta albeit with old fieldwork (January 5-7).Interesting though to see a sharp fall in the Labour lead across the 2024 polls to date from 24 with YouGov to 16 with Redfield & Wilton though as we know that's right up there with comparing apples with bulldozers.
Let's see where the midweek polls take us and see if the PO story is getting any real traction in terms of changing votes and minds. It's unclear currently.
Savanta are usually one of the better Conservative pollsters and Labour will be happy to see their biggest lead since October last year. Savanta is a UK rather than GB pollster so the swing is 15.5% from Conservative to Labour which is still in "solid majority" territory before tactical voting.
Under normal circumstances any bad news is bad news for the incumbent. Farage's takedown of Starmer may change that.
It is indeed very bad that Britain's first three miscarriages happened on his watch.
How do you know the three were innocent? Perhaps they are the guilty ones that Alex Chalk suggests will unfortunately be allowed through the net by his blanket acquittal.
I do wonder why these cases went to the CPS, rather than being private prosecutions. What was different about them?
But neither do we want to go to the other extreme, and suggest that because "I was DPP you know" Starmer was tangentially involved in their cases, they're guilty.
If Starmer and Davey resign, and I am not suggesting they should not, and Sunak gets away scot-free with rehiring Jujitsu on manifold occasions we can safely say the country is no longer a functioning democracy. A post- democracy that is run by Farage and the Tory client media.
We are forever seeing TV chefs swanning off to some distant shore and eulogising about the 'Street Food' that they purchase from some squalid shack that nobody in their right mind would go anywhere near.
If you want street food, buy a Greggs steak bake and eat it as you walk down the pavement.
A Cornish pasty surely?
Isn't that what strip-tease artiste's in St Ives's burlesque houses used to wear - strategically?
That's a Cornish patsy. But she really needs two for the full benefit.
Seriously though, is there anything finer than a hot Cornish pasty on cold winter's day?
We are forever seeing TV chefs swanning off to some distant shore and eulogising about the 'Street Food' that they purchase from some squalid shack that nobody in their right mind would go anywhere near.
If you want street food, buy a Greggs steak bake and eat it as you walk down the pavement.
Last year, I was two miles from the end of a marathon, and running through Croydon. I was really hungry, so I nipped into a Greggs, bought a sausage roll, and ate it as I jogged down the road.
To be quite clear: this was *not* a good idea...
Absolutely. Running a marathon is never a good idea.
Especially as any road through Croydon with a Greggs is almost certainly a bus route.
Yes, we will take back control of the United States.
I would make an excellent Viceroy of America.
We didn't manage it in the last one, and we had a far better chance then. Arguably if we had offered the confederate states the protection of the British Empire we would have held the United States in permanent check, and been the pre-eminent world power for the 20th century at least.
I've seen some crazy fantasies from right-wing loonies, but making the Confederate States a British Protectorate in order to stymie the USA has to beat them all.
Talking about fantasies, why should I get bollocked on PB the other day for accurately predicting that the New York Tunnels would have just this boring and humdrum explanation?
"The reason for the tunnel’s creation remains undisclosed."
Guess: a certain traditional ceremony or ritual has been banned by the elders. The tunnel-builders disagree, and perform it secretly at night. The humdrum part? This ceremony is dead boring.
Boring comes into it certainly.
That's quite a breakthrough - do you have a mole on the inside?
Another good poll for Labour from Savanta albeit with old fieldwork (January 5-7).Interesting though to see a sharp fall in the Labour lead across the 2024 polls to date from 24 with YouGov to 16 with Redfield & Wilton though as we know that's right up there with comparing apples with bulldozers.
Let's see where the midweek polls take us and see if the PO story is getting any real traction in terms of changing votes and minds. It's unclear currently.
Savanta are usually one of the better Conservative pollsters and Labour will be happy to see their biggest lead since October last year. Savanta is a UK rather than GB pollster so the swing is 15.5% from Conservative to Labour which is still in "solid majority" territory before tactical voting.
Under normal circumstances any bad news is bad news for the incumbent. Farage's takedown of Starmer may change that.
It is indeed very bad that Britain's first three miscarriages happened on his watch.
How do you know the three were innocent? Perhaps they are the guilty ones that Alex Chalk suggests will unfortunately be allowed through the net by his blanket acquittal.
I do wonder why these cases went to the CPS, rather than being private prosecutions. What was different about them?
But neither do we want to go to the other extreme, and suggest that because "I was DPP you know" Starmer was tangentially involved in their cases, they're guilty.
If Starmer and Davey resign, and I am not suggesting they should not, and Sunak gets away scot-free with rehiring Jujitsu on manifold occasions we can safely say the country is no longer a functioning democracy. A post- democracy that is run by Farage and the Tory client media.
I'm sorry - how important is Farage really? You and the Express may hang on his word - no one else does.
Absolutely no reason why either Starmer or Davey should resign unless every Conservative Minister involved also resigns.
It seems then those convicted as a result of the Post Office scandal are to have their convictions overturned via legislation.
Yes, that doesn't sit well with me either. It sets a dangerous precedent and a prime example of the road to hell being paved with good intentions. Of course, we see Sunak playing to the populist crowd - he sees the public wanting "something" to be done to put right the scandal and he's decided using Parliament to overturn legal decisions is the right "something".
We can all accept and understand there was a miscarriage of justice which needs to be corrected but imagine how this could be misused in the future. Guilty people having their convictions overturned by legislation - imagine where that ends, yes, it could be another miscarriage like and innocent person wrongly convicted of murder but it could be a "friend" of a future Government convicted of a crime who uses his or her influence to get the conviction quashed.
The Courts have mechanisms to overturn convictions - let's use those and speed the process rather than invoke legislation.
1) Horizon data was presented in court - falsely and likely with perjury - as a system that could not make mistakes.
2) This was the primary evidence - no trial, let alone conviction, would have happened without it.
3) The Horizon software was full of bugs and errors.
4) Thus, if nothing else, all trials that relied on Horizon data to convict should be considered mistrials and commenced again if other evidence was also beyond reasonable doubt.
How this happens is academic. Perhaps we should have a case representing all sub postmasters going to the supreme court to invalidate the convictions. But that is seemingly not possible given the snails pace at which things have occured.
If a system fails we should compensate those failed by it. And then work out how to improve the system going forward such that these extraordinary measures weren't necessary.
I’ve got some questions about your post, Apologies if this has already been asked and answered that I’ve missed.
The same system still there today. There’s no plan to get rid of it. Are the problems with it over - is it tweaked and trustable now? Or just not used in court evidence?
So the scandal only refers to convictions between which dates?
In contrast to cheese, the nature of systems is that they become less bug-ridden the older they get.
Is literally everyone now happy with the government overriding the courts to overturn all the PO convictions btw? It's the sort of "principle" point where I'd expect somebody to rebel. Probably David Davis.
No, I think it sets a very poor precedent. It's the work of a government which couldn't be arsed until a week ago, and doesn't now want to do the hard work of sorting it out through the courts rather than parliamentary fiat.
Some of the PO victims aren't very happy about it, either.
How's it a poor precedent when its been done before?
Eg for the past decade Parliament has overridden the courts to enable the overturning of prior convictions for buggery or alternative then-illegal homosexuality convictions. In the past year, that scheme has been widened.
Parliament overriding the courts to convict would be problematic, but where there has been gross miscarriages of justice, Parliament overriding to acquit seems entirely acceptable.
We are forever seeing TV chefs swanning off to some distant shore and eulogising about the 'Street Food' that they purchase from some squalid shack that nobody in their right mind would go anywhere near.
If you want street food, buy a Greggs steak bake and eat it as you walk down the pavement.
A Cornish pasty surely?
Isn't that what strip-tease artiste's in St Ives's burlesque houses used to wear - strategically?
That's a Cornish patsy. But she really needs two for the full benefit.
Seriously though, is there anything finer than a hot Cornish pasty on cold winter's day?
JosiasJessop, have you ever considered running in the Boston Marathon?
Challenging course, from Concord to Bean Town . . . but NOT as challenging as for British runners in April 1775 . . .
Frankly, no. I've never done any officially-timed run - I leave those for Mrs J, who is the runner in the family. I just go off and do my own thing (tm).
I hope to sort-of do one later in the year, as part of a sprint triathlon. If I can get the swimming right...
We are forever seeing TV chefs swanning off to some distant shore and eulogising about the 'Street Food' that they purchase from some squalid shack that nobody in their right mind would go anywhere near.
If you want street food, buy a Greggs steak bake and eat it as you walk down the pavement.
A Cornish pasty surely?
Isn't that what strip-tease artiste's in St Ives's burlesque houses used to wear - strategically?
That's a Cornish patsy. But she really needs two for the full benefit.
Seriously though, is there anything finer than a hot Cornish pasty on cold winter's day?
It seems then those convicted as a result of the Post Office scandal are to have their convictions overturned via legislation.
Yes, that doesn't sit well with me either. It sets a dangerous precedent and a prime example of the road to hell being paved with good intentions. Of course, we see Sunak playing to the populist crowd - he sees the public wanting "something" to be done to put right the scandal and he's decided using Parliament to overturn legal decisions is the right "something".
We can all accept and understand there was a miscarriage of justice which needs to be corrected but imagine how this could be misused in the future. Guilty people having their convictions overturned by legislation - imagine where that ends, yes, it could be another miscarriage like and innocent person wrongly convicted of murder but it could be a "friend" of a future Government convicted of a crime who uses his or her influence to get the conviction quashed.
The Courts have mechanisms to overturn convictions - let's use those and speed the process rather than invoke legislation.
1) Horizon data was presented in court - falsely and likely with perjury - as a system that could not make mistakes.
2) This was the primary evidence - no trial, let alone conviction, would have happened without it.
3) The Horizon software was full of bugs and errors.
4) Thus, if nothing else, all trials that relied on Horizon data to convict should be considered mistrials and commenced again if other evidence was also beyond reasonable doubt.
How this happens is academic. Perhaps we should have a case representing all sub postmasters going to the supreme court to invalidate the convictions. But that is seemingly not possible given the snails pace at which things have occured.
If a system fails we should compensate those failed by it. And then work out how to improve the system going forward such that these extraordinary measures weren't necessary.
I’ve got some questions about your post, Apologies if this has already been asked and answered that I’ve missed.
The same system still there today. There’s no plan to get rid of it. Are the problems with it over - is it tweaked and trustable now? Or just not used in court evidence?
So the scandal only refers to convictions between which dates?
I'm not sure when the last conviction was, but I'd be highly surprised if any jury accepted Horizon data as gospel in the years since its shortcomings have been public.
There's a broader question as to what extent any software can be relied upon - particularly if there's not full disclosure of all ledger entries relating to it. And proof of a cash shortfall at the aggregate level (which there wasn't).
We are forever seeing TV chefs swanning off to some distant shore and eulogising about the 'Street Food' that they purchase from some squalid shack that nobody in their right mind would go anywhere near.
If you want street food, buy a Greggs steak bake and eat it as you walk down the pavement.
A Cornish pasty surely?
Isn't that what strip-tease artiste's in St Ives's burlesque houses used to wear - strategically?
pastie - small circular flesh-coloured fabric disks used to obscure the nipple and enable striptease artists to remain within local regulations. See also merkin.
pasty - a combination of certain meat and veg folded within a strip of pastry with the open edge closed by a crimp; the crimp provides a way of holding it if your hands are dirty. Claimed as a cultural artifact by the Cornish.
also
pasty - pale wan expression worn by a Caucasian who has seen or eaten something they find disagreeable
We are forever seeing TV chefs swanning off to some distant shore and eulogising about the 'Street Food' that they purchase from some squalid shack that nobody in their right mind would go anywhere near.
If you want street food, buy a Greggs steak bake and eat it as you walk down the pavement.
Last year, I was two miles from the end of a marathon, and running through Croydon. I was really hungry, so I nipped into a Greggs, bought a sausage roll, and ate it as I jogged down the road.
To be quite clear: this was *not* a good idea...
Absolutely. Running a marathon is never a good idea.
Especially as any road through Croydon with a Greggs is almost certainly a bus route.
It is indeed very bad that Britain's first three miscarriages happened on his watch.
How do you know the three were innocent? Perhaps they are the guilty ones that Alex Chalk suggests will unfortunately be allowed through the net by his blanket acquittal.
I do wonder why these cases went to the CPS, rather than being private prosecutions. What was different about them?
But neither do we want to go to the other extreme, and suggest that because "I was DPP you know" Starmer was tangentially involved in their cases, they're guilty.
“I do wonder why these cases went to the CPS, rather than being private prosecutions. What was different about them?”
That is a good question. I’m not an expert, and I’m guessing, but maybe it’s because what everyone now trusts is unsafe convictions where the computer data was used in court, but in some instances it wasn’t the only evidence? There was other evidence. Such as CCTV showing money put into handbags gets taken straight to the police not post office? So if the police arrest you, you fall under Starmer?
Another good poll for Labour from Savanta albeit with old fieldwork (January 5-7).Interesting though to see a sharp fall in the Labour lead across the 2024 polls to date from 24 with YouGov to 16 with Redfield & Wilton though as we know that's right up there with comparing apples with bulldozers.
Let's see where the midweek polls take us and see if the PO story is getting any real traction in terms of changing votes and minds. It's unclear currently.
Savanta are usually one of the better Conservative pollsters and Labour will be happy to see their biggest lead since October last year. Savanta is a UK rather than GB pollster so the swing is 15.5% from Conservative to Labour which is still in "solid majority" territory before tactical voting.
Under normal circumstances any bad news is bad news for the incumbent. Farage's takedown of Starmer may change that.
It is indeed very bad that Britain's first three miscarriages happened on his watch.
How do you know the three were innocent? Perhaps they are the guilty ones that Alex Chalk suggests will unfortunately be allowed through the net by his blanket acquittal.
I do wonder why these cases went to the CPS, rather than being private prosecutions. What was different about them?
But neither do we want to go to the other extreme, and suggest that because "I was DPP you know" Starmer was tangentially involved in their cases, they're guilty.
If Starmer and Davey resign, and I am not suggesting they should not, and Sunak gets away scot-free with rehiring Jujitsu on manifold occasions we can safely say the country is no longer a functioning democracy. A post- democracy that is run by Farage and the Tory client media.
Farage thinks that the Labour will win the next two elections. You don’t. So he can’t be right all the time.
Can anyone point me to a link explaining how voter registration works in the USA.
I don't get this concept of needing to identify as "Republican" or "Democrat" or "Independent" in advance, and then taking part in that party's Primary, but you can also vote in the other Primary.
What is the point?
"but you can also vote in the other Primary"
Err, usually you can NOT do that. But depends on specific state law AND what it is you mean.
For example, in WA State you must pick a party in order for your presidential primary vote to count; but you are free to pick ANOTHER party at the next presidential primary.
In states with party registration, you are free to change from one to another (or neither) but there are deadlines; for example, a New Hampshire voter who is today a registered Democrat can NOT change registration and vote in 2024 Republican primary; same other way around.
However, in Iowa, voters CAN change their party registration, up to and including Caucus Night next Monday.
Also note that in states with closed party primaries (and not just presidential) dominated by one party or the other, pretty common for folks who consider themselves in one food group, to register with the opposite party, in order to vote in that party's primaries - which is where many elections are decided for practical purposes.
For example, decades ago when he lived in Louisiana, my GOPer father was a registered Democrat for just that reason. Yet he almost always voted Republican in the fall. And when he moved to another, more politially-competitive state (back then anyway) he registered as . . . wait for it . . . a Republican.
BEWARE OF "ONE SIZE FITS ALL" EXPLANATIONS!
It does occur to me that you should register for the other party, either to vote for the candidate most likely to lose, or for the candidate you consider the least objectionable should your side lose
Is literally everyone now happy with the government overriding the courts to overturn all the PO convictions btw? It's the sort of "principle" point where I'd expect somebody to rebel. Probably David Davis.
No, I think it sets a very poor precedent. It's the work of a government which couldn't be arsed until a week ago, and doesn't now want to do the hard work of sorting it out through the courts rather than parliamentary fiat.
Some of the PO victims aren't very happy about it, either.
How's it a poor precedent when its been done before?
Eg for the past decade Parliament has overridden the courts to enable the overturning of prior convictions for buggery or alternative then-illegal homosexuality convictions. In the past year, that scheme has been widened.
Parliament overriding the courts to convict would be problematic, but where there has been gross miscarriages of justice, Parliament overriding to acquit seems entirely acceptable.
JosiasJessop, have you ever considered running in the Boston Marathon?
Challenging course, from Concord to Bean Town . . . but NOT as challenging as for British runners in April 1775 . . .
The Boston marathon has fairly tough entry requirements, although I see they've gone woke by adding 'non-binary' qualifying times which are equivalent to the female ones.
Is literally everyone now happy with the government overriding the courts to overturn all the PO convictions btw? It's the sort of "principle" point where I'd expect somebody to rebel. Probably David Davis.
No, I think it sets a very poor precedent. It's the work of a government which couldn't be arsed until a week ago, and doesn't now want to do the hard work of sorting it out through the courts rather than parliamentary fiat.
Some of the PO victims aren't very happy about it, either.
How's it a poor precedent when its been done before?
Eg for the past decade Parliament has overridden the courts to enable the overturning of prior convictions for buggery or alternative then-illegal homosexuality convictions. In the past year, that scheme has been widened.
Parliament overriding the courts to convict would be problematic, but where there has been gross miscarriages of justice, Parliament overriding to acquit seems entirely acceptable.
Not quite the same thing. In those cases the criminal records were wiped, in the same way as a juvenile’s record can be, or a spent conviction under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act is. The convictions were not overturned. They were still guilty. What’s being proposed here is to change the verdict. Similar but not the same.
We are forever seeing TV chefs swanning off to some distant shore and eulogising about the 'Street Food' that they purchase from some squalid shack that nobody in their right mind would go anywhere near.
If you want street food, buy a Greggs steak bake and eat it as you walk down the pavement.
A Cornish pasty surely?
Isn't that what strip-tease artiste's in St Ives's burlesque houses used to wear - strategically?
pastie - small circular flesh-coloured fabric disks used to obscure the nipple and enable striptease artists to remain within local regulations. See also merkin.
pasty - a combination of certain meat and veg folded within a strip of pastry with the open edge closed by a crimp; the crimp provides a way of holding it if your hands are dirty. Claimed as a cultural artifact by the Cornish.
also
pasty - pale wan expression worn by a Caucasian who has seen or eaten something they find disagreeable
Is literally everyone now happy with the government overriding the courts to overturn all the PO convictions btw? It's the sort of "principle" point where I'd expect somebody to rebel. Probably David Davis.
No, I think it sets a very poor precedent. It's the work of a government which couldn't be arsed until a week ago, and doesn't now want to do the hard work of sorting it out through the courts rather than parliamentary fiat.
Some of the PO victims aren't very happy about it, either.
How's it a poor precedent when its been done before?
Eg for the past decade Parliament has overridden the courts to enable the overturning of prior convictions for buggery or alternative then-illegal homosexuality convictions. In the past year, that scheme has been widened.
Parliament overriding the courts to convict would be problematic, but where there has been gross miscarriages of justice, Parliament overriding to acquit seems entirely acceptable.
As far as the earlier case is concerned the crime for which they were convicted was decriminalised and the decriminalisation backdated.
Defrauding the Post Office remains a crime.
The context seems similar enough. They could have required people to appeal through the courts for the other scheme but didn't.
Defrauding the Post Office is a crime, but that didn't happen and it didn't happen on an industrial scale. Parliament stepping in to right the wrong seems reasonable to me - again if they were convicting over the wish of the courts to acquit that'd be different, but to provide a means to clear a miscarriage of justice seems reasonable and within precedence.
Actions like this should only ever be a one way ratchet.
Another good poll for Labour from Savanta albeit with old fieldwork (January 5-7).Interesting though to see a sharp fall in the Labour lead across the 2024 polls to date from 24 with YouGov to 16 with Redfield & Wilton though as we know that's right up there with comparing apples with bulldozers.
Let's see where the midweek polls take us and see if the PO story is getting any real traction in terms of changing votes and minds. It's unclear currently.
Savanta are usually one of the better Conservative pollsters and Labour will be happy to see their biggest lead since October last year. Savanta is a UK rather than GB pollster so the swing is 15.5% from Conservative to Labour which is still in "solid majority" territory before tactical voting.
Under normal circumstances any bad news is bad news for the incumbent. Farage's takedown of Starmer may change that.
It is indeed very bad that Britain's first three miscarriages happened on his watch.
How do you know the three were innocent? Perhaps they are the guilty ones that Alex Chalk suggests will unfortunately be allowed through the net by his blanket acquittal.
I do wonder why these cases went to the CPS, rather than being private prosecutions. What was different about them?
But neither do we want to go to the other extreme, and suggest that because "I was DPP you know" Starmer was tangentially involved in their cases, they're guilty.
If Starmer and Davey resign, and I am not suggesting they should not, and Sunak gets away scot-free with rehiring Jujitsu on manifold occasions we can safely say the country is no longer a functioning democracy. A post- democracy that is run by Farage and the Tory client media.
Farage thinks that the Labour will win the next two elections. You don’t. So he can’t be right all the time.
Perlease, I am no fan, but Farage may take down Starmer, he took down Alison Rose, and he took down the UK's post 2016 prosperity.
I wake up at night having nightmares about Sheffield Rallies and the 1992 GE. I'm not making that mistake again.
Is literally everyone now happy with the government overriding the courts to overturn all the PO convictions btw? It's the sort of "principle" point where I'd expect somebody to rebel. Probably David Davis.
No, I think it sets a very poor precedent. It's the work of a government which couldn't be arsed until a week ago, and doesn't now want to do the hard work of sorting it out through the courts rather than parliamentary fiat.
Some of the PO victims aren't very happy about it, either.
How's it a poor precedent when its been done before?
Eg for the past decade Parliament has overridden the courts to enable the overturning of prior convictions for buggery or alternative then-illegal homosexuality convictions. In the past year, that scheme has been widened.
Parliament overriding the courts to convict would be problematic, but where there has been gross miscarriages of justice, Parliament overriding to acquit seems entirely acceptable.
Not quite the same thing. In those cases the criminal records were wiped, in the same way as a juvenile’s record can be, or a spent conviction under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act is. The convictions were not overturned. They were still guilty. What’s being proposed here is to change the verdict. Similar but not the same.
IANAL but surely if the conviction is wiped, it has been overturned?
A spent conviction is completely different, it can be disregarded in certain circumstances but it still exists and could still be declared in eg an enhanced DBS check. Similarly surely sealing a juvenile's records is not the same as wiping them.
Is literally everyone now happy with the government overriding the courts to overturn all the PO convictions btw? It's the sort of "principle" point where I'd expect somebody to rebel. Probably David Davis.
No, I think it sets a very poor precedent. It's the work of a government which couldn't be arsed until a week ago, and doesn't now want to do the hard work of sorting it out through the courts rather than parliamentary fiat.
Some of the PO victims aren't very happy about it, either.
How's it a poor precedent when its been done before?
Eg for the past decade Parliament has overridden the courts to enable the overturning of prior convictions for buggery or alternative then-illegal homosexuality convictions. In the past year, that scheme has been widened.
Parliament overriding the courts to convict would be problematic, but where there has been gross miscarriages of justice, Parliament overriding to acquit seems entirely acceptable.
Not quite the same thing. In those cases the criminal records were wiped, in the same way as a juvenile’s record can be, or a spent conviction under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act is. The convictions were not overturned. They were still guilty. What’s being proposed here is to change the verdict. Similar but not the same.
The difference between "There's no reason to think that X didn't do this, and it's the fault of Parliament that it was against the law at the time when it shouldn't have been" and "Y didn't do this and it's the fault of the legal system that it concluded that they had"?
Is literally everyone now happy with the government overriding the courts to overturn all the PO convictions btw? It's the sort of "principle" point where I'd expect somebody to rebel. Probably David Davis.
No, I think it sets a very poor precedent. It's the work of a government which couldn't be arsed until a week ago, and doesn't now want to do the hard work of sorting it out through the courts rather than parliamentary fiat.
Some of the PO victims aren't very happy about it, either.
How's it a poor precedent when its been done before?
Eg for the past decade Parliament has overridden the courts to enable the overturning of prior convictions for buggery or alternative then-illegal homosexuality convictions. In the past year, that scheme has been widened.
Parliament overriding the courts to convict would be problematic, but where there has been gross miscarriages of justice, Parliament overriding to acquit seems entirely acceptable.
As far as the earlier case is concerned the crime for which they were convicted was decriminalised and the decriminalisation backdated.
Defrauding the Post Office remains a crime.
The context seems similar enough. They could have required people to appeal through the courts for the other scheme but didn't.
Defrauding the Post Office is a crime, but that didn't happen and it didn't happen on an industrial scale. Parliament stepping in to right the wrong seems reasonable to me - again if they were convicting over the wish of the courts to acquit that'd be different, but to provide a means to clear a miscarriage of justice seems reasonable and within precedence.
Actions like this should only ever be a one way ratchet.
"Defrauding the Post Office is a crime, but that didn't happen and it didn't happen on an industrial scale".
This makes as much sense as your promotion of the Laffer Curve.
Alex Chalk suggests a shortcoming of his blanket acquittal is the small percentage who were genuinely guilty also walk free as innocent men and women.
Another good poll for Labour from Savanta albeit with old fieldwork (January 5-7).Interesting though to see a sharp fall in the Labour lead across the 2024 polls to date from 24 with YouGov to 16 with Redfield & Wilton though as we know that's right up there with comparing apples with bulldozers.
Let's see where the midweek polls take us and see if the PO story is getting any real traction in terms of changing votes and minds. It's unclear currently.
Savanta are usually one of the better Conservative pollsters and Labour will be happy to see their biggest lead since October last year. Savanta is a UK rather than GB pollster so the swing is 15.5% from Conservative to Labour which is still in "solid majority" territory before tactical voting.
Under normal circumstances any bad news is bad news for the incumbent. Farage's takedown of Starmer may change that.
It is indeed very bad that Britain's first three miscarriages happened on his watch.
How do you know the three were innocent? Perhaps they are the guilty ones that Alex Chalk suggests will unfortunately be allowed through the net by his blanket acquittal.
I do wonder why these cases went to the CPS, rather than being private prosecutions. What was different about them?
But neither do we want to go to the other extreme, and suggest that because "I was DPP you know" Starmer was tangentially involved in their cases, they're guilty.
If Starmer and Davey resign, and I am not suggesting they should not, and Sunak gets away scot-free with rehiring Jujitsu on manifold occasions we can safely say the country is no longer a functioning democracy. A post- democracy that is run by Farage and the Tory client media.
I'm sorry - how important is Farage really? You and the Express may hang on his word - no one else does.
Absolutely no reason why either Starmer or Davey should resign unless every Conservative Minister involved also resigns.
Indeed. @MexicanPete is obsessed with SKS to such an extent that Big John Owls looks like a mildly interested observer of SKS in comparison.
PB is much the worse for Mexican’s predictable, repetitive bilge night after night.
We are forever seeing TV chefs swanning off to some distant shore and eulogising about the 'Street Food' that they purchase from some squalid shack that nobody in their right mind would go anywhere near.
If you want street food, buy a Greggs steak bake and eat it as you walk down the pavement.
A Cornish pasty surely?
Isn't that what strip-tease artiste's in St Ives's burlesque houses used to wear - strategically?
pastie - small circular flesh-coloured fabric disks used to obscure the nipple and enable striptease artists to remain within local regulations. See also merkin.
pasty - a combination of certain meat and veg folded within a strip of pastry with the open edge closed by a crimp; the crimp provides a way of holding it if your hands are dirty. Claimed as a cultural artifact by the Cornish.
also
pasty - pale wan expression worn by a Caucasian who has seen or eaten something they find disagreeable
Is literally everyone now happy with the government overriding the courts to overturn all the PO convictions btw? It's the sort of "principle" point where I'd expect somebody to rebel. Probably David Davis.
No, I think it sets a very poor precedent. It's the work of a government which couldn't be arsed until a week ago, and doesn't now want to do the hard work of sorting it out through the courts rather than parliamentary fiat.
Some of the PO victims aren't very happy about it, either.
How's it a poor precedent when its been done before?
Eg for the past decade Parliament has overridden the courts to enable the overturning of prior convictions for buggery or alternative then-illegal homosexuality convictions. In the past year, that scheme has been widened.
Parliament overriding the courts to convict would be problematic, but where there has been gross miscarriages of justice, Parliament overriding to acquit seems entirely acceptable.
Not quite the same thing. In those cases the criminal records were wiped, in the same way as a juvenile’s record can be, or a spent conviction under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act is. The convictions were not overturned. They were still guilty. What’s being proposed here is to change the verdict. Similar but not the same.
IANAL but surely if the conviction is wiped, it has been overturned?
A spent conviction is completely different, it can be disregarded in certain circumstances but it still exists and could still be declared in eg an enhanced DBS check.
The situation isn’t quite the same. For the various homosexual crimes, they weren’t claiming that the conviction was incorrect, just that the laws was unjust. Whereas for the post office cases, they are claiming a miscarriage of justice.
Is literally everyone now happy with the government overriding the courts to overturn all the PO convictions btw? It's the sort of "principle" point where I'd expect somebody to rebel. Probably David Davis.
No, I think it sets a very poor precedent. It's the work of a government which couldn't be arsed until a week ago, and doesn't now want to do the hard work of sorting it out through the courts rather than parliamentary fiat.
Some of the PO victims aren't very happy about it, either.
How's it a poor precedent when its been done before?
Eg for the past decade Parliament has overridden the courts to enable the overturning of prior convictions for buggery or alternative then-illegal homosexuality convictions. In the past year, that scheme has been widened.
Parliament overriding the courts to convict would be problematic, but where there has been gross miscarriages of justice, Parliament overriding to acquit seems entirely acceptable.
As far as the earlier case is concerned the crime for which they were convicted was decriminalised and the decriminalisation backdated.
Defrauding the Post Office remains a crime.
The context seems similar enough. They could have required people to appeal through the courts for the other scheme but didn't.
Defrauding the Post Office is a crime, but that didn't happen and it didn't happen on an industrial scale. Parliament stepping in to right the wrong seems reasonable to me - again if they were convicting over the wish of the courts to acquit that'd be different, but to provide a means to clear a miscarriage of justice seems reasonable and within precedence.
Actions like this should only ever be a one way ratchet.
"Defrauding the Post Office is a crime, but that didn't happen and it didn't happen on an industrial scale".
This makes as much sense as your promotion of the Laffer Curve.
Alex Chalk suggests a shortcoming of his blanket acquittal is the small percentage who were genuinely guilty also walk free as innocent men and women.
Shit happens.
Its better to acquit someone who is guilty but there's reasonable doubt, than it is to convict the innocent.
There's reasonable doubt now surely on everyone convicted under Horizon. A blanket acquittal is entirely reasonable.
Today in Parliament the PM talks about hardworking postmasters serving their communities suffering an outrageous miscarriage of justice and promises such a law. He even sends out to Tory party members the following message.
Is literally everyone now happy with the government overriding the courts to overturn all the PO convictions btw? It's the sort of "principle" point where I'd expect somebody to rebel. Probably David Davis.
No, I think it sets a very poor precedent. It's the work of a government which couldn't be arsed until a week ago, and doesn't now want to do the hard work of sorting it out through the courts rather than parliamentary fiat.
Some of the PO victims aren't very happy about it, either.
How's it a poor precedent when its been done before?
Eg for the past decade Parliament has overridden the courts to enable the overturning of prior convictions for buggery or alternative then-illegal homosexuality convictions. In the past year, that scheme has been widened.
Parliament overriding the courts to convict would be problematic, but where there has been gross miscarriages of justice, Parliament overriding to acquit seems entirely acceptable.
Not quite the same thing. In those cases the criminal records were wiped, in the same way as a juvenile’s record can be, or a spent conviction under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act is. The convictions were not overturned. They were still guilty. What’s being proposed here is to change the verdict. Similar but not the same.
IANAL but surely if the conviction is wiped, it has been overturned?
A spent conviction is completely different, it can be disregarded in certain circumstances but it still exists and could still be declared in eg an enhanced DBS check. Similarly surely sealing a juvenile's records is not the same as wiping them.
IIAL. It has the same practical effect but it is technically different. The record of the conviction is deleted but the conviction stands. It’s not the same as declaring someone acquitted. For all practical purposes it is the same but it’s not. As the link you post says -
“ Under the scheme, people who were unjustly criminalised will receive a pardon. Convictions will be deleted from official records and individuals will not be required to disclose them during court proceedings or when applying for jobs.”
Again - the conviction remains. The record of the conviction is deleted with the same effect as being overturned. As I said earlier today, a pardon is the state saying “you are/were guilty but we forgive you unconditionally”.
The practical effect is the same save that the moral satisfaction of being able to say that your conviction has been quashed is. It there.
Today in Parliament the PM talks about hardworking postmasters serving their communities suffering an outrageous miscarriage of justice and promises such a law. He even sends out to Tory party members the following message.
Anyone watch the Conservative Party Political Broadcast just now? (missed it myself)
Rishi being dishy
Hopefully not. They are using him far too much. He’s so hated and unpopular he’s suppressing the Conservative vote now.
He’s overdone the good news persona. Whatever he promises now, the instinctive reaction from voters is: believe it when we see it from him.
If they use different presenters, these adverts would be 100% better.
And before you think of replying, who’s popular in this rotten borough of a government, I’m talking fresh, different faces and voices to front the re-election campaign - Atkins, Trott, Coutinho, Badenoch, Glenn, Mourdant. Over using Rishi with his unpopularity as it is, not only suppresses effectiveness of the messaging, but it’s pushing Sunak’s own ratings further down.
Is literally everyone now happy with the government overriding the courts to overturn all the PO convictions btw? It's the sort of "principle" point where I'd expect somebody to rebel. Probably David Davis.
No, I think it sets a very poor precedent. It's the work of a government which couldn't be arsed until a week ago, and doesn't now want to do the hard work of sorting it out through the courts rather than parliamentary fiat.
Some of the PO victims aren't very happy about it, either.
How's it a poor precedent when its been done before?
Eg for the past decade Parliament has overridden the courts to enable the overturning of prior convictions for buggery or alternative then-illegal homosexuality convictions. In the past year, that scheme has been widened.
Parliament overriding the courts to convict would be problematic, but where there has been gross miscarriages of justice, Parliament overriding to acquit seems entirely acceptable.
As far as the earlier case is concerned the crime for which they were convicted was decriminalised and the decriminalisation backdated.
Defrauding the Post Office remains a crime.
The context seems similar enough. They could have required people to appeal through the courts for the other scheme but didn't.
Defrauding the Post Office is a crime, but that didn't happen and it didn't happen on an industrial scale. Parliament stepping in to right the wrong seems reasonable to me - again if they were convicting over the wish of the courts to acquit that'd be different, but to provide a means to clear a miscarriage of justice seems reasonable and within precedence.
Actions like this should only ever be a one way ratchet.
"Defrauding the Post Office is a crime, but that didn't happen and it didn't happen on an industrial scale".
This makes as much sense as your promotion of the Laffer Curve.
Alex Chalk suggests a shortcoming of his blanket acquittal is the small percentage who were genuinely guilty also walk free as innocent men and women.
One of the compelling arguments against the death penalty is it is better that guilty go free than the innocent do not. I think this same principle applies in this instance.
Beige, cheap, crap non-food for people that don’t like food.
Or alternatively: handy if you're in a hurry and want to get a quick snack to eat; like MaccyD's, it may not be high cuisine, but you know what you'll get. I quite like their egg, ham and mayo rolls. It's better quality than most supermarket sandwiches - and tastier.
Today in Parliament the PM talks about hardworking postmasters serving their communities suffering an outrageous miscarriage of justice and promises such a law. He even sends out to Tory party members the following message.
Better advice; better political instincts; better informed and ahead of others when it comes to the topics that matter and the actions to be taken.
You are perfectly entitled to some shameless self-promotion. You have driven the importance of an unwinding scandal on this site and over a lengthy timescale.
I doubted the impact it would have, nonetheless it could yet see the defenestration of two opposition leaders.
We are forever seeing TV chefs swanning off to some distant shore and eulogising about the 'Street Food' that they purchase from some squalid shack that nobody in their right mind would go anywhere near.
If you want street food, buy a Greggs steak bake and eat it as you walk down the pavement.
A Cornish pasty surely?
Isn't that what strip-tease artiste's in St Ives's burlesque houses used to wear - strategically?
That's a Cornish patsy. But she really needs two for the full benefit.
Seriously though, is there anything finer than a hot Cornish pasty on cold winter's day?
JosiasJessop, have you ever considered running in the Boston Marathon?
Challenging course, from Concord to Bean Town . . . but NOT as challenging as for British runners in April 1775 . . .
The Boston marathon has fairly tough entry requirements, although I see they've gone woke by adding 'non-binary' qualifying times which are equivalent to the female ones.
Yeah, I'd get nowhere near those times. Sadly. even for my age group. 3hr 25 is a fast time for a 50-year old IMV. If you look at (1), I think it puts you into the 'advanced' category...
We are forever seeing TV chefs swanning off to some distant shore and eulogising about the 'Street Food' that they purchase from some squalid shack that nobody in their right mind would go anywhere near.
If you want street food, buy a Greggs steak bake and eat it as you walk down the pavement.
A Cornish pasty surely?
Isn't that what strip-tease artiste's in St Ives's burlesque houses used to wear - strategically?
pastie - small circular flesh-coloured fabric disks used to obscure the nipple and enable striptease artists to remain within local regulations. See also merkin.
pasty - a combination of certain meat and veg folded within a strip of pastry with the open edge closed by a crimp; the crimp provides a way of holding it if your hands are dirty. Claimed as a cultural artifact by the Cornish.
also
pasty - pale wan expression worn by a Caucasian who has seen or eaten something they find disagreeable
Is the strip-tease pastie an American thing?
Unknown. I am often struck by the things I know that most people don't, and the things I don't know that they do. For example I once asked a colleague who was using the phrase "dry sex" what it was, a question that was received with incredulity (I genuinely didn't know). I don't know where I got the pastie info from, but the images it invokes in my mind makes me think it was from gumshoe novels set in the 30s/50s, sort of a LA Confidential vibe. It was not from personal knowledge of strippers, a field of knowledge which remains entirely academic to me, thank goodness.
I saw a little grey squirrel earlier today. I was going to lunch at the roadside caff near my home and a little squirrel popped out of a hedge. He darted back and forth but seemed uncertain, so I crossed the road and he followed me, step-by-step, using me as a shield against the traffic. When we both got to the other side I wished him good-day and he disappeared into the undergrowth
The world is full of absolutely horrible things, and thanks to this site and my inquisitive mind I know far too much about them. It is nice sometimes to reflect on the little good things in the world, and hopefully the squirrel's adventures are one of them.
Is literally everyone now happy with the government overriding the courts to overturn all the PO convictions btw? It's the sort of "principle" point where I'd expect somebody to rebel. Probably David Davis.
No, I think it sets a very poor precedent. It's the work of a government which couldn't be arsed until a week ago, and doesn't now want to do the hard work of sorting it out through the courts rather than parliamentary fiat.
Some of the PO victims aren't very happy about it, either.
How's it a poor precedent when its been done before?
Eg for the past decade Parliament has overridden the courts to enable the overturning of prior convictions for buggery or alternative then-illegal homosexuality convictions. In the past year, that scheme has been widened.
Parliament overriding the courts to convict would be problematic, but where there has been gross miscarriages of justice, Parliament overriding to acquit seems entirely acceptable.
As far as the earlier case is concerned the crime for which they were convicted was decriminalised and the decriminalisation backdated.
Defrauding the Post Office remains a crime.
The context seems similar enough. They could have required people to appeal through the courts for the other scheme but didn't.
Defrauding the Post Office is a crime, but that didn't happen and it didn't happen on an industrial scale. Parliament stepping in to right the wrong seems reasonable to me - again if they were convicting over the wish of the courts to acquit that'd be different, but to provide a means to clear a miscarriage of justice seems reasonable and within precedence.
Actions like this should only ever be a one way ratchet.
"Defrauding the Post Office is a crime, but that didn't happen and it didn't happen on an industrial scale".
This makes as much sense as your promotion of the Laffer Curve.
Alex Chalk suggests a shortcoming of his blanket acquittal is the small percentage who were genuinely guilty also walk free as innocent men and women.
One of the compelling arguments against the death penalty is it is better that guilty go free than the innocent do not. I think this same principle applies in this instance.
A serious question if you don't mind. Would you canvass and vote for a pro- capital punishment Conservative Party led by Braverman, Patel or Jenrick?
Anyway, I have pissed Anabob off, so my work is done!
We are forever seeing TV chefs swanning off to some distant shore and eulogising about the 'Street Food' that they purchase from some squalid shack that nobody in their right mind would go anywhere near.
If you want street food, buy a Greggs steak bake and eat it as you walk down the pavement.
A Cornish pasty surely?
Isn't that what strip-tease artiste's in St Ives's burlesque houses used to wear - strategically?
pastie - small circular flesh-coloured fabric disks used to obscure the nipple and enable striptease artists to remain within local regulations. See also merkin.
pasty - a combination of certain meat and veg folded within a strip of pastry with the open edge closed by a crimp; the crimp provides a way of holding it if your hands are dirty. Claimed as a cultural artifact by the Cornish.
also
pasty - pale wan expression worn by a Caucasian who has seen or eaten something they find disagreeable
Is the strip-tease pastie an American thing?
Certainly as old as the Moulin Rouge - so I'd guess even older. Though the burlesque craze a few years ago on the back of 'Betty Paige Madness' really brought it to the fore here.
Today in Parliament the PM talks about hardworking postmasters serving their communities suffering an outrageous miscarriage of justice and promises such a law. He even sends out to Tory party members the following message.
Better advice; better political instincts; better informed and ahead of others when it comes to the topics that matter and the actions to be taken.
What do you make of his plan though? How do you rate the options available, and which one would you go for?
Let’s be honest, today Sunak, under pressure to act, is making election year promises from a Primeminster and government that will no longer be in power but in opposition at the end of the year when these promises come to the crunch.
Sunak’s chosen option for justice for Wronged Postmasters has to be analysed and compared to other options, not just gone along with, as though today is the end of it. Where they were named in paper and jailed individually as crooks, they won’t be exonerated individually, could that bit be improved on? Where they are asked to sign saying they are innocent and not a crook, does that not still cast aspirations of not believing your innocence, could that bit not be improved on?
Before the website with Better advice; better political instincts; better informed and ahead of others when it comes to the topics that matter and the betterer actions to be taken, gets too carried away with itself. when the politicians, Davey, Starmer Truss and Sunak all chose the overly expensive, regressive winter payments scheme over NIESR sliding Price Cap, when I lost faith politicians can get these big calls right for the country, it wasn’t just too much of their own parties and the media, but also too much of the PB herd went along with that mistake, so we got regressive and overly expensive winter payments scheme, and didn’t question that one enough.
That's a shame, as when I was in a store earlier, it said to me: "I really love that Anabobazina off PoliticalBetting. com. I yearn for him. I want him to lick my delicious sausage roll and imbibe my scorching hot coffee, before we get undressed on top of the sizzling pizza slices so he can play with my doughy nuts..."
@kinabalu I think I saw you rhapsodising on the subject of fudge donuts earlier. If you're ever in St Andrews I recommend you get one from Fisher and Donaldson. I guarantee that it will be one of the most delicious things you ever eat.
That's a shame, as when I was in a store earlier, it said to me: "I really love that Anabobazina off PoliticalBetting. com. I yearn for him. I want him to lick my delicious sausage roll and imbibe my scorching hot coffee, before we get undressed on top of the sizzling pizza slices so he can play with my doughy nuts..."
Greggs wants you. Why do you spurn it so?
You forgot the empire biscuits, only available in Scotland, for obvious political reasons.
We are forever seeing TV chefs swanning off to some distant shore and eulogising about the 'Street Food' that they purchase from some squalid shack that nobody in their right mind would go anywhere near.
If you want street food, buy a Greggs steak bake and eat it as you walk down the pavement.
A Cornish pasty surely?
Isn't that what strip-tease artiste's in St Ives's burlesque houses used to wear - strategically?
pastie - small circular flesh-coloured fabric disks used to obscure the nipple and enable striptease artists to remain within local regulations. See also merkin.
pasty - a combination of certain meat and veg folded within a strip of pastry with the open edge closed by a crimp; the crimp provides a way of holding it if your hands are dirty. Claimed as a cultural artifact by the Cornish.
also
pasty - pale wan expression worn by a Caucasian who has seen or eaten something they find disagreeable
Is the strip-tease pastie an American thing?
Certainly as old as the Moulin Rouge - so I'd guess even older. Though the burlesque craze a few years ago on the back of 'Betty Paige Madness' really brought it to the fore here.
I don't recall ever seeing one in an American strip club, but at a birthday party a burlesque performer was invited to give a 'dance' class as entertainment, and handed them out to the guests
Beige, cheap, crap non-food for people that don’t like food.
They accept cash, too.
So what?
Fear not, they do contactless too when purchasing a vegan sausage roll. Very tasty too, but that is the nature of hot salty fat.
Regarding your second sentence, I've said it before and I'll say it again - just STOP copying content directly from my Tinder profile. It's clear breach of copyright, and I'm absolutely sick of it.
Is literally everyone now happy with the government overriding the courts to overturn all the PO convictions btw? It's the sort of "principle" point where I'd expect somebody to rebel. Probably David Davis.
No, I think it sets a very poor precedent. It's the work of a government which couldn't be arsed until a week ago, and doesn't now want to do the hard work of sorting it out through the courts rather than parliamentary fiat.
Some of the PO victims aren't very happy about it, either.
How's it a poor precedent when its been done before?
Eg for the past decade Parliament has overridden the courts to enable the overturning of prior convictions for buggery or alternative then-illegal homosexuality convictions. In the past year, that scheme has been widened.
Parliament overriding the courts to convict would be problematic, but where there has been gross miscarriages of justice, Parliament overriding to acquit seems entirely acceptable.
As far as the earlier case is concerned the crime for which they were convicted was decriminalised and the decriminalisation backdated.
Defrauding the Post Office remains a crime.
The context seems similar enough. They could have required people to appeal through the courts for the other scheme but didn't.
Defrauding the Post Office is a crime, but that didn't happen and it didn't happen on an industrial scale. Parliament stepping in to right the wrong seems reasonable to me - again if they were convicting over the wish of the courts to acquit that'd be different, but to provide a means to clear a miscarriage of justice seems reasonable and within precedence.
Actions like this should only ever be a one way ratchet.
"Defrauding the Post Office is a crime, but that didn't happen and it didn't happen on an industrial scale".
This makes as much sense as your promotion of the Laffer Curve.
Alex Chalk suggests a shortcoming of his blanket acquittal is the small percentage who were genuinely guilty also walk free as innocent men and women.
One of the compelling arguments against the death penalty is it is better that guilty go free than the innocent do not. I think this same principle applies in this instance.
A serious question if you don't mind. Would you canvass and vote for a pro- capital punishment Conservative Party led by ?
Anyway, I have pissed Anabob off, so my work is done!
No, I wouldn't. But I'd expect Braverman, Patel or Jenrick to get hammered anyway, so I'd support my current MP - the man not the Party - as he would not support such a policy. They will need MPs like him to have a basis of recovery.
Today in Parliament the PM talks about hardworking postmasters serving their communities suffering an outrageous miscarriage of justice and promises such a law. He even sends out to Tory party members the following message.
Better advice; better political instincts; better informed and ahead of others when it comes to the topics that matter and the actions to be taken.
You deserve a lot of praise for campaigning on this issue via PB and other outlets. However, the only reason that Sunak is acting on this now is because of the public response to the ITV drama.
The lesson here is that to get anything changed you must engender a public outcry - the bigger the outcry, the bigger the change. Not easy to do if you're not an ITV drama commissioner.
Is literally everyone now happy with the government overriding the courts to overturn all the PO convictions btw? It's the sort of "principle" point where I'd expect somebody to rebel. Probably David Davis.
No, I think it sets a very poor precedent. It's the work of a government which couldn't be arsed until a week ago, and doesn't now want to do the hard work of sorting it out through the courts rather than parliamentary fiat.
Some of the PO victims aren't very happy about it, either.
How's it a poor precedent when its been done before?
Eg for the past decade Parliament has overridden the courts to enable the overturning of prior convictions for buggery or alternative then-illegal homosexuality convictions. In the past year, that scheme has been widened.
Parliament overriding the courts to convict would be problematic, but where there has been gross miscarriages of justice, Parliament overriding to acquit seems entirely acceptable.
As far as the earlier case is concerned the crime for which they were convicted was decriminalised and the decriminalisation backdated.
Defrauding the Post Office remains a crime.
The context seems similar enough. They could have required people to appeal through the courts for the other scheme but didn't.
Defrauding the Post Office is a crime, but that didn't happen and it didn't happen on an industrial scale. Parliament stepping in to right the wrong seems reasonable to me - again if they were convicting over the wish of the courts to acquit that'd be different, but to provide a means to clear a miscarriage of justice seems reasonable and within precedence.
Actions like this should only ever be a one way ratchet.
"Defrauding the Post Office is a crime, but that didn't happen and it didn't happen on an industrial scale".
This makes as much sense as your promotion of the Laffer Curve.
Alex Chalk suggests a shortcoming of his blanket acquittal is the small percentage who were genuinely guilty also walk free as innocent men and women.
He’s right of course. I said the same this morning. But sometimes the needs of the innocent outweigh the obligations of the guilty. This is such a time.
JosiasJessop, have you ever considered running in the Boston Marathon?
Challenging course, from Concord to Bean Town . . . but NOT as challenging as for British runners in April 1775 . . .
The Boston marathon has fairly tough entry requirements, although I see they've gone woke by adding 'non-binary' qualifying times which are equivalent to the female ones.
Yeah, I'd get nowhere near those times. Sadly. even for my age group. 3hr 25 is a fast time for a 50-year old IMV. If you look at (1), I think it puts you into the 'advanced' category...
Is literally everyone now happy with the government overriding the courts to overturn all the PO convictions btw? It's the sort of "principle" point where I'd expect somebody to rebel. Probably David Davis.
No, I think it sets a very poor precedent. It's the work of a government which couldn't be arsed until a week ago, and doesn't now want to do the hard work of sorting it out through the courts rather than parliamentary fiat.
Some of the PO victims aren't very happy about it, either.
How's it a poor precedent when its been done before?
Eg for the past decade Parliament has overridden the courts to enable the overturning of prior convictions for buggery or alternative then-illegal homosexuality convictions. In the past year, that scheme has been widened.
Parliament overriding the courts to convict would be problematic, but where there has been gross miscarriages of justice, Parliament overriding to acquit seems entirely acceptable.
As far as the earlier case is concerned the crime for which they were convicted was decriminalised and the decriminalisation backdated.
Defrauding the Post Office remains a crime.
The context seems similar enough. They could have required people to appeal through the courts for the other scheme but didn't.
Defrauding the Post Office is a crime, but that didn't happen and it didn't happen on an industrial scale. Parliament stepping in to right the wrong seems reasonable to me - again if they were convicting over the wish of the courts to acquit that'd be different, but to provide a means to clear a miscarriage of justice seems reasonable and within precedence.
Actions like this should only ever be a one way ratchet.
"Defrauding the Post Office is a crime, but that didn't happen and it didn't happen on an industrial scale".
This makes as much sense as your promotion of the Laffer Curve.
Alex Chalk suggests a shortcoming of his blanket acquittal is the small percentage who were genuinely guilty also walk free as innocent men and women.
One of the compelling arguments against the death penalty is it is better that guilty go free than the innocent do not. I think this same principle applies in this instance.
A serious question if you don't mind. Would you canvass and vote for a pro- capital punishment Conservative Party led by Braverman, Patel or Jenrick?
Anyway, I have pissed Anabob off, so my work is done!
Go back to your supalyx, you’re losing it.
How does your heavily pushed “Rishi knocking Starmer out the park all last week” narrative sit with all last weeks polling where the Tories have dropped in everysingleone!
Anyone watch the Conservative Party Political Broadcast just now? (missed it myself)
Rishi being dishy
Hopefully not. They are using him far too much. He’s so hated and unpopular he’s suppressing the Conservative vote now.
He’s overdone the good news persona. Whatever he promises now, the instinctive reaction from voters is: believe it when we see it from him.
If they use different presenters, these adverts would be 100% better.
And before you think of replying, who’s popular in this rotten borough of a government, I’m talking fresh, different faces and voices to front the re-election campaign - Atkins, Trott, Coutinho, Badenoch, Glenn, Mourdant. Over using Rishi with his unpopularity as it is, not only suppresses effectiveness of the messaging, but it’s pushing Sunak’s own ratings further down.
Anyone disagree?
Rishi is ill-served by his spin doctors. They throw away his solid, technocrat credentials by Boris-like rants at PMQs. Today should be a triumph for the Prime Minister who at a stroke will free the Post Office 7 or 700 or 7,000, however many it is. Instead CCHQ has wrecked it by sending its allies over the top in pursuit of Keir Starmer. Instead of Good Old Rishi, it's what did Starmer do?
JosiasJessop, have you ever considered running in the Boston Marathon?
Challenging course, from Concord to Bean Town . . . but NOT as challenging as for British runners in April 1775 . . .
Frankly, no. I've never done any officially-timed run - I leave those for Mrs J, who is the runner in the family. I just go off and do my own thing (tm).
I hope to sort-of do one later in the year, as part of a sprint triathlon. If I can get the swimming right...
Well, am sure you'd be more than welcome on a Patriot Day ramble though - even sporting a Union Jack. And likely to make the cut, based on what you've posted here.
Not just a major runners race, but beloved civic institution in Middlesex AND Suffolk (counties in Mass).
IF you ever decided to try, read up first on that very first less-than-fun run. Great reasonably-recent book (can't recall author) gives virtually mile-by-mile description of the gauntlet the Redcoats had to endure on return march to Boston, with more militia arriving by the minute as news spread.
Including even Lexington militia - same men that British troops routed on the town green on the way to Concord - after somebody fired "the shot heard round the world". Who managed to shake off their shock, get their shit back together . . . and were there along the road to meet & greet when the British column returned to their town . . .
Which says volumes about their discipline and leadership, and that of the entire Massachusetts militia. Obviously NOT quite up to British Army standard; but also hardly the rabble often believe, on both sides of Atlantic (and Pacific).
Two stories that have stuck with me, about two different guys there that day, both local Mass farmers
> one a very old man, clearly cantankerous old coot, who lived along the road; when told the redcoats would soon be at his door, said (I paraphrase) damn them! an Englishman's home is his castle! Then grabbed his old gun, stood his ground, refused to cease & desist when so ordered. And died at his door.
> another farmer, younger and wiser, a veteran who'd served with British versus the French with fellow New Englanders the previous decade. He road a horse, and (it quickly transpired) was very skilled marksmen. So skilled that he rode along the edges of the column, at safe distance - for him - stopping occasionally to shot another hapless redcoat - preferably an officer.
On perhaps more positive note, pleased to inform, that YOUR odds of encountering hostile gunfire along the route are today somewhat reduced, though sadly hardly zero.
We are forever seeing TV chefs swanning off to some distant shore and eulogising about the 'Street Food' that they purchase from some squalid shack that nobody in their right mind would go anywhere near.
If you want street food, buy a Greggs steak bake and eat it as you walk down the pavement.
A Cornish pasty surely?
Isn't that what strip-tease artiste's in St Ives's burlesque houses used to wear - strategically?
That's a Cornish patsy. But she really needs two for the full benefit.
Seriously though, is there anything finer than a hot Cornish pasty on cold winter's day?
A hot bridie.
FIGHT.
Well-fired macaroni Scots pie, or vegan haggis ditto. Or both if hungry.
We are forever seeing TV chefs swanning off to some distant shore and eulogising about the 'Street Food' that they purchase from some squalid shack that nobody in their right mind would go anywhere near.
If you want street food, buy a Greggs steak bake and eat it as you walk down the pavement.
A Cornish pasty surely?
Isn't that what strip-tease artiste's in St Ives's burlesque houses used to wear - strategically?
pastie - small circular flesh-coloured fabric disks used to obscure the nipple and enable striptease artists to remain within local regulations. See also merkin.
pasty - a combination of certain meat and veg folded within a strip of pastry with the open edge closed by a crimp; the crimp provides a way of holding it if your hands are dirty. Claimed as a cultural artifact by the Cornish.
also
pasty - pale wan expression worn by a Caucasian who has seen or eaten something they find disagreeable
Am wondering, has a Cornish stripper ever worn pasty pasties as part of the act?
I’m surprised Starmer didn’t go on the Post Office scandal.
His silence has been absolutely thunderous.
Given New Labour commissioned and pushed out Horizon they're up to their necks in it. He's decided silence is the best strategy and is probably all too happy for Ed Davey to take the hit.
Can you people take responsibility for anything? It was the brainchild of Peter Lilley when he was a minister in Major's Government. Not absolving the 1997-2010 administration but, really, do some basic fact checking before spouting off will you?
Nothing wrong with my facts.
The Herd just can't stand it. They want to pretend it had nothing to do with them.
Nothing at all.
"The Herd"; "the Blob"...
Examples of Tory paranoia.
Nah, reflects our sheep-like regulars who are desperate to scrub any responsibility of Labour from the record.
There's plenty on here. We all know their names.
There is a time-value element to this which is quite important. The evidence for a huge miscarriage of justice has grown over time, as have the efforts to conceal it.
Blaming the Tories for commissioning it in the 90s is silly. Blaming the Tories for awarding Vennels a CBE in 2019 , along with Cabinet Office and NHS jobs... seems fair to me.
The basic idea of a computerised post office counter system reporting to HQ, doing the books etc was sensible. In fact, the standard way of doing things in most of retail.
The problem was
1) The implementation was crap 2) The crapness resulted in the prosecutions. 3) Managers with write-only minds failed to notice anything 4) When they did notice, they lied and covered up. Then lied and covered up. And carried on with the prosecutions. 5) As this went up the chain, so did the lying about it. Until everyone who knew was lying like Professors of Lying at Lying University in Lyingshire. 6) Meanwhile they were doing "Fuck you, pay me"* to all the SPMs
1) was required to create the disaster. But 2-6) were required to make the slow motion disaster destroy so many lives.
1) on it's own might have resulted in a handful of mistaken prosecutions, before the fuck up was corrected.
That's a good (but sad...) list. I'd just like to add two points:
*) Essentially, the cover-up caused this mess. When the PO realised something was wrong - which they must have done fairly early on - instead of admitting it and sorting it out, they lied and continued as before.
Strictly, when the PO realised something was wrong, they were willing to fund an independent investigation and fund an independent mediation scheme. Arbuthnot has said that his initial interactions with Vennells et al were constructive.
When they realised that what was wrong was a huge iceberg that would sink the entire ship, then somehow - yet to be established - they decided to obstruct and cover up. Which is shameful, and the main task of the inquiry to uncover.
Paradoxically, their original willingness to open their books is evidence that, at the top of the organisation at least, they didn’t have a full understanding of the abject shambles they were sitting on, long after it was apparent to people further down whose working lives were deep within it.
Yes, it shouldn't be forgotten that Vennells set up the independent inquiry by Second Sight voluntarily and at the PO's expense. As you indicate, it was only later when it started to report adverse findings that she backtracked.
And lest we be tempted to slag off all politicians, James Arbuthnot (my former MP) stands out like a beacon of light and reason.
Arbuthnot is on record as saying that, when he was first contacted by his constituent Jo Hamilton’s experience (now dramatised for us all), he raised it with someone he knew senior in the Federation, and was told that the system was working well and that Hamilton must be doing something wrong. So he let it rest.
Which he accepted, until some time later he got complaints from constituents that their village SPSO was closed. When he asked about it, he found out that PO auditors had suspended the postmaster because of unexplained shortfalls, and when he investigated further he discovered that this subpostmaster was new and had taken over the SPSO from another subpostmaster who had been forced out after shortfalls. That was when he connected the dots and wondered whether there might be a bigger picture.
James Arbuthnot is someone I know personally and a real hero of this story.
Part of the problem with the Tory party is they've lost people like him.
We are forever seeing TV chefs swanning off to some distant shore and eulogising about the 'Street Food' that they purchase from some squalid shack that nobody in their right mind would go anywhere near.
If you want street food, buy a Greggs steak bake and eat it as you walk down the pavement.
A Cornish pasty surely?
Isn't that what strip-tease artiste's in St Ives's burlesque houses used to wear - strategically?
That's a Cornish patsy. But she really needs two for the full benefit.
Seriously though, is there anything finer than a hot Cornish pasty on cold winter's day?
A hot bridie.
FIGHT.
Well-fired macaroni Scots pie, or vegan haggis ditto. Or both if hungry.
I took a couple of friends from Sheffield over to Arran for a trip and introduced them to Macaroni Pies. It was, I think, a life changing experience.
We are forever seeing TV chefs swanning off to some distant shore and eulogising about the 'Street Food' that they purchase from some squalid shack that nobody in their right mind would go anywhere near.
If you want street food, buy a Greggs steak bake and eat it as you walk down the pavement.
A Cornish pasty surely?
Isn't that what strip-tease artiste's in St Ives's burlesque houses used to wear - strategically?
That's a Cornish patsy. But she really needs two for the full benefit.
Seriously though, is there anything finer than a hot Cornish pasty on cold winter's day?
A hot bridie.
FIGHT.
Well-fired macaroni Scots pie, or vegan haggis ditto. Or both if hungry.
I took a couple of friends from Sheffield over to Arran for a trip and introduced them to Macaroni Pies. It was, I think, a life changing experience.
A somewhat shortened life, admittedly. But still.
I suppose you could adapt the concept and put any pasta recipe in a pie.
Today in Parliament the PM talks about hardworking postmasters serving their communities suffering an outrageous miscarriage of justice and promises such a law. He even sends out to Tory party members the following message.
Better advice; better political instincts; better informed and ahead of others when it comes to the topics that matter and the actions to be taken.
What do you make of his plan though? How do you rate the options available, and which one would you go for?
Let’s be honest, today Sunak, under pressure to act, is making election year promises from a Primeminster and government that will no longer be in power but in opposition at the end of the year when these promises come to the crunch.
Sunak’s chosen option for justice for Wronged Postmasters has to be analysed and compared to other options, not just gone along with, as though today is the end of it. Where they were named in paper and jailed individually as crooks, they won’t be exonerated individually, could that bit be improved on? Where they are asked to sign saying they are innocent and not a crook, does that not still cast aspirations of not believing your innocence, could that bit not be improved on?
Before the website with Better advice; better political instincts; better informed and ahead of others when it comes to the topics that matter and the betterer actions to be taken, gets too carried away with itself. when the politicians, Davey, Starmer Truss and Sunak all chose the overly expensive, regressive winter payments scheme over NIESR sliding Price Cap, when I lost faith politicians can get these big calls right for the country, it wasn’t just too much of their own parties and the media, but also too much of the PB herd went along with that mistake, so we got regressive and overly expensive winter payments scheme, and didn’t question that one enough.
The legislation to exonerate postmasters and promises to 'speed up payments' were all quite predictable political consequences should the post office crisis blow up, as it now has. I think that the main issue for the victims is that something actually now happens and it doesn't go back in to the long grass whilst everyone moves on to try to solve the next 'injustice'. At least with some legislation then they do get the convictions removed.
It is worth looking back at the Andrew Malkinson case last year, the guy who was jailed for 18 years but the conviction was then overturned. The government 'acted' then, setting up a public Inquiry etc. But as of last October he was living in a tent still waiting for his promised compensation.
Comments
Err, usually you can NOT do that. But depends on specific state law AND what it is you mean.
For example, in WA State you must pick a party in order for your presidential primary vote to count; but you are free to pick ANOTHER party at the next presidential primary.
In states with party registration, you are free to change from one to another (or neither) but there are deadlines; for example, a New Hampshire voter who is today a registered Democrat can NOT change registration and vote in 2024 Republican primary; same other way around.
However, in Iowa, voters CAN change their party registration, up to and including Caucus Night next Monday.
Also note that in states with closed party primaries (and not just presidential) dominated by one party or the other, pretty common for folks who consider themselves in one food group, to register with the opposite party, in order to vote in that party's primaries - which is where many elections are decided for practical purposes.
For example, decades ago when he lived in Louisiana, my GOPer father was a registered Democrat for just that reason. Yet he almost always voted Republican in the fall. And when he moved to another, more politially-competitive state (back then anyway) he registered as . . . wait for it . . . a Republican.
BEWARE OF "ONE SIZE FITS ALL" EXPLANATIONS!
2) This was the primary evidence - no trial, let alone conviction, would have happened without it.
3) The Horizon software was full of bugs and errors.
4) Thus, if nothing else, all trials that relied on Horizon data to convict should be considered mistrials and commenced again if other evidence was also beyond reasonable doubt.
How this happens is academic. Perhaps we should have a case representing all sub postmasters going to the supreme court to invalidate the convictions. But that is seemingly not possible given the snails pace at which things have occured.
If a system fails we should compensate those failed by it. And then work out how to improve the system going forward such that these extraordinary measures weren't necessary.
The same system still there today. There’s no plan to get rid of it. Are the problems with it over - is it tweaked and trustable now? Or just not used in court evidence?
So the scandal only refers to convictions between which dates?
Seriously though, is there anything finer than a hot Cornish pasty on cold winter's day?
Absolutely no reason why either Starmer or Davey should resign unless every Conservative Minister involved also resigns.
Eg for the past decade Parliament has overridden the courts to enable the overturning of prior convictions for buggery or alternative then-illegal homosexuality convictions. In the past year, that scheme has been widened.
Parliament overriding the courts to convict would be problematic, but where there has been gross miscarriages of justice, Parliament overriding to acquit seems entirely acceptable.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/more-historic-convictions-for-homosexuality-to-be-wiped
Challenging course, from Concord to Bean Town . . . but NOT as challenging as for British runners in April 1775 . . .
With marshmallows.
I hope to sort-of do one later in the year, as part of a sprint triathlon. If I can get the swimming right...
There's a broader question as to what extent any software can be relied upon - particularly if there's not full disclosure of all ledger entries relating to it. And proof of a cash shortfall at the aggregate level (which there wasn't).
- pastie - small circular flesh-coloured fabric disks used to obscure the nipple and enable striptease artists to remain within local regulations. See also merkin.
- pasty - a combination of certain meat and veg folded within a strip of pastry with the open edge closed by a crimp; the crimp provides a way of holding it if your hands are dirty. Claimed as a cultural artifact by the Cornish.
alsoThat is a good question. I’m not an expert, and I’m guessing, but maybe it’s because what everyone now trusts is unsafe convictions where the computer data was used in court, but in some instances it wasn’t the only evidence? There was other evidence. Such as CCTV showing money put into handbags gets taken straight to the police not post office? So if the police arrest you, you fall under Starmer?
As far as the earlier case is concerned the crime for which they were convicted was decriminalised and the decriminalisation backdated.
Defrauding the Post Office remains a crime.
https://www.baa.org/races/boston-marathon/qualify
Defrauding the Post Office is a crime, but that didn't happen and it didn't happen on an industrial scale. Parliament stepping in to right the wrong seems reasonable to me - again if they were convicting over the wish of the courts to acquit that'd be different, but to provide a means to clear a miscarriage of justice seems reasonable and within precedence.
Actions like this should only ever be a one way ratchet.
Beige, cheap, crap non-food for people that don’t like food.
I wake up at night having nightmares about Sheffield Rallies and the 1992 GE. I'm not making that mistake again.
A spent conviction is completely different, it can be disregarded in certain circumstances but it still exists and could still be declared in eg an enhanced DBS check. Similarly surely sealing a juvenile's records is not the same as wiping them.
This makes as much sense as your promotion of the Laffer Curve.
Alex Chalk suggests a shortcoming of his blanket acquittal is the small percentage who were genuinely guilty also walk free as innocent men and women.
PB is much the worse for Mexican’s predictable, repetitive bilge night after night.
Its better to acquit someone who is guilty but there's reasonable doubt, than it is to convict the innocent.
There's reasonable doubt now surely on everyone convicted under Horizon. A blanket acquittal is entirely reasonable.
1. I said a law should be passed overturning the subpostmasters convictions on here on 28 December 2023
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/4640786#Comment_4640786.
Today in Parliament the PM talks about hardworking postmasters serving their communities suffering an outrageous miscarriage of justice and promises such a law. He even sends out to Tory party members the following message.
2. He promises to speed up compensation payments.
Well, I urged him to do this on 8 May of last year - see here: https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2023/05/08/the-cheque-is-in-the-post/
And again on 18 July (https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2023/07/18/a-missed-opportunity/) when I also pointed out that the subpostmasters were small businesses - once the party's natural supporters, which might be a reason, on top of very many others, for doing right by them.
What took Sunak so long?
Perhaps he would do better to read this website.
Better advice; better political instincts; better informed and ahead of others when it comes to the topics that matter and the actions to be taken.
Damn hipster nonsense. (Though they do sell actual loaves of bread, which feels fairly fundamental for a bakers.)
“ Under the scheme, people who were unjustly criminalised will receive a pardon. Convictions will be deleted from official records and individuals will not be required to disclose them during court proceedings or when applying for jobs.”
Again - the conviction remains. The record of the conviction is deleted with the same effect as being overturned. As I said earlier today, a pardon is the state saying “you are/were guilty but we forgive you unconditionally”.
The practical effect is the same save that the moral satisfaction of being able to say that your conviction has been quashed is. It there.
He’s overdone the good news persona. Whatever he promises now, the instinctive reaction from voters is: believe it when we see it from him.
If they use different presenters, these adverts would be 100% better.
And before you think of replying, who’s popular in this rotten borough of a government, I’m talking fresh, different faces and voices to front the re-election campaign - Atkins, Trott, Coutinho, Badenoch, Glenn, Mourdant. Over using Rishi with his unpopularity as it is, not only suppresses effectiveness of the messaging, but it’s pushing Sunak’s own ratings further down.
Anyone disagree?
I doubted the impact it would have, nonetheless it could yet see the defenestration of two opposition leaders.
FIGHT.
(1): https://runninglevel.com/running-times/marathon-times
I saw a little grey squirrel earlier today. I was going to lunch at the roadside caff near my home and a little squirrel popped out of a hedge. He darted back and forth but seemed uncertain, so I crossed the road and he followed me, step-by-step, using me as a shield against the traffic. When we both got to the other side I wished him good-day and he disappeared into the undergrowth
The world is full of absolutely horrible things, and thanks to this site and my inquisitive mind I know far too much about them. It is nice sometimes to reflect on the little good things in the world, and hopefully the squirrel's adventures are one of them.
Anyway, I have pissed Anabob off, so my work is done!
Let’s be honest, today Sunak, under pressure to act, is making election year promises from a Primeminster and government that will no longer be in power but in opposition at the end of the year when these promises come to the crunch.
Sunak’s chosen option for justice for Wronged Postmasters has to be analysed and compared to other options, not just gone along with, as though today is the end of it. Where they were named in paper and jailed individually as crooks, they won’t be exonerated individually, could that bit be improved on? Where they are asked to sign saying they are innocent and not a crook, does that not still cast aspirations of not believing your innocence, could that bit not be improved on?
Before the website with Better advice; better political instincts; better informed and ahead of others when it comes to the topics that matter and the betterer actions to be taken, gets too carried away with itself. when the politicians, Davey, Starmer Truss and Sunak all chose the overly expensive, regressive winter payments scheme over NIESR sliding Price Cap, when I lost faith politicians can get these big calls right for the country, it wasn’t just too much of their own parties and the media, but also too much of the PB herd went along with that mistake, so we got regressive and overly expensive winter payments scheme, and didn’t question that one enough.
Greggs wants you. Why do you spurn it so?
That Anabob - what a snowflake, eh?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HW_pq4udeYQ
The lesson here is that to get anything changed you must engender a public outcry - the bigger the outcry, the bigger the change. Not easy to do if you're not an ITV drama commissioner.
How does your heavily pushed “Rishi knocking Starmer out the park all last week” narrative sit with all last weeks polling where the Tories have dropped in everysingleone!
Not just a major runners race, but beloved civic institution in Middlesex AND Suffolk (counties in Mass).
IF you ever decided to try, read up first on that very first less-than-fun run. Great reasonably-recent book (can't recall author) gives virtually mile-by-mile description of the gauntlet the Redcoats had to endure on return march to Boston, with more militia arriving by the minute as news spread.
Including even Lexington militia - same men that British troops routed on the town green on the way to Concord - after somebody fired "the shot heard round the world". Who managed to shake off their shock, get their shit back together . . . and were there along the road to meet & greet when the British column returned to their town . . .
Which says volumes about their discipline and leadership, and that of the entire Massachusetts militia. Obviously NOT quite up to British Army standard; but also hardly the rabble often believe, on both sides of Atlantic (and Pacific).
Two stories that have stuck with me, about two different guys there that day, both local Mass farmers
> one a very old man, clearly cantankerous old coot, who lived along the road; when told the redcoats would soon be at his door, said (I paraphrase) damn them! an Englishman's home is his castle! Then grabbed his old gun, stood his ground, refused to cease & desist when so ordered. And died at his door.
> another farmer, younger and wiser, a veteran who'd served with British versus the French with fellow New Englanders the previous decade. He road a horse, and (it quickly transpired) was very skilled marksmen. So skilled that he rode along the edges of the column, at safe distance - for him - stopping occasionally to shot another hapless redcoat - preferably an officer.
On perhaps more positive note, pleased to inform, that YOUR odds of encountering hostile gunfire along the route are today somewhat reduced, though sadly hardly zero.
Surely TSE can give definitive answer!
Part of the problem with the Tory party is they've lost people like him.
A somewhat shortened life, admittedly. But still.
https://scottishscran.com/scottish-macaroni-pie-recipe/
It is worth looking back at the Andrew Malkinson case last year, the guy who was jailed for 18 years but the conviction was then overturned. The government 'acted' then, setting up a public Inquiry etc. But as of last October he was living in a tent still waiting for his promised compensation.
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-67932247
HS2 to Birmingham may cost £65bn, railway boss says
The London to Birmingham stretch of the HS2 railway could cost more than £65bn in current prices, the boss of the company building it has said.
Sir Jonathan Thompson said a rise in the cost of materials such as concrete and steel over the past few years have added £8bn to £10bn.
In October the government cancelled the sections between the West Midlands, Manchester, and the East Midlands.
Now HS2 Ltd and the government disagree on the cost of building the rest.