Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Remember the 1999 Euros: Tony Blair’s LAB was 32 pc ahead i

SystemSystem Posts: 12,213
edited March 2014 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Remember the 1999 Euros: Tony Blair’s LAB was 32 pc ahead in the GE VI polls but trailed Hague’s CON by 8pts on the day

What we mustn’t forget as we approach the May Euro elections is that this is not a national vote where LAB has prospered since the introduction of the party list voting system.

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,790
    As I have said all along, this proves that UKIP will come 3rd.
  • MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    Postal votes should change that a lot imo. If that proves to be right then how much it changes the gap compared to 1999 should show how important postal votes are to labour in increasing their average certainty to vote especially in low turnout elections.
  • MillsyMillsy Posts: 900
    Are there any odds on Labour coming third?
  • O/T
    Who'd have thunk it?
    Just when everyone was seemingly writing off gold (and gold mining) as yesterday's investment, its value has increased very robustly by almost 15% in the first 10 weeks of 2014 from $1200 per oz to $1373 per oz currently, while in London, despite all the initial New Year's enthusiasm, share prices have actually fallen over this same period.
  • Right now there are tiny amounts available with Betfair at 9/1 (8.55/1 net) on the Tories winning the most seats in the forthcoming Euro Elections - I know I've just helped myself to some. With Rod Crosby's predicted crossover rapidly approaching, this could prove the year's best value bet and at worst it should prove a profitable trading chip.

    DYOR.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Ed Miliband has been a strong, competent leader of the Labour Party in many ways. He has navigated his way through party reform, tackled big business and taken on Rupert Murdoch, braving criticism and mockery in the process.

    On Wednesday, however, he made by far the biggest mistake of his leadership. As is so often the case, it came about as a direct consequence of one of his great strengths.

    Mr Miliband is highly skilled at conciliation, and bringing all sides together to create a common point of view. He has tried to do this with a new strategy on Europe, designed to please both Tony Blair and Ed Balls, big business and the unions. The result is a practical and intellectual nonsense that will delight the Conservative Party, please Ukip and profoundly damage Labour.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ed-miliband/10692783/Labours-unforced-error-on-the-EU-is-a-priceless-gift-for-its-opponents.html
  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    George Soros casts doubts on the long term viability of the EU in his new book The Tragedy of the European Union.

    He blames Germany for focusing on austerity and for failing to lead economically and says the EU may not survive long-lasting stagnation.

    www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-26541356
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,704
    The EU election is clearly not a good indicator of the GE either. Just ask PM Hague.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    In 2009 the Greens got 8% and the BNP 6%; neither party is doing well at the moment.

    Where those votes go will be interesting. I think that they are unlikely to go to the Tories. Some Greens may go Labour, but canot see BNPers going to Milibands Labour.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    My ARSE is on holiday for the Euro elections - far too much foreign intake is bad for its digestion and liable to provide unreliable outcomes.

    However my own take is that this is effectively the last hurrah to allow the punters to give the Coalition a decent kicking before the General Election when serious matters will be decided and accordingly voters will award Labour a consolation prize win with Ukip flattering to deceive in a battle for second place with the Tories. The LibDems may do a trifle better than expected but still be way off the top three.

    Lab 32% .. Con 24% .. Ukip 24% .. LibDem 10% .. Others 10%
  • VerulamiusVerulamius Posts: 1,549
    JackW said:

    My ARSE is on holiday for the Euro elections - far too much foreign intake is bad for its digestion and liable to provide unreliable outcomes.

    However my own take is that this is effectively the last hurrah to allow the punters to give the Coalition a decent kicking before the General Election when serious matters will be decided and accordingly voters will award Labour a consolation prize win with Ukip flattering to deceive in a battle for second place with the Tories. The LibDems may do a trifle better than expected but still be way off the top three.

    Lab 32% .. Con 24% .. Ukip 24% .. LibDem 10% .. Others 10%

    On that distribution in a 7 member seat it would be 3L,2U,2C. LD would only get a seat in an 8 member seat or more.

    It is possible for LD seats to go down even if they stay on the same percentage if the others are only 10%. In 2009 Others were more than 20%.

  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    JackW said:

    My ARSE is on holiday for the Euro elections - far too much foreign intake is bad for its digestion and liable to provide unreliable outcomes.

    However my own take is that this is effectively the last hurrah to allow the punters to give the Coalition a decent kicking before the General Election when serious matters will be decided and accordingly voters will award Labour a consolation prize win with Ukip flattering to deceive in a battle for second place with the Tories. The LibDems may do a trifle better than expected but still be way off the top three.

    Lab 32% .. Con 24% .. Ukip 24% .. LibDem 10% .. Others 10%

    On that distribution in a 7 member seat it would be 3L,2U,2C. LD would only get a seat in an 8 member seat or more.

    It is possible for LD seats to go down even if they stay on the same percentage if the others are only 10%. In 2009 Others were more than 20%.

    Only on the basis that the LibDems perform equally in all regions which will not be the case. Further The BNP, Greens and English Democrats will not perform as well cutting the Others figure way down.

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    "By putting the referendum pledge at the front and centre of its 2015 campaign the Conservative Party would not only be missing the chance to talk about the things most voters care about more, like the economy, jobs and public services. It would also, as far as these voters are concerned, be proving again the out-of-touchness (outness of touch?) of which it has for so long been accused."

    Yes a good summary. In some respects this has damaged the Conservatives in a different guise. Cameron's droning on and on about pasties, Leveson and gay marriage has already had the effect voters think he is out of touch with their core issues.
  • VerulamiusVerulamius Posts: 1,549
    JackW said:

    JackW said:

    My ARSE is on holiday for the Euro elections - far too much foreign intake is bad for its digestion and liable to provide unreliable outcomes.

    However my own take is that this is effectively the last hurrah to allow the punters to give the Coalition a decent kicking before the General Election when serious matters will be decided and accordingly voters will award Labour a consolation prize win with Ukip flattering to deceive in a battle for second place with the Tories. The LibDems may do a trifle better than expected but still be way off the top three.

    Lab 32% .. Con 24% .. Ukip 24% .. LibDem 10% .. Others 10%

    On that distribution in a 7 member seat it would be 3L,2U,2C. LD would only get a seat in an 8 member seat or more.

    It is possible for LD seats to go down even if they stay on the same percentage if the others are only 10%. In 2009 Others were more than 20%.

    Only on the basis that the LibDems perform equally in all regions which will not be the case. Further The BNP, Greens and English Democrats will not perform as well cutting the Others figure way down.

    True. If LD get up to 12 ( more than half the third placed party) they would get the 6th seat, assuming they are more than 1/3 of the first placed party.
  • BobaFettBobaFett Posts: 2,789
    I do wonder @ScottP whether you have opinions of your own, or whether you simply repost stuff from the press as a way of vicariously putting yourself out there. For balance, Milord has a different view
    http://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2014/03/lord-ashcroft-milibands-referendum-non-pledge-will-win-votes-for-labour-if-the-conservatives-let-it.html
  • DaemonBarberDaemonBarber Posts: 1,626
    edited March 2014
    Scott_P said:


    Mr Miliband is highly skilled at conciliation, and bringing all sides together to create a common point of view.

    This is very true, everybody I speak to thinks he's a muppet.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,789
    google suggestion for the day:

    Ian Lavery MP Michael Jackson

    and notice which two media organisations have lost their interest in racism in public life.

  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @tnewtondunn: EXCL: YouGov/Sun poll - Brits deliver thumbs down to Ed Miliband's EU referendum policy; 50% against, 32% for. http://t.co/AZHNUGsZp2
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @JoeMurphyLondon: Stand by for a cracking pre-Budget poll from our friends at @IpsosMORI in tonight's @eveningstandard It won't please Tory backbenchers
  • BobaFettBobaFett Posts: 2,789
    Scott_P said:

    @tnewtondunn: EXCL: YouGov/Sun poll - Brits deliver thumbs down to Ed Miliband's EU referendum policy; 50% against, 32% for. http://t.co/AZHNUGsZp2

    Against = Tory + Ukip so roughly in line with VI

  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    BobaFett said:

    I do wonder @ScottP whether you have opinions of your own, or whether you simply repost stuff from the press as a way of vicariously putting yourself out there. For balance, Milord has a different view
    http://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2014/03/lord-ashcroft-milibands-referendum-non-pledge-will-win-votes-for-labour-if-the-conservatives-let-it.html

    Last time I looked there were no rules about HOW people post. the fact tha Scott P seems to be getting up your nose is surely exactly what he wants, and good luck to him too.
  • EasterrossEasterross Posts: 1,915
    Morning all, did Compouter appear last night or is he busy ensuring the pogo stick pollsters revert to a Lab lead of 9% tonight?

    Euros are all about turnout as we know and it is a time when Tories in areas there are not supposed to be any Tories according to the media and the PB leftie brigade see Tories elected.

    What happens if UKIP are actually 2nd or even 3rd? It is all very well to suggest UKIP will run away with the forthcoming election but where will they actually add to the 13 seats won in 2009? Looking back at the polls before the election, generally the Tories were as usual understated and the other parties overstated.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,668
    Scott_P said:

    Ed Miliband has been a strong, competent leader of the Labour Party in many ways. He has navigated his way through party reform, tackled big business and taken on Rupert Murdoch, braving criticism and mockery in the process.

    On Wednesday, however, he made by far the biggest mistake of his leadership. As is so often the case, it came about as a direct consequence of one of his great strengths.

    Mr Miliband is highly skilled at conciliation, and bringing all sides together to create a common point of view. He has tried to do this with a new strategy on Europe, designed to please both Tony Blair and Ed Balls, big business and the unions. The result is a practical and intellectual nonsense that will delight the Conservative Party, please Ukip and profoundly damage Labour.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ed-miliband/10692783/Labours-unforced-error-on-the-EU-is-a-priceless-gift-for-its-opponents.html



    This is a very good article. However, Oborne may be making a mistake that many of those profoundly opposed to the EU make - that most voters care as much as they do about this.

    That said, there is now no doubt about it: if getting a direct say on the UK's continued EU membership really is the thing that most exercises you, there is only one practical voting choice you can make in 2015 and that is to vote Tory. But going back to the Oborne piece, it's odds on Bob Crow would not have done that.
  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    More Evidence of BBC political bias?

    The BBC’s Question Time has been accused of giving its Labour guests an easier ride than Coalition politicians.

    A leaked briefing note for host David Dimbleby revealed he was urged to ask many more questions of former Deputy Prime Minister, Lord Heseltine, than the Labour work and pensions spokesman Rachel Reeves.

    The note suggested Tory grandee Lord Heseltine be probed on trade sanctions against Russia, the Commons vote on Syria, David Cameron’s remarks in Opposition about Russian shoppers in Selfridges and Home Office minister James Brokenshire’s outburst on cheap migrant labour.

    In contrast, Miss Reeves was simply to be asked two soft questions: whether her party supported a financial bail-out for Ukraine and whether Labour agreed with the Government’s handling of the crisis.

    Lib Dem justice minister Simon Hughes was also lined up for more questions than Miss Reeves, including multiple queries about G8 talks and a Ukrainian bail-out.....

    Other guests on the show included Russian commentator Alexander Nekrassov, who later tweeted that there ‘should be an alternative question time … with an impartial presenter and all panellists given equal opportunities to speak’.

    ‘Now that the dust has settled I must say that last week’s was an appalling programme, biased and hijacked by liberals,’ he added...

    Radio 4 presenter John Humphrys admitted earlier this week that there is a ‘broadly liberal’ bias at the BBC.

    But he put this down to the BBC hiring the ‘best and the brightest’ university graduates where left-wing views were common.

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2579619/Was-Dimbleby-told-easy-Labour-guest-Question-Time-Leaked-note-reveals-presenter-urged-ask-questions-Tory-Lord-Heseltine.html#ixzz2vpRQSbmI








  • MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
    BobaFett said:

    Scott_P said:

    @tnewtondunn: EXCL: YouGov/Sun poll - Brits deliver thumbs down to Ed Miliband's EU referendum policy; 50% against, 32% for. http://t.co/AZHNUGsZp2

    Against = Tory + Ukip so roughly in line with VI

    Lab + LibDems should equal roughly 50% but EdM's policy gets 32%. He's failed in his attempted triangulation on an EU referendum.

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,668
    Financier said:

    More Evidence of BBC political bias?

    The BBC’s Question Time has been accused of giving its Labour guests an easier ride than Coalition politicians.

    A leaked briefing note for host David Dimbleby revealed he was urged to ask many more questions of former Deputy Prime Minister, Lord Heseltine, than the Labour work and pensions spokesman Rachel Reeves.

    The note suggested Tory grandee Lord Heseltine be probed on trade sanctions against Russia, the Commons vote on Syria, David Cameron’s remarks in Opposition about Russian shoppers in Selfridges and Home Office minister James Brokenshire’s outburst on cheap migrant labour.

    In contrast, Miss Reeves was simply to be asked two soft questions: whether her party supported a financial bail-out for Ukraine and whether Labour agreed with the Government’s handling of the crisis.

    Lib Dem justice minister Simon Hughes was also lined up for more questions than Miss Reeves, including multiple queries about G8 talks and a Ukrainian bail-out.....

    Other guests on the show included Russian commentator Alexander Nekrassov, who later tweeted that there ‘should be an alternative question time … with an impartial presenter and all panellists given equal opportunities to speak’.

    ‘Now that the dust has settled I must say that last week’s was an appalling programme, biased and hijacked by liberals,’ he added...

    Radio 4 presenter John Humphrys admitted earlier this week that there is a ‘broadly liberal’ bias at the BBC.

    But he put this down to the BBC hiring the ‘best and the brightest’ university graduates where left-wing views were common.

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2579619/Was-Dimbleby-told-easy-Labour-guest-Question-Time-Leaked-note-reveals-presenter-urged-ask-questions-Tory-Lord-Heseltine.html#ixzz2vpRQSbmI

    I like the way in which the Mail completely misrepresents what Humphreys said by equating liberal with left wing.

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,668
    Jonathan said:

    The EU election is clearly not a good indicator of the GE either. Just ask PM Hague.

    But it may just have become a good test of JackW's ARSE.

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514

    Gloomy report says we face massive tax rises and cuts within 2 years as politicians refuse to face up to scale of our problems and make more unfunded promises.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/10693317/UK-faces-crippling-tax-rises-and-spending-cuts-to-fund-pensions-and-healthcare.html
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,460

    Financier said:

    More Evidence of BBC political bias?

    The BBC’s Question Time has been accused of giving its Labour guests an easier ride than Coalition politicians.

    A leaked briefing note for host David Dimbleby revealed he was urged to ask many more questions of former Deputy Prime Minister, Lord Heseltine, than the Labour work and pensions spokesman Rachel Reeves.

    The note suggested Tory grandee Lord Heseltine be probed on trade sanctions against Russia, the Commons vote on Syria, David Cameron’s remarks in Opposition about Russian shoppers in Selfridges and Home Office minister James Brokenshire’s outburst on cheap migrant labour.

    In contrast, Miss Reeves was simply to be asked two soft questions: whether her party supported a financial bail-out for Ukraine and whether Labour agreed with the Government’s handling of the crisis.

    Lib Dem justice minister Simon Hughes was also lined up for more questions than Miss Reeves, including multiple queries about G8 talks and a Ukrainian bail-out.....

    Other guests on the show included Russian commentator Alexander Nekrassov, who later tweeted that there ‘should be an alternative question time … with an impartial presenter and all panellists given equal opportunities to speak’.

    ‘Now that the dust has settled I must say that last week’s was an appalling programme, biased and hijacked by liberals,’ he added...

    Radio 4 presenter John Humphrys admitted earlier this week that there is a ‘broadly liberal’ bias at the BBC.

    But he put this down to the BBC hiring the ‘best and the brightest’ university graduates where left-wing views were common.

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2579619/Was-Dimbleby-told-easy-Labour-guest-Question-Time-Leaked-note-reveals-presenter-urged-ask-questions-Tory-Lord-Heseltine.html#ixzz2vpRQSbmI

    I like the way in which the Mail completely misrepresents what Humphreys said by equating liberal with left wing.

    If this story is true and as reported (yes, I know) then the BBC does have some questions to answer. Hopefully they will be able to provide a ream of previous briefing notes that show hard questions and soft-soaping going regularly to all political parties in an unbiased manner ...
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,668
    BobaFett said:

    Scott_P said:

    @tnewtondunn: EXCL: YouGov/Sun poll - Brits deliver thumbs down to Ed Miliband's EU referendum policy; 50% against, 32% for. http://t.co/AZHNUGsZp2

    Against = Tory + Ukip so roughly in line with VI

    Not sure anything much should be read into a Tweet alone, especially from a Sun reporter who has a very specific interest in promoting a certain line on this.

  • Scott_P said:


    Mr Miliband is highly skilled at conciliation, and bringing all sides together to create a common point of view.

    This is very true, everybody I speak to thinks he's a muppet.
    You remind me of my ex-wife, who once said: "I don't understand how Thatcher's so popular - I don't know anyone who likes her".

    I replied: "the people you and I know are not typical of the electorate."

    (We divorced over something else entirely. I promise.Ttrust me.)

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514

    Financier said:

    More Evidence of BBC political bias?

    The BBC’s Question Time has been accused of giving its Labour guests an easier ride than Coalition politicians.

    A leaked briefing note for host David Dimbleby revealed he was urged to ask many more questions of former Deputy Prime Minister, Lord Heseltine, than the Labour work and pensions spokesman Rachel Reeves.

    The note suggested Tory grandee Lord Heseltine be probed on trade sanctions against Russia, the Commons vote on Syria, David Cameron’s remarks in Opposition about Russian shoppers in Selfridges and Home Office minister James Brokenshire’s outburst on cheap migrant labour.

    In contrast, Miss Reeves was simply to be asked two soft questions: whether her party supported a financial bail-out for Ukraine and whether Labour agreed with the Government’s handling of the crisis.


    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2579619/Was-Dimbleby-told-easy-Labour-guest-Question-Time-Leaked-note-reveals-presenter-urged-ask-questions-Tory-Lord-Heseltine.html#ixzz2vpRQSbmI

    I like the way in which the Mail completely misrepresents what Humphreys said by equating liberal with left wing.

    If this story is true and as reported (yes, I know) then the BBC does have some questions to answer. Hopefully they will be able to provide a ream of previous briefing notes that show hard questions and soft-soaping going regularly to all political parties in an unbiased manner ...
    It sort of raises questions about Miss Reeves as a media performer. Did she need an easy ride given the comments about her by the Newsight team ?
  • MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792

    Jonathan said:

    The EU election is clearly not a good indicator of the GE either. Just ask PM Hague.

    But it may just have become a good test of JackW's ARSE.

    JackW's ARSE isn't open for business on the EU election, as stated earlier.

  • Gloomy report says we face massive tax rises and cuts within 2 years as politicians refuse to face up to scale of our problems and make more unfunded promises.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/10693317/UK-faces-crippling-tax-rises-and-spending-cuts-to-fund-pensions-and-healthcare.html

    My brigade has to cut nearly 5 million quid over the next 3 years. We pretty much cut all the fat, lost jobs through natural wastage, and altered shift patterns to lose posts since the financial crisis. There's nowhere else to go now, apart from job loses, fewer pumps, and closed fire stations.
    Our SMT had a big pow wow last week, to thrash out a strategy. They're that desperate, that they've asked us to come up with ideas to save money. Needless to say, suggestions regarding the Chief's new car and our swanky new headquarters have not been received well.
    What concerns me the most, is that there are obviously tons of rumours flying around, but we've been told that all of the rumours are on the negotiating table.
    We live in interesting times.

  • SO [8.22am] Radio 4 presenter John Humphrys admitted earlier this week that there is a ‘broadly liberal’ bias at the BBC.

    But he put this down to the BBC hiring the ‘best and the brightest’ university graduates where left-wing views were common.


    There is a real problem here. If the Beeb tries deliberately to hire a political balance of reporters (as well as an ethnic and gender one, of course) a Flat Earther may inquire why all the successful candidates believed the Earth to be spherical. In the end, of course, it is bound to hire what is on offer. The interesting question would be to compare the politics of BBC graduates with those of other broadcasters (one should compare both applications and appointments, of course). A job for the EOC? Or has that been wound up?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,950
    edited March 2014
    Good morning, everyone.

    Betting post

    Backed Williams to top score at 5.5 (Ladbrokes).

    Mercedes are faster, but chewed up many gearboxes, Ferrari is likely slower and has a thirsty engine, McLaren and Force India appear to be slower. Williams is also the most reliable by some distance.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,668

    SO [8.22am] Radio 4 presenter John Humphrys admitted earlier this week that there is a ‘broadly liberal’ bias at the BBC.

    But he put this down to the BBC hiring the ‘best and the brightest’ university graduates where left-wing views were common.


    There is a real problem here. If the Beeb tries deliberately to hire a political balance of reporters (as well as an ethnic and gender one, of course) a Flat Earther may inquire why all the successful candidates believed the Earth to be spherical. In the end, of course, it is bound to hire what is on offer. The interesting question would be to compare the politics of BBC graduates with those of other broadcasters (one should compare both applications and appointments, of course). A job for the EOC? Or has that been wound up?

    The issue here is much more that the Mail is asserting that only left-wingers can be liberal. It's an interesting idea and one that many left-wingers love to believe; but it is, of course, a load of old rubbish.

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,668

    Financier said:

    More Evidence of BBC political bias?

    The BBC’s Question Time has been accused of giving its Labour guests an easier ride than Coalition politicians.

    A leaked briefing note for host David Dimbleby revealed he was urged to ask many more questions of former Deputy Prime Minister, Lord Heseltine, than the Labour work and pensions spokesman Rachel Reeves.

    The note suggested Tory grandee Lord Heseltine be probed on trade sanctions against Russia, the Commons vote on Syria, David Cameron’s remarks in Opposition about Russian shoppers in Selfridges and Home Office minister James Brokenshire’s outburst on cheap migrant labour.

    In contrast, Miss Reeves was simply to be asked two soft questions: whether her party supported a financial bail-out for Ukraine and whether Labour agreed with the Government’s handling of the crisis.

    Lib Dem justice minister Simon Hughes was also lined up for more questions than Miss Reeves, including multiple queries about G8 talks and a Ukrainian bail-out.....

    Other guests on the show included Russian commentator Alexander Nekrassov, who later tweeted that there ‘should be an alternative question time … with an impartial presenter and all panellists given equal opportunities to speak’.

    ‘Now that the dust has settled I must say that last week’s was an appalling programme, biased and hijacked by liberals,’ he added...

    Radio 4 presenter John Humphrys admitted earlier this week that there is a ‘broadly liberal’ bias at the BBC.

    But he put this down to the BBC hiring the ‘best and the brightest’ university graduates where left-wing views were common.

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2579619/Was-Dimbleby-told-easy-Labour-guest-Question-Time-Leaked-note-reveals-presenter-urged-ask-questions-Tory-Lord-Heseltine.html#ixzz2vpRQSbmI

    I like the way in which the Mail completely misrepresents what Humphreys said by equating liberal with left wing.

    If this story is true and as reported (yes, I know) then the BBC does have some questions to answer. Hopefully they will be able to provide a ream of previous briefing notes that show hard questions and soft-soaping going regularly to all political parties in an unbiased manner ...

    Surely the best way to decide is to watch the programme. As ever, people will see the biases they wish to see and will look for stuff that confirms their already held beliefs.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,534

    SO [8.22am] Radio 4 presenter John Humphrys admitted earlier this week that there is a ‘broadly liberal’ bias at the BBC.

    But he put this down to the BBC hiring the ‘best and the brightest’ university graduates where left-wing views were common.


    There is a real problem here. If the Beeb tries deliberately to hire a political balance of reporters (as well as an ethnic and gender one, of course) a Flat Earther may inquire why all the successful candidates believed the Earth to be spherical. In the end, of course, it is bound to hire what is on offer. The interesting question would be to compare the politics of BBC graduates with those of other broadcasters (one should compare both applications and appointments, of course). A job for the EOC? Or has that been wound up?

    The issue here is much more that the Mail is asserting that only left-wingers can be liberal. It's an interesting idea and one that many left-wingers love to believe; but it is, of course, a load of old rubbish.

    I think for the Mail (and for a lot of people) liberal = left wing.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,624

    O/T
    Who'd have thunk it?
    Just when everyone was seemingly writing off gold (and gold mining) as yesterday's investment, its value has increased very robustly by almost 15% in the first 10 weeks of 2014 from $1200 per oz to $1373 per oz currently, while in London, despite all the initial New Year's enthusiasm, share prices have actually fallen over this same period.

    When everyone is pointing in the same direction...
  • MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,668
    Sean_F said:

    SO [8.22am] Radio 4 presenter John Humphrys admitted earlier this week that there is a ‘broadly liberal’ bias at the BBC.

    But he put this down to the BBC hiring the ‘best and the brightest’ university graduates where left-wing views were common.


    There is a real problem here. If the Beeb tries deliberately to hire a political balance of reporters (as well as an ethnic and gender one, of course) a Flat Earther may inquire why all the successful candidates believed the Earth to be spherical. In the end, of course, it is bound to hire what is on offer. The interesting question would be to compare the politics of BBC graduates with those of other broadcasters (one should compare both applications and appointments, of course). A job for the EOC? Or has that been wound up?

    The issue here is much more that the Mail is asserting that only left-wingers can be liberal. It's an interesting idea and one that many left-wingers love to believe; but it is, of course, a load of old rubbish.

    I think for the Mail (and for a lot of people) liberal = left wing.

    I doubt that it does for John Humphreys. I'd expect him to be aware of what the word actually means. The fact that the Mail has decided to assume that he does not understand it rather weakens the rest of the article.

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,668

    Jonathan said:

    The EU election is clearly not a good indicator of the GE either. Just ask PM Hague.

    But it may just have become a good test of JackW's ARSE.

    JackW's ARSE isn't open for business on the EU election, as stated earlier.

    But its creator has made a prediction. You cannot remove JackW from his ARSE.

  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,033
    Yes vote also up, by the same amount I think.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,460



    I like the way in which the Mail completely misrepresents what Humphreys said by equating liberal with left wing.

    If this story is true and as reported (yes, I know) then the BBC does have some questions to answer. Hopefully they will be able to provide a ream of previous briefing notes that show hard questions and soft-soaping going regularly to all political parties in an unbiased manner ...

    Surely the best way to decide is to watch the programme. As ever, people will see the biases they wish to see and will look for stuff that confirms their already held beliefs.
    This is a briefing note, made by someone at the BBC (or perhaps production company) that shows what appears to be a large political bias. Biases are set into the program at that stage are hard to overcome.

    If, despite that, the targeted politicians perform well, then it would show just how poor their competition is. And Reeves is poor.

    As I said, perhaps this was just one show. Releasing the briefing notes for (say) the last 100 shows should allow us to see if it is a bias for one edition alone, or a long-term trend.

    I'm sure even you wouldn't condone a long-term bias towards or against any political party on the beloved BBC, would you?
  • EasterrossEasterross Posts: 1,915


    Gloomy report says we face massive tax rises and cuts within 2 years as politicians refuse to face up to scale of our problems and make more unfunded promises.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/10693317/UK-faces-crippling-tax-rises-and-spending-cuts-to-fund-pensions-and-healthcare.html

    My brigade has to cut nearly 5 million quid over the next 3 years. We pretty much cut all the fat, lost jobs through natural wastage, and altered shift patterns to lose posts since the financial crisis. There's nowhere else to go now, apart from job loses, fewer pumps, and closed fire stations.
    Our SMT had a big pow wow last week, to thrash out a strategy. They're that desperate, that they've asked us to come up with ideas to save money. Needless to say, suggestions regarding the Chief's new car and our swanky new headquarters have not been received well.
    What concerns me the most, is that there are obviously tons of rumours flying around, but we've been told that all of the rumours are on the negotiating table.
    We live in interesting times.

    Sadly we are only now really beginning to see the problems caused by Labour throwing money at the public sector in their 13 years. They didn't target it where it could do most good, only where it could create most jobs for the boys who vote for them, so acute and frontline services lost out to expanding offices and swankie furniture every time.

    At one point Highland Council seemed to be taking over every major empty office building and paid vast sums to convert them and fill them with staff. Now of course they are closing them and reducing the staff. No-one has noticed any change in the quality of service delivered at the grass roots, either better or worse but we have poshed up empty office space now.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,950
    Mr. Observer, spot on. Liberal and autocratic are like a Y axis to the X axis of right and leftwing economic perspectives.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,534
    edited March 2014
    JackW said:

    JackW said:

    My ARSE is on holiday for the Euro elections - far too much foreign intake is bad for its digestion and liable to provide unreliable outcomes.

    However my own take is that this is effectively the last hurrah to allow the punters to give the Coalition a decent kicking before the General Election when serious matters will be decided and accordingly voters will award Labour a consolation prize win with Ukip flattering to deceive in a battle for second place with the Tories. The LibDems may do a trifle better than expected but still be way off the top three.

    Lab 32% .. Con 24% .. Ukip 24% .. LibDem 10% .. Others 10%

    On that distribution in a 7 member seat it would be 3L,2U,2C. LD would only get a seat in an 8 member seat or more.

    It is possible for LD seats to go down even if they stay on the same percentage if the others are only 10%. In 2009 Others were more than 20%.

    Only on the basis that the LibDems perform equally in all regions which will not be the case. Further The BNP, Greens and English Democrats will not perform as well cutting the Others figure way down.

    I think the Greens should manage 8% or so. They have a clear, if limited niche, of secular, young, voters in poorly-paid professional occupations; plus some voters in rural areas with environmental concerns.
  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    rcs1000 said:

    O/T
    Who'd have thunk it?
    Just when everyone was seemingly writing off gold (and gold mining) as yesterday's investment, its value has increased very robustly by almost 15% in the first 10 weeks of 2014 from $1200 per oz to $1373 per oz currently, while in London, despite all the initial New Year's enthusiasm, share prices have actually fallen over this same period.

    When everyone is pointing in the same direction...
    @rcs1000

    Probably most people have missed the surge in coffee from 118 at the end of January to 204 today - but may notice the effect in the cafes soon.

    Looking at other commodity changes over the last 12 months:(ignoring changes during the period)

    Copper: 7800 to 6511
    Gold: 1600 to 1366
    West Texas Crude: 93 to 98
    Brent Crude: 109 to 108

    However, as usual some shares have done very well; e.g.
    Britvic: 425 to 727
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    edited March 2014


    Gloomy report says we face massive tax rises and cuts within 2 years as politicians refuse to face up to scale of our problems and make more unfunded promises.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/10693317/UK-faces-crippling-tax-rises-and-spending-cuts-to-fund-pensions-and-healthcare.html

    My brigade has to cut nearly 5 million quid over the next 3 years. We pretty much cut all the fat, lost jobs through natural wastage, and altered shift patterns to lose posts since the financial crisis. There's nowhere else to go now, apart from job loses, fewer pumps, and closed fire stations.
    Our SMT had a big pow wow last week, to thrash out a strategy. They're that desperate, that they've asked us to come up with ideas to save money. Needless to say, suggestions regarding the Chief's new car and our swanky new headquarters have not been received well.
    What concerns me the most, is that there are obviously tons of rumours flying around, but we've been told that all of the rumours are on the negotiating table.
    We live in interesting times.

    Maybe we could look at privatising the service. You know where instead of driving round to put out a fire, you drive up and sit on the drive and then tell the householder it will cost him a lot of money if he wants the fire put out. The middle class professionals have been doing it for years. You could call it No Fire No Fee or a bonus scheme like bankers need to get them out of bed.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,668



    I like the way in which the Mail completely misrepresents what Humphreys said by equating liberal with left wing.

    If this story is true and as reported (yes, I know) then the BBC does have some questions to answer. Hopefully they will be able to provide a ream of previous briefing notes that show hard questions and soft-soaping going regularly to all political parties in an unbiased manner ...

    Surely the best way to decide is to watch the programme. As ever, people will see the biases they wish to see and will look for stuff that confirms their already held beliefs.
    This is a briefing note, made by someone at the BBC (or perhaps production company) that shows what appears to be a large political bias. Biases are set into the program at that stage are hard to overcome.

    If, despite that, the targeted politicians perform well, then it would show just how poor their competition is. And Reeves is poor.

    As I said, perhaps this was just one show. Releasing the briefing notes for (say) the last 100 shows should allow us to see if it is a bias for one edition alone, or a long-term trend.

    I'm sure even you wouldn't condone a long-term bias towards or against any political party on the beloved BBC, would you?

    It is indeed "a briefing note". Perhaps the Mail could let us see it and explain the context within which it was prepared before we ask the BBC and the production company that produces the programme to release all the briefing notes prepared for the last 100 covering the last four years. Why the BBC or any other broadcaster should be held to account on the basis of what is demonstrably a partial report is beyond me.

  • Mr. Observer, spot on. Liberal and autocratic are like a Y axis to the X axis of right and leftwing economic perspectives.

    Indeed - I was taught that too! I think the confusion comes from mischief-making by right-wing editors (which of course is perfectly OK in & of itself) which in turn is enabled by the use of the word "liberal" in relation to morality, especially sexual morality. It's probably significant that, on this site, adjectives are mainly used for abuse - nouns and verbs to impart real information!

  • MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
    edited March 2014

    Jonathan said:

    The EU election is clearly not a good indicator of the GE either. Just ask PM Hague.

    But it may just have become a good test of JackW's ARSE.

    JackW's ARSE isn't open for business on the EU election, as stated earlier.

    But its creator has made a prediction. You cannot remove JackW from his ARSE.

    Jack's ARSE is a continent organ, its motions are fully under its master's control.
  • compouter2compouter2 Posts: 2,371

    Morning all, did Compouter appear last night or is he busy ensuring the pogo stick pollsters revert to a Lab lead of 9% tonight?

    Me and Basil meandered on with the goalposts in full view of the night shift Mr Ross

  • Gloomy report says we face massive tax rises and cuts within 2 years as politicians refuse to face up to scale of our problems and make more unfunded promises.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/10693317/UK-faces-crippling-tax-rises-and-spending-cuts-to-fund-pensions-and-healthcare.html

    My brigade has to cut nearly 5 million quid over the next 3 years. We pretty much cut all the fat, lost jobs through natural wastage, and altered shift patterns to lose posts since the financial crisis. There's nowhere else to go now, apart from job loses, fewer pumps, and closed fire stations.
    Our SMT had a big pow wow last week, to thrash out a strategy. They're that desperate, that they've asked us to come up with ideas to save money. Needless to say, suggestions regarding the Chief's new car and our swanky new headquarters have not been received well.
    What concerns me the most, is that there are obviously tons of rumours flying around, but we've been told that all of the rumours are on the negotiating table.
    We live in interesting times.

    Maybe we could look at privatising the service. You know where instead of driving round to put out a fire, you drive up and sit on the drive and then tell the householder it will cost him a lot of money if he wants the fire put out. The middle class professionals have been doing it for years. You could call it No Fire No Fee or a bonus scheme like bankers need to get them out of bed.
    We could just go entirely the other way, and not bother turning up at all. I read a study a while ago that it would be more cost effective to disband the Fire Service, and let buildings burn down and people die- the cost of the insurance payouts would be far cheaper than funding the Fire Service.
    I might put that to the Chief, then claim a consultancy fee.

  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    Jonathan said:

    The EU election is clearly not a good indicator of the GE either. Just ask PM Hague.

    But it may just have become a good test of JackW's ARSE.

    JackW's ARSE isn't open for business on the EU election, as stated earlier.

    But its creator has made a prediction. You cannot remove JackW from his ARSE.

    Not so.

    For the Euro elections my ARSE will be enjoying a cruise around the islands of the west of Scotland whilst its most modest founder and Mrs JackW will be spending quality time with some big knobs in the Chilterns.

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,668

    Jonathan said:

    The EU election is clearly not a good indicator of the GE either. Just ask PM Hague.

    But it may just have become a good test of JackW's ARSE.

    JackW's ARSE isn't open for business on the EU election, as stated earlier.

    But its creator has made a prediction. You cannot remove JackW from his ARSE.

    Jack's ARSE is a continent organ, its motions are fully under its master's control.

    Precisely!

  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,564
    FT on Miliband:

    "[W]hile there may be low political cunning in his decision, it has much to recommend it. Coming to a view on Europe may not have been the toughest challenge he has faced as Labour leader, even if his party has a modest eurosceptic wing. But his stance is far more sensible than the one set out by Mr Cameron. The prime minister's decision to commit to an arbitrary date for a referendum was an error of judgment."
  • boulayboulay Posts: 5,556
    edited March 2014
    @ easterross


    "Sadly we are only now really beginning to see the problems caused by Labour throwing money at the public sector in their 13 years. They didn't target it where it could do most good, only where it could create most jobs for the boys who vote for them, so acute and frontline services lost out to expanding offices and swankie furniture every time.

    At one point Highland Council seemed to be taking over every major empty office building and paid vast sums to convert them and fill them with staff. Now of course they are closing them and reducing the staff. No-one has noticed any change in the quality of service delivered at the grass roots, either better or worse but we have poshed up empty office space now."


    i am always amazed in the UK how government buildings and other entities aid for by the public (BBC for example) have an obsession with having swanky offices and cutting edge furniture and artwork.

    having lived in Switzerland for a long time i found that govt and cantonal offices were very functional and often shabby. they seemed to get the idea that they did not have to portray any image or "win" custom but were there to provide a necessary service.

    i do not understand why all govt or local authorities cannot be made to buy all their furniture from an approved supplier with pre-agreed standards for office chairs, desks etc. it would save an absolute fortune and hopefully stop the obsession with form over function.....

  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    edited March 2014


    Gloomy report says we face massive tax rises and cuts within 2 years as politicians refuse to face up to scale of our problems and make more unfunded promises.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/10693317/UK-faces-crippling-tax-rises-and-spending-cuts-to-fund-pensions-and-healthcare.html

    My brigade has to cut nearly 5 million quid over the next 3 years. We pretty much cut all the fat, lost jobs through natural wastage, and altered shift patterns to lose posts since the financial crisis. There's nowhere else to go now, apart from job loses, fewer pumps, and closed fire stations.
    Our SMT had a big pow wow last week, to thrash out a strategy. They're that desperate, that they've asked us to come up with ideas to save money. Needless to say, suggestions regarding the Chief's new car and our swanky new headquarters have not been received well.
    What concerns me the most, is that there are obviously tons of rumours flying around, but we've been told that all of the rumours are on the negotiating table.
    We live in interesting times.

    Sadly we are only now really beginning to see the problems caused by Labour throwing money at the public sector in their 13 years. They didn't target it where it could do most good, only where it could create most jobs for the boys who vote for them, so acute and frontline services lost out to expanding offices and swankie furniture every time.

    At one point Highland Council seemed to be taking over every major empty office building and paid vast sums to convert them and fill them with staff. Now of course they are closing them and reducing the staff. No-one has noticed any change in the quality of service delivered at the grass roots, either better or worse but we have poshed up empty office space now.
    @Easterross

    Exactly the same experience here in West Wales. Both the Welsh Assembly Government and the County Council decided to build new regional offices next door to each other (c/w subsidised staff canteens and free private parking). Each office cost around £20m and the excuse given was it would free up numerous old offices in the area and the sale of these offices would meet the cost of the new builds.

    Result about 4+ years later, plenty of old Victorian buildings are empty and still for sale and interest charges are having to be paid on the money borrowed to build these new offices.

    Council tax is going up by 5% with threats to cut education, leisure, bus services in a rural area and health services but no cuts to the numbers of, or salaries and pensions of council senior management.

  • Gloomy report says we face massive tax rises and cuts within 2 years as politicians refuse to face up to scale of our problems and make more unfunded promises.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/10693317/UK-faces-crippling-tax-rises-and-spending-cuts-to-fund-pensions-and-healthcare.html

    My brigade has to cut nearly 5 million quid over the next 3 years. We pretty much cut all the fat, lost jobs through natural wastage, and altered shift patterns to lose posts since the financial crisis. There's nowhere else to go now, apart from job loses, fewer pumps, and closed fire stations.
    Our SMT had a big pow wow last week, to thrash out a strategy. They're that desperate, that they've asked us to come up with ideas to save money. Needless to say, suggestions regarding the Chief's new car and our swanky new headquarters have not been received well.
    What concerns me the most, is that there are obviously tons of rumours flying around, but we've been told that all of the rumours are on the negotiating table.
    We live in interesting times.

    Maybe we could look at privatising the service. You know where instead of driving round to put out a fire, you drive up and sit on the drive and then tell the householder it will cost him a lot of money if he wants the fire put out. The middle class professionals have been doing it for years. You could call it No Fire No Fee or a bonus scheme like bankers need to get them out of bed.
    We could just go entirely the other way, and not bother turning up at all. I read a study a while ago that it would be more cost effective to disband the Fire Service, and let buildings burn down and people die- the cost of the insurance payouts would be far cheaper than funding the Fire Service.
    I might put that to the Chief, then claim a consultancy fee.

    ...via an Industrial Tribunal, I imagine...
  • BobaFettBobaFett Posts: 2,789

    FT on Miliband:

    "[W]hile there may be low political cunning in his decision, it has much to recommend it. Coming to a view on Europe may not have been the toughest challenge he has faced as Labour leader, even if his party has a modest eurosceptic wing. But his stance is far more sensible than the one set out by Mr Cameron. The prime minister's decision to commit to an arbitrary date for a referendum was an error of judgment."

    Hush Nick, Ed's move was an unmitigated disaster, haven't you heard?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,534

    Mr. Observer, spot on. Liberal and autocratic are like a Y axis to the X axis of right and leftwing economic perspectives.

    In general, I think most people would see support for mass immigration, European integration, and the European Convention on Human Rights as left-wing positions, although there are people with right wing economic views who support them, and people with left-wing economic views who oppose them.

  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,534


    Gloomy report says we face massive tax rises and cuts within 2 years as politicians refuse to face up to scale of our problems and make more unfunded promises.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/10693317/UK-faces-crippling-tax-rises-and-spending-cuts-to-fund-pensions-and-healthcare.html

    My brigade has to cut nearly 5 million quid over the next 3 years. We pretty much cut all the fat, lost jobs through natural wastage, and altered shift patterns to lose posts since the financial crisis. There's nowhere else to go now, apart from job loses, fewer pumps, and closed fire stations.
    Our SMT had a big pow wow last week, to thrash out a strategy. They're that desperate, that they've asked us to come up with ideas to save money. Needless to say, suggestions regarding the Chief's new car and our swanky new headquarters have not been received well.
    What concerns me the most, is that there are obviously tons of rumours flying around, but we've been told that all of the rumours are on the negotiating table.
    We live in interesting times.

    Maybe we could look at privatising the service. You know where instead of driving round to put out a fire, you drive up and sit on the drive and then tell the householder it will cost him a lot of money if he wants the fire put out. The middle class professionals have been doing it for years. You could call it No Fire No Fee or a bonus scheme like bankers need to get them out of bed.
    We could just go entirely the other way, and not bother turning up at all. I read a study a while ago that it would be more cost effective to disband the Fire Service, and let buildings burn down and people die- the cost of the insurance payouts would be far cheaper than funding the Fire Service.
    I might put that to the Chief, then claim a consultancy fee.

    You could suggest a catchy slogan:-

    "Can't Pay. Won't Live."
  • BobaFettBobaFett Posts: 2,789



    I like the way in which the Mail completely misrepresents what Humphreys said by equating liberal with left wing.

    If this story is true and as reported (yes, I know) then the BBC does have some questions to answer. Hopefully they will be able to provide a ream of previous briefing notes that show hard questions and soft-soaping going regularly to all political parties in an unbiased manner ...

    Surely the best way to decide is to watch the programme. As ever, people will see the biases they wish to see and will look for stuff that confirms their already held beliefs.
    This is a briefing note, made by someone at the BBC (or perhaps production company) that shows what appears to be a large political bias. Biases are set into the program at that stage are hard to overcome.

    If, despite that, the targeted politicians perform well, then it would show just how poor their competition is. And Reeves is poor.

    As I said, perhaps this was just one show. Releasing the briefing notes for (say) the last 100 shows should allow us to see if it is a bias for one edition alone, or a long-term trend.

    I'm sure even you wouldn't condone a long-term bias towards or against any political party on the beloved BBC, would you?

    It is indeed "a briefing note". Perhaps the Mail could let us see it and explain the context within which it was prepared before we ask the BBC and the production company that produces the programme to release all the briefing notes prepared for the last 100 covering the last four years. Why the BBC or any other broadcaster should be held to account on the basis of what is demonstrably a partial report is beyond me.

    Warning: we are in danger of this becoming a BBC/left-liberal London media conspiracy thread.

    Man has known few greater perils.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    Sean_F said:


    Gloomy report says we face massive tax rises and cuts within 2 years as politicians refuse to face up to scale of our problems and make more unfunded promises.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/10693317/UK-faces-crippling-tax-rises-and-spending-cuts-to-fund-pensions-and-healthcare.html

    My brigade has to cut nearly 5 million quid over the next 3 years. We pretty much cut all the fat, lost jobs through natural wastage, and altered shift patterns to lose posts since the financial crisis. There's nowhere else to go now, apart from job loses, fewer pumps, and closed fire stations.
    Our SMT had a big pow wow last week, to thrash out a strategy. They're that desperate, that they've asked us to come up with ideas to save money. Needless to say, suggestions regarding the Chief's new car and our swanky new headquarters have not been received well.
    What concerns me the most, is that there are obviously tons of rumours flying around, but we've been told that all of the rumours are on the negotiating table.
    We live in interesting times.

    Maybe we could look at privatising the service. You know where instead of driving round to put out a fire, you drive up and sit on the drive and then tell the householder it will cost him a lot of money if he wants the fire put out. The middle class professionals have been doing it for years. You could call it No Fire No Fee or a bonus scheme like bankers need to get them out of bed.
    We could just go entirely the other way, and not bother turning up at all. I read a study a while ago that it would be more cost effective to disband the Fire Service, and let buildings burn down and people die- the cost of the insurance payouts would be far cheaper than funding the Fire Service.
    I might put that to the Chief, then claim a consultancy fee.

    You could suggest a catchy slogan:-

    "Can't Pay. Won't Live."
    LOL
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,460



    I like the way in which the Mail completely misrepresents what Humphreys said by equating liberal with left wing.

    If this story is true and as reported (yes, I know) then the BBC does have some questions to answer. Hopefully they will be able to provide a ream of previous briefing notes that show hard questions and soft-soaping going regularly to all political parties in an unbiased manner ...

    Surely the best way to decide is to watch the programme. As ever, people will see the biases they wish to see and will look for stuff that confirms their already held beliefs.
    This is a briefing note, made by someone at the BBC (or perhaps production company) that shows what appears to be a large political bias. Biases are set into the program at that stage are hard to overcome.

    If, despite that, the targeted politicians perform well, then it would show just how poor their competition is. And Reeves is poor.

    As I said, perhaps this was just one show. Releasing the briefing notes for (say) the last 100 shows should allow us to see if it is a bias for one edition alone, or a long-term trend.

    I'm sure even you wouldn't condone a long-term bias towards or against any political party on the beloved BBC, would you?

    It is indeed "a briefing note". Perhaps the Mail could let us see it and explain the context within which it was prepared before we ask the BBC and the production company that produces the programme to release all the briefing notes prepared for the last 100 covering the last four years. Why the BBC or any other broadcaster should be held to account on the basis of what is demonstrably a partial report is beyond me.
    That is really a remarkably stupid and complacent attitude.

    Do you really think that just because it is in the Mail, it is demonstrably a partial report? Do you apply that same opinion to all stories in all newspapers, for instance the Mirror, the Guardian or the Indy?

    I don't recall you jumping up and down defending Mitchell in what was obviously a partial report in the Sun?
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Sean_F said:

    JackW said:

    JackW said:

    My ARSE is on holiday for the Euro elections - far too much foreign intake is bad for its digestion and liable to provide unreliable outcomes.

    However my own take is that this is effectively the last hurrah to allow the punters to give the Coalition a decent kicking before the General Election when serious matters will be decided and accordingly voters will award Labour a consolation prize win with Ukip flattering to deceive in a battle for second place with the Tories. The LibDems may do a trifle better than expected but still be way off the top three.

    Lab 32% .. Con 24% .. Ukip 24% .. LibDem 10% .. Others 10%

    On that distribution in a 7 member seat it would be 3L,2U,2C. LD would only get a seat in an 8 member seat or more.

    It is possible for LD seats to go down even if they stay on the same percentage if the others are only 10%. In 2009 Others were more than 20%.

    Only on the basis that the LibDems perform equally in all regions which will not be the case. Further The BNP, Greens and English Democrats will not perform as well cutting the Others figure way down.

    I think the Greens should manage 8% or so. They have a clear, if limited niche, of secular, young, voters in poorly-paid professional occupations; plus some voters in rural areas with environmental concerns.
    I think the Greens may be hit by Ukip as the latter mops up much of the "none of the above" protest vote and accordingly edge down a few points.

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,950
    Utterly OT, but not very happy with Microsoft. Just learnt about the demise of XP, which (having done no research beyond listening to a podcast on the Which? website) seems to mean I'll have to fork out for a new computer, just to be able to actually continue doing my bloody job.

    [XP won't disappear but it won't be patched anymore, making it a soft hit in security terms].

    Marvellous, bloody marvellous. I was just thinking that what I really needed was an unnecessary three figure bill and the choice between alternative operating systems which are varying degrees of shite.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,668
    Interesting developments in Italy:
    1. A new electoral law has been introduced which means that the voting threshold for Parliamentary seats has been raised to 12%.
    2. The government has announced plans for a big tax cut for everyone who earns less than 1,500 Euros per month to the effect that from May they'll get an extra 100 Euros each month.

  • BobaFettBobaFett Posts: 2,789

    Utterly OT, but not very happy with Microsoft. Just learnt about the demise of XP, which (having done no research beyond listening to a podcast on the Which? website) seems to mean I'll have to fork out for a new computer, just to be able to actually continue doing my bloody job.

    [XP won't disappear but it won't be patched anymore, making it a soft hit in security terms].

    Marvellous, bloody marvellous. I was just thinking that what I really needed was an unnecessary three figure bill and the choice between alternative operating systems which are varying degrees of shite.

    Take this opportunity to switch to Mac. You won't regret it - a far better OS than anything MS churn out.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    boulay said:


    i am always amazed in the UK how government buildings and other entities aid for by the public (BBC for example) have an obsession with having swanky offices and cutting edge furniture and artwork.

    Having seen the old DWP buildings at Longbenton, it is not always the case that Government spends money on accomodation
  • compouter2compouter2 Posts: 2,371



    I like the way in which the Mail completely misrepresents what Humphreys said by equating liberal with left wing.

    If this story is true and as reported (yes, I know) then the BBC does have some questions to answer. Hopefully they will be able to provide a ream of previous briefing notes that show hard questions and soft-soaping going regularly to all political parties in an unbiased manner ...

    Surely the best way to decide is to watch the programme. As ever, people will see the biases they wish to see and will look for stuff that confirms their already held beliefs.
    This is a briefing note, made by someone at the BBC (or perhaps production company) that shows what appears to be a large political bias. Biases are set into the program at that stage are hard to overcome.

    If, despite that, the targeted politicians perform well, then it would show just how poor their competition is. And Reeves is poor.

    As I said, perhaps this was just one show. Releasing the briefing notes for (say) the last 100 shows should allow us to see if it is a bias for one edition alone, or a long-term trend.

    I'm sure even you wouldn't condone a long-term bias towards or against any political party on the beloved BBC, would you?

    It is indeed "a briefing note". Perhaps the Mail could let us see it and explain the context within which it was prepared before we ask the BBC and the production company that produces the programme to release all the briefing notes prepared for the last 100 covering the last four years. Why the BBC or any other broadcaster should be held to account on the basis of what is demonstrably a partial report is beyond me.
    That is really a remarkably stupid and complacent attitude.

    Do you really think that just because it is in the Mail, it is demonstrably a partial report? Do you apply that same opinion to all stories in all newspapers, for instance the Mirror, the Guardian or the Indy?

    I don't recall you jumping up and down defending Mitchell in what was obviously a partial report in the Sun?
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eBT6OSr1TI
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,668



    I like the way in which the Mail completely misrepresents what Humphreys said by equating liberal with left wing.

    If this story is true and as reported (yes, I know) then the BBC does have some questions to answer. Hopefully they will be able to provide a ream of previous briefing notes that show hard questions and soft-soaping going regularly to all political parties in an unbiased manner ...

    Surely the best way to decide is to watch the programme. As ever, people will see the biases they wish to see and will look for stuff that confirms their already held beliefs.
    This is a briefing note, made by someone at the BBC (or perhaps production company) that shows what appears to be a large political bias. Biases are set into the program at that stage are hard to overcome.

    If, despite that, the targeted politicians perform well, then it would show just how poor their competition is. And Reeves is poor.

    As I said, perhaps this was just one show. Releasing the briefing notes for (say) the last 100 shows should allow us to see if it is a bias for one edition alone, or a long-term trend.

    I'm sure even you wouldn't condone a long-term bias towards or against any political party on the beloved BBC, would you?

    It is indeed "a briefing note". Perhaps the Mail could let us see it and explain the context within which it was prepared before we ask the BBC and the production company that produces the programme to release all the briefing notes prepared for the last 100 covering the last four years. Why the BBC or any other broadcaster should be held to account on the basis of what is demonstrably a partial report is beyond me.
    That is really a remarkably stupid and complacent attitude.

    Do you really think that just because it is in the Mail, it is demonstrably a partial report? Do you apply that same opinion to all stories in all newspapers, for instance the Mirror, the Guardian or the Indy?

    I don't recall you jumping up and down defending Mitchell in what was obviously a partial report in the Sun?

    I am afraid I do not agree with you. That may make me stupid, but there you go. I could label you stupid for not agreeing with me, but that would be rather childish. When I see a report that equates being "liberal" with being left-wing I see very partial journalism. Clearly you don't. We have different views. It happens.

  • BobaFett said:

    Utterly OT, but not very happy with Microsoft. Just learnt about the demise of XP, which (having done no research beyond listening to a podcast on the Which? website) seems to mean I'll have to fork out for a new computer, just to be able to actually continue doing my bloody job.

    [XP won't disappear but it won't be patched anymore, making it a soft hit in security terms].

    Marvellous, bloody marvellous. I was just thinking that what I really needed was an unnecessary three figure bill and the choice between alternative operating systems which are varying degrees of shite.

    Take this opportunity to switch to Mac. You won't regret it - a far better OS than anything MS churn out.
    It's the initial cost that stops me going to Mac. I can't afford a grand upfront, whereas you can get an acceptable Windows laptop for circa 300 quid. Couple that with all the proprietary bits you have to buy from Apple, and the cost is prohibitive.

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,950
    Mr. Fett/Mr. Stopper, I just can't afford £1,000 on a Mac.

    To be honest, I'm not exactly in the best position to spend a few hundred pounds on a desktop, but given my job is writing and I publish online I don't exactly have a choice.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406
    -- Betting Post --

    Does that dear old nan of yours not yet have a Paddy Power account ?

    If so give her a call and talk her through opening one with the 7/1 offer about "Annie Power" in the 3:20 at Chelters.
  • DaemonBarberDaemonBarber Posts: 1,626

    Scott_P said:


    Mr Miliband is highly skilled at conciliation, and bringing all sides together to create a common point of view.

    This is very true, everybody I speak to thinks he's a muppet.
    You remind me of my ex-wife, who once said: "I don't understand how Thatcher's so popular - I don't know anyone who likes her".

    I replied: "the people you and I know are not typical of the electorate."

    (We divorced over something else entirely. I promise.Ttrust me.)

    I should have used the smiley ;-)

    Naturally there is a degree of lost in translation when posting online.

    That said, my wife who is centre-left agrees that he is a muppet.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453


    It's the initial cost that stops me going to Mac. I can't afford a grand upfront, whereas you can get an acceptable Windows laptop for circa 300 quid. Couple that with all the proprietary bits you have to buy from Apple, and the cost is prohibitive.

    Brand new Mac Mini £500

    Probably get one on Ebay for less than that. Use with any keyboard monitor and mouse (An Apple keyboard would help because of the special keys, but the machine will work with any USB thing)
  • TwistedFireStopperTwistedFireStopper Posts: 2,538
    edited March 2014

    Mr. Fett/Mr. Stopper, I just can't afford £1,000 on a Mac.

    To be honest, I'm not exactly in the best position to spend a few hundred pounds on a desktop, but given my job is writing and I publish online I don't exactly have a choice.

    Have you thought about a Chromebook? My lad has one, and it's very good. Everything is online/Cloud based, apparently quite secure. Not a lot of on board storage, so a portable drive is essential.
    It's all Google/app based, so you'd need to find equivalent word processing apps and the like, though.

  • BobaFettBobaFett Posts: 2,789

    Mr. Fett/Mr. Stopper, I just can't afford £1,000 on a Mac.

    To be honest, I'm not exactly in the best position to spend a few hundred pounds on a desktop, but given my job is writing and I publish online I don't exactly have a choice.

    It's not going to cost you that much, and you may well be able to get it on finance.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    Mr. Fett/Mr. Stopper, I just can't afford £1,000 on a Mac.

    To be honest, I'm not exactly in the best position to spend a few hundred pounds on a desktop, but given my job is writing and I publish online I don't exactly have a choice.

    I'd agree with @TwistedFireStopper.

    In the Chez JackW Bunker I have a number of computers on the go. Save two, the others have all been purchased in the £250-300 range.

  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 5,818
    Labour's denial of an in/out vote on the EU may well not matter much in a general election but the timing and nature of it may cost them votes in the Euros . The tories could well sneak in top place (especially as it emphasises their in/out vote offer)
  • DaemonBarberDaemonBarber Posts: 1,626

    Utterly OT, but not very happy with Microsoft. Just learnt about the demise of XP, which (having done no research beyond listening to a podcast on the Which? website) seems to mean I'll have to fork out for a new computer, just to be able to actually continue doing my bloody job.

    [XP won't disappear but it won't be patched anymore, making it a soft hit in security terms].

    Marvellous, bloody marvellous. I was just thinking that what I really needed was an unnecessary three figure bill and the choice between alternative operating systems which are varying degrees of shite.

    Linux is free and easy to install, plus open office is much nicer than word anyway.
    If you have enough HDD space you could setup a dual boot, install ubuntu say on the 2nd partition and try it out for a while until you are happy with it.

    I'd happily talk you through the process if you like, it really isn't that hard.


  • That said, there is now no doubt about it: if getting a direct say on the UK's continued EU membership really is the thing that most exercises you, there is only one practical voting choice you can make in 2015 and that is to vote Tory.

    I respectfully disagree. Voting Tory demonstrably does not get you a say on EU membership, because

    1/ The referendum isn't till after a GE Cameron won't win
    2/ Cameron has a solid history of welshing on EU-related promises
    3/ He probably won't still be leader in 2017 even if he wins
    4/ So his successor can welsh on the promise instead, on the grounds that it was someone else's promise
    5/ Nothing binds Cameron to honour the result of a referendum even if it happens
    6/ Cameron has said he'll never take Britain out of the EU, so he has indicated in almost as many words that he'll welsh on either having a referendum or respecting its outcome
    7/ What has he indicated so far is not, even taken at face value, a prospectus for exit if the result goes that way. He'd need to invoke Article whatever, make moves to leave, and then renegotiate, none of which he has done or will do.

    The only way to get EU withdrawal is to vote for the only party that advocates it. Voting for a party that withdrawal advocates perceive as bullsh1tting them about it doesn't work.

    This leaves the BOOers with UKIP as the only choice. Voting UKIP stands a good chance of costing the Tories the next election. That in turn may make them reflect on how to stop it happening again. One way would be to remove Cameron and replace him with someone who will implement and act on an In / Out referendum.

    I don't agree with UKIP on this, but nor do I agree with Cameron or with what seems to me to be the identikit spineless Europhile "we must just put up with all this eurocr@p" attitude. I think British notice to leave the EU should be more or less permanently on the table at the councils of Europe as a negotiating position, on the basis that otherwise you have no leverage.

    An In / Out referendum result that was say 55 In 45 Out would be very handy to have, because you could then remind the other 26 that if they screw around with X Y or Z issue that matters to Britain you could quite easily spin the matter into a reversal of those positions, i.e. a No vote.
  • Scott_P said:


    It's the initial cost that stops me going to Mac. I can't afford a grand upfront, whereas you can get an acceptable Windows laptop for circa 300 quid. Couple that with all the proprietary bits you have to buy from Apple, and the cost is prohibitive.

    Brand new Mac Mini £500

    Probably get one on Ebay for less than that. Use with any keyboard monitor and mouse (An Apple keyboard would help because of the special keys, but the machine will work with any USB thing)
    Ah, yes, I'd forgotten about the Mini, I was just thinking about macbooks! Just checked it out. It doesn't look too bad.

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,950
    Mr. Barber, I had heard about Linux being free, but also that it apparently requires some tech knowledge. For someone who publishes stuff online I'm remarkably technically unaware.

    On the plus side a quick browse suggests a low/middle-end PC is a bit cheaper than I was expecting, but I'm still not happy that Microsoft being cretinous means I've got an unexpected bill. Ironic, given I had some good news yesterday (but any money from said news will be a long way off).
  • BJB [9.42am] I seem to remember that one of Heath's arguments in '75 for continuing in membership was that we'd have to abide by EU regulations anyway in order to trade with them. Doubtless you can explain why this is no longer the case.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,460



    Surely the best way to decide is to watch the programme. As ever, people will see the biases they wish to see and will look for stuff that confirms their already held beliefs.

    This is a briefing note, made by someone at the BBC (or perhaps production company) that shows what appears to be a large political bias. Biases are set into the program at that stage are hard to overcome.

    If, despite that, the targeted politicians perform well, then it would show just how poor their competition is. And Reeves is poor.

    As I said, perhaps this was just one show. Releasing the briefing notes for (say) the last 100 shows should allow us to see if it is a bias for one edition alone, or a long-term trend.

    I'm sure even you wouldn't condone a long-term bias towards or against any political party on the beloved BBC, would you?

    It is indeed "a briefing note". Perhaps the Mail could let us see it and explain the context within which it was prepared before we ask the BBC and the production company that produces the programme to release all the briefing notes prepared for the last 100 covering the last four years. Why the BBC or any other broadcaster should be held to account on the basis of what is demonstrably a partial report is beyond me.
    That is really a remarkably stupid and complacent attitude.

    Do you really think that just because it is in the Mail, it is demonstrably a partial report? Do you apply that same opinion to all stories in all newspapers, for instance the Mirror, the Guardian or the Indy?

    I don't recall you jumping up and down defending Mitchell in what was obviously a partial report in the Sun?

    I am afraid I do not agree with you. That may make me stupid, but there you go. I could label you stupid for not agreeing with me, but that would be rather childish. When I see a report that equates being "liberal" with being left-wing I see very partial journalism. Clearly you don't. We have different views. It happens.

    And you focus on a frayed thread in the carpet, whilst ignoring the elephant in the room.

    Also: you should note the difference between saying someone's comment is stupid, and saying they are stupid. You seem rather fond of equating the two ...
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453


    Ah, yes, I'd forgotten about the Mini, I was just thinking about macbooks! Just checked it out. It doesn't look too bad.

    I use one as a DVR connected to the TV

    And you can run Windows on it if you get 'homesick'
  • DaemonBarberDaemonBarber Posts: 1,626

    Mr. Barber, I had heard about Linux being free, but also that it apparently requires some tech knowledge. For someone who publishes stuff online I'm remarkably technically unaware.

    On the plus side a quick browse suggests a low/middle-end PC is a bit cheaper than I was expecting, but I'm still not happy that Microsoft being cretinous means I've got an unexpected bill. Ironic, given I had some good news yesterday (but any money from said news will be a long way off).

    Linux has had a fairly appalling history of being accessible to non techies.
    That isn't true any more. The latest distros of Ubuntu etc are actually pretty nice.
    The installer for Ubuntu will guide you through the complete dual boot process including setting up the partitions, migrating user accounts and documents.

    The real selling point from your POV is that it is free and requires no new hardware.
    All you need is enough disk space.

    Also, you will still have your XP machine and all your existing data available should you decide you don't like it.

    Why fork out on new hardware that you don't need?

  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,146
    RobD said:

    Yes vote also up, by the same amount I think.
    Yep, '39 per cent of Scots are planning to vote Yes on September 18 compared with 48 per cent who will vote No'.

    *Almost* more interestingly, 24% of Labour voters plan to vote Yes (v. 16% SNP voting No). If there's a No vote, I wonder how the the former are going to feel about their party and its part in the No campaign?

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,460

    Utterly OT, but not very happy with Microsoft. Just learnt about the demise of XP, which (having done no research beyond listening to a podcast on the Which? website) seems to mean I'll have to fork out for a new computer, just to be able to actually continue doing my bloody job.

    [XP won't disappear but it won't be patched anymore, making it a soft hit in security terms].

    Marvellous, bloody marvellous. I was just thinking that what I really needed was an unnecessary three figure bill and the choice between alternative operating systems which are varying degrees of shite.

    To defend MS: Windows XP was released in 2001, 13 years ago. Supporting and patching the OS requires massive resources. How long should they keep patching them for?

    MS supports a massive variety of hardware, from different drives, chips, BIOS, graphics / sound cards, IO, memory etc, little of which is under their command. To test the patches, they need to keep a vast array of hardware in the test labs and run the tests on them. (*) It's a very large expense for something that has brought them little or no revenue for five or six years.

    In comparison, Apple control their hardware rigorously, and have to target only their own hardware. Believe me, that's a heck of a lot easier. As I've said passim: MS's software engineering is much more impressive than Apple's for this very reason.

    (*) It's actually much more complex than that with the advent of VM's etc, but you hopefully get the general point.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,668



    Surely the best way to decide is to watch the programme. As ever, people will see the biases they wish to see and will look for stuff that confirms their already held beliefs.

    This is a briefing note, made by someone at the BBC (or perhaps production company) that shows what appears to be a large political bias. Biases are set into the program at that stage are hard to overcome.

    If, despite that, the targeted politicians perform well, then it would show just how poor their competition is. And Reeves is poor.

    As I said, perhaps this was just one show. Releasing the briefing notes for (say) the last 100 shows should allow us to see if it is a bias for one edition alone, or a long-term trend.

    I'm sure even you wouldn't condone a long-term bias towards or against any political party on the beloved BBC, would you?

    It is indeed "a briefing note". Perhaps the Mail could let us see it and explain the context within which it was prepared before we ask the BBC and the production company that produces the programme to release all the briefing notes prepared for the last 100 covering the last four years. Why the BBC or any other broadcaster should be held to account on the basis of what is demonstrably a partial report is beyond me.
    That is really a remarkably stupid and complacent attitude.

    Do you really think that just because it is in the Mail, it is demonstrably a partial report? Do you apply that same opinion to all stories in all newspapers, for instance the Mirror, the Guardian or the Indy?

    I don't recall you jumping up and down defending Mitchell in what was obviously a partial report in the Sun?

    I am afraid I do not agree with you. That may make me stupid, but there you go. I could label you stupid for not agreeing with me, but that would be rather childish. When I see a report that equates being "liberal" with being left-wing I see very partial journalism. Clearly you don't. We have different views. It happens.

    And you focus on a frayed thread in the carpet, whilst ignoring the elephant in the room.

    Also: you should note the difference between saying someone's comment is stupid, and saying they are stupid. You seem rather fond of equating the two ...
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,950
    Mr. Barber, message for you on this.

    Anyway, I'll try not to bleat about this anymore. I haven't gotten any work done today yet, and whining won't pay the bills.

    I do reserve the right to pen a short horror story involving a Microsoft executive being brutally murdered with a wiffle stick, though.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,668
    @Josias - You did not say I had made a stupid comment, you said I had a stupid attitude, which is somewhat different. What is the elephant in the room? That the Daily Mail believes the BBC is left-wing? I do not ignore that. I accept it absolutely. But I am not sure why that means the BBC should seek to spend time and resources trying to satisfy the Mail that it is not left-wing. In this case, it seems to me that the least the Mail could do is to show us the briefing document it says it has seen and explain the context within which it was issued - was it one of many, for example? How does the document compare to the actual way in which the programme was chaired? And so on. But, as I said, we clearly disagree on this, so let's not waste our own time and bore everyone else by banging on about it. I am leaving this alone now.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143

    Mr. Barber, I had heard about Linux being free, but also that it apparently requires some tech knowledge. For someone who publishes stuff online I'm remarkably technically unaware.

    On the plus side a quick browse suggests a low/middle-end PC is a bit cheaper than I was expecting, but I'm still not happy that Microsoft being cretinous means I've got an unexpected bill. Ironic, given I had some good news yesterday (but any money from said news will be a long way off).

    The simplest option is to follow our esteemed host and get yourself a Chromebook.

    Pretty much everything that most people use their computers for these days is done inside a browser, and the Chromebook sacrifices the option to install other software on the computer for being very cheap, and very fast and easy to use for that price. There's an ever-increasing amount of things that you can do through your browser without the need for additional software - for example I've been doing some Python coding on my Chromebook recently.

    Have a think about any software you use that isn't your browser and do a few web searches to see if there are alternatives that work in a browser.
  • DaemonBarberDaemonBarber Posts: 1,626

    Mr. Barber, message for you on this.

    Anyway, I'll try not to bleat about this anymore. I haven't gotten any work done today yet, and whining won't pay the bills.

    I do reserve the right to pen a short horror story involving a Microsoft executive being brutally murdered with a wiffle stick, though.

    back atcha
This discussion has been closed.