Options
Four weeks is a long time in politics – politicalbetting.com
Four weeks is a long time in politics – politicalbetting.com
#New @ABC General Election poll ? Harris 50% (+5)? Trump 45%Last poll vs Biden – ? Trump +1IPSOS #B – LV – 8/13
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Now there are lots of good reasons why you should be able to do that e.g. capture criminality, but just to embarrass people doing nothing illegal and going about their day doesn't seem fair or right.
Or something like that.
None.
You see, winning elections is like making love to a beautiful woman.
I drove sixty three miles today; I had just under three quarters of a tank when i finished. The computer said 576 miles to go
I know that the driving in the week on normal routes is less efficient than the longer distances on a Sunday, but that's a massive difference. I added fifty percent to the range of the tank
There has always been a soft social censorship that kept a sufficient lid on harmful speech, writing and behaviour that it didn't overwhelm society. Mostly. But they are too weak and to slow to do their jobs in a world where everyone can broadcast, anonymously and instantly, to millions.
But no, I don't know what we do next.
More seriously, the barrier for banning anything needs to be high. Sadly, I don't think this exceeds it.
The only way we can stay sane in a world where photos and video can be captured and shared in seconds - not to mention edited, AI-d and everything else - is to stop being so affected by this stuff. It needs to be drained of its power and importance.
A world of greater possibility requires greater tolerance.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c15gn0lq7p5o
There's one scene in there that has left me deeply traumatised, it is enough to put you off sex/women for life.
Apart from that scene it's the best Alien film since
Aliens vs Predator - RequiemAliens."I don't like you saying x" should not equate to "saying x should be illegal".
Otherwise we're on the route straight back to the middle ages.
I don't think it's appropriate to legislate for it as "extremism" - part of a broader trend to police attitude, beliefs and speech - and all sorts of things could get caught up in it, including gender critical beliefs, expressing male-centered perspectives and criticising neo-feminist doctrines.
Worse: I dont think it will do anything to solve the problem, and might even fuel it further.
However the devil is in the definition.
"It should have been a quick, simple rail journey.
Nearly two years ago, Sarah Cook hopped on a train at Wombwell Station, just outside her pet shop in South Yorkshire, to travel one stop to Barnsley. A mere six minutes.
"I tried to buy a ticket on the platform and the machine wouldn’t accept my bank card," she told the BBC. "I thought: 'It doesn’t matter, the train is here, I’ll buy one on the train.'"
Unfortunately, there was no guard on the train and when Ms Cook reached the station, transport police were scanning everyone's tickets.
When she tried to buy a ticket she was told it was "too late". So she was fined.
"The fine I appealed cause it was £20 which seemed a lot for a couple-of-pound journey and I never heard anything back."
But that wasn't the end of the story.
Nearly a year to the day later in 2023, Ms Cook received a letter telling her she was being fined £500.
"That escalated to going to court," she says. "Filling out a lot of forms, pleading guilty, pleading not guilty, the threat of a criminal record, the threat of a bigger fine, the threat of jail time, up to two years."
In the end, she did have to fork out some money. "After the threat of everything else, it was a ginormous £4," she says.
It turns out Ms Cook wasn't the only one caught out.
Last week, a ruling by the chief magistrate for England and Wales found the prosecutions by rail companies against Ms Cook and five other people were "unlawful" and declared them void.
As a result, an estimated 74,000 other cases will be re-examined. If rail companies are found to have acted unlawfully in those instances, prosecutions could be quashed and fines could be refunded.
For Ms Cook the ruling "feels good"."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn7lxjz3ek3o
Have you not come across the work of Andrew and Tristan Tate?
Or she could have selected the promise to pay option at the ticket machine.
It's how tyranny is built bit by bit.
Andrew Tate, Tristan Tate and their millions of followers?
The work of Andrew Tate leaches into other vile prejudice. Where did Nigel Farage claim he learned that the guy who murdered the little girls in Southport was a Syrian refugee? Answer: Andrew Tate's X account.
I wonder if it's a problem with the British Transport Police, as the story states? Or whether there's other factors, e.g. the member of the public appearing shifty or impolite?
At Manchester Piccadilly there are barriers and station staff who have machines to take your payment.
I spoke to staff a while back and they get to recognise repeat offenders, the trick is to say 'Oh I got on Stockport' when the reality is they got on at Stoke, this is backed up on CCTV using footfall.
The debate is about 'extreme' misogyny, which is clear from the BBC article but not from the misleading headline.
These things sound all very well in principle, less workable (or more open to abuse) in practice.
Eg your intro of it as "more speech banning".
"I am a pacifist and no threat to you whatsoever. But I hate you, you are a c...; I hate all women and you especially; you should all f... off. I would much prefer it if you and your baby die of something painful, and very soon."
I think this speech should be an offence. (Abusive and insulting behaviour). SFAICS the total free speech brigade would think that's OK. Is it?
On Sunday, former president and GOP nominee Donald Trump took to social media to declare the images of a large crowd were “fake” and “There was nobody there!” Others picked up Trump’s cries and questioned MLive’s photos of the event on social media posts.
MLive had four journalists there. They are real, living people, as were the 15,000 or so other bodies that were jammed into and around a hangar. We have it documented in photos and videos, as do other media that were there.
https://www.mlive.com/news/2024/08/letter-from-the-editor-dont-accuse-us-of-doctoring-photos-just-because-an-image-challenges-your-beliefs.html
The US has literally gone mad by falling for Trump and his cult. Literally don't want to believe the world as it exists. They want to believe a pathological liar. How can an advanced, technologically rich, well educated democracy fall for this shit?
It is just so astounding at times one wants to pinch oneself to see if this is all just a nightmare.
This all seems like a bit of the aftermath of the David Amess murder, in which an islamic extremis sought out his surgery and slaughtered him. This some how become, not a consequence of radical Islam but about social media abuse. Nothing to do with the murder could be attributed to social media abuse, yet a law was but a law was demanded in the name of David.
"here's a complicated problem, but lets all clear our throats and ban something else unrelated instead".
We could even have some through the looking glass public information films in which young black and Indian women are harassed by young white men. A recreation of an election count in which a successful black newly elected MP is shouted down and drowned out by lots of fat male white supremacists.
See: pornography.
Although in your purely hypothetical example, I'd argue the guy needs treatment rather than punishment.
Guardian
Let's hope he doesn't take Graham's advice.
I think there are genuine issue of young men who appear to be failing to operate normally in society and more moderate people like Chris Williamson have discussed this issue.
I think I know why but it's not easy to explain. So it will have to wait until I have a good hair day.
What we have now is the bit of the con that the conman relies on- where the victim ties themselves up in knots because the alternative is to admit that they were conned.
(Actually, that's been the case since January, 2021. That should have ruled him out of anything. But it's got even more pitiful over the last 3.5 years.)
(Trump, and the American response to him, does show the limits of "the answer to lies is to tell the truth" as an answer to the problem of Free Speech.)
I decided to make my own cream cheese
I started with a pint of full fat natural yoghurt. I added chopped dill and chives, lemon zest and horseradish. I wanted to use fresh but couldn't find any so used a strong horseradish sauce brand
Once well mixed add and mix a teaspoon of salt, then transfer to a muslin bag over a funnel in a bowl, tie the top, cover and leave in the fridge overnight
In the morning you have the best and freshest cream cheese, flavoured perfectly for smoked salmon
I have seen guys there just getting off the train and legging it when confronted by a collector.
There is no incitement and no threat. It is pure vituperation and a verbal expression to another of a lawful (though of course vile) opinion. I think it should be an offence.
I think the better approach is changing the culture through education and developing a shared understanding of what is acceptable behaviour and what is not. It takes time, and commitment, though. I don't think legislation is the answer.
And that's where you are wrong.
Women are not better drivers than men, they just drive fewer miles on average.
And yes, I am fairly ultra old fashioned liberal.
Which PB posters do you think want all criticism of immigration outlawed?
I do know that Tate business funnel is say outlandish stutt, get clicks, upsell you subscription to some very boring, poor value, but not really a scam set of courses about business, stock trading etc that aren't taught be him and nothing like the bitches and whores stuff he posts on social media.
Calling someone racist, if you think they are, is in itself an exercise in free speech.
Being liberal means I can think someone is a racist without wanting their speech to be outlawed.
Being liberal equally means I can express myself by calling someone racist if that's what I think they are.
Of the tone of the 2016 Republican presidential campaign, and the advertising dollars it delivered, Moonves said, "It may not be good for America, but it's damn good for CBS ... Man, who would have expected the ride we're all having right now? ... The money's rolling in and this is fun ... I've never seen anything like this, and this [is] going to be a very good year for us. Sorry. It's a terrible thing to say. But, bring it on, Donald. Keep going."[28] He added, "Donald's place in this election is a good thing."'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Les_Moonves
(It would be interesting to see how much more TV coverage Trump got in that primary campaign than the other candidates. I haven't checked recently, but I believe he received more than all the other candidates -- combined.)
Tell me one person who does criticise such levels of immigration and is spared these labels
. . . The U.S. government has embarked on a broad crackdown against election betting, relying on a mix of newly proposed rules and ongoing court cases to try to stamp out a nascent industry that critics call a potential threat to democracy. . . .
“To me, it is enormous corruption,” said Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., who expressed fear that well-heeled political or corporate interests could someday come to think, “Hey, I will spend millions of dollars smearing some candidate to make sure the candidate I bet on wins.”
The regulatory push is the work of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), whose chairman, Rostin Behnam, has pursued rules that would ban election-related betting on commercial exchanges under its watch. Citing a lack of staff and resources, the agency has argued it is not equipped to serve as an election watchdog and monitor political markets for fraud or manipulation.
The CFTC ratcheted up its crackdown two years ago, moving to halt election betting on PredictIt, a nonprofit that has continued to operate even as it squares off with the government in court. Federal regulators last year also rejected an application from KalshiEx, a regulated exchange that permits users to place bets on a wide variety of future events, such as inclement weather and SpaceX rocket launches. Kalshi had hoped to allow wagers — up to $100 million, in limited cases — on party control of Congress. Denied by the government, it filed its own lawsuit against the CFTC.
SSI - Short exerpt from looooong article.
by demonstrating that the defendant intentionally encouraged or assisted an offence, and that their behaviour was capable of actually persuading another person to
commit that offence. This is determined based on the circumstances and the type of statements or actions involved. So encouraging someone to assault an identifiable person will get a conviction, not saying “x crime should be legal”.
However, there’s a crime of inciting hatred against other ethnic groups e.g. advocating that a group should be eliminated or enslaved. Women are not covered by that. The new legislation, I think, expand that. That would mean that advocating rape would come under that general heading rather than incitement to commit an offence.