Mr. F, I still recall Oaten's comments on pb.com. Whilst I still find his actions inexplicable, it's a worthy reminder that the people we cheer and deride are men of flesh and blood, and that it's good to try and consider if we would say to their face the same words we write about them.
I remember people making posts along the lines of "OMG, I've just discovered what he paid extra for!"
Mr. F, I still recall Oaten's comments on pb.com. Whilst I still find his actions inexplicable, it's a worthy reminder that the people we cheer and deride are men of flesh and blood, and that it's good to try and consider if we would say to their face the same words we write about them.
I have no problem with that Mr. D., there is nothing I have written on here or anywhere else about any politician that I wouldn't say to their face if given the chance.
On Mr. Eagles point below,
"Clegg = Hannibal"
One can only hope that Clegg suffers the same fate; that is to be rejected by his own kind, take up a mercenary post in the service of a ruler in the Levant (Assad?) before finally topping himself when he realises what a loser he is and what a failure his life has been.
Haha!! The fact check bloke on BBC was asked about the "7% or 75% of laws made in EU" claims.. he said you could only get it to 50% so 75% was a bit high...
Its bloody closer than 7 isn't it?!!
Yes, the BBC struggle with materiality when they need to in order to sustain their argument too.
Not really.
It depends on what your definitions are where you place it, but the 75% is just utter bollocks. ~50% being as high a figure as you can make it.
Their own fact checker says 50% which was the number Farage used, and then they focussed on the fact that Farage also briefly mentioned an EU commission estimate of 75%. You think that is more noteworth and incorrect than Clegg trying to shut down the entire debate with a 7% figure which is little better than a lie, so narrow and weasily a definition of 'law' and 'from Europe' does it take.
I'd say how could they poll for such a stupid question, but I have seen some stupider ones in polls before in fairness.
It's the important question. The answer, of course, is no one sane noticed.
No it is not an important question, because as everyone sane has pointed out innumerable times in the past few weeks, hardly anyone notices anything to do with politics, so bringing that argument out for this event alone is meaningless, and no-one ever expected this event alone to make a whole lot of people not interested in politics notice politics for a change.
The expectation was never that this would be widely talked about by ordinary people, and by presenting the question as merely 'who noticed?' without context, the implication is the event was a failure if not many did, which is pathetic nonsense. It was an unanticipated addition to the general politcal debate, with as much and as little impact from a single event of that nature we would expect, nothing more.
It was never going to be game changing, or even significant for most people, but it was notable.
The thing is, I'd reckon the country is fairly heavily EU-sceptic, inasmuch that even people who believe we should be in, we're not entirely happy with the way it's run, or it's perceived direction. Clegg being so blatantly loved up with the EU can't play well with that type of voter. His patronising attitude was a turn off too.
Mr. Llama, rejected? After the Second Punic War, he became leader of Carthage.
That's the difference between Hannibal and Caesar. After defeat, Hannibal became more powerful. After victory, Caesar was killed by his own side.
Incidentally, have you read Theodore Dodge's biographies of Alexander, Hannibal and Caesar? They're well-worth acquiring, but be certain you get a full book. I last perused Amazon for them when Mr. Burdett, formerly of this parish, enquired about such things on Twitter and was irked to see abridged versions (not clearly marked as such) on sale. [They should be just under 700 pages for the first two, and a little over 800, I think, for Caesar].
Just watching the BBC news reaction to it and the Swedish dude has reminded me that my ex girlfriend was a campaigner for Sweden to join the Euro, and I used to wear a "Ja Til Euron" t shirt that she gave me to go out running in!
Oh the shame!
Sweden strikes me as part of a "slightly less enthusiastic Europeans/ skeptic bloc", made up of old generally rich, secure, nation states, with good governance - Sweden, Denmark, Netherlands, UK . These countries don't get an obvious trade off by being in the EU in the way that others do: Eastern Europe - keep out the Russians and the cash flowing, club Med - keep the army in its barracks and give us the subsidies, Italy - some hope of good governance, Ireland cash and a recognition they're not British, France a deluded sense of grandeur paid for by Germany, and Belgium something for the country to dissolve into as it splits, Germany - an assuaging of guilt - but that's fading fast as it inevitably will and should do as time passes. ( Austria dunno probably security - they were 25% occupied till 1955).
Question is can the northern reform bloc with added Germany reform it quickly enough to bridge the yawning democratic defecit (who elected Barroso? How do I fire him at the ballot box?) before it collapses in a heap.
It needs reform but the Euro really has been an utter disaster both economically and for the present credibility of all the over enthusiastic Europhiles who proclaimed it the inevitable future. Always was b***ks that, as anyone with half a brain knew. Trouble is it makes Clegg's claims he wants to reform the EU hard to believe, as he got the Euro debate so wrong.
Mr. Llama, rejected? After the Second Punic War, he became leader of Carthage.
That's the difference between Hannibal and Caesar. After defeat, Hannibal became more powerful. After victory, Caesar was killed by his own side.
Incidentally, have you read Theodore Dodge's biographies of Alexander, Hannibal and Caesar? They're well-worth acquiring, but be certain you get a full book. I last perused Amazon for them when Mr. Burdett, formerly of this parish, enquired about such things on Twitter and was irked to see abridged versions (not clearly marked as such) on sale. [They should be just under 700 pages for the first two, and a little over 800, I think, for Caesar].
I'd say how could they poll for such a stupid question, but I have seen some stupider ones in polls before in fairness.
It's the important question. The answer, of course, is no one sane noticed.
No it is not an important question, because as everyone sane has pointed out innumerable times in the past few weeks, hardly anyone notices anything to do with politics, so bringing that argument out for this event alone is meaningless, and no-one ever expected this event alone to make a whole lot of people not interested in politics notice politics for a change.
The expectation was never that this would be widely talked about by ordinary people, and by presenting the question as merely 'who noticed?' without context, the implication is the event was a failure if not many did, which is pathetic nonsense. It was an unanticipated addition to the general politcal debate, with as much and as little impact from a single event of that nature we would expect, nothing more.
It was never going to be game changing, or even significant for most people, but it was notable.
So, insignificant event gets discussed interminably.
The thing is, I'd reckon the country is fairly heavily EU-sceptic, inasmuch that even people who believe we should be in, we're not entirely happy with the way it's run, or it's perceived direction. Clegg being so blatantly loved up with the EU can't play well with that type of voter. His patronising attitude was a turn off too.
Tom Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn 3m Lib Dems' only brightside, despite the even bigger thumping: "We've had an hour's prime time telly," says Clegg spinner #europedebate
On that basis the countless hours of prime time on Huhne and Rennard must have been just bloody marvellous for them..
Amusing. I think we can safely say they meant that an hour of prime time telly where they at least had the chance to put their minority opinion directly to a wide (for politics) audience and hope it had some positive impact, is potentially useful, as opposed to hours of coverage of sordid scandals and divisions.
The crucial part being potentially useful. Let's be clear here. This wasn't just about the the EU and May locals for Clegg. This was a fairly desperate leadership strategy of trying to rehabilitate Cleggy in the eyes of the public to reverse or at least mitigate his own potent personal toxicity with the voter. Keep in mind this was all off the back of 'radio phone in Clegg' that he's been doing for so long which is also part of the same strategy. A strategy that I'm afraid he and his spinners just don't seem to grasp will not work. It's far too late for that now and always was.
What should put the fear of god into those lib dems that are left isn't merely how badly he did against Farage (who should be a very easy contrast lest we forget) but how badly he did on a subject the lib dems used to hold dear and should have those in favour of staying IN on their side to begin with. Clegg's performance should also give them a taste of just how badly he's going to do when he get's cornered on what the coalition has done and his own future promises/manifesto pledges and red lines for the 2015 debates.
Meanwhile .... concerns that Coalition changes to pensions would be a car crash waiting to happen in the form of Lamborghini pensioners appear to be accurate !!
Mr. kle4, Caesar buggered that up too (to be fair, so did Augustus). By never putting the empire on a legal footing and allowing the precedent of might is right they replaced civil wars for a brief time by stable government but made future civil wars certain. The Republic of the 3rd century BC was far better than the empire (which did have some good early periods).
Mr. Brooke, neither man has an army of enormo-haddock behind him.
38% more likely to vote Ukip after debate, Guardian ICM poll shows
I imagine that will go down in the immediate aftermath, but impressive nonetheless.
Although, I've just thought (and I'm not the first I'm sure) of a line for the desperate unofficial LD spinners (offical spinners have to stick to certain lines) - Clegg is a political genuine, willing to trade on his own poor reputation to make things tactically better for his side: He had a good showing in the first debate, at worse evens with Farage given how unpopular supporting the EU is, so he'd achieved the aim of trying to galvanise the small pro-Eu vote. Therefore, he had to simultaneously give a boost to UKIP with a clear win in the second, to undermine the Tory vote in the south and save a bunch of LD GE seats. Foolproof.
In all seriousness, haven't seen much fear from the Tories yet, holding their nerve for a few hours at least. The longer they can avoid talking about it in blue on blue terms, the better for them.
I've stuck in UPDATE II - Which makes for some very good reading for UKIP and appalling stuff for the Lib Dems
Christ, LDs will be hoping that the Anthony Wells view is right about these (that people who say less/more likely were generally planning not to/to vote for them anyway). But the extent of these skews...christ.
Mr. Llama, rejected? After the Second Punic War, he became leader of Carthage.
That's the difference between Hannibal and Caesar. After defeat, Hannibal became more powerful. After victory, Caesar was killed by his own side.
Incidentally, have you read Theodore Dodge's biographies of Alexander, Hannibal and Caesar? They're well-worth acquiring, but be certain you get a full book. I last perused Amazon for them when Mr. Burdett, formerly of this parish, enquired about such things on Twitter and was irked to see abridged versions (not clearly marked as such) on sale. [They should be just under 700 pages for the first two, and a little over 800, I think, for Caesar].
When it comes to Hannibal, you remind me of this chap and his take on history.
The best Question tonight for me was the one which said what's the point in voting for any parties at a GE knowing a lot of the rules/policies coming from Brussels,it just destroyed clegg's argument in that one Question.
Mr. kle4, Caesar buggered that up too (to be fair, so did Augustus). By never putting the empire on a legal footing and allowing the precedent of might is right they replaced civil wars for a brief time by stable government but made future civil wars certain. The Republic of the 3rd century BC was far better than the empire (which did have some good early periods).
Mr. Brooke, neither man has an army of enormo-haddock behind him.
I fear you are so last decade Mr D, the current demand is for erotico-haddock. Think fishnets.
Mr. kle4, Caesar buggered that up too (to be fair, so did Augustus). By never putting the empire on a legal footing and allowing the precedent of might is right they replaced civil wars for a brief time by stable government but made future civil wars certain. The Republic of the 3rd century BC was far better than the empire (which did have some good early periods).
In fairness I am counting the impact of his legacy in negative terms as well as positive, which is not using the the same criteria. Almost like Farage's view on Putin now I think about it (and also that wand seller in Harry Potter talking about Voldemort doing Great things. Terrible, but great).
It was never going to be game changing, or even significant for most people, but it was notable.
About the only thing that can make Clegg seem good is the stupendously amusing complacency of those who don't seem to think any political event matters in politics. Why not send all those irrelevant activists home and not bother with election campaigning at all? It doesn't matter, who cares, why vote, politics is for the politically obsessed, etc.
Now update II is actually of genuine interest, unlike the mere 'who won' figure. If sustained that one is actually troublesome for them.
Personally I'm still on the fence, but excited, as it may be the first election I've voted in where my vote might make a diference to the outcome (in the sense that a few points either way could make a big difference for once)
Mr. Llama, rejected? After the Second Punic War, he became leader of Carthage.
That's the difference between Hannibal and Caesar. After defeat, Hannibal became more powerful. After victory, Caesar was killed by his own side.
Incidentally, have you read Theodore Dodge's biographies of Alexander, Hannibal and Caesar? They're well-worth acquiring, but be certain you get a full book. I last perused Amazon for them when Mr. Burdett, formerly of this parish, enquired about such things on Twitter and was irked to see abridged versions (not clearly marked as such) on sale. [They should be just under 700 pages for the first two, and a little over 800, I think, for Caesar].
Farage = Morris dancer
Clegg = Morris Dancer
Mr. Brooke, that is a very unkind and inaccurate remark. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Mr. Dancer was making a valid point, he was talking b0llocks admittedly (if Hannibal was so good how come he had to leg it from Carthage, take work as a mecenary etc etc.), but he was making a serious point.
I shall add your recommendations to my reading list, but unless they are available on Kindle it will be a long time before I'll be able to buy those books (we are back to the "one in one out" lock down again).
38% of people more likely to vote UKIP. Well previous polling could barely find 38% of people who didn't actively dislike them, so that's clearly a big win.
I am sure there are a great many voters who like me would love to see Britain withdraw from the EU but recognise that it would be bad for our own businesses and therefore hope Dave can achieve a deal repatriating some powers.
I suspect after tonight, George Lyon will be emptying his office in Brussels and wondering if he can get his old job back at the Scottish NFU. I expect Scotland to be 3 SNP, 2 Lab, 1 Con with the LibDem vote evaporating out with the Highlands and Islands and Borders.
I'd say how could they poll for such a stupid question, but I have seen some stupider ones in polls before in fairness.
It's the important question. The answer, of course, is no one sane noticed.
No it is not an important question, because as everyone sane has pointed out innumerable times in the past few weeks, hardly anyone notices anything to do with politics, so bringing that argument out for this event alone is meaningless, and no-one ever expected this event alone to make a whole lot of people not interested in politics notice politics for a change.
The expectation was never that this would be widely talked about by ordinary people, and by presenting the question as merely 'who noticed?' without context, the implication is the event was a failure if not many did, which is pathetic nonsense. It was an unanticipated addition to the general politcal debate, with as much and as little impact from a single event of that nature we would expect, nothing more.
It was never going to be game changing, or even significant for most people, but it was notable.
So, insignificant event gets discussed interminably.
I would say it gets discussed intently for a brief period and have some small impact moving forward. It doesn't have the longevity to get discussed interminably I suspect, despite not being insigificant (nothing is wholly so, even the wretched spin games of the parties, much as I hate to admit it), just not hugely significant.
We keep on being told by OGH and others that Europe is low down on the list of voters' concerns. Yet we are taking this debate - which was meant to be about Europe - as a sign that Clegg has had it.
There is a long way to go on this. On some things I side with Farage - I would quite like a say about our position in Europe; I'm 41 and not had one. On others I find Farage a hideous beast - for instance on Putin.
Mr. Llama, rejected? After the Second Punic War, he became leader of Carthage.
That's the difference between Hannibal and Caesar. After defeat, Hannibal became more powerful. After victory, Caesar was killed by his own side.
Incidentally, have you read Theodore Dodge's biographies of Alexander, Hannibal and Caesar? They're well-worth acquiring, but be certain you get a full book. I last perused Amazon for them when Mr. Burdett, formerly of this parish, enquired about such things on Twitter and was irked to see abridged versions (not clearly marked as such) on sale. [They should be just under 700 pages for the first two, and a little over 800, I think, for Caesar].
Farage = Morris dancer
Clegg = Morris Dancer
Mr. Brooke, that is a very unkind and inaccurate remark. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Mr. Dancer was making a valid point, he was talking b0llocks admittedly (if Hannibal was so good how come he had to leg it from Carthage, take work as a mecenary etc etc.), but he was making a serious point.
I shall add your recommendations to my reading list, but unless they are available on Kindle it will be a long time before I'll be able to buy those books (we are back to the "one in one out" lock down again).
haha Mr Llama since I have been down here in the SE ( Ashford ) I have lost all sense of shame. I have spent the days picking gold off the streets and will use it to train as feline vet when I shall charge extortionate fees to fund my huge house which will appreciate at 30% a month. Then I shall buy Poland.
I'd say how could they poll for such a stupid question, but I have seen some stupider ones in polls before in fairness.
It's the important question. The answer, of course, is no one sane noticed.
No it is not an important question, because as everyone sane has pointed out innumerable times in the past few weeks, hardly anyone notices anything to do with politics, so bringing that argument out for this event alone is meaningless, and no-one ever expected this event alone to make a whole lot of people not interested in politics notice politics for a change.
The expectation was never that this would be widely talked about by ordinary people, and by presenting the question as merely 'who noticed?' without context, the implication is the event was a failure if not many did, which is pathetic nonsense. It was an unanticipated addition to the general politcal debate, with as much and as little impact from a single event of that nature we would expect, nothing more.
It was never going to be game changing, or even significant for most people, but it was notable.
So, insignificant event gets discussed interminably.
I would say it gets discussed intently for a brief period and have some small impact moving forward. It doesn't have the longevity to get discussed interminably I suspect, despite not being insigificant (nothing is wholly so, even the wretched spin games of the parties, much as I hate to admit it), just not hugely significant.
As ever, the effect is not in the event, but in the narrative the media will take forward from it. They all agreed amongst themselves it was a narrow Clegg win last week despite the views of us plebs in polls, but tonight was too 1-sided for a similar line to work outside HodgesLand.
Haha!! The fact check bloke on BBC was asked about the "7% or 75% of laws made in EU" claims.. he said you could only get it to 50% so 75% was a bit high...
Its bloody closer than 7 isn't it?!!
Yes, the BBC struggle with materiality when they need to in order to sustain their argument too.
Not really.
It depends on what your definitions are where you place it, but the 75% is just utter bollocks. ~50% being as high a figure as you can make it.
Their own fact checker says 50% which was the number Farage used, and then they focussed on the fact that Farage also briefly mentioned an EU commission estimate of 75%. You think that is more noteworth and incorrect than Clegg trying to shut down the entire debate with a 7% figure which is little better than a lie, so narrow and weasily a definition of 'law' and 'from Europe' does it take.
No, their own fact checker said you can get it to 50% using as wide a definition as you can. If you go narrow you can have it down in single figures. Farage threw out the 75% which is just bollocks.
Unfortunately the very many maps and illustrations may not show up as well on a Kindle.
Oh, and, if you intend to buy all three, you may prefer to start with Alexander, then Hannibal, then Caesar (chronological, and there's a nice chapter in Caesar's book comparing the three men).
Edited extra bit: I suspect the paperback linked to it is an abridged version, which is irksome.
It was never going to be game changing, or even significant for most people, but it was notable.
About the only thing that can make Clegg seem good is the stupendously amusing complacency of those who don't seem to think any political event matters in politics. Why not send all those irrelevant activists home and not bother with election campaigning at all? It doesn't matter, who cares, why vote, politics is for the politically obsessed, etc.
I'm in the south west, and last time it was Con 30, UKIP 22, LD 17, Green 9, Lab 8 (all approximate), with 3 Con, 2 UKIP and 1 LD elected. How much of a UKIP swing would see them get 4 and Con 2, as I suspect will be the result does anyone know?
It'll all come down to the Gibraltarian vote no doubt.
For all practical purposes 4-2 is near impossible.
two conditions would have to be satisfied.
Let T = the third party's votes (whoever it may be), INT is the integer part e.g. INT(2.9)=2
I am sure there are a great many voters who like me would love to see Britain withdraw from the EU but recognise that it would be bad for our own businesses and therefore hope Dave can achieve a deal repatriating some powers.
I suspect after tonight, George Lyon will be emptying his office in Brussels and wondering if he can get his old job back at the Scottish NFU. I expect Scotland to be 3 SNP, 2 Lab, 1 Con with the LibDem vote evaporating out with the Highlands and Islands and Borders.
I hope your own internals are better and that you are fully rested after this mornings upset.
The best Question tonight for me was the one which said what's the point in voting for any parties at a GE knowing a lot of the rules/policies coming from Brussels,it just destroyed clegg's argument in that one Question.
And Farage's argument was demolished by his love-in for despots of all varieties.
Like corporeal I have to concede that Nigel Farage won tonight. I thought Clegg won clearly last time, but tonight he lost his cool, and kept repeatingthings about Orpington, the 19th century, and was too defensive of the status quo throughout. An easy win is to say you want to stop going to Strasbourg for the plenary sessions every month, but there wasn't enough vision today. Even with the poor polling tonight, can't see how it's been bad for the LDs but a missed opportunity and I think there will be some cringing watching things back.
And as a southern councillor facing election in May, our pitch is that we work hardest locally, so tonight was never likely to be make or break at ward level.
It was appallingly scripted and patronising stuff. I cant believe someone in a position of power, who must have half a brain, could think this would resonate with everyday people.
Can someone in the (LibDem) know please explain the relevance of Orpington? I seem to remember there might have been a famous by-election there once but is that it?
The best Question tonight for me was the one which said what's the point in voting for any parties at a GE knowing a lot of the rules/policies coming from Brussels,it just destroyed clegg's argument in that one Question.
And Farage's argument was demolished by his love-in for despots of all varieties.
Bollocks,farage was right, on foreign policy ,putin has made the EU(Britain),USA a laughing stock.
It was never going to be game changing, or even significant for most people, but it was notable.
About the only thing that can make Clegg seem good is the stupendously amusing complacency of those who don't seem to think any political event matters in politics. Why not send all those irrelevant activists home and not bother with election campaigning at all? It doesn't matter, who cares, why vote, politics is for the politically obsessed, etc.
*chortle*
I suspect this may be part of the reason for the SNP's success, for all, as you will well know, people mock the so called cybernats - SNP support, organised or not, appears to treat every arena be it online or in person as of huge potential significance and attack and defend ferociously. Much of it may end up being wasted energy, but if you focus so intently with every battle you fight, significant or not (without exhausting your reserves), you will win the day in a lot of little areas and feel the cumulative impact of those successes which other people thought didn't matter.
It's the opposite of death by a thousand cuts I guess. Success of a thousand cuts perhaps?
Are there any pb LDs ready to defend Nick Clegg's performance tonight?
Hello?
*tumbleweed*
Well though a LD voter on several occasions I don't think I quite qualify as I'm not a party member, but I'll have a go. He had a decent middle portion of the debate, on business and negotiation. He also did not pass out in the final section.
It was never going to be game changing, or even significant for most people, but it was notable.
About the only thing that can make Clegg seem good is the stupendously amusing complacency of those who don't seem to think any political event matters in politics. Why not send all those irrelevant activists home and not bother with election campaigning at all? It doesn't matter, who cares, why vote, politics is for the politically obsessed, etc.
*chortle*
I agree with Mick
Most "politics" is utterly irrelevant displacement activity to keep the committed occupied. Tonight was just such an event.
It was appallingly scripted and patronising stuff. I cant believe someone in a position of power, who must have half a brain, could think this would resonate with everyday people.
It's a nice insight in to just how lowly they view UKIP and it's voters. He wouldn't use those lines if they didn't get big laughs at dinner parties and with his SPAD flunkies.
I am sure there are a great many voters who like me would love to see Britain withdraw from the EU but recognise that it would be bad for our own businesses and therefore hope Dave can achieve a deal repatriating some powers.
I suspect after tonight, George Lyon will be emptying his office in Brussels and wondering if he can get his old job back at the Scottish NFU. I expect Scotland to be 3 SNP, 2 Lab, 1 Con with the LibDem vote evaporating out with the Highlands and Islands and Borders.
I hope your own internals are better and that you are fully rested after this mornings upset.
Jack I was very sad to see my humble comments used to besmirch your noble ARSE.
You have to give immense credit to the lib dem media dipsh*t who thought "Billy No Mates" was a good spin line for Clegg. And indeed Clegg himself for thinking it sounded good.
The lib dems incalculably astute spin machine and Clegg have clearly moved on leaps and bounds since "Alarm Clock Britain".
Mr. Llama, rejected? After the Second Punic War, he became leader of Carthage.
That's the difference between Hannibal and Caesar. After defeat, Hannibal became more powerful. After victory, Caesar was killed by his own side.
Incidentally, have you read Theodore Dodge's biographies of Alexander, Hannibal and Caesar? They're well-worth acquiring, but be certain you get a full book. I last perused Amazon for them when Mr. Burdett, formerly of this parish, enquired about such things on Twitter and was irked to see abridged versions (not clearly marked as such) on sale. [They should be just under 700 pages for the first two, and a little over 800, I think, for Caesar].
Farage = Morris dancer
Clegg = Morris Dancer
Mr. Brooke, that is a very unkind and inaccurate remark. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Mr. Dancer was making a valid point, he was talking b0llocks admittedly (if Hannibal was so good how come he had to leg it from Carthage, take work as a mecenary etc etc.), but he was making a serious point.
I shall add your recommendations to my reading list, but unless they are available on Kindle it will be a long time before I'll be able to buy those books (we are back to the "one in one out" lock down again).
haha Mr Llama since I have been down here in the SE ( Ashford ) I have lost all sense of shame. I have spent the days picking gold off the streets and will use it to train as feline vet when I shall charge extortionate fees to fund my huge house which will appreciate at 30% a month. Then I shall buy Poland.
*Sniggers*
Don't forget, if you are heading this way to visit Mrs. Brooke's old stamping ground do stop off for a small, sweet, sherry.
Mr. kle4, ah, fair enough, then. Just like Cao Cao (Three Kingdoms), Caesar undoubtedly had an impact.
No idea about the Potter reference, though. I've only read the first book.
I only recall it from the movie, which I had to sit through recently. I get all my info from such things - I only know of Cao Cao thanks to Romance of the three Kingdoms (the video game series that is)!
Can someone in the (LibDem) know please explain the relevance of Orpington? I seem to remember there might have been a famous by-election there once but is that it?
There was a famous by-election win there, and for a while 'Orpington man' was a 'mondeo man' type phrase.
But tbh I think it was just a place picked to illustrate 'everyone in Scotland has the right to move to a particular place, doesn't mean they will' point.
Now that is a big surprise to me. I would not be surprised in general if UKIP's vote was less among the young, but Farage personally and during this debate I felt it would be fairly cross demographic in being clearly him winning, though I have left that demo myself in the past few years, so clearly I'm out of touch with it now.
We keep on being told by OGH and others that Europe is low down on the list of voters' concerns. Yet we are taking this debate - which was meant to be about Europe - as a sign that Clegg has had it.
There is a long way to go on this. On some things I side with Farage - I would quite like a say about our position in Europe; I'm 41 and not had one. On others I find Farage a hideous beast - for instance on Putin.
It ain't over.
One thing is for sure, an EU referendum just receded further into the future. No way will the LDs or the Labour party ever call one, after Clegg's painful drubbing tonight. A vote for OUT looks way too likely.
Europhile Tories must also be looking on with great anxiety.
And we do need one.
I'm persuadable either way ( ideally in with major major reform - the equivalent of " devo max") but I'm damn sure I'm pissed off that at 49 I've never been asked at all. Never trusted by the politicos to comment on the evolution from the "Common Market" via EEC, EC, to "European Union". Milliband please note.
The next election's going to be about the little guy v the big guys. Like I've said all along.
Who the hell do us little guys vote for, though?
Guts me to say it, but not only is there no one I want to vote for - there's no one I feel I can vote for, even holding my nose.
if you feel like that, why not look at the candidates and pick the best? Who has integrity, will work hard and not lose sight of they are standing and who they represent. Who has the most character? That transcends the party bickering.
It was never going to be game changing, or even significant for most people, but it was notable.
About the only thing that can make Clegg seem good is the stupendously amusing complacency of those who don't seem to think any political event matters in politics. Why not send all those irrelevant activists home and not bother with election campaigning at all? It doesn't matter, who cares, why vote, politics is for the politically obsessed, etc.
*chortle*
I agree with Mick
Most "politics" is utterly irrelevant displacement activity to keep the committed occupied. Tonight was just such an event.
No. Today was important if only for the funerary rites performed over Nick Clegg's career. But it might resonate beyond that.
We keep on being told by OGH and others that Europe is low down on the list of voters' concerns. Yet we are taking this debate - which was meant to be about Europe - as a sign that Clegg has had it.
There is a long way to go on this. On some things I side with Farage - I would quite like a say about our position in Europe; I'm 41 and not had one. On others I find Farage a hideous beast - for instance on Putin.
It ain't over.
Why should his views on Putin be a surprise? UKIP and the Russians have a common foe - the EU!
I am sure there are a great many voters who like me would love to see Britain withdraw from the EU but recognise that it would be bad for our own businesses and therefore hope Dave can achieve a deal repatriating some powers.
I suspect after tonight, George Lyon will be emptying his office in Brussels and wondering if he can get his old job back at the Scottish NFU. I expect Scotland to be 3 SNP, 2 Lab, 1 Con with the LibDem vote evaporating out with the Highlands and Islands and Borders.
I hope your own internals are better and that you are fully rested after this mornings upset.
Jack I was very sad to see my humble comments used to besmirch your noble ARSE.
And there is me so fond of all things pork .... well almost all.
The best Question tonight for me was the one which said what's the point in voting for any parties at a GE knowing a lot of the rules/policies coming from Brussels,it just destroyed clegg's argument in that one Question.
And Farage's argument was demolished by his love-in for despots of all varieties.
Bollocks,farage was right, on foreign policy ,putin has made the EU(Britain),USA a laughing stock.
Putin's "foreign policy" being the aim of not having one, as all 'foreign;' countries will be under his power. ;-)
I assume UKIP will be looking to have similar policies if we're ever unlucky enough to get them in power?
Comments
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100266038/farage-v-clegg-farage-won-easily-on-europe-his-argument-is-now-the-one-to-beat/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
Clegg = Baron Hardup
On Mr. Eagles point below,
"Clegg = Hannibal"
One can only hope that Clegg suffers the same fate; that is to be rejected by his own kind, take up a mercenary post in the service of a ruler in the Levant (Assad?) before finally topping himself when he realises what a loser he is and what a failure his life has been.
Here is more from the Guardian ICM poll.
Would you vote to leave the EU?
Definitely/probably vote to stay in the EU - 39%
Definitely/probably vote to leave the EU - 53%
Has what you've heard changed our mind about leaving the EU?
Yes, it's changed my mind - 16%
No, it's already made up - 69%
Has what you've heard in the debate made you more or less likely to vote Lib Dem in the European elections?
More likely - 7%
Less likely - 43%
No difference - 44%
Has what you've heard in the debate made you more or less likely to vote Ukip in the European elections?
More likely - 38%
Less likely - 17%
No difference - 37%
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/2014/apr/02/farage-v-clegg-the-debate-for-europe-politics-live-blog#block-533c6c6de4b040af4c4db528
@DraganBrBr @mihelaz Yes, Nick was that bad. Haughty, negative and patronising. Even I caught myself voting for a pint with Farage."
https://twitter.com/darinkabunjevac
The expectation was never that this would be widely talked about by ordinary people, and by presenting the question as merely 'who noticed?' without context, the implication is the event was a failure if not many did, which is pathetic nonsense. It was an unanticipated addition to the general politcal debate, with as much and as little impact from a single event of that nature we would expect, nothing more.
It was never going to be game changing, or even significant for most people, but it was notable.
His patronising attitude was a turn off too.
That's the difference between Hannibal and Caesar. After defeat, Hannibal became more powerful. After victory, Caesar was killed by his own side.
Incidentally, have you read Theodore Dodge's biographies of Alexander, Hannibal and Caesar? They're well-worth acquiring, but be certain you get a full book. I last perused Amazon for them when Mr. Burdett, formerly of this parish, enquired about such things on Twitter and was irked to see abridged versions (not clearly marked as such) on sale. [They should be just under 700 pages for the first two, and a little over 800, I think, for Caesar].
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100266058/farage-v-clegg-this-time-it-was-much-closer/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
Question is can the northern reform bloc with added Germany reform it quickly enough to bridge the yawning democratic defecit (who elected Barroso? How do I fire him at the ballot box?) before it collapses in a heap.
It needs reform but the Euro really has been an utter disaster both economically and for the present credibility of all the over enthusiastic Europhiles who proclaimed it the inevitable future. Always was b***ks that, as anyone with half a brain knew. Trouble is it makes Clegg's claims he wants to reform the EU hard to believe, as he got the Euro debate so wrong.
Clegg = Morris Dancer
twitter.com/julianborger/status/451451494035120128
What should put the fear of god into those lib dems that are left isn't merely how badly he did against Farage (who should be a very easy contrast lest we forget) but how badly he did on a subject the lib dems used to hold dear and should have those in favour of staying IN on their side to begin with. Clegg's performance should also give them a taste of just how badly he's going to do when he get's cornered on what the coalition has done and his own future promises/manifesto pledges and red lines for the 2015 debates.
Titters ....
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/video/2014/apr/01/lamborghini-aventador-worth-300000-crashes-london-street-video
Mr. Brooke, neither man has an army of enormo-haddock behind him.
Although, I've just thought (and I'm not the first I'm sure) of a line for the desperate unofficial LD spinners (offical spinners have to stick to certain lines) - Clegg is a political genuine, willing to trade on his own poor reputation to make things tactically better for his side: He had a good showing in the first debate, at worse evens with Farage given how unpopular supporting the EU is, so he'd achieved the aim of trying to galvanise the small pro-Eu vote. Therefore, he had to simultaneously give a boost to UKIP with a clear win in the second, to undermine the Tory vote in the south and save a bunch of LD GE seats. Foolproof.
In all seriousness, haven't seen much fear from the Tories yet, holding their nerve for a few hours at least. The longer they can avoid talking about it in blue on blue terms, the better for them.
There, I said it
http://tinyurl.com/IPityTheFoolThatRatesHannibal
http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/5jb6qc8a3u/YG-Archive-140302-CleggvFarage.pdf
William Hill make it 8/11 that Clegg won't be LD leader at end of 2015. Price cut from 11/10."
twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/451453867109404672
It doesn't matter, who cares, why vote, politics is for the politically obsessed, etc.
*chortle*
Personally I'm still on the fence, but excited, as it may be the first election I've voted in where my vote might make a diference to the outcome (in the sense that a few points either way could make a big difference for once)
Mr. Dancer was making a valid point, he was talking b0llocks admittedly (if Hannibal was so good how come he had to leg it from Carthage, take work as a mecenary etc etc.), but he was making a serious point.
@Morris Dancer
I shall add your recommendations to my reading list, but unless they are available on Kindle it will be a long time before I'll be able to buy those books (we are back to the "one in one out" lock down again).
I suspect after tonight, George Lyon will be emptying his office in Brussels and wondering if he can get his old job back at the Scottish NFU. I expect Scotland to be 3 SNP, 2 Lab, 1 Con with the LibDem vote evaporating out with the Highlands and Islands and Borders.
"Nick Clegg is easily the more accomplished political performer, and it was again his debate. But by a narrower margin than seven days ago."
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100266058/farage-v-clegg-this-time-it-was-much-closer/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
Farage still on a roll. If I was the Better Together campaign in Scotland I'd be worried.
No idea about the Potter reference, though. I've only read the first book.
Mr. Brooke, the enormo-haddock are the pinnacle of piscine genetic modification! They are cutting edge, not last decade!
There is a long way to go on this. On some things I side with Farage - I would quite like a say about our position in Europe; I'm 41 and not had one. On others I find Farage a hideous beast - for instance on Putin.
It ain't over.
I think this is the full shindig (just under £2 too, which is quite reasonable):
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Hannibal-History-Carthaginians-Detailed-Account-ebook/dp/B007H1UHYE/
Unfortunately the very many maps and illustrations may not show up as well on a Kindle.
Oh, and, if you intend to buy all three, you may prefer to start with Alexander, then Hannibal, then Caesar (chronological, and there's a nice chapter in Caesar's book comparing the three men).
Edited extra bit: I suspect the paperback linked to it is an abridged version, which is irksome.
two conditions would have to be satisfied.
Let T = the third party's votes (whoever it may be), INT is the integer part e.g. INT(2.9)=2
a) INT(UKIP/T) + INT(CON/T) >=6
b) UKIP/CON >=1.3334
UKIP 40
Con 29
Lab 9
LD 8
Grn 7
BNP 4
Oth 3
would do it, for example. Seems unlikely...
And as a southern councillor facing election in May, our pitch is that we work hardest locally, so tonight was never likely to be make or break at ward level.
It's the opposite of death by a thousand cuts I guess. Success of a thousand cuts perhaps?
And here is some more detail of how the Guardian ICM figures for "who won" broke down.
The headline figures, excluding don't knows, were:
Farage - 69%
Clegg - 31%
For men, the figures were:
Farage - 73%
Clegg - 27%
For women, the figures were:
Farage - 65%
Clegg - 35%
For 18 to 24-year-olds, the figures were:
Farage - 51%
Clegg - 49%
For 25 to 34-year-olds, the figures were:
Farage - 58%
Clegg - 42%
For 35 to 64-year-olds, the figures were:
Farage - 71%
Clegg 29%
For over 65s, the figures were:
Farage - 81%
Clegg - 19%
For Conservative supporters, the figures were:
Farage - 71%
Clegg - 29%
For Labour supporters, the figures were:
Farage - 57%
Clegg - 43%
For Lib Dem supporters, the figures were:
Farage - 42%
Clegg - 58%
For Ukip, the figures were:
Farage - 98%
Clegg - 2%
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/2014/apr/02/farage-v-clegg-the-debate-for-europe-politics-live-blog#block-533c707ee4b040af4c4db538
Sorry, I thought you might have been...
And here are the key points from those statistics.
• Clegg only won among one group - Lib Dem supporters. But he was virtually equal with Farage amongst the under 25s.
• Labour supporters backed Farage by 57% to 43% - even though Labour policy on Europe is very similar to the Lib Dem's.
• Some 42% of Lib Dem supporters thought Farage won.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/2014/apr/02/farage-v-clegg-the-debate-for-europe-politics-live-blog#block-533c735be4b0624e60d379f0
The lib dems incalculably astute spin machine and Clegg have clearly moved on leaps and bounds since "Alarm Clock Britain".
Don't forget, if you are heading this way to visit Mrs. Brooke's old stamping ground do stop off for a small, sweet, sherry.
Titters ....
But tbh I think it was just a place picked to illustrate 'everyone in Scotland has the right to move to a particular place, doesn't mean they will' point.
http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/ykmpjgw80r/YG-Archive-140326-Clegg-Farage.pdf
Mr Farage has improved with every group.
Farage - 51%
Clegg - 49%
Now that is a big surprise to me. I would not be surprised in general if UKIP's vote was less among the young, but Farage personally and during this debate I felt it would be fairly cross demographic in being clearly him winning, though I have left that demo myself in the past few years, so clearly I'm out of touch with it now.
And we do need one.
I'm persuadable either way ( ideally in with major major reform - the equivalent of " devo max") but I'm damn sure I'm pissed off that at 49 I've never been asked at all. Never trusted by the politicos to comment on the evolution from the "Common Market" via EEC, EC, to "European Union". Milliband please note.
Toodles all ....
I assume UKIP will be looking to have similar policies if we're ever unlucky enough to get them in power?