Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Final YouGov poll on Euros and Euros round up

13»

Comments

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,880
    NooffenceAlan Clegg has hinted he would accept an EU referendum
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited May 2014
    antifrank said:

    Speedy said:

    antifrank said:

    SeanT said:


    Are there teams of 70 something vaguely Tory Englishmen trying to push walls onto gay people because of some deeply held ideology?

    No.

    Is there a country, a culture, a billion strong civilisation which believes gays should be executed that way?

    Yes.

    And we import 100,000s of people from that latter culture, even as pathetic fools like you bleat about the former.

    You are a coward.

    You are defending a party that is likely to top the polls tomorrow and whose leader defends the right of its candidates to be anti-gay. Instead of invoking threats from 5000 miles away, I will prefer to concentrate on the bigotry that is being openly expressed here and now by silly old fools that you are condoning.
    Actually SeanT has a point, I got the point when muslims tried to segregate universities, ironically that is setting left wing atheists against islam.
    http://www.secularism.org.uk/blog/2014/03/gender-segregation--universities-and-student-representatives-continue-to-fail-their-students-miserably
    Kippers telling me that I shouldn't be concerned about Kipper homophobia? Well, whodathunkit?
    I'm not a kipper and I am not talking about homophobia, i'm talking about university segregation by muslims, but if you continue like this I might even become a member of the kippers just for you.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,534
    Were UKIP to come to power, I think it is hugely unlikely they would persecute gay men and women. And, I suspect that there will be gay men and women voting UKIP tomorrow.
  • MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523

    MrJones said:

    The political class' 1000 foot high, glowing pink neon double standard over islam is one of the things that defines the political class.

    Actually, I agree with that, or at least their double standards about some of the disagreeable variants of Islam which we have encouraged to take root here (and, in case tim is reading this: Yes, I accept that this mistake goes right back to Maggie's time, when the French authorities were tearing their hair out at the lack of action by Britain against some very nasty Algerian terrorist groups who were planting bombs in the Paris metro at the time).

    However, when it comes to double standards, UKIP take the biscuit on this. After all, if the threat is from militant Islam, why on earth are they pretending that it is about EU immigration?
    To me they're both symptoms of the PC religion.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    antifrank said:

    SeanT said:

    antifrank said:

    SeanT said:


    Are there teams of 70 something vaguely Tory Englishmen trying to push walls onto gay people because of some deeply held ideology?

    No.

    Is there a country, a culture, a billion strong civilisation which believes gays should be executed that way?

    Yes.

    And we import 100,000s of people from that latter culture, even as pathetic fools like you bleat about the former.

    You are a coward.

    You are defending a party that is likely to top the polls tomorrow and whose leader defends the right of its candidates to be anti-gay. Instead of invoking threats from 5000 miles away, I will prefer to concentrate on the bigotry that is being openly expressed here and now by silly old fools that you are condoning.
    Threats from 5000 miles away?

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/22/muslim-patrol-anti-gay-harassment-east-london-_n_2527111.html

    What will this be like when large parts of London, or other cities, are 20-30% Muslim, or 50% Muslim. It ain't gonna be Godfrey Bloom trying to hit you with a brick.

    You are an intellectual coward of the first rank, because you are smart enough to know better, but you choose to delude yourself.
    Thank you for telling me who you think is my biggest threat. Personally, I'll stick with being concerned about a party whose candidates want to shoot me and whose leader condones anti-gay statements.
    Show Farage condoning an anti gay statement.

    All he did was show understanding of why someone said what they did, rather than hair trigger, zero tolerance nonsense which chucks the baby out with the bathwater.

    Nothing worse than smug liberal bigotry. There will be things you say now that you think are reasonable but will look bigoted in another generation.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Speedy said:

    antifrank said:

    Speedy said:

    antifrank said:

    SeanT said:


    Are there teams of 70 something vaguely Tory Englishmen trying to push walls onto gay people because of some deeply held ideology?

    No.

    Is there a country, a culture, a billion strong civilisation which believes gays should be executed that way?

    Yes.

    And we import 100,000s of people from that latter culture, even as pathetic fools like you bleat about the former.

    You are a coward.

    You are defending a party that is likely to top the polls tomorrow and whose leader defends the right of its candidates to be anti-gay. Instead of invoking threats from 5000 miles away, I will prefer to concentrate on the bigotry that is being openly expressed here and now by silly old fools that you are condoning.
    Actually SeanT has a point, I got the point when muslims tried to segregate universities, ironically that is setting left wing atheists against islam.
    http://www.secularism.org.uk/blog/2014/03/gender-segregation--universities-and-student-representatives-continue-to-fail-their-students-miserably
    Kippers telling me that I shouldn't be concerned about Kipper homophobia? Well, whodathunkit?
    I'm not a kipper and I am not talking about homophobia, i'm talking about university segregation by muslims, but if you continue like this I might even become a member of the kippers just for you.
    Speedy said:

    Scott_P said:

    @rosschawkins: Oldham UKIP leaflet drawn up by Joe Fitzpatrick - fmr agent to ex-Lab MP Phil Woolas

    @rosschawkins: Fitzpatrick tells me it was a satire - I'm not saying go out and do it, I'm saying this is what happens

    @rosschawkins: UKIP leaflet said: steal postal votes, swap postal votes -- 36,000 copies distributed says Fitzpatrick

    http://www.chronic-oldham.co.uk/
    "Chronic-Oldham has no connection with UKIP, Joe Fitzpatrick or any other political party!"

    Labour mud.
    The end.

    If it smells like a kipper, and is as daft as a kipper...
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821

    It was in 1977 that the then Home Secretary, Merlyn Rees, was booed down by the Police Federation. In all the time since, no Minister has had the cojones to stand up to them, until today.

    Respect.

    Yes, and a cracking speech it is too.

    Plain speaking doesn't come any plainer than that.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,534

    isam said:

    Speedy said:

    The Sun Editorial on who to vote for tomorrow is fascinating.

    The Sun ‏@TheSunNewspaper 59s

    'It's rare for The Sun to endorse no one at an election' — on tomorrow's Euro elections...

    pic.twitter.com/CIJp7lHdq3

    The Sun is always right and backs the winner - on this occasion however, its to close to call.
    In this case they can not endorse the winner since endorsing UKIP after all this media firestorm is imposible for any newspaper bar the Daily Express and perhaps the Mail.

    Good point - quite honestly since the Sun went behind the pay-wall, I don't think I've seen a single article on the kippers or anything else linked to them on PB - have they been anti Ukip in your opinion?

    update - cheers Mr Jones, just read your reply.
    I for one am very surprised at The Sun's recent take on UKIP.

    I dont buy any paper, but when I go to the Cafe I read The Sun. Until May, it has read like a UKIP pamphlet, endorsing their immigration stance in articles and editorials, and portryaing EU immigration as a bad thing.

    I would have been prepared to back them endorsing UKIP at the GE at 6/4.

    So I got that wrong! Their volte face has been remarkable
    The Sun advocates working class populism as long as the working class vote for the establishment party which the Murdochs support.

    The Sun has discovered that advocating working class populism is now encouraging the working class to vote for a working class populist party instead of the establishment party which the Murdochs support.

    There's a 'Downfall' parody to be made here. Rupert would fit the bunker image well.

    Indeed so. Shortly after denouncing UKIP, the Sun will revert to running stories about Romanian gypsies on benefits.

  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    Sean_F said:

    Were UKIP to come to power, I think it is hugely unlikely they would persecute gay men and women. And, I suspect that there will be gay men and women voting UKIP tomorrow.

    Yeap, it would be like under Thatcher, they wouldn't really persecute them and they did have a number of gays not only voting for them but being in power.
  • isam said:

    Here is a thing not to be proud of..

    Tomorrow I am going to a place called Botteston, which I believe is in Leicestershire

    I think that still means I have only been North of Essex less than ten times in my 39 years

    Bottesford, or maybe Botcheston?

  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    edited May 2014
    SeanT said:


    FFS, because UKIP know that if they came out with one of their real beliefs - stop most immigration from Muslim countries - they would be instantly crucified as racist and they would die like the BNP.

    Political correctness has ensured that some things are politically unsayable, even if entirely justifiable. Therefore UKIP are obliged to dress up their Stop Immigration credo in the guise of Controlling our EU Borders.

    Of course, I agree entirely. Indeed I made exactly this point a few days ago. The entire EU immigration angle and the vilification of Romanians is a smokescreen.

    UKIP voters of course understand this perfectly.

    The only people who don't, or who pretend they don't, are those who post on here pushing the risible argument that UKIP wants to reduce EU immigration in order to increase non-EU immigration.

    Of course that in turn leads to an obvious objection: why are UKIP pretending to be a party which wants to take us out of the EU if their real agenda has nothing to do with whether we are in the EU or not?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,033

    It was in 1977 that the then Home Secretary, Merlyn Rees, was booed down by the Police Federation. In all the time since, no Minister has had the cojones to stand up to them, until today.

    Respect.

    Yes, and a cracking speech it is too.

    Plain speaking doesn't come any plainer than that.
    Do you know if the full video available online?
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    SeanT said:


    FFS, because UKIP know that if they came out with one of their real beliefs - stop most immigration from Muslim countries - they would be instantly crucified as racist and they would die like the BNP.

    Political correctness has ensured that some things are politically unsayable, even if entirely justifiable. Therefore UKIP are obliged to dress up their Stop Immigration credo in the guise of Controlling our EU Borders.

    Of course, I agree entirely. Indeed I made exactly this point a few days ago. The entire EU immigration angle and the vilification of Romanians is a smokescreen.

    UKIP voters of course understand this perfectly.

    The only people who don't, or who pretend they don't, are those who post on here pushing the risible argument that UKIP wants to reduce EU immigration in order to increase non-EU immigration.
    Exactly. pb has the wisest kipper fools in Christendom.
  • MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523


    The Sun advocates working class populism as long as the working class vote for the establishment party which the Murdochs support.

    The Sun has discovered that advocating working class populism is now encouraging the working class to vote for a working class populist party instead of the establishment party which the Murdochs support.

    There's a 'Downfall' parody to be made here. Rupert would fit the bunker image well.

    yup, enough to damage Lab but not enough to create a viable alternative to Con

    oops
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited May 2014
    SeanT said:

    antifrank said:

    SeanT said:

    antifrank said:

    SeanT said:


    Are there teams of 70 something vaguely Tory Englishmen trying to push walls onto gay people because of some deeply held ideology?

    No.

    Is there a country, a culture, a billion strong civilisation which believes gays should be executed that way?

    Yes.

    And we import 100,000s of people from that latter culture, even as pathetic fools like you bleat about the former.

    You are a coward.

    You are defending a party that is likely to top the polls tomorrow and whose leader defends the right of its candidates to be anti-gay. Instead of invoking threats from 5000 miles away, I will prefer to concentrate on the bigotry that is being openly expressed here and now by silly old fools that you are condoning.
    Threats from 5000 miles away?

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/22/muslim-patrol-anti-gay-harassment-east-london-_n_2527111.html

    What will this be like when large parts of London, or other cities, are 20-30% Muslim, or 50% Muslim. It ain't gonna be Godfrey Bloom trying to hit you with a brick.

    You are an intellectual coward of the first rank, because you are smart enough to know better, but you choose to delude yourself.
    Thank you for telling me who you think is my biggest threat. Personally, I'll stick with being concerned about a party whose candidates want to shoot me and whose leader condones anti-gay statements.
    Godfrey Bloom is abroad: let the gays cower. He may biff them with a copy of the Express.

    100,000s of seriously, virulently homophobic Muslims are immigrating into the UK: nah, not a problem, they make nice samosas.

    Rancid, arrogant, bewildered, homosexual fools like you are building your own crematorium. I can't be bothered trying to persuade you any more. Good luck and good night.
    This conversation reminded me of this:
    http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/02/the-threats-to-sadiq-khan-remind-us-of-the-dangers-that-many-mps-face/

    "Imams from major mosques in Bradford and Southfield responded by denouncing Khan as an apostate. Excommunicating him, they declared his own marriage null and void, and potentially opened the door for others to attack him (exploiting an extremist view that apostates should be killed)."

    All this for gay marriage.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    This headline says it all

    UKIP candidate Peter Lello arrested for 'sex assault' on homeless Bulgarian man

    Full article: http://bit.ly/1qW7oMR
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    SeanT said:

    antifrank said:

    SeanT said:

    antifrank said:

    SeanT said:


    Are there teams of 70 something vaguely Tory Englishmen trying to push walls onto gay people because of some deeply held ideology?

    No.

    Is there a country, a culture, a billion strong civilisation which believes gays should be executed that way?

    Yes.

    And we import 100,000s of people from that latter culture, even as pathetic fools like you bleat about the former.

    You are a coward.

    You are defending a party that is likely to top the polls tomorrow and whose leader defends the right of its candidates to be anti-gay. Instead of invoking threats from 5000 miles away, I will prefer to concentrate on the bigotry that is being openly expressed here and now by silly old fools that you are condoning.
    Threats from 5000 miles away?

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/22/muslim-patrol-anti-gay-harassment-east-london-_n_2527111.html

    What will this be like when large parts of London, or other cities, are 20-30% Muslim, or 50% Muslim. It ain't gonna be Godfrey Bloom trying to hit you with a brick.

    You are an intellectual coward of the first rank, because you are smart enough to know better, but you choose to delude yourself.
    Thank you for telling me who you think is my biggest threat. Personally, I'll stick with being concerned about a party whose candidates want to shoot me and whose leader condones anti-gay statements.
    Godfrey Bloom is abroad: let the gays cower. He may biff them with a copy of the Express.

    100,000s of seriously, virulently homophobic Muslims are immigrating into the UK: nah, not a problem, they make nice samosas.

    Rancid, arrogant, bewildered, homosexual fools like you are building your own crematorium. I can't be bothered trying to persuade you any more. Good luck and good night.
    Bibulous intellectual derelicts like you are not going to persuade me that Britain is going to become a Salafi outpost within the next 1000 years. But there is a clear and present danger that Britain may be turned into an inward-looking asylum in the thrall of the ravings of prejudiced old men. You seem to want to encourage them. Sweet dreams.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053

    SeanT said:


    FFS, because UKIP know that if they came out with one of their real beliefs - stop most immigration from Muslim countries - they would be instantly crucified as racist and they would die like the BNP.

    Political correctness has ensured that some things are politically unsayable, even if entirely justifiable. Therefore UKIP are obliged to dress up their Stop Immigration credo in the guise of Controlling our EU Borders.

    Of course, I agree entirely. Indeed I made exactly this point a few days ago. The entire EU immigration angle and the vilification of Romanians is a smokescreen.

    UKIP voters of course understand this perfectly.

    The only people who don't, or who pretend they don't, are those who post on here pushing the risible argument that UKIP wants to reduce EU immigration in order to increase non-EU immigration.

    Of course that in turn leads to an obvious objection: why are UKIP pretending to be a party which wants to take us out of the EU if their real agenda has nothing to do with whether we are in the EU or not?
    This daft conversation between to Tories is hard to beat for its inanities and total bollocks.
  • MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    imo

    PC as an ideology started as an anti-nationalist reaction to WWII and has become an anti-native religion.

    PC anti-nativism drives both europhilia and the double standards over islam (among many other things) so it's all the same thing to me.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    I just can't understand why antifrank is more exercised by UKIP than fundamentalist Muslims living in the UK. Totally baffling.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    isam said:

    Here is a thing not to be proud of..

    Tomorrow I am going to a place called Botteston, which I believe is in Leicestershire

    I think that still means I have only been North of Essex less than ten times in my 39 years

    Bottesford, or maybe Botcheston?

    Bottesford!

  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    AndyJS said:

    I just can't understand why antifrank is more exercised by UKIP than fundamentalist Muslims living in the UK. Totally baffling.

    Relative numbers. There are far more silly old UKIP-voting fools determined to make the lives of gay men a misery than fundamentalist Muslims. Simple as.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Dear MikeK.

    What limits would UKIP apply to migration in terms of numbers? How would this affect family re-unification, students and asylum seekers?

    I take it as read that EU and Non-EU would not be a consideration and neither would race or religion.
    MikeK said:

    SeanT said:


    FFS, because UKIP know that if they came out with one of their real beliefs - stop most immigration from Muslim countries - they would be instantly crucified as racist and they would die like the BNP.

    Political correctness has ensured that some things are politically unsayable, even if entirely justifiable. Therefore UKIP are obliged to dress up their Stop Immigration credo in the guise of Controlling our EU Borders.

    Of course, I agree entirely. Indeed I made exactly this point a few days ago. The entire EU immigration angle and the vilification of Romanians is a smokescreen.

    UKIP voters of course understand this perfectly.

    The only people who don't, or who pretend they don't, are those who post on here pushing the risible argument that UKIP wants to reduce EU immigration in order to increase non-EU immigration.

    Of course that in turn leads to an obvious objection: why are UKIP pretending to be a party which wants to take us out of the EU if their real agenda has nothing to do with whether we are in the EU or not?
    This daft conversation between to Tories is hard to beat for its inanities and total bollocks.
  • NinoinozNinoinoz Posts: 1,312
    antifrank said:

    SeanT said:


    Are there teams of 70 something vaguely Tory Englishmen trying to push walls onto gay people because of some deeply held ideology?

    No.

    Is there a country, a culture, a billion strong civilisation which believes gays should be executed that way?

    Yes.

    And we import 100,000s of people from that latter culture, even as pathetic fools like you bleat about the former.

    You are a coward.

    You are defending a party that is likely to top the polls tomorrow and whose leader defends the right of its candidates to be anti-gay. Instead of invoking threats from 5000 miles away, I will prefer to concentrate on the bigotry that is being openly expressed here and now by silly old fools that you are condoning.
    I've been fond of comparing the Euro elections with the Papal Visit of 2010.

    Now, how did gays behave during the Papal Visit? Threats of violence, jailings and disruption to religious events.

    Compared to the homosexuals' behaviour, UKIP are very mild indeed and more sinned against than sinning.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    SeanT said:


    FFS, because UKIP know that if they came out with one of their real beliefs - stop most immigration from Muslim countries - they would be instantly crucified as racist and they would die like the BNP.

    Political correctness has ensured that some things are politically unsayable, even if entirely justifiable. Therefore UKIP are obliged to dress up their Stop Immigration credo in the guise of Controlling our EU Borders.

    Of course, I agree entirely. Indeed I made exactly this point a few days ago. The entire EU immigration angle and the vilification of Romanians is a smokescreen.

    UKIP voters of course understand this perfectly.

    The only people who don't, or who pretend they don't, are those who post on here pushing the risible argument that UKIP wants to reduce EU immigration in order to increase non-EU immigration.

    Of course that in turn leads to an obvious objection: why are UKIP pretending to be a party which wants to take us out of the EU if their real agenda has nothing to do with whether we are in the EU or not?
    " UKIP wants to reduce EU immigration in order to increase non-EU immigration."

    As embarrassing a deliberate misunderstanding as those who say that because 28m Romanians or Bulgarians didnt arrive on JAn 1st UKIP were wrong somehow.

    No one from UKIP is saying that they want an increase in non EU immigration. They merely point out that it is ridiculous to discriminate between someone on the grounds of where outside the UK they were born rather than what they have to offer.

    It may be the case that no non EU citizens make the cut, or that only non EU citizens do.. more likely a mixture.. but you know that full well. Dont play the lefty "Im confused" schtick, it is for students, or people who havent grown up
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,326
    antifrank said:

    SeanT said:


    Are there teams of 70 something vaguely Tory Englishmen trying to push walls onto gay people because of some deeply held ideology?

    No.

    Is there a country, a culture, a billion strong civilisation which believes gays should be executed that way?

    Yes.

    And we import 100,000s of people from that latter culture, even as pathetic fools like you bleat about the former.

    You are a coward.

    You are defending a party that is likely to top the polls tomorrow and whose leader defends the right of its candidates to be anti-gay. Instead of invoking threats from 5000 miles away, I will prefer to concentrate on the bigotry that is being openly expressed here and now by silly old fools that you are condoning.
    Antifrank: I share your views about Ukip and their two- faced approach to immigration. But really there are very real threats to gays here in this country from parties in power - see how gay councillors in Tower Hamlets are shouted down with homophobic abuse. See how Livingstone allied himself with people who thought gays should be killed. Farage should not be condoning those who say that it is ok to hate gay people but the biggest and nastiest threat to liberal values does not really come from the Godfrey Blooms of this world. They want to turn the clock back to the 1950's, which is bad enough. But there are plenty who want to go very much further and who are willing to use violence to get their way.

    The problem with parties like Ukip is that they give a veneer of respectability to xenophobia and demonising of immigrants and a whole load of nastier ideas, even if they don't mean to. But even if Ukip vanished tomorrow the threats to gays and women and Jews and liberal values would still be here.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Isn't it very reasonable to dislike both rather than choose between them?

    Just as it is possible to dislike both the BNP and Respect?
    AndyJS said:

    I just can't understand why antifrank is more exercised by UKIP than fundamentalist Muslims living in the UK. Totally baffling.

  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    One for you, Dr. Sox:

    UpikNews ‏@UpikNews 14h

    #WhyImVotingUkip I was appalled at the number of immigrants in my local A&E. One of them bandaged my arm and another took me for an x-ray

    Dear MikeK.

    What limits would UKIP apply to migration in terms of numbers? How would this affect family re-unification, students and asylum seekers?

    I take it as read that EU and Non-EU would not be a consideration and neither would race or religion.

    MikeK said:

    SeanT said:


    FFS, because UKIP know that if they came out with one of their real beliefs - stop most immigration from Muslim countries - they would be instantly crucified as racist and they would die like the BNP.

    Political correctness has ensured that some things are politically unsayable, even if entirely justifiable. Therefore UKIP are obliged to dress up their Stop Immigration credo in the guise of Controlling our EU Borders.

    Of course, I agree entirely. Indeed I made exactly this point a few days ago. The entire EU immigration angle and the vilification of Romanians is a smokescreen.

    UKIP voters of course understand this perfectly.

    The only people who don't, or who pretend they don't, are those who post on here pushing the risible argument that UKIP wants to reduce EU immigration in order to increase non-EU immigration.

    Of course that in turn leads to an obvious objection: why are UKIP pretending to be a party which wants to take us out of the EU if their real agenda has nothing to do with whether we are in the EU or not?
    This daft conversation between to Tories is hard to beat for its inanities and total bollocks.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    edited May 2014
    AndyJS said:

    I just can't understand why antifrank is more exercised by UKIP than fundamentalist Muslims living in the UK. Totally baffling.

    We may have a clue in the avatar name he is using; antifrank. What does the name mean?
    The best possible answer is that he is against Franks. In the early middle ages - during the Crusades - Frank was the generic term for White Christian used by the whole muslim world, wether they came from France or not.

    So could antifrank be a muslim? Not so baffling after all, AJS.

  • NinoinozNinoinoz Posts: 1,312
    antifrank said:

    AndyJS said:

    I just can't understand why antifrank is more exercised by UKIP than fundamentalist Muslims living in the UK. Totally baffling.

    Relative numbers. There are far more silly old UKIP-voting fools determined to make the lives of gay men a misery than fundamentalist Muslims. Simple as.
    Irrelevant. Young people are the ones who commit violent crime. And there are far more young Muslims than young Ukippers.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,326
    antifrank said:

    AndyJS said:

    I just can't understand why antifrank is more exercised by UKIP than fundamentalist Muslims living in the UK. Totally baffling.

    Relative numbers. There are far more silly old UKIP-voting fools determined to make the lives of gay men a misery than fundamentalist Muslims. Simple as.
    Are there? Pretty much all Muslims think that homosexuality is wrong. And a very significant proportion want sharia law which goes way beyond anything proposed by Ukip. And we can see how they actually behave where they have power e.g. Tower Hamlets. If you were a Muslim who was gay, who would you be likely to fear most if you came out?

  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Ninoinoz said:

    antifrank said:

    AndyJS said:

    I just can't understand why antifrank is more exercised by UKIP than fundamentalist Muslims living in the UK. Totally baffling.

    Relative numbers. There are far more silly old UKIP-voting fools determined to make the lives of gay men a misery than fundamentalist Muslims. Simple as.
    Irrelevant. Young people are the ones who commit violent crime. And there are far more young Muslims than young Ukippers.
    That's pretty good going. In two posts you've managed homophobia, ageism and Islamophobia. It's a shame you couldn't get sexism in there. Perhaps you can manage that in your next post.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    antifrank said:

    AndyJS said:

    I just can't understand why antifrank is more exercised by UKIP than fundamentalist Muslims living in the UK. Totally baffling.

    Relative numbers. There are far more silly old UKIP-voting fools determined to make the lives of gay men a misery than fundamentalist Muslims. Simple as.
    Even if a UKIP govt repealed the law on gay Marriage, which they wouldnt, how would they make the lives of gay men a misery?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406
    For balance's sake does anyone have any statistics on the relative incidence of sexual abuse amongst homosexuals in general, heterosexuals in general and priests in the Catholic church ?

    I mean I have my suspicions on this subject - perhaps my prejudices are incorrect ?
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    isam said:

    isam said:

    Here is a thing not to be proud of..

    Tomorrow I am going to a place called Botteston, which I believe is in Leicestershire

    I think that still means I have only been North of Essex less than ten times in my 39 years

    Bottesford, or maybe Botcheston?

    Bottesford!

    Only a few miles away from my brother in law who is in Melton Mowbray - lovely area, if time allows en-route back to London, stop off at Stamford just off the A1. A bit like Bath with great pubs down by the river.
  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    [UpikNews ‏@UpikNews 14h

    #WhyImVotingUkip I was appalled at the number of immigrants in my local A&E. One of them bandaged my arm and another took me for an x-ray]

    It's a good one Avery.

    ah gawd - it's after midnight - will I be allowed this one-

    Has anyone, anywhere, gone oh no, I've got an Asian Doctor?
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    isam said:

    antifrank said:

    AndyJS said:

    I just can't understand why antifrank is more exercised by UKIP than fundamentalist Muslims living in the UK. Totally baffling.

    Relative numbers. There are far more silly old UKIP-voting fools determined to make the lives of gay men a misery than fundamentalist Muslims. Simple as.
    Even if a UKIP govt repealed the law on gay Marriage, which they wouldnt, how would they make the lives of gay men a misery?
    Shooting me would put rather a crimp on my day.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406
    MikeK said:

    AndyJS said:

    I just can't understand why antifrank is more exercised by UKIP than fundamentalist Muslims living in the UK. Totally baffling.

    We may have a clue in the avatar name he is using; antifrank. What does the name mean?
    The best possible answer is that he is against Franks. In the early middle ages - during the Crusades - Frank was the generic term for White Christian used by the whole muslim world, wether they came from France or not.

    So could antifrank be a muslim? Not so baffling after all, AJS.

    antifrank said:

    isam said:

    antifrank said:

    AndyJS said:

    I just can't understand why antifrank is more exercised by UKIP than fundamentalist Muslims living in the UK. Totally baffling.

    Relative numbers. There are far more silly old UKIP-voting fools determined to make the lives of gay men a misery than fundamentalist Muslims. Simple as.
    Even if a UKIP govt repealed the law on gay Marriage, which they wouldnt, how would they make the lives of gay men a misery?
    Shooting me would put rather a crimp on my day.
    Battle of the tin-foil hats !
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,959
    edited May 2014
    MikeK said:

    AndyJS said:

    I just can't understand why antifrank is more exercised by UKIP than fundamentalist Muslims living in the UK. Totally baffling.

    We may have a clue in the avatar name he is using; antifrank. What does the name mean?
    The best possible answer is that he is against Franks. In the early middle ages - during the Crusades - Frank was the generic term for White Christian used by the whole muslim world, wether they came from France or not.

    So could antifrank be a muslim? Not so baffling after all, AJS.

    Antifrank is one of the UK's (if not the top) Solicitor when it comes to all things pensions.

    Antifrank(ing) is a pension term

    Anti franking legislation requires that statutory indexation of an individual's [Guaranteed Minimum Pension (GMP)] is paid in addition to any amount by which the scheme benefits exceed the GMP, and is not deemed to be covered or "franked" by other scheme benefits.

    The requirements are covered in Chapter III of Part IV PSA93 and if brought into force Part II of Schedule 5 of the Child Support, Pensions and Social Security Act 2000.

    https://www.pensions-pmi.org.uk/news-and-publications/pensions-terminology/?p=6

    Edit: For full disclosure, I'm not an Eagle, the symbol so beloved of the Third Reich.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    I have had patients refuse to see various Asian doctors in my department over the years, despite never having been seen by them in the past.

    Patients are often anxious and afraid, and this sometimes manifests as aggression.
    JBriskin said:

    [UpikNews ‏@UpikNews 14h

    #WhyImVotingUkip I was appalled at the number of immigrants in my local A&E. One of them bandaged my arm and another took me for an x-ray]

    It's a good one Avery.

    ah gawd - it's after midnight - will I be allowed this one-

    Has anyone, anywhere, gone oh no, I've got an Asian Doctor?

  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    antifrank said:

    isam said:

    antifrank said:

    AndyJS said:

    I just can't understand why antifrank is more exercised by UKIP than fundamentalist Muslims living in the UK. Totally baffling.

    Relative numbers. There are far more silly old UKIP-voting fools determined to make the lives of gay men a misery than fundamentalist Muslims. Simple as.
    Even if a UKIP govt repealed the law on gay Marriage, which they wouldnt, how would they make the lives of gay men a misery?
    Shooting me would put rather a crimp on my day.
    That sort of misrepresentaion is just ridiculous. I know you are trying to win an argument, and no one on here ever admits defeat, but try to stay rational
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,959
    Huzzah for David Cameron

    The British government scuppered Madrid’s bid to host the 2020 Olympic Games in retaliation at Spain’s hard line stance over Gibraltar, a senior Liberal Democrat claimed.

    Sir Graham Watson, the MEP for South West England and Gibraltar, described how David Cameron threatened his Spanish counterpart with derailing the Madrid bid last summer amid escalating diplomatic tensions over controls imposed by Spain at its border with the British Overseas Territory.

    “I am told Mr Cameron actually said to the Spanish Prime Minister, ‘if you carry on with these border queues we will make sure you don’t get the Olympic Games,’” Sir Graham said during a debate televised debate in Gibraltar ahead of the EU elections.

    “And I believe that is what happened,” he added.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/10848248/Madrid-lost-Olympics-bid-because-of-row-over-Gibraltar.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    isam said:

    antifrank said:

    isam said:

    antifrank said:

    AndyJS said:

    I just can't understand why antifrank is more exercised by UKIP than fundamentalist Muslims living in the UK. Totally baffling.

    Relative numbers. There are far more silly old UKIP-voting fools determined to make the lives of gay men a misery than fundamentalist Muslims. Simple as.
    Even if a UKIP govt repealed the law on gay Marriage, which they wouldnt, how would they make the lives of gay men a misery?
    Shooting me would put rather a crimp on my day.
    That sort of misrepresentaion is just ridiculous. I know you are trying to win an argument, and no one on here ever admits defeat, but try to stay rational
    Staying rational, will you accept that an unacceptably high number of UKIP candidates have felt obliged to make comments about homosexuality, and that Nigel Farage has gone out of his way not to condemn those?
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    edited May 2014

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Here is a thing not to be proud of..

    Tomorrow I am going to a place called Botteston, which I believe is in Leicestershire

    I think that still means I have only been North of Essex less than ten times in my 39 years

    Bottesford, or maybe Botcheston?

    Bottesford!

    Only a few miles away from my brother in law who is in Melton Mowbray - lovely area, if time allows en-route back to London, stop off at Stamford just off the A1. A bit like Bath with great pubs down by the river.
    I think I am meeting work related peeps, going for dinner in the village of Bottesford then getting the train home.. rather worringly, quite excited to go to a new place!

  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    Thanks for replying Fox.

    I probably shouldn't say this but my vetoer isn't here.

    My Gf finds black faces comforting. I tend to find Asian faces comforting. I don't think there's a lot we can do about that. I'm sure in this PC world we can either be the most racist or most unracist people on the planet. There's nothing we can do about it unfortunately...
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    edited May 2014

    MikeK said:

    AndyJS said:

    I just can't understand why antifrank is more exercised by UKIP than fundamentalist Muslims living in the UK. Totally baffling.

    We may have a clue in the avatar name he is using; antifrank. What does the name mean?
    The best possible answer is that he is against Franks. In the early middle ages - during the Crusades - Frank was the generic term for White Christian used by the whole muslim world, wether they came from France or not.

    So could antifrank be a muslim? Not so baffling after all, AJS.

    Antifrank is one of the UK's (if not the top) Solicitor when it comes to all things pensions.

    Antifrank(ing) is a pension term

    Anti franking legislation requires that statutory indexation of an individual's [Guaranteed Minimum Pension (GMP)] is paid in addition to any amount by which the scheme benefits exceed the GMP, and is not deemed to be covered or "franked" by other scheme benefits.

    The requirements are covered in Chapter III of Part IV PSA93 and if brought into force Part II of Schedule 5 of the Child Support, Pensions and Social Security Act 2000.

    https://www.pensions-pmi.org.uk/news-and-publications/pensions-terminology/?p=6

    Edit: For full disclosure, I'm not an Eagle, the symbol so beloved of the Third Reich.
    I see you don't like it when sarcasm and taking the piss, is dished to your side, do you, Vulture?
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    antifrank said:

    isam said:

    antifrank said:

    isam said:

    antifrank said:

    AndyJS said:

    I just can't understand why antifrank is more exercised by UKIP than fundamentalist Muslims living in the UK. Totally baffling.

    Relative numbers. There are far more silly old UKIP-voting fools determined to make the lives of gay men a misery than fundamentalist Muslims. Simple as.
    Even if a UKIP govt repealed the law on gay Marriage, which they wouldnt, how would they make the lives of gay men a misery?
    Shooting me would put rather a crimp on my day.
    That sort of misrepresentaion is just ridiculous. I know you are trying to win an argument, and no one on here ever admits defeat, but try to stay rational
    Staying rational, will you accept that an unacceptably high number of UKIP candidates have felt obliged to make comments about homosexuality, and that Nigel Farage has gone out of his way not to condemn those?
    Has he really gone out of his way not to condemn them? To me he has acted like most normal, middle of the road people would and said that these views are a bit old fashioned etc but try to take into consideration the upbringing of those who said these things.

    The gay weather thing was so ridiculous he even parodied it

    In the sprirt of common ground I am typing this while listening to my current fav song "Jet Boy" by NY Dolls

  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,564

    Isn't it very reasonable to dislike both rather than choose between them?

    Just as it is possible to dislike both the BNP and Respect?

    AndyJS said:

    I just can't understand why antifrank is more exercised by UKIP than fundamentalist Muslims living in the UK. Totally baffling.

    Fox making sense as usual. Perhaps one day we'll get him back to Labour...
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,959
    MikeK said:

    MikeK said:

    AndyJS said:

    I just can't understand why antifrank is more exercised by UKIP than fundamentalist Muslims living in the UK. Totally baffling.

    We may have a clue in the avatar name he is using; antifrank. What does the name mean?
    The best possible answer is that he is against Franks. In the early middle ages - during the Crusades - Frank was the generic term for White Christian used by the whole muslim world, wether they came from France or not.

    So could antifrank be a muslim? Not so baffling after all, AJS.

    Antifrank is one of the UK's (if not the top) Solicitor when it comes to all things pensions.

    Antifrank(ing) is a pension term

    Anti franking legislation requires that statutory indexation of an individual's [Guaranteed Minimum Pension (GMP)] is paid in addition to any amount by which the scheme benefits exceed the GMP, and is not deemed to be covered or "franked" by other scheme benefits.

    The requirements are covered in Chapter III of Part IV PSA93 and if brought into force Part II of Schedule 5 of the Child Support, Pensions and Social Security Act 2000.

    https://www.pensions-pmi.org.uk/news-and-publications/pensions-terminology/?p=6

    Edit: For full disclosure, I'm not an Eagle, the symbol so beloved of the Third Reich.
    I see you don't like it when sarcasm is dished to your side, do you, Vulture?
    Considering you called me a twat a few weeks ago, when I made a joke at the expense of Nigel Farage (pbuh) perhaps you're the one who should check his sarcasm and humour sensors.

    I guess I should't be surprised that you don't like it up you.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    Those uncertain of how to vote tomorrow and who are thinking of voting UKIP could do worse than consult this Huff Post flow chart:

    http://bit.ly/RVzHLl
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053

    MikeK said:

    MikeK said:

    AndyJS said:

    I just can't understand why antifrank is more exercised by UKIP than fundamentalist Muslims living in the UK. Totally baffling.

    We may have a clue in the avatar name he is using; antifrank. What does the name mean?
    The best possible answer is that he is against Franks. In the early middle ages - during the Crusades - Frank was the generic term for White Christian used by the whole muslim world, wether they came from France or not.

    So could antifrank be a muslim? Not so baffling after all, AJS.

    Antifrank is one of the UK's (if not the top) Solicitor when it comes to all things pensions.

    Antifrank(ing) is a pension term

    Anti franking legislation requires that statutory indexation of an individual's [Guaranteed Minimum Pension (GMP)] is paid in addition to any amount by which the scheme benefits exceed the GMP, and is not deemed to be covered or "franked" by other scheme benefits.

    The requirements are covered in Chapter III of Part IV PSA93 and if brought into force Part II of Schedule 5 of the Child Support, Pensions and Social Security Act 2000.

    https://www.pensions-pmi.org.uk/news-and-publications/pensions-terminology/?p=6

    Edit: For full disclosure, I'm not an Eagle, the symbol so beloved of the Third Reich.
    I see you don't like it when sarcasm is dished to your side, do you, Vulture?
    Considering you called me a twat a few weeks ago, when I made a joke at the expense of Nigel Farage (pbuh) perhaps you're the one who should check his sarcasm and humour sensors.

    I guess I should't be surprised that you don't like it up you.
    I cannot remember calling you a twat, but since you are, I'll let it stand in the record.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,880
    SeanF Murdoch is more fond of Farage than Cameron and has had him to dinner
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    isam said:

    antifrank said:

    isam said:

    antifrank said:

    isam said:

    antifrank said:

    AndyJS said:

    I just can't understand why antifrank is more exercised by UKIP than fundamentalist Muslims living in the UK. Totally baffling.

    Relative numbers. There are far more silly old UKIP-voting fools determined to make the lives of gay men a misery than fundamentalist Muslims. Simple as.
    Even if a UKIP govt repealed the law on gay Marriage, which they wouldnt, how would they make the lives of gay men a misery?
    Shooting me would put rather a crimp on my day.
    That sort of misrepresentaion is just ridiculous. I know you are trying to win an argument, and no one on here ever admits defeat, but try to stay rational
    Staying rational, will you accept that an unacceptably high number of UKIP candidates have felt obliged to make comments about homosexuality, and that Nigel Farage has gone out of his way not to condemn those?
    Has he really gone out of his way not to condemn them? To me he has acted like most normal, middle of the road people would and said that these views are a bit old fashioned etc but try to take into consideration the upbringing of those who said these things.

    The gay weather thing was so ridiculous he even parodied it

    In the sprirt of common ground I am typing this while listening to my current fav song "Jet Boy" by NY Dolls

    I'll take that as an acknowledgement that an unacceptably high number of UKIP candidates have felt obliged to make comments about homosexuality.

    Sadly, I haven't had the quantities of anal sex that SeanT ascribes to me, but I do need to go to bed. In a spirit of common ground, if UKIP win tomorrow, I promise not to bring any floods of vengeance.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    edited May 2014
    There may be time to visit the Polish Community, derived from Veterans of the Polish Army and Airforce, who settled in the area from 1946.

    http://www.leicestershirevillages.com/meltonmowbray/chronologyofthepolishcommunity.html

    An excellent example of a hard working integrated community, proud of their cultural heritage and contributing their own strand to North East Leicestershire.

    I wonder whether they will be voting UKIP.

    Have a good day, but bring a brolly. Its going to be wet.
    isam said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Here is a thing not to be proud of..

    Tomorrow I am going to a place called Botteston, which I believe is in Leicestershire

    I think that still means I have only been North of Essex less than ten times in my 39 years

    Bottesford, or maybe Botcheston?

    Bottesford!

    Only a few miles away from my brother in law who is in Melton Mowbray - lovely area, if time allows en-route back to London, stop off at Stamford just off the A1. A bit like Bath with great pubs down by the river.
    I think I am meeting work related peeps, going for dinner in the village of Bottesford then getting the train home.. rather worringly, quite excited to go to a new place!

  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,564
    Long day coming up - good night all.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406
    antifrank said:

    isam said:

    antifrank said:

    isam said:

    antifrank said:

    isam said:

    antifrank said:

    AndyJS said:

    I just can't understand why antifrank is more exercised by UKIP than fundamentalist Muslims living in the UK. Totally baffling.

    Relative numbers. There are far more silly old UKIP-voting fools determined to make the lives of gay men a misery than fundamentalist Muslims. Simple as.
    Even if a UKIP govt repealed the law on gay Marriage, which they wouldnt, how would they make the lives of gay men a misery?
    Shooting me would put rather a crimp on my day.
    That sort of misrepresentaion is just ridiculous. I know you are trying to win an argument, and no one on here ever admits defeat, but try to stay rational
    Staying rational, will you accept that an unacceptably high number of UKIP candidates have felt obliged to make comments about homosexuality, and that Nigel Farage has gone out of his way not to condemn those?
    Has he really gone out of his way not to condemn them? To me he has acted like most normal, middle of the road people would and said that these views are a bit old fashioned etc but try to take into consideration the upbringing of those who said these things.

    The gay weather thing was so ridiculous he even parodied it

    In the sprirt of common ground I am typing this while listening to my current fav song "Jet Boy" by NY Dolls

    I'll take that as an acknowledgement that an unacceptably high number of UKIP candidates have felt obliged to make comments about homosexuality.

    Sadly, I haven't had the quantities of anal sex that SeanT ascribes to me, but I do need to go to bed. In a spirit of common ground, if UKIP win tomorrow, I promise not to bring any floods of vengeance.
    None of us can probably compare to Sean T when it comes to sexual experience though !
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    AveryLP said:

    Those uncertain of how to vote tomorrow and who are thinking of voting UKIP could do worse than consult this Huff Post flow chart:

    http://bit.ly/RVzHLl

    Hi Medhi
  • volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 2,078
    The message is quite simple.

    Vote Ukip,Get Tory.
  • NinoinozNinoinoz Posts: 1,312
    Pulpstar said:

    For balance's sake does anyone have any statistics on the relative incidence of sexual abuse amongst homosexuals in general, heterosexuals in general and priests in the Catholic church ?

    I mean I have my suspicions on this subject - perhaps my prejudices are incorrect ?

    You're probably asking the wrong question.

    75% of abuse takes place within families. Hardly surprising, as that's where the kids are.

    This would result in low proportions of abusers amongst homosexuals - and Catholic priests. They are already low proportions of the population anyway.

    Now, consider institutions. One abuser can end up abusing an awful lot of children unless discovered and stopped. Note also a lot of institutions are sex-segregated, thus exposing children to same-sex attacks only.

    But I can give one solid, verified fact. 80.9% of the victims of clerical child abuse in the USA were boys.( John Jay Report)
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    antifrank said:

    isam said:

    antifrank said:

    isam said:

    antifrank said:

    isam said:

    antifrank said:

    AndyJS said:

    I just can't understand why antifrank is more exercised by UKIP than fundamentalist Muslims living in the UK. Totally baffling.

    Relative numbers. There are far more silly old UKIP-voting fools determined to make the lives of gay men a misery than fundamentalist Muslims. Simple as.
    Even if a UKIP govt repealed the law on gay Marriage, which they wouldnt, how would they make the lives of gay men a misery?
    Shooting me would put rather a crimp on my day.
    That sort of misrepresentaion is just ridiculous. I know you are trying to win an argument, and no one on here ever admits defeat, but try to stay rational
    Staying rational, will you accept that an unacceptably high number of UKIP candidates have felt obliged to make comments about homosexuality, and that Nigel Farage has gone out of his way not to condemn those?
    Has he really gone out of his way not to condemn them? To me he has acted like most normal, middle of the road people would and said that these views are a bit old fashioned etc but try to take into consideration the upbringing of those who said these things.

    The gay weather thing was so ridiculous he even parodied it

    In the sprirt of common ground I am typing this while listening to my current fav song "Jet Boy" by NY Dolls

    I'll take that as an acknowledgement that an unacceptably high number of UKIP candidates have felt obliged to make comments about homosexuality.

    Sadly, I haven't had the quantities of anal sex that SeanT ascribes to me, but I do need to go to bed. In a spirit of common ground, if UKIP win tomorrow, I promise not to bring any floods of vengeance.
    Its raining outside, Ill take it you had your fingers crossed! Goodnight
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053

    The message is quite simple.

    Vote Ukip,Get Tory.

    It's even much simpler than that. Vote UKIP, get UKIP. Night all.
  • corporealcorporeal Posts: 2,549
    Ninoinoz said:

    Pulpstar said:

    For balance's sake does anyone have any statistics on the relative incidence of sexual abuse amongst homosexuals in general, heterosexuals in general and priests in the Catholic church ?

    I mean I have my suspicions on this subject - perhaps my prejudices are incorrect ?

    You're probably asking the wrong question.

    75% of abuse takes place within families. Hardly surprising, as that's where the kids are.

    This would result in low proportions of abusers amongst homosexuals - and Catholic priests. They are already low proportions of the population anyway.

    Now, consider institutions. One abuser can end up abusing an awful lot of children unless discovered and stopped. Note also a lot of institutions are sex-segregated, thus exposing children to same-sex attacks only.

    But I can give one solid, verified fact. 80.9% of the victims of clerical child abuse in the USA were boys.( John Jay Report)
    The Roman Catholic church remains quite sex segregated I guess.
  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    Aaaargggh, we can literally choose between Nepali or Spanish film fans!!! Damn you Cosmopolitan Conspirators.
  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    Okay - I'll choose Jack Lemmon and Julie Andrews - you've got me for at least another half hour. I'm not happy.
  • NinoinozNinoinoz Posts: 1,312
    corporeal said:

    Ninoinoz said:

    Pulpstar said:

    For balance's sake does anyone have any statistics on the relative incidence of sexual abuse amongst homosexuals in general, heterosexuals in general and priests in the Catholic church ?

    I mean I have my suspicions on this subject - perhaps my prejudices are incorrect ?

    You're probably asking the wrong question.

    75% of abuse takes place within families. Hardly surprising, as that's where the kids are.

    This would result in low proportions of abusers amongst homosexuals - and Catholic priests. They are already low proportions of the population anyway.

    Now, consider institutions. One abuser can end up abusing an awful lot of children unless discovered and stopped. Note also a lot of institutions are sex-segregated, thus exposing children to same-sex attacks only.

    But I can give one solid, verified fact. 80.9% of the victims of clerical child abuse in the USA were boys.( John Jay Report)
    The Roman Catholic church remains quite sex segregated I guess.
    Schools, boarding schools, kids' homes and juvenile offenders' institutions.

    The danger, in my view, is where the children are separated from the parents.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406
    Cripes, UKIP didn't respond to 38 Degrees.

    Well colour me pink.,
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406
    Conservatives off to thousandville on Betfair.

    2 horse race now.
  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    Do you think you'll make a profit Pulpstar? I could only bet on Ukip at the stage.
  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    Aaargh 1.4 - I can't even fun bet.
  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    And Lewis evens! That's harsh.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Reminder of the BBC's national projected shares from last year:

    Lab 29%
    Con 25%
    UKIP 23%
    LD 14%
    Others 9%

    www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUXfmS6n7uc&amp
  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,790
    There have been lots of predictions that the Lib Dems will lose all their seats, but these seem to be hysterical and wishful-thinking than realistic. It reminds me of 1994, when people were forecasting sweeping gains for the Lib Dems but they ended up with only 2 seats (albeit 2 more than they had ever had before) which was much more realistic and reasonable.

    I expect the Lib Dems will get about 3 or 4 as a minimum, and I think it's much more likely that the Greens will be squeezed into 5th place by the Lib Dems holding firm on 13% than vice-versa.
  • StickytrollStickytroll Posts: 30
    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-27508752

    I thought I was looking at a composite of E and D Miliband.
  • old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238
    edited May 2014
  • old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238
    That's one way to keep the Bulgars out.
    AveryLP said:

    This headline says it all

    UKIP candidate Peter Lello arrested for 'sex assault' on homeless Bulgarian man

    Full article: http://bit.ly/1qW7oMR

  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    I can't begin to imagine how the LDs might contrive to lose their final seat in the SE. They'd just have to do astonishingly badly in places they've been fairly strong in for decades like Eastleigh, Winchester, Newbury, Oxford West, Woking, Portsmouth. It won't happen IMO. In fact they should hold seats in London, NW and possibly SW as well.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    The message is quite simple.

    Vote Ukip,Get Tory.

    Vote Silly - get Mili..
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Anyone know how to get into bet fair from an iPad whilst in the US of A ?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    edited May 2014
    Wondering who to vote for in the European Elections? Why not ask Google!

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/wondering-who-vote-european-elections-3583515#ixzz32Q57iuMQ
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406
    Lib dems might hold seats but they ain't getting 13% lol
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    And following up on "the google test" the top three for:

    David Cameron: "a prick", "evil" "a liar"
    Ed Miliband: "useless", "weird" "a joke"
    Nick Clegg: "a liar" "sad" "an idiot"
    Nîgel Farage: "a prick, "right" "a moron"
    Alex Salmond is "a moron", "deluded", "racist"
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406
    Pissing it down here in deepest Labour Derbyshire.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Pulpstar said:

    Pissing it down here in deepest Labour Derbyshire.

    Rain map:

    http://www.raintoday.co.uk
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,704
    Beautiful sunshine here in Essex. And I'm still undecided about who to go and vote for!I suppose that as a committed no-borders European it’s goth to be the LibDems, although Richard Howitt, top of the Labour list, appears to be an excellent "on the ground” MEP.
  • rogerhrogerh Posts: 282
    Re Lib Dems Euro vote share.looking back at Euro vote shares and comparing with ICM April polls polls since 1989 the Lib Dems have always polled less than prevailing national opinion polls.The average deficit is 5.4%.Thus taking the latest ICM which is 13% would produce a 7.6 share.Anything above this is better than average.!
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498
    RobD said:

    kle4 said:

    isam said:


    I cant find my ballot card.. does this matter????

    No. Says right on them you don't need to take it with you 'but it is helpful if you can'.

    On a similar 'not in the rules business'. If anyone takes selfies can they do so in the voting booth tomorrow? Wasn't there a story earlier about how the Electoral Commission have asked staff to stop people doing it, but it is not actually against the law (so long as you don't accidentally show which way you voted)? Someone should try it.
    Heard the arse end of something on the radio saying they will fine people for doing so. It has apparently become a new fad.

    Can imagine some of the newbies going in there, getting their phone out and then asking the person in the next cubical "What do I do now?".
    Although it is easy to understand why the electoral commission don't want people photographing their ballots
    The cretins should be locked up and never ever allowed to vote again. Pathetic halfwits.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498

    marke09 said:

    ELECTOR ‏@britainelects 6m

    YouGov's final poll for Scotland #EP2014: LAB - 28% SNP - 26% CON - 15% UKIP - 13% GRN - 11% LDEM - 6% (NOTE: small sample of 533)

    But not all that small.
    Bet it is a mile away from the actual result
  • rogerhrogerh Posts: 282
    The pronunciation of the name" Farage" .In the UK we hear the name pronounced as Fa-rarge (as in large).A rather grand sounding pronunciation!
    In Europe" Farage "is pronounced Fa -rage (as in" forage").
    If opponents want to cut Mr Farage down to size suggest they use the European version.
  • rogerhrogerh Posts: 282
    Are any polling companies doing an exit poll on the Euros?
  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    YouGov EURO:

    The 2010 splits are interesting - as are the regional splits (usual caveats);But will be interesting to see how close these are to actual.

    2010:
    Cons: Cons49; LAB:3; LD:2; UKIP:39; Green:3
    LAB: Cons:4; LAB:65; LD:2; UKIP:15; Green:8
    LDem: Cons:8: LAB:18; LD:31; UKIP:18; Green:19

    Regions:
    London: Cons: 23; LAB: 27; LD:13; UKIP:20; Green: 12
    R of South: Cons: 26; LAB:19; LD:10; UKIP:33; Green:9
    Mids/Wales: Cons:22; LAB:26; LD:6; UKIP:30; Green:9; PC:3
    NORTH: Cons: 18; LAB:33; LD:7; UKIP:27; Green:10
    Scotland: Cons: 15; LAB:28; LD:6; UKIP:13; Green:11; SNP:26
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    TGOHF said:

    Anyone know how to get into bet fair from an iPad whilst in the US of A ?

    If you use Firefox, you could try adding the 'modify headers' extension, and spoofing a UK IP address.

    This sometimes lets me pretend to be a USA resident to watch US TV shows, but more often not. It depends how strict Betfair want to be.
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    Financier said:

    YouGov EURO:

    The 2010 splits are interesting - as are the regional splits (usual caveats);But will be interesting to see how close these are to actual.

    2010:
    Cons: Cons49; LAB:3; LD:2; UKIP:39; Green:3
    LAB: Cons:4; LAB:65; LD:2; UKIP:15; Green:8
    LDem: Cons:8: LAB:18; LD:31; UKIP:18; Green:19

    Regions:
    London: Cons: 23; LAB: 27; LD:13; UKIP:20; Green: 12
    R of South: Cons: 26; LAB:19; LD:10; UKIP:33; Green:9
    Mids/Wales: Cons:22; LAB:26; LD:6; UKIP:30; Green:9; PC:3
    NORTH: Cons: 18; LAB:33; LD:7; UKIP:27; Green:10
    Scotland: Cons: 15; LAB:28; LD:6; UKIP:13; Green:11; SNP:26

    The Scotland figure is encouraging. UKIP would win a seat, and I'd collect from Ladbrokes.
  • volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 2,078
    Suarez out of World Cup rumours but I stand by them for the World Cup.The price on Uruguay should go well out with this news.
    It's a blow to Uruguay indeed.
  • sarissasarissa Posts: 2,000

    marke09 said:

    ELECTOR ‏@britainelects 6m

    YouGov's final poll for Scotland #EP2014: LAB - 28% SNP - 26% CON - 15% UKIP - 13% GRN - 11% LDEM - 6% (NOTE: small sample of 533)

    But not all that small.
    Opinium's Scottish sub-sample is SNP 37% Lab 24% everbody else 7% or under - enough for SNP 4/Lab 2 seats??
This discussion has been closed.