Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Populus “Mondays good for LAB, Fridays for CON” sequenc

13»

Comments

  • MrJones said:

    It's an odd coincidence that France decided to make gay marriage legal at exactly the same time as the UK - almost like it was an EU directive or something.

    I don't watch the telly news much so i don't know if the massive protests against it in France got on the telly over here.

    http://edition.cnn.com/2013/04/04/world/europe/france-same-sex-marriage/

    Um. No. More likely the ruling parties in both countries saw that the time was right for such a move and were given courage by similar movements and changes in other countries. For all that I love to blame the EU for all manner of things I really don't think they can be given the blame/credit for this one. France and the UK just saw sense and did the right thing.
  • Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664

    Unlike several of my fellow Tories on this site who are trying to convince themselves that the Blues are only around 3% behind, I feel they have definitely lost ground over the past couple of weeks. The last three polls show them to be 5% adrift of Labour and this average of course excludes the 7% shocker from the "Gold Standard" pollster ICM which was blithely disregarded as being an outlier - I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that it almost certainly was not.
    I just don't go with the argument that it's "all simply noise"(whatever that means) - would the same explanation be put forward if and very possibly when Labour's lead extends to 5 - 6% or more, I hardly think so.
    Dave needs to arrest this slide and quickly.

    Possibly right, except that it isn't your fellow tories who are overexcited about short term polling movements.

    2 weeks is a very short space of time to identify a real trend, and it's been 2 weeks in which ed has been completely out of the public eye - often associated, entirely inexplicably, with an uptick in red fortunes. Normal service will be resumed shortly.

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    oh sorry it was Rudi Stephan.

    Not my cup of tea nevertheless.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,578
    TOPPING said:

    Smarmeron said:

    @TOPPING
    What you needed was less PR and more honesty. And I think you are right, in that he has no way to remedy it now.
    This is my honest view, with which you are free to disagree

    Thing is, I still believe that the British public would vote out in a heartbeat anyone who was "honest" with them.

    Honest as in explaining to them the implications of public/private debt levels; the reality of governement "investment" plans, the capital markets and borrowing rates (talking to you, here, @Hugh‌; the ever-increasing competition from newly developed countries and the implications for wage levels in this country; and Britain's place in a modern globalised economy.

    In 1997 the Cons were stale, unfocused, scandal-ridden and although they had delivered economic stability, the public were ready for a change.

    In 2010 small children in Weymouth realised how bad Lab had been but the Cons were still too nasty.

    In 2015 ain't no one winning without a healthy dose of PR. Honesty just doesn't cut it these days. Not because Cam or EdM or anyone else wouldn't like to be honest, but because they know it would be electoral suicide.
    Reluctantly, there appears to be something in what you say. What politician would be strong enough to stop spinning the regular old arguments and rolling out bandaid solutions, and still manage to be re-elected for taking the actions that need taking or saying what needs saying? The fallback position is that whichever of the right or left are correct about what needs doing (or some combination of the two), it feels like both know serious actions need taking that they cannot contemplate openly.
  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @kle4
    I think that is Cameron's weak spot, Tony B. got away with it because he started from a huge majority, and could get bye losing trust each election. Cameron does not have that luxury, and short of another "Falklands" moment, or enough people feeling much better off, he can only lose seats. (with a few "swaps" as well of course)
  • MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523

    MrJones said:

    It's an odd coincidence that France decided to make gay marriage legal at exactly the same time as the UK - almost like it was an EU directive or something.

    I don't watch the telly news much so i don't know if the massive protests against it in France got on the telly over here.

    http://edition.cnn.com/2013/04/04/world/europe/france-same-sex-marriage/

    Um. No. More likely the ruling parties in both countries saw that the time was right for such a move and were given courage by similar movements and changes in other countries. For all that I love to blame the EU for all manner of things I really don't think they can be given the blame/credit for this one. France and the UK just saw sense and did the right thing.
    Fair enough. Doing it independently at the same time still seems odd to me but I guess it happens.

  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,703
    I was looking back the other day over some articles I wrote for my professional Press around 1980. There was a reference there to someone high in the City who said, in connection with their profit-making actions during a financial crisis "it is un-British and derogative to sterling, but on balance it makes sense!"

    To hell in a hand-cart seems to be, ever since, the appropriate phrase.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    Where'd my post go? Extreme censorship!!!
  • nigel4englandnigel4england Posts: 4,800
    MrJones said:

    MrJones said:

    It's an odd coincidence that France decided to make gay marriage legal at exactly the same time as the UK - almost like it was an EU directive or something.

    I don't watch the telly news much so i don't know if the massive protests against it in France got on the telly over here.

    http://edition.cnn.com/2013/04/04/world/europe/france-same-sex-marriage/

    Um. No. More likely the ruling parties in both countries saw that the time was right for such a move and were given courage by similar movements and changes in other countries. For all that I love to blame the EU for all manner of things I really don't think they can be given the blame/credit for this one. France and the UK just saw sense and did the right thing.
    Fair enough. Doing it independently at the same time still seems odd to me but I guess it happens.

    You may be incorrect Richard, I read at the time that France and the UK were rushing it through, this may be the reason why:

    http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/cameron-pushing-for-gay-marriage-over-fear-of-uk-court-ruling-nigel-farage
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012

    @Life_ina_market_town - Governing is hard. It's about choices, and governing well is not about elevating some obsession to a 'principle' even if in the circumstances that leads you to an outcome where the disadvantages outweigh the benefits.

    You are defining a 'man or woman of principle' in such a way that it would exclude Winston Churchill or Margaret Thatcher, let alone politicians such as Macmillan, Willie Whitelaw or R. A. Butler who are more directly Cameron's political ancestors. You could make the same statement regarding consistency of principles, by your narrow and incorrect definition, about any of them. That reflects the fact that they spent their careers trying to wrestle with difficult problems in an uncertain, contradictory and changing world. Cameron is doing the same, and very well.

    Agreed.
    I am grateful for all the sense you are talking this evening.
  • O/T From Twitter this evening a funny hashtag is running.
    My favourite so far.
    RoadRunner ‏@roadrunner_83 2m
    #AskIslamicState Are your currency plans for the caliphate more advanced than Alex Salmond's for Scotland?
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    Israel News ‏@IsraelNewsNow 8m
    #BreakingNews Security sources: Mortar that killed boy was fired from UNRWA school http://dlvr.it/6hXbX1

    Israel News ‏@IsraelNewsNow 9m
    #BreakingNews Gaza rocket hits street in Ashdod area; 1 critically wounded, 2 others lightly http://dlvr.it/6hXbVD

    Israel News ‏@IsraelNewsNow 9m
    Four people injured, one mortally, by Hamas rocket to car http://dlvr.it/6hXbRR
    Expand
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012

    Smarmeron said:

    @TOPPING
    That particular one never ends, and started before homo sapiens
    The Battle of Britain, it could be argued that the Poles won it. Experienced pilots, who were not allowed in combat till the till the RAF had no alternative than to let the "foreigners fly".
    My own view is that it was the pilot/s that started bombing the cities,

    Poles were fighting and flying with the RAF from the first day of the Battle of Britain.

    People who want to whip up hysteria should remember this (wiki)
    ''In all, 30 Polish airmen were killed during the Battle. One of them died at the hands of an angry crowd in east London. He had baled out of his fighter and landed, injured in Wapping. His incoherent rambling was mistaken for German and he was set-upon by the people who had gathered round him. They were incensed by recent Nazi raids on civilian targets, but he was a member of the RAF''
  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @MikeK
    We are all humans, we bleed when cut, and deaths and injuries are a shame on all sides.
    Stop arguing about who started it, and stop it, or alternatively fight on till the bitter end.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,014

    Unlike several of my fellow Tories on this site who are trying to convince themselves that the Blues are only around 3% behind, I feel they have definitely lost ground over the past couple of weeks. The last three polls show them to be 5% adrift of Labour and this average of course excludes the 7% shocker from the "Gold Standard" pollster ICM which was blithely disregarded as being an outlier - I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that it almost certainly was not.
    I just don't go with the argument that it's "all simply noise"(whatever that means) - would the same explanation be put forward if and very possibly when Labour's lead extends to 5 - 6% or more, I hardly think so.
    Dave needs to arrest this slide and quickly.


    I agree. As I said the other night the problem is that Ed has not been on the telly enough. People need regular reminders of what they might be voting for.
  • MrJones said:

    MrJones said:

    It's an odd coincidence that France decided to make gay marriage legal at exactly the same time as the UK - almost like it was an EU directive or something.

    I don't watch the telly news much so i don't know if the massive protests against it in France got on the telly over here.

    http://edition.cnn.com/2013/04/04/world/europe/france-same-sex-marriage/

    Um. No. More likely the ruling parties in both countries saw that the time was right for such a move and were given courage by similar movements and changes in other countries. For all that I love to blame the EU for all manner of things I really don't think they can be given the blame/credit for this one. France and the UK just saw sense and did the right thing.
    Fair enough. Doing it independently at the same time still seems odd to me but I guess it happens.

    You may be incorrect Richard, I read at the time that France and the UK were rushing it through, this may be the reason why:

    http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/cameron-pushing-for-gay-marriage-over-fear-of-uk-court-ruling-nigel-farage
    It certainly wasn't 'rushed through' and was a long overdue change.

    Farage was wrong on this one.He decided a bandwagon was more important than his own principles and that is why he has found it so difficult to defend the UKIP position subsequently.

    I look forward (perhaps in vain) to Farage becoming rather more consistent in his self proclaimed Libertarian ideals.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,452

    MrJones said:

    MrJones said:

    It's an odd coincidence that France decided to make gay marriage legal at exactly the same time as the UK - almost like it was an EU directive or something.

    I don't watch the telly news much so i don't know if the massive protests against it in France got on the telly over here.

    http://edition.cnn.com/2013/04/04/world/europe/france-same-sex-marriage/

    Um. No. More likely the ruling parties in both countries saw that the time was right for such a move and were given courage by similar movements and changes in other countries. For all that I love to blame the EU for all manner of things I really don't think they can be given the blame/credit for this one. France and the UK just saw sense and did the right thing.
    Fair enough. Doing it independently at the same time still seems odd to me but I guess it happens.

    You may be incorrect Richard, I read at the time that France and the UK were rushing it through, this may be the reason why:

    http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/cameron-pushing-for-gay-marriage-over-fear-of-uk-court-ruling-nigel-farage
    Why would Tatchell's case have caused the French to take action?

    Like the smoking ban, gay marriage was an idea whose time had come. It also occurred outside Europe at roughly the same time, with Argentina recognising it in 2010, and New Zealand, Urugray and Brazil in 2013, amongst others. I was surprised to read that South Africa legalised it back in 2006.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage#Legal_recognition

    Once a few countries legalised it, and it was seen that the world did not end, it was bound to spread amongst civilised nations.
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012
    malcolmg said:

    RobD said:

    malcolmg said:

    RobD said:

    ... and that legal advice on EU membership.

    Oh, you can't help but laugh about that!

    And that they spent substantially more in defending against people finding out it didn't exist than not getting it in the first place......

    Fools are easy pleased
    Probably what Salmond thought when he suggested he had legal advice.... ;-)
    I refuse to rise to your misguided bait, so hard luck. You just play with the loonies.
    Translated as 'I've been shafted by the logic of your argument again'
  • Rexel56Rexel56 Posts: 807

    MrJones said:

    MrJones said:

    It's an odd coincidence that France decided to make gay marriage legal at exactly the same time as the UK - almost like it was an EU directive or something.

    I don't watch the telly news much so i don't know if the massive protests against it in France got on the telly over here.

    http://edition.cnn.com/2013/04/04/world/europe/france-same-sex-marriage/

    Um. No. More likely the ruling parties in both countries saw that the time was right for such a move and were given courage by similar movements and changes in other countries. For all that I love to blame the EU for all manner of things I really don't think they can be given the blame/credit for this one. France and the UK just saw sense and did the right thing.
    Fair enough. Doing it independently at the same time still seems odd to me but I guess it happens.

    You may be incorrect Richard, I read at the time that France and the UK were rushing it through, this may be the reason why:

    http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/cameron-pushing-for-gay-marriage-over-fear-of-uk-court-ruling-nigel-farage
    It certainly wasn't 'rushed through' and was a long overdue change.

    Farage was wrong on this one.He decided a bandwagon was more important than his own principles and that is why he has found it so difficult to defend the UKIP position subsequently.

    I look forward (perhaps in vain) to Farage becoming rather more consistent in his self proclaimed Libertarian ideals.
    Like stripping people of their citizenship in absentia based on intelligence...
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    edited August 2014
    Blah blah blah
  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    "Mafia Dons: is the Camorra in control of the Granite City?"
    Make your own minds up.
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/mafia-dons-is-the-camorra-in-control-of-the-granite-city-9686541.html
  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    In reference to the post below, They could make a film about it and call it the Codfather?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Smarmeron said:

    "Mafia Dons: is the Camorra in control of the Granite City?"
    Make your own minds up.
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/mafia-dons-is-the-camorra-in-control-of-the-granite-city-9686541.html

    I suppose if they vote "Yes" then they won't have to put up with those pesky bureaucrats writing difficult reports in future.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,578
    Smarmeron said:

    In reference to the post below, They could make a film about it and call it the Codfather?

    Too many fish and chip shops with that name already I think, would lack impact.
  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @kle4
    "Dons" on the Don?
  • peter_from_putneypeter_from_putney Posts: 6,956
    edited August 2014
    RobD said:

    Unlike several of my fellow Tories on this site who are trying to convince themselves that the Blues are only around 3% behind, I feel they have definitely lost ground over the past couple of weeks. The last three polls show them to be 5% adrift of Labour and this average of course excludes the 7% shocker from the "Gold Standard" pollster ICM which was blithely disregarded as being an outlier - I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that it almost certainly was not.
    I just don't go with the argument that it's "all simply noise"(whatever that means) - would the same explanation be put forward if and very possibly when Labour's lead extends to 5 - 6% or more, I hardly think so.
    Dave needs to arrest this slide and quickly.

    I plotted Tory lead on my spreadsheet, I don't recall their being a drop in recent weeks, more of a plateau. When I get to my computer I can share the link!
    I'm not talking about "recent weeks", but rather the very latest polls which as this thread has correctly highlighted have not, as previously, cancelled out Labour's leads at the start of the week. The last three polls, yes a small sample admittedly, give Labour an average 5% lead, then one has to explain that 7% lead in the most recent ICM poll .... taken together, there is a fair amount of evidence building up to suggest that Labour's lead has indeed increased, probably to around 5% or thereabouts. Should the next few polls show their lead having slipped back to an average of say 3%, then I will happily eat my words but I very much doubt this is about to happen.
    Just as I don't go with the "just noise" explanations, neither to I follow the suggestion that no one's interested in politics during the summer holiday months and that somehow meaningful polling somehow won't return until after the party conferences. Why ??? Whilst politics might not be uppermost in people's minds right now, we are talking about a polling exercise where they are being asked about their voting intention. Why should we assume that in such circumstances they would currently be more likely to favour Labour than at other times of the year? It simply isn't logical.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Smarmeron said:

    @kle4
    "Dons" on the Don?

    I suppose if you are forced into paying protection money, you could say

    Ah been don!

    (I'll get my coat)
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Kate Bush on BBC4 right now.
  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    "NHS plans rapid expansion of 'doctor's assistant' jobs"
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-28896625

    This will not be an easy "sell", even if it does makes sense.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    RobD said:

    Unlike several of my fellow Tories on this site who are trying to convince themselves that the Blues are only around 3% behind, I feel they have definitely lost ground over the past couple of weeks. The last three polls show them to be 5% adrift of Labour and this average of course excludes the 7% shocker from the "Gold Standard" pollster ICM which was blithely disregarded as being an outlier - I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that it almost certainly was not.
    I just don't go with the argument that it's "all simply noise"(whatever that means) - would the same explanation be put forward if and very possibly when Labour's lead extends to 5 - 6% or more, I hardly think so.
    Dave needs to arrest this slide and quickly.

    I plotted Tory lead on my spreadsheet, I don't recall their being a drop in recent weeks, more of a plateau. When I get to my computer I can share the link!
    I'm not talking about "recent weeks", but rather the very latest polls which as this thread has correctly highlighted have not, as previously, cancelled out Labour's leads at the start of the week. The last three polls, yes a small sample admittedly, give Labour an average 5% lead, then one has to explain that 7% lead in the most recent ICM poll .... taken together, there is a fair amount of evidence building up to suggest that Labour's lead has indeed increased, probably to around 5% or thereabouts. Should the next few polls show their lead having slipped back to an average of say 3%, then I will happily eat my words but I very much doubt this is about to happen.
    Just as I don't go with the "just noise" explanations, neither to I follow the suggestion that no one's interested in politics in the summer holiday months and that somehow meaningful polling somehow won't return until after the party conferences. Why ??? Whilst politics might not be uppermost in people's minds right now, we are talking about a polling exercise where they are being asked to express about their voting intention. Why should we assume that in such circumstances they would currently be more likely to favour Labour than at other times of the year? It simply isn't logical.
    If you believe - and robust evidence is difficult to come by to validate the thesis - that EdM being on TV tends to reduce Labour's lead, then it is possible that summer - and his absence from the news - might result in it firming up
  • FalseFlagFalseFlag Posts: 1,801
    James Gelvin, a Middle East history professor, cites at least three reasons for why the British government chose to support Zionist aspirations. Issuing the Balfour Declaration would appeal to Woodrow Wilson's two closest advisors, who were avid Zionists.

    "The British did not know quite what to make of President Woodrow Wilson and his conviction (before America's entrance into the war) that the way to end hostilities was for both sides to accept "peace without victory." Two of Wilson's closest advisors, Louis Brandeis and Felix Frankfurter, were avid Zionists. How better to shore up an uncertain ally than by endorsing Zionist aims? The British adopted similar thinking when it came to the Russians, who were in the midst of their revolution. Several of the most prominent revolutionaries, including Leon Trotsky, were of Jewish descent. Why not see if they could be persuaded to keep Russia in the war by appealing to their latent Jewishness and giving them another reason to continue the fight?" ... These include not only those already mentioned but also Britain's desire to attract Jewish financial resources.

    Even Wikipedia is more informed than you.
  • Smarmeron said:

    @kle4
    I think that is Cameron's weak spot, Tony B. got away with it because he started from a huge majority, and could get bye losing trust each election. Cameron does not have that luxury, and short of another "Falklands" moment, or enough people feeling much better off, he can only lose seats. (with a few "swaps" as well of course)

    Hmm, not sure about that. In 2001, his first election as PM, Tony Blair lost 5 seats (out of 418). In his second (2005), he lost 47 (according to Wikipedia), many as a result of his policy on Iraq.

    Will David Cameron have a better result in 2015?
  • peter_from_putneypeter_from_putney Posts: 6,956
    edited August 2014
    Charles said:

    RobD said:

    Unlike several of my fellow Tories on this site who are trying to convince themselves that the Blues are only around 3% behind, I feel they have definitely lost ground over the past couple of weeks. The last three polls show them to be 5% adrift of Labour and this average of course excludes the 7% shocker from the "Gold Standard" pollster ICM which was blithely disregarded as being an outlier - I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that it almost certainly was not.
    I just don't go with the argument that it's "all simply noise"(whatever that means) - would the same explanation be put forward if and very possibly when Labour's lead extends to 5 - 6% or more, I hardly think so.
    Dave needs to arrest this slide and quickly.



    If you believe - and robust evidence is difficult to come by to validate the thesis - that EdM being on TV tends to reduce Labour's lead, then it is possible that summer - and his absence from the news - might result in it firming up
    I don't pretend to know why Labour's lead has increased, I'm merely arguing that increased it has. I'll wager £20 at even money with the first bona fide PB.com bettor to accept prior to midnight tonight that Stephen Fisher's weekly projection either next Friday 29 Aug or the following Friday 5 Sept will show Labour as winning the most seats at the next GE.

    I can't be fairer than that, after all the Tories have been ahead of Labour in 21 out of his last 22 weekly projections.
  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    The_Woodpecker
    The number of seats maybe, but (and I may be wrong) he was losing quite high percentages of the vote share.
  • peter_from_putneypeter_from_putney Posts: 6,956
    edited August 2014
    Charles: " If you believe - and robust evidence is difficult to come by to validate the thesis - that EdM being on TV tends to reduce Labour's lead, then it is possible that summer - and his absence from the news - might result in it firming up"

    I don't pretend to know why Labour's lead has increased, I'm merely arguing that increased it has. I'll wager £20 at even money with the first bona fide PB.com bettor to accept prior to midnight tonight opposing my view that Stephen Fisher's weekly projection either next Friday 29 Aug or the following Friday 5 Sept will show Labour as winning the most seats at the next GE.

    I can't be fairer than that, after all the Tories have been ahead of Labour in 21 out of his last 22 weekly projections.
  • Rexel56 said:

    MrJones said:

    MrJones said:

    It's an odd coincidence that France decided to make gay marriage legal at exactly the same time as the UK - almost like it was an EU directive or something.

    I don't watch the telly news much so i don't know if the massive protests against it in France got on the telly over here.

    http://edition.cnn.com/2013/04/04/world/europe/france-same-sex-marriage/

    Um. No. More likely the ruling parties in both countries saw that the time was right for such a move and were given courage by similar movements and changes in other countries. For all that I love to blame the EU for all manner of things I really don't think they can be given the blame/credit for this one. France and the UK just saw sense and did the right thing.
    Fair enough. Doing it independently at the same time still seems odd to me but I guess it happens.

    You may be incorrect Richard, I read at the time that France and the UK were rushing it through, this may be the reason why:

    http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/cameron-pushing-for-gay-marriage-over-fear-of-uk-court-ruling-nigel-farage
    It certainly wasn't 'rushed through' and was a long overdue change.

    Farage was wrong on this one.He decided a bandwagon was more important than his own principles and that is why he has found it so difficult to defend the UKIP position subsequently.

    I look forward (perhaps in vain) to Farage becoming rather more consistent in his self proclaimed Libertarian ideals.
    Like stripping people of their citizenship in absentia based on intelligence...
    "Citizenship" is explicitly something given by government. As such it also falls within their scope to remove it. Certainly establishment and protection of borders is something that is entirely consistent with Libertarianism of any stripe - though it is something that is more commonly expressed in the US version than the UK.

    But you make the usual mistake of confusing Libertarianism and the strictly limited exercising of government power with anarchism and the disavowal of any form of authority. They are not the same thing at all.

    Certain things - such as the protection of people from foreign attack - are clearly within the remit of the Government so there is absolutely no contradiction between Libertarianism and the prevention of radicals returning to the country. Yours is, not surprisingly, a straw man argument.
  • HughHugh Posts: 955
    Lets go surfin now
    Everybody's learnin how
    Come on and safari with me
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012
    Smarmeron said:

    "NHS plans rapid expansion of 'doctor's assistant' jobs"
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-28896625

    This will not be an easy "sell", even if it does makes sense.

    Really? Labour sold it in their years in office.
    Of course if Miliband and Labour choose to be a bunch of lying hypocritical opportunists then you might have a point.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    edited August 2014
    FalseFlag said:

    James Gelvin, a Middle East history professor, cites at least three reasons for why the British government chose to support Zionist aspirations. Issuing the Balfour Declaration would appeal to Woodrow Wilson's two closest advisors, who were avid Zionists.

    "The British did not know quite what to make of President Woodrow Wilson and his conviction (before America's entrance into the war) that the way to end hostilities was for both sides to accept "peace without victory." Two of Wilson's closest advisors, Louis Brandeis and Felix Frankfurter, were avid Zionists. How better to shore up an uncertain ally than by endorsing Zionist aims? The British adopted similar thinking when it came to the Russians, who were in the midst of their revolution. Several of the most prominent revolutionaries, including Leon Trotsky, were of Jewish descent. Why not see if they could be persuaded to keep Russia in the war by appealing to their latent Jewishness and giving them another reason to continue the fight?" ... These include not only those already mentioned but also Britain's desire to attract Jewish financial resources.

    Even Wikipedia is more informed than you.

    Wikipedia is Wikipedia which I suppose is where your level is. I know for you that it represents the eternal truth but you really should try to think things through critically.

    The Balfour declaration did more for Brandeis than Brandeis did for the Balfour declaration. He wanted a reason for American Jews to be patriotic (towards America) and the Declaration provided this for him. He thought of American Jews as analogous to Irish-Americans. They could be patriotic but accept a "homeland". Hence with the Declaration (because the Brits had long misunderstood the role of the Jews especially amongst and within the Young Turks) he was able to make that connection.

    Of course @FalseFlag‌ I expect this to send you scurrying off to Wikipedia again to try to find snippets, because your quote only contained snippets, and meagre ones at that, if that's not tautological, to support your initial moronic contention.

    So I'll give you as long as you want, via Wiki and Google to respond.

    Then again, PB is much more interesting and engaging if, instead of mouthing platitudes and second hand hearsay (again with the tautologies) you actually contributed something substantial of your own creation.

    You have a long way to go.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,723

    Charles: " If you believe - and robust evidence is difficult to come by to validate the thesis - that EdM being on TV tends to reduce Labour's lead, then it is possible that summer - and his absence from the news - might result in it firming up"

    I don't pretend to know why Labour's lead has increased, I'm merely arguing that increased it has. I'll wager £20 at even money with the first bona fide PB.com bettor to accept prior to midnight tonight opposing my view that Stephen Fisher's weekly projection either next Friday 29 Aug or the following Friday 5 Sept will show Labour as winning the most seats at the next GE.

    I can't be fairer than that, after all the Tories have been ahead of Labour in 21 out of his last 22 weekly projections.

    If we look at YouGov alone, the last 7 weeks have gone:

    4.4
    4.4
    3.0
    3.2
    4.2
    2.6
    3.75 = This week, one poll to come

    So whilst this week is disappointing for Con, the Lab lead is still lower than for 3 of the last 6 weeks. All in all, there is no significant increase in the Lab lead - last week may just have been a random movement downwards.

    However Lab has had its best week for ages with Populus - but that could be random.

    YouGov shows effectively no movement over 4 polls - no reason to trust Populus's 2 polls to any greater degree.
  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    edited August 2014
    @Flightpath
    "sell" is in inverted comas because an easy "sell" is a car that is "mint nick", and both you and the customer know it is in mint condition.
    A hard "sell" is when the car has some faults but you hope the punter won't notice.
    The "punters" in this case are the BMA and the public.
    "Rapid expansion" of these doctors assistants will make some ask why do we need them so quickly, and a this precise moment?
    And Ms Chardonay Smith will tear her tracksuit in twain if her little poppet doesn't get to seen by a "proper" doctor.
    Few minor faults sir, but nothing a little TLC won't cure?
  • MikeL said:

    Charles: " If you believe - and robust evidence is difficult to come by to validate the thesis - that EdM being on TV tends to reduce Labour's lead, then it is possible that summer - and his absence from the news - might result in it firming up"

    I don't pretend to know why Labour's lead has increased, I'm merely arguing that increased it has. I'll wager £20 at even money with the first bona fide PB.com bettor to accept prior to midnight tonight opposing my view that Stephen Fisher's weekly projection either next Friday 29 Aug or the following Friday 5 Sept will show Labour as winning the most seats at the next GE.

    I can't be fairer than that, after all the Tories have been ahead of Labour in 21 out of his last 22 weekly projections.

    If we look at YouGov alone, the last 7 weeks have gone:

    4.4
    4.4
    3.0
    3.2
    4.2
    2.6
    3.75 = This week, one poll to come

    So whilst this week is disappointing for Con, the Lab lead is still lower than for 3 of the last 6 weeks. All in all, there is no significant increase in the Lab lead - last week may just have been a random movement downwards.

    However Lab has had its best week for ages with Populus - but that could be random.

    YouGov shows effectively no movement over 4 polls - no reason to trust Populus's 2 polls to any greater degree.
    I got quite excited there for a minute - I thought you were going to take me on!
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,723

    MikeL said:

    Charles: " If you believe - and robust evidence is difficult to come by to validate the thesis - that EdM being on TV tends to reduce Labour's lead, then it is possible that summer - and his absence from the news - might result in it firming up"

    I don't pretend to know why Labour's lead has increased, I'm merely arguing that increased it has. I'll wager £20 at even money with the first bona fide PB.com bettor to accept prior to midnight tonight opposing my view that Stephen Fisher's weekly projection either next Friday 29 Aug or the following Friday 5 Sept will show Labour as winning the most seats at the next GE.

    I can't be fairer than that, after all the Tories have been ahead of Labour in 21 out of his last 22 weekly projections.

    If we look at YouGov alone, the last 7 weeks have gone:

    4.4
    4.4
    3.0
    3.2
    4.2
    2.6
    3.75 = This week, one poll to come

    So whilst this week is disappointing for Con, the Lab lead is still lower than for 3 of the last 6 weeks. All in all, there is no significant increase in the Lab lead - last week may just have been a random movement downwards.

    However Lab has had its best week for ages with Populus - but that could be random.

    YouGov shows effectively no movement over 4 polls - no reason to trust Populus's 2 polls to any greater degree.
    I got quite excited there for a minute - I thought you were going to take me on!
    No - I'm sure Fisher's projection will move - I'm just doing my best to look at the numbers in a straightforward manner.

    It could be that the lead has genuinely risen this week but we certainly can't be sure - two Populus polls are nowhere near enough to conclude that on their own - especially given the evidence we have from YouGov.
  • Smarmeron said:

    The_Woodpecker
    The number of seats maybe, but (and I may be wrong) he was losing quite high percentages of the vote share.

    Well what you said was "Cameron...can only lose seats".

    Anyway, percentage wise Blair lost 2.5% in 2001. Must be a good chance Cameron can beat that.

    However the main opposition only went up 1% in 2001 (and a further 0.7% in 2005). At the moment it looks like Milliband will beat those numbers.
  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @The_Woodpecker
    Nothing is certain, we can only "guestemate" the odds, and hope the race goes the way we predict.
  • Wise man Mike, though I say so myself.
    I suppose the difference between us is simply that you are being more cautious by taking a longer term view.
    Whereas I'm persuaded from a Tory perspective by 2 poor Populus polls, the two most recent poor YouGov polls and a shocker, albeit 10 days ago, from ICM.

    It doesn't look like I'm going to get a taker for my bet - maybe that's what's meant by shy Tories?
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited August 2014
    Short blog post from Theodore Dalrymple:

    "But it is flattering, in a way, that England should be regarded as a ‘promised land’ for this mixture of Sudanese, Eritrean and Yemenis. The question is why."

    http://www.salisburyreview.com/Theodore_Dalrymple/migrants.html
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    Around 500 of the 2000 Isis jihadists are British, but labour mp reckons it's more like 2000

    How did we let it come to this?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2730602/The-homegrown-jihadists-fighting-ISIS-How-one-four-foreigners-signed-Islamic-State-British-half-ALREADY-UK.html
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    isam said:

    Around 500 of the 2000 Isis jihadists are British, but labour mp reckons it's more like 2000

    How did we let it come to this?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2730602/The-homegrown-jihadists-fighting-ISIS-How-one-four-foreigners-signed-Islamic-State-British-half-ALREADY-UK.html

    The billy bragg society.

  • isam said:

    Around 500 of the 2000 Isis jihadists are British, but labour mp reckons it's more like 2000

    How did we let it come to this?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2730602/The-homegrown-jihadists-fighting-ISIS-How-one-four-foreigners-signed-Islamic-State-British-half-ALREADY-UK.html

    The billy bragg society.

    "This is the Self-preservation Self-radicalisation Society!"
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362

    Sebastian Payne @SebastianEPayne

    Tomorrow's Daily Mirror has not held back on the Prime Minister: pic.twitter.com/PHcZwCHmZ1
    #ISIL

    Headline is -

    ISIS WHAT CRISIS - terror alert,but PM goes surfing.

    Some pb posters wondering why labour shooting up in the polls,this may be one of the reasons,if not,it will be.
  • corporealcorporeal Posts: 2,549
    isam said:

    Around 500 of the 2000 Isis jihadists are British, but labour mp reckons it's more like 2000

    How did we let it come to this?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2730602/The-homegrown-jihadists-fighting-ISIS-How-one-four-foreigners-signed-Islamic-State-British-half-ALREADY-UK.html

    Compare and contrast the International Brigades (largely communist iirc) who went to fight in the Spanish civil war.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216


    Some pb posters wondering why labour shooting up in the polls,this may be one of the reasons,if not,it will be.

    You think Labour's record on 1) intervention in Iraq and 2) Non-intervention in Syria will escape scrutiny indefinitely?

  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,116
    edited August 2014
    "Ting Tong" was a character in the BEEB's "Little Britain" comedy show.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362


    Some pb posters wondering why labour shooting up in the polls,this may be one of the reasons,if not,it will be.

    You think Labour's record on 1) intervention in Iraq and 2) Non-intervention in Syria will escape scrutiny indefinitely?

    We are talking about the PM,who is head of the government of this country,look at some of the front pages,not good reading or looking ;-)

    What this as to do with labour,I don't know.

    http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/103580/daily_mirror_friday_22nd_august_2014.html

  • "Hammond's refusal to consider allying with Assad against I.S. is proof that the UK govt. isn't serious in dealing with Jihadists" - discuss.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983


    What this as to do with labour,I don't know.

    It's Labour's fault Cameron is incapable of managing the House of Commons.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    @Tykejohnno‌

    What action would you (or they) have him take that requires his urgent attention?

    Without Parliamentary approval he's not going to send troops in. He's presumably not approving each and every flight from Cyprus. He's presumably being briefed on intelligence as needed.

    I'd rather the PM is refreshed and rested when he is, potentially, putting our troops in a dangerous situation.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    corporeal said:

    isam said:

    Around 500 of the 2000 Isis jihadists are British, but labour mp reckons it's more like 2000

    How did we let it come to this?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2730602/The-homegrown-jihadists-fighting-ISIS-How-one-four-foreigners-signed-Islamic-State-British-half-ALREADY-UK.html

    Compare and contrast the International Brigades (largely communist iirc) who went to fight in the Spanish civil war.
    Couldn't really care less about that sorry

    All I would say is the British government didn't import those people en masse despite warnings trouble would eventually arise. Well we've got it now.

    Why you have to play devils advocate I don't know. You sound like an apologist
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    Charles said:


    What action would you (or they) have him take that requires his urgent attention?

    I'd say the Mirror would probably be happy with his resignation, a grovelling apology for his very existence and an application from him to wind up the Tory party.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362

    "Hammond's refusal to consider allying with Assad against I.S. is proof that the UK govt. isn't serious in dealing with Jihadists" - discuss.

    Labour keeping Quiet,more proof that this party cares more about not upsetting they muslim vote than getting tough on the jihadist = not fit for Government ;-) discuss

  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,030
  • "Hammond's refusal to consider allying with Assad against I.S. is proof that the UK govt. isn't serious in dealing with Jihadists" - discuss.

    Labour keeping Quiet,more proof that this party cares more about not upsetting they muslim vote than getting tough on the jihadist = not fit for Government ;-) discuss

    But are your Tory Government serious about defeating I.S.? Refusal to ally with Syria would put that in doubt.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,030


    Some pb posters wondering why labour shooting up in the polls,this may be one of the reasons,if not,it will be.

    You think Labour's record on 1) intervention in Iraq and 2) Non-intervention in Syria will escape scrutiny indefinitely?

    We are talking about the PM,who is head of the government of this country,look at some of the front pages,not good reading or looking ;-)

    What this as to do with labour,I don't know.

    http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/103580/daily_mirror_friday_22nd_august_2014.html

    I DEMAND Cameron immediately fly to Syria and single-handedly defeat ISIS.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    RobD said:


    Some pb posters wondering why labour shooting up in the polls,this may be one of the reasons,if not,it will be.

    You think Labour's record on 1) intervention in Iraq and 2) Non-intervention in Syria will escape scrutiny indefinitely?

    We are talking about the PM,who is head of the government of this country,look at some of the front pages,not good reading or looking ;-)

    What this as to do with labour,I don't know.

    http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/103580/daily_mirror_friday_22nd_august_2014.html

    I DEMAND Cameron immediately fly to Syria and single-handedly defeat ISIS.
    Isnt that a job for Hague, Coe and their judo training?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    RobD said:


    I DEMAND Cameron immediately fly to Syria and single-handedly defeat ISIS.

    Using his surfboard
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Peter Oborne:

    "William Hague was a dud as foreign secretary. He is now in danger of turning into a useless Leader of the Commons."

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/peteroborne/100283755/william-hague-has-betrayed-the-commons-by-backing-john-bercow-over-carol-mills/
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    RobD said:


    Some pb posters wondering why labour shooting up in the polls,this may be one of the reasons,if not,it will be.

    You think Labour's record on 1) intervention in Iraq and 2) Non-intervention in Syria will escape scrutiny indefinitely?

    We are talking about the PM,who is head of the government of this country,look at some of the front pages,not good reading or looking ;-)

    What this as to do with labour,I don't know.

    http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/103580/daily_mirror_friday_22nd_august_2014.html

    I DEMAND Cameron immediately fly to Syria and single-handedly defeat ISIS.
    Keep your head the blue clouds,it's perception and it looks awful,you must know that.

  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,030
    edited August 2014

    "Hammond's refusal to consider allying with Assad against I.S. is proof that the UK govt. isn't serious in dealing with Jihadists" - discuss.

    Labour keeping Quiet,more proof that this party cares more about not upsetting they muslim vote than getting tough on the jihadist = not fit for Government ;-) discuss

    But are your Tory Government serious about defeating I.S.? Refusal to ally with Syria would put that in doubt.
    I don't think we have to ally ourselves with everyone who ISIS are fighting?

    Check out the list of their opponents here:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant

    Notice both sides of the Syrian civil war are opponents of ISIS...
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    RobD said:


    Some pb posters wondering why labour shooting up in the polls,this may be one of the reasons,if not,it will be.

    You think Labour's record on 1) intervention in Iraq and 2) Non-intervention in Syria will escape scrutiny indefinitely?

    We are talking about the PM,who is head of the government of this country,look at some of the front pages,not good reading or looking ;-)

    What this as to do with labour,I don't know.

    http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/103580/daily_mirror_friday_22nd_august_2014.html

    I DEMAND Cameron immediately fly to Syria and single-handedly defeat ISIS.
    Keep your head the blue clouds,it's perception and it looks awful,you must know that.

    Forget about how it looks for a second. Do you personally feel that Cameron's being on holidays is actually affecting the UK's approach to this situation for the worse?

  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,030

    RobD said:


    Some pb posters wondering why labour shooting up in the polls,this may be one of the reasons,if not,it will be.

    You think Labour's record on 1) intervention in Iraq and 2) Non-intervention in Syria will escape scrutiny indefinitely?

    We are talking about the PM,who is head of the government of this country,look at some of the front pages,not good reading or looking ;-)

    What this as to do with labour,I don't know.

    http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/103580/daily_mirror_friday_22nd_august_2014.html

    I DEMAND Cameron immediately fly to Syria and single-handedly defeat ISIS.
    Keep your head the blue clouds,it's perception and it looks awful,you must know that.

    I wouldn't agree with that, actually.

    I'm curious, what exactly should he be doing?
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362

    "Hammond's refusal to consider allying with Assad against I.S. is proof that the UK govt. isn't serious in dealing with Jihadists" - discuss.

    Labour keeping Quiet,more proof that this party cares more about not upsetting they muslim vote than getting tough on the jihadist = not fit for Government ;-) discuss

    But are your Tory Government serious about defeating I.S.? Refusal to ally with Syria would put that in doubt.
    My tory government,you voted tory last time matey at council elections,welcome back ;-)

    Yep,that's right,lets give Assad a free hand,let him kill the innocents who want to be free of this tyrant,maybe give him back his chemical weapons ?
  • RobD said:


    Some pb posters wondering why labour shooting up in the polls,this may be one of the reasons,if not,it will be.

    You think Labour's record on 1) intervention in Iraq and 2) Non-intervention in Syria will escape scrutiny indefinitely?

    We are talking about the PM,who is head of the government of this country,look at some of the front pages,not good reading or looking ;-)

    What this as to do with labour,I don't know.

    http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/103580/daily_mirror_friday_22nd_august_2014.html

    I DEMAND Cameron immediately fly to Syria and single-handedly defeat ISIS.
    Re-make the "Two Tribes" video with Cameron and the head of I.S. in the boxing ring!!!

    www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXWVpcypf0w
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    RobD said:

    RobD said:


    Some pb posters wondering why labour shooting up in the polls,this may be one of the reasons,if not,it will be.

    You think Labour's record on 1) intervention in Iraq and 2) Non-intervention in Syria will escape scrutiny indefinitely?

    We are talking about the PM,who is head of the government of this country,look at some of the front pages,not good reading or looking ;-)

    What this as to do with labour,I don't know.

    http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/103580/daily_mirror_friday_22nd_august_2014.html

    I DEMAND Cameron immediately fly to Syria and single-handedly defeat ISIS.
    Keep your head the blue clouds,it's perception and it looks awful,you must know that.

    I wouldn't agree with that, actually.

    I'm curious, what exactly should he be doing?
    First thing he shouldn't have gone back on his holiday and stayed in downing street,perception again. ;-)

  • AndyJS said:

    Peter Oborne:

    "William Hague was a dud as foreign secretary. He is now in danger of turning into a useless Leader of the Commons."

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/peteroborne/100283755/william-hague-has-betrayed-the-commons-by-backing-john-bercow-over-carol-mills/

    We all knew he was useless with the baseball cap, and the lack of any progress in the 2001 election :)
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,030

    AndyJS said:

    Peter Oborne:

    "William Hague was a dud as foreign secretary. He is now in danger of turning into a useless Leader of the Commons."

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/peteroborne/100283755/william-hague-has-betrayed-the-commons-by-backing-john-bercow-over-carol-mills/

    We all knew he was useless with the baseball cap, and the lack of any progress in the 2001 election :)
    I love that song! Trying not to imagine this guy in the ring:

    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/multimedia/archive/00444/135090348__444284b.jpg

    Sorry, Dave!
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    RobD said:

    RobD said:


    Some pb posters wondering why labour shooting up in the polls,this may be one of the reasons,if not,it will be.

    You think Labour's record on 1) intervention in Iraq and 2) Non-intervention in Syria will escape scrutiny indefinitely?

    We are talking about the PM,who is head of the government of this country,look at some of the front pages,not good reading or looking ;-)

    What this as to do with labour,I don't know.

    http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/103580/daily_mirror_friday_22nd_august_2014.html

    I DEMAND Cameron immediately fly to Syria and single-handedly defeat ISIS.
    Keep your head the blue clouds,it's perception and it looks awful,you must know that.

    I wouldn't agree with that, actually.

    I'm curious, what exactly should he be doing?
    First thing he shouldn't have gone back on his holiday and stayed in downing street,perception again. ;-)

    How would that shallow publicity stunt help?

    This is a job for the military and for our intelligence services.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    Neil said:

    RobD said:


    Some pb posters wondering why labour shooting up in the polls,this may be one of the reasons,if not,it will be.

    You think Labour's record on 1) intervention in Iraq and 2) Non-intervention in Syria will escape scrutiny indefinitely?

    We are talking about the PM,who is head of the government of this country,look at some of the front pages,not good reading or looking ;-)

    What this as to do with labour,I don't know.

    http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/103580/daily_mirror_friday_22nd_august_2014.html

    I DEMAND Cameron immediately fly to Syria and single-handedly defeat ISIS.
    Keep your head the blue clouds,it's perception and it looks awful,you must know that.

    Forget about how it looks for a second. Do you personally feel that Cameron's being on holidays is actually affecting the UK's approach to this situation for the worse?

    Doesn't matter,it's perception,look at the media storm in America with Obama and his golfing holiday,he's getting crucified for it.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    Neil said:

    RobD said:


    Some pb posters wondering why labour shooting up in the polls,this may be one of the reasons,if not,it will be.

    You think Labour's record on 1) intervention in Iraq and 2) Non-intervention in Syria will escape scrutiny indefinitely?

    We are talking about the PM,who is head of the government of this country,look at some of the front pages,not good reading or looking ;-)

    What this as to do with labour,I don't know.

    http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/103580/daily_mirror_friday_22nd_august_2014.html

    I DEMAND Cameron immediately fly to Syria and single-handedly defeat ISIS.
    Keep your head the blue clouds,it's perception and it looks awful,you must know that.

    Forget about how it looks for a second. Do you personally feel that Cameron's being on holidays is actually affecting the UK's approach to this situation for the worse?

    Doesn't matter,it's perception,look at the media storm in America with Obama and his golfing holiday,he's getting crucified for it.
    So, no! Excellent, he's your ideal PM, you should really vote for him.

  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,030

    RobD said:

    RobD said:


    Some pb posters wondering why labour shooting up in the polls,this may be one of the reasons,if not,it will be.

    You think Labour's record on 1) intervention in Iraq and 2) Non-intervention in Syria will escape scrutiny indefinitely?

    We are talking about the PM,who is head of the government of this country,look at some of the front pages,not good reading or looking ;-)

    What this as to do with labour,I don't know.

    http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/103580/daily_mirror_friday_22nd_august_2014.html

    I DEMAND Cameron immediately fly to Syria and single-handedly defeat ISIS.
    Keep your head the blue clouds,it's perception and it looks awful,you must know that.

    I wouldn't agree with that, actually.

    I'm curious, what exactly should he be doing?
    First thing he shouldn't have gone back on his holiday and stayed in downing street,perception again. ;-)

    How would that shallow publicity stunt help?

    This is a job for the military and for our intelligence services.
    Imagine, Dave in a tank, charging across the Syrian desert.... ISIS would be bricking it

    http://www.retronaut.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/I.jpg
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,376
    edited August 2014
    This silly media game that's played every year about Cameron spending most of August on holiday is very tiresome.

    Even if Cameron didn't have access to phone, internet, email, Skype, video-conferencing, etc... It would still be ridiculous to expect him to be chained to his desk all day every day, year in and year out.

    I think the public have far more common sense than the silly papers about all this rubbish.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362

    RobD said:

    RobD said:


    Some pb posters wondering why labour shooting up in the polls,this may be one of the reasons,if not,it will be.

    You think Labour's record on 1) intervention in Iraq and 2) Non-intervention in Syria will escape scrutiny indefinitely?

    We are talking about the PM,who is head of the government of this country,look at some of the front pages,not good reading or looking ;-)

    What this as to do with labour,I don't know.

    http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/103580/daily_mirror_friday_22nd_august_2014.html

    I DEMAND Cameron immediately fly to Syria and single-handedly defeat ISIS.
    Keep your head the blue clouds,it's perception and it looks awful,you must know that.

    I wouldn't agree with that, actually.

    I'm curious, what exactly should he be doing?
    First thing he shouldn't have gone back on his holiday and stayed in downing street,perception again. ;-)

    How would that shallow publicity stunt help?

    This is a job for the military and for our intelligence services.
    Publicity stunt ? It's called politics.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    GIN1138 said:


    I think the public have far more common sense than the silly papers about all this rubbish.

    Thankfully they do.

    Not everyone mind *glares at Tykejohnno*
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    Neil said:

    Neil said:

    RobD said:


    Some pb posters wondering why labour shooting up in the polls,this may be one of the reasons,if not,it will be.

    You think Labour's record on 1) intervention in Iraq and 2) Non-intervention in Syria will escape scrutiny indefinitely?

    We are talking about the PM,who is head of the government of this country,look at some of the front pages,not good reading or looking ;-)

    What this as to do with labour,I don't know.

    http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/103580/daily_mirror_friday_22nd_august_2014.html

    I DEMAND Cameron immediately fly to Syria and single-handedly defeat ISIS.
    Keep your head the blue clouds,it's perception and it looks awful,you must know that.

    Forget about how it looks for a second. Do you personally feel that Cameron's being on holidays is actually affecting the UK's approach to this situation for the worse?

    Doesn't matter,it's perception,look at the media storm in America with Obama and his golfing holiday,he's getting crucified for it.
    So, no! Excellent, he's your ideal PM, you should really vote for him.

    He is actually ;-)

  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    edited August 2014
    "Chillax about attacks"...... "We iz Digital now bro?"
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    Neil said:

    GIN1138 said:


    I think the public have far more common sense than the silly papers about all this rubbish.

    Thankfully they do.

    Not everyone mind *glares at Tykejohnno*
    lol

  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    I have just had a horrible vision of Dave with a wifi dongle plugged up his ar*e.
    I may not sleep for a week through nightmares.
    Night all, have fun.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,030
    Smarmeron said:

    I have just had a horrible vision of Dave with a wifi dongle plugged up his ar*e.
    I may not sleep for a week through nightmares.
    Night all, have fun.

    Thanks for leaving that with us.... :')
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,376
    edited August 2014
    @Smarmeron

    I'm sure Mr Ed will spend most of August on holiday with his family if/when he becomes PM. It's what they do...

    Well, I'm not sure Gordon Brown did, but then he was totally insane.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    Maybe it's because it's the first time we have gad serious prospect of war since I got into politics, and maybe because I am nearly Cameron's age so don't see him as a sensible grown up to my juvenile wally, but it reckon he just doesn't really know what to do. I wouldn't! And he'll get stick either way unless it's a spectacular success
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,507
    edited August 2014
    Ferguson’s black community must not be given the same ‘justice’ as Trayvon Martin. Only the courts can judge Michael Brown’s killer – but this is the system that let George Zimmerman walk free

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/aug/22/ferguson-black-community-justice-elusive-michael-brown

    Guilty, before, during and after a trial has found a man innocent...what a shocking and disgraceful headline.

    The law may be an ass and Americans obsession with guns needs to change, it was clear from the trial of Zimmerman that it was far from the original story of kid buys candy, man shoots him for no reason.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216


    Some pb posters wondering why labour shooting up in the polls,this may be one of the reasons,if not,it will be.

    You think Labour's record on 1) intervention in Iraq and 2) Non-intervention in Syria will escape scrutiny indefinitely?

    We are talking about the PM,who is head of the government of this country,look at some of the front pages,not good reading or looking ;-)

    What this as to do with labour,I don't know.

    http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/103580/daily_mirror_friday_22nd_august_2014.html

    Really? You don't want to talk about a Miliband's parliamentary stunt over Syria?

    I wonder why?

    Meanwhile, when asked last week, the British public seemed pretty relaxed about the whole thing:

    Cameron's return from Portugal:
    Should have been sooner: 31
    Not necessary to return: 17
    Got the balance right: 37

    Curiously enough, Labour voters were most anxious he return - whodathunkit?

    When asked about another leader, Labour voters also led in demanding a return - this time Obama, though fortunately the level headedness of the rest of the population left Obama on holiday:

    Should Obama cancel holiday:
    Yes: 30
    No: 52
  • Neil said:

    Neil said:

    RobD said:


    Some pb posters wondering why labour shooting up in the polls,this may be one of the reasons,if not,it will be.

    You think Labour's record on 1) intervention in Iraq and 2) Non-intervention in Syria will escape scrutiny indefinitely?

    We are talking about the PM,who is head of the government of this country,look at some of the front pages,not good reading or looking ;-)

    What this as to do with labour,I don't know.

    http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/103580/daily_mirror_friday_22nd_august_2014.html

    I DEMAND Cameron immediately fly to Syria and single-handedly defeat ISIS.
    Keep your head the blue clouds,it's perception and it looks awful,you must know that.

    Forget about how it looks for a second. Do you personally feel that Cameron's being on holidays is actually affecting the UK's approach to this situation for the worse?

    Doesn't matter,it's perception,look at the media storm in America with Obama and his golfing holiday,he's getting crucified for it.
    So, no! Excellent, he's your ideal PM, you should really vote for him.

    He is actually ;-)

    Tykejohnno or Toryjohnno?

    :)
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    GIN1138 said:

    @Smarmeron

    I'm sure Mr Ed will spend most of August on holiday with his family if/when he becomes PM. It's what they do...

    Well, I'm not sure Gordon Brown did, but then he was totally insane.

    Don't mind PM's and they holidays but we do have a mini crisis going on and it just looks awful our PM surfing while people are getting they heads chopped off by british citizens.

  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,507
    edited August 2014

    GIN1138 said:

    @Smarmeron

    I'm sure Mr Ed will spend most of August on holiday with his family if/when he becomes PM. It's what they do...

    Well, I'm not sure Gordon Brown did, but then he was totally insane.

    Don't mind PM's and they holidays but we do have a mini crisis going on and it just looks awful our PM surfing while people are getting they heads chopped off by british citizens.

    I remember Blair used to get it in the neck for regular holidays. If we exclude his choice of holiday partners, which were often very "interesting", I think he was actually very good thing he took breaks. I think it is a) normal and b) productive, especially in the internet age not like going to developed country means you are cut off from being able to make decisions. Brown just got worse and worse, never taking a break and ended up being unable really function.

    HOWEVER....there are times and places for holidays. Obama one moment looking serious about a journalist being beheaded and next giving it the big nubs on the golf course, bloody awful. And Cameron the same, with his beached whale impression.

    At the moment, it isn't appropriate to be buggering off on holiday for a month. Both in terms of perception, but also there is a lot of really worrying things going on that need calm and firm leadership.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362

    GIN1138 said:

    @Smarmeron

    I'm sure Mr Ed will spend most of August on holiday with his family if/when he becomes PM. It's what they do...

    Well, I'm not sure Gordon Brown did, but then he was totally insane.

    Don't mind PM's and they holidays but we do have a mini crisis going on and it just looks awful our PM surfing while people are getting they heads chopped off by british citizens.

    I remember Blair used to get it in the neck for constantly going on holiday. If we exclude his choice of holiday partners, which were often very "interesting", I think he was actually very good thing he took breaks. I think it is a) normal and b) productive, especially in the internet age not like going to developed country means you are cut off from being able to make decisions. Brown just got worse and worse, never taking a break and ended up being unable really function.

    HOWEVER....there are times and places for holidays. Obama one moment looking serious about a journalist being beheaded and next giving it the big nubs on the golf course, bloody awful. And Cameron the same, with his beached whale impression.

    At the moment, it isn't appropriate to be buggering off on holiday for a month. Both in terms of perception, but also there is a lot of really worrying things going on that need calm and firm leadership.
    Top post,you say it much better than me ;-)

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    RobD said:
    Depends. ASBOs are often used to exclude people from geographical areas (e.g. shopping centres) under pain of imprisonment.

    Is there anything in the rules that says you can't issue someone with an ASBO covering the entire of the UK?

    ;-)
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,564
    A constituent asks whether Britain can't use its global banking links to track down the banks where ISIS keeps its money to put pressure on the country of the banks to freeze the accounts - an apparently naive question, but he notes reports that they've taken large reserves from Mosul and that Germany and France are said to have paid ransom money - he asks whether that's likely to have been in gold or a bank transfer? He points out that unlike most groups they appear to have no supportive governments.

    I have not the least idea about this, but think it unlikely that they simply have a few account in a Saudi bank. But perhaps one of PB's well-informed flock knows whether this is worth pursuing - Yokel?
  • Charles said:

    RobD said:
    Depends. ASBOs are often used to exclude people from geographical areas (e.g. shopping centres) under pain of imprisonment.

    Is there anything in the rules that says you can't issue someone with an ASBO covering the entire of the UK?

    ;-)
    Anti-Socialist Behaviour Orders?

    :)
This discussion has been closed.