Also rumours of residents of Rochester being phoned saying Reckless is a drunk!
He did famously fail to vote once because of being too drunk.
If I was drunk at work, I would be suspended and up before the GMC. Reckless is apparently a man of great integrity despite being drunk at work, though Farage is famously also a boozer so maybe they can have some common interests.. These Westminster parties are all the same.
But no disciplinary action from the Conservative Whips?
In any case, an MP is never "off-duty", even when asleep, so unless you want them teetotal you should accept that they can drink.
They should not drink at their place of work.
If they go for a drink after work that is perfectly legit.
The hospital I worked at a few years ago had two on-site subsidised bars so your comment doesn't even stand up for your own profession.
Some hospitals have alcohol at social clubs on site (which are also often part of staff residences).
It is a suspending and GMC referrable offence to be drinking alcohol on duty though. Contrast this with Westminster, or Farages campaigns where drinking alcohol while working is taken for granted.
I love a clear majority of British people don't think people from the rest of the EU should be allowed to live and work in Britain, but do think that British people should be free to live and work in the rest of the EU.
You have to feel sorry for British politicians having to pander to these people for a living.
It's like people here who are against abortion - because life is sacred - but pro-death penalty
Why so? There is no contradiction in protecting an innocent life and ending the life of a fiend.
I love a clear majority of British people don't think people from the rest of the EU should be allowed to live and work in Britain, but do think that British people should be free to live and work in the rest of the EU.
You have to feel sorry for British politicians having to pander to these people for a living.
It's like people here who are against abortion - because life is sacred - but pro-death penalty
That would indicate it's similarly illogical to be anti death sentence but pro abortion. Which I imagine is your position.
Farage signed off the manifesto in 2010 and advocated a flat tax. Pointing out peoples past history is political fair game. If the kippers want to be a parliamentary party then they are going to have to be used to having their previous utterances scrutinised, and their drinking habits.
The Hope not Hate campaigners that I have seen could not easily pass for kippers.
That would be Hope not Hate that was set up by the former European Movement researcher and advisor Nick Lowles? He has spent the last 20 years or so doing all he can to undermine any anti-EU movements or groups.
Excellent. More power to his elbow!
If you believe that people should achieve their aims through smears and lies then I am afraid that says a great deal about you. Mind you I suspect we already knew that.
I do not support lying or telling untruths, but campaigning to stay in the EU is a perfectly valid democratic position.
It is not unknown for kippers to smear and lie!
Campaigning to stay in the EU is indeed a valid position. Doing so by smear and lies - which is the position that the founder of Hope not Hate has consistently taken in his career - is not a valid position and you should be ashamed to be defending it.
I love a clear majority of British people don't think people from the rest of the EU should be allowed to live and work in Britain, but do think that British people should be free to live and work in the rest of the EU.
You have to feel sorry for British politicians having to pander to these people for a living.
It's like people here who are against abortion - because life is sacred - but pro-death penalty
Why so? There is no contradiction in protecting an innocent life and ending the life of a fiend.
All the people I know who think this do so on religious grounds. Life is either sacred or it isn't.
Apparently Rishi Sunak not only worked at Goldman Sachs but is son in law of an Indian tech billionaire, so clearly we can say he is not in it for the money
I love a clear majority of British people don't think people from the rest of the EU should be allowed to live and work in Britain, but do think that British people should be free to live and work in the rest of the EU.
You have to feel sorry for British politicians having to pander to these people for a living.
It's like people here who are against abortion - because life is sacred - but pro-death penalty
That would indicate it's similarly illogical to be anti death sentence but pro abortion. Which I imagine is your position.
My position is that if a woman wishes to have an abortion or not it's her decision, not mine.
I'm pro-death penalty in principle but I'm not entirely comfortable with it. I've had some experience with it.
The Greens targeting Reading East is probably good news for the Conservatives though. And they need all the help they get.
Realistically a good night for the Greens will be a second MP and half a dozen close 3rd or 2nd places to build on. They need to seize this opportunity to broaden their support, and was pointed out to me earlier today the Greens only held 6 deposits in 2010.
Farage signed off the manifesto in 2010 and advocated a flat tax. Pointing out peoples past history is political fair game. If the kippers want to be a parliamentary party then they are going to have to be used to having their previous utterances scrutinised, and their drinking habits.
The Hope not Hate campaigners that I have seen could not easily pass for kippers.
That would be Hope not Hate that was set up by the former European Movement researcher and advisor Nick Lowles? He has spent the last 20 years or so doing all he can to undermine any anti-EU movements or groups.
Excellent. More power to his elbow!
If you believe that people should achieve their aims through smears and lies then I am afraid that says a great deal about you. Mind you I suspect we already knew that.
I do not support lying or telling untruths, but campaigning to stay in the EU is a perfectly valid democratic position.
It is not unknown for kippers to smear and lie!
Campaigning to stay in the EU is indeed a valid position. Doing so by smear and lies - which is the position that the founder of Hope not Hate has consistently taken in his career - is not a valid position and you should be ashamed to be defending it.
If we ban misrepresenting each others views then there will not be much politics left.
Indeed you are mis representing my views in this thread.
Farage signed off the manifesto in 2010 and advocated a flat tax. Pointing out peoples past history is political fair game. If the kippers want to be a parliamentary party then they are going to have to be used to having their previous utterances scrutinised, and their drinking habits.
The Hope not Hate campaigners that I have seen could not easily pass for kippers.
That would be Hope not Hate that was set up by the former European Movement researcher and advisor Nick Lowles? He has spent the last 20 years or so doing all he can to undermine any anti-EU movements or groups.
Excellent. More power to his elbow!
If you believe that people should achieve their aims through smears and lies then I am afraid that says a great deal about you. Mind you I suspect we already knew that.
I do not support lying or telling untruths, but campaigning to stay in the EU is a perfectly valid democratic position.
It is not unknown for kippers to smear and lie!
Campaigning to stay in the EU is indeed a valid position. Doing so by smear and lies - which is the position that the founder of Hope not Hate has consistently taken in his career - is not a valid position and you should be ashamed to be defending it.
If we ban misrepresenting each others views then there will not be much politics left.
Indeed you are mis representing my views in this thread.
Immaterial. The point is that the man you are defending and indeed applauding has made a career out of trying to undermine a legitimate political movement through lies and smears. Now indeed that is apparently common practice but at least when it is found out you should have the common decency not to defend it.
Farage signed off the manifesto in 2010 and advocated a flat tax. Pointing out peoples past history is political fair game. If the kippers want to be a parliamentary party then they are going to have to be used to having their previous utterances scrutinised, and their drinking habits.
The Hope not Hate campaigners that I have seen could not easily pass for kippers.
That would be Hope not Hate that was set up by the former European Movement researcher and advisor Nick Lowles? He has spent the last 20 years or so doing all he can to undermine any anti-EU movements or groups.
Excellent. More power to his elbow!
If you believe that people should achieve their aims through smears and lies then I am afraid that says a great deal about you. Mind you I suspect we already knew that.
I do not support lying or telling untruths, but campaigning to stay in the EU is a perfectly valid democratic position.
It is not unknown for kippers to smear and lie!
Campaigning to stay in the EU is indeed a valid position. Doing so by smear and lies - which is the position that the founder of Hope not Hate has consistently taken in his career - is not a valid position and you should be ashamed to be defending it.
If we ban misrepresenting each others views then there will not be much politics left.
Indeed you are mis representing my views in this thread.
Immaterial. The point is that the man you are defending and indeed applauding has made a career out of trying to undermine a legitimate political movement through lies and smears. Now indeed that is apparently common practice but at least when it is found out you should have the common decency not to defend it.
TimB Not personal experience I hope, I agree and am generally opposed to the death penalty, especially because of the risk of killing an innocent man or woman, though I can just about see the case for serial killers
Quincel Student cities with LD MPs like Cambridge and Bristol West are the best Green territory to add to their Brighton MP
Cambridge won't be won this time, but if Patrick O'Flynn is serious about standing for UKIP there and sticks with it I wonder if he won't help the Greens slip by in 2020 if they can make it to 25-30%?
I love a clear majority of British people don't think people from the rest of the EU should be allowed to live and work in Britain, but do think that British people should be free to live and work in the rest of the EU.
You have to feel sorry for British politicians having to pander to these people for a living.
It's like people here who are against abortion - because life is sacred - but pro-death penalty
Why so? There is no contradiction in protecting an innocent life and ending the life of a fiend.
All the people I know who think this do so on religious grounds. Life is either sacred or it isn't.
From a non-religious point of view I believe that natural justice applies equally in protecting the innocent and punishing the guilty. Each to their own, I guess!
I love a clear majority of British people don't think people from the rest of the EU should be allowed to live and work in Britain, but do think that British people should be free to live and work in the rest of the EU.
You have to feel sorry for British politicians having to pander to these people for a living.
It's like people here who are against abortion - because life is sacred - but pro-death penalty
Why so? There is no contradiction in protecting an innocent life and ending the life of a fiend.
All the people I know who think this do so on religious grounds. Life is either sacred or it isn't.
From a non-religious point of view I believe that natural justice applies equally in protecting the innocent and punishing the guilty. Each to their own, I guess!
Non-Leics folk would probably not be aware of the former expenses cheating Tory council leader turned kipper. He seems to have stepped down as candidate. I do wonder whether this may be because the sitting MP in NWLeics may be going kipper himself. Bridgen is very anti HS2, a significant issue in this constituency.
TimB Not personal experience I hope, I agree and am generally opposed to the death penalty, especially because of the risk of killing an innocent man or woman, though I can just about see the case for serial killers
I was on a grand jury years ago and we were tasked with evaluating different methods of execution, when Georgia was moving on from the electric chair. I have been to the Georgia and Texas death houses, talked with various prison governors who have officiated at executions, talked with doctors about various methods and what they do to the prisoner, and talked with people on strap down teams and several others involved with various methods of killing.
All the prison governors we talked to started out pro-death penalty but all were anti-death penalty on retirement.
I have not been present at an execution.
So I have more than a passing knowledge of any and all methods of execution and their effects on the human body. That experience, and talking with district attorneys who prosecute death penalty cases, made me less than certain of the efficacy of the death penalty.
The only pain free method of execution, hypoxia, has been universally rejected as either not being painful enough, or not giving the prisoner's victim's family enough of a show.
Green target seats Cambridge seems to be a Lab/LD contest. It's hard to see who the Greens will hurt more there. On ComRes's "consider voting for" numbers today, perhaps it hurts the LDs most?
Tim B Interesting comments, as I said in most cases I oppose the death penalty and interesting that those with personal experience also become sceptical, but I don't think it is going to disappear any time soon from those US states that have it and indeed a sizeable percentage of the UK population would support its restoration
anotherDave The Greens won 7% in Cambridge in 2010, it was their third best result in the UK after Brighton Pavilion and Norwich South, I would imagine they will take from both Labour and LDs, but more from the LDs because of students' anger at the tuition fees betrayal
anotherDave The Greens won 7% in Cambridge in 2010, it was their third best result in the UK after Brighton Pavilion and Norwich South, I would imagine they will take from both Labour and LDs, but more from the LDs because of students' anger at the tuition fees betrayal
Maybe the Greens should use 2015 to try and become the party of students long-term? They've always had a decent showing amongst them, but if they replaced the LDs permanently instead of the student vote becoming more fragmented it would be a powerful tool for them.
Positives: * Get's them concentrated support and target seats find themselves * Young people leaflet plentifully * If Greens are big on campuses that might have some osmosis through to tomorrows Cabinet ministers (this one is a bit of a punt)
Negatives: * Students don't vote enough, better to be the party of pensioners * Is it worth capturing the student vote if they lose their chance at making inroads elsewhere?
Tim B Interesting comments, as I said in most cases I oppose the death penalty and interesting that those with personal experience also become sceptical, but I don't think it is going to disappear any time soon from those US states that have it and indeed a sizeable percentage of the UK population would support its restoration
It's counter intuitive but it's much more expensive to execute someone than keep them in prison for life. Death Row is a hugely expensive facility to run. Given the length of appeal processes it's not unusual for a prisoner to be on Death Row for 20 years.
I have always found the Ricky Ray Rector execution troubling.
Farage signed off the manifesto in 2010 and advocated a flat tax. Pointing out peoples past history is political fair game. If the kippers want to be a parliamentary party then they are going to have to be used to having their previous utterances scrutinised, and their drinking habits.
The Hope not Hate campaigners that I have seen could not easily pass for kippers.
That would be Hope not Hate that was set up by the former European Movement researcher and advisor Nick Lowles? He has spent the last 20 years or so doing all he can to undermine any anti-EU movements or groups.
Excellent. More power to his elbow!
If you believe that people should achieve their aims through smears and lies then I am afraid that says a great deal about you. Mind you I suspect we already knew that.
Hope Not Hate is a typical extreme-left sect. The type that would brand anyone to the right of Harriet Harman as "racist and fascist".
For an organisation that professes to be against hate, they sure do a lot of hating themselves.
Farage signed off the manifesto in 2010 and advocated a flat tax. Pointing out peoples past history is political fair game. If the kippers want to be a parliamentary party then they are going to have to be used to having their previous utterances scrutinised, and their drinking habits.
The Hope not Hate campaigners that I have seen could not easily pass for kippers.
That would be Hope not Hate that was set up by the former European Movement researcher and advisor Nick Lowles? He has spent the last 20 years or so doing all he can to undermine any anti-EU movements or groups.
Excellent. More power to his elbow!
If you believe that people should achieve their aims through smears and lies then I am afraid that says a great deal about you. Mind you I suspect we already knew that.
Hope Not Hate is a typical extreme-left sect. The type that would brand anyone to the right of Harriet Harman as "racist and fascist".
For an organisation that professes to be against hate, they sure do a lot of hating themselves.
Really? Their website seems quite restrained to me.
I suspect that they do get a certain amount of Trotskyite infiltration of their protests, but so do many other respectable campaign groups such as CND, CAAT, various trade unions, Stop the War etc...
Organisations that get sudden influxes of new members should always be aware of entryist groups.
I love a clear majority of British people don't think people from the rest of the EU should be allowed to live and work in Britain, but do think that British people should be free to live and work in the rest of the EU.
You have to feel sorry for British politicians having to pander to these people for a living.
Yes. Democracy's a terrible thing, isn't it?
I wonder why we bother.
The issue isn't democracy per se, it's Britain's thick, spoiled, over-entitled voters.
I'm watching a college football game - Alabama are dissecting Texas A&M 59-0.
The commentators are almost lost for words. They have talked abut arcane rule changes, bull riding, where they'll be next week, whether college players should be paid, and frequently just say "I don't know what to say."
Normally they are just full of stats and facts, but this is such a dominating performance that they've run out.
On topic: it's nice to see Stephen Fisher's forecasts now being taken seriously.
I remember several posters on here being disparaging about him less than 18 months ago, when Labour were miles ahead in the polls and he was (correctly) forecasting a close result.
These numbers will chop and change a lot before May. But I expect when people seriously start considering the choice for the next government, they will recoil from Miliband (his fundmentals are awful) so the Tories will end up ahead on both votes and seats.
; Part of the argument for not prompting seems to be two wrongs making a right, in that if you prompt for the smaller parties they quite high scores that don't actually hold up in actual elections, where they inevitably get squeezed.
.
But isn't that what weighting is all about?
Not really, the weighting's supposed to deal with the problem that the people who you can get to answer your survey aren't representative of the population at large. That's not the issue here; You're contacting the right people, but they're telling you they'll vote for a small party when in practice they won't.
But I suppose there's a precedent for naming the parties then just knocking a bit off to adjust for how you think the voters would really vote, since that's basically what ICM do with their "spiral of silence" adjustment. The way ICM do it feels a little bit less outrageous due to the fact that they're only tinkering around with undecideds rather than explicitly reallocating people who said Party A to Party B in line with some kind of "Voters Are Full Of Shit Adjustment".
Farage signed off the manifesto in 2010 and advocated a flat tax. Pointing out peoples past history is political fair game. If the kippers want to be a parliamentary party then they are going to have to be used to having their previous utterances scrutinised, and their drinking habits.
The Hope not Hate campaigners that I have seen could not easily pass for kippers.
That would be Hope not Hate that was set up by the former European Movement researcher and advisor Nick Lowles? He has spent the last 20 years or so doing all he can to undermine any anti-EU movements or groups.
Excellent. More power to his elbow!
If you believe that people should achieve their aims through smears and lies then I am afraid that says a great deal about you. Mind you I suspect we already knew that.
Hope Not Hate is a typical extreme-left sect. The type that would brand anyone to the right of Harriet Harman as "racist and fascist".
For an organisation that professes to be against hate, they sure do a lot of hating themselves.
They turned up at a Ukip meeting this summer and started calling black and Asian people racists and a mixed race candidate a 'fake'
Plenty of labour politicians are supporters, they're listed on the website
I love a clear majority of British people don't think people from the rest of the EU should be allowed to live and work in Britain, but do think that British people should be free to live and work in the rest of the EU.
You have to feel sorry for British politicians having to pander to these people for a living.
Yes. Democracy's a terrible thing, isn't it?
I wonder why we bother.
The issue isn't democracy per se, it's Britain's thick, spoiled, over-entitled voters.
It's a shame the politicians can't just throw out the voters, and elect another lot in, isn't it?
And some people wonder why politicians are so hated. Jesus.
Farage signed off the manifesto in 2010 and advocated a flat tax. Pointing out peoples past history is political fair game. If the kippers want to be a parliamentary party then they are going to have to be used to having their previous utterances scrutinised, and their drinking habits.
The Hope not Hate campaigners that I have seen could not easily pass for kippers.
That would be Hope not Hate that was set up by the former European Movement researcher and advisor Nick Lowles? He has spent the last 20 years or so doing all he can to undermine any anti-EU movements or groups.
Excellent. More power to his elbow!
If you believe that people should achieve their aims through smears and lies then I am afraid that says a great deal about you. Mind you I suspect we already knew that.
Hope Not Hate is a typical extreme-left sect. The type that would brand anyone to the right of Harriet Harman as "racist and fascist".
For an organisation that professes to be against hate, they sure do a lot of hating themselves.
Really? Their website seems quite restrained to me.
I suspect that they do get a certain amount of Trotskyite infiltration of their protests, but so do many other respectable campaign groups such as CND, CAAT, various trade unions, Stop the War etc...
Organisations that get sudden influxes of new members should always be aware of entryist groups.
Try meeting them in the flesh. There are plenty who join thinking it gives them moral licence to freely exercise their own hatred towards those they disagree with.
On topic: it's nice to see Stephen Fisher's forecasts now being taken seriously.
I remember several posters on here being disparaging about him less than 18 months ago, when Labour were miles ahead in the polls and he was (correctly) forecasting a close result.
These numbers will chop and change a lot before May. But I expect when people seriously start considering the choice for the next government, they will recoil from Miliband (his fundmentals are awful) so the Tories will end up ahead on both votes and seats.
He wasn't forecasting a close result, he was forecasting a Conservative Majority, on the basis that previous polls, many of them with wildly different methodologies, showed huge swings from mid-term oppositions to governments. His forecasts have gradually moved into line with reality as the huge swing-back that his model was expecting failed to materialise for some fairly obvious reasons that we discussed at the time.
Farage signed off the manifesto in 2010 and advocated a flat tax. Pointing out peoples past history is political fair game. If the kippers want to be a parliamentary party then they are going to have to be used to having their previous utterances scrutinised, and their drinking habits.
The Hope not Hate campaigners that I have seen could not easily pass for kippers.
That would be Hope not Hate that was set up by the former European Movement researcher and advisor Nick Lowles? He has spent the last 20 years or so doing all he can to undermine any anti-EU movements or groups.
Excellent. More power to his elbow!
If you believe that people should achieve their aims through smears and lies then I am afraid that says a great deal about you. Mind you I suspect we already knew that.
Hope Not Hate is a typical extreme-left sect. The type that would brand anyone to the right of Harriet Harman as "racist and fascist".
For an organisation that professes to be against hate, they sure do a lot of hating themselves.
Really? Their website seems quite restrained to me.
I suspect that they do get a certain amount of Trotskyite infiltration of their protests, but so do many other respectable campaign groups such as CND, CAAT, various trade unions, Stop the War etc...
Organisations that get sudden influxes of new members should always be aware of entryist groups.
Try meeting them in the flesh. There are plenty who join thinking it gives them moral licence to freely exercise their own hatred towards those they disagree with.
That is a pretty fair description of many political parties! All campaigning groups tend to acquire a few embarrassing oddballs.
Personally I find labelling someone as racist or fascist as not useful. I cannot recall using these terms in such a way myself on PB.
I love a clear majority of British people don't think people from the rest of the EU should be allowed to live and work in Britain, but do think that British people should be free to live and work in the rest of the EU.
You have to feel sorry for British politicians having to pander to these people for a living.
Yes. Democracy's a terrible thing, isn't it?
I wonder why we bother.
The issue isn't democracy per se, it's Britain's thick, spoiled, over-entitled voters.
It's a shame the politicians can't just throw out the voters, and elect another lot in, isn't it?
And some people wonder why politicians are so hated. Jesus.
We lack poiliticians who are prepared to tell the public hard truths. That's the main reason why so many are currently flirting with the party offering the softest lies.
TimB Agree, and the Clinton ordered execution of the mentally defective Ricky Ray was not his finest hour, as I said I could only consider the death penalty for serial killers
I'm watching a college football game - Alabama are dissecting Texas A&M 59-0.
The commentators are almost lost for words. They have talked abut arcane rule changes, bull riding, where they'll be next week, whether college players should be paid, and frequently just say "I don't know what to say."
Normally they are just full of stats and facts, but this is such a dominating performance that they've run out.
Can they not just describe the action in front of them? Or failing that, talk about cake, busses and seagulls?
I love a clear majority of British people don't think people from the rest of the EU should be allowed to live and work in Britain, but do think that British people should be free to live and work in the rest of the EU.
You have to feel sorry for British politicians having to pander to these people for a living.
Yes. Democracy's a terrible thing, isn't it?
I wonder why we bother.
The issue isn't democracy per se, it's Britain's thick, spoiled, over-entitled voters.
It's a shame the politicians can't just throw out the voters, and elect another lot in, isn't it?
And some people wonder why politicians are so hated. Jesus.
We lack poiliticians who are prepared to tell the public hard truths. That's the main reason why so many are currently flirting with the party offering the softest lies.
Democracy rarely offers prizes to those who can say 'I told you so'.
This has a movie script in it surely? From The Mail RSS
Leaders of the Cologne-based Median Empire Motorcycle Club, which has strong Kurdish links, have posted images of their riders posing in the city - some of them carrying weapons.
Quincel Agreed, and city university seats in full of students are their best target seats, and the pensioners there tend to be more left/liberal than average anyway. The Greens are now third with students on 14%, ahead of the LDs on 6% and UKIP on 5% http://www.youthsight.com/media-centre/announcements/the-student-vote-2014/
On topic: it's nice to see Stephen Fisher's forecasts now being taken seriously.
I remember several posters on here being disparaging about him less than 18 months ago, when Labour were miles ahead in the polls and he was (correctly) forecasting a close result.
These numbers will chop and change a lot before May. But I expect when people seriously start considering the choice for the next government, they will recoil from Miliband (his fundmentals are awful) so the Tories will end up ahead on both votes and seats.
He wasn't forecasting a close result, he was forecasting a Conservative Majority, on the basis that previous polls, many of them with wildly different methodologies, showed huge swings from mid-term oppositions to governments. His forecasts have gradually moved into line with reality as the huge swing-back that his model was expecting failed to materialise for some fairly obvious reasons that we discussed at the time.
OK, fair enough. He wasn't forecasting a close result in October 2013 last year. However, all his subsequent forecasts (Feb 14 - date) have done so. I still recall plenty of disparaging comments saying it was nonsense, a Labour majority was "nailed on", "Lib Dem firewall" made it insurmountable, and there had been a "consistent Labour lead... for minths"
Well, there has been a lot of swingback. The poll shares of the two main parties are now very close together, and there is likely to be more of that to come in the new year.
TimB Agree, and the Clinton ordered execution of the mentally defective Ricky Ray was not his finest hour, as I said I could only consider the death penalty for serial killers
So many murderers face the death penalty for political reasons - District Attorneys or other elected folks who do not wish to be seen as 'soft on crime' come election time. Talking to DAs who prosecuted death penalty cases, there was often an awkward silence when we asked why they went for death in particular cases.
If you are a white murdering a black you will probably not get the death penalty, but a black murdering a white is much more likely to face it.
Clinton made a big deal out of being in state for the execution of Rector.
I love a clear majority of British people don't think people from the rest of the EU should be allowed to live and work in Britain, but do think that British people should be free to live and work in the rest of the EU.
You have to feel sorry for British politicians having to pander to these people for a living.
Yes. Democracy's a terrible thing, isn't it?
I wonder why we bother.
The issue isn't democracy per se, it's Britain's thick, spoiled, over-entitled voters.
It's a shame the politicians can't just throw out the voters, and elect another lot in, isn't it?
And some people wonder why politicians are so hated. Jesus.
We lack poiliticians who are prepared to tell the public hard truths. That's the main reason why so many are currently flirting with the party offering the softest lies.
I don't mind politicians telling the public they face hard choices, and honestly giving those choices together with the costs and benefits of each. But that requires respectfully listening to what the voters are saying first, rather than brandishing them all as idiots.
I do mind politicians only giving the voters "hard truths" that are politically convenient for them, in a pompous and condescending manner, by warping the facts to get the desired electoral result they want. They always get found out.
Like the 3 million jobs dependent on our membership of the EU nonsense. Or the everyone British who owns a home in Spain would have to sell up and leave canard.
I love a clear majority of British people don't think people from the rest of the EU should be allowed to live and work in Britain, but do think that British people should be free to live and work in the rest of the EU.
You have to feel sorry for British politicians having to pander to these people for a living.
It's like people here who are against abortion - because life is sacred - but pro-death penalty
Why so? There is no contradiction in protecting an innocent life and ending the life of a fiend.
And the unborn can grow up to be a fiend? Which ever way you look at it, it can be considered wrong.
To use abortion as a form of birth control is wrong, to use it as against a case of rape is also wrong?
So many questions, so short a life time to answer.
And some people wonder why politicians are so hated. Jesus.
Well, that's my point. The voters expect ridiculous, self-contradictory things then blame the politicians when they can't deliver them.
That's always been the case. I've been to presentations galore on this for years; it's not news.
Voters want both lower taxes and higher public spending. They want more affordable housing, just not near them. They want tough punishments for criminals they don't know. They want more regulation of things they don't like, but more freedom to do things they do like. They want toughness on welfare, except if they're on it.
In a way, that's people. We can all be prone to it. The politicians job is to present choices. Instead, they seem content to go for short-term gain by warping facts, and pulling wool over people's eyes, to suit what they really believe and want to happen. Not to mention what is more politically convenient for them.
I'm watching a college football game - Alabama are dissecting Texas A&M 59-0.
The commentators are almost lost for words. They have talked abut arcane rule changes, bull riding, where they'll be next week, whether college players should be paid, and frequently just say "I don't know what to say."
Normally they are just full of stats and facts, but this is such a dominating performance that they've run out.
Can they not just describe the action in front of them? Or failing that, talk about cake, busses and seagulls?
No seagulls in Tuscaloosa. But buses - this is from the Clemson - Georgia game last year, and shows the tradition, pageantry and emotion of college football. I've been to these games at Clemson, but not this one. You get swept up in it all.
The team gets in the buses, 80k plus in the stadium can see it on the jumbotron, screaming their lungs out and losing their minds, then the cannon fires, they run down the hill, the balloons go up. Wonderful stuff.
And some people wonder why politicians are so hated. Jesus.
Well, that's my point. The voters expect ridiculous, self-contradictory things then blame the politicians when they can't deliver them.
That's always been the case. I've been to presentations galore on this for years; it's not news.
Voters want both lower taxes and higher public spending. They want more affordable housing, just not near them. They want tough punishments for criminals they don't know. They want more regulation of things they don't like, but more freedom to do things they do like. They want toughness on welfare, except if they're on it.
In a way, that's people. We can all be prone to it. The politicians job is to present choices. Instead, they seem content to go for short-term gain by warping facts, and pulling wool over people's eyes, to suit what they really believe and want to happen. Not to mention what is more politically convenient for them.
It's just easier.
If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. - the classic example
I love a clear majority of British people don't think people from the rest of the EU should be allowed to live and work in Britain, but do think that British people should be free to live and work in the rest of the EU.
You have to feel sorry for British politicians having to pander to these people for a living.
Yes. Democracy's a terrible thing, isn't it?
I wonder why we bother.
The issue isn't democracy per se, it's Britain's thick, spoiled, over-entitled voters.
It's a shame the politicians can't just throw out the voters, and elect another lot in, isn't it?
And some people wonder why politicians are so hated. Jesus.
We lack poiliticians who are prepared to tell the public hard truths. That's the main reason why so many are currently flirting with the party offering the softest lies.
Democracy rarely offers prizes to those who can say 'I told you so'.
I was going to say "Churchill" and then realised that although he became PM in 1940, that wasn't through a mass popular vote, and he lost the election in 1945. Interesting to think (although probably impractical) about what might have happened had a snap election been held in 1940/1941, though. Not a catchy election slogan, but there would have been a strong undertone of that and about, consequently, why he was the right man to finish the job.
Sean Fear put it very well once: if telling the truth and being honest consistently got politicians votes, politicians would consistently tell the truth and be honest.
So, pandering with the soft lies might be with us for some time yet. But that doesn't mean we have to like it.
The way ICM do it feels a little bit less outrageous due to the fact that they're only tinkering around with undecideds rather than explicitly reallocating people who said Party A to Party B in line with some kind of "Voters Are Full Of Shit Adjustment".
Voters want both lower taxes and higher public spending. They want more affordable housing, just not near them. They want tough punishments for criminals they don't know. They want more regulation of things they don't like, but more freedom to do things they do like. They want toughness on welfare, except if they're on it.
In a way, that's people. We can all be prone to it. The politicians job is to present choices. Instead, they seem content to go for short-term gain by warping facts, and pulling wool over people's eyes, to suit what they really believe and want to happen. Not to mention what is more politically convenient for them.
It's just easier.
At retail level - talking to individual voters - you can make substantial progress by being straightforward: I've (apparently) won over Kipper-leaning voters by saying frankly that I wasn't in favour of EU withdrawal, sorry, and thought free movement within the EU/EEA was inevitable: they liked the frankness more than they disliked the message. But filtered through the media, permanently hunting "embarrassing gaffes" etc., it becomes much harder, since you lose the personal touch and are merely left with an out-of-context "admission".
Had a good day, mostly just talking to hundreds of people at the annual Oxjam festival (dozens of bands performing free for Oxfam), selling over £200 of raffle tickets. The dark arts of canvassing in a good cause.
I love a clear majority of British people don't think people from the rest of the EU should be allowed to live and work in Britain, but do think that British people should be free to live and work in the rest of the EU.
You have to feel sorry for British politicians having to pander to these people for a living.
Yes. Democracy's a terrible thing, isn't it?
I wonder why we bother.
The issue isn't democracy per se, it's Britain's thick, spoiled, over-entitled voters.
It's a shame the politicians can't just throw out the voters, and elect another lot in, isn't it?
And some people wonder why politicians are so hated. Jesus.
We lack poiliticians who are prepared to tell the public hard truths. That's the main reason why so many are currently flirting with the party offering the softest lies.
The full quote - "So this is the stark choice at the next election: the Conservatives or Labour. Let no one deceive you that there is a third way. A vote for Ukip is a vote for Labour. That much was proved in the recent by-elections. In Clacton, previously a Conservative seat, Ukip won. In Heywood and Middleton, Labour held their seat."
And that is a message that Cameron and the Conservative Party need to keep banging on about between now and GE polling day when you have both Conservative and Labour switchers to UKIP.... A vote for UKIP will see Labour scrap home at the next GE.
The full quote - "So this is the stark choice at the next election: the Conservatives or Labour. Let no one deceive you that there is a third way. A vote for Ukip is a vote for Labour. That much was proved in the recent by-elections. In Clacton, previously a Conservative seat, Ukip won. In Heywood and Middleton, Labour held their seat."
And that is a message that Cameron and the Conservative Party need to keep banging on about between now and GE polling day when you have both Conservative and Labour switchers to UKIP.... A vote for UKIP will see Labour scrap home at the next GE.
"Let no one deceive you that there is a third way. A vote for Ukip is a vote for Labour. That much was proved in the recent by-elections."
Ay??
Earth to Dave...
A vote for UKIP was a vote for UKIP in Clacton. And because the Tories collapsed in Heywood, you could argue that those people who voted Tory there prevented UKIP winning Heywood!
You know, I've been hearing that crap about Con or Lab - no other choice since 1960!
It's a fantastic line for the Lab/Con duoply to use since, if people swallow it - as they often do, then the British elite continue to rule regardless.
The full quote - "So this is the stark choice at the next election: the Conservatives or Labour. Let no one deceive you that there is a third way. A vote for Ukip is a vote for Labour. That much was proved in the recent by-elections. In Clacton, previously a Conservative seat, Ukip won. In Heywood and Middleton, Labour held their seat."
And that is a message that Cameron and the Conservative Party need to keep banging on about between now and GE polling day when you have both Conservative and Labour switchers to UKIP.... A vote for UKIP will see Labour scrap home at the next GE.
The full quote - "So this is the stark choice at the next election: the Conservatives or Labour. Let no one deceive you that there is a third way. A vote for Ukip is a vote for Labour. That much was proved in the recent by-elections. In Clacton, previously a Conservative seat, Ukip won. In Heywood and Middleton, Labour held their seat."
And that is a message that Cameron and the Conservative Party need to keep banging on about between now and GE polling day when you have both Conservative and Labour switchers to UKIP.... A vote for UKIP will see Labour scrap home at the next GE.
"Let no one deceive you that there is a third way. A vote for Ukip is a vote for Labour. That much was proved in the recent by-elections."
Ay??
Earth to Dave...
A vote for UKIP was a vote for UKIP in Clacton. And because the Tories collapsed in Heywood, you could argue that those people who voted Tory there prevented UKIP winning Heywood!
I'm not going to argue it, I am going to flat-out claim it as fact: it was a case of vote Tory, get Labour in Heywood.
Those numbers again:
Labour Liz McInnes 11,633 40.9 +0.8 UKIP John Bickley 11,016 38.7 +36.1 Conservative Iain Gartside 3,496
As David Cameron said in his Conference speech... 'Go to bed with Farage, wake up with Miliband'. I still think that is a very simple and effective campaign slogan, and one that Cameron and the Conservatives need to keep repeating until election day next May. It does two things, warns Tory > UKIP switchers that a vote for UKIP is a vote for an Ed Miliband led Labour Government and their policy platform, but on the other hand it also suggests to disgruntled Labour > UKIP switchers their protest vote is risk free. Win Win for the Conservatives in a GE campaign where the main issue is going to be the economy.
Who knows, it might even rub off up here in Scotland when it comes to a choice of voting Tory, Libdem or SNP in some key seats.
The full quote - "So this is the stark choice at the next election: the Conservatives or Labour. Let no one deceive you that there is a third way. A vote for Ukip is a vote for Labour. That much was proved in the recent by-elections. In Clacton, previously a Conservative seat, Ukip won. In Heywood and Middleton, Labour held their seat."
And that is a message that Cameron and the Conservative Party need to keep banging on about between now and GE polling day when you have both Conservative and Labour switchers to UKIP.... A vote for UKIP will see Labour scrap home at the next GE.
"Let no one deceive you that there is a third way. A vote for Ukip is a vote for Labour. That much was proved in the recent by-elections."
Ay??
Earth to Dave...
A vote for UKIP was a vote for UKIP in Clacton. And because the Tories collapsed in Heywood, you could argue that those people who voted Tory there prevented UKIP winning Heywood!
As David Cameron said in his Conference speech... 'Go to bed with Farage, wake up with Miliband'. I still think that is a very simple and effective campaign slogan, and one that Cameron and the Conservatives need to keep repeating until election day next May. It does two things, warns Tory > UKIP switchers that a vote for UKIP is a vote for an Ed Miliband led Labour Government and their policy platform, but on the other hand it also suggests to disgruntled Labour > UKIP switchers their protest vote is risk free. Win Win for the Conservatives in a GE campaign where the main issue is going to be the economy.
Who knows, it might even rub off up here in Scotland when it comes to a choice of voting Tory, Libdem or SNP in some key seats.
The full quote - "So this is the stark choice at the next election: the Conservatives or Labour. Let no one deceive you that there is a third way. A vote for Ukip is a vote for Labour. That much was proved in the recent by-elections. In Clacton, previously a Conservative seat, Ukip won. In Heywood and Middleton, Labour held their seat."
And that is a message that Cameron and the Conservative Party need to keep banging on about between now and GE polling day when you have both Conservative and Labour switchers to UKIP.... A vote for UKIP will see Labour scrap home at the next GE.
"Let no one deceive you that there is a third way. A vote for Ukip is a vote for Labour. That much was proved in the recent by-elections."
Ay??
Earth to Dave...
A vote for UKIP was a vote for UKIP in Clacton. And because the Tories collapsed in Heywood, you could argue that those people who voted Tory there prevented UKIP winning Heywood!
I think all that demonstrates is that Dave should get some therapy for his weird fantasies. Perhaps he should have a word with Lembit Opek's latest friend?
Comments
It is a suspending and GMC referrable offence to be drinking alcohol on duty though. Contrast this with Westminster, or Farages campaigns where drinking alcohol while working is taken for granted.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29678989
I'm pro-death penalty in principle but I'm not entirely comfortable with it. I've had some experience with it.
Indeed you are mis representing my views in this thread.
Hope not Hate are also critical of Islamists:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/in-britain-islamist-extremist-anjem-choudary-proves-elusive/2014/10/11/eb731514-4e43-11e4-8c24-487e92bc997b_story.html
Now, the Kipper surge in all its glory:
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/523094299005956097
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/523095042186289152
http://www.hopenothate.org.uk/blog/nick/
I struggle to find any smears or lies, perhaps you could point some out to me?
http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/Conservative-county-council-leader-gives-UKIP/story-22905164-detail/story.html
Non-Leics folk would probably not be aware of the former expenses cheating Tory council leader turned kipper. He seems to have stepped down as candidate. I do wonder whether this may be because the sitting MP in NWLeics may be going kipper himself. Bridgen is very anti HS2, a significant issue in this constituency.
All the prison governors we talked to started out pro-death penalty but all were anti-death penalty on retirement.
I have not been present at an execution.
So I have more than a passing knowledge of any and all methods of execution and their effects on the human body. That experience, and talking with district attorneys who prosecute death penalty cases, made me less than certain of the efficacy of the death penalty.
The only pain free method of execution, hypoxia, has been universally rejected as either not being painful enough, or not giving the prisoner's victim's family enough of a show.
Cambridge seems to be a Lab/LD contest. It's hard to see who the Greens will hurt more there. On ComRes's "consider voting for" numbers today, perhaps it hurts the LDs most?
Ladbrokes: Labour 10/11, LD evens.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/cambridge/
http://www.comres.co.uk/poll/1293/sunday-mirror-independent-on-sunday-poll.htm
Positives:
* Get's them concentrated support and target seats find themselves
* Young people leaflet plentifully
* If Greens are big on campuses that might have some osmosis through to tomorrows Cabinet ministers (this one is a bit of a punt)
Negatives:
* Students don't vote enough, better to be the party of pensioners
* Is it worth capturing the student vote if they lose their chance at making inroads elsewhere?
I have always found the Ricky Ray Rector execution troubling.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ricky_Ray_Rector
I wonder why we bother.
I suspect that they do get a certain amount of Trotskyite infiltration of their protests, but so do many other respectable campaign groups such as CND, CAAT, various trade unions, Stop the War etc...
Organisations that get sudden influxes of new members should always be aware of entryist groups.
OK, I've included both as separate entries (total of 11 polls so far) for this week's ELBOW.
The commentators are almost lost for words. They have talked abut arcane rule changes, bull riding, where they'll be next week, whether college players should be paid, and frequently just say "I don't know what to say."
Normally they are just full of stats and facts, but this is such a dominating performance that they've run out.
I remember several posters on here being disparaging about him less than 18 months ago, when Labour were miles ahead in the polls and he was (correctly) forecasting a close result.
These numbers will chop and change a lot before May. But I expect when people seriously start considering the choice for the next government, they will recoil from Miliband (his fundmentals are awful) so the Tories will end up ahead on both votes and seats.
But I suppose there's a precedent for naming the parties then just knocking a bit off to adjust for how you think the voters would really vote, since that's basically what ICM do with their "spiral of silence" adjustment. The way ICM do it feels a little bit less outrageous due to the fact that they're only tinkering around with undecideds rather than explicitly reallocating people who said Party A to Party B in line with some kind of "Voters Are Full Of Shit Adjustment".
Plenty of labour politicians are supporters, they're listed on the website
And some people wonder why politicians are so hated. Jesus.
See this thread from when he announced the model, and click through to the thread afterwards to see why what his model was expecting didn't happen:
http://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2013/10/25/new-ge2015-projection-from-oxford-political-scientist-stephen-fisher-suggests-that-tories-have-57-pc-chance-of-a-majority/
Personally I find labelling someone as racist or fascist as not useful. I cannot recall using these terms in such a way myself on PB.
ITV News @itvnews 13m13 minutes ago
Iraq: A Dutch biker gang has reportedly joined Kurdish troops in the flight against IS http://www.itv.com/news/2014-10-18/dutch-bikers-join-kurdish-troops-in-battle-against-islamic-state/ …
http://www.youthsight.com/media-centre/announcements/the-student-vote-2014/
Well, there has been a lot of swingback. The poll shares of the two main parties are now very close together, and there is likely to be more of that to come in the new year.
If you are a white murdering a black you will probably not get the death penalty, but a black murdering a white is much more likely to face it.
Clinton made a big deal out of being in state for the execution of Rector.
Stuff like this makes you wonder.
I do mind politicians only giving the voters "hard truths" that are politically convenient for them, in a pompous and condescending manner, by warping the facts to get the desired electoral result they want. They always get found out.
Like the 3 million jobs dependent on our membership of the EU nonsense. Or the everyone British who owns a home in Spain would have to sell up and leave canard.
To use abortion as a form of birth control is wrong, to use it as against a case of rape is also wrong?
So many questions, so short a life time to answer.
Voters want both lower taxes and higher public spending. They want more affordable housing, just not near them. They want tough punishments for criminals they don't know. They want more regulation of things they don't like, but more freedom to do things they do like. They want toughness on welfare, except if they're on it.
In a way, that's people. We can all be prone to it. The politicians job is to present choices. Instead, they seem content to go for short-term gain by warping facts, and pulling wool over people's eyes, to suit what they really believe and want to happen. Not to mention what is more politically convenient for them.
It's just easier.
The team gets in the buses, 80k plus in the stadium can see it on the jumbotron, screaming their lungs out and losing their minds, then the cannon fires, they run down the hill, the balloons go up. Wonderful stuff.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbvtdXHXaLU
Sean Fear put it very well once: if telling the truth and being honest consistently got politicians votes, politicians would consistently tell the truth and be honest.
So, pandering with the soft lies might be with us for some time yet. But that doesn't mean we have to like it.
Right, I'm off to bed. Goodnight.
Had a good day, mostly just talking to hundreds of people at the annual Oxjam festival (dozens of bands performing free for Oxfam), selling over £200 of raffle tickets. The dark arts of canvassing in a good cause.
Ay??
Earth to Dave...
And that is a message that Cameron and the Conservative Party need to keep banging on about between now and GE polling day when you have both Conservative and Labour switchers to UKIP.... A vote for UKIP will see Labour scrap home at the next GE.
It's a fantastic line for the Lab/Con duoply to use since, if people swallow it - as they often do, then the British elite continue to rule regardless.
Those numbers again:
Labour Liz McInnes 11,633 40.9 +0.8
UKIP John Bickley 11,016 38.7 +36.1
Conservative Iain Gartside 3,496
Who knows, it might even rub off up here in Scotland when it comes to a choice of voting Tory, Libdem or SNP in some key seats.
Perhaps he should have a word with Lembit Opek's latest friend?
http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/Exeter-sex-worker-fails-win-Clacton-election/story-23088102-detail/story.html
He clearly needs some sort of 'liberation'