Do I troll Carswell and Reckless or not via the medium of twitter.
How is your campaigning in Rochester going, or have you given it up as a lost cause?
Well when I found that Britain First was endorsing UKIP, I realised it might be uncomfortable for me.
So much as I'd like to avoid linking to their website (So I'll break the link) https://www.britain first.org/category/rochester/ "Jayda Fransen, our candidate for the Rochester by-election, led a march and rally today in the town ..."
It is plainly NOT the case that they are endorsing UKIP.
Well
BNP splinter group praises Mark Reckless and says Ukip is 'singing from same hymn sheet'
Footage emerges of Jayda Fransen, Britain First's deputy leader, saying 'absolutely' no difference between the two parties and cheering Tory defector for joining Ukip
More sad smears from TSE. If Britain First (who are indeed a thoroughly despicable bunch) are so behind Reckless and want him to win then why are they standing a candidate against him in Rochester?
You really have become a sad sack since some MPs decided that principles were more important than party.
I can only assume it is because you yourself lack any real principles.
Well that's just plain wrong.
I've been a sad sack long before Carswell and Reckless defected.
Interesting to see right wingers arguing for more government.
It would be the same amount of government: the same powers would just be moved to a different level.
If you believe that you'll believe anything. 400 new eMPs legislating 4 days a week. A new civil service department to manage each devolved English power. To manage liaison with the UK, a new English office to mirror the Scottish and Welsh Office.
- We can reduce the Lords to 100 members to make up for the new MEnPs. - No new departments are necessary: the Department for Health, Education etc are all English-only anyway - The Scottish and Welsh offices have a combined budget of £15 million. That's 0.002% of government spending. A slightly more right of centre English majority would save far, far more than that once we stop having splurging Welsh and Scots MPs voting for big state politics in England.
TSE's blathering about BritainFirst is ridiculous. Charles Manson was a fans of the Beatles: I guess that makes Lennon and Macartney equivalent to serial killers. BritainFirst are idiots: you wouldn't listen to them on anything else, but when you have a convenient false equivalency story, suddenly they speak the gospel truth.
TSE sees the writing on the wall, possibly clearly, for the first time. He has the trembles this morning and this accounts for his foul mouth abuse of Reckless, below.
While we wait for the Lord A to pontificate, perhaps TSE will ban himself for 15 mins.
The West Lothian Question would be answered forever, those interested in affairs of state could go to Westminster and those interested in domestic affairs could handle English, Welsh or Scottish matters. It would also prevent any question marks being raised over having a Scotsman/Welshman as Prime Minister or Secretary of State for the most important positions. Without an English Parliament we could have an MP from Scotland/Wales in charge of a department (say, Education) which would not, and could not, affect them or their constituents, or votes on such things being decided by people whose voters would not be affected.
An English Parliament delivers not only fairness for us, but resolves any lingering issues in Westminster too. It's the best solution by a mile.
More to the point, why not take a map of the world and colour in the bits where you think all these new exaflops are being made? Be afraid, be very afraid of the Yellow Peril.
Is that true?
The Exoflops are being made by:
Intel - in Ireland, the US, Israel and Singapore and ARM (via Samsung, etc.) - in South Korea, Taiwan and (to a lesser extent) in China
Surely Nvidia/TSMC are higher than ARM. The bitcoin boom is responible for a massive rise in computing power. Plus gamers who buy 6-7tf GPUs.
nVidia makes ARM chips - albeit ones with highly capable graphics coprocessors on-die. So, the nVidia Tegra K1 is four (plus one) ARM Cortex A-15 cores, plus a very large number of graphics cores.
You're right that the Bitcoin mining boom has created a lot of demand for processing power, but (like with nVidia GPUs) I'd argue it's not general purpose computing power such as that from Intel/ARM.
Bitcoin mining via Graphics cards is passe, it's all on custom ASICs these days.
When I looked into it about a year ago, I was left with the impression that the profitability of bitcoin mining dropped off so sharply within a few months of buying the hardware that you'd struggle to make your money back. Do people actually make money out of mining?
Mr. Divvie, it's remarkable how sometimes SNP types are seen as being anti-English, isn't it?
Mr. Jonathan, arguing for democratic equality for England is not remarkable. For most people it's an obvious and natural desire.
It's remarkable how you (and you certainly don't represent the English to me) seem to want your particular constitutional preference to be handed to you on a plate.
So - are the SNP going to go for the big daddy Labour megasafe Glasgow North East, or will you focus efforts perhaps more on Glasgow East ?
Both!
Obviously the SNP has history with Glasgow East, but Curran is what passes for a biggish SLAB beast nowadays and I guess will have more of their resources thrown at it. Willie Bain is maybe more vulnerable though he has the bigger maj. The Glasgow Provan Yes campaign covered mainly Glasgow NE and I think we had the highest Yes win in Glasgow.
It's perverse and utterly inconsistent to say: Welsh devolution = super Scottish devolution = super English devolution = doubleplusungood
If a Parliament is good enough for Scotland, it is good enough for England.
That depends why you think devolved parliaments are a good idea for Scotland and Wales. If you think they're good because they're countries (or nations or whatever they are, can't remember, but it involves flags and rugby teams and things) then that would apply to England as well. But if you think they're good because they're reasonably-sized regions, that doesn't apply to England, because it's much too big as a proportion of the UK.
If you think local assemblies for Wales and Northern Ireland are good because they're the right population size, at 3.1 million and 1.8 million respectively, then you would support carving Scotland into two, considering it has a relatively whopping 5.3 million. I've yet to meet someone that supports this, suggesting that no-one actually believes the population size argument. They actually just support cutting England up because they don't like the fact it's right-leaning, and grab for any argument they can to avoid admitting this. Witness Jonathan claiming that it would be a huge expansion of the state.
TSE's blathering about BritainFirst is ridiculous. Charles Manson was a fans of the Beatles: I guess that makes Lennon and Macartney equivalent to serial killers. BritainFirst are idiots: you wouldn't listen to them on anything else, but when you have a convenient false equivalency story, suddenly they speak the gospel truth.
TSE sees the writing on the wall, possibly clearly, for the first time. He has the trembles this morning and this accounts for his foul mouth abuse of Reckless, below.
While we wait for the Lord A to pontificate, perhaps TSE will ban himself for 15 mins.
I know you're not very bright Mike, but the abuse I quoted was from a Tory MP in a piece I did telling the Tory Party not be angry at/hate UKIPers.
Mr. Socrates, if Miliband thought it'd expand the state he'd be drooling at the prospect, not running away from even pretending to want England to have equality.
It was about UKIP demographics, a comparison with the Tea Party, and whether a party founded essentially 'against' something can ever win enough support to be other than a protest group. Put in a more positive way, if UKIP did have pretensions to power they would need to cross the rubicon into proper positive policies across the spectrum. The problem with the latter is that it's called the centre ground, and I cannot see UKIP straddling it.
I think that commonly held view might need reassessing if FN start to make real progress in France, they are in essence a protest party, and are a heartbeat away from the presidency.
Mr. Divvie, very heart-warming to be told by a Scotsman I don't represent England. Perhaps I'll have a Lancastrian telling me all about Yorkshire next.
I want equality for England. I want for England what Scotland has. No more power, no less. On behalf of all Englishmen, we are greatly flattered by your interest in our governance.
It's probably the 2nd time I've been arsed to comment on EVEL or an English parliament; I think it's a matter entirely for the English to decide upon. I'm slightly mystified as to how it'll come about though. Still, I'm sure with Morris of Arc at the head of a band of stout yeomanry it'll only be a matter of time.
Mr. Me, it is a significant change, because it would give us equality with Scotland. We would not have Scottish votes deciding English matters, as will increasingly happen with DevoMax.
It will also drastically change the UK-wide government, shifting it to, basically, Foreign, Defence and part of the Treasury. Is that not a colossal change?
I think that is OSM's key point: We cannot be equal to Scotland because we are the equivalence of nations such as Italy, Turkey and Indonesia. Why we continue to support minor nation-states within a Union that causes us pain and undue hatred is unknown.
An English Parliament can only exist outwith the Celtic benefit-belt. We are better off without....
The West Lothian Question would be answered forever, those interested in affairs of state could go to Westminster and those interested in domestic affairs could handle English, Welsh or Scottish matters. It would also prevent any question marks being raised over having a Scotsman/Welshman as Prime Minister or Secretary of State for the most important positions. Without an English Parliament we could have an MP from Scotland/Wales in charge of a department (say, Education) which would not, and could not, affect them or their constituents, or votes on such things being decided by people whose voters would not be affected.
An English Parliament delivers not only fairness for us, but resolves any lingering issues in Westminster too. It's the best solution by a mile.
Those problems would be resolved by devolution to English regions, providing that the powers and responsibilities devolved were the same across the board. For that matter, they'd be addressed by abolishing devolution altogether as well. It's only the current mix-and-match approach which fails.
Mr. Divvie, it's remarkable how sometimes SNP types are seen as being anti-English, isn't it?
Mr. Jonathan, arguing for democratic equality for England is not remarkable. For most people it's an obvious and natural desire.
It's remarkable how you (and you certainly don't represent the English to me) seem to want your particular constitutional preference to be handed to you on a plate.
So - are the SNP going to go for the big daddy Labour megasafe Glasgow North East, or will you focus efforts perhaps more on Glasgow East ?
Both!
Obviously the SNP has history with Glasgow East, but Curran is what passes for a biggish SLAB beast nowadays and I guess will have more of their resources thrown at it. Willie Bain is maybe more vulnerable though he has the bigger maj. The Glasgow Provan Yes campaign covered mainly Glasgow NE and I think we had the highest Yes win in Glasgow.
If I was Salmond, I'd be tempted to stand in one of the megared Glasgow seats.
TSE's blathering about BritainFirst is ridiculous. Charles Manson was a fans of the Beatles: I guess that makes Lennon and Macartney equivalent to serial killers. BritainFirst are idiots: you wouldn't listen to them on anything else, but when you have a convenient false equivalency story, suddenly they speak the gospel truth.
Some of us did warn you that UKIP's rhetoric would attract the far right but you didn't listen.
The West Lothian Question would be answered forever, those interested in affairs of state could go to Westminster and those interested in domestic affairs could handle English, Welsh or Scottish matters. It would also prevent any question marks being raised over having a Scotsman/Welshman as Prime Minister or Secretary of State for the most important positions. Without an English Parliament we could have an MP from Scotland/Wales in charge of a department (say, Education) which would not, and could not, affect them or their constituents, or votes on such things being decided by people whose voters would not be affected.
An English Parliament delivers not only fairness for us, but resolves any lingering issues in Westminster too. It's the best solution by a mile.
Right. People worry about English dominance of the UK, but an English Parliament solves this by relegating English-only issues down to a lower level. As things stand, English cabinet ministers have more jobs open for them than their Scots counterparts, and a UK-only majority deciding education, health and any other devolved measures faces a massive question of legitimacy. An English parliament prevents English domination of the UK, allowing the UK to be on a stable foundation again for the first time since 1998.
I've never met AudreyAnne, but suspect may not be male or retired. So, AlanBrooke would you like to engage with the subject or just snipe?
Is there a subject, if so what is it ?
I'd rather assumed I was just adding more sniping to a snipe match.
It was about UKIP demographics, a comparison with the Tea Party, and whether a party founded essentially 'against' something can ever win enough support to be other than a protest group. Put in a more positive way, if UKIP did have pretensions to power they would need to cross the rubicon into proper positive policies across the spectrum. The problem with the latter is that it's called the centre ground, and I cannot see UKIP straddling it.
Parties against things can win elections - see SNP Holyrood.
They can also win if being against stuff is all that's on offer from the other parties. Currently Labour is offering "we're not the Tories", the Tories are offering " we're not Ed Miliband" and the LDs are offering "we're against all the other parties".
So if being against stuff is all that's on offer, why should they fare worse than anyone else ? Their main weakness is a lack of a Rindvieh voting block.
Mr. Divvie, alas, I fear it won't, but that doesn't mean I'll stop advocating it, my words a democratic longbow loosing arrows of truth into the charging elites, not unlike at Agincourt.
More to the point, why not take a map of the world and colour in the bits where you think all these new exaflops are being made? Be afraid, be very afraid of the Yellow Peril.
Is that true?
The Exoflops are being made by:
Intel - in Ireland, the US, Israel and Singapore and ARM (via Samsung, etc.) - in South Korea, Taiwan and (to a lesser extent) in China
Surely Nvidia/TSMC are higher than ARM. The bitcoin boom is responible for a massive rise in computing power. Plus gamers who buy 6-7tf GPUs.
nVidia makes ARM chips - albeit ones with highly capable graphics coprocessors on-die. So, the nVidia Tegra K1 is four (plus one) ARM Cortex A-15 cores, plus a very large number of graphics cores.
You're right that the Bitcoin mining boom has created a lot of demand for processing power, but (like with nVidia GPUs) I'd argue it's not general purpose computing power such as that from Intel/ARM.
Bitcoin mining via Graphics cards is passe, it's all on custom ASICs these days.
When I looked into it about a year ago, I was left with the impression that the profitability of bitcoin mining dropped off so sharply within a few months of buying the hardware that you'd struggle to make your money back. Do people actually make money out of mining?
Nah, everybody seems to be losing money on it, with the possible exception of some of these "cloud mining" schemes that are probably ponzis in disguise.
In theory it should be a competitive market with barely attractive returns for the average miner. But it seems like it's currently either seriously irrational, or being used for some other purpose, eg people paying above the odds to make really anonymous bitcoins, or people in China being able to buy hardware for mining to turn their Chinese money into hard magical internet currency but not able to buy bitcoins directly.
TSE's blathering about BritainFirst is ridiculous. Charles Manson was a fans of the Beatles: I guess that makes Lennon and Macartney equivalent to serial killers. BritainFirst are idiots: you wouldn't listen to them on anything else, but when you have a convenient false equivalency story, suddenly they speak the gospel truth.
Some of us did warn you that UKIP's rhetoric would attract the far right but you didn't listen.
If by addressing people's legitimate concerns about Europe and immigration, UKIP persuade people towards a decent, democratic party, that is a good thing.
There were plenty of arch-conservatives in the US who said that rock and roll would encourage evil. Do you feel the Beatles didn't adequately listen to them after the Manson killings?
TSE's blathering about BritainFirst is ridiculous. Charles Manson was a fans of the Beatles: I guess that makes Lennon and Macartney equivalent to serial killers. BritainFirst are idiots: you wouldn't listen to them on anything else, but when you have a convenient false equivalency story, suddenly they speak the gospel truth.
A Pakistani muslim from South Yorkshire who likes to make sexually explicit jokes about dead white women lecturing on morality
Mr. Divvie, it's remarkable how sometimes SNP types are seen as being anti-English, isn't it?
Mr. Jonathan, arguing for democratic equality for England is not remarkable. For most people it's an obvious and natural desire.
It's remarkable how you (and you certainly don't represent the English to me) seem to want your particular constitutional preference to be handed to you on a plate.
So - are the SNP going to go for the big daddy Labour megasafe Glasgow North East, or will you focus efforts perhaps more on Glasgow East ?
Both!
Obviously the SNP has history with Glasgow East, but Curran is what passes for a biggish SLAB beast nowadays and I guess will have more of their resources thrown at it. Willie Bain is maybe more vulnerable though he has the bigger maj. The Glasgow Provan Yes campaign covered mainly Glasgow NE and I think we had the highest Yes win in Glasgow.
If I was Salmond, I'd be tempted to stand in one of the megared Glasgow seats.
He'd probably win, too.
It'll depend how mischievous he's feeling. Personally I'd be a bit disappointed if he went for Gordon (the constituency), but then I like a good political show.
Mr. Divvie, it's remarkable how sometimes SNP types are seen as being anti-English, isn't it?
Mr. Jonathan, arguing for democratic equality for England is not remarkable. For most people it's an obvious and natural desire.
It's remarkable how you (and you certainly don't represent the English to me) seem to want your particular constitutional preference to be handed to you on a plate.
So - are the SNP going to go for the big daddy Labour megasafe Glasgow North East, or will you focus efforts perhaps more on Glasgow East ?
Both!
Obviously the SNP has history with Glasgow East, but Curran is what passes for a biggish SLAB beast nowadays and I guess will have more of their resources thrown at it. Willie Bain is maybe more vulnerable though he has the bigger maj. The Glasgow Provan Yes campaign covered mainly Glasgow NE and I think we had the highest Yes win in Glasgow.
If I was Salmond, I'd be tempted to stand in one of the megared Glasgow seats.
He'd probably win, too.
Bigger swing than Belfast East would be needed in Glasgow NE but perhaps possible if not likely.
Salmond I doubt will go for Glasgow NE though, Gordon surely with his ties to the area etc.
More to the point, why not take a map of the world and colour in the bits where you think all these new exaflops are being made? Be afraid, be very afraid of the Yellow Peril.
Is that true?
The Exoflops are being made by:
Intel - in Ireland, the US, Israel and Singapore and ARM (via Samsung, etc.) - in South Korea, Taiwan and (to a lesser extent) in China
Lots of that looks yellow to me, and I know what I think the trend is.
Errr: ARM chips are designed in Cambridge (and California) Intel chips are designed in Washington (state), California and Israel
Manufacturing is done as near to the end customer (Dell, HP, Acer, Apple, Lenovo, Asus, etc.) as possible, as microchips depreciate at an extraordinary rate (1% a day is not uncommon), and therefore you want to minimise time in transit.
If I had the choice between owning the chip designing capability, or the manufacturing, I'd know which one I'd chose. (If you want to create a chip fabrication plant - a 'fab' - then you will need to buy your equipment from an incredibly small list of vendors: ASM Lithography in the Netherlands, Applied Materials in the US, etc.)
That, no doubt, is the way things are. We were talking about the way things are going. You are not presumably claiming that no chips are currently designed or made in China and that that will be the position forever?
As for end customers I've just turned my Sony Vaio upside down to see where it was made. Same country as all the Dell laptops in the world ...
Lots of chips are made in China (although fewer than you might think: TSMC and UMC are in Taiwan; SMIC is pretty much the only credible Chinese chip maker. However, relatively few are designed there - and what is designed tends to be on the Comms, or mixed-signal side, rather than on the general purpose computing side.
I'd reckon that if you looked at 'market shares' semiconductor design is one of the very few areas where there has been minimal incursion from 'China', and that's because:
a) the amount of institutional knowledge you need is massive b) the cost of your designer is a very small part of the chip, so 'labour arbitrage' is simply not that interesting c) it's incredibly capital intensive. Intel has built a $250+m supercomputer to simulate its chips for example
n my previous round of battleground polling, published last month, I looked at eleven constituencies where the Conservatives have majorities of up to 4.8 per cent over Labour. I found that nine of them would change hands on the basis of my snapshots, with swings to Labour ranging from two per cent to eight per cent, averaging five per cent in the seats as a whole.
This time I have looked further down the Conservative defence list, at twelve seats with majorities of between 1,936 or 4.8 per cent (Northampton North) and 3,744 or 7.1 per cent (Loughborough).
Taking the seats together, on the basis of the total sample of 12,008, Labour led the Conservatives by 36 per cent to 33 per cent, a swing of 4.5 per cent since the 2010 election. However, if the findings in individual constituencies were repeated at the election, three of the twelve would stay blue: Loughborough, Kingswood, and Blackpool North & Cleveleys, where the swings to Labour were two per cent or below. At the other end of the scale, in Bury North I found a swing to Labour of seven per cent and a Labour lead of nine points.
The six-point Labour lead in Croydon Central is the smallest I have yet found in a seat the Tories are defending from Labour in London. In the North, where the Conservatives are widely expected to struggle, the picture is in fact mixed. In previous rounds we have seen results ranging from a tie in Pudsey to a 14-point Labour lead in Lancaster & Fleetwood. In the current selection, though Labour look well ahead in Bury North they would probably expect to be leading by more than one point in both Chester and Wirral West.
In these seats, I found UKIP vote shares ranging between 12 per cent in Loughborough and 30 per cent in Cannock Chase, where they were in second place and just five points separated the three top parties.
TSE's blathering about BritainFirst is ridiculous. Charles Manson was a fans of the Beatles: I guess that makes Lennon and Macartney equivalent to serial killers. BritainFirst are idiots: you wouldn't listen to them on anything else, but when you have a convenient false equivalency story, suddenly they speak the gospel truth.
TSE sees the writing on the wall, possibly clearly, for the first time. He has the trembles this morning and this accounts for his foul mouth abuse of Reckless, below.
While we wait for the Lord A to pontificate, perhaps TSE will ban himself for 15 mins.
I know you're not very bright Mike, but the abuse I quoted was from a Tory MP in a piece I did telling the Tory Party not be angry at/hate UKIPers.
Don't worry TSE most of the angry people on PB appear to be kippers.
Incidentally Dave was in Morrisons in Strood yesterday which surprised a few shoppers according to local press reports.
If you believe that you'll believe anything. 400 new eMPs legislating 4 days a week. A new civil service department to manage each devolved English power. To manage liaison with the UK, a new English office to mirror the Scottish and Welsh Office.
Dr Planck:
You do realise that "HMG" Civil-Servants within the NHS, Education and Transport actually - and breathe - work for England only? You do - silly question; maybe not - understand the SLabour parties devolution process devolved responsibilities to other bodies...?
Trying something new can mean an English Parliament. Why is a Parliament for all Scotland, a large and varied land including lowlands, highlands and islands, a fine and just and obvious thing, but a Parliament for England some unwieldy and strange device?
I simply do not care about an English Parliament. It's not that I'm opposed to such a thing, I just don't think it will make anything other than the most marginal difference. So it bores me.
Devolution to a regional level would create polities that had a real and substantial amount of power and budget to choose their own future. There's a lot of complaining about over-bearing London from the extremities of England, and giving the regions power and freedom from London would also give them the responsibility to stop moaning and start improving.
Have your English Parliament if you want, but I'm more interested in devolving power to a lower level so that there is more doing and less complaining.
Then I take it you're a staunch opponent of the EU.
The United States of America manages to combine Federal government at a ~continental level with considerable powers reserved at the State and County level.
In principle I am in favour of a similar sort of arrangement for Europe, with a Federal European government, but substantial powers reserved at the National, Regional and local level.
TSE's blathering about BritainFirst is ridiculous. Charles Manson was a fans of the Beatles: I guess that makes Lennon and Macartney equivalent to serial killers. BritainFirst are idiots: you wouldn't listen to them on anything else, but when you have a convenient false equivalency story, suddenly they speak the gospel truth.
A Pakistani muslim from South Yorkshire who likes to make sexually explicit jokes about dead white women lecturing on morality
I think that's unfair. I've made bad taste jokes before now. And I don't see why TSE's Pakistani descent or nominal Islam should mean he can't make jokes any less than a white nominal Christian can.
It's perverse and utterly inconsistent to say: Welsh devolution = super Scottish devolution = super English devolution = doubleplusungood
If a Parliament is good enough for Scotland, it is good enough for England.
That depends why you think devolved parliaments are a good idea for Scotland and Wales. If you think they're good because they're countries (or nations or whatever they are, can't remember, but it involves flags and rugby teams and things) then that would apply to England as well. But if you think they're good because they're reasonably-sized regions, that doesn't apply to England, because it's much too big as a proportion of the UK.
If you think local assemblies for Wales and Northern Ireland are good because they're the right population size, at 3.1 million and 1.8 million respectively, then you would support carving Scotland into two, considering it has a relatively whopping 5.3 million. I've yet to meet someone that supports this, suggesting that no-one actually believes the population size argument. They actually just support cutting England up because they don't like the fact it's right-leaning, and grab for any argument they can to avoid admitting this. Witness Jonathan claiming that it would be a huge expansion of the state.
1.8 million to 5.3 million seems like quite a reasonable range for a regional tier. NI seems a bit on the small side but that's hard to fix given the reluctance of other parts of Ireland to rejoin the UK. Meanwhile a region of 53 million in a country of 63 million is obviously bonkers.
Obviously it makes a lot more sense if the question you're answering isn't "what would be a rational system of government?" but "how can we all rise and become nations again?".
TSE's blathering about BritainFirst is ridiculous. Charles Manson was a fans of the Beatles: I guess that makes Lennon and Macartney equivalent to serial killers. BritainFirst are idiots: you wouldn't listen to them on anything else, but when you have a convenient false equivalency story, suddenly they speak the gospel truth.
TSE sees the writing on the wall, possibly clearly, for the first time. He has the trembles this morning and this accounts for his foul mouth abuse of Reckless, below.
While we wait for the Lord A to pontificate, perhaps TSE will ban himself for 15 mins.
I know you're not very bright Mike, but the abuse I quoted was from a Tory MP in a piece I did telling the Tory Party not be angry at/hate UKIPers.
Don't worry TSE most of the angry people on PB appear to be kippers.
TSE's blathering about BritainFirst is ridiculous. Charles Manson was a fans of the Beatles: I guess that makes Lennon and Macartney equivalent to serial killers. BritainFirst are idiots: you wouldn't listen to them on anything else, but when you have a convenient false equivalency story, suddenly they speak the gospel truth.
A Pakistani muslim from South Yorkshire who likes to make sexually explicit jokes about dead white women lecturing on morality
You're obsessed, I would have made the joke if she were black, brown or green.
(Also, Robert of this parish also made that joke, but you seem to ignore that, I wonder why)
Also who is Pakistani? I'm English and British and Proud.
TSE's blathering about BritainFirst is ridiculous. Charles Manson was a fans of the Beatles: I guess that makes Lennon and Macartney equivalent to serial killers. BritainFirst are idiots: you wouldn't listen to them on anything else, but when you have a convenient false equivalency story, suddenly they speak the gospel truth.
TSE sees the writing on the wall, possibly clearly, for the first time. He has the trembles this morning and this accounts for his foul mouth abuse of Reckless, below.
While we wait for the Lord A to pontificate, perhaps TSE will ban himself for 15 mins.
I know you're not very bright Mike, but the abuse I quoted was from a Tory MP in a piece I did telling the Tory Party not be angry at/hate UKIPers.
Don't worry TSE most of the angry people on PB appear to be kippers.
Incidentally Dave was in Morrisons in Strood yesterday which surprised a few shoppers according to local press reports.
I think the Kippers having boring/no sex life explains it all.
Yes Dave was in Morrisons yesterday, there's even a picture (but not near the fish counter)
...I found UKIP vote shares ranging between 12 per cent in Loughborough and 30 per cent in Cannock Chase, where they were in second place and just five points separated the three top parties.
It was about UKIP demographics, a comparison with the Tea Party, and whether a party founded essentially 'against' something can ever win enough support to be other than a protest group. Put in a more positive way, if UKIP did have pretensions to power they would need to cross the rubicon into proper positive policies across the spectrum. The problem with the latter is that it's called the centre ground, and I cannot see UKIP straddling it.
The origins of the Whigs (later the Liberal party) lay in its opposition to absolute monarchy, and in particular its opposition to Catholic Monarchs.
The origins of the Tories lie in opposing the Whig's exclusion bill, aimed at disinheriting James Duke of York.
The Labour Party was formed as a movement to represent the newly enfranchised urban proletariat -a rejection of the centrist Liberal Party that aimed to represent this constituency.
The Scottish National Party was founded in opposition to the UK -its leader at the time was jailed for campaigning against conscription during World War II.
The SDP was founded to create a new centrist political force in the UK. We all know how that went.
Every successful political movement starts because it is against something. Otherwise what point would their be in a new political movement? It's not rocket science.
TSE's blathering about BritainFirst is ridiculous. Charles Manson was a fans of the Beatles: I guess that makes Lennon and Macartney equivalent to serial killers. BritainFirst are idiots: you wouldn't listen to them on anything else, but when you have a convenient false equivalency story, suddenly they speak the gospel truth.
TSE sees the writing on the wall, possibly clearly, for the first time. He has the trembles this morning and this accounts for his foul mouth abuse of Reckless, below.
While we wait for the Lord A to pontificate, perhaps TSE will ban himself for 15 mins.
I know you're not very bright Mike, but the abuse I quoted was from a Tory MP in a piece I did telling the Tory Party not be angry at/hate UKIPers.
Don't worry TSE most of the angry people on PB appear to be kippers.
Incidentally Dave was in Morrisons in Strood yesterday which surprised a few shoppers according to local press reports.
No, the exact opposite in fact. Most of the angry people on PB seem to be Tories, upset that their perceived divine right to votes has been challenged and found wanting. TSE with his accusations of treachery and his smears is a perfect example of this. As I have said before he is clearly someone who puts party before principle, hence the reason for his unfounded sense of outrage.
Meanwhile the PB Kippers are having a great time, enjoying watching the Tories squirm and looking forward to some moderate political success. We even have the ability to laugh at ourselves as opposed to the normal Tory position of laughing at others.
The future is bright for the Eurosceptics whatever party they support and it is only the dinosaurs who are wedded to party affiliation who are sulking.
Can anyone explain why this is worth an article? I know views on what's newsworthy or interesting vary hugely, but I cannot believe anyone anywhere would find this worth reading. Basically it's "Wife of someone who was once semi-famous posts restaurant review on Trip Advisor" and that's it. Weird.
It was about UKIP demographics, a comparison with the Tea Party, and whether a party founded essentially 'against' something can ever win enough support to be other than a protest group. Put in a more positive way, if UKIP did have pretensions to power they would need to cross the rubicon into proper positive policies across the spectrum. The problem with the latter is that it's called the centre ground, and I cannot see UKIP straddling it.
The origins of the Whigs (later the Liberal party) lay in its opposition to absolute monarchy, and in particular its opposition to Catholic Monarchs.
The origins of the Tories lie in opposing the Whig's exclusion bill, aimed at disinheriting James Duke of York.
The Labour Party was formed as a movement to represent the newly enfranchised urban proletariat -a rejection of the centrist Liberal Party that aimed to represent this constituency.
The Scottish National Party was founded in opposition to the UK -its leader at the time was jailed for campaigning against conscription during World War II.
The SDP was founded to create a new centrist political force in the UK. We all know how that went.
Every successful political movement starts because it is against something. Otherwise what point would their be in a new political movement? It's not rocket science.
The SNP was formed in 1934. Douglas Young, the person you are referring was its fourth leader, 1942-45, and did not join the party until 1938.
Brains trust trivia - why do the US parties have the usual colour coding for parties (red = left, blue = right) reversed?
Carlotta, in case no-one has answered, happenstance. Through much of the 20th century, the US print media used the traditional European left = red, blue = right. But the advent of colour TV saw different stations using different colorus. It was only the confusion after the 2000 election that saw all media converge on the current schema to present the unfolding electoral results in a standard format.
Comments
I've been a sad sack long before Carswell and Reckless defected.
- No new departments are necessary: the Department for Health, Education etc are all English-only anyway
- The Scottish and Welsh offices have a combined budget of £15 million. That's 0.002% of government spending. A slightly more right of centre English majority would save far, far more than that once we stop having splurging Welsh and Scots MPs voting for big state politics in England.
While we wait for the Lord A to pontificate, perhaps TSE will ban himself for 15 mins.
The West Lothian Question would be answered forever, those interested in affairs of state could go to Westminster and those interested in domestic affairs could handle English, Welsh or Scottish matters. It would also prevent any question marks being raised over having a Scotsman/Welshman as Prime Minister or Secretary of State for the most important positions. Without an English Parliament we could have an MP from Scotland/Wales in charge of a department (say, Education) which would not, and could not, affect them or their constituents, or votes on such things being decided by people whose voters would not be affected.
An English Parliament delivers not only fairness for us, but resolves any lingering issues in Westminster too. It's the best solution by a mile.
Obviously the SNP has history with Glasgow East, but Curran is what passes for a biggish SLAB beast nowadays and I guess will have more of their resources thrown at it. Willie Bain is maybe more vulnerable though he has the bigger maj. The Glasgow Provan Yes campaign covered mainly Glasgow NE and I think we had the highest Yes win in Glasgow.
An English Parliament can only exist outwith the Celtic benefit-belt. We are better off without....
He'd probably win, too.
They can also win if being against stuff is all that's on offer from the other parties. Currently Labour is offering "we're not the Tories", the Tories are offering " we're not Ed Miliband" and the LDs are offering "we're against all the other parties".
So if being against stuff is all that's on offer, why should they fare worse than anyone else ? Their main weakness is a lack of a Rindvieh voting block.
In theory it should be a competitive market with barely attractive returns for the average miner. But it seems like it's currently either seriously irrational, or being used for some other purpose, eg people paying above the odds to make really anonymous bitcoins, or people in China being able to buy hardware for mining to turn their Chinese money into hard magical internet currency but not able to buy bitcoins directly.
There were plenty of arch-conservatives in the US who said that rock and roll would encourage evil. Do you feel the Beatles didn't adequately listen to them after the Manson killings?
"Where are the Obama-supporting Conservatives this morning?
“He is the anti-politician in a time when people are rightly suspicious of political elites.” (Douglas Carswell, 2008.)"
http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2014/11/where-are-the-obama-supporting-conservatives-this-morning.html
Salmond I doubt will go for Glasgow NE though, Gordon surely with his ties to the area etc.
I'd reckon that if you looked at 'market shares' semiconductor design is one of the very few areas where there has been minimal incursion from 'China', and that's because:
a) the amount of institutional knowledge you need is massive
b) the cost of your designer is a very small part of the chip, so 'labour arbitrage' is simply not that interesting
c) it's incredibly capital intensive. Intel has built a $250+m supercomputer to simulate its chips for example
This time I have looked further down the Conservative defence list, at twelve seats with majorities of between 1,936 or 4.8 per cent (Northampton North) and 3,744 or 7.1 per cent (Loughborough).
Taking the seats together, on the basis of the total sample of 12,008, Labour led the Conservatives by 36 per cent to 33 per cent, a swing of 4.5 per cent since the 2010 election. However, if the findings in individual constituencies were repeated at the election, three of the twelve would stay blue: Loughborough, Kingswood, and Blackpool North & Cleveleys, where the swings to Labour were two per cent or below. At the other end of the scale, in Bury North I found a swing to Labour of seven per cent and a Labour lead of nine points.
The six-point Labour lead in Croydon Central is the smallest I have yet found in a seat the Tories are defending from Labour in London. In the North, where the Conservatives are widely expected to struggle, the picture is in fact mixed. In previous rounds we have seen results ranging from a tie in Pudsey to a 14-point Labour lead in Lancaster & Fleetwood. In the current selection, though Labour look well ahead in Bury North they would probably expect to be leading by more than one point in both Chester and Wirral West.
In these seats, I found UKIP vote shares ranging between 12 per cent in Loughborough and 30 per cent in Cannock Chase, where they were in second place and just five points separated the three top parties.
http://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2014/11/lord-ashcroft-my-latest-marginals-polling-shows-the-tories-still-losing-more-seats-than-they-can-afford-to-labour.html
Incidentally Dave was in Morrisons in Strood yesterday which surprised a few shoppers according to local press reports.
You do realise that "HMG" Civil-Servants within the NHS, Education and Transport actually - and breathe - work for England only? You do - silly question; maybe not - understand the SLabour parties devolution process devolved responsibilities to other bodies...?
:two-b-four:
In principle I am in favour of a similar sort of arrangement for Europe, with a Federal European government, but substantial powers reserved at the National, Regional and local level.
Obviously it makes a lot more sense if the question you're answering isn't "what would be a rational system of government?" but "how can we all rise and become nations again?".
(Also, Robert of this parish also made that joke, but you seem to ignore that, I wonder why)
Also who is Pakistani? I'm English and British and Proud.
Yes Dave was in Morrisons yesterday, there's even a picture (but not near the fish counter)
Kelly Tolhurst @KellyTolhurst
Took @David_Cameron to local Morrisons. My priority to improve #RochesterAndStrood primary schools was well received.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B1n1_GkIQAAX0D6.jpg:large
NEW THREAD
Q1. Con 28%, Lab 31%, LD 4%, UKIP 34%
Q2. Con 27%, Lab 32%, LD 8%, UKIP 30%
They also seem to be campaigning harder than the other parties in Cannock Chase (all numbers here are low though).
https://twitter.com/LordAshcroft
The origins of the Tories lie in opposing the Whig's exclusion bill, aimed at disinheriting James Duke of York.
The Labour Party was formed as a movement to represent the newly enfranchised urban proletariat -a rejection of the centrist Liberal Party that aimed to represent this constituency.
The Scottish National Party was founded in opposition to the UK -its leader at the time was jailed for campaigning against conscription during World War II.
The SDP was founded to create a new centrist political force in the UK. We all know how that went.
Every successful political movement starts because it is against something. Otherwise what point would their be in a new political movement? It's not rocket science.
Meanwhile the PB Kippers are having a great time, enjoying watching the Tories squirm and looking forward to some moderate political success. We even have the ability to laugh at ourselves as opposed to the normal Tory position of laughing at others.
The future is bright for the Eurosceptics whatever party they support and it is only the dinosaurs who are wedded to party affiliation who are sulking.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/foodanddrink/foodanddrinknews/11207176/Wife-of-former-ambassador-Sir-Christopher-calls-top-restaurant-pretentious-on-TripAdvisor.html