We don't force Muslim women to take their veils off in front of every man like they do their husbands, and I wouldn't ask them to. Why should we force Jews to touch women other than their wives if their religion forbids it? It's not against the law.
We don't ask Sikhs to remove their turbans when they go into places where we would expect headwear to be removed.. You've got to give people a bit of leeway. It seems like you just have it in for religion and take aggressive stances on behalf of any cause if religion is the enemy, even when no harm is being done
I'm not talking about forcing anyone to do anything. If someone wants to have obnoxious views about refusing to shake hands with people of the opposite sex, then they are perfectly free to do so. I just don't think we should have them representing our party. In the same way, I wouldn't want a woman that wears a veil to be a UKIP candidate, because I think the mindset that men can't look her in the face is obnoxious.
As for your last sentence, well you clearly haven't listened to me defend religion a hundred times on this board. Religion isn't wrong in and of itself, and I think religions do a lot of good in society. I particularly have a lot of time for religions like Quakerism and Reform Judaism. What I won't do is excuse rude behaviour because people start saying their God requires it. If someone refused to shake my hand because I was male, or white, or non-Hindu or whatever I'd find it insulting, so I can certainly understand why women would. They find it hard enough to work in male-dominated settings like politics and this sort of stuff just makes them feel more excluded.
Peter, my oldest son was contacted via his mobile and took part in a Populus survey on Tuesday, his first ever political poll. He said he was also asked to rate a selection of politicians including Alex Salmond.
@tnewtondunn: YouGov/Sun poll tonight: no Autumn Statement bounce for Coalition. Libs 5th + Greens high again. LAB 32%, CON 31%, UKIP 15%, GRN 8%, LD 7%.
The question is when was this poll conducted ...... before or after the Autumn statement?
If it follows YouGov's normal schedule, it began at 5pm yesterday and finished at 3pm today
Those polled yesterday are unlikely to have had a detailed grasp of the Chancellor's proposals. Unfortunately there's no Sun/YouGov poll tomorrow, so we may have to wait for the Sundays to gauge the true impact (if any).
The Sunday Times YouGov poll started at 5pm today and ends tomorrow at 3pm.
The Opinium poll for the Observer will have straddled the Autumn Statement.
The ICM and Ipsos-Mori phone polls should be going into the field tomorrow and end on Sunday.
Plus there should be a Populus poll tomorrow .... Yes?
That sounds very much like a Scottish poll, rather than their regular UK wide VI ones.
I think the Orthodox UKIP guy was at the Manchester PBmeet with DavidL and Big John and a few more of us - a bit keener than most of us on intense debate that evening, but a pleasant chap. IIRC he preferred to have Pepsi from a can rather than a glass for a religious reason. I think most people would think these things eccentric rather than obnoxious, but I suppose UKIP is trying to look mainstream.
Not really surprised if the Autumn Statement didn't do anything much. Firstly it was a bit meh for most people - do you buy or sell a house often enough to care intensely about the exact tax rate? Secondly, as I keep saying and nobody seems to believe (perhaps because it's boring), the main parties are down to their core voters and they aren't easy to shift.
You are kidding me?! What the hell, I was imagining a Clegg resignation or an attempted Burnham coup with that trailer. What a let down.
Just catching up with the threads today. Sorry I missed this mornings, as despite the headlines today being all about Osborne's Autumn Statement, it was the shannigans with the Libdem Leadership which appears to have almost slipped under the radar.
Clegg has basically given up if he cannot even bothered to turn up stand behind Osborne delivering his Coalition's Autumn Statement. Its just a question of when he resigns now, will it be before or after the GE? Vince Cable looked like he had swallowed a wasp yesterday during the Autumn Statement, he now cuts a far less substantial political figure despite having held the Business brief for nearly five years. But Danny Alexander seems to have grown in confidence, and he certainly seems to have managed to do what Clegg always failed too, effectively sidelined Vince Cable. I think that Danny Alexander will hold his seat at the next GE, and he will also turn out to be a serious contender to replace Clegg when he steps down.
I'd cancel my subscription to the Times, but for the fact subscribing to the Times helped me become PB's guest editor.
That reminds me TSE, where exactly do YOU stand on Twitter's list of those most influential individuals in the UK ....... you know - that list where OGH was once placed 33rd or at least I recall that being the case. It must be all of a couple of days since he last reminded us of the fact.
I think the Orthodox UKIP guy was at the Manchester PBmeet with DavidL and Big John and a few more of us - a bit keener than most of us on intense debate that evening, but a pleasant chap. IIRC he preferred to have Pepsi from a can rather than a glass for a religious reason. I think most people would think these things eccentric rather than obnoxious, but I suppose UKIP is trying to look mainstream.
Not really surprised if the Autumn Statement didn't do anything much. Firstly it was a bit meh for most people - do you buy or sell a house often enough to care intensely about the exact tax rate? Secondly, as I keep saying and nobody seems to believe (perhaps because it's boring), the main parties are down to their core voters and they aren't easy to shift.
I'd cancel my subscription to the Times, but for the fact subscribing to the Times helped me become PB's guest editor.
That reminds me TSE, where exactly do YOU stand on Twitter's list of those most influential individuals in the UK ....... you know - that list where OGH was once placed 33rd or at least I recall that being the case. It must be all of a couple of days since he last reminded us of the fact.
I think I'm the 33rd millionth most influential person on Twitter.
I'd cancel my subscription to the Times, but for the fact subscribing to the Times helped me become PB's guest editor.
That reminds me TSE, where exactly do YOU stand on Twitter's list of those most influential individuals in the UK ....... you know - that list where OGH was once placed 33rd or at least I recall that being the case. It must be all of a couple of days since he last reminded us of the fact.
We don't force Muslim women to take their veils off in front of every man like they do their husbands, and I wouldn't ask them to. Why should we force Jews to touch women other than their wives if their religion forbids it? It's not against the law.
We don't ask Sikhs to remove their turbans when they go into places where we would expect headwear to be removed.. You've got to give people a bit of leeway. It seems like you just have it in for religion and take aggressive stances on behalf of any cause if religion is the enemy, even when no harm is being done
I'm not talking about forcing anyone to do anything. If someone wants to have obnoxious views about refusing to shake hands with people of the opposite sex, then they are perfectly free to do so. I just don't think we should have them representing our party. In the same way, I wouldn't want a woman that wears a veil to be a UKIP candidate, because I think the mindset that men can't look her in the face is obnoxious.
As for your last sentence, well you clearly haven't listened to me defend religion a hundred times on this board. Religion isn't wrong in and of itself, and I think religions do a lot of good in society. I particularly have a lot of time for religions like Quakerism and Reform Judaism. What I won't do is excuse rude behaviour because people start saying their God requires it. If someone refused to shake my hand because I was male, or white, or non-Hindu or whatever I'd find it insulting, so I can certainly understand why women would. They find it hard enough to work in male-dominated settings like politics and this sort of stuff just makes them feel more excluded.
Hmm yes you are correct you didn't say anything about force, sorry
I don't know, if a woman said she wouldn't touch any man except her husband because of her religion, it just wouldn't bother me. I'd accept it as a bit odd but it takes allsorts
Well Labour retake the lead with YouGov - not a big deal normally (Moe) but interesting because the autumn statement was supposed to boost the Tories. It has not. The fact that the government cannot afford the giveaway is maybe cutting through?
NickP, you are obviously not a seasoned home owner if you are trying dismiss Osborne's stamp duty shake up in this way. Take it from me, it will have an effect both North and South of the border between now and the next GE. Its been over ten years now since I last bought and sold a house, and I still remember the cost of the stamp duty that I had to factor into my moving expenses. A friend's daughter has just managed to buy her first home on the outskirts of London this year, she's quite pleased with this Government's attempt to help first time buyers.
Not really surprised if the Autumn Statement didn't do anything much. Firstly it was a bit meh for most people - do you buy or sell a house often enough to care intensely about the exact tax rate? Secondly, as I keep saying and nobody seems to believe (perhaps because it's boring), the main parties are down to their core voters and they aren't easy to shift.
I think the Orthodox UKIP guy was at the Manchester PBmeet with DavidL and Big John and a few more of us - a bit keener than most of us on intense debate that evening, but a pleasant chap. IIRC he preferred to have Pepsi from a can rather than a glass for a religious reason. I think most people would think these things eccentric rather than obnoxious, but I suppose UKIP is trying to look mainstream.
Not really surprised if the Autumn Statement didn't do anything much. Firstly it was a bit meh for most people - do you buy or sell a house often enough to care intensely about the exact tax rate? Secondly, as I keep saying and nobody seems to believe (perhaps because it's boring), the main parties are down to their core voters and they aren't easy to shift.
I’m the one, you were a very generous host - I’m jolly glad you never mentioned my shockingly poor predictions, would be rather embarrassing if people found out :-) It was coke not pepsi and a glass would have been fine, a mug not.
We don't force Muslim women to take their veils off in front of every man like they do their husbands, and I wouldn't ask them to. Why should we force Jews to touch women other than their wives if their religion forbids it? It's not against the law.
We don't ask Sikhs to remove their turbans when they go into places where we would expect headwear to be removed.. You've got to give people a bit of leeway. It seems like you just have it in for religion and take aggressive stances on behalf of any cause if religion is the enemy, even when no harm is being done
I'm not talking about forcing anyone to do anything. If someone wants to have obnoxious views about refusing to shake hands with people of the opposite sex, then they are perfectly free to do so. I just don't think we should have them representing our party. In the same way, I wouldn't want a woman that wears a veil to be a UKIP candidate, because I think the mindset that men can't look her in the face is obnoxious.
As for your last sentence, well you clearly haven't listened to me defend religion a hundred times on this board. Religion isn't wrong in and of itself, and I think religions do a lot of good in society. I particularly have a lot of time for religions like Quakerism and Reform Judaism. What I won't do is excuse rude behaviour because people start saying their God requires it. If someone refused to shake my hand because I was male, or white, or non-Hindu or whatever I'd find it insulting, so I can certainly understand why women would. They find it hard enough to work in male-dominated settings like politics and this sort of stuff just makes them feel more excluded.
I do enjoy watching ‘liberals’ being anything but.
Based on recent polls, the Greens appear to be quite close to reaching critical mass, certainly in terms of competing with the LibDems. They should really be pushing as hard as poss to stand in another 50-100 seats, not with any chance of winning of course, but to put markers down for 2020 and in a good many cases by saving their deposits
Based on council by elections since June there are not even 100 council seats the Greens have a chance of fighting competitively . Their vote share overall is below 4% . Whatever some pollsters are measuring it is not real Green support in the polling booth .
Oh dear, Mark. You're getting more desperate. You do remember the Greens outpolling the Lib Dems in the Euro election polling booths, right? However if you feel that strongly about this I am more than happy to double the stake in our Caroline Lucas bet. At the same odds of course. 8/1 in case you have forgotten.
I think the Orthodox UKIP guy was at the Manchester PBmeet with DavidL and Big John and a few more of us - a bit keener than most of us on intense debate that evening, but a pleasant chap. IIRC he preferred to have Pepsi from a can rather than a glass for a religious reason. I think most people would think these things eccentric rather than obnoxious, but I suppose UKIP is trying to look mainstream.
Not really surprised if the Autumn Statement didn't do anything much. Firstly it was a bit meh for most people - do you buy or sell a house often enough to care intensely about the exact tax rate? Secondly, as I keep saying and nobody seems to believe (perhaps because it's boring), the main parties are down to their core voters and they aren't easy to shift.
He was that chap.
The tweet that started off this whole discussion was a fake anyway... Same bloke that trolled Ukip is now doing it to labour
Peter, my oldest son was contacted via his mobile and took part in a Populus survey on Tuesday, his first ever political poll. He said he was also asked to rate a selection of politicians including Alex Salmond.
@tnewtondunn: YouGov/Sun poll tonight: no Autumn Statement bounce for Coalition. Libs 5th + Greens high again. LAB 32%, CON 31%, UKIP 15%, GRN 8%, LD 7%.
The question is when was this poll conducted ...... before or after the Autumn statement?
If it follows YouGov's normal schedule, it began at 5pm yesterday and finished at 3pm today
Those polled yesterday are unlikely to have had a detailed grasp of the Chancellor's proposals. Unfortunately there's no Sun/YouGov poll tomorrow, so we may have to wait for the Sundays to gauge the true impact (if any).
The Sunday Times YouGov poll started at 5pm today and ends tomorrow at 3pm.
The Opinium poll for the Observer will have straddled the Autumn Statement.
The ICM and Ipsos-Mori phone polls should be going into the field tomorrow and end on Sunday.
Plus there should be a Populus poll tomorrow .... Yes?
That sounds very much like a Scottish poll, rather than their regular UK wide VI ones.
I think the Orthodox UKIP guy was at the Manchester PBmeet with DavidL and Big John and a few more of us - a bit keener than most of us on intense debate that evening, but a pleasant chap. IIRC he preferred to have Pepsi from a can rather than a glass for a religious reason. I think most people would think these things eccentric rather than obnoxious, but I suppose UKIP is trying to look mainstream.
Not really surprised if the Autumn Statement didn't do anything much. Firstly it was a bit meh for most people - do you buy or sell a house often enough to care intensely about the exact tax rate? Secondly, as I keep saying and nobody seems to believe (perhaps because it's boring), the main parties are down to their core voters and they aren't easy to shift.
I’m the one, you were a very generous host - I’m jolly glad you never mentioned my shockingly poor predictions, would be rather embarrassing if people found out :-) It was coke not pepsi and a glass would have been fine, a mug not.
Hello, and thank you for taking my reminiscence in good part - re-reading it, it looks a bit patronising, wasn't meant to be. It was good to meet you.
Based on recent polls, the Greens appear to be quite close to reaching critical mass, certainly in terms of competing with the LibDems. They should really be pushing as hard as poss to stand in another 50-100 seats, not with any chance of winning of course, but to put markers down for 2020 and in a good many cases by saving their deposits
Based on council by elections since June there are not even 100 council seats the Greens have a chance of fighting competitively . Their vote share overall is below 4% . Whatever some pollsters are measuring it is not real Green support in the polling booth .
Oh dear, Mark. You're getting more desperate. You do remember the Greens outpolling the Lib Dems in the Euro election polling booths, right? However if you feel that strongly about this I am more than happy to double the stake in our Caroline Lucas bet. At the same odds of course. 8/1 in case you have forgotten.
Andy JS And Spain of course, looks like The Times has lost its marbles this evening
And Israel (March 17) - though that is likely to be more depressing than interesting. Just when you thought they couldnt vote for a nuttier coalition...
Three interesting elections next year at least: UK, Canada and, now, Sweden again.
And Japan this year - looks to be a good demonstration of how with FPTP, just because most of the voters think you're shit, that doesn't mean you can't get a decent majority.
Comments
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B4DKzzECAAAfvqY.png
As for your last sentence, well you clearly haven't listened to me defend religion a hundred times on this board. Religion isn't wrong in and of itself, and I think religions do a lot of good in society. I particularly have a lot of time for religions like Quakerism and Reform Judaism. What I won't do is excuse rude behaviour because people start saying their God requires it. If someone refused to shake my hand because I was male, or white, or non-Hindu or whatever I'd find it insulting, so I can certainly understand why women would. They find it hard enough to work in male-dominated settings like politics and this sort of stuff just makes them feel more excluded.
Sun Politics @Sun_Politics · 1h 1 hour ago
Andy Burnham refuses to rule out launching Labour leadership bid: http://spr.ly/6011QHlB
Almost as insane a ramp as that UKIP one a while back.
Ok, maybe not that stupid.
That sounds very much like a Scottish poll, rather than their regular UK wide VI ones.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/autumn-statement/11274243/Once-again-the-BBC-shows-its-true-colours.html
Not really surprised if the Autumn Statement didn't do anything much. Firstly it was a bit meh for most people - do you buy or sell a house often enough to care intensely about the exact tax rate? Secondly, as I keep saying and nobody seems to believe (perhaps because it's boring), the main parties are down to their core voters and they aren't easy to shift.
Just catching up with the threads today. Sorry I missed this mornings, as despite the headlines today being all about Osborne's Autumn Statement, it was the shannigans with the Libdem Leadership which appears to have almost slipped under the radar.
Clegg has basically given up if he cannot even bothered to turn up stand behind Osborne delivering his Coalition's Autumn Statement. Its just a question of when he resigns now, will it be before or after the GE? Vince Cable looked like he had swallowed a wasp yesterday during the Autumn Statement, he now cuts a far less substantial political figure despite having held the Business brief for nearly five years. But Danny Alexander seems to have grown in confidence, and he certainly seems to have managed to do what Clegg always failed too, effectively sidelined Vince Cable. I think that Danny Alexander will hold his seat at the next GE, and he will also turn out to be a serious contender to replace Clegg when he steps down.
Only 33rd amongst over-50s!
I don't know, if a woman said she wouldn't touch any man except her husband because of her religion, it just wouldn't bother me. I'd accept it as a bit odd but it takes allsorts
Actually religion is wrong because there is no God that I can see. Live for today. Try to be good. Though it is hard.
It was coke not pepsi and a glass would have been fine, a mug not.
And how could I have forgotten co-host TSE?
Portugal will go to the polls too?