The Conservatives are seen as slightly more likely than Labour to be the largest party, 42% to 35%
52% would like one of the parties to win an overall majority, 24% would prefer a hung parliament
47% think government's cuts have gone too far, 37% say balance right; 15% think they've not gone far enough
58% think the pledges Labour have made mean they would end up having to increase taxes on people like them
Trying to get my head round those, I think the answer is the respondents are schizophrenic.
My favourite the voters are schizophrenic poll was when a ComRes poll found that the voters were in favour of state regulation of the press and OPPOSED to state regulation of the press
A reputable source has told me that the only polling we are getting tonight will be the YouGov for the Sunday Times
OK, so we're digging in for a late one waiting for sign's from YouGov?
Coffee and Ferrero Rocher on stand-bye!
In the last few months of last year, the Sunday Times were publishing their YouGov around 9.30pm
That's not too bad...
Still have Ferrero Rocher left over from Christmas though and I suspect they will be gone by the time YouGov turns up...
I complained that I was paying £26 a month to subscribe to the Times and I needed by YouGov fix on Saturday night's and I couldn't wait until 6am on Sunday Morning's to see the results.
So you took on Rupert and won? Unlike Hacked Off and Red! :O
Nah, I love Rupert, it is thanks to him (and Chris Huhne) that I became Guest Editor of PB.
They put a word in with OGH for you?
When the Times went paywall, Mike emailed me asking me if I could email him the articles with the Populus phone polls for the Times and the YouGov for the Sunday Times.
Eventually I ended up emailing him other articles that might be of interest, the big one was the Sunday Times story about Chris Huhne and his speeding problem.
We ended up discussing the story and I gave my honest assessment that I couldn't post on PB (Huhne is as guilty and Ms Pryce must be the source and they both would end up getting charged and face prison time)
After that, we ended up chatting on a lot of things on a regular basis and then one day he asked me, he was going on holiday in a few months time, and would I like to edit the site.
So what your basically saying is that your entire life's success might not have happened if Chris Who hadn't put his foot down on the M25!¬ :O
In fact its all down to Rupert Murdoch and his plans for on line journalism...
Latest from CNN - Terror sleeper cells activated in France - Has anyone thought how this may dominate the media for months and much more and what effect it will have on 2015 GE
Only a couple of weeks ago people here were solemly informing us that the agenda would move on as the election approaches denying publicity to UKIP and seeing their vote share decline.
In France, we could be looking at FN winning the next election and bringing back Madame Guillotine.
Mr. Isam, I've posted a fair bit on the self-censorship over the Jesus and Mo cartoons.
I'm not sure that "We had self-censorship before, and have it now" is very reassuring.
Edited extra bit: cut an errant 'as' so it makes sense.
If they want to have a go at the terrorists, I am sure there are ways of insulting them without offending the 5 million muslims living in the UK
Make fun/draw cartoons of ISIS/Bin Laden/Jihadi John whatever.. but reproducing images which offend peaceful and violent muslims alike is the way to more division, which is the terrorists aim
Even seen The Godfather? Remember how they got Sonny?
Your squalid pandering to the sensitivities of religious fundamentalists is as tragic as it demeaning.
No one is ''pandering to the sensitivities of religious fundamentalists'' - the weakness of your argument is made clear by the way you misrepresent. Muslim religious leaders all over the world have condemned the attacks. Any muslim you care to point a camera at condemns the attacks. More than that they say there is no excuse in quoting Islam as a reason - the leading UK muslim says Mohamed would condemn using his name as a reason.
The vast majority of people killed by muslim terrorists are other muslims.
Here we are with these people finally - as if we needed a 'finally' - exposing their nazi tendencies to everyone and people like you step up to the plate to dance to their tune Keep it up because as long as you continue in the vein you do then the terrorists are winning.
You step up to the plate to play baseball, not to dance to a tune. None of the rest of your post makes sense, either.
Two largest parties sling sh*t at each other and the voters opt for the NOTA party. Any chance Labour and the Conservatives recognising the stupidity of these tactics?
Lib Dems have stopped chucking sh*t for a week and their vote holds up. Guess what happens next time they start a round of chucking?
Isam and Rod C will correct me if I'm wrong, but what I think they're arguing is that if the basic principles of one's society are atheism and consumerism, you'd better not allow people to immigrate whose basic principles are radically different. And, you shouldn't complain if they follow their principles through to their logical outcome.
I would say if people from two great cricketing nations want to immigrate then we can can argue about numbers but should not be afraid. And the same goes for Australia and New Zealand.
Isam and Rod C will correct me if I'm wrong, but what I think they're arguing is that if the basic principles of one's society are atheism and consumerism, you'd better not allow people to immigrate whose basic principles are radically different. And, you shouldn't complain if they follow their principles through to their logical outcome.
I would say if people from two great cricketing nations want to immigrate then we can can argue about numbers but should not be afraid. And the same goes for Australia and New Zealand.
Given that cricket between the two great cricketing nations was recently suspended for five years because of Islamist terrorist murders in Bombay, I'm not sure you are being as clever as you think you are.
Someone really ought to map the UKIP vote against Muslim issues figuring heavily in the news.
My thoughts exactly. I think a percentage of people this week will watch the news, and come to the conclusion the only way to protect the Western World is to remove the muslim population from it. The perceived best way of doing this in this country is to vote UKIP.
The other big thing ignored by the UKIP+5 tonight is that the boost comes equally from all other parties even from the Greens, not one party in particular. But yes the events of the last few days have opened a can of worms, things that were not talked before as too extreme are now debated in the mainstream. That results in less resistance to UKIP's point of view.
Mr. Isam, I've posted a fair bit on the self-censorship over the Jesus and Mo cartoons.
I'm not sure that "We had self-censorship before, and have it now" is very reassuring.
Edited extra bit: cut an errant 'as' so it makes sense.
If they want to have a go at the terrorists, I am sure there are ways of insulting them without offending the 5 million muslims living in the UK
Make fun/draw cartoons of ISIS/Bin Laden/Jihadi John whatever.. but reproducing images which offend peaceful and violent muslims alike is the way to more division, which is the terrorists aim
Even seen The Godfather? Remember how they got Sonny?
Your squalid pandering to the sensitivities of religious fundamentalists is as tragic as it demeaning.
No one is ''pandering to the sensitivities of religious fundamentalists'' - the weakness of your argument is made clear by the way you misrepresent. Muslim religious leaders all over the world have condemned the attacks. Any muslim you care to point a camera at condemns the attacks. More than that they say there is no excuse in quoting Islam as a reason - the leading UK muslim says Mohamed would condemn using his name as a reason.
The vast majority of people killed by muslim terrorists are other muslims.
Here we are with these people finally - as if we needed a 'finally' - exposing their nazi tendencies to everyone and people like you step up to the plate to dance to their tune Keep it up because as long as you continue in the vein you do then the terrorists are winning.
You step up to the plate to play baseball, not to dance to a tune. None of the rest of your post makes sense, either.
Your reply is inconsequential. Fact - you talk about pandering to sensitivities. Fact - in the real world Muslims make clear the these sensitivities do not exist.
Just because a terrorist uses these images as an excuse it does not mean that the overwhelming majority of muslims agree with their actions. But you persist. As long as you daemonize the majority then the terrorists succeed. They need you to succeed in whipping up hatred.
21.35 More just in from David Chazan who has been following the investigation and reports that five relatives of the gunmen have been released.
Did they check if they are on the USA travel ban list?
What happened to the third gunman that surrendered and was with the twin brothers on the attack on the magazine? I read somewhere that he was released without charge.
21.35 More just in from David Chazan who has been following the investigation and reports that five relatives of the gunmen have been released.
Did they check if they are on the USA travel ban list?
What happened to the third gunman that surrendered and was with the twin brothers on the attack on the magazine? I read somewhere that he was released without charge.
The man was named as a suspect in the attack, if he was released it is to be assumed that the police were convinced that he was not in fact the third gunman
15% say their local GP service has got better, 34% worse, 40% that is has stayed about the same
49% of people say they are normally able to get an appointment when they need one, 36% that they are often unable to
8% say they have had to go to A&E when they were unable to get a GP appointment
Why would one go to A&E (which stands I believe for 'Accident'' and ''Emergency'') in lieu of a GP appointment? What are the criteria for defining ''need'' in relation or a GP appointment.
15% say their local GP service has got better, 34% worse, 40% that is has stayed about the same
49% of people say they are normally able to get an appointment when they need one, 36% that they are often unable to
8% say they have had to go to A&E when they were unable to get a GP appointment
Why would one go to A&E (which stands I believe for 'Accident'' and ''Emergency'') in lieu of a GP appointment? What are the criteria for defining ''need'' in relation or a GP appointment.
Years ago I found myself vomiting uncontrollably in the middle of the night. When it went on for a couple of hours I called out an out of hours GP who came round and injected me in the butt with something that stopped the vomiting. These days I would probably just go to A&E as I wouldnt have any confidence that if I called out an out of Hours GP they would turn up.
In my local hospital an out of hours GP surgery has been set up next door to A&E. Anyone presenting at A&E needing a GP is triaged straight to the end of the queue at the out of hours GP next door. Problem solved. However in the case of my vomiting I suspect they would treat that in A&E - if only to get rid of me fast!
Isam and Rod C will correct me if I'm wrong, but what I think they're arguing is that if the basic principles of one's society are atheism and consumerism, you'd better not allow people to immigrate whose basic principles are radically different. And, you shouldn't complain if they follow their principles through to their logical outcome.
I think the social situation is far more complex than that. Young Muslims may have a totally different motivation to their non-Muslim cohorts, but they are every bit as affected by the desensitised, amoral, illiterate, lazy, materialistic, narcissistic, violent influences that are part of modern British life. An ISIS fighter interviewed spoke of how much better than playing Halo going around shooting real people was. The same is surely true of those committing child rape in Rotherham. Twisted outlook, but combined with an entitlement culture and a selfish pursuit of gratification that is pure 21st century Britain. Wahhabist Islamic extremism is a disease, but it takes hold because the host immune system is weak. We cannot truly confront it without recognising our own decline.
I’m wondering this: Could it be that prompting, in general, makes no difference to YouGov's UKIP VI, but when there’s an event favourable to them (whether it's the debate about debates, Paris, or whatever) it amplifies the move (or avoids understating the move) compared with not prompting? I wonder…
Isam and Rod C will correct me if I'm wrong, but what I think they're arguing is that if the basic principles of one's society are atheism and consumerism, you'd better not allow people to immigrate whose basic principles are radically different. And, you shouldn't complain if they follow their principles through to their logical outcome.
I think the social situation is far more complex than that. Young Muslims may have a totally different motivation to their non-Muslim cohorts, but they are every bit as affected by the desensitised, amoral, illiterate, lazy, materialistic, narcissistic, violent influences that are part of modern British life. An ISIS fighter interviewed spoke of how much better than playing Halo going around shooting real people was. The same is surely true of those committing child rape in Rotherham. Twisted outlook, but combined with an entitlement culture and a selfish pursuit of gratification that is pure 21st century Britain. Wahhabist Islamic extremism is a disease, but it takes hold because the host immune system is weak. We cannot truly confront it without recognising our own decline.
Interesting that the woman on the run is described as girlfriend or partner. How is she permitted out without a male relative as escort? Ironic if she was stoned for fornication.
Isam and Rod C will correct me if I'm wrong, but what I think they're arguing is that if the basic principles of one's society are atheism and consumerism, you'd better not allow people to immigrate whose basic principles are radically different. And, you shouldn't complain if they follow their principles through to their logical outcome.
I think the social situation is far more complex than that. Young Muslims may have a totally different motivation to their non-Muslim cohorts, but they are every bit as affected by the desensitised, amoral, illiterate, lazy, materialistic, narcissistic, violent influences that are part of modern British life. An ISIS fighter interviewed spoke of how much better than playing Halo going around shooting real people was. The same is surely true of those committing child rape in Rotherham. Twisted outlook, but combined with an entitlement culture and a selfish pursuit of gratification that is pure 21st century Britain. Wahhabist Islamic extremism is a disease, but it takes hold because the host immune system is weak. We cannot truly confront it without recognising our own decline.
To summarize, Islamic terrorists are encouraged to become terrorists by playing Halo, and fundamentally terrorism is our fault? I know we don't communicate, but you cannot really believe this.
Sorry, extra edited bit, but you also seem to be trying to make some kind of excuse for the Rotherham child rape as well.
Good poll for UKIP today and even Populus had UKIP on 14 Friday. However why are the other pollsters keeping shtum? I'd now like to see what the other pollsters have to say.
Browsing Shadsys odds, he has 6.5 for Conservative minority government, 5.5 for Lab minority government and 7 for a second election in 2015.
Given that NOM looks most likely, theee seem reasonable value, as I cannot see much else that adds up to a government in the seat projections. Any thoughts?
Isam and Rod C will correct me if I'm wrong, but what I think they're arguing is that if the basic principles of one's society are atheism and consumerism, you'd better not allow people to immigrate whose basic principles are radically different. And, you shouldn't complain if they follow their principles through to their logical outcome.
I think the social situation is far more complex than that. Young Muslims may have a totally different motivation to their non-Muslim cohorts, but they are every bit as affected by the desensitised, amoral, illiterate, lazy, materialistic, narcissistic, violent influences that are part of modern British life. An ISIS fighter interviewed spoke of how much better than playing Halo going around shooting real people was. The same is surely true of those committing child rape in Rotherham. Twisted outlook, but combined with an entitlement culture and a selfish pursuit of gratification that is pure 21st century Britain. Wahhabist Islamic extremism is a disease, but it takes hold because the host immune system is weak. We cannot truly confront it without recognising our own decline.
So we are all gulity? Its wrong to blame the satirists for 'bringing it on themselves' (not that I do) but quite OK to blame in your casually ignorant way the rest of British society? Or rather your warped view of British society. Once again we see another small victory for terrorism as it unlocks your inner lunatic.
Even if we take your argument at remotely face value the real culprit which erodes values are the broadcasting film and media outlets themselves who pursue I have to admit an unremittingly drab menu of misery and anger in what passes for drama.
I’m wondering this: Could it be that prompting, in general, makes no difference to YouGov's UKIP VI, but when there’s an event favourable to them (whether it's the debate about debates, Paris, or whatever) it amplifies the move (or avoids understating the move) compared with not prompting? I wonder…
I was wondering something else. There is such a thing as positive prompting and negative prompting; this happens in all advertising. Just which method does YouGov use and when and how does it use it?
Isam and Rod C will correct me if I'm wrong, but what I think they're arguing is that if the basic principles of one's society are atheism and consumerism, you'd better not allow people to immigrate whose basic principles are radically different. And, you shouldn't complain if they follow their principles through to their logical outcome.
I think the social situation is far more complex than that. Young Muslims may have a totally different motivation to their non-Muslim cohorts, but they are every bit as affected by the desensitised, amoral, illiterate, lazy, materialistic, narcissistic, violent influences that are part of modern British life. An ISIS fighter interviewed spoke of how much better than playing Halo going around shooting real people was. The same is surely true of those committing child rape in Rotherham. Twisted outlook, but combined with an entitlement culture and a selfish pursuit of gratification that is pure 21st century Britain. Wahhabist Islamic extremism is a disease, but it takes hold because the host immune system is weak. We cannot truly confront it without recognising our own decline.
Good poll for UKIP today and even Populus had UKIP on 14 Friday. However why are the other pollsters keeping shtum? I'd now like to see what the other pollsters have to say.
Well usually hear from MORI, ICM and ComRes during the middle part of the month, so expect a lot of activity next week and the week after.
Isam and Rod C will correct me if I'm wrong, but what I think they're arguing is that if the basic principles of one's society are atheism and consumerism, you'd better not allow people to immigrate whose basic principles are radically different. And, you shouldn't complain if they follow their principles through to their logical outcome.
I think the social situation is far more complex than that. Young Muslims may have a totally different motivation to their non-Muslim cohorts, but they are every bit as affected by the desensitised, amoral, illiterate, lazy, materialistic, narcissistic, violent influences that are part of modern British life. An ISIS fighter interviewed spoke of how much better than playing Halo going around shooting real people was. The same is surely true of those committing child rape in Rotherham. Twisted outlook, but combined with an entitlement culture and a selfish pursuit of gratification that is pure 21st century Britain. Wahhabist Islamic extremism is a disease, but it takes hold because the host immune system is weak. We cannot truly confront it without recognising our own decline.
So we are all gulity? Its wrong to blame the satirists for 'bringing it on themselves' (not that I do) but quite OK to blame in your casually ignorant way the rest of British society? Or rather your warped view of British society. Once again we see another small victory for terrorism as it unlocks your inner lunatic.
Even if we take your argument at remotely face value the real culprit which erodes values are the broadcasting film and media outlets themselves who pursue I have to admit an unremittingly drab menu of misery and anger in what passes for drama.
I don't blame anything on 'society' -society is an outcome, not an actor. I blame any number of things -the demoralising effect over decades of state socialism, the desensitising and coarsening effect of the media, including films, TV, computer games etc. as you rightly state, the decline in respect for authority, the decline of the family etc. etc. How do you explain the London riots? Those people were motivated by nothing except nihilistic malice and (well founded) belief in their own invincibility.
'“Defending freedom of expression in the face of oppression is one thing; insisting on the right to be obnoxious and offensive just because you can is infantile,” [Al Jazeera English editor and executive producer Salah-Aldeen Khadr] Khadr wrote. “Baiting extremists isn’t bravely defiant when your manner of doing so is more significant in offending millions of moderate people as well. And within a climate where violent response—however illegitimate [sic]—is a real risk, taking a goading stand on a principle virtually no one contests is worse than pointless: it’s pointlessly all about you.”'
That could have been written by some people on here.
Isam and Rod C will correct me if I'm wrong, but what I think they're arguing is that if the basic principles of one's society are atheism and consumerism, you'd better not allow people to immigrate whose basic principles are radically different. And, you shouldn't complain if they follow their principles through to their logical outcome.
Yes thats about it
I think mass immigration is the biggest disaster in this country's history and will be the ruin of it. But that's not the fault of the immigrants, it's the stupid governments and the lemmings that support them
1/ That Farage should exploit the murder of French citizens on the most bigoted and misleading TV faux news show makes it clear the kind of person he is.
2/ Most people in the UK are not Christians, and I suggest the only reason he is talking about Britain as a Christian state is so he keeps getting asked back to Fox News to satisfy his own ego.
I’m wondering this: Could it be that prompting, in general, makes no difference to YouGov's UKIP VI, but when there’s an event favourable to them (whether it's the debate about debates, Paris, or whatever) it amplifies the move (or avoids understating the move) compared with not prompting? I wonder…
I was wondering something else. There is such a thing as positive prompting and negative prompting; this happens in all advertising. Just which method does YouGov use and when and how does it use it?
They just present a list of parties on the screen and a second if "another"... Difference is that Ukip is now on the first list
Isam and Rod C will correct me if I'm wrong, but what I think they're arguing is that if the basic principles of one's society are atheism and consumerism, you'd better not allow people to immigrate whose basic principles are radically different. And, you shouldn't complain if they follow their principles through to their logical outcome.
Yes thats about it
I think mass immigration is the biggest disaster in this country's history and will be the ruin of it.
Sam, I hope this isn't too personal a question, but what is your family immigration history?
Personally, half of my family are Irish - my grandparents came over in one of the biggest migrations this country has ever seen.
A hundred years ago, Isam, you would have been making exactly the same argument about mass immigration from Ireland.
Would our country have been better without my grandparents and without me?
Is this not my country too? Am I ruining it? Ruining it for who?
1/ That Farage should exploit the murder of French citizens on the most bigoted and misleading TV faux news show makes it clear the kind of person he is.
2/ Most people in the UK are not Christians, and I suggest the only reason he is talking about Britain as a Christian state is so he keeps getting asked back to Fox News to satisfy his own ego.
Both your points are wrong. The first is a matter of opinion and says far more about you than Farage.
The second is factually incorrect. Although I am a staunch atheist even I recognise that Britain is officially a Christian country. So much so that the head of State is the head of the main Christian denomination in Britain and Anglicanism is the official state religion. In fact we are one of the few countries in the world still to have a state religion.
And in the 2011 census 60% of the population identified themselves as Christians.
Isam and Rod C will correct me if I'm wrong, but what I think they're arguing is that if the basic principles of one's society are atheism and consumerism, you'd better not allow people to immigrate whose basic principles are radically different. And, you shouldn't complain if they follow their principles through to their logical outcome.
Yes thats about it
I think mass immigration is the biggest disaster in this country's history and will be the ruin of it.
Sam, I hope this isn't too personal a question, but what is your family immigration history?
Personally, half of my family are Irish - my grandparents came over in one of the biggest migrations this country has ever seen.
A hundred years ago, Isam, you would have been making exactly the same argument about mass immigration from Ireland.
Would our country have been better without my grandparents and without me?
Is this not my country too? Am I ruining it? Ruining it for who?
I really hate it when people bring their own personal situations into debates about nationwide issues. It doesn't matter where your family are from or mine
It's the equivalent if showing a picture of a young child who lives in a town that our air forces are going to bomb in a war... 'Do you really need to kill me?' 'Would the world be a better place if I were orphaned?' Etc etc
1/ That Farage should exploit the murder of French citizens on the most bigoted and misleading TV faux news show makes it clear the kind of person he is.
2/ Most people in the UK are not Christians, and I suggest the only reason he is talking about Britain as a Christian state is so he keeps getting asked back to Fox News to satisfy his own ego.
1/ That Farage should exploit the murder of French citizens on the most bigoted and misleading TV faux news show makes it clear the kind of person he is.
2/ Most people in the UK are not Christians, and I suggest the only reason he is talking about Britain as a Christian state is so he keeps getting asked back to Fox News to satisfy his own ego.
Both your points are wrong. The first is a matter of opinion and says far more about you than Farage.
The second is factually incorrect. Although I am a staunch atheist even I recognise that Britain is officially a Christian country. So much so that the head of State is the head of the main Christian denomination in Britain and Anglicanism is the official state religion. In fact we are one of the few countries in the world still to have a state religion.
And in the 2011 census 60% of the population identified themselves as Christians.
1/ That Farage should exploit the murder of French citizens on the most bigoted and misleading TV faux news show makes it clear the kind of person he is.
2/ Most people in the UK are not Christians, and I suggest the only reason he is talking about Britain as a Christian state is so he keeps getting asked back to Fox News to satisfy his own ego.
Both your points are wrong. The first is a matter of opinion and says far more about you than Farage.
The second is factually incorrect. Although I am a staunch atheist even I recognise that Britain is officially a Christian country. So much so that the head of State is the head of the main Christian denomination in Britain and Anglicanism is the official state religion. In fact we are one of the few countries in the world still to have a state religion.
And in the 2011 census 60% of the population identified themselves as Christians.
Opinion polls show that Fox News viewers are the most misinformed, Where do you think American extremist is now part of the mainstream? Who made the strongest case that Iraq had WMD? Where do up to half of GOP voters think Obama was born in Kenya, and therefore not legally President? You might choose to defend it, but I live in America and see what it does to people? A TV show that campaigns to take away unemployment benefits, to take away healthcare from millions of people, that plays the race card at every opportunity. You are welcome to defend that.
Tell me how many times you hear Farage talking about Britain as a Christian state to the British media. If he says that in the debates, I will write you a check for a thousand pounds. He has one message to the British media and a different one to a far-right media show in America. You are welcome to defend that. If you embrace the things Farage says, vote for him.
1/ That Farage should exploit the murder of French citizens on the most bigoted and misleading TV faux news show makes it clear the kind of person he is.
2/ Most people in the UK are not Christians, and I suggest the only reason he is talking about Britain as a Christian state is so he keeps getting asked back to Fox News to satisfy his own ego.
Both your points are wrong. The first is a matter of opinion and says far more about you than Farage.
The second is factually incorrect. Although I am a staunch atheist even I recognise that Britain is officially a Christian country. So much so that the head of State is the head of the main Christian denomination in Britain and Anglicanism is the official state religion. In fact we are one of the few countries in the world still to have a state religion.
And in the 2011 census 60% of the population identified themselves as Christians.
Opinion polls show that Fox News viewers are the most misinformed, Where do you think American extremist is now part of the mainstream? Who made the strongest case that Iraq had WMD? Where do up to half of GOP voters think Obama was born in Kenya, and therefore not legally President? You might choose to defend it, but I live in America and see what it does to people? A TV show that campaigns to take away unemployment benefits, to take away healthcare from millions of people, that plays the race card at every opportunity. You are welcome to defend that.
Tell me how many times you hear Farage talking about Britain as a Christian state to the British media. If he says that in the debates, I will write you a check for a thousand pounds. He has one message to the British media and a different one to a far-right media show in America. You are welcome to defend that. If you embrace the things Farage says, vote for him.
Isam and Rod C will correct me if I'm wrong, but what I think they're arguing is that if the basic principles of one's society are atheism and consumerism, you'd better not allow people to immigrate whose basic principles are radically different. And, you shouldn't complain if they follow their principles through to their logical outcome.
I think the social situation is far more complex than that. Young Muslims may have a totally different motivation to their non-Muslim cohorts, but they are every bit as affected by the desensitised, amoral, illiterate, lazy, materialistic, narcissistic, violent influences that are part of modern British life. An ISIS fighter interviewed spoke of how much better than playing Halo going around shooting real people was. The same is surely true of those committing child rape in Rotherham. Twisted outlook, but combined with an entitlement culture and a selfish pursuit of gratification that is pure 21st century Britain. Wahhabist Islamic extremism is a disease, but it takes hold because the host immune system is weak. We cannot truly confront it without recognising our own decline.
So we are all gulity? Its wrong to blame the satirists for 'bringing it on themselves' (not that I do) but quite OK to blame in your casually ignorant way the rest of British society? Or rather your warped view of British society. Once again we see another small victory for terrorism as it unlocks your inner lunatic.
Even if we take your argument at remotely face value the real culprit which erodes values are the broadcasting film and media outlets themselves who pursue I have to admit an unremittingly drab menu of misery and anger in what passes for drama.
I don't blame anything on 'society' -society is an outcome, not an actor. I blame any number of things -the demoralising effect over decades of state socialism, the desensitising and coarsening effect of the media, including films, TV, computer games etc. as you rightly state, the decline in respect for authority, the decline of the family etc. etc. How do you explain the London riots? Those people were motivated by nothing except nihilistic malice and (well founded) belief in their own invincibility.
The English riots were caused by predominantly by poor parenting. The main groups participating were white chavs and black ghetto types. These are the groups with by far the highest rates of single parents, unmarried parents, and family breakdowns.
1/ That Farage should exploit the murder of French citizens on the most bigoted and misleading TV faux news show makes it clear the kind of person he is.
2/ Most people in the UK are not Christians, and I suggest the only reason he is talking about Britain as a Christian state is so he keeps getting asked back to Fox News to satisfy his own ego.
Both your points are wrong. The first is a matter of opinion and says far more about you than Farage.
The second is factually incorrect. Although I am a staunch atheist even I recognise that Britain is officially a Christian country. So much so that the head of State is the head of the main Christian denomination in Britain and Anglicanism is the official state religion. In fact we are one of the few countries in the world still to have a state religion.
And in the 2011 census 60% of the population identified themselves as Christians.
Opinion polls show that Fox News viewers are the most misinformed, Where do you think American extremist is now part of the mainstream? Who made the strongest case that Iraq had WMD? Where do up to half of GOP voters think Obama was born in Kenya, and therefore not legally President? You might choose to defend it, but I live in America and see what it does to people? A TV show that campaigns to take away unemployment benefits, to take away healthcare from millions of people, that plays the race card at every opportunity. You are welcome to defend that.
Tell me how many times you hear Farage talking about Britain as a Christian state to the British media. If he says that in the debates, I will write you a check for a thousand pounds. He has one message to the British media and a different one to a far-right media show in America. You are welcome to defend that. If you embrace the things Farage says, vote for him.
Your last point kind of misses the fact that I am a UKIP member so the chances are I will be voting for his party (though personally as I have said before I would rather he was not the leader.)
And Farage regularly talks about Britain being a Christian - or Judeo-Christian - country. Just go google it and see how many times he has said it in various newspaper interviews down the years.
Of course those facts don't fit your bigoted view of UKIP so it is no surprise you ignore or misrepresent them, just as you did in your ludicrous claims about the UK not being a Christian country.
You said Britain was not a Christian country. This is factually incorrect. We are one of only half a dozen officially Christian countries in Europe (even Italy does not have a state religion) and at the last census 60% of the population identified themselves as Christian. A far higher number are, like me, officially Christian even if we describe ourselves as atheists.
I do think that "Judeo-Christian" is a bit of a weasel term. The shared heritage that is both Jewish and Christian in origin (i.e. traditional Abrahamic mythology and law) is also shared with Islam. If when people talk about it they actually mean democratic culture and liberal principles, then that is Enlightenment in origin, not Jewish or Christian. If there is any religion associated with such a movement, it's Deism.
Another important factor was the credit card culture of people believing that if they wanted something they had a right to buy it regardless of whether they could afford it.
Isam and Rod C will correct me if I'm wrong, but what I think they're arguing is that if the basic principles of one's society are atheism and consumerism, you'd better not allow people to immigrate whose basic principles are radically different. And, you shouldn't complain if they follow their principles through to their logical outcome.
I think the social situation is far more complex than that. Young Muslims may have a totally different motivation to their non-Muslim cohorts, but they are every bit as affected by the desensitised, amoral, illiterate, lazy, materialistic, narcissistic, violent influences that are part of modern British life. An ISIS fighter interviewed spoke of how much better than playing Halo going around shooting real people was. The same is surely true of those committing child rape in Rotherham. Twisted outlook, but combined with an entitlement culture and a selfish pursuit of gratification that is pure 21st century Britain. Wahhabist Islamic extremism is a disease, but it takes hold because the host immune system is weak. We cannot truly confront it without recognising our own decline.
So we are all gulity? Its wrong to blame the satirists for 'bringing it on themselves' (not that I do) but quite OK to blame in your casually ignorant way the rest of British society? Or rather your warped view of British society. Once again we see another small victory for terrorism as it unlocks your inner lunatic.
Even if we take your argument at remotely face value the real culprit which erodes values are the broadcasting film and media outlets themselves who pursue I have to admit an unremittingly drab menu of misery and anger in what passes for drama.
I don't blame anything on 'society' -society is an outcome, not an actor. I blame any number of things -the demoralising effect over decades of state socialism, the desensitising and coarsening effect of the media, including films, TV, computer games etc. as you rightly state, the decline in respect for authority, the decline of the family etc. etc. How do you explain the London riots? Those people were motivated by nothing except nihilistic malice and (well founded) belief in their own invincibility.
The English riots were caused by predominantly by poor parenting. The main groups participating were white chavs and black ghetto types. These are the groups with by far the highest rates of single parents, unmarried parents, and family breakdowns.
I do think that "Judeo-Christian" is a bit of a weasel term. The shared heritage that is both Jewish and Christian in origin (i.e. traditional Abrahamic mythology and law) is also shared with Islam. If when people talk about it they actually mean democratic culture and liberal principles, then that is Enlightenment in origin, not Jewish or Christian. If there is any religion associated with such a movement, it's Deism.
Not really. Half of the official book of Christianity (the Old Testament bit) is Jewish All the term does is recognise that there is a Jewish origin to the Christian religion which has then be developed by the other half of the Bible (the New Testament bit).
Isam and Rod C will correct me if I'm wrong, but what I think they're arguing is that if the basic principles of one's society are atheism and consumerism, you'd better not allow people to immigrate whose basic principles are radically different. And, you shouldn't complain if they follow their principles through to their logical outcome.
I think the social situation is far more complex than that. Young Muslims may have a totally different motivation to their non-Muslim cohorts, but they are every bit as affected by the desensitised, amoral, illiterate, lazy, materialistic, narcissistic, violent influences that are part of modern British life. An ISIS fighter interviewed spoke of how much better than playing Halo going around shooting real people was. The same is surely true of those committing child rape in Rotherham. Twisted outlook, but combined with an entitlement culture and a selfish pursuit of gratification that is pure 21st century Britain. Wahhabist Islamic extremism is a disease, but it takes hold because the host immune system is weak. We cannot truly confront it without recognising our own decline.
Vast numbers of children grow up playing violent games and watching violent movies. They are still capable of realising the difference between games and causing harm in real life. What matters is not the exposure to 'bad' media, but that that such children have a humanitarian and moral code to interpret such things. Unfortunately many children either have no such code because of poor parenting, or the moral code includes many elements of violence (as in Islam or, in rare cases, highly right wing Christianity).
I do think that "Judeo-Christian" is a bit of a weasel term. The shared heritage that is both Jewish and Christian in origin (i.e. traditional Abrahamic mythology and law) is also shared with Islam. If when people talk about it they actually mean democratic culture and liberal principles, then that is Enlightenment in origin, not Jewish or Christian. If there is any religion associated with such a movement, it's Deism.
Not really. Half of the official book of Christianity (the Old Testament bit) is Jewish All the term does is recognise that there is a Jewish origin to the Christian religion which has then be developed by the other half of the Bible (the New Testament bit).
That's the "Abrahamic mythology and law" bit, which Islam is also heavily dominated by.
I do think that "Judeo-Christian" is a bit of a weasel term. The shared heritage that is both Jewish and Christian in origin (i.e. traditional Abrahamic mythology and law) is also shared with Islam. If when people talk about it they actually mean democratic culture and liberal principles, then that is Enlightenment in origin, not Jewish or Christian. If there is any religion associated with such a movement, it's Deism.
I think that's a slightly misinformed view. St Augustin, Thomas Aquinas -Christian thinkers have been just as vital to the development of political thought as figures like Plato. The 10 commandments is still the fundament of our legal system. Far later, it is Christianity that practically invented the modern concept of egalitarianism, with its notion of every man being equal before God. In the 19th century, the Evangelical movement was obviously at the forefront of anti-slavery and took a far more progressive attitude to race than society in general.
Browsing Shadsys odds, he has 6.5 for Conservative minority government, 5.5 for Lab minority government and 7 for a second election in 2015.
Given that NOM looks most likely, theee seem reasonable value, as I cannot see much else that adds up to a government in the seat projections. Any thoughts?
The first thought is you'd need to study the terms carefully to see if the second election offering is separate from the others -- in other words, is it possible to have two winning bets if, say, a minority government for three months is followed by a second election?
If you combine the implied probabilities from the prices, you get: 6.5 + 5.5 + 7 = 2.1-ish or in traditional odds: 11/2 + 9/2 + 6/1 = 11/10-ish
Without the second election, you are looking at around 2/1 (or 3 in decimal prices) against either a Labour or Conservative minority government.
Whether it is value depends on how willing you are to rule out a coalition government.
Isam and Rod C will correct me if I'm wrong, but what I think they're arguing is that if the basic principles of one's society are atheism and consumerism, you'd better not allow people to immigrate whose basic principles are radically different. And, you shouldn't complain if they follow their principles through to their logical outcome.
I think the social situation is far more complex than that. Young Muslims may have a totally different motivation to their non-Muslim cohorts, but they are every bit as affected by the desensitised, amoral, illiterate, lazy, materialistic, narcissistic, violent influences that are part of modern British life. An ISIS fighter interviewed spoke of how much better than playing Halo going around shooting real people was. The same is surely true of those committing child rape in Rotherham. Twisted outlook, but combined with an entitlement culture and a selfish pursuit of gratification that is pure 21st century Britain. Wahhabist Islamic extremism is a disease, but it takes hold because the host immune system is weak. We cannot truly confront it without recognising our own decline.
Vast numbers of children grow up playing violent games and watching violent movies. They are still capable of realising the difference between games and causing harm in real life. What matters is not the exposure to 'bad' media, but that that such children have a humanitarian and moral code to interpret such things. Unfortunately many children either have no such code because of poor parenting, or the moral code includes many elements of violence (as in Islam or, in rare cases, highly right wing Christianity).
I'm not sure that disagrees with what I say. Of course good parenting instilling good values is the most important influence. But it isn't the only one.
You said Britain was not a Christian country. This is factually incorrect. We are one of only half a dozen officially Christian countries in Europe (even Italy does not have a state religion) and at the last census 60% of the population identified themselves as Christian. A far higher number are, like me, officially Christian even if we describe ourselves as atheists.
You are comprehensively wrong.
Britain is a nation that embraces all faiths, whether Christian, Jewish, Muslim, or lack of faith.
I don't know where you get "officially Christian" from, but actually atheist. You either are an atheist or you aren't. You either are a Christian or you aren't. If you have both official and unofficial beliefs, than it suggests you are in the closet in some circles. That too is your choice. Opinion polls show those in the UK who say they are Christian are now in the minority.
Tories and Labour again tied tonight and UKIP heading towards Marine Le Pen totals, Greens also only a fraction behind LDs
Also, went to see 'The Theory of Everything' tonight, Eddie Redmayne brilliant and gives a very human portrayal of Hawking, astonishing he was only originally given 2 months to live, well worth catching!
bondegezou (Earlier) If a party wins the constituency vote it wins the constituency, however it is not guaranteed to win the regional vote either if another party which did not win the constituency does better across the region
1/ That Farage should exploit the murder of French citizens on the most bigoted and misleading TV faux news show makes it clear the kind of person he is.
2/ Most people in the UK are not Christians, and I suggest the only reason he is talking about Britain as a Christian state is so he keeps getting asked back to Fox News to satisfy his own ego.
Both your points are wrong. The first is a matter of opinion and says far more about you than Farage.
The second is factually incorrect. Although I am a staunch atheist even I recognise that Britain is officially a Christian country. So much so that the head of State is the head of the main Christian denomination in Britain and Anglicanism is the official state religion. In fact we are one of the few countries in the world still to have a state religion.
And in the 2011 census 60% of the population identified themselves as Christians.
Opinion polls show that Fox News viewers are the most misinformed, Where do you think American extremist is now part of the mainstream? Who made the strongest case that Iraq had WMD? Where do up to half of GOP voters think Obama was born in Kenya, and therefore not legally President? You might choose to defend it, but I live in America and see what it does to people? A TV show that campaigns to take away unemployment benefits, to take away healthcare from millions of people, that plays the race card at every opportunity. You are welcome to defend that.
Tell me how many times you hear Farage talking about Britain as a Christian state to the British media. If he says that in the debates, I will write you a check for a thousand pounds. He has one message to the British media and a different one to a far-right media show in America. You are welcome to defend that. If you embrace the things Farage says, vote for him.
Are you seriously saying that Fox News viewers are less well informed and more racist than viewers of the terrible MsNBC network, featuring hosts like Al Sharpton, race baiter in chief?
Lassana Bathily, a Muslim employee at the HyperChacher supermarket in Paris, saved the lives of 15 Jewish shoppers, when he hid them in the supermarket’s basement freezer after the terrorist, Amedy Coulibaly, entered the store and opened fire.
Bathily also had the presence of mind to also turn the freezer off.
1/ That Farage should exploit the murder of French citizens on the most bigoted and misleading TV faux news show makes it clear the kind of person he is.
2/ Most people in the UK are not Christians, and I suggest the only reason he is talking about Britain as a Christian state is so he keeps getting asked back to Fox News to satisfy his own ego.
Both your points are wrong. The first is a matter of opinion and says far more about you than Farage.
The second is factually incorrect. Although I am a staunch atheist even I recognise that Britain is officially a Christian country. So much so that the head of State is the head of the main Christian denomination in Britain and Anglicanism is the official state religion. In fact we are one of the few countries in the world still to have a state religion.
And in the 2011 census 60% of the population identified themselves as Christians.
Opinion polls show that Fox News viewers are the most misinformed, Where do you think American extremist is now part of the mainstream? Who made the strongest case that Iraq had WMD? Where do up to half of GOP voters think Obama was born in Kenya, and therefore not legally President? You might choose to defend it, but I live in America and see what it does to people? A TV show that campaigns to take away unemployment benefits, to take away healthcare from millions of people, that plays the race card at every opportunity. You are welcome to defend that.
Tell me how many times you hear Farage talking about Britain as a Christian state to the British media. If he says that in the debates, I will write you a check for a thousand pounds. He has one message to the British media and a different one to a far-right media show in America. You are welcome to defend that. If you embrace the things Farage says, vote for him.
Are you seriously saying that Fox News viewers are less well informed and more racist than viewers of the terrible MsNBC network, featuring hosts like Al Sharpton, race baiter in chief?
Lassana Bathily, a Muslim employee at the HyperChacher supermarket in Paris, saved the lives of 15 Jewish shoppers, when he hid them in the supermarket’s basement freezer after the terrorist, Amedy Coulibaly, entered the store and opened fire.
Bathily also had the presence of mind to also turn the freezer off.
1/ That Farage should exploit the murder of French citizens on the most bigoted and misleading TV faux news show makes it clear the kind of person he is.
2/ Most people in the UK are not Christians, and I suggest the only reason he is talking about Britain as a Christian state is so he keeps getting asked back to Fox News to satisfy his own ego.
Both your points are wrong. The first is a matter of opinion and says far more about you than Farage.
The second is factually incorrect. Although I am a staunch atheist even I recognise that Britain is officially a Christian country. So much so that the head of State is the head of the main Christian denomination in Britain and Anglicanism is the official state religion. In fact we are one of the few countries in the world still to have a state religion.
And in the 2011 census 60% of the population identified themselves as Christians.
Opinion polls show that Fox News viewers are the most misinformed, Where do you think American extremist is now part of the mainstream? Who made the strongest case that Iraq had WMD? Where do up to half of GOP voters think Obama was born in Kenya, and therefore not legally President? You might choose to defend it, but I live in America and see what it does to people? A TV show that campaigns to take away unemployment benefits, to take away healthcare from millions of people, that plays the race card at every opportunity. You are welcome to defend that.
Tell me how many times you hear Farage talking about Britain as a Christian state to the British media. If he says that in the debates, I will write you a check for a thousand pounds. He has one message to the British media and a different one to a far-right media show in America. You are welcome to defend that. If you embrace the things Farage says, vote for him.
Are you seriously saying that Fox News viewers are less well informed and more racist than viewers of the terrible MsNBC network, featuring hosts like Al Sharpton, race baiter in chief?
YES!
Well, Eddie hasn't risen to the challenge of providing a link to these "opinion polls".
I do think that "Judeo-Christian" is a bit of a weasel term. The shared heritage that is both Jewish and Christian in origin (i.e. traditional Abrahamic mythology and law) is also shared with Islam. If when people talk about it they actually mean democratic culture and liberal principles, then that is Enlightenment in origin, not Jewish or Christian. If there is any religion associated with such a movement, it's Deism.
I think that's a slightly misinformed view. St Augustin, Thomas Aquinas -Christian thinkers have been just as vital to the development of political thought as figures like Plato. The 10 commandments is still the fundament of our legal system. Far later, it is Christianity that practically invented the modern concept of egalitarianism, with its notion of every man being equal before God. In the 19th century, the Evangelical movement was obviously at the forefront of anti-slavery and took a far more progressive attitude to race than society in general.
St Augustin, Thomas Aquinas are specifically Christian, not Judeo-Christian.
The 10 Commandments are also with the Koran, so are shared between all three, so Abrahamic, not Judeo-Christian. (I also do not buy that they're the fundamental part of our legal system, but that's another argument.)
Religious egalitarianism before God is shared between Christianity and Islam, so Christo-Islamic, not Judeo-Christian.
Evangelical abolitionism is specifically Christian, not Judeo-Christian.
So we've yet to get an example of something that's both Jewish and Christian, but not Islamic. Like I said, it's a weasel term.
1/ That Farage should exploit the murder of French citizens on the most bigoted and misleading TV faux news show makes it clear the kind of person he is.
2/ Most people in the UK are not Christians, and I suggest the only reason he is talking about Britain as a Christian state is so he keeps getting asked back to Fox News to satisfy his own ego.
Both your points are wrong. The first is a matter of opinion and says far more about you than Farage.
The second is factually incorrect. Although I am a staunch atheist even I recognise that Britain is officially a Christian country. So much so that the head of State is the head of the main Christian denomination in Britain and Anglicanism is the official state religion. In fact we are one of the few countries in the world still to have a state religion.
And in the 2011 census 60% of the population identified themselves as Christians.
Opinion polls show that Fox News viewers are the most misinformed, Where do you think American extremist is now part of the mainstream? Who made the strongest case that Iraq had WMD? Where do up to half of GOP voters think Obama was born in Kenya, and therefore not legally President? You might choose to defend it, but I live in America and see what it does to people? A TV show that campaigns to take away unemployment benefits, to take away healthcare from millions of people, that plays the race card at every opportunity. You are welcome to defend that.
Tell me how many times you hear Farage talking about Britain as a Christian state to the British media. If he says that in the debates, I will write you a check for a thousand pounds. He has one message to the British media and a different one to a far-right media show in America. You are welcome to defend that. If you embrace the things Farage says, vote for him.
Are you seriously saying that Fox News viewers are less well informed and more racist than viewers of the terrible MsNBC network, featuring hosts like Al Sharpton, race baiter in chief?
YES!
In that case you'll have to show me a Fox News presenter more racist than Al Sharpton.
I do think that "Judeo-Christian" is a bit of a weasel term. The shared heritage that is both Jewish and Christian in origin (i.e. traditional Abrahamic mythology and law) is also shared with Islam. If when people talk about it they actually mean democratic culture and liberal principles, then that is Enlightenment in origin, not Jewish or Christian. If there is any religion associated with such a movement, it's Deism.
I think that's a slightly misinformed view. St Augustin, Thomas Aquinas -Christian thinkers have been just as vital to the development of political thought as figures like Plato. The 10 commandments is still the fundament of our legal system. Far later, it is Christianity that practically invented the modern concept of egalitarianism, with its notion of every man being equal before God. In the 19th century, the Evangelical movement was obviously at the forefront of anti-slavery and took a far more progressive attitude to race than society in general.
Nope, too simplistic. Just like saying the views of the Jewish, Islamic and Buddhist philosophers are relevant to the basic tenets of their religions instead of them trying to interpret the sayings of their beliefs are more correct than the others.
1/ That Farage should exploit the murder of French citizens on the most bigoted and misleading TV faux news show makes it clear the kind of person he is.
2/ Most people in the UK are not Christians, and I suggest the only reason he is talking about Britain as a Christian state is so he keeps getting asked back to Fox News to satisfy his own ego.
Both your points are wrong. The first is a matter of opinion and says far more about you than Farage.
The second is factually incorrect. Although I am a staunch atheist even I recognise that Britain is officially a Christian country. So much so that the head of State is the head of the main Christian denomination in Britain and Anglicanism is the official state religion. In fact we are one of the few countries in the world still to have a state religion.
And in the 2011 census 60% of the population identified themselves as Christians.
Opinion polls show that Fox News viewers are the most misinformed, Where do you think American extremist is now part of the mainstream? Who made the strongest case that Iraq had WMD? Where do up to half of GOP voters think Obama was born in Kenya, and therefore not legally President? You might choose to defend it, but I live in America and see what it does to people? A TV show that campaigns to take away unemployment benefits, to take away healthcare from millions of people, that plays the race card at every opportunity. You are welcome to defend that.
Tell me how many times you hear Farage talking about Britain as a Christian state to the British media. If he says that in the debates, I will write you a check for a thousand pounds. He has one message to the British media and a different one to a far-right media show in America. You are welcome to defend that. If you embrace the things Farage says, vote for him.
Are you seriously saying that Fox News viewers are less well informed and more racist than viewers of the terrible MsNBC network, featuring hosts like Al Sharpton, race baiter in chief?
YES!
Well, Eddie hasn't risen to the challenge of providing a link to these "opinion polls".
Can you do better?
I suspect that the 'Fox news viewers are ignorant' theme is more due to the political views of the asserters than any actual poll.
1/ That Farage should exploit the murder of French citizens on the most bigoted and misleading TV faux news show makes it clear the kind of person he is.
2/ Most people in the UK are not Christians, and I suggest the only reason he is talking about Britain as a Christian state is so he keeps getting asked back to Fox News to satisfy his own ego.
Both your points are wrong. The first is a matter of opinion and says far more about you than Farage.
The second is factually incorrect. Although I am a staunch atheist even I recognise that Britain is officially a Christian country. So much so that the head of State is the head of the main Christian denomination in Britain and Anglicanism is the official state religion. In fact we are one of the few countries in the world still to have a state religion.
And in the 2011 census 60% of the population identified themselves as Christians.
Opinion polls show that Fox News viewers are the most misinformed, Where do you think American extremist is now part of the mainstream? Who made the strongest case that Iraq had WMD? Where do up to half of GOP voters think Obama was born in Kenya, and therefore not legally President? You might choose to defend it, but I live in America and see what it does to people? A TV show that campaigns to take away unemployment benefits, to take away healthcare from millions of people, that plays the race card at every opportunity. You are welcome to defend that.
Tell me how many times you hear Farage talking about Britain as a Christian state to the British media. If he says that in the debates, I will write you a check for a thousand pounds. He has one message to the British media and a different one to a far-right media show in America. You are welcome to defend that. If you embrace the things Farage says, vote for him.
Are you seriously saying that Fox News viewers are less well informed and more racist than viewers of the terrible MsNBC network, featuring hosts like Al Sharpton, race baiter in chief?
YES!
In that case you'll have to show me a Fox News presenter more racist than Al Sharpton.
It was a special moment when Bill O'Reilly told a black guest dressed in business attire that he looked like a drug dealer.
I do think that "Judeo-Christian" is a bit of a weasel term. The shared heritage that is both Jewish and Christian in origin (i.e. traditional Abrahamic mythology and law) is also shared with Islam. If when people talk about it they actually mean democratic culture and liberal principles, then that is Enlightenment in origin, not Jewish or Christian. If there is any religion associated with such a movement, it's Deism.
I think that's a slightly misinformed view. St Augustin, Thomas Aquinas -Christian thinkers have been just as vital to the development of political thought as figures like Plato. The 10 commandments is still the fundament of our legal system. Far later, it is Christianity that practically invented the modern concept of egalitarianism, with its notion of every man being equal before God. In the 19th century, the Evangelical movement was obviously at the forefront of anti-slavery and took a far more progressive attitude to race than society in general.
So we've yet to get an example of something that's both Jewish and Christian, but not Islamic. Like I said, it's a weasel term.
If the archbishop of Canterbury had an affair with the wife of the chief rabbi, that would be both Jewish and Christian.
Well, Eddie hasn't risen to the challenge of providing a link to these "opinion polls".
Can you do better?
I suspect that the 'Fox news viewers are ignorant' theme is more due to the political views of the asserters than any actual poll.
Not only a single poll but multiple opinion polls according to Eddie! And now Enid_Rokz is joining in. Could it be instead that this is just a figment of a joint New Year wishlist?
I would be most disappointed if it turns out we've been exposed to high levels of concentrated bellendery.
1/ That Farage should exploit the murder of French citizens on the most bigoted and misleading TV faux news show makes it clear the kind of person he is.
2/ Most people in the UK are not Christians, and I suggest the only reason he is talking about Britain as a Christian state is so he keeps getting asked back to Fox News to satisfy his own ego.
Both your points are wrong. The first is a matter of opinion and says far more about you than Farage.
And in the 2011 census 60% of the population identified themselves as Christians.
Opinion polls show that Fox News viewers are the most misinformed, Where do you think American extremist is now part of the mainstream? Who made the strongest case that Iraq had WMD? Where do up to half of GOP voters think Obama was born in Kenya, and therefore not legally President? You might choose to defend it, but I live in America and see what it does to people? A TV show that campaigns to take away unemployment benefits, to take away healthcare from millions of people, that plays the race card at every opportunity. You are welcome to defend that.
Tell me how many times you hear Farage talking about Britain as a Christian state to the British media. If he says that in the debates, I will write you a check for a thousand pounds. He has one message to the British media and a different one to a far-right media show in America. You are welcome to defend that. If you embrace the things Farage says, vote for him.
Are you seriously saying that Fox News viewers are less well informed and more racist than viewers of the terrible MsNBC network, featuring hosts like Al Sharpton, race baiter in chief?
YES!
In that case you'll have to show me a Fox News presenter more racist than Al Sharpton.
It was a special moment when Bill O'Reilly told a black guest dressed in business attire that he looked like a drug dealer.
It was a good line - he did. Given all the charitable work that O'Reilly does, and you want to call him a racist based on a throwaway line? That doesn't make him more racist than Sharpton, who has made a career pouring troubled waters on oil.
Comments
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2015/01/07/if-ukip-is-a-bit-on-the-wane-then-maybe-there-are-some-good-bets-out-there/
"If UKIP is a bit on the wane then maybe there are some good bets out there"
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2015/01/07/yougovs-ukip-share-falls-to-lowest-level-since-october-and-this-is-with-the-party-being-prompted/
YouGov’s UKIP share falls to lowest level since October – and this is with the party being prompted"
Je suis UKIP effect?
Thursdays poll might have been an outlier but thats a heck of a jump.
52% think cuts about right or not far enough - so effective majority support for what people will regard as the Con position.
Large majority expecting higher taxes from Lab - perfect starting point for Tax Bombshell campaign.
First finding is a quasi wisdom - if people think Con likely to be largest party then that is a subliminal signal of expected voting intention.
In France, we could be looking at FN winning the next election and bringing back Madame Guillotine.
Lib Dems have stopped chucking sh*t for a week and their vote holds up. Guess what happens next time they start a round of chucking?
But yes the events of the last few days have opened a can of worms, things that were not talked before as too extreme are now debated in the mainstream.
That results in less resistance to UKIP's point of view.
Just because a terrorist uses these images as an excuse it does not mean that the overwhelming majority of muslims agree with their actions. But you persist. As long as you daemonize the majority then the terrorists succeed. They need you to succeed in whipping up hatred.
Correction, this is what apparently happened to him according to the Independent:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/hamyd-mourad-released-without-charge-after-being-named-as-suspect-in-charlie-hebdo-attack-9969843.html
Was there really a third gunman?
What are the criteria for defining ''need'' in relation or a GP appointment.
In my local hospital an out of hours GP surgery has been set up next door to A&E. Anyone presenting at A&E needing a GP is triaged straight to the end of the queue at the out of hours GP next door. Problem solved. However in the case of my vomiting I suspect they would treat that in A&E - if only to get rid of me fast!
Sorry, extra edited bit, but you also seem to be trying to make some kind of excuse for the Rotherham child rape as well.
Just wow.
Given that NOM looks most likely, theee seem reasonable value, as I cannot see much else that adds up to a government in the seat projections. Any thoughts?
Its wrong to blame the satirists for 'bringing it on themselves' (not that I do) but quite OK to blame in your casually ignorant way the rest of British society? Or rather your warped view of British society. Once again we see another small victory for terrorism as it unlocks your inner lunatic.
Even if we take your argument at remotely face value the real culprit which erodes values are the broadcasting film and media outlets themselves who pursue I have to admit an unremittingly drab menu of misery and anger in what passes for drama.
Decline from when? From what?
54% of people think Prince Andrew was wrong to maintain a friendship with Jeffrey Epstein, 15% he was right to do so
27% think sex allegations against Prince Andrew by Virginia Roberts are probably true, 38% that they're probably false
38% of people think Ched Evans should be allowed to return to football, 47% that he should not
By 47% to 39% men think Ched Evans should be able to return to football, by 55% to 29% women say not
War inside al Jazeera over 'I am not Charlie!' http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/396131/i-am-not-charlie-leaked-newsroom-emails-reveal-al-jazeera-fury-over-global-support …
#Farage is the only one with the guts to actually say what people are thinking #Parisattacks #ukip #Charliehebdo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUOKyd98fkk&feature=youtu.be … …""
That could have been written by some people on here.
I think mass immigration is the biggest disaster in this country's history and will be the ruin of it. But that's not the fault of the immigrants, it's the stupid governments and the lemmings that support them
Why insult the immigrants?
Unfortunately, tthe same accusation could be levelled at almost all UK media outlets, including the Beeb.
We need a greater enforcer of impartiality and news in this country.
The only enforcer of impartiality is the public. They, however, are powerless.
However, certain organisations claim impartiality.
The standards at work are not good enough.
1/ That Farage should exploit the murder of French citizens on the most bigoted and misleading TV faux news show makes it clear the kind of person he is.
2/ Most people in the UK are not Christians, and I suggest the only reason he is talking about Britain as a Christian state is so he keeps getting asked back to Fox News to satisfy his own ego.
Personally, half of my family are Irish - my grandparents came over in one of the biggest migrations this country has ever seen.
A hundred years ago, Isam, you would have been making exactly the same argument about mass immigration from Ireland.
Would our country have been better without my grandparents and without me?
Is this not my country too? Am I ruining it? Ruining it for who?
The second is factually incorrect. Although I am a staunch atheist even I recognise that Britain is officially a Christian country. So much so that the head of State is the head of the main Christian denomination in Britain and Anglicanism is the official state religion. In fact we are one of the few countries in the world still to have a state religion.
And in the 2011 census 60% of the population identified themselves as Christians.
It's the equivalent if showing a picture of a young child who lives in a town that our air forces are going to bomb in a war... 'Do you really need to kill me?' 'Would the world be a better place if I were orphaned?' Etc etc
https://www.google.co.uk/?gws_rd=ssl#q=dawkins+cultural+christian
Tell me how many times you hear Farage talking about Britain as a Christian state to the British media. If he says that in the debates, I will write you a check for a thousand pounds. He has one message to the British media and a different one to a far-right media show in America. You are welcome to defend that. If you embrace the things Farage says, vote for him.
Christians now a minority in UK as half the population have no religion
Only half the British population now identifies with any religion and Christians have become a minority, a major study has found.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/10297036/Christians-now-a-minority-in-UK-as-half-the-population-have-no-religion.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/10422169/Nigel-Farage-We-must-defend-Christian-heritage.html
And Farage regularly talks about Britain being a Christian - or Judeo-Christian - country. Just go google it and see how many times he has said it in various newspaper interviews down the years.
Of course those facts don't fit your bigoted view of UKIP so it is no surprise you ignore or misrepresent them, just as you did in your ludicrous claims about the UK not being a Christian country.
You are comprehensively wrong.
I do think that "Judeo-Christian" is a bit of a weasel term. The shared heritage that is both Jewish and Christian in origin (i.e. traditional Abrahamic mythology and law) is also shared with Islam. If when people talk about it they actually mean democratic culture and liberal principles, then that is Enlightenment in origin, not Jewish or Christian. If there is any religion associated with such a movement, it's Deism.
Mike Smithson (@MSmithsonPB)
10/01/2015 22:39
Tonight's YouGov 18% for UKIP has only been exceeded once before. In mid-Oct the party reached 19%
Ben Foley reselected as Green Party candidate. In 2010 he polled 393 votes (0.9%).
http://www.bedfordshire-news.co.uk/Ben-Foley-contest-Bedford-Kempston-Constituency/story-25835419-detail/story.html#comments
If you combine the implied probabilities from the prices, you get:
6.5 + 5.5 + 7 = 2.1-ish
or in traditional odds: 11/2 + 9/2 + 6/1 = 11/10-ish
Without the second election, you are looking at around 2/1 (or 3 in decimal prices) against either a Labour or Conservative minority government.
Whether it is value depends on how willing you are to rule out a coalition government.
I don't know where you get "officially Christian" from, but actually atheist. You either are an atheist or you aren't. You either are a Christian or you aren't. If you have both official and unofficial beliefs, than it suggests you are in the closet in some circles. That too is your choice. Opinion polls show those in the UK who say they are Christian are now in the minority.
Also, went to see 'The Theory of Everything' tonight, Eddie Redmayne brilliant and gives a very human portrayal of Hawking, astonishing he was only originally given 2 months to live, well worth catching!
https://twitter.com/BOS_CA
(Only joking. His name is Jean-Paul Floru).
http://www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/15-french-jews-alive-thanks-to-lassana-bathily/2015/01/10/
Can you do better?
St Augustin, Thomas Aquinas are specifically Christian, not Judeo-Christian.
The 10 Commandments are also with the Koran, so are shared between all three, so Abrahamic, not Judeo-Christian. (I also do not buy that they're the fundamental part of our legal system, but that's another argument.)
Religious egalitarianism before God is shared between Christianity and Islam, so Christo-Islamic, not Judeo-Christian.
Evangelical abolitionism is specifically Christian, not Judeo-Christian.
So we've yet to get an example of something that's both Jewish and Christian, but not Islamic. Like I said, it's a weasel term.
All BS when you come down to it.
I would be most disappointed if it turns out we've been exposed to high levels of concentrated bellendery.