Our political system is a complete mess if the SNP get 49 seats on 4.39% of the vote, and UKIP get 0 (or 1) seat on 15.5%
No voting system is perfect, but FPTP is just ridiculous.
Rather different geographical spread, so the comparison is not fair.
Why should there be a seat bonus for being popular in Scotland?
Because (a) the SNP is standing in 8.4% of the population and (b) UKIP is standing in about 95% I guess - no idea how much really. The actual popularity figures in those areas are rather different, too ...
One could just as well argue that the Tories get a seat bonus for being popular in the shires. Actually that SNP figure is downgraded somewhat because Labour have a bonus for being popular in the Scottish industrial areas.
I still see no good reason for thinking SNP over-representation in Westminster in those circumstances is fair.
Can I just say that the general brown-nosing today towards the dead king of Saudi Arabia is really quite sickening. A short statement expressing sympathy with the people of SA would have been more than sufficient.
But all this guff is quite revolting. And for Westminster Abbey to have a flag at half mast in honour of the leader of a country where being a Christian is punishable by death is beyond disgraceful.
With apologies for the image - but the West's approach to this sordid country is to bend over and hold its ankles. And it's long past the time for this to stop.
The good old BBC grudgingly mention Wales in the last paragraph, wonder if Big John can offer some light as to why the NHS under Labour in Wales is so shite?
But if they are partisan enough to have faith in him in the first place are they likely to switch votes if he disappoints them?
I'm not sure that being able to envisage Ed being crapper than he now seems is a particularly partisan position. It seems quite a reasonable view to me.
Fair enough. It's hard for me to envisage serious scenarios in which he could disappoint me, but I do think he is utterly and irredeemably abysmal.
Can I just say that the general brown-nosing today towards the dead king of Saudi Arabia is really quite sickening. A short statement expressing sympathy with the people of SA would have been more than sufficient.
But all this guff is quite revolting. And for Westminster Abbey to have a flag at half mast in honour of the leader of a country where being a Christian is punishable by death is beyond disgraceful.
With apologies for the image - but the West's approach to this sordid country is to bend over and hold its ankles. And it's long past the time for this to stop.
Glasgow South 5-4 with William Hills btw - I'd have thought a 15% swing for the SNP here would be a cakewalk.
That's Sturgeon's patch in the Scottish Parliament, right? I would definitely expect that to have one of the biggest swings.
Glasgow Central includes almost all of Glasgow Southside Holyrood Constituency (Nicola's seat). A very small part of Southshide comes into Glasgow South.
Can I just say that the general brown-nosing today towards the dead king of Saudi Arabia is really quite sickening. A short statement expressing sympathy with the people of SA would have been more than sufficient.
But all this guff is quite revolting. And for Westminster Abbey to have a flag at half mast in honour of the leader of a country where being a Christian is punishable by death is beyond disgraceful.
With apologies for the image - but the West's approach to this sordid country is to bend over and hold its ankles. And it's long past the time for this to stop.
He may struggle to land many blows but Farage at least has a decent chance of winning the seven leader debates. The votes will be splintered all over the place but Farage will be the only right wing participant and could get support from both Conservative and Labour voters. It'd be a useful headline for UKIP if it happens.
One of the key factors will be how many topics they try to cover in each debate.
If you have a 120 minute debate and say go for 6 topics per debate then that is 20 minutes per topic. You could have 2 minutes per leader and then 6 minutes free for all.
So you would have 12 topics over the first 2 debates, which probably covers it:
The deficit Taxes Benefits Education Health Law and order The environment Europe Immigration Defence (Trident) Transport (rail re-nationalisation) Foreign policy (ISIS/Iraq)
For the final debate between Miliband and Cameron you could cover the same 12 topics for 10 minutes each with 2 minutes per leader and 6 minutes free for all
300 trained terrorists roam our streets after Syria got a bit hot -this doesn't seem to concern our security services, but apparently they can't protect us without snooping rights to everyone's emails.
In 2013 this government wanted to bomb the same Syrian government that those jihadists have been fighting.
So a bit difficult to now claim that they're such bad people.
audreyanne and Richard Nabavi should be kept away from sharp objects. The BBC don't seem to share their view that Cameron has played a blinder unless non stop ridicule of the sort Roy Hattersley's puppet had to endure all those years ago can be seen as 'playing a blinder'..
Its the BBC FFS. What other view do you ever expect them to take with anyone right of moderate left
Our political system is a complete mess if the SNP get 49 seats on 4.39% of the vote, and UKIP get 0 (or 1) seat on 15.5%
No voting system is perfect, but FPTP is just ridiculous.
Rather different geographical spread, so the comparison is not fair.
Why should there be a seat bonus for being popular in Scotland?
Because (a) the SNP is standing in 8.4% of the population and (b) UKIP is standing in about 95% I guess - no idea how much really. The actual popularity figures in those areas are rather different, too ...
One could just as well argue that the Tories get a seat bonus for being popular in the shires. Actually that SNP figure is downgraded somewhat because Labour have a bonus for being popular in the Scottish industrial areas.
I still see no good reason for thinking SNP over-representation in Westminster in those circumstances is fair.
What on earth are you thinking of here?! It's inherent in the FPTP system which the Unionist and Conservative (or unionist and conservative) strand of UK thought has deemed an ornament of the UK constitution. Labour and the Tories have benefited very greatly from it, so it's odd that you should suddenly turn round and say how awful it is when someone else is winning.
What else do you want? Parties being forced to stand in every constituency in the UK (and no cheating about NI here please)?
Our political system is a complete mess if the SNP get 49 seats on 4.39% of the vote, and UKIP get 0 (or 1) seat on 15.5%
No voting system is perfect, but FPTP is just ridiculous.
Rather different geographical spread, so the comparison is not fair.
Why should there be a seat bonus for being popular in Scotland?
Because (a) the SNP is standing in 8.4% of the population and (b) UKIP is standing in about 95% I guess - no idea how much really. The actual popularity figures in those areas are rather different, too ...
One could just as well argue that the Tories get a seat bonus for being popular in the shires. Actually that SNP figure is downgraded somewhat because Labour have a bonus for being popular in the Scottish industrial areas.
I still see no good reason for thinking SNP over-representation in Westminster in those circumstances is fair.
Labour and the Tories have benefited very greatly from it, so it's odd that you should suddenly turn round and say how awful it is when someone else is winning.
I was just pointing out that the comparison you originally objected to was actually fair.
Can I just say that the general brown-nosing today towards the dead king of Saudi Arabia is really quite sickening. A short statement expressing sympathy with the people of SA would have been more than sufficient.
But all this guff is quite revolting. And for Westminster Abbey to have a flag at half mast in honour of the leader of a country where being a Christian is punishable by death is beyond disgraceful.
With apologies for the image - but the West's approach to this sordid country is to bend over and hold its ankles. And it's long past the time for this to stop.
I agree (apart from the rather homophobic final paragraph). One of the best things about renewable energy and fracking is that Saudi can go back to being a flyblown desert. They will no longer be needed.
Can I just say that the general brown-nosing today towards the dead king of Saudi Arabia is really quite sickening. A short statement expressing sympathy with the people of SA would have been more than sufficient.
But all this guff is quite revolting. And for Westminster Abbey to have a flag at half mast in honour of the leader of a country where being a Christian is punishable by death is beyond disgraceful.
With apologies for the image - but the West's approach to this sordid country is to bend over and hold its ankles. And it's long past the time for this to stop.
I agree (apart from the rather homophobic final paragraph). One of the best things about renewable energy and fracking is that Saudi can go back to being a flyblown desert. They will no longer be needed.
I don't see how the last paragraph is homophobic *cough*
Can I just say that the general brown-nosing today towards the dead king of Saudi Arabia is really quite sickening. A short statement expressing sympathy with the people of SA would have been more than sufficient.
But all this guff is quite revolting. And for Westminster Abbey to have a flag at half mast in honour of the leader of a country where being a Christian is punishable by death is beyond disgraceful.
With apologies for the image - but the West's approach to this sordid country is to bend over and hold its ankles. And it's long past the time for this to stop.
I agree (apart from the rather homophobic final paragraph). One of the best things about renewable energy and fracking is that Saudi can go back to being a flyblown desert. They will no longer be needed.
Well with the energy strategy of the PPEocrachy Middle Eastern oil and gas will continue to be needed by the UK at least.
In response to Nick Palmer on a previous thread, who asked this:-
"A work question which someone here may know - the director of a company breeding beagles in Brescia has just been given a 2.5 year prison sentence for cruelty and unlawful killing of dogs (it's relevant for Britain as she's also a director of a British-based company seeking to develop beagle production in Britain). Someone advises that in Italy, sentences under 4 years never lead to prison custody. Is that Right? What does it then mean?"
In Italy a criminal conviction is only finalised when all appeals are concluded. If the limitation period has expired before the final appeal has been definitively concluded then the conviction never becomes firm.
Thanks very much, Cyclefree. I'm due on the Today programme at 720ish tomorrow morning on the subject. (It's not a party polutical issue.)
BBC director-general implicated in leaking details of leadership debates Lord Hall, director-general of the BBC, accused of 'crass' intervention after discussing his views on television debates before proposals have been put to political parties.
Wow, Westwood is reported to be donating £300,000 to the Greens. If that actually happens it will mean they can spend the max amount in all their target seats and then some. That's before counting the membership subs from all those extra members.
Obviously it's 'more' targeted at the English but only in the sense that's where most of the winnable Tory seats are.
This is the sort of (cruel but effective) thing I'm expecting to cause the St Valentines day Swingback Massacre on or around 14th Feb, when the electorate start taking notice of the fact that there will soon be an election.
I suspect the Tory campaign will attempt to portray Ed as rather odd and not quite as others (see left hand photo) which has no effect on reason but is devastating at instinct level, which has more impact on peoples vote than reason (libdems excepted).
Alas for Ed and the libdems we are animals that run on instinct not reason (except when it serves self interest) and take the most important decisions in our lives based on instinct not reason (one reason many people take more care about buying a car or clothes than buying a house, and the reason why certain B grade celebs I can mention have no trouble attracting successive victims</> boyfriends.
BBC director-general implicated in leaking details of leadership debates Lord Hall, director-general of the BBC, accused of 'crass' intervention after discussing his views on television debates before proposals have been put to political parties.
But for once the BBC is playing it evenly.
It is clear from the article that the LDs are objecting and the other parties have yet to accept. In addition those left out are also objecting. All of which makes the thread header about Cameron even more ludicrous.
Can I just say that the general brown-nosing today towards the dead king of Saudi Arabia is really quite sickening. A short statement expressing sympathy with the people of SA would have been more than sufficient.
But all this guff is quite revolting. And for Westminster Abbey to have a flag at half mast in honour of the leader of a country where being a Christian is punishable by death is beyond disgraceful.
With apologies for the image - but the West's approach to this sordid country is to bend over and hold its ankles. And it's long past the time for this to stop.
I agree (apart from the rather homophobic final paragraph). One of the best things about renewable energy and fracking is that Saudi can go back to being a flyblown desert. They will no longer be needed.
I don't think Cyclefree is being homophobic at all. It's a crude submissive analogy, but all sorts of individual tastes and orientations could be accommodated (or not) within its bounds.
Stop looking for prejudice and offence when its neither intended to be made, or needed to be taken.
This is a big part of the problem with this country today.
@Carnyx A comparison of both pictures on that poster is notable for the way the format size has been changed....obviously accidentally of course.
Not by me, I wouldn't know how. But (as I remarked earlier) they seem to have used a pre-diet photo of Mr S, and porked up Mr Miliband (too many bacon rolls). Poor chap only has the alternative of the Ken Dodd/Wallace and G style.
Can I just say that the general brown-nosing today towards the dead king of Saudi Arabia is really quite sickening. A short statement expressing sympathy with the people of SA would have been more than sufficient.
But all this guff is quite revolting. And for Westminster Abbey to have a flag at half mast in honour of the leader of a country where being a Christian is punishable by death is beyond disgraceful.
With apologies for the image - but the West's approach to this sordid country is to bend over and hold its ankles. And it's long past the time for this to stop.
I agree (apart from the rather homophobic final paragraph). One of the best things about renewable energy and fracking is that Saudi can go back to being a flyblown desert. They will no longer be needed.
I don't think Cyclefree is being homophobic at all. It's a crude submissive analogy, but all sorts of individual tastes and orientations could be accommodated (or not) within its bounds.
Stop looking for prejudice and offence when its neither intended to be made, or needed to be taken.
This is a big part of the problem with this country today.
Apart from anything else, there's nothing to indicate the gender of the recipient. Rather like old fashioned English law on sodomy, which IIRC included sheep, etc., as well as women in its rubric.
BBC director-general implicated in leaking details of leadership debates Lord Hall, director-general of the BBC, accused of 'crass' intervention after discussing his views on television debates before proposals have been put to political parties.
But for once the BBC is playing it evenly.
It is clear from the article that the LDs are objecting and the other parties have yet to accept. In addition those left out are also objecting. All of which makes the thread header about Cameron even more ludicrous.
Ludicrous but unsurprising - OGH talking up his book.
Can I just say that the general brown-nosing today towards the dead king of Saudi Arabia is really quite sickening. A short statement expressing sympathy with the people of SA would have been more than sufficient.
But all this guff is quite revolting. And for Westminster Abbey to have a flag at half mast in honour of the leader of a country where being a Christian is punishable by death is beyond disgraceful.
With apologies for the image - but the West's approach to this sordid country is to bend over and hold its ankles. And it's long past the time for this to stop.
I agree (apart from the rather homophobic final paragraph). One of the best things about renewable energy and fracking is that Saudi can go back to being a flyblown desert. They will no longer be needed.
I don't think Cyclefree is being homophobic at all. It's a crude submissive analogy, but all sorts of individual tastes and orientations could be accommodated (or not) within its bounds.
Stop looking for prejudice and offence when its neither intended to be made, or needed to be taken.
This is a big part of the problem with this country today.
I didn't take offence, indeed I agreed with Cyclefree. All I did was dislike the depiction as homophobic for implying that gay sex was degrading. Not a big deal, just better ways of making the point.
Can I just say that the general brown-nosing today towards the dead king of Saudi Arabia is really quite sickening. A short statement expressing sympathy with the people of SA would have been more than sufficient.
But all this guff is quite revolting. And for Westminster Abbey to have a flag at half mast in honour of the leader of a country where being a Christian is punishable by death is beyond disgraceful.
With apologies for the image - but the West's approach to this sordid country is to bend over and hold its ankles. And it's long past the time for this to stop.
I agree (apart from the rather homophobic final paragraph). One of the best things about renewable energy and fracking is that Saudi can go back to being a flyblown desert. They will no longer be needed.
I don't think Cyclefree is being homophobic at all. It's a crude submissive analogy, but all sorts of individual tastes and orientations could be accommodated (or not) within its bounds.
Stop looking for prejudice and offence when its neither intended to be made, or needed to be taken.
This is a big part of the problem with this country today.
Thank you. For the record I am not homophobic. The analogy is a crude one - which is why I put in a warning. It could just as easily refer to bending over to be lashed. I just think there is a difference between diplomatic politeness and grovelling and demeaning submission.
@Carnyx It is a common advertising trick, Squeeze a model's picture horizontally to make her look slimmer and taller, or squeeze it vertically if she has annoyed you. The usual idea is to do it in such a way that it isn't obvious, otherwise it tends to annoy the more intelligent.
In response to Nick Palmer on a previous thread, who asked this:-
"A work question which someone here may know - the director of a company breeding beagles in Brescia has just been given a 2.5 year prison sentence for cruelty and unlawful killing of dogs (it's relevant for Britain as she's also a director of a British-based company seeking to develop beagle production in Britain). Someone advises that in Italy, sentences under 4 years never lead to prison custody. Is that Right? What does it then mean?"
In Italy a criminal conviction is only finalised when all appeals are concluded. If the limitation period has expired before the final appeal has been definitively concluded then the conviction never becomes firm.
Thanks very much, Cyclefree. I'm due on the Today programme at 720ish tomorrow morning on the subject. (It's not a party polutical issue.)
Can I just say that the general brown-nosing today towards the dead king of Saudi Arabia is really quite sickening. A short statement expressing sympathy with the people of SA would have been more than sufficient.
But all this guff is quite revolting. And for Westminster Abbey to have a flag at half mast in honour of the leader of a country where being a Christian is punishable by death is beyond disgraceful.
With apologies for the image - but the West's approach to this sordid country is to bend over and hold its ankles. And it's long past the time for this to stop.
I agree (apart from the rather homophobic final paragraph). One of the best things about renewable energy and fracking is that Saudi can go back to being a flyblown desert. They will no longer be needed.
I don't think Cyclefree is being homophobic at all. It's a crude submissive analogy, but all sorts of individual tastes and orientations could be accommodated (or not) within its bounds.
Stop looking for prejudice and offence when its neither intended to be made, or needed to be taken.
This is a big part of the problem with this country today.
I didn't take offence, indeed I agreed with Cyclefree. All I did was dislike the depiction as homophobic for implying that gay sex was degrading. Not a big deal, just better ways of making the point.
You inferred that both the West and Saudi Arabia were male. Not me.
But hey not a big point and generally I don't like painting pictures quite that crude, whoever the participants are and whatever they're doing.
Given the Greens are now included alongside UKIP and the SNP in 1 debate Cameron should not have a problem debating. Canada has debates with 5 party leaders Sweden and New Zealand have had a debate with more than that. As none of the main parties stand in Northern Ireland it can have its own debates
Wow, Westwood is reported to be donating £300,000 to the Greens. If that actually happens it will mean they can spend the max amount in all their target seats and then some. That's before counting the membership subs from all those extra members.
@foxinsoxuk It depends on the tests being carried out, for dermatological testing whippets/greyhounds are preferred due to their thinner skin and sensitivity.
audreyanne and Richard Nabavi should be kept away from sharp objects. The BBC don't seem to share their view that Cameron has played a blinder unless non stop ridicule of the sort Roy Hattersley's puppet had to endure all those years ago can be seen as 'playing a blinder'..
Its the BBC FFS. What other view do you ever expect them to take with anyone right of moderate left
Can I just say that the general brown-nosing today towards the dead king of Saudi Arabia is really quite sickening. A short statement expressing sympathy with the people of SA would have been more than sufficient.
But all this guff is quite revolting. And for Westminster Abbey to have a flag at half mast in honour of the leader of a country where being a Christian is punishable by death is beyond disgraceful.
With apologies for the image - but the West's approach to this sordid country is to bend over and hold its ankles. And it's long past the time for this to stop.
I agree (apart from the rather homophobic final paragraph). One of the best things about renewable energy and fracking is that Saudi can go back to being a flyblown desert. They will no longer be needed.
I don't think Cyclefree is being homophobic at all. It's a crude submissive analogy, but all sorts of individual tastes and orientations could be accommodated (or not) within its bounds.
Stop looking for prejudice and offence when its neither intended to be made, or needed to be taken.
This is a big part of the problem with this country today.
I didn't take offence, indeed I agreed with Cyclefree. All I did was dislike the depiction as homophobic for implying that gay sex was degrading. Not a big deal, just better ways of making the point.
You inferred that both the West and Saudi Arabia were male. Not me.
But hey not a big point and generally I don't like painting pictures quite that crude, whoever the participants are and whatever they're doing.
I would have though licking of boots would have been a better image (or sandals so as to avoid offending cultural sensitivities. Though possibly foot fetishists would still be offended!)
Wow, Westwood is reported to be donating £300,000 to the Greens. If that actually happens it will mean they can spend the max amount in all their target seats and then some. That's before counting the membership subs from all those extra members.
A fashion designer giving money to a party that believes there is too much materialism and consumption. How delicious!!
It's the biggest donation I can remember the party getting. First the membership, then the poll ratings and now donations. It's been a good 2015 so far.
Can I just say that the general brown-nosing today towards the dead king of Saudi Arabia is really quite sickening. A short statement expressing sympathy with the people of SA would have been more than sufficient.
But all this guff is quite revolting. And for Westminster Abbey to have a flag at half mast in honour of the leader of a country where being a Christian is punishable by death is beyond disgraceful.
With apologies for the image - but the West's approach to this sordid country is to bend over and hold its ankles. And it's long past the time for this to stop.
I agree (apart from the rather homophobic final paragraph). One of the best things about renewable energy and fracking is that Saudi can go back to being a flyblown desert. They will no longer be needed.
I don't think Cyclefree is being homophobic at all. It's a crude submissive analogy, but all sorts of individual tastes and orientations could be accommodated (or not) within its bounds.
Stop looking for prejudice and offence when its neither intended to be made, or needed to be taken.
This is a big part of the problem with this country today.
I didn't take offence, indeed I agreed with Cyclefree. All I did was dislike the depiction as homophobic for implying that gay sex was degrading. Not a big deal, just better ways of making the point.
Who says it's gay sex? It could be a man to a woman. It could be a woman to another woman. It could be a woman to a man. I won't spell it out.
And why should people always have to deliberate over all possible permutations of their analogies for fear of being censored or unfairly called out as prejudiced?
You are looking for a link with gay sex, so you can construct offence. It's petty and unnecessary.
Honestly, I do wish people would focus on real homophobia where it actually exists, rather than this self-indulgent suppositional moral grandstanding.
It's this sort of bollocks that suffocates free-expression.
Given the Greens are now included alongside UKIP and the SNP in 1 debate Cameron should not have a problem debating. Canada has debates with 5 party leaders Sweden and New Zealand have had a debate with more than that. As none of the main parties stand in Northern Ireland it can have its own debates
Didn't the Tories have their own candidates last time or was it in 2005 ? THe SDLP MPs take the Labour whip.
@foxinsoxuk I should add in case Nick isn't around, that beagles are easy to handle, cope reasonably well in crowded situations, and their short legs mean you can stack the crates higher.
Can I just say that the general brown-nosing today towards the dead king of Saudi Arabia is really quite sickening. A short statement expressing sympathy with the people of SA would have been more than sufficient.
But all this guff is quite revolting. And for Westminster Abbey to have a flag at half mast in honour of the leader of a country where being a Christian is punishable by death is beyond disgraceful.
With apologies for the image - but the West's approach to this sordid country is to bend over and hold its ankles. And it's long past the time for this to stop.
I agree (apart from the rather homophobic final paragraph). One of the best things about renewable energy and fracking is that Saudi can go back to being a flyblown desert. They will no longer be needed.
I don't think Cyclefree is being homophobic at all. It's a crude submissive analogy, but all sorts of individual tastes and orientations could be accommodated (or not) within its bounds.
Stop looking for prejudice and offence when its neither intended to be made, or needed to be taken.
This is a big part of the problem with this country today.
I didn't take offence, indeed I agreed with Cyclefree. All I did was dislike the depiction as homophobic for implying that gay sex was degrading. Not a big deal, just better ways of making the point.
Who says it's gay sex? It could be a man to a woman. It could be a woman to another woman. It could be a woman to a man. I won't spell it out.
You are looking for a link with gay sex, so you can construct offence. It's petty and unnecessary.
Honestly, I do wish people would focus on real homophobia where it actually exists, rather than this self-indulgent suppositional moral grandstanding.
The main person taking offence and grandstanding seems to be you!
IMO, the mistake Cameron is now making is not just coming out and saying yes they now look fair, as long as we get the format of how a 7 way debate to be such that isn't a bun fight....his silence allows him to painted as still ducking them, when we all know he has probably got a better deal than having to have just 3 other parties and that ultimately he has to do them.
It is really hard to lose a 7 way debate, and if he really is frightened of Ed Miliband head to head, well he doesn't really deserve a second term.
I know the Tories think that they hindered their campaign last time, but that was because it wasn't him vs Brown, it was him vs Clegg and Brown, and Clegg was able to stand in the middle and say hey I'm normal and sound reasonable.
Can I just say that the general brown-nosing today towards the dead king of Saudi Arabia is really quite sickening. A short statement expressing sympathy with the people of SA would have been more than sufficient.
But all this guff is quite revolting. And for Westminster Abbey to have a flag at half mast in honour of the leader of a country where being a Christian is punishable by death is beyond disgraceful.
With apologies for the image - but the West's approach to this sordid country is to bend over and hold its ankles. And it's long past the time for this to stop.
I agree (apart from the rather homophobic final paragraph). One of the best things about renewable energy and fracking is that Saudi can go back to being a flyblown desert. They will no longer be needed.
I don't think Cyclefree is being homophobic at all. It's a crude submissive analogy, but all sorts of individual tastes and orientations could be accommodated (or not) within its bounds.
Stop looking for prejudice and offence when its neither intended to be made, or needed to be taken.
This is a big part of the problem with this country today.
Thank you. For the record I am not homophobic. The analogy is a crude one - which is why I put in a warning. It could just as easily refer to bending over to be lashed. I just think there is a difference between diplomatic politeness and grovelling and demeaning submission.
I agree with you.
And I know perfectly well you are not homophobic. You have no need to justify or defend yourself to me, nor anyone else.
We do *generic politically-correct and inoffensive, but clearly equally evocative and powerful metaphor to symbolise a deeply demeaning and submissive act* to Saudi Arabia.
@foxinsoxuk I should add in case Nick isn't around, that beagles are easy to handle, cope reasonably well in crowded situations, and their short legs mean you can stack the crates higher.
Thanks. As I recall beagles are very energetic though. Cannot imagine them being very happy.
Usually in new drug tests, you look for the best animal model - that is one that is closest to man in the way the drug is metabolised and also in the potential toxicity. Non-human primates tend to be best but not always. Other factors are also important .. ease and cost of rearing (if that is involved) which means a calmer and tamer variety is good (beagles?). A real factor is background pathology - you need a pedigree strain with a known background. If they were human, they'd be extremely posh and wouldn't talk to you.
If the new drug is limited, then the smaller the better as it's dosage (dose per unit of bodyweight) that is important.
An ideal non-primate study animal could be a small pig. For skin studies, pigs used to be good. But whatever animal is used, its incredibly expensive to develop a new drug. Especially nowadays with all the regulations on animal welfare.
Hence non-animal procedures would be very popular with the drug companies. The draw back is still the relevance of the results of in-vitro work. Dr P will know even if he may be a little biased (smiley face).
Animal libbers always believed that firms used animals because they liked ill-treating them. In the same way, that some believe Tories eat babies because they enjoy doing it.
IMO, the mistake Cameron is now making is not just coming out and saying yes they now look fair, as long as we get the format of how a 7 way debate to be such that isn't a bun fight....his silence allows him to painted as still ducking them, when we all know he has probably got a better deal than having to have just 3 other parties and that ultimately he has to do them.
It is really hard to lose a 7 way debate, and if he really is frightened of Ed Miliband head to head, well he doesn't really deserve a second term.
I know the Tories think that they hindered their campaign last time, but that was because it wasn't him vs Brown, it was him vs Clegg and Brown, and Clegg was able to stand in the middle and say hey I'm normal and sound reasonable.
The fact that Ed and Nick haven't endorsed this new format should tell you something.
Usually in new drug tests, you look for the best animal model - that is one that is closest to man in the way the drug is metabolised and also in the potential toxicity. Non-human primates tend to be best but not always. Other factors are also important .. ease and cost of rearing (if that is involved) which means a calmer and tamer variety is good (beagles?). A real factor is background pathology - you need a pedigree strain with a known background. If they were human, they'd be extremely posh and wouldn't talk to you.
If the new drug is limited, then the smaller the better as it's dosage (dose per unit of bodyweight) that is important.
An ideal non-primate study animal could be a small pig. For skin studies, pigs used to be good. But whatever animal is used, its incredibly expensive to develop a new drug. Especially nowadays with all the regulations on animal welfare.
Hence non-animal procedures would be very popular with the drug companies. The draw back is still the relevance of the results of in-vitro work. Dr P will know even if he may be a little biased (smiley face).
Animal libbers always believed that firms used animals because they liked ill-treating them. In the same way, that some believe Tories eat babies because they enjoy doing it.
I always was rather uncomfortable with vivisection myself andI have never done animal experiments myself, all my research was on human volunteers.
IMO, the mistake Cameron is now making is not just coming out and saying yes they now look fair, as long as we get the format of how a 7 way debate to be such that isn't a bun fight....his silence allows him to painted as still ducking them, when we all know he has probably got a better deal than having to have just 3 other parties and that ultimately he has to do them.
It is really hard to lose a 7 way debate, and if he really is frightened of Ed Miliband head to head, well he doesn't really deserve a second term.
I know the Tories think that they hindered their campaign last time, but that was because it wasn't him vs Brown, it was him vs Clegg and Brown, and Clegg was able to stand in the middle and say hey I'm normal and sound reasonable.
The fact that Ed and Nick haven't endorsed this new format should tell you something.
OT. Watching Cameron and fawning over the Saud Royal family makes any civilized person want to retch. How could anyone criticize Galloway for his antics in front of Saddam when we are forced to watch this. Iraq was never nearly as odious as Saudi and I've worked for both.
T was employed as a toxicologist for many years in the pharmaceutical industry. Novel drug work only and I was comfortable with what we did. Always for a worthy goal. Don't know much about cosmetic testing work and blue-sky medical research - you may know more about the latter.
Comments
But all this guff is quite revolting. And for Westminster Abbey to have a flag at half mast in honour of the leader of a country where being a Christian is punishable by death is beyond disgraceful.
With apologies for the image - but the West's approach to this sordid country is to bend over and hold its ankles. And it's long past the time for this to stop.
The good old BBC grudgingly mention Wales in the last paragraph, wonder if Big John can offer some light as to why the NHS under Labour in Wales is so shite?
If you have a 120 minute debate and say go for 6 topics per debate then that is 20 minutes per topic. You could have 2 minutes per leader and then 6 minutes free for all.
So you would have 12 topics over the first 2 debates, which probably covers it:
The deficit
Taxes
Benefits
Education
Health
Law and order
The environment
Europe
Immigration
Defence (Trident)
Transport (rail re-nationalisation)
Foreign policy (ISIS/Iraq)
For the final debate between Miliband and Cameron you could cover the same 12 topics for 10 minutes each with 2 minutes per leader and 6 minutes free for all
So a bit difficult to now claim that they're such bad people.
What else do you want? Parties being forced to stand in every constituency in the UK (and no cheating about NI here please)?
http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-uks-official-political-bogeyman/
BBC director-general implicated in leaking details of leadership debates
Lord Hall, director-general of the BBC, accused of 'crass' intervention after discussing his views on television debates before proposals have been put to political parties.
But for once the BBC is playing it evenly.
Obviously it's 'more' targeted at the English but only in the sense that's where most of the winnable Tory seats are.
http://may2015.com/breaking-news/fashion-designer-vivienne-westwood-to-donate-300000-to-the-green-party/
I suspect the Tory campaign will attempt to portray Ed as rather odd and not quite as others (see left hand photo) which has no effect on reason but is devastating at instinct level, which has more impact on peoples vote than reason (libdems excepted).
Alas for Ed and the libdems we are animals that run on instinct not reason (except when it serves self interest) and take the most important decisions in our lives based on instinct not reason (one reason many people take more care about buying a car or clothes than buying a house, and the reason why certain B grade celebs I can mention have no trouble attracting successive victims</> boyfriends.
A comparison of both pictures on that poster is notable for the way the format size has been changed....obviously accidentally of course.
Stop looking for prejudice and offence when its neither intended to be made, or needed to be taken.
This is a big part of the problem with this country today.
It is a common advertising trick, Squeeze a model's picture horizontally to make her look slimmer and taller, or squeeze it vertically if she has annoyed you.
The usual idea is to do it in such a way that it isn't obvious, otherwise it tends to annoy the more intelligent.
I take it the beagles were for animal experiments?
Why is it that beagles are favoured for these over other breeds? Just curiosity on my part.
But hey not a big point and generally I don't like painting pictures quite that crude, whoever the participants are and whatever they're doing.
It depends on the tests being carried out, for dermatological testing whippets/greyhounds are preferred due to their thinner skin and sensitivity.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2923709/TV-chiefs-warn-Cameron-Clegg-chaired-avoid-leaders-debates-Miliband-signs-7-way-showdown.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
And I still say: Cyclefree for PM.
And why should people always have to deliberate over all possible permutations of their analogies for fear of being censored or unfairly called out as prejudiced?
You are looking for a link with gay sex, so you can construct offence. It's petty and unnecessary.
Honestly, I do wish people would focus on real homophobia where it actually exists, rather than this self-indulgent suppositional moral grandstanding.
It's this sort of bollocks that suffocates free-expression.
I should add in case Nick isn't around, that beagles are easy to handle, cope reasonably well in crowded situations, and their short legs mean you can stack the crates higher.
It is really hard to lose a 7 way debate, and if he really is frightened of Ed Miliband head to head, well he doesn't really deserve a second term.
I know the Tories think that they hindered their campaign last time, but that was because it wasn't him vs Brown, it was him vs Clegg and Brown, and Clegg was able to stand in the middle and say hey I'm normal and sound reasonable.
And I know perfectly well you are not homophobic. You have no need to justify or defend yourself to me, nor anyone else.
We do *generic politically-correct and inoffensive, but clearly equally evocative and powerful metaphor to symbolise a deeply demeaning and submissive act* to Saudi Arabia.
I think it stinks.
Usually in new drug tests, you look for the best animal model - that is one that is closest to man in the way the drug is metabolised and also in the potential toxicity. Non-human primates tend to be best but not always. Other factors are also important .. ease and cost of rearing (if that is involved) which means a calmer and tamer variety is good (beagles?). A real factor is background pathology - you need a pedigree strain with a known background. If they were human, they'd be extremely posh and wouldn't talk to you.
If the new drug is limited, then the smaller the better as it's dosage (dose per unit of bodyweight) that is important.
An ideal non-primate study animal could be a small pig. For skin studies, pigs used to be good. But whatever animal is used, its incredibly expensive to develop a new drug. Especially nowadays with all the regulations on animal welfare.
Hence non-animal procedures would be very popular with the drug companies. The draw back is still the relevance of the results of in-vitro work. Dr P will know even if he may be a little biased (smiley face).
Animal libbers always believed that firms used animals because they liked ill-treating them. In the same way, that some believe Tories eat babies because they enjoy doing it.
T was employed as a toxicologist for many years in the pharmaceutical industry. Novel drug work only and I was comfortable with what we did. Always for a worthy goal. Don't know much about cosmetic testing work and blue-sky medical research - you may know more about the latter.