Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The 1992 experience would be a great precedent for the Tori

124

Comments

  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    Pulpstar said:

    Dair said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Dair said:

    malcolmg said:

    Pulpstar said:
    He needs to watch if walking about Paisley
    I always thought Paisley was quite nice, having an Abbey and all that. Then I went there...
    Much of Paisley's problems are to do with the most deprived community in Scotland - Ferguslie Park - being within 5 minutes walk of the town centre. This significantly effects the whole dynamic of the place.

    In Glasgow or Edinburgh you need a bus far to get from the worst parts to the centre.
    Is Ferguslie Park in P&RS or P&RN ?
    North
    P&RN likely to be more SNP than P&RS you think ?
    Like a lot of the suburban Glasgow constituencies (sorry Buddies but you are a suburb of Glasgow) there is huge variation between very posh places like Bridge of Weir and very deprived places like Ferguslie Park. The overall SNP swing could deliver them both, North has a slightly easier starting point but you're still talking about 15.2k vs 16.6k majorities.

    Jim Sheridan being a typical invisible man Scottish Labourite compared to Dougie makes it a far likelier outcome that the SNP will win. The Black effect may be a bit of an unknown, there's going to be conservative CoS old dears pity voting for her (aww, poor Mhairi) and those who would vote SNP but won't because of her accent and age. Probably not helped because she can't pronounce her own name.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,847
    Charles said:

    Charles said:



    Oil tends to be found in backward neofeudal kleptocracies - Iran; Saudi; Russia; Scotland - and as such all you do by reducing reliance on it is heighten reliance on something else.

    Texas?
    Montana?
    Virginia?
    Your point?

    We probably disagree, but I don't view any of those places as "backward neofeudal kleptocracies"
    Oh.

  • Neil said:

    We can add Guernsey to the list of territories not impressed with Ed

    Are there many marginal seats in Guernsey?
    No taxation without representation!

    Guernsey would just about qualify for a Commons seat if they were so incorporated.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    edited February 2015
    antifrank said:

    Mike Smithson ‏@MSmithsonPB · 13m13 minutes ago
    I'm hearing that there's another Scottish poll coming out overnight. Surprised I've not seen any Tweets yet about it.

    Judging by Twitter it looks like the SNP ground game is underway - also since they are going to be gunning for pretty much every Scottish seat - going to be lots and lots of their members out and about everywhere

    Back in 1997 doubt you'd have seen many Labour canvassers in Richmond in North Yorks, but that's going to be the equivalent of the SNP ground game now.
  • Neil said:

    We can add Guernsey to the list of territories not impressed with Ed

    Are there many marginal seats in Guernsey?
    Yes, Rhoderick Matthews missed out by only two votes in St Peter Port North in 2012.
  • Dair said:

    Probably not helped because she can't pronounce her own name.

    Really? I know a Mhairi who changed the spelling of their name to Vari because of people having problems with pronunciation.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,937

    Ouchies

    @LordAshcroft: Prime Ministerial attributes. EM leads only on “understanding ordinary people” - and only just:

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B9ah8zUCAAInHa4.jpg

    STOP PRESS: the ordinary people are demanding a recount.....

  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    malcolmg said:

    TGOHF said:

    Looking like this could be possible

    Con 300
    Lab 242
    Lib Dem 38
    UKIP 3
    SNP 48
    Plaid 2
    NI 18

    More to the point , what about the Gers, are they stuffed or can King and the 3 bears save them
    One would hope King will prevail - but those slippery eels could buy a big shareholder off at the last minute to conceal their nefarious deals.

    If the EGM goes wrong its lights out time - 8k there yesterday..
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,937
    The souffle is rising very nicely.....
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Alistair said:

    malcolmg said:

    Pulpstar said:
    He needs to watch if walking about Paisley
    I always thought Paisley was quite nice, having an Abbey and all that. Then I went there...
    I know two people who have been stabbed.
    Both unprovoked.
    Both in Paisley.
    Perhaps they should have worn stripes or plaid....

    Gets coat..
  • felix said:

    Out of the last 16 polls Supreme Leader and Political Mastermind Cameron has been ahead in 1. Ed is Crap has been ahead in 11.

    January is the crossover month and February is the pulling away month.....March is the consistent leads showing a Tory Majority month*


    *Copyright PB Hodges and some Tory Ratbag from The Scum, who said it was what Tory HQ had told him would happen.

    Ashcroft National Poll, 6-8 Feb: CON 34%, LAB 31%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 14%, GRN 6%7

    Rofl?
    Must be an outlier :)
  • TGOHF said:

    As we at the Sunil on Sunday remind Lord Ashcroft every week, ELBOW is a snapshot, not a prediction ;)

    https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/564397207026425856

    Clear peak Kipper there Sunil..
    Yes, clearly pulled away from the LibDems and Greens, but no sign of them catching Lab or Con.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    Dair said:

    Probably not helped because she can't pronounce her own name.

    Really? I know a Mhairi who changed the spelling of their name to Vari because of people having problems with pronunciation.
    I was at school with a Mhairi, who pronounced it Mhairi.

    I didn't meet a 'Vari' until 20 years later
  • Ouchies

    @LordAshcroft: Prime Ministerial attributes. EM leads only on “understanding ordinary people” - and only just:

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B9ah8zUCAAInHa4.jpg

    STOP PRESS: the ordinary people are demanding a recount.....

    Ed even fails badly on the questions "has a clear idea of what he wants to achieve"...I would have thought that was one that Ed would score ok on. How he would / if he could achieve a country shaped by world view is a different matter.
  • murali_s said:

    As expected, PB Tories are popping champagne corks and back-slapping each other.

    Don't want to be a part pooper but this is just ONE poll. Let's wait till we have a raft of polls from diverse polling organisations.

    We had that the week before last (4 leads with 3 organisations) but I think there was some other reason why Labour was nailed on for an overall majority.

  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,142

    Mortimer said:

    I'm enjoying catching up on some archive '92 election coverage on Youtube. Only an hour or so in, but so far have observed a couple of interesting points:

    - Concerns amongst Labour party of the softness of the vote and final day's switchers in the more private sector employment dominated areas (Midlands, NW)
    - Turnout up everywhere vs '87, slowing down declarations

    I can see both of these happening again, but more convinced of the first. What do others think of likely turnout in May?

    Lots of people have fallen off the register. Given how easy it is to register to vote online I suspect that the people who have fallen off the register are mostly those who wouldn't turnout to vote anyway.

    Thus I would expect that the percentage turnout will be up. The absolute numbers are harder to guess at, because of the confounding factor of continued population growth.
    Good points. And administrational issues aside, I feel that turnout will be increased by close polls (at least in marginals and Scotland), if they continue as such towards election day.
  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,790
    1987 as well. Wobbly Wednesday (or was it Thursday?). Anyway.
  • Neil said:

    We can add Guernsey to the list of territories not impressed with Ed

    Are there many marginal seats in Guernsey?
    No taxation without representation!

    Guernsey would just about qualify for a Commons seat if they were so incorporated.
    Bailiwick of Guernsey
    Bailiwick of Jersey
    Isle of Man
    Gib?
  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,790
    Scott_P said:

    Dair said:

    Probably not helped because she can't pronounce her own name.

    Really? I know a Mhairi who changed the spelling of their name to Vari because of people having problems with pronunciation.
    I was at school with a Mhairi, who pronounced it Mhairi.

    I didn't meet a 'Vari' until 20 years later
    If I saw the name "Mhairi" written down then I would assume it's pronounced "Mhairi" and that if it were supposed to be pronouncded "Mairi" then it would be spelled "Mairi".

  • DairDair Posts: 6,108

    Dair said:

    Probably not helped because she can't pronounce her own name.

    Really? I know a Mhairi who changed the spelling of their name to Vari because of people having problems with pronunciation.
    She uses mari. It might seem strange but to people like my mother that would be pretty off putting on its own. It's really not that a rare a viewpoint in the conservative CoS old dear market.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    What's this CoS ?

    Church of Scotland ?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @TelePolitics: Sketch: It isn't just Bill Somebody... Ed Miliband unveils Labour's other big business backers http://t.co/IIFBbeuJCF
  • Neil said:

    We can add Guernsey to the list of territories not impressed with Ed

    Are there many marginal seats in Guernsey?
    We don't 'report' to the UK - we report to the Duke of Normandy, thank you very much!

    Oh, and everytime someone says 'We defend you!', ask them why we have a big party every 9th of May......
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    TGOHF said:

    malcolmg said:

    TGOHF said:

    Looking like this could be possible

    Con 300
    Lab 242
    Lib Dem 38
    UKIP 3
    SNP 48
    Plaid 2
    NI 18

    More to the point , what about the Gers, are they stuffed or can King and the 3 bears save them
    One would hope King will prevail - but those slippery eels could buy a big shareholder off at the last minute to conceal their nefarious deals.

    If the EGM goes wrong its lights out time - 8k there yesterday..
    There's only two ways back for Rangers, either the government steps in due to police evidence over the Administration/Liquidation and nullifies much of what has happened since. This has problems due to FIFA rules on government involvement in football.

    The only other way is to go through another administration event but the government refer it to be handled by the Acccountant in Bankruptcy on public interest grounds (assuming they even have this power).

    Rangers fans have had about £20m of their re-investment stripped out the club since it went into administration.
  • Scott_P said:

    Dair said:

    Probably not helped because she can't pronounce her own name.

    Really? I know a Mhairi who changed the spelling of their name to Vari because of people having problems with pronunciation.
    I was at school with a Mhairi, who pronounced it Mhairi.

    I didn't meet a 'Vari' until 20 years later
    I can't bring to mind an occurrence of "mh" in English.

    In the absence of Mr Gove to advise on phonics pronunciation I turned to the web, and found this guide, but it's missing "mh".

    Seems to me that if you use the spelling "mh" you are using a language other than English, and you have to look to that other language for a guide to the correct pronunciation. Otherwise, why bother?
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    TGOHF said:

    Pulpstar said:

    226-250 seats isn't a bad price at all at 10-1 actually, taken a tenner of that.

    In fact if you think about it

    276.5+ is the under/over at 5-6 and

    251-275 is 5-2,

    With 225-250 at 10-1

    That's a 92% book

    Odds of getting precisely 276 must be slim 1/50 and sub 224 looks unrealistic too, Labour aren't doing THAT badly in the polls.

    Labour currently on 257

    Lose 35 to SNP - possible = 222.

    Win 20 from LDs = 242

    Game on for sub 250...
    Are we forgeting Labour gains from the Tories in England ? In GE2010, the Tories had a 11% lead over Labour.
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012

    We can add Guernsey to the list of territories not impressed with Ed:

    We will await Ed Miliband’s letter with interest. We have held a number of meetings with Labour’s shadow team over the past two years, and those meetings have indicated a greater level of understanding of Guernsey’s track record on tax transparency than is reflected in today’s media coverage,’

    http://guernseypress.com/news/2015/02/09/guernsey-hits-back-over-labour-blacklist-threat/

    Guernsey need not worry - its all just Labour's politics of envy resurfacing at election time.
    If you want a good reason to keep Labour out of power just look at some facts as presented by David Smith of The Times,
    In inflation-adjusted terms, 2013-14 prices, there was a massive increase in total managed expenditure over the 2000-2010 period. Spending in real terms in 2009-10, £737.3bn, was 51% higher than it was in 1999-2000, £488.5bn.
    Something like £25 billion a year. Mismanaged expenditure more like...
    Labour increased public spending by 51% in inflation adjusted terms ''the biggest sustained increase in public spending in British history.''

    Between 2010 to 2015 spending went up by about £7 billion a year.
    and
    well over 600,000 public sector jobs have been lost - at least 400,000 more to go.


  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    "UK police force apologises for taking details of Charlie Hebdo readers

    Wiltshire force says it has deleted from its system details of four people who bought copies of magazine from a newsagent"

    http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/feb/09/wiltshire-police-apologise-details-charlie-hebdo-readers
  • Pulpstar said:

    What's this CoS ?

    Church of Scotland ?

    Church of Sunil
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    Pulpstar said:

    What's this CoS ?

    Church of Scotland ?

    Yes
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621

    Scott_P said:

    Dair said:

    Probably not helped because she can't pronounce her own name.

    Really? I know a Mhairi who changed the spelling of their name to Vari because of people having problems with pronunciation.
    I was at school with a Mhairi, who pronounced it Mhairi.

    I didn't meet a 'Vari' until 20 years later
    I can't bring to mind an occurrence of "mh" in English.
    bumhole

    Sorry, the taxi will be here in a minute.
  • Scott_P said:

    Dair said:

    Probably not helped because she can't pronounce her own name.

    Really? I know a Mhairi who changed the spelling of their name to Vari because of people having problems with pronunciation.
    I was at school with a Mhairi, who pronounced it Mhairi.

    I didn't meet a 'Vari' until 20 years later
    I can't bring to mind an occurrence of "mh" in English.

    Amhurst? (also Amherst)
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    TGOHF said:

    Looking like this could be possible

    Con 300
    Lab 242
    Lib Dem 38
    UKIP 3
    SNP 48
    Plaid 2
    NI 18

    Those figures are a distinct possibility IMO.
  • Scott_P said:

    Dair said:

    Probably not helped because she can't pronounce her own name.

    Really? I know a Mhairi who changed the spelling of their name to Vari because of people having problems with pronunciation.
    I was at school with a Mhairi, who pronounced it Mhairi.

    I didn't meet a 'Vari' until 20 years later
    I can't bring to mind an occurrence of "mh" in English.

    In the absence of Mr Gove to advise on phonics pronunciation I turned to the web, and found this guide, but it's missing "mh".

    Seems to me that if you use the spelling "mh" you are using a language other than English, and you have to look to that other language for a guide to the correct pronunciation. Otherwise, why bother?
    You've obviously never played Superghosts. "Wormhole" is a perfectly good English word.

    And for that matter, "mho", the unit of conductance, is a good English word.

    (But I take your point.)
  • Anorak said:

    Scott_P said:

    Dair said:

    Probably not helped because she can't pronounce her own name.

    Really? I know a Mhairi who changed the spelling of their name to Vari because of people having problems with pronunciation.
    I was at school with a Mhairi, who pronounced it Mhairi.

    I didn't meet a 'Vari' until 20 years later
    I can't bring to mind an occurrence of "mh" in English.
    bumhole

    Sorry, the taxi will be here in a minute.
    Compound words don't count!
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    Imo Ed Miliband @ 6-4 next PM, 225-250 @ 10-1 Labour seats, 251-275 Labour seats @ 5-2 are all bets at the moment, one of them should cop.
  • Scott_P said:

    Dair said:

    Probably not helped because she can't pronounce her own name.

    Really? I know a Mhairi who changed the spelling of their name to Vari because of people having problems with pronunciation.
    I was at school with a Mhairi, who pronounced it Mhairi.

    I didn't meet a 'Vari' until 20 years later
    I can't bring to mind an occurrence of "mh" in English.

    Amhurst? (also Amherst)
    If we insist on following the pronunciation in the compound word sense, then "Mhairi" would end up as something like "Mm-hairy", which I don't think is what was intended.
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    I can't bring to mind an occurrence of "mh" in English.

    Farmhand
  • Pulpstar said:

    Imo Ed Miliband @ 6-4 next PM, 225-250 @ 10-1 Labour seats, 251-275 Labour seats @ 5-2 are all bets at the moment, one of them should cop.

    It's entirely conceivable that two of them could cop.
  • antifrank said:

    Scott_P said:

    Dair said:

    Probably not helped because she can't pronounce her own name.

    Really? I know a Mhairi who changed the spelling of their name to Vari because of people having problems with pronunciation.
    I was at school with a Mhairi, who pronounced it Mhairi.

    I didn't meet a 'Vari' until 20 years later
    I can't bring to mind an occurrence of "mh" in English.

    In the absence of Mr Gove to advise on phonics pronunciation I turned to the web, and found this guide, but it's missing "mh".

    Seems to me that if you use the spelling "mh" you are using a language other than English, and you have to look to that other language for a guide to the correct pronunciation. Otherwise, why bother?
    You've obviously never played Superghosts. "Wormhole" is a perfectly good English word.

    And for that matter, "mho", the unit of conductance, is a good English word.

    (But I take your point.)
    I feel a bit like my English teacher who declared to us that vacuum was the only word in the English language containing "uu". I came across the other that evening reading science-fiction...
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108

    Scott_P said:

    Dair said:

    Probably not helped because she can't pronounce her own name.

    Really? I know a Mhairi who changed the spelling of their name to Vari because of people having problems with pronunciation.
    I was at school with a Mhairi, who pronounced it Mhairi.

    I didn't meet a 'Vari' until 20 years later
    I can't bring to mind an occurrence of "mh" in English.

    In the absence of Mr Gove to advise on phonics pronunciation I turned to the web, and found this guide, but it's missing "mh".

    Seems to me that if you use the spelling "mh" you are using a language other than English, and you have to look to that other language for a guide to the correct pronunciation. Otherwise, why bother?
    this is quite useful http://angaelmagazine.com/pronunciation/consonants.htm
  • Scott_P said:

    Dair said:

    Probably not helped because she can't pronounce her own name.

    Really? I know a Mhairi who changed the spelling of their name to Vari because of people having problems with pronunciation.
    I was at school with a Mhairi, who pronounced it Mhairi.

    I didn't meet a 'Vari' until 20 years later
    I can't bring to mind an occurrence of "mh" in English.

    Amhurst? (also Amherst)
    If we insist on following the pronunciation in the compound word sense, then "Mhairi" would end up as something like "Mm-hairy", which I don't think is what was intended.
    I think the Gaelic and Irish use of "mh" reflects the relationships between consonants v, b and m.
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    Ashcroft Average (since Xmas) - CON 32 LAB 30

    Tempting to disregard as one pollster, but the last 6 with Ipsos have CON 32.3 LAB 31.8.

    Yougov 2010: 2015 ratios (applied to 2010 %) showing CON 32 LAB 31.2 across the last ten.
  • chestnut said:

    Ashcroft Average (since Xmas) - CON 32 LAB 30

    Tempting to disregard as one pollster, but the last 6 with Ipsos have CON 32.3 LAB 31.8.

    Yougov 2010: 2015 ratios (applied to 2010 %) showing CON 32 LAB 31.2 across the last ten.

    ELBOW leads since August:

    https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/564397780618477568
  • antifrank said:

    Scott_P said:

    Dair said:

    Probably not helped because she can't pronounce her own name.

    Really? I know a Mhairi who changed the spelling of their name to Vari because of people having problems with pronunciation.
    I was at school with a Mhairi, who pronounced it Mhairi.

    I didn't meet a 'Vari' until 20 years later
    I can't bring to mind an occurrence of "mh" in English.

    In the absence of Mr Gove to advise on phonics pronunciation I turned to the web, and found this guide, but it's missing "mh".

    Seems to me that if you use the spelling "mh" you are using a language other than English, and you have to look to that other language for a guide to the correct pronunciation. Otherwise, why bother?
    You've obviously never played Superghosts. "Wormhole" is a perfectly good English word.

    And for that matter, "mho", the unit of conductance, is a good English word.

    (But I take your point.)
    Mho also known as Siemens (1/Resistance in Ohms).
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498
    TGOHF said:

    malcolmg said:

    TGOHF said:

    Looking like this could be possible

    Con 300
    Lab 242
    Lib Dem 38
    UKIP 3
    SNP 48
    Plaid 2
    NI 18

    More to the point , what about the Gers, are they stuffed or can King and the 3 bears save them
    One would hope King will prevail - but those slippery eels could buy a big shareholder off at the last minute to conceal their nefarious deals.

    If the EGM goes wrong its lights out time - 8k there yesterday..
    Yesterday was shocking, like a desert
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    edited February 2015

    antifrank said:

    Scott_P said:

    Dair said:

    Probably not helped because she can't pronounce her own name.

    Really? I know a Mhairi who changed the spelling of their name to Vari because of people having problems with pronunciation.
    I was at school with a Mhairi, who pronounced it Mhairi.

    I didn't meet a 'Vari' until 20 years later
    I can't bring to mind an occurrence of "mh" in English.

    In the absence of Mr Gove to advise on phonics pronunciation I turned to the web, and found this guide, but it's missing "mh".

    Seems to me that if you use the spelling "mh" you are using a language other than English, and you have to look to that other language for a guide to the correct pronunciation. Otherwise, why bother?
    You've obviously never played Superghosts. "Wormhole" is a perfectly good English word.

    And for that matter, "mho", the unit of conductance, is a good English word.

    (But I take your point.)
    I feel a bit like my English teacher who declared to us that vacuum was the only word in the English language containing "uu". I came across the other that evening reading science-fiction...
    *cough* http://www.morewords.com/contains/uu/

    and for that matter: http://www.morewords.com/contains/mh/

  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    Lol my FoI request on Murphy's Irn Bru claims made Guido.
  • Ashcroft poll: Leaders as drinks

    According to Conservative Home, respondents said David Cameron would be a "good red wine", Ed Miliband would be a tomato juice and Nick Clegg would be a Babysham or "a Woo-woo" (a vodka-based fruit cocktail).
  • Norman Smith
    BBC Assistant Political Editor
    HSBC tax scandal

    The BBC's Norman Smith says "frankly it's no surprise that this has become a profoundly explosive and emotional political issue", as many are angry at the idea that very wealthy people are getting away with paying less than their fair share. He says: "The one unanswered aspect of this whole saga centres around Lord Green himself; we still - still - haven't heard from him as to what he knew."

    Well we know where Normal 'Wigan Pier' Smith will be focusing....of course how many times will he say Tory Lord Green, in comparison to hardly ever mentioning Labour run Rotherham council for instance....
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621

    Ashcroft poll: Leaders as drinks

    According to Conservative Home, respondents said David Cameron would be a "good red wine", Ed Miliband would be a tomato juice and Nick Clegg would be a Babysham or "a Woo-woo" (a vodka-based fruit cocktail).

    Natalie Bennett: organic nettle wine
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498
    Dair said:

    TGOHF said:

    malcolmg said:

    TGOHF said:

    Looking like this could be possible

    Con 300
    Lab 242
    Lib Dem 38
    UKIP 3
    SNP 48
    Plaid 2
    NI 18

    More to the point , what about the Gers, are they stuffed or can King and the 3 bears save them
    One would hope King will prevail - but those slippery eels could buy a big shareholder off at the last minute to conceal their nefarious deals.

    If the EGM goes wrong its lights out time - 8k there yesterday..
    There's only two ways back for Rangers, either the government steps in due to police evidence over the Administration/Liquidation and nullifies much of what has happened since. This has problems due to FIFA rules on government involvement in football.

    The only other way is to go through another administration event but the government refer it to be handled by the Acccountant in Bankruptcy on public interest grounds (assuming they even have this power).

    Rangers fans have had about £20m of their re-investment stripped out the club since it went into administration.
    Dair, King and the others have enough cash to resolve if they can get control soon , if it drags on it is curtains.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498
    Dair said:

    Lol my FoI request on Murphy's Irn Bru claims made Guido.

    Hard to believe these creeps will claim for a can of Irn Bru, parasites.
  • Robert Fox in the Evening Standard tonight reporting that talk in Whitehall is that the Conservatives plan to cut Defence by a further 10-30% if they win in May.

    Deeply worrying.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498
    Dair said:

    Lol my FoI request on Murphy's Irn Bru claims made Guido.

    Hard to believe these creeps will claim for a can of Irn Bru, parasites.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,975
    I think it's fitting to have a Lord as the new Gold Standard.

    And as it's the third time his poll has favoured the Tories he should get to keep it
  • Robert Fox in the Evening Standard tonight reporting that talk in Whitehall is that the Conservatives plan to cut Defence by a further 10-30% if they win in May.

    Deeply worrying.

    Bloody stupid move if true. Plenty of good arguments about refocusing given the threats we face, but another 30% would be totally bonkers.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498

    Robert Fox in the Evening Standard tonight reporting that talk in Whitehall is that the Conservatives plan to cut Defence by a further 10-30% if they win in May.

    Deeply worrying.

    Bloody stupid move if true. Plenty of good arguments about refocusing given the threats we face, but another 30% would be totally bonkers.
    Get rid of Trident to woo the SNP
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    malcolmg said:

    Dair said:

    TGOHF said:

    malcolmg said:

    TGOHF said:

    Looking like this could be possible

    Con 300
    Lab 242
    Lib Dem 38
    UKIP 3
    SNP 48
    Plaid 2
    NI 18

    More to the point , what about the Gers, are they stuffed or can King and the 3 bears save them
    One would hope King will prevail - but those slippery eels could buy a big shareholder off at the last minute to conceal their nefarious deals.

    If the EGM goes wrong its lights out time - 8k there yesterday..
    There's only two ways back for Rangers, either the government steps in due to police evidence over the Administration/Liquidation and nullifies much of what has happened since. This has problems due to FIFA rules on government involvement in football.

    The only other way is to go through another administration event but the government refer it to be handled by the Acccountant in Bankruptcy on public interest grounds (assuming they even have this power).

    Rangers fans have had about £20m of their re-investment stripped out the club since it went into administration.
    Dair, King and the others have enough cash to resolve if they can get control soon , if it drags on it is curtains.
    Yes but control won't be relinquished. There's still a few bucks left to squeeze out the fans.
  • Robert Fox in the Evening Standard tonight reporting that talk in Whitehall is that the Conservatives plan to cut Defence by a further 10-30% if they win in May.

    Deeply worrying.

    If that were true and they came out and said so, I'd be seriously tempted to vote for them. The time of Britain ruling the waves is long past, and we need to husband our financial resources accordingly. We live in one of the very safest spots on the entire planet. Why are we wasting so much money and risking the blood of our young men and women on fights on the other side of the world?
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498
    Dair said:

    malcolmg said:

    Dair said:

    TGOHF said:

    malcolmg said:

    TGOHF said:

    Looking like this could be possible

    Con 300
    Lab 242
    Lib Dem 38
    UKIP 3
    SNP 48
    Plaid 2
    NI 18

    More to the point , what about the Gers, are they stuffed or can King and the 3 bears save them
    One would hope King will prevail - but those slippery eels could buy a big shareholder off at the last minute to conceal their nefarious deals.

    If the EGM goes wrong its lights out time - 8k there yesterday..
    There's only two ways back for Rangers, either the government steps in due to police evidence over the Administration/Liquidation and nullifies much of what has happened since. This has problems due to FIFA rules on government involvement in football.

    The only other way is to go through another administration event but the government refer it to be handled by the Acccountant in Bankruptcy on public interest grounds (assuming they even have this power).

    Rangers fans have had about £20m of their re-investment stripped out the club since it went into administration.
    Dair, King and the others have enough cash to resolve if they can get control soon , if it drags on it is curtains.
    Yes but control won't be relinquished. There's still a few bucks left to squeeze out the fans.
    Not so sure only real diehards left , will be empty stadium shortly and if it continues it is hard to see who would buy a season ticket next year unless really deluded.
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    malcolmg said:

    Dair said:

    Lol my FoI request on Murphy's Irn Bru claims made Guido.

    Hard to believe these creeps will claim for a can of Irn Bru, parasites.
    I was hoping it would actually show no purchases before the campaign started and lots since. In hindsight it is probably too early to pick up the campaign claims (and they may have been made to Better Together). I didn't say anything about it after I got it back as I wanted to wait and do another towards the end of 2015 hoping to catch a big increase in claims.

    As it is, it's working out as a negative for him anyway and I can't help but feel I did my bit to rid Scotland of the Red Tories.
  • antifrank said:

    Robert Fox in the Evening Standard tonight reporting that talk in Whitehall is that the Conservatives plan to cut Defence by a further 10-30% if they win in May.

    Deeply worrying.

    If that were true and they came out and said so, I'd be seriously tempted to vote for them. The time of Britain ruling the waves is long past, and we need to husband our financial resources accordingly. We live in one of the very safest spots on the entire planet. Why are we wasting so much money and risking the blood of our young men and women on fights on the other side of the world?
    If that's the level of debate you're operating at, it's not even worth discussing the issue with you.
  • Dair said:

    Lol my FoI request on Murphy's Irn Bru claims made Guido.

    All of £1.30.

    I expect you feel proud at this effective use of taxpayers money.

    How did your FOI request into Salmond's Chicago bill fare?
  • Robert Fox in the Evening Standard tonight reporting that talk in Whitehall is that the Conservatives plan to cut Defence by a further 10-30% if they win in May.

    Deeply worrying.

    Bloody stupid move if true. Plenty of good arguments about refocusing given the threats we face, but another 30% would be totally bonkers.
    Quite. We already face a number of localised threats, and the geopolitical situation has deteriorated remarkably over the last five years. Yet the Conservatives are seriously considering cutting more.

    Absolutely insane.
  • antifrank said:

    Robert Fox in the Evening Standard tonight reporting that talk in Whitehall is that the Conservatives plan to cut Defence by a further 10-30% if they win in May.

    Deeply worrying.

    If that were true and they came out and said so, I'd be seriously tempted to vote for them. The time of Britain ruling the waves is long past, and we need to husband our financial resources accordingly. We live in one of the very safest spots on the entire planet. Why are we wasting so much money and risking the blood of our young men and women on fights on the other side of the world?
    If that's the level of debate you're operating at, it's not even worth discussing the issue with you.
    Which one of those assertions do you disagree with? That Britain is not the force that it once was? That we need to husband our financial resources accordingly? That we live in one of the very safest spots on the entire planet?
  • malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Pulpstar said:
    He needs to watch if walking about Paisley
    I always thought Paisley was quite nice, having an Abbey and all that. Then I went there...
    It once was a very very nice place but recent years it has got quite a reputation. Why they vote in such a loser as Alexander for so many years is hard to understand.
    Have you met the local SNP ? - then it's very easy to see why he wins.
  • Whilst we're on the subject of accents, I simply love Matt Forde's impression of Ed Miliband. Spot on IMHO:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zBntNWvnyM
  • FalseFlagFalseFlag Posts: 1,801
    antifrank said:

    Robert Fox in the Evening Standard tonight reporting that talk in Whitehall is that the Conservatives plan to cut Defence by a further 10-30% if they win in May.

    Deeply worrying.

    If that were true and they came out and said so, I'd be seriously tempted to vote for them. The time of Britain ruling the waves is long past, and we need to husband our financial resources accordingly. We live in one of the very safest spots on the entire planet. Why are we wasting so much money and risking the blood of our young men and women on fights on the other side of the world?
    Very encouraging, still toeing the neo intervensionist line from Washington in word, but at least no longer in deed, as under Blair. The reason Merkel excluded the UK in Moscow is we are seen as a shill for DC and would only seek to undermine any discussions.
  • Neil said:

    In the last two hours the Green party crowdfunder has raised enough money to stand two more candidates in May. Thank you fellow PB Tories for your generosity.

    How come the Green Party crowdfunder campaign time has been shortened? When I made my donation on 31st of January there were 28 days left. Now I see that 9 days later there are only 6 days of it left. :/

  • Apparently a Scottish TNS tonight according to UKPR.
    Don't think there's been a Scottish-only one before, but fwiw their last Scottish sub sample (end of Jan) was SNP 40, Lab 28.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,568
    Canvassing anecdote from the weekend: a group of 8 of us were fanned out along a road doing alternate houses, when two mildly tipsy teenagers appeared, each with a can of lager, one of them with a small child on his shoulders. He grabbed the day's canvass records (including lots of personal data) and started walking off. I politely asked for them back and reached out for them. He stared at me menacingly, and said "Don't TOUCH me, I'm carrying a child. You're not having them." The other lad slurred affably, "Yeah, iss my son". I asked for the records back again, and this time he said, "Course you can." and handed them over.

    The child didn't seem at risk - his bearer was only very mildly drunk and steady on his feet, and both of them were clearly protective of him. But what should we have done if he'd simply walked off? Actually risking a scuffle with the child involved wasn't worth it, thoug we outnumbered them 8-2. Giving up the day's work would have been a risk to the constituents listed with addresses and in some cases phone numbers (and annoying too). Calling 999 seemed OTT and by the time the police turned up he'd probably have gone. Suggestions?
  • Dair said:

    Lol my FoI request on Murphy's Irn Bru claims made Guido.

    How did your FOI request into Salmond's Chicago bill fare?
    How did yours go, or have you got complacent and lazy letting the Telegraph, Mail, Express etc do that stuff for you?

  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,326
    antifrank said:

    Robert Fox in the Evening Standard tonight reporting that talk in Whitehall is that the Conservatives plan to cut Defence by a further 10-30% if they win in May.

    Deeply worrying.

    If that were true and they came out and said so, I'd be seriously tempted to vote for them. The time of Britain ruling the waves is long past, and we need to husband our financial resources accordingly. We live in one of the very safest spots on the entire planet. Why are we wasting so much money and risking the blood of our young men and women on fights on the other side of the world?
    We need first class intelligence and police resources given the terrorist threats we face. Refocusing may be sensible. But cutting is not if it means that we're unable to counter those threats we do face. As ever, it's not so much how much we spend but what we spend it on. that's the issue.

  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,366
    NickP,

    Violence is seldom the answer but it can be effective. And with an 8 to 2 margin, the threat would have been enough.
  • saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,245

    Canvassing anecdote from the weekend: a group of 8 of us were fanned out along a road doing alternate houses, when two mildly tipsy teenagers appeared, each with a can of lager, one of them with a small child on his shoulders. He grabbed the day's canvass records (including lots of personal data) and started walking off. I politely asked for them back and reached out for them. He stared at me menacingly, and said "Don't TOUCH me, I'm carrying a child. You're not having them." The other lad slurred affably, "Yeah, iss my son". I asked for the records back again, and this time he said, "Course you can." and handed them over.

    The child didn't seem at risk - his bearer was only very mildly drunk and steady on his feet, and both of them were clearly protective of him. But what should we have done if he'd simply walked off? Actually risking a scuffle with the child involved wasn't worth it, thoug we outnumbered them 8-2. Giving up the day's work would have been a risk to the constituents listed with addresses and in some cases phone numbers (and annoying too). Calling 999 seemed OTT and by the time the police turned up he'd probably have gone. Suggestions?

    Call 101, as you where in a position to follow with no risk to yourself or anyone else. It's extremely unlikely they would be going far to their home address where they could be contacted later.

    If they kicked off about being followed, escalate to a three nines call.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Canvassing anecdote from the weekend: a group of 8 of us were fanned out along a road doing alternate houses, when two mildly tipsy teenagers appeared, each with a can of lager, one of them with a small child on his shoulders. He grabbed the day's canvass records (including lots of personal data) and started walking off. I politely asked for them back and reached out for them. He stared at me menacingly, and said "Don't TOUCH me, I'm carrying a child. You're not having them." The other lad slurred affably, "Yeah, iss my son". I asked for the records back again, and this time he said, "Course you can." and handed them over.

    The child didn't seem at risk - his bearer was only very mildly drunk and steady on his feet, and both of them were clearly protective of him. But what should we have done if he'd simply walked off? Actually risking a scuffle with the child involved wasn't worth it, thoug we outnumbered them 8-2. Giving up the day's work would have been a risk to the constituents listed with addresses and in some cases phone numbers (and annoying too). Calling 999 seemed OTT and by the time the police turned up he'd probably have gone. Suggestions?

    Walk with him and talk him into submission
  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,790

    Canvassing anecdote from the weekend: a group of 8 of us were fanned out along a road doing alternate houses, when two mildly tipsy teenagers appeared, each with a can of lager, one of them with a small child on his shoulders. He grabbed the day's canvass records (including lots of personal data) and started walking off. I politely asked for them back and reached out for them. He stared at me menacingly, and said "Don't TOUCH me, I'm carrying a child. You're not having them." The other lad slurred affably, "Yeah, iss my son". I asked for the records back again, and this time he said, "Course you can." and handed them over.

    The child didn't seem at risk - his bearer was only very mildly drunk and steady on his feet, and both of them were clearly protective of him. But what should we have done if he'd simply walked off? Actually risking a scuffle with the child involved wasn't worth it, thoug we outnumbered them 8-2. Giving up the day's work would have been a risk to the constituents listed with addresses and in some cases phone numbers (and annoying too). Calling 999 seemed OTT and by the time the police turned up he'd probably have gone. Suggestions?

    What do you mean, suggestions? Obvious. You outnumbered them by 8 to 2. You would have been entirely justified in using reasonable force to restrain them in order to recover the information. If there were 8 of you and 2 of them, you could easily have obstacled their passage safely and securely until (if necessary) the police arrived.

  • MP_SEMP_SE Posts: 3,642
    edited February 2015
    AndyJS said:

    "UK police force apologises for taking details of Charlie Hebdo readers

    Wiltshire force says it has deleted from its system details of four people who bought copies of magazine from a newsagent"

    http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/feb/09/wiltshire-police-apologise-details-charlie-hebdo-readers

    The police force appear to be in a death spiral. Moral at rock bottom, inability to recruitment half decent candidates, lack of promotion, etc., etc. It used to be they were expected to know the law inside out. Now it seems like they make it up as they go along. I do not know a single former police officer who has recommended joining. This does not bode well for the future.
  • antifrank said:

    antifrank said:

    Robert Fox in the Evening Standard tonight reporting that talk in Whitehall is that the Conservatives plan to cut Defence by a further 10-30% if they win in May.

    Deeply worrying.

    If that were true and they came out and said so, I'd be seriously tempted to vote for them. The time of Britain ruling the waves is long past, and we need to husband our financial resources accordingly. We live in one of the very safest spots on the entire planet. Why are we wasting so much money and risking the blood of our young men and women on fights on the other side of the world?
    If that's the level of debate you're operating at, it's not even worth discussing the issue with you.
    Which one of those assertions do you disagree with? That Britain is not the force that it once was? That we need to husband our financial resources accordingly? That we live in one of the very safest spots on the entire planet?
    All of them, I'm afraid.

    You don't start well with a post-imperalist cliche, that is both silly and dated. I see you've now switched it from "Britannia rules the waves" to 'Britain (no longer being) the force that it once was'. That is irrefutable but I reject the core thrust of your argument. This is about us maintaining a basic (and credible) core defence capability.

    Second, how we allocate our financial resources is a choice. We could easily fund our armed forces properly at 2.5% GDP if we chose to do so. The politicians are prioritising funding other government departments (such as international development, health and education) at the expense of its core duty to defend us. I think that's grossly irresponsible.

    Third, you make the classic error of assuming our security is geographically localised. Britain is a highly interconnected trading nation. An island dependent for its well-being on global and regional geo-political stability. We don't have to have the Russians at Calais to be under threat (although they do seem pretty happy to sail their subs into our estuaries, and nuclear bombers grazing our airspace) or subject to economic or political blackmail.

    In the last few years we've had the growth of a terrorist state in the middle-east which gravely threatens our domestic security, and increasing belligerence from Russia in Eastern Europe, which we've been unable to deter. We are now almost an irrelevance to NATO and to the Americans, and unable to build alliances to defend our interests in Europe and the Middle-East. Soft power and hard power go hand-in-hand. It's called real-politik.

    You seem to think that having armed forces in and of themselves encourages conflict, and that disengaging from global trouble-spots where they might be needed is the responsible thing to do.

    It is neither.
  • The seventh data protection principle requires that:

    "Appropriate technical and organisational measures shall be taken against unauthorised or unlawful processing of personal data and against accidental loss or destruction of, or damage to, personal data."

    You might want to consider whether your security measures when canvassing were adequate in the circumstances given that the data was taken so easily, particularly given that what you had no doubt included "sensitive personal data", which includes data about identifiable people's political opinions.
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    JohnLoony said:

    Canvassing anecdote from the weekend: a group of 8 of us were fanned out along a road doing alternate houses, when two mildly tipsy teenagers appeared, each with a can of lager, one of them with a small child on his shoulders. He grabbed the day's canvass records (including lots of personal data) and started walking off. I politely asked for them back and reached out for them. He stared at me menacingly, and said "Don't TOUCH me, I'm carrying a child. You're not having them." The other lad slurred affably, "Yeah, iss my son". I asked for the records back again, and this time he said, "Course you can." and handed them over.

    The child didn't seem at risk - his bearer was only very mildly drunk and steady on his feet, and both of them were clearly protective of him. But what should we have done if he'd simply walked off? Actually risking a scuffle with the child involved wasn't worth it, thoug we outnumbered them 8-2. Giving up the day's work would have been a risk to the constituents listed with addresses and in some cases phone numbers (and annoying too). Calling 999 seemed OTT and by the time the police turned up he'd probably have gone. Suggestions?

    What do you mean, suggestions? Obvious. You outnumbered them by 8 to 2. You would have been entirely justified in using reasonable force to restrain them in order to recover the information. If there were 8 of you and 2 of them, you could easily have obstacled their passage safely and securely until (if necessary) the police arrived.

    "Vicious Tory Candidate Assaults Young Dad"
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,366
    NickP,

    The PB jury votes for provoked violence. Threaten initially but mean it. Then you probably won't need to follow through.

  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    edited February 2015
    Canvassing anecdote from the weekend:

    From your description that area must be what's known as a 'target rich environment' for potential labour votes
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Interesting to compare today's Ashcroft poll with Peter Kellner's prediction:

    Ashcroft: Con 34%, Lab 31%, UKIP 14%, LD 9%.

    Kellner: Con 35%, Lab 31%, UKIP 13%, LD 10%.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    edited February 2015


    All of them, I'm afraid.

    You don't start well with a post-imperalist cliche, that is both silly and dated. I see you've now switched it from "Britannia rules the waves" to 'Britain (no longer being) the force that it once was'. That is irrefutable but I reject the core thrust of your argument. This is about us maintaining a basic (and credible) core defence capability.

    Second, how we allocate our financial resources is a choice. We could easily fund our armed forces properly at 2.5% GDP if we chose to do so. The politicians are prioritising funding other government departments (such as international development, health and education) at the expense of its core duty to defend us. I think that's grossly irresponsible.

    Third, you make the classic error of assuming our security is geographically localised. Britain is a highly interconnected trading nation. An island dependent for its well-being on global and regional geo-political stability. We don't have to have the Russians at Calais to be under threat (although they do seem pretty happy to sail their subs into our estuaries, and nuclear bombers grazing our airspace) or subject to economic or political blackmail.

    In the last few years we've had the growth of a terrorist state in the middle-east which gravely threatens our domestic security, and increasing belligerence from Russia in Eastern Europe, which we've been unable to deter. We are now almost an irrelevance to NATO and to the Americans, and unable to build alliances to defend our interests in Europe and the Middle-East. Soft power and hard power go hand-in-hand. It's called real-politik.

    You seem to think that having armed forces in and of themselves encourages conflict, and that disengaging from global trouble-spots where they might be needed is the responsible thing to do.

    It is neither.

    You presuppose that 2.5% of GDP is the proper level of defence spending, which begs the question of what it is we should be trying to do.

    Our security is not exclusively geographically localised. But it's a pretty big part of it. While we certainly have interests around the world, we can project power into few parts of it in practice and have not been able to for some time. This is a race we cannot win, so we should stop trying.

    Germany, one of the world's great export nations, gets by without being a huge military power. There are other ways of dealing with the matter.

    And why is Britain a country that is somehow expected to join the charge into Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya or Syria whenever there's a problem? We don't have to be Robin to the USA's Batman.

    Your idea of a core defence capability is an expensive luxury. It baffles me why the right are so blind to addressing this one obvious area where spending could profitably be trimmed further.
  • FalseFlagFalseFlag Posts: 1,801

    antifrank said:

    antifrank said:

    Robert Fox in the Evening Standard tonight reporting that talk in Whitehall is that the Conservatives plan to cut Defence by a further 10-30% if they win in May.

    Deeply worrying.

    If that's the level of debate you're operating at, it's not even worth discussing the issue with you.
    Which one of those assertions do you disagree with? That Britain is not the force that it once was? That we need to husband our financial resources accordingly? That we live in one of the very safest spots on the entire planet?
    All of them, I'm afraid.

    You don't start well with a post-imperalist cliche, that is both silly and dated. I see you've now switched it from "Britannia rules the waves" to 'Britain (no longer being) the force that it once was'. That is irrefutable but I reject the core thrust of your argument. This is about us maintaining a basic (and credible) core defence capability.

    Second, how we allocate our financial resources is a choice. We could easily fund our armed forces properly at 2.5% GDP if we chose to do so. The politicians are prioritising funding other government departments (such as international development, health and education) at the expense of its core duty to defend us. I think that's grossly irresponsible.

    Third, you make the classic error of assuming our security is geographically localised. Britain is a highly interconnected trading nation. An island dependent for its well-being on global and regional geo-political stability. We don't have to have the Russians at Calais to be under threat (although they do seem pretty happy to sail their subs into our estuaries, and nuclear bombers grazing our airspace) or subject to economic or political blackmail.

    In the last few years we've had the growth of a terrorist state in the middle-east which gravely threatens our domestic security, and increasing belligerence from Russia in Eastern Europe, which we've been unable to deter. We are now almost an irrelevance to NATO and to the Americans, and unable to build alliances to defend our interests in Europe and the Middle-East. Soft power and hard power go hand-in-hand. It's called real-politik.

    You seem to think that having armed forces in and of themselves encourages conflict, and that disengaging from global trouble-spots where they might be needed is the responsible thing to do.

    It is neither.
    All the problems we currently face are blowback from an interventionist foreign policy excessive defence spending has afforded. A sane immigration policy would help too.
  • Suggestions?

    Put him down as a Maybe?
  • Canvassing anecdote from the weekend: a group of 8 of us were fanned out along a road doing alternate houses, when two mildly tipsy teenagers appeared, each with a can of lager, one of them with a small child on his shoulders. He grabbed the day's canvass records (including lots of personal data) and started walking off. I politely asked for them back and reached out for them. He stared at me menacingly, and said "Don't TOUCH me, I'm carrying a child. You're not having them." The other lad slurred affably, "Yeah, iss my son". I asked for the records back again, and this time he said, "Course you can." and handed them over.

    The child didn't seem at risk - his bearer was only very mildly drunk and steady on his feet, and both of them were clearly protective of him. But what should we have done if he'd simply walked off? Actually risking a scuffle with the child involved wasn't worth it, thoug we outnumbered them 8-2. Giving up the day's work would have been a risk to the constituents listed with addresses and in some cases phone numbers (and annoying too). Calling 999 seemed OTT and by the time the police turned up he'd probably have gone. Suggestions?

    He feels powerless in society and disrespected by adults and the other authority figures he encounters in his everyday life. He felt he had a free-hit at you.

    You therefore acted properly in showing patience, and asking for the records back politely a second time. That was enough for him to believe he had been shown some respect, whilst in a temporary position of relative power, and satiated his immediate craving to be taken seriously.

    If he had continued, you should have barred his way. He (and his friend) would no doubt have been very abusive, but you could have asked for the records (politely) again making it clear you would call the authorities if he did not.

    If you didn't get them you could have used your judgement to either wait for the authorities (he'd probably throw them at you, abuse you a lot and then escape) or restrain him mildly, protected any risk of the fall of the child, and then used reasonable force to remove the records from him.

    You would then need to report the incident anyway.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,975
    edited February 2015
    OT it's pretty clear the reason all these tax evaders have got away with it is because the CPS have spent their time and resources on ludicrous prosecutions of people like Dave Lee Travis taken to court
    THREE times achieving a single conviction for briefly touching a researchers breasts.....

    meanwhile while these obsessive prurient morons continued chasing these people billions were squirreled away by serious criminals with a single half hearted prosecution. Time for a Labour poster campaign I think.......
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    CD13 said:

    NickP,

    The PB jury votes for provoked violence. Threaten initially but mean it. Then you probably won't need to follow through.

    "Young Dad's Fear at Intimidation by Tory Mob"
    Sub - "Election Hopeful leads gang of tory thugs"
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited February 2015
    That's the sort of bovine behaviour which is commonplace these days from members of the underclass. Basically, they just want to impose their presence on everyone else in whatever way they happen to feel like at that moment. In particular they like to use children as props in their campaign of menace.

    Canvassing anecdote from the weekend: a group of 8 of us were fanned out along a road doing alternate houses, when two mildly tipsy teenagers appeared, each with a can of lager, one of them with a small child on his shoulders. He grabbed the day's canvass records (including lots of personal data) and started walking off. I politely asked for them back and reached out for them. He stared at me menacingly, and said "Don't TOUCH me, I'm carrying a child. You're not having them." The other lad slurred affably, "Yeah, iss my son". I asked for the records back again, and this time he said, "Course you can." and handed them over.

    The child didn't seem at risk - his bearer was only very mildly drunk and steady on his feet, and both of them were clearly protective of him. But what should we have done if he'd simply walked off? Actually risking a scuffle with the child involved wasn't worth it, thoug we outnumbered them 8-2. Giving up the day's work would have been a risk to the constituents listed with addresses and in some cases phone numbers (and annoying too). Calling 999 seemed OTT and by the time the police turned up he'd probably have gone. Suggestions?

  • antifrank said:

    Robert Fox in the Evening Standard tonight reporting that talk in Whitehall is that the Conservatives plan to cut Defence by a further 10-30% if they win in May.

    Deeply worrying.

    If that were true and they came out and said so, I'd be seriously tempted to vote for them. The time of Britain ruling the waves is long past, and we need to husband our financial resources accordingly. We live in one of the very safest spots on the entire planet. Why are we wasting so much money and risking the blood of our young men and women on fights on the other side of the world?
    The problem is that they want defence cuts AND more warmongering.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    Roger said:

    OT it's pretty clear the reason all these tax evaders have got away with it is because the CPS have spent their time and resources on ludicrous prosecutions of people like Dave Lee Travis taken to court
    THREE times achieving a single conviction for briefly touching a researchers breasts.....A criminal waste of money

    meanwhile while these obsessive prurient morons continued chasing these people billions were squirreled away by serious criminal and a single prosecution. Time for a Labour poster campaign I think.......

    Yes Roger, I agree . "Labour wants sex offenders left alone" will go down a storm
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    MP_SE said:

    AndyJS said:

    "UK police force apologises for taking details of Charlie Hebdo readers

    Wiltshire force says it has deleted from its system details of four people who bought copies of magazine from a newsagent"

    http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/feb/09/wiltshire-police-apologise-details-charlie-hebdo-readers

    The police force appear to be in a death spiral. Moral at rock bottom, inability to recruitment half decent candidates, lack of promotion, etc., etc. It used to be they were expected to know the law inside out. Now it seems like they make it up as they go along. I do not know a single former police officer who has recommended joining. This does not bode well for the future.
    The head of the Wiltshire plod is under investigation.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-31296182

    The head of the Avon & Somerset force likewise, none of the IPCC hearing was in public.

    https://www.ipcc.gov.uk/investigations/chief-constable-investigation-avon-and-somerset-police
  • AndyJS said:

    "UK police force apologises for taking details of Charlie Hebdo readers

    Wiltshire force says it has deleted from its system details of four people who bought copies of magazine from a newsagent"

    http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/feb/09/wiltshire-police-apologise-details-charlie-hebdo-readers

    I wonder how many other police forces have done likewise.

    And once you're on the system your details are never deleted.
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,366
    Dair,

    Do you remember John Prescott's response to being egged. 'Good on him' was my initial response and 85% of the public agreed with me.

    The "great and the good" may differ but they're wrong.

    "Brave OAP candidate kicks young yobs in testicles" as a headline would see him elected with a massive majority.

    Ed would cry though.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,568
    edited February 2015
    Thanks for the advice, all. Casino's sounds about right to me. I take antifrank's data protection point, though it's the first time in 40 years that I've had record snatched out of my hands - not sure what reasonable precautions one could take against that.

    I think that he was actually being responsible up to a point, if we ignore the original grabbing - when I reached for the folder the first time, he probably hazily interpreted it as "a stranger is trying to do something to me while I have a child on my shoulders". A sharp warning was appropriate if that was his perception. He'd no way of really being sure I was just reaching for the folder and not about to grab him. The second time, I merely requested them back and was therefore clearly unthreatening.
    taffys said:

    Canvassing anecdote from the weekend:

    From your description that area must be what's known as a 'target rich environment' for potential labour votes

    The ward is LibDem-held (Stapleford SE). Make of that what you will!

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    Roger said:

    OT it's pretty clear the reason all these tax evaders have got away with it is because the CPS have spent their time and resources on ludicrous prosecutions of people like Dave Lee Travis taken to court
    THREE times achieving a single conviction for briefly touching a researchers breasts.....

    meanwhile while these obsessive prurient morons continued chasing these people billions were squirreled away by serious criminals with a single half hearted prosecution. Time for a Labour poster campaign I think.......

    :-( :-(

    double whammy Roge,

    your mates are both seventies personalities of dubious provenance AND tax evaders.

    Come to Ludlow you know you want to.
This discussion has been closed.