politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Hillary looks set to struggle in New Hampshire but Sanders unlikely to be much of a threat elsewhere
Hillary Clinton continues to dominate the betting for the Democratic nomination for next year’s White House Race. She has slipped a bit but she is still a very tight odds on favourite.
Its good for Clinton that Sanders is seen as the main competitor. Biden and O'Malley have far more potential to put together a winning voter coalition.
Sanders is the Corbyn candidate. He is the "I really shouldn't be winning ANYWHERE if the voters had any belief in the alternatives on offer..." candidate.
Could someone explain to me why Biden is believed to be taking so long to make up his mind? He's going to face the political equivalent of a cricketer being "timed out" if he doesn't get a move on.
Could someone explain to me why Biden is believed to be taking so long to make up his mind? He's going to face the political equivalent of a cricketer being "timed out" if he doesn't get a move on.
Here's one theory: Basically that he isn't particularly planning on running, but he's keeping his options open in case Hillary blows up.
So what's wrong with the religious and racial hatred act? It doesn't seem so bad in principle but perhaps others know more about the law than I do.
Because "hate" is a very nebulous concept. Almost any robust political or religious argument can be said to incite hate by those who are deeply offended by it (eg Aneurin Bevan's comments about " lower than vermin").
Specifically, I do think it has a chilling effect on free speech. It would likely be unlawful to reproduce the Jylands Post cartoons in this country, for example. University Secular societies frequently have their activities restricted to avoid giving offence to those who are annoyed by them. Christian preachers have been prosecuted for saying harsh things about Islam.
Could someone explain to me why Biden is believed to be taking so long to make up his mind? He's going to face the political equivalent of a cricketer being "timed out" if he doesn't get a move on.
I think he's always said he'd make his mind up late summer. So its got to be soon, not least because there's a big Democratic debate coming up in October.
Out of curiosity - we haven't had a single thread about the Kipper or LD conferences - yet had a fair few on a distant US race. I wonder why that is?
Wrong. We had a thread on Farron's speech on Wednesday.
In any case the US election is by far the biggest political betting event that there is. That the UK media is not really interested at the moment is irrelevant.
Out of curiosity - we haven't had a single thread about the Kipper or LD conferences - yet had a fair few on a distant US race. I wonder why that is?
Wrong. We had a thread on Farron's speech on Wednesday.
In any case the US election is by far the biggest political betting event that there is. That the UK media is not really interested at the moment is irrelevant.
Kippers conference, few are listening, usual rant from Farage, donor slagging off Carswell etc etc.. They hate each other more than they hate immigrants.
LD's Conference NO one was listening.
Green Conference.. NO one was listening
The Labour Conference is the one, lots of popcorn on order.
The Tory conference will be one of self congratulation URrghh
The main Tory dinner is bound to have wild boar pate on the menu.
I do believe that our JackW is taking the piss, @HYUFD:
This 'Venice' of London began to garner more influence after the second world war, and it soon became known as 'Little' Venice. This apparently was a result of a council decision to save Beauchamp Lodge, and it recalled Byron's labelling of the area as 'Venice.' Not until the 1950's was the area was officially recognised as Little Venice and thus gained wide acceptance. This letter to the Telegraph (opens new window) by Lord Kinross published in 1966 makes it absolutely clear that Browning never called the locale Little Venice, and Kinross shows his annoyance at the constantly perpetuated myth. It is clearly time that BW and the tourist agencies stopped these gross distortions of history.
Out of curiosity - we haven't had a single thread about the Kipper or LD conferences - yet had a fair few on a distant US race. I wonder why that is?
Wrong. We had a thread on Farron's speech on Wednesday.
In any case the US election is by far the biggest political betting event that there is. That the UK media is not really interested at the moment is irrelevant.
And the fact that you are a L/Dem'er is irrelevant too, Mike?
Twitter spat earlier between Louise Mensch and Iain Dale about "unsubstantiated claims" in Ashcroft's book. Some very ungentlemanly language from Mr Dale. Perhaps Mrs Balls needs to have word, given her campaign re abuse of women on social media.
Twitter spat earlier between Louise Mensch and Iain Dale about "unsubstantiated claims" in Ashcroft's book. Some very ungentlemanly language from Mr Dale. Perhaps Mrs Balls needs to have word, given her campaign re abuse of women on social media.
Is Mr Dale feeling the heat, I wonder?
Yes, Dale's reputation, such as it was, is now in tatters. It was foolish of him to lend his imprint to what was effectively a glorified and elongated smear sheet. But this is the guy who once demanded that the late, great Keith Waterhouse be sacked from his column at The Mail for having the temerity to criticize 'blogging', so I have no sympathy.
Twitter spat earlier between Louise Mensch and Iain Dale about "unsubstantiated claims" in Ashcroft's book. Some very ungentlemanly language from Mr Dale. Perhaps Mrs Balls needs to have word, given her campaign re abuse of women on social media.
Is Mr Dale feeling the heat, I wonder?
Abuse of women? Is that targeted against Mrs Mensch or Mrs Dale?
Is it really the case this time that a late entrant will be at a disadvantage? I can see that there would be organisational difficulties but in an election round when the public seem to be searching for a credible new face, might it not be best to offer yourself as a credible new face quite late in the process, capitalising on excitement for your candidacy and before the gilt can come off the gingerbread?
Quite pleased that Peter Whittle will be the UKIP Mayoral candidate. Nothing at all against Suzanne Evans, but I think this is a good move
For one, it means another Kipper gets some attention, Suzanne is already an established media performer, and also it seems more authentic to have a Londoner who stood in a London seat as the candidate
Lets be fair we could have Mother Theresa as our candidate and we wouldn't win, so whoever would do best isn't really a factor
Quite pleased that Peter Whittle will be the UKIP Mayoral candidate. Nothing at all against Suzanne Evans, but I think this is a good move
For one, it means another Kipper gets some attention, Suzanne is already an established media performer, and also it seems more authentic to have a Londoner who stood in a London seat as the candidate
Lets be fair we could have Mother Theresa as our candidate and we wouldn't win, so whoever would do best isn't really a factor
Since Mother Teresa was an Albanian immigrant, she doesn't sound like the most natural fit for UKIP.
Quite pleased that Peter Whittle will be the UKIP Mayoral candidate. Nothing at all against Suzanne Evans, but I think this is a good move
For one, it means another Kipper gets some attention, Suzanne is already an established media performer, and also it seems more authentic to have a Londoner who stood in a London seat as the candidate
Lets be fair we could have Mother Theresa as our candidate and we wouldn't win, so whoever would do best isn't really a factor
I'm going to have to put some money on the US presidential race some time soon to generate some level of interest.
Otherwise I'll just have to root for Sanders v Trump as that prospect is about the only thing I can think of that would make Congressional Democrats and Republicans work together...
Quite pleased that Peter Whittle will be the UKIP Mayoral candidate. Nothing at all against Suzanne Evans, but I think this is a good move
For one, it means another Kipper gets some attention, Suzanne is already an established media performer, and also it seems more authentic to have a Londoner who stood in a London seat as the candidate
Lets be fair we could have Mother Theresa as our candidate and we wouldn't win, so whoever would do best isn't really a factor
Since Mother Teresa was an Albanian immigrant, she doesn't sound like the most natural fit for UKIP.
Well exactly!
If only there had been betting on such a non descript unimportant heat!
Twitter spat earlier between Louise Mensch and Iain Dale about "unsubstantiated claims" in Ashcroft's book. Some very ungentlemanly language from Mr Dale. Perhaps Mrs Balls needs to have word, given her campaign re abuse of women on social media.
Is Mr Dale feeling the heat, I wonder?
Abuse of women? Is that targeted against Mrs Mensch or Mrs Dale?
Oh how we laughed. Mr Dale may well be feeling some deserved heat; his decent into mediahood has inevitably coincided with his rise onto pillockhood.
Quite pleased that Peter Whittle will be the UKIP Mayoral candidate. Nothing at all against Suzanne Evans, but I think this is a good move
For one, it means another Kipper gets some attention, Suzanne is already an established media performer, and also it seems more authentic to have a Londoner who stood in a London seat as the candidate
Lets be fair we could have Mother Theresa as our candidate and we wouldn't win, so whoever would do best isn't really a factor
He has written a few good articles in Standpoint, nice guy
Out of curiosity - we haven't had a single thread about the Kipper or LD conferences - yet had a fair few on a distant US race. I wonder why that is?
US Presidential Election is a major betting event. At this stage, little from the Lib Dem or UKIP conference are likely to have much by the way of betting implications. To be honest they are not even that big as political news events (not just because the parties involved are not in government, but also because of the more stage-managed nature of conferences - few surprises are expected).
Twitter spat earlier between Louise Mensch and Iain Dale about "unsubstantiated claims" in Ashcroft's book. Some very ungentlemanly language from Mr Dale. Perhaps Mrs Balls needs to have word, given her campaign re abuse of women on social media.
Is Mr Dale feeling the heat, I wonder?
Abuse of women? Is that targeted against Mrs Mensch or Mrs Dale?
Oh how we laughed. Mr Dale may well be feeling some deserved heat; his decent into mediahood has inevitably coincided with his rise onto pillockhood.
I'm not sure it's been as much a 'rise' into pillockhood as a public unveiling of a long existing affliction.
I met him a few years ago at a do in Fuengirola. The conversation began amiably enough but he became incredibly agitated and stalked off after we disagreed strongly about the relative merits of, bizarrely, Ann Widdicombe. It was surreal.
There is surely space for an AN Other candidate in the Democratic field. If Sanders is the answer, then it's the wrong question. Biden not quite so much but really, is that the best they can do?
There is an enormous opportunity for some young governor or senator to take this race by the scruff of its neck and run away with it. Hillary's establishment backing didn't matter in the end in 2008 and can be overcome this time too. Any strong showing in Iowa - not a particularly expensive state - will propel the candidate way up the field and up the fundraising ladder. The issue is more organisation: it takes time to prepare and have the activists and campaign in place. Any later than October is really pushing it.
Quite pleased that Peter Whittle will be the UKIP Mayoral candidate. Nothing at all against Suzanne Evans, but I think this is a good move
For one, it means another Kipper gets some attention, Suzanne is already an established media performer, and also it seems more authentic to have a Londoner who stood in a London seat as the candidate
Lets be fair we could have Mother Theresa as our candidate and we wouldn't win, so whoever would do best isn't really a factor
That sounds like quite desperate straw clutching.
Another example of the dysfunctional, amateur and backstabbing nature of UKIP and it's leaving you "quite pleased".
I guess you can at least hope he is better than David Coburn and doesn't leave UKIP as toxic in London as they now are in Scotland.
Twitter spat earlier between Louise Mensch and Iain Dale about "unsubstantiated claims" in Ashcroft's book. Some very ungentlemanly language from Mr Dale. Perhaps Mrs Balls needs to have word, given her campaign re abuse of women on social media.
Is Mr Dale feeling the heat, I wonder?
Abuse of women? Is that targeted against Mrs Mensch or Mrs Dale?
Oh how we laughed. Mr Dale may well be feeling some deserved heat; his decent into mediahood has inevitably coincided with his rise onto pillockhood.
I'm not sure it's been as much a 'rise' into pillockhood as a public unveiling of a long existing affliction.
I met him a few years ago at a do in Fuengirola. The conversation began amiably enough but he became incredibly agitated and stalked off after we disagreed strongly about the relative merits of, bizarrely, Ann Widdicombe. It was surreal.
I have until recently always thought he was a not a bad observer of politics. His weakness has always been that he was too generous with his political opponents, far too sympathetic with people who would happily do him down for his politics. But I think the radio and media business, which he may be good at, is more important to him now and colours his actions. I think it demeans him to publish this blatant tittle tattle which incudes trying to smear peoples wives for the fun of it. Personally I do not have too bad an opinion of Widdicombe, allowing for the fact that everyone has flaws.
Twitter spat earlier between Louise Mensch and Iain Dale about "unsubstantiated claims" in Ashcroft's book. Some very ungentlemanly language from Mr Dale. Perhaps Mrs Balls needs to have word, given her campaign re abuse of women on social media.
Is Mr Dale feeling the heat, I wonder?
Abuse of women? Is that targeted against Mrs Mensch or Mrs Dale?
Oh how we laughed. Mr Dale may well be feeling some deserved heat; his decent into mediahood has inevitably coincided with his rise onto pillockhood.
I'm not sure it's been as much a 'rise' into pillockhood as a public unveiling of a long existing affliction.
I met him a few years ago at a do in Fuengirola. The conversation began amiably enough but he became incredibly agitated and stalked off after we disagreed strongly about the relative merits of, bizarrely, Ann Widdicombe. It was surreal.
I trust it had nothing to do with sensuality but if it was, I hope you were on the right side!
Hopefully the public is being kept well back in case there are explosives hidden inside.
Fat chance of that, unless the mosque has been bombed by an extremist group (not unknown in Pakistan). The Ahmadis are probably the most liberal, tolerant and modern Muslim denomination in Britain, though their unusual theology places them outside the Islamic mainstream. The group is fiercely opposed to violence, has no record of supporting militancy even in the face of really quite brutal persecution, and Mirza Ghulam Ahmad argued that this far after the age of Mohammed, "jihad" must be interpreted as a form of non-violent struggle and could not be used to justify bloodshed. They are also relatively liberal on social issues, for instance female Ahmadi teens have to attend workshops where they are encouraged to pursue university education and an independent professional career.
Ironically one of the reasons they attract so much vituperation from other Muslim groups in the UK is that their level of integration and westernisation has rendered them "sell-outs", and that they are working against Pakistani and other Muslim interests. Even in Britain they are often abused by other Muslims as "Qadianis" (literally, inhabitants of the Indian town where Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was born, but seen as a derogatory slur) or even "Kafir" (non-believer). In Tooting, Sunni Muslim religious groups have been campaigning for other British-Pakistanis to boycott Ahmadi-owned shops and services. Pakistani internet forums often contain gossip about political, business and military leaders who are "secretly Qadianis", and are acting in concert with the USA and Israel.
Virtually all the candidates in both the Democratic and Republican races for 2016 are mediocre to pretty dire. I feel sorry for the Americans.
Who were the last few presidential candidates (don't mean party nominee necessarily, anyone running in the primaries) who you would have identified as "strong", regardless of whether you agreed with their policies?
Virtually all the candidates in both the Democratic and Republican races for 2016 are mediocre to pretty dire. I feel sorry for the Americans.
Who were the last few presidential candidates (don't mean party nominee necessarily, anyone running in the primaries) who you would have identified as "strong", regardless of whether you agreed with their policies?
Joe Lieberman 2004, John McCain 2000, Bill Clinton 1992, Ronald Reagan 1980
Virtually all the candidates in both the Democratic and Republican races for 2016 are mediocre to pretty dire. I feel sorry for the Americans.
Who were the last few presidential candidates (don't mean party nominee necessarily, anyone running in the primaries) who you would have identified as "strong", regardless of whether you agreed with their policies?
Obama was a truly brilliant candidate, one of the best ever. As President more of a meh, but a great candidate.
The last really able US President was Clinton, especially when he focussed on the job after being somewhat distracted by his jollies. He took governance seriously. Hilary does too but seems to completely lack her husband's easy charm.
I agree OGH, Sanders will do well in the north east and the West Coast, but Hillary should sweep the South and MidWest in sufficient strength to be nominee. If it is Clinton v Trump, as the polls still suggest, she would then be in the better position for the general election as this new poll makes clear. Against any other nominee though she would struggle
Twitter spat earlier between Louise Mensch and Iain Dale about "unsubstantiated claims" in Ashcroft's book. Some very ungentlemanly language from Mr Dale. Perhaps Mrs Balls needs to have word, given her campaign re abuse of women on social media.
Is Mr Dale feeling the heat, I wonder?
Abuse of women? Is that targeted against Mrs Mensch or Mrs Dale?
Oh how we laughed. Mr Dale may well be feeling some deserved heat; his decent into mediahood has inevitably coincided with his rise onto pillockhood.
I'm not sure it's been as much a 'rise' into pillockhood as a public unveiling of a long existing affliction.
I met him a few years ago at a do in Fuengirola. The conversation began amiably enough but he became incredibly agitated and stalked off after we disagreed strongly about the relative merits of, bizarrely, Ann Widdicombe. It was surreal.
I trust it had nothing to do with sensuality but if it was, I hope you were on the right side!
LOL! At that time Mrs Dale was on a stage tour with Widdicombe in some sort of stand-up double act so he was an undiluted fan. I actively disliked her politics and especially her stance on hunting.
Iain asked me if I'd thought of coming to see them on tour when I was next in the UK. My answer was a very polite No but he took it incredibly personally.
Hopefully the public is being kept well back in case there are explosives hidden inside.
Fat chance of that, unless the mosque has been bombed by an extremist group (not unknown in Pakistan). The Ahmadis are probably the most liberal, tolerant and modern Muslim denomination in Britain, though their unusual theology places them outside the Islamic mainstream. The group is fiercely opposed to violence, has no record of supporting militancy even in the face of really quite brutal persecution, and Mirza Ghulam Ahmad argued that this far after the age of Mohammed, "jihad" must be interpreted as a form of non-violent struggle and could not be used to justify bloodshed. They are also relatively liberal on social issues, for instance female Ahmadi teens have to attend workshops where they are encouraged to pursue university education and an independent professional career.
Ironically one of the reasons they attract so much vituperation from other Muslim groups in the UK is that their level of integration and westernisation has rendered them "sell-outs", and that they are working against Pakistani and other Muslim interests. Even in Britain they are often abused by other Muslims as "Qadianis" (literally, inhabitants of the Indian town where Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was born, but seen as a derogatory slur) or even "Kafir" (non-believer). In Tooting, Sunni Muslim religious groups have been campaigning for other British-Pakistanis to boycott Ahmadi-owned shops and services. Pakistani internet forums often contain gossip about political, business and military leaders who are "secretly Qadianis", and are acting in concert with the USA and Israel.
Really interesting stuff (and a tad more credible than JackW's story about root canals). Many thanks.
Virtually all the candidates in both the Democratic and Republican races for 2016 are mediocre to pretty dire. I feel sorry for the Americans.
Who were the last few presidential candidates (don't mean party nominee necessarily, anyone running in the primaries) who you would have identified as "strong", regardless of whether you agreed with their policies?
Joe Lieberman 2004, John McCain 2000, Bill Clinton 1992, Ronald Reagan 1980
Whenever I've expressed a degree of admiration for McCain (in the company of Brits), I've got very peculiar looks.
There is surely space for an AN Other candidate in the Democratic field. If Sanders is the answer, then it's the wrong question. Biden not quite so much but really, is that the best they can do?
There is an enormous opportunity for some young governor or senator to take this race by the scruff of its neck and run away with it. Hillary's establishment backing didn't matter in the end in 2008 and can be overcome this time too. Any strong showing in Iowa - not a particularly expensive state - will propel the candidate way up the field and up the fundraising ladder. The issue is more organisation: it takes time to prepare and have the activists and campaign in place. Any later than October is really pushing it.
After 8 years in power in the US the incumbent party almost always picks the Vice President or an older, experienced Senator (or former Senator in Hillary's case). Young governors and senators are normally only picked by parties which have been out of the White House for 8 years
Most British Muslims would deny that the affected building is a "mosque" at all.
That's very interesting. Your outsider characterisation of them has not made it as far as the Telegraph, though, who use the word mosque a dozen times in their report or the London Fire Brigade twitter feed who similarly don't bother with such nuances.
In fact the way you choose to define them hasn't made it to the website of their mosque itself, which describes itself as the "the largest mosque in western europe" http://www.baitulfutuh.org/
So what's wrong with the religious and racial hatred act? It doesn't seem so bad in principle but perhaps others know more about the law than I do.
I do find it curious, those who would have in the past railed against 'Blasphemy law', have essentially created an inversion of the original law. It only covered the established church. Now we have the incitement to religious hatred which in practice covers all and every religion except the established church.
Who would have thought it was the left, in their desire to not only stuff the mouths of their muslim supporters with welfare payments, brought in this law as payback for their (multiple) vote?
Hopefully the public is being kept well back in case there are explosives hidden inside.
Fat chance of that, unless the mosque has been bombed by an extremist group (not unknown in Pakistan). The Ahmadis are probably the most liberal, tolerant and modern Muslim denomination in Britain, though their unusual theology places them outside the Islamic mainstream. The group is fiercely opposed to violence, has no record of supporting militancy even in the face of really quite brutal persecution, and Mirza Ghulam Ahmad argued that this far after the age of Mohammed, "jihad" must be interpreted as a form of non-violent struggle and could not be used to justify bloodshed. They are also relatively liberal on social issues, for instance female Ahmadi teens have to attend workshops where they are encouraged to pursue university education and an independent professional career.
Ironically one of the reasons they attract so much vituperation from other Muslim groups in the UK is that their level of integration and westernisation has rendered them "sell-outs", and that they are working against Pakistani and other Muslim interests. Even in Britain they are often abused by other Muslims as "Qadianis" (literally, inhabitants of the Indian town where Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was born, but seen as a derogatory slur) or even "Kafir" (non-believer). In Tooting, Sunni Muslim religious groups have been campaigning for other British-Pakistanis to boycott Ahmadi-owned shops and services. Pakistani internet forums often contain gossip about political, business and military leaders who are "secretly Qadianis", and are acting in concert with the USA and Israel.
Really interesting stuff (and a tad more credible than JackW's story about root canals). Many thanks.
Cheers. I have a tendency to screed a bit on here, and I'm never sure if I'm just talking (or typing) to myself!
I've got quite strong personal/professional ties with the Pakistani (and to some extent, wider Muslim) community around London - and actually, it's not a monolithic "community" at all, and has strong divides along pretty much every metric you can think of. Ethnic, linguistic, cultural, denominational, geographic origin, economic background, and - very deeply, but in a way that cuts orthogonally across the other factors - inter-generational. And what I know barely scratches the surface of the complexity.
There is surely space for an AN Other candidate in the Democratic field. If Sanders is the answer, then it's the wrong question. Biden not quite so much but really, is that the best they can do?
There is an enormous opportunity for some young governor or senator to take this race by the scruff of its neck and run away with it. Hillary's establishment backing didn't matter in the end in 2008 and can be overcome this time too. Any strong showing in Iowa - not a particularly expensive state - will propel the candidate way up the field and up the fundraising ladder. The issue is more organisation: it takes time to prepare and have the activists and campaign in place. Any later than October is really pushing it.
There is surely space for an AN Other candidate in the Democratic field. If Sanders is the answer, then it's the wrong question. Biden not quite so much but really, is that the best they can do?
There is an enormous opportunity for some young governor or senator to take this race by the scruff of its neck and run away with it. Hillary's establishment backing didn't matter in the end in 2008 and can be overcome this time too. Any strong showing in Iowa - not a particularly expensive state - will propel the candidate way up the field and up the fundraising ladder. The issue is more organisation: it takes time to prepare and have the activists and campaign in place. Any later than October is really pushing it.
After 8 years in power in the US the incumbent party almost always picks the Vice President or an older, experienced Senator (or former Senator in Hillary's case). Young governors and senators are normally only picked by parties which have been out of the White House for 8 years
There is surely space for an AN Other candidate in the Democratic field. If Sanders is the answer, then it's the wrong question. Biden not quite so much but really, is that the best they can do?
There is an enormous opportunity for some young governor or senator to take this race by the scruff of its neck and run away with it. Hillary's establishment backing didn't matter in the end in 2008 and can be overcome this time too. Any strong showing in Iowa - not a particularly expensive state - will propel the candidate way up the field and up the fundraising ladder. The issue is more organisation: it takes time to prepare and have the activists and campaign in place. Any later than October is really pushing it.
Michelle Obama.
It's not completely inconceivable...
If anyone is seriously offering odds on that then it's a lay. It's about as unlikely as things get.
Hopefully the public is being kept well back in case there are explosives hidden inside.
Fat chance of that, unless the mosque has been bombed by an extremist group (not unknown in Pakistan). The Ahmadis are probably the most liberal, tolerant and modern Muslim denomination in Britain, though their unusual theology places them outside the Islamic mainstream. The group is fiercely opposed to violence, has no record of supporting militancy even in the face of really quite brutal persecution, and Mirza Ghulam Ahmad argued that this far after the age of Mohammed, "jihad" must be interpreted as a form of non-violent struggle and could not be used to justify bloodshed. They are also relatively liberal on social issues, for instance female Ahmadi teens have to attend workshops where they are encouraged to pursue university education and an independent professional career.
Ironically one of the reasons they attract so much vituperation from other Muslim groups in the UK is that their level of integration and westernisation has rendered them "sell-outs", and that they are working against Pakistani and other Muslim interests. Even in Britain they are often abused by other Muslims as "Qadianis" (literally, inhabitants of the Indian town where Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was born, but seen as a derogatory slur) or even "Kafir" (non-believer). In Tooting, Sunni Muslim religious groups have been campaigning for other British-Pakistanis to boycott Ahmadi-owned shops and services. Pakistani internet forums often contain gossip about political, business and military leaders who are "secretly Qadianis", and are acting in concert with the USA and Israel.
Really interesting stuff (and a tad more credible than JackW's story about root canals). Many thanks.
And what I know barely scratches the surface of the complexity.
That is what I continually found about south Asia - the more I learnt, I realised I understood less than I thought I did about the place.
Most British Muslims would deny that the affected building is a "mosque" at all.
That's very interesting. Your outsider characterisation of them has not made it as far as the Telegraph, though, who use the word mosque a dozen times in their report or the London Fire Brigade twitter feed who similarly don't bother with such nuances.
In fact the way you choose to define them hasn't made it to the website of their mosque itself, which describes itself as the "the largest mosque in western europe" http://www.baitulfutuh.org/
Um. Its not the way MBE 'chooses' to define them. It is the way they are defined both by themselves and the rest of the muslim world. Are you that utterly anti-islamic that you cannot conceive that there might be factions who have genuine peaceful intent?
Out of curiosity - we haven't had a single thread about the Kipper or LD conferences - yet had a fair few on a distant US race. I wonder why that is?
Wrong. We had a thread on Farron's speech on Wednesday.
In any case the US election is by far the biggest political betting event that there is. That the UK media is not really interested at the moment is irrelevant.
Indeed, UK politics is effectively now a one party state for 3 years anyway
Hopefully the public is being kept well back in case there are explosives hidden inside.
Fat chance of that, unless the mosque has been bombed by an extremist group (not unknown in Pakistan). The Ahmadis are probably the most liberal, tolerant and modern Muslim denomination in Britain, though their unusual theology places them outside the Islamic mainstream. The group is fiercely opposed to violence, has no record of supporting militancy even in the face of really quite brutal persecution, and Mirza Ghulam Ahmad argued that this far after the age of Mohammed, "jihad" must be interpreted as a form of non-violent struggle and could not be used to justify bloodshed. They are also relatively liberal on social issues, for instance female Ahmadi teens have to attend workshops where they are encouraged to pursue university education and an independent professional career.
Ironically one of the reasons they attract so much vituperation from other Muslim groups in the UK is that their level of integration and westernisation has rendered them "sell-outs", and that they are working against Pakistani and other Muslim interests. Even in Britain they are often abused by other Muslims as "Qadianis" (literally, inhabitants of the Indian town where Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was born, but seen as a derogatory slur) or even "Kafir" (non-believer). In Tooting, Sunni Muslim religious groups have been campaigning for other British-Pakistanis to boycott Ahmadi-owned shops and services. Pakistani internet forums often contain gossip about political, business and military leaders who are "secretly Qadianis", and are acting in concert with the USA and Israel.
Really interesting stuff (and a tad more credible than JackW's story about root canals). Many thanks.
Cheers. I have a tendency to screed a bit on here, and I'm never sure if I'm just talking (or typing) to myself!
I've got quite strong personal/professional ties with the Pakistani (and to some extent, wider Muslim) community around London - and actually, it's not a monolithic "community" at all, and has strong divides along pretty much every metric you can think of. Ethnic, linguistic, cultural, denominational, geographic origin, economic background, and - very deeply, but in a way that cuts orthogonally across the other factors - inter-generational. And what I know barely scratches the surface of the complexity.
The way the word Community is now used is ridiculous.
Hopefully the public is being kept well back in case there are explosives hidden inside.
Fat chance of that, unless the mosque has been bombed by an extremist group (not unknown in Pakistan). The Ahmadis are probably the most liberal, tolerant and modern Muslim denomination in Britain, though their unusual theology places them outside the Islamic mainstream. The group is fiercely opposed to violence, has no record of supporting militancy even in the face of really quite brutal persecution, and Mirza Ghulam Ahmad argued that this far after the age of Mohammed, "jihad" must be interpreted as a form of non-violent struggle and could not be used to justify bloodshed. They are also relatively liberal on social issues, for instance female Ahmadi teens have to attend workshops where they are encouraged to pursue university education and an independent professional career.
Ironically one of the reasons they attract so much vituperation from other Muslim groups in the UK is that their level of integration and westernisation has rendered them "sell-outs", and that they are working against Pakistani and other Muslim interests. Even in Britain they are often abused by other Muslims as "Qadianis" (literally, inhabitants of the Indian town where Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was born, but seen as a derogatory slur) or even "Kafir" (non-believer). In Tooting, Sunni Muslim religious groups have been campaigning for other British-Pakistanis to boycott Ahmadi-owned shops and services. Pakistani internet forums often contain gossip about political, business and military leaders who are "secretly Qadianis", and are acting in concert with the USA and Israel.
Really interesting stuff (and a tad more credible than JackW's story about root canals). Many thanks.
Cheers. I have a tendency to screed a bit on here, and I'm never sure if I'm just talking (or typing) to myself!
I've got quite strong personal/professional ties with the Pakistani (and to some extent, wider Muslim) community around London - and actually, it's not a monolithic "community" at all, and has strong divides along pretty much every metric you can think of. Ethnic, linguistic, cultural, denominational, geographic origin, economic background, and - very deeply, but in a way that cuts orthogonally across the other factors - inter-generational. And what I know barely scratches the surface of the complexity.
It is unfortunate that our media are not so well informed. A more nuanced approach to "acceptable" Islam and "unacceptable" Islam would be a lot more persuasive than our PM claiming it is a religion of peace.
Most British Muslims would deny that the affected building is a "mosque" at all.
That's very interesting. Your outsider characterisation of them has not made it as far as the Telegraph, though, who use the word mosque a dozen times in their report or the London Fire Brigade twitter feed who similarly don't bother with such nuances.
In fact the way you choose to define them hasn't made it to the website of their mosque itself, which describes itself as the "the largest mosque in western europe" http://www.baitulfutuh.org/
Um. Its not the way MBE 'chooses' to define them. It is the way they are defined both by themselves and the rest of the muslim world. Are you that utterly anti-islamic that you cannot conceive that there might be factions who have genuine peaceful intent?
I'm going by their own website which defines their own building as "the largest mosque in western europe" against someone on the internet who says it isn't.
Quite pleased that Peter Whittle will be the UKIP Mayoral candidate. Nothing at all against Suzanne Evans, but I think this is a good move
For one, it means another Kipper gets some attention, Suzanne is already an established media performer, and also it seems more authentic to have a Londoner who stood in a London seat as the candidate
Lets be fair we could have Mother Theresa as our candidate and we wouldn't win, so whoever would do best isn't really a factor
That sounds like quite desperate straw clutching.
Another example of the dysfunctional, amateur and backstabbing nature of UKIP and it's leaving you "quite pleased".
I guess you can at least hope he is better than David Coburn and doesn't leave UKIP as toxic in London as they now are in Scotland.
Twitter spat earlier between Louise Mensch and Iain Dale about "unsubstantiated claims" in Ashcroft's book. Some very ungentlemanly language from Mr Dale. Perhaps Mrs Balls needs to have word, given her campaign re abuse of women on social media.
Is Mr Dale feeling the heat, I wonder?
Abuse of women? Is that targeted against Mrs Mensch or Mrs Dale?
Oh how we laughed. Mr Dale may well be feeling some deserved heat; his decent into mediahood has inevitably coincided with his rise onto pillockhood.
I'm not sure it's been as much a 'rise' into pillockhood as a public unveiling of a long existing affliction.
I met him a few years ago at a do in Fuengirola. The conversation began amiably enough but he became incredibly agitated and stalked off after we disagreed strongly about the relative merits of, bizarrely, Ann Widdicombe. It was surreal.
I trust it had nothing to do with sensuality but if it was, I hope you were on the right side!
LOL! At that time Mrs Dale was on a stage tour with Widdicombe in some sort of stand-up double act so he was an undiluted fan. I actively disliked her politics and especially her stance on hunting.
Iain asked me if I'd thought of coming to see them on tour when I was next in the UK. My answer was a very polite No but he took it incredibly personally.
Did you simultaneously look aghast? He always comes across to me as so urbane. I haven't seen him lately.
That's terrible that Ahmadis are being persecuted in Britain of all places. There seems to be a strain of Sunni Islam that is highly regressive and yet is alive and well in this country. We need to take more of a stand against it.
There is surely space for an AN Other candidate in the Democratic field. If Sanders is the answer, then it's the wrong question. Biden not quite so much but really, is that the best they can do?
There is an enormous opportunity for some young governor or senator to take this race by the scruff of its neck and run away with it. Hillary's establishment backing didn't matter in the end in 2008 and can be overcome this time too. Any strong showing in Iowa - not a particularly expensive state - will propel the candidate way up the field and up the fundraising ladder. The issue is more organisation: it takes time to prepare and have the activists and campaign in place. Any later than October is really pushing it.
After 8 years in power in the US the incumbent party almost always picks the Vice President or an older, experienced Senator (or former Senator in Hillary's case). Young governors and senators are normally only picked by parties which have been out of the White House for 8 years
Except in The West Wing!
Yes, and even in the West Wing world he was the first Congressman to be a presidential nominee for about a century. Even then Vice President Bob Russell was the frontrunner and won the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary. However former VP John Hoynes won the South Carolina primary this splitting the VP/ex VP vote and allowing Congressman Santos to come through the middle and win California, Pennsylvania, Texas and Florida and the nomination
Most British Muslims would deny that the affected building is a "mosque" at all.
That's very interesting. Your outsider characterisation of them has not made it as far as the Telegraph, though, who use the word mosque a dozen times in their report or the London Fire Brigade twitter feed who similarly don't bother with such nuances.
In fact the way you choose to define them hasn't made it to the website of their mosque itself, which describes itself as the "the largest mosque in western europe" http://www.baitulfutuh.org/
Both my mother in law and sister in law live near there - it is most definitely described as a Mosque and it is huge.
Virtually all the candidates in both the Democratic and Republican races for 2016 are mediocre to pretty dire. I feel sorry for the Americans.
Who were the last few presidential candidates (don't mean party nominee necessarily, anyone running in the primaries) who you would have identified as "strong", regardless of whether you agreed with their policies?
Joe Lieberman 2004, John McCain 2000, Bill Clinton 1992, Ronald Reagan 1980
Whenever I've expressed a degree of admiration for McCain (in the company of Brits), I've got very peculiar looks.
I would have happily voted for McCain over Gore in 2000, he would have been a far better president than Bush. The failure of Bobby Kennedy to become president in 1968 and John McCain to become President in 2000 produced the Nixon and George W Bush presidencies, two of the worst presidencies in recent times. I would also add had Reagan beaten Ford and then Carter in 1976 that would also have saved the US from the 3rd worst president of the postwar era, even if it had meant Ronnie becoming president 4 years early!
Most British Muslims would deny that the affected building is a "mosque" at all.
That's very interesting. Your outsider characterisation of them has not made it as far as the Telegraph, though, who use the word mosque a dozen times in their report or the London Fire Brigade twitter feed who similarly don't bother with such nuances.
In fact the way you choose to define them hasn't made it to the website of their mosque itself, which describes itself as the "the largest mosque in western europe" http://www.baitulfutuh.org/
The subdivision of religions into sects seems to lead to violence between the sects as frequently as violence between the religions. This violence always involves collateral damage: a plague on all their houses.
Virtually all the candidates in both the Democratic and Republican races for 2016 are mediocre to pretty dire. I feel sorry for the Americans.
Who were the last few presidential candidates (don't mean party nominee necessarily, anyone running in the primaries) who you would have identified as "strong", regardless of whether you agreed with their policies?
Joe Lieberman 2004, John McCain 2000, Bill Clinton 1992, Ronald Reagan 1980
Whenever I've expressed a degree of admiration for McCain (in the company of Brits), I've got very peculiar looks.
I would have happily voted for McCain over Gore in 2000, he would have been a far better president than Bush. The failure of Bobby Kennedy to become president in 1968 and John McCain to become President in 2000 produced the Nixon and George W Bush presidencies, two of the worst presidencies in recent times. I would also add had Reagan beaten Ford and then Carter in 1976 that would also have saved the US from the 3rd worst president of the postwar era, even if it had meant Ronnie becoming president 4 years early!
Robert Kennedy was a terrible loss. Schlesinger's "Life and Times of Robert Kennedy" is probably my second favourite US history book (after "Battle Cry of Freedom"). It is a brilliant read, even if he wears his heart on his sleeve.
“The Conservatives will drag England’s schools into the past by reviving grammar schools, demoralising teachers and cutting resources, according to the new shadow education secretary. Lucy Powell, who took over the education role last week following Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership victory, said Labour would fiercely contest any move by the government to allow the revival of selective schools. A decision on the proposed expansion of a Kent grammar school is expected soon.” http://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/sep/25/labour-lucy-powell-tories-selective-schools-education
“The Conservatives will drag England’s schools into the past by reviving grammar schools, demoralising teachers and cutting resources, according to the new shadow education secretary. Lucy Powell, who took over the education role last week following Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership victory, said Labour would fiercely contest any move by the government to allow the revival of selective schools. A decision on the proposed expansion of a Kent grammar school is expected soon.” http://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/sep/25/labour-lucy-powell-tories-selective-schools-education
Is this the same Lucy Powell who was responsible for Ed M 's successfu l shambolic election program?
Most British Muslims would deny that the affected building is a "mosque" at all.
That's very interesting. Your outsider characterisation of them has not made it as far as the Telegraph, though, who use the word mosque a dozen times in their report or the London Fire Brigade twitter feed who similarly don't bother with such nuances.
In fact the way you choose to define them hasn't made it to the website of their mosque itself, which describes itself as the "the largest mosque in western europe" http://www.baitulfutuh.org/
Um. Its not the way MBE 'chooses' to define them. It is the way they are defined both by themselves and the rest of the muslim world. Are you that utterly anti-islamic that you cannot conceive that there might be factions who have genuine peaceful intent?
I'm going by their own website which defines their own building as "the largest mosque in western europe" against someone on the internet who says it isn't.
Sure I accept that every grouping has factions.
He said that most other Muslims would not describe it as a mosque, not that the owners did. I was happy to follow the point he was making, not twist it into something stupid.
Out of curiosity - we haven't had a single thread about the Kipper or LD conferences - yet had a fair few on a distant US race. I wonder why that is?
Wrong. We had a thread on Farron's speech on Wednesday.
In any case the US election is by far the biggest political betting event that there is. That the UK media is not really interested at the moment is irrelevant.
Indeed, UK politics is effectively now a one party state for 3 years anyway
Only because one party has boarded a time machine into the 1970s .And thinks protest is better than power.
Virtually all the candidates in both the Democratic and Republican races for 2016 are mediocre to pretty dire. I feel sorry for the Americans.
Who were the last few presidential candidates (don't mean party nominee necessarily, anyone running in the primaries) who you would have identified as "strong", regardless of whether you agreed with their policies?
Joe Lieberman 2004, John McCain 2000, Bill Clinton 1992, Ronald Reagan 1980
Whenever I've expressed a degree of admiration for McCain (in the company of Brits), I've got very peculiar looks.
I would have happily voted for McCain over Gore in 2000, he would have been a far better president than Bush. The failure of Bobby Kennedy to become president in 1968 and John McCain to become President in 2000 produced the Nixon and George W Bush presidencies, two of the worst presidencies in recent times. I would also add had Reagan beaten Ford and then Carter in 1976 that would also have saved the US from the 3rd worst president of the postwar era, even if it had meant Ronnie becoming president 4 years early!
Robert Kennedy was a terrible loss. Schlesinger's "Life and Times of Robert Kennedy" is probably my second favourite US history book (after "Battle Cry of Freedom"). It is a brilliant read, even if he wears his heart on his sleeve.
Indeed, in some ways he was even more charismatic and inspiring than his brother. His assassination was a dreadful tragedy for the US and the world
Out of curiosity - we haven't had a single thread about the Kipper or LD conferences - yet had a fair few on a distant US race. I wonder why that is?
Wrong. We had a thread on Farron's speech on Wednesday.
In any case the US election is by far the biggest political betting event that there is. That the UK media is not really interested at the moment is irrelevant.
Indeed, UK politics is effectively now a one party state for 3 years anyway
Well we have the referendum to bet on, or rather some do. I would have thought that anyone wanting Out would be happy to see UKIP kept out of any publicity.
In fact the way you choose to define them hasn't made it to the website of their mosque itself, which describes itself as the "the largest mosque in western europe" http://www.baitulfutuh.org/
Of course - because in Britain, unlike in Pakistan - it's not a criminal offence for them to claim to be Muslims, or that their place of worship is a bona fide mosque.
An interesting accident of history is the Joseph Smith was roughly historically contemporaneous with Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. For a point of comparison, try telling a Mormon that they're "not technically a Christian".
My initial "careful" comment was somewhat tongue in cheek. Personally, I'd be inclined to call it a mosque, and the to describe Ahmadiyya as "Muslim", because that is how they describe themselves and I am in no position to judge. But if you tell a Sunni Muslim that the Ahmadiyya have the largest mosque in Europe, you may get a laughing response where they point out it's "not technically a mosque". Or if you stumble across a more sectarian person, you may get a surprisingly aggressive response (some Sunnis get very worked up about the Ahmadiyya "pretending" to be Muslims; I've had that kind of reaction from a few folk before and it's pretty unnerving). You may recall that Channel 4 got into controversy for showing the call of prayer during Ramadan a few years back: one odd aspect of that controversy was a rumour (false) that had made its way around social media, that an Ahmadi "mosque" had been used (apparently a photo of an Ahmadi mosque had been selected by an under-zealous picture editor in an article about the series) and Channel 4 were supporting the heretics.
The way one devout Sunni explained it to me, most Muslims accept that different Muslims have different ways of viewing Islam, but they can generally "draw a mental box" that all Muslims fit into, because they believe or follow core precepts, even if they think other sects are wrong on the fine details. So the Shia are wrong (incorrect views on Ali and succession, various historically incorrect practices, too much veneration of saints, blah-di-blah) but in his view they're still "Muslim". The Ahmadiyya, by believing there was an extra prophet after Mohammed, have put themselves firmly outside the box. (The Ahmadis deny this of course: since their prophet was not a "law-giving" prophet like Moses or Jesus or Mohammed, he doesn't "count" as a violation of Mohammed being the final prophet.)
“The Conservatives will drag England’s schools into the past by reviving grammar schools, demoralising teachers and cutting resources, according to the new shadow education secretary. Lucy Powell, who took over the education role last week following Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership victory, said Labour would fiercely contest any move by the government to allow the revival of selective schools. A decision on the proposed expansion of a Kent grammar school is expected soon.” http://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/sep/25/labour-lucy-powell-tories-selective-schools-education
Is this the same Lucy Powell who was responsible for Ed M 's successfu l shambolic election program?
If so, she has little credibility - on anything.
Good, hopefully she does as bad a job at Shadow Education as she did in the election
Incidentally, denying that someone else is Muslim is called takfir. Extremely sectarian Sunnis - ones following Wahhabi or salafist teaching, including the "radicalised" young Muslims who start following al-Qaeda or ISIS, are even stronger takfiri: they will deny that Shia are Muslim. Shia "mosques" are not truly mosques, and so on. This is part of the reason there is so much bloodshed in Pakistan, Iraq and Syria at the moment: there is a strong sectarian aspect to the killing. Takfiri thought has long been associated with Islamist extremism. One of the issues Islamic State has had recently is with hyper-extremists who started accusing the leadership of al-Qaeda of not being true Muslims; when IS refused to back them on this stance they started accusing IS of not being Muslim either. Apparently several dozen such extremists have been killed by IS authorities, while others have escaped the caliphate.
Out of curiosity - we haven't had a single thread about the Kipper or LD conferences - yet had a fair few on a distant US race. I wonder why that is?
Wrong. We had a thread on Farron's speech on Wednesday.
In any case the US election is by far the biggest political betting event that there is. That the UK media is not really interested at the moment is irrelevant.
Indeed, UK politics is effectively now a one party state for 3 years anyway
Well we have the referendum to bet on, or rather some do. I would have thought that anyone wanting Out would be happy to see UKIP kept out of any publicity.
Indeed, EUref at least offers some betting interest before the end of 2017
Out of curiosity - we haven't had a single thread about the Kipper or LD conferences - yet had a fair few on a distant US race. I wonder why that is?
Wrong. We had a thread on Farron's speech on Wednesday.
In any case the US election is by far the biggest political betting event that there is. That the UK media is not really interested at the moment is irrelevant.
Indeed, UK politics is effectively now a one party state for 3 years anyway
Only because one party has boarded a time machine into the 1970s .And thinks protest is better than power.
Indeed, but basically this is 2001-2003 in reverse, except Cameron, not Blair, now reigns supreme. Indeed, if they get their act to together UKIP could become the main opposition by default as the LDs were in those years, EUref, like Iraq, providing the catalyst
Comments
So what's wrong with the religious and racial hatred act? It doesn't seem so bad in principle but perhaps others know more about the law than I do.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/25/us-usa-election-biden-exclusive-idUSKCN0RP24Q20150925
https://trove.com/a/What-Is-Taking-Joe-Biden-So-Long.doajs?utm_campaign=hosted&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=sns&nocrawl=1
Specifically, I do think it has a chilling effect on free speech. It would likely be unlawful to reproduce the Jylands Post cartoons in this country, for example. University Secular societies frequently have their activities restricted to avoid giving offence to those who are annoyed by them. Christian preachers have been prosecuted for saying harsh things about Islam.
In any case the US election is by far the biggest political betting event that there is. That the UK media is not really interested at the moment is irrelevant.
Is this right/really a boost/can he win?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-34355043
LD's Conference NO one was listening.
Green Conference.. NO one was listening
The Labour Conference is the one, lots of popcorn on order.
The Tory conference will be one of self congratulation URrghh
The main Tory dinner is bound to have wild boar pate on the menu.
Well you learn something new every day
Quite so.
I do believe that our JackW is taking the piss, @HYUFD:
This 'Venice' of London began to garner more influence after the second world war, and it soon became known as 'Little' Venice. This apparently was a result of a council decision to save Beauchamp Lodge, and it recalled Byron's labelling of the area as 'Venice.' Not until the 1950's was the area was officially recognised as Little Venice and thus gained wide acceptance. This letter to the Telegraph (opens new window) by Lord Kinross published in 1966 makes it absolutely clear that Browning never called the locale Little Venice, and Kinross shows his annoyance at the constantly perpetuated myth. It is clearly time that BW and the tourist agencies stopped these gross distortions of history.
http://www.londoncanals.co.uk/lvenice/lv00.html
Is Mr Dale feeling the heat, I wonder?
Honoured to have the backing of 7/9 of London's leaders of Tory councils; http://t.co/MQ8QLIbsRn http://t.co/cyy3pX2f97
Sign O' The Times: Top News on the #lab15 timeline is a piece from the Morning Star.
#howdiditevercometothis
For one, it means another Kipper gets some attention, Suzanne is already an established media performer, and also it seems more authentic to have a Londoner who stood in a London seat as the candidate
Lets be fair we could have Mother Theresa as our candidate and we wouldn't win, so whoever would do best isn't really a factor
Otherwise I'll just have to root for Sanders v Trump as that prospect is about the only thing I can think of that would make Congressional Democrats and Republicans work together...
If only there had been betting on such a non descript unimportant heat!
Mr Dale may well be feeling some deserved heat; his decent into mediahood has inevitably coincided with his rise onto pillockhood.
I met him a few years ago at a do in Fuengirola. The conversation began amiably enough but he became incredibly agitated and stalked off after we disagreed strongly about the relative merits of, bizarrely, Ann Widdicombe. It was surreal.
There is an enormous opportunity for some young governor or senator to take this race by the scruff of its neck and run away with it. Hillary's establishment backing didn't matter in the end in 2008 and can be overcome this time too. Any strong showing in Iowa - not a particularly expensive state - will propel the candidate way up the field and up the fundraising ladder. The issue is more organisation: it takes time to prepare and have the activists and campaign in place. Any later than October is really pushing it.
Another example of the dysfunctional, amateur and backstabbing nature of UKIP and it's leaving you "quite pleased".
I guess you can at least hope he is better than David Coburn and doesn't leave UKIP as toxic in London as they now are in Scotland.
But I think the radio and media business, which he may be good at, is more important to him now and colours his actions. I think it demeans him to publish this blatant tittle tattle which incudes trying to smear peoples wives for the fun of it.
Personally I do not have too bad an opinion of Widdicombe, allowing for the fact that everyone has flaws.
:-)
Most British Muslims would deny that the affected building is a "mosque" at all.
Ironically one of the reasons they attract so much vituperation from other Muslim groups in the UK is that their level of integration and westernisation has rendered them "sell-outs", and that they are working against Pakistani and other Muslim interests. Even in Britain they are often abused by other Muslims as "Qadianis" (literally, inhabitants of the Indian town where Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was born, but seen as a derogatory slur) or even "Kafir" (non-believer). In Tooting, Sunni Muslim religious groups have been campaigning for other British-Pakistanis to boycott Ahmadi-owned shops and services. Pakistani internet forums often contain gossip about political, business and military leaders who are "secretly Qadianis", and are acting in concert with the USA and Israel.
The last really able US President was Clinton, especially when he focussed on the job after being somewhat distracted by his jollies. He took governance seriously. Hilary does too but seems to completely lack her husband's easy charm.
Elon University North Carolina general election
Clinton 47% Trump 40%
Bush 46% Clinton 43%
Carson 52% Clinton 41%
http://www.elon.edu/docs/e-web/elonpoll/092415_ElonPollExecSumm.pdf
Iain asked me if I'd thought of coming to see them on tour when I was next in the UK. My answer was a very polite No but he took it incredibly personally.
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-09-20/japan-dumbs-down-its-universities-at-the-wrong-time
Oh wait a minute.......
Harriet Harman blasts Labour over the"clean sweep of men" at the top of the party and tells Jeremy Corbyn to "sort it out".
Oh dear..... And the conference hasn't even started yet.
Sky news
In fact the way you choose to define them hasn't made it to the website of their mosque itself, which describes itself as the "the largest mosque in western europe" http://www.baitulfutuh.org/
Who would have thought it was the left, in their desire to not only stuff the mouths of their muslim supporters with welfare payments, brought in this law as payback for their (multiple) vote?
I've got quite strong personal/professional ties with the Pakistani (and to some extent, wider Muslim) community around London - and actually, it's not a monolithic "community" at all, and has strong divides along pretty much every metric you can think of. Ethnic, linguistic, cultural, denominational, geographic origin, economic background, and - very deeply, but in a way that cuts orthogonally across the other factors - inter-generational. And what I know barely scratches the surface of the complexity.
It's not completely inconceivable...
It's about as unlikely as things get.
Sure I accept that every grouping has factions.
https://twitter.com/ianbremmer?lang=en-gb
http://westwing.wikia.com/wiki/Democratic_presidential_primary_election,_2006
I only scanned the Dale whining after the first few paragraphs, but I wasn't impressed.
http://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/sep/25/labour-lucy-powell-tories-selective-schools-education
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3249351/No-wonder-like-George-China-hails-Osborne-NOT-mentioning-human-rights-week-long-tour.html
Is this the same Lucy Powell who was responsible for Ed M 's successfu l shambolic election program?
If so, she has little credibility - on anything.
However if ether party picks somebody else then I'm less convinced it would work.
An interesting accident of history is the Joseph Smith was roughly historically contemporaneous with Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. For a point of comparison, try telling a Mormon that they're "not technically a Christian".
My initial "careful" comment was somewhat tongue in cheek. Personally, I'd be inclined to call it a mosque, and the to describe Ahmadiyya as "Muslim", because that is how they describe themselves and I am in no position to judge. But if you tell a Sunni Muslim that the Ahmadiyya have the largest mosque in Europe, you may get a laughing response where they point out it's "not technically a mosque". Or if you stumble across a more sectarian person, you may get a surprisingly aggressive response (some Sunnis get very worked up about the Ahmadiyya "pretending" to be Muslims; I've had that kind of reaction from a few folk before and it's pretty unnerving). You may recall that Channel 4 got into controversy for showing the call of prayer during Ramadan a few years back: one odd aspect of that controversy was a rumour (false) that had made its way around social media, that an Ahmadi "mosque" had been used (apparently a photo of an Ahmadi mosque had been selected by an under-zealous picture editor in an article about the series) and Channel 4 were supporting the heretics.
The way one devout Sunni explained it to me, most Muslims accept that different Muslims have different ways of viewing Islam, but they can generally "draw a mental box" that all Muslims fit into, because they believe or follow core precepts, even if they think other sects are wrong on the fine details. So the Shia are wrong (incorrect views on Ali and succession, various historically incorrect practices, too much veneration of saints, blah-di-blah) but in his view they're still "Muslim". The Ahmadiyya, by believing there was an extra prophet after Mohammed, have put themselves firmly outside the box. (The Ahmadis deny this of course: since their prophet was not a "law-giving" prophet like Moses or Jesus or Mohammed, he doesn't "count" as a violation of Mohammed being the final prophet.)
"Who is a Muslim" is a tangled web indeed.