Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A betting market on the size of Donald Trump’s non flaccid

13

Comments

  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    Pong said:

    Speedy said:

    As I've been saying for weeks now, the only sure bet is Winning Party: Democrats.

    The GOP is doomed no matter who they nominate.

    I think you've basically nailed it there.

    A brokered convention won't be pretty. Both Donald and Cruz will use every possible means, fair or foul, to get the nomination - whoever loses is almost certain to throw their nukes out of the pram.

    There are going to be some very very angry republicans - and a sore loser who can't be bought off.
    How do you think the Sanders supporters are going to react when Queen Hilary in Clinton is coronated by the "Democrat" establishment?
    The overwhelming majority will swing behind Clinton just as Clinton supporters did for Obama in 08. Most Dem and GOP voters are as tribal as Con and Lab voters are in the UK regardless of which leading donkey wears their rosette.

    The US general election will be determined by moderate/independent voters in the swing states, especially where changing demographics are in play.

    Accordingly Hillary Clinton succeed Obama as POTUS.
  • Options
    John_NJohn_N Posts: 389
    edited April 2016

    OT, I cannot believe betting has reached this kind of sad low.

    Nah. The lowest it ever reached was when Paddy Power had a market which effectively was betting on would Barack Obama get assassinated.
    You're kidding, right?

    Surely no one actually placed money on that bet?
    BOOKMAKER Paddy Power was last night slated over a bet on which it will pay out should president-elect Barack Obama be assassinated during his first term in office, write Patrick Griffin and Allison Bray.

    A spokesman for the American Embassy described the bet as very offensive and in extremely bad taste.
    Oh that is so hypocritical! We're talking about the embassy of the US here? Some of us remember when a US government agency (DARPA, the organisation that started the internet) announced in 2003 that it was going to start a market in "terrorism futures".

  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,951

    I believe the EPL description comes from foreign markets. As long as I can remember when I have been abroad and the games come on the tv, they have always described it as EPL.

    Urghhhh.

    But thanks for clarifying FU.
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,951
    The other one that gets me is coronated.

    It is not a word.

    Crowned!
  • Options
    The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,830
    @TheScreamingEagles That is absolutely disgusting.

    @tlg86 True, but I think Swansea did the double over Arsenal last season. It was one of the reasons why I thought that after beating Swansea 3-0 away this season, they'd have a fair chance of beating them at home this year. Arsenal have faced Pulis so many times when he was managing Stoke that I feel it's hard to judge whether it's simply Stoke or Pulis who has a poor record at the Emirates. I'm a gooner as well, so I enjoyed the win over United in 2015. However, I knew we'd lose against them at Old Trafford this year. Arsenal always does well when the pressure's off (like now when nobody thinks they'll win the title) but as soon as they face any expectation they collapse. I bet if you if Arsenal had lost to Leicester at home they would have beaten United, purely because everyone would have written them off after a loss against Leicester.
  • Options
    PongPong Posts: 4,693
    edited April 2016

    Pong said:

    Speedy said:

    As I've been saying for weeks now, the only sure bet is Winning Party: Democrats.

    The GOP is doomed no matter who they nominate.

    I think you've basically nailed it there.

    A brokered convention won't be pretty. Both Donald and Cruz will use every possible means, fair or foul, to get the nomination - whoever loses is almost certain to throw their nukes out of the pram.

    There are going to be some very very angry republicans - and a sore loser who can't be bought off.
    How do you think the Sanders supporters are going to react when Queen Hilary in Clinton is coronated by the "Democrat" establishment?
    Sanders supporters are irrelevant. Their man will very publicly kiss and make up. A pile of sanders supporters will tweet expletives and say there's no way they can vote Hillary and they'll vote for Gary Johnson or Ace Ventura instead, before calming down and either not getting around to vote, or actually voting for Hillary in November.

    Up against Cruz, their minds will be focussed.

  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    Well this has happened:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3520932/PETER-HITCHENS-Privatisation-Free-trade-Shares-great-ruined-Britain.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

    "PETER HITCHENS: Privatisation! Free trade! Shares for all! The great con that ruined Britain"

    A very Trumpian position.
    Trump policies and perceptions (but just without Trump) are seeping through the atlantic.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,193
    edited April 2016
    It's worth noting that England is in real danger of losing its fourth Champions League spot for 2018-19. The rankings are done over a rolling five year period and the allocations for 2018-19 will be determined by the rankings at the end of next season:

    http://tinyurl.com/lbwoah3

    As things stand we are just ahead of Italy, but they are all out this season and we still have City and Liverpool playing for us. But we really could do with doing well next year if we want to keep that fourth spot.
  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,052
    Could the silver voters who won Cameron an election last year become his Frankenstein's monster in the EU ref? IN desperately needs to inspire the young to go out and vote but who is there who can do that? A bunch of Tory politicians and captains of industry aren't likely to do that.
  • Options
    ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133
    Mortimer said:

    When did the Premier League become the EPL?

    It never has. It's just the Premier League (not even the FA Premier League).

  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    malcolmg said:

    tlg86 said:

    I had low expectations but I think Sajid Javid has put up a decent performance on the Marr show. As ever, I'm frustrated that this isn't an Andrew Neil interview. Javid rebuked the accusation that Britain has been the ring leader for blocking tariffs increases in the EU but Marr seemed startled by this and doesn't know the details well enough to come back at him.

    I was surprised how well Sajid Javid did on Marr this morning and maybe he has been underestimated. If I was a steel worker in Port Talbot I would have been encouraged by his support and also his sensible rejection of nationalisation. He refered to co-operation in Europe and if Europe does play a big part in protecting the European and UK steel industry over the next three months, and is perceived to do so, it could have a positive influence on remain
    LOL, easily taken in , will be hot air and the steel workers down the tubes. When does UK become a fully fledged Chinese province.
    They're following the example of the SNP government who refused to meet the Dalai Lama .. :smile:
  • Options
    The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,830
    @ThreeQuidder That doesn't really change the fact that English teams have performed poorly in the last five years or so. On May, well we'll see. I haven't heard Merkel invoke her Gender as much as Cooper, or even Hilary recently have done.

    @Mortimer I think Barclays are no longer sponsoring the league next year (it used to be abbreviated to BPL or PL), so that's why I've seen more people refer to the league as the EPL.
  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,052
    Speedy said:

    Well this has happened:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3520932/PETER-HITCHENS-Privatisation-Free-trade-Shares-great-ruined-Britain.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

    "PETER HITCHENS: Privatisation! Free trade! Shares for all! The great con that ruined Britain"

    A very Trumpian position.
    Trump policies and perceptions (but just without Trump) are seeping through the atlantic.

    To be fair, Hitchens has been fairly consistent on this. He's probably one of the those conservatives who felt that working class job security was good for the social stability of the country.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,216
    edited April 2016
    Mortimer said:

    The other one that gets me is coronated.

    It is not a word.

    Crowned!

    It's certainly a word, whether it's often used correctly is another matter.
  • Options
    John_NJohn_N Posts: 389

    Punters know that phone polls are better for Remain and Matt Singh says the phone polls are more accurate.

    Has someone done a proper chi-squared test and formed a view on how significant the difference in people's responses to online and phone polls actually is? Screening out other variables, such as how samples are chosen.

    I dispute the utility of the notion of "accuracy" of any poll. It's the predictions that people make from the data that may or may not be accurate.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,193

    @Mortimer I think Barclays are no longer sponsoring the league next year (it used to be abbreviated to BPL or PL), so that's why I've seen more people refer to the league as the EPL.

    I think they are dropping having a sponsor altogether. The thinking is the Premier League is a stronger brand without a sponsor (like the NFL, NBA etc) and it might make them more money when they sell the rights abroad. Apparently some TV companies aren't too keen on banks/booze being part of the brand.
  • Options
    YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382

    Could the silver voters who won Cameron an election last year become his Frankenstein's monster in the EU ref? IN desperately needs to inspire the young to go out and vote but who is there who can do that? A bunch of Tory politicians and captains of industry aren't likely to do that.

    I expect Richard Branson to be dragged out shortly to stand shoulder to shoulder with Cameron and Obama with a vow to the people.

    Regading the EPL , York City are at the bottom of the league two about to go into non league with the new ground postponed yet again,
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,352



    I agree with all of this. It is particularly obnoxious that any criticism of Israel for how they behave is immediately condemned by some people as anti-semitic. Nothing could be further from the truth.

    The difficulty is one seen in several areas - if revolting people adopt an issue, it's very difficult to embrace it even if you come to think that there's something in it. For example, the rape gangs were highlighted by the BNP, making it difficult for mainstream parties to see beyond the "pet theory of fascists" to the actual facts. I'm against halal slaughter, but deeply suspicious of far-right politicians who campaign on the issue while remaining silent on any other suffering in slaughterhouses. Similarly, there indisputably are anti-semitic people and groups who oppose Israel and everything Israel does merely because it's Jewish, and that's always made it harder to criticise Israel.

    Surely the right thing is to separate the critcism from the person or group. One can agree with opposition to some or even all of Israel's security policies while disagreeing with some of the groups who take the same view, because they clearly have a different motive. But there's a tendency to assume that everyone on one side of an issue must agree on everything else.
  • Options
    ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133

    @ThreeQuidder That doesn't really change the fact that English teams have performed poorly in the last five years or so.

    Fourth best last year, 2nd, 3rd, 2nd, 2nd in previous years.

    So yes, you're right - if you assume that being the third best is "performing poorly".

  • Options
    MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
    edited April 2016
    Pong said:

    Pong said:

    Speedy said:

    As I've been saying for weeks now, the only sure bet is Winning Party: Democrats.

    The GOP is doomed no matter who they nominate.

    I think you've basically nailed it there.

    A brokered convention won't be pretty. Both Donald and Cruz will use every possible means, fair or foul, to get the nomination - whoever loses is almost certain to throw their nukes out of the pram.

    There are going to be some very very angry republicans - and a sore loser who can't be bought off.
    How do you think the Sanders supporters are going to react when Queen Hilary in Clinton is coronated by the "Democrat" establishment?
    Sanders supporters are irrelevant. Their man will very publicly kiss and make up. A pile of sanders supporters will tweet expletives and say there's no way they can vote Hillary and they'll vote for Gary Johnson or Ace Ventura instead, before calming down and either not getting around to vote, or actually voting for Hillary in November.

    Up against Cruz, their minds will be focussed.

    I agree that Ted is even more repulsive than Hillary.
    But Hilliary isn't going to be up against Cruz, is she?
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,054
    For those who wants to watch decent motorsport, the first of today's BTCC races is about to start on ITV 4.

    For those who want to watch poor motorsport, the F1 is on later. ;)

    (The qualifying was so bad yesterday that I turned over to watch an antiques program, where a vase values at £900 sold for £4,100. It was that bad).
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    tlg86 said:

    It's worth noting that England is in real danger of losing its fourth Champions League spot for 2018-19. The rankings are done over a rolling five year period and the allocations for 2018-19 will be determined by the rankings at the end of next season:

    http://tinyurl.com/lbwoah3

    As things stand we are just ahead of Italy, but they are all out this season and we still have City and Liverpool playing for us. But we really could do with doing well next year if we want to keep that fourth spot.

    Yes the regular teams have let the nation down. Time for someone else to have a crack!

    The rankings are from a combination of CL and Europa League. Several British teams have a record of not taking the Europa League seriously, and that is what has done most damage to our rankings.

    The Europa League would benefit from being slimmed down. Making the ties single rather than double headers would be a simple way to start.
  • Options
    Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Holy Moly - Martin Sorrell on Sky looks like he's had a bath in Bisto - what a tan. :open_mouth:
  • Options
    The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,830

    @ThreeQuidder That doesn't really change the fact that English teams have performed poorly in the last five years or so.

    Fourth best last year, 2nd, 3rd, 2nd, 2nd in previous years.

    So yes, you're right - if you assume that being the third best is "performing poorly".

    Well, looking at the results of English teams' in the CL and that none of them look like they'll be challenging the Bayern-Real-Barca monopoly, yes I'll state that being third best is 'performing poorly'. Particularly given the amount of money that goes into the league, and how in recent years some of the best coaches in the world manage in the league.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,343
    That is a really good piece, well worth reading. Thanks for the link.
  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,052
    Yorkcity said:

    Could the silver voters who won Cameron an election last year become his Frankenstein's monster in the EU ref? IN desperately needs to inspire the young to go out and vote but who is there who can do that? A bunch of Tory politicians and captains of industry aren't likely to do that.

    I expect Richard Branson to be dragged out shortly to stand shoulder to shoulder with Cameron and Obama with a vow to the people.

    Regading the EPL , York City are at the bottom of the league two about to go into non league with the new ground postponed yet again,
    Except it's not in their gift to make the people a vow. Merkel, Juncker and Von Rumpey would have to do it.
  • Options
    YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382

    Yorkcity said:

    Could the silver voters who won Cameron an election last year become his Frankenstein's monster in the EU ref? IN desperately needs to inspire the young to go out and vote but who is there who can do that? A bunch of Tory politicians and captains of industry aren't likely to do that.

    I expect Richard Branson to be dragged out shortly to stand shoulder to shoulder with Cameron and Obama with a vow to the people.

    Regading the EPL , York City are at the bottom of the league two about to go into non league with the new ground postponed yet again,
    Except it's not in their gift to make the people a vow. Merkel, Juncker and Von Rumpey would have to do it.
    Whatever they vow , it will have to be the first 3 I mentioned, to get anyone intrested.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,193
    edited April 2016

    tlg86 said:

    It's worth noting that England is in real danger of losing its fourth Champions League spot for 2018-19. The rankings are done over a rolling five year period and the allocations for 2018-19 will be determined by the rankings at the end of next season:

    http://tinyurl.com/lbwoah3

    As things stand we are just ahead of Italy, but they are all out this season and we still have City and Liverpool playing for us. But we really could do with doing well next year if we want to keep that fourth spot.

    Yes the regular teams have let the nation down. Time for someone else to have a crack!

    The rankings are from a combination of CL and Europa League. Several British teams have a record of not taking the Europa League seriously, and that is what has done most damage to our rankings.

    The Europa League would benefit from being slimmed down. Making the ties single rather than double headers would be a simple way to start.
    If Leicester tank in the Champions League and don't even make it to the Europa League (that's NOT a prediction, btw), then you will get your share of the blame too. In fact, rather unfairly, you'll probably get most of the blame as the lazy English press will think this has happened overnight and look at what's changed in 2016-17.

    I used to quite like the five team groups in the Europa League where you would play each team only once. As ever, the group stage was expanded to 48 teams to curry favour with middle and lower ranking nations.
  • Options
    Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Superb article on Port Talbot and the wider energy pricing issue, Dominic Lawson nails it http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/our-steel-industry-is-a-small-price-to-pay-for-lower-emissions-isnt-it-wszz50r0f
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,193
    edited April 2016
    Yorkcity said:

    Yorkcity said:

    Could the silver voters who won Cameron an election last year become his Frankenstein's monster in the EU ref? IN desperately needs to inspire the young to go out and vote but who is there who can do that? A bunch of Tory politicians and captains of industry aren't likely to do that.

    I expect Richard Branson to be dragged out shortly to stand shoulder to shoulder with Cameron and Obama with a vow to the people.

    Regading the EPL , York City are at the bottom of the league two about to go into non league with the new ground postponed yet again,
    Except it's not in their gift to make the people a vow. Merkel, Juncker and Von Rumpey would have to do it.
    Whatever they vow , it will have to be the first 3 I mentioned, to get anyone intrested.
    Paul Mason on the Marr show sad that he reckons a 'vow' will be made in the week before the referendum.
  • Options
    ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133

    @ThreeQuidder That doesn't really change the fact that English teams have performed poorly in the last five years or so.

    Fourth best last year, 2nd, 3rd, 2nd, 2nd in previous years.

    So yes, you're right - if you assume that being the third best is "performing poorly".

    Well, looking at the results of English teams' in the CL and that none of them look like they'll be challenging the Bayern-Real-Barca monopoly, yes I'll state that being third best is 'performing poorly'. Particularly given the amount of money that goes into the league, and how in recent years some of the best coaches in the world manage in the league.
    Wow, high standards.

    England have been the best country in UEFA competitions precisely three times in the modern era (and only six times before that).
  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,151

    Yorkcity said:

    Could the silver voters who won Cameron an election last year become his Frankenstein's monster in the EU ref? IN desperately needs to inspire the young to go out and vote but who is there who can do that? A bunch of Tory politicians and captains of industry aren't likely to do that.

    I expect Richard Branson to be dragged out shortly to stand shoulder to shoulder with Cameron and Obama with a vow to the people.

    Regading the EPL , York City are at the bottom of the league two about to go into non league with the new ground postponed yet again,
    Except it's not in their gift to make the people a vow. Merkel, Juncker and Von Rumpey would have to do it.
    Not in their gift either, although maybe British voters would believe it was.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    malcolmg said:

    When does UK become a fully fledged Chinese province.

    Seems Nicola already signed away Scotland

    https://twitter.com/aidankerrpol/status/716191796078985216
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    It's worth noting that England is in real danger of losing its fourth Champions League spot for 2018-19. The rankings are done over a rolling five year period and the allocations for 2018-19 will be determined by the rankings at the end of next season:

    http://tinyurl.com/lbwoah3

    As things stand we are just ahead of Italy, but they are all out this season and we still have City and Liverpool playing for us. But we really could do with doing well next year if we want to keep that fourth spot.

    Yes the regular teams have let the nation down. Time for someone else to have a crack!

    The rankings are from a combination of CL and Europa League. Several British teams have a record of not taking the Europa League seriously, and that is what has done most damage to our rankings.

    The Europa League would benefit from being slimmed down. Making the ties single rather than double headers would be a simple way to start.
    If Leicester tank in the Champions League and don't even make it to the Europa League (that's NOT a prediction, btw), then you will get your share of the blame too. In fact, rather unfairly, you'll probably get most of the blame as the lazy English press will think this has happened overnight and look at what's changed in 2016-17.

    I used to quite like the five team groups in the Europa League where you would play each team only once. As ever, the group stage was expanded to 48 teams to curry favour with middle and lower ranking nations.
    Yes. Its going to be fun though!

    We last played competitively in Europe when we won the League Cup 15 years ago. It has a novelty value to us that is hard to beat.

    Enjoy the ride while it lasts, is the only way to go through life.

    Off to the match now. Beer and doughnuts await...

  • Options
    The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,830

    @ThreeQuidder That doesn't really change the fact that English teams have performed poorly in the last five years or so.

    Fourth best last year, 2nd, 3rd, 2nd, 2nd in previous years.

    So yes, you're right - if you assume that being the third best is "performing poorly".

    Well, looking at the results of English teams' in the CL and that none of them look like they'll be challenging the Bayern-Real-Barca monopoly, yes I'll state that being third best is 'performing poorly'. Particularly given the amount of money that goes into the league, and how in recent years some of the best coaches in the world manage in the league.
    Wow, high standards.

    England have been the best country in UEFA competitions precisely three times in the modern era (and only six times before that).
    No one has denied that English teams have performed well in the past (particularly the 00's). However, they are performing pretty badly now.
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    Pong said:

    Pong said:

    Speedy said:

    As I've been saying for weeks now, the only sure bet is Winning Party: Democrats.

    The GOP is doomed no matter who they nominate.

    I think you've basically nailed it there.

    A brokered convention won't be pretty. Both Donald and Cruz will use every possible means, fair or foul, to get the nomination - whoever loses is almost certain to throw their nukes out of the pram.

    There are going to be some very very angry republicans - and a sore loser who can't be bought off.
    How do you think the Sanders supporters are going to react when Queen Hilary in Clinton is coronated by the "Democrat" establishment?
    Sanders supporters are irrelevant. Their man will very publicly kiss and make up. A pile of sanders supporters will tweet expletives and say there's no way they can vote Hillary and they'll vote for Gary Johnson or Ace Ventura instead, before calming down and either not getting around to vote, or actually voting for Hillary in November.

    Up against Cruz, their minds will be focussed.

    Well there where some national polls lately that tried to measure that effect.

    PPP national with Rick Perry, and Deez Nuts (fictional candidate).

    Hillary 48
    Trump 41

    Hillary 44
    Trump 35
    Perry 12

    Hillary 42
    Trump 37
    Deez Nuts 10

    Monmouth national, with Garry Johnson.

    Hillary 48
    Trump 38

    Hillary 42
    Trump 34
    Johnson 11

    So pretty much given only 2 choices those who despise Trump more than Hillary, but still don't like Hillary, will vote for Hillary, same for the reverse.

    Given 3 choices and 10% will vote for that generic 3rd choice, cutting Hillary's margin a bit because there are more people who despise Trump more than Hillary.
  • Options
    ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133
    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    It's worth noting that England is in real danger of losing its fourth Champions League spot for 2018-19. The rankings are done over a rolling five year period and the allocations for 2018-19 will be determined by the rankings at the end of next season:

    http://tinyurl.com/lbwoah3

    As things stand we are just ahead of Italy, but they are all out this season and we still have City and Liverpool playing for us. But we really could do with doing well next year if we want to keep that fourth spot.

    Yes the regular teams have let the nation down. Time for someone else to have a crack!

    The rankings are from a combination of CL and Europa League. Several British teams have a record of not taking the Europa League seriously, and that is what has done most damage to our rankings.

    The Europa League would benefit from being slimmed down. Making the ties single rather than double headers would be a simple way to start.
    If Leicester tank in the Champions League and don't even make it to the Europa League (that's NOT a prediction, btw), then you will get your share of the blame too. In fact, rather unfairly, you'll probably get most of the blame as the lazy English press will think this has happened overnight and look at what's changed in 2016-17.
    If we do, it'll be last season that did it, with Liverpool and Man City each losing four games, and no side making it past R16 in either competition whilst Italy had a finalist and two other semi-finalists.

  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,052
    Yorkcity said:

    Yorkcity said:

    Could the silver voters who won Cameron an election last year become his Frankenstein's monster in the EU ref? IN desperately needs to inspire the young to go out and vote but who is there who can do that? A bunch of Tory politicians and captains of industry aren't likely to do that.

    I expect Richard Branson to be dragged out shortly to stand shoulder to shoulder with Cameron and Obama with a vow to the people.

    Regading the EPL , York City are at the bottom of the league two about to go into non league with the new ground postponed yet again,
    Except it's not in their gift to make the people a vow. Merkel, Juncker and Von Rumpey would have to do it.
    Whatever they vow , it will have to be the first 3 I mentioned, to get anyone intrested.
    What possible vow can Cameron, Obama and Branson make on the EU? They can't promise a single thing. And do you honestly think Obama would so damage his relations with the rest of Europe as to demand that they give the British whatever they want to make sure they stay in?
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,031
    Mortimer said:

    When did the Premier League become the EPL?

    It was around way before the IPL, and we're in England.

    We don't call the championship the EC.

    Or the Grand National the EGN.

    I believe the "E" stands for
    weejonnie said:

    Cabinet Office
    New plans to boost British steel industry announced: https://t.co/W38dwXAkyO https://t.co/aMtg45HEnN

    I can see a horse galloping away over a far away hill. Or the stern of ship on a far horizon.

    Take your pick.
    All bluster anyway - the contracts (under EU rules) must be put out for tender to all EU countries.
    The contacts should be put out to tender to whoever can deliver the best value to UK taxpayers, whether they are in the UK, the EU, or anywhere else for that matter.
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited April 2016
    Scott_P said:

    malcolmg said:

    When does UK become a fully fledged Chinese province.

    Seems Nicola already signed away Scotland

    https://twitter.com/aidankerrpol/status/716191796078985216
    That's about 10% of scottish GDP, I wonder what it actually involves given its magnitude.
    The chinese guy looks more happy than Sturgeon.
  • Options
    ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133

    @ThreeQuidder That doesn't really change the fact that English teams have performed poorly in the last five years or so.

    Fourth best last year, 2nd, 3rd, 2nd, 2nd in previous years.

    So yes, you're right - if you assume that being the third best is "performing poorly".

    Well, looking at the results of English teams' in the CL and that none of them look like they'll be challenging the Bayern-Real-Barca monopoly, yes I'll state that being third best is 'performing poorly'. Particularly given the amount of money that goes into the league, and how in recent years some of the best coaches in the world manage in the league.
    Wow, high standards.

    England have been the best country in UEFA competitions precisely three times in the modern era (and only six times before that).
    No one has denied that English teams have performed well in the past (particularly the 00's). However, they are performing pretty badly now.
    Rankings since readmission (I'd use ranking points, but the methodology has changed three times since then):

    90/91-98/99: 1*, 8, 18, 5, 8, 19, 5, 5, 4
    99/00-09/10: 2, 2, 4, 4, 3, 1, 4, 2, 1, 2
    10/11-15/16: 2, 2, 2, 3, 2, 4, 3#

    * - only two teams entered
    # - probably

    I don't think the results from this decade are really any worse than the 00s.

  • Options
    YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382

    Yorkcity said:

    Yorkcity said:

    Could the silver voters who won Cameron an election last year become his Frankenstein's monster in the EU ref? IN desperately needs to inspire the young to go out and vote but who is there who can do that? A bunch of Tory politicians and captains of industry aren't likely to do that.

    I expect Richard Branson to be dragged out shortly to stand shoulder to shoulder with Cameron and Obama with a vow to the people.

    Regading the EPL , York City are at the bottom of the league two about to go into non league with the new ground postponed yet again,
    Except it's not in their gift to make the people a vow. Merkel, Juncker and Von Rumpey would have to do it.
    Whatever they vow , it will have to be the first 3 I mentioned, to get anyone intrested.
    What possible vow can Cameron, Obama and Branson make on the EU? They can't promise a single thing. And do you honestly think Obama would so damage his relations with the rest of Europe as to demand that they give the British whatever they want to make sure they stay in?
    You were stating earlier that Remain had to get the young out to vote.
    They will say to this age group that the future for business and global security and the planet is working together.
    Bland I know but it will be big picture emotion that will win the day , not the minutiae.
    I wish it was different, as I am voting for leave due to the lack of democracy in the EU.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Speedy said:

    That's about 10% of scottish GDP, I wonder what it actually involves given its magnitude.

    You, and everybody else. The SG did not put out a press release at the time (although the Chinese did) and are now saying journalists have to submit an FOI request, to the Commissioner who has already said she won't release anything critical of the SNP...

    Welcome to modern Scotland.
  • Options
    MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    In all honesty, TSE, I think this only proves the weirdness of the betting markets and of your good self for posting this.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,031

    OT, I cannot believe betting has reached this kind of sad low.

    Nah. The lowest it ever reached was when Paddy Power had a market which effectively was betting on would Barack Obama get assassinated.
    Yeah, I called and tried to put a million pounds on a specific date, and they refused to take my bet, and they even sent special branch round to have a chat with me.

    (Joke)
  • Options
    LadyBucketLadyBucket Posts: 590
    I see Donald Tusk was sat at the "World Leaders" table at the summit in Washington!

    The British EU referendum must seem such "small fry" and a complete irritant to him and the other unelected non-entities in Brussels.

    I thought Sajid Javid did reasonably well on Marr but PM material he is not! John McDonnell got a pretty soft interview in my view.

    I think Marr should become the BBC's showbusiness correspondent, he looks totally star-struck when interviewing some of these "stars."
  • Options
    runnymederunnymede Posts: 2,536
    tlg86 said:

    Yorkcity said:

    Yorkcity said:

    Could the silver voters who won Cameron an election last year become his Frankenstein's monster in the EU ref? IN desperately needs to inspire the young to go out and vote but who is there who can do that? A bunch of Tory politicians and captains of industry aren't likely to do that.

    I expect Richard Branson to be dragged out shortly to stand shoulder to shoulder with Cameron and Obama with a vow to the people.

    Regading the EPL , York City are at the bottom of the league two about to go into non league with the new ground postponed yet again,
    Except it's not in their gift to make the people a vow. Merkel, Juncker and Von Rumpey would have to do it.
    Whatever they vow , it will have to be the first 3 I mentioned, to get anyone intrested.
    Paul Mason on the Marr show sad that he reckons a 'vow' will be made in the week before the referendum.
    I'm sure it will but it will be as devoid of meaning as all other UK government promises on the EU have been.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,031

    I see Donald Tusk was sat at the "World Leaders" table at the summit in Washington!

    The British EU referendum must seem such "small fry" and a complete irritant to him and the other unelected non-entities in Brussels.

    I thought Sajid Javid did reasonably well on Marr but PM material he is not! John McDonnell got a pretty soft interview in my view.

    I think Marr should become the BBC's showbusiness correspondent, he looks totally star-struck when interviewing some of these "stars."

    Isn't Donald Tusk elected by the European Parliament?
  • Options
    Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Indeed, this isn't Sindy.

    Given the fanfare 5% off tampons got as a last ditch win, I can't see what's possibly on offer.

    Yorkcity said:

    Yorkcity said:

    Could the silver voters who won Cameron an election last year become his Frankenstein's monster in the EU ref? IN desperately needs to inspire the young to go out and vote but who is there who can do that? A bunch of Tory politicians and captains of industry aren't likely to do that.

    I expect Richard Branson to be dragged out shortly to stand shoulder to shoulder with Cameron and Obama with a vow to the people.

    Regading the EPL , York City are at the bottom of the league two about to go into non league with the new ground postponed yet again,
    Except it's not in their gift to make the people a vow. Merkel, Juncker and Von Rumpey would have to do it.
    Whatever they vow , it will have to be the first 3 I mentioned, to get anyone intrested.
    What possible vow can Cameron, Obama and Branson make on the EU? They can't promise a single thing. And do you honestly think Obama would so damage his relations with the rest of Europe as to demand that they give the British whatever they want to make sure they stay in?
  • Options
    The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,830

    @ThreeQuidder That doesn't really change the fact that English teams have performed poorly in the last five years or so.

    Fourth best last year, 2nd, 3rd, 2nd, 2nd in previous years.

    So yes, you're right - if you assume that being the third best is "performing poorly".

    Well, looking at the results of English teams' in the CL and that none of them look like they'll be challenging the Bayern-Real-Barca monopoly, yes I'll state that being third best is 'performing poorly'. Particularly given the amount of money that goes into the league, and how in recent years some of the best coaches in the world manage in the league.
    Wow, high standards.

    England have been the best country in UEFA competitions precisely three times in the modern era (and only six times before that).
    No one has denied that English teams have performed well in the past (particularly the 00's). However, they are performing pretty badly now.
    Rankings since readmission (I'd use ranking points, but the methodology has changed three times since then):

    90/91-98/99: 1*, 8, 18, 5, 8, 19, 5, 5, 4
    99/00-09/10: 2, 2, 4, 4, 3, 1, 4, 2, 1, 2
    10/11-15/16: 2, 2, 2, 3, 2, 4, 3#

    * - only two teams entered
    # - probably

    I don't think the results from this decade are really any worse than the 00s.

    In the 00s at one-stage English teams were regularly reaching CL semi-finals, and finals. Manchester United reached the final two times, Chelsea once, Arsenal once, and Liverpool twice. That's not even accounting for the number of semi-final appearances these teams made either. By contrast not a single English team has made the CL final for the last four years. And only one team (Chelsea) have made the semis since 2012.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,031
    Speedy said:

    Well this has happened:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3520932/PETER-HITCHENS-Privatisation-Free-trade-Shares-great-ruined-Britain.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

    "PETER HITCHENS: Privatisation! Free trade! Shares for all! The great con that ruined Britain"

    A very Trumpian position.
    Trump policies and perceptions (but just without Trump) are seeping through the atlantic.

    The idea that people should be allowed to decide for themselves? I can see why autocrats like Hitchens wouldn't like that.

  • Options

    Indeed, this isn't Sindy.

    Given the fanfare 5% off tampons got as a last ditch win, I can't see what's possibly on offer.

    Yorkcity said:

    Yorkcity said:

    Could the silver voters who won Cameron an election last year become his Frankenstein's monster in the EU ref? IN desperately needs to inspire the young to go out and vote but who is there who can do that? A bunch of Tory politicians and captains of industry aren't likely to do that.

    I expect Richard Branson to be dragged out shortly to stand shoulder to shoulder with Cameron and Obama with a vow to the people.

    Regading the EPL , York City are at the bottom of the league two about to go into non league with the new ground postponed yet again,
    Except it's not in their gift to make the people a vow. Merkel, Juncker and Von Rumpey would have to do it.
    Whatever they vow , it will have to be the first 3 I mentioned, to get anyone intrested.
    What possible vow can Cameron, Obama and Branson make on the EU? They can't promise a single thing. And do you honestly think Obama would so damage his relations with the rest of Europe as to demand that they give the British whatever they want to make sure they stay in?
    A cut in the contribution to the EU budget?
  • Options
    Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    His show is autograph collecting with politics added on.

    I see Donald Tusk was sat at the "World Leaders" table at the summit in Washington!

    The British EU referendum must seem such "small fry" and a complete irritant to him and the other unelected non-entities in Brussels.

    I thought Sajid Javid did reasonably well on Marr but PM material he is not! John McDonnell got a pretty soft interview in my view.

    I think Marr should become the BBC's showbusiness correspondent, he looks totally star-struck when interviewing some of these "stars."

  • Options
    MP_SEMP_SE Posts: 3,642
    tlg86 said:

    Yorkcity said:

    Yorkcity said:

    Could the silver voters who won Cameron an election last year become his Frankenstein's monster in the EU ref? IN desperately needs to inspire the young to go out and vote but who is there who can do that? A bunch of Tory politicians and captains of industry aren't likely to do that.

    I expect Richard Branson to be dragged out shortly to stand shoulder to shoulder with Cameron and Obama with a vow to the people.

    Regading the EPL , York City are at the bottom of the league two about to go into non league with the new ground postponed yet again,
    Except it's not in their gift to make the people a vow. Merkel, Juncker and Von Rumpey would have to do it.
    Whatever they vow , it will have to be the first 3 I mentioned, to get anyone intrested.
    Paul Mason on the Marr show sad that he reckons a 'vow' will be made in the week before the referendum.
    The polling is too close and a lot depends on turnout. If I was Cameron or any other Europhile I would be very very worried. If it remains close we will get something offered to us in return for remaining.
  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,052
    rcs1000 said:

    Speedy said:

    Well this has happened:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3520932/PETER-HITCHENS-Privatisation-Free-trade-Shares-great-ruined-Britain.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

    "PETER HITCHENS: Privatisation! Free trade! Shares for all! The great con that ruined Britain"

    A very Trumpian position.
    Trump policies and perceptions (but just without Trump) are seeping through the atlantic.

    The idea that people should be allowed to decide for themselves? I can see why autocrats like Hitchens wouldn't like that.

    True but he does seem to be tackling it from the angle of working class security and empowerment. Still I'm sure you are the kind of liberal who thinks it's all a matter of natural selection. Some people aren't meant to be free.
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    For those interested in the works of the Libertarian Party and wondering about the generic 3rd choices between Hillary and the GOP, here are the frontrunner candidates for their nomination:

    Garry Johnson:
    Former republican Governor of New Mexico, 2012 Libertarian nominee got 0.99% then, he has the most extreme Ron Paul policies.

    Austin Petersen:
    Founder and CEO of Stonegait LLC, generic Ron Paul policies.

    Darryl Perry:
    Owner and Managing Editor of Free Press Publications, wants to abolish the USA, enough said.

    John McAfee:
    Founder of McAfee, famous for the notorious case of the murder of his neighbours and his escape from the police to Guatemala, if you think Trump is crazy well you haven't heard of McAfee.

    In short the policies of the Libertarian party are:
    Abolishing all taxes and government, abolish all forms of social security and pensions, legalize prostitution and drugs.

    So as you can see they are appealing to an extremely small slice of the population, hence they struggle to get more than 1%.
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    Scott_P said:

    Speedy said:

    That's about 10% of scottish GDP, I wonder what it actually involves given its magnitude.

    You, and everybody else. The SG did not put out a press release at the time (although the Chinese did) and are now saying journalists have to submit an FOI request, to the Commissioner who has already said she won't release anything critical of the SNP...

    Welcome to modern Scotland.
    Well knowing that in europe everything that involves a memorandum between states is usually a bailout, and knowing the tragic state of scottish finances after the oil crash, it could be a secret loan with punitive terms.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,277
    runnymede said:

    tlg86 said:

    Yorkcity said:

    Yorkcity said:

    Could the silver voters who won Cameron an election last year become his Frankenstein's monster in the EU ref? IN desperately needs to inspire the young to go out and vote but who is there who can do that? A bunch of Tory politicians and captains of industry aren't likely to do that.

    I expect Richard Branson to be dragged out shortly to stand shoulder to shoulder with Cameron and Obama with a vow to the people.

    Regading the EPL , York City are at the bottom of the league two about to go into non league with the new ground postponed yet again,
    Except it's not in their gift to make the people a vow. Merkel, Juncker and Von Rumpey would have to do it.
    Whatever they vow , it will have to be the first 3 I mentioned, to get anyone intrested.
    Paul Mason on the Marr show sad that he reckons a 'vow' will be made in the week before the referendum.
    I'm sure it will but it will be as devoid of meaning as all other UK government promises on the EU have been.
    I'm coming to the view that what is going to happen is a narrow vote for Leave, followed by panic across the EU and the offer of a new deal with a 2nd referendum. That is, Boris was right.

    This will happen partly because Labour voters and the young are going to stay at home on the first referendum.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,277
    Speedy said:

    For those interested in the works of the Libertarian Party and wondering about the generic 3rd choices between Hillary and the GOP, here are the frontrunner candidates for their nomination:

    Garry Johnson:
    Former republican Governor of New Mexico, 2012 Libertarian nominee got 0.99% then, he has the most extreme Ron Paul policies.

    Austin Petersen:
    Founder and CEO of Stonegait LLC, generic Ron Paul policies.

    Darryl Perry:
    Owner and Managing Editor of Free Press Publications, wants to abolish the USA, enough said.

    John McAfee:
    Founder of McAfee, famous for the notorious case of the murder of his neighbours and his escape from the police to Guatemala, if you think Trump is crazy well you haven't heard of McAfee.

    In short the policies of the Libertarian party are:
    Abolishing all taxes and government, abolish all forms of social security and pensions, legalize prostitution and drugs.

    So as you can see they are appealing to an extremely small slice of the population, hence they struggle to get more than 1%.

    Isn't this just anarchism? Pure and simple.
  • Options
    ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133

    @ThreeQuidder That doesn't really change the fact that English teams have performed poorly in the last five years or so.

    Fourth best last year, 2nd, 3rd, 2nd, 2nd in previous years.

    So yes, you're right - if you assume that being the third best is "performing poorly".

    Well, looking at the results of English teams' in the CL and that none of them look like they'll be challenging the Bayern-Real-Barca monopoly, yes I'll state that being third best is 'performing poorly'. Particularly given the amount of money that goes into the league, and how in recent years some of the best coaches in the world manage in the league.
    Wow, high standards.

    England have been the best country in UEFA competitions precisely three times in the modern era (and only six times before that).
    No one has denied that English teams have performed well in the past (particularly the 00's). However, they are performing pretty badly now.
    Rankings since readmission (I'd use ranking points, but the methodology has changed three times since then):

    90/91-98/99: 1*, 8, 18, 5, 8, 19, 5, 5, 4
    99/00-09/10: 2, 2, 4, 4, 3, 1, 4, 2, 1, 2
    10/11-15/16: 2, 2, 2, 3, 2, 4, 3#

    * - only two teams entered
    # - probably

    I don't think the results from this decade are really any worse than the 00s.

    In the 00s at one-stage English teams were regularly reaching CL semi-finals, and finals. Manchester United reached the final two times, Chelsea once, Arsenal once, and Liverpool twice. That's not even accounting for the number of semi-final appearances these teams made either. By contrast not a single English team has made the CL final for the last four years. And only one team (Chelsea) have made the semis since 2012.
    Yes, it's no surprise that the two 1s are the year Liverpool won, and the year Man U beat Chelsea in the final.

    And yet, in terms of overall performance and in terms of staying in the top 3 and getting the 4th CL place, the results have been very similar.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,277

    I see Donald Tusk was sat at the "World Leaders" table at the summit in Washington!

    The British EU referendum must seem such "small fry" and a complete irritant to him and the other unelected non-entities in Brussels.

    I thought Sajid Javid did reasonably well on Marr but PM material he is not! John McDonnell got a pretty soft interview in my view.

    I think Marr should become the BBC's showbusiness correspondent, he looks totally star-struck when interviewing some of these "stars."

    He certainly was when he interviewed Dave Gilmour. Marr said as much and started gushing away, much to Gilmour's evident embarrassment.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    Speedy said:

    For those interested in the works of the Libertarian Party and wondering about the generic 3rd choices between Hillary and the GOP, here are the frontrunner candidates for their nomination:

    Garry Johnson:
    Former republican Governor of New Mexico, 2012 Libertarian nominee got 0.99% then, he has the most extreme Ron Paul policies.

    Austin Petersen:
    Founder and CEO of Stonegait LLC, generic Ron Paul policies.

    Darryl Perry:
    Owner and Managing Editor of Free Press Publications, wants to abolish the USA, enough said.

    John McAfee:
    Founder of McAfee, famous for the notorious case of the murder of his neighbours and his escape from the police to Guatemala, if you think Trump is crazy well you haven't heard of McAfee.

    In short the policies of the Libertarian party are:
    Abolishing all taxes and government, abolish all forms of social security and pensions, legalize prostitution and drugs.

    So as you can see they are appealing to an extremely small slice of the population, hence they struggle to get more than 1%.

    Mcafe is great entertainment in a my god he is totally and utterly bonkers genius kind of way. Obviously you wouldn't have him in charge of anything but definitely popcorn time when he does media.
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098

    For those who wants to watch decent motorsport, the first of today's BTCC races is about to start on ITV 4.

    For those who want to watch poor motorsport, the F1 is on later. ;)

    (The qualifying was so bad yesterday that I turned over to watch an antiques program, where a vase values at £900 sold for £4,100. It was that bad).

    Serves you right for watching passive TV, Mr. Jessop. You could, perhaps should, have been using that time for more productive purposes. Like running some contraband cargo into a distant station, or sorting out a few pirates with some hot action in a well modified Viper. Sitting watching someone else do something - pah!

    P.S. Finally, got my new gaming monitor set up yesterday - 40 inch Sony. Freakin awesome. Talk about adding to the immersion. I may have to revisit my heavily modified version of Skyrim just to enjoy the graphics.
  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,151
    rcs1000 said:

    I see Donald Tusk was sat at the "World Leaders" table at the summit in Washington!

    The British EU referendum must seem such "small fry" and a complete irritant to him and the other unelected non-entities in Brussels.

    I thought Sajid Javid did reasonably well on Marr but PM material he is not! John McDonnell got a pretty soft interview in my view.

    I think Marr should become the BBC's showbusiness correspondent, he looks totally star-struck when interviewing some of these "stars."

    Isn't Donald Tusk elected by the European Parliament?
    No, he's chosen by the member states. I'm not sure if the European Parliament have to sign off on the appointment.

    The sort-of-elected one is Juncker, who got his job (President of the European Commission) by being the designated candidate of the group that won the election. Technically the member states choose him too and the parliament ratifies or vetoes their nomination, but if they'd tried to pick someone else the parliament would have told them where to get off.
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited April 2016

    Speedy said:

    For those interested in the works of the Libertarian Party and wondering about the generic 3rd choices between Hillary and the GOP, here are the frontrunner candidates for their nomination:

    Garry Johnson:
    Former republican Governor of New Mexico, 2012 Libertarian nominee got 0.99% then, he has the most extreme Ron Paul policies.

    Austin Petersen:
    Founder and CEO of Stonegait LLC, generic Ron Paul policies.

    Darryl Perry:
    Owner and Managing Editor of Free Press Publications, wants to abolish the USA, enough said.

    John McAfee:
    Founder of McAfee, famous for the notorious case of the murder of his neighbours and his escape from the police to Guatemala, if you think Trump is crazy well you haven't heard of McAfee.

    In short the policies of the Libertarian party are:
    Abolishing all taxes and government, abolish all forms of social security and pensions, legalize prostitution and drugs.

    So as you can see they are appealing to an extremely small slice of the population, hence they struggle to get more than 1%.

    Isn't this just anarchism? Pure and simple.
    Well there are libertarian anarchists and much as marxist anarchists, the difference is that the libertarian anarchists wear business suits:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2bc-Ussr9HM
  • Options
    TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    edited April 2016
    Big news if Brady really does oppose.
    "The leader of the backbench Conservatives at Westminster has raised serious concerns about plans to force all state schools to become academies by 2022"
    http://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/apr/02/backbench-pressure-on-osborne-academy-scheme
    The truth is that he expressed concern and a misleading headline from the Guardian.
    “I’ve always favoured greater autonomy for schools. But I do think there is an issue if all schools are to become part of huge new chains, in which there is little accountability or parental involvement,”
  • Options
    Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    40" !!!

    I've a 32" tv and can't imagine a monster screen anywhere. Friends have ones almost the size of single beds and I wince.

    For those who wants to watch decent motorsport, the first of today's BTCC races is about to start on ITV 4.

    For those who want to watch poor motorsport, the F1 is on later. ;)

    (The qualifying was so bad yesterday that I turned over to watch an antiques program, where a vase values at £900 sold for £4,100. It was that bad).

    Serves you right for watching passive TV, Mr. Jessop. You could, perhaps should, have been using that time for more productive purposes. Like running some contraband cargo into a distant station, or sorting out a few pirates with some hot action in a well modified Viper. Sitting watching someone else do something - pah!

    P.S. Finally, got my new gaming monitor set up yesterday - 40 inch Sony. Freakin awesome. Talk about adding to the immersion. I may have to revisit my heavily modified version of Skyrim just to enjoy the graphics.
  • Options
    The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,830
    edited April 2016



    Yes, it's no surprise that the two 1s are the year Liverpool won, and the year Man U beat Chelsea in the final.

    And yet, in terms of overall performance and in terms of staying in the top 3 and getting the 4th CL place, the results have been very similar.

    I don't think it can be said that the results now are in any way similar to the ones of 00s especially during England's most successful period of that era. That England's poor performance is not reflected in UEFA rankings is more reflective of how flawed the UEFA ranking system is than anything else. FIFA's ranking system regarding national teams is similarly flawed.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,343
    WI played 1 won 1. One to go.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    runnymede said:

    tlg86 said:

    Yorkcity said:

    Yorkcity said:

    Could the silver voters who won Cameron an election last year become his Frankenstein's monster in the EU ref? IN desperately needs to inspire the young to go out and vote but who is there who can do that? A bunch of Tory politicians and captains of industry aren't likely to do that.

    I expect Richard Branson to be dragged out shortly to stand shoulder to shoulder with Cameron and Obama with a vow to the people.

    Regading the EPL , York City are at the bottom of the league two about to go into non league with the new ground postponed yet again,
    Except it's not in their gift to make the people a vow. Merkel, Juncker and Von Rumpey would have to do it.
    Whatever they vow , it will have to be the first 3 I mentioned, to get anyone intrested.
    Paul Mason on the Marr show sad that he reckons a 'vow' will be made in the week before the referendum.
    I'm sure it will but it will be as devoid of meaning as all other UK government promises on the EU have been.
    I'm coming to the view that what is going to happen is a narrow vote for Leave, followed by panic across the EU and the offer of a new deal with a 2nd referendum. That is, Boris was right.

    This will happen partly because Labour voters and the young are going to stay at home on the first referendum.
    If there is a second referendum it will be to confirm EEA membership via the EFTA not to stay in the EU.

    To be fair though there's not a complete world of difference between us being semi-informally on the outside of the EU by being a member not in the Eurozone or Schengen etc ... and being formally on the outside but still in the Single Market.

    To try and keep us in the EU rather than the Single Market if we vote Leave will be more hassle than its worth.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,080
    Speedy said:

    For those interested in the works of the Libertarian Party and wondering about the generic 3rd choices between Hillary and the GOP, here are the frontrunner candidates for their nomination:

    Garry Johnson:
    Former republican Governor of New Mexico, 2012 Libertarian nominee got 0.99% then, he has the most extreme Ron Paul policies.

    Austin Petersen:
    Founder and CEO of Stonegait LLC, generic Ron Paul policies.

    Darryl Perry:
    Owner and Managing Editor of Free Press Publications, wants to abolish the USA, enough said.

    John McAfee:
    Founder of McAfee, famous for the notorious case of the murder of his neighbours and his escape from the police to Guatemala, if you think Trump is crazy well you haven't heard of McAfee.

    In short the policies of the Libertarian party are:
    Abolishing all taxes and government, abolish all forms of social security and pensions, legalize prostitution and drugs.

    So as you can see they are appealing to an extremely small slice of the population, hence they struggle to get more than 1%.

    Indeed, the Libertarian Party appeals most to young investment bankers and corporate lawyers living in Manhattan and Chicago and IT entrepreneurs living in Seattle and San Francisco and wealthy actors like Clint Eastwood living in and around Los Angeles. Abolishing taxes and social security and legalising prostitution and drugs looks great if you are on a six figure salary and young with few responsibilities (or work in Hollywood) however unfortunately for the Libertarian Party only a small minority of Americans are wealthy single men or are Hollywood films stars!
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited April 2016
    HYUFD said:

    Speedy said:

    For those interested in the works of the Libertarian Party and wondering about the generic 3rd choices between Hillary and the GOP, here are the frontrunner candidates for their nomination:

    Garry Johnson:
    Former republican Governor of New Mexico, 2012 Libertarian nominee got 0.99% then, he has the most extreme Ron Paul policies.

    Austin Petersen:
    Founder and CEO of Stonegait LLC, generic Ron Paul policies.

    Darryl Perry:
    Owner and Managing Editor of Free Press Publications, wants to abolish the USA, enough said.

    John McAfee:
    Founder of McAfee, famous for the notorious case of the murder of his neighbours and his escape from the police to Guatemala, if you think Trump is crazy well you haven't heard of McAfee.

    In short the policies of the Libertarian party are:
    Abolishing all taxes and government, abolish all forms of social security and pensions, legalize prostitution and drugs.

    So as you can see they are appealing to an extremely small slice of the population, hence they struggle to get more than 1%.

    Indeed, the Libertarian Party appeals most to young investment bankers and corporate lawyers living in Manhattan and Chicago and IT entrepreneurs living in Seattle and San Francisco and wealthy actors like Clint Eastwood living in and around Los Angeles. Abolishing taxes and social security and legalising prostitution and drugs looks great if you are on a six figure salary and young with few responsibilities (or work in Hollywood) however unfortunately for the Libertarian Party only a small minority of Americans are wealthy single men or are Hollywood films stars!
    Wait a minute, Clint Eastwood wants to abolish the police and to legalize drugs?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmxcOMjUkF0
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,855

    John_N said:

    Let's bear in mind that more people are aged 55+ than between 18 and 34, and then play with the Opinium poll figures.

    The figures are as follows:

    18-34s: 53% remain, 29% leave; 52% likely to vote;
    35-54s: 38% remain, 42% leave; 66% likely to vote;
    18-34s: 30% remain, 54% leave; 81% likely to vote.

    Plug in the relative sizes of the age groups, which are

    18-34s: 29%;
    35-54s: 35%;
    55+ : 36%

    If we assume that 52% of 18-34s who say they'll vote actually will, and so on, we get:

    remain: 25.2%
    leave: 29.7%
    turnout: 55%

    or for actual votes:

    remain 46.0%
    leave 54.0%

    so an 8% victory for LEAVE.

    Meanwhile, the pathetic David Cameron is telling the media "My fear is turnout".

    You gotta wonder just how bright this cocaine-snorting, restaurant-smashing pig-botherer actually is. I know he got a first, but markers of university exams do tend to recognise the candidates' handwriting and writing style. When you were at university, was it the braying posh boys with a liking for bestiality, hard drugs and smashing stuff up who were the brightest of the bunch?

    Of course it wasn't. Sure, they got highly-paid jobs (or "jobs"), but no-one would call them intelligent.

    Cameron has got one word right: "fear".

    It's obvious he should play the fear card, because he's supposed to be encouraging people to vote for the status quo. So far, so normal. But he should still exude confidence that "common sense" (i.e. fear, but there's no need to headline "fear" all the time) will win out. To say that he personally has "fear" that he will lose is moronic. Doesn't he think before he says what he's told to say? He should say he's confident that he will win, that the British people will make the right choice - all that kinda crap. Not that he's scared he'll lose. What an idiot.

    Whatever people may have told Opinium, turnout will probably be a lot higher than 55%. But I don't envisage a differential rush to the polls, near the end of flaming June, a few days before Wimbledon starts, by youngsters. I mean, seriously! They're going to be out in the sun!

    Leave has got this in the bag. All shocks are likely to go their way. It's hard to imagine one that will shunt people into voting Remain. The directors and governors of the Bank of England announcing a week before the vote that they'll resign? That they despise the choices of the hoi


    Punters know that phone polls are better for Remain and Matt Singh says the phone polls are more accurate.
    Phone polls, however, are now converging with the online polls, so we're unlikely to know which is the more accurate. The range of leads is now from 4% for Leave, to 11% for Remain, with an average of 3% for Remain.

    Odds of 2/1 actually mean the contest is pretty close.
  • Options
    Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    edited April 2016
    This is wonderful from Neil Oliver, the archeologist - Mr Dancer, its right up your street too

    We were undone in the end by having too many among us who wanted straight walls, straight roads and plenty of forms to fill out in order to prove they existed. http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/scotland/we-were-all-just-celts-before-rome-divided-us-with-a-wall-ct70h9rt2
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,277
    Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
    Wisconsin has suffered a great loss of jobs and trade, but if I win, all of the bad things happening in the U.S. will be rapidly reversed!
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,080
    John_N said:

    Let's bear in mind that more people are aged 55+ than between 18 and 34, and then play with the Opinium poll figures.

    The figures are as follows:

    18-34s: 53% remain, 29% leave; 52% likely to vote;
    35-54s: 38% remain, 42% leave; 66% likely to vote;
    18-34s: 30% remain, 54% leave; 81% likely to vote.

    an 8% victory for LEAVE.

    Meanwhile, the pathetic

    Of course it wasn't. Sure, they got highly-paid jobs (or "jobs"), but no-one would call them intelligent.

    Cameron has got one word right: "fear".

    It's obvious he should play the fear card, because he's supposed to be encouraging people to vote for the status quo. So far, so normal. But he should still exude confidence that "common sense" (i.e. fear, but there's no need to headline "fear" all the time) will win out. To say that he personally has "fear" that he will lose is moronic. Doesn't he think before he says what he's told to say? He should say he's confident that he will win, that the British people will make the right choice, that they'll reject the idea of taking a scary step into the unknown, pushed by irresponsible types like Nigel Farage and George Galloway who have never held real responsibilities - all that kinda crap. He shouldn't say that he's scared he'll lose. What an idiot.

    Whatever people may have told Opinium, turnout will probably be a lot higher than 55%. But I don't envisage a differential rush to the polls, near the end of flaming June, a few days before Wimbledon starts, by youngsters. I mean, seriously! They're going to be out in the sun!

    Leave has got this in the bag. All shocks are likely to go their way. It's hard to imagine one that will shunt people into voting Remain. The directors and governors of the Bank of England announcing a week before the vote that they'll resign if Leave wins? That they despise the choices of the hoi polloi so much that they'll take their pensions early? Be serious. Say you're a trader. Will you buy Remain or Leave when you watch that news on your ticker feed?

    What do the punters at Betfair, where Leave is still at 33%, know that I don't?




    Remain leads in a poll for the Independent today by GQRR 45%-40%, do not forget either that middle class voters are more likely to vote than working class voters and middle class voters back Remain (you could equally argue Leave leaning working class voters will be distracted by the European Football championships)
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-could-hold-key-to-eu-referendum-vote-polls-shows-a6965751.html
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,320
    edited April 2016

    Big news if Brady really does oppose.
    "The leader of the backbench Conservatives at Westminster has raised serious concerns about plans to force all state schools to become academies by 2022"
    http://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/apr/02/backbench-pressure-on-osborne-academy-scheme
    The truth is that he expressed concern and a misleading headline from the Guardian.
    “I’ve always favoured greater autonomy for schools. But I do think there is an issue if all schools are to become part of huge new chains, in which there is little accountability or parental involvement,”

    He's quite correct. Getting rid of LEAs is an excellent idea. Putting all schools into unwieldy academy chains is a very bad idea. Getting rid of parent governors is the worst idea since Richard III murdered the princes in the Tower to secure his place on the throne.

    This is why it is a free hit for Labour and why Powell's decision to focus on mistaken cost estimates is clear evidence of just how awesomely ineffectual and irrelevant Labour are on domestic matters.

    PS, in reply to those upthread harrumphing about antisemitism and criticism of Israel not being the same, you are of course correct. We all, or almost all, criticise some of the stupid things Israel does. However, Corbyn has made common cause with Holocaust deniers and so called 9/11 truthers. That's not people who are making legitimate criticism of Israel. That's people who hate Jews and are looking for any stick to beat them with.

    With regard to boycotts, I resigned from the UCU when I realised its boycott of Israel was driven by a group with links to the Ku Klux Klan. I would hardly describe them as 'rational' people making 'legitimate' points. Yet some of those same people have just rejoined Labour, and Corbyn has done nothing to stop them.
  • Options
    PongPong Posts: 4,693
    edited April 2016

    Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
    Wisconsin has suffered a great loss of jobs and trade, but if I win, all of the bad things happening in the U.S. will be rapidly reversed!

    How is this man about to win the GOP nomination?

    It makes no sense.

    He makes no sense.

    It's the sort of thing a 10 year old would say in his pitch to become primary school prefect.

    It's at that level of logic.

    Dear God.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,080
    Speedy said:

    HYUFD said:

    Speedy said:

    For those interested in the works of the Libertarian Party and wondering about the generic 3rd choices between Hillary and the GOP, here are the frontrunner candidates for their nomination:

    Garry Johnson:
    Former republican Governor of New Mexico, 2012 Libertarian nominee got 0.99% then, he has the most extreme Ron Paul policies.

    Austin Petersen:
    Founder and CEO of Stonegait LLC, generic Ron Paul policies.

    Darryl Perry:
    Owner and Managing Editor of Free Press Publications, wants to abolish the USA, enough said.

    John McAfee:
    Founder of McAfee, famous for the notorious case of the murder of his neighbours and his escape from the police to Guatemala, if you think Trump is crazy well you haven't heard of McAfee.

    In short the policies of the Libertarian party are:
    Abolishing all taxes and government, abolish all forms of social security and pensions, legalize prostitution and drugs.

    So as you can see they are appealing to an extremely small slice of the population, hence they struggle to get more than 1%.

    Indeed, the Libertarian Party appeals most to young investment bankers and corporate lawyers living in Manhattan and Chicago and IT entrepreneurs living in Seattle and San Francisco and wealthy actors like Clint Eastwood living in and around Los Angeles. Abolishing taxes and social security and legalising prostitution and drugs looks great if you are on a six figure salary and young with few responsibilities (or work in Hollywood) however unfortunately for the Libertarian Party only a small minority of Americans are wealthy single men or are Hollywood films stars!
    Wait a minute, Clint Eastwood wants to abolish the police and to legalize drugs?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmxcOMjUkF0
    Eastwood is socially liberal, fiscally conservative, I don't think even the Libertarian Party wants to abolish the police entirely
  • Options
    ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133



    Yes, it's no surprise that the two 1s are the year Liverpool won, and the year Man U beat Chelsea in the final.

    And yet, in terms of overall performance and in terms of staying in the top 3 and getting the 4th CL place, the results have been very similar.

    I don't think it can be said that the results now are in any way similar to the ones of 00s especially during England's most successful period of that era. That England's poor performance is not reflected in UEFA rankings is more reflective of how flawed the UEFA ranking system is than anything else. FIFA's ranking system regarding national teams is similarly flawed.
    If there's a flaw in UEFA's system, it's that a country with only a couple of teams entered that go deep in a competition can end up top of the pile (it happened with Romania in 05/06, a year when England had two finalists). But rankings for the access list are based on a five year rolling cycle which smooths that effect out, and overall it's not bad, certainly compared with FIFA's rankings.

    I would actually hope that we drop out of the top 4 for a season if I thought it would make teams take the Europa League seriously.
  • Options
    oldpoliticsoldpolitics Posts: 455
    On the question of a second EEA/EFTA referendum, when was the last three-option poll? I'd expect it to say something like 35% EU, 35% EEA but not EU, 30% leave both.

    Depending on the ability to get organised, if Leave are behind with a week to go it feels like coalescing around "EEA for the foreseeable" is the way to get over project fear.

    The desire to be 'further out' would also be ideal for those within the UKIP ranks who are worried that a Leave victory makes them redundant.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,277
    Pong said:

    Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
    Wisconsin has suffered a great loss of jobs and trade, but if I win, all of the bad things happening in the U.S. will be rapidly reversed!

    How is this man about to win the GOP nomination?

    It makes no sense.

    He makes no sense.

    It's the sort of thing a 10 year old would say in his pitch to become primary school prefect.

    It's at that level of logic.

    Dear God.
    I know. It beggars belief. Even if he wins there will be trouble on a huge scale when he fails to deliver on never-never land.

  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,352
    edited April 2016
    ydoethur said:



    With regard to boycotts, I resigned from the UCU when I realised its boycott of Israel was driven by a group with links to the Ku Klux Klan. I would hardly describe them as 'rational' people making 'legitimate' points. Yet some of those same people have just rejoined Labour, and Corbyn has done nothing to stop them.

    Nope. Like other parties we normally accept new applicants without doing a background check on everything they've ever said, and we then throw them out, observing due process, when they say something thoroughly objectionable. There have been a series of recent expulsions doing exactly that. I don't think that any party is immune to Joe Bloggs joining up and turning out to have horrid opinions - doing preemptive background checks on hundreds of thousands of people is just not practical, and the other parties have all had members who on reflection they'd have been better off refusing.

    I think the legitimate point is more subtle - why does party X attract people like Joe Bloggs? And there perhaps there's work to be done, such as McDonnell's proposal to make membership barred to anyone who has ever expressed anti-semitic views.
  • Options
    chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341

    Punters know that phone polls are better for Remain and Matt Singh says the phone polls are more accurate.

    Punters BELIEVE phone polls are more accurate.

    The internet was, however, far more accurate in identifying the Right/Left divide last May.

    It's also the case that the majority of polls underscored the independence position at this point in both the 2014 Euros and 2014 SIndy.

    Opinium 10/10 to vote (65% turnout) Leave 54 / Remain 46.
  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,151

    And there perhaps there's work to be done, such as McDonnell's proposal to make membership barred to anyone who has ever expressed anti-semitic views.

    I haven't heard the detail of this but it doesn't sound like a good idea to refuse to accept people who have changed their minds, particularly given there will be rival parties out there that will be happy to welcome them in and try to change their minds back.
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,969
    Speedy said:

    For those interested in the works of the Libertarian Party and wondering about the generic 3rd choices between Hillary and the GOP, here are the frontrunner candidates for their nomination:

    Garry Johnson:
    Former republican Governor of New Mexico, 2012 Libertarian nominee got 0.99% then, he has the most extreme Ron Paul policies.

    Austin Petersen:
    Founder and CEO of Stonegait LLC, generic Ron Paul policies.

    Darryl Perry:
    Owner and Managing Editor of Free Press Publications, wants to abolish the USA, enough said.

    John McAfee:
    Founder of McAfee, famous for the notorious case of the murder of his neighbours and his escape from the police to Guatemala, if you think Trump is crazy well you haven't heard of McAfee.

    In short the policies of the Libertarian party are:
    Abolishing all taxes and government, abolish all forms of social security and pensions, legalize prostitution and drugs.

    So as you can see they are appealing to an extremely small slice of the population, hence they struggle to get more than 1%.

    It is interesting how large a difference there is between US and UK strands of Libertarianism. For all that I often claim the UK and Europe are culturally and politically very different it is undeniable that British Libertarianism is significantly influenced by continental philosophies which I think moderate it markedly when compared to the US version.
  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,052
    On academies, it surely isn't wise for central government to be trying to run all schools from Whitehall. For all the moaning about LEAs, are they really so bad in more affluent areas? Whatever their motivations and that of the teachers (of whom I'm not generally cynical), the demands of pushy parents will see their feet being held to the fire. Far better for central government to focus on deprivation where parental involvement is weak and the local council might be complacent.
  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,151
    Pong said:

    Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
    Wisconsin has suffered a great loss of jobs and trade, but if I win, all of the bad things happening in the U.S. will be rapidly reversed!

    How is this man about to win the GOP nomination?

    It makes no sense.

    He makes no sense.

    It's the sort of thing a 10 year old would say in his pitch to become primary school prefect.

    It's at that level of logic.

    Dear God.
    Brings you back to the Nate Silver's thing about not knowing whether Trump is a political genius or just a guy mashing buttons at random. All the bad things will be rapidly reversed! It makes the rest of the manifesto redundant.
  • Options
    weejonnieweejonnie Posts: 3,820

    ydoethur said:



    With regard to boycotts, I resigned from the UCU when I realised its boycott of Israel was driven by a group with links to the Ku Klux Klan. I would hardly describe them as 'rational' people making 'legitimate' points. Yet some of those same people have just rejoined Labour, and Corbyn has done nothing to stop them.

    Nope. Like other parties we normally accept new applicants without doing a background check on everything they've ever said, and we then throw them out, observing due process, when they say something thoroughly objectionable. There have been a series of recent expulsions doing exactly that. I don't think that any party is immune to Joe Bloggs joining up and turning out to have horrid opinions - doing preemptive background checks on hundreds of thousands of people is just not practical, and the other parties have all had members who on reflection they'd have been better off refusing.

    I think the legitimate point is more subtle - why does party X attract people like Joe Bloggs? And there perhaps there's work to be done, such as McDonnell's proposal to make membership barred to anyone who has ever expressed anti-semitic views.
    The only difference of course is that if it were someone joining UKIP it would be 3 days news on the BBC.
  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,052

    Pong said:

    Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
    Wisconsin has suffered a great loss of jobs and trade, but if I win, all of the bad things happening in the U.S. will be rapidly reversed!

    How is this man about to win the GOP nomination?

    It makes no sense.

    He makes no sense.

    It's the sort of thing a 10 year old would say in his pitch to become primary school prefect.

    It's at that level of logic.

    Dear God.
    Brings you back to the Nate Silver's thing about not knowing whether Trump is a political genius or just a guy mashing buttons at random. All the bad things will be rapidly reversed! It makes the rest of the manifesto redundant.
    His expertise is in marketing. Identify a niche and tell them what they want to hear.
  • Options
    SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    edited April 2016

    ydoethur said:



    With regard to boycotts, I resigned from the UCU when I realised its boycott of Israel was driven by a group with links to the Ku Klux Klan. I would hardly describe them as 'rational' people making 'legitimate' points. Yet some of those same people have just rejoined Labour, and Corbyn has done nothing to stop them.

    Nope. Like other parties we normally accept new applicants without doing a background check on everything they've ever said, and we then throw them out, observing due process, when they say something thoroughly objectionable. There have been a series of recent expulsions doing exactly that. I don't think that any party is immune to Joe Bloggs joining up and turning out to have horrid opinions - doing preemptive background checks on hundreds of thousands of people is just not practical, and the other parties have all had members who on reflection they'd have been better off refusing.

    I think the legitimate point is more subtle - why does party X attract people like Joe Bloggs? And there perhaps there's work to be done, such as McDonnell's proposal to make membership barred to anyone who has ever expressed anti-semitic views.
    He's be better off making membership barred to friends of terrorists.
  • Options
    MP_SEMP_SE Posts: 3,642
    weejonnie said:

    ydoethur said:



    With regard to boycotts, I resigned from the UCU when I realised its boycott of Israel was driven by a group with links to the Ku Klux Klan. I would hardly describe them as 'rational' people making 'legitimate' points. Yet some of those same people have just rejoined Labour, and Corbyn has done nothing to stop them.

    Nope. Like other parties we normally accept new applicants without doing a background check on everything they've ever said, and we then throw them out, observing due process, when they say something thoroughly objectionable. There have been a series of recent expulsions doing exactly that. I don't think that any party is immune to Joe Bloggs joining up and turning out to have horrid opinions - doing preemptive background checks on hundreds of thousands of people is just not practical, and the other parties have all had members who on reflection they'd have been better off refusing.

    I think the legitimate point is more subtle - why does party X attract people like Joe Bloggs? And there perhaps there's work to be done, such as McDonnell's proposal to make membership barred to anyone who has ever expressed anti-semitic views.
    The only difference of course is that if it were someone joining UKIP it would be 3 days news on the BBC.
    Uncovering vile anti-Semites in Labour has become almost a daily occurrence. Yet I do not think the BBC has covered a single one.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,080
    chestnut said:

    Punters know that phone polls are better for Remain and Matt Singh says the phone polls are more accurate.

    Punters BELIEVE phone polls are more accurate.

    The internet was, however, far more accurate in identifying the Right/Left divide last May.

    It's also the case that the majority of polls underscored the independence position at this point in both the 2014 Euros and 2014 SIndy.

    Opinium 10/10 to vote (65% turnout) Leave 54 / Remain 46.
    ICM had it 55 No 45 Yes at about this point on indyref and that was the result
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,352
    Pong said:

    Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
    Wisconsin has suffered a great loss of jobs and trade, but if I win, all of the bad things happening in the U.S. will be rapidly reversed!

    How is this man about to win the GOP nomination?

    It makes no sense.

    He makes no sense.

    It's the sort of thing a 10 year old would say in his pitch to become primary school prefect.

    It's at that level of logic.

    Dear God.
    I suspect his supporters would cut him some slack if there are a few little practical difficulties - the guy's on our side, he's doing his best, it's the damned Congress/Supreme Court/Muslims getting in the way.
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    edited April 2016
    HYUFD said:

    chestnut said:

    Punters know that phone polls are better for Remain and Matt Singh says the phone polls are more accurate.

    Punters BELIEVE phone polls are more accurate.

    The internet was, however, far more accurate in identifying the Right/Left divide last May.

    It's also the case that the majority of polls underscored the independence position at this point in both the 2014 Euros and 2014 SIndy.

    Opinium 10/10 to vote (65% turnout) Leave 54 / Remain 46.
    ICM had it 55 No 45 Yes at about this point on indyref and that was the result
    ICM was

    Yes: 34%
    No: 45%
    Undecided: 21%

    Which, ignoring the 1 in 5 people who were undecided, was 43/57.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,054

    For those who wants to watch decent motorsport, the first of today's BTCC races is about to start on ITV 4.

    For those who want to watch poor motorsport, the F1 is on later. ;)

    (The qualifying was so bad yesterday that I turned over to watch an antiques program, where a vase values at £900 sold for £4,100. It was that bad).

    Serves you right for watching passive TV, Mr. Jessop. You could, perhaps should, have been using that time for more productive purposes. Like running some contraband cargo into a distant station, or sorting out a few pirates with some hot action in a well modified Viper. Sitting watching someone else do something - pah!

    P.S. Finally, got my new gaming monitor set up yesterday - 40 inch Sony. Freakin awesome. Talk about adding to the immersion. I may have to revisit my heavily modified version of Skyrim just to enjoy the graphics.
    Heh. Lucky you.

    Unfortunately the little 'un rather constraints gaming time atm, although due to the lingering effects of my illness I'm having occasional family help around the house. Even then, by the time I've done the chores I can probably only get half an hour of playing in before he wakes. That's if the headaches let me. :(

    Mrs J is next in line to get a new gaming PC, although I might follow your lead and get a new monitor.

    BTW, I've made Elite in Exploration. Now trying to become a federal operative in my 'conda. ;)

    P.s. Frontier have a new game in alpha - Planet Coaster. It's really rather good, even for an alpha.
    https://www.planetcoaster.com/
  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,052
    Is Trump secretly a subervise liberal? Is his vulgar campaign merely an attempt to expose the sham dignity of the Republican establishment, which likes to think of itself as rather refined yet relies on primitive messaging to bigots and meatheads.
  • Options

    ydoethur said:



    With regard to boycotts, I resigned from the UCU when I realised its boycott of Israel was driven by a group with links to the Ku Klux Klan. I would hardly describe them as 'rational' people making 'legitimate' points. Yet some of those same people have just rejoined Labour, and Corbyn has done nothing to stop them.

    Nope. Like other parties we normally accept new applicants without doing a background check on everything they've ever said, and we then throw them out, observing due process, when they say something thoroughly objectionable. There have been a series of recent expulsions doing exactly that. I don't think that any party is immune to Joe Bloggs joining up and turning out to have horrid opinions - doing preemptive background checks on hundreds of thousands of people is just not practical, and the other parties have all had members who on reflection they'd have been better off refusing.

    I think the legitimate point is more subtle - why does party X attract people like Joe Bloggs? And there perhaps there's work to be done, such as McDonnell's proposal to make membership barred to anyone who has ever expressed anti-semitic views.
    He's be better off making membership barred to friends of terrorists.
    Need a new Shadow Cabinet then if that happened.
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,951
    ydoethur said:

    Big news if Brady really does oppose.
    "The leader of the backbench Conservatives at Westminster has raised serious concerns about plans to force all state schools to become academies by 2022"
    http://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/apr/02/backbench-pressure-on-osborne-academy-scheme
    The truth is that he expressed concern and a misleading headline from the Guardian.
    “I’ve always favoured greater autonomy for schools. But I do think there is an issue if all schools are to become part of huge new chains, in which there is little accountability or parental involvement,”

    He's quite correct. Getting rid of LEAs is an excellent idea. Putting all schools into unwieldy academy chains is a very bad idea. Getting rid of parent governors is the worst idea since Richard III murdered the princes in the Tower to secure his place on the throne.

    This is why it is a free hit for Labour and why Powell's decision to focus on mistaken cost estimates is clear evidence of just how awesomely ineffectual and irrelevant Labour are on domestic matters.

    PS, in reply to those upthread harrumphing about antisemitism and criticism of Israel not being the same, you are of course correct. We all, or almost all, criticise some of the stupid things Israel does. However, Corbyn has made common cause with Holocaust deniers and so called 9/11 truthers. That's not people who are making legitimate criticism of Israel. That's people who hate Jews and are looking for any stick to beat them with.

    With regard to boycotts, I resigned from the UCU when I realised its boycott of Israel was driven by a group with links to the Ku Klux Klan. I would hardly describe them as 'rational' people making 'legitimate' points. Yet some of those same people have just rejoined Labour, and Corbyn has done nothing to stop them.
    For once we almost agree on educational policy.

    Very anti LEAs - why people think it is better for local councils to run schools than anyone else just baffles me.

    Academy chains are a bad idea. The main problem, from what I've heard, is that reporting constraints for academies are just so far above the average calabilities of school business managers.

    Parent governors - I'm sort of mixed on these. Great in theory, but From experience they're not sufficiently decisive about a) budgetary issues or b) disciplinary issues. A bit like magistrates, the position attracts the wrong sort of person. One with time and inclination on their hands rather than the expertise.

    I would much rather 'trusted elder' governors. Encourage local lawyers, accountants and council lots to take up governorships.
This discussion has been closed.