People are finding it really hard to decide, and feel like they're being asked to ajudicate on incomplete information and misleading facts. And the country is split right down the middle.
Which you could probably read as the arguments being finely balanced either way to floating voters and a pointer to a close(ish) result.
You don’t have to be a crank to be an Outer but the Out campaign seems disproportionately stuffed with cranks. You know, the kinds of people who screech that people voting to Remain are nothing more than Vichy-style collaborators. One day, you’d hope, these people will be ashamed of this kind of talk but I wouldn’t want to wager too much money on that proposition. They might, however, want to reflect on the thought that careless talk costs votes.
I can;t help thinking that people are criticising the leave movement as they imagine it to be, rather than as it is.
Indeed. On the previous thread CarlottaVance has quoted a piece by Dominic Raab which she says insults Obama. It really doesn't. Anyone who can read the piece quoted and see an insult probably needs to be in one of those university safe spaces.
Which part of "frankly wanton double standards" and "frankly absurd" do you regard as compliments?
Gove is the past master of the polite insult- something his colleagues could learn.
As Alex Massie observed "a lot of angry people"....
There is a big difference between insults and compliments. The lack of one does not imply the other.
And yes the more you post on this the more I realise you really do need to be in one of those University safe zones.next you'll be telling us that simply by disagreeing someone is being insulting.
Thank you for making my point about Leavers being fond of insults.
And I had you down as one of the rational ones....
Again imagining insults where none exist. When even TSE is saying you are overstating things I think perhaps you should consider that you are the one in he wrong here.
Off topic but on London, the Guardian has an article about encouraging people to stand on both sides of the escalator on the tube at Holborn (because it's more efficient):
What baffles me about this is that there is a simple solution that would leave everyone happy but that doesn't seem to have occurred to anyone at TfL. If instead of compelling people to stand on both sides a major and continuing effort was made to get more people to walk up the left side of the escalator, those who want to walk will not be impeded while those who want to stand can continue to do so. You wouldn't need to encourage all that many more people to walk up for the efficiencies to be regained by the existing model. And those extra people who had been encouraged to walk up the escalator would be that little bit fitter.
ComRes: ComRes poll for @itvnews finds 51% say @POTUS should not air views on #EUref
Dave gets it wrong again. The World At One said Downing Street was "ecstatic" about the Obama endorsement.
I find it interesting how the BBC gave George's voodoo forecasting headline billing on Monday, and is doing the same for Obama's views on the EU today, but relegated Gove's fightback to 3rd or 4th item on Tuesday.
You don’t have to be a crank to be an Outer but the Out campaign seems disproportionately stuffed with cranks. You know, the kinds of people who screech that people voting to Remain are nothing more than Vichy-style collaborators. One day, you’d hope, these people will be ashamed of this kind of talk but I wouldn’t want to wager too much money on that proposition. They might, however, want to reflect on the thought that careless talk costs votes.
'Why then is it that even an enlightened Muslim - as you say Khan is (and I have praised him for what he has said on anti-Semitism, for instance) - seems to use as advisors those who are not as enlightened as him e.g. those who worked on the Lutfur Rahman campaign?'
---------------
Probably because these people are useful for 'mobilising' a certain part of the vote. Or you could think Parnell and Irish extremists and the long tradition of having an 'each way bet on force'.
And if what you say is true it shows that his claim to be the person who will take on the extremists to be so much hot air.
People like NickPalmer rightly say that we should not assume or label all Muslims as extremists. But by associating with extremists as too many of them (not Mr Palmer, to be clear) do they themselves give the impression that that's what they think that Muslims are or are receptive too. And in so doing they make it more likely that those people will gain more legitimacy.
ComRes: ComRes poll for @itvnews finds 51% say @POTUS should not air views on #EUref
Dave gets it wrong again. The World At One said Downing Street was "ecstatic" about the Obama endorsement.
I find it interesting how the BBC gave George's voodoo forecasting headline billing on Monday, and is doing the same for Obama's views on the EU today, but relegated Gove's fightback to 3rd or 4th item on Tuesday.
Not just the BBC - only one paper featured Gove's speech on the front page on Wednesday - and that was the FT, which mentioned the A-word......
ComRes: ComRes poll for @itvnews finds 51% say @POTUS should not air views on #EUref
Dave gets it wrong again. The World At One said Downing Street was "ecstatic" about the Obama endorsement.
I find it interesting how the BBC gave George's voodoo forecasting headline billing on Monday, and is doing the same for Obama's views on the EU today, but relegated Gove's fightback to 3rd or 4th item on Tuesday.
I've had a wee look at the Holyrood constituency betting markets and I think there may actually be a smidge of value.
South of Scotland is a tough Area for the SNP, currently all 3 border constituencies are non-SNP, Conservative, Labour and Conservative respectively from West to East.
Galloway & West Dumfries is currently Ruth Davidson for a Strong Opposition but with a majority of only 862, with the SNP in second place. This looks a slam dunk SNP gain but Ladbrokes are rating it as only a 63% chance of a gain. I will be backing this one all day long.
The analogous Westminster constituency takes in all of Dumfries whilst the Holyrood constituency takes in only half of it but with no Lib Dem presence to speak of I can only see the Labour vote breaking heavily for the SNP as they did last year. 4/7 Looks like a great price to back the SNP here.
Dumfriesshire is vastly harder to call. the Labour MP here has a personal vote and is respected also the consituency bears little relation to the Westminster constituency it overlaps so it would be foolish to try ad apply Westminster trends to this seat.
There is a real sense of disappointment amongst the Anti-Ruth Davidson for a Strong Opposition voters that they failed to kick out Mundell by a scant few hundred votes and the idea of his son getting a seat doesn't sit well with them. the Labour vote will drop, it will only go to the SNP. It would require a 7.5 point swing to the SNP for Lab to get them over the line. Evens on the SNP here feels like a gamble, 9/2 on Labour is betting on their personal vote to hold up. The 5/4 on Ruth Davidson for a Strong Opposition feels too short. They would be relying on the handful of Lib Dem voters to go to them and a near perfect vote split between Lab and SNP to win it. Like Dumfries and Galloway in Westminster election I would be willing to have a punt at 8/1 on the starts aligning but not 5/4.
Etrrick, roxburgh & Berwicks is a 1/8 Ruth Davidson for a Strong Opposition hold. I can't disagree with that. SNP won the Westminster version by a whisker and the Holyrood configuration is less favorable to them.
So SNP in Galloway & West Dumfries, Labour in Dumfriesshire with an SNP saver. ER&B to be left alone.
Off topic but on London, the Guardian has an article about encouraging people to stand on both sides of the escalator on the tube at Holborn (because it's more efficient):
What baffles me about this is that there is a simple solution that would leave everyone happy but that doesn't seem to have occurred to anyone at TfL. If instead of compelling people to stand on both sides a major and continuing effort was made to get more people to walk up the left side of the escalator, those who want to walk will not be impeded while those who want to stand can continue to do so. You wouldn't need to encourage all that many more people to walk up for the efficiencies to be regained by the existing model. And those extra people who had been encouraged to walk up the escalator would be that little bit fitter.
"It’s British lore: on escalators, you stand on the right and walk on the left."
Has Archie Bland ever been outside London ?!?
I can assure him it simply isn't the case elsewhere - and people aren't standing on the left as part of a congestion easing measures either. They're standing in the way !
Most in the groups had seen the picture of Cameron making campaign calls alongside Lords Ashdown and Kinnock. This prompted some nostalgic smiles (“Neil Kinnock. My goodness. Neil Kinnock”), and reinforced the cross-party nature of the campaign...
Off topic but on London, the Guardian has an article about encouraging people to stand on both sides of the escalator on the tube at Holborn (because it's more efficient):
What baffles me about this is that there is a simple solution that would leave everyone happy but that doesn't seem to have occurred to anyone at TfL. If instead of compelling people to stand on both sides a major and continuing effort was made to get more people to walk up the left side of the escalator, those who want to walk will not be impeded while those who want to stand can continue to do so. You wouldn't need to encourage all that many more people to walk up for the efficiencies to be regained by the existing model. And those extra people who had been encouraged to walk up the escalator would be that little bit fitter.
"It’s British lore: on escalators, you stand on the right and walk on the left."
Has Archie Bland ever been outside London ?!?
I can assure him it simply isn't the case elsewhere - and people aren't standing on the left as part of a congestion easing measures either. They're standing in the way !
I realise that it's clickbait but this article has made me far angrier than any other article that has appeared anywhere this year. Forget arguments about Brexit, this stuff is important.
As I asked yesterday, why is it that senior Labour people always seem to associate with extremist Muslims and not the liberal peaceful non-extremist Muslims they're always talking about?
It does seem somewhat like asking why a committed churchgoer "associates" with people with homophobic attitudes. How much of one's faith and community is it necessary to repudiate in order to be "clean" in the eyes of a the political process? (This isn't just a glib example, I'm aware that several politicians have had problems due to their own Christian views on this issue, and if Crosby tactics of guilt-by-community association were adopted across the board, soon everyone who had attended a church containing conservative evangelicals would be accused of providing cover and oxygen to homophobes.)
I don't disagree with some of your comments but I'd but interested to see evidence to back up your implication that it is a characteristic choice of Labour politicians to shun "peaceful" Muslims in favour of "extremist" ones. That seems a smear too far. I mean, Khan is a "peaceful" one, unless you're one of Zac's "nut jobs on Twitter" and plenty of senior Labour people associate with him.
Look at who Jeremy Corbyn associates with. Look in detail at the people who run the Finsbury Park Mosque. These are not liberals. Look at Andy Slaughter and who he associates with. These are not liberals. Look at Ken Livingstone and Al Qaradawi. He invited him to London and praised him as a moderate. Moderate, my a*se!
Politicians have a certain standing and if they agree to speak at events with extremists without challenging them then they need to think about whether this might not be seen as implicit support for those views. If they invite them to Parliament (as Corbyn has done with Raad Saleh) or City Hall, what message do you think it sends out to real moderates. These are the people that the authorities value: that's the message.
This is not just my view. This is what Yvette Cooper herself said last summer.
There are those in the Muslim community who do have a good understanding of how extremists work and how to challenge and confront, some of them being ex-extremists themselves. Think of those at the Quillam Foundation. Think of Gita Saghal who pointed out the grossness of Amnesty teaming up with Cage, given the latter's views on women's rights. And yet those people are not reached out to by Labour.
[All I can think of is that it might be Stalin acquiring influence through his role as general secretary, or whatever it was, but it's not my area].
When revolution first broke out in early 1917 in Russia, Lenin was not there. The Germans facilitated his return to Russia in a train because they reckoned that all that revolution would make Russia easier to beat. Which was true. The Germans temporarily won a lot of territory with the Brest-Litovsk Treaty and got Russia out of the war. But they unleashed a monster that devoured half their nation. A case of winning the battle but losing the longer war. (And of course they didn't even the actual war either.)
Not in 1918. The second revolution forced Russia out of the war, which had continued on the eastern front after the fall of the tsar and should have allowed Germany to transfer huge numbers of troops to the west (in fact, taking possession of nearly all of Ukraine and beyond used more for occupation than was sensible). Even then, Germany came close to winning the war in the Spring of 1918. When they did lose, it was on the West that they were broken. A Russia in less turmoil wouldn't have helped them.
As for the later war, assuming all else panned out in the same way (which is very far from guaranteed), yes, the Soviet Union ended up destroying Germany (with a little help from the RAF and USAF), but wouldn't much the same have been true of a republican Russia that hadn't been through the civil war, famines and purges of the USSR? Remember that one reason that Germany was willing to write Austria the blank cheque in 1914 was because they feared that Russia might be unbeatable given its rate of development within a few years.
Sean McMeekin's The Ottoman Endgame, refers to plans made by Kolchak & Yudenich for an amphibious attack on Constantinople in 1917. He argues that the Ottoman forces were overstretched and likely to be unable to cope with Russian Offensives.
It is a very good book about the fall of the Ottomans and the rise of the modern Turkish Republic. Highlights the relative stability of Turkey's European borders with the chaos to the South and East.
Off topic but on London, the Guardian has an article about encouraging people to stand on both sides of the escalator on the tube at Holborn (because it's more efficient):
What baffles me about this is that there is a simple solution that would leave everyone happy but that doesn't seem to have occurred to anyone at TfL. If instead of compelling people to stand on both sides a major and continuing effort was made to get more people to walk up the left side of the escalator, those who want to walk will not be impeded while those who want to stand can continue to do so. You wouldn't need to encourage all that many more people to walk up for the efficiencies to be regained by the existing model. And those extra people who had been encouraged to walk up the escalator would be that little bit fitter.
"It’s British lore: on escalators, you stand on the right and walk on the left."
Has Archie Bland ever been outside London ?!?
I can assure him it simply isn't the case elsewhere - and people aren't standing on the left as part of a congestion easing measures either. They're standing in the way !
I realise that it's clickbait but this article has made me far angrier than any other article that has appeared anywhere this year. Forget arguments about Brexit, this stuff is important.
I understand your concerns and I'm only an occasional London visitor. The escalator discipline at my work's nearest Tescos in Sheffield is completely shocking and if standing becomes commonplace in London too - well you won't be able to get anywhere around the tubes in a hurry. If you're in a hurry, you're walking up !
As I asked yesterday, why is it that senior Labour people always seem to associate with extremist Muslims and not the liberal peaceful non-extremist Muslims they're always talking about?
It does seem somewhat like asking why a committed churchgoer "associates" with people with homophobic attitudes. How much of one's faith and community is it necessary to repudiate in order to be "clean" in the eyes of a the political process? (This isn't just a glib example, I'm aware that several politicians have had problems due to their own Christian views on this issue, and if Crosby tactics of guilt-by-community association were adopted across the board, soon everyone who had attended a church containing conservative evangelicals would be accused of providing cover and oxygen to homophobes.)
I don't disagree with some of your comments but I'd but interested to see evidence to back up your implication that it is a characteristic choice of Labour politicians to shun "peaceful" Muslims in favour of "extremist" ones. That seems a smear too far. I mean, Khan is a "peaceful" one, unless you're one of Zac's "nut jobs on Twitter" and plenty of senior Labour people associate with him.
Incidentally, I don't think that Khan is an extremist. I think he has shown poor judgment and is a bit too prone to play the identity card strategy in his politics. But he has shown some understanding of his weaknesses and of his party's weaknesses and has tried to address them e.g. in the way he has reached out to the Jewish community for instance.
Off topic but on London, the Guardian has an article about encouraging people to stand on both sides of the escalator on the tube at Holborn (because it's more efficient):
What baffles me about this is that there is a simple solution that would leave everyone happy but that doesn't seem to have occurred to anyone at TfL. If instead of compelling people to stand on both sides a major and continuing effort was made to get more people to walk up the left side of the escalator, those who want to walk will not be impeded while those who want to stand can continue to do so. You wouldn't need to encourage all that many more people to walk up for the efficiencies to be regained by the existing model. And those extra people who had been encouraged to walk up the escalator would be that little bit fitter.
"It’s British lore: on escalators, you stand on the right and walk on the left."
Yes and these days it's difficult to get hold of a dog so I'm glad they've dropped that requirement.
Bit of a way to go to 'war on whites', 'death panels', 'send him back to Kenya', racoon, chimpanzee, skunk, Marxist/Communist/Islamic/Nazi etc. Not saying that Bojo with a sufficient rush of blood to the head wouldn't resort to that kind of thing of course.
Off topic but on London, the Guardian has an article about encouraging people to stand on both sides of the escalator on the tube at Holborn (because it's more efficient):
What baffles me about this is that there is a simple solution that would leave everyone happy but that doesn't seem to have occurred to anyone at TfL. If instead of compelling people to stand on both sides a major and continuing effort was made to get more people to walk up the left side of the escalator, those who want to walk will not be impeded while those who want to stand can continue to do so. You wouldn't need to encourage all that many more people to walk up for the efficiencies to be regained by the existing model. And those extra people who had been encouraged to walk up the escalator would be that little bit fitter.
"It’s British lore: on escalators, you stand on the right and walk on the left."
Has Archie Bland ever been outside London ?!?
I can assure him it simply isn't the case elsewhere - and people aren't standing on the left as part of a congestion easing measures either. They're standing in the way !
At Leeds station people are instructed to stand on the right. The rule is sort-of accepted.
Much though I would like to be able to agree with Mike that the Conservative Party machine is as effective as he suggests, I'm not sure it really is, particularly not in this election where the enthusiasm of party members for Zac is distinctly lukewarm. That might not matter if the alternative was genuinely alarming, but he isn't. Compared with Ken Livingstone, Sadiq Khan seems a perfectly reasonable guy, the cogent posts of Ms Cyclefree notwithstanding.
I'm also not convinced that CCHQ really regards this as an election worth throwing the kitchen sink at. Mayor Zac could well end up as more of a nuisance than an asset, given his Heathrow position. Admittedly Sadiq is also now anti-Heathrow, but fortunately no-one takes his position seriously. In any case, from Cameron's point of view, being opposed by a mayor of the opposition party is one thing, being opposed by your own party's mayor rather more awkward.
In betting terms, I'm already on both candidates at gratifyingly long odds, but I tilted my position towards Sadiq a few weeks ago when his odds were more attractive than they are now. If I were starting from scratch, I suppose Zac might just be worth a speculative punt at around 9/1, but I don't think the current odds are far out.
Ken Livingstone isn't really a high bar. One would like to have had something better on offer from Labour. We will need to wait for a change of leadership for that.
Most in the groups had seen the picture of Cameron making campaign calls alongside Lords Ashdown and Kinnock. This prompted some nostalgic smiles (“Neil Kinnock. My goodness. Neil Kinnock”), and reinforced the cross-party nature of the campaign...
Most in the groups had seen the picture of Cameron making campaign calls alongside Lords Ashdown and Kinnock. This prompted some nostalgic smiles (“Neil Kinnock. My goodness. Neil Kinnock”), and reinforced the cross-party nature of the campaign...
Small not-quite self-promotion: I've put up a Twitter poll about releasing a trilogy and how best to time each book's publication. If you're on Twitter, your views would be very much appreciated: https://twitter.com/MorrisF1/status/723496885575671808
[I'm in the process of writing a trilogy, so it's not just a theoretical musing].
Now imagine if Boris had engaged his brain for a bit longer and come up with a response that challenged Obama's pro EU stance and put what he's asking us to do in an American context that he would undoubtedly refuse/oppose. The discussion wouldn't be about Boris but about the issues. Ah, now I see why Boris did what he did.
Off topic but on London, the Guardian has an article about encouraging people to stand on both sides of the escalator on the tube at Holborn (because it's more efficient):
What baffles me about this is that there is a simple solution that would leave everyone happy but that doesn't seem to have occurred to anyone at TfL. If instead of compelling people to stand on both sides a major and continuing effort was made to get more people to walk up the left side of the escalator, those who want to walk will not be impeded while those who want to stand can continue to do so. You wouldn't need to encourage all that many more people to walk up for the efficiencies to be regained by the existing model. And those extra people who had been encouraged to walk up the escalator would be that little bit fitter.
So how do you force people who want to stand to walk? This sounds a lot like a fascist dictatorship to me rather than a free country.
Also by making a larger percentage of users walk you've now increased the capacity problem of the walking side causing even greater queues at the escalator entrance.
Most in the groups had seen the picture of Cameron making campaign calls alongside Lords Ashdown and Kinnock. This prompted some nostalgic smiles (“Neil Kinnock. My goodness. Neil Kinnock”), and reinforced the cross-party nature of the campaign...
But the Leavers said otherwise.
Hand on heart TSE you really believe Kinnock is an asset to the Remain campaign?
Khan leads Goldsmith 60-40 after second preferences according to the latest poll. Indeed, Khan is even narrowly ahead in Outer London.
I realise some on here witter on about the wondrous Conservative election machine but the Labour machine in London was pretty effective in both 2014 and 2015. I agree the Inner London vote needs to come out but where is the evidence it won't ?
Yes, there's a proportion of Undecideds but where is the evidence they will break overwhelmingly for Goldsmith ?
13 days out and it could change and the Standard's political editor did another hatchet job on Khan last night but it's not having an impact yet.
It's an interesting counter-factual, whether a non-Communist Russia would have defeated the Germans in WWII.
Certainly, there would have been far fewer people in the Baltic States and Ukraine who were willing to side with the Germans. And, it's likely that Russian casualties in 1941 would have been far fewer under a leader who was prepared to let Russian forces retreat, rather than stand firm and be overwhelmed. And, one can assume that the Russian officer corps wouldn't have been purged in 1935-37.
OTOH, the Communists did establish a terrific military-industrial complex in Russia. Their ability to outpace the German arms industry, both in terms of quantity and quality, served them extremely well. A non-Communist government might never had had that advantage, as production would have focused more on consumer goods.
ComRes: ComRes poll for @itvnews finds 51% say @POTUS should not air views on #EUref
Dave gets it wrong again. The World At One said Downing Street was "ecstatic" about the Obama endorsement.
I find it interesting how the BBC gave George's voodoo forecasting headline billing on Monday, and is doing the same for Obama's views on the EU today, but relegated Gove's fightback to 3rd or 4th item on Tuesday.
Off topic but on London, the Guardian has an article about encouraging people to stand on both sides of the escalator on the tube at Holborn (because it's more efficient):
What baffles me about this is that there is a simple solution that would leave everyone happy but that doesn't seem to have occurred to anyone at TfL. If instead of compelling people to stand on both sides a major and continuing effort was made to get more people to walk up the left side of the escalator, those who want to walk will not be impeded while those who want to stand can continue to do so. You wouldn't need to encourage all that many more people to walk up for the efficiencies to be regained by the existing model. And those extra people who had been encouraged to walk up the escalator would be that little bit fitter.
So how do you force people who want to stand to walk? This sounds a lot like a fascist dictatorship to me rather than a free country.
Also by making a larger percentage of users walk you've now increased the capacity problem of the walking side causing even greater queues at the escalator entrance.
Most in the groups had seen the picture of Cameron making campaign calls alongside Lords Ashdown and Kinnock. This prompted some nostalgic smiles (“Neil Kinnock. My goodness. Neil Kinnock”), and reinforced the cross-party nature of the campaign...
But the Leavers said otherwise.
Hand on heart TSE you really believe Kinnock is an asset to the Remain campaign?
Overall yes, because one of the ways Leave could win this, if the referendum was viewed as a referendum on Cameron/The Tories.
This shows it is a cross party alliance.
The alternative would have been with Corbyn, and that would be a mistake for Cameron and the Tories.
Most in the groups had seen the picture of Cameron making campaign calls alongside Lords Ashdown and Kinnock. This prompted some nostalgic smiles (“Neil Kinnock. My goodness. Neil Kinnock”), and reinforced the cross-party nature of the campaign...
But the Leavers said otherwise.
You have to hand it to Roger. He said immediately that the cross-party consensus thing was what leapt out at him. I suppose it takes the ad-man's experience to see what thoughts these things genuinely evoke in the man on the street.
Most in the groups had seen the picture of Cameron making campaign calls alongside Lords Ashdown and Kinnock. This prompted some nostalgic smiles (“Neil Kinnock. My goodness. Neil Kinnock”), and reinforced the cross-party nature of the campaign...
But the Leavers said otherwise.
Hand on heart TSE you really believe Kinnock is an asset to the Remain campaign?
This shows it is a cross party alliance.
Which is what the focus group found.
For most people Kinnock was an energetic Labour leader who fought the good fight and lost, before Labour was taken over by a bunch of spivs.
I doubt very few are aware of his time in the EU or the largesse that has been lavished on his family.
Most in the groups had seen the picture of Cameron making campaign calls alongside Lords Ashdown and Kinnock. This prompted some nostalgic smiles (“Neil Kinnock. My goodness. Neil Kinnock”), and reinforced the cross-party nature of the campaign...
But the Leavers said otherwise.
Hand on heart TSE you really believe Kinnock is an asset to the Remain campaign?
This shows it is a cross party alliance.
I doubt very few are aware of his time in the EU or the largesse that has been lavished on his family.
Political anoraks, on the other hand.......
Perhaps we'll be reminded of how well the Kinnock family have done out of the EU closer to voting? Alongside that photo.
ComRes: ComRes poll for @itvnews finds 51% say @POTUS should not air views on #EUref
Dave gets it wrong again. The World At One said Downing Street was "ecstatic" about the Obama endorsement.
I find it interesting how the BBC gave George's voodoo forecasting headline billing on Monday, and is doing the same for Obama's views on the EU today, but relegated Gove's fightback to 3rd or 4th item on Tuesday.
Most in the groups had seen the picture of Cameron making campaign calls alongside Lords Ashdown and Kinnock. This prompted some nostalgic smiles (“Neil Kinnock. My goodness. Neil Kinnock”), and reinforced the cross-party nature of the campaign...
But the Leavers said otherwise.
Hand on heart TSE you really believe Kinnock is an asset to the Remain campaign?
This shows it is a cross party alliance.
I doubt very few are aware of his time in the EU or the largesse that has been lavished on his family.
Political anoraks, on the other hand.......
Perhaps we'll be reminded of how well the Kinnock family have done out of the EU closer to voting? Alongside that photo.
Play the man not the ball? How unlike LEAVE.......I look forward to Nigel fronting it.....
It's an interesting counter-factual, whether a non-Communist Russia would have defeated the Germans in WWII.
Certainly, there would have been far fewer people in the Baltic States and Ukraine who were willing to side with the Germans. And, it's likely that Russian casualties in 1941 would have been far fewer under a leader who was prepared to let Russian forces retreat, rather than stand firm and be overwhelmed. And, one can assume that the Russian officer corps wouldn't have been purged in 1935-37.
OTOH, the Communists did establish a terrific military-industrial complex in Russia. Their ability to outpace the German arms industry, both in terms of quantity and quality, served them extremely well. A non-Communist government might never had had that advantage, as production would have focused more on consumer goods.
In many ways the UK and US also adopted a planned economy. When you have something like a war to fight and everyone is easily galvanised it probably works quite well. Once that's over people can afford to indulge in individual ambitions.
Most in the groups had seen the picture of Cameron making campaign calls alongside Lords Ashdown and Kinnock. This prompted some nostalgic smiles (“Neil Kinnock. My goodness. Neil Kinnock”), and reinforced the cross-party nature of the campaign...
But the Leavers said otherwise.
Hand on heart TSE you really believe Kinnock is an asset to the Remain campaign?
This shows it is a cross party alliance.
I doubt very few are aware of his time in the EU or the largesse that has been lavished on his family.
Political anoraks, on the other hand.......
Perhaps we'll be reminded of how well the Kinnock family have done out of the EU closer to voting? Alongside that photo.
Play the man not the ball? How unlike LEAVE.......I look forward to Nigel fronting it.....
All's fair. Remain have no qualms about playing the man. Perhaps Meeks should have a word with them?
And Farage is as much a part of the EU problem. Ineffective trougher, happy to claim all the 'allowances' but never voting.
Most in the groups had seen the picture of Cameron making campaign calls alongside Lords Ashdown and Kinnock. This prompted some nostalgic smiles (“Neil Kinnock. My goodness. Neil Kinnock”), and reinforced the cross-party nature of the campaign...
But the Leavers said otherwise.
I said otherwise. I said Cameron shouldn't have been pictured next to them, and to do so all laughing and joking was a mistake. He could have been on the phones on a different row, in the same room, just not all buddy-buddy in the same shot, and clearly enjoying it. The optics were awful.
Several other loyal Tories mentioned it to me (unprompted)
If you don't think that's a problem for the party then you're deluding yourself.
But perhaps your view is that anyone who criticises what Cameron does must be because they have a problem, not him.
Most in the groups had seen the picture of Cameron making campaign calls alongside Lords Ashdown and Kinnock. This prompted some nostalgic smiles (“Neil Kinnock. My goodness. Neil Kinnock”), and reinforced the cross-party nature of the campaign...
But the Leavers said otherwise.
You have to hand it to Roger. He said immediately that the cross-party consensus thing was what leapt out at him. I suppose it takes the ad-man's experience to see what thoughts these things genuinely evoke in the man on the street.
Roger is becoming one of the stars of this referendum.
Most in the groups had seen the picture of Cameron making campaign calls alongside Lords Ashdown and Kinnock. This prompted some nostalgic smiles (“Neil Kinnock. My goodness. Neil Kinnock”), and reinforced the cross-party nature of the campaign...
But the Leavers said otherwise.
Hand on heart TSE you really believe Kinnock is an asset to the Remain campaign?
This shows it is a cross party alliance.
I doubt very few are aware of his time in the EU or the largesse that has been lavished on his family.
Political anoraks, on the other hand.......
Perhaps we'll be reminded of how well the Kinnock family have done out of the EU closer to voting? Alongside that photo.
Play the man not the ball? How unlike LEAVE.......I look forward to Nigel fronting it.....
There is no ball to be played. The Remain campaign's argument is all about voting in because Obama/Goldman Sachs/Kinnock say we should. That and lies about £4,300 per household.
In response to Sean F, it seems unlikely a Nazi Germany would have existed in the absence of a Communist Russia but the next question is what sort of Russia would have emerged if Bolshevism had failed ?
Democratic ? If so, a Russian version of Weimar with the continual threat of a military or nationalist takeover. Authoritarianism in central and Eastern Europe was the response to revolutionary Communism but would that have been the case with a democratic or nationalist Russia ?
I've had a wee look at the Holyrood constituency betting markets and I think there may actually be a smidge of value.
South of Scotland is a tough Area for the SNP, currently all 3 border constituencies are non-SNP, Conservative, Labour and Conservative respectively from West to East.
Galloway & West Dumfries is currently Ruth Davidson for a Strong Opposition but with a majority of only 862, with the SNP in second place. This looks a slam dunk SNP gain but Ladbrokes are rating it as only a 63% chance of a gain. I will be backing this one all day long.
The analogous Westminster constituency takes in all of Dumfries whilst the Holyrood constituency takes in only half of it but with no Lib Dem presence to speak of I can only see the Labour vote breaking heavily for the SNP as they did last year. 4/7 Looks like a great price to back the SNP here.
Dumfriesshire is vastly harder to call. the Labour MP here has a personal vote and is respected also the consituency bears little relation to the Westminster constituency it overlaps so it would be foolish to try ad apply Westminster trends to this seat.
There is a real sense of disappointment amongst the Anti-Ruth Davidson for a Strong Opposition voters that they failed to kick out Mundell by a scant few hundred votes and the idea of his son getting a seat doesn't sit well with them. the Labour vote will drop, it will only go to the SNP. It would require a 7.5 point swing to the SNP for Lab to get them over the line. Evens on the SNP here feels like a gamble, 9/2 on Labour is betting on their personal vote to hold up. The 5/4 on Ruth Davidson for a Strong Opposition feels too short. They would be relying on the handful of Lib Dem voters to go to them and a near perfect vote split between Lab and SNP to win it. Like Dumfries and Galloway in Westminster election I would be willing to have a punt at 8/1 on the starts aligning but not 5/4.
Etrrick, roxburgh & Berwicks is a 1/8 Ruth Davidson for a Strong Opposition hold. I can't disagree with that. SNP won the Westminster version by a whisker and the Holyrood configuration is less favorable to them.
So SNP in Galloway & West Dumfries, Labour in Dumfriesshire with an SNP saver. ER&B to be left alone.
If anyone ever gets to the point of putting up markets for the regional lists, backing the SCons No.1 Glasgow candidate Adam WATP Tomkins might be inadvisable.
It's an interesting counter-factual, whether a non-Communist Russia would have defeated the Germans in WWII.
Certainly, there would have been far fewer people in the Baltic States and Ukraine who were willing to side with the Germans. And, it's likely that Russian casualties in 1941 would have been far fewer under a leader who was prepared to let Russian forces retreat, rather than stand firm and be overwhelmed. And, one can assume that the Russian officer corps wouldn't have been purged in 1935-37.
OTOH, the Communists did establish a terrific military-industrial complex in Russia. Their ability to outpace the German arms industry, both in terms of quantity and quality, served them extremely well. A non-Communist government might never had had that advantage, as production would have focused more on consumer goods.
In many ways the UK and US also adopted a planned economy. When you have something like a war to fight and everyone is easily galvanised it probably works quite well. Once that's over people can afford to indulge in individual ambitions.
That's true as well. In fact, British and American economic planning was far superior to German, throughout the war.
A very good read, which reinforces the message made here over the past few days that those who are undecided would like some more clarity in the discussion. Both sides would benefit from turning the rhetoric down a notch or two, but of course if only one side does then it will be to that side's disadvantage.
Most in the groups had seen the picture of Cameron making campaign calls alongside Lords Ashdown and Kinnock. This prompted some nostalgic smiles (“Neil Kinnock. My goodness. Neil Kinnock”), and reinforced the cross-party nature of the campaign...
But the Leavers said otherwise.
Hand on heart TSE you really believe Kinnock is an asset to the Remain campaign?
This shows it is a cross party alliance.
I doubt very few are aware of his time in the EU or the largesse that has been lavished on his family.
Political anoraks, on the other hand.......
Perhaps we'll be reminded of how well the Kinnock family have done out of the EU closer to voting? Alongside that photo.
Play the man not the ball? How unlike LEAVE.......I look forward to Nigel fronting it.....
All's fair. Remain have no qualms about playing the man. Perhaps Meeks should have a word with them?
And Farage is as much a part of the EU problem. Ineffective trougher, happy to claim all the 'allowances' but never voting.
Not voting in the EU Parliament is a point in favour of Farage.
Off topic but on London, the Guardian has an article about encouraging people to stand on both sides of the escalator on the tube at Holborn (because it's more efficient):
What baffles me about this is that there is a simple solution that would leave everyone happy but that doesn't seem to have occurred to anyone at TfL. If instead of compelling people to stand on both sides a major and continuing effort was made to get more people to walk up the left side of the escalator, those who want to walk will not be impeded while those who want to stand can continue to do so. You wouldn't need to encourage all that many more people to walk up for the efficiencies to be regained by the existing model. And those extra people who had been encouraged to walk up the escalator would be that little bit fitter.
"It’s British lore: on escalators, you stand on the right and walk on the left."
Has Archie Bland ever been outside London ?!?
I can assure him it simply isn't the case elsewhere - and people aren't standing on the left as part of a congestion easing measures either. They're standing in the way !
I realise that it's clickbait but this article has made me far angrier than any other article that has appeared anywhere this year. Forget arguments about Brexit, this stuff is important.
This is a well known traffic phenomena. You get more cars through more quickly at a 50mph regulated contraflow than if you let rip at 70mph. Basically what happens is that cars get too close to one another, someone brakes and their brake lights go on, and then the car behind brakes a bit more just to be sure, and then goes on all the way down the line until the traffic comes to a complete standstill.
It doesn't work the other way because people aren't as quick to disengage the handbrake and pull away as they are to hit the brake pedal, they will tend to wait until the car has moved a good few feet first.
Pedestrians are worse. They stare at their feet, their phones, take up two steps instead of one, bunch up at the bottom, bunch up at the top, and walk up at the rate of the slowest. In peak times it can leave big gaps of the LHS of the escalator unoccupied as people like walking space.
So when flows are very heavy you can get more throughput with everyone standing both sides.
There's a cracking tweet out there with a bewigged picture and quote from Lord North
''Those fighting for independence can;t tell us what life would be like outside of the British Empire.''
Underneath it has the slogan
America stronger in empire.
Yes, well that would have been a better response from the Leave campaign than Boris' rambling about Kenya. It may be true that Obama doesn't like this country (and I'm in that camp), but I also don't think he really cares that much if we stay or go so if his views were challenged he wouldn't give a robust defence.
What stood out to me from the focus group is that Leave need to drum home the message that voting for "Remain" does not equal voting for the status quo.
Off topic but on London, the Guardian has an article about encouraging people to stand on both sides of the escalator on the tube at Holborn (because it's more efficient):
What baffles me about this is that there is a simple solution that would leave everyone happy but that doesn't seem to have occurred to anyone at TfL. If instead of compelling people to stand on both sides a major and continuing effort was made to get more people to walk up the left side of the escalator, those who want to walk will not be impeded while those who want to stand can continue to do so. You wouldn't need to encourage all that many more people to walk up for the efficiencies to be regained by the existing model. And those extra people who had been encouraged to walk up the escalator would be that little bit fitter.
"It’s British lore: on escalators, you stand on the right and walk on the left."
Has Archie Bland ever been outside London ?!?
I can assure him it simply isn't the case elsewhere - and people aren't standing on the left as part of a congestion easing measures either. They're standing in the way !
I realise that it's clickbait but this article has made me far angrier than any other article that has appeared anywhere this year. Forget arguments about Brexit, this stuff is important.
This is a well known traffic phenomena. You get more cars through more quickly at a 50mph regulated contraflow than if you let rip at 70mph. Basically what happens is that cars get too close to one another, someone brakes and their brake lights go on, and then the car behind brakes a bit more just to be sure, and then goes on all the way down the line until the traffic comes to a complete standstill.
It doesn't work the other way because people aren't as quick to disengage the handbrake and pull away as they are to hit the brake pedal, they will tend to wait until the car has moved a good few feet first.
Pedestrians are worse. They stare at their feet, their phones, take up two steps instead of one, bunch up at the bottom, bunch up at the top, and walk up at the rate of the slowest. In peak times it can leave big gaps of the LHS of the escalator unoccupied as people like walking space.
So when flows are very heavy you can get more throughput with everyone standing both sides.
Yes surely flow rate with both sides full up is higher than one side full up and one side at intervals..
Off topic but on London, the Guardian has an article about encouraging people to stand on both sides of the escalator on the tube at Holborn (because it's more efficient):
What baffles me about this is that there is a simple solution that would leave everyone happy but that doesn't seem to have occurred to anyone at TfL. If instead of compelling people to stand on both sides a major and continuing effort was made to get more people to walk up the left side of the escalator, those who want to walk will not be impeded while those who want to stand can continue to do so. You wouldn't need to encourage all that many more people to walk up for the efficiencies to be regained by the existing model. And those extra people who had been encouraged to walk up the escalator would be that little bit fitter.
"It’s British lore: on escalators, you stand on the right and walk on the left."
Has Archie Bland ever been outside London ?!?
I can assure him it simply isn't the case elsewhere - and people aren't standing on the left as part of a congestion easing measures either. They're standing in the way !
I realise that it's clickbait but this article has made me far angrier than any other article that has appeared anywhere this year. Forget arguments about Brexit, this stuff is important.
This is a well known traffic phenomena. You get more cars through more quickly at a 50mph regulated contraflow than if you let rip at 70mph. Basically what happens is that cars get too close to one another, someone brakes and their brake lights go on, and then the car behind brakes a bit more just to be sure, and then goes on all the way down the line until the traffic comes to a complete standstill.
It doesn't work the other way because people aren't as quick to disengage the handbrake and pull away as they are to hit the brake pedal, they will tend to wait until the car has moved a good few feet first.
Pedestrians are worse. They stare at their feet, their phones, take up two steps instead of one, bunch up at the bottom, bunch up at the top, and walk up at the rate of the slowest. In peak times it can leave big gaps of the LHS of the escalator unoccupied as people like walking space.
So when flows are very heavy you can get more throughput with everyone standing both sides.
Yes surely flow rate with both sides full up is higher than one side full up and one side at intervals..
Perhaps we'll be reminded of how well the Kinnock family have done out of the EU closer to voting? Alongside that photo.
Guido Fawkes points out that the alliance isn't so much cross party as 'Davos attending'.
If I were running the Leave campaign, I'd have at least one ad in the run-up about how many of those on the Remain side personally benefit from EU funds. Starting with Kinnock and Mandleson with their EU pensions.
In fact, anyone for Leave up against either of them in an interview should open with. "Well of course X is in favour of the EU, they pay him £xxx,000 per year tax free."
If I were running the Leave campaign, I'd have at least one ad in the run-up about how many of those on the Remain side personally benefit from EU funds
What stood out to me from the focus group is that Leave need to drum home the message that voting for "Remain" does not equal voting for the status quo.
Some of us have been saying that from the start.
The Leave campaign - so far - should win awards for how sh*t it is.
"they will tend to wait until the car has moved a good few feet first."
People are genuinely terrible at pulling off in good order from lights when they're in a queue. It's one area semi-driverless cars will have a huge advantage in. I always try to leave a decent enough gap to avoid a bump, and then pull away when the car two or three in front is starting to move. The same idiots that take half an hour to disengage the handbrake are doing 40 in the village 30 zones, 40 in the unrestricted national speed limit areas outside the villages and not keeping left on the motorway.
In response to Sean F, it seems unlikely a Nazi Germany would have existed in the absence of a Communist Russia but the next question is what sort of Russia would have emerged if Bolshevism had failed ?
Democratic ? If so, a Russian version of Weimar with the continual threat of a military or nationalist takeover. Authoritarianism in central and Eastern Europe was the response to revolutionary Communism but would that have been the case with a democratic or nationalist Russia ?
I love the historical comments on PB. Better than any documentary.
If I were running the Leave campaign, I'd have at least one ad in the run-up about how many of those on the Remain side personally benefit from EU funds
Peter Bone has helpfully shot that fox already...
Except he hasn't. Unless the suggestion was that the Kinnock's have done very well out of the Remain organisation, as opposed to the EU. (Assuming that they're not one and the same of course)
Most in the groups had seen the picture of Cameron making campaign calls alongside Lords Ashdown and Kinnock. This prompted some nostalgic smiles (“Neil Kinnock. My goodness. Neil Kinnock”), and reinforced the cross-party nature of the campaign...
But the Leavers said otherwise.
I said otherwise. I said Cameron shouldn't have been pictured next to them, and to do so all laughing and joking was a mistake. He could have been on the phones on a different row, in the same room, just not all buddy-buddy in the same shot, and clearly enjoying it. The optics were awful.
Several other loyal Tories mentioned it to me (unprompted)
If you don't think that's a problem for the party then you're deluding yourself.
But perhaps your view is that anyone who criticises what Cameron does must be because they have a problem, not him.
In past plebiscites, Dave has campaigned alongside/on the same side as Ed Miliband and Gordon Brown.
He builds vast coalitions to win plebiscites, it's what he does.
The difference in rhetoric is actually painful, Salmond is so far beyond these Leave clowns it isn't funny
"Perhaps on the Richter scale of presidential interventions, this was pretty mild," Salmond added. "[Obama] hopes that the UK will be strong and united as an ally. Well, if Scotland becomes independent, America will have two allies in these islands, not one."
Are there any Tories on here who like Zac as their candidate? It seems like a lot of nose holding to stop Saqid.
No, I've been active in the Zac campaign as well, there is not a lot of enthusiasm there either, but people still turn out to deliver leaflets and support the candidate. I hope the party can convince Karren Brady to run next time, she would be a great candidate, but it would mean giving up her role at WHU and on TV, this time around she wasn't willing to do it, but hopefully next time she will agree.
Despite her pro-EU views, I'd support Ms Brady for Mayor of London.
Perhaps we'll be reminded of how well the Kinnock family have done out of the EU closer to voting? Alongside that photo.
Guido Fawkes points out that the alliance isn't so much cross party as 'Davos attending'.
If I were running the Leave campaign, I'd have at least one ad in the run-up about how many of those on the Remain side personally benefit from EU funds. Starting with Kinnock and Mandleson with their EU pensions.
In fact, anyone for Leave up against either of them in an interview should open with. "Well of course X is in favour of the EU, they pay him £xxx,000 per year tax free."
Off topic but on London, the Guardian has an article about encouraging people to stand on both sides of the escalator on the tube at Holborn (because it's more efficient):
What baffles me about this is that there is a simple solution that would leave everyone happy but that doesn't seem to have occurred to anyone at TfL. If instead of compelling people to stand on both sides a major and continuing effort was made to get more people to walk up the left side of the escalator, those who want to walk will not be impeded while those who want to stand can continue to do so. You wouldn't need to encourage all that many more people to walk up for the efficiencies to be regained by the existing model. And those extra people who had been encouraged to walk up the escalator would be that little bit fitter.
"It’s British lore: on escalators, you stand on the right and walk on the left."
Has Archie Bland ever been outside London ?!?
I can assure him it simply isn't the case elsewhere - and people aren't standing on the left as part of a congestion easing measures either. They're standing in the way !
Since the new Birmingham New Street station was opened a few months ago people have started adopting the London method of escalator behaviour, probably because there are signs saying stand on the right for the first time. A bit ironic that those notices have appeared just as Holborn has partially abandoned the rule.
Are there any Tories on here who like Zac as their candidate? It seems like a lot of nose holding to stop Saqid.
No, I've been active in the Zac campaign as well, there is not a lot of enthusiasm there either, but people still turn out to deliver leaflets and support the candidate. I hope the party can convince Karren Brady to run next time, she would be a great candidate, but it would mean giving up her role at WHU and on TV, this time around she wasn't willing to do it, but hopefully next time she will agree.
Despite her pro-EU views, I'd support Ms Brady for Mayor of London.
Would you have supported Seb Coe ? I think were it not for the IAAF job coming up (Or going to Bubka) he may well have gone for it.
Off topic but on London, the Guardian has an article about encouraging people to stand on both sides of the escalator on the tube at Holborn (because it's more efficient):
What baffles me about this is that there is a simple solution that would leave everyone happy but that doesn't seem to have occurred to anyone at TfL. If instead of compelling people to stand on both sides a major and continuing effort was made to get more people to walk up the left side of the escalator, those who want to walk will not be impeded while those who want to stand can continue to do so. You wouldn't need to encourage all that many more people to walk up for the efficiencies to be regained by the existing model. And those extra people who had been encouraged to walk up the escalator would be that little bit fitter.
"It’s British lore: on escalators, you stand on the right and walk on the left."
Has Archie Bland ever been outside London ?!?
I can assure him it simply isn't the case elsewhere - and people aren't standing on the left as part of a congestion easing measures either. They're standing in the way !
Since the new Birmingham New Street station was opened a few months ago people have started adopting the London method of escalator behaviour, probably because there are signs saying stand on the right for the first time. A bit ironic that those notices have appeared just as Holborn has partially abandoned the rule.
It's probably correct for New Street (Lower through numbers than London) - though I've not been there for a while.
What stood out to me from the focus group is that Leave need to drum home the message that voting for "Remain" does not equal voting for the status quo.
Some of us have been saying that from the start.
The Leave campaign - so far - should win awards for how sh*t it is.
Disagree. Remain is not the status quo can only be understood as a double negative. LEAVE needs to present a clear and credible set of benefits: Leave means (a), (b), (c) ... And stick to it. No agenda on bringing down the EU or changing it. What other countries want to do is up to them.
The problem is that Leave is disparate bunch of people that don't agree on anything much beyond leaving the EU.
The difference in rhetoric is actually painful, Salmond is so far beyond these Leave clowns it isn't funny
"Perhaps on the Richter scale of presidential interventions, this was pretty mild," Salmond added. "[Obama] hopes that the UK will be strong and united as an ally. Well, if Scotland becomes independent, America will have two allies in these islands, not one."
Salmond defused it very neatly......some of LEAVE senior bods are acting like - what's the phrase? - Oh yes - 'racist fruitcakes' (NO, I know the vast majority of LEAVErs aren't - but its a pity some of your senior bods are acting as if they are.....)
Are there any Tories on here who like Zac as their candidate? It seems like a lot of nose holding to stop Saqid.
No, I've been active in the Zac campaign as well, there is not a lot of enthusiasm there either, but people still turn out to deliver leaflets and support the candidate. I hope the party can convince Karren Brady to run next time, she would be a great candidate, but it would mean giving up her role at WHU and on TV, this time around she wasn't willing to do it, but hopefully next time she will agree.
Despite her pro-EU views, I'd support Ms Brady for Mayor of London.
Well in all honesty we're a minority in London. Not as small a minority as some think, especially in the City, but we're definitely a minority.
Mr. 30, quite. Cameron's been a grave disappointment. Even as a soft EU-phile, I expected more from him. He's behaving more like a Clegg than a Conservative.
What stood out to me from the focus group is that Leave need to drum home the message that voting for "Remain" does not equal voting for the status quo.
Some of us have been saying that from the start.
The Leave campaign - so far - should win awards for how sh*t it is.
Disagree. Remain is not the status quo can only be understood as a double negative. LEAVE needs to present a clear and credible set of benefits: Leave means (a), (b), (c) ... And stick to it. No agenda on bringing down the EU or changing it. What other countries want to do is up to them.
The problem is that Leave is disparate bunch of people that don't agree on anything much beyond leaving the EU.
Oh I agree with that. I've said repeatedly there's been too much about the push factors and not enough about the pull factors.
That's why I think it is - so far - a sh*t campaign.
What stood out to me from the focus group is that Leave need to drum home the message that voting for "Remain" does not equal voting for the status quo.
Some of us have been saying that from the start.
The Leave campaign - so far - should win awards for how sh*t it is.
Disagree. Remain is not the status quo can only be understood as a double negative. LEAVE needs to present a clear and credible set of benefits: Leave means (a), (b), (c) ... And stick to it. No agenda on bringing down the EU or changing it. What other countries want to do is up to them.
The problem is that Leave is disparate bunch of people that don't agree on anything much beyond leaving the EU.
As it's the one in the (PB) news atm, you can see from eg Neil Woodford's Capital Economics report into Brexit that a), b) and c) are far from clear cut or quantifiable.
Comments
https://twitter.com/robfordmancs/status/723494146116333568
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2015/01/27/ted-cruzs-claim-that-one-of-obamas-very-first-acts-was-returning-a-bust-of-churchill/
People are finding it really hard to decide, and feel like they're being asked to ajudicate on incomplete information and misleading facts. And the country is split right down the middle.
Which you could probably read as the arguments being finely balanced either way to floating voters and a pointer to a close(ish) result.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/22/londoners-break-escalator-rule-standing-only-holborn
What baffles me about this is that there is a simple solution that would leave everyone happy but that doesn't seem to have occurred to anyone at TfL. If instead of compelling people to stand on both sides a major and continuing effort was made to get more people to walk up the left side of the escalator, those who want to walk will not be impeded while those who want to stand can continue to do so. You wouldn't need to encourage all that many more people to walk up for the efficiencies to be regained by the existing model. And those extra people who had been encouraged to walk up the escalator would be that little bit fitter.
People like NickPalmer rightly say that we should not assume or label all Muslims as extremists. But by associating with extremists as too many of them (not Mr Palmer, to be clear) do they themselves give the impression that that's what they think that Muslims are or are receptive too. And in so doing they make it more likely that those people will gain more legitimacy.
South of Scotland is a tough Area for the SNP, currently all 3 border constituencies are non-SNP, Conservative, Labour and Conservative respectively from West to East.
Galloway & West Dumfries is currently Ruth Davidson for a Strong Opposition but with a majority of only 862, with the SNP in second place. This looks a slam dunk SNP gain but Ladbrokes are rating it as only a 63% chance of a gain. I will be backing this one all day long.
The analogous Westminster constituency takes in all of Dumfries whilst the Holyrood constituency takes in only half of it but with no Lib Dem presence to speak of I can only see the Labour vote breaking heavily for the SNP as they did last year. 4/7 Looks like a great price to back the SNP here.
Dumfriesshire is vastly harder to call. the Labour MP here has a personal vote and is respected also the consituency bears little relation to the Westminster constituency it overlaps so it would be foolish to try ad apply Westminster trends to this seat.
There is a real sense of disappointment amongst the Anti-Ruth Davidson for a Strong Opposition voters that they failed to kick out Mundell by a scant few hundred votes and the idea of his son getting a seat doesn't sit well with them. the Labour vote will drop, it will only go to the SNP. It would require a 7.5 point swing to the SNP for Lab to get them over the line. Evens on the SNP here feels like a gamble, 9/2 on Labour is betting on their personal vote to hold up. The 5/4 on Ruth Davidson for a Strong Opposition feels too short. They would be relying on the handful of Lib Dem voters to go to them and a near perfect vote split between Lab and SNP to win it. Like Dumfries and Galloway in Westminster election I would be willing to have a punt at 8/1 on the starts aligning but not 5/4.
Etrrick, roxburgh & Berwicks is a 1/8 Ruth Davidson for a Strong Opposition hold. I can't disagree with that. SNP won the Westminster version by a whisker and the Holyrood configuration is less favorable to them.
So SNP in Galloway & West Dumfries, Labour in Dumfriesshire with an SNP saver. ER&B to be left alone.
Has Archie Bland ever been outside London ?!?
I can assure him it simply isn't the case elsewhere - and people aren't standing on the left as part of a congestion easing measures either. They're standing in the way !
Most in the groups had seen the picture of Cameron making campaign calls alongside Lords Ashdown and Kinnock. This prompted some nostalgic smiles (“Neil Kinnock. My goodness. Neil Kinnock”), and reinforced the cross-party nature of the campaign...
As the inertia of the status quo helped us evade that grisly fate, it'll hinder the UK escaping the tentacles of Brussels.
Look at who Jeremy Corbyn associates with. Look in detail at the people who run the Finsbury Park Mosque. These are not liberals. Look at Andy Slaughter and who he associates with. These are not liberals. Look at Ken Livingstone and Al Qaradawi. He invited him to London and praised him as a moderate. Moderate, my a*se!
Politicians have a certain standing and if they agree to speak at events with extremists without challenging them then they need to think about whether this might not be seen as implicit support for those views. If they invite them to Parliament (as Corbyn has done with Raad Saleh) or City Hall, what message do you think it sends out to real moderates. These are the people that the authorities value: that's the message.
This is not just my view. This is what Yvette Cooper herself said last summer.
There are those in the Muslim community who do have a good understanding of how extremists work and how to challenge and confront, some of them being ex-extremists themselves. Think of those at the Quillam Foundation. Think of Gita Saghal who pointed out the grossness of Amnesty teaming up with Cage, given the latter's views on women's rights. And yet those people are not reached out to by Labour.
It is a very good book about the fall of the Ottomans and the rise of the modern Turkish Republic. Highlights the relative stability of Turkey's European borders with the chaos to the South and East.
Not saying that Bojo with a sufficient rush of blood to the head wouldn't resort to that kind of thing of course.
£10 @ 4-7 SNP (Galloway)
Also by making a larger percentage of users walk you've now increased the capacity problem of the walking side causing even greater queues at the escalator entrance.
Khan leads Goldsmith 60-40 after second preferences according to the latest poll. Indeed, Khan is even narrowly ahead in Outer London.
I realise some on here witter on about the wondrous Conservative election machine but the Labour machine in London was pretty effective in both 2014 and 2015. I agree the Inner London vote needs to come out but where is the evidence it won't ?
Yes, there's a proportion of Undecideds but where is the evidence they will break overwhelmingly for Goldsmith ?
13 days out and it could change and the Standard's political editor did another hatchet job on Khan last night but it's not having an impact yet.
Certainly, there would have been far fewer people in the Baltic States and Ukraine who were willing to side with the Germans. And, it's likely that Russian casualties in 1941 would have been far fewer under a leader who was prepared to let Russian forces retreat, rather than stand firm and be overwhelmed. And, one can assume that the Russian officer corps wouldn't have been purged in 1935-37.
OTOH, the Communists did establish a terrific military-industrial complex in Russia. Their ability to outpace the German arms industry, both in terms of quantity and quality, served them extremely well. A non-Communist government might never had had that advantage, as production would have focused more on consumer goods.
WHO WILL STAND UP FOR EnglandUS
This shows it is a cross party alliance.
The alternative would have been with Corbyn, and that would be a mistake for Cameron and the Tories.
For most people Kinnock was an energetic Labour leader who fought the good fight and lost, before Labour was taken over by a bunch of spivs.
I doubt very few are aware of his time in the EU or the largesse that has been lavished on his family.
Political anoraks, on the other hand.......
Its going to be like Biggie Smalls and Tupac all over again....20 years later and still releasing new music.
Miss Cyclefree, thanks. I have a parody account (HeroofHornska) and will have it vote 6 months to take note of your response.
Guido Fawkes points out that the alliance isn't so much cross party as 'Davos attending'.
And Farage is as much a part of the EU problem. Ineffective trougher, happy to claim all the 'allowances' but never voting.
Several other loyal Tories mentioned it to me (unprompted)
If you don't think that's a problem for the party then you're deluding yourself.
But perhaps your view is that anyone who criticises what Cameron does must be because they have a problem, not him.
His pieces are must reads and bloody informative.
Democratic ? If so, a Russian version of Weimar with the continual threat of a military or nationalist takeover. Authoritarianism in central and Eastern Europe was the response to revolutionary Communism but would that have been the case with a democratic or nationalist Russia ?
https://twitter.com/libby_brooks/status/723499592579448832
''Those fighting for independence can;t tell us what life would be like outside of the British Empire.''
Underneath it has the slogan
America stronger in empire.
It doesn't work the other way because people aren't as quick to disengage the handbrake and pull away as they are to hit the brake pedal, they will tend to wait until the car has moved a good few feet first.
Pedestrians are worse. They stare at their feet, their phones, take up two steps instead of one, bunch up at the bottom, bunch up at the top, and walk up at the rate of the slowest. In peak times it can leave big gaps of the LHS of the escalator unoccupied as people like walking space.
So when flows are very heavy you can get more throughput with everyone standing both sides.
Superb destruction of Obama and his policy by Andrew Roberts.
Ouch.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-36111753
In fact, anyone for Leave up against either of them in an interview should open with. "Well of course X is in favour of the EU, they pay him £xxx,000 per year tax free."
The Leave campaign - so far - should win awards for how sh*t it is.
The same idiots that take half an hour to disengage the handbrake are doing 40 in the village 30 zones, 40 in the unrestricted national speed limit areas outside the villages and not keeping left on the motorway.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jun/08/alex-salmond-obama-cameron-scottish-independence
Mind you, Cameron's 'negotiation' with the EU is about as impressive as John Lackland's tete-a-tete's with Philip Augustus.
He builds vast coalitions to win plebiscites, it's what he does.
"Perhaps on the Richter scale of presidential interventions, this was pretty mild," Salmond added. "[Obama] hopes that the UK will be strong and united as an ally. Well, if Scotland becomes independent, America will have two allies in these islands, not one."
I guess the rest of the country is a control between Project Smear and Project Ruth.
The problem is that Leave is disparate bunch of people that don't agree on anything much beyond leaving the EU.
Has spending on Scotland reflected the oil price slump yet?
That's why I think it is - so far - a sh*t campaign.
The Leave campaign seem to be headed by reactionary morons and that can't bode well for Leave.