I shall be voting Goldsmith first and UKIP second. Can anyone advise how a euro sceptic Conservative should order Khan and Pigeon? I know little about Pigeon.
You would only expect Green second preferences to go to a Tory if you thought the Greens were primarily concerned by environmentalism. That seems an odd assumption to me.
I shall be voting Goldsmith first and UKIP second. Can anyone advise how a euro sceptic Conservative should order Khan and Pigeon? I know little about Pigeon.
Don't you only have to vote for your first two choices?
The Jewish scholar & historian from whom Naz Shah re-posted the 'move Israel to USA' image expresses a view. I'm sure all fans of free speech will approve.
'Finkelstein Breaks His Silence. Tells Holocaust-Mongers, “It is time to crawl back into your sewer!”'
That is an absolutely fascinating article. It is pretty hard to refute his contentions as well.
I thought so. His views are trenchant, but seem informed and thoughtful to me.
While agree that he clearly knows a lot about the subject, I'd suggest he doesn't know much about what's happened here in the last week. He says:
Meanwhile, what are the Blairite-Israel lobby creeps up to in the UK? They’re fanning the embers of hate and creating new discord between Jews and Muslims by going after Naz Shah, a Muslim woman who has attained public office. They’re making her pass through these rituals of public self-degradation, as she is forced to apologise once, twice, three times over for a tongue-in-cheek cartoon reposted from my website.
I'm sorry, I don't think it was tongue in cheek in the slightest. Anything like that will only be seen as meaning one thing - that she does not believe that Israel has the right to exist and advocates the ethnic cleansing of Jews from the Middle East. If she didn't mean that, and was too stupid to realise that's how it would be seen, then I have no sympathy with her.
The Jewish scholar & historian from whom Naz Shah re-posted the 'move Israel to USA' image expresses a view. I'm sure all fans of free speech will approve.
'Finkelstein Breaks His Silence. Tells Holocaust-Mongers, “It is time to crawl back into your sewer!”'
That is an absolutely fascinating article. It is pretty hard to refute his contentions as well.
I thought so. His views are trenchant, but seem informed and thoughtful to me.
While agree that he clearly knows a lot about the subject, I'd suggest he doesn't know much about what's happened here in the last week. He says:
Meanwhile, what are the Blairite-Israel lobby creeps up to in the UK? They’re fanning the embers of hate and creating new discord between Jews and Muslims by going after Naz Shah, a Muslim woman who has attained public office. They’re making her pass through these rituals of public self-degradation, as she is forced to apologise once, twice, three times over for a tongue-in-cheek cartoon reposted from my website.
I'm sorry, I don't think it was tongue in cheek in the slightest. Anything like that will only be seen as meaning one thing - that she does not believe that Israel has the right to exist and advocates the ethnic cleansing of Jews from the Middle East. If she didn't mean that, and was too stupid to realise that's how it would be seen, then I have no sympathy with her.
Finkelstein says the cartoon was perceived as tongue in cheek in the US. Are you disputing that or are you expressing yourself badly in ascribing motives to Shah?
I shall be voting Goldsmith first and UKIP second. Can anyone advise how a euro sceptic Conservative should order Khan and Pigeon? I know little about Pigeon.
If you're voting for Goldsmith with your first vote is there any point in voting for anybody with your second vote? I would assume that Goldsmith would come in the first two and your second vote would only be used if he was eliminated. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_mayoral_election,_2016
The Jewish scholar & historian from whom Naz Shah re-posted the 'move Israel to USA' image expresses a view. I'm sure all fans of free speech will approve.
'Finkelstein Breaks His Silence. Tells Holocaust-Mongers, “It is time to crawl back into your sewer!”'
That is an absolutely fascinating article. It is pretty hard to refute his contentions as well.
I thought so. His views are trenchant, but seem informed and thoughtful to me.
While agree that he clearly knows a lot about the subject, I'd suggest he doesn't know much about what's happened here in the last week. He says:
Meanwhile, what are the Blairite-Israel lobby creeps up to in the UK? They’re fanning the embers of hate and creating new discord between Jews and Muslims by going after Naz Shah, a Muslim woman who has attained public office. They’re making her pass through these rituals of public self-degradation, as she is forced to apologise once, twice, three times over for a tongue-in-cheek cartoon reposted from my website.
I'm sorry, I don't think it was tongue in cheek in the slightest. Anything like that will only be seen as meaning one thing - that she does not believe that Israel has the right to exist and advocates the ethnic cleansing of Jews from the Middle East. If she didn't mean that, and was too stupid to realise that's how it would be seen, then I have no sympathy with her.
I accept that Naz Shah was joking, but it was a crass joke. And, anti-semitism does appear to be rife in Bradford politics. But, she's apologised, and that should be the end of it.
Livingstone just enjoys poking Jews in the eye. He deserves no defence.
I've followed the campaign quite closely, and the candidate who has impressed me most is Sian Berry, the Green. Khan has been noticeably better than Goldsmith (who at one stage I thought I might vote for). The infamous Bollywood interview just caps what has been a pretty hapless effort overall. And one just feels that in the end Khan wants it more.
The Jewish scholar & historian from whom Naz Shah re-posted the 'move Israel to USA' image expresses a view. I'm sure all fans of free speech will approve.
'Finkelstein Breaks His Silence. Tells Holocaust-Mongers, “It is time to crawl back into your sewer!”'
That is an absolutely fascinating article. It is pretty hard to refute his contentions as well.
I thought so. His views are trenchant, but seem informed and thoughtful to me.
While agree that he clearly knows a lot about the subject, I'd suggest he doesn't know much about what's happened here in the last week. He says:
Meanwhile, what are the Blairite-Israel lobby creeps up to in the UK? They’re fanning the embers of hate and creating new discord between Jews and Muslims by going after Naz Shah, a Muslim woman who has attained public office. They’re making her pass through these rituals of public self-degradation, as she is forced to apologise once, twice, three times over for a tongue-in-cheek cartoon reposted from my website.
I'm sorry, I don't think it was tongue in cheek in the slightest. Anything like that will only be seen as meaning one thing - that she does not believe that Israel has the right to exist and advocates the ethnic cleansing of Jews from the Middle East. If she didn't mean that, and was too stupid to realise that's how it would be seen, then I have no sympathy with her.
Finkelstein says the cartoon was perceived as tongue in cheek in the US. Are you disputing that or are you expressing yourself badly in ascribing motives to Shah?
Apologies, yes, I don't think Shah was being tongue-in-cheek - surely she would have said? I understand why Finkelstein might be puzzled about the reaction over here, but I think he's giving her the benefit of the doubt when she does not deserve it.
The Jewish scholar & historian from whom Naz Shah re-posted the 'move Israel to USA' image expresses a view. I'm sure all fans of free speech will approve.
'Finkelstein Breaks His Silence. Tells Holocaust-Mongers, “It is time to crawl back into your sewer!”'
That is an absolutely fascinating article. It is pretty hard to refute his contentions as well.
I thought so. His views are trenchant, but seem informed and thoughtful to me.
While agree that he clearly knows a lot about the subject, I'd suggest he doesn't know much about what's happened here in the last week. He says:
Meanwhile, what are the Blairite-Israel lobby creeps up to in the UK? They’re fanning the embers of hate and creating new discord between Jews and Muslims by going after Naz Shah, a Muslim woman who has attained public office. They’re making her pass through these rituals of public self-degradation, as she is forced to apologise once, twice, three times over for a tongue-in-cheek cartoon reposted from my website.
I'm sorry, I don't think it was tongue in cheek in the slightest. Anything like that will only be seen as meaning one thing - that she does not believe that Israel has the right to exist and advocates the ethnic cleansing of Jews from the Middle East. If she didn't mean that, and was too stupid to realise that's how it would be seen, then I have no sympathy with her.
Finkelstein says the cartoon was perceived as tongue in cheek in the US. Are you disputing that or are you expressing yourself badly in ascribing motives to Shah?
Shah has yet to explain what she meant by “The Jews are rallying”. This cannot be explained away as anti-Zionism.
Unfortunately there are individuals who see Jewish conspiracies everywhere they look.
The Jewish scholar & historian from whom Naz Shah re-posted the 'move Israel to USA' image expresses a view. I'm sure all fans of free speech will approve.
'Finkelstein Breaks His Silence. Tells Holocaust-Mongers, “It is time to crawl back into your sewer!”'
I shall be voting Goldsmith first and UKIP second. Can anyone advise how a euro sceptic Conservative should order Khan and Pigeon? I know little about Pigeon.
If you're voting for Goldsmith with your first vote is there any point in voting for anybody with your second vote? I would assume that Goldsmith would come in the first two and your second vote would only be used if he was eliminated. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_mayoral_election,_2016
Yes, but they're counted anyway so the vote is recorded even if it's not used. It sends a message.
Finkelstein says the cartoon was perceived as tongue in cheek in the US. Are you disputing that or are you expressing yourself badly in ascribing motives to Shah?
/fpt; I never thought the map thing was especially offensive - there are historical reasons why Jews wanted to flee to Israel but it's possible to argue in some scholarly forum that the USA should have made a large area available to them and it might have worked out well. The problem, though, about talking about the issue in the almost flippant way that she and Livingstone did is that it turns the relatively recent historical catastrophe of the Holocaust into a subject for idle banter and speculation.
I accept that Naz didn't mean to cause offence and think she's taking reasonable steps to make up for it and should in due course be forgiven. Livingstone, however, should know better, and his enjoyment in winding people up with shock-jock chatter was spectacularly inappropriate here.
On topic, Zac's run an ignoble campaign, you get the feeling his comment on the Mail on Sunday's choice of picture was an an attempt to lose with honour.
Obviously were he to win, awesome campaign by Sir Lynton Crosby, and excellent message discipline by Zac Goldsmith
Mark Salter former adviser to John McCain has endorsed Clinton after Trump called Fox News this morning to claim that Rafael Cruz, father of Ted, had been with Lee Harvey Oswald when the latter assassinated JFK ....
Trump off his trolley ?!? .... Sorry .... apologies to any offended trolley worldwide.
Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly said Tuesday that GOP presidential front-runner Donald Trump could still pick up female votes this fall, despite language that she called “diminishing of womankind.”
“The comments about women, I don’t think women love that. But I don’t know that it’s going to drive their vote,” Kelly said before a crowd at the American Hospital Association meeting.
“I think if Trump behaves himself and acts presidentially, and isn’t so much of a bully — which women tend to not appreciate, either — he can move those numbers a bit,” Kelly said.
Finkelstein says the cartoon was perceived as tongue in cheek in the US. Are you disputing that or are you expressing yourself badly in ascribing motives to Shah?
/fpt; I never thought the map thing was especially offensive - there are historical reasons why Jews wanted to flee to Israel but it's possible to argue in some scholarly forum that the USA should have made a large area available to them and it might have worked out well. The problem, though, about talking about the issue in the almost flippant way that she and Livingstone did is that it turns the relatively recent historical catastrophe of the Holocaust into a subject for idle banter and speculation.
I accept that Naz didn't mean to cause offence and think she's taking reasonable steps to make up for it and should in due course be forgiven. Livingstone, however, should know better, and his enjoyment in winding people up with shock-jock chatter was spectacularly inappropriate here.
Jeremy Corbyn’s critics inside his party have set aside the possibility of a post-election leadership challenge in the face of warnings by pollsters that the party leader remains impossible to defeat in any vote of Labour members.
A day before polls are due to open in national and local elections, where Labour’s performance will come under intense scrutiny, MPs who are unhappy with Corbyn are indicating in private they do not believe it is the right time to mount a coup attempt.
Joe Twyman, head of political and social research at YouGov, said his data confirmed that Corbyn remained “a country mile” ahead of other potential candidates. “The bottom line is that those eligible to vote in the Labour party leadership election strongly supported Jeremy Corbyn last year and that has not significantly changed,” he said.
I've followed the campaign quite closely, and the candidate who has impressed me most is Sian Berry, the Green. Khan has been noticeably better than Goldsmith (who at one stage I thought I might vote for). The infamous Bollywood interview just caps what has been a pretty hapless effort overall. And one just feels that in the end Khan wants it more.
My general feeling about politicians is that, the more they want power, the less they should be trusted with it.
It's hard to believe West Virginia was a Democratic stronghold till recently. It's no longer even close.
It's hard to think of a less Hillary Clinton friendly state than West Virginia
There are several States, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, Georgia, West Virginia, that Bill Clinton carried, but which are not in contention now.
Finkelstein says the cartoon was perceived as tongue in cheek in the US. Are you disputing that or are you expressing yourself badly in ascribing motives to Shah?
/fpt; I never thought the map thing was especially offensive - there are historical reasons why Jews wanted to flee to Israel but it's possible to argue in some scholarly forum that the USA should have made a large area available to them and it might have worked out well. The problem, though, about talking about the issue in the almost flippant way that she and Livingstone did is that it turns the relatively recent historical catastrophe of the Holocaust into a subject for idle banter and speculation.
I accept that Naz didn't mean to cause offence and think she's taking reasonable steps to make up for it and should in due course be forgiven. Livingstone, however, should know better, and his enjoyment in winding people up with shock-jock chatter was spectacularly inappropriate here.
It wasn't just the map, was it? It's the people she employed and the charity she got involved in after she became an MP. Look at what those people were sending out. They weren't all jokes, were they? There was a pattern of someone saying really offensive comments about Jews in a way which suggested, at best, a complete indifference to the issue of racism against one community - an odd position for an MP in a party that prides itself - oh how it polishes that halo - on being anti-racist.
And why did Labour feel that it needed to have a Muslim-only short list in that constituency? Are we only fit to be represented by those who have the same religious affiliation as ourselves? Is that what Labour values now are?
She may be sorry - but let's see what she does to show how sorry she is before deciding.
What came across to me from Finkelstein's really interesting piece is that the holocaust was truly one of the most evil acts in history. It was and remains profoundly shocking. It is not a play piece for anyone of any description, especially non Jews, and people should respect the dead. I think it is impossible to read that piece and not remember and re-appreciate that.
He thinks that people are playing games with the holocaust finding offence and using it to shut down debate and discussion about the actions of modern day Israel. He finds that morally offensive and it is frankly impossible to disagree after even a moment's reflection.
But that goes a very long way from excusing those who challenge Israel's right to exist, Jews right to exist and their right to play a full part in our society which some have challenged on this site over the last couple of days.
I fear that his left wing views are causing him to cut an excessive amount of slack to those who might hold those views or at least are willing to associate with those who hold those views. He is right that Naz Shah is being manipulated and that is ultimately a gift to anti-Semitism not something that should be encouraged or condoned. Whether he is right about Livingstone's contributions I am far less sure.
On topic, Zac's run an ignoble campaign, you get the feeling his comment on the Mail on Sunday's choice of picture was an an attempt to lose with honour.
Obviously were he to win, awesome campaign by Sir Lynton Crosby, and excellent message discipline by Zac Goldsmith
If he loses he'll go down in the book of infamy with Woolas Griffiths and O'Grady.
It's hard to believe West Virginia was a Democratic stronghold till recently. It's no longer even close.
It's hard to think of a less Hillary Clinton friendly state than West Virginia
There are several States, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, Georgia, West Virginia, that Bill Clinton carried, but which are not in contention now.
Democrats apparently think Georgia could be "in play" this year.
Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly said Tuesday that GOP presidential front-runner Donald Trump could still pick up female votes this fall, despite language that she called “diminishing of womankind.”
“The comments about women, I don’t think women love that. But I don’t know that it’s going to drive their vote,” Kelly said before a crowd at the American Hospital Association meeting.
“I think if Trump behaves himself and acts presidentially, and isn’t so much of a bully — which women tend to not appreciate, either — he can move those numbers a bit,” Kelly said.
So he can mover from 17 to 38? Not percent, just number of female supporters
It's hard to believe West Virginia was a Democratic stronghold till recently. It's no longer even close.
It's hard to think of a less Hillary Clinton friendly state than West Virginia
There are several States, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, Georgia, West Virginia, that Bill Clinton carried, but which are not in contention now.
Democrats apparently think Georgia could be "in play" this year.
I don't think Livingstone is really Anti- Semitic. He is just a bloody fool. I wonder whether he might be a bit autistic to be frank.
"a bit autistic" oh fuck off. The left would never be making excuses if a tory or ukipper said the things he did.
Well said. An insult to autistics frankly. I loathe people using some badly understood mental condition as an explanation for behaviour, wrongly. Like someone saying that a very tidy person is "a bit OCD". Anyone who knows what OCD is really like would know what utter twaddle such a statement is.
Livingstone knew what he was doing. Trying to pretend that he didn't really mean it or was ill or not up to it is just an attempt to avoid placing the responsibility where it belongs: on the person saying it. It's just another attempt to evade seeing what is in front of our eyes: a number of Labour politicians and supporters have some seriously unpleasant and offensive views about Jews and too many people have rushed to excuse them or justify them and/or to blame the targets.
Goodness we have even had on this board one person suggest that Jews should stay out of public life in order not to draw attention and hatred to themselves.
The Labour carpet has been picked up and all sorts of nasty things are crawling out from underneath.
It's hard to believe West Virginia was a Democratic stronghold till recently. It's no longer even close.
It's hard to think of a less Hillary Clinton friendly state than West Virginia
There are several States, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, Georgia, West Virginia, that Bill Clinton carried, but which are not in contention now.
Agreed save for Georgia which is more competitive as the blacks and hispanics hit almost 40%.
It's hard to believe West Virginia was a Democratic stronghold till recently. It's no longer even close.
It's hard to think of a less Hillary Clinton friendly state than West Virginia
There are several States, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, Georgia, West Virginia, that Bill Clinton carried, but which are not in contention now.
Democrats apparently think Georgia could be "in play" this year.
I have a bet that Texas goes Blue this year.
I think Clinton would need to win by more than 10% nationally to have a real chance in Texas. Which admittedly is not TOTALLY impossible if Trump completely implodes, but unlikely.
'YouGov’s data has suggested that Corbyn would win 43% of first preference, rising to 62% when second and third preferences are taken into account.'
Even if those YouGov figures from the Guardian are accurate, 43% still represents a significant weakening of Corbyn's position compared with last year's 59%'
I shall be voting Goldsmith first and UKIP second. Can anyone advise how a euro sceptic Conservative should order Khan and Pigeon? I know little about Pigeon.
If you're voting for Goldsmith with your first vote is there any point in voting for anybody with your second vote? I would assume that Goldsmith would come in the first two and your second vote would only be used if he was eliminated. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_mayoral_election,_2016
Yes, but they're counted anyway so the vote is recorded even if it's not used. It sends a message.
I'll be voting Goldsmith second. That is actually my first preference. The number one slot will go to Pidgeon as a non-offensive placeholder.
It's hard to believe West Virginia was a Democratic stronghold till recently. It's no longer even close.
It's hard to think of a less Hillary Clinton friendly state than West Virginia
There are several States, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, Georgia, West Virginia, that Bill Clinton carried, but which are not in contention now.
Democrats apparently think Georgia could be "in play" this year.
I have a bet that Texas goes Blue this year.
That better be at Leicester for the title type price.
It's hard to believe West Virginia was a Democratic stronghold till recently. It's no longer even close.
It's hard to think of a less Hillary Clinton friendly state than West Virginia
There are several States, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, Georgia, West Virginia, that Bill Clinton carried, but which are not in contention now.
Democrats apparently think Georgia could be "in play" this year.
I have a bet that Texas goes Blue this year.
That better be at Leicester for the title type price.
What came across to me from Finkelstein's really interesting piece is that the holocaust was truly one of the most evil acts in history. It was and remains profoundly shocking. It is not a play piece for anyone of any description, especially non Jews, and people should respect the dead. I think it is impossible to read that piece and not remember and re-appreciate that.
He thinks that people are playing games with the holocaust finding offence and using it to shut down debate and discussion about the actions of modern day Israel. He finds that morally offensive and it is frankly impossible to disagree after even a moment's reflection.
But that goes a very long way from excusing those who challenge Israel's right to exist, Jews right to exist and their right to play a full part in our society which some have challenged on this site over the last couple of days.
I fear that his left wing views are causing him to cut an excessive amount of slack to those who might hold those views or at least are willing to associate with those who hold those views. He is right that Naz Shah is being manipulated and that is ultimately a gift to anti-Semitism not something that should be encouraged or condoned. Whether he is right about Livingstone's contributions I am far less sure.
Very good post. I wait for Guido to declare him an anti semite. I find it puzzling how so many know what others should find offensive.
It's hard to believe West Virginia was a Democratic stronghold till recently. It's no longer even close.
It's hard to think of a less Hillary Clinton friendly state than West Virginia
There are several States, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, Georgia, West Virginia, that Bill Clinton carried, but which are not in contention now.
Democrats apparently think Georgia could be "in play" this year.
I have a bet that Texas goes Blue this year.
I think that would need a kind of LBJ/Goldwater lead, which seems unlikely.
It's hard to believe West Virginia was a Democratic stronghold till recently. It's no longer even close.
It's hard to think of a less Hillary Clinton friendly state than West Virginia
There are several States, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, Georgia, West Virginia, that Bill Clinton carried, but which are not in contention now.
Democrats apparently think Georgia could be "in play" this year.
I have a bet that Texas goes Blue this year.
Not this year.
In time the hispanic demographic will come into play but probably not a swing state until 2024/28.
Whether he is right about Livingstone's contributions I am far less sure.
I'm still not sure what Livingstone's point was. From what I can tell from Finkelstein's piece, Hitler's support for Zionism was purely cynical.
His point: Hitler liked Zionism. Zionism means Israel. Israel is no better than Hitler. That's all.
He was not making a serious historical point: no respectable historian relies on one book which falsifies and manipulates the historical record. It's no better than relying on David Irving, for heaven's sake.
It's hard to believe West Virginia was a Democratic stronghold till recently. It's no longer even close.
It's hard to think of a less Hillary Clinton friendly state than West Virginia
There are several States, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, Georgia, West Virginia, that Bill Clinton carried, but which are not in contention now.
Democrats apparently think Georgia could be "in play" this year.
I have a bet that Texas goes Blue this year.
I think that would need a kind of LBJ/Goldwater lead, which seems unlikely.
It's hard to believe West Virginia was a Democratic stronghold till recently. It's no longer even close.
It's hard to think of a less Hillary Clinton friendly state than West Virginia
There are several States, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, Georgia, West Virginia, that Bill Clinton carried, but which are not in contention now.
Democrats apparently think Georgia could be "in play" this year.
I have a bet that Texas goes Blue this year.
Not this year.
In time the hispanic demographic will come into play but probably not a swing state until 2024/28.
For some reason, when it comes to Trump, I seem to be back betting with my heart and not my head.
It's hard to believe West Virginia was a Democratic stronghold till recently. It's no longer even close.
It's hard to think of a less Hillary Clinton friendly state than West Virginia
There are several States, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, Georgia, West Virginia, that Bill Clinton carried, but which are not in contention now.
Democrats apparently think Georgia could be "in play" this year.
It's hard to believe West Virginia was a Democratic stronghold till recently. It's no longer even close.
It's hard to think of a less Hillary Clinton friendly state than West Virginia
There are several States, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, Georgia, West Virginia, that Bill Clinton carried, but which are not in contention now.
Agreed save for Georgia which is more competitive as the blacks and hispanics hit almost 40%.
More competitive than the others, but still carried by the Republicans by 9% in 2012.
It's hard to believe West Virginia was a Democratic stronghold till recently. It's no longer even close.
It's hard to think of a less Hillary Clinton friendly state than West Virginia
There are several States, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, Georgia, West Virginia, that Bill Clinton carried, but which are not in contention now.
Democrats apparently think Georgia could be "in play" this year.
I have a bet that Texas goes Blue this year.
Texas was ,of course, a reasonable bet for the Democrats in the not so distant past in that not only did JFK and LBJ carry the state in 1960 & 1964 but so also did Hubert Humphrey against Nixon in 1968. Less surprising ,perhaps, was Carter winning there in 1976.
Whether he is right about Livingstone's contributions I am far less sure.
I'm still not sure what Livingstone's point was. From what I can tell from Finkelstein's piece, Hitler's support for Zionism was purely cynical.
Yes, I agree, a way of showing that Jews who had lived in Germany for many generations were not Germans at all but a different and inferior race. Why he thought that such cynicism on Hitler's part excused an attack on Zionism is really hard to follow. But then I have often found that with Livingstone.
What came across to me from Finkelstein's really interesting piece is that the holocaust was truly one of the most evil acts in history. It was and remains profoundly shocking. It is not a play piece for anyone of any description, especially non Jews, and people should respect the dead. I think it is impossible to read that piece and not remember and re-appreciate that.
He thinks that people are playing games with the holocaust finding offence and using it to shut down debate and discussion about the actions of modern day Israel. He finds that morally offensive and it is frankly impossible to disagree after even a moment's reflection.
But that goes a very long way from excusing those who challenge Israel's right to exist, Jews right to exist and their right to play a full part in our society which some have challenged on this site over the last couple of days.
I fear that his left wing views are causing him to cut an excessive amount of slack to those who might hold those views or at least are willing to associate with those who hold those views. He is right that Naz Shah is being manipulated and that is ultimately a gift to anti-Semitism not something that should be encouraged or condoned. Whether he is right about Livingstone's contributions I am far less sure.
It is your first paragraph that really sums up my views on the whole thing.
I was genuinely surprised to find that, outside of a defined set of muslim extremists and a tiny and hopefully diminishing BNP, there was any anti-Semitism in the country. Now I will qualify this by saying that I have never lived in a major city so absolutely understand I am probably not well placed to comment on the real situation. But I have always held a strong impression that the events of 70 years ago and the fact we had fought the Germans and then found out the true depths of their depravity under the Nazi regime had effectively made anti Semitism a complete non starter in British society.
I am not in this case talking about being anti-Likud, anti-settler or pro-Palestinian. I believe you can still be all of those things and not be anti-Semitic. I just find it hard to believe that, after all that happened just a few decades ago and all that Britain stood for in that fight, there are still people who can be anti-Jewish.
It's hard to believe West Virginia was a Democratic stronghold till recently. It's no longer even close.
It's hard to think of a less Hillary Clinton friendly state than West Virginia
There are several States, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, Georgia, West Virginia, that Bill Clinton carried, but which are not in contention now.
Democrats apparently think Georgia could be "in play" this year.
I have a bet that Texas goes Blue this year.
I think that would need a kind of LBJ/Goldwater lead, which seems unlikely.
It's hard to believe West Virginia was a Democratic stronghold till recently. It's no longer even close.
It's hard to think of a less Hillary Clinton friendly state than West Virginia
There are several States, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, Georgia, West Virginia, that Bill Clinton carried, but which are not in contention now.
Democrats apparently think Georgia could be "in play" this year.
I have a bet that Texas goes Blue this year.
Not this year.
In time the hispanic demographic will come into play but probably not a swing state until 2024/28.
For some reason, when it comes to Trump, I seem to be back betting with my heart and not my head.
It's hard to believe West Virginia was a Democratic stronghold till recently. It's no longer even close.
It's hard to think of a less Hillary Clinton friendly state than West Virginia
There are several States, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, Georgia, West Virginia, that Bill Clinton carried, but which are not in contention now.
Democrats apparently think Georgia could be "in play" this year.
I have a bet that Texas goes Blue this year.
I think that would need a kind of LBJ/Goldwater lead, which seems unlikely.
It's hard to believe West Virginia was a Democratic stronghold till recently. It's no longer even close.
It's hard to think of a less Hillary Clinton friendly state than West Virginia
There are several States, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, Georgia, West Virginia, that Bill Clinton carried, but which are not in contention now.
Democrats apparently think Georgia could be "in play" this year.
I have a bet that Texas goes Blue this year.
Not this year.
In time the hispanic demographic will come into play but probably not a swing state until 2024/28.
For some reason, when it comes to Trump, I seem to be back betting with my heart and not my head.
Oh dear ....
Fortunately Pulpstar limited my stake to a tenner.
It's hard to believe West Virginia was a Democratic stronghold till recently. It's no longer even close.
It's hard to think of a less Hillary Clinton friendly state than West Virginia
There are several States, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, Georgia, West Virginia, that Bill Clinton carried, but which are not in contention now.
Agreed save for Georgia which is more competitive as the blacks and hispanics hit almost 40%.
More competitive than the others, but still carried by the Republicans by 9% in 2012.
Indeed.
Presently Trump will carry the state but if he implodes or loses by 10 point plus then states like Georgia will come into play.
It's hard to believe West Virginia was a Democratic stronghold till recently. It's no longer even close.
It's hard to think of a less Hillary Clinton friendly state than West Virginia
There are several States, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, Georgia, West Virginia, that Bill Clinton carried, but which are not in contention now.
Democrats apparently think Georgia could be "in play" this year.
I have a bet that Texas goes Blue this year.
I think that would need a kind of LBJ/Goldwater lead, which seems unlikely.
It's hard to believe West Virginia was a Democratic stronghold till recently. It's no longer even close.
It's hard to think of a less Hillary Clinton friendly state than West Virginia
There are several States, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, Georgia, West Virginia, that Bill Clinton carried, but which are not in contention now.
Democrats apparently think Georgia could be "in play" this year.
I have a bet that Texas goes Blue this year.
Not this year.
In time the hispanic demographic will come into play but probably not a swing state until 2024/28.
For some reason, when it comes to Trump, I seem to be back betting with my heart and not my head.
What came across to me from Finkelstein's really interesting piece is that the holocaust was truly one of the most evil acts in history. It was and remains profoundly shocking. It is not a play piece for anyone of any description, especially non Jews, and people should respect the dead. I think it is impossible to read that piece and not remember and re-appreciate that.
He thinks that people are playing games with the holocaust finding offence and using it to shut down debate and discussion about the actions of modern day Israel. He finds that morally offensive and it is frankly impossible to disagree after even a moment's reflection.
But that goes a very long way from excusing those who challenge Israel's right to exist, Jews right to exist and their right to play a full part in our society which some have challenged on this site over the last couple of days.
I fear that his left wing views are causing him to cut an excessive amount of slack to those who might hold those views or at least are willing to associate with those who hold those views. He is right that Naz Shah is being manipulated and that is ultimately a gift to anti-Semitism not something that should be encouraged or condoned. Whether he is right about Livingstone's contributions I am far less sure.
It is your first paragraph that really sums up my views on the whole thing.
I was genuinely surprised to find that, outside of a defined set of muslim extremists and a tiny and hopefully diminishing BNP, there was any anti-Semitism in the country. Now I will qualify this by saying that I have never lived in a major city so absolutely understand I am probably not well placed to comment on the real situation. But I have always held a strong impression that the events of 70 years ago and the fact we had fought the Germans and then found out the true depths of their depravity under the Nazi regime had effectively made anti Semitism a complete non starter in British society.
I am not in this case talking about being anti-Likud, anti-settler or pro-Palestinian. I believe you can still be all of those things and not be anti-Semitic. I just find it hard to believe that, after all that happened just a few decades ago and all that Britain stood for in that fight, there are still people who can be anti-Jewish.
It's hard to believe West Virginia was a Democratic stronghold till recently. It's no longer even close.
It's hard to think of a less Hillary Clinton friendly state than West Virginia
There are several States, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, Georgia, West Virginia, that Bill Clinton carried, but which are not in contention now.
Democrats apparently think Georgia could be "in play" this year.
I have a bet that Texas goes Blue this year.
I think that would need a kind of LBJ/Goldwater lead, which seems unlikely.
It's hard to believe West Virginia was a Democratic stronghold till recently. It's no longer even close.
It's hard to think of a less Hillary Clinton friendly state than West Virginia
There are several States, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, Georgia, West Virginia, that Bill Clinton carried, but which are not in contention now.
Democrats apparently think Georgia could be "in play" this year.
I have a bet that Texas goes Blue this year.
Not this year.
In time the hispanic demographic will come into play but probably not a swing state until 2024/28.
For some reason, when it comes to Trump, I seem to be back betting with my heart and not my head.
It's hard to believe West Virginia was a Democratic stronghold till recently. It's no longer even close.
It's hard to think of a less Hillary Clinton friendly state than West Virginia
There are several States, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, Georgia, West Virginia, that Bill Clinton carried, but which are not in contention now.
Democrats apparently think Georgia could be "in play" this year.
I have a bet that Texas goes Blue this year.
I think that would need a kind of LBJ/Goldwater lead, which seems unlikely.
It's hard to believe West Virginia was a Democratic stronghold till recently. It's no longer even close.
It's hard to think of a less Hillary Clinton friendly state than West Virginia
There are several States, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, Georgia, West Virginia, that Bill Clinton carried, but which are not in contention now.
Democrats apparently think Georgia could be "in play" this year.
I have a bet that Texas goes Blue this year.
Not this year.
In time the hispanic demographic will come into play but probably not a swing state until 2024/28.
For some reason, when it comes to Trump, I seem to be back betting with my heart and not my head.
On topic it is very difficult to disagree with Mike. Anything other than a very comfortable win for Khan now would make the polling last year look good.
I hate to interrupt your profound discussion about how Livingstone isn't antisemitic if you tilt your head at the right angle, squint, and pull up your trouser leg honest, but I wanna talk about EURef predictions: specifically, ElectionsEtc's frankly magisterial round up of all the predictions IN THE FUCKING WORLD
I thought I had done a good job but I've got less than a third of theirs and I'm feeling like somebody's run over me like a truck. The preds they list are:
Woo, comprehensive, huh? Good job, huh? Well it certainly deserves enormous marks for spread and diligence: I am impressed. Unfotunately I think there are problems...
Anybody remember 2015? Every academic model except one used polls as input and all of them had one absofuckinglootly almighty carcrash: it was horrible. The exception was Lebo and Norpoth, who had developed a model using leader ratings and was impervious to bad polls. Problem is, about nine(?) months out they panicked and modified their model to cope with the polls...which were wrong. RodCrosby of this parish stuck with the unmodified L&N model and it worked.
The point I'm making is that if all your predictions use polls as input, then they'll all be wrong if the polls are wrong. Of the preds listed above, only "Non-poll based models" are pollproof (and volunteer forecasts as well?). All the others are drinking from the same pollspring, and I'm quite a bit sceptical.
As Fisher points out "All methods still show a strong consensus pointing towards a Remain win"...which doesn't mean anything if they all take polls as input.
Incidentally the only pollproof model - Matt Qvortrup's model - shows a much tighter result: 52/48.
It is your first paragraph that really sums up my views on the whole thing.
I was genuinely surprised top find that, outside of a defined set of muslim extremists and a tiny and hopefully diminishing BNP, there was any anti-Semitism in the country. Now I will qualify this by saying that I have never lived in a major city so absolutely understand I am probably not well placed to comment on the real situation. But I have always held a strong impression that the events of 70 years ago and the fact we had fought the Germans and then found out the true depths of their depravity under the Nazi regime had effectively made anti Semitism a complete non starter in British society.
I am not in this case talking about being anti-Likud, anti-settler or pro-Palestinian. I believe you can still be all of those things and not be anti-Semitic. I just find it hard to believe that, after all that happened just a few decades ago and all that Britain stood for in that fight, there are still people who can be anti-Jewish.
Anti-Semitism has been around for over 2000 years. Why would it not still survive and mutate? The desire for a scapegoat runs deep in human beings, in human societies and Jews have been the eternal scapegoat.
WW2 is a long time ago. People forget. Holocaust denial and revisionism is still around and peddled by all sorts of people. It is no coincidence that much of the source of anti-Semitism in European society these days emanates from people who come from outside Europe, who did not necessarily view WW2 in the way you describe and who were not confronted with the horror (and, to be fair, this was a European crime). Nor have they ever been confronted by those within their own societies who wished to join the Axis powers in attacking Jews (Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem).
And this works both ways: when Israel recently wanted to include and honour a brave Arab who had saved some Jewish lives in North Africa into the list of the Righteous at Yad Vashem, his family refused. They refused to accept an honour for someone who saved lives, despite all that we are told the Koran says about this, as if they were either ashamed of what he did or hated Israel so much that they did not want their own relative honoured for an act of mercy.
We have to some extent reimported the virus of anti-Semitism: transmuted and altered and triggered by different things (not the classic Christian view of Jews as Christ's killer) with the growth in Muslim communities in Europe.
No - I am not surprised that anti-Jewish feeling is no longer a non-starter in parts of British society.
For some reason, when it comes to Trump, I seem to be back betting with my heart and not my head.
Reckless phenomenon
Only a day or two left on the iplayer.
Preserved for the nation on youtube.
I think there's time for a full run through whilst I do admin in the office all day... I'm off football. Though I might retain an interest in the PB Fantasy Footie if I can motivate myself for one last push..
Undefined discussion subject.
Comments
Meanwhile, what are the Blairite-Israel lobby creeps up to in the UK? They’re fanning the embers of hate and creating new discord between Jews and Muslims by going after Naz Shah, a Muslim woman who has attained public office. They’re making her pass through these rituals of public self-degradation, as she is forced to apologise once, twice, three times over for a tongue-in-cheek cartoon reposted from my website.
I'm sorry, I don't think it was tongue in cheek in the slightest. Anything like that will only be seen as meaning one thing - that she does not believe that Israel has the right to exist and advocates the ethnic cleansing of Jews from the Middle East. If she didn't mean that, and was too stupid to realise that's how it would be seen, then I have no sympathy with her.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/434807/donald-trump-his-supporters
Khan: 47%
Goldsmith: 35%
UKIP: 6%
Grn: 6%
LD: 5%
Res: 0.6%
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_mayoral_election,_2016
Livingstone just enjoys poking Jews in the eye. He deserves no defence.
Trump 61 .. Cruz 22 .. Kasich 14
Clinton 37 .. Sanders 45
Clinton 30 .. Trump 57
Clinton 31 .. Cruz 44
Clinton 27 .. Kasich 52
Sanders 35 .. Trump 56
Sanders 39 .. Cruz 40
Sanders 31 .. Kasich 48
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/PPP_Release_WV_50316.pdf
Remain 39 (+1)
Leave 36 (+2)
Fieldwork April 26 and 28
http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-poll-tns-idUKKCN0XU1T1
TNS who thinks that more than a quarter of voters are undecided.
or
ORB who believes it's fewer than one in 30.
Unfortunately there are individuals who see Jewish conspiracies everywhere they look.
The Jewish scholar & historian from whom Naz Shah re-posted the 'move Israel to USA' image expresses a view. I'm sure all fans of free speech will approve.
'Finkelstein Breaks His Silence. Tells Holocaust-Mongers, “It is time to crawl back into your sewer!”'
http://tinyurl.com/jb35ruu
Richard Tyndall
"That is an absolutely fascinating article. It is pretty hard to refute his contentions as well."
Thanks for linking this article , it really is an intresting article, and a must read to try and understand many of the points raised on all sides.
I accept that Naz didn't mean to cause offence and think she's taking reasonable steps to make up for it and should in due course be forgiven. Livingstone, however, should know better, and his enjoyment in winding people up with shock-jock chatter was spectacularly inappropriate here.
Obviously were he to win, awesome campaign by Sir Lynton Crosby, and excellent message discipline by Zac Goldsmith
Trump off his trolley ?!? .... Sorry .... apologies to any offended trolley worldwide.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/mark-salter-mccain-adviser-hillary-clinton-supports-222749
So the DKs are falling 2:1 in favour of Leave...
The poll you're after was part of their EU wide polling?
Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly said Tuesday that GOP presidential front-runner Donald Trump could still pick up female votes this fall, despite language that she called “diminishing of womankind.”
“The comments about women, I don’t think women love that. But I don’t know that it’s going to drive their vote,” Kelly said before a crowd at the American Hospital Association meeting.
“I think if Trump behaves himself and acts presidentially, and isn’t so much of a bully — which women tend to not appreciate, either — he can move those numbers a bit,” Kelly said.
The "he's not bad, he's mad" defence.
https://twitter.com/David_Cameron/status/727583038213894144
Like watching George Best been interviewed by Terry Wogan all those years ago.
A day before polls are due to open in national and local elections, where Labour’s performance will come under intense scrutiny, MPs who are unhappy with Corbyn are indicating in private they do not believe it is the right time to mount a coup attempt.
Joe Twyman, head of political and social research at YouGov, said his data confirmed that Corbyn remained “a country mile” ahead of other potential candidates. “The bottom line is that those eligible to vote in the Labour party leadership election strongly supported Jeremy Corbyn last year and that has not significantly changed,” he said.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/03/jeremy-corbyns-critics-abandon-hopes-of-leadership-challenge
There are Zoomers on my timeline now seriously claiming the Nat onal is a Unionist front to 'split the SNP vote"...
Wait till they find out the Dandy MI5 connection!
https://twitter.com/David_Cameron/status/727583038213894144
And why did Labour feel that it needed to have a Muslim-only short list in that constituency? Are we only fit to be represented by those who have the same religious affiliation as ourselves? Is that what Labour values now are?
She may be sorry - but let's see what she does to show how sorry she is before deciding.
The other two look very awkward.
Zac can not hold a pint pot, and Boris wants one to piss in.
He thinks that people are playing games with the holocaust finding offence and using it to shut down debate and discussion about the actions of modern day Israel. He finds that morally offensive and it is frankly impossible to disagree after even a moment's reflection.
But that goes a very long way from excusing those who challenge Israel's right to exist, Jews right to exist and their right to play a full part in our society which some have challenged on this site over the last couple of days.
I fear that his left wing views are causing him to cut an excessive amount of slack to those who might hold those views or at least are willing to associate with those who hold those views. He is right that Naz Shah is being manipulated and that is ultimately a gift to anti-Semitism not something that should be encouraged or condoned. Whether he is right about Livingstone's contributions I am far less sure.
West Virginia is modern Dixiecrat that is now elements of the GOP.
What a nice day
For the Eton *****s
Livingstone knew what he was doing. Trying to pretend that he didn't really mean it or was ill or not up to it is just an attempt to avoid placing the responsibility where it belongs: on the person saying it. It's just another attempt to evade seeing what is in front of our eyes: a number of Labour politicians and supporters have some seriously unpleasant and offensive views about Jews and too many people have rushed to excuse them or justify them and/or to blame the targets.
Goodness we have even had on this board one person suggest that Jews should stay out of public life in order not to draw attention and hatred to themselves.
The Labour carpet has been picked up and all sorts of nasty things are crawling out from underneath.
Even if those YouGov figures from the Guardian are accurate, 43% still represents a significant weakening of Corbyn's position compared with last year's 59%'
Horses for courses in such states.
In time the hispanic demographic will come into play but probably not a swing state until 2024/28.
He was not making a serious historical point: no respectable historian relies on one book which falsifies and manipulates the historical record. It's no better than relying on David Irving, for heaven's sake.
This article - http://www.thetower.org/article/the-holocaust-the-left-and-the-return-of-hate/ - and this book - Israel and the European Left: Between Solidarity and Delegitimization by Colin Shindler are pretty good guides to a significant strain of Leftist thought on Jews and Israel.
I was genuinely surprised to find that, outside of a defined set of muslim extremists and a tiny and hopefully diminishing BNP, there was any anti-Semitism in the country. Now I will qualify this by saying that I have never lived in a major city so absolutely understand I am probably not well placed to comment on the real situation. But I have always held a strong impression that the events of 70 years ago and the fact we had fought the Germans and then found out the true depths of their depravity under the Nazi regime had effectively made anti Semitism a complete non starter in British society.
I am not in this case talking about being anti-Likud, anti-settler or pro-Palestinian. I believe you can still be all of those things and not be anti-Semitic. I just find it hard to believe that, after all that happened just a few decades ago and all that Britain stood for in that fight, there are still people who can be anti-Jewish.
Presently Trump will carry the state but if he implodes or loses by 10 point plus then states like Georgia will come into play.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/03/data-gap-lets-migrants-disappear-as-eu-opens-door-to-127-million/
I hate to interrupt your profound discussion about how Livingstone isn't antisemitic if you tilt your head at the right angle, squint, and pull up your trouser leg honest, but I wanna talk about EURef predictions: specifically, ElectionsEtc's frankly magisterial round up of all the predictions IN THE FUCKING WORLD
I thought I had done a good job but I've got less than a third of theirs and I'm feeling like somebody's run over me like a truck. The preds they list are:
* Polls
* Citizen forecasts
* Expert forecasts
* Volunteer forecasts
* Poll based models
* Non-poll based models
* Prediction markets
* Betting markets
Woo, comprehensive, huh? Good job, huh? Well it certainly deserves enormous marks for spread and diligence: I am impressed. Unfotunately I think there are problems...
Anybody remember 2015? Every academic model except one used polls as input and all of them had one absofuckinglootly almighty carcrash: it was horrible. The exception was Lebo and Norpoth, who had developed a model using leader ratings and was impervious to bad polls. Problem is, about nine(?) months out they panicked and modified their model to cope with the polls...which were wrong. RodCrosby of this parish stuck with the unmodified L&N model and it worked.
The point I'm making is that if all your predictions use polls as input, then they'll all be wrong if the polls are wrong. Of the preds listed above, only "Non-poll based models" are pollproof (and volunteer forecasts as well?). All the others are drinking from the same pollspring, and I'm quite a bit sceptical.
As Fisher points out "All methods still show a strong consensus pointing towards a Remain win"...which doesn't mean anything if they all take polls as input.
Incidentally the only pollproof model - Matt Qvortrup's model - shows a much tighter result: 52/48.
WW2 is a long time ago. People forget. Holocaust denial and revisionism is still around and peddled by all sorts of people. It is no coincidence that much of the source of anti-Semitism in European society these days emanates from people who come from outside Europe, who did not necessarily view WW2 in the way you describe and who were not confronted with the horror (and, to be fair, this was a European crime). Nor have they ever been confronted by those within their own societies who wished to join the Axis powers in attacking Jews (Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem).
And this works both ways: when Israel recently wanted to include and honour a brave Arab who had saved some Jewish lives in North Africa into the list of the Righteous at Yad Vashem, his family refused. They refused to accept an honour for someone who saved lives, despite all that we are told the Koran says about this, as if they were either ashamed of what he did or hated Israel so much that they did not want their own relative honoured for an act of mercy.
We have to some extent reimported the virus of anti-Semitism: transmuted and altered and triggered by different things (not the classic Christian view of Jews as Christ's killer) with the growth in Muslim communities in Europe.
No - I am not surprised that anti-Jewish feeling is no longer a non-starter in parts of British society.
Reckless phenomenon
Only a day or two left on the iplayer.
Preserved for the nation on youtube.
I think there's time for a full run through whilst I do admin in the office all day... I'm off football.
Though I might retain an interest in the PB Fantasy Footie if I can motivate myself for one last push..