Nevertheless, if your family reported nearly everyone they met in the NW being leave, then either they weren't in fact meeting a representative cross-section, or people weren't being entirely straight.
Probably true. They weren't doing any sort of analysis. It was the contrast with the assumption that people made in London i.e. that Remain would likely win. My daughter was surprised by the sorts of people she would have expected in London to be Remain (and who largely were) who were for Leave. Purely anecdotal. I only mention it because they got the result right unlike - as they crowed later - me, who is more interested in politics.
Interesting - although the one piece of academic analysis I have seen of the vote suggests that both London and the NW were close to par, once the tendency of younger people to vote remain and vice versa, and graduates to vote remain and vice versa, had been allowed for. So on average this would suggest that the same "type of person" would have the same probability of voting remain in either location.
Edit/ and I got it wrong, too. My brother, who runs a restaurant in the Home Counties, had told me that most of his customers were leave, but I discounted this information.
The real outlier was the former London County Council area, which voted Remain by 72% to 28%. The twenty boroughs of Outer London voted Remain by 54% to 46%. In fact, Outer London was much closer to the rest of England than it was to Inner London in terms of the way it voted. 5 Outer London boroughs voted Leave, and 5 more came close to voting Leave. Conservative boroughs in Inner London (Wandsworth, Westminster, Kensington) were almost as solid for Remain as Labour boroughs.
All true. But then I suggest the proportion of graduates is significantly higher amongst inner London residents than in the suburbs, with the proportion of pensioners significantly lower. So the model probably holds.
I think it's more a case of Inner London having its own very distinct political culture. It has a huge number of very wealthy people, very trendy people, people either working in government, or in those parts of the private sector that work closely with government, and the City. In no other part of the country did you find 12 contiguous boroughs going 72% for Remain.
It would be interesting to crunch the numbers, since really your view is just a large anecdote. In truth I doubt you are saying much more than that Inner London has an unusual concentration of young (up to max working age) and qualified people.
Didn't they say what happened in Cologne could not happen in the UK since those found guilty couldn't get in. Who'd have thunk it.... it's not just them.
Didn't they say what happened in Cologne could not happen in the UK since those found guilty couldn't get in. Who'd have thunk it.... it's not just them.
Foreigner in the UK commits a crime and what? It's the end of civilisation/we're being overrun by an alien culture?
Nevertheless, if your family reported nearly everyone they met in the NW being leave, then either they weren't in fact meeting a representative cross-section, or people weren't being entirely straight.
Probably true. They weren't doing any sort of analysis. It was the contrast with the assumption that people made in London i.e. that Remain would likely win. My daughter was surprised by the sorts of people she would have expected in London to be Remain (and who largely were) who were for Leave. Purely anecdotal. I only mention it because they got the result right unlike - as they crowed later - me, who is more interested in politics.
Edit/ and I got it wrong, too. My brother, who runs a restaurant in the Home Counties, had told me that most of his customers were leave, but I discounted this information.
(Wandsworth, Westminster, Kensington) were almost as solid for Remain as Labour boroughs.
All true. But then I suggest the proportion of graduates is significantly higher amongst inner London residents than in the suburbs, with the proportion of pensioners significantly lower. So the model probably holds.
I think it's more a case of Inner London having its own very distinct political culture. It has a huge number of very wealthy people, very trendy people, people either working in government, or in those parts of the private sector that work closely with government, and the City. In no other part of the country did you find 12 contiguous boroughs going 72% for Remain.
It would be interesting to crunch the numbers, since really your view is just a large anecdote. In truth I doubt you are saying much more than that Inner London has an unusual concentration of young (up to max working age) and qualified people.
If Yougov is right 75% of 18-24 year olds voted Remain. But, most Inner London voters are aged over 24. About 58% of graduates, and 57% of professional people voted Remain overall. But, in Inner London, the Remain vote was 72%, implying that it was far higher there among graduates and professionals than it was elsewhere. Conversely (and I don't have detailed data) I imagine that most professional people and graduates in places like South Essex, North Kent, or Lincolnshire will have voted Leave.
Didn't they say what happened in Cologne could not happen in the UK since those found guilty couldn't get in. Who'd have thunk it.... it's not just them.
Foreigner in the UK commits a crime and what? It's the end of civilisation/we're being overrun by an alien culture?
On 1 July, Choudary's wife, Rubana Akhtar, also known as Umm Luqman told him: "It's haram (forbidden) to spend more than three nights without giving bayah (swearing allegiance) once it has been announced."
I note the BBC couldn't actually stomach saying "yes".
I don't always agree with his politics, and he let himself down during the EU ref again, but I find it hard to dislike John Major.
I think he's a genuine patriot, smarter than people think and has been a great advocate for sport in this country.
It may be inverted snobbishness but I don't want old style, Old Etonian Tories of the old school to succeed me and go back to the old complacent, consensus ways. John Major is someone who has fought his way up from the bottom and is far more in tune with the skilled and ambitious and worthwhile working classes than Douglas Hurd is.
- Margaret Thatcher to Woodrow Wyatt (23 November 1990), per Sarah Curtis (ed.), "The Journals of Woodrow Wyatt". Volume Two (Pan, 2000), pp. 401-402.
Edit/ and I got it wrong, too. My brother, who runs a restaurant in the Home Counties, had told me that most of his customers were leave, but I discounted this information.
(Wandsworth, Westminster, Kensington) were almost as solid for Remain as Labour boroughs.
.
I think it's more a case of Inner London having its own very distinct political culture. It has a huge number of very wealthy people, very trendy people, people either working in government, or in those parts of the private sector that work closely with government, and the City. In no other part of the country did you find 12 contiguous boroughs going 72% for Remain.
It would be interesting to crunch the numbers, since really your view is just a large anecdote. In truth I doubt you are saying much more than that Inner London has an unusual concentration of young (up to max working age) and qualified people.
If Yougov is right 75% of 18-24 year olds voted Remain. But, most Inner London voters are aged over 24. About 58% of graduates, and 57% of professional people voted Remain overall. But, in Inner London, the Remain vote was 72%, implying that it was far higher there among graduates and professionals than it was elsewhere. Conversely (and I don't have detailed data) I imagine that most professional people and graduates in places like South Essex, North Kent, or Lincolnshire will have voted Leave.
The analysis I saw - which was a link here on PB - looked at the correlations between a range of socio-economic factors and voting results, by council area, and identified age and qualification as the two with the strongest relationship. It then modelled the expected voting result based on age and qualification for each region. Scotland was significantly and Wales marginally more remain than the model predicted, the North East and somewhere else (possibly part of the Midlands, I can't recall) marginally more leave. London was almost on par.
If you are right and Inner London was more remain than expected from age/quals, then it must follow that outer London was more leave than age/quals. Whilst parts of outer London were quite leave, these were areas with relatively high retired populations and lots of cabbies/lorry/van driver types who would be leave in the model. I don't believe that outer London would have come out more towards leave, after adjusting for age and graduates, than, say, the Home Counties. Thus it remains my view that the inner London position reflects the high graduate percentage and the relative absence of pensioners.
Crickey they are running quickly in the 200m qualifying.
20.30 is going to be lucky to qualify for the semi finals!!
After the 400m final and the general clusterf##k that has been going on (like tipping the wrong chemicals in the pool), are we absolutely sure the Brazilians have measured up this track correctly?
I note the BBC couldn't actually stomach saying "yes".
I don't always agree with his politics, and he let himself down during the EU ref again, but I find it hard to dislike John Major.
I think he's a genuine patriot, smarter than people think and has been a great advocate for sport in this country.
It may be inverted snobbishness but I don't want old style, Old Etonian Tories of the old school to succeed me and go back to the old complacent, consensus ways. John Major is someone who has fought his way up from the bottom and is far more in tune with the skilled and ambitious and worthwhile working classes than Douglas Hurd is.
- Margaret Thatcher to Woodrow Wyatt (23 November 1990), per Sarah Curtis (ed.), "The Journals of Woodrow Wyatt". Volume Two (Pan, 2000), pp. 401-402.
Shortly before he became PM, one of my close friends worked in the civil service under Major. His view was that Major was an extremely astute and clever man who should not be under-estimated. Needless to say when he became (surprise) PM my friend dined out on his judgement for a little while, until events enabled the rest of us to extract years of enjoyment at his expense. Maybe history will see him right after all.
Edit/ after all, no-one has ever chalked up more GE votes than Major in 1992. Although I have a suspicion that this record is heading towards one T May. The Tories do so much better when they pick someone from an ordinary background.
I note the BBC couldn't actually stomach saying "yes".
I don't always agree with his politics, and he let himself down during the EU ref again, but I find it hard to dislike John Major.
I think he's a genuine patriot, smarter than people think and has been a great advocate for sport in this country.
My Dad met him a few times and said he was incredibly charming. At one point my Dad popped into Downing Street to drop off a Christmas present for someone and bumped in to John who perched on the edge of a desk and chatted for 15 minutes or so. My Dad was always slightly surprised that John didn't have anywhere better to be...
Probably he is one of those very talented people who make brilliant top team members but aren't natural leaders for the very top job. Such people nevertheless tend to get promoted to the top rather too often (/edit one G Brown comes to mind)(/edit2 except perhaps for the bit about being brilliant in a team!)
I note the BBC couldn't actually stomach saying "yes".
I don't always agree with his politics, and he let himself down during the EU ref again, but I find it hard to dislike John Major.
I think he's a genuine patriot, smarter than people think and has been a great advocate for sport in this country.
My Dad met him a few times and said he was incredibly charming. At one point my Dad popped into Downing Street to drop off a Christmas present for someone and bumped in to John who perched on the edge of a desk and chatted for 15 minutes or so. My Dad was always slightly surprised that John didn't have anywhere better to be...
I note the BBC couldn't actually stomach saying "yes".
I don't always agree with his politics, and he let himself down during the EU ref again, but I find it hard to dislike John Major.
I think he's a genuine patriot, smarter than people think and has been a great advocate for sport in this country.
My Dad met him a few times and said he was incredibly charming. At one point my Dad popped into Downing Street to drop off a Christmas present for someone and bumped in to John who perched on the edge of a desk and chatted for 15 minutes or so. My Dad was always slightly surprised that John didn't have anywhere better to be...
I note the BBC couldn't actually stomach saying "yes".
I don't always agree with his politics, and he let himself down during the EU ref again, but I find it hard to dislike John Major.
I think he's a genuine patriot, smarter than people think and has been a great advocate for sport in this country.
It may be inverted snobbishness but I don't want old style, Old Etonian Tories of the old school to succeed me and go back to the old complacent, consensus ways. John Major is someone who has fought his way up from the bottom and is far more in tune with the skilled and ambitious and worthwhile working classes than Douglas Hurd is.
- Margaret Thatcher to Woodrow Wyatt (23 November 1990), per Sarah Curtis (ed.), "The Journals of Woodrow Wyatt". Volume Two (Pan, 2000), pp. 401-402.
Shortly before he became PM, one of my close friends worked in the civil service under Major. His view was that Major was an extremely astute and clever man who should not be under-estimated. Needless to say when he became (surprise) PM my friend dined out on his judgement for a little while, until events enabled the rest of us to extract years of enjoyment at his expense. Maybe history will see him right after all.
Edit/ after all, no-one has ever chalked up more GE votes than Major in 1992. Although I have a suspicion that this record is heading towards one T May. The Tories do so much better when they pick someone from an ordinary background.
She'll be popular until she starts making decisions.
I note the BBC couldn't actually stomach saying "yes".
I don't always agree with his politics, and he let himself down during the EU ref again, but I find it hard to dislike John Major.
I think he's a genuine patriot, smarter than people think and has been a great advocate for sport in this country.
My Dad met him a few times and said he was incredibly charming. At one point my Dad popped into Downing Street to drop off a Christmas present for someone and bumped in to John who perched on the edge of a desk and chatted for 15 minutes or so. My Dad was always slightly surprised that John didn't have anywhere better to be...
He wrote a (full) handwritten letter to my parents of two pages in response to a note of congratulations on winning the 1992GE too.
Extremely polite but how did he find the time?
Conversely, they wrote to Cameron (twice) and never heard a bean.
I note the BBC couldn't actually stomach saying "yes".
I don't always agree with his politics, and he let himself down during the EU ref again, but I find it hard to dislike John Major.
I think he's a genuine patriot, smarter than people think and has been a great advocate for sport in this country.
My Dad met him a few times and said he was incredibly charming. At one point my Dad popped into Downing Street to drop off a Christmas present for someone and bumped in to John who perched on the edge of a desk and chatted for 15 minutes or so. My Dad was always slightly surprised that John didn't have anywhere better to be...
No doubt John was waiting for Edwina...
Not in that particular office. Its occupant would have been very disappointed with John for any misbehaviour
I doubt the majority of Labour members give a jot what the rest of the country thinks. They’re uneligible to vote, are all Murdoch lackeys etc and besides, they’re all wrong. - Cont Pg 94.
WHY DOESN'T THE ELECTORATE JUST GO JOIN THE TORIES?!
Given elections since 1979 they generally do (if you count Blair as tory)
Which is isn't, so you can't.
Well ask the typical labour party member at the moment and you might get a different answer..
You might. Doesn't make it true.
It is interesting how both the Labour left and the Conservatives conspire to airbrush the fact that Blair not only defeated he Tories he utterly eviscerated them to the point that they had to change dramatically to get back into power.
Oh well.
I do think that in the long run, Blair did immense damage to his own party, by causing it to wither and die in many of its heartlands. While his government was not a Conservative one, it did appear so, on economic issues, to Labour voters in Scotland, and in a lot of working class districts. At the same time, the left wing and pro-EU policies which his government implemented were very much the concerns of the Inner London left. They either left many Labour voters in the provinces cold, or alienated them.
That's not to say that Corbyn is the answer to Labour's woes, but nor is a return to Blairism.
Both the most successful Tory and Labour leaders of recent years (Thatcher and Blair) left their parties mere empty husks. It took the Tories some time to learn how to be a party again and, even now, they still define themselves by reference to Thatcher. Ditto with Blair and Labour.
It's as if both were political Dementors, sucking the lives out of the parties they led.
I note the BBC couldn't actually stomach saying "yes".
I don't always agree with his politics, and he let himself down during the EU ref again, but I find it hard to dislike John Major.
I think he's a genuine patriot, smarter than people think and has been a great advocate for sport in this country.
My Dad met him a few times and said he was incredibly charming. At one point my Dad popped into Downing Street to drop off a Christmas present for someone and bumped in to John who perched on the edge of a desk and chatted for 15 minutes or so. My Dad was always slightly surprised that John didn't have anywhere better to be...
Much as I'm glad to see the back of that individual for a while I feel most uncomfortable about what he has been convicted of. 'Inciting Support for ISIS'
It sounds dreadfully Illiberal, repressive and McCarthyite.
We could have had half the Labour Party imprisoned in the 1950s including Ed Milibands Father if we had made inciting support for the USSR or inciting support for communism illegal.
That law might have been used to snare a wrongun this time but the scope for such a law to be misused by a capricious government is dreadful.
Much as I'm glad to see the back of that individual for a while I feel most uncomfortable about what he has been convicted of. 'Inciting Support for ISIS'
It sounds dreadfully Illiberal, repressive and McCarthyite.
We could have had half the Labour Party imprisoned in the 1950s including Ed Milibands Father if we had made inciting support for the USSR or inciting support for communism illegal.
That law might have been used to snare a wrongun this time but the scope for such a law to be misused by a capricious government is dreadful.
I agree. Especially as it's only 'for a proscribed organisation'. It doesn't have to be headloppers; it seems like it could be the WI if the authorities wished it.
Much as I'm glad to see the back of that individual for a while I feel most uncomfortable about what he has been convicted of. 'Inciting Support for ISIS'
It sounds dreadfully Illiberal, repressive and McCarthyite.
We could have had half the Labour Party imprisoned in the 1950s including Ed Milibands Father if we had made inciting support for the USSR or inciting support for communism illegal.
That law might have been used to snare a wrongun this time but the scope for such a law to be misused by a capricious government is dreadful.
It is very difficult. What is even more difficult now is what are they going to do with him in prison? Let him in gen pop and try to radicalize lots of young men or lock him up away from everybody else and turn him into a martyr.
Crickey they are running quickly in the 200m qualifying.
20.30 is going to be lucky to qualify for the semi finals!!
After the 400m final and the general clusterf##k that has been going on (like tipping the wrong chemicals in the pool), are we absolutely sure the Brazilians have measured up this track correctly?
It was said beforehand that it would be a quick track, I think the surface is of a new material compared to London.
But one hopes that the IAAF and the IOC bought their own measuring equipment and people who know how to use it! They probably double checked again to ratify the smashing of the women's 10k by Almaz Ayana on the first afternoon.
Edit: Bolt has said he wants to go out with the biggest bang that would be the 200m WR, good luck to him!
Much as I'm glad to see the back of that individual for a while I feel most uncomfortable about what he has been convicted of. 'Inciting Support for ISIS'
It sounds dreadfully Illiberal, repressive and McCarthyite.
We could have had half the Labour Party imprisoned in the 1950s including Ed Milibands Father if we had made inciting support for the USSR or inciting support for communism illegal.
That law might have been used to snare a wrongun this time but the scope for such a law to be misused by a capricious government is dreadful.
I think - or certainly would hope - that the offence is acting violently, or encouraging others to do so. In support of the regime, rather than simply expressing support for it. but I agree it is potentially a fine, and moveable, line.
Much as I'm glad to see the back of that individual for a while I feel most uncomfortable about what he has been convicted of. 'Inciting Support for ISIS'
It sounds dreadfully Illiberal, repressive and McCarthyite.
We could have had half the Labour Party imprisoned in the 1950s including Ed Milibands Father if we had made inciting support for the USSR or inciting support for communism illegal.
That law might have been used to snare a wrongun this time but the scope for such a law to be misused by a capricious government is dreadful.
I agree. Especially as it's only 'for a proscribed organisation'. It doesn't have to be headloppers; it seems like it could be the WI if the authorities wished it.
I am sure the WI would use this as a method of recourse:
Much as I'm glad to see the back of that individual for a while I feel most uncomfortable about what he has been convicted of. 'Inciting Support for ISIS'
It sounds dreadfully Illiberal, repressive and McCarthyite.
We could have had half the Labour Party imprisoned in the 1950s including Ed Milibands Father if we had made inciting support for the USSR or inciting support for communism illegal.
That law might have been used to snare a wrongun this time but the scope for such a law to be misused by a capricious government is dreadful.
It is very difficult. What is even more difficult now is what are they going to do with him in prison? Let him in gen pop and try to radicalize lots of young men or lock him up away from everybody else and turn him into a martyr.
Most of the radicalisation appears to be going on either on the Internet or in prisons. So of course we are focusing our attention on schools and mosques.
Crickey they are running quickly in the 200m qualifying.
20.30 is going to be lucky to qualify for the semi finals!!
After the 400m final and the general clusterf##k that has been going on (like tipping the wrong chemicals in the pool), are we absolutely sure the Brazilians have measured up this track correctly?
It was said beforehand that it would be a quick track, I think the surface is of a new material compared to London.
But one hopes that the IAAF and the IOC bought their own measuring equipment and people who know how to use it! They probably double checked again to ratify the smashing of the women's 10k by Almaz Ayana on the first afternoon.
This 200m could go very very quick. The Canadian lad has just done 20.09 and isn't even out of breath and Bolt went round as the commentator put it with the handbrake on the whole way round.
Edit/ and I got it wrong, too. My brother, who runs a restaurant in the Home Counties, had told me that most of his customers were leave, but I discounted this information.
(Wandsworth, Westminster, Kensington) were almost as solid for Remain as Labour boroughs.
.
I think it's more a case of Inner London having its own very distinct political culture. It has a huge number of very wealthy people, very trendy people, people either working in government, or in those parts of the private sector that work closely with government, and the City. In no other part of the country did you find 12 contiguous boroughs going 72% for Remain.
It would be interesting to crunch the numbers, since really your view is just a large anecdote. In truth I doubt you are saying much more than that Inner London has an unusual concentration of young (up to max working age) and qualified people.
elsewhere. Conversely (and I don't have detailed data) I imagine that most professional people and graduates in places like South Essex, North Kent, or Lincolnshire will have voted Leave.
The analysis I saw - which was a link here on PB - looked at the correlations between a range of socio-economic factors and voting results, by council area, and identified age and qualification as the two with the strongest relationship. It then modelled the expected voting result based on age and qualification for each region. Scotland was significantly and Wales marginally more remain than the model predicted, the North East and somewhere else (possibly part of the Midlands, I can't recall) marginally more leave. London was almost on par.
If you are right and Inner London was more remain than expected from age/quals, then it must follow that outer London was more leave than age/quals. Whilst parts of outer London were quite leave, these were areas with relatively high retired populations and lots of cabbies/lorry/van driver types who would be leave in the model. I don't believe that outer London would have come out more towards leave, after adjusting for age and graduates, than, say, the Home Counties. Thus it remains my view that the inner London position reflects the high graduate percentage and the relative absence of pensioners.
Chris Hanretty had an interesting set of projected results, although I can't find the link.
(Wandsworth, Westminster, Kensington) were almost as solid for Remain as Labour boroughs.
.
I think it's more a case of Inner London having its own very distinct political culture. It has a huge number of very wealthy people, very trendy people, people either working in government, or in those parts of the private sector that work closely with government, and the City. In no other part of the country did you find 12 contiguous boroughs going 72% for Remain.
It would be interesting to crunch the numbers, since really your view is just a large anecdote. In truth I doubt you are saying much more than that Inner London has an unusual concentration of young (up to max working age) and qualified people.
elsewhere. Conversely (and I don't have detailed data) I imagine that most professional people and graduates in places like South Essex, North Kent, or Lincolnshire will have voted Leave.
The analysis I saw - which was a link here on PB - looked at the correlations between a range of socio-economic factors and voting results, by council area, and identified age and qualification as the two with the strongest relationship. It then modelled the expected voting result based on age and qualification for each region. Scotland was significantly and Wales marginally more remain than the model predicted, the North East and somewhere else (possibly part of the Midlands, I can't recall) marginally more leave. London was almost on par.
If you are right and Inner London was more remain than expected from age/quals, then it must follow that outer London was more leave than age/quals. Whilst parts of outer London were quite leave, these were areas with relatively high retired populations and lots of cabbies/lorry/van driver types who would be leave in the model. I don't believe that outer London would have come out more towards leave, after adjusting for age and graduates, than, say, the Home Counties. Thus it remains my view that the inner London position reflects the high graduate percentage and the relative absence of pensioners.
Chris Hanretty had an interesting set of projected results, although I can't find the link.
Wasn't that speculative - i.e. modelled on assumptions before the result - rather than based on actual analysis of voting patterns, though?
Crickey they are running quickly in the 200m qualifying.
20.30 is going to be lucky to qualify for the semi finals!!
After the 400m final and the general clusterf##k that has been going on (like tipping the wrong chemicals in the pool), are we absolutely sure the Brazilians have measured up this track correctly?
It was said beforehand that it would be a quick track, I think the surface is of a new material compared to London.
But one hopes that the IAAF and the IOC bought their own measuring equipment and people who know how to use it! They probably double checked again to ratify the smashing of the women's 10k by Almaz Ayana on the first afternoon.
This 200m could go very very quick. The Canadian lad has just done 20.09 and isn't even out of breath and Bolt went round as the commentator put it with the handbrake on the whole way round.
Yep. Bolt thinks the WR could be on for the final, that would be a way to bow out!
Crickey they are running quickly in the 200m qualifying.
20.30 is going to be lucky to qualify for the semi finals!!
After the 400m final and the general clusterf##k that has been going on (like tipping the wrong chemicals in the pool), are we absolutely sure the Brazilians have measured up this track correctly?
It was said beforehand that it would be a quick track, I think the surface is of a new material compared to London.
But one hopes that the IAAF and the IOC bought their own measuring equipment and people who know how to use it! They probably double checked again to ratify the smashing of the women's 10k by Almaz Ayana on the first afternoon.
This 200m could go very very quick. The Canadian lad has just done 20.09 and isn't even out of breath and Bolt went round as the commentator put it with the handbrake on the whole way round.
Yep. Bolt thinks the WR could be on for the final, that would be a way to bow out!
Perhaps running anti clockwise is easier in the Southern Hemisphere?
Much as I'm glad to see the back of that individual for a while I feel most uncomfortable about what he has been convicted of. 'Inciting Support for ISIS'
It sounds dreadfully Illiberal, repressive and McCarthyite.
We could have had half the Labour Party imprisoned in the 1950s including Ed Milibands Father if we had made inciting support for the USSR or inciting support for communism illegal.
That law might have been used to snare a wrongun this time but the scope for such a law to be misused by a capricious government is dreadful.
It is very difficult. What is even more difficult now is what are they going to do with him in prison? Let him in gen pop and try to radicalize lots of young men or lock him up away from everybody else and turn him into a martyr.
The problem is that in convicting him for expressing opinions we have made him a martyr.
I would rather have seen him stand trial for treason - ISIS have declared war on us so encouraging people to go and fight for them is Treason. Instead Blair brought in a deeply oppressive law that as Luckyguy1983 pointed out could be used to criminalise support for the WI.
Much as I'm glad to see the back of that individual for a while I feel most uncomfortable about what he has been convicted of. 'Inciting Support for ISIS'
It sounds dreadfully Illiberal, repressive and McCarthyite.
We could have had half the Labour Party imprisoned in the 1950s including Ed Milibands Father if we had made inciting support for the USSR or inciting support for communism illegal.
That law might have been used to snare a wrongun this time but the scope for such a law to be misused by a capricious government is dreadful.
It is very difficult. What is even more difficult now is what are they going to do with him in prison? Let him in gen pop and try to radicalize lots of young men or lock him up away from everybody else and turn him into a martyr.
The problem is that in convicting him for expressing opinions we have made him a martyr.
I would rather have seen him stand trial for treason - ISIS have declared war on us so encouraging people to go and fight for them is Treason. Instead Blair brought in a deeply oppressive law that as Luckyguy1983 pointed out could be used to criminalise support for the WI.
Also, if we could convict him of treason we could have him hanged, drawn and quartered at dawn on Tower Hill to whooping crowds of American tourists.
Much as I'm glad to see the back of that individual for a while I feel most uncomfortable about what he has been convicted of. 'Inciting Support for ISIS'
It sounds dreadfully Illiberal, repressive and McCarthyite.
We could have had half the Labour Party imprisoned in the 1950s including Ed Milibands Father if we had made inciting support for the USSR or inciting support for communism illegal.
That law might have been used to snare a wrongun this time but the scope for such a law to be misused by a capricious government is dreadful.
It is very difficult. What is even more difficult now is what are they going to do with him in prison? Let him in gen pop and try to radicalize lots of young men or lock him up away from everybody else and turn him into a martyr.
The problem is that in convicting him for expressing opinions we have made him a martyr.
I would rather have seen him stand trial for treason - ISIS have declared war on us so encouraging people to go and fight for them is Treason. Instead Blair brought in a deeply oppressive law that as Luckyguy1983 pointed out could be used to criminalise support for the WI.
Using that logic, we can't prosecute anyone for anything lest they become a martyr to someone.
Yes, we could have a deranged Home Secretary that proscribes the WI, but it'd never stand up in court!
Much as I'm glad to see the back of that individual for a while I feel most uncomfortable about what he has been convicted of. 'Inciting Support for ISIS'
It sounds dreadfully Illiberal, repressive and McCarthyite.
We could have had half the Labour Party imprisoned in the 1950s including Ed Milibands Father if we had made inciting support for the USSR or inciting support for communism illegal.
That law might have been used to snare a wrongun this time but the scope for such a law to be misused by a capricious government is dreadful.
I think - or certainly would hope - that the offence is acting violently, or encouraging others to do so. In support of the regime, rather than simply expressing support for it. but I agree it is potentially a fine, and moveable, line.
It's a very fine line, but for this scumbag I'm not sure any tears would be shed. Throw away the key.
It will be of interest to see what was the process that led to his conviction, which might come out soon or at the appeal. He's clearly had spooks following him around for a while, and there would have been a process involving the DPP, Home Sec (Theresa May, which could explain her silence in May and June) and senior judges.
Much as I'm glad to see the back of that individual for a while I feel most uncomfortable about what he has been convicted of. 'Inciting Support for ISIS'
It sounds dreadfully Illiberal, repressive and McCarthyite.
We could have had half the Labour Party imprisoned in the 1950s including Ed Milibands Father if we had made inciting support for the USSR or inciting support for communism illegal.
That law might have been used to snare a wrongun this time but the scope for such a law to be misused by a capricious government is dreadful.
It is very difficult. What is even more difficult now is what are they going to do with him in prison? Let him in gen pop and try to radicalize lots of young men or lock him up away from everybody else and turn him into a martyr.
The problem is that in convicting him for expressing opinions we have made him a martyr.
I would rather have seen him stand trial for treason - ISIS have declared war on us so encouraging people to go and fight for them is Treason. Instead Blair brought in a deeply oppressive law that as Luckyguy1983 pointed out could be used to criminalise support for the WI.
Also, if we could convict him of treason we could have him hanged, drawn and quartered at dawn on Tower Hill to whooping crowds of American tourists.
Only yesterday saw the 75th anniversary of a spy being executed at the Tower, the last ever execution at that location:
"He was caught still wearing his flying suit and carrying £500 in British currency, forged identity papers, a radio transmitter, and a German sausage.[1]"
Given the way prices of offshore wind are falling and the new generation batteries becoming available is it possible that the reason we don't need Hinckley Point built is because other solutions are now available..
Much as I'm glad to see the back of that individual for a while I feel most uncomfortable about what he has been convicted of. 'Inciting Support for ISIS'
It sounds dreadfully Illiberal, repressive and McCarthyite.
We could have had half the Labour Party imprisoned in the 1950s including Ed Milibands Father if we had made inciting support for the USSR or inciting support for communism illegal.
That law might have been used to snare a wrongun this time but the scope for such a law to be misused by a capricious government is dreadful.
Much as I'm glad to see the back of that individual for a while I feel most uncomfortable about what he has been convicted of. 'Inciting Support for ISIS'
It sounds dreadfully Illiberal, repressive and McCarthyite.
We could have had half the Labour Party imprisoned in the 1950s including Ed Milibands Father if we had made inciting support for the USSR or inciting support for communism illegal.
That law might have been used to snare a wrongun this time but the scope for such a law to be misused by a capricious government is dreadful.
It is very difficult. What is even more difficult now is what are they going to do with him in prison? Let him in gen pop and try to radicalize lots of young men or lock him up away from everybody else and turn him into a martyr.
The problem is that in convicting him for expressing opinions we have made him a martyr.
I would rather have seen him stand trial for treason - ISIS have declared war on us so encouraging people to go and fight for them is Treason. Instead Blair brought in a deeply oppressive law that as Luckyguy1983 pointed out could be used to criminalise support for the WI.
Also, if we could convict him of treason we could have him hanged, drawn and quartered at dawn on Tower Hill to whooping crowds of American tourists.
Only yesterday saw the 75th anniversary of a spy being executed at the Tower, the last ever execution at that location:
"He was caught still wearing his flying suit and carrying £500 in British currency, forged identity papers, a radio transmitter, and a German sausage.[1]"
Given the way prices of offshore wind are falling and the new generation batteries becoming available is it possible that the reason we don't need Hinckley Point built is because other solutions are now available..
It's not that we need to only replace the 3,200 MWh that Hinkley Point would have delivered, but also the capacity that will be lost when old plants are decommissioned.
Given the way prices of offshore wind are falling and the new generation batteries becoming available is it possible that the reason we don't need Hinckley Point built is because other solutions are now available..
10GW is a decent chunk of energy production (at least when operating close to capacity)
In the northern hemisphere athletes have to battle against the force of Coriolis when running around the track, whereas in Rio it is helping them round.
Given the way prices of offshore wind are falling and the new generation batteries becoming available is it possible that the reason we don't need Hinckley Point built is because other solutions are now available..
10GW is a decent chunk of energy production (at least when operating close to capacity)
Given the way prices of offshore wind are falling and the new generation batteries becoming available is it possible that the reason we don't need Hinckley Point built is because other solutions are now available..
It's not that we need to only replace the 3,200 MWh that Hinkley Point would have delivered, but also the capacity that will be lost when old plants are decommissioned.
But isn't demand falling (slightly - I think certain household generation, e.g. solar, reduces demand rather than increases supply) - I'm not sure HInkley Point was for *additional* capacity was it?
Given the way prices of offshore wind are falling and the new generation batteries becoming available is it possible that the reason we don't need Hinckley Point built is because other solutions are now available..
It's not that we need to only replace the 3,200 MWh that Hinkley Point would have delivered, but also the capacity that will be lost when old plants are decommissioned.
But isn't demand falling (slightly - I think certain household generation, e.g. solar, reduces demand rather than increases supply) - I'm not sure HInkley Point was for *additional* capacity was it?
Much as I'm glad to see the back of that individual for a while I feel most uncomfortable about what he has been convicted of. 'Inciting Support for ISIS'
It sounds dreadfully Illiberal, repressive and McCarthyite.
We could have had half the Labour Party imprisoned in the 1950s including Ed Milibands Father if we had made inciting support for the USSR or inciting support for communism illegal.
That law might have been used to snare a wrongun this time but the scope for such a law to be misused by a capricious government is dreadful.
It is very difficult. What is even more difficult now is what are they going to do with him in prison? Let him in gen pop and try to radicalize lots of young men or lock him up away from everybody else and turn him into a martyr.
The problem is that in convicting him for expressing opinions we have made him a martyr.
I would rather have seen him stand trial for treason - ISIS have declared war on us so encouraging people to go and fight for them is Treason. Instead Blair brought in a deeply oppressive law that as Luckyguy1983 pointed out could be used to criminalise support for the WI.
Also, if we could convict him of treason we could have him hanged, drawn and quartered at dawn on Tower Hill to whooping crowds of American tourists.
Only yesterday saw the 75th anniversary of a spy being executed at the Tower, the last ever execution at that location:
"He was caught still wearing his flying suit and carrying £500 in British currency, forged identity papers, a radio transmitter, and a German sausage.[1]"
A knockwurst?
Apparently not - somebody on Wiki "inserted" the sausage as a joke! (But it wasn't me!)
Given the way prices of offshore wind are falling and the new generation batteries becoming available is it possible that the reason we don't need Hinckley Point built is because other solutions are now available..
It's not that we need to only replace the 3,200 MWh that Hinkley Point would have delivered, but also the capacity that will be lost when old plants are decommissioned.
But isn't demand falling (slightly - I think certain household generation, e.g. solar, reduces demand rather than increases supply) - I'm not sure HInkley Point was for *additional* capacity was it?
Almost half our existing nuclear capacity is due for decommissioning by 2025.
Given the way prices of offshore wind are falling and the new generation batteries becoming available is it possible that the reason we don't need Hinckley Point built is because other solutions are now available..
It's not that we need to only replace the 3,200 MWh that Hinkley Point would have delivered, but also the capacity that will be lost when old plants are decommissioned.
But isn't demand falling (slightly - I think certain household generation, e.g. solar, reduces demand rather than increases supply) - I'm not sure HInkley Point was for *additional* capacity was it?
No, but that was my point exactly.
Sorry I don't follow. I read you as contrasting (a) the output Hinkley Point would have created with (b) old plants being decommissioned. To my mind that seems like double counting?
Given the way prices of offshore wind are falling and the new generation batteries becoming available is it possible that the reason we don't need Hinckley Point built is because other solutions are now available..
I am not sure that the storage problem has been fully solved yet but it almost certainly will be by the time Hinkley Point is built. So it will a massively expensive white elephant.
Changing the building regs so that all new builds are obliged to have solar panels and heat exchangers, then Gas topping up solar and off-shore wind will do the trick once the new battery technology is perfected.
Given the way prices of offshore wind are falling and the new generation batteries becoming available is it possible that the reason we don't need Hinckley Point built is because other solutions are now available..
It's not that we need to only replace the 3,200 MWh that Hinkley Point would have delivered, but also the capacity that will be lost when old plants are decommissioned.
But isn't demand falling (slightly - I think certain household generation, e.g. solar, reduces demand rather than increases supply) - I'm not sure HInkley Point was for *additional* capacity was it?
Almost half our existing nuclear capacity is due for decommissioning by 2025.
That's only 4GW. Worth remembering that we have about 22GW of coal capacity in the UK that is currently sitting completely idle, and another 3.5GW of OCGT and 2.5GW of oil. Or, to put another way, 28GW of generating capacity in the UK is currently compeltely unused due to:
- falling electricity demand - cheap gas displacing coal - behind the meter solar - wind
Given the way prices of offshore wind are falling and the new generation batteries becoming available is it possible that the reason we don't need Hinckley Point built is because other solutions are now available..
It's not that we need to only replace the 3,200 MWh that Hinkley Point would have delivered, but also the capacity that will be lost when old plants are decommissioned.
But isn't demand falling (slightly - I think certain household generation, e.g. solar, reduces demand rather than increases supply) - I'm not sure HInkley Point was for *additional* capacity was it?
Almost half our existing nuclear capacity is due for decommissioning by 2025.
"UK energy policy since the 2008 Energy Act through to July 2015 has been built around reducing CO2 emissions rather than security of supply or cost. In 2010-11 the price of renewable energy certificates doubled the price or electricity from those sources – an increasing proportion, including imports – more than one-quarter.
Hence energy poverty is an issue in the UK (as elsewhere), and in the winter of 2012-13 some 31,000 excess deaths – mostly people over 75 – were reported by the Office of National Statistics, the highest figure since 2008. Since wind is intermittent, it displaces CCGT power and compromises the economics of that.
From August 2015 renewables no longer receive climate change levy exemption certificates, saving £3.9 billion over five years. In 2013-14, 18.6 TWh was involved and 67.2 million certificates were issued or redeemed, 57% for wind, 17% for biomass and 12.6% for hydro."
Comments
ABC
Clinton has unprecedented 20-point advantage over Trump among college-educated white women: https://t.co/QttIZyuZQO https://t.co/BlbuXpIoja
That it?
Took a while to report though, probably other related trials or witnesses to hide.
I note the BBC couldn't actually stomach saying "yes".
http://news.sky.com/story/anjem-choudarys-conviction-ends-years-of-police-cat-and-mouse-10539053?dcmp=snt-sf-twitter
Trump's 41-point lead among non-college white men could set a record for GOP candidates https://t.co/QttIZydoZg https://t.co/2tPVsAgQrO
Either he is a moron or the authorities are...you don't use CCleaner for that.
Yeh right, the woman who suffered terribly should just suck it up!
I need cheap services to maintain my great middle class lifestyle!
Thats very specific info...
"Many British athletes at the Rio Olympics have effusively thanked the National Lottery in televised interviews after winning a medal."
There you go it's official and straight from the horses mouth. – So, thanks John Major
Given the specific info that they are releasing with this story, it seems clear they had him bugged in every which way.
...WOW!!!
Floyd Mayweather in the audience for the boxing!
Sorry @taffys any ridiculous point you were making is far less important than FMJ
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/anjem-choudary-verdict-youtube-twitter-facebook-isis-terrorism-posts-not-deleted-a7194041.html
The answer, of course, is HELL YES!!
I think he's a genuine patriot, smarter than people think and has been a great advocate for sport in this country.
- Margaret Thatcher to Woodrow Wyatt (23 November 1990), per Sarah Curtis (ed.), "The Journals of Woodrow Wyatt". Volume Two (Pan, 2000), pp. 401-402.
https://twitter.com/sunny_hundal/status/765550957736460288
If you are right and Inner London was more remain than expected from age/quals, then it must follow that outer London was more leave than age/quals. Whilst parts of outer London were quite leave, these were areas with relatively high retired populations and lots of cabbies/lorry/van driver types who would be leave in the model. I don't believe that outer London would have come out more towards leave, after adjusting for age and graduates, than, say, the Home Counties. Thus it remains my view that the inner London position reflects the high graduate percentage and the relative absence of pensioners.
Edit/ after all, no-one has ever chalked up more GE votes than Major in 1992. Although I have a suspicion that this record is heading towards one T May. The Tories do so much better when they pick someone from an ordinary background.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37089246
And then people will look at the 1997 result....
Extremely polite but how did he find the time?
Conversely, they wrote to Cameron (twice) and never heard a bean.
'More appeasement bullshit from the Archsocialist and assorted mosques:
https://twitter.com/sunny_hundal/status/765550957736460288'
Could anyone make that up ?
Obviously the hate crime legislation doesn't apply to them.
May? Decisions? I wouldn't hold your breath...
It's as if both were political Dementors, sucking the lives out of the parties they led.
It sounds dreadfully Illiberal, repressive and McCarthyite.
We could have had half the Labour Party imprisoned in the 1950s including Ed Milibands Father if we had made inciting support for the USSR or inciting support for communism illegal.
That law might have been used to snare a wrongun this time but the scope for such a law to be misused by a capricious government is dreadful.
See upthread about the huge support for Remain in inner London
But one hopes that the IAAF and the IOC bought their own measuring equipment and people who know how to use it! They probably double checked again to ratify the smashing of the women's 10k by Almaz Ayana on the first afternoon.
Edit: Bolt has said he wants to go out with the biggest bang that would be the 200m WR, good luck to him!
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/appeal-against-a-ban-on-your-organisation
http://bit.ly/2buFWRD
I would rather have seen him stand trial for treason - ISIS have declared war on us so encouraging people to go and fight for them is Treason. Instead Blair brought in a deeply oppressive law that as Luckyguy1983 pointed out could be used to criminalise support for the WI.
Yes, we could have a deranged Home Secretary that proscribes the WI, but it'd never stand up in court!
It will be of interest to see what was the process that led to his conviction, which might come out soon or at the appeal. He's clearly had spooks following him around for a while, and there would have been a process involving the DPP, Home Sec (Theresa May, which could explain her silence in May and June) and senior judges.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josef_Jakobs
"He was caught still wearing his flying suit and carrying £500 in British currency, forged identity papers, a radio transmitter, and a German sausage.[1]"
trump 44 clinton 36
romney won it 57/41 last time.
he may turn texas into a swing state☺
Ohhh 31.8GW give or take
http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-profiles/countries-t-z/united-kingdom.aspx
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/aug/16/anjem-choudary-convicted-of-supporting-islamic-state
There’s hope for them yet.
Changing the building regs so that all new builds are obliged to have solar panels and heat exchangers, then Gas topping up solar and off-shore wind will do the trick once the new battery technology is perfected.
- falling electricity demand
- cheap gas displacing coal
- behind the meter solar
- wind
"UK energy policy since the 2008 Energy Act through to July 2015 has been built around reducing CO2 emissions rather than security of supply or cost. In 2010-11 the price of renewable energy certificates doubled the price or electricity from those sources – an increasing proportion, including imports – more than one-quarter.
Hence energy poverty is an issue in the UK (as elsewhere), and in the winter of 2012-13 some 31,000 excess deaths – mostly people over 75 – were reported by the Office of National Statistics, the highest figure since 2008. Since wind is intermittent, it displaces CCGT power and compromises the economics of that.
From August 2015 renewables no longer receive climate change levy exemption certificates, saving £3.9 billion over five years. In 2013-14, 18.6 TWh was involved and 67.2 million certificates were issued or redeemed, 57% for wind, 17% for biomass and 12.6% for hydro."