Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Labour holding up better in London where there are fewer UKIP

135

Comments

  • Options
    logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,737

    surbiton said:

    The CPS decision is not surprising. They don't have the balls!

    So, now it is open season regarding expenses. The Tories win twice over !

    Nothing to do with not having the balls. The Electoral Commission stated that they were unable to prove any intention to make false declarations. Unless you can prove intent any criminal prosecution will fail.
    Was there any unintentional under spending?
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,173
    Pulpstar said:

    Serious effort ought to be put into 4 seats in the capital by the Lib Dems

    Carshalton, Twickenham, Richmond, Bermondsey.

    Adventures into Vauxhall won't help in those seats, though obviously there is a message that could help in say Bermondsey.

    I would be surprised if they hold Carshalton as there's a big UKIP vote for the Tories to hoover up, and Heathrow is much less of an issue there.

    Richmond and Twickenham are both Heathrow seats, and both heavily Remain. I think they are more likely to hold at least one of these than Carshalton.
  • Options
    Blue_rogBlue_rog Posts: 2,019
    eek said:

    Being that I'm sat in Helsinki have we covered Labour's magic money tree and Education yet...

    Nice airport
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,173
    Patrick said:

    If you weren't so complacent about Brexit you'd see that being on the Leave side of the debate will be toxic in the next political cycle.

    So you have now accepted that it's happening?
    There's still a non-zero chance that it won't happen. If things go south Theresa May could be tempted to go for a second referendum next summer.
    Indeed it's non-zero. The likelihood is 0.00000000001%
    Nah, there's probably a 5% chance that it doesn't happen pre-2020.
  • Options


    ***** BETTING POST *****

    Ladbrokes have at last been tempted to offer a meaningful number of individual constituencies about 2 full weeks after the opposition and frankly too late to represent any meaningful degree of value - but I guess that is sort of the idea from their viewpoint!

    One exception I feel is their offer of 11/10 against the Tories winning Batley & Spen which was considered very marginal in 2015 but where the Blue Team's high hopes were thwarted by UKIP's mega 18% share of the vote which is likely to be heavily squeezed in the Tories' favour on 8 June. For the record Baxter gives the Tories a 56% chance of winning, compared with a 42% chance for Labour ...... not bad for an odds against shot!
    As ever, DYOR.

    I've looked at Batley and Spen a couple of times. Every number crunching I do says it's a Con gain. But I wonder if there could be a local Jo Cox effect here. thoughts anyone?
    The Tory candidate is Dr Ann Myatt who stood against Tim Farron in 2015. A VERY safe pair of hands in a constituency with such a delicate history.
  • Options
    PatrickPatrick Posts: 225
    rcs1000 said:

    Patrick said:

    If you weren't so complacent about Brexit you'd see that being on the Leave side of the debate will be toxic in the next political cycle.

    So you have now accepted that it's happening?
    There's still a non-zero chance that it won't happen. If things go south Theresa May could be tempted to go for a second referendum next summer.
    Indeed it's non-zero. The likelihood is 0.00000000001%
    Nah, there's probably a 5% chance that it doesn't happen pre-2020.
    Hmmm...1 in 20? This is an opinion rather than a scientific thing so not alot of point in arguing just how low the chances are.
    I guess it will hinge on the real world effect of No Deal / WTO. Armegeddon or a blip or nothing at all. For me it would have to be total armageddon on steroids with people forced into eating their pets to be worth getting subsumed into an anti-democratic superstate that hates us. But WTO / 5% tariff on washing machines? Meh.
  • Options
    PaulMPaulM Posts: 613

    PaulM said:


    I'm sceptical that the UKIP vote in seats like Batley will be heavily squuezed in the Tories' favour, as I'm unconvinved that the UKIPers there were ever Tory in the first place.

    But that's the whole "gateway drug" argument - that it doesn't matter where the Kippers came from (and I agree it was multiple sources) the fact is they've unwound to the Cons.

    It's hard to argue with the "gateway drug" hypothesis, either statistically or anecdotally. I'd like to do so... but the evidence is what it is.
    My problem with the gateway drug hypothesis (and I appreciate it might be different in the South where there is argualbly less tribalism) is that there are a large number of people who know one thing viscerally and that is they are not Tories. They might not be happy with Labour on immigration, Europe, Diane Abbot etc and can be persuaded into breaking ranks with Labour. Put putting that "X" next to Conservative is a step too far. If there was evidence that they were voting for Tory councillors that would be something.
    The leave referendum provided people of this mind a chance to vote what they think without having to vote Tory, (and in fact voting against what a Tory prime minister wanted).
    Anecdotally my extended family in South Lancashire will never vote Conservative for anything ever. It would rightly or wrongly feel like a betrayal. Most of them voted Brexit though.
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    With one exception most peoples instincts about these charges proved correct.

    That exception being the Prime Minister?
  • Options
    PaulMPaulM Posts: 613

    PaulM said:


    I'm sceptical that the UKIP vote in seats like Batley will be heavily squuezed in the Tories' favour, as I'm unconvinved that the UKIPers there were ever Tory in the first place.

    But that's the whole "gateway drug" argument - that it doesn't matter where the Kippers came from (and I agree it was multiple sources) the fact is they've unwound to the Cons.

    It's hard to argue with the "gateway drug" hypothesis, either statistically or anecdotally. I'd like to do so... but the evidence is what it is.
    agree that in aggregate they have unwound to the Tories. Just suspect that the unwind in say Someerset is different to the unwind in Labour heartlands.
  • Options
    Animal_pbAnimal_pb Posts: 608
    Patrick said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Patrick said:

    If you weren't so complacent about Brexit you'd see that being on the Leave side of the debate will be toxic in the next political cycle.

    So you have now accepted that it's happening?
    There's still a non-zero chance that it won't happen. If things go south Theresa May could be tempted to go for a second referendum next summer.
    Indeed it's non-zero. The likelihood is 0.00000000001%
    Nah, there's probably a 5% chance that it doesn't happen pre-2020.
    Hmmm...1 in 20? This is an opinion rather than a scientific thing so not alot of point in arguing just how low the chances are.
    I guess it will hinge on the real world effect of No Deal / WTO. Armegeddon or a blip or nothing at all. For me it would have to be total armageddon on steroids with people forced into eating their pets to be worth getting subsumed into an anti-democratic superstate that hates us. But WTO / 5% tariff on washing machines? Meh.
    More likely the EU and Mrs May agree to extend the 2 year period; possible even if (maybe especially if) things are going well. Feels like a higher chance than Gotterdammerung by WTO.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,173
    Patrick said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Patrick said:

    If you weren't so complacent about Brexit you'd see that being on the Leave side of the debate will be toxic in the next political cycle.

    So you have now accepted that it's happening?
    There's still a non-zero chance that it won't happen. If things go south Theresa May could be tempted to go for a second referendum next summer.
    Indeed it's non-zero. The likelihood is 0.00000000001%
    Nah, there's probably a 5% chance that it doesn't happen pre-2020.
    Hmmm...1 in 20? This is an opinion rather than a scientific thing so not alot of point in arguing just how low the chances are.
    I guess it will hinge on the real world effect of No Deal / WTO. Armegeddon or a blip or nothing at all. For me it would have to be total armageddon on steroids with people forced into eating their pets to be worth getting subsumed into an anti-democratic superstate that hates us. But WTO / 5% tariff on washing machines? Meh.
    I don't think that's the risk. The risk is that you get a situation where there is an extension of negotiations, due to their complexity, yada yada. And separation gets perpetually delayed.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,210
    rcs1000 said:

    Patrick said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Patrick said:

    If you weren't so complacent about Brexit you'd see that being on the Leave side of the debate will be toxic in the next political cycle.

    So you have now accepted that it's happening?
    There's still a non-zero chance that it won't happen. If things go south Theresa May could be tempted to go for a second referendum next summer.
    Indeed it's non-zero. The likelihood is 0.00000000001%
    Nah, there's probably a 5% chance that it doesn't happen pre-2020.
    Hmmm...1 in 20? This is an opinion rather than a scientific thing so not alot of point in arguing just how low the chances are.
    I guess it will hinge on the real world effect of No Deal / WTO. Armegeddon or a blip or nothing at all. For me it would have to be total armageddon on steroids with people forced into eating their pets to be worth getting subsumed into an anti-democratic superstate that hates us. But WTO / 5% tariff on washing machines? Meh.
    I don't think that's the risk. The risk is that you get a situation where there is an extension of negotiations, due to their complexity, yada yada. And separation gets perpetually delayed.
    Extending the Article 50 period would be more palatable politically for the UK than a transition deal where nothing changed.
  • Options
    timmotimmo Posts: 1,469
    Blue_rog said:

    eek said:

    Being that I'm sat in Helsinki have we covered Labour's magic money tree and Education yet...

    Nice airport
    Expensive airport
  • Options
    PatrickPatrick Posts: 225
    Animal_pb said:

    Patrick said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Patrick said:

    If you weren't so complacent about Brexit you'd see that being on the Leave side of the debate will be toxic in the next political cycle.

    So you have now accepted that it's happening?
    There's still a non-zero chance that it won't happen. If things go south Theresa May could be tempted to go for a second referendum next summer.
    Indeed it's non-zero. The likelihood is 0.00000000001%
    Nah, there's probably a 5% chance that it doesn't happen pre-2020.
    Hmmm...1 in 20? This is an opinion rather than a scientific thing so not alot of point in arguing just how low the chances are.
    I guess it will hinge on the real world effect of No Deal / WTO. Armegeddon or a blip or nothing at all. For me it would have to be total armageddon on steroids with people forced into eating their pets to be worth getting subsumed into an anti-democratic superstate that hates us. But WTO / 5% tariff on washing machines? Meh.
    More likely the EU and Mrs May agree to extend the 2 year period; possible even if (maybe especially if) things are going well. Feels like a higher chance than Gotterdammerung by WTO.
    Yes - I suppose that's true. But very, very politically risky unless things are going just fantastically and we're all best mates again. And, for the record, I'd be fine with an extension as long as the default setting at the end of it is Leave on WTO terms (which I assume must be the case legally). I'd also be fine with tapered exit arrangements.
  • Options
    ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133
    Blue_rog said:

    eek said:

    Being that I'm sat in Helsinki have we covered Labour's magic money tree and Education yet...

    Nice airport
    I've been there. It's in the south of France.
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,440
    Now here is a first for PB.

    I do not believe in fox hunting and I do not support Theresa on this policy
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,173

    Now here is a first for PB.

    I do not believe in fox hunting and I do not support Theresa on this policy

    I hate to break it to you, but fox hunting really does exist.
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,440
    rcs1000 said:

    Now here is a first for PB.

    I do not believe in fox hunting and I do not support Theresa on this policy

    I hate to break it to you, but fox hunting really does exist.
    I know but my entire family are opposed to bringing it back in any form
  • Options
    PongPong Posts: 4,693
    edited May 2017
    Scott_P said:
    lol

    Being a ref is a good second job.

    It's the kind of interesting, transparent and socially useful second job that voters want their MP to have.

  • Options
    PatrickPatrick Posts: 225
    edited May 2017
    Off topic: An 11 year-old girl has died tragically in a water ride accident. Seems she STOOD UP to change seats with a friend when the boat bumped and knocked her into the water. WTF? How can that be possible? I recently took my 12 year-old daughter to Chessington. Every ride had us strapped in like bondage fans. Physically impossible to get up/out. How can a bumpy water ride not have the riders strapped in? They sit there holding a central ring. That can't be safe surely - as we now know the hard way. Water ride re-design / law changes coming any moment now I guess.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,023
  • Options
    Blue_rogBlue_rog Posts: 2,019

    Blue_rog said:

    eek said:

    Being that I'm sat in Helsinki have we covered Labour's magic money tree and Education yet...

    Nice airport
    I've been there. It's in the south of France.
    :lol:
  • Options
    HaroldOHaroldO Posts: 1,185

    Now here is a first for PB.

    I do not believe in fox hunting and I do not support Theresa on this policy

    Same.
  • Options
    ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133
    Pong said:

    Scott_P said:
    lol

    Being a ref is a good second job.

    It's the kind of interesting, transparent and socially useful second job that voters want their MP to have.

    There already is one MP who is a football ref: Chris Heaton-Harris.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,452
    HaroldO said:

    Now here is a first for PB.

    I do not believe in fox hunting and I do not support Theresa on this policy

    Same.
    +1. Killing for fun is just sick.
  • Options
    TypoTypo Posts: 195
    HaroldO said:

    Now here is a first for PB.

    I do not believe in fox hunting and I do not support Theresa on this policy

    Same.
    Ditto.

    May's stance is disappointing and at odds with where the country is. That isn't necessarily a bad thing, but she has had her finger right on the public pulse to date.
  • Options
    dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    DavidL said:

    HaroldO said:

    Now here is a first for PB.

    I do not believe in fox hunting and I do not support Theresa on this policy

    Same.
    +1. Killing for fun is just sick.
    But killing in the name is a Christmas number one
  • Options

    Now here is a first for PB.

    I do not believe in fox hunting and I do not support Theresa on this policy

    Looking at my Twitter feed, it seems to have upset a lot of lefties.
    I suspect that TM the PM is now just trolling Labour over this.

  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,023
    Patrick said:

    Off topic: An 11 year-old girl has died tragically in a water ride accident. Seems she STOOD UP to change seats with a friend when the boat bumped and knocked her into the water. WTF? How can that be possible? I recently took my 12 year-old daughter to Chessington. Every ride had us strapped in like bondage fans. Physically impossible to get up/out. How can a bumpy water ride not have the riders strapped in? They sit there holding a central ring. That can't be safe surely - as we now know the hard way. Water ride re-design / law changes coming any moment now I guess.

    I'd rather not be strapped into a ride like that. The possibility is remote but if the ring flips I'd like to be able to swim out rather than be stuck drowning underwater.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,019
    Good afternoon, everyone.

    Mr. B/Mr. Sandpit, I left just before your posts.

    Red Bull can make up a lot of ground (they did so last year) but I agree they have their work cut out.
  • Options
    PatrickPatrick Posts: 225
    Typo said:


    HaroldO said:

    Now here is a first for PB.

    I do not believe in fox hunting and I do not support Theresa on this policy

    Same.
    Ditto.

    May's stance is disappointing and at odds with where the country is. That isn't necessarily a bad thing, but she has had her finger right on the public pulse to date.
    I suspect it's a Lynton Crosby thing that stinks to those who have a strong view but may actually help her electorally:
    https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/05/how-the-hunting-community-could-boost-theresa-mays-campaign/
    It always serves well to remember that a majority of people are not metropolitan liberals and may have non-progressive views in larger numbers than progressives think possible.
  • Options
    SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095

    Now here is a first for PB.

    I do not believe in fox hunting and I do not support Theresa on this policy

    When a fox comes into your garden and kills 50 chickens and only takes one, the only thing it deservers is a bullet. The anti hunt people have it all wrong. Its the foxes that kill for pleasure.
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 25,061
    edited May 2017
    timmo said:

    Blue_rog said:

    eek said:

    Being that I'm sat in Helsinki have we covered Labour's magic money tree and Education yet...

    Nice airport
    Expensive airport
    I rarely spend long enough in the airport to care about food prices - from memory it's not that bad - Munich Terminal 1 is more expensive and a utter dump. Munich T2 is great...

    As for CDG....
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,359
    Scott_P said:
    Since Murdo has lost every single constituency election in which he's stood (is it 7or 8?), I guess fear of losing is something he's long past feeling.
  • Options
    nunununu Posts: 6,024
    edited May 2017
    stuartrc said:

    Continuing my thoughts on Vauxhall; I have bought my place there 10 years ago and the amount of gentrification/claphamisation in the last three years is very noteable. Whether its enough to push the tory candiate in - I doubt.

    Currently the tory is at 7s, at 10s I might have a cheeky punt.

    DO tories even have any councillors in the seat? Hoey is safe as houses.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,452

    Now here is a first for PB.

    I do not believe in fox hunting and I do not support Theresa on this policy

    When a fox comes into your garden and kills 50 chickens and only takes one, the only thing it deservers is a bullet. The anti hunt people have it all wrong. Its the foxes that kill for pleasure.
    Foxes are vermin and need to be destroyed or controlled as appropriate. But it should be a necessary task, not fun. I think May is out of step on this. But it probably won't matter very much.
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,448

    If you weren't so complacent about Brexit you'd see that being on the Leave side of the debate will be toxic in the next political cycle.

    So you have now accepted that it's happening?
    There's still a non-zero chance that it won't happen. If things go south Theresa May could be tempted to go for a second referendum next summer.
    Even if the EU could get round the fact that there's no 'back in again' provision within the TEU, if May tried to advocate a second referendum and an 'In' vote in it, she'd be No Confidenced within a week.
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,125

    surbiton said:

    The CPS decision is not surprising. They don't have the balls!

    So, now it is open season regarding expenses. The Tories win twice over !

    Nothing to do with not having the balls. The Electoral Commission stated that they were unable to prove any intention to make false declarations. Unless you can prove intent any criminal prosecution will fail.
    Was there any unintentional under spending?
    Why don't you ask Mark Pack? maybe the LDs kept back £250,000 for some random future project in SE London?
  • Options
    NemtynakhtNemtynakht Posts: 2,311

    PaulM said:


    I'm sceptical that the UKIP vote in seats like Batley will be heavily squuezed in the Tories' favour, as I'm unconvinved that the UKIPers there were ever Tory in the first place.

    But that's the whole "gateway drug" argument - that it doesn't matter where the Kippers came from (and I agree it was multiple sources) the fact is they've unwound to the Cons.

    It's hard to argue with the "gateway drug" hypothesis, either statistically or anecdotally. I'd like to do so... but the evidence is what it is.
    I think this is why the PMs strategy is so clever. She is tying the 52% to her on the proviso that she will enact their will. In addition remainers like myself who accept the result and want the referendum result observed and enacted also.

    She is being aided and abetted by the Euro fanaticism of the lib dems, and the frankly inept pronouncements by Jeremy Corbyn who position yesterday was incomprehensible, but namely wouldn't guarantee that we will exit.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,821
    Scott_P said:
    Ticking off the Fishermen too:

    SNP accused of twisting Andrea Leadsom's fishing industry remarks
    Nicola Sturgeon’s party criticised by Tories and industry leaders over leaked excerpts of letter about integrating EU fisheries law
    The Scottish Fishermen’s Federation retaliated by releasing the full text of Leadsom’s letter, and said reading the letter “in full makes it clear that the UK government is committed to ensuring we exit the CFP”.

    Bertie Armstrong, the SFF’s chief executive, said the minister’s position was identical to the industry’s stance that the UK would quit the CFP, while negotiating the right access deal to UK waters for other EU fishing nations in line with international law.

    “We were very surprised to see an interpretation of bits of a private letter appearing in a newspaper,” Armstrong said. “We will leave the politicking to politicians, but the obvious fact is the letter is unequivocally a letter of support for the fishing industry.”


    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/10/snp-accused-twisting-andrea-leadsom-fishing-industry-scotland-brexit-eu?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,125

    Now here is a first for PB.

    I do not believe in fox hunting and I do not support Theresa on this policy

    You don't support a free vote? How undemocratic of you.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,821

    Now here is a first for PB.

    I do not believe in fox hunting and I do not support Theresa on this policy

    When a fox comes into your garden and kills 50 chickens and only takes one, the only thing it deservers is a bullet. The anti hunt people have it all wrong. Its the foxes that kill for pleasure.

    As the report commissioned by the Blair government made clear 'foxes rarely die peacefully in their beds...'
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,210

    If you weren't so complacent about Brexit you'd see that being on the Leave side of the debate will be toxic in the next political cycle.

    So you have now accepted that it's happening?
    There's still a non-zero chance that it won't happen. If things go south Theresa May could be tempted to go for a second referendum next summer.
    Even if the EU could get round the fact that there's no 'back in again' provision within the TEU, if May tried to advocate a second referendum and an 'In' vote in it, she'd be No Confidenced within a week.
    The scenario depends on a particular strand of opinion within the Tory party changing its mind when faced with the reality of our position on leaving. If Johnson, Fox and Davis all report back that it's all futile and give chapter on verse on how weak our position would be outside the EU, they may gave a change of heart.
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,448
    Typo said:


    HaroldO said:

    Now here is a first for PB.

    I do not believe in fox hunting and I do not support Theresa on this policy

    Same.
    Ditto.

    May's stance is disappointing and at odds with where the country is. That isn't necessarily a bad thing, but she has had her finger right on the public pulse to date.
    It is going to be a free vote though. Most MPs represent urban constituencies and I wouldn't have thought that the chance of a repeal going through are very high, even with a Tory majority of 150+.
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,125
    Patrick said:

    Off topic: An 11 year-old girl has died tragically in a water ride accident. Seems she STOOD UP to change seats with a friend when the boat bumped and knocked her into the water. WTF? How can that be possible? I recently took my 12 year-old daughter to Chessington. Every ride had us strapped in like bondage fans. Physically impossible to get up/out. How can a bumpy water ride not have the riders strapped in? They sit there holding a central ring. That can't be safe surely - as we now know the hard way. Water ride re-design / law changes coming any moment now I guess.

    Presumable they're not strapped in because if the boat was upended they'd be trapped.
  • Options
    PatrickPatrick Posts: 225
    edited May 2017
    Pulpstar said:

    Patrick said:

    Off topic: An 11 year-old girl has died tragically in a water ride accident. Seems she STOOD UP to change seats with a friend when the boat bumped and knocked her into the water. WTF? How can that be possible? I recently took my 12 year-old daughter to Chessington. Every ride had us strapped in like bondage fans. Physically impossible to get up/out. How can a bumpy water ride not have the riders strapped in? They sit there holding a central ring. That can't be safe surely - as we now know the hard way. Water ride re-design / law changes coming any moment now I guess.

    I'd rather not be strapped into a ride like that. The possibility is remote but if the ring flips I'd like to be able to swim out rather than be stuck drowning underwater.
    Which then makes water rides inherently unsafe. They come in two varieties:
    1. Wild rides in a giant ring. Bumpy, splashy.
    2. Tame rides along a 'river' follwed by a lift and plunge into splash pool / runout
    Any ride that doesn't strap in is sooner or later going to suffer a stupid / immature / drunk rider standing up at the wrong moment and placing themselves in grave physical danger. If rollercoasters are safe enough (with wheels/ runners preventing any chance of comning off the rail) then water rides can be made safe enough that the chance of overturning is essentially zero. Relying on the common sense of Joe Public not to kill himself seems a bad way to go.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,452
  • Options
    BaskervilleBaskerville Posts: 391
    I don't like the idea of fox hunting either, but, as a Londoner, I'm not sure it's anything much to do with me. If farmers and country folk say the fox is a pest and needs to be controlled, so be it. I don't see any moral difference between poisoning, shooting, trapping and hunting. Mrs May has promised a free vote - as was in the 2015 manifesto - and has told us which way she's likely to vote.
    Effect on general election? Helps her in the countryside marginally, upsets some voters unlikely to support her anyway, makes some switchers take another look at whether she is the woman they thought she was. i.e. plenty of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    DavidL said:

    Is 3 lost deposits not enough?

    The SNP are worried about the Greens splitting their vote in 56 other constituencies...
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,125
    nunu said:

    stuartrc said:

    Continuing my thoughts on Vauxhall; I have bought my place there 10 years ago and the amount of gentrification/claphamisation in the last three years is very noteable. Whether its enough to push the tory candiate in - I doubt.

    Currently the tory is at 7s, at 10s I might have a cheeky punt.

    DO tories even have any councillors in the seat? Hoey is safe as houses.
    Actually she is as safe as council flats of which there are many in Vauxhall despite its central London location. She's safe.
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,448
    edited May 2017

    If you weren't so complacent about Brexit you'd see that being on the Leave side of the debate will be toxic in the next political cycle.

    So you have now accepted that it's happening?
    There's still a non-zero chance that it won't happen. If things go south Theresa May could be tempted to go for a second referendum next summer.
    Even if the EU could get round the fact that there's no 'back in again' provision within the TEU, if May tried to advocate a second referendum and an 'In' vote in it, she'd be No Confidenced within a week.
    The scenario depends on a particular strand of opinion within the Tory party changing its mind when faced with the reality of our position on leaving. If Johnson, Fox and Davis all report back that it's all futile and give chapter on verse on how weak our position would be outside the EU, they may gave a change of heart.
    If they report back that it's futile then the demand will be Leave Now, rather than keep on negotiating (and if there's one thing the EU is good at, it's keeping meetings going, so it's highly unlikely that it'd ever reach that stage anyway).

    As for them "giv[ing] chapter on verse on how weak our position would be outside the EU", there is more chance of Jeremy Corbyn advocating the privatisation of the NHS while tap-dancing of Karl Marx's grave, singing "Tomorrow belongs to me".
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,925

    Typo said:


    HaroldO said:

    Now here is a first for PB.

    I do not believe in fox hunting and I do not support Theresa on this policy

    Same.
    Ditto.

    May's stance is disappointing and at odds with where the country is. That isn't necessarily a bad thing, but she has had her finger right on the public pulse to date.
    It is going to be a free vote though. Most MPs represent urban constituencies and I wouldn't have thought that the chance of a repeal going through are very high, even with a Tory majority of 150+.
    Why bring it up as an issue? Surely she has the rural wealthy vote locked up?
    Or is it just that she'd rather the campaign focused on a total non issue to most people - the equivalent of time wasting in a football match when you're 3-0 up....
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,452
    Scott_P said:

    DavidL said:

    Is 3 lost deposits not enough?

    The SNP are worried about the Greens splitting their vote in 56 other constituencies...
    Yes I get that and their little helpers have once more obliged. I really don't know why they bother pretending they are a separate party. I mean if Patrick Harvey was in the SNP Alex Salmond and Pete Wishart would have some decent competition for most annoying men in the party.
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,125
    Patrick said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Patrick said:

    Off topic: An 11 year-old girl has died tragically in a water ride accident. Seems she STOOD UP to change seats with a friend when the boat bumped and knocked her into the water. WTF? How can that be possible? I recently took my 12 year-old daughter to Chessington. Every ride had us strapped in like bondage fans. Physically impossible to get up/out. How can a bumpy water ride not have the riders strapped in? They sit there holding a central ring. That can't be safe surely - as we now know the hard way. Water ride re-design / law changes coming any moment now I guess.

    I'd rather not be strapped into a ride like that. The possibility is remote but if the ring flips I'd like to be able to swim out rather than be stuck drowning underwater.
    Which then makes water rides inherently unsafe. They come in two varieties:
    1. Wild rides in a giant ring. Bumpy, splashy.
    2. Tame rides along a 'river' follwed by a lift and plunge into splash pool / runout
    Any ride that doesn't strap in is sooner or later going to suffer a stupid / immature / drunk rider standing up at the wrong moment and placing themselves in grave physical danger. If rollercoasters are safe enough (with wheels/ runners preventing any chance of comning off the rail) then water rides can be made safe enough that the chance of overturning is essentially zero. Relying on the common sense of Joe Public not to kill himself seems a bad way to go.
    It is the first serious accident on the ride since in opened. Life is full of risk - that's why most people love life.
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,982
    Typo said:


    HaroldO said:

    Now here is a first for PB.

    I do not believe in fox hunting and I do not support Theresa on this policy

    Same.
    Ditto.

    May's stance is disappointing and at odds with where the country is. That isn't necessarily a bad thing, but she has had her finger right on the public pulse to date.

    Crucially, it will not piss off the right wing anti-European press whose approval is so important to her and will actually win her positive headlines.

  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,023
    DavidL said:

    Scott_P said:

    DavidL said:

    Is 3 lost deposits not enough?

    The SNP are worried about the Greens splitting their vote in 56 other constituencies...
    Yes I get that and their little helpers have once more obliged. I really don't know why they bother pretending they are a separate party. I mean if Patrick Harvey was in the SNP Alex Salmond and Pete Wishart would have some decent competition for most annoying men in the party.
    We're in a FPTP voting system.

    What seats ARE the Greens stanind in ?

    I assume North & Leith...
  • Options
    Scott_P said:
    It was for many years taken as a truth universally acknowledged that politicians with beards had something to hide. Thatcher, as I recall, was one who was very much against them.

    But they've made a huge comeback in recent years. Indeed, films made in 30 years time will merely need to give all male characters facial hair in order to transport viewers immediately back to the glorious '10s (it will be the lazy director's way to provide a period feel, mark my words).

    I wonder if there was ever any systematic evidence that it disadvantaged candidates?
  • Options
    PatrickPatrick Posts: 225
    edited May 2017
    felix said:

    Patrick said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Patrick said:

    Off topic: An 11 year-old girl has died tragically in a water ride accident. Seems she STOOD UP to change seats with a friend when the boat bumped and knocked her into the water. WTF? How can that be possible? I recently took my 12 year-old daughter to Chessington. Every ride had us strapped in like bondage fans. Physically impossible to get up/out. How can a bumpy water ride not have the riders strapped in? They sit there holding a central ring. That can't be safe surely - as we now know the hard way. Water ride re-design / law changes coming any moment now I guess.

    I'd rather not be strapped into a ride like that. The possibility is remote but if the ring flips I'd like to be able to swim out rather than be stuck drowning underwater.
    Which then makes water rides inherently unsafe. They come in two varieties:
    1. Wild rides in a giant ring. Bumpy, splashy.
    2. Tame rides along a 'river' follwed by a lift and plunge into splash pool / runout
    Any ride that doesn't strap in is sooner or later going to suffer a stupid / immature / drunk rider standing up at the wrong moment and placing themselves in grave physical danger. If rollercoasters are safe enough (with wheels/ runners preventing any chance of comning off the rail) then water rides can be made safe enough that the chance of overturning is essentially zero. Relying on the common sense of Joe Public not to kill himself seems a bad way to go.
    It is the first serious accident on the ride since in opened. Life is full of risk - that's why most people love life.
    Indeed. For adults I'd say 'do WTF you like'. Go naked sky-diving over a cactus plantation if that floats your boat. But this was an 11 year-old. Children do not have the mental capacity to make adult decisions. It's why in law they cannot be guilty of crimes. That child needed to be protected by the law. The law covering water rides safety standards has been found wanting.
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    felix said:

    Why don't you ask Mark Pack? maybe the LDs kept back £250,000 for some random future project in SE London?

    The LibDems got the £250K from Dianne Abbott who handed over five 50p coins to them and assured the yellow peril that the Bank of England would promise to pay the bearer on demand the larger amount.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,977
    Scott_P said:
    Reminds me of my grandfather's saying - "some folk are too lazy to lake*".

    *Yorkshire for play
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,023
    Patrick said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Patrick said:

    Off topic: An 11 year-old girl has died tragically in a water ride accident. Seems she STOOD UP to change seats with a friend when the boat bumped and knocked her into the water. WTF? How can that be possible? I recently took my 12 year-old daughter to Chessington. Every ride had us strapped in like bondage fans. Physically impossible to get up/out. How can a bumpy water ride not have the riders strapped in? They sit there holding a central ring. That can't be safe surely - as we now know the hard way. Water ride re-design / law changes coming any moment now I guess.

    I'd rather not be strapped into a ride like that. The possibility is remote but if the ring flips I'd like to be able to swim out rather than be stuck drowning underwater.
    Which then makes water rides inherently unsafe. They come in two varieties:
    1. Wild rides in a giant ring. Bumpy, splashy.
    2. Tame rides along a 'river' follwed by a lift and plunge into splash pool / runout
    Any ride that doesn't strap in is sooner or later going to suffer a stupid / immature / drunk rider standing up at the wrong moment and placing themselves in grave physical danger. If rollercoasters are safe enough (with wheels/ runners preventing any chance of comning off the rail) then water rides can be made safe enough that the chance of overturning is essentially zero. Relying on the common sense of Joe Public not to kill himself seems a bad way to go.
    Meh, I've always enjoyed this sort of ride at the thene park. No doubt it'll get regulated out of existence now.
    It probably can't be made 100% safe, so will go even though it really shouldn't.
  • Options
    calumcalum Posts: 3,046
    DavidL said:

    Scott_P said:

    DavidL said:

    Is 3 lost deposits not enough?

    The SNP are worried about the Greens splitting their vote in 56 other constituencies...
    Yes I get that and their little helpers have once more obliged. I really don't know why they bother pretending they are a separate party. I mean if Patrick Harvey was in the SNP Alex Salmond and Pete Wishart would have some decent competition for most annoying men in the party.
    FWIW last week the Greens hit over 12% in Edinburgh, 8% in Glasgow and 6% in Stirling !!
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,982

    If you weren't so complacent about Brexit you'd see that being on the Leave side of the debate will be toxic in the next political cycle.

    So you have now accepted that it's happening?
    There's still a non-zero chance that it won't happen. If things go south Theresa May could be tempted to go for a second referendum next summer.
    Even if the EU could get round the fact that there's no 'back in again' provision within the TEU, if May tried to advocate a second referendum and an 'In' vote in it, she'd be No Confidenced within a week.
    The scenario depends on a particular strand of opinion within the Tory party changing its mind when faced with the reality of our position on leaving. If Johnson, Fox and Davis all report back that it's all futile and give chapter on verse on how weak our position would be outside the EU, they may gave a change of heart.

    If you weren't so complacent about Brexit you'd see that being on the Leave side of the debate will be toxic in the next political cycle.

    So you have now accepted that it's happening?
    There's still a non-zero chance that it won't happen. If things go south Theresa May could be tempted to go for a second referendum next summer.
    Even if the EU could get round the fact that there's no 'back in again' provision within the TEU, if May tried to advocate a second referendum and an 'In' vote in it, she'd be No Confidenced within a week.
    The scenario depends on a particular strand of opinion within the Tory party changing its mind when faced with the reality of our position on leaving. If Johnson, Fox and Davis all report back that it's all futile and give chapter on verse on how weak our position would be outside the EU, they may gave a change of heart.

    No - for good or ill the Conservatives are now bound to Brexit. Fox and Davis are totally convinced of its merits and will not accept under any circumstances it is going to be damaging to the UK. Boris might change his mind. But who takes Boris seriously?

  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,302
    edited May 2017
    Patrick said:

    Typo said:


    HaroldO said:

    Now here is a first for PB.

    I do not believe in fox hunting and I do not support Theresa on this policy

    Same.
    Ditto.

    May's stance is disappointing and at odds with where the country is. That isn't necessarily a bad thing, but she has had her finger right on the public pulse to date.
    I suspect it's a Lynton Crosby thing that stinks to those who have a strong view but may actually help her electorally:
    https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/05/how-the-hunting-community-could-boost-theresa-mays-campaign/
    It always serves well to remember that a majority of people are not metropolitan liberals and may have non-progressive views in larger numbers than progressives think possible.
    Remember one of Crosby's golden rules. People rarely vote based on a single policy, it is more about a feeling of what that leader or party represent. Hence when May is doing I'm tough on the EU, tough on the causes of the EU, strong and stable, etc, rather than any real policy stuff, while pointing at Jezza and saying nonsensical all the time.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,154
  • Options
    tpfkartpfkar Posts: 1,548
    rkrkrk said:

    Typo said:


    HaroldO said:

    Now here is a first for PB.

    I do not believe in fox hunting and I do not support Theresa on this policy

    Same.
    Ditto.

    May's stance is disappointing and at odds with where the country is. That isn't necessarily a bad thing, but she has had her finger right on the public pulse to date.
    It is going to be a free vote though. Most MPs represent urban constituencies and I wouldn't have thought that the chance of a repeal going through are very high, even with a Tory majority of 150+.
    Why bring it up as an issue? Surely she has the rural wealthy vote locked up?
    Or is it just that she'd rather the campaign focused on a total non issue to most people - the equivalent of time wasting in a football match when you're 3-0 up....
    While I don't agree with Theresa May on this I've found the opposition very juvenile. She was asked a question, she answered it. Hooray! An opinion! A straight answer!

    But then come the daft attacks. Why are you prioritising foxes over foodbanks*? Hasn't it been settled? Isn't this playing to your core people rather than the swing voters?

    She just answered a straight question. Good for her.

    (*Insert pet issue to taste)
  • Options
    JasonJason Posts: 1,614
    edited May 2017

    I don't like the idea of fox hunting either, but, as a Londoner, I'm not sure it's anything much to do with me. If farmers and country folk say the fox is a pest and needs to be controlled, so be it. I don't see any moral difference between poisoning, shooting, trapping and hunting. Mrs May has promised a free vote - as was in the 2015 manifesto - and has told us which way she's likely to vote.
    Effect on general election? Helps her in the countryside marginally, upsets some voters unlikely to support her anyway, makes some switchers take another look at whether she is the woman they thought she was. i.e. plenty of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

    Reminds me of when the ban was first talked about in the late 1990s. A wholly disproportionate amount of time was given to the question of a ban on fox hunting. If it is deemed to be cruel - and it is - then why aren't Halal and Kosher slaughter discussed in the same terms? Could it be that fox hunters are white Tory toffs and the others aren't?

    An animal does not discern whether it is ripped apart by hounds or if it has its throat cut while it is fully conscious. Either way, it dies in an act of premeditated cruelty.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Patrick said:

    felix said:

    Patrick said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Patrick said:

    Off topic: An 11 year-old girl has died tragically in a water ride accident. Seems she STOOD UP to change seats with a friend when the boat bumped and knocked her into the water. WTF? How can that be possible? I recently took my 12 year-old daughter to Chessington. Every ride had us strapped in like bondage fans. Physically impossible to get up/out. How can a bumpy water ride not have the riders strapped in? They sit there holding a central ring. That can't be safe surely - as we now know the hard way. Water ride re-design / law changes coming any moment now I guess.

    I'd rather not be strapped into a ride like that. The possibility is remote but if the ring flips I'd like to be able to swim out rather than be stuck drowning underwater.
    Which then makes water rides inherently unsafe. They come in two varieties:
    1. Wild rides in a giant ring. Bumpy, splashy.
    2. Tame rides along a 'river' follwed by a lift and plunge into splash pool / runout
    Any ride that doesn't strap in is sooner or later going to suffer a stupid / immature / drunk rider standing up at the wrong moment and placing themselves in grave physical danger. If rollercoasters are safe enough (with wheels/ runners preventing any chance of comning off the rail) then water rides can be made safe enough that the chance of overturning is essentially zero. Relying on the common sense of Joe Public not to kill himself seems a bad way to go.
    It is the first serious accident on the ride since in opened. Life is full of risk - that's why most people love life.
    Indeed. For adults I'd say 'do WTF you like'. Go naked sky-diving over a cactus plantation if that floats your boat. But this was an 11 year-old. Children do not have the mental capacity to make adult decisions. It's why in law they cannot be guilty of crimes. That child needed to be protected by the law. The law covering water rides safety standards has been found wanting.
    I'm sorry but as tragic as this incident was if we follow your logic to its conclusion we'd need to eliminate streets and cars and all sorts of other areas of life where fatal accidents can and do happen. If this was a child that had stepped in front of a bus we wouldn't even be having this conversation.

    This is tragic, maybe more can be learnt about how to tell riders the importance of following safety instructions like stay seated during the ride. But to eliminate rides like this due to one tragedy after many decades is not necessary.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,359
    edited May 2017

    Now here is a first for PB.

    I do not believe in fox hunting and I do not support Theresa on this policy

    When a fox comes into your garden and kills 50 chickens and only takes one, the only thing it deservers is a bullet. The anti hunt people have it all wrong. Its the foxes that kill for pleasure.
    I think many anti hunt people might agree with you on the bullet, that's the point.

    Its odd how much the 'execute the evil foxes' brigade are just as keen on the thing of which they accuse the antis, anthropomorphising. Foxes aren't fluffy, cuddly toys, but nor are they homicidal psycopaths taking sadistic pleasure in chicken murder. Like most predators they're hard wired to kill as many of their prey as possible, which includes finding numbers of them in an enclosed space. In their normal environment they'd bury what they can't eat or take away, not really an option in a coop.
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,448
    rkrkrk said:

    Typo said:


    HaroldO said:

    Now here is a first for PB.

    I do not believe in fox hunting and I do not support Theresa on this policy

    Same.
    Ditto.

    May's stance is disappointing and at odds with where the country is. That isn't necessarily a bad thing, but she has had her finger right on the public pulse to date.
    It is going to be a free vote though. Most MPs represent urban constituencies and I wouldn't have thought that the chance of a repeal going through are very high, even with a Tory majority of 150+.
    Why bring it up as an issue? Surely she has the rural wealthy vote locked up?
    Or is it just that she'd rather the campaign focused on a total non issue to most people - the equivalent of time wasting in a football match when you're 3-0 up....
    I've not seen how it was brought up. If she (or some CCHQ grid) did it then it's utterly nuts. I'd assume that it was a question put to her.

    All the same, I don't think it's time-wasting at 3-0 up as showboating. It's unnecessarily risky and of no electoral advantage at all.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,154

    Now here is a first for PB.

    I do not believe in fox hunting and I do not support Theresa on this policy


    Same. We have a hunt just up the road, but don't allow them on our land (modest though it is).

    We have a fox den in the top field. Lovely to see cubs gambolling about.

    Our neighbour lost his chickens one night. All two dozen. But it wasn't a fox. It was a stoat, that had gnawed its way in. Good luck hunting stoats on horseback!
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,302
    edited May 2017
    Scott_P said:
    He's a bit dodgy and no leadership, no backbone....killer quotes.
  • Options
    RestharrowRestharrow Posts: 233

    If you weren't so complacent about Brexit you'd see that being on the Leave side of the debate will be toxic in the next political cycle.

    So you have now accepted that it's happening?
    There's still a non-zero chance that it won't happen. If things go south Theresa May could be tempted to go for a second referendum next summer.
    Even if the EU could get round the fact that there's no 'back in again' provision within the TEU, if May tried to advocate a second referendum and an 'In' vote in it, she'd be No Confidenced within a week.
    The scenario depends on a particular strand of opinion within the Tory party changing its mind when faced with the reality of our position on leaving. If Johnson, Fox and Davis all report back that it's all futile and give chapter on verse on how weak our position would be outside the EU, they may gave a change of heart.

    If you weren't so complacent about Brexit you'd see that being on the Leave side of the debate will be toxic in the next political cycle.

    So you have now accepted that it's happening?
    There's still a non-zero chance that it won't happen. If things go south Theresa May could be tempted to go for a second referendum next summer.
    Even if the EU could get round the fact that there's no 'back in again' provision within the TEU, if May tried to advocate a second referendum and an 'In' vote in it, she'd be No Confidenced within a week.
    The scenario depends on a particular strand of opinion within the Tory party changing its mind when faced with the reality of our position on leaving. If Johnson, Fox and Davis all report back that it's all futile and give chapter on verse on how weak our position would be outside the EU, they may gave a change of heart.

    No - for good or ill the Conservatives are now bound to Brexit. Fox and Davis are totally convinced of its merits and will not accept under any circumstances it is going to be damaging to the UK. Boris might change his mind. But who takes Boris seriously?

    At long last ... a question to which the answer is "Boris Johnson".
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    How very dare you Madam !!!!!

    The LibDems wouldn't be seen dead in the grasp of Nicola .... or should that be dead LibDems ?!? ....

    :smiley:
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,023
    Jason said:

    I don't like the idea of fox hunting either, but, as a Londoner, I'm not sure it's anything much to do with me. If farmers and country folk say the fox is a pest and needs to be controlled, so be it. I don't see any moral difference between poisoning, shooting, trapping and hunting. Mrs May has promised a free vote - as was in the 2015 manifesto - and has told us which way she's likely to vote.
    Effect on general election? Helps her in the countryside marginally, upsets some voters unlikely to support her anyway, makes some switchers take another look at whether she is the woman they thought she was. i.e. plenty of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

    Reminds me of when the ban was first talked about in the late 1990s. A wholly disproportionate amount of time was given to the question of a ban on fox hunting. If it is deemed to be cruel - and it is - then why aren't Halal and Kosher slaughter discussed in the same terms? Could it be that fox hunters are white Tory toffs and the others aren't?

    An animal does not discern whether it is ripped apart by hounds or if it has its throat cut while it is fully conscious. Either way, it dies in an act of premeditated cruelty.
    Then why bother wasting any more ?

    This argument is one that was used by the pro hunt brigade but its just as good to use now by the antis. A waste of parliamentary time imo to change the law.
  • Options
    calumcalum Posts: 3,046
    Pulpstar said:

    DavidL said:

    Scott_P said:

    DavidL said:

    Is 3 lost deposits not enough?

    The SNP are worried about the Greens splitting their vote in 56 other constituencies...
    Yes I get that and their little helpers have once more obliged. I really don't know why they bother pretending they are a separate party. I mean if Patrick Harvey was in the SNP Alex Salmond and Pete Wishart would have some decent competition for most annoying men in the party.
    We're in a FPTP voting system.

    What seats ARE the Greens stanind in ?

    I assume North & Leith...
    Patrick is standing in Glasgow North.

    Pathetic whinging from SCON, the party of please vote for us tactically to stop the SNP !!
  • Options
    justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    The five seats Labour is projected to lose in this poll were gains from the Tories/LibDems in 2015 – with the exception of Hampstead & Kilburn which had a new Labour MP following Glenda Jackson’s retirement. An adverse swing of 2% could quite easily be offset by a first term bonus for these new MPs so it is entirely possible that Labour could retain them all – in the same way that Tory MPs elected in marginal seats in 2010 were able to withstand the pro- Labour swing in England in 2015.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,302
    Here it comes....

    Labour hints that it will pledge to abolish university tuition fees

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/may/10/labour-hints-that-it-will-pledge-to-abolish-university-tuition-fees
  • Options
    PatrickPatrick Posts: 225

    Patrick said:

    felix said:

    Patrick said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Patrick said:

    Off topic: An 11 year-old girl has died tragically in a water ride accident. Seems she STOOD UP to change seats with a friend when the boat bumped and knocked her into the water. WTF? How can that be possible? I recently took my 12 year-old daughter to Chessington. Every ride had us strapped in like bondage fans. Physically impossible to get up/out. How can a bumpy water ride not have the riders strapped in? They sit there holding a central ring. That can't be safe surely - as we now know the hard way. Water ride re-design / law changes coming any moment now I guess.

    I'd rather not be strapped into a ride like that. The possibility is remote but if the ring flips I'd like to be able to swim out rather than be stuck drowning underwater.
    Which then makes water rides inherently unsafe. They come in two varieties:
    1. Wild rides in a giant ring. Bumpy, splashy.
    2. Tame rides along a 'river' follwed by a lift and plunge into splash pool / runout
    Any ride that doesn't strap in is sooner or later going to suffer a stupid / immature / drunk rider standing up at the wrong moment and placing themselves in grave physical danger. If rollercoasters are safe enough (with wheels/ runners preventing any chance of comning off the rail) then water rides can be made safe enough that the chance of overturning is essentially zero. Relying on the common sense of Joe Public not to kill himself seems a bad way to go.
    It is the first serious accident on the ride since in opened. Life is full of risk - that's why most people love life.
    Indeed. For adults I'd say 'do WTF you like'. Go naked sky-diving over a cactus plantation if that floats your boat. But this was an 11 year-old. Children do not have the mental capacity to make adult decisions. It's why in law they cannot be guilty of crimes. That child needed to be protected by the law. The law covering water rides safety standards has been found wanting.
    I'm sorry but as tragic as this incident was if we follow your logic to its conclusion we'd need to eliminate streets and cars and all sorts of other areas of life where fatal accidents can and do happen. If this was a child that had stepped in front of a bus we wouldn't even be having this conversation.

    This is tragic, maybe more can be learnt about how to tell riders the importance of following safety instructions like stay seated during the ride. But to eliminate rides like this due to one tragedy after many decades is not necessary.
    I'm not saying eliminate them. I'm saying strap in. How many rides have overturned? Ever? Zero. Clunk click is all it needs.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,154

    Here it comes....

    Labour hints that it will pledge to abolish university tuition fees

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/may/10/labour-hints-that-it-will-pledge-to-abolish-university-tuition-fees

    The magic money tree is getting one hell of a shaking....
  • Options
    ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133
    DavidL said:
    Let me guess, the three that the SNP didn't win 2 years ago.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,302
    edited May 2017

    Here it comes....

    Labour hints that it will pledge to abolish university tuition fees

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/may/10/labour-hints-that-it-will-pledge-to-abolish-university-tuition-fees

    The magic money tree is getting one hell of a shaking....
    Or the definition of rich who get hit with the tax rises just going to get reduced....
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,023
    justin124 said:

    The five seats Labour is projected to lose in this poll were gains from the Tories/LibDems in 2015 – with the exception of Hampstead & Kilburn which had a new Labour MP following Glenda Jackson’s retirement. An adverse swing of 2% could quite easily be offset by a first term bonus for these new MPs so it is entirely possible that Labour could retain them all – in the same way that Tory MPs elected in marginal seats in 2010 were able to withstand the pro- Labour swing in England in 2015.

    Is that correct ?
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,545

    Now here is a first for PB.

    I do not believe in fox hunting and I do not support Theresa on this policy


    Same. We have a hunt just up the road, but don't allow them on our land (modest though it is).

    We have a fox den in the top field. Lovely to see cubs gambolling about.

    Our neighbour lost his chickens one night. All two dozen. But it wasn't a fox. It was a stoat, that had gnawed its way in. Good luck hunting stoats on horseback!
    Naught but WEASEL words :lol:
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,125
    Patrick said:

    felix said:

    Patrick said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Patrick said:

    Off topic: An 11 year-old girl has died tragically in a water ride accident. Seems she STOOD UP to change seats with a friend when the boat bumped and knocked her into the water. WTF? How can that be possible? I recently took my 12 year-old daughter to Chessington. Every ride had us strapped in like bondage fans. Physically impossible to get up/out. How can a bumpy water ride not have the riders strapped in? They sit there holding a central ring. That can't be safe surely - as we now know the hard way. Water ride re-design / law changes coming any moment now I guess.

    I'd rather not be strapped into a ride like that. The possibility is remote but if the ring flips I'd like to be able to swim out rather than be stuck drowning underwater.
    Which then makes water rides inherently unsafe. They come in two varieties:
    1. Wild rides in a giant ring. Bumpy, splashy.
    2. Tame rides along a 'river' follwed by a lift and plunge into splash pool / runout
    Any ride that doesn't strap in is sooner or later going to suffer a stupid / immature / drunk rider standing up at the wrong moment and placing themselves in grave physical danger. If rollercoasters are safe enough (with wheels/ runners preventing any chance of comning off the rail) then water rides can be made safe enough that the chance of overturning is essentially zero. Relying on the common sense of Joe Public not to kill himself seems a bad way to go.
    It is the first serious accident on the ride since in opened. Life is full of risk - that's why most people love life.
    Indeed. For adults I'd say 'do WTF you like'. Go naked sky-diving over a cactus plantation if that floats your boat. But this was an 11 year-old. Children do not have the mental capacity to make adult decisions. It's why in law they cannot be guilty of crimes. That child needed to be protected by the law. The law covering water rides safety standards has been found wanting.
    I disagree. Children need to take risks too albeit to a lesser degree. The parents will have decided to allow her on the trip as is required in law. What happened is immensely sad but we'd all be poorer if risk was artificially removed from our lives. You ought at least to await the H/S report before assuming this was anything other than a tragic accident.
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,545
    edited May 2017

    Here it comes....

    Labour hints that it will pledge to abolish university tuition fees

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/may/10/labour-hints-that-it-will-pledge-to-abolish-university-tuition-fees

    Remind me which party introduced Tuition Fees...
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,448
    Nigelb said:

    Scott_P said:
    Reminds me of my grandfather's saying - "some folk are too lazy to lake*".

    *Yorkshire for play
    Derived from Old Norse, I believe. (And more usually spelled 'laik'?). A cultural Viking inheritance.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,452
    Jason said:

    I don't like the idea of fox hunting either, but, as a Londoner, I'm not sure it's anything much to do with me. If farmers and country folk say the fox is a pest and needs to be controlled, so be it. I don't see any moral difference between poisoning, shooting, trapping and hunting. Mrs May has promised a free vote - as was in the 2015 manifesto - and has told us which way she's likely to vote.
    Effect on general election? Helps her in the countryside marginally, upsets some voters unlikely to support her anyway, makes some switchers take another look at whether she is the woman they thought she was. i.e. plenty of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

    Reminds me of when the ban was first talked about in the late 1990s. A wholly disproportionate amount of time was given to the question of a ban on fox hunting. If it is deemed to be cruel - and it is - then why aren't Halal and Kosher slaughter discussed in the same terms? Could it be that fox hunters are white Tory toffs and the others aren't?

    An animal does not discern whether it is ripped apart by hounds or if it has its throat cut while it is fully conscious. Either way, it dies in an act of premeditated cruelty.
    I agree although Halal and Kosher do not have the "fun" element.

    I also agree that Blair used fox hunting to entertain his somewhat brainless back benchers to an astonishing extent when he should have been pursuing a reform agenda. The fact that they were content to waste months of Parliamentary time on such a matter was perhaps indicative of the kinds of problems they have now.
  • Options
    PatrickPatrick Posts: 225
    Now that Comey has gone what are the chances that the FBI will resume its investigation of Clinton? That might be a very interesting political bet. Who remembers 'you'd be in jail'?
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,821
    Matt Singh:

    When local council areas are mapped against Westminster constituencies, the Scottish Conservatives won the most “first preference” votes — in Scottish local elections, voters number their candidates in preference order and can vote for as many as they want — in as many as 18 of Scotland’s 59 Westminster constituencies.

    The same analysis for the Scottish National party puts them ahead in 33 constituencies but senior MPs, including Alex Salmond and Angus Robertson, the SNP’s deputy leader, would need to outperform their local government colleagues to hold on to their seats on June 8.

    Mapping local council results on Westminster constituencies also shows the gradual shift of the SNP from its “tartan Tory” territory of Perthshire and the north-east into traditionally Labour-dominated areas in Scotland’s central belt and south-west.


    https://www.ft.com/content/e86a4bae-34db-11e7-bce4-9023f8c0fd2e
This discussion has been closed.