Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Many Democrats are viewing the November 6th Midterms in same w

24

Comments

  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,314

    TOPPING said:

    timmo said:
    Ernest Saunders, that’s one.

    I can name more if you’d like.
    I'm surprised you're here and sober given the day.
    Well.

    I found out the MD of my new firm is French.

    This will be awkward.

    I only popped on here to reply to a message, now back to Agincourt Day celebrations.

    Personally speaking Waterloo, Trafalgar, and Mers-el-Kébir do it more for me.
    Great that you've got a new firm already.

    Yes perhaps gloss over your long held hatred of the French and emphasise your impeccable EU credentials.
  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,151

    Sean_F said:

    Extremist rhetoric leads to extremist attacks. This is neither surprising nor unprecedented.

    Given all the talk of traitors and quislings, more of this can be expected in Britain as well.

    I have just heard a Trump supporter on R4 saying that the police should be investing the Democrats to see if they are sending themselves pipe-bombs to whip up sympathy for themselves and to make Trump look bad.

    This was not a man-in-the-street interview, this was a studio interview with a friend of John Bolton, Trump's National Security Adviser.

    Incredible...
    I think it stands to reason that Democrats would be sending bombs to themselves.
    As well as being critics of Trump, all the recipients were involved in fixing the Democrat primaries against Sanders.
    I thought the conspiracy theory was that Soros was funding Bernie Sanders, is there a conspiracy theory that he was fixing the primary against him as well?
  • Options
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    timmo said:
    Ernest Saunders, that’s one.

    I can name more if you’d like.
    I'm surprised you're here and sober given the day.
    Well.

    I found out the MD of my new firm is French.

    This will be awkward.

    I only popped on here to reply to a message, now back to Agincourt Day celebrations.

    Personally speaking Waterloo, Trafalgar, and Mers-el-Kébir do it more for me.
    Great that you've got a new firm already.

    Yes perhaps gloss over your long held hatred of the French and emphasise your impeccable EU credentials.
    The ERG have radicalised me into becoming a federalist.
  • Options

    Sean_F said:

    Extremist rhetoric leads to extremist attacks. This is neither surprising nor unprecedented.

    Given all the talk of traitors and quislings, more of this can be expected in Britain as well.

    I have just heard a Trump supporter on R4 saying that the police should be investing the Democrats to see if they are sending themselves pipe-bombs to whip up sympathy for themselves and to make Trump look bad.

    This was not a man-in-the-street interview, this was a studio interview with a friend of John Bolton, Trump's National Security Adviser.

    Incredible...
    I think it stands to reason that Democrats would be sending bombs to themselves.
    As well as being critics of Trump, all the recipients were involved in fixing the Democrat primaries against Sanders.
    Even Robert De Niro?
    Hadn't read about de Niro until you mentioned it!
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,850
    OllyT said:

    Sean_F said:

    Nigelb said:

    TBF on the gerrymandering, a lot the Democratic disadvantage is just FPTP doing its normal thing of arbitrarily screwing parties whose voters live close to each other....

    Which doesn't really explain how district like these came into being...
    https://edition.cnn.com/2017/10/03/politics/redistricting-supreme-court-gerrymandered/index.html
    Sure, I'm not saying there's no gerrymandering, I'm saying that even if there was no gerrymandering the Dems would still be at a serious disadvantage.
    The Democratic vote is too heavily concentrated in very large cities.
    In a truly democratic system it shouldn't't really matter where your voters live. The US system is stacked in favour of rural conservatives with a Senate voter in Wyoming having the voting strength of 50 cCalifornians. That's before you begin to factor in gerrymandering and voter suppression. If the situation were reversed it would have been rectified years ago.
    Each State having two Senators is a feature, not a bug, and never used to favour one party over another, as the Democrats used to win seats in small rural States until very recently. If they can't do so now, that's on them rather than the system.

  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,631
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    timmo said:
    Ernest Saunders, that’s one.

    I can name more if you’d like.
    I'm surprised you're here and sober given the day.
    Well.

    I found out the MD of my new firm is French.

    This will be awkward.

    I only popped on here to reply to a message, now back to Agincourt Day celebrations.

    Personally speaking Waterloo, Trafalgar, and Mers-el-Kébir do it more for me.
    Great that you've got a new firm already.

    Yes perhaps gloss over your long held hatred of the French and emphasise your impeccable EU credentials.
    Or rebrand himself as a critical friend ?
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,850

    Sean_F said:

    Extremist rhetoric leads to extremist attacks. This is neither surprising nor unprecedented.

    Given all the talk of traitors and quislings, more of this can be expected in Britain as well.

    I have just heard a Trump supporter on R4 saying that the police should be investing the Democrats to see if they are sending themselves pipe-bombs to whip up sympathy for themselves and to make Trump look bad.

    This was not a man-in-the-street interview, this was a studio interview with a friend of John Bolton, Trump's National Security Adviser.

    Incredible...
    I think it stands to reason that Democrats would be sending bombs to themselves.
    As well as being critics of Trump, all the recipients were involved in fixing the Democrat primaries against Sanders.
    I thought the conspiracy theory was that Soros was funding Bernie Sanders, is there a conspiracy theory that he was fixing the primary against him as well?
    Isn't that obvious?
  • Options
    Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    timmo said:
    Ernest Saunders, that’s one.

    I can name more if you’d like.
    I'm surprised you're here and sober given the day.
    Well.

    I found out the MD of my new firm is French.

    This will be awkward.

    I only popped on here to reply to a message, now back to Agincourt Day celebrations.

    Personally speaking Waterloo, Trafalgar, and Mers-el-Kébir do it more for me.
    Great that you've got a new firm already.

    Yes perhaps gloss over your long held hatred of the French and emphasise your impeccable EU credentials.
    The ERG have radicalised me into becoming a federalist.
    The loonier Brexiteers did the same for me. The govt's atrocious handling of the Brexit process was merely icing on the cake of my conversion.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,631
    Sean_F said:

    OllyT said:

    Sean_F said:

    Nigelb said:

    TBF on the gerrymandering, a lot the Democratic disadvantage is just FPTP doing its normal thing of arbitrarily screwing parties whose voters live close to each other....

    Which doesn't really explain how district like these came into being...
    https://edition.cnn.com/2017/10/03/politics/redistricting-supreme-court-gerrymandered/index.html
    Sure, I'm not saying there's no gerrymandering, I'm saying that even if there was no gerrymandering the Dems would still be at a serious disadvantage.
    The Democratic vote is too heavily concentrated in very large cities.
    In a truly democratic system it shouldn't't really matter where your voters live. The US system is stacked in favour of rural conservatives with a Senate voter in Wyoming having the voting strength of 50 cCalifornians. That's before you begin to factor in gerrymandering and voter suppression. If the situation were reversed it would have been rectified years ago.
    Each State having two Senators is a feature, not a bug, and never used to favour one party over another, as the Democrats used to win seats in small rural States until very recently. If they can't do so now, that's on them rather than the system.

    It was a feature required to get a handful of states ratify the constitution a couple of centuries back.
    In a modern democracy, it’s very much a bug.

  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929
    edited October 2018
    Why can't the Americans use the word "convoy" for the migrants, I keep having visions of a Swift Challenger when I look at the news regarding the central american situation :EEEEEEEEEEEE
  • Options
    kjhkjh Posts: 10,644
    Sean_F said:

    Extremist rhetoric leads to extremist attacks. This is neither surprising nor unprecedented.

    Given all the talk of traitors and quislings, more of this can be expected in Britain as well.

    I have just heard a Trump supporter on R4 saying that the police should be investing the Democrats to see if they are sending themselves pipe-bombs to whip up sympathy for themselves and to make Trump look bad.

    This was not a man-in-the-street interview, this was a studio interview with a friend of John Bolton, Trump's National Security Adviser.

    Incredible...
    I think it stands to reason that Democrats would be sending bombs to themselves.
    He didn't even flinch when it was pointed out that the devices were viable.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,631

    Sean_F said:

    Extremist rhetoric leads to extremist attacks. This is neither surprising nor unprecedented.

    Given all the talk of traitors and quislings, more of this can be expected in Britain as well.

    I have just heard a Trump supporter on R4 saying that the police should be investing the Democrats to see if they are sending themselves pipe-bombs to whip up sympathy for themselves and to make Trump look bad.

    This was not a man-in-the-street interview, this was a studio interview with a friend of John Bolton, Trump's National Security Adviser.

    Incredible...
    I think it stands to reason that Democrats would be sending bombs to themselves.
    As well as being critics of Trump, all the recipients were involved in fixing the Democrat primaries against Sanders.
    Even Robert De Niro?
    Add Bananarama to the list of suspects.

  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    @david_herdson your argument has made the pages of the Speccie:

    I have been surprised by the number of MPs who have told me that they would never send a letter in but that they are either not sure how they would vote in a confidence vote, or that they would definitely vote against the Prime Minister.

    https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/10/why-a-no-confidence-vote-in-theresa-may-could-be-closer-than-she-thinks/
  • Options
    kjhkjh Posts: 10,644
    Nigelb said:

    Sean_F said:

    Extremist rhetoric leads to extremist attacks. This is neither surprising nor unprecedented.

    Given all the talk of traitors and quislings, more of this can be expected in Britain as well.

    I have just heard a Trump supporter on R4 saying that the police should be investing the Democrats to see if they are sending themselves pipe-bombs to whip up sympathy for themselves and to make Trump look bad.

    This was not a man-in-the-street interview, this was a studio interview with a friend of John Bolton, Trump's National Security Adviser.

    Incredible...
    I think it stands to reason that Democrats would be sending bombs to themselves.
    As well as being critics of Trump, all the recipients were involved in fixing the Democrat primaries against Sanders.
    Even Robert De Niro?
    Add Bananarama to the list of suspects.

    :) It took a few minutes.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Nigelb said:

    Sean_F said:

    Extremist rhetoric leads to extremist attacks. This is neither surprising nor unprecedented.

    Given all the talk of traitors and quislings, more of this can be expected in Britain as well.

    I have just heard a Trump supporter on R4 saying that the police should be investing the Democrats to see if they are sending themselves pipe-bombs to whip up sympathy for themselves and to make Trump look bad.

    This was not a man-in-the-street interview, this was a studio interview with a friend of John Bolton, Trump's National Security Adviser.

    Incredible...
    I think it stands to reason that Democrats would be sending bombs to themselves.
    As well as being critics of Trump, all the recipients were involved in fixing the Democrat primaries against Sanders.
    Even Robert De Niro?
    Add Bananarama to the list of suspects.

    You've found the criminals. Guilty (of love in the first degree).
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    edited October 2018
    Sean_F said:

    OllyT said:

    Sean_F said:

    Nigelb said:

    TBF on the gerrymandering, a lot the Democratic disadvantage is just FPTP doing its normal thing of arbitrarily screwing parties whose voters live close to each other....

    Which doesn't really explain how district like these came into being...
    https://edition.cnn.com/2017/10/03/politics/redistricting-supreme-court-gerrymandered/index.html
    Sure, I'm not saying there's no gerrymandering, I'm saying that even if there was no gerrymandering the Dems would still be at a serious disadvantage.
    The Democratic vote is too heavily concentrated in very large cities.
    In a truly democratic system it shouldn't't really matter where your voters live. The US system is stacked in favour of rural conservatives with a Senate voter in Wyoming having the voting strength of 50 cCalifornians. That's before you begin to factor in gerrymandering and voter suppression. If the situation were reversed it would have been rectified years ago.
    Each State having two Senators is a feature, not a bug, and never used to favour one party over another, as the Democrats used to win seats in small rural States until very recently. If they can't do so now, that's on them rather than the system.

    The Dakota territory was split into two states for statehood specifically to get two extra Senators for the Republicans. It was bitterly opposed by the Democrats of the time.

    The idea that it has been a neutral feature until recently is bogus.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,314

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    timmo said:
    Ernest Saunders, that’s one.

    I can name more if you’d like.
    I'm surprised you're here and sober given the day.
    Well.

    I found out the MD of my new firm is French.

    This will be awkward.

    I only popped on here to reply to a message, now back to Agincourt Day celebrations.

    Personally speaking Waterloo, Trafalgar, and Mers-el-Kébir do it more for me.
    Great that you've got a new firm already.

    Yes perhaps gloss over your long held hatred of the French and emphasise your impeccable EU credentials.
    The ERG have radicalised me into becoming a federalist.
    The loonier Brexiteers did the same for me. The govt's atrocious handling of the Brexit process was merely icing on the cake of my conversion.
    So true impossible to believe that I approached the whole thing with an open mind.

    Problem is, with a bit of digging, together with the loons lining up on the, er, loon side, it became a no-brainer.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,631

    Nigelb said:

    Sean_F said:

    Extremist rhetoric leads to extremist attacks. This is neither surprising nor unprecedented.

    Given all the talk of traitors and quislings, more of this can be expected in Britain as well.

    I have just heard a Trump supporter on R4 saying that the police should be investing the Democrats to see if they are sending themselves pipe-bombs to whip up sympathy for themselves and to make Trump look bad.

    This was not a man-in-the-street interview, this was a studio interview with a friend of John Bolton, Trump's National Security Adviser.

    Incredible...
    I think it stands to reason that Democrats would be sending bombs to themselves.
    As well as being critics of Trump, all the recipients were involved in fixing the Democrat primaries against Sanders.
    Even Robert De Niro?
    Add Bananarama to the list of suspects.

    You've found the criminals. Guilty (of love in the first degree).
    Yep, time for some rough justice.

  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,079
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sean_F said:

    Extremist rhetoric leads to extremist attacks. This is neither surprising nor unprecedented.

    Given all the talk of traitors and quislings, more of this can be expected in Britain as well.

    I have just heard a Trump supporter on R4 saying that the police should be investing the Democrats to see if they are sending themselves pipe-bombs to whip up sympathy for themselves and to make Trump look bad.

    This was not a man-in-the-street interview, this was a studio interview with a friend of John Bolton, Trump's National Security Adviser.

    Incredible...
    I think it stands to reason that Democrats would be sending bombs to themselves.
    As well as being critics of Trump, all the recipients were involved in fixing the Democrat primaries against Sanders.
    Even Robert De Niro?
    Add Bananarama to the list of suspects.

    You've found the criminals. Guilty (of love in the first degree).
    Yep, time for some rough justice.

    You can't trust Bananarama on matters of law.

    https://twitter.com/BarristerSecret/status/969643563800723458
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,631
    Alistair said:

    Sean_F said:

    OllyT said:

    Sean_F said:

    Nigelb said:

    TBF on the gerrymandering, a lot the Democratic disadvantage is just FPTP doing its normal thing of arbitrarily screwing parties whose voters live close to each other....

    Which doesn't really explain how district like these came into being...
    https://edition.cnn.com/2017/10/03/politics/redistricting-supreme-court-gerrymandered/index.html
    Sure, I'm not saying there's no gerrymandering, I'm saying that even if there was no gerrymandering the Dems would still be at a serious disadvantage.
    The Democratic vote is too heavily concentrated in very large cities.
    In a truly democratic system it shouldn't't really matter where your voters live. The US system is stacked in favour of rural conservatives with a Senate voter in Wyoming having the voting strength of 50 cCalifornians. That's before you begin to factor in gerrymandering and voter suppression. If the situation were reversed it would have been rectified years ago.
    Each State having two Senators is a feature, not a bug, and never used to favour one party over another, as the Democrats used to win seats in small rural States until very recently. If they can't do so now, that's on them rather than the system.

    The Dakota territory was split into two states for statehood specifically to get two extra Senators for the Republicans. It was bitterly opposed by the Democrats of the time.

    The idea that it has been a neutral feature until recently is bogus.
    The Senate in its very conception is a conservative institution. Nothing necessarily wrong with that - until it becomes as grossly unrepresentative as it now has.
  • Options
    FishingFishing Posts: 4,561
    Only if the 1972 vote and the 1975 referendum can be nullified for the same reason.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sean_F said:

    Extremist rhetoric leads to extremist attacks. This is neither surprising nor unprecedented.

    Given all the talk of traitors and quislings, more of this can be expected in Britain as well.

    I have just heard a Trump supporter on R4 saying that the police should be investing the Democrats to see if they are sending themselves pipe-bombs to whip up sympathy for themselves and to make Trump look bad.

    This was not a man-in-the-street interview, this was a studio interview with a friend of John Bolton, Trump's National Security Adviser.

    Incredible...
    I think it stands to reason that Democrats would be sending bombs to themselves.
    As well as being critics of Trump, all the recipients were involved in fixing the Democrat primaries against Sanders.
    Even Robert De Niro?
    Add Bananarama to the list of suspects.

    You've found the criminals. Guilty (of love in the first degree).
    Yep, time for some rough justice.

    You can't trust Bananarama on matters of law.

    https://twitter.com/BarristerSecret/status/969643563800723458
    That's excellent!
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,850
    edited October 2018
    Alistair said:

    Sean_F said:

    OllyT said:

    Sean_F said:

    Nigelb said:

    TBF on the gerrymandering, a lot the Democratic disadvantage is just FPTP doing its normal thing of arbitrarily screwing parties whose voters live close to each other....

    Which doesn't really explain how district like these came into being...
    https://edition.cnn.com/2017/10/03/politics/redistricting-supreme-court-gerrymandered/index.html
    Sure, I'm not saying there's no gerrymandering, I'm saying that even if there was no gerrymandering the Dems would still be at a serious disadvantage.
    The Democratic vote is too heavily concentrated in very large cities.
    In a truly democratic system it shouldn't't really matter where your voters live. The US system is stacked in favour of rural conservatives with a Senate voter in Wyoming having the voting strength of 50 cCalifornians. That's before you begin to factor in gerrymandering and voter suppression. If the situation were reversed it would have been rectified years ago.
    Each State having two Senators is a feature, not a bug, and never used to favour one party over another, as the Democrats used to win seats in small rural States until very recently. If they can't do so now, that's on them rather than the system.

    The Dakota territory was split into two states for statehood specifically to get two extra Senators for the Republicans. It was bitterly opposed by the Democrats of the time.

    The idea that it has been a neutral feature until recently is bogus.
    At the beginning of this century, the Democrats held all four seats in North and South Dakota.
  • Options
    Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    Fishing said:

    Only if the 1972 vote and the 1975 referendum can be nullified for the same reason.
    It has been. It is called Brexit, or rather TPOLTEUKAB as I agreed to call it to satisfy one the of the PB pedants...
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Sean_F said:

    Alistair said:

    Sean_F said:

    OllyT said:

    Sean_F said:

    Nigelb said:

    TBF on the gerrymandering, a lot the Democratic disadvantage is just FPTP doing its normal thing of arbitrarily screwing parties whose voters live close to each other....

    Which doesn't really explain how district like these came into being...
    https://edition.cnn.com/2017/10/03/politics/redistricting-supreme-court-gerrymandered/index.html
    Sure, I'm not saying there's no gerrymandering, I'm saying that even if there was no gerrymandering the Dems would still be at a serious disadvantage.
    The Democratic vote is too heavily concentrated in very large cities.
    In a truly democratic system it shouldn't't really matter where your voters live. The US system is stacked in favour of rural conservatives with a Senate voter in Wyoming having the voting strength of 50 cCalifornians. That's before you begin to factor in gerrymandering and voter suppression. If the situation were reversed it would have been rectified years ago.
    Each State having two Senators is a feature, not a bug, and never used to favour one party over another, as the Democrats used to win seats in small rural States until very recently. If they can't do so now, that's on them rather than the system.

    The Dakota territory was split into two states for statehood specifically to get two extra Senators for the Republicans. It was bitterly opposed by the Democrats of the time.

    The idea that it has been a neutral feature until recently is bogus.
    At the beginning of this century, the Democrats held all four seats in North and South Dakota.
    The expansion of America with the addition of new states was always highly contentious due to how they would change the balance of the Senate.

    The idea that disquiet at the two Senators per state rule is new is simply not accurate.
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,419
    Sean_F said:

    OllyT said:

    Sean_F said:

    Nigelb said:

    TBF on the gerrymandering, a lot the Democratic disadvantage is just FPTP doing its normal thing of arbitrarily screwing parties whose voters live close to each other....

    Which doesn't really explain how district like these came into being...
    https://edition.cnn.com/2017/10/03/politics/redistricting-supreme-court-gerrymandered/index.html
    Sure, I'm not saying there's no gerrymandering, I'm saying that even if there was no gerrymandering the Dems would still be at a serious disadvantage.
    The Democratic vote is too heavily concentrated in very large cities.
    In a truly democratic system it shouldn't't really matter where your voters live. The US system is stacked in favour of rural conservatives with a Senate voter in Wyoming having the voting strength of 50 cCalifornians. That's before you begin to factor in gerrymandering and voter suppression. If the situation were reversed it would have been rectified years ago.
    Each State having two Senators is a feature, not a bug, and never used to favour one party over another, as the Democrats used to win seats in small rural States until very recently. If they can't do so now, that's on them rather than the system.

    It's still a bug; it's just a bug that wasn't hit until recently due to the happenstance of vote distribution.

    The problem's been known about since very early on in the Republic's history. One reason that Maine was split off from Massachusetts was to balance the creation of new states in the South. Similarly, one factor influencing Southern thinking before the Civil War was the (legitimate, as it turned out) fear of the creation of low-population non-slave states across the Prairies and Rockies, which would leave the slaveholding states in a permanent minority, potentially to the point of giving them constitution-changing majorities and certainly to the point of, over the course of 20 years or so, delivering a northern and perhaps Abolitionist Supreme Court.

    The proper solution would be to break states like California, New York or Texas up (or merge small ones) but identity and interests would probably make that unrealistic as a practical proposal.
  • Options
    Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    timmo said:
    Ernest Saunders, that’s one.

    I can name more if you’d like.
    I'm surprised you're here and sober given the day.
    Well.

    I found out the MD of my new firm is French.

    This will be awkward.

    I only popped on here to reply to a message, now back to Agincourt Day celebrations.

    Personally speaking Waterloo, Trafalgar, and Mers-el-Kébir do it more for me.
    Great that you've got a new firm already.

    Yes perhaps gloss over your long held hatred of the French and emphasise your impeccable EU credentials.
    The ERG have radicalised me into becoming a federalist.
    The loonier Brexiteers did the same for me. The govt's atrocious handling of the Brexit process was merely icing on the cake of my conversion.
    So true impossible to believe that I approached the whole thing with an open mind.

    Problem is, with a bit of digging, together with the loons lining up on the, er, loon side, it became a no-brainer.
    Indeed. I am considering some quiet out of the way spot with cr*p communications.

    I must ask Cyclefree about Cumbia :D
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,850
    An interesting comment just now from Lord Hain (do not post a link to it).
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,987
    Good afternoon, everyone.

    I trust we aren't holding our manhoods cheap?
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,214
    Sean_F said:

    An interesting comment just now from Lord Hain (do not post a link to it).

    Indeed. Hardly a surprise, though.
  • Options

    Sean_F said:

    OllyT said:

    Sean_F said:

    Nigelb said:

    TBF on the gerrymandering, a lot the Democratic disadvantage is just FPTP doing its normal thing of arbitrarily screwing parties whose voters live close to each other....

    Which doesn't really explain how district like these came into being...
    https://edition.cnn.com/2017/10/03/politics/redistricting-supreme-court-gerrymandered/index.html
    Sure, I'm not saying there's no gerrymandering, I'm saying that even if there was no gerrymandering the Dems would still be at a serious disadvantage.
    The Democratic vote is too heavily concentrated in very large cities.
    In a truly democratic system it shouldn't't really matter where your voters live. The US system is stacked in favour of rural conservatives with a Senate voter in Wyoming having the voting strength of 50 cCalifornians. That's before you begin to factor in gerrymandering and voter suppression. If the situation were reversed it would have been rectified years ago.
    Each State having two Senators is a feature, not a bug, and never used to favour one party over another, as the Democrats used to win seats in small rural States until very recently. If they can't do so now, that's on them rather than the system.

    It's still a bug; it's just a bug that wasn't hit until recently due to the happenstance of vote distribution.

    The problem's been known about since very early on in the Republic's history. One reason that Maine was split off from Massachusetts was to balance the creation of new states in the South. Similarly, one factor influencing Southern thinking before the Civil War was the (legitimate, as it turned out) fear of the creation of low-population non-slave states across the Prairies and Rockies, which would leave the slaveholding states in a permanent minority, potentially to the point of giving them constitution-changing majorities and certainly to the point of, over the course of 20 years or so, delivering a northern and perhaps Abolitionist Supreme Court.

    The proper solution would be to break states like California, New York or Texas up (or merge small ones) but identity and interests would probably make that unrealistic as a practical proposal.
    Alternatively the Democrats could figure out how to appeal to rural states. Which is what the founders basically had in mind when they put this in.

    Feature not bug as its by design. Bugs are unintended.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929
    Oh my. Popcorn.
  • Options
    What's the legal position regarding repeating comments made under parliamentary privilege?
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,259

    What's the legal position regarding repeating comments made under parliamentary privilege?

    Snap.
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,419

    Sean_F said:

    OllyT said:

    Sean_F said:

    Nigelb said:



    Which doesn't really explain how district like these came into being...
    https://edition.cnn.com/2017/10/03/politics/redistricting-supreme-court-gerrymandered/index.html

    Sure, I'm not saying there's no gerrymandering, I'm saying that even if there was no gerrymandering the Dems would still be at a serious disadvantage.
    The Democratic vote is too heavily concentrated in very large cities.
    In a truly democratic system it shouldn't't really matter where your voters live. The US system is stacked in favour of rural conservatives with a Senate voter in Wyoming having the voting strength of 50 cCalifornians. That's before you begin to factor in gerrymandering and voter suppression. If the situation were reversed it would have been rectified years ago.
    Each State having two Senators is a feature, not a bug, and never used to favour one party over another, as the Democrats used to win seats in small rural States until very recently. If they can't do so now, that's on them rather than the system.

    It's still a bug; it's just a bug that wasn't hit until recently due to the happenstance of vote distribution.

    The problem's been known about since very early on in the Republic's history. One reason that Maine was split off from Massachusetts was to balance the creation of new states in the South. Similarly, one factor influencing Southern thinking before the Civil War was the (legitimate, as it turned out) fear of the creation of low-population non-slave states across the Prairies and Rockies, which would leave the slaveholding states in a permanent minority, potentially to the point of giving them constitution-changing majorities and certainly to the point of, over the course of 20 years or so, delivering a northern and perhaps Abolitionist Supreme Court.

    The proper solution would be to break states like California, New York or Texas up (or merge small ones) but identity and interests would probably make that unrealistic as a practical proposal.
    Alternatively the Democrats could figure out how to appeal to rural states. Which is what the founders basically had in mind when they put this in.

    Feature not bug as its by design. Bugs are unintended.
    An unintended and negative consequence of a feature is still a bug.

    It wasn't what the founders had in mind. They disapproved of faction (or at least, or organised faction), never mind Party, and the kind of triangulation you're talking about there is certainly not an 18th century way of thinking.
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    What's the legal position regarding repeating comments made under parliamentary privilege?

    Or on the front page of the Telegraph website..
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,259

    What's the legal position regarding repeating comments made under parliamentary privilege?

    Whatever it is, not holding back at least one journalist.
  • Options

    What's the legal position regarding repeating comments made under parliamentary privilege?

    100% legal. Can't censor discussions in Parliament.

    Sir Philip Green has induced the Streisand Effect with that injunction now.
  • Options

    What's the legal position regarding repeating comments made under parliamentary privilege?

    Snap.
    Don't. Even MPs, who repeat their comments outside the Chamber, can be liable.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,850

    What's the legal position regarding repeating comments made under parliamentary privilege?

    I don't know, but better to be safe than sorry.
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,419
    Sean_F said:

    An interesting comment just now from Lord Hain (do not post a link to it).

    Is he not protected by parliamentary privilege? Mainstream journalists are quoting him on social media.

    For Mike's sake, I won't repeat their comments but the detail is a doddle to find.
  • Options

    What's the legal position regarding repeating comments made under parliamentary privilege?

    Snap.
    Don't. Even MPs, who repeat their comments outside the Chamber, can be liable.
    The BBC have named them by breaking news alert mind you
  • Options
    Businessman's name now reported by most leading news organisations including telegraph, BBC and Independent.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929

    What's the legal position regarding repeating comments made under parliamentary privilege?

    Not sure, but it'll be interesting to see if the named individual goes after the whole of the news media that reported re Hain.
  • Options
    Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256

    What's the legal position regarding repeating comments made under parliamentary privilege?

    I am sure that the Telegraph's lawyers advised them accordingly.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929
    TGOHF said:

    What's the legal position regarding repeating comments made under parliamentary privilege?

    Or on the front page of the Telegraph website..
    You got the wrong 'Private Fraser' lol xD
  • Options
    Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    edited October 2018

    Good afternoon, everyone.

    I trust we aren't holding our manhoods cheap?

    Not an issue for me ..... :D
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,481
    edited October 2018

    What's the legal position regarding repeating comments made under parliamentary privilege?

    The Guardian, BBC, and Sky have named him so we’ll let PBers discuss it.

    However if any one goes too far, we’ll withdraw that privilege.

    Cf Ryan Giggs.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,214
    edited October 2018

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    timmo said:
    Ernest Saunders, that’s one.

    I can name more if you’d like.
    I'm surprised you're here and sober given the day.
    Well.

    I found out the MD of my new firm is French.

    This will be awkward.

    I only popped on here to reply to a message, now back to Agincourt Day celebrations.

    Personally speaking Waterloo, Trafalgar, and Mers-el-Kébir do it more for me.
    Great that you've got a new firm already.

    Yes perhaps gloss over your long held hatred of the French and emphasise your impeccable EU credentials.
    The ERG have radicalised me into becoming a federalist.
    The loonier Brexiteers did the same for me. The govt's atrocious handling of the Brexit process was merely icing on the cake of my conversion.
    So true impossible to believe that I approached the whole thing with an open mind.

    Problem is, with a bit of digging, together with the loons lining up on the, er, loon side, it became a no-brainer.
    Indeed. I am considering some quiet out of the way spot with cr*p communications.

    I must ask Cyclefree about Cumbia :D
    - Bloody good WiFi communications here, at least in my neck of the woods.
    - Beach is gorgeous.
    - Mountains ditto. Black Combe is lovely and not trampled over by tourists.
    - Good pubs roundabout.
    - The estuary is spectacular. The views of the moon over the estuary are amazing.
    - Fantastic club in our local small town which gets all the comedians doing their pre-tours tours.
    - Proper butchers.
    - You can see the sky and stars at night.
    - LOTS of sheep. (And no silly Americans shooting them, either.)
    - The Ulverston Music Festival
    - The road over the fells leading down into the Duddon estuary is one of the most beautiful in the whole UK, whatever the weather or season.
    - People talk to each other

    And once Cyclefree Towers is completed, friends and nice people can come and stay. Lots of space so no-one need talk to me and can instead admire garden etc and have proper sleeps.

    Really, don't all rush at once - :)
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Sean_F said:

    An interesting comment just now from Lord Hain (do not post a link to it).

    Turns out it was a top name.
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Pulpstar said:

    TGOHF said:

    What's the legal position regarding repeating comments made under parliamentary privilege?

    Or on the front page of the Telegraph website..
    You got the wrong 'Private Fraser' lol xD
    Mr ABC's £500k on Schillings looks a bit forlorn now.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited October 2018
    Is anybody in the slightest bit surprised who it is? Hasn't it been previously widely reported in the media of a number of incidents of a nature the Telegraph were claiming an exclusive on.

    Is it just me...I am extremely uncomfortable at the fact the press can be gagged like this, but I am equally uncomfortable that individuals with knowledge of a case can then give an MP / Lord a ring and they will out them in parliament.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929

    What's the legal position regarding repeating comments made under parliamentary privilege?

    The Guardian, BBC, and Sky have named him so we’ll let PBers discuss it.

    However if any one goes too far, we’ll withdraw that privilege.
    Of course noone should infer guilt, but Sir Philip Green has done himself no favours with the injunction.
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670



    An unintended and negative consequence of a feature is still a bug.

    It wasn't what the founders had in mind. They disapproved of faction (or at least, or organised faction), never mind Party, and the kind of triangulation you're talking about there is certainly not an 18th century way of thinking.

    Whenever people try and laud the intellect of the American Founders I like to bring up their desire to wish away political parties as an example of their naive idiocy.
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Never mind that it was not intended that Senators be elected by popular vote.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929
    Outed by Lord Cuprinol too !
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,969

    Is anybody in the slightest bit surprised who it is? Hasn't it been previously widely reported in the media of a number of incidents of a nature the Telegraph were claiming an exclusive on.

    Is it just me...I am extremely uncomfortable at the fact the press can be gagged like this, but I am equally uncomfortable that individuals with knowledge of a case can then give an MP / Lord a ring and they will out them in parliament.

    Yes, what if they named the wrong person?
  • Options
    RobD said:

    Is anybody in the slightest bit surprised who it is? Hasn't it been previously widely reported in the media of a number of incidents of a nature the Telegraph were claiming an exclusive on.

    Is it just me...I am extremely uncomfortable at the fact the press can be gagged like this, but I am equally uncomfortable that individuals with knowledge of a case can then give an MP / Lord a ring and they will out them in parliament.

    Yes, what if they named the wrong person?
    Didn't John Hemming get in a spot of bother doing this?
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,259
    a newspaper reporting what is said in parliament under absolute privilege gains only qualified privilege i.e. they will need a public interest defence. Should be ok for the newspaper.

    But does not apply to websites and forums.

    This I think is the status of the law. DYOR.

  • Options
    Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    Cyclefree said:



    Indeed. I am considering some quiet out of the way spot with cr*p communications.

    I must ask Cyclefree about Cumbia :D

    - Bloody good WiFi communications here, at least in my neck of the woods.
    - Beach is gorgeous.
    - Mountains ditto. Black Combe is lovely and not trampled over by tourists.
    - Good pubs roundabout.
    - The estuary is spectacular. The views of the moon over the estuary are amazing.
    - Fantastic club in our local small town which gets all the comedians doing their pre-tours tours.
    - Proper butchers.
    - You can see the sky and stars at night.
    - LOTS of sheep. (And no silly Americans shooting them, either.)
    - The Ulverston Music Festival
    - The road over the fells leading down into the Duddon estuary is one of the most beautiful in the whole UK, whatever the weather or season.
    - People talk to each other

    And once Cyclefree Towers is completed, friends and nice people can come and stay. Lots of space so no-one need talk to me and can instead admire garden etc and have proper sleeps.

    Really, don't all rush at once - :)
    Sounds lovely. Have you given up London entirely?
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,987
    As an aside, Goodall's claim the Tories 'ate up' the UKIP vote last time is questionable at best, as a reply indicates (basically, UKIP fell about 12 points and the Cons rose by about 7 points. But Lab was up 11-12 too).
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,259
    RobD said:

    Is anybody in the slightest bit surprised who it is? Hasn't it been previously widely reported in the media of a number of incidents of a nature the Telegraph were claiming an exclusive on.

    Is it just me...I am extremely uncomfortable at the fact the press can be gagged like this, but I am equally uncomfortable that individuals with knowledge of a case can then give an MP / Lord a ring and they will out them in parliament.

    Yes, what if they named the wrong person?
    A newspaper must prove there is no element of "malice" when using qualified privilege I believe.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,214

    Extremist rhetoric leads to extremist attacks. This is neither surprising nor unprecedented.

    Given all the talk of traitors and quislings, more of this can be expected in Britain as well.

    This is sadly often true.

    But I would suggest a small note of caution. We don't know - and I assume you don't either - who has done this and why.

    When the shootings and bombings happened in Norway in 2011 some people (even on here) immediately assumed that this was another Islamist terrorist incident. Turned out it wasn't and we all had a horrible wake up call to terrorism inspired by other reasons than one particular religion. Sometimes it is sensible not to jump to conclusions, even ones which accord with what we would like or think to be true, until we have the facts.
  • Options

    a newspaper reporting what is said in parliament under absolute privilege gains only qualified privilege i.e. they will need a public interest defence. Should be ok for the newspaper.

    But does not apply to websites and forums.

    This I think is the status of the law. DYOR.

    Do you mean that websites don't need to demonstrate public interest to justify repeating what is said, or that they can't claim a public interest defence?
  • Options
    RobD said:

    Is anybody in the slightest bit surprised who it is? Hasn't it been previously widely reported in the media of a number of incidents of a nature the Telegraph were claiming an exclusive on.

    Is it just me...I am extremely uncomfortable at the fact the press can be gagged like this, but I am equally uncomfortable that individuals with knowledge of a case can then give an MP / Lord a ring and they will out them in parliament.

    Yes, what if they named the wrong person?
    I know legally it is, but to me it doesn't seem that different from Tommy Robinson standing outside a court live streaming defendants and reporting all the details of a trial.
  • Options
    currystarcurrystar Posts: 1,171
    Totally O/T, my experience of the NHS today. My friend whis 72 and lives alone was diagnosed with prostate cancer. On Tuesday I dropped him off at the QA hospital in Portsmouth as he was having his prostate removed. He had a five hour operation. I spoke to him yesterday at Lunchtime and he sounded shot away and visited him last night. He said that the nurses had been hassling all day trying to discharge him. He has two incisions on his belly one four inch and one three inch. He has a catheter fitted and a piss bag attached to his leg. So one day after 5 hours of surgery to remove his prostrate they wanted to send him home. It was only his pleading of the pain he was in what stopped them. This morning at 7 am the nurse made him get dressed and wheeled him to the discharge lounge. They gaive him 30 syringes and told him to inject himself daily for 30 days. He called me to pick him up. They have moved the discharge lounge at the QA to the 4th floor, but have not told anyone. I asked 13 NHS workers before finally someone told me where to go. There was my mate sat by himself. As he stood up he winced in anquish, he was in horrendous pain, hardly surprising as his belly had been opened up less than 48 hours before. There was no one to ask for a wheelchair so my mate had to walk over 500 meters to the exit, (They could not have put the Discharge Lounge in a worse place) and then up steps to the car. He is not someone who shows emotion but he had tears in his eyes as he was walking the pain was so bad. His two wounds on his belly were leaking blood. The only aftercare he is getting is an appointment in 10 days to have his catheter removed. No visits have been arranged from a district nurse and no one from the hospital is going to call him to see how he is.

    So just two days afer major life changing surgery he is alone at his house in terrible pain trying to work out how to empty his piss bag and having to inject himself.

    This is the NHS in 2018, apparently they are all heroes.

  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,969

    As an aside, Goodall's claim the Tories 'ate up' the UKIP vote last time is questionable at best, as a reply indicates (basically, UKIP fell about 12 points and the Cons rose by about 7 points. But Lab was up 11-12 too).

    Fake news?
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,419
    edited October 2018
    Alistair said:



    An unintended and negative consequence of a feature is still a bug.

    It wasn't what the founders had in mind. They disapproved of faction (or at least, or organised faction), never mind Party, and the kind of triangulation you're talking about there is certainly not an 18th century way of thinking.

    Whenever people try and laud the intellect of the American Founders I like to bring up their desire to wish away political parties as an example of their naive idiocy.
    To be fair, it wasn't completely naive. There weren't (AFAIK) any permanent parties in America pre-1789: those that arose did so around specific issues and tended to break up when that issue subsided. British politics at the time, and for 50 years or so, had been marked more by factions of Whigs with smatterings of Independents rather than what we would recognise today as party politics (the Queen Anne era Tory/Whig division had long since fallen into irrelevance as that Stuart Toryism became badly tainted with Jacobitism).

    By and large, the Founding Fathers did a pretty good job and there were some outstanding individuals. Didn't get everything right though and made the odd shocker, such as making the runner-up in a presidential election the vice-president.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,214

    TOPPING said:

    timmo said:
    Ernest Saunders, that’s one.

    I can name more if you’d like.
    I'm surprised you're here and sober given the day.
    Well.

    I found out the MD of my new firm is French.

    This will be awkward.

    I only popped on here to reply to a message, now back to Agincourt Day celebrations.

    Personally speaking Waterloo, Trafalgar, and Mers-el-Kébir do it more for me.
    How much due diligence did you do?
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,259

    What's the legal position regarding repeating comments made under parliamentary privilege?

    The Guardian, BBC, and Sky have named him so we’ll let PBers discuss it.

    However if any one goes too far, we’ll withdraw that privilege.

    Cf Ryan Giggs.
    I would be interested if any lawyers are around to advise on this. As I said earlier, the qualified privilege to report on what Hain has said, under absolute, applies iirc only to news outfits.

  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,850
    Cyclefree said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    timmo said:
    Ernest Saunders, that’s one.

    I can name more if you’d like.
    I'm surprised you're here and sober given the day.
    Well.

    I found out the MD of my new firm is French.

    This will be awkward.

    I only popped on here to reply to a message, now back to Agincourt Day celebrations.

    Personally speaking Waterloo, Trafalgar, and Mers-el-Kébir do it more for me.
    Great that you've got a new firm already.

    Yes perhaps gloss over your long held hatred of the French and emphasise your impeccable EU credentials.
    The ERG have radicalised me into becoming a federalist.
    The loonier Brexiteers did the same for me. The govt's atrocious handling of the Brexit process was merely icing on the cake of my conversion.
    So true impossible to believe that I approached the whole thing with an open mind.

    Problem is, with a bit of digging, together with the loons lining up on the, er, loon side, it became a no-brainer.
    Indeed. I am considering some quiet out of the way spot with cr*p communications.

    I must ask Cyclefree about Cumbia :D
    - Bloody good WiFi communications here, at least in my neck of the woods.
    - Beach is gorgeous.
    - Mountains ditto. Black Combe is lovely and not trampled over by tourists.
    - Good pubs roundabout.
    - The estuary is spectacular. The views of the moon over the estuary are amazing.
    - Fantastic club in our local small town which gets all the comedians doing their pre-tours tours.
    - Proper butchers.
    - You can see the sky and stars at night.
    - LOTS of sheep. (And no silly Americans shooting them, either.)
    - The Ulverston Music Festival
    - The road over the fells leading down into the Duddon estuary is one of the most beautiful in the whole UK, whatever the weather or season.
    - People talk to each other

    And once Cyclefree Towers is completed, friends and nice people can come and stay. Lots of space so no-one need talk to me and can instead admire garden etc and have proper sleeps.

    Really, don't all rush at once - :)
    The highlights for me were Honister Pass, Buttermere, Borrowdale, and Crummock Water.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,969

    What's the legal position regarding repeating comments made under parliamentary privilege?

    The Guardian, BBC, and Sky have named him so we’ll let PBers discuss it.

    However if any one goes too far, we’ll withdraw that privilege.

    Cf Ryan Giggs.
    I would be interested if any lawyers are around to advise on this. As I said earlier, the qualified privilege to report on what Hain has said, under absolute, applies iirc only to news outfits.

    If we read the newspaper headline aloud in a public space could we be sued?
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,987
    Mr. D, I'd be inclined to say a misinterpretation of the numbers.

    Although when next the MSM considers why some people think mainstream news is tosh, we need only compare coverage of the Saudi journalist butchered in Turkey with the reporting (a foot note in one night's news) of the Huddersfield rape gang.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,214
    Sean_F said:

    Cyclefree said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    timmo said:

    https:

    I'm surprised you're here and sober given the day.
    Well.

    I found out the MD of my new firm is French.

    This will be awkward.

    I only popped on here to reply to a message, now back to Agincourt Day celebrations.

    Personally speaking Waterloo, Trafalgar, and Mers-el-Kébir do it more for me.
    Great that you've got a new firm already.

    Yes perhaps gloss over your long held hatred of the French and emphasise your impeccable EU credentials.
    The ERG have radicalised me into becoming a federalist.
    The loonier Brexiteers did the same for me. The govt's atrocious handling of the Brexit process was merely icing on the cake of my conversion.
    So true impossible to believe that I approached the whole thing with an open mind.

    Problem is, with a bit of digging, together with the loons lining up on the, er, loon side, it became a no-brainer.
    Indeed. I am considering some quiet out of the way spot with cr*p communications.

    I must ask Cyclefree about Cumbia :D
    - Bloody good WiFi communications here, at least in my neck of the woods.
    - Beach is gorgeous.
    - Mountains ditto. Black Combe is lovely and not trampled over by tourists.
    - Good pubs roundabout.
    - The estuary is spectacular. The views of the moon over the estuary are amazing.
    - Fantastic club in our local small town which gets all the comedians doing their pre-tours tours.
    - Proper butchers.
    - You can see the sky and stars at night.
    - LOTS of sheep. (And no silly Americans shooting them, either.)
    - The Ulverston Music Festival
    - The road over the fells leading down into the Duddon estuary is one of the most beautiful in the whole UK, whatever the weather or season.
    - People talk to each other

    And once Cyclefree Towers is completed, friends and nice people can come and stay. Lots of space so no-one need talk to me and can instead admire garden etc and have proper sleeps.

    Really, don't all rush at once - :)
    The highlights for me were Honister Pass, Buttermere, Borrowdale, and Crummock Water.
    All lovely. Coniston is our nearest lake. But tourists don't tend to know the Duddon Valley. More fools them. It's lovely. We get walkers and bikers and riders rather than people buying Peter Rabbit tat......
  • Options
    rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787
    Historically, state Senates were often constructed to give equal representation to the counties of the state after the federal model. This was ruled unconstitutional by SCOTUS in the '60s as a violation of the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The principle cannot be applied to the US Senate as Article V of the Constitution does not allow any amendment to deprive any state of equal representation in the Senate without its consent.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929
    RobD said:

    What's the legal position regarding repeating comments made under parliamentary privilege?

    The Guardian, BBC, and Sky have named him so we’ll let PBers discuss it.

    However if any one goes too far, we’ll withdraw that privilege.

    Cf Ryan Giggs.
    I would be interested if any lawyers are around to advise on this. As I said earlier, the qualified privilege to report on what Hain has said, under absolute, applies iirc only to news outfits.

    If we read the newspaper headline aloud in a public space could we be sued?
    Isn't that basically twitter xD !
  • Options

    What's the legal position regarding repeating comments made under parliamentary privilege?

    The Guardian, BBC, and Sky have named him so we’ll let PBers discuss it.

    However if any one goes too far, we’ll withdraw that privilege.

    Cf Ryan Giggs.
    I would be interested if any lawyers are around to advise on this. As I said earlier, the qualified privilege to report on what Hain has said, under absolute, applies iirc only to news outfits.

    I took some advice from a barrister on this when we had a plethora of super injunctions about.

    Their view was so long as people didn’t infer guilt or outed the other parties involved websites like PB are fine.
  • Options
    ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 2,201
    currystar said:

    Totally O/T, my experience of the NHS today. My friend whis 72 and lives alone was diagnosed with prostate cancer. On Tuesday I dropped him off at the QA hospital in Portsmouth as he was having his prostate removed. He had a five hour operation. I spoke to him yesterday at Lunchtime and he sounded shot away and visited him last night. He said that the nurses had been hassling all day trying to discharge him. He has two incisions on his belly one four inch and one three inch. He has a catheter fitted and a piss bag attached to his leg. So one day after 5 hours of surgery to remove his prostrate they wanted to send him home. It was only his pleading of the pain he was in what stopped them. This morning at 7 am the nurse made him get dressed and wheeled him to the discharge lounge. They gaive him 30 syringes and told him to inject himself daily for 30 days. He called me to pick him up. They have moved the discharge lounge at the QA to the 4th floor, but have not told anyone. I asked 13 NHS workers before finally someone told me where to go. There was my mate sat by himself. As he stood up he winced in anquish, he was in horrendous pain, hardly surprising as his belly had been opened up less than 48 hours before. There was no one to ask for a wheelchair so my mate had to walk over 500 meters to the exit, (They could not have put the Discharge Lounge in a worse place) and then up steps to the car. He is not someone who shows emotion but he had tears in his eyes as he was walking the pain was so bad. His two wounds on his belly were leaking blood. The only aftercare he is getting is an appointment in 10 days to have his catheter removed. No visits have been arranged from a district nurse and no one from the hospital is going to call him to see how he is.

    So just two days afer major life changing surgery he is alone at his house in terrible pain trying to work out how to empty his piss bag and having to inject himself.

    This is the NHS in 2018, apparently they are all heroes.

    I believe that the NHS service varies massively around the country. My father had his prostrate removed last year. State of the art keyhole surgery done by a machine controlled by the surgeon. The surgeon even offered my father a computer screen to view what he was doing. One night in hospital to make sure no infections and train him to use his catheter and bag. Then home and nurse visited twice a week to make sure all was going well.
    The real questions that should be asked on of the NHS management is why there seems to be massive differences in the quality of service. They must have a mechanism for sharing best practices.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,214

    Cyclefree said:



    Indeed. I am considering some quiet out of the way spot with cr*p communications.

    I must ask Cyclefree about Cumbia :D

    - Bloody good WiFi communications here, at least in my neck of the woods.
    - Beach is gorgeous.
    - Mountains ditto. Black Combe is lovely and not trampled over by tourists.
    - Good pubs roundabout.
    - The estuary is spectacular. The views of the moon over the estuary are amazing.
    - Fantastic club in our local small town which gets all the comedians doing their pre-tours tours.
    - Proper butchers.
    - You can see the sky and stars at night.
    - LOTS of sheep. (And no silly Americans shooting them, either.)
    - The Ulverston Music Festival
    - The road over the fells leading down into the Duddon estuary is one of the most beautiful in the whole UK, whatever the weather or season.
    - People talk to each other

    And once Cyclefree Towers is completed, friends and nice people can come and stay. Lots of space so no-one need talk to me and can instead admire garden etc and have proper sleeps.

    Really, don't all rush at once - :)
    Sounds lovely. Have you given up London entirely?
    No. Work is here. And there is a lot of building work still to be done. Months of it, in fact. So we will have to move out temporarily. The intention is that I can work remotely from there, at least some of the time. But for now I intend dividing my time between the two. I spent most of June - September there this year which was wonderful.
  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 18,891

    What's the legal position regarding repeating comments made under parliamentary privilege?

    The Guardian, BBC, and Sky have named him so we’ll let PBers discuss it.

    However if any one goes too far, we’ll withdraw that privilege.

    Cf Ryan Giggs.
    As I said to Carlotta when she first mentioned this there were only ever three possibilities and the other two though equally well known were far less likely.


    In other news the understated yacht 'Lioness' has been seen cruising in the waters around Monaco though David Cameron's 'Waste Tzar' was nowhere to be seen
  • Options
    Cyclefree said:

    TOPPING said:

    timmo said:
    Ernest Saunders, that’s one.

    I can name more if you’d like.
    I'm surprised you're here and sober given the day.
    Well.

    I found out the MD of my new firm is French.

    This will be awkward.

    I only popped on here to reply to a message, now back to Agincourt Day celebrations.

    Personally speaking Waterloo, Trafalgar, and Mers-el-Kébir do it more for me.
    How much due diligence did you do?
    I did a cursory check, and now I’m doing the detailed due diligence.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,689
    currystar said:

    Totally O/T, my experience of the NHS today. My friend whis 72 and lives alone was diagnosed with prostate cancer. On Tuesday I dropped him off at the QA hospital in Portsmouth as he was having his prostate removed. He had a five hour operation. I spoke to him yesterday at Lunchtime and he sounded shot away and visited him last night. He said that the nurses had been hassling all day trying to discharge him. He has two incisions on his belly one four inch and one three inch. He has a catheter fitted and a piss bag attached to his leg. So one day after 5 hours of surgery to remove his prostrate they wanted to send him home. It was only his pleading of the pain he was in what stopped them. This morning at 7 am the nurse made him get dressed and wheeled him to the discharge lounge. They gaive him 30 syringes and told him to inject himself daily for 30 days. He called me to pick him up. They have moved the discharge lounge at the QA to the 4th floor, but have not told anyone. I asked 13 NHS workers before finally someone told me where to go. There was my mate sat by himself. As he stood up he winced in anquish, he was in horrendous pain, hardly surprising as his belly had been opened up less than 48 hours before. There was no one to ask for a wheelchair so my mate had to walk over 500 meters to the exit, (They could not have put the Discharge Lounge in a worse place) and then up steps to the car. He is not someone who shows emotion but he had tears in his eyes as he was walking the pain was so bad. His two wounds on his belly were leaking blood. The only aftercare he is getting is an appointment in 10 days to have his catheter removed. No visits have been arranged from a district nurse and no one from the hospital is going to call him to see how he is.

    So just two days afer major life changing surgery he is alone at his house in terrible pain trying to work out how to empty his piss bag and having to inject himself.

    This is the NHS in 2018, apparently they are all heroes.

    The problem is the number of beds. This leads to premature discharge of recovering patients.

    I agree it is poor care, but we do not have the bed or nursing numbers to keep patients in while they recover. If your friend was kept in, then someone elses prostate cancer operation would be cancelled.

    It is only going to get worse. Our winter bed crisis is now year round.

  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,631

    Good afternoon, everyone.

    I trust we aren't holding our manhoods cheap?

    Not while typing....
  • Options

    Good afternoon, everyone.

    I trust we aren't holding our manhoods cheap?

    I wouldn't let anyone (with a few exceptions) hold my manhood for anything less than *redacted*
  • Options
    currystarcurrystar Posts: 1,171




    I believe that the NHS service varies massively around the country. My father had his prostrate removed last year. State of the art keyhole surgery done by a machine controlled by the surgeon. The surgeon even offered my father a computer screen to view what he was doing. One night in hospital to make sure no infections and train him to use his catheter and bag. Then home and nurse visited twice a week to make sure all was going well.
    The real questions that should be asked on of the NHS management is why there seems to be massive differences in the quality of service. They must have a mechanism for sharing best practices.

    This was definitely not keyhole surgery, two massive cuts in his belly. My wife is a nurse at a different hospital and I am aware that even between wards the service can be vastly different, but how they can send a old man home such a short time after this major surgery with no aftercare at all is simply staggering
  • Options
    Cyclefree said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    timmo said:
    Ernest Saunders, that’s one.

    I can name more if you’d like.
    I'm surprised you're here and sober given the day.
    Well.

    I found out the MD of my new firm is French.

    This will be awkward.

    I only popped on here to reply to a message, now back to Agincourt Day celebrations.

    Personally speaking Waterloo, Trafalgar, and Mers-el-Kébir do it more for me.
    Great that you've got a new firm already.

    Yes perhaps gloss over your long held hatred of the French and emphasise your impeccable EU credentials.
    The ERG have radicalised me into becoming a federalist.
    The loonier Brexiteers did the same for me. The govt's atrocious handling of the Brexit process was merely icing on the cake of my conversion.
    So true impossible to believe that I approached the whole thing with an open mind.

    Problem is, with a bit of digging, together with the loons lining up on the, er, loon side, it became a no-brainer.
    Indeed. I am considering some quiet out of the way spot with cr*p communications.

    I must ask Cyclefree about Cumbia :D
    - Bloody good WiFi communications here, at least in my neck of the woods.
    - Beach is gorgeous.
    - Mountains ditto. Black Combe is lovely and not trampled over by tourists.
    - Good pubs roundabout.
    - The estuary is spectacular. The views of the moon over the estuary are amazing.
    - Fantastic club in our local small town which gets all the comedians doing their pre-tours tours.
    - Proper butchers.
    - You can see the sky and stars at night.
    - LOTS of sheep. (And no silly Americans shooting them, either.)
    - The Ulverston Music Festival
    - The road over the fells leading down into the Duddon estuary is one of the most beautiful in the whole UK, whatever the weather or season.
    - People talk to each other

    And once Cyclefree Towers is completed, friends and nice people can come and stay. Lots of space so no-one need talk to me and can instead admire garden etc and have proper sleeps.

    Really, don't all rush at once - :)

    We were some tourists who climbed Black Combe last year.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,987
    Mr. Divvie, a redacted manhood sounds like a terrible condition.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929
    edited October 2018
    I had two (majorish) operations on the NHS for a pilonidal sinus. It recurred after the first time. The second op was done to a much higher standard than the first I think, and following that I received laser treatment to prevent recurrence *crosses fingers, it won't*

    @Currystar Hopefully your friend will convalesce OK, his post-op treatment sounds poor though.
  • Options
    rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787
    Alistair said:

    Never mind that it was not intended that Senators be elected by popular vote.

    The Seventeenth Amendment was passed because the appointment of Senators by state legislators had widely come to be seen to be corrupt. It was also the first amendment, after the Bill of Rights, to be passed by Congress in order to circumvent the states from calling an Article V convention to amend the Constitution.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,987
    Mr. Pulpstar, hope it doesn't recur.
  • Options
    OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    Pulpstar said:

    What's the legal position regarding repeating comments made under parliamentary privilege?

    The Guardian, BBC, and Sky have named him so we’ll let PBers discuss it.

    However if any one goes too far, we’ll withdraw that privilege.
    Of course noone should infer guilt, but Sir Philip Green has done himself no favours with the injunction.
    He wasn't doing other "prominent" businessmen any favours either, with all of them suspected to one degree or another as a result of the anonymity.

    I'm not sure where we go from here though. No doubt we will hear the stories of the women concerned, which is good, but what are we to make of it? The probability of any formal proceedings coming to a judgement that would be convincing (either way) on allegations of harassment are very low. People will make their own minds up, but due process would be preferable. How can we restore public confidence in due process in cases such as this?
  • Options

    Is anybody in the slightest bit surprised who it is? Hasn't it been previously widely reported in the media of a number of incidents of a nature the Telegraph were claiming an exclusive on.

    Is it just me...I am extremely uncomfortable at the fact the press can be gagged like this, but I am equally uncomfortable that individuals with knowledge of a case can then give an MP / Lord a ring and they will out them in parliament.

    There's a book been written about it published in June this year, see

    https://www.hrgrapevine.com/content/article/2018-06-25-philip-greens-vile-abuse-alleged-in-explosive-new-book
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,631
    And nothing to worry about as far as voting machine security goes, either...
    https://www.wired.com/story/i-bought-used-voting-machines-on-ebay/
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,214

    Cyclefree said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    timmo said:
    Ernest Saunders, that’s one.

    I can name more if you’d like.
    I'm surprised you're here and sober given the day.
    Well.

    I found out the MD of my new firm is French.

    This will be awkward.

    I only popped on here to reply to a message, now back to Agincourt Day celebrations.

    Personally speaking Waterloo, Trafalgar, and Mers-el-Kébir do it more for me.
    Great that you've got a new firm already.

    Yes perhaps gloss over your long held hatred of the French and emphasise your impeccable EU credentials.
    The ERG have radicalised me into becoming a federalist.
    The loonier Brexiteers did the same for me. The govt's atrocious handling of the Brexit process was merely icing on the cake of my conversion.
    So true impossible to believe that I approached the whole thing with an open mind.

    Problem is, with a bit of digging, together with the loons lining up on the, er, loon side, it became a no-brainer.
    Indeed. I am considering some quiet out of the way spot with cr*p communications.

    I must ask Cyclefree about Cumbia :D
    - Bloody good WiFi communications here, at least in my neck of the woods.
    - Beach is gorgeous.
    - Mountains ditto. Black Combe is lovely and not trampled over by tourists.
    - Good pubs roundabout.
    - The estuary is spectacular. The views of the moon over the estuary are amazing.
    - Fantastic club in our local small town which gets all the comedians doing their pre-tours tours.
    - Proper butchers.
    - You can see the sky and stars at night.
    - LOTS of sheep. (And no silly Americans shooting them, either.)
    - The Ulverston Music Festival
    - The road over the fells leading down into the Duddon estuary is one of the most beautiful in the whole UK, whatever the weather or season.
    - People talk to each other

    And once Cyclefree Towers is completed, friends and nice people can come and stay. Lots of space so no-one need talk to me and can instead admire garden etc and have proper sleeps.

    Really, don't all rush at once - :)

    We were some tourists who climbed Black Combe last year.
    I hope you liked it and it was a clear day.
  • Options
    Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:



    Indeed. I am considering some quiet out of the way spot with cr*p communications.

    I must ask Cyclefree about Cumbia :D

    - Bloody good WiFi communications here, at least in my neck of the woods.
    - Beach is gorgeous.
    - Mountains ditto. Black Combe is lovely and not trampled over by tourists.
    - Good pubs roundabout.
    - The estuary is spectacular. The views of the moon over the estuary are amazing.
    - Fantastic club in our local small town which gets all the comedians doing their pre-tours tours.
    - Proper butchers.
    - You can see the sky and stars at night.
    - LOTS of sheep. (And no silly Americans shooting them, either.)
    - The Ulverston Music Festival
    - The road over the fells leading down into the Duddon estuary is one of the most beautiful in the whole UK, whatever the weather or season.
    - People talk to each other

    And once Cyclefree Towers is completed, friends and nice people can come and stay. Lots of space so no-one need talk to me and can instead admire garden etc and have proper sleeps.

    Really, don't all rush at once - :)
    Sounds lovely. Have you given up London entirely?
    No. Work is here. And there is a lot of building work still to be done. Months of it, in fact. So we will have to move out temporarily. The intention is that I can work remotely from there, at least some of the time. But for now I intend dividing my time between the two. I spent most of June - September there this year which was wonderful.
    PM-d you

    Quality of life is the thing. I hope it all works out for you because it sounds lovely.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited October 2018

    Is anybody in the slightest bit surprised who it is? Hasn't it been previously widely reported in the media of a number of incidents of a nature the Telegraph were claiming an exclusive on.

    Is it just me...I am extremely uncomfortable at the fact the press can be gagged like this, but I am equally uncomfortable that individuals with knowledge of a case can then give an MP / Lord a ring and they will out them in parliament.

    There's a book been written about it published in June this year, see

    https://www.hrgrapevine.com/content/article/2018-06-25-philip-greens-vile-abuse-alleged-in-explosive-new-book
    Makes it all even more confusing. Both Green and courts actions.

    There is already a book out, The Times did a piece on that book....unless the Telegraph have far far worse allegations ready to print?
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,308
    edited October 2018

    What's the legal position regarding repeating comments made under parliamentary privilege?

    The Guardian, BBC, and Sky have named him so we’ll let PBers discuss it.

    However if any one goes too far, we’ll withdraw that privilege.

    Cf Ryan Giggs.
    I would be interested if any lawyers are around to advise on this. As I said earlier, the qualified privilege to report on what Hain has said, under absolute, applies iirc only to news outfits.

    I think it covers anyone publishing or reporting what was said in Parliament but it wouldn’t cover anyone adding details or discussing matters arising from the allegations that were not said. So I would advise against any detailed discussions.

    That said I really don’t understand what was going through the heads of the learned Justices in the Court of Appeal who overturned the eminently sensible decision of the Judge at first instance.
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    Alistair said:



    An unintended and negative consequence of a feature is still a bug.

    It wasn't what the founders had in mind. They disapproved of faction (or at least, or organised faction), never mind Party, and the kind of triangulation you're talking about there is certainly not an 18th century way of thinking.

    Whenever people try and laud the intellect of the American Founders I like to bring up their desire to wish away political parties as an example of their naive idiocy.
    To be fair, it wasn't completely naive. There weren't (AFAIK) any permanent parties in America pre-1789: those that arose did so around specific issues and tended to break up when that issue subsided. British politics at the time, and for 50 years or so, had been marked more by factions of Whigs with smatterings of Independents rather than what we would recognise today as party politics (the Queen Anne era Tory/Whig division had long since fallen into irrelevance as that Stuart Toryism became badly tainted with Jacobitism).

    By and large, the Founding Fathers did a pretty good job and there were some outstanding individuals. Didn't get everything right though and made the odd shocker, such as making the runner-up in a presidential election the vice-president.
    No, I think the 2nd place gets vice president was awesome and they should definitely revert to doing that.
This discussion has been closed.