Hmmm, in addition to trying to excuse the inexcusable. It isn't really true, modern limited overs players often travel year round to play in all the various T20 leagues, where they are then expected to play every few days.
It wasn't so long ago, that cricket was only played for a handul of months in the summer, unless you where on an international tour. Then you had incredible amounts of down time.
As a practical matter I will almost certainly be betting against the Brexit party in Peterborough (and more generally). Past experience has shown that hardline Eurosceptics bet with their hearts and while the Brexit party will certainly have their chances, I expect them to be overestimated again by the markets.
Agreed. Even when they win their odds tend to be too short. Plus there's a persistent bias in the markers ever since Brexit and Trump for favouring dramatic wins. Betting on the establishment candidates to hold on has become fairly profitable.
Incredibly small sample to be drawing conclusions from I would say. Labour are establishment but they got a massive favourite turned over at the last GE
It's happened a few times now. The insurgent/populist odds remain strong despite being behind in the polls, and the odds don't sink as time runs out and the polling doesn't change. Le Pen was behind in the first round polls but tied or ahead in first round odds. In Sweden the Sweden Democrats were behind in the polls but favourites to come top until days before, and they barely slipped then. Dems were too long to take the House despite a sizeable generic ballot lead (even given gerrymandering and other vote inefficiencies).
On the other hand, Bolsonaro stuck at 1/5 after a huge 1st round win, and I got 1/10 on Putin a mere 3 months before the election. So maybe it's more that the market keeps expecting upsets beyond when it's reasonable to do so. Ironically GE17 is a huge exception, probably because Labour had done so poorly in the by-elections shortly before so people figured the polls putting them far behind were nailed on accurate.
Roger be honest, you dont actually know where Oldham is do you ?
That wasn't a geographical question. I just thought it interesting that we've now got clear proof he's a reincarnation of Enoch Powell and to days Tories are flocking to him like bees around a honey pot. It surely tells you something?
Yes it does. None of it good for the Tories.
......and 40 years after we thought we'd put this kind of thing behind us for good it's alive and kicking and living in Leaver-Land
after 15 years I thought we were leaving all the suppress uncomfortable issues meme behind us. Irresepective of whether you like the man or not ( not my type ) what happens if he's got a point ?
But he doesn't have a point. If two communities like to live in areas with people they feel more affinity with why shouldn't they? Why didn't he talk about Brooklyn with their Hasidic community or Golders Green or Prestwich in Manchester? Whole areas with almost 100% Jewish communities. It's called living in a free country.
My flat in Soho is opposite the Admiral Duncan. One night some years ago there was a doorman outside who told me I couldn't come in. 'Gays only I'm afraid'. I told him I lived opposite and I was meeting someone. 'Is he gay?' he asked. 'I don't think so' I said. 'Well he won't have got in then' he replied
Just as I was about to kick up a fuss he said 'Listen I'm really sorry but we're turning this into a gay pub so we're keeping straights out for a month and by then it'll be gay and we'll let anyone in'. 'Fair enough' I said and that was that. Sure enough the restriction stopped and it's been a 'gay pub' ever since. Interestingly Soho has always been as multi cultural as anywhere in the land but even there they can choose who they want to mix with.
What about if the community that was there first doesn’t want to live in one that is split in two?
Then I guess they'd need a system where housing is allocated by a central authority along cultural lines rather than by a free market. Doesn't sound great, honestly.
Is anyone else struck by how little the government has progressed Brexit since the flextension. They have said/done nothing. Feels more like they are broken than a plan behind the scenes. Worrying.
What could they do that has any chance of working?
It's difficult to imagine which votes he hopes to gain? Aspiring coal-miners?
Curiously there's a contingent of the Daily Mail crowd that might be be receptive. The paper has run pieces about how there's an abundance of Great British coal just waiting to be tapped with new technology, and we're being ripped off by the imported foreign muck.
The island of coal in a sea of fish demographic.
More like dinosaurs wanting to excavate dinosaurs...
Roger be honest, you dont actually know where Oldham is do you ?
That wasn't a geographical question. I just thought it interesting that we've now got clear proof he's a reincarnation of Enoch Powell and to days Tories are flocking to him like bees around a honey pot. It surely tells you something?
Yes it does. None of it good for the Tories.
......and 40 years after we thought we'd put this kind of thing behind us for good it's alive and kicking and living in Leaver-Land
after 15 years I thought we were leaving all the suppress uncomfortable issues meme behind us. Irresepective of whether you like the man or not ( not my type ) what happens if he's got a point ?
But he doesn't have a point. If two communities like to live in areas with people they feel more affinity with why shouldn't they? Why didn't he talk about Brooklyn with their Hasidic community or Golders Green or Prestwich in Manchester? Whole areas with almost 100% Jewish communities. It's called living in a free country.
My flat in Soho is opposite the Admiral Duncan. One night some years ago there was a doorman outside who told me I couldn't come in. 'Gays only I'm afraid'. I told him I lived opposite and I was meeting someone. 'Is he gay?' he asked. 'I don't think so' I said. 'Well he won't have got in then' he replied
Just as I was about to kick up a fuss he said 'Listen I'm really sorry but we're turning this into a gay pub so we're keeping straights out for a month and by then it'll be gay and we'll let anyone in'. 'Fair enough' I said and that was that. Sure enough the restriction stopped and it's been a 'gay pub' ever since. Interestingly Soho has always been as multi cultural as anywhere in the land but even there they can choose who they want to mix with.
What about if the community that was there first doesn’t want to live in one that is split in two?
Then I guess they'd need a system where housing is allocated by a central authority along cultural lines rather than by a free market. Doesn't sound great, honestly.
Apparently works, or at least is tried, in Holland
Hmmm, in addition to trying to excuse the inexcusable. It isn't really true, modern limited overs players often travel year round to play in all the various T20 leagues, where they are then expected to play every few days.
It wasn't so long ago, that cricket was only played for a handul of months in the summer, unless you where on an international tour. Then you had incredible amounts of down time.
A lot would have got second jobs in the winter like playing for Scunthorpe United.
Is anyone else struck by how little the government has progressed Brexit since the flextension. They have said/done nothing. Feels more like they are broken than a plan behind the scenes. Worrying.
Yes, and it's not as though the Opposition has grabbed the initiative either, putting forward a bold and credible alternative. It's drift from both sides.
A zombie government opposed by a zombie opposition while we are in Brexit limbo.
Roger be honest, you dont actually know where Oldham is do you ?
That wasn't a geographical question. I just thought it interesting that we've now got clear proof he's a reincarnation of Enoch Powell and to days Tories are flocking to him like bees around a honey pot. It surely tells you something?
Yes it does. None of it good for the Tories.
......and 40 years after we thought we'd put this kind of thing behind us for good it's alive and kicking and living in Leaver-Land
after 15 years I thought we were leaving all the suppress uncomfortable issues meme behind us. Irresepective of whether you like the man or not ( not my type ) what happens if he's got a point ?
But he doesn't have a point. If two communities like to live in areas with people they feel more affinity with why shouldn't they? Why didn't he talk about Brooklyn with their Hasidic community or Golders Green or Prestwich in Manchester? Whole areas with almost 100% Jewish communities. It's called living in a free country.
My flat in Soho is opposite the Admiral Duncan. One night some years ago there was a doorman outside who told me I couldn't come in. 'Gays only I'm afraid'. I told him I lived opposite and I was meeting someone. 'Is he gay?' he asked. 'I don't think so' I said. 'Well he won't have got in then' he replied
Just as I was about to kick up a fuss he said 'Listen I'm really sorry but we're turning this into a gay pub so we're keeping straights out for a month and by then it'll be gay and we'll let anyone in'. 'Fair enough' I said and that was that. Sure enough the restriction stopped and it's been a 'gay pub' ever since. Interestingly Soho has always been as multi cultural as anywhere in the land but even there they can choose who they want to mix with.
why dont you talk about NI where people live in largely segregated communities and occasioanlly murder each other. You arent going to get integrated communities if you cant start out bt recognising effective segregation.
As for the gay pub, why should they get away with it ? If I started a pub for straights only Id get taken to court. Do we have equality before the law or not ?
As a practical matter I will almost certainly be betting against the Brexit party in Peterborough (and more generally). Past experience has shown that hardline Eurosceptics bet with their hearts and while the Brexit party will certainly have their chances, I expect them to be overestimated again by the markets.
Agreed. Even when they win their odds tend to be too short. Plus there's a persistent bias in the markers ever since Brexit and Trump for favouring dramatic wins. Betting on the establishment candidates to hold on has become fairly profitable.
Incredibly small sample to be drawing conclusions from I would say. Labour are establishment but they got a massive favourite turned over at the last GE
It's happened a few times now. The insurgent/populist odds remain strong despite being behind in the polls, and the odds don't sink as time runs out and the polling doesn't change. Le Pen was behind in the first round polls but tied or ahead in first round odds. In Sweden the Sweden Democrats were behind in the polls but favourites to come top until days before, and they barely slipped then. Dems were too long to take the House despite a sizeable generic ballot lead (even given gerrymandering and other vote inefficiencies).
On the other hand, Bolsonaro stuck at 1/5 after a huge 1st round win, and I got 1/10 on Putin a mere 3 months before the election. So maybe it's more that the market keeps expecting upsets beyond when it's reasonable to do so. Ironically GE17 is a huge exception, probably because Labour had done so poorly in the by-elections shortly before so people figured the polls putting them far behind were nailed on accurate.
Doesn’t that happen in betting across all genres though? The short prices generally aren’t short enough. That’s the way a lot of pros bet anyway.
A strong leave seat which narrowly elected a labour MP last time and where the leave vote will be split as the Tories might well reduce but not collapse like in the EP elections
No, if we are still in the EU by the by election and with the BP having momentum from likely winning the Euro elections Tory voters will tactically vote BP and if Labour loses a marginal seat it is defending like Peterborough that could terrify enough Labour MPs in Leave seats for the Withdrawal Agreement to pass.
If we are still in the EU by a Brecon by election I would also not rule out the BP wining there too as Brecon and Radnor voted Leave too
Powys voted 53% Leave
I could see BP winning Brecon as well. At the moment, it seems to form a home for two types (1) those genuinely wanting a harder form of Brexit and (2) those wanting to give both political parties a kick up the backside (and who are not virulently pro-Remain). I suspect in both those seats, especially given voter fragmentation, there would be enough of (1) + (2) combine to push BP over the line.
There is no way a Farage-led party will win Brecon & Radnor.
I have typed and retyped about five paragraphs trying to explain this but... no. Go there. Meet the people. They are not voting Farage any time in the next 100 years. He would get some votes in the poorer parts of Llandod and one or two of the more struggling farmers and that is it.
There is no such place as Llandod, unless it is an Englishman's comic view of a Welsh village.
Not sure the LibDems have much to brag about in Powys. We have not forgotten Lembit Opik or William Powell or Mick Bates.
Once went into a pub in Llandrindod which advertised itself as the local HQ of the OMRLP. TBH, it wasn't somwhere I'd want to go back to.
Is anyone else struck by how little the government has progressed Brexit since the flextension. They have said/done nothing. Feels more like they are broken than a plan behind the scenes. Worrying.
Yes, and it's not as though the Opposition has grabbed the initiative either, putting forward a bold and credible alternative. It's drift from both sides.
A zombie government opposed by a zombie opposition while we are in Brexit limbo.
Feels like they just saw Flextension as an excuse to relax and take a bit of a holiday.
Roger be honest, you dont actually know where Oldham is do you ?
That wasn't a geographical question. I just thought it interesting that we've now got clear proof he's a reincarnation of Enoch Powell and to days Tories are flocking to him like bees around a honey pot. It surely tells you something?
Yes it does. None of it good for the Tories.
......and 40 years after we thought we'd put this kind of thing behind us for good it's alive and kicking and living in Leaver-Land
after 15 years I thought we were leaving all the suppress uncomfortable issues meme behind us. Irresepective of whether you like the man or not ( not my type ) what happens if he's got a point ?
My flat in Soho is opposite the Admiral Duncan. One night some years ago there was a doorman outside who told me I couldn't come in. 'Gays only I'm afraid'. I told him I lived opposite and I was meeting someone. 'Is he gay?' he asked. 'I don't think so' I said. 'Well he won't have got in then' he replied
Just as I was about to kick up a fuss he said 'Listen I'm really sorry but we're turning this into a gay pub so we're keeping straights out for a month and by then it'll be gay and we'll let anyone in'. 'Fair enough' I said and that was that. Sure enough the restriction stopped and it's been a 'gay pub' ever since. Interestingly Soho has always been as multi cultural as anywhere in the land but even there they can choose who they want to mix with.
why dont you talk about NI where people live in largely segregated communities and occasioanlly murder each other. You arent going to get integrated communities if you cant start out bt recognising effective segregation.
As for the gay pub, why should they get away with it ? If I started a pub for straights only Id get taken to court. Do we have equality before the law or not ?
How can you tell from looking at someone whether they're gay or straight. I've known people who were as camp as possible but were straight and people who appeared totally straight but were gay. And unless the matter comes up for discussion, I've no idea whether most of the people I meet casually are either. Nor do I care.
As a practical matter I will almost certainly be betting against the Brexit party in Peterborough (and more generally). Past experience has shown that hardline Eurosceptics bet with their hearts and while the Brexit party will certainly have their chances, I expect them to be overestimated again by the markets.
Agreed. Even when they win their odds tend to be too short. Plus there's a persistent bias in the markers ever since Brexit and Trump for favouring dramatic wins. Betting on the establishment candidates to hold on has become fairly profitable.
Incredibly small sample to be drawing conclusions from I would say. Labour are establishment but they got a massive favourite turned over at the last GE
It's happened a few times now. The insurgent/populist odds remain strong despite being behind in the polls, and the odds don't sink as time runs out and the polling doesn't change. Le Pen was behind in the first round polls but tied or ahead in first round odds. In Sweden the Sweden Democrats were behind in the polls but favourites to come top until days before, and they barely slipped then. Dems were too long to take the House despite a sizeable generic ballot lead (even given gerrymandering and other vote inefficiencies).
On the other hand, Bolsonaro stuck at 1/5 after a huge 1st round win, and I got 1/10 on Putin a mere 3 months before the election. So maybe it's more that the market keeps expecting upsets beyond when it's reasonable to do so. Ironically GE17 is a huge exception, probably because Labour had done so poorly in the by-elections shortly before so people figured the polls putting them far behind were nailed on accurate.
Doesn’t that happen in betting across all genres though? The short prices generally aren’t short enough. That’s the way a lot of pros bet anyway.
Except in Sweden and France the favourite was straight wrong. And a populist party wrongly topping the odds both times. Trump was too short in 2016 imho, even though he won. It's a small sample size, but elections are rare so we have to learn both to be cautious of our conclusions and to draw those conclusions from just a few cases.
Is anyone else struck by how little the government has progressed Brexit since the flextension. They have said/done nothing. Feels more like they are broken than a plan behind the scenes. Worrying.
Yes, and it's not as though the Opposition has grabbed the initiative either, putting forward a bold and credible alternative. It's drift from both sides.
A zombie government opposed by a zombie opposition while we are in Brexit limbo.
Feels like they just saw Flextension as an excuse to relax and take a bit of a holiday.
Theresa May's entire strategy was to bully people with a deadline. Pretty much everyone now assumes we can have endless extensions, so there's zero time pressure and no other strategy.
Meanwhile the Labour leadership was hoping that the Tories would have done Brexit by now so that they could criticise them for it, and they don't have a backup plan either.
As a practical matter I will almost certainly be betting against the Brexit party in Peterborough (and more generally). Past experience has shown that hardline Eurosceptics bet with their hearts and while the Brexit party will certainly have their chances, I expect them to be overestimated again by the markets.
Agreed. Even when they win their odds tend to be too short. Plus there's a persistent bias in the markers ever since Brexit and Trump for favouring dramatic wins. Betting on the establishment candidates to hold on has become fairly profitable.
Incredibly small sample to be drawing conclusions from I would say. Labour are establishment but they got a massive favourite turned over at the last GE
It's happened a few times now. The insurgent/populist odds remain strong despite being behind in the polls, and the odds don't sink as time runs out and the polling doesn't change. Le Pen was behind in the first round polls but tied or ahead in first round odds. In Sweden the Sweden Democrats were behind in the polls but favourites to come top until days before, and they barely slipped then. Dems were too long to take the House despite a sizeable generic ballot lead (even given gerrymandering and other vote inefficiencies).
On the other hand, Bolsonaro stuck at 1/5 after a huge 1st round win, and I got 1/10 on Putin a mere 3 months before the election. So maybe it's more that the market keeps expecting upsets beyond when it's reasonable to do so. Ironically GE17 is a huge exception, probably because Labour had done so poorly in the by-elections shortly before so people figured the polls putting them far behind were nailed on accurate.
Doesn’t that happen in betting across all genres though? The short prices generally aren’t short enough. That’s the way a lot of pros bet anyway.
Except in Sweden and France the favourite was straight wrong. And a populist party wrongly topping the odds both times. Trump was too short in 2016 imho, even though he won. It's a small sample size, but elections are rare so we have to learn both to be cautious of our conclusions and to draw those conclusions from just a few cases.
As a practical matter I will almost certainly be betting against the Brexit party in Peterborough (and more generally). Past experience has shown that hardline Eurosceptics bet with their hearts and while the Brexit party will certainly have their chances, I expect them to be overestimated again by the markets.
Agreed. Even when they win their odds tend to be too short. Plus there's a persistent bias in the markers ever since Brexit and Trump for favouring dramatic wins. Betting on the establishment candidates to hold on has become fairly profitable.
Incredibly small sample to be drawing conclusions from I would say. Labour are establishment but they got a massive favourite turned over at the last GE
It's happened a few times now. The insurgent/populist odds remain strong despite being behind in the polls, and the odds don't sink as time runs out and the polling doesn't change. Le Pen was behind in the first round polls but tied or ahead in first round odds. In Sweden the Sweden Democrats were behind in the polls but favourites to come top until days before, and they barely slipped then. Dems were too long to take the House despite a sizeable generic ballot lead (even given gerrymandering and other vote inefficiencies).
On the other hand, Bolsonaro stuck at 1/5 after a huge 1st round win, and I got 1/10 on Putin a mere 3 months before the election. So maybe it's more that the market keeps expecting upsets beyond when it's reasonable to do so. Ironically GE17 is a huge exception, probably because Labour had done so poorly in the by-elections shortly before so people figured the polls putting them far behind were nailed on accurate.
Doesn’t that happen in betting across all genres though? The short prices generally aren’t short enough. That’s the way a lot of pros bet anyway.
Except in Sweden and France the favourite was straight wrong. And a populist party wrongly topping the odds both times. Trump was too short in 2016 imho, even though he won. It's a small sample size, but elections are rare so we have to learn both to be cautious of our conclusions and to draw those conclusions from just a few cases.
Oh right, I didnt really follow those elections. I agree the sample is too small to draw any real conclusions, recency bias must play a huge role in election betting.
Roger be honest, you dont actually know where Oldham is do you ?
That wasn't a geographical question. I just thought it interesting that we've now got clear proof he's a reincarnation of Enoch Powell and to days Tories are flocking to him like bees around a honey pot. It surely tells you something?
Yes it does. None of it good for the Tories.
......and 40 years after we thought we'd put this kind of thing behind us for good it's alive and kicking and living in Leaver-Land
after 15 years I thought we were leaving all the suppress uncomfortable issues meme behind us. Irresepective of whether you like the man or not ( not my type ) what happens if he's got a point ?
My flat in Soho is opposite the Admiral Duncan. One night some years ago there was a doorman outside who told me I couldn't come in. 'Gays only I'm afraid'. I told him I lived opposite and I was meeting someone. 'Is he gay?' he asked. 'I don't think so' I said. 'Well he won't have got in then' he replied
Just as I was about to kick up a fuss he said 'Listen I'm really sorry but we're turning this into a gay pub so we're keeping straights out for a month and by then it'll be gay and we'll let anyone in'. 'Fair enough' I said and that was that. Sure enough the restriction stopped and it's been a 'gay pub' ever since. Interestingly Soho has always been as multi cultural as anywhere in the land but even there they can choose who they want to mix with.
why dont you talk about NI where people live in largely segregated communities and occasioanlly murder each other. You arent going to get integrated communities if you cant start out bt recognising effective segregation.
As for the gay pub, why should they get away with it ? If I started a pub for straights only Id get taken to court. Do we have equality before the law or not ?
How can you tell from looking at someone whether they're gay or straight. I've known people who were as camp as possible but were straight and people who appeared totally straight but were gay. And unless the matter comes up for discussion, I've no idea whether most of the people I meet casually are either. Nor do I care.
apparently the bouncers at the Admiral Duncan can. No idea myself apart from those who advertise the fact.
Oh right, I didnt really follow those elections. I agree the sample is too small to draw any real conclusions, recency bias must play a huge role in election betting.
Shock results generate more press too, so the recency bias is tilted toward surprises.
Hmmm, in addition to trying to excuse the inexcusable. It isn't really true, modern limited overs players often travel year round to play in all the various T20 leagues, where they are then expected to play every few days.
It wasn't so long ago, that cricket was only played for a handul of months in the summer, unless you where on an international tour. Then you had incredible amounts of down time.
A lot would have got second jobs in the winter like playing for Scunthorpe United.
Back in the day, most professional cricketers had winter jobs. However, I was talking more about 10-15 years. And of course 4 day games, loads and loads of down time, especially if you are batsman.
If you open the batting at a home game, get out last ball of the day, you know you aren't going to be batting the next day. At worst, fielding. For those inclined to get in trouble, that is a recipe to do so.
Where as a T20 travelling pro, they play one day, train the next, travel the next and then play again. Virtually no free time away from the team.
It's a big country and I'm not convinced things are as bad as this selection suggests. I'm aware of zero such incidents in either my patch or my former (in parts rougher) patch, and I'd be willing to canvass anywhere in Britain on my own without qualms.
Some irony that all this has made our politics more European. Change the parties' names, and that could be a poll from Germany, France or Holland with those vote shares.
As Farage said, they should have just called themselves The Remain Party, and "Change" does not represent what they are trying to do, unless they are referring to the referendum result.
As Farage said, they should have just called themselves The Remain Party, and "Change" does not represent what they are trying to do, unless they are referring to the referendum result.
Nothing embarrassing about being Conservative!
At least Farage understands marketing and messaging it would appear.
I'd like to meet the 5% who think the LDs are pro-Brexit. I have a bridge I'd like to sell them.
To be fair, those that don't follow politics closely might have formed that opinion from the classic "we respect the referendum" nonsense, and also Norman Lamb does actually believe that when he says it.
Reminds me of sitting in front of the polling station in 1997 with a blue rosette pinned to my lapel. A gentleman shuffled towards me and leant into my face.
'You ought to be utterly ashamed of yourself,' he said. The penny finally dropped for me that we were in for a Blair landslide.
Reminds me of sitting in front of the polling station in 1997 with a blue rosette pinned to my lapel. A gentleman shuffled towards me and leant into my face.
'You ought to be utterly ashamed of yourself,' he said. The penny finally dropped for me that we were in for a Blair landslide.
Roger be honest, you dont actually know where Oldham is do you ?
That wasn't a geographical question. I just thought it interesting that we've now got clear proof he's a reincarnation of Enoch Powell and to days Tories are flocking to him like bees around a honey pot. It surely tells you something?
Yes it does. None of it good for the Tories.
......and 40 years after we thought we'd put this kind of thing behind us for good it's alive and kicking and living in Leaver-Land
after 15 years I thought we were leaving all the suppress uncomfortable issues meme behind us. Irresepective of whether you like the man or not ( not my type ) what happens if he's got a point ?
But he doesn't have a point. If two communities like to live in areas with people they feel more affinity with why shouldn't they? Why didn't he talk about Brooklyn with their Hasidic community or Golders Green or Prestwich in Manchester? Whole areas with almost 100% Jewish communities. It's called living in a free country.
My flat in Soho is opposite the Admiral Duncan. One night some years ago there was a doorman outside who told me I couldn't come in. 'Gays only I'm afraid'. I told him I lived opposite and I was meeting someone. 'Is he gay?' he asked. 'I don't think so' I said. 'Well he won't have got in then' he replied
Just as I was about to kick up a fuss he said 'Listen I'm really sorry but we're turning this into a gay pub so we're keeping straights out for a month and by then it'll be gay and we'll let anyone in'. 'Fair enough' I said and that was that. Sure enough the restriction stopped and it's been a 'gay pub' ever since. Interestingly Soho has always been as multi cultural as anywhere in the land but even there they can choose who they want to mix with.
Golders Green is not 100% Jewish. There are Asians living there and Cypriots and some Chinese and a bloody great Catholic church in the middle of it with a large congregation. A number of the secular and non-Jewish schools have always had a large proportion of Jewish pupils. The issues to do with integration are not as black and white as Farage likes to make out.
Good job we don't take what 15 &16 year olds say seriously, or hold people responsible for things they said in the past, or he could be in trouble
twitter.com/SunSport/status/1122977620889604097
Given he is black (to be precise his father is black), I thought you were then allowed to make such jokes, in the same way as being able to use the n word?
The whole of Paul Chowdhry act is only "allowable", because he is Asian.
Good job we don't take what 15 &16 year olds say seriously, or hold people responsible for things they said in the past, or he could be in trouble
twitter.com/SunSport/status/1122977620889604097
Given he is black (to be precise his father is black), I thought you were then allowed to make such jokes, in the same way as being able to use the n word?
I guess so, in that case why apologise? This seems a bit confused
"Choudhury's father is Grenadian and his mother is of Bangladeshi descent. Regarding his ethnicity Hamza has stated: "Both my parents are Bangladeshi and I have been brought up in an Asian family, but I have Caribbean blood in me as my dad is from Grenada. We have a massive family"
Good job we don't take what 15 &16 year olds say seriously, or hold people responsible for things they said in the past, or he could be in trouble
twitter.com/SunSport/status/1122977620889604097
Given he is black (to be precise his father is black), I thought you were then allowed to make such jokes, in the same way as being able to use the n word?
I guess so, in that case why apologise? This seems a bit confused
"Choudhury's father is Grenadian and his mother is of Bangladeshi descent. Regarding his ethnicity Hamza has stated: "Both my parents are Bangladeshi and I have been brought up in an Asian family, but I have Caribbean blood in me as my dad is from Grenada. We have a massive family"
Good job we don't take what 15 &16 year olds say seriously, or hold people responsible for things they said in the past, or he could be in trouble
twitter.com/SunSport/status/1122977620889604097
Given he is black (to be precise his father is black), I thought you were then allowed to make such jokes, in the same way as being able to use the n word?
I guess so, in that case why apologise? This seems a bit confused
"Choudhury's father is Grenadian and his mother is of Bangladeshi descent. Regarding his ethnicity Hamza has stated: "Both my parents are Bangladeshi and I have been brought up in an Asian family, but I have Caribbean blood in me as my dad is from Grenada. We have a massive family"
"If more than 10% of Peterborough’s voters have in fact signed the petition then the by-election will be triggered. The Speaker will be notified and the seat declared vacant. "
Does this mean she won't be an MP, so unable to vote, from that moment?
Can the Kremlin watchers explained what this means?
Ambiguous wording in the election leaflets about a referendum if the stars and moon align in the right way and Halley's comet is seen and the Messiah returns to earth.
Or some such bollocks.
Plus those around Corbyn making it clear to Watson that the deputy leadership post is as important as a bucket of piss.
Can the Kremlin watchers explained what this means?
Ambiguous wording in the election leaflets about a referendum if the stars and moon align in the right way and Halley's comet is seen and the Messiah returns to earth.
Or some such bollocks.
Plus those around Corbyn making it clear to Watson that the deputy leadership post is as important as a bucket of piss.
Reminds me of sitting in front of the polling station in 1997 with a blue rosette pinned to my lapel. A gentleman shuffled towards me and leant into my face.
'You ought to be utterly ashamed of yourself,' he said...
And with considerably less justification then than now.
Can the Kremlin watchers explained what this means?
Ambiguous wording in the election leaflets about a referendum if the stars and moon align in the right way and Halley's comet is seen and the Messiah returns to earth.
Or some such bollocks.
Plus those around Corbyn making it clear to Watson that the deputy leadership post is as important as a bucket of piss.
I'm getting a little bit tired of the media over Brexit. In fact, I'm not sure I can remember any other long running story which has contained so many inaccurate, downright false and sometimes deliberately mischievous words pouring out from the media.
Take one of the better ones, Pesto. I reckon about 1/5 of his stories are basically true, 3/5 have some element of truth about them somewhere, and 1/5 are just completely and utterly wrong.
Who would you rank as genuinely reliable? Laura K and Katya Adler seem pretty good but I'd be interested to know.
I'm getting a little bit tired of the media over Brexit. In fact, I'm not sure I can remember any other long running story which has contained so many inaccurate, downright false and sometimes deliberately mischievous words pouring out from the media.
Take one of the better ones, Pesto. I reckon about 1/5 of his stories are basically true, 3/5 have some element of truth about them somewhere, and 1/5 are just completely and utterly wrong.
Who would you rank as genuinely reliable? Laura K and Katya Adler seem pretty good but I'd be interested to know.
I'm getting a little bit tired of the media over Brexit. In fact, I'm not sure I can remember any other long running story which has contained so many inaccurate, downright false and sometimes deliberately mischievous words pouring out from the media.
Take one of the better ones, Pesto. I reckon about 1/5 of his stories are basically true, 3/5 have some element of truth about them somewhere, and 1/5 are just completely and utterly wrong.
Who would you rank as genuinely reliable? Laura K and Katya Adler seem pretty good but I'd be interested to know.
Mentioning Laura K is like saying Candyman five times in the mirror
A strong leave seat which narrowly elected a labour MP last time and where the leave vote will be split as the Tories might well reduce but not collapse like in the EP elections
No, if we are still in the EU by the by election and with the BP having momentum from likely winning the Euro elections Tory voters will tactically vote BP and if Labour loses a marginal seat it is defending like Peterborough that could terrify enough Labour MPs in Leave seats for the Withdrawal Agreement to pass.
If we are still in the EU by a Brecon by election I would also not rule out the BP wining there too as Brecon and Radnor voted Leave too
Here you go again. I'm never sure if you're ramping or just wrong. Of course the BP will do well in Peterborough, but the idea that they will win the seat is bizarre, unless perhaps they have a candidate that local people can identify with beyond the party's base. There are a lot of Tory voters who are currently lending their vote to the BP, but beyond that there is a pool of Tory voters who would vote tactically to keep the BP out.
When they get to run the country, the kevels of paranoia is going to be insane.
Think of all the Contempt of Parliament votes!
Tories will be glad of a Speaker as strong-willed as Bercow when it comes to standing up to the Executive.
Would be so funny (except not really) if they finally find a meek duffer who will defer to the Executive's interpretation of procedure in time for Corbyn to be running the Executive.
Reminds me of sitting in front of the polling station in 1997 with a blue rosette pinned to my lapel. A gentleman shuffled towards me and leant into my face.
'You ought to be utterly ashamed of yourself,' he said. The penny finally dropped for me that we were in for a Blair landslide.
You have to feel sorry for her. She thought she'd won the lottery and on the way to collecting her prize she lost her ticket. It was a once in a lifetime chance blown because she has the small character flaw of believing that breaking the law is OK if you think you can get away with it.
I can't actually think of anyone whom I feel less sorry for.
[Sunil utters a cough that sounds suspiciously like "1988 Bruges Speech"]
I just read the Bruges speech in full. It seems to me that years of selective quoting from it have given it a much more anti-EU reputation than it deserves. This line stood out in particular: "Britain does not dream of some cosy, isolated existence on the fringes of the European Community. Our destiny is in Europe, as part of the Community."
[Sunil utters a cough that sounds suspiciously like "1988 Bruges Speech"]
I just read the Bruges speech in full. It seems to me that years of selective quoting from it have given it a much more anti-EU reputation than it deserves. This line stood out in particular: "Britain does not dream of some cosy, isolated existence on the fringes of the European Community. Our destiny is in Europe, as part of the Community."
OTOH, she rejected "a European super-state exercising a new dominance from Brussels".
[Sunil utters a cough that sounds suspiciously like "1988 Bruges Speech"]
I just read the Bruges speech in full. It seems to me that years of selective quoting from it have given it a much more anti-EU reputation than it deserves. This line stood out in particular: "Britain does not dream of some cosy, isolated existence on the fringes of the European Community. Our destiny is in Europe, as part of the Community."
Also, with respect to isam’s comment about enlargement:
“We must never forget that east of the Iron Curtain, people who once enjoyed a full share of European culture, freedom and identity have been cut off from their roots. We shall always look on Warsaw, Prague and Budapest as great European cities.”
[Sunil utters a cough that sounds suspiciously like "1988 Bruges Speech"]
I just read the Bruges speech in full. It seems to me that years of selective quoting from it have given it a much more anti-EU reputation than it deserves. This line stood out in particular: "Britain does not dream of some cosy, isolated existence on the fringes of the European Community. Our destiny is in Europe, as part of the Community."
As far as I can make out, having created the single market she wanted to preserve the then EC at that point. That didn't happen because enough people disagreed with her, which means the option she wanted no longer exists.
So the Bruges speech is made irrelevant by events and people have to decide for themselves.
[Sunil utters a cough that sounds suspiciously like "1988 Bruges Speech"]
I just read the Bruges speech in full. It seems to me that years of selective quoting from it have given it a much more anti-EU reputation than it deserves. This line stood out in particular: "Britain does not dream of some cosy, isolated existence on the fringes of the European Community. Our destiny is in Europe, as part of the Community."
OTOH, she rejected "a European super-state exercising a new dominance from Brussels".
Indeed, there are elements of both positions in the speech. What is interesting in the context of the Brexit debate is that it is only the Brexity side of the speech that is remembered, whereas in fact the only definitive statement that directly pertains to Brexit says that the UK should stay in. Not that I am holding up Thatcher as the font of all wisdom on this or indeed any topic (look at her comments on the "civilising" qualities of European colonialism - delivered in Belgium of all places! - to get a reminder of how wrong she could be).
[Sunil utters a cough that sounds suspiciously like "1988 Bruges Speech"]
I just read the Bruges speech in full. It seems to me that years of selective quoting from it have given it a much more anti-EU reputation than it deserves. This line stood out in particular: "Britain does not dream of some cosy, isolated existence on the fringes of the European Community. Our destiny is in Europe, as part of the Community."
Also, with respect to isam’s comment about enlargement:
“We must never forget that east of the Iron Curtain, people who once enjoyed a full share of European culture, freedom and identity have been cut off from their roots. We shall always look on Warsaw, Prague and Budapest as great European cities.”
"Whos citizens we must pay child support - even if they don't live in the Uk.."
[Sunil utters a cough that sounds suspiciously like "1988 Bruges Speech"]
I just read the Bruges speech in full. It seems to me that years of selective quoting from it have given it a much more anti-EU reputation than it deserves. This line stood out in particular: "Britain does not dream of some cosy, isolated existence on the fringes of the European Community. Our destiny is in Europe, as part of the Community."
Also, with respect to isam’s comment about enlargement:
“We must never forget that east of the Iron Curtain, people who once enjoyed a full share of European culture, freedom and identity have been cut off from their roots. We shall always look on Warsaw, Prague and Budapest as great European cities.”
"“The Community is not an end in itself. Nor is it an institutional device to be constantly modified according to the dictates of some abstract intellectual concept. Nor must it be ossified by endless regulation. The European Community is a practical means by which Europe can ensure the future prosperity and security of its people in a world in which there are many other powerful nations and groups of nations. We Europeans cannot afford to waste our energies on internal disputes or arcane institutional debates.”"
[Sunil utters a cough that sounds suspiciously like "1988 Bruges Speech"]
I just read the Bruges speech in full. It seems to me that years of selective quoting from it have given it a much more anti-EU reputation than it deserves. This line stood out in particular: "Britain does not dream of some cosy, isolated existence on the fringes of the European Community. Our destiny is in Europe, as part of the Community."
As far as I can make out, having created the single market she wanted to preserve the then EC at that point. That didn't happen because enough people disagreed with her, which means the option she wanted no longer exists.
So the Bruges speech is made irrelevant by events and people have to decide for themselves.
"My first guiding principle is this: willing and active cooperation between independent sovereign states is the best way to build a successful European Community. To try to suppress nationhood and concentrate power at the centre of a European conglomerate would be highly damaging and would jeopardise the objectives we seek to achieve."
[Sunil utters a cough that sounds suspiciously like "1988 Bruges Speech"]
I just read the Bruges speech in full. It seems to me that years of selective quoting from it have given it a much more anti-EU reputation than it deserves. This line stood out in particular: "Britain does not dream of some cosy, isolated existence on the fringes of the European Community. Our destiny is in Europe, as part of the Community."
OTOH, she rejected "a European super-state exercising a new dominance from Brussels".
That is in the context of "rolling back the frontiers of the state in Britain". It's an argument against statism, not against politics at the European level.
[Sunil utters a cough that sounds suspiciously like "1988 Bruges Speech"]
I just read the Bruges speech in full. It seems to me that years of selective quoting from it have given it a much more anti-EU reputation than it deserves. This line stood out in particular: "Britain does not dream of some cosy, isolated existence on the fringes of the European Community. Our destiny is in Europe, as part of the Community."
Also, with respect to isam’s comment about enlargement:
“We must never forget that east of the Iron Curtain, people who once enjoyed a full share of European culture, freedom and identity have been cut off from their roots. We shall always look on Warsaw, Prague and Budapest as great European cities.”
She didn't seem so keen on the EU over the EC
"The Maastricht Rebels were British members of Parliament (MPs) belonging to the then governing Conservative Party who refused to support the government of Prime Minister John Major in a series of votes in the House of Commons on the issue of the implementation of the Maastricht Treaty (Treaty on European Union) in British law.
The Maastricht Rebellion was a major event in the life of John Major's troubled second term as Prime Minister (1992–1997). Major's party had a small majority, thus giving the relatively small number of rebels disproportionate influence: for example, there were 22 rebels on the second reading of the European Communities (Amendment) Bill in May 1992, and the government's majority at the time was only 18.
[Sunil utters a cough that sounds suspiciously like "1988 Bruges Speech"]
I just read the Bruges speech in full. It seems to me that years of selective quoting from it have given it a much more anti-EU reputation than it deserves. This line stood out in particular: "Britain does not dream of some cosy, isolated existence on the fringes of the European Community. Our destiny is in Europe, as part of the Community."
Also, with respect to isam’s comment about enlargement:
“We must never forget that east of the Iron Curtain, people who once enjoyed a full share of European culture, freedom and identity have been cut off from their roots. We shall always look on Warsaw, Prague and Budapest as great European cities.”
"“The Community is not an end in itself. Nor is it an institutional device to be constantly modified according to the dictates of some abstract intellectual concept. Nor must it be ossified by endless regulation. The European Community is a practical means by which Europe can ensure the future prosperity and security of its people in a world in which there are many other powerful nations and groups of nations. We Europeans cannot afford to waste our energies on internal disputes or arcane institutional debates.”"
If we "cannot afford to waste our energies on internal disputes or arcane institutional debates", you must be very disappointed that your vote for Brexit means we in the UK are doing nothing but that.
Just an observation but should not someone found guilty of a crime involving their position as an MP - as in the case of Chris Davies - as opposed to a crime not involving their position as an MP, be an automatic by election rather than just a recall? I know that is not the case legally at the moment but I am arguing that it should be.
Also as a matter of interest is an MP still able to choose to be tried in Parliament rather than in a normal criminal court? Or was that done away with?
Comments
https://www.bbc.com/sport/cricket/48102481
Hmmm, in addition to trying to excuse the inexcusable. It isn't really true, modern limited overs players often travel year round to play in all the various T20 leagues, where they are then expected to play every few days.
It wasn't so long ago, that cricket was only played for a handul of months in the summer, unless you where on an international tour. Then you had incredible amounts of down time.
On the other hand, Bolsonaro stuck at 1/5 after a huge 1st round win, and I got 1/10 on Putin a mere 3 months before the election. So maybe it's more that the market keeps expecting upsets beyond when it's reasonable to do so. Ironically GE17 is a huge exception, probably because Labour had done so poorly in the by-elections shortly before so people figured the polls putting them far behind were nailed on accurate.
A zombie government opposed by a zombie opposition while we are in Brexit limbo.
As for the gay pub, why should they get away with it ? If I started a pub for straights only Id get taken to court. Do we have equality before the law or not ?
Meanwhile the Labour leadership was hoping that the Tories would have done Brexit by now so that they could criticise them for it, and they don't have a backup plan either.
If you open the batting at a home game, get out last ball of the day, you know you aren't going to be batting the next day. At worst, fielding. For those inclined to get in trouble, that is a recipe to do so.
Where as a T20 travelling pro, they play one day, train the next, travel the next and then play again. Virtually no free time away from the team.
Nothing embarrassing about being Conservative!
This is what filter bubbles actually look like
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/611807/this-is-what-filter-bubbles-actually-look-like/
Only the Brexit Party and UKIP have a majority who see them as pro Brexit and only the SNP and LDs have a majority who see them as anti Brexit
Reminds me of sitting in front of the polling station in 1997 with a blue rosette pinned to my lapel. A gentleman shuffled towards me and leant into my face.
'You ought to be utterly ashamed of yourself,' he said. The penny finally dropped for me that we were in for a Blair landslide.
Sometimes you have to listen to the birdsong.
https://twitter.com/SunSport/status/1122977620889604097
https://www.twitter.com/YouGov/status/1121737087764652032
The whole of Paul Chowdhry act is only "allowable", because he is Asian.
"Choudhury's father is Grenadian and his mother is of Bangladeshi descent. Regarding his ethnicity Hamza has stated: "Both my parents are Bangladeshi and I have been brought up in an Asian family, but I have Caribbean blood in me as my dad is from Grenada. We have a massive family"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamza_Choudhury
He looks like Snoop Dogg in that tweet!
https://lifebogger.com/hamza-choudhury-childhood-story-plus-untold-biography-facts/
LOL
Does this mean she won't be an MP, so unable to vote, from that moment?
Or some such bollocks.
Plus those around Corbyn making it clear to Watson that the deputy leadership post is as important as a bucket of piss.
It seems like his options are jumping ship to CUK, or lumping it.
“We talk about it for 20 minutes and then we decide I was right”
I'm getting a little bit tired of the media over Brexit. In fact, I'm not sure I can remember any other long running story which has contained so many inaccurate, downright false and sometimes deliberately mischievous words pouring out from the media.
Take one of the better ones, Pesto. I reckon about 1/5 of his stories are basically true, 3/5 have some element of truth about them somewhere, and 1/5 are just completely and utterly wrong.
Who would you rank as genuinely reliable? Laura K and Katya Adler seem pretty good but I'd be interested to know.
https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/i-can-confirm-im-not-2809301.amp
https://twitter.com/andynash/status/1122980029800112129
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/apr/30/venezuelas-guiado-says-final-phase-of-plan-to-oust-maduro-has-begun
Tories will be glad of a Speaker as strong-willed as Bercow when it comes to standing up to the Executive.
Would be so funny (except not really) if they finally find a meek duffer who will defer to the Executive's interpretation of procedure in time for Corbyn to be running the Executive.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/far-right-smear-merchants-jacob-wohl-and-jack-burkman-try-to-slime-pete-buttigieg-with-bogus-sex-assault-claim
"Britain does not dream of some cosy, isolated existence on the fringes of the European Community. Our destiny is in Europe, as part of the Community."
“We must never forget that east of the Iron Curtain, people who once enjoyed a full share of European culture, freedom and identity have been cut off from their roots. We shall always look on Warsaw, Prague and Budapest as great European cities.”
So the Bruges speech is made irrelevant by events and people have to decide for themselves.
Not that I am holding up Thatcher as the font of all wisdom on this or indeed any topic (look at her comments on the "civilising" qualities of European colonialism - delivered in Belgium of all places! - to get a reminder of how wrong she could be).
"The Maastricht Rebels were British members of Parliament (MPs) belonging to the then governing Conservative Party who refused to support the government of Prime Minister John Major in a series of votes in the House of Commons on the issue of the implementation of the Maastricht Treaty (Treaty on European Union) in British law.
The Maastricht Rebellion was a major event in the life of John Major's troubled second term as Prime Minister (1992–1997). Major's party had a small majority, thus giving the relatively small number of rebels disproportionate influence: for example, there were 22 rebels on the second reading of the European Communities (Amendment) Bill in May 1992, and the government's majority at the time was only 18.
The rebellion had the support of former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and former Party Chairman Norman Tebbit."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maastricht_Rebels
Also as a matter of interest is an MP still able to choose to be tried in Parliament rather than in a normal criminal court? Or was that done away with?