Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » PB Nighthawks is now open

2»

Comments

  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,133
    edited November 2013
    I am not a destroyer of energy companies! I am a liberator of them!

    The point is, ladies and gentlemen, that Ed, for lack of a better word, is good. Ed is right, Ed works. Ed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the Revolutionary spirit. Ed, in all of his forms; Ed for life, for money, for love, knowledge has marked the upward surge of mankind. And Ed, you mark my words, will not only save the Labour Party, but that other malfunctioning corporation called the UK. Thank you very much.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,928
    MikeL said:

    Per Sun - tomorrow morning's YouGov

    YouGov/Sun poll tonight: Labour with 7 point lead: CON 32%, LAB 39%, LD 10%, UKIP 13%

    Identical to previous poll except UKIP +1.

    In Dan Hodges' polling calculator that works out as a Tory majority I think.
  • stjohnstjohn Posts: 1,861
    Me_ said:

    Hi everyone.

    How are things going around here?

    Me_

    Is that You_?

  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited November 2013

    I simply do not see why anyone is surprised that politicians try to exploit these cases. It is in their nature.

    Again you seem to be implying that because they do it then every case of them doing so is equal and no more meritorious or deserving of contempt than others. There may be a dry legal basis for that view but some cases do polarise opinion and are much harder to justify than others.

    That is why I tend to think your outrage is more due to the fact that you trenchantly disagree with Osborne's comments, rather than anything in those comments being "vile".

    Obviously I disagree with his view but I can hardly be characterised as Clegg's biggest fan which is why I highlighted his repudiation of the posturing. As for whether anyone thinks posturing so broadly on six dead children in such horrific circumstances is vile or not, others are free to decide for themselves as I know perfectly well where I stand on the matter.
  • SMukeshSMukesh Posts: 1,759

    SMukesh said:



    Bizarre reasoning as when ministers ruled out a ban on plain packaging 4 months ago it was attributed to Lynton Crosby clearing the decks for an attack.It was supposed to be `scraping the barnacles off the boat` and now that the barnacles are back,it`s time for an attack too..

    Sigh... they DIDN'T rule out plain packaging, they said they were waiting for further evidence about how well it worked in Australia.

    I know Labour and truth are hardly on speaking terms, but even so...
    Could you point out the new evidence that has emerged in the last 4 months?

    And even if such evidence has emerged recently,why could the government not wait for 4 months and look vaguely competent rather than appearing clueless by appearing to `u`turn with this policy?
  • Mick_Pork said:

    Obviously I disagree with his view but I can hardly be characterised as Clegg's biggest fan which is why I highlighted his repudiation of the posturing. As for whether anyone thinks posturing so broadly on six dead children in such horrific circumstances is vile or not, others are free to decide for themselves as I know perfectly well where I stand on the matter.

    In any event Mick, the Philpott case will be back in the news this week, as the Court of Appeal (Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd CJ, Flaux & MacDuff JJ), sitting in Nottingham, will on Friday hear renewed applications for leave to appeal against sentence made by Ms Philpott and Mr Mosley. It is likely that the applications will be televised, if it is technically possible. I think we can both agree that it would be best for politicians to avoid further using the case to score points.
  • Me_Me_ Posts: 66
    stjohn said:

    Me_ said:

    Hi everyone.

    How are things going around here?

    Me_

    Is that You_?

    It`s actually Me! Just passing by to see how things are going...

    Nothing changed, it seems.

  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,400
    SMukesh said:

    SMukesh said:



    Bizarre reasoning as when ministers ruled out a ban on plain packaging 4 months ago it was attributed to Lynton Crosby clearing the decks for an attack.It was supposed to be `scraping the barnacles off the boat` and now that the barnacles are back,it`s time for an attack too..

    Sigh... they DIDN'T rule out plain packaging, they said they were waiting for further evidence about how well it worked in Australia.

    I know Labour and truth are hardly on speaking terms, but even so...
    And even if such evidence has emerged recently,why could the government not wait for 4 months and look vaguely competent rather than appearing clueless by appearing to `u`turn with this policy?
    There is no u-turn since the plan was always to wait for further evidence of the Australia trial before making a decision

    "But Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt said the government wanted to see how the policy had worked in Australia, the first country to introduce plain packaging last year, before making a "final decision"."

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-23281804


    Since the Australia experiment has just turned one year old there will now be plenty of studies and evidence into how effective it has been so it seems a good time to look at it all again.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    Bad news for hot lib dem leadership tip Alistair Carmichael.

    I'm afraid the so called 'bruiser' got a severe pasting tonight from Nicola Sturgeon and his comical antics even had him trending on twitter in Glasgow for a time.

    Somewhere Michael Moore is laughing grimly to himself.

    LOL

    :)
  • BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536
    @Antifrank

    For the record, on which territory do you think they will "go on the attack"?
    The debt/deficit?
  • BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536
    SMukesh said:

    SMukesh said:



    Bizarre reasoning as when ministers ruled out a ban on plain packaging 4 months ago it was attributed to Lynton Crosby clearing the decks for an attack.It was supposed to be `scraping the barnacles off the boat` and now that the barnacles are back,it`s time for an attack too..

    Sigh... they DIDN'T rule out plain packaging, they said they were waiting for further evidence about how well it worked in Australia.

    I know Labour and truth are hardly on speaking terms, but even so...
    Could you point out the new evidence that has emerged in the last 4 months?

    And even if such evidence has emerged recently,why could the government not wait for 4 months and look vaguely competent rather than appearing clueless by appearing to `u`turn with this policy?
    Clearing the barnacles off the boat.
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,320
    Those of a Scottish Nationalist persuasion, look away now.
    Twitter
    Ramsay Jones ‏@Ramsay59 1h
    #scotnight Tomorrow's Scottish Daily Mail pic.twitter.com/MulYPE0Xh2”
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited November 2013
    Oh noes! The Daily Mail thinks independence is a bad thing.

    ROFL

    Poor old scottish tory surgers. Their great white hope comical Ali Carmichael has burst like a balloon and was all but greetin for his mammy.

    Unionists look away now.
    Meghan Weir ‏@MeghanWeir25 41m

    #scotnight #indyref another victory for yes campaign. Carmichael looked like a greetin wean! pic.twitter.com/Y54mFebeAN

    Kevin Williamson ‏@williamsonkev 2h

    Dear @UK_Together can we see more of Alistair Carmichael on live TV over next 10 months? #scotnight

    Magnus Jamieson ‏@Magnus_Jamieson 2h

    Oh my goodness. Carmichael is citing coalition policies as a positive case for the Union. Oh my. #scotnight

    Chris Paton ‏@ChrisMPaton 42m

    SCOT goes POP!: Sturgeon v the Lib Dems' third choice http://scotgoespop.blogspot.com/2013/11/sturgeon-v-lib-dems-third-choice.html?spref=tw

    Colin ‏@_mozza_ 1h

    Carmichael's facial expressions during the debate reminded me of that taxi driver who ended up live on BBC News by mistake! #scotnight

    Jack Fogg ‏@foggyFTW 2h

    Carmichael is getting his arse handed to him by Sturgeon #ScotNight pic.twitter.com/CWqzS4DrDc

    Calton View ‏@caltonview 48m

    Clear points victory for @NicolaSturgeon but arguments on issues like currency and EU are not going to swing many voters. #scotnight

    Sheena Cleland ‏@SheenaCSNP 1h

    Nicola Sturgeon "out-thought, out-foxed and out-debated" Alasdair Carmichael according to Bernard Ponsonby. Agreed! #scotnight
    :)
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    France
    "…last month a poll published in the left-wing Nouvel Observateur revealed that in next year's European elections more people intended to vote for the Front National than for any other party. The shock waves are still being felt. The personal popularity of Marine Le Pen is even higher. "

    http://standpointmag.co.uk/node/5310/full
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,712
    Well, if the Daliy Mail thinks it's a bad idea, there must be quite a lot going for it!
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    Comet ISON's big day today. Perihelion day. Will it live up to it's own hype ?!
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411

    MikeL said:

    Per Sun - tomorrow morning's YouGov

    YouGov/Sun poll tonight: Labour with 7 point lead: CON 32%, LAB 39%, LD 10%, UKIP 13%

    Identical to previous poll except UKIP +1.

    In Dan Hodges' polling calculator that works out as a Tory majority I think.
    Stephen FIsher's too
  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,790
    (Off Topic) Question for any Spanish speakers

    Why does this article say "e" (meaning "and") instead of "y" (4th line)?
    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BaFwQXNCEAA6I9H.jpg:large
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,173
    edited November 2013
    JohnLoony said:

    (Off Topic) Question for any Spanish speakers

    Why does this article say "e" (meaning "and") instead of "y" (4th line)?
    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BaFwQXNCEAA6I9H.jpg:large

    The Spanish use e instead of y for and, normally when the words either side end and start with vowels or y. It's to do with ease of speaking.
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,320
    edited November 2013
    The Labour party in Scotland continue to show how you hold a grudge that will fester like an open wound. And then the people of Falkirk will go onto to vote in a new Labour MP from this short-list simple because they are wearing a red rosette at the next GE, all of which kinda reinforces all the problems that caused the scandal in Falkirk in the first place.

    Labour shortlist for Falkirk

    Pam Duncan ( policy officer for disabled people’s charity Inclusion Scotland)
    Monica Lennon (South Lanarkshire Cllrs, works for Tom Greatrex)
    Karen Whitefield (former Airdrie and Shotts MSP)

    Former coucil leader Linda Gow (runner in the original selection and one of the first complainers) has not been shortlisted by the NEC/SEC panel (plus 1 CLP rep).


  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,471
    Too may tweets make a tw@.

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/11/27/twitter_hate_mob_lynch_the_wrong_man/

    How long before this sort of thing does some real damage?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,712

    Too may tweets make a tw@.

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/11/27/twitter_hate_mob_lynch_the_wrong_man/

    How long before this sort of thing does some real damage?

    Isn't killing someone, who'd asked for police protection, real enough?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,471

    Too may tweets make a tw@.

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/11/27/twitter_hate_mob_lynch_the_wrong_man/

    How long before this sort of thing does some real damage?

    Isn't killing someone, who'd asked for police protection, real enough?
    You mean this case?
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-25122280 , or something else?

    More of this sort of stuff is going to happen in the future. Some people just love to hate.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,471
    tim said:

    You don't know what you're doing
    You don't know what you're doing

    @PeterHoskinsSky: David Cameron 'U-Turn' Over Cigarette Packaging via @SkyNews http://t.co/fYTwehxIIY

    @TelePolitics: Carney: Bank has "no power" to stop Help to Buy http://t.co/bPCZeD79ho

    There's a funny quote in that article. Ed Miliband accuses everyone of smearing him and Labour, yet is not against smearing people himself.

    And still no apology to Mitchell.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    tim said:

    You don't know what you're doing
    You don't know what you're doing

    @PeterHoskinsSky: David Cameron 'U-Turn' Over Cigarette Packaging via @SkyNews http://t.co/fYTwehxIIY

    @TelePolitics: Carney: Bank has "no power" to stop Help to Buy http://t.co/bPCZeD79ho

    While Luciana Berger demanded immediate action, rather than a review of the facts.

    Australia's decision was highly controversial. My understanding is that it is having a pretty major impact on cigarette sales, which can only be a good thing. But it is entirely reasonable to wait for 12 months to see how the policy is working in practice before introducing it in the UK.

    A multi-faceted strategy incorporating plain packaging, support for harm reduction approaches, regulation of e-cigarettes, and primary care led support programmes could have a major beneficial impact on public health

    (disclosure: I have a dog in this hunt)
  • fitalass said:

    The Labour party in Scotland continue to show how you hold a grudge that will fester like an open wound. And then the people of Falkirk will go onto to vote in a new Labour MP from this short-list simple because they are wearing a red rosette at the next GE, all of which kinda reinforces all the problems that caused the scandal in Falkirk in the first place.

    Labour shortlist for Falkirk

    Pam Duncan ( policy officer for disabled people’s charity Inclusion Scotland)
    Monica Lennon (South Lanarkshire Cllrs, works for Tom Greatrex)
    Karen Whitefield (former Airdrie and Shotts MSP)

    Former coucil leader Linda Gow (runner in the original selection and one of the first complainers) has not been shortlisted by the NEC/SEC panel (plus 1 CLP rep).


    What are they frightened of? That the local party will pick the local lass? London Labour knows best!

    Falkirk claims councillor loses selection battle
    A LABOUR councillor who helped raise the alarm about alleged membership irregularities in Falkirk has been blocked from trying to stand as a Westminster candidate in the seat.

    Linda Gow, who had also called for the party's internal report into the scandal to be published, has been kept off Labour's all-women shortlist in the constituency.


    http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/wider-political-news/falkirk-claims-councillor-loses-selection-battle.22811104
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    tim said:

    @Charles

    Camerons position on everything is the same as his position on his tiny windmill
    It's been up, its been down, it's been up in the wrong place and its in a box in the garage.

    A spineless man with no beliefs.

    Hunt's comment was quite clear (someone else posted it): a pause in the consultation to wait for more evidence from Australia.

    The fact that Labour and their front-riders choose to lie and dissemble is not something that Cameron can do anything about
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,471
    tim said:

    @Charles

    Camerons position on everything is the same as his position on his tiny windmill
    It's been up, its been down, it's been up in the wrong place and its in a box in the garage.

    A spineless man with no beliefs.

    You may want to look at Miliband's position on energy.

    Whilst in charge at DECC, increasing bills were for the good.
    Now, whilst in opposition, they are evil.

    And whilst you are talking about having no spine, you may want to look into the mirror.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    tim said:

    @Charles

    Camerons position on everything is the same as his position on his tiny windmill
    It's been up, its been down, it's been up in the wrong place and its in a box in the garage.

    A spineless man with no beliefs.

    You may want to look at Miliband's position on energy.

    Whilst in charge at DECC, increasing bills were for the good.
    Now, whilst in opposition, they are evil.

    And whilst you are talking about having no spine, you may want to look into the mirror.
    Blood-sucking parasites don't do self-reflection
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    @Charles

    "tim's" position on everything is the same as his position on his tiny todger. It's been up, it's been down, it's been up in the wrong place and it's in a box in the garage.

    A politically erectile dysfunctional man with no hope
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,069
    edited November 2013
    I thought Crosby had killed this per tim and hence, per tim, showed the tories in the fag industry pocket?

    is this tim's fox hunting season and them being shot?

    Blue Nun to be banned next?
  • Great stuff on here this morning from a few of our right-leaning posters. Smear, smear, smear they grizzle as they throw personal insults at Tim. The hypocrisy is glorious.
  • I thought Crosby had killed this per tim and hence, per tim, showed the tories in the fag industry pocket?

    tim wrong?

    Impossible!

    "Man cries at funeral"


  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    tim said:

    @Charles

    Camerons position on everything is the same as his position on his tiny windmill
    It's been up, its been down, it's been up in the wrong place and its in a box in the garage.

    A spineless man with no beliefs.


    "A spineless man with no beliefs"

    That's just so funny. Go on tell us what Miliband believes in ?

  • Great stuff on here this morning from a few of our right-leaning posters. Smear, smear, smear they grizzle as they throw personal insults at Tim. The hypocrisy is glorious.

    Damien McBride.

    Burnham asked "if plain packaging is so important why didn't you do it?"

    Wibble Wibble Wibble........

  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    Great stuff on here this morning from a few of our right-leaning posters. Smear, smear, smear they grizzle as they throw personal insults at Tim. The hypocrisy is glorious.

    SO - thy middle name is irony.

    The PM has done exactly what he said he would do. Wait several months until the results of the Oz review was clear. It is, he's acted - What's the problem ??

    If one was inclined to make a political point out of the issue, then one might remind you that Labour failed to implement these measures in 13 years .... but I'll not mention that.

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,471

    Great stuff on here this morning from a few of our right-leaning posters. Smear, smear, smear they grizzle as they throw personal insults at Tim. The hypocrisy is glorious.

    I know you have a blind spot about Tim, but he throws personal insults about all the time. (*) Perhaps we should not react, but his near-permanent presence on this site is hardly conducive to rational debate.

    It is clear that Labour have decided that any criticism of them is now classed as a smear. Tim's continued nastiness shows that claim to be utter hypocrisy.

    It's a shame you cannot see that. Just read Tim's posts from this morning and ask yourself if they are anything but trolling.

    (*) You may have seen the post the other day, when Tim told me to go back to telling people how to tie knots. It was rather a pathetic 'attack'.
  • Great stuff on here this morning from a few of our right-leaning posters. Smear, smear, smear they grizzle as they throw personal insults at Tim. The hypocrisy is glorious.

    I know you have a blind spot about Tim, but he throws personal insults about all the time. (*) Perhaps we should not react, but his near-permanent presence on this site is hardly conducive to rational debate.

    It is clear that Labour have decided that any criticism of them is now classed as a smear. Tim's continued nastiness shows that claim to be utter hypocrisy.

    It's a shame you cannot see that. Just read Tim's posts from this morning and ask yourself if they are anything but trolling.

    (*) You may have seen the post the other day, when Tim told me to go back to telling people how to tie knots. It was rather a pathetic 'attack'.

    Tim never claims others are smearing. You do. And then you do it. That's the hypocrisy.

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,471

    Great stuff on here this morning from a few of our right-leaning posters. Smear, smear, smear they grizzle as they throw personal insults at Tim. The hypocrisy is glorious.

    I know you have a blind spot about Tim, but he throws personal insults about all the time. (*) Perhaps we should not react, but his near-permanent presence on this site is hardly conducive to rational debate.

    It is clear that Labour have decided that any criticism of them is now classed as a smear. Tim's continued nastiness shows that claim to be utter hypocrisy.

    It's a shame you cannot see that. Just read Tim's posts from this morning and ask yourself if they are anything but trolling.

    (*) You may have seen the post the other day, when Tim told me to go back to telling people how to tie knots. It was rather a pathetic 'attack'.

    Tim never claims others are smearing. You do. And then you do it. That's the hypocrisy.

    Yeah, right.

    Are you telling me that you never see Tim's personal attacks on other posters?
  • Great stuff on here this morning from a few of our right-leaning posters. Smear, smear, smear they grizzle as they throw personal insults at Tim. The hypocrisy is glorious.

    I know you have a blind spot about Tim, but he throws personal insults about all the time. (*) Perhaps we should not react, but his near-permanent presence on this site is hardly conducive to rational debate.

    It is clear that Labour have decided that any criticism of them is now classed as a smear. Tim's continued nastiness shows that claim to be utter hypocrisy.

    It's a shame you cannot see that. Just read Tim's posts from this morning and ask yourself if they are anything but trolling.

    (*) You may have seen the post the other day, when Tim told me to go back to telling people how to tie knots. It was rather a pathetic 'attack'.

    Tim never claims others are smearing. You do. And then you do it. That's the hypocrisy.

    Yeah, right.

    Are you telling me that you never see Tim's personal attacks on other posters?

    No, I am saying that unlike you Tim does not go on endlessly about smears. If you think that personal insults are smears and that smears on an anonymous message board are out of order, don't do it.

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,471

    Great stuff on here this morning from a few of our right-leaning posters. Smear, smear, smear they grizzle as they throw personal insults at Tim. The hypocrisy is glorious.

    I know you have a blind spot about Tim, but he throws personal insults about all the time. (*) Perhaps we should not react, but his near-permanent presence on this site is hardly conducive to rational debate.

    It is clear that Labour have decided that any criticism of them is now classed as a smear. Tim's continued nastiness shows that claim to be utter hypocrisy.

    It's a shame you cannot see that. Just read Tim's posts from this morning and ask yourself if they are anything but trolling.

    (*) You may have seen the post the other day, when Tim told me to go back to telling people how to tie knots. It was rather a pathetic 'attack'.

    Tim never claims others are smearing. You do. And then you do it. That's the hypocrisy.

    Yeah, right.

    Are you telling me that you never see Tim's personal attacks on other posters?

    No, I am saying that unlike you Tim does not go on endlessly about smears. If you think that personal insults are smears and that smears on an anonymous message board are out of order, don't do it.
    What rubbish; you are winding yourself up into knots (the sort Tim probably thinks I could explain how to do).

    So to make it clear:
    1) you do not think that Tim smears anyone (in which case, read his posts passim)
    2) you think that my reaction to Tim accusing Cameron of spinelessness is a smear?

    You'd be better off trying to convince Tim to moderate his posts. I doubt you will, as you're on the same side of the debate.
  • Great stuff on here this morning from a few of our right-leaning posters. Smear, smear, smear they grizzle as they throw personal insults at Tim. The hypocrisy is glorious.

    I know you have a blind spot about Tim, but he throws personal insults about all the time. (*) Perhaps we should not react, but his near-permanent presence on this site is hardly conducive to rational debate.

    It is clear that Labour have decided that any criticism of them is now classed as a smear. Tim's continued nastiness shows that claim to be utter hypocrisy.

    It's a shame you cannot see that. Just read Tim's posts from this morning and ask yourself if they are anything but trolling.

    (*) You may have seen the post the other day, when Tim told me to go back to telling people how to tie knots. It was rather a pathetic 'attack'.

    Tim never claims others are smearing. You do. And then you do it. That's the hypocrisy.

    Yeah, right.

    Are you telling me that you never see Tim's personal attacks on other posters?

    No, I am saying that unlike you Tim does not go on endlessly about smears. If you think that personal insults are smears and that smears on an anonymous message board are out of order, don't do it.
    What rubbish; you are winding yourself up into knots (the sort Tim probably thinks I could explain how to do).

    So to make it clear:
    1) you do not think that Tim smears anyone (in which case, read his posts passim)
    2) you think that my reaction to Tim accusing Cameron of spinelessness is a smear?

    You'd be better off trying to convince Tim to moderate his posts. I doubt you will, as you're on the same side of the debate.

    No, I think that someone who consistently complains that other posters are smearing is a hypocrite when he smears other posters. If you don't understand that there's not much I can do about it.

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,471



    I know you have a blind spot about Tim, but he throws personal insults about all the time. (*) Perhaps we should not react, but his near-permanent presence on this site is hardly conducive to rational debate.

    It is clear that Labour have decided that any criticism of them is now classed as a smear. Tim's continued nastiness shows that claim to be utter hypocrisy.

    It's a shame you cannot see that. Just read Tim's posts from this morning and ask yourself if they are anything but trolling.

    (*) You may have seen the post the other day, when Tim told me to go back to telling people how to tie knots. It was rather a pathetic 'attack'.

    Tim never claims others are smearing. You do. And then you do it. That's the hypocrisy.

    Yeah, right.

    Are you telling me that you never see Tim's personal attacks on other posters?

    No, I am saying that unlike you Tim does not go on endlessly about smears. If you think that personal insults are smears and that smears on an anonymous message board are out of order, don't do it.
    What rubbish; you are winding yourself up into knots (the sort Tim probably thinks I could explain how to do).

    So to make it clear:
    1) you do not think that Tim smears anyone (in which case, read his posts passim)
    2) you think that my reaction to Tim accusing Cameron of spinelessness is a smear?

    You'd be better off trying to convince Tim to moderate his posts. I doubt you will, as you're on the same side of the debate.

    No, I think that someone who consistently complains that other posters are smearing is a hypocrite when he smears other posters. If you don't understand that there's not much I can do about it.

    So your answer to point 2) is yes? You think I smeared Tim by suggesting he looks in a mirror?

    In which case, wow.

    May I suggest you re-read this thread (and others) dispassionately. You might also wish to learn the relevant definition of 'smear', and see who it applies to.
  • Blofelds_CatBlofelds_Cat Posts: 154
    edited November 2013
    That tim et al. have increased the volume should be taken as a sign of their weakness.
    If the left had anything positive to contribute to the debate, I am sure they would.
    Their current output is just chaff and it serves to make them feel better. Shame it makes the threads so poisonous and unenlightening.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    Handbrake u turn from the wobbling jelly fish or principled pragmatic review by the greatest living PM in office in Britain.

    Still waiting for Cameron to drop all the green crap on energy bills and other restrictions. He really is a spineless, Janus faced son of a ...cont p 94.
  • Perhaps we should not react, but [tim's] near-permanent presence on this site is hardly conducive to rational debate.

    Thanks to @edmundintokyo, solutions are available (unless you use Internet Explorer, it seems).
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,025
    I have rarely read so much of a political speech that I agree with.

    "It seems to me therefore that though it would be wrong to persecute the rich, and madness to try and stifle wealth creation, and futile to try and stamp out inequality, that we should only tolerate this wealth gap on two conditions: one, that we help those who genuinely cannot compete; and two, that we provide opportunity for those who can."

    If you were to seek to sum up modern conservatism in a single sentence I think you would be hard put to improve on that.

    Perhaps a little dig about the independence debate as well?
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    When is the Autumn Statement? We desperately need something meaty to discuss on PB - I'm scrolling by 90% of the posts because it's the same old same old.
This discussion has been closed.