I agree with Ash. It smacks of a "making an example of" sentence.
Also, one does not want to see the creation of a martyr.
OK, 14 days for pissing on a wall is hardly Mandela and Robben Island, but it does kind of suit the cause in this case - which is grubby and base - and it could be used to stir up trouble that we do not want.
Same thing happened during the Summer Of Riots concerning the patron saint of Guns In Socks. The magistrates went a bit Judge Dredd on people stealing bottles of water.
Yes I remember some "tabloid justice" getting dished out there.
I agree with Ash. It smacks of a "making an example of" sentence.
Also, one does not want to see the creation of a martyr.
OK, 14 days for pissing on a wall is hardly Mandela and Robben Island, but it does kind of suit the cause in this case - which is grubby and base - and it could be used to stir up trouble that we do not want.
Same thing happened during the Summer Of Riots concerning the patron saint of Guns In Socks. The magistrates went a bit Judge Dredd on people stealing bottles of water.
Yes I remember some "tabloid justice" getting dished out there.
It wasn't "tabloid justice" - it was the context of participation in a riot and looting which attracted a greater sentence than if the bloke had, apropos of nothing, nicked some water.
You're having a bit of a shocker today, although fair one Monday and all that.
Yup - twas ever thus.
Civil disorder + Given crime > Given Crime
is the maths.
Personally, I find it quite easy to save my crimes for times of social peace.
If you get sentenced for 14 days, how much time behind bars do you actually serve ?
Will he appeal against sentence?
Why bother? By the time he could appeal, he'll be out.
He might appeal the criminal conviction it presumably involved.
He would get interim liberation pending the appeal. Edit, its a bit difficult to appeal the conviction when you have pleaded guilty.
Isn't appealing a sentence a thing?
Yes, the sentence will be appealed and, in my view, almost certainly that appeal will be granted. But the conviction will remain on his record and rightly so.
If you get sentenced for 14 days, how much time behind bars do you actually serve ?
Will he appeal against sentence?
Why bother? By the time he could appeal, he'll be out.
He might appeal the criminal conviction it presumably involved.
He would get interim liberation pending the appeal. Edit, its a bit difficult to appeal the conviction when you have pleaded guilty.
Couldn't it be a civil offence rather than a crime though? The two do have a significant impact on his future. e.g. if his job requires enhanced DBS clearance.
You're the lawyer and I'm not, but that was my thought.
I am not an English lawyer but in Scotland it would have been possible for a relatively minor offence like this to be diverted into a Fiscal fine which, if you pay it, doesn't amount to a conviction. Once the decision is made to prosecute, however, there must either be an acquittal or a conviction. In this case, AIUI, the offender gave himself up and pleaded guilty at the first opportunity. These are both strong mitigatory factors. Unless he had done time before there was also a statutory presumption against imprisonment. I'm pretty sure all of this applies in England as well but no doubt someone will put me right if I am wrong.
I agree with Ash. It smacks of a "making an example of" sentence.
Also, one does not want to see the creation of a martyr.
OK, 14 days for pissing on a wall is hardly Mandela and Robben Island, but it does kind of suit the cause in this case - which is grubby and base - and it could be used to stir up trouble that we do not want.
Same thing happened during the Summer Of Riots concerning the patron saint of Guns In Socks. The magistrates went a bit Judge Dredd on people stealing bottles of water.
Yes I remember some "tabloid justice" getting dished out there.
It wasn't "tabloid justice" - it was the context of participation in a riot and looting which attracted a greater sentence than if the bloke had, apropos of nothing, nicked some water.
You're having a bit of a shocker today, although fair one Monday and all that.
But there were some OTT punishments. Think most recognized this at the time. I certainly did. Not that I was in any way involved, you understand. All just based on what I saw on the telly and read in the papers.
A Ramadan wave of infections and death from the Covid is now evident in many countries: Iran, Indonesia, Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Bangladesh, Iraq.
Iran's decision to open the mosques like normal was incredible decision.
Quite a few decisions are looking a bit rough in retrospect. The Cheltenham Festival appears to have been a istake and as for Liverpool v A Madrid......
3,000 or so supporters came over from Madrid for a single day. Meanwhile, 200,000 people were returning from a holiday in Spain every day for about a fortnight.
60,000 were at Cheltenham Meanwhile 5,000,000 people were using the tube.
It was the late lockdown that was the problem, not specific events that were allowed before it was brought in.
In truth they were all mistakes
Wouldn't mandatory mask wearing on public transport have been more useful 3 months ago?
Wouldn't checking on arrivals from virus hot spots have been more useful 3 months ago?
The government's approach from the start has been just like Boris himself, lazy, late, half-arsed., lack of clear focus, loads of waffle.
Not that it's all the government's fault, when we are now advised to wear masks/face coverings in shops etc where social distancing is not possible 80% of the great British public can't even be arsed to do that much.
If you get sentenced for 14 days, how much time behind bars do you actually serve ?
Will he appeal against sentence?
Why bother? By the time he could appeal, he'll be out.
He might appeal the criminal conviction it presumably involved.
He would get interim liberation pending the appeal. Edit, its a bit difficult to appeal the conviction when you have pleaded guilty.
Couldn't it be a civil offence rather than a crime though? The two do have a significant impact on his future. e.g. if his job requires enhanced DBS clearance.
You're the lawyer and I'm not, but that was my thought.
I am not an English lawyer but in Scotland it would have been possible for a relatively minor offence like this to be diverted into a Fiscal fine which, if you pay it, doesn't amount to a conviction. Once the decision is made to prosecute, however, there must either be an acquittal or a conviction. In this case, AIUI, the offender gave himself up and pleaded guilty at the first opportunity. These are both strong mitigatory factors. Unless he had done time before there was also a statutory presumption against imprisonment. I'm pretty sure all of this applies in England as well but no doubt someone will put me right if I am wrong.
A Ramadan wave of infections and death from the Covid is now evident in many countries: Iran, Indonesia, Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Bangladesh, Iraq.
Iran's decision to open the mosques like normal was incredible decision.
Quite a few decisions are looking a bit rough in retrospect. The Cheltenham Festival appears to have been a istake and as for Liverpool v A Madrid......
3,000 or so supporters came over from Madrid for a single day. Meanwhile, 200,000 people were returning from a holiday in Spain every day for about a fortnight.
60,000 were at Cheltenham Meanwhile 5,000,000 people were using the tube.
It was the late lockdown that was the problem, not specific events that were allowed before it was brought in.
In truth they were all mistakes
Wouldn't mandatory mask wearing on public transport have been more useful 3 months ago?
Wouldn't checking on arrivals from virus hot spots have been more useful 3 months ago?
The government's approach from the start has been just like Boris himself, lazy, late, half-arsed., lack of clear focus, loads of waffle.
Not that it's all the government's fault, when we are now advised to wear masks/face coverings in shops etc where social distancing is not possible 80% of the great British public can't even be arsed to do that much.
BiB - That would have been a de facto work from home directive; not necessarily a bad thing of course.
OK guys, do we all remember the Google Churchill kerfuffle? We should do, it was yesterday.
Here's another one, which is even weirder
Go to Youtube, and select a random video. Doesn't matter which one. Add this comment underneath:
"Black Lives Matter violence"
Within 30 seconds or so, it will be automatically deleted. I'm not joking. I did it last night, and I did it this morning: same result both times.
Now I can understand why Youtube might censor certain racist terms. But if you want to comment that this is "Black Lives Matter violence", which is not racist, just an opinion, you cannot.
Same goes for things like "this is black violence", or "what about black violence". They just disappear.
YouTube is preventing commenters from simply expressing lawful opinions
Draining the swamp.
You know the owners of these gigantic media companies are billionaires, and perhaps due to become trillionaires in the not-too-distant future?
What happens if a popular movement for the redistribution of wealth rises up and gets itself completely censored by said media billionaires? Because you can sure they'll justify it as 'draining the swamp' too...
We'll cross that bridge when we (don't) come to it. In the meantime, I am not going to get upset about it becoming more difficult to spread racist propaganda. Sorry, but that's how I feel about this. Slippery slope, go and have a natter with yourself in the corner, I'm living in the here and now.
That's fine, it just means that the world's future is likely to be hyper-liberal socially, and hyper-conservative economically. So we'll both be pissed off with it, just in different ways.
Not given current voting trends, populism is more conservative socially, left-wing economically at the moment
I agree with Ash. It smacks of a "making an example of" sentence.
Also, one does not want to see the creation of a martyr.
OK, 14 days for pissing on a wall is hardly Mandela and Robben Island, but it does kind of suit the cause in this case - which is grubby and base - and it could be used to stir up trouble that we do not want.
Same thing happened during the Summer Of Riots concerning the patron saint of Guns In Socks. The magistrates went a bit Judge Dredd on people stealing bottles of water.
Yes I remember some "tabloid justice" getting dished out there.
It wasn't "tabloid justice" - it was the context of participation in a riot and looting which attracted a greater sentence than if the bloke had, apropos of nothing, nicked some water.
You're having a bit of a shocker today, although fair one Monday and all that.
Yup - twas ever thus.
Civil disorder + Given crime > Given Crime
is the maths.
Personally, I find it quite easy to save my crimes for times of social peace.
Hang on. You write a post and I agree with it. Then Topping comes along and says I'm having a shocker for agreeing (with your post). Then you reply "Yup" to the aforementioned Topping.
That's gaslighting and bullying. You two are gaslighting and bullying me.
Oh dear. I sense some vacuous "rah rah" bluster coming on.
Globally chlorinated chicken, I suspect. Johnson's mostly talking to his Brexiteer base these days, not all of whom are happy about the concessions the UK will need to make to get a US trade deal.
What that shows is that the repubs are up for the fight - and will have plenty of money behind them.
Still a very dangerous opponent.
Dangerous - for the world and the US. I am still worried about the possibility of a Trump win, but I do now believe the wheels are coming of the train. He will keep his base, but few others.
My best current guess is an Electoral College of 412/125 in favour of Biden. How's that for foolishly sticking your neck out?
Where's your ambition. Reagan won against a sitting President 489/49. Surely that's the benchmark.
I couldn't care less if it is 330/328 so long as he's gone afterwards.
However the bigger the defeat the better to draw a line under this unpleasant era and hopefully see some sanity return to the GOP. Bit like the defeat of Corbynism, the bigger the better.
If it's 330/328 there will be some raised eyebrows.
Oops I accidentally added a hundred to the Electoral College.
Globally chlorinated chicken, I suspect. Johnson's mostly talking to his Brexiteer base these days, not all of whom are happy about the concessions the UK will need to make to get a US trade deal.
What that shows is that the repubs are up for the fight - and will have plenty of money behind them.
Still a very dangerous opponent.
Dangerous - for the world and the US. I am still worried about the possibility of a Trump win, but I do now believe the wheels are coming of the train. He will keep his base, but few others.
My best current guess is an Electoral College of 412/125 in favour of Biden. How's that for foolishly sticking your neck out?
Where's your ambition. Reagan won against a sitting President 489/49. Surely that's the benchmark.
I couldn't care less if it is 330/328 so long as he's gone afterwards.
However the bigger the defeat the better to draw a line under this unpleasant era and hopefully see some sanity return to the GOP. Bit like the defeat of Corbynism, the bigger the better.
If it's 330/328 there will be some raised eyebrows.
Oops I accidentally added a hundred to the Electoral College.
I see you've just stumbled upon Trump's master plan for re-election...
I agree with Ash. It smacks of a "making an example of" sentence.
Also, one does not want to see the creation of a martyr.
OK, 14 days for pissing on a wall is hardly Mandela and Robben Island, but it does kind of suit the cause in this case - which is grubby and base - and it could be used to stir up trouble that we do not want.
Same thing happened during the Summer Of Riots concerning the patron saint of Guns In Socks. The magistrates went a bit Judge Dredd on people stealing bottles of water.
Yes I remember some "tabloid justice" getting dished out there.
It wasn't "tabloid justice" - it was the context of participation in a riot and looting which attracted a greater sentence than if the bloke had, apropos of nothing, nicked some water.
You're having a bit of a shocker today, although fair one Monday and all that.
But there were some OTT punishments. Think most recognized this at the time. I certainly did. Not that I was in any way involved, you understand. All just based on what I saw on the telly and read in the papers.
Neither are you a lawyer so frankly your assessment that the punishments were OTT is neither here nor there. Some sentences were reduced on appeal but the context is critical and, importantly the "Court of Appeal confirmed that participation in a collective outbreak of disorder takes offending outside the sentencing guidelines."
I agree with Ash. It smacks of a "making an example of" sentence.
Also, one does not want to see the creation of a martyr.
OK, 14 days for pissing on a wall is hardly Mandela and Robben Island, but it does kind of suit the cause in this case - which is grubby and base - and it could be used to stir up trouble that we do not want.
Same thing happened during the Summer Of Riots concerning the patron saint of Guns In Socks. The magistrates went a bit Judge Dredd on people stealing bottles of water.
Yes I remember some "tabloid justice" getting dished out there.
To much unseemly self touching on here.
I can well imagine. I'm afraid I'm detecting a considerable appetite for cracking heads and other draconian punishments from some on here.
If you get sentenced for 14 days, how much time behind bars do you actually serve ?
Will he appeal against sentence?
Why bother? By the time he could appeal, he'll be out.
He might appeal the criminal conviction it presumably involved.
He would get interim liberation pending the appeal. Edit, its a bit difficult to appeal the conviction when you have pleaded guilty.
Isn't appealing a sentence a thing?
Yes, the sentence will be appealed and, in my view, almost certainly that appeal will be granted. But the conviction will remain on his record and rightly so.
Depends on the accused and his advisers. If he wants to get over this and become normal he will do the time and get over it. If he is or becomes part of an organised grievance campaign on behalf of right wing nutters he can appeal against sentence and have a field day with the media for some time; it is occasionally possible to appeal conviction when you have pleaded guilty but very unlikely in this case.
SFAICS his defence was being a drunken slob rather than disrespecting a brave and heroic police officer. Neither is very brilliant but if I had to choose between these identities, being a drunken slob is a great deal easier for people to forgive.
I agree with Ash. It smacks of a "making an example of" sentence.
Also, one does not want to see the creation of a martyr.
OK, 14 days for pissing on a wall is hardly Mandela and Robben Island, but it does kind of suit the cause in this case - which is grubby and base - and it could be used to stir up trouble that we do not want.
Same thing happened during the Summer Of Riots concerning the patron saint of Guns In Socks. The magistrates went a bit Judge Dredd on people stealing bottles of water.
Yes I remember some "tabloid justice" getting dished out there.
It wasn't "tabloid justice" - it was the context of participation in a riot and looting which attracted a greater sentence than if the bloke had, apropos of nothing, nicked some water.
You're having a bit of a shocker today, although fair one Monday and all that.
Yup - twas ever thus.
Civil disorder + Given crime > Given Crime
is the maths.
Personally, I find it quite easy to save my crimes for times of social peace.
Hang on. You write a post and I agree with it. Then Topping comes along and says I'm having a shocker for agreeing (with your post). Then you reply "Yup" to the aforementioned Topping.
That's gaslighting and bullying. You two are gaslighting and bullying me.
Mods!
As I said, you're having a shocker. Not your best day on here. We're all allowed them.
I agree with Ash. It smacks of a "making an example of" sentence.
Also, one does not want to see the creation of a martyr.
OK, 14 days for pissing on a wall is hardly Mandela and Robben Island, but it does kind of suit the cause in this case - which is grubby and base - and it could be used to stir up trouble that we do not need.
She's clearly concerned because if urinating next to a monument merits 14 days in prison, how much will the people who actually destroyed or vandalized a monument get? Or all the other malefactors the police will identify via CCTV after the fact?
Answers on the back of a postcard...
You're always seeking out the worst in people. I try not to do that.
I agree with Ash. It smacks of a "making an example of" sentence.
Also, one does not want to see the creation of a martyr.
OK, 14 days for pissing on a wall is hardly Mandela and Robben Island, but it does kind of suit the cause in this case - which is grubby and base - and it could be used to stir up trouble that we do not want.
Same thing happened during the Summer Of Riots concerning the patron saint of Guns In Socks. The magistrates went a bit Judge Dredd on people stealing bottles of water.
Yes I remember some "tabloid justice" getting dished out there.
It wasn't "tabloid justice" - it was the context of participation in a riot and looting which attracted a greater sentence than if the bloke had, apropos of nothing, nicked some water.
You're having a bit of a shocker today, although fair one Monday and all that.
But there were some OTT punishments. Think most recognized this at the time. I certainly did. Not that I was in any way involved, you understand. All just based on what I saw on the telly and read in the papers.
Neither are you a lawyer so frankly your assessment that the punishments were OTT is neither here nor there. Some sentences were reduced on appeal but the context is critical and, importantly the "Court of Appeal confirmed that participation in a collective outbreak of disorder takes offending outside the sentencing guidelines."
I think non-lawyers can often add value to these sort of discussions. Especially me.
Globally chlorinated chicken, I suspect. Johnson's mostly talking to his Brexiteer base these days, not all of whom are happy about the concessions the UK will need to make to get a US trade deal.
A poll which did not mention ending free movement at all which was the main reason the Red Wall voted for Brexit and for Boris is not worth the paper it is written in
Globally chlorinated chicken, I suspect. Johnson's mostly talking to his Brexiteer base these days, not all of whom are happy about the concessions the UK will need to make to get a US trade deal.
I agree with Ash. It smacks of a "making an example of" sentence.
Also, one does not want to see the creation of a martyr.
OK, 14 days for pissing on a wall is hardly Mandela and Robben Island, but it does kind of suit the cause in this case - which is grubby and base - and it could be used to stir up trouble that we do not need.
She's clearly concerned because if urinating next to a monument merits 14 days in prison, how much will the people who actually destroyed or vandalized a monument get? Or all the other malefactors the police will identify via CCTV after the fact?
Answers on the back of a postcard...
You're always seeking out the worst in people. I try not to do that.
You had an interesting disquisition on personal hatred the other day which might suggest you don't always succeed in that ambition.
Anyway, I don't quite see it as 'seeking out the worst' in Sarkar. She is both deeply political and self-interested - neither of which is an intrinsically disreputable quality - and she doesn't want the more, er, enthusiastic members of the far left to receive a free diet of porridge as a result of their protesting activities. Hence her extraordinary and uncharacteristic leniency towards Mr. Micturator.
I agree with Ash. It smacks of a "making an example of" sentence.
Also, one does not want to see the creation of a martyr.
OK, 14 days for pissing on a wall is hardly Mandela and Robben Island, but it does kind of suit the cause in this case - which is grubby and base - and it could be used to stir up trouble that we do not want.
Same thing happened during the Summer Of Riots concerning the patron saint of Guns In Socks. The magistrates went a bit Judge Dredd on people stealing bottles of water.
Yes I remember some "tabloid justice" getting dished out there.
It wasn't "tabloid justice" - it was the context of participation in a riot and looting which attracted a greater sentence than if the bloke had, apropos of nothing, nicked some water.
You're having a bit of a shocker today, although fair one Monday and all that.
But there were some OTT punishments. Think most recognized this at the time. I certainly did. Not that I was in any way involved, you understand. All just based on what I saw on the telly and read in the papers.
Neither are you a lawyer so frankly your assessment that the punishments were OTT is neither here nor there. Some sentences were reduced on appeal but the context is critical and, importantly the "Court of Appeal confirmed that participation in a collective outbreak of disorder takes offending outside the sentencing guidelines."
I think non-lawyers can often add value to these sort of discussions. Especially me.
Lawyers, of course, add value to every discussion, although the hourly rate can vary a bit.
What that shows is that the repubs are up for the fight - and will have plenty of money behind them.
Still a very dangerous opponent.
Dangerous - for the world and the US. I am still worried about the possibility of a Trump win, but I do now believe the wheels are coming of the train. He will keep his base, but few others.
My best current guess is an Electoral College of 412/125 in favour of Biden. How's that for foolishly sticking your neck out?
Where's your ambition. Reagan won against a sitting President 489/49. Surely that's the benchmark.
I couldn't care less if it is 330/328 so long as he's gone afterwards.
However the bigger the defeat the better to draw a line under this unpleasant era and hopefully see some sanity return to the GOP. Bit like the defeat of Corbynism, the bigger the better.
If it's 330/328 there will be some raised eyebrows.
Oops I accidentally added a hundred to the Electoral College.
Might be the Google Suggest widget or something - this grabs data from a database of countries in their knowledge graph, which is in turn sourced from Wikipedia and various other databases, and if you ask it for countries I expect it will also include ex-countries.
Might be the Google Suggest widget or something - this grabs data from a database of countries in their knowledge graph, which is in turn sourced from Wikipedia and various other databases, and if you ask it for countries I expect it will also include ex-countries.
The earlier suggestion that it's from a list used for a country of birth question seems the most plausible.
OK guys, do we all remember the Google Churchill kerfuffle? We should do, it was yesterday.
Here's another one, which is even weirder
Go to Youtube, and select a random video. Doesn't matter which one. Add this comment underneath:
"Black Lives Matter violence"
Within 30 seconds or so, it will be automatically deleted. I'm not joking. I did it last night, and I did it this morning: same result both times.
Now I can understand why Youtube might censor certain racist terms. But if you want to comment that this is "Black Lives Matter violence", which is not racist, just an opinion, you cannot.
Same goes for things like "this is black violence", or "what about black violence". They just disappear.
YouTube is preventing commenters from simply expressing lawful opinions
Draining the swamp.
You know the owners of these gigantic media companies are billionaires, and perhaps due to become trillionaires in the not-too-distant future?
What happens if a popular movement for the redistribution of wealth rises up and gets itself completely censored by said media billionaires? Because you can sure they'll justify it as 'draining the swamp' too...
We'll cross that bridge when we (don't) come to it. In the meantime, I am not going to get upset about it becoming more difficult to spread racist propaganda. Sorry, but that's how I feel about this. Slippery slope, go and have a natter with yourself in the corner, I'm living in the here and now.
That's fine, it just means that the world's future is likely to be hyper-liberal socially, and hyper-conservative economically. So we'll both be pissed off with it, just in different ways.
Not given current voting trends, populism is more conservative socially, left-wing economically at the moment
I think we have seen "peak populism". There will probably be a smaller second wave, but it will eventually fizzle out. People will look back and wonder how it all happened.
I agree with Ash. It smacks of a "making an example of" sentence.
Also, one does not want to see the creation of a martyr.
OK, 14 days for pissing on a wall is hardly Mandela and Robben Island, but it does kind of suit the cause in this case - which is grubby and base - and it could be used to stir up trouble that we do not want.
Same thing happened during the Summer Of Riots concerning the patron saint of Guns In Socks. The magistrates went a bit Judge Dredd on people stealing bottles of water.
Yes I remember some "tabloid justice" getting dished out there.
It wasn't "tabloid justice" - it was the context of participation in a riot and looting which attracted a greater sentence than if the bloke had, apropos of nothing, nicked some water.
You're having a bit of a shocker today, although fair one Monday and all that.
But there were some OTT punishments. Think most recognized this at the time. I certainly did. Not that I was in any way involved, you understand. All just based on what I saw on the telly and read in the papers.
Neither are you a lawyer so frankly your assessment that the punishments were OTT is neither here nor there. Some sentences were reduced on appeal but the context is critical and, importantly the "Court of Appeal confirmed that participation in a collective outbreak of disorder takes offending outside the sentencing guidelines."
I think non-lawyers can often add value to these sort of discussions. Especially me.
Lawyers, of course, add value to every discussion, although the hourly rate can vary a bit.
Lawyers, of course, add remove value to from every discussion, although the hourly rate can vary a bit.
I agree with Ash. It smacks of a "making an example of" sentence.
Also, one does not want to see the creation of a martyr.
OK, 14 days for pissing on a wall is hardly Mandela and Robben Island, but it does kind of suit the cause in this case - which is grubby and base - and it could be used to stir up trouble that we do not want.
Same thing happened during the Summer Of Riots concerning the patron saint of Guns In Socks. The magistrates went a bit Judge Dredd on people stealing bottles of water.
Yes I remember some "tabloid justice" getting dished out there.
It wasn't "tabloid justice" - it was the context of participation in a riot and looting which attracted a greater sentence than if the bloke had, apropos of nothing, nicked some water.
You're having a bit of a shocker today, although fair one Monday and all that.
But there were some OTT punishments. Think most recognized this at the time. I certainly did. Not that I was in any way involved, you understand. All just based on what I saw on the telly and read in the papers.
Neither are you a lawyer so frankly your assessment that the punishments were OTT is neither here nor there. Some sentences were reduced on appeal but the context is critical and, importantly the "Court of Appeal confirmed that participation in a collective outbreak of disorder takes offending outside the sentencing guidelines."
I think non-lawyers can often add value to these sort of discussions. Especially me.
I would never use the phrase 'gammon', but to me it evokes a pub-bore, who spends most of their time in a sort of apoplectic but fundamentally ineffectual rage where life would be great if only other people could see how stupid they were being. So whilst gammons would probably always be white, and male, to me it doesn't really connote a political persuasion. Since Brexit, we've had a lot of people who meet that gammon qualification on the left-wing side of the argument. Possibly even some on PB.
OK guys, do we all remember the Google Churchill kerfuffle? We should do, it was yesterday.
Here's another one, which is even weirder
Go to Youtube, and select a random video. Doesn't matter which one. Add this comment underneath:
"Black Lives Matter violence"
Within 30 seconds or so, it will be automatically deleted. I'm not joking. I did it last night, and I did it this morning: same result both times.
Now I can understand why Youtube might censor certain racist terms. But if you want to comment that this is "Black Lives Matter violence", which is not racist, just an opinion, you cannot.
Same goes for things like "this is black violence", or "what about black violence". They just disappear.
YouTube is preventing commenters from simply expressing lawful opinions
Draining the swamp.
You know the owners of these gigantic media companies are billionaires, and perhaps due to become trillionaires in the not-too-distant future?
What happens if a popular movement for the redistribution of wealth rises up and gets itself completely censored by said media billionaires? Because you can sure they'll justify it as 'draining the swamp' too...
We'll cross that bridge when we (don't) come to it. In the meantime, I am not going to get upset about it becoming more difficult to spread racist propaganda. Sorry, but that's how I feel about this. Slippery slope, go and have a natter with yourself in the corner, I'm living in the here and now.
That's fine, it just means that the world's future is likely to be hyper-liberal socially, and hyper-conservative economically. So we'll both be pissed off with it, just in different ways.
Not given current voting trends, populism is more conservative socially, left-wing economically at the moment
I think we have seen "peak populism". There will probably be a smaller second wave, but it will eventually fizzle out. People will look back and wonder how it all happened.
It is quite arguable that BLM is populism.
The main objectors to that would be people for who "populism" = "bad thangs"
I have mixed feelings about the 14 days. Objectively, I don't mind it.
But subjectively, my mind goes to every occasion the police have told one of my clients that the fact that them or their family has been abused, racially or sexually harassed, threatened with harm and in one case death, sometimes by idiots and sometimes by sophisticated operators, that it is "not a police matter".
I have mixed feelings about the 14 days. Objectively, I don't mind it.
But subjectively, my mind goes to every occasion the police have told one of my clients that the fact that them or their family has been abused, racially or sexually harassed, threatened with harm and in one case death, sometimes by idiots and sometimes by sophisticated operators, that it is "not a police matter".
True.
I am reminded of a corner shop owner on a bad estate, who was told that it wasn't in the public interest to prosecute the persistent shop lifters who harried him.
Mr. Glenn, not the same department, but been having problems creating my online account. I don't even want one, but the Government, in its infinite wisdom, has decided to stop using paper returns (which work) in favour of online ones (which currently don't).
I have mixed feelings about the 14 days. Objectively, I don't mind it.
But subjectively, my mind goes to every occasion the police have told one of my clients that the fact that them or their family has been abused, racially or sexually harassed, threatened with harm and in one case death, sometimes by idiots and sometimes by sophisticated operators, that it is "not a police matter".
I wasn't shocked by it. Given the forces and views ranged on both sides, it was probably quite expedient.
Globally chlorinated chicken, I suspect. Johnson's mostly talking to his Brexiteer base these days, not all of whom are happy about the concessions the UK will need to make to get a US trade deal.
I agree with Ash. It smacks of a "making an example of" sentence.
Also, one does not want to see the creation of a martyr.
OK, 14 days for pissing on a wall is hardly Mandela and Robben Island, but it does kind of suit the cause in this case - which is grubby and base - and it could be used to stir up trouble that we do not want.
Same thing happened during the Summer Of Riots concerning the patron saint of Guns In Socks. The magistrates went a bit Judge Dredd on people stealing bottles of water.
Yes I remember some "tabloid justice" getting dished out there.
It wasn't "tabloid justice" - it was the context of participation in a riot and looting which attracted a greater sentence than if the bloke had, apropos of nothing, nicked some water.
You're having a bit of a shocker today, although fair one Monday and all that.
But there were some OTT punishments. Think most recognized this at the time. I certainly did. Not that I was in any way involved, you understand. All just based on what I saw on the telly and read in the papers.
Neither are you a lawyer so frankly your assessment that the punishments were OTT is neither here nor there. Some sentences were reduced on appeal but the context is critical and, importantly the "Court of Appeal confirmed that participation in a collective outbreak of disorder takes offending outside the sentencing guidelines."
I think non-lawyers can often add value to these sort of discussions. Especially me.
Lawyers, of course, add value to every discussion, although the hourly rate can vary a bit.
- they are a shower.
When I meet one I always expect Atticus Finch and I'm invariably disappointed. Sometimes bitterly.
Trump and the GOP. Compare state polls for the US Senate and the Presidency (I've used polls conducted by the same company/at the same time whenever possible, so some of the results are old).
State
Trump lead
GOP Senate lead
Kentucky
+17
McConnell -1
Alabama
+20
+8 to +13
Alaska
+5
+0 to +2
Arizona
-4
-13
Georgia
-1
-11 to +3
Iowa
+4.6
-3
Kansas
+12
-1 to +1
Montana
+16
-7
North Carolina
-4
-2
Oklahoma
+24
+26
South Carolina
+10
Graham +0
In most cases Trump massively outperforms GOP Senate candidates in Red and competitive states. Trump has so effectively parasitised his GOP host that he's the only thing keeping it alive even while he chews it up.
The idea that the GOP will abandon Trump to save themselves is complete fantasy. His coattails are about all they have left now.
I agree with Ash. It smacks of a "making an example of" sentence.
Also, one does not want to see the creation of a martyr.
OK, 14 days for pissing on a wall is hardly Mandela and Robben Island, but it does kind of suit the cause in this case - which is grubby and base - and it could be used to stir up trouble that we do not want.
Same thing happened during the Summer Of Riots concerning the patron saint of Guns In Socks. The magistrates went a bit Judge Dredd on people stealing bottles of water.
Yes I remember some "tabloid justice" getting dished out there.
It wasn't "tabloid justice" - it was the context of participation in a riot and looting which attracted a greater sentence than if the bloke had, apropos of nothing, nicked some water.
You're having a bit of a shocker today, although fair one Monday and all that.
But there were some OTT punishments. Think most recognized this at the time. I certainly did. Not that I was in any way involved, you understand. All just based on what I saw on the telly and read in the papers.
Neither are you a lawyer so frankly your assessment that the punishments were OTT is neither here nor there. Some sentences were reduced on appeal but the context is critical and, importantly the "Court of Appeal confirmed that participation in a collective outbreak of disorder takes offending outside the sentencing guidelines."
I think non-lawyers can often add value to these sort of discussions. Especially me.
Lawyers, of course, add value to every discussion, although the hourly rate can vary a bit.
- they are a shower.
When I meet one I always expect Atticus Finch and I'm invariably disappointed. Sometimes bitterly.
Nope, they are no worse than any other profession, or walk of life and probably better than many. I have met just as many self centred and greedy doctors as I have lawyers or accountants with similar vices
I have mixed feelings about the 14 days. Objectively, I don't mind it.
But subjectively, my mind goes to every occasion the police have told one of my clients that the fact that them or their family has been abused, racially or sexually harassed, threatened with harm and in one case death, sometimes by idiots and sometimes by sophisticated operators, that it is "not a police matter".
True.
I am reminded of a corner shop owner on a bad estate, who was told that it wasn't in the public interest to prosecute the persistent shop lifters who harried him.
I agree with Ash. It smacks of a "making an example of" sentence.
Also, one does not want to see the creation of a martyr.
OK, 14 days for pissing on a wall is hardly Mandela and Robben Island, but it does kind of suit the cause in this case - which is grubby and base - and it could be used to stir up trouble that we do not want.
Same thing happened during the Summer Of Riots concerning the patron saint of Guns In Socks. The magistrates went a bit Judge Dredd on people stealing bottles of water.
Yes I remember some "tabloid justice" getting dished out there.
It wasn't "tabloid justice" - it was the context of participation in a riot and looting which attracted a greater sentence than if the bloke had, apropos of nothing, nicked some water.
You're having a bit of a shocker today, although fair one Monday and all that.
But there were some OTT punishments. Think most recognized this at the time. I certainly did. Not that I was in any way involved, you understand. All just based on what I saw on the telly and read in the papers.
Neither are you a lawyer so frankly your assessment that the punishments were OTT is neither here nor there. Some sentences were reduced on appeal but the context is critical and, importantly the "Court of Appeal confirmed that participation in a collective outbreak of disorder takes offending outside the sentencing guidelines."
I think non-lawyers can often add value to these sort of discussions. Especially me.
Lawyers, of course, add value to every discussion, although the hourly rate can vary a bit.
- they are a shower.
When I meet one I always expect Atticus Finch and I'm invariably disappointed. Sometimes bitterly.
I rather think you should try the kind of society that doesn't really use lawyers.
Some of the more... brisk parts of Lagos, for example.
Globally chlorinated chicken, I suspect. Johnson's mostly talking to his Brexiteer base these days, not all of whom are happy about the concessions the UK will need to make to get a US trade deal.
Very leading questions from an anti-Brexit campaign group gets the answers it wants. What a shocker!
Only a fuckwit would want a no-deal Brexit. You would have to be extremely stupid even by Brexiter standards...…. Oh, awfully sorry Philip old bean!
I don't want a no-deal Brexit. I want a good deal Brexit, but no deal is better than a bad deal.
The poll though was by anti-Brexit campaign group Best for Britain and the polling question was ludicrously leading.
After a set of Yes, Prime Minister style set of leading questions were asked this was the question eventually asked:
‘The Conservative campaign manifesto said that the Government would pursue "a new free trade agreement with the EU [and that] this will be a new relationship based on free trade and friendly cooperation”. How important is it that the Government keeps this promise?’
What a leading question! Hint: I'd answer its important that the Government keeps its promise. That doesn't mean what Nick Cohen is trying to spin it as.
I have mixed feelings about the 14 days. Objectively, I don't mind it.
But subjectively, my mind goes to every occasion the police have told one of my clients that the fact that them or their family has been abused, racially or sexually harassed, threatened with harm and in one case death, sometimes by idiots and sometimes by sophisticated operators, that it is "not a police matter".
True.
I am reminded of a corner shop owner on a bad estate, who was told that it wasn't in the public interest to prosecute the persistent shop lifters who harried him.
I agree with Ash. It smacks of a "making an example of" sentence.
Also, one does not want to see the creation of a martyr.
OK, 14 days for pissing on a wall is hardly Mandela and Robben Island, but it does kind of suit the cause in this case - which is grubby and base - and it could be used to stir up trouble that we do not need.
She's clearly concerned because if urinating next to a monument merits 14 days in prison, how much will the people who actually destroyed or vandalized a monument get? Or all the other malefactors the police will identify via CCTV after the fact?
Answers on the back of a postcard...
You're always seeking out the worst in people. I try not to do that.
You had an interesting disquisition on personal hatred the other day which might suggest you don't always succeed in that ambition.
Anyway, I don't quite see it as 'seeking out the worst' in Sarkar. She is both deeply political and self-interested - neither of which is an intrinsically disreputable quality - and she doesn't want the more, er, enthusiastic members of the far left to receive a free diet of porridge as a result of their protesting activities. Hence her extraordinary and uncharacteristic leniency towards Mr. Micturator.
I sense she's quite a nice person actually. Ditto - to show balance - that "Montie" bloke.
As for 'the other day' and 'hate', I was provoked beyond endurance by somebody, forget who, but somebody. Could have been you.
The truth is, I can detect some good in almost all people, including politicians of the right. There is one exception, a person with no redeeming features whatsoever, but he's across the pond and he'll be out of the picture soon anyway.
Well good - I want the consensus to remain that it's going to be close so I can sell that Trump EC opening spread at about 245.
Want to double that bet to £10, Kinablu ?
In seriousness, here's a question: apart from the published polls which come out, what gives you confidence that Biden is winning by a storm at the moment? Because it is not shown by actual results - the Democrats lost a House seat (@RCS says we shouldn't read too much into CA-25 but the very best interpretation is that it doesn't suggest an electorate fired up to give Trump a bloody nose where possible); it wasn't shown in PA when more Republicans turned out for their primary than Democrats did besides the latter having an advantage in registered voters; there has been plenty of anecdotes about Trump posters in backyards still been commonplace but no one seems to be talking of the rapid spread of Biden euphoria. Where is the evidence on the ground to back up the polls?
That is why the Republicans in that article seem confident.
Compare that the Georgia poll which showed little change and we could have some very weird results...
America is waking up to the insanity of having your head of government (and state in their case) a populist headline grabbing incompetent. The British electorate will gradually also realise what has happened to their once stable system of government.
Globally chlorinated chicken, I suspect. Johnson's mostly talking to his Brexiteer base these days, not all of whom are happy about the concessions the UK will need to make to get a US trade deal.
Very leading questions from an anti-Brexit campaign group gets the answers it wants. What a shocker!
Only a fuckwit would want a no-deal Brexit. You would have to be extremely stupid even by Brexiter standards...…. Oh, awfully sorry Philip old bean!
Only a fool would want a No Deal Brexit. Not getting an FTA with the EU would not be a No Deal Brexit, it would be a hard, or WTO Brexit. It wouldn't be a No Deal Brexit because we have a withdrawal agreement that ensures an orderly disengagement with the continuance of travel and trade.
When we were actually facing a No Deal Brexit, in TMay's time, we were told in no uncertain terms by our remainer cohort that in NO WAY was crashing out with NO DEAL to be compared to leaving on WTO terms. It spelled imminent disaster, falling off a cliff, crashing the bus, having to eat the cat, etc. Now we face leaving on WTO terms, they've revived the No Deal term because it's scarier. It baffles me why the 'more educated' side of the debate continues to try to pull the wool over people's eyes with such silly and obvious rhetorical swapsies.
I have mixed feelings about the 14 days. Objectively, I don't mind it.
But subjectively, my mind goes to every occasion the police have told one of my clients that the fact that them or their family has been abused, racially or sexually harassed, threatened with harm and in one case death, sometimes by idiots and sometimes by sophisticated operators, that it is "not a police matter".
True.
I am reminded of a corner shop owner on a bad estate, who was told that it wasn't in the public interest to prosecute the persistent shop lifters who harried him.
The solution to that problem was interesting.
Is there a story here?
(If it's another £845.23+VAT I'm not interested.)
Given our prior business, I can quote you a reduced rate....
One of his habitual customers heard about the problem. He advised the shop keeper to join his (the customers) members club, not far round the corner. A basement under a taxi shop.... £x per week.
And never go there.
Just put his (the customers) business card on the pin board of locals ads near the door.
According to my friend who lived in the area, only the more stupid and fargone addicts tried anything after that.
The customer got his daily paper for free, as well.
Some people are shocked by this kind of thing - but if the legal system withdraws coverage, what do they expect?
Compare that the Georgia poll which showed little change and we could have some very weird results...
America is waking up to the insanity of having your head of government (and state in their case) a populist headline grabbing incompetent. The British electorate will gradually also realise what has happened to their once stable system of government.
I too sense the tide turning. Have done for a while now, Dec 12th notwithstanding. Trump being booted out with some considerable force this November will (imo) be iconic. As with his election it will mean much more than the bare event.
What that shows is that the repubs are up for the fight - and will have plenty of money behind them.
Still a very dangerous opponent.
Dangerous - for the world and the US. I am still worried about the possibility of a Trump win, but I do now believe the wheels are coming of the train. He will keep his base, but few others.
My best current guess is an Electoral College of 412/125 in favour of Biden. How's that for foolishly sticking your neck out?
I know one eligible voter here, who always votes postally. He's registered to New York State though so his Democrat vote just adds to the pile there .
That's TimB. I am a Legal Alien, so voteless here and, as I've been out of the country since 2000, voteless in the UK.
Bet you still have to pay taxes though. Americans (and everyone else) can be hypocritical about that sort of thing.
Yeah, I live near DC and have a wry smile every time I read the "No Taxation without Representation" plates.
PS And I still pay UK taxes...
Us 'aliens' everywhere are the only group seemingly obliged to pay local taxes, without getting a vote over who sets them! (Thankfully taxes are low here, so I'm not yet complaining too much).
Globally chlorinated chicken, I suspect. Johnson's mostly talking to his Brexiteer base these days, not all of whom are happy about the concessions the UK will need to make to get a US trade deal.
Very leading questions from an anti-Brexit campaign group gets the answers it wants. What a shocker!
Only a fuckwit would want a no-deal Brexit. You would have to be extremely stupid even by Brexiter standards...…. Oh, awfully sorry Philip old bean!
I don't want a no-deal Brexit. I want a good deal Brexit, but no deal is better than a bad deal.
The poll though was by anti-Brexit campaign group Best for Britain and the polling question was ludicrously leading.
After a set of Yes, Prime Minister style set of leading questions were asked this was the question eventually asked:
‘The Conservative campaign manifesto said that the Government would pursue "a new free trade agreement with the EU [and that] this will be a new relationship based on free trade and friendly cooperation”. How important is it that the Government keeps this promise?’
What a leading question! Hint: I'd answer its important that the Government keeps its promise. That doesn't mean what Nick Cohen is trying to spin it as.
Love the use of the hackneyed slogan, you are a marketing person's dream. It is a silly slogan and wrong. Any "deal" we get out of the stupidity known as Brexit is demonstrably worse than the one we had already. Any deal will therefore be a bad deal, but pretty much any deal is better than no-deal
Globally chlorinated chicken, I suspect. Johnson's mostly talking to his Brexiteer base these days, not all of whom are happy about the concessions the UK will need to make to get a US trade deal.
Very leading questions from an anti-Brexit campaign group gets the answers it wants. What a shocker!
Only a fuckwit would want a no-deal Brexit. You would have to be extremely stupid even by Brexiter standards...…. Oh, awfully sorry Philip old bean!
I don't want a no-deal Brexit. I want a good deal Brexit, but no deal is better than a bad deal.
The poll though was by anti-Brexit campaign group Best for Britain and the polling question was ludicrously leading.
After a set of Yes, Prime Minister style set of leading questions were asked this was the question eventually asked:
‘The Conservative campaign manifesto said that the Government would pursue "a new free trade agreement with the EU [and that] this will be a new relationship based on free trade and friendly cooperation”. How important is it that the Government keeps this promise?’
What a leading question! Hint: I'd answer its important that the Government keeps its promise. That doesn't mean what Nick Cohen is trying to spin it as.
Love the use of the hackneyed slogan, you are a marketing person's dream. It is a silly slogan and wrong. Any "deal" we get out of the stupidity known as Brexit is demonstrably worse than the one we had already. Any deal will therefore be a bad deal, but pretty much any deal is better than no-deal
Hahahahahahaha
I do love the fact you actually believe this rubbish.
Compare that the Georgia poll which showed little change and we could have some very weird results...
America is waking up to the insanity of having your head of government (and state in their case) a populist headline grabbing incompetent. The British electorate will gradually also realise what has happened to their once stable system of government.
I too sense the tide turning. Have done for a while now, Dec 12th notwithstanding. Trump being booted out with some considerable force this November will (imo) be iconic. As with his election it will mean much more than the bare event.
A couple of keepers there people, as Trump reveals almost a million applied for tickets to his Tulsa rally.
Well good - I want the consensus to remain that it's going to be close so I can sell that Trump EC opening spread at about 245.
Want to double that bet to £10, Kinablu ?
In seriousness, here's a question: apart from the published polls which come out, what gives you confidence that Biden is winning by a storm at the moment? Because it is not shown by actual results - the Democrats lost a House seat (@RCS says we shouldn't read too much into CA-25 but the very best interpretation is that it doesn't suggest an electorate fired up to give Trump a bloody nose where possible); it wasn't shown in PA when more Republicans turned out for their primary than Democrats did besides the latter having an advantage in registered voters; there has been plenty of anecdotes about Trump posters in backyards still been commonplace but no one seems to be talking of the rapid spread of Biden euphoria. Where is the evidence on the ground to back up the polls?
That is why the Republicans in that article seem confident.
Fine with the tenner. Although I really ought to be giving you a shade of odds now. It was a genuine consensus even money chance when we did the original bet.
I have a number of ways to explain why I see the big loss for him.
Writing one at the moment - "WH2020 through the lens of the Deer Hunter" - which I will make sure to post when you are on the thread.
Compare that the Georgia poll which showed little change and we could have some very weird results...
America is waking up to the insanity of having your head of government (and state in their case) a populist headline grabbing incompetent. The British electorate will gradually also realise what has happened to their once stable system of government.
I too sense the tide turning. Have done for a while now, Dec 12th notwithstanding. Trump being booted out with some considerable force this November will (imo) be iconic. As with his election it will mean much more than the bare event.
Dec 12th was in reality a choice between very right wing populism and far-left populism. However ridiculous Johnson and his team are, the electorate correctly deduced that it wasn't quite as ridiculous as Corbyn et al.
Well good - I want the consensus to remain that it's going to be close so I can sell that Trump EC opening spread at about 245.
Want to double that bet to £10, Kinablu ?
In seriousness, here's a question: apart from the published polls which come out, what gives you confidence that Biden is winning by a storm at the moment? Because it is not shown by actual results - the Democrats lost a House seat (@RCS says we shouldn't read too much into CA-25 but the very best interpretation is that it doesn't suggest an electorate fired up to give Trump a bloody nose where possible); it wasn't shown in PA when more Republicans turned out for their primary than Democrats did besides the latter having an advantage in registered voters; there has been plenty of anecdotes about Trump posters in backyards still been commonplace but no one seems to be talking of the rapid spread of Biden euphoria. Where is the evidence on the ground to back up the polls?
That is why the Republicans in that article seem confident.
People aren't voting about Trump or Biden in these smaller elections. In the big one that's the main point... It's not exactly the same but backing many gains for the Lib Dems off the back of the Brecon and Radnorshire by-election would have been a similiar category error in terms of UK political betting at the 2019 GE. Polls are a better indicator.
Compare that the Georgia poll which showed little change and we could have some very weird results...
America is waking up to the insanity of having your head of government (and state in their case) a populist headline grabbing incompetent. The British electorate will gradually also realise what has happened to their once stable system of government.
I too sense the tide turning. Have done for a while now, Dec 12th notwithstanding. Trump being booted out with some considerable force this November will (imo) be iconic. As with his election it will mean much more than the bare event.
Dec 12th was in reality a choice between very right wing populism and far-left populism. However ridiculous Johnson and his team are, the electorate correctly deduced that it wasn't quite as ridiculous as Corbyn et al.
On Brexit and despite non stop anti brexit and HMG postings by Scott I really expect a deal will be made with the EU this Autumn
I just hope so. Trouble tis the Brexiters have shifted from promises of 'easiest thing in the world' and 'everything but migration' to threats of the hardest Brexit. Where is this shift going to end? You can, one hopes, forgive us for worry and doubt and fear for such basic things as food and medicine. IIRC one of the Cabinet was saying that medicine was a doddle because there had never been problems even during the virus. Well, that was an absolute lie. There were problems during the virus, and problems before - especially when one considers that the actual formulation/brand is as important for many people as the basic active principle used. And many of us need our medicine, or our partners [edit and families] do.
I agree with Ash. It smacks of a "making an example of" sentence.
Also, one does not want to see the creation of a martyr.
OK, 14 days for pissing on a wall is hardly Mandela and Robben Island, but it does kind of suit the cause in this case - which is grubby and base - and it could be used to stir up trouble that we do not want.
Same thing happened during the Summer Of Riots concerning the patron saint of Guns In Socks. The magistrates went a bit Judge Dredd on people stealing bottles of water.
Yes I remember some "tabloid justice" getting dished out there.
It wasn't "tabloid justice" - it was the context of participation in a riot and looting which attracted a greater sentence than if the bloke had, apropos of nothing, nicked some water.
You're having a bit of a shocker today, although fair one Monday and all that.
But there were some OTT punishments. Think most recognized this at the time. I certainly did. Not that I was in any way involved, you understand. All just based on what I saw on the telly and read in the papers.
Neither are you a lawyer so frankly your assessment that the punishments were OTT is neither here nor there. Some sentences were reduced on appeal but the context is critical and, importantly the "Court of Appeal confirmed that participation in a collective outbreak of disorder takes offending outside the sentencing guidelines."
I think non-lawyers can often add value to these sort of discussions. Especially me.
Lawyers, of course, add value to every discussion, although the hourly rate can vary a bit.
- they are a shower.
When I meet one I always expect Atticus Finch and I'm invariably disappointed. Sometimes bitterly.
I rather think you should try the kind of society that doesn't really use lawyers.
Some of the more... brisk parts of Lagos, for example.
I know I know. We need them. And some are very noble (I would imagine).
I was going to wade into the discussion about lawyers. My contribution contained a nice little pithily worded phrase, but quite frankly no-one would go about their day happier or better informed as a result. So instead, let me relate the tears of happiness I have just shed in picking my youngest daughter up from her first day back at school. She has spent a whole day surrounded by people her own age, and I think she is happier than she's been in months, and therefore I am too.
Compare that the Georgia poll which showed little change and we could have some very weird results...
America is waking up to the insanity of having your head of government (and state in their case) a populist headline grabbing incompetent. The British electorate will gradually also realise what has happened to their once stable system of government.
I too sense the tide turning. Have done for a while now, Dec 12th notwithstanding. Trump being booted out with some considerable force this November will (imo) be iconic. As with his election it will mean much more than the bare event.
Dec 12th was in reality a choice between very right wing populism and far-left populism. However ridiculous Johnson and his team are, the electorate correctly deduced that it wasn't quite as ridiculous as Corbyn et al.
"very right wing"?
The current UK government is to the left of the Democratic party.
In fact, I think that they are to the left of Sanders, in nearly all policies?
I agree with Ash. It smacks of a "making an example of" sentence.
Also, one does not want to see the creation of a martyr.
OK, 14 days for pissing on a wall is hardly Mandela and Robben Island, but it does kind of suit the cause in this case - which is grubby and base - and it could be used to stir up trouble that we do not want.
Same thing happened during the Summer Of Riots concerning the patron saint of Guns In Socks. The magistrates went a bit Judge Dredd on people stealing bottles of water.
Yes I remember some "tabloid justice" getting dished out there.
It wasn't "tabloid justice" - it was the context of participation in a riot and looting which attracted a greater sentence than if the bloke had, apropos of nothing, nicked some water.
You're having a bit of a shocker today, although fair one Monday and all that.
But there were some OTT punishments. Think most recognized this at the time. I certainly did. Not that I was in any way involved, you understand. All just based on what I saw on the telly and read in the papers.
Neither are you a lawyer so frankly your assessment that the punishments were OTT is neither here nor there. Some sentences were reduced on appeal but the context is critical and, importantly the "Court of Appeal confirmed that participation in a collective outbreak of disorder takes offending outside the sentencing guidelines."
I think non-lawyers can often add value to these sort of discussions. Especially me.
Lawyers, of course, add value to every discussion, although the hourly rate can vary a bit.
- they are a shower.
When I meet one I always expect Atticus Finch and I'm invariably disappointed. Sometimes bitterly.
I rather think you should try the kind of society that doesn't really use lawyers.
Some of the more... brisk parts of Lagos, for example.
I know I know. We need them. And some are very noble (I would imagine).
It has been my general experience that, for a very wide range of groups, the ratio of chods to decent human beings is surprisingly invariant.
Nepalese hill farmers and UK immigration consultants for example.
I was going to wade into the discussion about lawyers. My contribution contained a nice little pithily worded phrase, but quite frankly no-one would go about their day happier or better informed as a result. So instead, let me relate the tears of happiness I have just shed in picking my youngest daughter up from her first day back at school. She has spent a whole day surrounded by people her own age, and I think she is happier than she's been in months, and therefore I am too.
No 2 Granddaughter emailed her Grannie to say much the same. She was worried, and therefore we're doubly relieved.
I agree with Ash. It smacks of a "making an example of" sentence.
Also, one does not want to see the creation of a martyr.
OK, 14 days for pissing on a wall is hardly Mandela and Robben Island, but it does kind of suit the cause in this case - which is grubby and base - and it could be used to stir up trouble that we do not want.
Same thing happened during the Summer Of Riots concerning the patron saint of Guns In Socks. The magistrates went a bit Judge Dredd on people stealing bottles of water.
Yes I remember some "tabloid justice" getting dished out there.
It wasn't "tabloid justice" - it was the context of participation in a riot and looting which attracted a greater sentence than if the bloke had, apropos of nothing, nicked some water.
You're having a bit of a shocker today, although fair one Monday and all that.
But there were some OTT punishments. Think most recognized this at the time. I certainly did. Not that I was in any way involved, you understand. All just based on what I saw on the telly and read in the papers.
Neither are you a lawyer so frankly your assessment that the punishments were OTT is neither here nor there. Some sentences were reduced on appeal but the context is critical and, importantly the "Court of Appeal confirmed that participation in a collective outbreak of disorder takes offending outside the sentencing guidelines."
I think non-lawyers can often add value to these sort of discussions. Especially me.
Not in this instance. And not you.
Otherwise yes.
Sounds like we have complete agreement on the only point where we could reasonably expect any agreement whatsoever.
Compare that the Georgia poll which showed little change and we could have some very weird results...
America is waking up to the insanity of having your head of government (and state in their case) a populist headline grabbing incompetent. The British electorate will gradually also realise what has happened to their once stable system of government.
I too sense the tide turning. Have done for a while now, Dec 12th notwithstanding. Trump being booted out with some considerable force this November will (imo) be iconic. As with his election it will mean much more than the bare event.
Dec 12th was in reality a choice between very right wing populism and far-left populism. However ridiculous Johnson and his team are, the electorate correctly deduced that it wasn't quite as ridiculous as Corbyn et al.
"very right wing"?
The current UK government is to the left of the Democratic party.
In fact, I think that they are to the left of Sanders, in nearly all policies?
There are some Democrats who could easily be Kippers with their support for economic protectionism, the death penalty, fierce anti-Chinese rhetoric etc.
Compare that the Georgia poll which showed little change and we could have some very weird results...
America is waking up to the insanity of having your head of government (and state in their case) a populist headline grabbing incompetent. The British electorate will gradually also realise what has happened to their once stable system of government.
I too sense the tide turning. Have done for a while now, Dec 12th notwithstanding. Trump being booted out with some considerable force this November will (imo) be iconic. As with his election it will mean much more than the bare event.
Dec 12th was in reality a choice between very right wing populism and far-left populism. However ridiculous Johnson and his team are, the electorate correctly deduced that it wasn't quite as ridiculous as Corbyn et al.
"very right wing"?
The current UK government is to the left of the Democratic party.
In fact, I think that they are to the left of Sanders, in nearly all policies?
There are some Democrats who could easily be Kippers with their support for economic protectionism, the death penalty, fierce anti-Chinese rhetoric etc.
Biden is quietly forgetting about some of his past positions....
Comments
Civil disorder + Given crime > Given Crime
is the maths.
Personally, I find it quite easy to save my crimes for times of social peace.
https://twitter.com/heraldscotland/status/1272463520723095554?s=20
In this case, AIUI, the offender gave himself up and pleaded guilty at the first opportunity. These are both strong mitigatory factors. Unless he had done time before there was also a statutory presumption against imprisonment. I'm pretty sure all of this applies in England as well but no doubt someone will put me right if I am wrong.
Wouldn't mandatory mask wearing on public transport have been more useful 3 months ago?
Wouldn't checking on arrivals from virus hot spots have been more useful 3 months ago?
The government's approach from the start has been just like Boris himself, lazy, late, half-arsed., lack of clear focus, loads of waffle.
Not that it's all the government's fault, when we are now advised to wear masks/face coverings in shops etc where social distancing is not possible 80% of the great British public can't even be arsed to do that much.
That's gaslighting and bullying. You two are gaslighting and bullying me.
Mods!
SFAICS his defence was being a drunken slob rather than disrespecting a brave and heroic police officer. Neither is very brilliant but if I had to choose between these identities, being a drunken slob is a great deal easier for people to forgive.
https://twitter.com/nicktolhurst/status/1272467700170833922
https://twitter.com/PpollingNumbers/status/1272506671194144769?s=20
Anyway, I don't quite see it as 'seeking out the worst' in Sarkar. She is both deeply political and self-interested - neither of which is an intrinsically disreputable quality - and she doesn't want the more, er, enthusiastic members of the far left to receive a free diet of porridge as a result of their protesting activities. Hence her extraordinary and uncharacteristic leniency towards Mr. Micturator.
Though it does inspire thoughts of a strategy game like Railroad, with lots of town maps of eastern Scottish burghs.
Fixed that for you. That will be £845.23 + VAT
Otherwise yes.
https://abacusdata.ca/biden_trump_2020_abacus-data/
The main objectors to that would be people for who "populism" = "bad thangs"
But subjectively, my mind goes to every occasion the police have told one of my clients that the fact that them or their family has been abused, racially or sexually harassed, threatened with harm and in one case death, sometimes by idiots and sometimes by sophisticated operators, that it is "not a police matter".
Compare that the Georgia poll which showed little change and we could have some very weird results...
I am reminded of a corner shop owner on a bad estate, who was told that it wasn't in the public interest to prosecute the persistent shop lifters who harried him.
The solution to that problem was interesting.
When I meet one I always expect Atticus Finch and I'm invariably disappointed. Sometimes bitterly.
Compare state polls for the US Senate and the Presidency (I've used polls conducted by the same company/at the same time whenever possible, so some of the results are old).
The idea that the GOP will abandon Trump to save themselves is complete fantasy. His coattails are about all they have left now.
(If it's another £845.23+VAT I'm not interested.)
Some of the more... brisk parts of Lagos, for example.
The poll though was by anti-Brexit campaign group Best for Britain and the polling question was ludicrously leading.
After a set of Yes, Prime Minister style set of leading questions were asked this was the question eventually asked:
‘The Conservative campaign manifesto said that the Government would pursue "a new free trade agreement with the EU [and that] this will be a new relationship based on free trade and friendly cooperation”. How important is it that the Government keeps this promise?’
What a leading question! Hint: I'd answer its important that the Government keeps its promise. That doesn't mean what Nick Cohen is trying to spin it as.
If we're taking the pollster to be as accurate, and giving Trump the benefit of all swing doubt at this point then it's a 4.5 pt swing from 2016.
Trump +11 Arkansas to Trump +2 Arkansas.
As for 'the other day' and 'hate', I was provoked beyond endurance by somebody, forget who, but somebody. Could have been you.
The truth is, I can detect some good in almost all people, including politicians of the right. There is one exception, a person with no redeeming features whatsoever, but he's across the pond and he'll be out of the picture soon anyway.
In seriousness, here's a question: apart from the published polls which come out, what gives you confidence that Biden is winning by a storm at the moment? Because it is not shown by actual results - the Democrats lost a House seat (@RCS says we shouldn't read too much into CA-25 but the very best interpretation is that it doesn't suggest an electorate fired up to give Trump a bloody nose where possible); it wasn't shown in PA when more Republicans turned out for their primary than Democrats did besides the latter having an advantage in registered voters; there has been plenty of anecdotes about Trump posters in backyards still been commonplace but no one seems to be talking of the rapid spread of Biden euphoria. Where is the evidence on the ground to back up the polls?
That is why the Republicans in that article seem confident.
When we were actually facing a No Deal Brexit, in TMay's time, we were told in no uncertain terms by our remainer cohort that in NO WAY was crashing out with NO DEAL to be compared to leaving on WTO terms. It spelled imminent disaster, falling off a cliff, crashing the bus, having to eat the cat, etc. Now we face leaving on WTO terms, they've revived the No Deal term because it's scarier. It baffles me why the 'more educated' side of the debate continues to try to pull the wool over people's eyes with such silly and obvious rhetorical swapsies.
One of his habitual customers heard about the problem. He advised the shop keeper to join his (the customers) members club, not far round the corner. A basement under a taxi shop.... £x per week.
And never go there.
Just put his (the customers) business card on the pin board of locals ads near the door.
According to my friend who lived in the area, only the more stupid and fargone addicts tried anything after that.
The customer got his daily paper for free, as well.
Some people are shocked by this kind of thing - but if the legal system withdraws coverage, what do they expect?
(Thankfully taxes are low here, so I'm not yet complaining too much).
I do love the fact you actually believe this rubbish.
Wonder how many Biden's getting.
The repubs are pumped!
I have a number of ways to explain why I see the big loss for him.
Writing one at the moment - "WH2020 through the lens of the Deer Hunter" - which I will make sure to post when you are on the thread.
It's not exactly the same but backing many gains for the Lib Dems off the back of the Brecon and Radnorshire by-election would have been a similiar category error in terms of UK political betting at the 2019 GE.
Polls are a better indicator.
In fact, I think that they are to the left of Sanders, in nearly all policies?
Nepalese hill farmers and UK immigration consultants for example.
Not too shabby. Not too shabby at all.