This is remarkable (or maybe y'all knew about it already) - you can look at Florida voting patterns in real time. This for example is Pinellas country, which in 2016 split pretty much evenly Trump/Clinton. You can see the registered Dem early advantage, but more GOP-registered voting today:
Last time, Pinellas County went 50.6% Trump, 49.4% Clinton. Assuming: People vote according to their registrations The unaffliated split 50/50 Trump/Biden The turnout is 77% (last time was 77%) then the result in this county would be 50.8% Trump, 49.2% Biden (basically same as last time)
It is very sensitive to turnout and unaffiliated split. Turnout of 80% gives 51.4% Trump 48.6% Biden (as voters on the day favour Trump) Unaffliated split 40/60 Trump/Biden and 80% turnout gives 49.0% Trump, 51.0% Biden.
My feel on this small amount of data on just one county in Florida is that it favours Trump holding Florida.
FYI Sumter is at 81% turnout and will likely go higher. Not so many in-person votes yet but Republicans leading Democrats by registration by nearly 5 to 1
Fake news?
Party Ballots Cast Percent of Ballots Cast Democrat 20,172 23.45% Republican 50,691 58.93% No Party Affiliation 14,584 16.95% Other 575 0.67%
He's talking about election day votes only, it's currently 67.27% Rep to 14.39% for the Dems. So at 4.8 to 1
He didn't write that though – seriously misleading on a betting site.
Trump won Sumpter 68/29 in 2016 . If he matches that or is close it will mean hes not losing the older voters in the numbers some were suggesting which will also mean he's very likely to hold the state. On the other hand if he is down around 60-62% there that's not a good sign for him statewide. I don't expect him to be much higher than 68 but it will be interesting to see how the NPAs fall as well
Again, quick back of the cig calculation based on 5% of Reps / Dems voting for the other party and 50% split of the independents, assuming 90% turnout in Sumter and that the votes continue to be split in the same way by party registration.
So PB experts, should how much should we read into the on the day Florida vote tallies posted?
That right now, Florida is tighter than a duck's arse.
On current sparse county data I'm calling it for Trump. But on Betfair the money has been going on Biden who has moved from 2.44 to 2.36 in the last half hour.
What's the three-letter code for Miami Dade? I see @bigjohnowls is asking a similar question!
Where do you want to draw the line; parents, grandparents, great grandparents .... Are you going to deport people back to Normandy?
If a person is British they are British. It is of no relevance what their parents are/were.
Just to give you an example of how silly that is I have a friend whose father is Yugoslavian. She was born here and has never been to the Balkans, can't speak the language, has a Mancunian accent and is 66. What would you do with her? She is about as Yugoslavian as I am.
Oh and her name is unpronounceable (a lack of vowels) so clearly not British.
This is getting ridiculous.
What would I do with your friend? Nothing of course as she's not a terrorist!
I honestly wonder if people are actually capable of reading, I think on certain subjects it is clear that they are not.
Anyway I'm not going to comment on this anymore as it is cluttering up the site on election day (I tried to confine it to the other thread for this very reason, but of course Topping when he thought he found a gotcha went pasting it on this one too to try and shame me like all good lefties do).
I'm left wing but not not that left wing - although admittedly more so than many on here. Centre left. But I, and a significant number of Tory voters on here, Philip Thompson for example, found the phrase "native English" to be crass and clearly racist. If you had said "had a second nationality so should have been deported" I would have looked askance but given you the benefit of the doubt. But how you can possibly claim that "native English" is acceptable is beyond me.
Vienna gunman, 20, who killed four and wounded 17 was released early from prison on terror charges because of his age, had wanted to join ISIS in Syria - but 'was deemed incapable of an attack'
FFS this sums up European handling of the problem.
Had they tried to keep him in jail I can imagine all sorts of human rights lawyers taking the government to the cleaners.
You want to defend western democratic values against islamism by ripping up the rule of law, its very foundation?
You my friend may want to think that through.
I could have guessed that you would have supported releasing this bloke to allow him to go on a gun rampage.
I don't want to rip up the rule of law, I want the law changed to stop people like this getting released for a very long time before being deported.
Again, stop putting words in my mouth.
If you want to change the law that's fine, but stop whinging about "human rights lawyers" who are simply ensuring that the Government operates within the law as it currently is.
Why is it wrong to complain about lawyers using every trick to pervert the system?
How is that any different to complaining about aggressive tax avoidance?
Are lawyers perverting the system within the law any better than accountants doing the same?
If someone is lawfully avoiding paying taxes by their accountants using every trick in the book - or if someone is lawfully avoiding deportation by their lawyers using every trick in the book - should governments, campaigners and voters just accept that? Or should they identify the problem and look to fix it by closing the loopholes?
Because this isn't about money, this is about people's liberty.
People like @DAlexander are very quick to criticise but very slow to produce any actual solutions.
If you want to dis-apply the Human Rights Act to "terrorism" suspects you then are into the territory of what constitutes a "terrorist" - is it simply at the whim of the Government? The court? Are you comfortable that your human rights could be similarly taken away, almost on an arbitrary basis?
You may be comfortable with that but people like @DAlexander never want to discuss the hard questions.
The bloke tried to join ISIS, I think it's a fairly reasonable conclusion to draw that he should be behind bars.
Forever?
And please note I am not defending this bloke. I'm not defending him whatsoever. I am defending "human rights lawyers".
Until at the very least he's deemed no longer a danger to the public.
The problem isn't lawyers who get involved when there is a clear case of the law not being implemented correctly, but that isn't what happens. There are a group of human rights lawyers who target these particular cases and use every legal loophole and trick in the book to get them out of jail.
Isn't that exactly what happened in this case? He was deemed no longer a danger to the public.
See you don't actually have a solution at all. You just like to whine about "lefty human rights lawyers".
He was released early because of his age.
My solution for Islamic terrorists is jail and then deportation at the end of the sentence.
What about the 7/7 perpetrators. Where in Leeds or Bucks would you have deported them to?
Well for example Mohammad Sidique Khan could be deported back to Pakistan.
Surprised you didn't manage to work out that Mohammad Sidique Khan isn't a native English name.
That's got to be worth a sin-bin surely?
Mohammad Sidique Khan is one of the 7/7 bombers. I thought I'd add that context before Topping gets me banned.
That doesn't change the fact you want to deport a British citizen born in Britain because of his name. 🤦🏻♂️
This is getting ridiculous.
I wanted to deport him because he committed a terrorist act not because of his name.
But as someone has just pointed out...there's not much left of him to deport.
This game of trying to twist peoples' words so you can shout racist at them for instead of coming up with a reasonable counter-argument is incredibly tedious now.
Denmark are doing it, it's really not that outrageous. And maybe those people killed yesterday would still be alive now (not that actual real people matter when there's a chance to score points off people you don't know on the internet).
I posted the below on the previous thread in response to you @DAlexander However I suspect the post is pointless. I couple of days ago I challenged you and @contrarian to actually come out with what you really think about stuff. The pair of you are blatantly holding back on the keyboard but I think most of us can clearly see what your views really are on stuff, but it would be good to really hear it. I suspect most Conservatives on this site would not want to be associated with your views, but we don't really know until you tell us.
___________________________________
Where do you want to draw the line; parents, grandparents, great grandparents .... Are you going to deport people back to Normandy?
If a person is British they are British. It is of no relevance what their parents are/were.
Just to give you an example of how silly that is I have a friend whose father is Yugoslavian. She was born here and has never been to the Balkans, can't speak the language, has a Mancunian accent and is 66. What would you do with her? She is about as Yugoslavian as I am.
Oh and her name is unpronounceable (a lack of vowels) so clearly not British.
The solution is simple - there is nothing we can do to unpick the horrendous mistake of allowing mass immigration from Islamic countries to Europe, so we will have to put up with the consequences of it.
Education, education, education. The more educated people are the more clearly they can see the myths of organised religion contain many falsehoods and that the fundamentalist versions that seek to impose their versions on the rest of the world are extremely dangerous.
Telling them their culture is bad? That's punching down. Very bad....
Yes but for Biden to get the same % lead as Clinton did in 2016, either the unaffiliateds have to split to him at least 60/40 or voters registered as Republicans have to be unfaithful in large numbers. Could be.
In 2016 Clinton 553,000 Trump 261,000
By party turnoit DEM: 446,000 GOP: 194,000 UNA: 194,000
Illustrates my point. Assume the UNA split 50/50 and add 97,000 to each of the DEM and GOP numbers and compare with 2016.
Best thing to do with these terrorists is lock them up into isolation, throw away the key and then forget they exist. Three meals a day and no right to appeal.
This site will be in absolute turmoil if Trump wins, I can imagine posters needing counselling for PTSD.
I will be mildly surprised, and deeply disappointed in the US public.
I won't be disappointed in the American public as I am fairly sure Trump will lose the popular vote. I will be unsurprised and worried by the consequences of what promises to be a reasonably large popular vote win being nullified by the archane machinery of the Electoral College and a Supreme Court filled by presidents who lost the popular vote with the conivance of an upper chamber which is rigged towards rural states. Which is exactly what I think will happen.
Not sure where he is getting this -just checked and the ratio of Rep: Dem registered voters was 2.25 to 1. A few hours back it was 2.3. It has been remarkably stable
Yes but for Biden to get the same % lead as Clinton did in 2016, either the unaffiliateds have to split to him at least 60/40 or voters registered as Republicans have to be unfaithful in large numbers. Could be.
In 2016 Clinton 553,000 Trump 261,000
By party turnoit DEM: 446,000 GOP: 194,000 UNA: 194,000
Illustrates my point. Assume the UNA split 50/50 and add 97,000 to each of the DEM and GOP numbers and compare with 2016.
Quite a jump with no change in GOP Now reading DEM: 459,000 GOP: 194,000 UNA: 209,000
Seems very strange - how can that be right?
13,000 Dem and zero (to nearest thousand) Rep since previous update.
Just a reminder that we have had some spectacularly wild movements on the betting markets, including the spreads, on election days in recent times. They have presented some superb money-making for those who disengage their nerves and emotions and keep their brains firmly in control.
Biden is going to win this and by a clear margin. Not because I think so, or because I wish so, but because all the data cumulatively does.
Vienna gunman, 20, who killed four and wounded 17 was released early from prison on terror charges because of his age, had wanted to join ISIS in Syria - but 'was deemed incapable of an attack'
FFS this sums up European handling of the problem.
Had they tried to keep him in jail I can imagine all sorts of human rights lawyers taking the government to the cleaners.
You want to defend western democratic values against islamism by ripping up the rule of law, its very foundation?
You my friend may want to think that through.
I could have guessed that you would have supported releasing this bloke to allow him to go on a gun rampage.
I don't want to rip up the rule of law, I want the law changed to stop people like this getting released for a very long time before being deported.
Again, stop putting words in my mouth.
If you want to change the law that's fine, but stop whinging about "human rights lawyers" who are simply ensuring that the Government operates within the law as it currently is.
Why is it wrong to complain about lawyers using every trick to pervert the system?
How is that any different to complaining about aggressive tax avoidance?
Are lawyers perverting the system within the law any better than accountants doing the same?
If someone is lawfully avoiding paying taxes by their accountants using every trick in the book - or if someone is lawfully avoiding deportation by their lawyers using every trick in the book - should governments, campaigners and voters just accept that? Or should they identify the problem and look to fix it by closing the loopholes?
Because this isn't about money, this is about people's liberty.
People like @DAlexander are very quick to criticise but very slow to produce any actual solutions.
If you want to dis-apply the Human Rights Act to "terrorism" suspects you then are into the territory of what constitutes a "terrorist" - is it simply at the whim of the Government? The court? Are you comfortable that your human rights could be similarly taken away, almost on an arbitrary basis?
You may be comfortable with that but people like @DAlexander never want to discuss the hard questions.
The bloke tried to join ISIS, I think it's a fairly reasonable conclusion to draw that he should be behind bars.
Forever?
And please note I am not defending this bloke. I'm not defending him whatsoever. I am defending "human rights lawyers".
Until at the very least he's deemed no longer a danger to the public.
The problem isn't lawyers who get involved when there is a clear case of the law not being implemented correctly, but that isn't what happens. There are a group of human rights lawyers who target these particular cases and use every legal loophole and trick in the book to get them out of jail.
Isn't that exactly what happened in this case? He was deemed no longer a danger to the public.
See you don't actually have a solution at all. You just like to whine about "lefty human rights lawyers".
He was released early because of his age.
My solution for Islamic terrorists is jail and then deportation at the end of the sentence.
What about the 7/7 perpetrators. Where in Leeds or Bucks would you have deported them to?
Well for example Mohammad Sidique Khan could be deported back to Pakistan.
Surprised you didn't manage to work out that Mohammad Sidique Khan isn't a native English name.
That's got to be worth a sin-bin surely?
Mohammad Sidique Khan is one of the 7/7 bombers. I thought I'd add that context before Topping gets me banned.
That doesn't change the fact you want to deport a British citizen born in Britain because of his name. 🤦🏻♂️
This is getting ridiculous.
I wanted to deport him because he committed a terrorist act not because of his name.
But as someone has just pointed out...there's not much left of him to deport.
This game of trying to twist peoples' words so you can shout racist at them for instead of coming up with a reasonable counter-argument is incredibly tedious now.
Denmark are doing it, it's really not that outrageous. And maybe those people killed yesterday would still be alive now (not that actual real people matter when there's a chance to score points off people you don't know on the internet).
Then why did you make such a point of his name not sounding "native English". Why not simply say that if at all possible he should have been deported? It's the use of the phrase "native English" that outs you.
Oh geez more mock outrage, it is literally endless.
While people are more agitated over trying to find non-existent racism in posts rather than actual people getting machined gunned or beheaded on the streets, any discussion on this is completely pointless.
It's just never-ending accusations of racism from halfwits.
Having reflected on your comment, maybe people are getting a bit agitated not because they are trying to find "non-existent racism" but because they think the racism is, in fact, existent rather than non-existent?
Best thing to do with these terrorists is lock them up into isolation, throw away the key and then forget they exist. Three meals a day and no right to appeal.
I've just been taking a look at the final POTUS election forecast from Trafalgar Group who, alone, were spot on in 2016 when they predicted a comfortable win for Trump against Clinton. As then, they are again claiming to have identified a clear and significant proportion of "shy trumpsters" who, they claim, will deliver a second term in office for the incumbent as a result of him winning 306 ECVs compared with only 232 for Biden. The half-hour video accompanying their forecast which is in long, laboured and very muddled is intended to impress the viewer with its so-called methodology - but which I found it anything but impressive. Indeed, I was left with the distinct impression that it would be very difficult indeed for Biden to lose this election. This is perhaps best demonstrated by 3 states, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin which have been chalked up as being in the Trump camp, despite the fact that they are all considered to be near certain wins for Biden. These three states have a combined total of 46 Electoral College Votes. Deduct this number from the Red team and add it to the Blue team and as if by magic, Biden becomes the winner by 278 votes to 260 votes. If, by some miracle, Trump were to win one of these three states, there are at least another 4 or 5 which Trafalgar show as being Republican wins, but which virtually every other pollster shows the Democrats winning. God help the U.S. polling industry is all I would add were Trafalgar, against all the odds, to be proved right yet again
If Trafalgar had made their case based on Trump losing WI and MI but holding everything else and PA being the genuine tipping point. I could have given them some credence. However simply saying that Trump will overturn a 7/8/9% defecit in the other two states 'because they found more shy trumpers' is just making it up. PA is within the realms of possibly staying red, I dont believe either of the other two are
So PB experts, should how much should we read into the on the day Florida vote tallies posted?
That right now, Florida is tighter than a duck's arse.
On current sparse county data I'm calling it for Trump. But on Betfair the money has been going on Biden who has moved from 2.44 to 2.36 in the last half hour.
It's only 10am on the East Coast. Far too early to make any sort of call.
Just a reminder that we have had some spectacularly wild movements on the betting markets, including the spreads, on election days in recent times. They have presented some superb money-making for those who disengage their nerves and emotions and keep their brains firmly in control.
Biden is going to win this and by a clear margin. Not because I think so, or because I wish so, but because all the data cumulatively does.
I hope you’re right. Wish I could be that confident.
Vienna gunman, 20, who killed four and wounded 17 was released early from prison on terror charges because of his age, had wanted to join ISIS in Syria - but 'was deemed incapable of an attack'
FFS this sums up European handling of the problem.
Had they tried to keep him in jail I can imagine all sorts of human rights lawyers taking the government to the cleaners.
You want to defend western democratic values against islamism by ripping up the rule of law, its very foundation?
You my friend may want to think that through.
I could have guessed that you would have supported releasing this bloke to allow him to go on a gun rampage.
I don't want to rip up the rule of law, I want the law changed to stop people like this getting released for a very long time before being deported.
Again, stop putting words in my mouth.
If you want to change the law that's fine, but stop whinging about "human rights lawyers" who are simply ensuring that the Government operates within the law as it currently is.
Why is it wrong to complain about lawyers using every trick to pervert the system?
How is that any different to complaining about aggressive tax avoidance?
Are lawyers perverting the system within the law any better than accountants doing the same?
If someone is lawfully avoiding paying taxes by their accountants using every trick in the book - or if someone is lawfully avoiding deportation by their lawyers using every trick in the book - should governments, campaigners and voters just accept that? Or should they identify the problem and look to fix it by closing the loopholes?
Because this isn't about money, this is about people's liberty.
People like @DAlexander are very quick to criticise but very slow to produce any actual solutions.
If you want to dis-apply the Human Rights Act to "terrorism" suspects you then are into the territory of what constitutes a "terrorist" - is it simply at the whim of the Government? The court? Are you comfortable that your human rights could be similarly taken away, almost on an arbitrary basis?
You may be comfortable with that but people like @DAlexander never want to discuss the hard questions.
The bloke tried to join ISIS, I think it's a fairly reasonable conclusion to draw that he should be behind bars.
Forever?
And please note I am not defending this bloke. I'm not defending him whatsoever. I am defending "human rights lawyers".
Until at the very least he's deemed no longer a danger to the public.
The problem isn't lawyers who get involved when there is a clear case of the law not being implemented correctly, but that isn't what happens. There are a group of human rights lawyers who target these particular cases and use every legal loophole and trick in the book to get them out of jail.
Isn't that exactly what happened in this case? He was deemed no longer a danger to the public.
See you don't actually have a solution at all. You just like to whine about "lefty human rights lawyers".
He was released early because of his age.
My solution for Islamic terrorists is jail and then deportation at the end of the sentence.
What about the 7/7 perpetrators. Where in Leeds or Bucks would you have deported them to?
Well for example Mohammad Sidique Khan could be deported back to Pakistan.
Surprised you didn't manage to work out that Mohammad Sidique Khan isn't a native English name.
That's got to be worth a sin-bin surely?
Mohammad Sidique Khan is one of the 7/7 bombers. I thought I'd add that context before Topping gets me banned.
That doesn't change the fact you want to deport a British citizen born in Britain because of his name. 🤦🏻♂️
This is getting ridiculous.
I wanted to deport him because he committed a terrorist act not because of his name.
But as someone has just pointed out...there's not much left of him to deport.
This game of trying to twist peoples' words so you can shout racist at them for instead of coming up with a reasonable counter-argument is incredibly tedious now.
Denmark are doing it, it's really not that outrageous. And maybe those people killed yesterday would still be alive now (not that actual real people matter when there's a chance to score points off people you don't know on the internet).
I posted the below on the previous thread in response to you @DAlexander However I suspect the post is pointless. I couple of days ago I challenged you and @contrarian to actually come out with what you really think about stuff. The pair of you are blatantly holding back on the keyboard but I think most of us can clearly see what your views really are on stuff, but it would be good to really hear it. I suspect most Conservatives on this site would not want to be associated with your views, but we don't really know until you tell us.
___________________________________
Where do you want to draw the line; parents, grandparents, great grandparents .... Are you going to deport people back to Normandy?
If a person is British they are British. It is of no relevance what their parents are/were.
Just to give you an example of how silly that is I have a friend whose father is Yugoslavian. She was born here and has never been to the Balkans, can't speak the language, has a Mancunian accent and is 66. What would you do with her? She is about as Yugoslavian as I am.
Oh and her name is unpronounceable (a lack of vowels) so clearly not British.
The solution is simple - there is nothing we can do to unpick the horrendous mistake of allowing mass immigration from Islamic countries to Europe, so we will have to put up with the consequences of it.
Education, education, education. The more educated people are the more clearly they can see the myths of organised religion contain many falsehoods and that the fundamentalist versions that seek to impose their versions on the rest of the world are extremely dangerous.
Telling them their culture is bad? That's punching down. Very bad....
Eh? We have freedom of speech and freedom of religion. I can say what I want, if others want to criticise me for it that's fine. Everyone has freedom of religion, that's fine too. I support a society where people are educated and are therefore less likely to support fundamentalist beliefs whether religious or political of any flavour. Nothing to do with "them".
So PB experts, should how much should we read into the on the day Florida vote tallies posted?
That right now, Florida is tighter than a duck's arse.
On current sparse county data I'm calling it for Trump. But on Betfair the money has been going on Biden who has moved from 2.44 to 2.36 in the last half hour.
It's only 10am on the East Coast. Far too early to make any sort of call.
Not sure where he is getting this -just checked and the ratio of Rep: Dem registered voters was 2.25 to 1. A few hours back it was 2.3. It has been remarkably stable
So PB experts, should how much should we read into the on the day Florida vote tallies posted?
That right now, Florida is tighter than a duck's arse.
On current sparse county data I'm calling it for Trump. But on Betfair the money has been going on Biden who has moved from 2.44 to 2.36 in the last half hour.
So PB experts, should how much should we read into the on the day Florida vote tallies posted?
That right now, Florida is tighter than a duck's arse.
On current sparse county data I'm calling it for Trump. But on Betfair the money has been going on Biden who has moved from 2.44 to 2.36 in the last half hour.
What's the three-letter code for Miami Dade? I see @bigjohnowls is asking a similar question!
I've tried several and got nowhere - all the others I've tried have been "first three letters"
Edit - looks like it should be "dad" - but it doesn't load.
So PB experts, should how much should we read into the on the day Florida vote tallies posted?
That right now, Florida is tighter than a duck's arse.
On current sparse county data I'm calling it for Trump. But on Betfair the money has been going on Biden who has moved from 2.44 to 2.36 in the last half hour.
I hate to be rude but you're crazy. Election day voting trends often wax and wane from hour to hour, and we still don't really know how the early vote broke down nor how big the election day vote will be or how it will break down. Inds often don't split evenly, and party registration can be misleading.
As only Corbyn’s luck would have it, he in fact spent the best part of an hour in the company of local activist Stephen Smith, who is currently also suspended by the Labour Party and under investigation after being accused of “antisemitism” on social media. Only days ago Smith shared a cartoon of the Israeli Prime Minister flying an IDF jet which was firing “defamation” missiles at Corbyn.
Now my understanding of the rules are you can leave a higher Tier to a lower Tier to go on holiday.l (but shouldn't make unnecessary journies and especially not to a lower tier in your normal day to day life...yes its dumb as )..but it is very clear you should spend that holiday with just your own household.
You do have a penchant for crap sites pedalling even crapper stories. In brief Corbyn was photographed with someone who had re-posted a cartoon of Netanyahu. Wow!!!!
So PB experts, should how much should we read into the on the day Florida vote tallies posted?
That right now, Florida is tighter than a duck's arse.
On current sparse county data I'm calling it for Trump. But on Betfair the money has been going on Biden who has moved from 2.44 to 2.36 in the last half hour.
Vienna gunman, 20, who killed four and wounded 17 was released early from prison on terror charges because of his age, had wanted to join ISIS in Syria - but 'was deemed incapable of an attack'
FFS this sums up European handling of the problem.
Had they tried to keep him in jail I can imagine all sorts of human rights lawyers taking the government to the cleaners.
You want to defend western democratic values against islamism by ripping up the rule of law, its very foundation?
You my friend may want to think that through.
I could have guessed that you would have supported releasing this bloke to allow him to go on a gun rampage.
I don't want to rip up the rule of law, I want the law changed to stop people like this getting released for a very long time before being deported.
Again, stop putting words in my mouth.
If you want to change the law that's fine, but stop whinging about "human rights lawyers" who are simply ensuring that the Government operates within the law as it currently is.
Why is it wrong to complain about lawyers using every trick to pervert the system?
How is that any different to complaining about aggressive tax avoidance?
Are lawyers perverting the system within the law any better than accountants doing the same?
If someone is lawfully avoiding paying taxes by their accountants using every trick in the book - or if someone is lawfully avoiding deportation by their lawyers using every trick in the book - should governments, campaigners and voters just accept that? Or should they identify the problem and look to fix it by closing the loopholes?
Because this isn't about money, this is about people's liberty.
People like @DAlexander are very quick to criticise but very slow to produce any actual solutions.
If you want to dis-apply the Human Rights Act to "terrorism" suspects you then are into the territory of what constitutes a "terrorist" - is it simply at the whim of the Government? The court? Are you comfortable that your human rights could be similarly taken away, almost on an arbitrary basis?
You may be comfortable with that but people like @DAlexander never want to discuss the hard questions.
The bloke tried to join ISIS, I think it's a fairly reasonable conclusion to draw that he should be behind bars.
Forever?
And please note I am not defending this bloke. I'm not defending him whatsoever. I am defending "human rights lawyers".
Until at the very least he's deemed no longer a danger to the public.
The problem isn't lawyers who get involved when there is a clear case of the law not being implemented correctly, but that isn't what happens. There are a group of human rights lawyers who target these particular cases and use every legal loophole and trick in the book to get them out of jail.
Isn't that exactly what happened in this case? He was deemed no longer a danger to the public.
See you don't actually have a solution at all. You just like to whine about "lefty human rights lawyers".
He was released early because of his age.
My solution for Islamic terrorists is jail and then deportation at the end of the sentence.
What about the 7/7 perpetrators. Where in Leeds or Bucks would you have deported them to?
Well for example Mohammad Sidique Khan could be deported back to Pakistan.
Surprised you didn't manage to work out that Mohammad Sidique Khan isn't a native English name.
That's got to be worth a sin-bin surely?
Mohammad Sidique Khan is one of the 7/7 bombers. I thought I'd add that context before Topping gets me banned.
That doesn't change the fact you want to deport a British citizen born in Britain because of his name. 🤦🏻♂️
This is getting ridiculous.
I wanted to deport him because he committed a terrorist act not because of his name.
But as someone has just pointed out...there's not much left of him to deport.
This game of trying to twist peoples' words so you can shout racist at them for instead of coming up with a reasonable counter-argument is incredibly tedious now.
Denmark are doing it, it's really not that outrageous. And maybe those people killed yesterday would still be alive now (not that actual real people matter when there's a chance to score points off people you don't know on the internet).
I posted the below on the previous thread in response to you @DAlexander However I suspect the post is pointless. I couple of days ago I challenged you and @contrarian to actually come out with what you really think about stuff. The pair of you are blatantly holding back on the keyboard but I think most of us can clearly see what your views really are on stuff, but it would be good to really hear it. I suspect most Conservatives on this site would not want to be associated with your views, but we don't really know until you tell us.
___________________________________
Where do you want to draw the line; parents, grandparents, great grandparents .... Are you going to deport people back to Normandy?
If a person is British they are British. It is of no relevance what their parents are/were.
Just to give you an example of how silly that is I have a friend whose father is Yugoslavian. She was born here and has never been to the Balkans, can't speak the language, has a Mancunian accent and is 66. What would you do with her? She is about as Yugoslavian as I am.
Oh and her name is unpronounceable (a lack of vowels) so clearly not British.
The solution is simple - there is nothing we can do to unpick the horrendous mistake of allowing mass immigration from Islamic countries to Europe, so we will have to put up with the consequences of it.
Education, education, education. The more educated people are the more clearly they can see the myths of organised religion contain many falsehoods and that the fundamentalist versions that seek to impose their versions on the rest of the world are extremely dangerous.
Telling them their culture is bad? That's punching down. Very bad....
Eh? We have freedom of speech and freedom of religion. I can say what I want, if others want to criticise me for it that's fine. Everyone has freedom of religion, that's fine too. I support a society where people are educated and are therefore less likely to support fundamentalist beliefs whether religious or political of any flavour. Nothing to do with "them".
Sounds like France, where people are getting their heads cut off for saying it
This particular "shrieking harpy" (c. @Charles - tsk tsk, you're not in the City when you're on here....) is still plugging away here fighting for my daughter. This was issued by Tim Farron today:-
"MP presses Prime Minister to reverse ban on pubs being allowed to sell takeaway drinks
South Lakes MP Tim Farron has written to the Prime Minister urging him to scrap plans to ban pubs from serving alcoholic drinks to take away.
From Thursday, bars and pubs will still be permitted to sell takeaway food and drink but not alcohol.
Tim has been contacted by a number of local landlords who say that the ability to sell takeaway alcohol was a ‘lifeline’ for their business during the first lockdown, and they now fear for the future of their pubs.
There are also questions over the fairness of the new rules, with supermarkets still allowed to sell alcohol.
In his letter to Boris Johnson, Tim also echoed calls from the Campaign For Real Ale (CAMRA) for the Government to support local pubs by:
Continuing the furlough scheme for the beer and pubs sector into December and beyond Introducing a more sustainable round of grants for businesses to meet fixed costs during the four-week closure period, and those affected by restrictions in all tiers beyond it, in line with the first lockdown Compensating breweries for unsold beer and returned stock Extending the business rates holiday in 2021 Taking action on the cost of rents Introducing a lower rate of duty on draught beer, to help local pubs compete with cheap supermarket alcohol
Tim said: “This is a cruel and deeply unfair decision from the Government which will be devastating for our local independent pubs, who were banking on being able to sell takeaway alcohol to keep themselves ticking over during this second lockdown. “Why should it be one rule for the big supermarkets, and another for local community pubs who are on their knees?
“These measures will have no effect on tackling the virus but they will have a huge impact on the livelihoods of many people working in pubs and bars across Cumbria.
“For their sakes, the Government must think again.”"
Yes, it bloody well must. Will it? Probably not. But still worth trying.
So PB experts, should how much should we read into the on the day Florida vote tallies posted?
That right now, Florida is tighter than a duck's arse.
On current sparse county data I'm calling it for Trump. But on Betfair the money has been going on Biden who has moved from 2.44 to 2.36 in the last half hour.
Yes but for Biden to get the same % lead as Clinton did in 2016, either the unaffiliateds have to split to him at least 60/40 or voters registered as Republicans have to be unfaithful in large numbers. Could be.
In 2016 Clinton 553,000 Trump 261,000
By party turnoit DEM: 446,000 GOP: 194,000 UNA: 194,000
Illustrates my point. Assume the UNA split 50/50 and add 97,000 to each of the DEM and GOP numbers and compare with 2016.
Quite a jump with no change in GOP Now reading DEM: 459,000 GOP: 194,000 UNA: 209,000
Seems very strange - how can that be right?
13,000 Dem and zero (to nearest thousand) Rep since previous update.
Doesn't make any sense.
Did Trump organise an on day rally there and 13.000 MAGAs went there?
Vienna gunman, 20, who killed four and wounded 17 was released early from prison on terror charges because of his age, had wanted to join ISIS in Syria - but 'was deemed incapable of an attack'
FFS this sums up European handling of the problem.
Had they tried to keep him in jail I can imagine all sorts of human rights lawyers taking the government to the cleaners.
You want to defend western democratic values against islamism by ripping up the rule of law, its very foundation?
You my friend may want to think that through.
I could have guessed that you would have supported releasing this bloke to allow him to go on a gun rampage.
I don't want to rip up the rule of law, I want the law changed to stop people like this getting released for a very long time before being deported.
Again, stop putting words in my mouth.
If you want to change the law that's fine, but stop whinging about "human rights lawyers" who are simply ensuring that the Government operates within the law as it currently is.
Why is it wrong to complain about lawyers using every trick to pervert the system?
How is that any different to complaining about aggressive tax avoidance?
Are lawyers perverting the system within the law any better than accountants doing the same?
If someone is lawfully avoiding paying taxes by their accountants using every trick in the book - or if someone is lawfully avoiding deportation by their lawyers using every trick in the book - should governments, campaigners and voters just accept that? Or should they identify the problem and look to fix it by closing the loopholes?
Because this isn't about money, this is about people's liberty.
People like @DAlexander are very quick to criticise but very slow to produce any actual solutions.
If you want to dis-apply the Human Rights Act to "terrorism" suspects you then are into the territory of what constitutes a "terrorist" - is it simply at the whim of the Government? The court? Are you comfortable that your human rights could be similarly taken away, almost on an arbitrary basis?
You may be comfortable with that but people like @DAlexander never want to discuss the hard questions.
The bloke tried to join ISIS, I think it's a fairly reasonable conclusion to draw that he should be behind bars.
Forever?
And please note I am not defending this bloke. I'm not defending him whatsoever. I am defending "human rights lawyers".
Until at the very least he's deemed no longer a danger to the public.
The problem isn't lawyers who get involved when there is a clear case of the law not being implemented correctly, but that isn't what happens. There are a group of human rights lawyers who target these particular cases and use every legal loophole and trick in the book to get them out of jail.
Isn't that exactly what happened in this case? He was deemed no longer a danger to the public.
See you don't actually have a solution at all. You just like to whine about "lefty human rights lawyers".
He was released early because of his age.
My solution for Islamic terrorists is jail and then deportation at the end of the sentence.
What about the 7/7 perpetrators. Where in Leeds or Bucks would you have deported them to?
Well for example Mohammad Sidique Khan could be deported back to Pakistan.
Surprised you didn't manage to work out that Mohammad Sidique Khan isn't a native English name.
That's got to be worth a sin-bin surely?
Mohammad Sidique Khan is one of the 7/7 bombers. I thought I'd add that context before Topping gets me banned.
That doesn't change the fact you want to deport a British citizen born in Britain because of his name. 🤦🏻♂️
This is getting ridiculous.
I wanted to deport him because he committed a terrorist act not because of his name.
But as someone has just pointed out...there's not much left of him to deport.
This game of trying to twist peoples' words so you can shout racist at them for instead of coming up with a reasonable counter-argument is incredibly tedious now.
Denmark are doing it, it's really not that outrageous. And maybe those people killed yesterday would still be alive now (not that actual real people matter when there's a chance to score points off people you don't know on the internet).
I posted the below on the previous thread in response to you @DAlexander However I suspect the post is pointless. I couple of days ago I challenged you and @contrarian to actually come out with what you really think about stuff. The pair of you are blatantly holding back on the keyboard but I think most of us can clearly see what your views really are on stuff, but it would be good to really hear it. I suspect most Conservatives on this site would not want to be associated with your views, but we don't really know until you tell us.
___________________________________
Where do you want to draw the line; parents, grandparents, great grandparents .... Are you going to deport people back to Normandy?
If a person is British they are British. It is of no relevance what their parents are/were.
Just to give you an example of how silly that is I have a friend whose father is Yugoslavian. She was born here and has never been to the Balkans, can't speak the language, has a Mancunian accent and is 66. What would you do with her? She is about as Yugoslavian as I am.
Oh and her name is unpronounceable (a lack of vowels) so clearly not British.
The solution is simple - there is nothing we can do to unpick the horrendous mistake of allowing mass immigration from Islamic countries to Europe, so we will have to put up with the consequences of it.
Education, education, education. The more educated people are the more clearly they can see the myths of organised religion contain many falsehoods and that the fundamentalist versions that seek to impose their versions on the rest of the world are extremely dangerous.
Telling them their culture is bad? That's punching down. Very bad....
Eh? We have freedom of speech and freedom of religion. I can say what I want, if others want to criticise me for it that's fine. Everyone has freedom of religion, that's fine too. I support a society where people are educated and are therefore less likely to support fundamentalist beliefs whether religious or political of any flavour. Nothing to do with "them".
Sounds like France, where people are getting their heads cut off for saying it
Yes France has got the right idea, but needs to do more on education and equality for it to work more quickly.
Western Europe had much higher levels of terrorism in the 1970s and comparable levels to now ever since then.
The difference is 24 hr international news, social media and camera phones making the problem seem much more important than it really is.
Vienna gunman, 20, who killed four and wounded 17 was released early from prison on terror charges because of his age, had wanted to join ISIS in Syria - but 'was deemed incapable of an attack'
FFS this sums up European handling of the problem.
Had they tried to keep him in jail I can imagine all sorts of human rights lawyers taking the government to the cleaners.
You want to defend western democratic values against islamism by ripping up the rule of law, its very foundation?
You my friend may want to think that through.
I could have guessed that you would have supported releasing this bloke to allow him to go on a gun rampage.
I don't want to rip up the rule of law, I want the law changed to stop people like this getting released for a very long time before being deported.
Again, stop putting words in my mouth.
If you want to change the law that's fine, but stop whinging about "human rights lawyers" who are simply ensuring that the Government operates within the law as it currently is.
Why is it wrong to complain about lawyers using every trick to pervert the system?
How is that any different to complaining about aggressive tax avoidance?
Are lawyers perverting the system within the law any better than accountants doing the same?
If someone is lawfully avoiding paying taxes by their accountants using every trick in the book - or if someone is lawfully avoiding deportation by their lawyers using every trick in the book - should governments, campaigners and voters just accept that? Or should they identify the problem and look to fix it by closing the loopholes?
Because this isn't about money, this is about people's liberty.
People like @DAlexander are very quick to criticise but very slow to produce any actual solutions.
If you want to dis-apply the Human Rights Act to "terrorism" suspects you then are into the territory of what constitutes a "terrorist" - is it simply at the whim of the Government? The court? Are you comfortable that your human rights could be similarly taken away, almost on an arbitrary basis?
You may be comfortable with that but people like @DAlexander never want to discuss the hard questions.
The bloke tried to join ISIS, I think it's a fairly reasonable conclusion to draw that he should be behind bars.
Forever?
And please note I am not defending this bloke. I'm not defending him whatsoever. I am defending "human rights lawyers".
Until at the very least he's deemed no longer a danger to the public.
The problem isn't lawyers who get involved when there is a clear case of the law not being implemented correctly, but that isn't what happens. There are a group of human rights lawyers who target these particular cases and use every legal loophole and trick in the book to get them out of jail.
Isn't that exactly what happened in this case? He was deemed no longer a danger to the public.
See you don't actually have a solution at all. You just like to whine about "lefty human rights lawyers".
He was released early because of his age.
My solution for Islamic terrorists is jail and then deportation at the end of the sentence.
What about the 7/7 perpetrators. Where in Leeds or Bucks would you have deported them to?
Well for example Mohammad Sidique Khan could be deported back to Pakistan.
Surprised you didn't manage to work out that Mohammad Sidique Khan isn't a native English name.
That's got to be worth a sin-bin surely?
Mohammad Sidique Khan is one of the 7/7 bombers. I thought I'd add that context before Topping gets me banned.
That doesn't change the fact you want to deport a British citizen born in Britain because of his name. 🤦🏻♂️
This is getting ridiculous.
I wanted to deport him because he committed a terrorist act not because of his name.
But as someone has just pointed out...there's not much left of him to deport.
This game of trying to twist peoples' words so you can shout racist at them for instead of coming up with a reasonable counter-argument is incredibly tedious now.
Denmark are doing it, it's really not that outrageous. And maybe those people killed yesterday would still be alive now (not that actual real people matter when there's a chance to score points off people you don't know on the internet).
I posted the below on the previous thread in response to you @DAlexander However I suspect the post is pointless. I couple of days ago I challenged you and @contrarian to actually come out with what you really think about stuff. The pair of you are blatantly holding back on the keyboard but I think most of us can clearly see what your views really are on stuff, but it would be good to really hear it. I suspect most Conservatives on this site would not want to be associated with your views, but we don't really know until you tell us.
___________________________________
Where do you want to draw the line; parents, grandparents, great grandparents .... Are you going to deport people back to Normandy?
If a person is British they are British. It is of no relevance what their parents are/were.
Just to give you an example of how silly that is I have a friend whose father is Yugoslavian. She was born here and has never been to the Balkans, can't speak the language, has a Mancunian accent and is 66. What would you do with her? She is about as Yugoslavian as I am.
Oh and her name is unpronounceable (a lack of vowels) so clearly not British.
The solution is simple - there is nothing we can do to unpick the horrendous mistake of allowing mass immigration from Islamic countries to Europe, so we will have to put up with the consequences of it.
Whenever I see your name I think it says "Islam". But I guess it doesn't.
As only Corbyn’s luck would have it, he in fact spent the best part of an hour in the company of local activist Stephen Smith, who is currently also suspended by the Labour Party and under investigation after being accused of “antisemitism” on social media. Only days ago Smith shared a cartoon of the Israeli Prime Minister flying an IDF jet which was firing “defamation” missiles at Corbyn.
Now my understanding of the rules are you can leave a higher Tier to a lower Tier to go on holiday.l (but shouldn't make unnecessary journies and especially not to a lower tier in your normal day to day life...yes its dumb as )..but it is very clear you should spend that holiday with just your own household.
You do have a penchant for crap sites pedalling even crapper stories. In brief Corbyn was photographed with someone who had re-posted a cartoon of Netanyahu. Wow!!!!
No he spent an hour with, which is breaking covid rules, yet again....and loads of other selfies with him, which again is breaking the rules. Like his brother, he just doesn't care about sticking to the rules, he continually does it from illegal funeral gatherings, dinner parties with too many people, etc etc etc
Be fascinating what this crazed antisemite and Jezza talked about for an hour.
Yes but for Biden to get the same % lead as Clinton did in 2016, either the unaffiliateds have to split to him at least 60/40 or voters registered as Republicans have to be unfaithful in large numbers. Could be.
In 2016 Clinton 553,000 Trump 261,000
By party turnoit DEM: 446,000 GOP: 194,000 UNA: 194,000
Illustrates my point. Assume the UNA split 50/50 and add 97,000 to each of the DEM and GOP numbers and compare with 2016.
Quite a jump with no change in GOP Now reading DEM: 459,000 GOP: 194,000 UNA: 209,000
Seems very strange - how can that be right?
13,000 Dem and zero (to nearest thousand) Rep since previous update.
Doesn't make any sense.
Suspect various precincts 'dump' their votes in one go. So, perhaps, a very blue precinct has just reported.
This site will be in absolute turmoil if Trump wins, I can imagine posters needing counselling for PTSD.
Yep.
The site is made of a broad spectrum of political views, however Trump is so out there that there is almost a 100% consensus here in wanting him out and so yes posters here will be very upset if he wins.
However it is also a gambling site and nearly everyone who does gamble here is a savvy gambler so knows what they are doing and is looking at the evidence. If anything they are over cautious in being frightened they might be wrong and oh 2016! I don't think any are biased by their own political leaning. In fact I have complimented several in the past for betting against their own political instincts. To name just one @Casino_Royale is one who clearly can separate his heart from his brain.
If anything the few that think Trump will definitely win also seem to be Trump supporters and come up with interesting evidence for that conclusion. They may well turn out to be right though.
Where do you want to draw the line; parents, grandparents, great grandparents .... Are you going to deport people back to Normandy?
If a person is British they are British. It is of no relevance what their parents are/were.
Just to give you an example of how silly that is I have a friend whose father is Yugoslavian. She was born here and has never been to the Balkans, can't speak the language, has a Mancunian accent and is 66. What would you do with her? She is about as Yugoslavian as I am.
Oh and her name is unpronounceable (a lack of vowels) so clearly not British.
This is getting ridiculous.
What would I do with your friend? Nothing of course as she's not a terrorist!
I honestly wonder if people are actually capable of reading, I think on certain subjects it is clear that they are not.
Anyway I'm not going to comment on this anymore as it is cluttering up the site on election day (I tried to confine it to the other thread for this very reason, but of course Topping when he thought he found a gotcha went pasting it on this one too to try and shame me like all good lefties do).
I'm left wing but not not that left wing - although admittedly more so than many on here. Centre left. But I, and a significant number of Tory voters on here, Philip Thompson for example, found the phrase "native English" to be crass and clearly racist. If you had said "had a second nationality so should have been deported" I would have looked askance but given you the benefit of the doubt. But how you can possibly claim that "native English" is acceptable is beyond me.
Was shocked to discover @TOPPING is a lefty. Guess I should join the SWP forthwith.
So PB experts, should how much should we read into the on the day Florida vote tallies posted?
That right now, Florida is tighter than a duck's arse.
On current sparse county data I'm calling it for Trump. But on Betfair the money has been going on Biden who has moved from 2.44 to 2.36 in the last half hour.
What's the three-letter code for Miami Dade? I see @bigjohnowls is asking a similar question!
I've tried several and got nowhere - all the others I've tried have been "first three letters"
Edit - looks like it should be "dad" - but it doesn't load.
Based on patterns in the US and the UK, people who vote before and after work are more likely to be men, and those who vote during the day are more likely to be women. Add to this the fact that the Dems are much more likely to have voted early, and I would be staggered if the on the day pre-work election crowd is anything other than overwhelmingly Republican.
During the day, it'll be a bit more mixed as there will be more women voting, although this will be offset by a greater number of seniors to some extent. This evening there will be a flurry of people voting on their way home, who will (again) be more likely to be male and to be late voters.
Turnout is key.
Late voters are - as all the opinion polls tell us - overwhelmingly Republican. Before today started, we were at (give or take) 94% of 2016 turnout. The higher the on the day turnout, the better for Trump. My gut says the 'tipping point' where Trump becomes favourite overall is probably 25-28% of all votes being on the day (given he'll probably win these 3-1). Any less, and the early Biden lead is too much.
Yes but for Biden to get the same % lead as Clinton did in 2016, either the unaffiliateds have to split to him at least 60/40 or voters registered as Republicans have to be unfaithful in large numbers. Could be.
In 2016 Clinton 553,000 Trump 261,000
By party turnoit DEM: 446,000 GOP: 194,000 UNA: 194,000
Illustrates my point. Assume the UNA split 50/50 and add 97,000 to each of the DEM and GOP numbers and compare with 2016.
Quite a jump with no change in GOP Now reading DEM: 459,000 GOP: 194,000 UNA: 209,000
Seems very strange - how can that be right?
13,000 Dem and zero (to nearest thousand) Rep since previous update.
Doesn't make any sense.
Suspect various precincts 'dump' their votes in one go. So, perhaps, a very blue precinct has just reported.
I've been following that county since then and the Republican voters are going up very slightly faster than the Democrat ones, so if the Ds jumped up 13,000 in one go with no increase in R earlier then that is suspicious IMO.
Where do you want to draw the line; parents, grandparents, great grandparents .... Are you going to deport people back to Normandy?
If a person is British they are British. It is of no relevance what their parents are/were.
Just to give you an example of how silly that is I have a friend whose father is Yugoslavian. She was born here and has never been to the Balkans, can't speak the language, has a Mancunian accent and is 66. What would you do with her? She is about as Yugoslavian as I am.
Oh and her name is unpronounceable (a lack of vowels) so clearly not British.
This is getting ridiculous.
What would I do with your friend? Nothing of course as she's not a terrorist!
I honestly wonder if people are actually capable of reading, I think on certain subjects it is clear that they are not.
Anyway I'm not going to comment on this anymore as it is cluttering up the site on election day (I tried to confine it to the other thread for this very reason, but of course Topping when he thought he found a gotcha went pasting it on this one too to try and shame me like all good lefties do).
You are right to have wanted to confine it to the other thread and perhaps I shouldn't have ported it over here but on the substance of our exchange your own words provide all the evidence that people need to make an assessment of what is going on in your head.
Yes but for Biden to get the same % lead as Clinton did in 2016, either the unaffiliateds have to split to him at least 60/40 or voters registered as Republicans have to be unfaithful in large numbers. Could be.
In 2016 Clinton 553,000 Trump 261,000
By party turnoit DEM: 446,000 GOP: 194,000 UNA: 194,000
Illustrates my point. Assume the UNA split 50/50 and add 97,000 to each of the DEM and GOP numbers and compare with 2016.
Quite a jump with no change in GOP Now reading DEM: 459,000 GOP: 194,000 UNA: 209,000
Seems very strange - how can that be right?
13,000 Dem and zero (to nearest thousand) Rep since previous update.
Doesn't make any sense.
Suspect various precincts 'dump' their votes in one go. So, perhaps, a very blue precinct has just reported.
I've been following that county since then and the Republican voters are going up very slightly faster than the Democrat ones, so if the Ds jumped up 13,000 in one go with no increase in R earlier then that is suspicious IMO.
Don't some Florida counties phone their numbers in? It leads to (temporary) potential errors, but it also leads to big jumps from time to time.
Looked at Orange County - 59.8% Clinton, 35.8% Trump 2016
Actual votes 2016 - Clinton 329,894; Trump 195,216
Looking at the votes now, it is Dems 264,793; Reps 160,106, Unaffiliated 141,957
If you split unaffiliated 50/50, you get to Dems at just under 336K now and Reps at 231K. So Dems marginally ahead of 16 but Republicans significantly so
Also, so far, the Reps are leading the voting in day.
Obvious caveats around registration matching vote, splits of unaffiliated etc but gut feel more and more is that the Republicans will win Florida unless there have been less minute large crossovers or independents break heavily for Biden.
This particular "shrieking harpy" (c. @Charles - tsk tsk, you're not in the City when you're on here....) is still plugging away here fighting for my daughter. This was issued by Tim Farron today:-
"MP presses Prime Minister to reverse ban on pubs being allowed to sell takeaway drinks
South Lakes MP Tim Farron has written to the Prime Minister urging him to scrap plans to ban pubs from serving alcoholic drinks to take away.
From Thursday, bars and pubs will still be permitted to sell takeaway food and drink but not alcohol.
Tim has been contacted by a number of local landlords who say that the ability to sell takeaway alcohol was a ‘lifeline’ for their business during the first lockdown, and they now fear for the future of their pubs.
There are also questions over the fairness of the new rules, with supermarkets still allowed to sell alcohol.
In his letter to Boris Johnson, Tim also echoed calls from the Campaign For Real Ale (CAMRA) for the Government to support local pubs by:
Continuing the furlough scheme for the beer and pubs sector into December and beyond Introducing a more sustainable round of grants for businesses to meet fixed costs during the four-week closure period, and those affected by restrictions in all tiers beyond it, in line with the first lockdown Compensating breweries for unsold beer and returned stock Extending the business rates holiday in 2021 Taking action on the cost of rents Introducing a lower rate of duty on draught beer, to help local pubs compete with cheap supermarket alcohol
Tim said: “This is a cruel and deeply unfair decision from the Government which will be devastating for our local independent pubs, who were banking on being able to sell takeaway alcohol to keep themselves ticking over during this second lockdown. “Why should it be one rule for the big supermarkets, and another for local community pubs who are on their knees?
“These measures will have no effect on tackling the virus but they will have a huge impact on the livelihoods of many people working in pubs and bars across Cumbria.
“For their sakes, the Government must think again.”"
Yes, it bloody well must. Will it? Probably not. But still worth trying.
Yes seems very unfair. I have just had a pub lunch in Pooley Bridge before lockdown, the pub has had a hugely expensive renovation and only just re-opened, the bridge has just re-opened and the village has had a torrid time since the bridge collapsed. Now they face another closure got to feel sorry for the owners.
This site will be in absolute turmoil if Trump wins, I can imagine posters needing counselling for PTSD.
Yep.
The site is made of a broad spectrum of political views, however Trump is so out there that there is almost a 100% consensus here in wanting him out and so yes posters here will be very upset if he wins.
However it is also a gambling site and nearly everyone who does gamble here is a savvy gambler so knows what they are doing and is looking at the evidence. If anything they are over cautious in being frightened they might be wrong and oh 2016! I don't think any are biased by their own political leaning. In fact I have complimented several in the past for betting against their own political instincts. To name just one @Casino_Royale is one who clearly can separate his heart from his brain.
If anything the few that think Trump will definitely win also seem to be Trump supporters and come up with interesting evidence for that conclusion. They may well turn out to be right though.
Trump has to win every single one of the close states. If Biden beats him once, he will be hanged, and his posterity be made slaves.
Yes but for Biden to get the same % lead as Clinton did in 2016, either the unaffiliateds have to split to him at least 60/40 or voters registered as Republicans have to be unfaithful in large numbers. Could be.
In 2016 Clinton 553,000 Trump 261,000
By party turnoit DEM: 446,000 GOP: 194,000 UNA: 194,000
Illustrates my point. Assume the UNA split 50/50 and add 97,000 to each of the DEM and GOP numbers and compare with 2016.
Quite a jump with no change in GOP Now reading DEM: 459,000 GOP: 194,000 UNA: 209,000
Seems very strange - how can that be right?
13,000 Dem and zero (to nearest thousand) Rep since previous update.
Doesn't make any sense.
Suspect various precincts 'dump' their votes in one go. So, perhaps, a very blue precinct has just reported.
I've been following that county since then and the Republican voters are going up very slightly faster than the Democrat ones, so if the Ds jumped up 13,000 in one go with no increase in R earlier then that is suspicious IMO.
That trend is reversing now. Dems outpacing GOP atm. DEM: 462,000 GOP: 196,000 UNA: 210,000
Shit, my name Irish, I don't think that passes muster either.
Is it one of those Irish names that is spelt nothing like it sounds?
Because I'm all in favour of deporting people like that?
I had an employee called 'Kiva' but spelt 'Caoimhe'
That was a bloody nightmare.
That's only becausde your eddication isn't broad enough. You can pronounce French. What's wrong with the Gaelic?
As a rootless cosmopolitan I can speak seven languages, all of them have some sort of logic, including the French with their plethora of things like accent aigus, Gaelic has no logic.
Oh, why do you think that? Seriously?
Probably because I've tried to learn to speak Gaelic.
And yet I have this Gaelic grammar in the bookcase downstairs, so it certainly has its logic!
The pronunciation system is simple. Every letter has a fixed pronunciation apart from d and g. However if a h gets involved all bets are off.
This site will be in absolute turmoil if Trump wins, I can imagine posters needing counselling for PTSD.
Yep.
The site is made of a broad spectrum of political views, however Trump is so out there that there is almost a 100% consensus here in wanting him out and so yes posters here will be very upset if he wins.
However it is also a gambling site and nearly everyone who does gamble here is a savvy gambler so knows what they are doing and is looking at the evidence. If anything they are over cautious in being frightened they might be wrong and oh 2016! I don't think any are biased by their own political leaning. In fact I have complimented several in the past for betting against their own political instincts. To name just one @Casino_Royale is one who clearly can separate his heart from his brain.
If anything the few that think Trump will definitely win also seem to be Trump supporters and come up with interesting evidence for that conclusion. They may well turn out to be right though.
Trump has to win every single one of the close states. If Biden beats him once, he will be hanged, and his posterity be made slaves.
I have said I would vote Trump if I was in the US and i have said Trump will win. However, when it comes to betting on this, my heaviest bets have been on Trump being above EV votes of 200-250+.
This particular "shrieking harpy" (c. @Charles - tsk tsk, you're not in the City when you're on here....) is still plugging away here fighting for my daughter. This was issued by Tim Farron today:-
"MP presses Prime Minister to reverse ban on pubs being allowed to sell takeaway drinks
South Lakes MP Tim Farron has written to the Prime Minister urging him to scrap plans to ban pubs from serving alcoholic drinks to take away.
From Thursday, bars and pubs will still be permitted to sell takeaway food and drink but not alcohol.
Tim has been contacted by a number of local landlords who say that the ability to sell takeaway alcohol was a ‘lifeline’ for their business during the first lockdown, and they now fear for the future of their pubs.
There are also questions over the fairness of the new rules, with supermarkets still allowed to sell alcohol.
In his letter to Boris Johnson, Tim also echoed calls from the Campaign For Real Ale (CAMRA) for the Government to support local pubs by:
Continuing the furlough scheme for the beer and pubs sector into December and beyond Introducing a more sustainable round of grants for businesses to meet fixed costs during the four-week closure period, and those affected by restrictions in all tiers beyond it, in line with the first lockdown Compensating breweries for unsold beer and returned stock Extending the business rates holiday in 2021 Taking action on the cost of rents Introducing a lower rate of duty on draught beer, to help local pubs compete with cheap supermarket alcohol
Tim said: “This is a cruel and deeply unfair decision from the Government which will be devastating for our local independent pubs, who were banking on being able to sell takeaway alcohol to keep themselves ticking over during this second lockdown. “Why should it be one rule for the big supermarkets, and another for local community pubs who are on their knees?
“These measures will have no effect on tackling the virus but they will have a huge impact on the livelihoods of many people working in pubs and bars across Cumbria.
“For their sakes, the Government must think again.”"
Yes, it bloody well must. Will it? Probably not. But still worth trying.
Vienna gunman, 20, who killed four and wounded 17 was released early from prison on terror charges because of his age, had wanted to join ISIS in Syria - but 'was deemed incapable of an attack'
FFS this sums up European handling of the problem.
Had they tried to keep him in jail I can imagine all sorts of human rights lawyers taking the government to the cleaners.
You want to defend western democratic values against islamism by ripping up the rule of law, its very foundation?
You my friend may want to think that through.
I could have guessed that you would have supported releasing this bloke to allow him to go on a gun rampage.
I don't want to rip up the rule of law, I want the law changed to stop people like this getting released for a very long time before being deported.
Again, stop putting words in my mouth.
If you want to change the law that's fine, but stop whinging about "human rights lawyers" who are simply ensuring that the Government operates within the law as it currently is.
Why is it wrong to complain about lawyers using every trick to pervert the system?
How is that any different to complaining about aggressive tax avoidance?
Are lawyers perverting the system within the law any better than accountants doing the same?
If someone is lawfully avoiding paying taxes by their accountants using every trick in the book - or if someone is lawfully avoiding deportation by their lawyers using every trick in the book - should governments, campaigners and voters just accept that? Or should they identify the problem and look to fix it by closing the loopholes?
Because this isn't about money, this is about people's liberty.
People like @DAlexander are very quick to criticise but very slow to produce any actual solutions.
If you want to dis-apply the Human Rights Act to "terrorism" suspects you then are into the territory of what constitutes a "terrorist" - is it simply at the whim of the Government? The court? Are you comfortable that your human rights could be similarly taken away, almost on an arbitrary basis?
You may be comfortable with that but people like @DAlexander never want to discuss the hard questions.
The bloke tried to join ISIS, I think it's a fairly reasonable conclusion to draw that he should be behind bars.
Forever?
And please note I am not defending this bloke. I'm not defending him whatsoever. I am defending "human rights lawyers".
Until at the very least he's deemed no longer a danger to the public.
The problem isn't lawyers who get involved when there is a clear case of the law not being implemented correctly, but that isn't what happens. There are a group of human rights lawyers who target these particular cases and use every legal loophole and trick in the book to get them out of jail.
Isn't that exactly what happened in this case? He was deemed no longer a danger to the public.
See you don't actually have a solution at all. You just like to whine about "lefty human rights lawyers".
He was released early because of his age.
My solution for Islamic terrorists is jail and then deportation at the end of the sentence.
What about the 7/7 perpetrators. Where in Leeds or Bucks would you have deported them to?
Well for example Mohammad Sidique Khan could be deported back to Pakistan.
Surprised you didn't manage to work out that Mohammad Sidique Khan isn't a native English name.
That's got to be worth a sin-bin surely?
Mohammad Sidique Khan is one of the 7/7 bombers. I thought I'd add that context before Topping gets me banned.
That doesn't change the fact you want to deport a British citizen born in Britain because of his name. 🤦🏻♂️
This is getting ridiculous.
I wanted to deport him because he committed a terrorist act not because of his name.
But as someone has just pointed out...there's not much left of him to deport.
This game of trying to twist peoples' words so you can shout racist at them for instead of coming up with a reasonable counter-argument is incredibly tedious now.
Denmark are doing it, it's really not that outrageous. And maybe those people killed yesterday would still be alive now (not that actual real people matter when there's a chance to score points off people you don't know on the internet).
I posted the below on the previous thread in response to you @DAlexander However I suspect the post is pointless. I couple of days ago I challenged you and @contrarian to actually come out with what you really think about stuff. The pair of you are blatantly holding back on the keyboard but I think most of us can clearly see what your views really are on stuff, but it would be good to really hear it. I suspect most Conservatives on this site would not want to be associated with your views, but we don't really know until you tell us.
___________________________________
Where do you want to draw the line; parents, grandparents, great grandparents .... Are you going to deport people back to Normandy?
If a person is British they are British. It is of no relevance what their parents are/were.
Just to give you an example of how silly that is I have a friend whose father is Yugoslavian. She was born here and has never been to the Balkans, can't speak the language, has a Mancunian accent and is 66. What would you do with her? She is about as Yugoslavian as I am.
Oh and her name is unpronounceable (a lack of vowels) so clearly not British.
The solution is simple - there is nothing we can do to unpick the horrendous mistake of allowing mass immigration from Islamic countries to Europe, so we will have to put up with the consequences of it.
Education, education, education. The more educated people are the more clearly they can see the myths of organised religion contain many falsehoods and that the fundamentalist versions that seek to impose their versions on the rest of the world are extremely dangerous.
Telling them their culture is bad? That's punching down. Very bad....
Eh? We have freedom of speech and freedom of religion. I can say what I want, if others want to criticise me for it that's fine. Everyone has freedom of religion, that's fine too. I support a society where people are educated and are therefore less likely to support fundamentalist beliefs whether religious or political of any flavour. Nothing to do with "them".
Sounds like France, where people are getting their heads cut off for saying it
Yes France has got the right idea, but needs to do more on education and equality for it to work more quickly.
Western Europe had much higher levels of terrorism in the 1970s and comparable levels to now ever since then.
The difference is 24 hr international news, social media and camera phones making the problem seem much more important than it really is.
What were the terrorist incidents in the 70s? Save me looking it up
So PB experts, should how much should we read into the on the day Florida vote tallies posted?
That right now, Florida is tighter than a duck's arse.
On current sparse county data I'm calling it for Trump. But on Betfair the money has been going on Biden who has moved from 2.44 to 2.36 in the last half hour.
I hate to be rude but you're crazy. Election day voting trends often wax and wane from hour to hour, and we still don't really know how the early vote broke down nor how big the election day vote will be or how it will break down. Inds often don't split evenly, and party registration can be misleading.
We're nowhere near calling anything.
You're right. "Call" is definitely the wrong Trumpite word!
My feeling about Florida has moved slightly towards Trump and has affected my betting on Florida. It is no more than that.
I've already made the point that it's critcally dependent on how INDs split and on whether registered Republicans stay faithful. I'm just sniffing the air. "Call" is definitely the wrong word. I got over-excited. It is going to be a long day (and night (and day)).
Yes but for Biden to get the same % lead as Clinton did in 2016, either the unaffiliateds have to split to him at least 60/40 or voters registered as Republicans have to be unfaithful in large numbers. Could be.
In 2016 Clinton 553,000 Trump 261,000
By party turnoit DEM: 446,000 GOP: 194,000 UNA: 194,000
Illustrates my point. Assume the UNA split 50/50 and add 97,000 to each of the DEM and GOP numbers and compare with 2016.
Quite a jump with no change in GOP Now reading DEM: 459,000 GOP: 194,000 UNA: 209,000
Seems very strange - how can that be right?
13,000 Dem and zero (to nearest thousand) Rep since previous update.
Doesn't make any sense.
Suspect various precincts 'dump' their votes in one go. So, perhaps, a very blue precinct has just reported.
I've been following that county since then and the Republican voters are going up very slightly faster than the Democrat ones, so if the Ds jumped up 13,000 in one go with no increase in R earlier then that is suspicious IMO.
That trend is reversing now. Dems outpacing GOP atm. DEM: 462,000 GOP: 196,000 UNA: 210,000
Vienna gunman, 20, who killed four and wounded 17 was released early from prison on terror charges because of his age, had wanted to join ISIS in Syria - but 'was deemed incapable of an attack'
FFS this sums up European handling of the problem.
Had they tried to keep him in jail I can imagine all sorts of human rights lawyers taking the government to the cleaners.
You want to defend western democratic values against islamism by ripping up the rule of law, its very foundation?
You my friend may want to think that through.
I could have guessed that you would have supported releasing this bloke to allow him to go on a gun rampage.
I don't want to rip up the rule of law, I want the law changed to stop people like this getting released for a very long time before being deported.
Again, stop putting words in my mouth.
If you want to change the law that's fine, but stop whinging about "human rights lawyers" who are simply ensuring that the Government operates within the law as it currently is.
Why is it wrong to complain about lawyers using every trick to pervert the system?
How is that any different to complaining about aggressive tax avoidance?
Are lawyers perverting the system within the law any better than accountants doing the same?
If someone is lawfully avoiding paying taxes by their accountants using every trick in the book - or if someone is lawfully avoiding deportation by their lawyers using every trick in the book - should governments, campaigners and voters just accept that? Or should they identify the problem and look to fix it by closing the loopholes?
Because this isn't about money, this is about people's liberty.
People like @DAlexander are very quick to criticise but very slow to produce any actual solutions.
If you want to dis-apply the Human Rights Act to "terrorism" suspects you then are into the territory of what constitutes a "terrorist" - is it simply at the whim of the Government? The court? Are you comfortable that your human rights could be similarly taken away, almost on an arbitrary basis?
You may be comfortable with that but people like @DAlexander never want to discuss the hard questions.
The bloke tried to join ISIS, I think it's a fairly reasonable conclusion to draw that he should be behind bars.
Forever?
And please note I am not defending this bloke. I'm not defending him whatsoever. I am defending "human rights lawyers".
Until at the very least he's deemed no longer a danger to the public.
The problem isn't lawyers who get involved when there is a clear case of the law not being implemented correctly, but that isn't what happens. There are a group of human rights lawyers who target these particular cases and use every legal loophole and trick in the book to get them out of jail.
Isn't that exactly what happened in this case? He was deemed no longer a danger to the public.
See you don't actually have a solution at all. You just like to whine about "lefty human rights lawyers".
He was released early because of his age.
My solution for Islamic terrorists is jail and then deportation at the end of the sentence.
What about the 7/7 perpetrators. Where in Leeds or Bucks would you have deported them to?
Well for example Mohammad Sidique Khan could be deported back to Pakistan.
Surprised you didn't manage to work out that Mohammad Sidique Khan isn't a native English name.
That's got to be worth a sin-bin surely?
Mohammad Sidique Khan is one of the 7/7 bombers. I thought I'd add that context before Topping gets me banned.
That doesn't change the fact you want to deport a British citizen born in Britain because of his name. 🤦🏻♂️
This is getting ridiculous.
I wanted to deport him because he committed a terrorist act not because of his name.
But as someone has just pointed out...there's not much left of him to deport.
This game of trying to twist peoples' words so you can shout racist at them for instead of coming up with a reasonable counter-argument is incredibly tedious now.
Denmark are doing it, it's really not that outrageous. And maybe those people killed yesterday would still be alive now (not that actual real people matter when there's a chance to score points off people you don't know on the internet).
I posted the below on the previous thread in response to you @DAlexander However I suspect the post is pointless. I couple of days ago I challenged you and @contrarian to actually come out with what you really think about stuff. The pair of you are blatantly holding back on the keyboard but I think most of us can clearly see what your views really are on stuff, but it would be good to really hear it. I suspect most Conservatives on this site would not want to be associated with your views, but we don't really know until you tell us.
___________________________________
Where do you want to draw the line; parents, grandparents, great grandparents .... Are you going to deport people back to Normandy?
If a person is British they are British. It is of no relevance what their parents are/were.
Just to give you an example of how silly that is I have a friend whose father is Yugoslavian. She was born here and has never been to the Balkans, can't speak the language, has a Mancunian accent and is 66. What would you do with her? She is about as Yugoslavian as I am.
Oh and her name is unpronounceable (a lack of vowels) so clearly not British.
The solution is simple - there is nothing we can do to unpick the horrendous mistake of allowing mass immigration from Islamic countries to Europe, so we will have to put up with the consequences of it.
Education, education, education. The more educated people are the more clearly they can see the myths of organised religion contain many falsehoods and that the fundamentalist versions that seek to impose their versions on the rest of the world are extremely dangerous.
Telling them their culture is bad? That's punching down. Very bad....
Eh? We have freedom of speech and freedom of religion. I can say what I want, if others want to criticise me for it that's fine. Everyone has freedom of religion, that's fine too. I support a society where people are educated and are therefore less likely to support fundamentalist beliefs whether religious or political of any flavour. Nothing to do with "them".
Sounds like France, where people are getting their heads cut off for saying it
Yes France has got the right idea, but needs to do more on education and equality for it to work more quickly.
Western Europe had much higher levels of terrorism in the 1970s and comparable levels to now ever since then.
The difference is 24 hr international news, social media and camera phones making the problem seem much more important than it really is.
What were the terrorist incidents in the 70s? Save me looking it up
German Red Army Faction (Baader-Meinhof Gang), and whatever the Italian brigades were
Where do you want to draw the line; parents, grandparents, great grandparents .... Are you going to deport people back to Normandy?
If a person is British they are British. It is of no relevance what their parents are/were.
Just to give you an example of how silly that is I have a friend whose father is Yugoslavian. She was born here and has never been to the Balkans, can't speak the language, has a Mancunian accent and is 66. What would you do with her? She is about as Yugoslavian as I am.
Oh and her name is unpronounceable (a lack of vowels) so clearly not British.
This is getting ridiculous.
What would I do with your friend? Nothing of course as she's not a terrorist!
I honestly wonder if people are actually capable of reading, I think on certain subjects it is clear that they are not.
Anyway I'm not going to comment on this anymore as it is cluttering up the site on election day (I tried to confine it to the other thread for this very reason, but of course Topping when he thought he found a gotcha went pasting it on this one too to try and shame me like all good lefties do).
I'm left wing but not not that left wing - although admittedly more so than many on here. Centre left. But I, and a significant number of Tory voters on here, Philip Thompson for example, found the phrase "native English" to be crass and clearly racist. If you had said "had a second nationality so should have been deported" I would have looked askance but given you the benefit of the doubt. But how you can possibly claim that "native English" is acceptable is beyond me.
Was shocked to discover @TOPPING is a lefty. Guess I should join the SWP forthwith.
John Sessions has died. A great mimic and a great shame
That's a shame indeed, I always enjoyed him on Whose Line is it Anyway
Always thought Stella Street would have been very highly regarded had it come out today rather than up against the higher quality sitcoms of the early noughties.
Best thing to do with these terrorists is lock them up into isolation, throw away the key and then forget they exist. Three meals a day and no right to appeal.
I wonder what will happen to the lincoln project after Trump loses?
I imagine they'll want to take back the GOP.
Betting tip. If it only takes GOP eight years to recover from this nadir, Liz Cheney stands a chance to be next Republican President. What odds do you have today?
No wonder Moscow Mitch been looking so uncomfortable the last few weeks, he’s the guy who has to press the button under the table summoning the praetorian guard.
"Betting tip. If it only takes GOP eight years to recover from this nadir, Liz Cheney stands a chance to be next Republican President.
Just think, assuming PB.com is still going strong in 8 years time, and your tip above was to prove to be a winner, your name would go down in history, along with that of the site's founder, as one of the greatest in its distinguished history.
Best thing to do with these terrorists is lock them up into isolation, throw away the key and then forget they exist. Three meals a day and no right to appeal.
Ascension Island...
Canvey Island.
Got to be against their human rights to send them somewhere so horrible.
Vienna gunman, 20, who killed four and wounded 17 was released early from prison on terror charges because of his age, had wanted to join ISIS in Syria - but 'was deemed incapable of an attack'
FFS this sums up European handling of the problem.
Had they tried to keep him in jail I can imagine all sorts of human rights lawyers taking the government to the cleaners.
You want to defend western democratic values against islamism by ripping up the rule of law, its very foundation?
You my friend may want to think that through.
I could have guessed that you would have supported releasing this bloke to allow him to go on a gun rampage.
I don't want to rip up the rule of law, I want the law changed to stop people like this getting released for a very long time before being deported.
Again, stop putting words in my mouth.
If you want to change the law that's fine, but stop whinging about "human rights lawyers" who are simply ensuring that the Government operates within the law as it currently is.
Why is it wrong to complain about lawyers using every trick to pervert the system?
How is that any different to complaining about aggressive tax avoidance?
Are lawyers perverting the system within the law any better than accountants doing the same?
If someone is lawfully avoiding paying taxes by their accountants using every trick in the book - or if someone is lawfully avoiding deportation by their lawyers using every trick in the book - should governments, campaigners and voters just accept that? Or should they identify the problem and look to fix it by closing the loopholes?
Because this isn't about money, this is about people's liberty.
People like @DAlexander are very quick to criticise but very slow to produce any actual solutions.
If you want to dis-apply the Human Rights Act to "terrorism" suspects you then are into the territory of what constitutes a "terrorist" - is it simply at the whim of the Government? The court? Are you comfortable that your human rights could be similarly taken away, almost on an arbitrary basis?
You may be comfortable with that but people like @DAlexander never want to discuss the hard questions.
The bloke tried to join ISIS, I think it's a fairly reasonable conclusion to draw that he should be behind bars.
Forever?
And please note I am not defending this bloke. I'm not defending him whatsoever. I am defending "human rights lawyers".
Until at the very least he's deemed no longer a danger to the public.
The problem isn't lawyers who get involved when there is a clear case of the law not being implemented correctly, but that isn't what happens. There are a group of human rights lawyers who target these particular cases and use every legal loophole and trick in the book to get them out of jail.
Isn't that exactly what happened in this case? He was deemed no longer a danger to the public.
See you don't actually have a solution at all. You just like to whine about "lefty human rights lawyers".
He was released early because of his age.
My solution for Islamic terrorists is jail and then deportation at the end of the sentence.
What about the 7/7 perpetrators. Where in Leeds or Bucks would you have deported them to?
Well for example Mohammad Sidique Khan could be deported back to Pakistan.
Surprised you didn't manage to work out that Mohammad Sidique Khan isn't a native English name.
That's got to be worth a sin-bin surely?
Mohammad Sidique Khan is one of the 7/7 bombers. I thought I'd add that context before Topping gets me banned.
That doesn't change the fact you want to deport a British citizen born in Britain because of his name. 🤦🏻♂️
This is getting ridiculous.
I wanted to deport him because he committed a terrorist act not because of his name.
But as someone has just pointed out...there's not much left of him to deport.
This game of trying to twist peoples' words so you can shout racist at them for instead of coming up with a reasonable counter-argument is incredibly tedious now.
Denmark are doing it, it's really not that outrageous. And maybe those people killed yesterday would still be alive now (not that actual real people matter when there's a chance to score points off people you don't know on the internet).
I posted the below on the previous thread in response to you @DAlexander However I suspect the post is pointless. I couple of days ago I challenged you and @contrarian to actually come out with what you really think about stuff. The pair of you are blatantly holding back on the keyboard but I think most of us can clearly see what your views really are on stuff, but it would be good to really hear it. I suspect most Conservatives on this site would not want to be associated with your views, but we don't really know until you tell us.
___________________________________
Where do you want to draw the line; parents, grandparents, great grandparents .... Are you going to deport people back to Normandy?
If a person is British they are British. It is of no relevance what their parents are/were.
Just to give you an example of how silly that is I have a friend whose father is Yugoslavian. She was born here and has never been to the Balkans, can't speak the language, has a Mancunian accent and is 66. What would you do with her? She is about as Yugoslavian as I am.
Oh and her name is unpronounceable (a lack of vowels) so clearly not British.
The solution is simple - there is nothing we can do to unpick the horrendous mistake of allowing mass immigration from Islamic countries to Europe, so we will have to put up with the consequences of it.
Education, education, education. The more educated people are the more clearly they can see the myths of organised religion contain many falsehoods and that the fundamentalist versions that seek to impose their versions on the rest of the world are extremely dangerous.
Telling them their culture is bad? That's punching down. Very bad....
Eh? We have freedom of speech and freedom of religion. I can say what I want, if others want to criticise me for it that's fine. Everyone has freedom of religion, that's fine too. I support a society where people are educated and are therefore less likely to support fundamentalist beliefs whether religious or political of any flavour. Nothing to do with "them".
Sounds like France, where people are getting their heads cut off for saying it
Yes France has got the right idea, but needs to do more on education and equality for it to work more quickly.
Western Europe had much higher levels of terrorism in the 1970s and comparable levels to now ever since then.
The difference is 24 hr international news, social media and camera phones making the problem seem much more important than it really is.
What were the terrorist incidents in the 70s? Save me looking it up
N Ireland, ETA, Italian years of lead, Israel-Palestinian spillover with Munich and bringing down a Swiss plane the biggest ones I think.
Vienna gunman, 20, who killed four and wounded 17 was released early from prison on terror charges because of his age, had wanted to join ISIS in Syria - but 'was deemed incapable of an attack'
FFS this sums up European handling of the problem.
Had they tried to keep him in jail I can imagine all sorts of human rights lawyers taking the government to the cleaners.
You want to defend western democratic values against islamism by ripping up the rule of law, its very foundation?
You my friend may want to think that through.
I could have guessed that you would have supported releasing this bloke to allow him to go on a gun rampage.
I don't want to rip up the rule of law, I want the law changed to stop people like this getting released for a very long time before being deported.
Again, stop putting words in my mouth.
If you want to change the law that's fine, but stop whinging about "human rights lawyers" who are simply ensuring that the Government operates within the law as it currently is.
Why is it wrong to complain about lawyers using every trick to pervert the system?
How is that any different to complaining about aggressive tax avoidance?
Are lawyers perverting the system within the law any better than accountants doing the same?
If someone is lawfully avoiding paying taxes by their accountants using every trick in the book - or if someone is lawfully avoiding deportation by their lawyers using every trick in the book - should governments, campaigners and voters just accept that? Or should they identify the problem and look to fix it by closing the loopholes?
Because this isn't about money, this is about people's liberty.
People like @DAlexander are very quick to criticise but very slow to produce any actual solutions.
If you want to dis-apply the Human Rights Act to "terrorism" suspects you then are into the territory of what constitutes a "terrorist" - is it simply at the whim of the Government? The court? Are you comfortable that your human rights could be similarly taken away, almost on an arbitrary basis?
You may be comfortable with that but people like @DAlexander never want to discuss the hard questions.
The bloke tried to join ISIS, I think it's a fairly reasonable conclusion to draw that he should be behind bars.
Forever?
And please note I am not defending this bloke. I'm not defending him whatsoever. I am defending "human rights lawyers".
Until at the very least he's deemed no longer a danger to the public.
The problem isn't lawyers who get involved when there is a clear case of the law not being implemented correctly, but that isn't what happens. There are a group of human rights lawyers who target these particular cases and use every legal loophole and trick in the book to get them out of jail.
Isn't that exactly what happened in this case? He was deemed no longer a danger to the public.
See you don't actually have a solution at all. You just like to whine about "lefty human rights lawyers".
He was released early because of his age.
My solution for Islamic terrorists is jail and then deportation at the end of the sentence.
What about the 7/7 perpetrators. Where in Leeds or Bucks would you have deported them to?
Well for example Mohammad Sidique Khan could be deported back to Pakistan.
Surprised you didn't manage to work out that Mohammad Sidique Khan isn't a native English name.
That's got to be worth a sin-bin surely?
Mohammad Sidique Khan is one of the 7/7 bombers. I thought I'd add that context before Topping gets me banned.
That doesn't change the fact you want to deport a British citizen born in Britain because of his name. 🤦🏻♂️
This is getting ridiculous.
I wanted to deport him because he committed a terrorist act not because of his name.
But as someone has just pointed out...there's not much left of him to deport.
This game of trying to twist peoples' words so you can shout racist at them for instead of coming up with a reasonable counter-argument is incredibly tedious now.
Denmark are doing it, it's really not that outrageous. And maybe those people killed yesterday would still be alive now (not that actual real people matter when there's a chance to score points off people you don't know on the internet).
I posted the below on the previous thread in response to you @DAlexander However I suspect the post is pointless. I couple of days ago I challenged you and @contrarian to actually come out with what you really think about stuff. The pair of you are blatantly holding back on the keyboard but I think most of us can clearly see what your views really are on stuff, but it would be good to really hear it. I suspect most Conservatives on this site would not want to be associated with your views, but we don't really know until you tell us.
___________________________________
Where do you want to draw the line; parents, grandparents, great grandparents .... Are you going to deport people back to Normandy?
If a person is British they are British. It is of no relevance what their parents are/were.
Just to give you an example of how silly that is I have a friend whose father is Yugoslavian. She was born here and has never been to the Balkans, can't speak the language, has a Mancunian accent and is 66. What would you do with her? She is about as Yugoslavian as I am.
Oh and her name is unpronounceable (a lack of vowels) so clearly not British.
The solution is simple - there is nothing we can do to unpick the horrendous mistake of allowing mass immigration from Islamic countries to Europe, so we will have to put up with the consequences of it.
Education, education, education. The more educated people are the more clearly they can see the myths of organised religion contain many falsehoods and that the fundamentalist versions that seek to impose their versions on the rest of the world are extremely dangerous.
Telling them their culture is bad? That's punching down. Very bad....
Eh? We have freedom of speech and freedom of religion. I can say what I want, if others want to criticise me for it that's fine. Everyone has freedom of religion, that's fine too. I support a society where people are educated and are therefore less likely to support fundamentalist beliefs whether religious or political of any flavour. Nothing to do with "them".
Sounds like France, where people are getting their heads cut off for saying it
Yes France has got the right idea, but needs to do more on education and equality for it to work more quickly.
Western Europe had much higher levels of terrorism in the 1970s and comparable levels to now ever since then.
The difference is 24 hr international news, social media and camera phones making the problem seem much more important than it really is.
What were the terrorist incidents in the 70s? Save me looking it up
German Red Army Faction (Baader-Meinhof Gang), and whatever the Italian brigades were
And the Italian Facists.... Ordine Nero, had to look that up. ETA. A wee spot of bother in Northern Ireland. A whole smorgasbord of Palestinian and Iraniann terror cells.
Trump out to 3 on BF but Dems out to 4 to take Texas
The value bet is, rather than bet on Trump, to bet on next president losing popular vote which always runs a smidge ahead of Trump's number. Because that is exactly what is going to happen.
As only Corbyn’s luck would have it, he in fact spent the best part of an hour in the company of local activist Stephen Smith, who is currently also suspended by the Labour Party and under investigation after being accused of “antisemitism” on social media. Only days ago Smith shared a cartoon of the Israeli Prime Minister flying an IDF jet which was firing “defamation” missiles at Corbyn.
Now my understanding of the rules are you can leave a higher Tier to a lower Tier to go on holiday.l (but shouldn't make unnecessary journies and especially not to a lower tier in your normal day to day life...yes its dumb as )..but it is very clear you should spend that holiday with just your own household.
You do have a penchant for crap sites pedalling even crapper stories. In brief Corbyn was photographed with someone who had re-posted a cartoon of Netanyahu. Wow!!!!
No he spent an hour with, which is breaking covid rules, yet again....and loads of other selfies with him, which again is breaking the rules. Like his brother, he just doesn't care about sticking to the rules, he continually does it from illegal funeral gatherings, dinner parties with too many people, etc etc etc
Be fascinating what this crazed antisemite and Jezza talked about for an hour.
Jezza was out every weekend freezing his bollocks off demonstating with the ANL. Meanwhile fat turds like Staines and Johnson were either ripping restaurants apart with the Bullingdon boys or doing fuck all. Its time for these armchair warriors to STFU. I say this as someone who believes he was the worst Labour leader for years. But he is not and never has been a racist so now he's out its time to leave him alone.
Comments
By my calculation, I get to 66.7% Trump
https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1323632242711810048?s=20
Best thing to do with these terrorists is lock them up into isolation, throw away the key and then forget they exist. Three meals a day and no right to appeal.
You're affecting to be surprised that people who post to a site with "political" in the name care about politics.
Referencing PTSD is lame and ignorant.
13,000 Dem and zero (to nearest thousand) Rep since previous update.
Doesn't make any sense.
https://twitter.com/TheScotsman/status/1323639594236235776?s=20
Biden is going to win this and by a clear margin. Not because I think so, or because I wish so, but because all the data cumulatively does.
Rebuilding a decent party for conservatives in the US is going to be a large task.
‘We Love What They Did’: Florida Sen. Marco Rubio Supports Pro-Trump Caravan That Swarmed Biden Bus
https://miami.cbslocal.com/2020/11/03/florida-senator-marco-rubio-supports-pro-trump-caravan-swarmed-biden-bus-texas/
Edit - looks like it should be "dad" - but it doesn't load.
http://entnemdept.ufl.edu/teneb/florida_checklist_map.htm
We're nowhere near calling anything.
Election Project has 446,422 mail ballots returned = 76.0% return rate
Live County site has 467,570 mail ballots returned
Implies updated mail ballot return rate now 79.6%
This particular "shrieking harpy" (c. @Charles - tsk tsk, you're not in the City when you're on here....) is still plugging away here fighting for my daughter. This was issued by Tim Farron today:-
"MP presses Prime Minister to reverse ban on pubs being allowed to sell takeaway drinks
South Lakes MP Tim Farron has written to the Prime Minister urging him to scrap plans to ban pubs from serving alcoholic drinks to take away.
From Thursday, bars and pubs will still be permitted to sell takeaway food and drink but not alcohol.
Tim has been contacted by a number of local landlords who say that the ability to sell takeaway alcohol was a ‘lifeline’ for their business during the first lockdown, and they now fear for the future of their pubs.
There are also questions over the fairness of the new rules, with supermarkets still allowed to sell alcohol.
In his letter to Boris Johnson, Tim also echoed calls from the Campaign For Real Ale (CAMRA) for the Government to support local pubs by:
Continuing the furlough scheme for the beer and pubs sector into December and beyond
Introducing a more sustainable round of grants for businesses to meet fixed costs during the four-week closure period, and those affected by restrictions in all tiers beyond it, in line with the first lockdown
Compensating breweries for unsold beer and returned stock
Extending the business rates holiday in 2021
Taking action on the cost of rents
Introducing a lower rate of duty on draught beer, to help local pubs compete with cheap supermarket alcohol
Tim said: “This is a cruel and deeply unfair decision from the Government which will be devastating for our local independent pubs, who were banking on being able to sell takeaway alcohol to keep themselves ticking over during this second lockdown.
“Why should it be one rule for the big supermarkets, and another for local community pubs who are on their knees?
“These measures will have no effect on tackling the virus but they will have a huge impact on the livelihoods of many people working in pubs and bars across Cumbria.
“For their sakes, the Government must think again.”"
Yes, it bloody well must. Will it? Probably not. But still worth trying.
Western Europe had much higher levels of terrorism in the 1970s and comparable levels to now ever since then.
The difference is 24 hr international news, social media and camera phones making the problem seem much more important than it really is.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.170366129
Be fascinating what this crazed antisemite and Jezza talked about for an hour.
However it is also a gambling site and nearly everyone who does gamble here is a savvy gambler so knows what they are doing and is looking at the evidence. If anything they are over cautious in being frightened they might be wrong and oh 2016! I don't think any are biased by their own political leaning. In fact I have complimented several in the past for betting against their own political instincts. To name just one @Casino_Royale is one who clearly can separate his heart from his brain.
If anything the few that think Trump will definitely win also seem to be Trump supporters and come up with interesting evidence for that conclusion. They may well turn out to be right though.
Guess I should join the SWP forthwith.
Based on patterns in the US and the UK, people who vote before and after work are more likely to be men, and those who vote during the day are more likely to be women. Add to this the fact that the Dems are much more likely to have voted early, and I would be staggered if the on the day pre-work election crowd is anything other than overwhelmingly Republican.
During the day, it'll be a bit more mixed as there will be more women voting, although this will be offset by a greater number of seniors to some extent. This evening there will be a flurry of people voting on their way home, who will (again) be more likely to be male and to be late voters.
Turnout is key.
Late voters are - as all the opinion polls tell us - overwhelmingly Republican. Before today started, we were at (give or take) 94% of 2016 turnout. The higher the on the day turnout, the better for Trump. My gut says the 'tipping point' where Trump becomes favourite overall is probably 25-28% of all votes being on the day (given he'll probably win these 3-1). Any less, and the early Biden lead is too much.
Looked at Orange County - 59.8% Clinton, 35.8% Trump 2016
Actual votes 2016 - Clinton 329,894; Trump 195,216
Looking at the votes now, it is Dems 264,793; Reps 160,106, Unaffiliated 141,957
If you split unaffiliated 50/50, you get to Dems at just under 336K now and Reps at 231K. So Dems marginally ahead of 16 but Republicans significantly so
Also, so far, the Reps are leading the voting in day.
Obvious caveats around registration matching vote, splits of unaffiliated etc but gut feel more and more is that the Republicans will win Florida unless there have been less minute large crossovers or independents break heavily for Biden.
Now they face another closure got to feel sorry for the owners.
DEM: 462,000
GOP: 196,000
UNA: 210,000
Lagging Broward and Miami Dade
My feeling about Florida has moved slightly towards Trump and has affected my betting on Florida. It is no more than that.
I've already made the point that it's critcally dependent on how INDs split and on whether registered Republicans stay faithful. I'm just sniffing the air. "Call" is definitely the wrong word. I got over-excited. It is going to be a long day (and night (and day)).
(but not the ghastly ones, obvs)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-54798679
Just think, assuming PB.com is still going strong in 8 years time, and your tip above was to prove to be a winner, your name would go down in history, along with that of the site's founder, as one of the greatest in its distinguished history.