politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » With Zac continuing to trail some Tory voices are questioni
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » With Zac continuing to trail some Tory voices are questioning the Crosby-inspired campaign
Pick your metaphor. Canine or feline. The folklore surrounding Tory election guru Lynton Crosby has both “dead cats” and “dog whistles”.
Comments
-
Boris ain't pulling his punches either.0
-
As for Sir Lynton and Canada
http://m.smh.com.au/world/lynton-cosby-bemused-at-reports-of-involvement-in-canadian-elections-20151022-gkfp35.html0 -
Data for Channel 4 What Muslims Think docu
http://www.icmunlimited.com/media-centre/polls/icm-unlimited-survey-for-the-channel-4-programme-what-muslims-really-think0 -
I don't really think is true. Goldsmith is not a strong enough candidate to win on his own virtues. He had to go negative. It may not work (almost certainly won't) but it was the only chance he had.0
-
Don on Zac, seriously?0
-
Thank feck I don't live in London.0
-
As impartial as any BBC employee.Plato_Says said:Don on Zac, seriously?
0 -
I wonder if Boris is regretting not standing again.0
-
The problem with a nice-guy-Zac campaign is that it wouldn't fire up right-leaning voters to turn out. All it would do is make Labour supporters sympathise with the loser while they voted for Sadiq. People who see Zac as "not that bad, considering he's a Tory" aren't actually going to vote for him.0
-
It reminds one of the unflattering comparison made at the time between Bill Clinton and Bob Dole.0
-
Have we reached the point that commentary can only be provided on political figures by members of their own party? Or does this restriction only apply to Conservative politicians?Plato_Says said:Don on Zac, seriously?
0 -
Are you saying that Labour people shouldn't write about Conservatives? And vice versa presumably?TCPoliticalBetting said:0 -
Sweden's national co-ordinator against extremism has criticized Malmö for not doing enough to stop jihadism, after a 23-year-old from the city was arrested by Belgian police on terror suspicions.
0 -
Zac will suffer from general non-specific grumpiness aimed at Dave. He's a wealthy trustafarian ecomentaltist - not a good look right at the moment! BoJo won because he was attractive enough to small c conservative outer London to overwhelm the lefty core. Goldsmith simply isn't.0
-
No but given that Don was wrong about Crosby being involved in Canada then, that was pointed out then and now he's repeating his mistake now ... he lacks all credibility here.AlastairMeeks said:
Have we reached the point that commentary can only be provided on political figures by members of their own party? Or does this restriction only apply to Conservative politicians?Plato_Says said:Don on Zac, seriously?
The issue is Don and his disingenuity not a generalised principle.0 -
What we could do with are some numbers on the London mayor election. Since the 2012 election there have been important changes to the electoral roll. These will reduce the potential voter numbers for Khan far more than Zac. Easily worth a drop of 100,000 in Khan's support, but many of these people think they have a vote and give opinions to pollsters! There is also the virtual abandonment of the jewish vote (I would guess circa 150,000+ in London). True Livingstone lost much of that vote but recent events in Labour will have shifted more jewish votes away.0
-
You want to live in Sheffield.TwistedFireStopper said:Thank feck I don't live in London.
https://twitter.com/bet365/status/7192901015163944960 -
More readable than usual, and some interesting points punctuating the partisan narrative.0
-
Zac is not enough of a personality and has been rather laidback. I don't think the campaign has been divisive as is claimed here. It's been a bit "meh" if anything and has not focused ruthlessly enough on Khan's weaknesses, of which there are plenty.
As I have stated plenty of times before, it is Khan who has raised the issue of racial quotas - and if anything reeks of racial profiling, it is that. It is Khan who has made an issue of his Muslimness by saying that electing him would send a "message". It is Khan who has made an issue about how he will tackle Muslim extremists, even though there is no evidence that he ever done so in the past and some evidence that he has been and continues to be a bit too cosy with some of them. Having raised these issues, he should have been challenged on them but Goldsmith has not done that and I think it a pity because there are questions which Khan should answer.
Khan is not the worst Labour candidate we could have had but he is not the best. I think he lacks good judgment. But he is energetic and, with luck, won't be a disaster. Whether he will be what London needs I doubt - and that is a pity. Goldsmith would not be a disaster either but he is certainly not the best candidate the Tories could have produced. Personally, I'd have been happy to have had Boris continue. Mayor suits him perfectly. He is overrated as an MP and as a future Leader of the Tories.0 -
JohnO are you responsible for managing road maintenance in Cobham? I now know why so many locals drive 'Chelsea tractors' to get around! The A245 is like Paschendaele.0
-
What also needs to be borne in mind about London elections is that turnout is going to be low, probably 40%. The voters who are least likely to bother voting are going to be the young (for Khan) and not the 65+ year olds (for Zac)0
-
Zac is nowhere near as good as Boris.
Khan is better than Livingstone.
The political background is broadly the same.
Last time it was 51.5:48:5
Looks like it might be a close Labour win.
0 -
Zac is beyond dull and a TINO. All the greenie stuff. I've no idea how we've ended up with him as our candidate. No one else seemed interested. I'd have voted Jowell if on the ballot.
Both candidates lack anything special. We were spoilt with Boris, and were with Cameron before he lost the plot.
Back to the unremarkable for a while all round in every Party.Patrick said:Zac will suffer from general non-specific grumpiness aimed at Dave. He's a wealthy trustafarian ecomentaltist - not a good look right at the moment! BoJo won because he was attractive enough to small c conservative outer London to overwhelm the lefty core. Goldsmith simply isn't.
0 -
Possibly - though Khan has tried to reach out to the Jewish community (unlike many in his party) and is to be congratulated on that.TCPoliticalBetting said:[Snipped]
There is also the virtual abandonment of the jewish vote (I would guess circa 150,000+ in London). True Livingstone lost much of that vote but recent events in Labour will have shifted more jewish votes away.
0 -
Ezekiel "Kell" Brook is a British professional boxer. As the current IBF welterweight champion, Brook is the highest-ranked welterweight in the world, according to The Ring magazine.TheScreamingEagles said:
Welterweight is one of the strongest divisions.0 -
Which candidate is going to stand up for the legal community?0
-
George Galloway obviously. Duh.AlastairMeeks said:Which candidate is going to stand up for the legal community?
0 -
Ultimate dead cat if it a Tory MP does it.
An MP is preparing to name the “celebrity threesome” couple in the House of Commons , the Telegraph can disclose, as a Scottish newspaper published the identities of the mystery couple behind the injunction.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/10/celebrity-threesome-injunction-mp-plans-to-name-mystery-couple-i/0 -
I guess that's why they call them the blues.TheScreamingEagles said:Ultimate dead cat if it a Tory MP does it.
An MP is preparing to name the “celebrity threesome” couple in the House of Commons , the Telegraph can disclose, as a Scottish newspaper published the identities of the mystery couple behind the injunction.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/10/celebrity-threesome-injunction-mp-plans-to-name-mystery-couple-i/0 -
Wanderer said:
George Galloway obviously. Duh.AlastairMeeks said:Which candidate is going to stand up for the legal community?
0 -
Since Sheffield has opted out of competing in football, I suppose they had to busy themselves with minor sports.Pulpstar said:
Ezekiel "Kell" Brook is a British professional boxer. As the current IBF welterweight champion, Brook is the highest-ranked welterweight in the world, according to The Ring magazine.TheScreamingEagles said:
Welterweight is one of the strongest divisions.0 -
The Sun published a photo of an English couple reading the Scottish edition that named them. And pixeled the whole image, brilliant.TheScreamingEagles said:
Ultimate dead cat if it a Tory MP does it.
An MP is preparing to name the “celebrity threesome” couple in the House of Commons , the Telegraph can disclose, as a Scottish newspaper published the identities of the mystery couple behind the injunction.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/10/celebrity-threesome-injunction-mp-plans-to-name-mystery-couple-i/0 -
-
Brind - "The Crosby strategy failed in Canada when playing the Islamaphobia card back-fired on the then Premier Stephen Harper."
Lynton Crosby - "The 'niquab issue' was something I learnt about when I read the media like most people," - "I have watched with bemusement suggestions I was running the campaign or somehow on the campaign team. I wasn't".
0 -
Why, for heaven's sake? It would be news if a celebrity went to bed at 9 pm on their own, having washed the dishes, put the cat out and said their prayers.TheScreamingEagles said:Ultimate dead cat if it a Tory MP does it.
An MP is preparing to name the “celebrity threesome” couple in the House of Commons , the Telegraph can disclose, as a Scottish newspaper published the identities of the mystery couple behind the injunction.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/10/celebrity-threesome-injunction-mp-plans-to-name-mystery-couple-i/
Honestly, this desire to invade everyone's privacy over everything is beyond tiresome. It's really quite troubling.
0 -
Don is indulging in wishful thinking by taking an article by one disgruntled activist seriously. If he looked without rose-tinted spectacles, he'd find Labour activists disgruntled with Sadiq.
Having said that, Jonathan's post upthread succinctly summarises the position, which is why Sadiq is likely to win. TBH I'm struggling to see why anyone should be particularly concerned about this; he's a decent enough candidate, even if he has made a silly pledge on fares. In particular, he's a far, far more acceptable figure than Livingstone.0 -
Jamie Vardy is from Sheffield.AlastairMeeks said:
Since Sheffield has opted out of competing in football, I suppose they had to busy themselves with minor sports.Pulpstar said:
Ezekiel "Kell" Brook is a British professional boxer. As the current IBF welterweight champion, Brook is the highest-ranked welterweight in the world, according to The Ring magazine.TheScreamingEagles said:
Welterweight is one of the strongest divisions.0 -
Miss Plato, Farron there, with a pithy definition of the term 'pining for attention'
Edited extra bit: That said, it probably would've been a better line if someone who didn't keep banging on about his own books had written it...0 -
That poll.....Muslims overwhelmingly against gay men and women being allowed to teach and believe that homosexuality should be illegal.
I wonder what Corbyn thinks.0 -
1 Zac will lose because he's the weaker candidate
2 The Tories need a very strong candidate to overcome London's inherent Labour skew
3 Good to see our friends on the left still respect Sir Lynton - do they respect Lord Livermore?
4 Also good to see our friends on the left writing off Sir Lynton as a failing has been...
5 If Zac hadn't done leaflets targeting specific ethnic groups he'd be accused of ignoring them.
6 The main focus should be going after 'Jeremy Corbyn's candidate Sadiq Khan' - which it appears the leaflet does.....0 -
The Lib Dem Press team joined in, they said it was actually 1999.Morris_Dancer said:
Miss Plato, Farron there, with a pithy definition of the term 'pining for attention'
Edited extra bit: That said, it probably would've been a better line if someone who didn't keep banging on about his own books had written it...0 -
http://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/elections/electoralregistration/bulletins/electoralstatisticsforuk/2015TCPoliticalBetting said:What we could do with are some numbers on the London mayor election. Since the 2012 election there have been important changes to the electoral roll. These will reduce the potential voter numbers for Khan far more than Zac. Easily worth a drop of 100,000 in Khan's support, but many of these people think they have a vote and give opinions to pollsters! There is also the virtual abandonment of the jewish vote (I would guess circa 150,000+ in London). True Livingstone lost much of that vote but recent events in Labour will have shifted more jewish votes away.
Suggests London lost 2.11% of voters in 2013-14 and 1.24% the following year.
Boris v Ken was almost exactly 2m voter, so what would be 67,000 voters lost if that was it, or more like double that if the average was extrapolated over the electoral period.0 -
Bravo.Pulpstar said:
I guess that's why they call them the blues.TheScreamingEagles said:Ultimate dead cat if it a Tory MP does it.
An MP is preparing to name the “celebrity threesome” couple in the House of Commons , the Telegraph can disclose, as a Scottish newspaper published the identities of the mystery couple behind the injunction.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/10/celebrity-threesome-injunction-mp-plans-to-name-mystery-couple-i/0 -
O/T If you are still holding on to betting slips about the Irish GE, don't give up hope! There's a faint possibility that they might get round to forming a government eventually, probably an FG minority since that's pretty much the only option available:
http://www.rte.ie/news/2016/0411/780901-irish-politics-monday/
0 -
Both main candidates are running incredibly unambitious campaigns. In the case of Zac Goldsmith that's a clear mistake, given the inbuilt Labour advantage in votes. I can't see value in the betting and I expect Sadiq Khan to win comfortably, as I have done for a long time.0
-
Entirely. I'll be in my high viz yellow number disappearing majestically into pothole 54. Only cos I love Cobham.Patrick said:JohnO are you responsible for managing road maintenance in Cobham? I now know why so many locals drive 'Chelsea tractors' to get around! The A245 is like Paschendaele.
Er, no, it's Surrey County Council. Get in touch with Mary Lewis. She is VERY good.0 -
Nope. He could be PM within the next six monthsMorris_Dancer said:I wonder if Boris is regretting not standing again.
0 -
I've just looked at the BackZac press team Twitter account, it's got less than 2000 followers. It's tweeted less than 1300x
No wonder I've barely noticed despite following it for weeks.0 -
People only care because they were daft enough to take out an injunction. Without it they would have got a page on the gossip section in a newspaper that not that many people read, and would have been forgotten about 10 minutes later. Now the Streisand Effect kicks in, and everyone wants to know who it is, and why they were so grand as to feel they needed protecting by an injunction.Cyclefree said:
Why, for heaven's sake? It would be news if a celebrity went to bed at 9 pm on their own, having washed the dishes, put the cat out and said their prayers.TheScreamingEagles said:Ultimate dead cat if it a Tory MP does it.
An MP is preparing to name the “celebrity threesome” couple in the House of Commons , the Telegraph can disclose, as a Scottish newspaper published the identities of the mystery couple behind the injunction.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/10/celebrity-threesome-injunction-mp-plans-to-name-mystery-couple-i/
Honestly, this desire to invade everyone's privacy over everything is beyond tiresome. It's really quite troubling.0 -
Where of? ..TheScreamingEagles said:
Nope. He could be PM within the next six monthsMorris_Dancer said:I wonder if Boris is regretting not standing again.
0 -
Final figures for candidates for the May elections including 51 by elections are
Lab 2673
Con 2663
LDem 1801
Green 1521
UKIP 1427
TUSC 308
Others 525
Note 1 Labour in Halton and 1 Conservative in a by election in Rutland elected unopposed .
Wolverhampton Tettenhall Regis ward has 2 Conservative candidates for 1 seat !!!!0 -
Perhaps it was a mistake renouncing his US citizenship..JackW said:
Where of? ..TheScreamingEagles said:
Nope. He could be PM within the next six monthsMorris_Dancer said:I wonder if Boris is regretting not standing again.
0 -
Careful someone might mistake you for the ChancellorJohnO said:
Entirely. I'll be in my high viz yellow number disappearing majestically into pothole 54. Only cos I love Cobham.Patrick said:JohnO are you responsible for managing road maintenance in Cobham? I now know why so many locals drive 'Chelsea tractors' to get around! The A245 is like Paschendaele.
0 -
OT.I am currently re-reading The Art of Legging. and discovered the term "plum" is used for bets of £100,000 just as £500 is a "monkey" and a "pony" is £25.Is it still in use?0
-
Just being ironic. We have lots of anti-Conservatives writing items on here. If only the anti-Conservatives could write in the balanced way that Mr Herdson and Mr Fear write.Wanderer said:
Are you saying that Labour people shouldn't write about Conservatives? And vice versa presumably?TCPoliticalBetting said:
0 -
Not so. He's only near perfect, whereas I....Indigo said:
Careful someone might mistake you for the ChancellorJohnO said:
Entirely. I'll be in my high viz yellow number disappearing majestically into pothole 54. Only cos I love Cobham.Patrick said:JohnO are you responsible for managing road maintenance in Cobham? I now know why so many locals drive 'Chelsea tractors' to get around! The A245 is like Paschendaele.
0 -
Well indeed.TCPoliticalBetting said:
Just being ironic. We have lots of anti-Conservatives writing items on here. If only the anti-Conservatives could write in the balanced way that Mr Herdson and Mr Fear write.Wanderer said:
Are you saying that Labour people shouldn't write about Conservatives? And vice versa presumably?TCPoliticalBetting said:0 -
He needs to consult his friends at Finsbury Park Mosque first....chestnut said:That poll.....Muslims overwhelmingly against gay men and women being allowed to teach and believe that homosexuality should be illegal.
I wonder what Corbyn thinks.0 -
When Trinity Mirror tried to raise funds by issuing new shares to investors, it set up TM Finance (Jersey) Ltd, a “special purpose vehicle” to collect the proceeds offshore. Trinity Mirror’s annual report discloses the existence of “The Trinity Mirror Employee Benefit Trust”, a pension scheme whose beneficiaries could well include Mirror employees like chief offshore critic Kevin Maguire.
Then there is the Trinity International Restricted Share Plan, administered by Barclays Wealth Trustees (Guernsey) Ltd, another offshore trustee.
http://order-order.com/2016/04/11/look-in-the-mirror-millions-held-offshore/0 -
In a complete surprise to absolutely no one, the Mirror holds money offshore:
http://order-order.com/2016/04/11/look-in-the-mirror-millions-held-offshore/
Wouldn't want to get left behind by the Guardian, would it?0 -
There are only two ways of keeping a secret: one is never to tell anyone or even hint at whatever it is you want to keep private. Not hard. Save that people who have secrets are usually quite keen to let someone know that they have a secret, which is where the trouble starts. If they just shut up there would not be a problem. People are incapable these days - seemingly - of shutting up, not aided by Twitter and its like on the one hand and a ludicrous desire for transparency, on the other.Indigo said:
People only care because they were daft enough to take out an injunction. Without it they would have got a page on the gossip section in a newspaper that not that many people read, and would have been forgotten about 10 minutes later. Now the Streisand Effect kicks in, and everyone wants to know who it is, and why they were so grand as to feel they needed protecting by an injunction.Cyclefree said:
Why, for heaven's sake? It would be news if a celebrity went to bed at 9 pm on their own, having washed the dishes, put the cat out and said their prayers.TheScreamingEagles said:Ultimate dead cat if it a Tory MP does it.
An MP is preparing to name the “celebrity threesome” couple in the House of Commons , the Telegraph can disclose, as a Scottish newspaper published the identities of the mystery couple behind the injunction.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/10/celebrity-threesome-injunction-mp-plans-to-name-mystery-couple-i/
Honestly, this desire to invade everyone's privacy over everything is beyond tiresome. It's really quite troubling.
And the second, counter-intuitively, is to tell someone but in such a way that they assume it's a huge joke e.g. announcing to the office that you're having a passionate affair with the office cleaner. Everyone assumes that it can't possibly be true and dismisses it, when in reality...... etc.
0 -
Donald, Donald, Donald.
You might want to take a closer look at the Labour party
"They refer to a strategy based on playing the man not the ball; issuing innuendos and smears rather than fighting on the issues" Ring any bells? It really should unless you don't care what Labour did and do.
" intrusive, patronising and divisive tactics”" - mhhh - I suggest you could look again at your own party.
While you are at it can you can get Labour to sort out it's problem with anti semites - that might be a bit of a task though.
0 -
Yes, he's going to win but it's no fun backing him at such short odds.AlastairMeeks said:Both main candidates are running incredibly unambitious campaigns. In the case of Zac Goldsmith that's a clear mistake, given the inbuilt Labour advantage in votes. I can't see value in the betting and I expect Sadiq Khan to win comfortably, as I have done for a long time.
0 -
To be fair to Alastair, he was recommending backing Sadiq at longer odds than now. I guess now the odds are fair, Sadiq's dominant positon is emphasised.Wanderer said:
Yes, he's going to win but it's no fun backing him at such short odds.AlastairMeeks said:Both main candidates are running incredibly unambitious campaigns. In the case of Zac Goldsmith that's a clear mistake, given the inbuilt Labour advantage in votes. I can't see value in the betting and I expect Sadiq Khan to win comfortably, as I have done for a long time.
0 -
The integration of Britain's Muslims will probably be the hardest task we've ever faced.chestnut said:That poll.....Muslims overwhelmingly against gay men and women being allowed to teach and believe that homosexuality should be illegal.
I wonder what Corbyn thinks.
It will require the abandonment of the milk-and-water multiculturalism still so beloved of many, and the adoption of a far more muscular approach to integration.
– TREVOR PHILLIPS, FORMER EQUALITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION CHAIRMAN
http://www.itv.com/news/2016-04-11/more-than-half-of-muslims-in-britain-think-homosexuality-should-be-illegal-poll-finds/0 -
""He that would keep a secret must keep it secret that he hath a secret to keep"Cyclefree said:
There are only two ways of keeping a secret: one is never to tell anyone or even hint at whatever it is you want to keep private. Not hard. Save that people who have secrets are usually quite keen to let someone know that they have a secret, which is where the trouble starts. If they just shut up there would not be a problem. People are incapable these days - seemingly - of shutting up, not aided by Twitter and its like on the one hand and a ludicrous desire for transparency, on the other.Indigo said:
People only care because they were daft enough to take out an injunction. Without it they would have got a page on the gossip section in a newspaper that not that many people read, and would have been forgotten about 10 minutes later. Now the Streisand Effect kicks in, and everyone wants to know who it is, and why they were so grand as to feel they needed protecting by an injunction.Cyclefree said:
Why, for heaven's sake? It would be news if a celebrity went to bed at 9 pm on their own, having washed the dishes, put the cat out and said their prayers.TheScreamingEagles said:Ultimate dead cat if it a Tory MP does it.
An MP is preparing to name the “celebrity threesome” couple in the House of Commons , the Telegraph can disclose, as a Scottish newspaper published the identities of the mystery couple behind the injunction.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/10/celebrity-threesome-injunction-mp-plans-to-name-mystery-couple-i/
Honestly, this desire to invade everyone's privacy over everything is beyond tiresome. It's really quite troubling.
- Humphrey Appleby (and possibly Francis Bacon)
0 -
As I understand it everyone on the planet except me is on Sadiq at 33-1. I will stick my neck out and say that is value.Pulpstar said:
To be fair to Alastair, he was recommending backing Sadiq at longer odds than now. I guess now the odds are fair, Sadiq's dominant positon is emphasised.Wanderer said:
Yes, he's going to win but it's no fun backing him at such short odds.AlastairMeeks said:Both main candidates are running incredibly unambitious campaigns. In the case of Zac Goldsmith that's a clear mistake, given the inbuilt Labour advantage in votes. I can't see value in the betting and I expect Sadiq Khan to win comfortably, as I have done for a long time.
0 -
Mr. Wanderer, I'm not on that either.
Miss Vance, Twitter appears awash with people shrieking outrage at Philips and his 'Islamophobia'.0 -
I'm not on Sadiq at 33-1 eitherWanderer said:
As I understand it everyone on the planet except me is on Sadiq at 33-1. I will stick my neck out and say that is value.Pulpstar said:
To be fair to Alastair, he was recommending backing Sadiq at longer odds than now. I guess now the odds are fair, Sadiq's dominant positon is emphasised.Wanderer said:
Yes, he's going to win but it's no fun backing him at such short odds.AlastairMeeks said:Both main candidates are running incredibly unambitious campaigns. In the case of Zac Goldsmith that's a clear mistake, given the inbuilt Labour advantage in votes. I can't see value in the betting and I expect Sadiq Khan to win comfortably, as I have done for a long time.
0 -
I'm on Sadiq at 33/1 and Goldsmith at 22/1Pulpstar said:
I'm not on Sadiq at 33-1 eitherWanderer said:
As I understand it everyone on the planet except me is on Sadiq at 33-1. I will stick my neck out and say that is value.Pulpstar said:
To be fair to Alastair, he was recommending backing Sadiq at longer odds than now. I guess now the odds are fair, Sadiq's dominant positon is emphasised.Wanderer said:
Yes, he's going to win but it's no fun backing him at such short odds.AlastairMeeks said:Both main candidates are running incredibly unambitious campaigns. In the case of Zac Goldsmith that's a clear mistake, given the inbuilt Labour advantage in votes. I can't see value in the betting and I expect Sadiq Khan to win comfortably, as I have done for a long time.
/Endeth smug bastard mode/0 -
I got on Zac at 50s ;p - now Winston Mckenzie is out the running I feel alot more assured about using that theoretical profit to back Khan withTheScreamingEagles said:
I'm on Sadiq at 33/1 and Goldsmith at 22/1Pulpstar said:
I'm not on Sadiq at 33-1 eitherWanderer said:
As I understand it everyone on the planet except me is on Sadiq at 33-1. I will stick my neck out and say that is value.Pulpstar said:
To be fair to Alastair, he was recommending backing Sadiq at longer odds than now. I guess now the odds are fair, Sadiq's dominant positon is emphasised.Wanderer said:
Yes, he's going to win but it's no fun backing him at such short odds.AlastairMeeks said:Both main candidates are running incredibly unambitious campaigns. In the case of Zac Goldsmith that's a clear mistake, given the inbuilt Labour advantage in votes. I can't see value in the betting and I expect Sadiq Khan to win comfortably, as I have done for a long time.
/Endeth smug bastard mode/
#Slyaftertime0 -
0
-
On the face of it, it doesn't seem especially islamophobic, though you do wonder why relatively few similar concerns are raised about the integration of evangelical Christians and some sections of the Jewish communityMorris_Dancer said:Mr. Wanderer, I'm not on that either.
Miss Vance, Twitter appears awash with people shrieking outrage at Philips and his 'Islamophobia'.0 -
Perhaps its because evangelical Christians and some sections of the jewish community do not spawn people who murder hundreds of innocents?Polruan said:
On the face of it, it doesn't seem especially islamophobic, though you do wonder why relatively few similar concerns are raised about the integration of evangelical Christians and some sections of the Jewish communityMorris_Dancer said:Mr. Wanderer, I'm not on that either.
Miss Vance, Twitter appears awash with people shrieking outrage at Philips and his 'Islamophobia'.0 -
More worrying than these figures is the apparent widespread belief that religious law should trump secular law. Such a view is simply incompatible with democracy. No amount of handwringing statements saying that most Muslims simply want to leave peaceably here (however true) gets over this very fundamental problem.CarlottaVance said:
The integration of Britain's Muslims will probably be the hardest task we've ever faced.chestnut said:That poll.....Muslims overwhelmingly against gay men and women being allowed to teach and believe that homosexuality should be illegal.
I wonder what Corbyn thinks.
It will require the abandonment of the milk-and-water multiculturalism still so beloved of many, and the adoption of a far more muscular approach to integration.
– TREVOR PHILLIPS, FORMER EQUALITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION CHAIRMAN
http://www.itv.com/news/2016-04-11/more-than-half-of-muslims-in-britain-think-homosexuality-should-be-illegal-poll-finds/
I'm not sure how easy integration will be even if we had the will. Even more concerning I don't think enough people do have the will. Given that, we are simply storing up more and more problems for ourselves.
The full article is well worth reading.
0 -
Integration will fail as long as large numbers of people continue to be imported from backward parts of the subcontinent. This has been a key factor in promoting the creation of parallel communities, which it may already be too late to break up.CarlottaVance said:
The integration of Britain's Muslims will probably be the hardest task we've ever faced.chestnut said:That poll.....Muslims overwhelmingly against gay men and women being allowed to teach and believe that homosexuality should be illegal.
I wonder what Corbyn thinks.
It will require the abandonment of the milk-and-water multiculturalism still so beloved of many, and the adoption of a far more muscular approach to integration.
– TREVOR PHILLIPS, FORMER EQUALITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION CHAIRMAN
http://www.itv.com/news/2016-04-11/more-than-half-of-muslims-in-britain-think-homosexuality-should-be-illegal-poll-finds/0 -
Trevor Philips that well known racist....FFS....it doesn't matter who points out there might be some issues, be it Douglas Murray, Trevor Phillips or Maajid Nawaz, somehow they are all racist Islamophobes / not proper Muslims.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Wanderer, I'm not on that either.
Miss Vance, Twitter appears awash with people shrieking outrage at Philips and his 'Islamophobia'.0 -
And for vulgarians like me, the intro to Pretty Little Liars 'two can keep a secret, if one of you is dead'.Indigo said:
""He that would keep a secret must keep it secret that he hath a secret to keep"Cyclefree said:
There are only two ways of keeping a secret: one is never to tell anyone or even hint at whatever it is you want to keep private. Not hard. Save that people who have secrets are usually quite keen to let someone know that they have a secret, which is where the trouble starts. If they just shut up there would not be a problem. People are incapable these days - seemingly - of shutting up, not aided by Twitter and its like on the one hand and a ludicrous desire for transparency, on the other.Indigo said:
People only care because they were daft enough to take out an injunction. Without it they would have got a page on the gossip section in a newspaper that not that many people read, and would have been forgotten about 10 minutes later. Now the Streisand Effect kicks in, and everyone wants to know who it is, and why they were so grand as to feel they needed protecting by an injunction.Cyclefree said:
Why, for heaven's sake? It would be news if a celebrity went to bed at 9 pm on their own, having washed the dishes, put the cat out and said their prayers.TheScreamingEagles said:Ultimate dead cat if it a Tory MP does it.
An MP is preparing to name the “celebrity threesome” couple in the House of Commons , the Telegraph can disclose, as a Scottish newspaper published the identities of the mystery couple behind the injunction.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/10/celebrity-threesome-injunction-mp-plans-to-name-mystery-couple-i/
Honestly, this desire to invade everyone's privacy over everything is beyond tiresome. It's really quite troubling.
- Humphrey Appleby (and possibly Francis Bacon)0 -
I am fascinated by the idea that empirical evidence measured at source can be "racist". It is what it is, the expressed views of the sample group with no value judgement attached. In the same way as it is supposedly "sexist" to point out objective (often biologically determined) differences between men and women. Can facts be racist/sexist ? Or only the way they are used and abused to imply non-empirical attributes. It's a funny old world.Polruan said:
On the face of it, it doesn't seem especially islamophobic, though you do wonder why relatively few similar concerns are raised about the integration of evangelical Christians and some sections of the Jewish communityMorris_Dancer said:Mr. Wanderer, I'm not on that either.
Miss Vance, Twitter appears awash with people shrieking outrage at Philips and his 'Islamophobia'.0 -
That is a variation on Benjamin Franklin:Plato_Says said:And for vulgarians like me, the intro to Pretty Little Liars 'two can keep a secret, if one of you is dead'.
Indigo said:
""He that would keep a secret must keep it secret that he hath a secret to keep"Cyclefree said:
There are only two ways of keeping a secret: one is never to tell anyone or even hint at whatever it is you want to keep private. Not hard. Save that people who have secrets are usually quite keen to let someone know that they have a secret, which is where the trouble starts. If they just shut up there would not be a problem. People are incapable these days - seemingly - of shutting up, not aided by Twitter and its like on the one hand and a ludicrous desire for transparency, on the other.Indigo said:
People only care because they were daft enough to take out an injunction. Without it they would have got a page on the gossip section in a newspaper that not that many people read, and would have been forgotten about 10 minutes later. Now the Streisand Effect kicks in, and everyone wants to know who it is, and why they were so grand as to feel they needed protecting by an injunction.Cyclefree said:
Why, for heaven's sake? It would be news if a celebrity went to bed at 9 pm on their own, having washed the dishes, put the cat out and said their prayers.TheScreamingEagles said:Ultimate dead cat if it a Tory MP does it.
An MP is preparing to name the “celebrity threesome” couple in the House of Commons , the Telegraph can disclose, as a Scottish newspaper published the identities of the mystery couple behind the injunction.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/10/celebrity-threesome-injunction-mp-plans-to-name-mystery-couple-i/
Honestly, this desire to invade everyone's privacy over everything is beyond tiresome. It's really quite troubling.
- Humphrey Appleby (and possibly Francis Bacon)"Three may keep a secret, if two of them are dead."
0 -
Anyone who cares already knows surely? (And most people who really don't...)TheScreamingEagles said:Ultimate dead cat if it a Tory MP does it.
An MP is preparing to name the “celebrity threesome” couple in the House of Commons , the Telegraph can disclose, as a Scottish newspaper published the identities of the mystery couple behind the injunction.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/10/celebrity-threesome-injunction-mp-plans-to-name-mystery-couple-i/0 -
There's a difference between the context and content of a proposition, obviously. So let's say 60pc of Christians want to slaughter kittens, but the proportion for Muslims is 45pc. To state the empirical fact about Muslims in isolation because you want to demonise them (cf Taffys' comment below) could be seen as deliberately misleading and motivated by an intent to denigrate than the statement "Christians more into kitten-killing than Muslims".Indigo said:
I am fascinated by the idea that empirical evidence measured at source can be "racist". It is what it is, the expressed views of the sample group with no value judgement attached. In the same way as it is supposedly "sexist" to point out objective (often biologically determined) differences between men and women. Can facts be racist/sexist ? Or only the way they are used and abused to imply non-empirical attributes. It's a funny old world.Polruan said:
On the face of it, it doesn't seem especially islamophobic, though you do wonder why relatively few similar concerns are raised about the integration of evangelical Christians and some sections of the Jewish communityMorris_Dancer said:Mr. Wanderer, I'm not on that either.
Miss Vance, Twitter appears awash with people shrieking outrage at Philips and his 'Islamophobia'.0 -
Zac Goldsmith's tax return is going to be interesting.
Will he also reveal his assets held overseas eg offshore.
I seem to recall Boris and other London candidates published their tax returns at a previous election.0 -
Corbyn should be thinking "Hmmmmm....I wonder if Khan wants my job?"chestnut said:That poll.....Muslims overwhelmingly against gay men and women being allowed to teach and believe that homosexuality should be illegal.
I wonder what Corbyn thinks.0 -
The interesting part about this story is of course the absurd nature of the law, that allows this farcical state of affairs to come about. Not the incredibly dull nature of the events underlying the situation.JonCisBack said:
Anyone who cares already knows surely? (And most people who really don't...)TheScreamingEagles said:Ultimate dead cat if it a Tory MP does it.
An MP is preparing to name the “celebrity threesome” couple in the House of Commons , the Telegraph can disclose, as a Scottish newspaper published the identities of the mystery couple behind the injunction.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/10/celebrity-threesome-injunction-mp-plans-to-name-mystery-couple-i/0 -
I wouldn't even bother trying to analyse this. Some people simply refuse to believe anything other than what they want to be true. "Racist" or "Islamophobia" are just ways of refusing to deal with uncomfortable facts or arguments. There are none so deaf as those that don't want to hear.Indigo said:
I am fascinated by the idea that empirical evidence measured at source can be "racist". It is what it is, the expressed views of the sample group with no value judgement attached. In the same way as it is supposedly "sexist" to point out objective (often biologically determined) differences between men and women. Can facts be racist/sexist ? Or only the way they are used and abused to imply non-empirical attributes. It's a funny old world.Polruan said:
On the face of it, it doesn't seem especially islamophobic, though you do wonder why relatively few similar concerns are raised about the integration of evangelical Christians and some sections of the Jewish communityMorris_Dancer said:Mr. Wanderer, I'm not on that either.
Miss Vance, Twitter appears awash with people shrieking outrage at Philips and his 'Islamophobia'.
People can use facts selectively to sustain an argument and can do so because they have an agenda. The way to deal with this is to point out the missing facts and show how weak/spurious/inadequate the argument is*. But that would take a bit of work and engagement. So those who cannot be bothered to defeat a poor argument with a better one resort to ad hominem insults to bypass the whole concept of argument and debate. These are the tactics of the babyish, the scared, the inadequates and the bullies - of which there are far too many around in positions of influence.
* One of the best examples of this was Deborah Lipstadt's demolition of David Irving in a libel trial. It took a lot of time and effort and money but his claim to be an academic historian (albeit one with horrible views) was utterly destroyed as a result.
0 -
Twitter can never stand the truth.FrancisUrquhart said:
Trevor Philips that well known racist....FFS....it doesn't matter who points out there might be some issues, be it Douglas Murray, Trevor Phillips or Maajid Nawaz, somehow they are all racist Islamophobes / not proper Muslims.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Wanderer, I'm not on that either.
Miss Vance, Twitter appears awash with people shrieking outrage at Philips and his 'Islamophobia'.
Hillary is miles ahead in the votes over Bernie.
The Tories won a MAJORITY.
Trevor Phillips and Maajid Nawaz speak the truth.0 -
The Waltham Forest Islamic Association: Conspiracy Theories, Antisemitism, and Rejection of the West
http://hurryupharry.org/2016/04/06/the-waltham-forest-islamic-association-conspiracy-theories-antisemitism-and-rejection-of-the-west/0 -
What on earth are you going on about?Polruan said:
There's a difference between the context and content of a proposition, obviously. So let's say 60pc of Christians want to slaughter kittens, but the proportion for Muslims is 45pc. To state the empirical fact about Muslims in isolation because you want to demonise them (cf Taffys' comment below) could be seen as deliberately misleading and motivated by an intent to denigrate than the statement "Christians more into kitten-killing than Muslims".Indigo said:
I am fascinated by the idea that empirical evidence measured at source can be "racist". It is what it is, the expressed views of the sample group with no value judgement attached. In the same way as it is supposedly "sexist" to point out objective (often biologically determined) differences between men and women. Can facts be racist/sexist ? Or only the way they are used and abused to imply non-empirical attributes. It's a funny old world.Polruan said:
On the face of it, it doesn't seem especially islamophobic, though you do wonder why relatively few similar concerns are raised about the integration of evangelical Christians and some sections of the Jewish communityMorris_Dancer said:Mr. Wanderer, I'm not on that either.
Miss Vance, Twitter appears awash with people shrieking outrage at Philips and his 'Islamophobia'.0 -
Ha! I'm pretty disappointed that Sleepy Hollow is limping to cancellation. Some great Civil War quotes and fun stuff spoiled by crap plotting.Indigo said:
That is a variation on Benjamin Franklin:Plato_Says said:And for vulgarians like me, the intro to Pretty Little Liars 'two can keep a secret, if one of you is dead'.
Indigo said:
""He that would keep a secret must keep it secret that he hath a secret to keep"Cyclefree said:
There are only two ways of keeping a secret: one is never to tell anyone or even hint at whatever it is you want to keep private. Not hard. Save that people who have secrets are usually quite keen to let someone know that they have a secret, which is where the trouble starts. If they just shut up there would not be a problem. People are incapable these days - seemingly - of shutting up, not aided by Twitter and its like on the one hand and a ludicrous desire for transparency, on the other.Indigo said:
People only care because they were daft enough to take out an injunction. Without it they would have got a page on the gossip section in a newspaper that not that many people read, and would have been forgotten about 10 minutes later. Now the Streisand Effect kicks in, and everyone wants to know who it is, and why they were so grand as to feel they needed protecting by an injunction.Cyclefree said:
Why, for heaven's sake? It would be news if a celebrity went to bed at 9 pm on their own, having washed the dishes, put the cat out and said their prayers.TheScreamingEagles said:Ultimate dead cat if it a Tory MP does it.
An MP is preparing to name the “celebrity threesome” couple in the House of Commons , the Telegraph can disclose, as a Scottish newspaper published the identities of the mystery couple behind the injunction.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/10/celebrity-threesome-injunction-mp-plans-to-name-mystery-couple-i/
Honestly, this desire to invade everyone's privacy over everything is beyond tiresome. It's really quite troubling.
- Humphrey Appleby (and possibly Francis Bacon)"Three may keep a secret, if two of them are dead."
0 -
He already released it weeks ago. It was boring. He is rich, he paid shed loads of tax and nothing more than that.David_Evershed said:Zac Goldsmith's tax return is going to be interesting.
Will he also reveal his assets held overseas eg offshore.
I seem to recall Boris and other London candidates published their tax returns at a previous election.0 -
Didn't he publish it a few ago?David_Evershed said:
Zac Goldsmith's tax return is going to be interesting.
Will he also reveal his assets held overseas eg offshore.
I seem to recall Boris and other London candidates published their tax returns at a previous election.0 -
@BBCNormanS: Still no sign of @jeremycorbyn tax return even tho promised it last Wed. Surely can't be that complicated ? Or maybe lost Chez Corbyn ?
@MrHarryCole: Zinger in @timesredbox: "With the air of someone still desperately rummaging in a filing cabinet" Corbyn will publish tax return "very soon"0 -
Probably lost in a pile of past editions of the Morning Star....Scott_P said:@BBCNormanS: Still no sign of @jeremycorbyn tax return even tho promised it last Wed. Surely can't be that complicated ? Or maybe lost Chez Corbyn ?
@MrHarryCole: Zinger in @timesredbox: "With the air of someone still desperately rummaging in a filing cabinet" Corbyn will publish tax return "very soon"0 -
There's some dancing-on-pinheads wording issues here, I think. Read Crosby's denial carefully - he wasn't running the campaign, but he's not denying offering advice:SimonStClare said:Brind - "The Crosby strategy failed in Canada when playing the Islamaphobia card back-fired on the then Premier Stephen Harper."
Lynton Crosby - "The 'niquab issue' was something I learnt about when I read the media like most people," - "I have watched with bemusement suggestions I was running the campaign or somehow on the campaign team. I wasn't".
http://www.smh.com.au/world/lynton-cosby-bemused-at-reports-of-involvement-in-canadian-elections-20151022-gkfp35.html
The more fundamental point is that the Canadian Tories tried the anti-Islamist stuff, and it didn't work at all, even in heavily white and non-Islamic Canada.0 -
He's been public paid PAYE his entire life, how complicated can it be?Scott_P said:
@BBCNormanS: Still no sign of @jeremycorbyn tax return even tho promised it last Wed. Surely can't be that complicated ? Or maybe lost Chez Corbyn ?
@MrHarryCole: Zinger in @timesredbox: "With the air of someone still desperately rummaging in a filing cabinet" Corbyn will publish tax return "very soon"0 -
Of course, but a survey which sets out the explore the views of one section of the population in contrast to the general population, and publishes a set of figures which show in which way those views differ and in which they are the same might be controversial, but is hardly "racist". It should be no more of an issue that comparing the views about offshore financial vehicles of Tory and Labour voters.Polruan said:
There's a difference between the context and content of a proposition, obviously. So let's say 60pc of Christians want to slaughter kittens, but the proportion for Muslims is 45pc. To state the empirical fact about Muslims in isolation because you want to demonise them (cf Taffys' comment below) could be seen as deliberately misleading and motivated by an intent to denigrate than the statement "Christians more into kitten-killing than Muslims".Indigo said:
I am fascinated by the idea that empirical evidence measured at source can be "racist". It is what it is, the expressed views of the sample group with no value judgement attached. In the same way as it is supposedly "sexist" to point out objective (often biologically determined) differences between men and women. Can facts be racist/sexist ? Or only the way they are used and abused to imply non-empirical attributes. It's a funny old world.Polruan said:
On the face of it, it doesn't seem especially islamophobic, though you do wonder why relatively few similar concerns are raised about the integration of evangelical Christians and some sections of the Jewish communityMorris_Dancer said:Mr. Wanderer, I'm not on that either.
Miss Vance, Twitter appears awash with people shrieking outrage at Philips and his 'Islamophobia'.
Leaving aside the minor detail is how credible is it that Trevor Phillips, until reasonably recently the Chair of the Campaign for Racial Equality is a racist ?0 -
2012 press re London candidate tax returnsDavid_Evershed said:Zac Goldsmith's tax return is going to be interesting.
Will he also reveal his assets held overseas eg offshore.
I seem to recall Boris and other London candidates published their tax returns at a previous election.
Boris Johnson earned just short of £900,000 from his freelance work on top of his six-figure mayoral salary in the first three years at City Hall, figures published by the Conservative mayor revealed yesterday, bringing his total earnings for the period to close to £1.3m.
His freelance earnings were £363,000 the year before he became mayor, when he was still an MP with a £55,000 salary. His full earnings over the past four years are just under £1.7m. The scale of Johnson's earnings will fuel claims by his rival Ken Livingstone that the Conservative candidate stands to significantly benefit from chancellor George Osborne's decision to scrap the 50p top rate of tax – a move that Johnson strongly lobbied for.
The release of the earnings data raises the possibility of demands on future MPs to reveal their tax arrangements, and could set a precedent at the next general election for a more open, US-style contest.
The figures were published after Johnson made a public commitment during a mayoral debate on BBC2's Newsnight on Wednesday in an attempt to settle a row with Livingstone over their respective tax arrangements in an increasingly bitter contest ahead of elections next month. Johnson called Livingstone a "fucking liar" in a lift the day before.
But figures eventually released by Livingstone – after an initial refusal to do so – showed that over four years the Labour mayoral candidate paid himself dividends worth £125,555 from Silveta Ltd, the company he owns with his wife, on which he paid just £23,730 in corporation tax – which at 20% is significantly lower than the income tax he would have paid.
The figures, verified by an accountant, show Livingstone took £342,041 over the period from a combined income for employment, "interest", company dividends, and his pension. Total tax paid over the period was £113,861, comprising £90,131 in income tax between 2007-2008 and 2010/2011 and the £23,730 in corporation tax . However, the figures do not show the true scale of his earnings since these were channelled through the company.
0 -
The people in question start with the default assumption that only white people can be racists or bigots.Cyclefree said:
I wouldn't even bother trying to analyse this. Some people simply refuse to believe anything other than what they want to be true. "Racist" or "Islamophobia" are just ways of refusing to deal with uncomfortable facts or arguments. There are none so deaf as those that don't want to hear.Indigo said:
I am fascinated by the idea that empirical evidence measured at source can be "racist". It is what it is, the expressed views of the sample group with no value judgement attached. In the same way as it is supposedly "sexist" to point out objective (often biologically determined) differences between men and women. Can facts be racist/sexist ? Or only the way they are used and abused to imply non-empirical attributes. It's a funny old world.Polruan said:
On the face of it, it doesn't seem especially islamophobic, though you do wonder why relatively few similar concerns are raised about the integration of evangelical Christians and some sections of the Jewish communityMorris_Dancer said:Mr. Wanderer, I'm not on that either.
Miss Vance, Twitter appears awash with people shrieking outrage at Philips and his 'Islamophobia'.
People can use facts selectively to sustain an argument and can do so because they have an agenda. The way to deal with this is to point out the missing facts and show how weak/spurious/inadequate the argument is*. But that would take a bit of work and engagement. So those who cannot be bothered to defeat a poor argument with a better one resort to ad hominem insults to bypass the whole concept of argument and debate. These are the tactics of the babyish, the scared, the inadequates and the bullies - of which there are far too many around in positions of influence.
* One of the best examples of this was Deborah Lipstadt's demolition of David Irving in a libel trial. It took a lot of time and effort and money but his claim to be an academic historian (albeit one with horrible views) was utterly destroyed as a result.
0
![[Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/d2ea526b1b06ed109333f390c7ae956b_100.png)
