Skip to content
Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Trump-Boris mural on the Bristol wall – the betting cha

SystemSystem Posts: 12,599
edited May 2016 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Trump-Boris mural on the Bristol wall – the betting chances of what’s depicted actually happening

Via @PaulWaugh Bristol Post report of giant mural in cityhttps://t.co/JtI6NKIGVk pic.twitter.com/Z2SGOLDVji

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    F**k me.

    Trump in to 3.1
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,023
    edited May 2016
    EU referendum poll:
    Remain: 45% (+2)
    Leave: 45% (-2)
    (via ICM / 20 - 22 May)

    Online poll new methodology
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    From ICM summary:

    "the future of telephone polling is somewhat bleak, for reasons both linked to its own ability to produce representative samples in an age when the public has radically redefined its relationship with the telephone (landline in particular) and because the cost and practicality of telephone polling is problematic for vote intention work."
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    edited May 2016
    I reckon Trump for POTUS is a better bet than Boris for PM.
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    Burt Kwouk has died aged 85...
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    Stunned. Ever feel you are being misled?

    http://order-order.com/2016/05/24/conservatives-in-spot-the-difference/
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 63,864
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    EU referendum poll:
    Remain: 45% (+2)
    Leave: 45% (-2)
    (via ICM / 20 - 22 May)

    Online poll new methodology

    What have they changed?
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    Also from ICM

    Indeed, there is a remarkable consistency across our online polls, with big Leave leads being built up in each hour from 4pm to 9pm on a Friday, partially mitigated by big Remain In leads every hour thereafter until the survey closes, ostensibly by Monday morning for data delivery to clients.

    This is known as "young people go out on the lash every Friday night" bias.

  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    I reckon Trump for POTUS is a better bet than Boris for PM.

    I bloody well hope so. The idea that Boris Johnson might become PM is just too awful to contemplate.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 63,864
    Hard to contend there hasn't been a 3-4% swing back to Remain over the last 2 weeks since the Blitzkreig was launched.

    Question is: what is Vote Leave doing? Where are they?

    I presume they are doing something, but it's not visible to man or beast.
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    edited May 2016
    FPT: HYUFD said:
    "No president ever has won because of their VP, with possible exception of LBJ winning Texas for JFK though he would have won without it. Personally I think Trump might pick Scott Brown, Hillary Castro or Warren"

    Yebbut, never before has someone run without legislative, military or foreign policy experience.

    Trump needs a good Veep, or he may as well forget it...
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/americans-concerned-trump-experience_us_574448e6e4b045cc9a71da3e
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,321
    Amazing how no one saw it being painted.
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    Stunned. Ever feel you are being misled?

    http://order-order.com/2016/05/24/conservatives-in-spot-the-difference/

    Interesting, isn't it?

    Tory voters are apparently flocking to remain, and yet conservative IN in the home counties can;t fill a reliant robin.
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    edited May 2016
    Trump just traded at 3.0

    Timberrrrrrr!!!!

    image
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 40,378
    In all of this, the 2015/16 borrowing figures look atrocious. A £3.8bn shortfall and overall a £76bn deficit.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @jimwaterson: 5ive have pulled out of the world's first pro-Brexit music festival. Absolutely gutted. https://t.co/l75DYoHv2c

    @journodave: is the Leave campaign in crisis now it has lost the backing of 5ive
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    Casino_Royale said:

    Hard to contend there hasn't been a 3-4% swing back to Remain over the last 2 weeks since the Blitzkreig was launched.

    Question is: what is Vote Leave doing? Where are they?

    I presume they are doing something, but it's not visible to man or beast.

    Somebody made the point on the last thread that the phone polls might be more a verdict on the campaigns than the issues, and perhaps there might be something in that.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    Stunned. Ever feel you are being misled?

    http://order-order.com/2016/05/24/conservatives-in-spot-the-difference/

    One way to avoid expenses scandals.
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    edited May 2016
    MaxPB said:

    In all of this, the 2015/16 borrowing figures look atrocious. A £3.8bn shortfall and overall a £76bn deficit.

    What I found worse was the massive failure of the Treasury forecasting. In April they stated that the financial year (that by then had closed) had a deficit of £74bn. Then a month later they state that they added it up wrong and the forecast was now a £76bn deficit. This is the scale of error that a finance director would be fired over.....

    May be this arises because they were running their spreadsheets over forecasting the next 14 years and overlooked doing the day job?
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,998
    Casino_Royale said:

    Hard to contend there hasn't been a 3-4% swing back to Remain over the last 2 weeks since the Blitzkreig was launched.

    Question is: what is Vote Leave doing? Where are they?

    I presume they are doing something, but it's not visible to man or beast.

    This won't go down well but I think Leave.EU might have done a better job. My dad's reaction to the broadcast last night was "do Vote Leave want us to stay in the EU or something?"
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    Casino_Royale said:

    Hard to contend there hasn't been a 3-4% swing back to Remain over the last 2 weeks since the Blitzkreig was launched.

    It's hard to know truthfully because Yougov and ICM are both tinkering with their methodologies.

    One thing is clear though, Yougov, ICM and Prof. Curtice are all down on the side of the line which places very little faith in one-call telephone polling. The BES/BSA findings have thrown the whole methodology into doubt.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,023
    Casino_Royale said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    EU referendum poll:
    Remain: 45% (+2)
    Leave: 45% (-2)
    (via ICM / 20 - 22 May)

    Online poll new methodology

    What have they changed?
    See here

    http://us11.campaign-archive2.com/?u=fbcf81e4dd2761d48aba0b6da&id=14df1d3e14
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,751
    FPT Bodie: You will get competitiveness reforms with or without a treaty, everybody agrees this needs doing. They were in Cameron's speech because he was hoping to take the credit for what was happening anyway. You won't get internal controls on migration, for the same reason: One of the main objections to the Euro was that the labour market inside the EU wasn't mobile enough, unlike the US where people could up and move to where the jobs were. They're not going to deliberately make the EU less competitive like that, barring right-wing populists winning in basically all the member states.
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,455
    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    MaxPB said:

    In all of this, the 2015/16 borrowing figures look atrocious. A £3.8bn shortfall and overall a £76bn deficit.

    What I found worse was the sheer uselesness of the Treasury forecasting. In April they stated that the financial year (that by then had closed) had a deficit of £74bn. Then a month later they state that they added it up wrong and the forecast was now a £76bn deficit. This is the scale of error that a finance director would be fired over.....

    May be this arises because they were running their spreadsheets over forecasting the next 14 years and overlooked doing the day job?
    I don't know which accountants you work with, we revise our accounts after year end here.
  • blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    On the previous thread somebody mentioned how drugs had ruined the working class, a bit of a generalisation but in essence I agree. I had a long conversation with a very senior police officer who said they'd more or less lost the streets, all they could do was try and contain things. The misery class A drugs cause is immeasurable, we spoke about Wet Rooms, an idea used around the world. No political party here has the bollox to get on top of the issue.

    I suggested we should execute dealers and treat users, the policeman said not many in the force would disagree, he called them "peddlars of death". Something like 95% of prisoners are in for drug related crime, what we're doing simply isn't working. As SeanT would no doubt testify, the extent to which drugs like heroin are in daily use would astound most people, its terrifying. As Stephen Fry says, the difference between middle class and working class drug use is the middle classes can afford it.
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    MaxPB said:

    In all of this, the 2015/16 borrowing figures look atrocious. A £3.8bn shortfall and overall a £76bn deficit.

    But, Mr. Max, that can only be true if the Treasury have got their figures of what is likely to happen three to six months down the line completely wrong. Yet we are supposed to believe than can accurately forecast up to 14 years in advance.

    Leaving that aside, Osborne, "The near perfect chancellor", has his credibility shot away by each set of figures. Keeps missing his targets, that "march of the makers" actually is a recession in the manufacturing sector, and so on and so forth. The expression, "Osbrown" seems to sum him up quite well.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,250
    Casino_Royale said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    EU referendum poll:
    Remain: 45% (+2)
    Leave: 45% (-2)
    (via ICM / 20 - 22 May)

    Online poll new methodology

    What have they changed?
    Broadly, their changes would reduce the Leave share by 0-2%. That would suggest that the numbers are unchanged from last week, on a like for like basis.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,250
    chestnut said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Hard to contend there hasn't been a 3-4% swing back to Remain over the last 2 weeks since the Blitzkreig was launched.

    It's hard to know truthfully because Yougov and ICM are both tinkering with their methodologies.

    One thing is clear though, Yougov, ICM and Prof. Curtice are all down on the side of the line which places very little faith in one-call telephone polling. The BES/BSA findings have thrown the whole methodology into doubt.
    Overall, I would say there has been a shift to Remain over a fortnight. Not massive, but it's there.
  • gettingbettergettingbetter Posts: 599
    blackburn63 said:

    On the previous thread somebody mentioned how drugs had ruined the working class, a bit of a generalisation but in essence I agree. I had a long conversation with a very senior police officer who said they'd more or less lost the streets, all they could do was try and contain things. The misery class A drugs cause is immeasurable, we spoke about Wet Rooms, an idea used around the world. No political party here has the bollox to get on top of the issue.

    I suggested we should execute dealers and treat users, the policeman said not many in the force would disagree, he called them "peddlars of death". Something like 95% of prisoners are in for drug related crime, what we're doing simply isn't working. As SeanT would no doubt testify, the extent to which drugs like heroin are in daily use would astound most people, its terrifying. As Stephen Fry says, the difference between middle class and working class drug use is the middle classes can afford it.

    If we gave the drugs out free to addicts then there would not be any dealers, except those selling to celebrities and politicians who did not want their habits to be known.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 63,864
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    EU referendum poll:
    Remain: 45% (+2)
    Leave: 45% (-2)
    (via ICM / 20 - 22 May)

    Online poll new methodology

    What have they changed?
    See here

    http://us11.campaign-archive2.com/?u=fbcf81e4dd2761d48aba0b6da&id=14df1d3e14
    Thanks. I see it's a "time of weight" adjustment to the onlines to reflect the fact that Brexit backers have very quick trigger fingers, which may be filling up the demographic quotas too quickly and (therefore) disproportionately.
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    TheWhiteRabbit said:

    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    MaxPB said:

    In all of this, the 2015/16 borrowing figures look atrocious. A £3.8bn shortfall and overall a £76bn deficit.

    What I found worse was the sheer uselesness of the Treasury forecasting. In April they stated that the financial year (that by then had closed) had a deficit of £74bn. Then a month later they state that they added it up wrong and the forecast was now a £76bn deficit. This is the scale of error that a finance director would be fired over.....

    May be this arises because they were running their spreadsheets over forecasting the next 14 years and overlooked doing the day job?
    I don't know which accountants you work with, we revise our accounts after year end here.
    The overall level of revision is ALWAYS less than 1%. In fact it is a tiny %. Revisions on this scale would be indicative of a badly run business. Which is what our Treasury appears to be.
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,455
    edited May 2016
    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    TheWhiteRabbit said:

    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    MaxPB said:

    In all of this, the 2015/16 borrowing figures look atrocious. A £3.8bn shortfall and overall a £76bn deficit.

    What I found worse was the sheer uselesness of the Treasury forecasting. In April they stated that the financial year (that by then had closed) had a deficit of £74bn. Then a month later they state that they added it up wrong and the forecast was now a £76bn deficit. This is the scale of error that a finance director would be fired over.....

    May be this arises because they were running their spreadsheets over forecasting the next 14 years and overlooked doing the day job?
    I don't know which accountants you work with, we revise our accounts after year end here.
    The overall level of revision is ALWAYS less than 1%. In fact it is a tiny %. Revisions on this scale would be indicative of a badly run business. Which is what our Treasury appears to be.
    Total spending by government is at least £772bn, £2bn is approximately one quarter of one percent.
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    tlg86 said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Hard to contend there hasn't been a 3-4% swing back to Remain over the last 2 weeks since the Blitzkreig was launched.

    Question is: what is Vote Leave doing? Where are they?

    I presume they are doing something, but it's not visible to man or beast.

    This won't go down well but I think Leave.EU might have done a better job. My dad's reaction to the broadcast last night was "do Vote Leave want us to stay in the EU or something?"
    LEAVE.EU would overall have done a far worse job. But that said LEAVE.EU should have been brought in to run most of the grassroots and leaflet work as that is very patchy.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 63,864
    tlg86 said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Hard to contend there hasn't been a 3-4% swing back to Remain over the last 2 weeks since the Blitzkreig was launched.

    Question is: what is Vote Leave doing? Where are they?

    I presume they are doing something, but it's not visible to man or beast.

    This won't go down well but I think Leave.EU might have done a better job. My dad's reaction to the broadcast last night was "do Vote Leave want us to stay in the EU or something?"
    Probably true. The Brexit animation move (3 minutes or so) wasn't too bad but it gets a bit Aaron Banksy and sweary towards the end.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    GOP and Trump tanking with the growing Asian American electorate. Significantly worse than Romney :

    http://advancingjustice-aajc.org/sites/aajc/files/Inclusion-AAVS-2016.pdf
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 32,202
    FTP: Even as an extreme polling layman, I think this 'ORB' thing is a bit of a joke.

    This is the extent of their analysis of their own poll?:
    http://www.opinion.co.uk/article.php?s=daily-telegraph-poll-18th-22nd-may

    And look at this:

    'EU Poll
    Page 62
    Table 16
    Q3 - Thinking about the UK as a whole, do you believe the country is generally heading in the right direction, or seriously heading in the wrong direction?'

    'Generally right direction' is not the equivalent of 'Seriously wrong direction'. I know that from basic market research - this is meant to be a polling company? Done properly, this question could have been quite a good proxy to compare to the headline figures.

    There are tables riddled with gobbledygook keyboard typing, typos in the questions etc.

    And why is the general aim to come back with as few don't knows as possible?
  • blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    gettingbetter said:

    blackburn63 said:

    On the previous thread somebody mentioned how drugs had ruined the working class, a bit of a generalisation but in essence I agree. I had a long conversation with a very senior police officer who said they'd more or less lost the streets, all they could do was try and contain things. The misery class A drugs cause is immeasurable, we spoke about Wet Rooms, an idea used around the world. No political party here has the bollox to get on top of the issue.

    I suggested we should execute dealers and treat users, the policeman said not many in the force would disagree, he called them "peddlars of death". Something like 95% of prisoners are in for drug related crime, what we're doing simply isn't working. As SeanT would no doubt testify, the extent to which drugs like heroin are in daily use would astound most people, its terrifying. As Stephen Fry says, the difference between middle class and working class drug use is the middle classes can afford it.

    If we gave the drugs out free to addicts then there would not be any dealers, except those selling to celebrities and politicians who did not want their habits to be known.
    It's not as straightforward as that, dealers are ruthless and in effect politicians become the dealers, negotiating to buy the drugs. But I agree its a start, in controlled, safe conditions. The thought appalls an entire strata of society until somebody close to them gets involved and the fetid mess becomes reality.

    Unfortunately it keeps getting brushed under the carpet.
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    Sean_F said:

    chestnut said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Hard to contend there hasn't been a 3-4% swing back to Remain over the last 2 weeks since the Blitzkreig was launched.

    It's hard to know truthfully because Yougov and ICM are both tinkering with their methodologies.

    One thing is clear though, Yougov, ICM and Prof. Curtice are all down on the side of the line which places very little faith in one-call telephone polling. The BES/BSA findings have thrown the whole methodology into doubt.
    Overall, I would say there has been a shift to Remain over a fortnight. Not massive, but it's there.
    I keep waiting for the leave counter attack to Remain's blitzkrieg.

    It never seems to come.
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    edited May 2016
    Sean_F said:

    chestnut said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Hard to contend there hasn't been a 3-4% swing back to Remain over the last 2 weeks since the Blitzkreig was launched.

    It's hard to know truthfully because Yougov and ICM are both tinkering with their methodologies.

    One thing is clear though, Yougov, ICM and Prof. Curtice are all down on the side of the line which places very little faith in one-call telephone polling. The BES/BSA findings have thrown the whole methodology into doubt.
    Overall, I would say there has been a shift to Remain over a fortnight. Not massive, but it's there.
    I wonder how much is real and how much is:

    a) Methodological change;
    b) Spates of polls that use a favourable method for one outcome or another coming in bunches;

    I don't get the sense on here, or elsewhere, that anyone is really changing their mind.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 32,202
    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    tlg86 said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Hard to contend there hasn't been a 3-4% swing back to Remain over the last 2 weeks since the Blitzkreig was launched.

    Question is: what is Vote Leave doing? Where are they?

    I presume they are doing something, but it's not visible to man or beast.

    This won't go down well but I think Leave.EU might have done a better job. My dad's reaction to the broadcast last night was "do Vote Leave want us to stay in the EU or something?"
    LEAVE.EU would overall have done a far worse job. But that said LEAVE.EU should have been brought in to run most of the grassroots and leaflet work as that is very patchy.
    No They wouldn't. Because unlike Vote Leave, they at least vaguely have their sh*t together. Check out their social media account numbers and engagement.

    The idea that the bunch of hopeless Tories that run Vote Leave could do better if only they only had the use of UKIP as a sort of 'party that does' is deeply misguided and rather insulting. Accordingly, I gave Leave.EU a small but hopefully useful donation the other week. I wouldn't give the others a penny.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 63,864
    Sean_F said:

    chestnut said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Hard to contend there hasn't been a 3-4% swing back to Remain over the last 2 weeks since the Blitzkreig was launched.

    It's hard to know truthfully because Yougov and ICM are both tinkering with their methodologies.

    One thing is clear though, Yougov, ICM and Prof. Curtice are all down on the side of the line which places very little faith in one-call telephone polling. The BES/BSA findings have thrown the whole methodology into doubt.
    Overall, I would say there has been a shift to Remain over a fortnight. Not massive, but it's there.
    VM for you.
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    Luckyguy1983 said:

    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    tlg86 said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Hard to contend there hasn't been a 3-4% swing back to Remain over the last 2 weeks since the Blitzkreig was launched.

    Question is: what is Vote Leave doing? Where are they?

    I presume they are doing something, but it's not visible to man or beast.

    This won't go down well but I think Leave.EU might have done a better job. My dad's reaction to the broadcast last night was "do Vote Leave want us to stay in the EU or something?"
    LEAVE.EU would overall have done a far worse job. But that said LEAVE.EU should have been brought in to run most of the grassroots and leaflet work as that is very patchy.
    No They wouldn't. Because unlike Vote Leave, they at least vaguely have their sh*t together. Check out their social media account numbers and engagement.
    The idea that the bunch of hopeless Tories that run Vote Leave could do better if only they only had the use of UKIP as a sort of 'party that does' is deeply misguided and rather insulting. Accordingly, I gave Leave.EU a small but hopefully useful donation the other week. I wouldn't give the others a penny.
    errr you are saying the same as me.... VoteLeave are bad at mobilising activists and Leave.Eu are better at it.... I am using both in the volunteer work !
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,316
    RodCrosby said:

    Burt Kwouk has died aged 85...

    Blimey - RIP, Cato!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryuW22MWnOU
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    blackburn63 said:

    gettingbetter said:

    blackburn63 said:

    On the previous thread somebody mentioned how drugs had ruined the working class, a bit of a generalisation but in essence I agree. I had a long conversation with a very senior police officer who said they'd more or less lost the streets, all they could do was try and contain things. The misery class A drugs cause is immeasurable, we spoke about Wet Rooms, an idea used around the world. No political party here has the bollox to get on top of the issue.

    I suggested we should execute dealers and treat users, the policeman said not many in the force would disagree, he called them "peddlars of death". Something like 95% of prisoners are in for drug related crime, what we're doing simply isn't working. As SeanT would no doubt testify, the extent to which drugs like heroin are in daily use would astound most people, its terrifying. As Stephen Fry says, the difference between middle class and working class drug use is the middle classes can afford it.

    If we gave the drugs out free to addicts then there would not be any dealers, except those selling to celebrities and politicians who did not want their habits to be known.
    It's not as straightforward as that, dealers are ruthless and in effect politicians become the dealers, negotiating to buy the drugs. But I agree its a start, in controlled, safe conditions. The thought appalls an entire strata of society until somebody close to them gets involved and the fetid mess becomes reality.

    Unfortunately it keeps getting brushed under the carpet.
    The growth of cannabis legalisation (sort of) across the United States may change things. Our politicians can ignore Portugal and Holland but America is on telly. As Faraday replied when Gladstone asked what is the use of electricity: one day, sir, you may tax it. Politicians in the states are attracted not by liberty but by revenue.
  • blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    taffys said:

    Sean_F said:

    chestnut said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Hard to contend there hasn't been a 3-4% swing back to Remain over the last 2 weeks since the Blitzkreig was launched.

    It's hard to know truthfully because Yougov and ICM are both tinkering with their methodologies.

    One thing is clear though, Yougov, ICM and Prof. Curtice are all down on the side of the line which places very little faith in one-call telephone polling. The BES/BSA findings have thrown the whole methodology into doubt.
    Overall, I would say there has been a shift to Remain over a fortnight. Not massive, but it's there.
    I keep waiting for the leave counter attack to Remain's blitzkrieg.

    It never seems to come.
    People such as Hannan and Carswell, who I've spent time with, are old school gentlemen, play up and play the game, do things properly. It seems Gove is the same. Under the influence of Crosby Cameron is prepared to say or do anything, integrity has become obsolete.

    But Nigel won't see it like the others, listening to him recently he seems pent up with frustration. If he can contain and manage that on ITV he might just land some killer blows on Cameron, let's hope so. It's been Cameron's to lose all along, he might just crack.
  • perdixperdix Posts: 1,806
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    RodCrosby said:

    Burt Kwouk has died aged 85...

    Blimey - RIP, Cato!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryuW22MWnOU
    Also as "Entwhistle" from his ancestral home in Hull (Last of the Summer Wine) :)

  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,321
    The pair were commissioned to paint the piece by We Are Europe, a group dedicated to convincing young people to register to vote in order to keep Britain in the EU.

    http://www.bristol247.com/channel/culture/art/street-art/exclusive-boris-trump-kiss-artists-revealed

    A cunning pro EU stunt.
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    TheWhiteRabbit said:

    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    TheWhiteRabbit said:

    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    MaxPB said:

    In all of this, the 2015/16 borrowing figures look atrocious. A £3.8bn shortfall and overall a £76bn deficit.

    What I found worse was the sheer uselesness of the Treasury forecasting. In April they stated that the financial year (that by then had closed) had a deficit of £74bn. Then a month later they state that they added it up wrong and the forecast was now a £76bn deficit. This is the scale of error that a finance director would be fired over.....

    May be this arises because they were running their spreadsheets over forecasting the next 14 years and overlooked doing the day job?
    I don't know which accountants you work with, we revise our accounts after year end here.
    The overall level of revision is ALWAYS less than 1%. In fact it is a tiny %. Revisions on this scale would be indicative of a badly run business. Which is what our Treasury appears to be.
    Total spending by government is at least £772bn, £2bn is approximately one quarter of one percent.
    The profit/Loss figure is where city analysts first look for and that really has to come in within a tiny % of the forecast if you want to keep your job as finance director.
  • tpfkartpfkar Posts: 1,578
    Luckyguy1983 said:

    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    tlg86 said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Hard to contend there hasn't been a 3-4% swing back to Remain over the last 2 weeks since the Blitzkreig was launched.

    Question is: what is Vote Leave doing? Where are they?

    I presume they are doing something, but it's not visible to man or beast.

    This won't go down well but I think Leave.EU might have done a better job. My dad's reaction to the broadcast last night was "do Vote Leave want us to stay in the EU or something?"
    LEAVE.EU would overall have done a far worse job. But that said LEAVE.EU should have been brought in to run most of the grassroots and leaflet work as that is very patchy.
    No They wouldn't. Because unlike Vote Leave, they at least vaguely have their sh*t together. Check out their social media account numbers and engagement.

    The idea that the bunch of hopeless Tories that run Vote Leave could do better if only they only had the use of UKIP as a sort of 'party that does' is deeply misguided and rather insulting. Accordingly, I gave Leave.EU a small but hopefully useful donation the other week. I wouldn't give the others a penny.
    Isn't the very fact that we're having this discussion the problem? The Leave side are still divided, unhappy, have different visions, and as of last night publishing personal contact details of the other groups. Winning the referendum for out with a clear vision and united campaign would have been hard enough, but like this? If we do vote out, I fear that the negotiations would have a similar tone and be just as fractious - as the different camps want so many different things, and even 'Take Control' can mean whatever you want it to.
  • weejonnieweejonnie Posts: 3,820
    I think implied chance for the Don has gone from 30% to 32% since this page opened.
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    chestnut said:

    Sean_F said:

    chestnut said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Hard to contend there hasn't been a 3-4% swing back to Remain over the last 2 weeks since the Blitzkreig was launched.

    It's hard to know truthfully because Yougov and ICM are both tinkering with their methodologies.

    One thing is clear though, Yougov, ICM and Prof. Curtice are all down on the side of the line which places very little faith in one-call telephone polling. The BES/BSA findings have thrown the whole methodology into doubt.
    Overall, I would say there has been a shift to Remain over a fortnight. Not massive, but it's there.
    I wonder how much is real and how much is:

    a) Methodological change;
    b) Spates of polls that use a favourable method for one outcome or another coming in bunches;

    I don't get the sense on here, or elsewhere, that anyone is really changing their mind.
    This ICM effectively has no change. A few days ago Prof John Curtice reviewed a bunch of polls and said no change. We are in the 14th effing week of this REMAIN Government fear barrage.... and we get polls from reliable attentive pollsters such as ICM and Yougov saying it is basically level.
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    edited May 2016
    perdix said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    RodCrosby said:

    Burt Kwouk has died aged 85...

    Blimey - RIP, Cato!

    Also as "Entwhistle" from his ancestral home in Hull (Last of the Summer Wine) :)

    He was excellent as the Japanese commandant in "Tenko"
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 63,864
    Twats can now be longer:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-36367752
  • weejonnieweejonnie Posts: 3,820
    Personally, I think VL have probably been swamped so far by Government Propaganda. Now that the source of much of it will dry up, they have a better chance of swimming against the current and make some progress.

    Three letters will decide this referendum though for Remain. B*C.
  • blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    blackburn63 said:

    gettingbetter said:

    blackburn63 said:

    On the previous thread somebody mentioned how drugs had ruined the working class, a bit of a generalisation but in essence I agree. I had a long conversation with a very senior police officer who said they'd more or less lost the streets, all they could do was try and contain things. The misery class A drugs cause is immeasurable, we spoke about Wet Rooms, an idea used around the world. No political party here has the bollox to get on top of the issue.

    I suggested we should execute dealers and treat users, the policeman said not many in the force would disagree, he called them "peddlars of death". Something like 95% of prisoners are in for drug related crime, what we're doing simply isn't working. As SeanT would no doubt testify, the extent to which drugs like heroin are in daily use would astound most people, its terrifying. As Stephen Fry says, the difference between middle class and working class drug use is the middle classes can afford it.

    If we gave the drugs out free to addicts then there would not be any dealers, except those selling to celebrities and politicians who did not want their habits to be known.
    It's not as straightforward as that, dealers are ruthless and in effect politicians become the dealers, negotiating to buy the drugs. But I agree its a start, in controlled, safe conditions. The thought appalls an entire strata of society until somebody close to them gets involved and the fetid mess becomes reality.

    Unfortunately it keeps getting brushed under the carpet.
    The growth of cannabis legalisation (sort of) across the United States may change things. Our politicians can ignore Portugal and Holland but America is on telly. As Faraday replied when Gladstone asked what is the use of electricity: one day, sir, you may tax it. Politicians in the states are attracted not by liberty but by revenue.
    Good point.

    The image of an entourage from Whitehall sat around with Colombians and Afghans is too awful to contemplate, but drugs are the scourge of society, an entirely different approach is required.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Just think yourself lucky that the picture shows them kissing.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 18,357
    RodCrosby said:

    FPT: HYUFD said:
    "No president ever has won because of their VP, with possible exception of LBJ winning Texas for JFK though he would have won without it. Personally I think Trump might pick Scott Brown, Hillary Castro or Warren"

    Yebbut, never before has someone run without legislative, military or foreign policy experience.

    Trump needs a good Veep, or he may as well forget it...
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/americans-concerned-trump-experience_us_574448e6e4b045cc9a71da3e

    Wendall Wilkie did.

    Never before has someone won without legislative, military or executive experience.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,250
    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    chestnut said:

    Sean_F said:

    chestnut said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Hard to contend there hasn't been a 3-4% swing back to Remain over the last 2 weeks since the Blitzkreig was launched.

    It's hard to know truthfully because Yougov and ICM are both tinkering with their methodologies.

    One thing is clear though, Yougov, ICM and Prof. Curtice are all down on the side of the line which places very little faith in one-call telephone polling. The BES/BSA findings have thrown the whole methodology into doubt.
    Overall, I would say there has been a shift to Remain over a fortnight. Not massive, but it's there.
    I wonder how much is real and how much is:

    a) Methodological change;
    b) Spates of polls that use a favourable method for one outcome or another coming in bunches;

    I don't get the sense on here, or elsewhere, that anyone is really changing their mind.
    This ICM effectively has no change. A few days ago Prof John Curtice reviewed a bunch of polls and said no change. We are in the 14th effing week of this REMAIN Government fear barrage.... and we get polls from reliable attentive pollsters such as ICM and Yougov saying it is basically level.
    But, on average, Remain are ahead. No change means they win, even if not by much.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,316
    AlastairMeeks said:

    Just think yourself lucky that the picture shows them kissing.

    There should be one showing Alastair snogging TSE :lol:
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,023
    Just odious, no wonder they posted people's mobile numbers online

    @Hannah_McGrath: So Farage has just told his 'people's army' in Dudley to 'go out, persuade people, bully people'. #Brexit
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    Sean_F said:

    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    chestnut said:

    Sean_F said:

    chestnut said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Hard to contend there hasn't been a 3-4% swing back to Remain over the last 2 weeks since the Blitzkreig was launched.

    It's hard to know truthfully because Yougov and ICM are both tinkering with their methodologies.

    One thing is clear though, Yougov, ICM and Prof. Curtice are all down on the side of the line which places very little faith in one-call telephone polling. The BES/BSA findings have thrown the whole methodology into doubt.
    Overall, I would say there has been a shift to Remain over a fortnight. Not massive, but it's there.
    I wonder how much is real and how much is:

    a) Methodological change;
    b) Spates of polls that use a favourable method for one outcome or another coming in bunches;

    I don't get the sense on here, or elsewhere, that anyone is really changing their mind.
    This ICM effectively has no change. A few days ago Prof John Curtice reviewed a bunch of polls and said no change. We are in the 14th effing week of this REMAIN Government fear barrage.... and we get polls from reliable attentive pollsters such as ICM and Yougov saying it is basically level.
    But, on average, Remain are ahead. No change means they win, even if not by much.
    If they are getting the turnout right. All I have seen are using self selecting turnouts of "of course I will vote". The young are much more optimistic (and wrong) about their chances of voting. Some are unaware that they are not on the register.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,316
    Casino_Royale said:

    Twats can now be longer:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-36367752

    Wonder why he chose 140, rather than (say) 150 characters.
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    Sean_F said:

    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    chestnut said:

    Sean_F said:

    chestnut said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Hard to contend there hasn't been a 3-4% swing back to Remain over the last 2 weeks since the Blitzkreig was launched.

    It's hard to know truthfully because Yougov and ICM are both tinkering with their methodologies.

    One thing is clear though, Yougov, ICM and Prof. Curtice are all down on the side of the line which places very little faith in one-call telephone polling. The BES/BSA findings have thrown the whole methodology into doubt.
    Overall, I would say there has been a shift to Remain over a fortnight. Not massive, but it's there.
    I wonder how much is real and how much is:

    a) Methodological change;
    b) Spates of polls that use a favourable method for one outcome or another coming in bunches;

    I don't get the sense on here, or elsewhere, that anyone is really changing their mind.
    This ICM effectively has no change. A few days ago Prof John Curtice reviewed a bunch of polls and said no change. We are in the 14th effing week of this REMAIN Government fear barrage.... and we get polls from reliable attentive pollsters such as ICM and Yougov saying it is basically level.
    But, on average, Remain are ahead. No change means they win, even if not by much.
    Indeed. Leave need something.
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    Just think yourself lucky that the picture shows them kissing.

    There should be one showing Alastair snogging TSE :lol:
    NSFW
  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    It is now 7 days since Channel 4 carried the story of its advance preview of the 22,000 poll by BES ( interviews apparently completed May 4th ) . Is it not strange that the BES website still has no mention whatsoever of this poll let alone detailed data tables .
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Just odious, no wonder they posted people's mobile numbers online

    @Hannah_McGrath: So Farage has just told his 'people's army' in Dudley to 'go out, persuade people, bully people'. #Brexit

    That's rich coming from a remain campaign that's exploited the full resources of government to scare the sh8t out of the electorate.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 18,357
    blackburn63 said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    blackburn63 said:

    gettingbetter said:

    blackburn63 said:

    On the previous thread somebody mentioned how drugs had ruined the working class, a bit of a generalisation but in essence I agree. I had a long conversation with a very senior police officer who said they'd more or less lost the streets, all they could do was try and contain things. The misery class A drugs cause is immeasurable, we spoke about Wet Rooms, an idea used around the world. No political party here has the bollox to get on top of the issue.

    I suggested we should execute dealers and treat users, the policeman said not many in the force would disagree, he called them "peddlars of death". Something like 95% of prisoners are in for drug related crime, what we're doing simply isn't working. As SeanT would no doubt testify, the extent to which drugs like heroin are in daily use would astound most people, its terrifying. As Stephen Fry says, the difference between middle class and working class drug use is the middle classes can afford it.

    If we gave the drugs out free to addicts then there would not be any dealers, except those selling to celebrities and politicians who did not want their habits to be known.
    It's not as straightforward as that, dealers are ruthless and in effect politicians become the dealers, negotiating to buy the drugs. But I agree its a start, in controlled, safe conditions. The thought appalls an entire strata of society until somebody close to them gets involved and the fetid mess becomes reality.

    Unfortunately it keeps getting brushed under the carpet.
    The growth of cannabis legalisation (sort of) across the United States may change things. Our politicians can ignore Portugal and Holland but America is on telly. As Faraday replied when Gladstone asked what is the use of electricity: one day, sir, you may tax it. Politicians in the states are attracted not by liberty but by revenue.
    Good point.

    The image of an entourage from Whitehall sat around with Colombians and Afghans is too awful to contemplate, but drugs are the scourge of society, an entirely different approach is required.
    Legalise, regulate, educate, tax.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 63,864
    weejonnie said:

    Personally, I think VL have probably been swamped so far by Government Propaganda. Now that the source of much of it will dry up, they have a better chance of swimming against the current and make some progress.

    Three letters will decide this referendum though for Remain. B*C.

    A huge number of people now get their news from the BBC website.

    I know I'm not neutral but, let's face it, neither are they and the last Leave headline I think it gave anyone was Boris and Hitler.
  • blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Just odious, no wonder they posted people's mobile numbers online

    @Hannah_McGrath: So Farage has just told his 'people's army' in Dudley to 'go out, persuade people, bully people'. #Brexit

    Dry your eyes princess
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,250
    MarkSenior said:

    It is now 7 days since Channel 4 carried the story of its advance preview of the 22,000 poll by BES ( interviews apparently completed May 4th ) . Is it not strange that the BES website still has no mention whatsoever of this poll let alone detailed data tables .

    I understand we won't get the tables till the end of the month.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,316
    Sean_F said:

    MarkSenior said:

    It is now 7 days since Channel 4 carried the story of its advance preview of the 22,000 poll by BES ( interviews apparently completed May 4th ) . Is it not strange that the BES website still has no mention whatsoever of this poll let alone detailed data tables .

    I understand we won't get the tables till the end of the month.
    By which time the figures will be almost a month out of date?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,250
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Just odious, no wonder they posted people's mobile numbers online

    @Hannah_McGrath: So Farage has just told his 'people's army' in Dudley to 'go out, persuade people, bully people'. #Brexit

    Sounds like a standard pep talk to political activists.
  • blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    david_herdson said:

    blackburn63 said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    blackburn63 said:

    gettingbetter said:

    blackburn63 said:

    On the previous thread somebody mentioned how drugs had ruined the working class, a bit of a generalisation but in essence I agree. I had a long conversation with a very senior police officer who said they'd more or less lost the streets, all they could do was try and contain things. The misery class A drugs cause is immeasurable, we spoke about Wet Rooms, an idea used around the world. No political party here has the bollox to get on top of the issue.

    I suggested we should execute dealers and treat users, the policeman said not many in the force would disagree, he called them "peddlars of death". Something like 95% of prisoners are in for drug related crime, what we're doing simply isn't working. As SeanT would no doubt testify, the extent to which drugs like heroin are in daily use would astound most people, its terrifying. As Stephen Fry says, the difference between middle class and working class drug use is the middle classes can afford it.

    If we gave the drugs out free to addicts then there would not be any dealers, except those selling to celebrities and politicians who did not want their habits to be known.
    It's not as straightforward as that, dealers are ruthless and in effect politicians become the dealers, negotiating to buy the drugs. But I agree its a start, in controlled, safe conditions. The thought appalls an entire strata of society until somebody close to them gets involved and the fetid mess becomes reality.

    Unfortunately it keeps getting brushed under the carpet.
    The growth of cannabis legalisation (sort of) across the United States may change things. Our politicians can ignore Portugal and Holland but America is on telly. As Faraday replied when Gladstone asked what is the use of electricity: one day, sir, you may tax it. Politicians in the states are attracted not by liberty but by revenue.
    Good point.

    The image of an entourage from Whitehall sat around with Colombians and Afghans is too awful to contemplate, but drugs are the scourge of society, an entirely different approach is required.
    Legalise, regulate, educate, tax.
    Yes that's a start. As a libertarian it's nobody's business what an individual chooses to ingest, but dealers prey on users in unimaginable ways. So somewhere in your equation proper punishment must appear too.

    Good to talk though, I wish parliament would.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Sean_F said:

    I understand we won't get the tables till the end of the month.

    The month of June ?!?

  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    Todays ICM poll had VI Con 32 Lab 30 UKIP 18 LD 8 Others 11
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,874
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    Sean_F said:

    MarkSenior said:

    It is now 7 days since Channel 4 carried the story of its advance preview of the 22,000 poll by BES ( interviews apparently completed May 4th ) . Is it not strange that the BES website still has no mention whatsoever of this poll let alone detailed data tables .

    I understand we won't get the tables till the end of the month.
    By which time the figures will be almost a month out of date?
    If there has been fundamentally "no change" since then though...
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Michael A Cohen of the "Boston Globe" tells "Clintonistas - "Don't Panic ..."

    http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/05/23/still-panicked-about-trump-don/kJuFeFnQMMPwvAGvSXwHJO/story.html
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 18,357
    edited May 2016
    blackburn63 said:

    david_herdson said:

    blackburn63 said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    blackburn63 said:

    gettingbetter said:

    blackburn63 said:



    I suggested we should execute dealers and treat users, the policeman said not many in the force would disagree, he called them "peddlars of death". Something like 95% of prisoners are in for drug related crime, what we're doing simply isn't working. As SeanT would no doubt testify, the extent to which drugs like heroin are in daily use would astound most people, its terrifying. As Stephen Fry says, the difference between middle class and working class drug use is the middle classes can afford it.

    If we gave the drugs out free to addicts then there would not be any dealers, except those selling to celebrities and politicians who did not want their habits to be known.
    It's not as straightforward as that, dealers are ruthless and in effect politicians become the dealers, negotiating to buy the drugs. But I agree its a start, in controlled, safe conditions. The thought appalls an entire strata of society until somebody close to them gets involved and the fetid mess becomes reality.

    Unfortunately it keeps getting brushed under the carpet.
    The growth of cannabis legalisation (sort of) across the United States may change things. Our politicians can ignore Portugal and Holland but America is on telly. As Faraday replied when Gladstone asked what is the use of electricity: one day, sir, you may tax it. Politicians in the states are attracted not by liberty but by revenue.
    Good point.

    The image of an entourage from Whitehall sat around with Colombians and Afghans is too awful to contemplate, but drugs are the scourge of society, an entirely different approach is required.
    Legalise, regulate, educate, tax.
    Yes that's a start. As a libertarian it's nobody's business what an individual chooses to ingest, but dealers prey on users in unimaginable ways. So somewhere in your equation proper punishment must appear too.

    Good to talk though, I wish parliament would.
    Once you legalise, then commercial enterprises will move in: that's part of 'regulate' - ensure standards of supply. Criminal suppliers will be driven out by simple market forces, just as those who controlled the US prohibition-era drinks market were once legal brewers and distillers were back in the market.

    That said, illegal, unregistered suppliers should still be prosecuted, the same as in any other regulated industry.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,874
    http://us11.campaign-archive2.com/?u=fbcf81e4dd2761d48aba0b6da&id=14df1d3e14

    Regarding quotas being filled too quickly - surely the optimal solution is to allow quotas to be filled, and then even overfilled ... but take a random sample of the overfilled quota to par down to the actual quota ?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,629
    dr_spyn said:

    The pair were commissioned to paint the piece by We Are Europe, a group dedicated to convincing young people to register to vote in order to keep Britain in the EU.

    http://www.bristol247.com/channel/culture/art/street-art/exclusive-boris-trump-kiss-artists-revealed

    A cunning pro EU stunt.

    It really is quite annoying that the debate isn't actually focussed on Britain's long term future.
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    david_herdson said:

    blackburn63 said:

    david_herdson said:

    blackburn63 said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    blackburn63 said:

    gettingbetter said:

    blackburn63 said:



    I suggested we should execute dealers and treat users, the policeman said not many in the force would disagree, he called them "peddlars of death". Something like 95% of prisoners are in for drug related crime, what we're doing simply isn't working. As SeanT would no doubt testify, the extent to which drugs like heroin are in daily use would astound most people, its terrifying. As Stephen Fry says, the difference between middle class and working class drug use is the middle classes can afford it.

    If we gave the drugs out free to addicts then there would not be any dealers, except those selling to celebrities and politicians who did not want their habits to be known.
    It's not as straightforward as that, dealers are ruthless and in effect politicians become the dealers, negotiating to buy the drugs. But I agree its a start, in controlled, safe conditions. The thought appalls an entire strata of society until somebody close to them gets involved and the fetid mess becomes reality.

    Unfortunately it keeps getting brushed under the carpet.
    The growth of cannabis legalisation (sort of) across the United States may change things. Our politicians can ignore Portugal and Holland but America is on telly. As Faraday replied when Gladstone asked what is the use of electricity: one day, sir, you may tax it. Politicians in the states are attracted not by liberty but by revenue.
    Good point.

    The image of an entourage from Whitehall sat around with Colombians and Afghans is too awful to contemplate, but drugs are the scourge of society, an entirely different approach is required.
    Legalise, regulate, educate, tax.
    Yes that's a start. As a libertarian it's nobody's business what an individual chooses to ingest, but dealers prey on users in unimaginable ways. So somewhere in your equation proper punishment must appear too.

    Good to talk though, I wish parliament would.
    Once you legalise, then commercial enterprises will move in: that's part of 'regulate' - ensure standards of supply. Criminal suppliers will be driven out by simple market forces, just as those who controlled the US prohibition-era drinks market were once legal brewers and distillers were back in the market.
    Of course the idiots in our government are going the other way on tobacco, a massive shot in the arm for organised crime.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 63,864
    MarkSenior said:

    Todays ICM poll had VI Con 32 Lab 30 UKIP 18 LD 8 Others 11

    UKIP looks a bit high..
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    The reasoning behind the ICM revision of methodology is interesting. It does give weight to the idea that online panels are unrepresentatively politically engaged.
  • blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    david_herdson said:

    blackburn63 said:

    david_herdson said:

    blackburn63 said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    blackburn63 said:

    gettingbetter said:

    blackburn63 said:



    I suggested we should execute dealers and treat users, the policeman said not many in the force would disagree, he called them "peddlars of death". Something like 95% of prisoners are in for drug related crime, what we're doing simply isn't working. As SeanT would no doubt testify, the extent to which drugs like heroin are in daily use would astound most people, its terrifying. As Stephen Fry says, the difference between middle class and working class drug use is the middle classes can afford it.

    If we gave the drugs out free to addicts then there would not be any dealers, except those selling to celebrities and politicians who did not want their habits to be known.
    It's not as straightforward as that, dealers are ruthless and in effect politicians become the dealers, negotiating to buy the drugs. But I agree its a start, in controlled, safe conditions. The thought appalls an entire strata of society until somebody close to them gets involved and the fetid mess becomes reality.

    Unfortunately it keeps getting brushed under the carpet.
    The growth of cannabis legalisation (sort of) across the United States may change things. Our politicians can ignore Portugal and Holland but America is on telly. As Faraday replied when Gladstone asked what is the use of electricity: one day, sir, you may tax it. Politicians in the states are attracted not by liberty but by revenue.
    Good point.

    The image of an entourage from Whitehall sat around with Colombians and Afghans is too awful to contemplate, but drugs are the scourge of society, an entirely different approach is required.
    Legalise, regulate, educate, tax.
    Yes that's a start. As a libertarian it's nobody's business what an individual chooses to ingest, but dealers prey on users in unimaginable ways. So somewhere in your equation proper punishment must appear too.

    Good to talk though, I wish parliament would.
    Once you legalise, then commercial enterprises will move in: that's part of 'regulate' - ensure standards of supply. Criminal suppliers will be driven out by simple market forces, just as those who controlled the US prohibition-era drinks market were once legal brewers and distillers were back in the market.
    I'd like to agree but I'm afraid you're being naive. People controlling £million drug rings won't just shrug their shoulders. That's not to say nothing can be done, it can, but politicians refuse to even discuss it. None of them has the foggiest idea of the depth of the problem.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 63,864
    Pulpstar said:

    http://us11.campaign-archive2.com/?u=fbcf81e4dd2761d48aba0b6da&id=14df1d3e14

    Regarding quotas being filled too quickly - surely the optimal solution is to allow quotas to be filled, and then even overfilled ... but take a random sample of the overfilled quota to par down to the actual quota ?

    You'd think.

    One point I haven't seen made yet is that to all intents and purposes telephone and online polls are, now, to many people basically the same thing.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    National - SurveyMonkey/NBC

    Clinton 51 .. Sanders 42 - Sample 4,888

    Clinton 47 .. Trump 43 - Sample 14,513
    Sanders 53 .. Trump 41 - Sample 14,513

    http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/poll-majority-americans-dislike-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-n578926
  • blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    Casino_Royale said:

    MarkSenior said:

    Todays ICM poll had VI Con 32 Lab 30 UKIP 18 LD 8 Others 11

    UKIP looks a bit high..
    Remain is edging clear as Ukip rises, mmmmmh, interesting.
  • prh47bridgeprh47bridge Posts: 480
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Twats can now be longer:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-36367752

    Wonder why he chose 140, rather than (say) 150 characters.
    Twitter was originally designed to use SMS messages. These are limited to 160 characters (any longer message is actually made up of a series of 160 character messages). So the designers of Twitter reserved 20 characters for a username leaving 140 characters for the post. Hence the 140 character limit.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 33,486
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    Just think yourself lucky that the picture shows them kissing.

    There should be one showing Alastair snogging TSE :lol:
    Or Cameron kissing Junker's cheeks. I leave it to you to decide which ones would be more appropriate.
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    I hope this link works, scroll down to see 3 people seated listening to Phil Hammond speak....

    http://tinyurl.com/gshu3u7
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,776
    Good afternoon, everyone.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,250
    Casino_Royale said:

    MarkSenior said:

    Todays ICM poll had VI Con 32 Lab 30 UKIP 18 LD 8 Others 11

    UKIP looks a bit high..
    The overall right of centre vote share seems correct, though. If 5% or so of voters from 2015 switch from Conservatives to UKIP, they'll be almost all supporters of Leave, regardless whether they vote Conservative or UKIP.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,250
    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    Just think yourself lucky that the picture shows them kissing.

    There should be one showing Alastair snogging TSE :lol:
    Or Cameron kissing Junker's cheeks. I leave it to you to decide which ones would be more appropriate.
    Or kissing another part of Juncker's anatomy.
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    Casino_Royale said:

    MarkSenior said:

    Todays ICM poll had VI Con 32 Lab 30 UKIP 18 LD 8 Others 11

    UKIP looks a bit high..
    Not with the movement of Conservatives to UKIP, repelled by Cameron and Osborne.
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,455
    Pulpstar said:

    http://us11.campaign-archive2.com/?u=fbcf81e4dd2761d48aba0b6da&id=14df1d3e14

    Regarding quotas being filled too quickly - surely the optimal solution is to allow quotas to be filled, and then even overfilled ... but take a random sample of the overfilled quota to par down to the actual quota ?

    Isn't it a question of paying them?
  • WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838
    blackburn63 said:

    david_herdson said:

    blackburn63 said:

    david_herdson said:

    blackburn63 said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    blackburn63 said:

    gettingbetter said:



    If we gave the drugs out free to addicts then there would not be any dealers, except those selling to celebrities and politicians who did not want their habits to be known.

    It's not as straightforward as that, dealers are ruthless and in effect politicians become the dealers, negotiating to buy the drugs. But I agree its a start, in controlled, safe conditions. The thought appalls an entire strata of society until somebody close to them gets involved and the fetid mess becomes reality.

    Unfortunately it keeps getting brushed under the carpet.
    The growth of cannabis legalisation (sort of) across the United States may change things. Our politicians can ignore Portugal and Holland but America is on telly. As Faraday replied when Gladstone asked what is the use of electricity: one day, sir, you may tax it. Politicians in the states are attracted not by liberty but by revenue.
    Good point.

    The image of an entourage from Whitehall sat around with Colombians and Afghans is too awful to contemplate, but drugs are the scourge of society, an entirely different approach is required.
    Legalise, regulate, educate, tax.
    Yes that's a start. As a libertarian it's nobody's business what an individual chooses to ingest, but dealers prey on users in unimaginable ways. So somewhere in your equation proper punishment must appear too.

    Good to talk though, I wish parliament would.
    Once you legalise, then commercial enterprises will move in: that's part of 'regulate' - ensure standards of supply. Criminal suppliers will be driven out by simple market forces, just as those who controlled the US prohibition-era drinks market were once legal brewers and distillers were back in the market.
    I'd like to agree but I'm afraid you're being naive. People controlling £million drug rings won't just shrug their shoulders. That's not to say nothing can be done, it can, but politicians refuse to even discuss it. None of them has the foggiest idea of the depth of the problem.
    A legal product will destroy the market for an illegal one (unless the legal one has an absurdly high tax on it). It doesn't really matter whether criminals like it or not. They won't have any customers.
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,455
    Wanderer said:

    blackburn63 said:

    david_herdson said:

    blackburn63 said:

    david_herdson said:

    blackburn63 said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    blackburn63 said:

    gettingbetter said:



    If we gave the drugs out free to addicts then there would not be any dealers, except those selling to celebrities and politicians who did not want their habits to be known.

    It's not as straightforward as that, dealers are ruthless and in effect politicians become the dealers, negotiating to buy the drugs. But I agree its a start, in controlled, safe conditions. The thought appalls an entire strata of society until somebody close to them gets involved and the fetid mess becomes reality.

    Unfortunately it keeps getting brushed under the carpet.
    The growth of cannabis legalisation (sort of) across the United States may change things. Our politicians can ignore Portugal and Holland but America is on telly. As Faraday replied when Gladstone asked what is the use of electricity: one day, sir, you may tax it. Politicians in the states are attracted not by liberty but by revenue.
    Good point.

    The image of an entourage from Whitehall sat around with Colombians and Afghans is too awful to contemplate, but drugs are the scourge of society, an entirely different approach is required.
    Legalise, regulate, educate, tax.
    Yes that's a start. As a libertarian it's nobody's business what an individual chooses to ingest, but dealers prey on users in unimaginable ways. So somewhere in your equation proper punishment must appear too.

    Good to talk though, I wish parliament would.
    Once you legalise, then commercial enterprises will move in: that's part of 'regulate' - ensure standards of supply. Criminal suppliers will be driven out by simple market forces, just as those who controlled the US prohibition-era drinks market were once legal brewers and distillers were back in the market.
    I'd like to agree but I'm afraid you're being naive. People controlling £million drug rings won't just shrug their shoulders. That's not to say nothing can be done, it can, but politicians refuse to even discuss it. None of them has the foggiest idea of the depth of the problem.
    A legal product will destroy the market for an illegal one (unless the legal one has an absurdly high tax on it). It doesn't really matter whether criminals like it or not. They won't have any customers.
    The principle problem is that still guarantees a market for a deadly product. Which libertarians wouldn't have a problem with, I see that, but most people would.
  • blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    Wanderer said:

    blackburn63 said:

    david_herdson said:

    blackburn63 said:

    david_herdson said:

    blackburn63 said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    blackburn63 said:

    gettingbetter said:



    If we gave the drugs out free to addicts then there would not be any dealers, except those selling to celebrities and politicians who did not want their habits to be known.

    It's not as straightforward as that, dealers are ruthless and in effect politicians become the dealers, negotiating to buy the drugs. But I agree its a start, in controlled, safe conditions. The thought appalls an entire strata of society until somebody close to them gets involved and the fetid mess becomes reality.

    Unfortunately it keeps getting brushed under the carpet.
    The growth of cannabis legalisation (sort of) across the United States may change things. Our politicians can ignore Portugal and Holland but America is on telly. As Faraday replied when Gladstone asked what is the use of electricity: one day, sir, you may tax it. Politicians in the states are attracted not by liberty but by revenue.
    Good point.

    The image of an entourage from Whitehall sat around with Colombians and Afghans is too awful to contemplate, but drugs are the scourge of society, an entirely different approach is required.
    Legalise, regulate, educate, tax.
    Yes that's a start. As a libertarian it's nobody's business what an individual chooses to ingest, but dealers prey on users in unimaginable ways. So somewhere in your equation proper punishment must appear too.

    Good to talk though, I wish parliament would.
    Once you legalise, then commercial enterprises will move in: that's part of 'regulate' - ensure standards of supply. Criminal suppliers will be driven out by simple market forces, just as those who controlled the US prohibition-era drinks market were once legal brewers and distillers were back in the market.
    I'd like to agree but I'm afraid you're being naive. People controlling £million drug rings won't just shrug their shoulders. That's not to say nothing can be done, it can, but politicians refuse to even discuss it. None of them has the foggiest idea of the depth of the problem.
    A legal product will destroy the market for an illegal one (unless the legal one has an absurdly high tax on it). It doesn't really matter whether criminals like it or not. They won't have any customers.
    In East Kent contraband tobacco is everywhere, its naive to think that if you legalise something dealers disappear.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Not content with losing, Brexiteers are now briefing they will be BAD losers...

    @BethRigby: Brexit minister tells me damage done in party over #EUref. PM "50/50 chance of vote of no confidence" post June 23. 1/2

    @BethRigby: And even if Cameron does survive, #Brexit minister warns impending blood letting will make party "ungovernable" Grim state of affairs #euref
  • blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    TheWhiteRabbit said:

    Wanderer said:

    blackburn63 said:

    david_herdson said:

    blackburn63 said:

    david_herdson said:

    blackburn63 said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    blackburn63 said:

    gettingbetter said:



    If we gave the drugs out free to addicts then there would not be any dealers, except those selling to celebrities and politicians who did not want their habits to be known.

    It's not as straightforward as that, dealers are ruthless and in effect politicians become the dealers, negotiating to buy the drugs. But I agree its a start, in controlled, safe conditions. The thought appalls an entire strata of society until somebody close to them gets involved and the fetid mess becomes reality.

    Unfortunately it keeps getting brushed under the carpet.
    The growth of cannabis legalisation (sort of) across the United States may change things. Our politicians can ignore Portugal and Holland but America is on telly. As Faraday replied when Gladstone asked what is the use of electricity: one day, sir, you may tax it. Politicians in the states are attracted not by liberty but by revenue.
    Good point.

    The image of an entourage from Whitehall sat around with Colombians and Afghans is too awful to contemplate, but drugs are the scourge of society, an entirely different approach is required.
    Legalise, regulate, educate, tax.
    Yes that's a start. As a libertarian it's nobody's business what an individual chooses to ingest, but dealers prey on users in unimaginable ways. So somewhere in your equation proper punishment must appear too.

    Good to talk though, I wish parliament would.
    Once you legalise, then commercial enterprises will move in: that's part of 'regulate' - ensure standards of supply. Criminal suppliers will be driven out by simple market forces, just as those who controlled the US prohibition-era drinks market were once legal brewers and distillers were back in the market.
    I'd like to agree but I'm afraid you're being naive. People controlling £million drug rings won't just shrug their shoulders. That's not to say nothing can be done, it can, but politicians refuse to even discuss it. None of them has the foggiest idea of the depth of the problem.
    A legal product will destroy the market for an illegal one (unless the legal one has an absurdly high tax on it). It doesn't really matter whether criminals like it or not. They won't have any customers.
    The principle problem is that still guarantees a market for a deadly product. Which libertarians wouldn't have a problem with, I see that, but most people would.
    Alcohol and tobacco are deadly and legal.
This discussion has been closed.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2025