politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Corbyn and McCluskey, comrades in arms
Options
Comments
-
Is Christianity any better, when in past times it has been powerful? Or is the sort of world the Christian fanatics in the US want to see really any better? The antidote, for us, is that when our Christian fanatics come out with their nonsense the majority of us just laugh. The real question therefore is why more Muslims are not laughing. Or laughing, and turning them in.John_M said:
The trouble is, where is this reformation to come from? The direction of travel seems to be in one direction - backwards. Iran and Afghanistan were very western in the 70s. Lebanon was the playground of the Med.SeanT said:
Islam.John_M said:AramintaMoonbeamQC said:Paul_Bedfordshire said:AramintaMoonbeamQC said:
Perhaps when you've had to teach 11 year old girls sent to school dressed like that, when their parents want to withdraw them from large sections of the curriculum including non-participation in sport/music, removing them from school for months on end, harming their educational prospects - culminating in them going altogether to marry someone against their express wishes - you *might* have a rather different view of the extremes of certain religions.SeanT said:Paul_Bedforshire
"Maybe it is because I am catholic that my initial reaction to a woman in full length dress and a headscarf is respect for their sense of modesty amongst the sick decadence and hedonism all around them."
That's what I think when I see the burqa, too. I think "respect". Also FGM. Save these poor girls from their immoral clitorises. Teach their vaginas to respect.
My experiences are from inner city UK schools in the 21st century, not the backwaters of Appalachia.
Islam is horribly diseased. It is a great faith suffering a terrible psychosis, lurching back to the cruel and hideous verities of the early Middle Ages. How hard is this to grasp? The evidence is everywhere: it dominates the news daily.
It's an arms race, within Islam, of theologically-inspired barbarity and homicide. And this is itself intensified by a gruesome war between Shia and Sunni - like our own 30 Years War, but happening now.
As such the best we can do in the west is insulate ourselves from Islam as it goes through its madness. We reduce Muslim immigration into our countries to near zero, we strongly encourage Muslims of the more fundamentalist kind to leave the West (by making it hard for them to follow the faith), and we cease our interference in their affairs - let the Islamic world do what it wants to do, so be it.
This is the only option.
Recently finished Bernard Lewis's 'What Went Wrong'. Came away utterly depressed.0 -
And it shall come to pass that in the end days the beast shall reign 100 score and 30 days and nights. And the faithful shall cry unto the Lord, 'Wherefore art thou in the day of evil?' And the Lord shall hear their prayers. And out of the Angel Isle he shall bring forth the Deliverer; the holy Lamb of God who shall do battle with the beast. And shall destroy him."Tim_B said:
Anglais means English: we might be angels, but it doesn't translate that way. The French for angels is anges. It's not even close. Just dumb.
That "the beast shall reign 100 score and 30 days and nights" is another way of saying "seven years": it's the time I've been head of Thorne.
"And out of the Angel Isle he shall bring forth the Deliverer": the Angel Isle, the original Latin has "ex insula Anglorum"...
..."England"
Omen III: The Final Conflict (1981)0 -
You can back the Librarian on Betfair. They have a book.ThreeQuidder said:0 -
I don't know how it will happen or wither Farron will play a big role in it, but think its possible that in a few years time we could be looking more like the Canada, with one major conservative party, one major Liberal party, and a smaller trade union supported left wing party (the New Democracy party in Canada) and how could I forget a significant sucseshanist party.TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
LOL, sorry, it must have been all the talk of Libraries earlier.ThreeQuidder said:0 -
Good for us, but in each case we should modestly bear in mind that what we are really celebrating isChelyabinsk said:
Though Trafalgar fulfilled much the same function. "England has saved herself by her exertions, and will, as I trust, save Europe by her example," and all that. And before that, the Armada.Jonathan said:
Arguably this baggage holds us back. So much so its almost impossible to imagine that before 1940 this was not a part in the British identity at all.SeanT said:
Britain was exhausted by, say, 1944. And understandably. We didn't especially distinguish ourselves in D Day, tho there was particular heroism in places.anotherDave said:
I read Mr Johnson's 'Churchill Factor" recently.John_M said:
I think my most obscure books are the two volume 'Bloody Shambles' series, on the WW2 British air war in the Pacific. Pretty heavy going, but fascinating. We really don't pay as much attention to the Burma campaign as we should. Men of iron.
Apparently Stalin used to mock Churchill for the british military's reluctance to fight, and inability to win.
Bit of a surprise to me, when I was growing up WW2 propaganda films were used by the TV bods as cheap fillers, so I absorbed a version full of pluck and triumph.
Our great triumph was the Battle of Britain and the sheer moral courage of withstanding the Blitz and the rest. Standing entirely alone - and then winning. When everyone else was absent, or fallen. It's why many Europeans slightly and subconsciously resent us, even now. We have this sense of self-worth that they lost, forever.
And these things are handed on, via cultural DNA. Without the Battle of Britain there would be no Brexit.
It may be a foolish national delusion, but it exists. It's got nothing to do with nostalgia for Empire, as so many europhiles would have it.
It's 1940.
the silver sea,
Which serves us in the office of a wall,
Or as a moat defensive to a house,
Against the envy of less happier lands.0 -
...And Saint Attila raised the hand grenade up on high, saying, "O LORD, bless this Thy hand grenade that with it Thou mayest blow Thine enemies to tiny bits, in Thy mercy." And the LORD did grin and the people did feast upon the lambs and sloths and carp and anchovies and orangutans and breakfast cereals, and fruit bats and large chu... [At this point, the friar is urged by Brother Maynard to "skip a bit, brother"]... And the LORD spake, saying, "First shalt thou take out the Holy Pin, then shalt thou count to three, no more, no less. Three shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, neither count thou two, excepting that thou then proceed to three. Five is right out. Once the number three, being the third number, be reached, then lobbest thou thy Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch towards thy foe, who being naughty in My sight, shall snuff it.viewcode said:
And it shall come to pass that in the end days the beast shall reign 100 score and 30 days and nights. And the faithful shall cry unto the Lord, 'Wherefore art thou in the day of evil?' And the Lord shall hear their prayers. And out of the Angel Isle he shall bring forth the Deliverer; the holy Lamb of God who shall do battle with the beast. And shall destroy him."Tim_B said:
Anglais means English: we might be angels, but it doesn't translate that way. The French for angels is anges. It's not even close. Just dumb.
That "the beast shall reign 100 score and 30 days and nights" is another way of saying "seven years": it's the time I've been head of Thorne.
"And out of the Angel Isle he shall bring forth the Deliverer": the Angel Isle, the original Latin has "ex insula Anglorum"...
..."England"
Omen III: The Final Conflict (1981)
Book of Armaments, Chapter 2, verses 9-21
I can quote irrelevant nonsense too
0 -
This is an issue that we have all failed to address properly, I feel."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4974870.stm0 -
Groan...stjohn said:
You can back the Librarian on Betfair. They have a book.ThreeQuidder said:0 -
If I had said "The UK has suffered very little from recent immigration", you might have had a point.SeanT said:
The UK has suffered "very little" from recent immigration??viewcode said:
I looked at that UK vs US immigration fears graph and trace the data back to its original source, which is here:http://www.policyuncertainty.com/immigration_fear.html . It has indices for the US, UK, German, French and Spanish fear of immigration.rcs1000 said:
But we've had massive numbers of terrorist attacks in France in the last year, and Le Pen has gone backwards against Juppe - from getting 36% to around 30% today.
Here's a thing
The UK has suffered very little from recent immigration, at least in comparison to France and Germany. But the UK's fear of immigration index is considerably higher than France's, Germany's, the US or Spain's.
I think this differential fear will distort our view of the upcoming French election, and cause us to assume Le Pen (whichever one) is more popular than reality. This has implications with respect to betting.
Did you overlook the 1400 white girls gang raped by racist Muslims in Rotherham alone? Or did that slip your mind?
Because it sure as hell didn't get overlooked by lots of Brexit voters. Who took the only chance they had, however clumsy, to register their distress.
But what I did say is "The UK has suffered very little from recent immigration, at least in comparison to France and Germany.".
Which doesn't mean the same thing.0 -
All that time and still they have failed to deal with the issues.nunu said:This is an issue that we have all failed to address properly, I feel."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4974870.stm0 -
It's from 2006 nunu. Or have I missed your point?nunu said:This is an issue that we have all failed to address properly, I feel."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4974870.stm0 -
Basically because whilst Russians were dying in their thousands on the eastern front, Britain was particularly reluctant to press on with opening a second front, and wasn't even particularly keen on the Americans pressing ahead with this as early as 1943. As with article 50 we prefer to get everything lined up before making a rash move.anotherDave said:
I read Mr Johnson's 'Churchill Factor" recently.John_M said:
I think my most obscure books are the two volume 'Bloody Shambles' series, on the WW2 British air war in the Pacific. Pretty heavy going, but fascinating. We really don't pay as much attention to the Burma campaign as we should. Men of iron.
Apparently Stalin used to mock Churchill for the british military's reluctance to fight, and inability to win.
Bit of a surprise to me, when I was growing up WW2 propaganda films were used by the TV bods as cheap fillers, so I absorbed a version full of pluck and triumph.0 -
From 2006?nunu said:This is an issue that we have all failed to address properly, I feel."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4974870.stm0 -
If a Third Front in France (Italy was the Second Front, remember?!) was also successfully opened up in 1943 (no guarantee of success, of course), but if it was opened up, wouldn't Western Allies have reached Berlin way before the Russians would have done?IanB2 said:
Basically because whilst Russians were dying in their thousands on the eastern front, Britain was particularly reluctant to press on with opening a second front, and wasn't even particularly keen on the Americans pressing ahead with this as early as 1943. As with article 50 we prefer to get everything lined up before making a rash move.anotherDave said:
I read Mr Johnson's 'Churchill Factor" recently.John_M said:
I think my most obscure books are the two volume 'Bloody Shambles' series, on the WW2 British air war in the Pacific. Pretty heavy going, but fascinating. We really don't pay as much attention to the Burma campaign as we should. Men of iron.
Apparently Stalin used to mock Churchill for the british military's reluctance to fight, and inability to win.
Bit of a surprise to me, when I was growing up WW2 propaganda films were used by the TV bods as cheap fillers, so I absorbed a version full of pluck and triumph.0 -
My father often used to speculate on the damage to our society caused by the WWI slaughter of this country's gene pool. Never seen any work on it, though.SeanT said:
Yes, possibly. But it is a fundamental part of our identity now, just as the French revolution crucially forms their self image, even though the country dates back a thousand years before 1789.Jonathan said:
Arguably this baggage holds us back. So much so its almost impossible to imagine that before 1940 this was not a part in the British identity at all.SeanT said:
Britain was exhausted by, say, 1944. And understandably. We didn't especially distinguish ourselves in D Day, tho there was particular heroism in places.anotherDave said:
I read Mr Johnson's 'Churchill Factor" recently.John_M said:
I think my most obscure books are the two volume 'Bloody Shambles' series, on the WW2 British air war in the Pacific. Pretty heavy going, but fascinating. We really don't pay as much attention to the Burma campaign as we should. Men of iron.
Apparently Stalin used to mock Churchill for the british military's reluctance to fight, and inability to win.
Bit of a surprise to me, when I was growing up WW2 propaganda films were used by the TV bods as cheap fillers, so I absorbed a version full of pluck and triumph.
Our great triumph was the Battle of Britain and the sheer moral courage of withstanding the Blitz and the rest. Standing entirely alone - and then winning. When everyone else was absent, or fallen. It's why many Europeans slightly and subconsciously resent us, even now. We have this sense of self-worth that they lost, forever.
And these things are handed on, via cultural DNA. Without the Battle of Britain there would be no Brexit.
It may be a foolish national delusion, but it exists. It's got nothing to do with nostalgia for Empire, as so many europhiles would have it.
It's 1940.0 -
Someone predicted on here in the immediate aftermath of the Brexit vote that the LDs would be the big winners. Will be interesting to see how this unfolds, but the scenario that someone else has outlined i.e. Canadian style political parties is very plausible.Jonathan said:
Look to what happened in Scotland. The side that lost the vote had the anger and energy to prosper.rottenborough said:
Certainly shouldn't be written off at this stage. The 48% are, from my anecdotal experience, bloody angry and looking for a home, and that certainly isn't the fratricidal cesspit the Labour party has become.SeanT said:
I disagree. If they can organise it (most unlikely) there is a huge constituency out there yearning to vote for them. 48% of Brits voted IN. Many of them are very upset. And want a rematch.runnymede said:
A handwringers' and losers' alliance, appealing to a small metropolitan minority.TheScreamingEagles said:
48% was 16 million votes, remember.
A new party promising to take us back into the EU only has to get 10 million votes, and they likely win the GE.
What will fox them is time and party politics. But there is a prize to be had, if they get lucky.0 -
Its possible that will scupper him in some people minds at least, but, like with Gay Marriage opinions are change fast on Pot use, and for some people it will be a plus, (at least his openness and honesty) remember he does not need to be everybody's first pic, he just has to be above both Hillary and Trump for about a third of the people.williamglenn said:
Sadly I think the odds are right. A self-confessed current pot user is not going to become president, and the party has even more nut-jobs in it than usual for American politics.BigRich said:
Indeed, good luck to both of us! I wish I had the courage of my convictions a month ago to get 1000 to 1!stjohn said:
BigRich. You highlighted Gary Johnson's POTUS prospects about a month ago. I had never heard of him or the Libertarian Party at the time. After a bit of googling I backed him on Betfair at 1000.BigRich said:
Many thanks for you help, I now understand the difference, and have placed my first ever Political bet, no my first real bet of any type!Pong said:
Not a stupid question at all!BigRich said:
Many thanks, at 450/1 I will do this!Pong said:BigRich said:Pulpstar said:Pong said:Nate Silver Verified account
@NateSilver538
Gary Johnson up to 9.3% in our national poll average, his high point of the year so far.
??
But I don't quite understand how it could be 450/1 on one site and then 33/1 to lay on another site, what is stopping somebody backing on one site and laying on another, and then overall making money whatever the outcome? sorry if this is a stupid question.
Predictit only accepts US customers, Betfair explicitly rejects US customers.
So form now on, when people accuse me of being mad to belief Gary Johnson has a chance I will be able to say I am putting my money where my mouth is!
Good luck to us both!
To recap, the reasons I think that The Librarian party candidate Gary Johnson may be the next POTUS is:0 -
Yes, but did you track down a YouTube copy of the original movie then transcribe the dialog in order to ensure the quote was accurate? If I'm going to quote gibberish, I'll make damn sure it's accurately quoted...Tim_B said:
...And Saint Attila raised the hand grenade up on high, saying, "O LORD, bless this Thy hand grenade that with it Thou mayest blow Thine enemies to tiny bits, in Thy mercy." And the LORD did grin and the people did feast upon the lambs and sloths and carp and anchovies and orangutans and breakfast cereals, and fruit bats and large chu... [At this point, the friar is urged by Brother Maynard to "skip a bit, brother"]... And the LORD spake, saying, "First shalt thou take out the Holy Pin, then shalt thou count to three, no more, no less. Three shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, neither count thou two, excepting that thou then proceed to three. Five is right out. Once the number three, being the third number, be reached, then lobbest thou thy Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch towards thy foe, who being naughty in My sight, shall snuff it.viewcode said:
And it shall come to pass that in the end days the beast shall reign 100 score and 30 days and nights. And the faithful shall cry unto the Lord, 'Wherefore art thou in the day of evil?' And the Lord shall hear their prayers. And out of the Angel Isle he shall bring forth the Deliverer; the holy Lamb of God who shall do battle with the beast. And shall destroy him."Tim_B said:
Anglais means English: we might be angels, but it doesn't translate that way. The French for angels is anges. It's not even close. Just dumb.
That "the beast shall reign 100 score and 30 days and nights" is another way of saying "seven years": it's the time I've been head of Thorne.
"And out of the Angel Isle he shall bring forth the Deliverer": the Angel Isle, the original Latin has "ex insula Anglorum"...
..."England"
Omen III: The Final Conflict (1981)
Book of Armaments, Chapter 2, verses 9-21
I can quote irrelevant nonsense too
0 -
Didn't Patton think (rightly or otherwise) that he could make Berlin first, but was refused permission to try because it had already been agreed at the highest level that this was for the Russians?Sunil_Prasannan said:
If a Third Front in France (Italy was the Second Front, remember?!) was also successfully opened up in 1943 (no guarantee of success, of course), but if it was opened up, wouldn't Western Allies have reached Berlin way before the Russians would have done?IanB2 said:
Basically because whilst Russians were dying in their thousands on the eastern front, Britain was particularly reluctant to press on with opening a second front, and wasn't even particularly keen on the Americans pressing ahead with this as early as 1943. As with article 50 we prefer to get everything lined up before making a rash move.anotherDave said:
I read Mr Johnson's 'Churchill Factor" recently.John_M said:
I think my most obscure books are the two volume 'Bloody Shambles' series, on the WW2 British air war in the Pacific. Pretty heavy going, but fascinating. We really don't pay as much attention to the Burma campaign as we should. Men of iron.
Apparently Stalin used to mock Churchill for the british military's reluctance to fight, and inability to win.
Bit of a surprise to me, when I was growing up WW2 propaganda films were used by the TV bods as cheap fillers, so I absorbed a version full of pluck and triumph.0 -
If the russians had opened up a second front in 1939/40 instead of just helping themselves to bits of poland.........IanB2 said:
Basically because whilst Russians were dying in their thousands on the eastern front, Britain was particularly reluctant to press on with opening a second front, and wasn't even particularly keen on the Americans pressing ahead with this as early as 1943. As with article 50 we prefer to get everything lined up before making a rash move.anotherDave said:
I read Mr Johnson's 'Churchill Factor" recently.John_M said:
I think my most obscure books are the two volume 'Bloody Shambles' series, on the WW2 British air war in the Pacific. Pretty heavy going, but fascinating. We really don't pay as much attention to the Burma campaign as we should. Men of iron.
Apparently Stalin used to mock Churchill for the british military's reluctance to fight, and inability to win.
Bit of a surprise to me, when I was growing up WW2 propaganda films were used by the TV bods as cheap fillers, so I absorbed a version full of pluck and triumph.0 -
Years ago, I remember reading Max Hasting's Overlord. The British believed that the Germans were simply better combat soldiers. We had an inferiority complex if you will. They also didn't think much of US troops (the impression made at Kasserine Pass took a long time to recede) .IanB2 said:
Basically because whilst Russians were dying in their thousands on the eastern front, Britain was particularly reluctant to press on with opening a second front, and wasn't even particularly keen on the Americans pressing ahead with this as early as 1943. As with article 50 we prefer to get everything lined up before making a rash move.anotherDave said:
I read Mr Johnson's 'Churchill Factor" recently.John_M said:
I think my most obscure books are the two volume 'Bloody Shambles' series, on the WW2 British air war in the Pacific. Pretty heavy going, but fascinating. We really don't pay as much attention to the Burma campaign as we should. Men of iron.
Apparently Stalin used to mock Churchill for the british military's reluctance to fight, and inability to win.
Bit of a surprise to me, when I was growing up WW2 propaganda films were used by the TV bods as cheap fillers, so I absorbed a version full of pluck and triumph.
Normandy showed that we were right to be cautious. I think we'd have been destroyed in '43.
We had a lot of trouble beating Rommel - I think he only had about 4 German divisions in Pz armee Afrika.
The Heer were excellent troops. The Waffen-SS were even better.0 -
Fallon is a man fighting yesterday's battles.TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
BBC1 now, a chance for us to remember and be proud!0
-
1) snake bileSeanT said:
I've eaten frog. I've also eaten DRIED frog, in Cambodia.MyBurningEars said:
A few days ago Malc revealed that, while incredibly drunk in Texas, he ate a frog. The man is a hero. Whatever people say about "too many non-political non-betting posts on PB," I know my life would feel far less complete if he had never told us that.Paul_Bedfordshire said:
Ah I see.John_M said:
It's like the WWI Iron Cross 2nd class. Every Tom, Dick and Harry's got one. You get the oak leaves if you're on the receiving end of a peroration.Paul_Bedfordshire said:Is there a special badge you get for being insulted here by Sean, or do I have to commission a special T shirt?
Have to say Malcolm is much more erudite when it comes to sending insults,
But then I am a bit partial to Turnips....
It tasted of chicken, apparently. Which disappointed me, since that seems to be what all meat-eaters think any new non-fishy meat tastes like, though as a vegetarian I don't really know that translates to. I had my hopes pinned on something more exotic though. If he'd said "it tasted like horse" or "tang of jellyfish" then I think I'd have awarded him a medal!
Let me tell you, the fresh frog is ambrosia, in comparison.
2) rotten shark
3) drunken shrimp
Absolutely disgusting.
I think the UK is having a let your hair down moment wrt immigration which at times is very ugly and was sanctioned by the referendum although that was hardly the referendum's fault.0 -
There's a good argument that the halcyon inter-war period that people often accuse us of harking back to is because a lot of burglars, armed robbers etc were slaughtered, not just the odd poet or artist.AnneJGP said:
My father often used to speculate on the damage to our society caused by the WWI slaughter of this country's gene pool. Never seen any work on it, though.SeanT said:
Yes, possibly. But it is a fundamental part of our identity now, just as the French revolution crucially forms their self image, even though the country dates back a thousand years before 1789.Jonathan said:
Arguably this baggage holds us back. So much so its almost impossible to imagine that before 1940 this was not a part in the British identity at all.SeanT said:
Britain was exhausted by, say, 1944. And understandably. We didn't especially distinguish ourselves in D Day, tho there was particular heroism in places.anotherDave said:
I read Mr Johnson's 'Churchill Factor" recently.John_M said:
I think my most obscure books are the two volume 'Bloody Shambles' series, on the WW2 British air war in the Pacific. Pretty heavy going, but fascinating. We really don't pay as much attention to the Burma campaign as we should. Men of iron.
Apparently Stalin used to mock Churchill for the british military's reluctance to fight, and inability to win.
Bit of a surprise to me, when I was growing up WW2 propaganda films were used by the TV bods as cheap fillers, so I absorbed a version full of pluck and triumph.
Our great triumph was the Battle of Britain and the sheer moral courage of withstanding the Blitz and the rest. Standing entirely alone - and then winning. When everyone else was absent, or fallen. It's why many Europeans slightly and subconsciously resent us, even now. We have this sense of self-worth that they lost, forever.
And these things are handed on, via cultural DNA. Without the Battle of Britain there would be no Brexit.
It may be a foolish national delusion, but it exists. It's got nothing to do with nostalgia for Empire, as so many europhiles would have it.
It's 1940.
Britain was certainly short of men in WW2. Our manpower peaked in summer '44. Monty had to nurse what was left until war's end.0 -
Of course - you need to make sure it's complete gibberish!viewcode said:
Yes, but did you track down a YouTube copy of the original movie then transcribe the dialog in order to ensure the quote was accurate? If I'm going to quote gibberish, I'll make damn sure it's accurately quoted...Tim_B said:
...And Saint Attila raised the hand grenade up on high, saying, "O LORD, bless this Thy hand grenade that with it Thou mayest blow Thine enemies to tiny bits, in Thy mercy." And the LORD did grin and the people did feast upon the lambs and sloths and carp and anchovies and orangutans and breakfast cereals, and fruit bats and large chu... [At this point, the friar is urged by Brother Maynard to "skip a bit, brother"]... And the LORD spake, saying, "First shalt thou take out the Holy Pin, then shalt thou count to three, no more, no less. Three shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, neither count thou two, excepting that thou then proceed to three. Five is right out. Once the number three, being the third number, be reached, then lobbest thou thy Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch towards thy foe, who being naughty in My sight, shall snuff it.viewcode said:
And it shall come to pass that in the end days the beast shall reign 100 score and 30 days and nights. And the faithful shall cry unto the Lord, 'Wherefore art thou in the day of evil?' And the Lord shall hear their prayers. And out of the Angel Isle he shall bring forth the Deliverer; the holy Lamb of God who shall do battle with the beast. And shall destroy him."Tim_B said:
Anglais means English: we might be angels, but it doesn't translate that way. The French for angels is anges. It's not even close. Just dumb.
That "the beast shall reign 100 score and 30 days and nights" is another way of saying "seven years": it's the time I've been head of Thorne.
"And out of the Angel Isle he shall bring forth the Deliverer": the Angel Isle, the original Latin has "ex insula Anglorum"...
..."England"
Omen III: The Final Conflict (1981)
Book of Armaments, Chapter 2, verses 9-21
I can quote irrelevant nonsense too0 -
Those troops were so good that they lost. In every theatre, in every campaign from 1942 onwards they lost.John_M said:
Years ago, I remember reading Max Hasting's Overlord. The British believed that the Germans were simply better combat soldiers. We had an inferiority complex if you will. They also didn't think much of US troops (the impression made at Kasserine Pass took a long time to recede) .IanB2 said:
Basically because whilst Russians were dying in their thousands on the eastern front, Britain was particularly reluctant to press on with opening a second front, and wasn't even particularly keen on the Americans pressing ahead with this as early as 1943. As with article 50 we prefer to get everything lined up before making a rash move.anotherDave said:
I read Mr Johnson's 'Churchill Factor" recently.John_M said:
I think my most obscure books are the two volume 'Bloody Shambles' series, on the WW2 British air war in the Pacific. Pretty heavy going, but fascinating. We really don't pay as much attention to the Burma campaign as we should. Men of iron.
Apparently Stalin used to mock Churchill for the british military's reluctance to fight, and inability to win.
Bit of a surprise to me, when I was growing up WW2 propaganda films were used by the TV bods as cheap fillers, so I absorbed a version full of pluck and triumph.
Normandy showed that we were right to be cautious. I think we'd have been destroyed in '43.
We had a lot of trouble beating Rommel - I think he only had about 4 German divisions in Pz armee Afrika.
The Heer were excellent troops. The Waffen-SS were even better.0 -
Farron is a man who desperately needs both to be noticed and to find a new cause if his party is to survive - he's swinging big, even if it means going old school!MP_SE said:
Fallon is a man fighting yesterday's battles.TheScreamingEagles said:
Truthfully though, I feel like I'm being left behind again as a voter. If the LDs want a new centre left alliance which involves the Greens, that locks them into that area and makes statements about working with anyone if needs be pretty hollow, so any centre-rightish tendencies I have will go unheeded from them. Labour are tacking left. May from her appointments intends to tack right. Not many options.0 -
On Amazon Prime Day, (7/12), I got a great new cover for my BBQ, which has four burners plus side burner and matching shelf on the other side (the bbq not the cover, pedants!). Tailored to fit perfectly with side vents and bottom vents to prevent it blowing off in high winds. Looks great, fits perfectly, two tone khaki, a deal down from $50 to $15.
It's rained every bloody day since I got it!
Rain is a little different here though. Almost always accompanied by thunder, high winds which drop the temperature by 20 degrees,heavy rain for about 30 minutes.
Then the rain stops, temperature goes back up by 20 degrees, roads and sidewalks steam, and in an hour everything is bone dry.0 -
If things don't descend into utter disaster, the proportion of the 48% who will be suitably angry will diminish.Jonathan said:
Look to what happened in Scotland. The side that lost the vote had the anger and energy to prosper.rottenborough said:
Certainly shouldn't be written off at this stage. The 48% are, from my anecdotal experience, bloody angry and looking for a home, and that certainly isn't the fratricidal cesspit the Labour party has become.SeanT said:
I disagree. If they can organise it (most unlikely) there is a huge constituency out there yearning to vote for them. 48% of Brits voted IN. Many of them are very upset. And want a rematch.runnymede said:
A handwringers' and losers' alliance, appealing to a small metropolitan minority.TheScreamingEagles said:
48% was 16 million votes, remember.
A new party promising to take us back into the EU only has to get 10 million votes, and they likely win the GE.
What will fox them is time and party politics. But there is a prize to be had, if they get lucky.0 -
I've wondered about that too. If you look at the numbers as a proportion of population though, Britain was relatively less hit than others.AnneJGP said:
My father often used to speculate on the damage to our society caused by the WWI slaughter of this country's gene pool. Never seen any work on it, though.SeanT said:
Yes, possibly. But it is a fundamental part of our identity now, just as the French revolution crucially forms their self image, even though the country dates back a thousand years before 1789.Jonathan said:
Arguably this baggage holds us back. So much so its almost impossible to imagine that before 1940 this was not a part in the British identity at all.SeanT said:
Britain was exhausted by, say, 1944. And understandably. We didn't especially distinguish ourselves in D Day, tho there was particular heroism in places.anotherDave said:
I read Mr Johnson's 'Churchill Factor" recently.John_M said:
I think my most obscure books are the two volume 'Bloody Shambles' series, on the WW2 British air war in the Pacific. Pretty heavy going, but fascinating. We really don't pay as much attention to the Burma campaign as we should. Men of iron.
Apparently Stalin used to mock Churchill for the british military's reluctance to fight, and inability to win.
Bit of a surprise to me, when I was growing up WW2 propaganda films were used by the TV bods as cheap fillers, so I absorbed a version full of pluck and triumph.
Our great triumph was the Battle of Britain and the sheer moral courage of withstanding the Blitz and the rest. Standing entirely alone - and then winning. When everyone else was absent, or fallen. It's why many Europeans slightly and subconsciously resent us, even now. We have this sense of self-worth that they lost, forever.
And these things are handed on, via cultural DNA. Without the Battle of Britain there would be no Brexit.
It may be a foolish national delusion, but it exists. It's got nothing to do with nostalgia for Empire, as so many europhiles would have it.
It's 1940.
2% UK, vs 4% France/Germany.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I_casualties0 -
Excellent troops, atrocious logistics.HurstLlama said:
Those troops were so good that they lost. In every theatre, in every campaign from 1942 onwards they lost.John_M said:
Years ago, I remember reading Max Hasting's Overlord. The British believed that the Germans were simply better combat soldiers. We had an inferiority complex if you will. They also didn't think much of US troops (the impression made at Kasserine Pass took a long time to recede) .IanB2 said:
Basically because whilst Russians were dying in their thousands on the eastern front, Britain was particularly reluctant to press on with opening a second front, and wasn't even particularly keen on the Americans pressing ahead with this as early as 1943. As with article 50 we prefer to get everything lined up before making a rash move.anotherDave said:
I read Mr Johnson's 'Churchill Factor" recently.John_M said:
I think my most obscure books are the two volume 'Bloody Shambles' series, on the WW2 British air war in the Pacific. Pretty heavy going, but fascinating. We really don't pay as much attention to the Burma campaign as we should. Men of iron.
Apparently Stalin used to mock Churchill for the british military's reluctance to fight, and inability to win.
Bit of a surprise to me, when I was growing up WW2 propaganda films were used by the TV bods as cheap fillers, so I absorbed a version full of pluck and triumph.
Normandy showed that we were right to be cautious. I think we'd have been destroyed in '43.
We had a lot of trouble beating Rommel - I think he only had about 4 German divisions in Pz armee Afrika.
The Heer were excellent troops. The Waffen-SS were even better.0 -
After some very loose googling:AnneJGP said:
My father often used to speculate on the damage to our society caused by the WWI slaughter of this country's gene pool. Never seen any work on it, though.SeanT said:
Yes, possibly. But it is a fundamental part of our identity now, just as the French revolution crucially forms their self image, even though the country dates back a thousand years before 1789.Jonathan said:
Arguably this baggage holds us back. So much so its almost impossible to imagine that before 1940 this was not a part in the British identity at all.SeanT said:
Britain was exhausted by, say, 1944. And understandably. We didn't especially distinguish ourselves in D Day, tho there was particular heroism in places.anotherDave said:
I read Mr Johnson's 'Churchill Factor" recently.John_M said:
I think my most obscure books are the two volume 'Bloody Shambles' series, on the WW2 British air war in the Pacific. Pretty heavy going, but fascinating. We really don't pay as much attention to the Burma campaign as we should. Men of iron.
Apparently Stalin used to mock Churchill for the british military's reluctance to fight, and inability to win.
Bit of a surprise to me, when I was growing up WW2 propaganda films were used by the TV bods as cheap fillers, so I absorbed a version full of pluck and triumph.
Our great triumph was the Battle of Britain and the sheer moral courage of withstanding the Blitz and the rest. Standing entirely alone - and then winning. When everyone else was absent, or fallen. It's why many Europeans slightly and subconsciously resent us, even now. We have this sense of self-worth that they lost, forever.
And these things are handed on, via cultural DNA. Without the Battle of Britain there would be no Brexit.
It may be a foolish national delusion, but it exists. It's got nothing to do with nostalgia for Empire, as so many europhiles would have it.
It's 1940.
2% of the entire population died (whereas 4% died in the civil war)
Our forces were 54% volunteer/46% conscript
Entirely uneducated guess is that the losses aren't big enough to make that much difference, either by overall loss because the pool shrinks, or differentially because the good guys die out and the cads survive.0 -
Jeez, over here we have a place in nearly every home called a kitchen. This is a room inside the home equipped with kit so that you can cook food whatever the weather outside. You septics might want to try the idea.Tim_B said:On Amazon Prime Day, (7/12), I got a great new cover for my BBQ, which has four burners plus side burner and matching shelf on the other side (the bbq not the cover, pedants!). Tailored to fit perfectly with side vents and bottom vents to prevent it blowing off in high winds. Looks great, fits perfectly, two tone khaki, a deal down from $50 to $15.
It's rained every bloody day since I got it!
Rain is a little different here though. Almost always accompanied by thunder, high winds which drop the temperature by 20 degrees,heavy rain for about 30 minutes.
Then the rain stops, temperature goes back up by 20 degrees, roads and sidewalks steam, and in an hour everything is bone dry.0 -
Also the vote split is different. All the Out scots could unite behind the SNP, while the unionist vote was split.kle4 said:
If things don't descend into utter disaster, the proportion of the 48% who will be suitably angry will diminish.Jonathan said:
Look to what happened in Scotland. The side that lost the vote had the anger and energy to prosper.rottenborough said:
Certainly shouldn't be written off at this stage. The 48% are, from my anecdotal experience, bloody angry and looking for a home, and that certainly isn't the fratricidal cesspit the Labour party has become.SeanT said:
I disagree. If they can organise it (most unlikely) there is a huge constituency out there yearning to vote for them. 48% of Brits voted IN. Many of them are very upset. And want a rematch.runnymede said:
A handwringers' and losers' alliance, appealing to a small metropolitan minority.TheScreamingEagles said:
48% was 16 million votes, remember.
A new party promising to take us back into the EU only has to get 10 million votes, and they likely win the GE.
What will fox them is time and party politics. But there is a prize to be had, if they get lucky.
For Leave, the Leave vote goes UKIP/Con (because Con is delivering Brexit), while the Remain vote is split between Labour, LD, SNP, Plaid, Green.
0 -
Appears to be some kind of situation in Ankara tonight., Very confusing reports about a number of helicopters in the sky.
May be nothing, may be something.0 -
The party where The Quiet Man isn't allowed to turn up the volume?BigRich said:
The Librarian partystjohn said:
BigRich. You highlighted Gary Johnson's POTUS prospects about a month ago. I had never heard of him or the Libertarian Party at the time. After a bit of googling I backed him on Betfair at 1000.BigRich said:
Many thanks for you help, I now understand the difference, and have placed my first ever Political bet, no my first real bet of any type!Pong said:
Not a stupid question at all!BigRich said:
Many thanks, at 450/1 I will do this!Pong said:BigRich said:Pulpstar said:Pong said:Nate Silver Verified account
@NateSilver538
Gary Johnson up to 9.3% in our national poll average, his high point of the year so far.
??
But I don't quite understand how it could be 450/1 on one site and then 33/1 to lay on another site, what is stopping somebody backing on one site and laying on another, and then overall making money whatever the outcome? sorry if this is a stupid question.
Predictit only accepts US customers, Betfair explicitly rejects US customers.
So form now on, when people accuse me of being mad to belief Gary Johnson has a chance I will be able to say I am putting my money where my mouth is!
Good luck to us both!
0 -
On Brexit, if my previously non-voting relative who voted Leave is any indication, a lot of people are going to be furious if we don't declare article 50 within the month - there were apoplectic at the idea it would not be until next year, and I've never heard such vitriol toward a political figure from them as towards Sturgeon.0
-
Are you reading yesterday's newspaper?Y0kel said:Appears to be some kind of situation in Ankara tonight., Very confusing reports about a number of helicopters in the sky.
May be nothing, may be something.
0 -
I think to take the raw percentage is to miss out on a lot. Look instead at the number of young officers who died. they along with the NCOs, were the brightest and the best. Losing those chaps in the proportion that we did, perhaps hit the gene pool hardest.anotherDave said:
I've wondered about that too. If you look at the numbers as a proportion of population though, Britain was relatively less hit than others.AnneJGP said:
My father often used to speculate on the damage to our society caused by the WWI slaughter of this country's gene pool. Never seen any work on it, though.SeanT said:
Yes, possibly. But it is a fundamental part of our identity now, just as the French revolution crucially forms their self image, even though the country dates back a thousand years before 1789.Jonathan said:
Arguably this baggage holds us back. So much so its almost impossible to imagine that before 1940 this was not a part in the British identity at all.SeanT said:
Britain was exhausted by, say, 1944. And understandably. We didn't especially distinguish ourselves in D Day, tho there was particular heroism in places.anotherDave said:
I read Mr Johnson's 'Churchill Factor" recently.John_M said:
I think my most obscure books are the two volume 'Bloody Shambles' series, on the WW2 British air war in the Pacific. Pretty heavy going, but fascinating. We really don't pay as much attention to the Burma campaign as we should. Men of iron.
Apparently Stalin used to mock Churchill for the british military's reluctance to fight, and inability to win.
Bit of a surprise to me, when I was growing up WW2 propaganda films were used by the TV bods as cheap fillers, so I absorbed a version full of pluck and triumph.
Our great triumph was the Battle of Britain and the sheer moral courage of withstanding the Blitz and the rest. Standing entirely alone - and then winning. When everyone else was absent, or fallen. It's why many Europeans slightly and subconsciously resent us, even now. We have this sense of self-worth that they lost, forever.
And these things are handed on, via cultural DNA. Without the Battle of Britain there would be no Brexit.
It may be a foolish national delusion, but it exists. It's got nothing to do with nostalgia for Empire, as so many europhiles would have it.
It's 1940.
2% UK, vs 4% France/Germany.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I_casualties0 -
"A hell of a waste of fine infantry!" - George C. Scott as Patton.saddened said:
Excellent troops, atrocious logistics.HurstLlama said:
Those troops were so good that they lost. In every theatre, in every campaign from 1942 onwards they lost.John_M said:
Years ago, I remember reading Max Hasting's Overlord. The British believed that the Germans were simply better combat soldiers. We had an inferiority complex if you will. They also didn't think much of US troops (the impression made at Kasserine Pass took a long time to recede) .IanB2 said:
Basically because whilst Russians were dying in their thousands on the eastern front, Britain was particularly reluctant to press on with opening a second front, and wasn't even particularly keen on the Americans pressing ahead with this as early as 1943. As with article 50 we prefer to get everything lined up before making a rash move.anotherDave said:
I read Mr Johnson's 'Churchill Factor" recently.John_M said:
I think my most obscure books are the two volume 'Bloody Shambles' series, on the WW2 British air war in the Pacific. Pretty heavy going, but fascinating. We really don't pay as much attention to the Burma campaign as we should. Men of iron.
Apparently Stalin used to mock Churchill for the british military's reluctance to fight, and inability to win.
Bit of a surprise to me, when I was growing up WW2 propaganda films were used by the TV bods as cheap fillers, so I absorbed a version full of pluck and triumph.
Normandy showed that we were right to be cautious. I think we'd have been destroyed in '43.
We had a lot of trouble beating Rommel - I think he only had about 4 German divisions in Pz armee Afrika.
The Heer were excellent troops. The Waffen-SS were even better.0 -
The lesson from the Scottish referendum is that without a conclusive result the decision does not go away. Ruth Davidson spotted this and used it to beat Labour into 3rd place in their old heartland. The Tories whether they like it or not are seen as the Brexit party and the Lib Dems are going for the remain voters. Labour is at risk of losing the battle as no-one knows where it stands on this key issue.AramintaMoonbeamQC said:
Someone predicted on here in the immediate aftermath of the Brexit vote that the LDs would be the big winners. Will be interesting to see how this unfolds, but the scenario that someone else has outlined i.e. Canadian style political parties is very plausible.Jonathan said:
Look to what happened in Scotland. The side that lost the vote had the anger and energy to prosper.rottenborough said:
Certainly shouldn't be written off at this stage. The 48% are, from my anecdotal experience, bloody angry and looking for a home, and that certainly isn't the fratricidal cesspit the Labour party has become.SeanT said:
I disagree. If they can organise it (most unlikely) there is a huge constituency out there yearning to vote for them. 48% of Brits voted IN. Many of them are very upset. And want a rematch.runnymede said:
A handwringers' and losers' alliance, appealing to a small metropolitan minority.TheScreamingEagles said:
48% was 16 million votes, remember.
A new party promising to take us back into the EU only has to get 10 million votes, and they likely win the GE.
What will fox them is time and party politics. But there is a prize to be had, if they get lucky.
For the Tories the execution risk is high and the timeline of 4 years is short. I still do not see an easy answer to freedom of movement and keeping the Irish border open. Sending EU nationals home is just not credible but neither is giving passports to everyone here before a set date. I don't see the big wins from trade deals with the ROW. USA is already a big trade partner, China is a difficult market and Australia is far away and small. What about universities and students? They have been getting a raw deal for the last 10 years.
While a remainer I think the general review of our country future is a good idea. There are too many things that don't make sense and the country is like the English football team. Nowhere near as good as it thinks it is. If the review is done well then it could set the Tories as the dominant party for the next 10 years. However if it messes up then ...
0 -
I don't cook - I have never cooked. If a recipe says to separate the eggs I make two piles. I have a kitchen - I know I do because it has a pantry where I keep Heidi's food, and a large range which has never been used but is a good place to store trays etc.HurstLlama said:
Jeez, over here we have a place in nearly every home called a kitchen. This is a room inside the home equipped with kit so that you can cook food whatever the weather outside. You septics might want to try the idea.Tim_B said:On Amazon Prime Day, (7/12), I got a great new cover for my BBQ, which has four burners plus side burner and matching shelf on the other side (the bbq not the cover, pedants!). Tailored to fit perfectly with side vents and bottom vents to prevent it blowing off in high winds. Looks great, fits perfectly, two tone khaki, a deal down from $50 to $15.
It's rained every bloody day since I got it!
Rain is a little different here though. Almost always accompanied by thunder, high winds which drop the temperature by 20 degrees,heavy rain for about 30 minutes.
Then the rain stops, temperature goes back up by 20 degrees, roads and sidewalks steam, and in an hour everything is bone dry.
But as a husband and father (in that order - no whiff of scandal here) I fell victim to the US custom that it is the man of the house who operates the bbq.
I have recently cracked the problem by buying a T-Fal Optigrill. It cooks everything from sausages to steaks to chicken and god knows what from frozen, and beeps when it's done right. It sits in the kitchen. I use the bbq a few times a year with mesquite chips or other wood chips to get that beautiful taste in steak.0 -
Thanks for that. It's actually rather misleading, because what it measures is not 'immigration fear' at all, but certain terms in articles written in a small number of newspapers:viewcode said:I looked at that UK vs US immigration fears graph and trace the data back to its original source, which is here:http://www.policyuncertainty.com/immigration_fear.html . It has indices for the US, UK, German, French and Spanish fear of immigration.
...
To construct our Migration Fear Index, we count the number of newspaper articles with at least one term from each of the M and F term sets, and then divide by the total count of newspaper articles (in the same calendar quarter and country).
...
We obtain counts from Le Monde for France, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung and Handelsblatt for Germany, the Financial Times and the Times of London for the United Kingdom, and US newspapers indexed by the Access World News Newsbank database for the United States.
Unless Le Monde has changed one hell of a lot since I last read it, I don't think you can tell the slightest thing about 'immigration fear' in France from its articles; it is even less representative of France as a whole than the FT and Times are of the UK.
So, sadly, I think this is voodoo academia, and should be chucked in the bin. A pity, because a more robust immigration-fear index might be quite interesting.
0 -
History repeats...anotherDave said:
Are you reading yesterday's newspaper?Y0kel said:Appears to be some kind of situation in Ankara tonight., Very confusing reports about a number of helicopters in the sky.
May be nothing, may be something.
This is in the last hour.0 -
'Why doesn't she (Sturgeon) shut up? So irritating,' was the verdict of my daughter earlier.kle4 said:On Brexit, if my previously non-voting relative who voted Leave is any indication, a lot of people are going to be furious if we don't declare article 50 within the month - there were apoplectic at the idea it would not be until next year, and I've never heard such vitriol toward a political figure from them as towards Sturgeon.
27, Green/Labour sympathetic, pro-Remain ++++, works in banking for a big European bank.
0 -
One where Dewey did prevail.Gravitation said:
The party where The Quiet Man isn't allowed to turn up the volume?BigRich said:
The Librarian partystjohn said:
BigRich. You highlighted Gary Johnson's POTUS prospects about a month ago. I had never heard of him or the Libertarian Party at the time. After a bit of googling I backed him on Betfair at 1000.BigRich said:
Many thanks for you help, I now understand the difference, and have placed my first ever Political bet, no my first real bet of any type!Pong said:
Not a stupid question at all!BigRich said:
Many thanks, at 450/1 I will do this!Pong said:BigRich said:Pulpstar said:Pong said:Nate Silver Verified account
@NateSilver538
Gary Johnson up to 9.3% in our national poll average, his high point of the year so far.
??
But I don't quite understand how it could be 450/1 on one site and then 33/1 to lay on another site, what is stopping somebody backing on one site and laying on another, and then overall making money whatever the outcome? sorry if this is a stupid question.
Predictit only accepts US customers, Betfair explicitly rejects US customers.
So form now on, when people accuse me of being mad to belief Gary Johnson has a chance I will be able to say I am putting my money where my mouth is!
Good luck to us both!0 -
That and they simply took on too many fights.saddened said:
Excellent troops, atrocious logistics.HurstLlama said:
Those troops were so good that they lost. In every theatre, in every campaign from 1942 onwards they lost.John_M said:
Years ago, I remember reading Max Hasting's Overlord. The British believed that the Germans were simply better combat soldiers. We had an inferiority complex if you will. They also didn't think much of US troops (the impression made at Kasserine Pass took a long time to recede) .IanB2 said:
Basically because whilst Russians were dying in their thousands on the eastern front, Britain was particularly reluctant to press on with opening a second front, and wasn't even particularly keen on the Americans pressing ahead with this as early as 1943. As with article 50 we prefer to get everything lined up before making a rash move.anotherDave said:
I read Mr Johnson's 'Churchill Factor" recently.John_M said:
I think my most obscure books are the two volume 'Bloody Shambles' series, on the WW2 British air war in the Pacific. Pretty heavy going, but fascinating. We really don't pay as much attention to the Burma campaign as we should. Men of iron.
Apparently Stalin used to mock Churchill for the british military's reluctance to fight, and inability to win.
Bit of a surprise to me, when I was growing up WW2 propaganda films were used by the TV bods as cheap fillers, so I absorbed a version full of pluck and triumph.
Normandy showed that we were right to be cautious. I think we'd have been destroyed in '43.
We had a lot of trouble beating Rommel - I think he only had about 4 German divisions in Pz armee Afrika.
The Heer were excellent troops. The Waffen-SS were even better.0 -
Dang, Mr B., I sure am glad that Heidi knows where her food is stored (looking forward the the lady's prediction for the presidential election too).Tim_B said:
I don't cook - I have never cooked. If a recipe says to separate the eggs I make two piles. I have a kitchen - I know I do because it has a pantry where I keep Heidi's food, and a large range which has never been used but is a good place to store trays etc.HurstLlama said:
Jeez, over here we have a place in nearly every home called a kitchen. This is a room inside the home equipped with kit so that you can cook food whatever the weather outside. You septics might want to try the idea.Tim_B said:On Amazon Prime Day, (7/12), I got a great new cover for my BBQ, which has four burners plus side burner and matching shelf on the other side (the bbq not the cover, pedants!). Tailored to fit perfectly with side vents and bottom vents to prevent it blowing off in high winds. Looks great, fits perfectly, two tone khaki, a deal down from $50 to $15.
It's rained every bloody day since I got it!
Rain is a little different here though. Almost always accompanied by thunder, high winds which drop the temperature by 20 degrees,heavy rain for about 30 minutes.
Then the rain stops, temperature goes back up by 20 degrees, roads and sidewalks steam, and in an hour everything is bone dry.
But as a husband and father (in that order - no whiff of scandal here) I fell victim to the US custom that it is the man of the house who operates the bbq.
I have recently cracked the problem by buying a T-Fal Optigrill. It cooks everything from sausages to steaks to chicken and god knows what from frozen, and beeps when it's done right. It sits in the kitchen. I use the bbq a few times a year with mesquite chips or other wood chips to get that beautiful taste in steak.
As for the Optigrill, I agree a brilliant bit of kit. My son bought me one as a birthday present.0 -
Sounds like your lad thinks your culinary skills are on a par with mineHurstLlama said:
Dang, Mr B., I sure am glad that Heidi knows where her food is stored (looking forward the the lady's prediction for the presidential election too).Tim_B said:
I don't cook - I have never cooked. If a recipe says to separate the eggs I make two piles. I have a kitchen - I know I do because it has a pantry where I keep Heidi's food, and a large range which has never been used but is a good place to store trays etc.HurstLlama said:
Jeez, over here we have a place in nearly every home called a kitchen. This is a room inside the home equipped with kit so that you can cook food whatever the weather outside. You septics might want to try the idea.Tim_B said:On Amazon Prime Day, (7/12), I got a great new cover for my BBQ, which has four burners plus side burner and matching shelf on the other side (the bbq not the cover, pedants!). Tailored to fit perfectly with side vents and bottom vents to prevent it blowing off in high winds. Looks great, fits perfectly, two tone khaki, a deal down from $50 to $15.
It's rained every bloody day since I got it!
Rain is a little different here though. Almost always accompanied by thunder, high winds which drop the temperature by 20 degrees,heavy rain for about 30 minutes.
Then the rain stops, temperature goes back up by 20 degrees, roads and sidewalks steam, and in an hour everything is bone dry.
But as a husband and father (in that order - no whiff of scandal here) I fell victim to the US custom that it is the man of the house who operates the bbq.
I have recently cracked the problem by buying a T-Fal Optigrill. It cooks everything from sausages to steaks to chicken and god knows what from frozen, and beeps when it's done right. It sits in the kitchen. I use the bbq a few times a year with mesquite chips or other wood chips to get that beautiful taste in steak.
As for the Optigrill, I agree a brilliant bit of kit. My son bought me one as a birthday present.
On the plus side the cooking plates are dishwasher safe. This makes me feel less like an eco-terrorist when running the dishwasher with nothing but a few cups, spoons and cereal bowls.0 -
Not necessarily: it doesn't have to be representative of France per se, it just has to be comparable to itself over time (so you can say that the index has risen or fallen)Richard_Nabavi said:
Thanks for that. It's actually rather misleading, because what it measures is not 'immigration fear' at all, but certain terms in articles written in a small number of newspapers:viewcode said:I looked at that UK vs US immigration fears graph and trace the data back to its original source, which is here:http://www.policyuncertainty.com/immigration_fear.html . It has indices for the US, UK, German, French and Spanish fear of immigration.
...
To construct our Migration Fear Index, we count the number of newspaper articles with at least one term from each of the M and F term sets, and then divide by the total count of newspaper articles (in the same calendar quarter and country).
...
We obtain counts from Le Monde for France, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung and Handelsblatt for Germany, the Financial Times and the Times of London for the United Kingdom, and US newspapers indexed by the Access World News Newsbank database for the United States.
Unless Le Monde has changed one hell of a lot since I last read it, I don't think you can tell the slightest thing about 'immigration fear' in France from its articles; it is even less representative of France as a whole than the FT and Times are of the UK.
So, sadly, I think this is voodoo academia, and should be chucked in the bin. A pity, because a more robust immigration-fear index might be quite interesting.
Although for comparisons between countries, I would prefer it to be phrased as "LeMonde vs FAZ/Handelsblatt vs FT/Times" instead of "France vs Germany vs UK".
0 -
Wow, you have a dishwasher? Herself will not have such a thing in the house. As far as she is concerned she already has one that works quite well - me.Tim_B said:
Sounds like your lad thinks your culinary skills are on a par with mineHurstLlama said:
Dang, Mr B., I sure am glad that Heidi knows where her food is stored (looking forward the the lady's prediction for the presidential election too).Tim_B said:
I don't cook - I have never cooked. If a recipe says to separate the eggs I make two piles. I have a kitchen - I know I do because it has a pantry where I keep Heidi's food, and a large range which has never been used but is a good place to store trays etc.HurstLlama said:
Jeez, over here we have a place in nearly every home called a kitchen. This is a room inside the home equipped with kit so that you can cook food whatever the weather outside. You septics might want to try the idea.Tim_B said:On Amazon Prime Day, (7/12), I got a great new cover for my BBQ, which has four burners plus side burner and matching shelf on the other side (the bbq not the cover, pedants!). Tailored to fit perfectly with side vents and bottom vents to prevent it blowing off in high winds. Looks great, fits perfectly, two tone khaki, a deal down from $50 to $15.
It's rained every bloody day since I got it!
Rain is a little different here though. Almost always accompanied by thunder, high winds which drop the temperature by 20 degrees,heavy rain for about 30 minutes.
Then the rain stops, temperature goes back up by 20 degrees, roads and sidewalks steam, and in an hour everything is bone dry.
But as a husband and father (in that order - no whiff of scandal here) I fell victim to the US custom that it is the man of the house who operates the bbq.
I have recently cracked the problem by buying a T-Fal Optigrill. It cooks everything from sausages to steaks to chicken and god knows what from frozen, and beeps when it's done right. It sits in the kitchen. I use the bbq a few times a year with mesquite chips or other wood chips to get that beautiful taste in steak.
As for the Optigrill, I agree a brilliant bit of kit. My son bought me one as a birthday present.
On the plus side the cooking plates are dishwasher safe. This makes me feel less like an eco-terrorist when running the dishwasher with nothing but a few cups, spoons and cereal bowls.0 -
- and they studiously avoided engaging the Batley Townswomen's Guilddavid_herdson said:
That and they simply took on too many fights.saddened said:
Excellent troops, atrocious logistics.HurstLlama said:
Those troops were so good that they lost. In every theatre, in every campaign from 1942 onwards they lost.John_M said:
Years ago, I remember reading Max Hasting's Overlord. The British believed that the Germans were simply better combat soldiers. We had an inferiority complex if you will. They also didn't think much of US troops (the impression made at Kasserine Pass took a long time to recede) .IanB2 said:
Basically because whilst Russians were dying in their thousands on the eastern front, Britain was particularly reluctant to press on with opening a second front, and wasn't even particularly keen on the Americans pressing ahead with this as early as 1943. As with article 50 we prefer to get everything lined up before making a rash move.anotherDave said:
I read Mr Johnson's 'Churchill Factor" recently.John_M said:
I think my most obscure books are the two volume 'Bloody Shambles' series, on the WW2 British air war in the Pacific. Pretty heavy going, but fascinating. We really don't pay as much attention to the Burma campaign as we should. Men of iron.
Apparently Stalin used to mock Churchill for the british military's reluctance to fight, and inability to win.
Bit of a surprise to me, when I was growing up WW2 propaganda films were used by the TV bods as cheap fillers, so I absorbed a version full of pluck and triumph.
Normandy showed that we were right to be cautious. I think we'd have been destroyed in '43.
We had a lot of trouble beating Rommel - I think he only had about 4 German divisions in Pz armee Afrika.
The Heer were excellent troops. The Waffen-SS were even better.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ce2jEDfPwG80 -
YouGov are polling on a Labour Party split.0
-
Do people who don't read The Times really matter though!Richard_Nabavi said:
Thanks for that. It's actually rather misleading, because what it measures is not 'immigration fear' at all, but certain terms in articles written in a small number of newspapers:viewcode said:I looked at that UK vs US immigration fears graph and trace the data back to its original source, which is here:http://www.policyuncertainty.com/immigration_fear.html . It has indices for the US, UK, German, French and Spanish fear of immigration.
...
To construct our Migration Fear Index, we count the number of newspaper articles with at least one term from each of the M and F term sets, and then divide by the total count of newspaper articles (in the same calendar quarter and country).
...
We obtain counts from Le Monde for France, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung and Handelsblatt for Germany, the Financial Times and the Times of London for the United Kingdom, and US newspapers indexed by the Access World News Newsbank database for the United States.
Unless Le Monde has changed one hell of a lot since I last read it, I don't think you can tell the slightest thing about 'immigration fear' in France from its articles; it is even less representative of France as a whole than the FT and Times are of the UK.
So, sadly, I think this is voodoo academia, and should be chucked in the bin. A pity, because a more robust immigration-fear index might be quite interesting.0 -
No wonder your lad left home!HurstLlama said:
Wow, you have a dishwasher? Herself will not have such a thing in the house. As far as she is concerned she already has one that works quite well - me.Tim_B said:
Sounds like your lad thinks your culinary skills are on a par with mineHurstLlama said:
Dang, Mr B., I sure am glad that Heidi knows where her food is stored (looking forward the the lady's prediction for the presidential election too).Tim_B said:
I don't cook - I have never cooked. If a recipe says to separate the eggs I make two piles. I have a kitchen - I know I do because it has a pantry where I keep Heidi's food, and a large range which has never been used but is a good place to store trays etc.HurstLlama said:Tim_B said:On Amazon Prime Day, (7/12), I got a great new cover for my BBQ, which has four burners plus side burner and matching shelf on the other side (the bbq not the cover, pedants!). Tailored to fit perfectly with side vents and bottom vents to prevent it blowing off in high winds. Looks great, fits perfectly, two tone khaki, a deal down from $50 to $15.
It's rained every bloody day since I got it!
Rain is a little different here though. Almost always accompanied by thunder, high winds which drop the temperature by 20 degrees,heavy rain for about 30 minutes.
Then the rain stops, temperature goes back up by 20 degrees, roads and sidewalks steam, and in an hour everything is bone dry.
But as a husband and father (in that order - no whiff of scandal here) I fell victim to the US custom that it is the man of the house who operates the bbq.
I have recently cracked the problem by buying a T-Fal Optigrill. It cooks everything from sausages to steaks to chicken and god knows what from frozen, and beeps when it's done right. It sits in the kitchen. I use the bbq a few times a year with mesquite chips or other wood chips to get that beautiful taste in steak.
As for the Optigrill, I agree a brilliant bit of kit. My son bought me one as a birthday present.
On the plus side the cooking plates are dishwasher safe. This makes me feel less like an eco-terrorist when running the dishwasher with nothing but a few cups, spoons and cereal bowls. Do you have washday hands, or did the fairy Liquid commercials lie?
I live in America, kitchens here have everything (and it all matches) - I have a garbage disposal, fridge, microwave, dishwasher and a trash masher - it mercilessly crushes cans, packages and other crushable stuff. Come trash day you pull the bag out of the machine, small but almost impossibly heavy to lift, dump it in the trash can and wheel that out to the curb.0 -
Yes, the change in the index is of some interest. But even there I'd be very wary; for example, the upcoming referendum in the UK might well of itself have generated articles which would bump up the index as they've defined it.viewcode said:Not necessarily: it doesn't have to be representative of France per se, it just has to be comparable to itself over time (so you can say that the index has risen or fallen)
Although for comparisons between countries, I would prefer it to be phrased as "LeMonde vs FAZ/Handelsblatt vs FT/Times" instead of "France vs Germany vs UK".0 -
www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGscoaUWW2MMaxPB said:Do people who don't read The Times really matter though!
0 -
-
I assume that a campaign that was dominated so heavily by immigration would generate a spike in an index measuring fear of immigration. And it seems that that did, in fact, occur.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, the change in the index is of some interest. But even there I'd be very wary; for example, the upcoming referendum in the UK might well of itself have generated articles which would bump up the index as they've defined it.viewcode said:Not necessarily: it doesn't have to be representative of France per se, it just has to be comparable to itself over time (so you can say that the index has risen or fallen)
Although for comparisons between countries, I would prefer it to be phrased as "LeMonde vs FAZ/Handelsblatt vs FT/Times" instead of "France vs Germany vs UK".0 -
0
-
My objection is that it's not an index measuring fear of immigration, it's a count of words in newspaper articles (and in a tiny number of unrepresentative newspapers at that). It is a simple and unambiguous logical error to conflate the two. Only academics and economists make errors as stupid as that!viewcode said:I assume that a campaign that was dominated so heavily by immigration would generate a spike in an index measuring fear of immigration. And it seems that that did, in fact, occur.
0 -
Richard_Nabavi said:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGscoaUWW2MMaxPB said:Do people who don't read The Times really matter though!
0 -
More specifically, it's the number of articles using one/more of certain words, divided by the total number of articles. I don't think it's unreasonable to use that as a proxy for fear of immigration (which isn't the same as conflation).Richard_Nabavi said:
My objection is that it's not an index measuring fear of immigration, it's a count of words in newspaper articles. It is a simple and unambiguous logical error to conflate the two.
You'd have to install safeguards - an article using the phrase "The town did not show a fear of immigration" does not mean the same as an article with the phrase "The town did show a fear of immigration" - and I'm sure there are other concerns (changes in terminology over time springs to mind) but it's not prima facie ridiculous.0 -
All very laudable, and I quite like the guy. But which States do you think he'll win? Remember that the Presidential election is about winning EC votes from States.BigRich said:
Indeed, good luck to both of us! I wish I had the courage of my convictions a month ago to get 1000 to 1!stjohn said:
BigRich. You highlighted Gary Johnson's POTUS prospects about a month ago. I had never heard of him or the Libertarian Party at the time. After a bit of googling I backed him on Betfair at 1000.BigRich said:
Many thanks for you help, I now understand the difference, and have placed my first ever Political bet, no my first real bet of any type!Pong said:
Not a stupid question at all!BigRich said:Pong said:BigRich said:Pulpstar said:Pong said:Nate Silver Verified account
@NateSilver538
Gary Johnson up to 9.3% in our national poll average, his high point of the year so far.
??
Predictit only accepts US customers, Betfair explicitly rejects US customers.
So form now on, when people accuse me of being mad to belief Gary Johnson has a chance I will be able to say I am putting my money where my mouth is!
Good luck to us both!
To recap, the reasons I think that The Librarian party candidate Gary Johnson may be the next POTUS is:
1) Get over 15% in the opinion poles to get in the debates, with both of the main party candidates so unpopular some people will at least tell pollsters that they are backing him to avoid being associated with the other 2.
2) Debates are always levelers, last time Romney was lagging and therefor got a boost out of them. in 2010 in the UK when Clegg was on the stage hear in the UK, he got a huge boost and was even in second place for a time! I could go on.
3) he doesn't need to win 270 Electoral Collage Votes, he just needs to win sufficient to stop ether of the other 2 wining an out right majority. with the other 2 focusing much of there time, money and effort in 12 or so states, there are plenty that will be ignored, and he can appeal to Dems in Republican states to stop Trump in that state and Republicans in Dem states to stop Hilary,
4) if no candidate has 270 ECVs then it foes to the house of congress, where I believe there are sufficient Libertarian leaning Republicans, to team up with the Democrats and nominate Johnson as preferable to Trump.
Its still a long shot, but better than 430 to 1! and more to the point I would much rather be cheering his victory than ether Trump or Hillary!0 -
It just underlines that, despite all the froth (pro and anti) on here and elsewhere, we won't really know how things pan out for the economy for some months, if not years.nunu said:When was the last time a fund manager led the BBC headline news.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business
Meanwhile I hope you caught the BBC programme about the 2012 opening ceremony; a simply amazing achievement. And the prog includes some revelations including that Jeremy Hunt tried to cut back the NHS sequence and Danny Boyle has to threaten to walk out to hang onto it.
0 -
I think this is right - depending on what happens to the economy over the next few years. Owen Smith sees the danger, hence all his talk about second referendums. But Labour is trapped between its London middle class/ethnic constituency and its northern wwc voters, with no way out. Yet another of its insoluable problems (barring the sudden appearance of a British Obama).hamiltonace said:
The lesson from the Scottish referendum is that without a conclusive result the decision does not go away. Ruth Davidson spotted this and used it to beat Labour into 3rd place in their old heartland. The Tories whether they like it or not are seen as the Brexit party and the Lib Dems are going for the remain voters. Labour is at risk of losing the battle as no-one knows where it stands on this key issue.AramintaMoonbeamQC said:
Someone predicted on here in the immediate aftermath of the Brexit vote that the LDs would be the big winners. Will be interesting to see how this unfolds, but the scenario that someone else has outlined i.e. Canadian style political parties is very plausible.Jonathan said:
Look to what happened in Scotland. The side that lost the vote had the anger and energy to prosper.rottenborough said:
Certainly shouldn't be written off at this stage. The 48% are, from my anecdotal experience, bloody angry and looking for a home, and that certainly isn't the fratricidal cesspit the Labour party has become.SeanT said:
I disagree. If they can organise it (most unlikely) there is a huge constituency out there yearning to vote for them. 48% of Brits voted IN. Many of them are very upset. And want a rematch.runnymede said:
A handwringers' and losers' alliance, appealing to a small metropolitan minority.TheScreamingEagles said:
48% was 16 million votes, remember.
A new party promising to take us back into the EU only has to get 10 million votes, and they likely win the GE.
What will fox them is time and party politics. But there is a prize to be had, if they get lucky.0 -
It is sometimes hard to avoid the impression that Jeremy Hunt is a bit of a prat.IanB2 said:
It just underlines that, despite all the froth (pro and anti) on here and elsewhere, we won't really know how things pan out for the economy for some months, if not years.nunu said:When was the last time a fund manager led the BBC headline news.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business
Meanwhile I hope you caught the BBC programme about the 2012 opening ceremony; a simply amazing achievement. And the prog includes some revelations including that Jeremy Hunt tried to cut back the NHS sequence and Danny Boyle has to threaten to walk out to hang onto it.0 -
In a country where 37% gets you a majority government, aiming for the 48% is almost certainly a viable strategy.IanB2 said:
I think this is right - depending on what happens to the economy over the next few years. Owen Smith sees the danger, hence all his talk about second referendums. But Labour is trapped between its London middle class/ethnic constituency and its northern wwc voters, with no way out. Yet another of its insoluable problems (barring the sudden appearance of a British Obama).hamiltonace said:
The lesson from the Scottish referendum is that without a conclusive result the decision does not go away. Ruth Davidson spotted this and used it to beat Labour into 3rd place in their old heartland. The Tories whether they like it or not are seen as the Brexit party and the Lib Dems are going for the remain voters. Labour is at risk of losing the battle as no-one knows where it stands on this key issue.AramintaMoonbeamQC said:
Someone predicted on here in the immediate aftermath of the Brexit vote that the LDs would be the big winners. Will be interesting to see how this unfolds, but the scenario that someone else has outlined i.e. Canadian style political parties is very plausible.Jonathan said:
Look to what happened in Scotland. The side that lost the vote had the anger and energy to prosper.rottenborough said:
Certainly shouldn't be written off at this stage. The 48% are, from my anecdotal experience, bloody angry and looking for a home, and that certainly isn't the fratricidal cesspit the Labour party has become.SeanT said:
I disagree. If they can organise it (most unlikely) there is a huge constituency out there yearning to vote for them. 48% of Brits voted IN. Many of them are very upset. And want a rematch.runnymede said:
A handwringers' and losers' alliance, appealing to a small metropolitan minority.TheScreamingEagles said:
48% was 16 million votes, remember.
A new party promising to take us back into the EU only has to get 10 million votes, and they likely win the GE.
What will fox them is time and party politics. But there is a prize to be had, if they get lucky.0 -
If the result of Brexit is a recession followed by a deal with little or no new restrictions on immigration, an agile leader of the opposition should be able to appeal to both pro-immigration remainers and anti-immigration leavers at the same time.IanB2 said:
I think this is right - depending on what happens to the economy over the next few years. Owen Smith sees the danger, hence all his talk about second referendums. But Labour is trapped between its London middle class/ethnic constituency and its northern wwc voters, with no way out. Yet another of its insoluable problems (barring the sudden appearance of a British Obama).hamiltonace said:
The lesson from the Scottish referendum is that without a conclusive result the decision does not go away. Ruth Davidson spotted this and used it to beat Labour into 3rd place in their old heartland. The Tories whether they like it or not are seen as the Brexit party and the Lib Dems are going for the remain voters. Labour is at risk of losing the battle as no-one knows where it stands on this key issue.AramintaMoonbeamQC said:
Someone predicted on here in the immediate aftermath of the Brexit vote that the LDs would be the big winners. Will be interesting to see how this unfolds, but the scenario that someone else has outlined i.e. Canadian style political parties is very plausible.Jonathan said:
Look to what happened in Scotland. The side that lost the vote had the anger and energy to prosper.rottenborough said:
Certainly shouldn't be written off at this stage. The 48% are, from my anecdotal experience, bloody angry and looking for a home, and that certainly isn't the fratricidal cesspit the Labour party has become.SeanT said:
I disagree. If they can organise it (most unlikely) there is a huge constituency out there yearning to vote for them. 48% of Brits voted IN. Many of them are very upset. And want a rematch.runnymede said:
A handwringers' and losers' alliance, appealing to a small metropolitan minority.TheScreamingEagles said:
48% was 16 million votes, remember.
A new party promising to take us back into the EU only has to get 10 million votes, and they likely win the GE.
What will fox them is time and party politics. But there is a prize to be had, if they get lucky.0 -
Chuka hasn't gone away you know.IanB2 said:Yet another of its insoluable problems (barring the sudden appearance of a British Obama).
-1 -
In the First World War, we were pretty careless about who we let die in the trenches, and by WW2 and probably even by the end of WW1 had developed the idea of reserved occupations, scientists were kept in their labs, and most officers were kept behind the lines.Ishmael_X said:
After some very loose googling:AnneJGP said:
My father often used to speculate on the damage to our society caused by the WWI slaughter of this country's gene pool. Never seen any work on it, though.SeanT said:
Yes, possibly. But it is a fundamental part of our identity now, just as the French revolution crucially forms their self image, even though the country dates back a thousand years before 1789.Jonathan said:
Arguably this baggage holds us back. So much so its almost impossible to imagine that before 1940 this was not a part in the British identity at all.SeanT said:
Britain was exhausted by, say, 1944. And understandably. We didn't especially distinguish ourselves in D Day, tho there was particular heroism in places.anotherDave said:
I read Mr Johnson's 'Churchill Factor" recently.John_M said:
I think my most obscure books are the two volume 'Bloody Shambles' series, on the WW2 British air war in the Pacific. Pretty heavy going, but fascinating. We really don't pay as much attention to the Burma campaign as we should. Men of iron.
Apparently Stalin used to mock Churchill for the british military's reluctance to fight, and inability to win.
Bit of a surprise to me, when I was growing up WW2 propaganda films were used by the TV bods as cheap fillers, so I absorbed a version full of pluck and triumph.
Our great triumph was the Battle of Britain and the sheer moral courage of withstanding the Blitz and the rest. Standing entirely alone - and then winning. When everyone else was absent, or fallen. It's why many Europeans slightly and subconsciously resent us, even now. We have this sense of self-worth that they lost, forever.
And these things are handed on, via cultural DNA. Without the Battle of Britain there would be no Brexit.
It may be a foolish national delusion, but it exists. It's got nothing to do with nostalgia for Empire, as so many europhiles would have it.
It's 1940.
2% of the entire population died (whereas 4% died in the civil war)
Our forces were 54% volunteer/46% conscript
Entirely uneducated guess is that the losses aren't big enough to make that much difference, either by overall loss because the pool shrinks, or differentially because the good guys die out and the cads survive.0 -
"...most officers were kept behind the lines"
I would be very interested to see some figures to back up that assertion, Mr. L.0 -
Chuka? Lol, funny doesn't even come close to Obama.williamglenn said:
Chuka hasn't gone away you know.IanB2 said:Yet another of its insoluable problems (barring the sudden appearance of a British Obama).
0 -
Incidentally, a happy occasion for him today:nunu said:
Chuka? Lol, funny doesn't even come close to Obama.williamglenn said:
Chuka hasn't gone away you know.IanB2 said:Yet another of its insoluable problems (barring the sudden appearance of a British Obama).
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1460059/labour-mp-chuka-umunna-reveals-wedding-photo-after-marriage-to-lawyer-fiancee/0 -
Labour should ask the actual Obama if he's interested.nunu said:
Chuka? Lol, funny doesn't even come close to Obama.williamglenn said:
Chuka hasn't gone away you know.IanB2 said:Yet another of its insoluable problems (barring the sudden appearance of a British Obama).
0 -
Northern Ireland: 3500 killed in 30 years of troubles.Paul_Bedfordshire said:
Its all getting a bit UlsterPlatoSaid said:What makes my blood run cold right now is that there's a deliberate intention to murder officers across the nation.
Thinking your spouse may not come home each night is always a worry for law enforcement families, knowing that a small number of racists are seeking to shoot them is an entirely different kettle of fish.
God knows what's going to happen in Cleveland tomorrow with the Trump convention. IIRC it's a open carry state.
The US: 11000 homicides by firearm in 2013; 13000 in 2015.
Much of the media, such as CNN, are fanning the flames. When I heard that a sniper had shot dead five policemen in Dallas, I thought this is it; this is one serious destabilisation effort that may well blow the country up. Snipers started it in Kiev 2014, in Budapest 1956, and elsewhere. Snipers anywhere near large political demonstrations are very bad news indeed. They have been used in Caracas too.
But the mainstream account of what Micah Johnson did in Dallas doesn't describe the actions of a sniper at all. Sniper.
Not that I have looked for holes in stories or weighed up conflicting accounts or speculation. But people should get a grip. Widespread armed conflict is certainly what some interests want, and it won't help the presidential campaigns of Hillary Clinton, Gary Johnson or Jill Stein.
0 -
35% for Blair in 2005!Lowlander said:
In a country where 37% gets you a majority government, aiming for the 48% is almost certainly a viable strategy.IanB2 said:
I think this is right - depending on what happens to the economy over the next few years. Owen Smith sees the danger, hence all his talk about second referendums. But Labour is trapped between its London middle class/ethnic constituency and its northern wwc voters, with no way out. Yet another of its insoluable problems (barring the sudden appearance of a British Obama).hamiltonace said:
The lesson from the Scottish referendum is that without a conclusive result the decision does not go away. Ruth Davidson spotted this and used it to beat Labour into 3rd place in their old heartland. The Tories whether they like it or not are seen as the Brexit party and the Lib Dems are going for the remain voters. Labour is at risk of losing the battle as no-one knows where it stands on this key issue.AramintaMoonbeamQC said:
Someone predicted on here in the immediate aftermath of the Brexit vote that the LDs would be the big winners. Will be interesting to see how this unfolds, but the scenario that someone else has outlined i.e. Canadian style political parties is very plausible.Jonathan said:
Look to what happened in Scotland. The side that lost the vote had the anger and energy to prosper.rottenborough said:
Certainly shouldn't be written off at this stage. The 48% are, from my anecdotal experience, bloody angry and looking for a home, and that certainly isn't the fratricidal cesspit the Labour party has become.SeanT said:
I disagree. If they can organise it (most unlikely) there is a huge constituency out there yearning to vote for them. 48% of Brits voted IN. Many of them are very upset. And want a rematch.runnymede said:
A handwringers' and losers' alliance, appealing to a small metropolitan minority.TheScreamingEagles said:
48% was 16 million votes, remember.
A new party promising to take us back into the EU only has to get 10 million votes, and they likely win the GE.
What will fox them is time and party politics. But there is a prize to be had, if they get lucky.0 -
Would be great to have a Librarian Party president, the best news libraries have had in ages!BigRich said:
Indeed, good luck to both of us! I wish I had the courage of my convictions a month ago to get 1000 to 1!stjohn said:
BigRich. You highlighted Gary Johnson's POTUS prospects about a month ago. I had never heard of him or the Libertarian Party at the time. After a bit of googling I backed him on Betfair at 1000.BigRich said:
Many thanks for you help, I now understand the difference, and have placed my first ever Political bet, no my first real bet of any type!Pong said:
Not a stupid question at all!BigRich said:
Many thanks, at 450/1 estion.Pong said:BigRich said:Pulpstar said:Pong said:Nate Silver Verified account
@NateSilver538
Gary Johnson up to 9.3% in our national poll average, his high point of the year so far.
??
Predictit only accepts US customers, Betfair explicitly rejects US customers.
So form now on, when people accuse me of being mad to belief Gary Johnson has a chance I will be able to say I am putting my money where my mouth is!
Good luck to us both!
To recap, the reasons I think that The Librarian party candidate Gary Johnson may be the next POTUS is:
1) Get over 15% in the opinion poles to get in the debates, with both of the main party candidates so unpopular some people will at least tell pollsters that they are backing him to avoid being associated with the other 2.
2) Debates are always levelers, last time Romney was lagging and therefor got a boost out of them. in 2010 in the UK when Clegg was on the stage hear in the UK, he got a huge boost and was even in second place for a time! I could go on.
3) he doesn't need to win 270 Electoral Collage Votes, he just needs to win sufficient to stop ether of the other 2 wining an out right majority. with the other 2 focusing much of there time, money and effort in 12 or so states, there are plenty that will be ignored, and he can appeal to Dems in Republican states to stop Trump in that state and Republicans in Dem states to stop Hilary,
4) if no candidate has 270 ECVs then it foes to the house of congress, where I believe there are sufficient Libertarian leaning Republicans, to team up with the Democrats and nominate Johnson as preferable to Trump.
Its still a long shot, but better than 430 to 1! and more to the point I would much rather be cheering his victory than ether Trump or Hillary!0 -
I do not have figures to hand. The problem in WW1 was that generals kept visiting the front lines and getting killed (and in fact, officers were more likely to be killed than ordinary soldiers). By the end of the war, they'd been largely stopped from doing this.HurstLlama said:"...most officers were kept behind the lines"
I would be very interested to see some figures to back up that assertion, Mr. L.0 -
On present trends in France I think Sarkozy could win the LR nomination, remember it is the rightwing party base who are most likely to turn outrcs1000 said:
How funny, I've been meaning to write one too!david_herdson said:
I have a piece on the French presidential written for when Mike can find time among everything else!anotherDave said:
Marine Le Pen must look ever more likely. Every terrorist attack pushes voters to the strongest response, and that's always going to be Le Pen.david_herdson said:
It's roughly what google translate says too: "I hope that the prefects are authorized to immediately close any place of worship Related Salafism"SeanT said:
So my schoolboy French tells me. Could be wrong.FrancisUrquhart said:
He is proposing to close all Salafist places right?SeanT said:Et voila
Sarkozy wins the election?
@NicolasSarkozy 25m25 minutes ago View translation
Je souhaite que les préfets soient autorisés à fermer immédiatement tout lieu de culte ayant un lien avec le salafisme #NS20H
But it won't win Sarkozy the election. It won't even win him the nomination unless Juppe does or says something stupid, which isn't his style.
To cut a long story short, her odds are far too short at the moment. She'll lose to everyone except Hollande (more black swans permitting), and Hollande is unlikely to make the second round.
Basically, Juppe will be the Les Republicains candidate, beating Sarkozy by 2:1 in the second round. Bayrou will not stand if Juppe is the LR candidate, and so he'll top the first round on perhaps 35%, against 30% for Le Pen. And Juppe walks the second round.
His odds are far too long, hers too short.
And people forget how poorly the FN performed in second rounds in the last 18 months - even after topping the polls in the first rounds. They still haven't become transfer friendly, and probably won't be until Marion Marechel Le Pen takes over the leadership from Marine.0 -
Yes. He called me a ridiculous gargoyle. I had the distinct impression he was 'going easy' on me. For which I'm most grateful.Moses_ said:
That's not a true SeanT insult trust me. Sean has mellowed slightly but some years ago they were eye wateringly withering but also funny.Paul_Bedfordshire said:Is there a special badge you get for being insulted here by Sean, or do I have to commission a special T shirt?
You are yet to be on the end of one of those.......0
This discussion has been closed.