politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Trump’s approval ratings, fake news, leader ratings, and immig
Comments
-
Absolutely - have you heard about the Islamophobia laws being suggested in Canada?Sean_F said:
I'd do away with the concept of "hate crime" in law. Either something should be a crime or it shouldn't.rkrkrk said:
What would your suggested wording be?MattW said:
Definitions of hate crime *are* ridiculously broad. Here is our local one from Nottinghamshire:JosiasJessop said:
"ridiculously broad definition of hate speech"Morris_Dancer said:Miss Plato, not surprised, sadly. There's pressure for (self-)censorship from the religious, from government curtailing free speech by the ridiculously broad definition of hate speech, and from the terminally over-sensitive.
It's pathetic.
From your perspective. Then again, you're not a member of a group likely to encounter much hate speech (aside from being a Yorkshireman, that is)
"Nottinghamshire Police describes hate
crime as “any incident, which may or may
not constitute a criminal offence, which is
perceived by the victim or any other person,
as being motivated by prejudice or hate”."
http://nottinghamshire.police.uk/sites/default/files/documents/files/NottsHateStrategy.pdf
They are idiots, but writing those 3 words is probably a hate crime according to our local police.
http://www.torontosun.com/2017/02/11/yes-canadas-anti-islamophobia-motion-poses-a-problem0 -
Even their Cayman Islands tax haven can't help them now!SeanT said:
Indeed, any comparison between the Express and the Guardian is grossly unjust, if not imbecilic. The Express makes a handsome profit.Sean_F said:
That would be unfair on the Express.Roger said:
Are you SERIOUSLY equating Guardian stories with ones in the Express?felix said:
People are equally good at identifying the 'Guardian' stories from real news as well these days.Roger said:Very interesting podcast. For those with no time to listen.....Trump's approval ratings are tanking. He arrived with the worst figures on record and they've just got worse. There's 4/1 at Paddy Power that he'll be impeached within a year.....
On fake news....people are pretty good at separating 'Daily Express' stories from real stories and on the whole peddling nasty stories about immigrants etc doesn't work.
On PB's own poll...respondents views on immigration are mixed. On the whole a good thing but some reservations.
My conclusions; PB posters are well to the right of the mean......
Footnote; Corbyn will never be Prime Minister.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/may/09/express-newspapers-richard-desmond-pre-tax-profits
Whereas the Guardian is now losing £90m a year and could be gone completely by 2020.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/02/01/heavy-losses-feared-guardian-forecasts-will-burn-90m-cash-year/0 -
Raphael Behr on the latest May biography:
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/feb/16/theresa-may-the-enigmatic-prime-minister-by-rosa-prince-review0 -
Re: The Express
The pre-tax profit figure is significantly boosted by a £15m in interest received. Bloody hell, how on earth is it earning £15 million in interest ?0 -
to be fair they only used the Cayman Islands in conjunction with a hedge fund to avoid tax on one particular transaction and, apparently, everyone does it and it is perfectly legal.RobD said:
Even their Cayman Islands tax haven can't help them now!SeanT said:
Indeed, any comparison between the Express and the Guardian is grossly unjust, if not imbecilic. The Express makes a handsome profit.Sean_F said:
That would be unfair on the Express.Roger said:
Are you SERIOUSLY equating Guardian stories with ones in the Express?felix said:
People are equally good at identifying the 'Guardian' stories from real news as well these days.Roger said:Very interesting podcast. For those with no time to listen.....Trump's approval ratings are tanking. He arrived with the worst figures on record and they've just got worse. There's 4/1 at Paddy Power that he'll be impeached within a year.....
On fake news....people are pretty good at separating 'Daily Express' stories from real stories and on the whole peddling nasty stories about immigrants etc doesn't work.
On PB's own poll...respondents views on immigration are mixed. On the whole a good thing but some reservations.
My conclusions; PB posters are well to the right of the mean......
Footnote; Corbyn will never be Prime Minister.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/may/09/express-newspapers-richard-desmond-pre-tax-profits
Whereas the Guardian is now losing £90m a year and could be gone completely by 2020.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/02/01/heavy-losses-feared-guardian-forecasts-will-burn-90m-cash-year/
*pause*
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA0 -
At least The Grauniad does not have its adverstiser's stampeding for the exit....
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/breitbart-advertising-deals-companies-pull-out-steve-bannon-alt-right-site-a7582296.html
It could not happen to a nicer bunch....
0 -
Seems sensible.Sean_F said:
Punish them if they incite criminal acts. Leave them be if they simply express nasty views.rkrkrk said:
Well that's certainly a consistent line to take.Sean_F said:
I'd do away with the concept of "hate crime" in law. Either something should be a crime or it shouldn't.rkrkrk said:
What would your suggested wording be?MattW said:
Definitions of hate crime *are* ridiculously broad. Here is our local one from Nottinghamshire:JosiasJessop said:
"ridiculously broad definition of hate speech"Morris_Dancer said:Miss Plato, not surprised, sadly. There's pressure for (self-)censorship from the religious, from government curtailing free speech by the ridiculously broad definition of hate speech, and from the terminally over-sensitive.
It's pathetic.
From your perspective. Then again, you're not a member of a group likely to encounter much hate speech (aside from being a Yorkshireman, that is)
"Nottinghamshire Police describes hate
crime as “any incident, which may or may
not constitute a criminal offence, which is
perceived by the victim or any other person,
as being motivated by prejudice or hate”."
http://nottinghamshire.police.uk/sites/default/files/documents/files/NottsHateStrategy.pdf
They are idiots, but writing those 3 words is probably a hate crime according to our local police.
But what do you do about people like Abu Hamza?
I think it's obvious they shouldnt be allowed to call for violence... But that does contradict a right to free speech.
But I do think it's difficult.
The people at Westboriugh Baptist Church who picket funerals and say soldiers and gay people deserve to die etc...
I can understand why people think that should be illegal.0 -
It wasn't odd - and the material used was not ice - it was a combination of ice/ sawdust. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pykrete Pykrete which is much stronger but had to be kept very cold. No doubt commercial 'islands' could be made today (for use in the North Atlantic or near Antarctica - NOT the Bahamas), if any suitable use was found - but the costs and time delays back in the 1940s meant conventional aircraft carriers could be built - although of course not with the size of the proposed ones.dr_spyn said:One of the odder schemes backed by Churchill - aircraft carrier made with ice.
http://www.nmrn-portsmouth.org.uk/sites/default/files/Habbakkuk.pdf
Re Sun and 'texts' sent to voters, perhaps Gareth Snell is lucky in his choice of opponents, but it is getting close to I refute the rumours that my opponeent...blows goats
It was amazing the designs (lunatic and sound) that were hatched in the 1940s.
0 -
There's quite an amusing intv between Tucker Carlson and the WaPo's media journalist. I think Tucker was a bit unfair, but his central point is spot on.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AEgsJZ8J88E0 -
I am firmly of the opinion that, if it was not for laws holding them back, some of the more extreme religious types would go back to burning people at the stake...rkrkrk said:
Seems sensible.
But I do think it's difficult.
The people at Westboriugh Baptist Church who picket funerals and say soldiers and gay people deserve to die etc...
I can understand why people think that should be illegal.
0 -
Mrs C, certainly true in ISIS-land...0
-
rkrkrk said:
What would your suggested wording be?MattW said:
Definitions of hate crime *are* ridiculously broad. Here is our local one from Nottinghamshire:JosiasJessop said:
"ridiculously broad definition of hate speech"Morris_Dancer said:Miss Plato, not surprised, sadly. There's pressure for (self-)censorship from the religious, from government curtailing free speech by the ridiculously broad definition of hate speech, and from the terminally over-sensitive.
It's pathetic.
From your perspective. Then again, you're not a member of a group likely to encounter much hate speech (aside from being a Yorkshireman, that is)
"Nottinghamshire Police describes hate
crime as “any incident, which may or may
not constitute a criminal offence, which is
perceived by the victim or any other person,
as being motivated by prejudice or hate”."
http://nottinghamshire.police.uk/sites/default/files/documents/files/NottsHateStrategy.pdf
They are idiots, but writing those 3 words is probably a hate crime according to our local police.CongressParliament shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.0 -
On Hitler and weapons, the most remarkable thing surely is that he did have a potentially war-winning weapon - Germany's massive stockpiles of tabun and sarin which the allies knew nothing about. Churchill was terrified that the Germans would use poison gas against our civilian population but he only knew about conventional agents like chlorine and liquid mustard. If he'd know about nerve gas he'd have been wetting himself, yet Hitler refused to allow gas to be used. We were lucky - a V2 with a warhead full of sarin would have been as devastating as a nuclear bomb.0
-
Mr. Rex, that was a curious decision by Hitler. I wonder if it was influenced by his own experienced of mustard gas in the First World War.0
-
What's it worth not to suggest to Katherine Viner that she ought to check out PB?SeanT said:
Actually. *nervous cough*TOPPING said:
to be fair they only used the Cayman Islands in conjunction with a hedge fund to avoid tax on one particular transaction and, apparently, everyone does it and it is perfectly legal.RobD said:
Even their Cayman Islands tax haven can't help them now!SeanT said:
Indeed, any comparison between the Express and the Guardian is grossly unjust, if not imbecilic. The Express makes a handsome profit.Sean_F said:
That would be unfair on the Express.Roger said:
Are you SERIOUSLY equating Guardian stories with ones in the Express?felix said:
People are equally good at identifying the 'Guardian' stories from real news as well these days.Roger said:Very interesting podcast. For those with no time to listen.....Trump's approval ratings are tanking. He arrived with the worst figures on record and they've just got worse. There's 4/1 at Paddy Power that he'll be impeached within a year.....
On fake news....people are pretty good at separating 'Daily Express' stories from real stories and on the whole peddling nasty stories about immigrants etc doesn't work.
On PB's own poll...respondents views on immigration are mixed. On the whole a good thing but some reservations.
My conclusions; PB posters are well to the right of the mean......
Footnote; Corbyn will never be Prime Minister.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/may/09/express-newspapers-richard-desmond-pre-tax-profits
Whereas the Guardian is now losing £90m a year and could be gone completely by 2020.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/02/01/heavy-losses-feared-guardian-forecasts-will-burn-90m-cash-year/
*pause*
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
I've just remembered the Guardian are doing - literally - a special S K Tremayne promotion over the next two weeks, giving away 15,000 copies of the ICE TWINS with extra chapters of THE FIRE CHILD, with lavish advertising inside etc etc.
Forget everything bad I ever said about the Guardian ever. I never said it. The Guardian is a brilliant paper run by business masterminds, and has a glowing and golden future.0 -
Indeed. It was true here as well for many hundreds (thousands?) of years until we started giving primacy to a more secular outlook.Morris_Dancer said:Mrs C, certainly true in ISIS-land...
0 -
Mrs C, was it?
I know there were burnings during the 16th century when religion went to and fro, and a tiny number of witch burnings centuries earlier, but apart from that I'm not sure it was commonplace here at all. Could be wrong, but that was my understanding.0 -
If we are talking specifically about burning at the stake as a punishment for heresy, about two hundred, actually (from the passing of the statute De Heretico Comburendo in 1401 until the death of Edward Wroughton in 1612).Beverley_C said:
Indeed. It was true here as well for many hundreds (thousands?) of years until we started giving primacy to a more secular outlook.Morris_Dancer said:Mrs C, certainly true in ISIS-land...
Before and after that it was used as a punishment for high treason (edit: for women, that is. Men of course were hanged, drawn and quartered).0 -
Michael Tracey
These were the "smoking gun" reports that Very Serious people just spent the last 24 hours screaming about https://t.co/8K8QVa8Tnh https://t.co/AHwXeMnrg80 -
No wonder they are going bust, must be throwing a fair bit of money at you for that.SeanT said:
Actually. *nervous cough*TOPPING said:
to be fair they only used the Cayman Islands in conjunction with a hedge fund to avoid tax on one particular transaction and, apparently, everyone does it and it is perfectly legal.RobD said:
Even their Cayman Islands tax haven can't help them now!SeanT said:
Indeed, any comparison between the Express and the Guardian is grossly unjust, if not imbecilic. The Express makes a handsome profit.Sean_F said:
That would be unfair on the Express.Roger said:
Are you SERIOUSLY equating Guardian stories with ones in the Express?felix said:
People are equally good at identifying the 'Guardian' stories from real news as well these days.Roger said:Very interesting podcast. For those with no time to listen.....Trump's approval ratings are tanking. He arrived with the worst figures on record and they've just got worse. There's 4/1 at Paddy Power that he'll be impeached within a year.....
On fake news....people are pretty good at separating 'Daily Express' stories from real stories and on the whole peddling nasty stories about immigrants etc doesn't work.
On PB's own poll...respondents views on immigration are mixed. On the whole a good thing but some reservations.
My conclusions; PB posters are well to the right of the mean......
Footnote; Corbyn will never be Prime Minister.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/may/09/express-newspapers-richard-desmond-pre-tax-profits
Whereas the Guardian is now losing £90m a year and could be gone completely by 2020.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/02/01/heavy-losses-feared-guardian-forecasts-will-burn-90m-cash-year/
*pause*
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
I've just remembered the Guardian are doing - literally - a special S K Tremayne promotion over the next two weeks, giving away 15,000 copies of the ICE TWINS with extra chapters of THE FIRE CHILD, with lavish advertising inside etc etc.
Forget everything bad I ever said about the Guardian ever. I never said it. The Guardian is a brilliant paper run by business masterminds, and has a glowing and golden future.0 -
Hmmm, she might not be much of an asset during a general election campaign.
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/8321667964929474560 -
May pointedly refused to answer the questions when asked on local radio over whether she supported the downgrading.rottenborough said:
Labour grab the comfort blanket. Fair enough. But purely practically, electing a new Tory backbencher who can have the odd word with ministers in the division queue, is more likely to save a hospital than electing an opposition MP.dr_spyn said:Artisan crafted political letter in Copeland, at least get the spelling and punctuation right.
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/832149706369331200/photo/1
Perhaps Labour could print off A Modest Proposal as it blames Tories for measures to reduce poverty.
https://twitter.com/GillTroughton/status/832161389565399040
0 -
In the Westboro's mindset you should be *happy* to be burned at the stake (it being an act of God). That's the step above what we used to do to witches, isn't it?rkrkrk said:
Seems sensible.Sean_F said:
Punish them if they incite criminal acts. Leave them be if they simply express nasty views.rkrkrk said:
Well that's certainly a consistent line to take.Sean_F said:
I'd do away with the concept of "hate crime" in law. Either something should be a crime or it shouldn't.rkrkrk said:
What would your suggested wording be?MattW said:
Definitions of hate crime *are* ridiculously broad. Here is our local one from Nottinghamshire:JosiasJessop said:
"ridiculously broad definition of hate speech"Morris_Dancer said:Miss Plato, not surprised, sadly. There's pressure for (self-)censorship from the religious, from government curtailing free speech by the ridiculously broad definition of hate speech, and from the terminally over-sensitive.
It's pathetic.
From your perspective. Then again, you're not a member of a group likely to encounter much hate speech (aside from being a Yorkshireman, that is)
"Nottinghamshire Police describes hate
crime as “any incident, which may or may
not constitute a criminal offence, which is
perceived by the victim or any other person,
as being motivated by prejudice or hate”."
http://nottinghamshire.police.uk/sites/default/files/documents/files/NottsHateStrategy.pdf
They are idiots, but writing those 3 words is probably a hate crime according to our local police.
But what do you do about people like Abu Hamza?
I think it's obvious they shouldnt be allowed to call for violence... But that does contradict a right to free speech.
But I do think it's difficult.
The people at Westboriugh Baptist Church who picket funerals and say soldiers and gay people deserve to die etc...
I can understand why people think that should be illegal.0 -
I don't really want to get into an ancient apples v. modern oranges argument, or defend Isis, but how many Sharia approved burnings have actually taken place?Morris_Dancer said:Mrs C, was it?
I know there were burnings during the 16th century when religion went to and fro, and a tiny number of witch burnings centuries earlier, but apart from that I'm not sure it was commonplace here at all. Could be wrong, but that was my understanding.
In terms of general non judicial savagery, Isis have got a bit of catching up to do to compete with the European religious wars of the 16th-17th centuries.0 -
Have you seen the competition ?TheScreamingEagles said:Hmmm, she might not be much of an asset during a general election campaign.
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/832166796492947456
0 -
IIRC germany were told that if they ever used poison gas they would expect no mercy from the allies in their retaliation - even if the allies were thinking of Chlorine/ Mustard only - the Germans didn't know the British didn't have sarin, only that they might have it as production was obviously technically possible at the time. (And I would be amazed if nothing about Sarin/ Tabun ever emerged from Bletchley). Hitler was gassed in the 1st world war - and that might have something to do with it.Carolus_Rex said:On Hitler and weapons, the most remarkable thing surely is that he did have a potentially war-winning weapon - Germany's massive stockpiles of tabun and sarin which the allies knew nothing about. Churchill was terrified that the Germans would use poison gas against our civilian population but he only knew about conventional agents like chlorine and liquid mustard. If he'd know about nerve gas he'd have been wetting himself, yet Hitler refused to allow gas to be used. We were lucky - a V2 with a warhead full of sarin would have been as devastating as a nuclear bomb.
0 -
I know a few states have banned protesting at funerals for fallen members of the armed services.rkrkrk said:
Seems sensible.Sean_F said:
Punish them if they incite criminal acts. Leave them be if they simply express nasty views.rkrkrk said:
Well that's certainly a consistent line to take.Sean_F said:
I'd do away with the concept of "hate crime" in law. Either something should be a crime or it shouldn't.rkrkrk said:
What would your suggested wording be?MattW said:
Definitions of hate crime *are* ridiculously broad. Here is our local one from Nottinghamshire:JosiasJessop said:
"ridiculously broad definition of hate speech"Morris_Dancer said:Miss Plato, not surprised, sadly. There's pressure for (self-)censorship from the religious, from government curtailing free speech by the ridiculously broad definition of hate speech, and from the terminally over-sensitive.
It's pathetic.
From your perspective. Then again, you're not a member of a group likely to encounter much hate speech (aside from being a Yorkshireman, that is)
"Nottinghamshire Police describes hate
crime as “any incident, which may or may
not constitute a criminal offence, which is
perceived by the victim or any other person,
as being motivated by prejudice or hate”."
http://nottinghamshire.police.uk/sites/default/files/documents/files/NottsHateStrategy.pdf
They are idiots, but writing those 3 words is probably a hate crime according to our local police.
But what do you do about people like Abu Hamza?
I think it's obvious they shouldnt be allowed to call for violence... But that does contradict a right to free speech.
But I do think it's difficult.
The people at Westboriugh Baptist Church who picket funerals and say soldiers and gay people deserve to die etc...
I can understand why people think that should be illegal.0 -
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/14/french-banlieues-violence-theo-affair-paris-police
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/08/12-arrested-as-french-youths-clash-with-police-on-estates-near-paris
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/06/french-police-brutality-in-spotlight-again-after-officer-charged-with
Anyway, we'll be well shut of those French telling us what to do.0 -
Well if she's basing her election strategy on repeating 'I am not Jeremy Corbyn' she might be in for a shock.Alanbrooke said:
Have you seen the competition ?TheScreamingEagles said:Hmmm, she might not be much of an asset during a general election campaign.
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/8321667964929474560 -
This former Democrat rep from Ohio gets it, re Deep State vs The People
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFR9z5fwf480 -
Oh dear. This is a Labour hold now I suspect.foxinsoxuk said:
May pointedly refused to answer the questions when asked on local radio over whether she supported the downgrading.rottenborough said:
Labour grab the comfort blanket. Fair enough. But purely practically, electing a new Tory backbencher who can have the odd word with ministers in the division queue, is more likely to save a hospital than electing an opposition MP.dr_spyn said:Artisan crafted political letter in Copeland, at least get the spelling and punctuation right.
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/832149706369331200/photo/1
Perhaps Labour could print off A Modest Proposal as it blames Tories for measures to reduce poverty.
https://twitter.com/GillTroughton/status/8321613895653990400 -
Or Northern Ireland.Theuniondivvie said:
I don't really want to get into an ancient apples v. modern oranges argument, or defend Isis, but how many Sharia approved burnings have actually taken place?Morris_Dancer said:Mrs C, was it?
I know there were burnings during the 16th century when religion went to and fro, and a tiny number of witch burnings centuries earlier, but apart from that I'm not sure it was commonplace here at all. Could be wrong, but that was my understanding.
In terms of general non judicial savagery, Isis have got a bit of catching up to do to compete with the European religious wars of the 16th-17th centuries.0 -
You would think the leftwing media would be giving these lots of coverage given that they are protests over a particularly horrible bit of police brutality, so it's surprising that they are ignoring it.SeanT said:Talking of leftwing media, watching the BBC or reading (generally brilliant) leftwing broadsheet newspapers, you'd barely know there was a tiny bit of rioting in France right now.
Go to the tabloids and internet, however:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/fear-spreads-across-paris-riots-9826436
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/767573/paris-riots-protest-theo-tourist-travel-warning-saint-denis
https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ea1_1487019845
There have been NINETY riots in France in the last few days0 -
Expected: Lab / Tories , Lab 2nd Copeland +£363.99
The Good: Lab / Lab +£1180.41
The Bad UKIP / Tories -£327.51 (Lab 2nd Copeland)
The Ugly UKIP / UKIP, Lab 3rd Copeland -£3361.110 -
It's not going to be long before we get "on balance ISIS did more good than harm"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uB4o5n2EGyA0 -
For those thinking Ukip has twitter problems
Wokileaks1
I have never seen someone own himself on twitter has often as Ian Millhiser https://t.co/neaKOcKwLC0 -
Indeed. France seems to be panning out as predicted in Houellebecqe's latest novel.SeanT said:Talking of leftwing media, watching the BBC or reading (generally brilliant) leftwing broadsheet newspapers, you'd barely know there was a tiny bit of rioting in France right now.
Go to the tabloids and internet, however:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/fear-spreads-across-paris-riots-9826436
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/767573/paris-riots-protest-theo-tourist-travel-warning-saint-denis
https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ea1_1487019845
There have been NINETY riots in France in the last few days0 -
It provides a classic example of why Prime Ministers should not go to by elections or if they do go then they should go prepared.
It does lead to what I think is a growing feeling that at base Mrs May ain't really that good but up until now has been rather lucky in her opponents within and without the Tory Party. .0 -
Maybe she's playing the long game - let Corbyn win the battle so that she will win the war in 2020!rottenborough said:
Oh dear. This is a Labour hold now I suspect.foxinsoxuk said:
May pointedly refused to answer the questions when asked on local radio over whether she supported the downgrading.rottenborough said:
Labour grab the comfort blanket. Fair enough. But purely practically, electing a new Tory backbencher who can have the odd word with ministers in the division queue, is more likely to save a hospital than electing an opposition MP.dr_spyn said:Artisan crafted political letter in Copeland, at least get the spelling and punctuation right.
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/832149706369331200/photo/1
Perhaps Labour could print off A Modest Proposal as it blames Tories for measures to reduce poverty.
https://twitter.com/GillTroughton/status/8321613895653990400 -
obviouslyTheScreamingEagles said:
Well if she's basing her election strategy on repeating 'I am not Jeremy Corbyn' she might be in for a shock.Alanbrooke said:
Have you seen the competition ?TheScreamingEagles said:Hmmm, she might not be much of an asset during a general election campaign.
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/832166796492947456
but he hasnt gone away you know
and the others
Farron
Nuttall
wee Mrs McTurnip
none of them terribly convincing0 -
That'll be a terrrrrrrrrrible result for the Conservatives.....rottenborough said:
Oh dear. This is a Labour hold now I suspect.foxinsoxuk said:
May pointedly refused to answer the questions when asked on local radio over whether she supported the downgrading.rottenborough said:
Labour grab the comfort blanket. Fair enough. But purely practically, electing a new Tory backbencher who can have the odd word with ministers in the division queue, is more likely to save a hospital than electing an opposition MP.dr_spyn said:Artisan crafted political letter in Copeland, at least get the spelling and punctuation right.
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/832149706369331200/photo/1
Perhaps Labour could print off A Modest Proposal as it blames Tories for measures to reduce poverty.
https://twitter.com/GillTroughton/status/832161389565399040
Mind you, come 2020 when the Labour MP has failed to stop the NHS closure......0 -
The Tories need to get a grip on NHS and Social Care in next two years, or they will find themselves in for a nasty surprise come GE.TheScreamingEagles said:
Well if she's basing her election strategy on repeating 'I am not Jeremy Corbyn' she might be in for a shock.Alanbrooke said:
Have you seen the competition ?TheScreamingEagles said:Hmmm, she might not be much of an asset during a general election campaign.
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/8321667964929474560 -
I would LOVE to be a judge! I am tempted to put in a wild card application - I have had a long and varied career in many aspects of the law, am the daughter of immigrants and would take no nonsense from the pompous or the crooked.Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:Morning all.
The supreme court has some vacancies.
Is @TSE polishing his CV?
http://www.cityam.com/259146/get-your-cv-ready-supreme-court-hiring-three-new-judges
I mean, what's not to like -
0 -
Who is as 'invincible' in Scotland as May is in the UK.......Alanbrooke said:
wee Mrs McTurnipTheScreamingEagles said:
Well if she's basing her election strategy on repeating 'I am not Jeremy Corbyn' she might be in for a shock.Alanbrooke said:
Have you seen the competition ?TheScreamingEagles said:Hmmm, she might not be much of an asset during a general election campaign.
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/832166796492947456
0 -
Go for it.Cyclefree said:
I would LOVE to be a judge! I am tempted to put in a wild card application - I have had a long and varied career in many aspects of the law, am the daughter of immigrants and would take no nonsense from the pompous or the crooked.Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:Morning all.
The supreme court has some vacancies.
Is @TSE polishing his CV?
http://www.cityam.com/259146/get-your-cv-ready-supreme-court-hiring-three-new-judges
I mean, what's not to like -
Though I'm not sure you would be allowed to carry on posting here if you were a judge. Which would be a pity.0 -
For all their faults, Farron and Corbyn love canvassing and front line campaigning.Alanbrooke said:
Have you seen the competition ?TheScreamingEagles said:Hmmm, she might not be much of an asset during a general election campaign.
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/8321667964929474560 -
Genuine question... I always thought of the mirror as being left wing?Paristonda said:
You would think the leftwing media would be giving these lots of coverage given that they are protests over a particularly horrible bit of police brutality, so it's surprising that they are ignoring it.SeanT said:Talking of leftwing media, watching the BBC or reading (generally brilliant) leftwing broadsheet newspapers, you'd barely know there was a tiny bit of rioting in France right now.
Go to the tabloids and internet, however:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/fear-spreads-across-paris-riots-9826436
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/767573/paris-riots-protest-theo-tourist-travel-warning-saint-denis
https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ea1_1487019845
There have been NINETY riots in France in the last few days0 -
you mean they love being in oppositionfoxinsoxuk said:
For all their faults, Farron and Corbyn love canvassing and front line campaigning.Alanbrooke said:
Have you seen the competition ?TheScreamingEagles said:Hmmm, she might not be much of an asset during a general election campaign.
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/8321667964929474560 -
His most withering criticism was reserved for Liz Truss, rightly so.AlastairMeeks said:On the subject of newspapers, Lord Neuberger has made his views on the coverage of the High Court decision in the Miller case known:
http://app.ft.com/content/7d3668c2-f39f-11e6-8758-6876151821a6
"over the top" is his verdict.0 -
I would only be a judge if they gave me special dispensation to use a gavel.Cyclefree said:
I would LOVE to be a judge! I am tempted to put in a wild card application - I have had a long and varied career in many aspects of the law, am the daughter of immigrants and would take no nonsense from the pompous or the crooked.Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:Morning all.
The supreme court has some vacancies.
Is @TSE polishing his CV?
http://www.cityam.com/259146/get-your-cv-ready-supreme-court-hiring-three-new-judges
I mean, what's not to like -0 -
One thing that Labour have absolubtely got right in Copeland is the candidate. I think if Snell was the man there, it'd be lost. Fortunately for Labour, his opponent is even worse.
0 -
I'd insist on being allowed to say "approach the bench" every so often too.TheScreamingEagles said:
I would only be a judge if they gave me special dispensation to use a gavel.Cyclefree said:
I would LOVE to be a judge! I am tempted to put in a wild card application - I have had a long and varied career in many aspects of the law, am the daughter of immigrants and would take no nonsense from the pompous or the crooked.Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:Morning all.
The supreme court has some vacancies.
Is @TSE polishing his CV?
http://www.cityam.com/259146/get-your-cv-ready-supreme-court-hiring-three-new-judges
I mean, what's not to like -0 -
+1. Social care is unfit for purpose and 2 lots of 5% council tax increases to support it while everything else councils used to do disappears isn't going to win them any friends...rottenborough said:
The Tories need to get a grip on NHS and Social Care in next two years, or they will find themselves in for a nasty surprise come GE.TheScreamingEagles said:
Well if she's basing her election strategy on repeating 'I am not Jeremy Corbyn' she might be in for a shock.Alanbrooke said:
Have you seen the competition ?TheScreamingEagles said:Hmmm, she might not be much of an asset during a general election campaign.
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/832166796492947456
And there are some really awkward NHS questions to come. The consolidation of A&E services is not going to go down well anywhere...0 -
So did Dave.foxinsoxuk said:
For all their faults, Farron and Corbyn love canvassing and front line campaigning.Alanbrooke said:
Have you seen the competition ?TheScreamingEagles said:Hmmm, she might not be much of an asset during a general election campaign.
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/832166796492947456
I think that's where Mrs May is slightly lacking. The ability to be witty/cruel/think on your feet.
We see it at PMQs.0 -
Did May do any canvassing or delivery up there ?0
-
O/T
Interesting counterpoint negotiating position
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/16/britain-will-attempt-offset-brexit-cost-150-billion-worth-european/0 -
So you want somebody who's good at acting rather than someone who will govern ?TheScreamingEagles said:
So did Dave.foxinsoxuk said:
For all their faults, Farron and Corbyn love canvassing and front line campaigning.Alanbrooke said:
Have you seen the competition ?TheScreamingEagles said:Hmmm, she might not be much of an asset during a general election campaign.
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/832166796492947456
I think that's where Mrs May is slightly lacking. The ability to be witty/cruel/think on your feet.
We see it at PMQs.
0 -
The bit I really don't understand about America judgery is them saying they will have something that has been said "stricken from the record", how much use is that if the jury has already heard it, or even worse, instructions that the jury should give some piece of theatrics they had just been exposed to "no weight in their deliberations" - seriously ? Motion to ask the jury to forget ?Carolus_Rex said:
I'd insist on being allowed to say "approach the bench" every so often too.TheScreamingEagles said:
I would only be a judge if they gave me special dispensation to use a gavel.Cyclefree said:
I would LOVE to be a judge! I am tempted to put in a wild card application - I have had a long and varied career in many aspects of the law, am the daughter of immigrants and would take no nonsense from the pompous or the crooked.Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:Morning all.
The supreme court has some vacancies.
Is @TSE polishing his CV?
http://www.cityam.com/259146/get-your-cv-ready-supreme-court-hiring-three-new-judges
I mean, what's not to like -0 -
I'd like both qualities. We need good governance and an ability to mock their opponents.Alanbrooke said:
So you want somebody who's good at acting rather than someone who will govern ?TheScreamingEagles said:
So did Dave.foxinsoxuk said:
For all their faults, Farron and Corbyn love canvassing and front line campaigning.Alanbrooke said:
Have you seen the competition ?TheScreamingEagles said:Hmmm, she might not be much of an asset during a general election campaign.
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/832166796492947456
I think that's where Mrs May is slightly lacking. The ability to be witty/cruel/think on your feet.
We see it at PMQs.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/pmqs/8955789/David-Cameron-defends-coalition-Its-not-like-were-brothers-Ed.html0 -
Will Jennings
The changing nature of class voting in France - analysis from @MartialFoucault @lemondefr https://t.co/i9JsbwkWb3 https://t.co/BnE87IqZR10 -
Witch burnings were a fraction of the number compared to burnings for heresy. Most of the figures I have seen said that over 400 years or so across Europe there were a minimum of 12,000 and more likely 50,000. That would be 30 to 125 per year across Europe - less than one person per town per year.Morris_Dancer said:Mrs C, was it?
I know there were burnings during the 16th century when religion went to and fro, and a tiny number of witch burnings centuries earlier, but apart from that I'm not sure it was commonplace here at all. Could be wrong, but that was my understanding.
Mary Tudor had 274 people burned. In England witches were generally hanged, but the last person burned in the UK was in 1727
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janet_Horne
0 -
I think there should be no such thing. Let people say what the hell they want, however offensive it may be. The only thing which ought to be proscribed by law is incitement to violence.rkrkrk said:
What would your suggested wording be?MattW said:
Definitions of hate crime *are* ridiculously broad. Here is our local one from Nottinghamshire:JosiasJessop said:
"ridiculously broad definition of hate speech"Morris_Dancer said:Miss Plato, not surprised, sadly. There's pressure for (self-)censorship from the religious, from government curtailing free speech by the ridiculously broad definition of hate speech, and from the terminally over-sensitive.
It's pathetic.
From your perspective. Then again, you're not a member of a group likely to encounter much hate speech (aside from being a Yorkshireman, that is)
"Nottinghamshire Police describes hate
crime as “any incident, which may or may
not constitute a criminal offence, which is
perceived by the victim or any other person,
as being motivated by prejudice or hate”."
http://nottinghamshire.police.uk/sites/default/files/documents/files/NottsHateStrategy.pdf
They are idiots, but writing those 3 words is probably a hate crime according to our local police.
It is not the role of the police or the criminal law to police or enforce good manners.
Not in a free society anyway.
0 -
What goes on a labour candidates twitter feed is unlikely to have an effect. Same with Mr Snell in Stoke sadly. The PM's positive nuclear stance appears to be getting all the local news headlines.rottenborough said:
Oh dear. This is a Labour hold now I suspect.foxinsoxuk said:
May pointedly refused to answer the questions when asked on local radio over whether she supported the downgrading.rottenborough said:
Labour grab the comfort blanket. Fair enough. But purely practically, electing a new Tory backbencher who can have the odd word with ministers in the division queue, is more likely to save a hospital than electing an opposition MP.dr_spyn said:Artisan crafted political letter in Copeland, at least get the spelling and punctuation right.
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/832149706369331200/photo/1
Perhaps Labour could print off A Modest Proposal as it blames Tories for measures to reduce poverty.
https://twitter.com/GillTroughton/status/8321613895653990400 -
We'll take 1/28th of that giant egg boondoggle in Brussels. Preferably in cash.Blue_rog said:O/T
Interesting counterpoint negotiating position
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/16/britain-will-attempt-offset-brexit-cost-150-billion-worth-european/ 0 -
A pretty cheap jibe in all honesty. Governing parties have to campaign as well whether or not they have a legion of friendly newspapers and media outlets to help them.Alanbrooke said:
you mean they love being in opposition
There's a question as to the value of Prime Ministers attending by elections. On the one hand, it's a local boost for the candidate and the campaigners but on the other, it re-enforces the view of the Prime Minister as a partisan political figure leading one party and opposing others.
That's fine to a point but the Prime Minister isn't just leader of the governing party - he or she is the representative of all of us, whether we voted for him/her or not. It undermines the status of the office to carry the party political aspect too far.
In 2015, it was my experience the Conservative vote had two considerable aspects - one was a straight anti-Labour, anti-SNP and the other was David Cameron. If Cameron had stood as his own party, he'd have done pretty well as people were voting for him and a consequence of doing that was voting for the party.
May is at the moment enjoying a similar advantage - people vote for her and the party gets the vote as a by-product. This explains the Copeland vote as a way of maximising the turn out for the combined Conservative and Theresa May Party candidate.
0 -
The BBC has reported it, for instance:SeanT said:Talking of leftwing media, watching the BBC or reading (generally brilliant) leftwing broadsheet newspapers, you'd barely know there was a tiny bit of rioting in France right now.
Go to the tabloids and internet, however:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/fear-spreads-across-paris-riots-9826436
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/767573/paris-riots-protest-theo-tourist-travel-warning-saint-denis
https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ea1_1487019845
There have been NINETY riots in France in the last few days
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-38957953
As has the Guardian, with of course their own spin on the circumstances:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/14/french-banlieues-violence-theo-affair-paris-police
I think the problem with the BBC is not so much their editorial policy, so much as the news function on their website, which used to be excellent, has been deliberately and severely downgraded over the last two or three years (partly owing to pressure from the Murdochs etc and partly cost cutting).
0 -
Aside from occasional PMQs like the last one before recess (A sort of mufty day for parliament I guess), I think the jokes and crap asides are used way too much.Alanbrooke said:
So you want somebody who's good at acting rather than someone who will govern ?TheScreamingEagles said:
So did Dave.foxinsoxuk said:
For all their faults, Farron and Corbyn love canvassing and front line campaigning.Alanbrooke said:
Have you seen the competition ?TheScreamingEagles said:Hmmm, she might not be much of an asset during a general election campaign.
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/832166796492947456
I think that's where Mrs May is slightly lacking. The ability to be witty/cruel/think on your feet.
We see it at PMQs.
Corbyn recently has stuck to asking actual questions. May's homilies, truisms and platitudes don't cut it. They might impress the village journos most of whom hate Corbyn as they're all Blairite soft Labourites but her guff has worn thin.
The last time May really walloped Corbyn at PMQs was when he strayed onto an ad hom directed at Boris Johnson. He's learnt from that, remarkably.0 -
Like Prime Minister Hague?Alanbrooke said:
So you want somebody who's good at acting rather than someone who will govern ?TheScreamingEagles said:
So did Dave.foxinsoxuk said:
For all their faults, Farron and Corbyn love canvassing and front line campaigning.Alanbrooke said:
Have you seen the competition ?TheScreamingEagles said:Hmmm, she might not be much of an asset during a general election campaign.
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/832166796492947456
I think that's where Mrs May is slightly lacking. The ability to be witty/cruel/think on your feet.
We see it at PMQs.0 -
Cyclefree said:
I think there should be no such thing. Let people say what the hell they want, however offensive it may be. The only thing which ought to be proscribed by law is incitement to violence.rkrkrk said:
What would your suggested wording be?MattW said:
Definitions of hate crime *are* ridiculously broad. Here is our local one from Nottinghamshire:JosiasJessop said:
"ridiculously broad definition of hate speech"Morris_Dancer said:Miss Plato, not surprised, sadly. There's pressure for (self-)censorship from the religious, from government curtailing free speech by the ridiculously broad definition of hate speech, and from the terminally over-sensitive.
It's pathetic.
From your perspective. Then again, you're not a member of a group likely to encounter much hate speech (aside from being a Yorkshireman, that is)
"Nottinghamshire Police describes hate
crime as “any incident, which may or may
not constitute a criminal offence, which is
perceived by the victim or any other person,
as being motivated by prejudice or hate”."
http://nottinghamshire.police.uk/sites/default/files/documents/files/NottsHateStrategy.pdf
They are idiots, but writing those 3 words is probably a hate crime according to our local police.
It is not the role of the police or the criminal law to police or enforce good manners.
Not in a free society anyway.
0 -
0
-
That's because we seem as a society to have lost the art of policing ourselves and our behavior through social taboos and pressure and concepts such as shame. That's how normal well ordered societies have always controlled themselves throughout the ages. There is something very wrong with a mindset which thinks that the only way to stop stuff happening is through the law, by making something a crime. It results in a very authoritarian society in the end.rkrkrk said:
Seems sensible.Sean_F said:
Punish them if they incite criminal acts. Leave them be if they simply express nasty views.rkrkrk said:
Well that's certainly a consistent line to take.Sean_F said:
I'd do away with the concept of "hate crime" in law. Either something should be a crime or it shouldn't.rkrkrk said:
What would your suggested wording be?MattW said:
Definitions of hate crime *are* ridiculously broad. Here is our local one from Nottinghamshire:JosiasJessop said:
"ridiculously broad definition of hate speech"Morris_Dancer said:Miss Plato, not surprised, sadly. There's pressure for (self-)censorship from the religious, from government curtailing free speech by the ridiculously broad definition of hate speech, and from the terminally over-sensitive.
It's pathetic.
From your perspective. Then again, you're not a member of a group likely to encounter much hate speech (aside from being a Yorkshireman, that is)
"Nottinghamshire Police describes hate
crime as “any incident, which may or may
not constitute a criminal offence, which is
perceived by the victim or any other person,
as being motivated by prejudice or hate”."
http://nottinghamshire.police.uk/sites/default/files/documents/files/NottsHateStrategy.pdf
They are idiots, but writing those 3 words is probably a hate crime according to our local police.
But what do you do about people like Abu Hamza?
I think it's obvious they shouldnt be allowed to call for violence... But that does contradict a right to free speech.
But I do think it's difficult.
The people at Westboriugh Baptist Church who picket funerals and say soldiers and gay people deserve to die etc...
I can understand why people think that should be illegal.
0 -
Not sure whether anyone knows or cares, but just found out Malcolm MacLaren was basically raping and pillaging South African music in the 80s and passing it off as his own. Remember "Double Dutch"?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNunnQ9MB7k0 -
drawn, hung and quartered. Unless you were a noble.Carolus_Rex said:
If we are talking specifically about burning at the stake as a punishment for heresy, about two hundred, actually (from the passing of the statute De Heretico Comburendo in 1401 until the death of Edward Wroughton in 1612).Beverley_C said:
Indeed. It was true here as well for many hundreds (thousands?) of years until we started giving primacy to a more secular outlook.Morris_Dancer said:Mrs C, certainly true in ISIS-land...
Before and after that it was used as a punishment for high treason (edit: for women, that is. Men of course were hanged, drawn and quartered).0 -
Hmm... I wonder about that.Cyclefree said:
That's because we seem as a society to have lost the art of policing ourselves and our behavior through social taboos and pressure and concepts such as shame. That's how normal well ordered societies have always controlled themselves throughout the ages. There is something very wrong with a mindset which thinks that the only way to stop stuff happening is through the law, by making something a crime. It results in a very authoritarian society in the end.rkrkrk said:
Seems sensible.Sean_F said:
Punish them if they incite criminal acts. Leave them be if they simply express nasty views.rkrkrk said:
Well that's certainly a consistent line to take.Sean_F said:
I'd do away with the concept of "hate crime" in law. Either something should be a crime or it shouldn't.rkrkrk said:
What would your suggested wording be?MattW said:
Definitions of hate crime *are* ridiculously broad. Here is our local one from Nottinghamshire:JosiasJessop said:
"ridiculously broad definition of hate speech"Morris_Dancer said:Miss Plato, not surprised, sadly. There's pressure for (self-)censorship from the religious, from government curtailing free speech by the ridiculously broad definition of hate speech, and from the terminally over-sensitive.
It's pathetic.
From your perspective. Then again, you're not a member of a group likely to encounter much hate speech (aside from being a Yorkshireman, that is)
"Nottinghamshire Police describes hate
crime as “any incident, which may or may
not constitute a criminal offence, which is
perceived by the victim or any other person,
as being motivated by prejudice or hate”."
http://nottinghamshire.police.uk/sites/default/files/documents/files/NottsHateStrategy.pdf
They are idiots, but writing those 3 words is probably a hate crime according to our local police.
But what do you do about people like Abu Hamza?
I think it's obvious they shouldnt be allowed to call for violence... But that does contradict a right to free speech.
But I do think it's difficult.
The people at Westboriugh Baptist Church who picket funerals and say soldiers and gay people deserve to die etc...
I can understand why people think that should be illegal.
I think societies through the ages have certainly been comfortable with locking people up for saying things thought to be unacceptable.
Edit - for instance the UK we have banned books, political protests, political organisations etc...
Arguably we have more free speech now than before?
0 -
YES!Cyclefree said:
I think there should be no such thing. Let people say what the hell they want, however offensive it may be. The only thing which ought to be proscribed by law is incitement to violence.rkrkrk said:
What would your suggested wording be?MattW said:
Definitions of hate crime *are* ridiculously broad. Here is our local one from Nottinghamshire:JosiasJessop said:
"ridiculously broad definition of hate speech"Morris_Dancer said:Miss Plato, not surprised, sadly. There's pressure for (self-)censorship from the religious, from government curtailing free speech by the ridiculously broad definition of hate speech, and from the terminally over-sensitive.
It's pathetic.
From your perspective. Then again, you're not a member of a group likely to encounter much hate speech (aside from being a Yorkshireman, that is)
"Nottinghamshire Police describes hate
crime as “any incident, which may or may
not constitute a criminal offence, which is
perceived by the victim or any other person,
as being motivated by prejudice or hate”."
http://nottinghamshire.police.uk/sites/default/files/documents/files/NottsHateStrategy.pdf
They are idiots, but writing those 3 words is probably a hate crime according to our local police.
It is not the role of the police or the criminal law to police or enforce good manners.
Not in a free society anyway.
Hate is an emotion. How can we legislate for emotion? It's bullshit. Especially so where a victim gets to decide if an offence against him/her is hate driven or not.0 -
Or is a consequence of a drugs war.Paristonda said:
You would think the leftwing media would be giving these lots of coverage given that they are protests over a particularly horrible bit of police brutality, so it's surprising that they are ignoring it.SeanT said:Talking of leftwing media, watching the BBC or reading (generally brilliant) leftwing broadsheet newspapers, you'd barely know there was a tiny bit of rioting in France right now.
Go to the tabloids and internet, however:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/fear-spreads-across-paris-riots-9826436
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/767573/paris-riots-protest-theo-tourist-travel-warning-saint-denis
https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ea1_1487019845
There have been NINETY riots in France in the last few days0 -
I'd like to agree but I'm not comfortable doing so.Cyclefree said:
I think there should be no such thing. Let people say what the hell they want, however offensive it may be. The only thing which ought to be proscribed by law is incitement to violence.
It is not the role of the police or the criminal law to police or enforce good manners.
Not in a free society anyway.
The problem with your scenario is that it will be the loud, the angry and the sweary who will come to be the only voices heard. The problem with "Free" speech isn't the ability to speak but the ability to drive away by verbal intimidation those who don't feel comfortable in an adversarial verbal bear-pit but whose voices have a right to be heard.
It's a travesty of free speech in that by allowing some the freedom to say what they like (subject to incitement to violence and other laws relating to libel and slander) you keep others silent. It re-enforces the echo chambers and the silos if the only voices you ever hear are the ones you agree with or the ones that shout loudly enough.
0 -
Like to go for a pint with rating: LOWTheScreamingEagles said:
So did Dave.foxinsoxuk said:
For all their faults, Farron and Corbyn love canvassing and front line campaigning.Alanbrooke said:
Have you seen the competition ?TheScreamingEagles said:Hmmm, she might not be much of an asset during a general election campaign.
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/832166796492947456
I think that's where Mrs May is slightly lacking. The ability to be witty/cruel/think on your feet.
We see it at PMQs.0 -
It also reflects badly on her advisers. Did they not anticipate questions on local health care provision?0
-
The Sixteenth Century is an interesting example of how societies can become simultaneously more civilised, and less civilised.Beverley_C said:
Witch burnings were a fraction of the number compared to burnings for heresy. Most of the figures I have seen said that over 400 years or so across Europe there were a minimum of 12,000 and more likely 50,000. That would be 30 to 125 per year across Europe - less than one person per town per year.Morris_Dancer said:Mrs C, was it?
I know there were burnings during the 16th century when religion went to and fro, and a tiny number of witch burnings centuries earlier, but apart from that I'm not sure it was commonplace here at all. Could be wrong, but that was my understanding.
Mary Tudor had 274 people burned. In England witches were generally hanged, but the last person burned in the UK was in 1727
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janet_Horne
Henry VIII didn't think that punishments like burning and hanging, drawing and quartering were severe enough. He introduced boiling to death, as a method of capital punishment. From time to time, the victim would be hauled out on a chain, to display to the crowds, before being dropped back into boiling water.0 -
Well said.stodge said:
I'd like to agree but I'm not comfortable doing so.
The problem with your scenario is that it will be the loud, the angry and the sweary who will come to be the only voices heard. The problem with "Free" speech isn't the ability to speak but the ability to drive away by verbal intimidation those who don't feel comfortable in an adversarial verbal bear-pit but whose voices have a right to be heard.
It's a travesty of free speech in that by allowing some the freedom to say what they like (subject to incitement to violence and other laws relating to libel and slander) you keep others silent. It re-enforces the echo chambers and the silos if the only voices you ever hear are the ones you agree with or the ones that shout loudly enough.0 -
The burden of proof is the wrong way round for libel in this country, and if someone wins an action then subsequently 'truth' becomes apparent (Private Eye vs the recent paedophile); the case should be quashed with costs, damages etc reversed.0
-
Germany is changing its tune
"Marriages involving almost 500 migrant children under the age of 16 who arrived in Germany during the influx of asylum seekers over the past two years are to be annulled.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/berlin-will-annul-marriages-of-500-migrant-children-05h6ksncz0 -
It's part of #OperationSaveJezza - Nothing to see here.TheScreamingEagles said:Hmmm, she might not be much of an asset during a general election campaign.
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/832166796492947456
#Tories4Corbyn0 -
Ipsos Mori
Con 40 (-3)
Lab 29 (-2)
Lib Dems 13 (+2)
UKIP 9 (+3)
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/jeremy-corbyn-left-standing-as-theresa-may-is-handed-poll-boost-a3468351.html
0 -
When did (-3) become a poll boost ?TheScreamingEagles said:Ipsos Mori
Con 40 (-3)
Lab 29 (-2)
Lib Dems 13 (+2)
UKIP 9 (+3)
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/jeremy-corbyn-left-standing-as-theresa-may-is-handed-poll-boost-a3468351.html
UKIP were never on 6 too.0 -
It will be a triumph if we win either - but no disaster either way. They're safe Labour Heartland seats....stodge said:
Presumably Conservatives will brush off fourth place in Stoke and a failure to win Copeland as irrelevant as well.Mortimer said:Just a hint to those Labour partisans here.
You can't play expectations games both ways around. Stoke and Copeland, both safe Labour seats, cannot be a disaster if lost but a total triumph if won.
0 -
As soon as you move from an absolute right of free speech you move into the realms of who get to chose. The evidence isn't as we would hope, that it is Parliament, instead it is local bureaucrats, functionaries and busybodies.Beverley_C said:
Well said.stodge said:
I'd like to agree but I'm not comfortable doing so.
The problem with your scenario is that it will be the loud, the angry and the sweary who will come to be the only voices heard. The problem with "Free" speech isn't the ability to speak but the ability to drive away by verbal intimidation those who don't feel comfortable in an adversarial verbal bear-pit but whose voices have a right to be heard.
It's a travesty of free speech in that by allowing some the freedom to say what they like (subject to incitement to violence and other laws relating to libel and slander) you keep others silent. It re-enforces the echo chambers and the silos if the only voices you ever hear are the ones you agree with or the ones that shout loudly enough.
The definition cited by a local police force below wasnt copied from any act of law, or set of regulations, it that that forces statement of how they would interpret the law. The problem is that functionaries and bureaucrats don't decide on these things in the public interest, they decide on them in the private interest, or more specifically, their own interest in terms of living a quiet life, and not getting a lot of hassle from vocal local pressure groups.0 -
Who wouldn't vote for a peer of the realm and double VC recipient?TheScreamingEagles said:Ipsos Mori
Con 40 (-3)
Lab 29 (-2)
Lib Dems 13 (+2)
UKIP 9 (+3)
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/jeremy-corbyn-left-standing-as-theresa-may-is-handed-poll-boost-a3468351.html
0 -
How could the burden possibly be on the defendant to show that they didn't have a gay affair (for example)?Pulpstar said:The burden of proof is the wrong way round for libel in this country, and if someone wins an action then subsequently 'truth' becomes apparent (Private Eye vs the recent paedophile); the case should be quashed with costs, damages etc reversed.
0 -
Given she is a) more popular than the party at large b) not a Posho and c) facing weak and divided opposition, I'll take my chances.TheScreamingEagles said:Hmmm, she might not be much of an asset during a general election campaign.
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/832166796492947456
0 -
-
The issue you identify is not going to be solved by imposing laws limiting what people can say. All that will do is scare off those who do have something to say but are worried about the possible consequences and will do nothing to stop the shameless.stodge said:
I'd like to agree but I'm not comfortable doing so.Cyclefree said:
I think there should be no such thing. Let people say what the hell they want, however offensive it may be. The only thing which ought to be proscribed by law is incitement to violence.
It is not the role of the police or the criminal law to police or enforce good manners.
Not in a free society anyway.
The problem with your scenario is that it will be the loud, the angry and the sweary who will come to be the only voices heard. The problem with "Free" speech isn't the ability to speak but the ability to drive away by verbal intimidation those who don't feel comfortable in an adversarial verbal bear-pit but whose voices have a right to be heard.
It's a travesty of free speech in that by allowing some the freedom to say what they like (subject to incitement to violence and other laws relating to libel and slander) you keep others silent. It re-enforces the echo chambers and the silos if the only voices you ever hear are the ones you agree with or the ones that shout loudly enough.
The only way to allow a range of voices and opinions to be heard is by having as wide a public debate as possible, by making it clear that anyone can say what they want and not be afraid of a police visit, to encourage a multiplicity of sources, by limiting monopolies and concentration of ownership in the press, by challenging false stories and so on.
Of course, there is a danger that the noisy will be heard loudest and first but in the end I think we need to have confidence in ourselves and in the belief that I have that the only way to challenge and defeat bad ideas is by good ideas and by saying them repeatedly in as many ways as possible and to as many audiences as possible. The loudmouth Milos of this world can easily have their bubble pricked by sharp argument, not by banning them and allowing themselves to present themselves as "martyrs".
What we lack is self-confidence and eloquence and the willingness to engage in debate and the courage to do so. Self-important bullies just need their over-inflated bubbles pricking.
0 -
JustinShortStraws in 5, 4, 3, 2......0
-
THE company behind plans for nuclear new build in Cumbria has welcomed comments by Prime Minister Theresa May on the project.
NuGen made the statement after Mrs May spoke about the proposals for a new power plant at Moorside, near Sellafield, during a visit to Copeland yesterday.
http://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/latest/Moorside-company-welcomes-Prime-Ministers-nuclear-comments-fc36c1f4-2b3d-48fd-9238-f56f282c227e-ds
Mrs May talked about the local NHS and the proposed Moorside nuclear development, which she said the Conservatives are committed to, and recognise its importance.
“A number of issues have been raised about the NHS, in particular the West Cumberland Hospital,” she said. “There is no truth whatsoever to close the A&E at the West Cumberland Hospital.
"Labour have made claims about what I have said about maternity services. The claims they made are misleading.’’
It had previously been claimed Mrs May had refused to intervene to stop consultant-led maternity services being removed from Whitehaven.
http://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/latest/VIDEO-Prime-Minister-Theresa-May-visits-Copeland-in-run-up-to-by-election-e00b05d9-c18f-4d3b-a687-da6ad2994791-ds0 -
Is it currently the case that if someone wins a libel case against (say) a newspaper for disclosing some aspect of your private life you found infelicitous, and for which they had no proof, and then subsequently it is found that the newspaper was right in what they had said, that there is no redress for the newspaper ?TheWhiteRabbit said:
How could the burden possibly be on the defendant to show that they didn't have a gay affair (for example)?Pulpstar said:The burden of proof is the wrong way round for libel in this country, and if someone wins an action then subsequently 'truth' becomes apparent (Private Eye vs the recent paedophile); the case should be quashed with costs, damages etc reversed.
0 -
I think I agree with the views that May / Tories risk becoming complacent. They are vulnerable on NHS / Social Care. Hammond strikes me as being savvy though. I expect he'll find a few bob unexpectedly down the back of the sofa to bolster health.0
-
Are you certain that would normally be the 'defendant' ?TheWhiteRabbit said:
How could the burden possibly be on the defendant to show that they didn't have a gay affair (for example)?Pulpstar said:The burden of proof is the wrong way round for libel in this country, and if someone wins an action then subsequently 'truth' becomes apparent (Private Eye vs the recent paedophile); the case should be quashed with costs, damages etc reversed.
0
![[Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/d2ea526b1b06ed109333f390c7ae956b_100.png)
