politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Quantifying the great cultural divide: those wanting blunt lea
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Quantifying the great cultural divide: those wanting blunt leaders versus those who think you shouldn’t cause offence
There’s some new polling just out by YouGov for the latest Prospect Magazine which appears to identify and quantify a divide amongst voters based on a series of questions that I don’t recall being asked in this form before.
Comments
-
That's the second greatest cultural divide, surely? The first is the great question regarding the presence of small pieces of a yellow fruit on a certain variety of baked food.0
-
The true divide is between those who think the world is divisible into two ridiculously simple charicatures, and those who do not.0
-
The wording is silly but I think it does identity a dislike of the half truths and prevarications which pervade so much political discourse today. Not helped by the endless spin from the media and the scourge of political correctness. No wonder the blunt speakers are seen as a breath of fresh air. Anything else comes across as lying.0
-
There are 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand binary, and those who don’t.0
-
Which do you prefer: people who recognise that the real world is full of nuance, and there are few simple answers to complex problems; or people who say it how they see it?felix said:The wording is silly but I think it does identity a dislike of the half truths and prevarications which pervade so much political discourse today. Not helped by the endless spin from the media and the scourge of political correctness. No wonder the blunt speakers are seen as a breath of fresh air. Anything else comes across as lying.
All these questions are bullshit. Is the person prevaricating to avoid giving offence? Or recognising the world is a complex place?0 -
Isn’t that itself the second to the ultimate cultural divide, those that worship at the all encompassing greatness of Radiohead and those who think they are massively overrated song writers and a piss poor live act.RobD said:That's the second greatest cultural divide, surely? The first is the great question regarding the presence of small pieces of a yellow fruit on a certain variety of baked food.
0 -
-
0
-
There are 1.99999 types of people in the world, those who understand floating-point maths, and those who do not.RobD said:0 -
That's not even 32 bit precision.JosiasJessop said:
There are 1.99999 types of people in the world, those who understand floating-point maths, and those who do not.RobD said:
0 -
There are two types of people in the world, those that can extrapolate from incomplete data sets0
-
So long as the plain speaking leader speaks the truth .......0
-
I haven't had any coffee yet. I can only manage an indeterminate amount of precision.RobD said:
That's not even 32 bit precision.JosiasJessop said:
There are 1.99999 types of people in the world, those who understand floating-point maths, and those who do not.RobD said:0 -
There’s an unstated bias in that representation of the results
It’s possible to be blunt and plain spoken without being a “bull in a china shop”0 -
There are two types of people in the world: those who think that Jamie Bell is an amazingly talented gorgeous handsome rugged vigorous tough athletic masculine actor, and those who want to destroy civilisation by cutting everybody in half with a scythe and poking everybody in the eye with a piece of frozen-solid lemon juice.0
-
On topic. I think the results are a partly a reflection of the fact that those on the right are expected to be shy about it.0
-
Shhhh... Don’t make a fuss....tlg86 said:On topic. I think the results are a partly a reflection of the fact that those on the right are expected to be shy about it.
0 -
http://www.bbc.com/sport/winter-olympics/43109290
Performance enhancing drugs... for curling. I've now heard everything.0 -
Let's face it you'd have to be stonedRobD said:http://www.bbc.com/sport/winter-olympics/43109290
Performance enhancing drugs... for curling. I've now heard everything.
to do it. 0 -
Oh, if he tested positive and his wife didn’t....there’s going to be matrimonials as she gives the medal back!RobD said:http://www.bbc.com/sport/winter-olympics/43109290
Performance enhancing drugs... for curling. I've now heard everything.0 -
It is however a very great error to assume that those who are rude and inconsiderate are telling the truth about anything other than their disregard for others...felix said:The wording is silly but I think it does identity a dislike of the half truths and prevarications which pervade so much political discourse today. Not helped by the endless spin from the media and the scourge of political correctness. No wonder the blunt speakers are seen as a breath of fresh air. Anything else comes across as lying.
0 -
I'm giving that the icy response it deserves.felix said:
Let's face it you'd have to be stonedRobD said:http://www.bbc.com/sport/winter-olympics/43109290
Performance enhancing drugs... for curling. I've now heard everything. to do it.0 -
Is that blunt speaking or a slippery comment to avoid offence?ydoethur said:
I'm giving that the icy response it deserves.felix said:
Let's face it you'd have to be stonedRobD said:http://www.bbc.com/sport/winter-olympics/43109290
Performance enhancing drugs... for curling. I've now heard everything. to do it.0 -
Corbyn is generally polite and disarming - doesn't make his lies and agenda any more palatable to me. Same with JRM.Nigelb said:
It is however a very great error to assume that those who are rude and inconsiderate are telling the truth about anything other than their disregard for others...felix said:The wording is silly but I think it does identity a dislike of the half truths and prevarications which pervade so much political discourse today. Not helped by the endless spin from the media and the scourge of political correctness. No wonder the blunt speakers are seen as a breath of fresh air. Anything else comes across as lying.
0 -
It’s a false dichotomy. It should be possible to express yourself clearly without giving unnecessary offence.
Some of our politicians manage neither.0 -
It was intended as a witty pun but you seem to be giving it the cold shoulder.felix said:
Is that blunt speaking or a slippery comment to avoid offence?ydoethur said:
I'm giving that the icy response it deserves.felix said:
Let's face it you'd have to be stonedRobD said:http://www.bbc.com/sport/winter-olympics/43109290
Performance enhancing drugs... for curling. I've now heard everything. to do it.0 -
First day of half term and it's raining cats and dogs. Bloody typical.0
-
Indeed, but it clearly does for some.felix said:
Corbyn is generally polite and disarming - doesn't make his lies and agenda any more palatable to me. Same with JRM.Nigelb said:
It is however a very great error to assume that those who are rude and inconsiderate are telling the truth about anything other than their disregard for others...felix said:The wording is silly but I think it does identity a dislike of the half truths and prevarications which pervade so much political discourse today. Not helped by the endless spin from the media and the scourge of political correctness. No wonder the blunt speakers are seen as a breath of fresh air. Anything else comes across as lying.
Having said that, I think the number of those who are liable to be swayed by demagoguery is probably larger than that of those who are convinced merely by politeness.0 -
Not convinced by politeness, but am put off by demagoguery.Nigelb said:
Indeed, but it clearly does for some.felix said:
Corbyn is generally polite and disarming - doesn't make his lies and agenda any more palatable to me. Same with JRM.Nigelb said:
It is however a very great error to assume that those who are rude and inconsiderate are telling the truth about anything other than their disregard for others...felix said:The wording is silly but I think it does identity a dislike of the half truths and prevarications which pervade so much political discourse today. Not helped by the endless spin from the media and the scourge of political correctness. No wonder the blunt speakers are seen as a breath of fresh air. Anything else comes across as lying.
Having said that, I think the number of those who are liable to be swayed by demagoguery is probably larger than that of those who are convinced merely by politeness.
Quite surprised demagoguery’s a word, actually,0 -
-
-
Indeed.AlastairMeeks said:0 -
Good morning all.
Like others, I feel this is a false choice. It is possible to be clear without being an oaf.0 -
Looks like right wing English nationalist loons have finally twigged that the Good Friday Agreement precludes the kind of extreme Brexit they crave. Therefore, the Good Friday Agreement has to go. And some people call them patriots :-D0
-
-
I don't think that's true any longer, there is a segment of society who's role has become to be perpetually offended, and be the forever victim. I think that's why "straight talking" politicians are getting so much airtime from everyone else. Even looking at the chart above there are more people in favour of it than the other way around. Though I think the question is flawed.AlastairMeeks said:It’s a false dichotomy. It should be possible to express yourself clearly without giving unnecessary offence.
Some of our politicians manage neither.0 -
I'm with Alastair, who, today at least, has chosen his words carefully. I'm bang alongside giving necessary offence. Facts trump feelings. Even so, it is possible to refute an argument without being boorish.MaxPB said:
I don't think that's true any longer, there is a segment of society who's role has become to be perpetually offended, and be the forever victim. I think that's why "straight talking" politicians are getting so much airtime from everyone else. Even looking at the chart above there are more people in favour of it than the other way around. Though I think the question is flawed.AlastairMeeks said:It’s a false dichotomy. It should be possible to express yourself clearly without giving unnecessary offence.
Some of our politicians manage neither.0 -
Offence is taken not offered.
Suspect it there was a £5 charge for offence rather than it being free, we would see a lot less of it.0 -
Obama was on 51% at this time in his presidency and predicted to be heading for a mid term drubbling.AndyJS said:
You think 41% is a long way from 46% in mid-term? Its a 90% retention rate.Alistair said:
You mean he's polling at a level where he would lose in a crushing landslide?AndyJS said:Bad news for Trump opponents: his approval rating is now as high as 41.4%, not far below the 46% he got at the election.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/0 -
This is a vaguely interesting example of the application of the frustration lying behind the questions in the thread to business: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43107500
Basically it was pretty obvious to investors who had the money and resources to do a proper analysis of Carillion's accounts from 2015 onwards that the company was heading towards the precipice. A simplistic reading of the accounts, however, painted a very different picture, a picture that the directors largely got away with trying to maintain even after liquidation when giving evidence to MPs.
What we will find is that the way that the accountants and auditors of the company reported matters was compliant with the incredibly complicated reporting standards which resulted in the accounts giving something less than a true and fair view of the company's position and prospects. These standards, which have developed to prevent misrepresentation, have themselves become a source of misunderstanding and deception for those who do not have the expertise to read carefully between the lines.
So in public life generally we see acceptable parameters of what can and cannot be said controlling what people can say to the point where many feel that simple and obvious truths cannot be said or addressed resulting in the underlying problems not being addressed.0 -
In the context of the arid middle east, rain is a good not a bad thing as we in a maritime climate experience it. The meaning of the phrase is that God benefits the unjust, rather than punishes the just.ydoethur said:0 -
Not wanting to divert into a theological debate but I am not sure that is correct because the same verse points out that the sun rises on the just and the unjust alike every day. Surely the point is that God has given us the world and it is up to us what we make of it, we cannot expect him to be constantly tilting the playing field in favour of those who perceive themselves just?Foxy said:
In the context of the arid middle east, rain is a good not a bad thing as we in a maritime climate experience it. The meaning of the phrase is that God benefits the unjust, rather than punishes the just.ydoethur said:
(Which rules out most prayers, when you think about it.)0 -
What's been a revelation is that the hard core Brexiteer zealots, who have spent years muttering to themselves about every minute aspect of the EU, don't seem to have a clue about the process of leaving.SouthamObserver said:Looks like right wing English nationalist loons have finally twigged that the Good Friday Agreement precludes the kind of extreme Brexit they crave. Therefore, the Good Friday Agreement has to go. And some people call them patriots :-D
0 -
I've had too much ice and too little dope!ydoethur said:
It was intended as a witty pun but you seem to be giving it the cold shoulder.felix said:
Is that blunt speaking or a slippery comment to avoid offence?ydoethur said:
I'm giving that the icy response it deserves.felix said:
Let's face it you'd have to be stonedRobD said:http://www.bbc.com/sport/winter-olympics/43109290
Performance enhancing drugs... for curling. I've now heard everything. to do it. 0 -
“The rain it raineth on the justFoxy said:
In the context of the arid middle east, rain is a good not a bad thing as we in a maritime climate experience it. The meaning of the phrase is that God benefits the unjust, rather than punishes the just.ydoethur said:
And also on the unjust fella;
But chiefly on the just, because
The unjust hath the just’s umbrella.”
Charles Bowen0 -
Good morning, everyone.
Not fond of that line. It puts everything on offensiveness, making it a sensitivity/honesty pair of poles. Still, it allows those who want to compare the desire to leave the EU to Trump, which may have been the intention in the first place.
I'm not fond of outspokenness and think people, especially politicians, should pick their words carefully. However, the capacity to offend rather than have one's vocabulary be dictated by the terminally oversensitive has never been more important. These things aren't mutually exclusive.0 -
Yes, and they are all columnists in right wing papers.MaxPB said:
I don't think that's true any longer, there is a segment of society who's role has become to be perpetually offended, and be the forever victim.AlastairMeeks said:It’s a false dichotomy. It should be possible to express yourself clearly without giving unnecessary offence.
Some of our politicians manage neither.0 -
Does anyone seriously think that?Alistair said:
Yes, and they are all columnists in right wing papers.MaxPB said:
I don't think that's true any longer, there is a segment of society who's role has become to be perpetually offended, and be the forever victim.AlastairMeeks said:It’s a false dichotomy. It should be possible to express yourself clearly without giving unnecessary offence.
Some of our politicians manage neither.
They're across the board, sometimes loud, sometimes not so much.
But to pretend they're *all* only on the other side is full on 100 % jalepeno special sauce.0 -
I prefer neither of those two.
I want a political leader who doesn't consider any subject off-limits, and does speak their mind, but does so reasonably, politely and respectfully.0 -
-
Being a politician means treating facts in the same way that barristers do. Downplaying facts that spoil your case but emphasising anything that helps it. No surprises there. The media do the same thing when pursuing a narrative.
It can be called being economical with the facts, and when facts are missing, it means being selective with evidence. Often twisting evidence to give erroneous 'facts'.
I watched the 'Cheddar man' documentary last night and found it both enlightening and annoying. The earliest complete skeleton found in the UK showed that this man, 10,000 years old, had dark skin and blue eyes and came across the land-bridge from Europe. An unusual combination if typical of the UK population at the time. A sample of one, remember, but some other parts of Europe had similar genes at the time. It could have been very enlightening, but the media need a story.
Fascinating because dark skin is an advantage in high UV areas - bright sunshine or snowy regions, but a disadvantage in cloudy conditions. I believe blue/green eyes are a default but melanin aids vision in brighter light. Does this suggest that skin colour is slower to adapt to weather conditions?
Who cares? The media is the message.
0 -
And Polly Toynbee never takes offence, never I tell you. No-one in The Guardian ever does.Alistair said:
Yes, and they are all columnists in right wing papers.MaxPB said:
I don't think that's true any longer, there is a segment of society who's role has become to be perpetually offended, and be the forever victim.AlastairMeeks said:It’s a false dichotomy. It should be possible to express yourself clearly without giving unnecessary offence.
Some of our politicians manage neither.
*stifles a titter*
Anyone saying "all" is just setting themselves up for a fall.0 -
Yes, that puts it well. I think we all more or less agree on this. The poll question wording is not ideal but it's got us discussing it anyway.Casino_Royale said:I prefer neither of those two.
I want a political leader who doesn't consider any subject off-limits, and does speak their mind, but does so reasonably, politely and respectfully.
The real Trump question is perhaps more, "Do you prefer politicians who attack opponents bluntly, or politicians who put their case but don't attack others?" But that's loaded too. Really hard to get a balanced question.0 -
Mr. Palmer, indeed, Clinton did attack Trump (and his supporters. Still can't believe she thought calling half the electorate a basket of deplorables, in a tight election, was a clever thing to do).0
-
This poll clearly clearly explains why Boris and Rees Mogg currently lead polls of Tory members and voters bit with Corbyn in charge of Labour you could also say Labour have a leader who is more of a bull in a China shop than someone who does not cause offence.
After years of relatively 'PC' candidates and leaders e.g. Cameron, Clegg, Ed Miliband, May, Obama and Romney and Merkel it seems voters are willing to push for more plainspeaking leaders again, hence Trump, Sanders, Boris, Mogg and Corbyn have all been on the rise and even in Italy it looks like the ultimate 'Bull in a China shop' Berlusconi could return as kingmaker albeit not as PM from which he is barred and the big loser will be the relatively mild mannered Matteo Renzi the former PM and leader of the incumbent Democratic Party0 -
Although with the DUP and Sinn Fein having refused to share power for months the Good Friday Agreement has been effectively dead for almost a year anywaySouthamObserver said:Looks like right wing English nationalist loons have finally twigged that the Good Friday Agreement precludes the kind of extreme Brexit they crave. Therefore, the Good Friday Agreement has to go. And some people call them patriots :-D
0 -
Hmmm, seems a lot of people are getting annoyed at my sweeping generalisation. I must be onto something here.MarqueeMark said:
And Polly Toynbee never takes offence, never I tell you. No-one in The Guardian ever does.Alistair said:
Yes, and they are all columnists in right wing papers.MaxPB said:
I don't think that's true any longer, there is a segment of society who's role has become to be perpetually offended, and be the forever victim.AlastairMeeks said:It’s a false dichotomy. It should be possible to express yourself clearly without giving unnecessary offence.
Some of our politicians manage neither.
*stifles a titter*
Anyone saying "all" is just setting themselves up for a fall.0 -
Do you want politician who will tell you what you don't want to hear? Or do you want the pill to be sugar-coated?NickPalmer said:
Yes, that puts it well. I think we all more or less agree on this. The poll question wording is not ideal but it's got us discussing it anyway.Casino_Royale said:I prefer neither of those two.
I want a political leader who doesn't consider any subject off-limits, and does speak their mind, but does so reasonably, politely and respectfully.
The real Trump question is perhaps more, "Do you prefer politicians who attack opponents bluntly, or politicians who put their case but don't attack others?" But that's loaded too. Really hard to get a balanced question.
0 -
No, you're just being prat.Alistair said:
Hmmm, seems a lot of people are getting annoyed at my sweeping generalisation. I must be onto something here.MarqueeMark said:
And Polly Toynbee never takes offence, never I tell you. No-one in The Guardian ever does.Alistair said:
Yes, and they are all columnists in right wing papers.MaxPB said:
I don't think that's true any longer, there is a segment of society who's role has become to be perpetually offended, and be the forever victim.AlastairMeeks said:It’s a false dichotomy. It should be possible to express yourself clearly without giving unnecessary offence.
Some of our politicians manage neither.
*stifles a titter*
Anyone saying "all" is just setting themselves up for a fall.0 -
F1: with testing around the corner, and Mercedes/Ferrari to be unveiled tomorrow, here's a link for those who missed it to some rambling about why testing shouldn't be taken too seriously:
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2018/02/a-surprise-video-why-you-shouldnt-take.html0 -
Think I've spotted another one of those perpetually offended snowflakes.MarqueeMark said:
No, you're just being prat.Alistair said:
Hmmm, seems a lot of people are getting annoyed at my sweeping generalisation. I must be onto something here.MarqueeMark said:
And Polly Toynbee never takes offence, never I tell you. No-one in The Guardian ever does.Alistair said:
Yes, and they are all columnists in right wing papers.MaxPB said:
I don't think that's true any longer, there is a segment of society who's role has become to be perpetually offended, and be the forever victim.AlastairMeeks said:It’s a false dichotomy. It should be possible to express yourself clearly without giving unnecessary offence.
Some of our politicians manage neither.
*stifles a titter*
Anyone saying "all" is just setting themselves up for a fall.0 -
This thread is getting more surreal than a post on the benefits of Socialism by JWisemann.
I will see you later.0 -
Pretty early on in my admittedly low-level political life I learned not to use the word ‘never’!
As in 'we never negotiate with terrorists, Mr Adams!'0 -
King Cole, how would you tell someone whether you liked Queen's lovely, if short, track "Nevermore"?0
-
‘Nevermore' and ‘never' are two different words. Not keen on that sort of music, anyway.Morris_Dancer said:King Cole, how would you tell someone whether you liked Queen's lovely, if short, track "Nevermore"?
Edit; FFS strikes again!0 -
King Cole, ......
That's fine. I support the right of people in a free society to hold different views. Even if they're tasteless, heretical views that clearly indicate such people are bedfellows of Satan.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lXwT7mxmf8
Edited extra bit
0 -
But plain speech is not the same as rudeness, and you can have devious rudeness (which I think is what we get from Trump) or polite plain speech (which I think is what you get from Corbyn - people who don't like him object to the content and the personal history, not the manner).HYUFD said:This poll clearly clearly explains why Boris and Rees Mogg currently lead polls of Tory members and voters bit with Corbyn in charge of Labour you could also say Labour have a leader who is more of a bull in a China shop than someone who does not cause offence.
After years of relatively 'PC' candidates and leaders e.g. Cameron, Clegg, Ed Miliband, May, Obama and Romney and Merkel it seems voters are willing to push for more plainspeaking leaders again, hence Trump, Sanders, Boris, Mogg and Corbyn have all been on the rise and even in Italy it looks like the ultimate 'Bull in a China shop' Berlusconi could return as kingmaker albeit not as PM from which he is barred and the big loser will be the relatively mild mannered Matteo Renzi the former PM and leader of the incumbent Democratic Party
In general I reckon most of us are more comfortable with plain speech if we basically agree with it, although I always disliked Scargill even when I broadly supported the strikes. But there's been quite a bit of polling showing many Trump supporters uncomfortable with the tone and frequency of the ouytspoken tweets. It's possible to overdo it, even for fans.0 -
Actually, having played the clip, I liked it. Thank you!Morris_Dancer said:King Cole, ......
That's fine. I support the right of people in a free society to hold different views. Even if they're tasteless, heretical views that clearly indicate such people are bedfellows of Satan.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lXwT7mxmf8
Edited extra bit0 -
King Cole, huzzah for renouncing Satanism!
0 -
One for OGH?
“Bedford is a shithole,”
https://briefingsforbrexit.com/the-ethics-of-a-second-brexit-referendum-equality-trust-honesty/0 -
Still like the likes Liam Clancy, the Dubliners and so on.Morris_Dancer said:King Cole, huzzah for renouncing Satanism!
0 -
F1: not a tip, but interesting that Ladbrokes considers Alonso likelier than Raikkonen to win in 2018 (1.9 against 3.5).
And Alonso's price is down (for the title) to 17 on Betfair. It was 29 a week or so ago, lay value now is 19. Not sure why the change has happened, frankly, as testing hasn't begun and the car hasn't even been unveiled yet.0 -
The approach of countries like the Netherlands is perhaps best: ie, plain speech but without setting out to be deliberately rude to anyone. But if people are nonetheless offended, too bad, they have to put up with it.NickPalmer said:
But plain speech is not the same as rudeness, and you can have devious rudeness (which I think is what we get from Trump) or polite plain speech (which I think is what you get from Corbyn - people who don't like him object to the content and the personal history, not the manner).HYUFD said:This poll clearly clearly explains why Boris and Rees Mogg currently lead polls of Tory members and voters bit with Corbyn in charge of Labour you could also say Labour have a leader who is more of a bull in a China shop than someone who does not cause offence.
After years of relatively 'PC' candidates and leaders e.g. Cameron, Clegg, Ed Miliband, May, Obama and Romney and Merkel it seems voters are willing to push for more plainspeaking leaders again, hence Trump, Sanders, Boris, Mogg and Corbyn have all been on the rise and even in Italy it looks like the ultimate 'Bull in a China shop' Berlusconi could return as kingmaker albeit not as PM from which he is barred and the big loser will be the relatively mild mannered Matteo Renzi the former PM and leader of the incumbent Democratic Party
In general I reckon most of us are more comfortable with plain speech if we basically agree with it, although I always disliked Scargill even when I broadly supported the strikes. But there's been quite a bit of polling showing many Trump supporters uncomfortable with the tone and frequency of the ouytspoken tweets. It's possible to overdo it, even for fans.0 -
Clearly the author has never walked along the river there.rottenborough said:One for OGH?
“Bedford is a shithole,”
https://briefingsforbrexit.com/the-ethics-of-a-second-brexit-referendum-equality-trust-honesty/0 -
I usually choose my words carefully. All offence caused is kept to a necessary minimum.John_M said:
I'm with Alastair, who, today at least, has chosen his words carefully. I'm bang alongside giving necessary offence. Facts trump feelings. Even so, it is possible to refute an argument without being boorish.MaxPB said:
I don't think that's true any longer, there is a segment of society who's role has become to be perpetually offended, and be the forever victim. I think that's why "straight talking" politicians are getting so much airtime from everyone else. Even looking at the chart above there are more people in favour of it than the other way around. Though I think the question is flawed.AlastairMeeks said:It’s a false dichotomy. It should be possible to express yourself clearly without giving unnecessary offence.
Some of our politicians manage neither.0 -
Clearly I need no further evidence.Alistair said:
Yes, and they are all columnists in right wing papers.MaxPB said:
I don't think that's true any longer, there is a segment of society who's role has become to be perpetually offended, and be the forever victim.AlastairMeeks said:It’s a false dichotomy. It should be possible to express yourself clearly without giving unnecessary offence.
Some of our politicians manage neither.0 -
Meanwhile. in Germany: https://twitter.com/afneil/status/965499042510843904
The new SPD leader, I think, has backed the coalition deal. We find out the result on 4 March, which I think is also the date of the Italian election.0 -
If the coalition deal is done, the next German general election could be years away. If Andrew Neil is going to hyperventilate about every opinion poll in the interim, he’s going to get through a lot of paper bags.Morris_Dancer said:Meanwhile. in Germany: https://twitter.com/afneil/status/965499042510843904
The new SPD leader, I think, has backed the coalition deal. We find out the result on 4 March, which I think is also the date of the Italian election.0 -
Mr. Meeks, to be fair, the coalition deal is not done yet. We'll discover the state of things in just under a fortnight.
Edited extra bit: and here's the Red Bull:
https://twitter.com/RachelBrookesTV/status/9655135267847331840 -
The Riverside and the fine streets heading Nothwards from it remind me of Cambridge. Of course, there are parts of the town that are run-down, but that's true of anywhere.OldKingCole said:
Clearly the author has never walked along the river there.rottenborough said:One for OGH?
“Bedford is a shithole,”
https://briefingsforbrexit.com/the-ethics-of-a-second-brexit-referendum-equality-trust-honesty/0 -
I have, including a few weeks ago (as part of my campaign along the Ouse Valley Way). Aside from a few hundred metres near the A6 bridge, it is a dump. It makes Northampton look salubrious.OldKingCole said:
Clearly the author has never walked along the river there.rottenborough said:One for OGH?
“Bedford is a shithole,”
https://briefingsforbrexit.com/the-ethics-of-a-second-brexit-referendum-equality-trust-honesty/
Even where it has a potential gem - such as the riverside park to the east - it does not take advantage. And as for the decaying pyramid (apparently a swimming pool or somesuch) - whoever designed and commissioned it should be put atop a spike in front of it as a warning to future urban planners.
I don't know which party traditionally runs the town, but whichever it has, has let the population down. And I'm unsure how it can be fixed without wholesale demolition.
Which is a shame, as there are some very picturesque villages to the west and north.0 -
Ahem. No.Sean_F said:
The Riverside and the fine streets heading Nothwards from it remind me of Cambridge. Of course, there are parts of the town that are run-down, but that's true of anywhere.OldKingCole said:
Clearly the author has never walked along the river there.rottenborough said:One for OGH?
“Bedford is a shithole,”
https://briefingsforbrexit.com/the-ethics-of-a-second-brexit-referendum-equality-trust-honesty/
Unless you're talking about Chesterton.
0 -
Thanks for that. It looks almost razzle dazzle.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Meeks, to be fair, the coalition deal is not done yet. We'll discover the state of things in just under a fortnight.
Edited extra bit: and here's the Red Bull:
https://twitter.com/RachelBrookesTV/status/965513526784733184
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dazzle_camouflage0 -
It is possible to be polite and speak your mind regardless of what others think e.g. Rees Mogg, agreedNickPalmer said:
But plain speech is not the same as rudeness, and you can have devious rudeness (which I think is what we get from Trump) or polite plain speech (which I think is what you get from Corbyn - people who don't like him object to the content and the personal history, not the manner).HYUFD said:This poll clearly clearly explains why Boris and Rees Mogg currently lead polls of Tory members and voters bit with Corbyn in charge of Labour you could also say Labour have a leader who is more of a bull in a China shop than someone who does not cause offence.
After years of relatively 'PC' candidates and leaders e.g. Cameron, Clegg, Ed Miliband, May, Obama and Romney and Merkel it seems voters are willing to push for more plainspeaking leaders again, hence Trump, Sanders, Boris, Mogg and Corbyn have all been on the rise and even in Italy it looks like the ultimate 'Bull in a China shop' Berlusconi could return as kingmaker albeit not as PM from which he is barred and the big loser will be the relatively mild mannered Matteo Renzi the former PM and leader of the incumbent Democratic Party
In general I reckon most of us are more comfortable with plain speech if we basically agree with it, although I always disliked Scargill even when I broadly supported the strikes. But there's been quite a bit of polling showing many Trump supporters uncomfortable with the tone and frequency of the ouytspoken tweets. It's possible to overdo it, even for fans.0 -
I suspect there's a male and female divide on this question?0
