politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Ed Miliband’s ‘immorality’ might explain why he lost the 2015
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Ed Miliband’s ‘immorality’ might explain why he lost the 2015 general election and why voters never really took to him
Anthropologists at Oxford University have identified what they believe to be seven universal moral rules. We asked Brits which they thought was the single most important:Help your family – 38%Divide resources fairly – 18%Respect others' property – 16%https://t.co/WoS2oPccRe pic.twitter.com/gwMcQtgh8r
Comments
-
First! And I thought Jeffery Archer went to Oxford Brookes...0
-
What is the point of Elections if the Elite does not believe or follow democracy ? The UK is no longer a beacon for democracy in the world0
-
"the University of Oxford, a place with such low standards they let in Jeffrey Archer."
Cambridge Five anyone?0 -
...its called facism or Socialist Nationalism...please consider this , whatever your views are0
-
To be honest I thought it was sad that 2 brothers fell out so spectacularly.
There were plenty of other reasons not to vote for him but I don't think that factored into my thinking.
He is after all a politician........0 -
Oxford Poly, surely at that time.PClipp said:First! And I thought Jeffery Archer went to Oxford Brookes...
As a second son, I am with Ed Miliband. There is no role for primogeniture in democratic politics.
It was not a stab in the back*, it was a fair contest.
*be careful of the anti-semitic overtones of this phrase btw.0 -
The explanation for 2015 is much more straightforward - People decided they wanted stability with Cameron and the Tories NOT chaos with Miliband and Labour...
0 -
Nope, Brasenose.PClipp said:First! And I thought Jeffery Archer went to Oxford Brookes...
Archer's assault on Oxford University was equally impressive. Backed by Dover College, his application as a mature student for a one-year Diploma of Education at Brasenose was accepted.
By now, according to his letter of recommendation, his academic achievements encompassed six O-levels, three A-levels, a two-year anatomy course at the University of California, as well as being an "FIFPC".
It was 30 years later, when Crick was researching his biography of Archer, that he discovered that the FIFPC was a body-building club, advertised through newspapers and which you paid to join to help develop muscles through home exercise.
Getting to Oxford, albeit by a back-door route, would transform Archer's life. He prolonged his one-year course to three with "extra research".
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1334660/He-lied-his-way-to-the-top.html
0 -
Presumably this is why UK people have tolerated the nepotism fest that is the Windsors for so long.0
-
I misread the title as immortality before I clicked on it and read it, was mildly confused...
David couldn't beat his brother because Ed was more appealing to the Labour selectorate than him, I suspect some of the kickback was driven by those angry that people had chosen the wrong brother (in their mind)
The Labour selectorate then went and made those people even more furious by choosing the wrong one again, I don't think Dan Hodges has calmed down yet...0 -
The Cambridge Five are generally regarded as the world's best spies.Fishing said:"the University of Oxford, a place with such low standards they let in Jeffrey Archer."
Cambridge Five anyone?
Also Oxford had a nest of traitors.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5434139/Oxford-traitor-spied-Russia-revealed.html0 -
"EICIPM!" -1
-
What is meant by "divide resources fairly" though?
I might consider it fair that I keep what I earn. A communist might consider it fair that all resources are divided equally.0 -
Such innocent times... Who'd like to go back to arguing about pasty's, jerry-cans and EICIPM? :Sunil_Prasannan said:"EICIPM!"
0 -
The Labour selectorate changed; they elected a Jew in 2010, and an anti-Semite in 2015.TheJezziah said:I misread the title as immortality before I clicked on it and read it, was mildly confused...
David couldn't beat his brother because Ed was more appealing to the Labour selectorate than him, I suspect some of the kickback was driven by those angry that people had chosen the wrong brother (in their mind)
The Labour selectorate then went and made those people even more furious by choosing the wrong one again, I don't think Dan Hodges has calmed down yet...
I just shows how he selectorate changed, and how progress can be backwards as well as forwards.0 -
Off topic - Brexit I’m afraid.
A quick look at Sunday Times. Anonymous piece from a Civil Servant detailing the contempt said service has for the decision ro leave and for the voters who took that decision. Author afraid to show out that he is a leaver himself. Elsewhere an anecdote of Blair lobbing Macron to refuse British requests if Parliament votes for delay - telling him to hold firm and the UK will remain. Sigh.0 -
FPT:
Yup. I think ironically social media and the internet doesn’t seem to encourage us to read the actual primary evidence, but what someone else thinks of it. In the case of this report it had been jumped on as saying XYZ, when it had actual said 123. And that became inextricably linked with the report. And then through a series of Chinese whispers that XYZ which it didn’t say, but could if you squinted your eyes and read the report through a mirror while holding it upside down became ABC. So now report says ABC. No questioning of this fact.. it becomes respected enough that to question that the report says ABC is to be a denier of the report.Floater said:
LOL - I was accused of spreading fake news by quoting verbatim from a report which allegedly supported the case the other person was trying to make.notme2 said:
Not sure, some of the smarter people I have met are as much susceptible to confirmation bias and their own righteousness as dimid.nico67 said:
The original study was carried out last June . You can find the results if you google privacy foundation Brexit .Foxy said:
It doesn't seem to just be education, there are diferences in Leavers Brains:nico67 said:I
I never said Remainers were better people . Education is irrelevant as to whether people are good , bad or better or worse .brendan16 said:
Oddly these were the same sorts of arguments used to deny women the vote a century ago - they cannot be trusted to vote as 'they arenico67 said:
Just confirms data post referendum. It might be uncomfortable for Leavers but the stats on education and vote is strongly correlated . That’s not to say some dumb people also voted Remain , but taken as a whole the Leave vote had more dumb people .Scott_P said:
My mother
She has certainly added more value to the world than someone who writes opinion pieces in the Guardian for a living.
So lets stop the sneering please - remain votes by definition aren't 'better people'. They just voted remain - some are wonderful people some aren't and some write for the Guardian!
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/da4760e4-42b1-11e9-b2a3-e9b8ad72e51b
Fascinating results there especially on the Dunning Kruger effect especially related to men .
We really are in a weird place right now
Those people who are convinced the report says ABC will show a google list of people indeed saying that the report says ABC. Not because it did, but because they too read a press release or another journalist/infuencer saying that it indeed say ABC.0 -
I bet Blair would love to bomb the crap out of LEAVE voting constituency's.trawl said:Off topic - Brexit I’m afraid.
A quick look at Sunday Times. Anonymous piece from a Civil Servant detailing the contempt said service has for the decision ro leave and for the voters who took that decision. Author afraid to show out that he is a leaver himself. Elsewhere an anecdote of Blair lobbing Macron to refuse British requests if Parliament votes for delay - telling him to hold firm and the UK will remain. Sigh. 0 -
What did EICIPM mean anyway? He was a poor choice but I don't see how he stabbed his brother in the back. David had no right to be leader and they both stood openly for the leadership.0
-
kyf_100 said:
What is meant by "divide resources fairly" though?
I might consider it fair that I keep what I earn. A communist might consider it fair that all resources are divided equally.
Communists with resources have historically been quite keen to make sure their families are properly looked after. Usually with a Swiss bank account.0 -
This sort of talk assumes that a Labour government under Ed would have meant that the EU would have suddenly become a non-issue. That's a very odd way of looking at it.Foxy said:
Would we have been a better country? Hell Yes!GIN1138 said:The explanation for 2015 is much more straightforward - People decided the wanted stability with Cameron and the Tories NOT chaos with Miliband and Labour...
The #edstone alone would have made it worthwhile.
A referendum was needed because a large section of the public did not agree with being in the EU (at various levels): and that's why leave won. Whilst the EU is much more of an issue for the Conservatives than Labour, there are *many* Labour leavers.
It's easy to see scenarios where an EU referendum would have occurred before or after 2020, even if Ed had won.0 -
Look on the bright side. He'd devote insufficient resources to the task, rely on wildly inaccurate information, do what the Americans tell him regardless, then bomb the wrong neighborhoods.GIN1138 said:
I bet Blair would love to bomb the crap out of LEAVE voting constituency's.trawl said:Off topic - Brexit I’m afraid.
A quick look at Sunday Times. Anonymous piece from a Civil Servant detailing the contempt said service has for the decision ro leave and for the voters who took that decision. Author afraid to show out that he is a leaver himself. Elsewhere an anecdote of Blair lobbing Macron to refuse British requests if Parliament votes for delay - telling him to hold firm and the UK will remain. Sigh.0 -
Cameron didn't 'beat' Miliband. He turned his fire on his coalition partners and won a majority that way.Foxy said:
Would we have been a better country? Hell Yes!GIN1138 said:The explanation for 2015 is much more straightforward - People decided the wanted stability with Cameron and the Tories NOT chaos with Miliband and Labour...
The #edstone alone would have made it worthwhile.0 -
EICIPM = Ed [Miliband] Is Crap Is Prime Ministerhoundtang said:What did EICIPM mean anyway? He was a poor choice but I don't see how he stabbed his brother in the back. David had no right to be leader and they both stood openly for the leadership.
It became received wisdom on PB that Miliband was a bit rubbish but around 2012/2013 he had a modest opinion poll lead which if carried into the general election would have seen him become Prime Minister0 -
Ed is crap, Ed is PM. Usually following a lord Ashcroft mega poll showing how all the marginals were lost to the conservatives.houndtang said:What did EICIPM mean anyway? He was a poor choice but I don't see how he stabbed his brother in the back. David had no right to be leader and they both stood openly for the leadership.
0 -
The story I've heard is that David Miliband was going to resign in June 2009 alongside James Purnell, Ed Miliband persuaded him not to with the assurance he'd back him when Brown resigns.houndtang said:What did EICIPM mean anyway? He was a poor choice but I don't see how he stabbed his brother in the back. David had no right to be leader and they both stood openly for the leadership.
Ed then reneged on that.
(The best theory I've heard is that Ed Miliband only stood in the 2010 leadership contest to make sure he was seen as contender worthy of being appointed to a senior shadow cabinet by David Miliband rather than it being seen as nepotism.)0 -
What helps your family more - becoming Labour party leader or earning a £650,000 a year wage doing 'charity work' to help poor people in the developing work and refugees? A charity partly funded by the UK taxpayer.kyf_100 said:What is meant by "divide resources fairly" though?
I might consider it fair that I keep what I earn. A communist might consider it fair that all resources are divided equally.
Lets stop sending £650,000 a year to New York to fund David's salary - and spend it on the NHS instead (or on helping refugees)!0 -
As I believe I said at the time, Ed wasn't the problem. True, he was lacklustre, and appeared a little lightweight, but his real problem were the people around him.GIN1138 said:
EICIPM = Ed [Miliband] Is Crap Is Prime Ministerhoundtang said:What did EICIPM mean anyway? He was a poor choice but I don't see how he stabbed his brother in the back. David had no right to be leader and they both stood openly for the leadership.
It became received wisdom on PB that Miliband was a bit rubbish but around 2012/2013 he had a modest opinion poll lead which if carried into the general election would have seen him become Prime Minister
And Scotland. You should never forget Scotland ...0 -
Surely the best spies are ones one has never heard of? In which case the Cambridge Five were spectacular failures even for Cambridge.TheScreamingEagles said:
The Cambridge Five are generally regarded as the world's best spies.Fishing said:"the University of Oxford, a place with such low standards they let in Jeffrey Archer."
Cambridge Five anyone?
Also Oxford had a nest of traitors.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5434139/Oxford-traitor-spied-Russia-revealed.html
Not that I'm particularly holding a candle for Oxford - a plague on both of them.0 -
Sorry Richmond, sorry Twickenham.....viewcode said:
Look on the bright side. He'd devote insufficient resources to the task, rely on wildly inaccurate information, do what the Americans tell him regardless, then bomb the wrong neighborhoods.GIN1138 said:
I bet Blair would love to bomb the crap out of LEAVE voting constituency's.trawl said:Off topic - Brexit I’m afraid.
A quick look at Sunday Times. Anonymous piece from a Civil Servant detailing the contempt said service has for the decision ro leave and for the voters who took that decision. Author afraid to show out that he is a leaver himself. Elsewhere an anecdote of Blair lobbing Macron to refuse British requests if Parliament votes for delay - telling him to hold firm and the UK will remain. Sigh.0 -
What a weird list of 'universal moral rules'. You'd have thought that at least the sixth, seventh and ninth commandments might also be worth a nod.
As for EdM, yes it is likely that his shafting of his brother counted against him, especially since he was pretty hopeless but his brother was (a little) better. Ruthlessness in politics is often a good thing, but not in this case.0 -
Putin still raises a glass to the great work done by the KGB's undiscovered nest of spies in Huddersfield Polytechnic.....Fishing said:
Surely the best spies are ones one has never heard of? In which case the Cambridge Five were spectacular failures even for Cambridge.TheScreamingEagles said:
The Cambridge Five are generally regarded as the world's best spies.Fishing said:"the University of Oxford, a place with such low standards they let in Jeffrey Archer."
Cambridge Five anyone?
Also Oxford had a nest of traitors.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5434139/Oxford-traitor-spied-Russia-revealed.html
Not that I'm particularly holding a candle for Oxford - a plague on both of them.0 -
Ireland tonking the French. Lucky the Italians still take part, or France would have a wooden spoon to stir their famous cuisine......0
-
Don't let everyone know!MarqueeMark said:
Putin still raises a glass to the great work done by the KGB's undiscovered nest of spies in Huddersfield Polytechnic.....Fishing said:
Surely the best spies are ones one has never heard of? In which case the Cambridge Five were spectacular failures even for Cambridge.TheScreamingEagles said:
The Cambridge Five are generally regarded as the world's best spies.Fishing said:"the University of Oxford, a place with such low standards they let in Jeffrey Archer."
Cambridge Five anyone?
Also Oxford had a nest of traitors.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5434139/Oxford-traitor-spied-Russia-revealed.html
Not that I'm particularly holding a candle for Oxford - a plague on both of them.0 -
MarqueeMark said:
Sorry Richmond, sorry Twickenham.....viewcode said:
Look on the bright side. He'd devote insufficient resources to the task, rely on wildly inaccurate information, do what the Americans tell him regardless, then bomb the wrong neighborhoods.GIN1138 said:
I bet Blair would love to bomb the crap out of LEAVE voting constituency's.trawl said:Off topic - Brexit I’m afraid.
A quick look at Sunday Times. Anonymous piece from a Civil Servant detailing the contempt said service has for the decision ro leave and for the voters who took that decision. Author afraid to show out that he is a leaver himself. Elsewhere an anecdote of Blair lobbing Macron to refuse British requests if Parliament votes for delay - telling him to hold firm and the UK will remain. Sigh.
0 -
Ireland are 14-0 up at present but have just had a try disallowed. Maybe Barnier might be wishing he had spent his Sunday discussing Cox's codpiece instead?williamglenn said:0 -
We referred to one (Blunt) in passing in the last thread's Picasso debate, and it was in the Spanish civil war that both Picasso and Philby came of age.Fishing said:"the University of Oxford, a place with such low standards they let in Jeffrey Archer."
Cambridge Five anyone?
The Oxford spies were quickly rounded up. Or were they? During the 1970s, rogue elements of MI5 convinced themselves that the head of MI5 and even the Prime Minister, both Oxford men, worked for the other side.0 -
In the southern hemisphere, the original tri-nations (Australia, New Zealand and South Africa) was expanded to include Argentina and arguably rightly so but the travelling far exceeds anything in our six nations. However, this is mitigated to some extent by a complex schedule which means each side plays the others three times.MarqueeMark said:Ireland tonking the French. Lucky the Italians still take part, or France would have a wooden spoon to stir their famous cuisine......
There have been suggestions of further expansion to include one of the Pacific Islands such as Fiji or Tonga but that hasn't happened yet.0 -
Indeed. And many traditional societies had no concept of personal property eg Polynesia and some Native Americans. How can respect for it be Universal then?Richard_Nabavi said:What a weird list of 'universal moral rules'. You'd have thought that at least the sixth, seventh and ninth commandments might also be worth a nod.
As for EdM, yes it is likely that his shafting of his brother counted against him, especially since he was pretty hopeless but his brother was (a little) better. Ruthlessness in politics is often a good thing, but not in this case.0 -
The seven universal moral rules are:
* Help your family
* Help your group
* Return favours
* Be brave
* Defer to superiors
* Divide resources fairly
* Respect others’ property
I looked but I couldn't find:
* Serve the public trust
* Protect the innocent
* Uphold the law
* An OCP product shall not act against any senior OCP official
So obviously some omissions there...
0 -
They seem to complain a lot when its taken from them...dixiedean said:
Indeed. And many traditional societies had no concept of personal property eg Polynesia and some Native Americans. How can respect for it be Universal then?Richard_Nabavi said:What a weird list of 'universal moral rules'. You'd have thought that at least the sixth, seventh and ninth commandments might also be worth a nod.
As for EdM, yes it is likely that his shafting of his brother counted against him, especially since he was pretty hopeless but his brother was (a little) better. Ruthlessness in politics is often a good thing, but not in this case.0 -
Indeed. That said, plenty of people seem to believe that he stabbed his brother in the back, whatever the truth (the truth being that David stabbed himself in the back with his own leadership election performance).houndtang said:What did EICIPM mean anyway? He was a poor choice but I don't see how he stabbed his brother in the back. David had no right to be leader and they both stood openly for the leadership.
0 -
I think there were a number of factors working against Labour in 2015. It's very hard for parties to win back power from Opposition after a long period of power. The Conservatives managed it in 1970 but, that period excepting, we have become used to one party enjoying an extended period in power before having to endure an extended period in opposition.Richard_Nabavi said:What a weird list of 'universal moral rules'. You'd have thought that at least the sixth, seventh and ninth commandments might also be worth a nod.
As for EdM, yes it is likely that his shafting of his brother counted against him, especially since he was pretty hopeless but his brother was (a little) better. Ruthlessness in politics is often a good thing, but not in this case.
As others have said, through a combination of their own stupidity and naivety and some superb campaigning by the Conservatives, the LDs were destroyed and Labour took some of the pickings too but the SNP emerged as the completely dominant force and indeed a third Parliamentary force close to where the LDs had been in 2010.
The collapse of the LDs across Britain and of Labour in Scotland disproportionately favoured the Conservatives who feasted on the LD carcass in England and Wales but had nothing to lose to the SNP in Scotland. Those English gains pushed Cameron over the majority line.
Oddly enough, I think Ed M was inconsequential in what actually happened - the SNP provided a useful foil but I have always thought (and still do) they would have done a deal with the Conservatives had they been in the same position as Clegg's LDs were in 2010.0 -
An excellent point and usually missed.kyf_100 said:What is meant by "divide resources fairly" though?
I might consider it fair that I keep what I earn. A communist might consider it fair that all resources are divided equally.
As a member of one planning committee and the former chairman of another how many times have I heard it said that applicants should be treated "equally". To many members, mainly it is true members with an axe to grind against people who had clearly done better than them in life that was all.
The truth is, to treat applicants equally IS NOT ENOUGH. You should always treat applicants FAIRLY. Usually, but not absolutely always treating applicants fairly includes treating them equally.
Seriously for those out there who are potential chairs of planning or licensing committees you will surely be better respected by your colleagues, the public and the press if you always bear this in mind. Of course your officers will hate you and will do anything to be rid of you.0 -
The only real criticism of the Ed M campaign I have seen is that they didn't "fight fair" over Iraq. David M was elected as an MP in 2001 and therefore voted for war or Iraq, where Ed M wasn't elected until 2005 and therefore didn't.TheJezziah said:I misread the title as immortality before I clicked on it and read it, was mildly confused...
David couldn't beat his brother because Ed was more appealing to the Labour selectorate than him, I suspect some of the kickback was driven by those angry that people had chosen the wrong brother (in their mind)
The Labour selectorate then went and made those people even more furious by choosing the wrong one again, I don't think Dan Hodges has calmed down yet...0 -
You should all be watching Traitors on Channel 4 - episode 4 is on tonight - with Keeley Hawes. Seems like the Cabinet office was quite the hotbed of reds under the bed just after the war.Fishing said:
Surely the best spies are ones one has never heard of? In which case the Cambridge Five were spectacular failures even for Cambridge.TheScreamingEagles said:
The Cambridge Five are generally regarded as the world's best spies.Fishing said:"the University of Oxford, a place with such low standards they let in Jeffrey Archer."
Cambridge Five anyone?
Also Oxford had a nest of traitors.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5434139/Oxford-traitor-spied-Russia-revealed.html
Not that I'm particularly holding a candle for Oxford - a plague on both of them.
I have watched all six episodes and while I won't give the plot away it demonstrates the dangers of not adequately funding care for those with dementia.0 -
We can all do the counterfactuals. But one thing is certain. Chaos with Ed Miliband would have been far better than what we have now.JosiasJessop said:
This sort of talk assumes that a Labour government under Ed would have meant that the EU would have suddenly become a non-issue. That's a very odd way of looking at it.Foxy said:
Would we have been a better country? Hell Yes!GIN1138 said:The explanation for 2015 is much more straightforward - People decided the wanted stability with Cameron and the Tories NOT chaos with Miliband and Labour...
The #edstone alone would have made it worthwhile.
A referendum was needed because a large section of the public did not agree with being in the EU (at various levels): and that's why leave won. Whilst the EU is much more of an issue for the Conservatives than Labour, there are *many* Labour leavers.
It's easy to see scenarios where an EU referendum would have occurred before or after 2020, even if Ed had won.
I believe this government's just about only policy implementation - capping utility bills - was pinched from Ed and roundly condemned by Tories at the time.0 -
That rugby game is great cover for the pressure the EU must be applying to Varadkar right now....williamglenn said:0 -
How can that be certain?FF43 said:
We can all do the counterfactuals. But one thing is certain. Chaos with Ed Miliband would have been far better than what we have now.JosiasJessop said:
This sort of talk assumes that a Labour government under Ed would have meant that the EU would have suddenly become a non-issue. That's a very odd way of looking at it.Foxy said:
Would we have been a better country? Hell Yes!GIN1138 said:The explanation for 2015 is much more straightforward - People decided the wanted stability with Cameron and the Tories NOT chaos with Miliband and Labour...
The #edstone alone would have made it worthwhile.
A referendum was needed because a large section of the public did not agree with being in the EU (at various levels): and that's why leave won. Whilst the EU is much more of an issue for the Conservatives than Labour, there are *many* Labour leavers.
It's easy to see scenarios where an EU referendum would have occurred before or after 2020, even if Ed had won.
I believe this government's just about only policy implementation - capping utility bills - was pinched from Ed and roundly condemned by Tories at the time.
0 -
They probably don't have much grasp of integal calculus either. As stated here "personal property" is a philosophical construct but that does not mean that the concept itself is not undestood in an innate way. Thus if you spent days making something essential for existence, perhaps a canoe and a fellow tribesman came along and took it then that would be "wrong" with or without the philosophical construct in the background.notme2 said:
They seem to complain a lot when its taken from them...dixiedean said:
Indeed. And many traditional societies had no concept of personal property eg Polynesia and some Native Americans. How can respect for it be Universal then?Richard_Nabavi said:What a weird list of 'universal moral rules'. You'd have thought that at least the sixth, seventh and ninth commandments might also be worth a nod.
As for EdM, yes it is likely that his shafting of his brother counted against him, especially since he was pretty hopeless but his brother was (a little) better. Ruthlessness in politics is often a good thing, but not in this case.0 -
Basically due to a change in momentum.JosiasJessop said:
The Labour selectorate changed; they elected a Jew in 2010, and an anti-Semite in 2015.TheJezziah said:I misread the title as immortality before I clicked on it and read it, was mildly confused...
David couldn't beat his brother because Ed was more appealing to the Labour selectorate than him, I suspect some of the kickback was driven by those angry that people had chosen the wrong brother (in their mind)
The Labour selectorate then went and made those people even more furious by choosing the wrong one again, I don't think Dan Hodges has calmed down yet...
I just shows how he selectorate changed, and how progress can be backwards as well as forwards.0 -
LOL.TheAncientMariner said:
Basically due to a change in momentum.JosiasJessop said:
The Labour selectorate changed; they elected a Jew in 2010, and an anti-Semite in 2015.TheJezziah said:I misread the title as immortality before I clicked on it and read it, was mildly confused...
David couldn't beat his brother because Ed was more appealing to the Labour selectorate than him, I suspect some of the kickback was driven by those angry that people had chosen the wrong brother (in their mind)
The Labour selectorate then went and made those people even more furious by choosing the wrong one again, I don't think Dan Hodges has calmed down yet...
I just shows how he selectorate changed, and how progress can be backwards as well as forwards.
Badum-tish!0 -
Corrupt? I assume you are referring to how much extra Remain spent vs. Leave?Scott_P said:
because we refuse to annul the result of a corrupt referendum...Marco1 said:What is the point of Elections if the Elite does not believe or follow democracy ? The UK is no longer a beacon for democracy in the world
0 -
The thought that 0% of Brits think that deferring to superiors is the most important rule is a cheerful chink of light and hope in a dark world. I wonder what % of Brits think in fact it is a truly terrible idea? Most, I hope.0
-
Both sides broke the law, and both sides have been fined for it. It's a very dangerous argument to use to suggest the result isn't acceptable. Just as it's hard to argue that Leave's lies call the result into question when Remain were just as dishonest.Scott_P said:0 -
Yeah, not only did they spend millions more then Leave, they also broke the rules, too.Scott_P said:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/2f91721d-9512-3c2a-9e0f-4453897183c80 -
Would it have? The alleged overspend is minuscule in comparison to the overall spend.Scott_P said:
An election result would have been annulled.ydoethur said:It's a very dangerous argument to use to suggest the result isn't acceptable.
The only "argument" is precedent, and the rule of law.
I know Brexiteers don't like that...0 -
I'm not a Brexiteer. And no, an election result would not have been annulled on that basis. Otherwise we would have had to rerun 2017. You're confusing breaching constituency limits (which can lead to a by-election) with national campaigns.Scott_P said:
An election result would have been annulled.ydoethur said:It's a very dangerous argument to use to suggest the result isn't acceptable.
The only "argument" is precedent, and the rule of law.
I know Brexiteers don't like that...0 -
I'm sure that the anti-semitic tropes used by the Conservatives against Ed Miliband were as accidental as the anti-semitic tropes used by Labour against Michael Howard.Foxy said:
Oxford Poly, surely at that time.PClipp said:First! And I thought Jeffery Archer went to Oxford Brookes...
As a second son, I am with Ed Miliband. There is no role for primogeniture in democratic politics.
It was not a stab in the back*, it was a fair contest.
*be careful of the anti-semitic overtones of this phrase btw.0 -
Harold Wilson a Soviet spy? Extraordinary! Imagine if somebody had written a story around that theme and then published it as a book which could be purchased online?DecrepitJohnL said:During the 1970s, rogue elements of MI5 convinced themselves that the head of MI5 and even the Prime Minister, both Oxford men, worked for the other side.
0 -
The highest morality is helping your family?
The Kray twins will be smiling down from heaven then. Quite a thought.0 -
I had nothing against Ed Miliband but knew he would struggle much more than his brother to beat the Tories.
Not saying Labour would have won but Cameron wouldn’t have got his majority and there wouldn’t have been a referendum .
Ed M never sought to nullify attacks re Labour spending . The message should have been Labour had to repair the damage done to the NHS and education under the Tories.
0 -
Did somebody look in the mirror and say three times, "Am I tough enuss? Hell yeah I'm tough enough!"0
-
Ed Miliband's image problem was than he was seen as a wet wimp.
See the second photo on this article:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32328664
A bit more imagery of a ruthless tough-guy who won the leadership as an underdog wouldn't have done him any harm0 -
The story that prevailed at Oxford was that Archer, while at the unaffiliated local education college, simply marched into the Brasenose porters’ lodge and angrily complained they had given him no pigeon hole. Bullishit baffling brains, the porters apologised gave him one. With a pigeon hole you are essentially part of the college, ergo the university, and the rest is history.0
-
2017 was rerun after Labour broke the rules? I missed that one. When did it happen?Scott_P said:
Yes, they would. It has happened before. Election campaigns which break the law are annulled, and rerun.ydoethur said:And no, an election result would not have been annulled on that basis.
0 -
-
I always fancied the Miliband brothers as kind of like our Kennedys. Used to picture them, vibrant and tussle haired, both of them incredibly brainy and popular, playing touch football at Holland Park comprehensive. This vision was trashed when they fell out over the leadership and now they're not even in the same continent. Sad story.0
-
Oi! Do you mind not associating him with my subject? It was in Educa...ah.DougSeal said:The story that prevailed at Oxford was that Archer, while at the unaffiliated local education college, simply marched into the Brasenose porters’ lodge and angrily complained they had given him no pigeon hole. Bullishit baffling brains, the porters apologised gave him one. With a pigeon hole you are essentially part of the college, ergo the university, and the rest is history.
0 -
Well at least Ed Miliband didn't lose a referendum that'll probably end up splitting his party, or end up as a sex pest.0
-
There were clearly breaches of election law by leave but I’d be interesting in seeing the detail of the corruption alleged above.0
-
Labour choosing Corbyn to succeed him as party leader isn't the best political epitaph.Pulpstar said:Well at least Ed Miliband didn't lose a referendum that'll probably end up splitting his party, or end up as a sex pest.
0 -
-
Ah, I'm now sensing something fishy here perhaps? Or are we all Green on this one?Pulpstar said:
Unpleasant though it is, it's much better than the truly horrible mental image I had before.0 -
Extreme centrists, apparently, according to Corbynistas. The ultimate Golden Mean.TheAncientMariner said:0 -
The key word there is "them". They have group. Not personal.notme2 said:
They seem to complain a lot when its taken from them...dixiedean said:
Indeed. And many traditional societies had no concept of personal property eg Polynesia and some Native Americans. How can respect for it be Universal then?Richard_Nabavi said:What a weird list of 'universal moral rules'. You'd have thought that at least the sixth, seventh and ninth commandments might also be worth a nod.
As for EdM, yes it is likely that his shafting of his brother counted against him, especially since he was pretty hopeless but his brother was (a little) better. Ruthlessness in politics is often a good thing, but not in this case.0 -
I think that pretty well all of those qualities have an element of selfishness in them i.e. I will benefit from these actions as well. (whether financially or genetically)kinabalu said:The highest morality is helping your family?
The Kray twins will be smiling down from heaven then. Quite a thought.0 -
I quite like the LibDems being called the Golden Meanies.....ydoethur said:
Extreme centrists, apparently, according to Corbynistas. The ultimate Golden Mean.TheAncientMariner said:0 -
Thanks for the recommendation, though with Cheltenham this week, viewing might need to wait for the DVD in April. Thank heavens there is nothing happening in politics.brendan16 said:
You should all be watching Traitors on Channel 4 - episode 4 is on tonight - with Keeley Hawes. Seems like the Cabinet office was quite the hotbed of reds under the bed just after the war.Fishing said:
Surely the best spies are ones one has never heard of? In which case the Cambridge Five were spectacular failures even for Cambridge.TheScreamingEagles said:
The Cambridge Five are generally regarded as the world's best spies.Fishing said:"the University of Oxford, a place with such low standards they let in Jeffrey Archer."
Cambridge Five anyone?
Also Oxford had a nest of traitors.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5434139/Oxford-traitor-spied-Russia-revealed.html
Not that I'm particularly holding a candle for Oxford - a plague on both of them.
I have watched all six episodes and while I won't give the plot away it demonstrates the dangers of not adequately funding care for those with dementia.0 -
Corruption is generally taken to involve bribery. If you want to take the view that it’s just a synonym for dishonesty, feel free but that’s a pretty wide view. For example, I’d suggest that the Labour Party 2017 manifesto was dishonest. Was it corrupt though? Corrupting of the electorate perhaps, but it’s an argument that would rightly get little traction.Scott_P said:
When is a breach of election law not corrupt?matt said:There were clearly breaches of election law by leave but I’d be interesting in seeing the detail of the corruption alleged above.
0 -
Never knew you were a student, Mark!MarqueeMark said:
I quite like the LibDems being called the Golden Meanies.....ydoethur said:
Extreme centrists, apparently, according to Corbynistas. The ultimate Golden Mean.TheAncientMariner said:
But the best nickname of course was William I: William the Bastard to his friends, and William the much worse to his enemies.0 -
Totally agree. He was far too defensive on that and on other things too. Ed had some great ideas but he was cramped by fear of the reactionary tabloid press.nico67 said:I had nothing against Ed Miliband but knew he would struggle much more than his brother to beat the Tories.
Not saying Labour would have won but Cameron wouldn’t have got his majority and there wouldn’t have been a referendum .
Ed M never sought to nullify attacks re Labour spending . The message should have been Labour had to repair the damage done to the NHS and education under the Tories.
Corbyn is much better in this regard. He does not pander to the enemy.0 -
OT shops are rubbish (part 94). Round up your bill for Comic Relief it says. Shame they've not told any of the till staff how to do this, and there is precious little chance of them stumbling across the function hidden behind several menus. It's one way of ending the Dooley/Lammy debate, I suppose.0
-
-
Strange how Labour can't give their staff a decent paybrise - because , you know it would threaten their financial stability.nico67 said:I had nothing against Ed Miliband but knew he would struggle much more than his brother to beat the Tories.
Not saying Labour would have won but Cameron wouldn’t have got his majority and there wouldn’t have been a referendum .
Ed M never sought to nullify attacks re Labour spending . The message should have been Labour had to repair the damage done to the NHS and education under the Tories.
They always seem so unconcerned about doing the same to the country.0 -
Unless the weather improves radically I don't think you'll be watching too much racing. It's been snowing here.DecrepitJohnL said:
Thanks for the recommendation, though with Cheltenham this week, viewing might need to wait for the DVD in April. Thank heavens there is nothing happening in politics.brendan16 said:
You should all be watching Traitors on Channel 4 - episode 4 is on tonight - with Keeley Hawes. Seems like the Cabinet office was quite the hotbed of reds under the bed just after the war.Fishing said:
Surely the best spies are ones one has never heard of? In which case the Cambridge Five were spectacular failures even for Cambridge.TheScreamingEagles said:
The Cambridge Five are generally regarded as the world's best spies.Fishing said:"the University of Oxford, a place with such low standards they let in Jeffrey Archer."
Cambridge Five anyone?
Also Oxford had a nest of traitors.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5434139/Oxford-traitor-spied-Russia-revealed.html
Not that I'm particularly holding a candle for Oxford - a plague on both of them.
I have watched all six episodes and while I won't give the plot away it demonstrates the dangers of not adequately funding care for those with dementia.0 -
The only manifesto and associated campaign I'd call dishonest is the Conservative one in 1979 when the Conservatives denied they planned to double VAT (technically it was not quite doubled from 8 to 15 per cent in the budget immediately following the election). There are other campaigns that were robust to the point of being dirty but that is not quite the same thing.matt said:
Corruption is generally taken to involve bribery. If you want to take the view that it’s just a synonym for dishonesty, feel free but that’s a pretty wide view. For example, I’d suggest that the Labour Party 2017 manifesto was dishonest. Was it corrupt though? Corrupting of the electorate perhaps, but it’s an argument that would rightly get little traction.Scott_P said:
When is a breach of election law not corrupt?matt said:There were clearly breaches of election law by leave but I’d be interesting in seeing the detail of the corruption alleged above.
There are lots of manifestos we all disagree with but I'd not call them dishonest.0
