Vanilla is once again slower and more unreliable than Cummings’ thought processes.
However, if it does get stuck, just click ‘stop’ and it will load, without tweets.
If you have a browser that works with the uBlock Origin add-on then installing that and configuring it to block platform.twitter.com will stop all tweets automatically loading and this site then works well. This is how mine is configured...
Good Morning everyone. This is getting to be like British elections were, apparently, before the secret ballot. Big poster up, men going up and putting a cross beside their favoured candidate and someone keeping a tally.
IIRC, too at the beginning of the 20thC voting in UK was over several days, and some constituencies declared while others were still voting.
What was that about a functioning democracy? Shall be very glad when (if ever) this is all over!
This American system is stupid. TBH I agree with the GOP challenges that election day is the cut-off to ballots being accepted - how bloody long do people want to vote?
Bit late in the day to change that (as happened with a court ruling in Minnesota yesterday) when it's printed on the postal ballot that it will be counted if returned, postmarked by election day.
The point about all these arguments is that they're not conducted in a vacuum. If there were plentiful polling places for everyone on or before election day, and provision for absentee voting which wasn't actively hampered, then you would be right.
I have little doubt that a Democratic administration with control of both houses will bring in legislation to try to bring in rational rules across the nation. And no doubt that Republicans will try to stop it.
The GOP will use their 6-3 SCOTUS majority to get any laws to improve elections thrown out
Yes, the benefit of such a majority is if 1 finds it too shameless to back it doesn't matter.
But if course, that 9 times out of 10 (this is an example not analysis) people can guess the outcome for a justice based on political leanings in political cases is just coincidence and it's all about legal philosophy and precedent
"Boris Johnson is not the leader I want to have for my country."
That is a sentiment 79 percent of Scottish swing voters agree with, making it the biggest factor driving those on the fence in Scotland towards backing independence. https://t.co/fWHpqCpRCU
Re.this new indy poll - surely the most simple conclusion here is that Johnson needs to go sooner rather than later? Whether that's quite twigged in the Tory party yet..
It is one of the factors why I want to see Boris replaced asap
Sorry to pour cold water. Trump is gaining and if Trafalgar is correct, they were more or less right last time, he will get in by the back door of hanging onto his crucial states whilst losing the popular vote. Other pollsters are producing a similar message of Trump moving forward. The only hope for the Democrats is that sufficent numbers of their people early voted, enough to just get him over the wire, but its a slim one. What a daft electoral system they have. It is possible that if Biden wins by say 4-5 million votes or more then some of the Electoral College in States he narrowly wins may not support Trump, there were a very small number of such instances last time. But the forecast looks gloomy, I fear an authoritarian regime will follow. Re Ballots after polling day, In Australia they are still counting two weeks or more after the event, outlying areas, late deliveries and the forces, so its nothing new.
Looking at the polls I fail to see any real movement. WI,MI and PA are all pretty steady or even seen slight movement towards Biden. The lowest for the 3 States is PA which depending where you look is averaging 4.5-5 points ahead, at this point Clinton was only 2 points ahead, and the District polling suggests this is under reporting Biden's lead, in fact in all 3 states the district polling show better Biden figures. In fact district polling shows Biden leading almost across the board.
In 2016 Trafalgar was supported by the other polls showing a distinct and fairly rapid decline in Clinton's lead over the last 2 weeks, the district polling was showing even worse figures for her suggesting her statewide polls were being generous to her.
This time round that is not happening, Trafalgar have again shown Trump to be heading to a narrow victory in 2 of the 3, however this time there is no narrowing and the district polls are not leaning Trump either. So in order for Trafalgar to be correct this time round they need the average polling to be even further out with their error AND for the district polling to be even further out than the state polling.
So far the only things that seem to allow Trump to win are the pollsters being wrong by over twice that of 2016 or truly massive vote rigging/fraud, or by some miracle a very fast and steep narrowing of the polls.
It is a weird election, what with covid, voter suppression and a dozen different types of Trump related insanity.
I do think that everyone is watching the one side of the MoE curve, for a Trump victory, and ignoring the other side, for an equally likely Biden Landslide. I think the latter is where the value is.
Well indeed. A Biden victory of over 400 Electoral College votes is more probable than a Trump EC victory.
The only reason anyone thinks otherwise is that, as MysticRose (for once) correctly points out, he amazed us all in 2016 when victory looked impossible to many shrewd pundits right up until Pennsylvania went red.
Can he do again? Yes. Only a fool would write off Trump entirely. He has a fairly long history of winning electoral contests that according to the normal rules of politics are unwinnable.
Is he likely to? No. He has to do at least as well as last time and all the evidence we have suggests he’s doing worse.
He also has a number of headwinds to contend with - early voting suggesting higher turnout, a lack of an explanation for the shambolic way he’s handled Covid, a track record of not so much of draining the swamp as swamping the drain, and ultimately no track record of achievement despite four years in office to point to. None of those applied last time.
Plus, he’s up against a candidate who may be wet and ineffectual but isn’t openly divisive and nasty, or deliberately alienating the Democratic base by threatening to put them all out of work.
I’d say he has a 10-15% chance of winning. That’s not no hope, but it is low hope. Last time it was put at 25-30%, so his chances have halved.
He’s not Truman, he’s a crazier more depraved version of Heath.
Very sound post... until the last sentence. That's a terrible slur on Ted Heath.
Geoffrey Skeller of 538 looks at the marginal movements in the battleground states of PA FL OH and GA that are slowly trending to Biden. Georgia of particular note :
Yes, that's a good article and shows that the gap between the contestants is not diminishing even at this late stage.
I think Mike is right however that the odds are unlikely to change much before counting starts which is a bit of a puzzle. What does an elder statesman like yourself make of it all?
Personally I'm inclined to use Occam's razor and say the punters are just dumb, and have been spooked by 2016 but I wonder if your vast experience suggests a different reason.
Republican voters vote on average later than Democrat ones, so why are the Rs talking about not counting late postal votes?
Rs are considerably more likely to request a mail ballot and drop it off on in person either early or on election day (state laws permitting), especially this year.
Late-arriving mail is far more likely to be Dem, and the place where voter fraud is most likely to occur, because campaigns know who has voted and how many votes they need.
Ah that makes sense and I can see why they want to ban it now.
I've not seen a plausible reason that the Democrats get so many more votes by post than in person.
Surely you can something when you can prove there's a problem not just think it might exist because of your partisan position?
That said I'm not persuaded counting late arrival is a great idea, and feels like bolting on unnecessary procedures which delay things rather than addressing the issues which cause there to be so many late arrivals.
Good Morning everyone. This is getting to be like British elections were, apparently, before the secret ballot. Big poster up, men going up and putting a cross beside their favoured candidate and someone keeping a tally.
IIRC, too at the beginning of the 20thC voting in UK was over several days, and some constituencies declared while others were still voting.
What was that about a functioning democracy? Shall be very glad when (if ever) this is all over!
This American system is stupid. TBH I agree with the GOP challenges that election day is the cut-off to ballots being accepted - how bloody long do people want to vote?
Bit late in the day to change that (as happened with a court ruling in Minnesota yesterday) when it's printed on the postal ballot that it will be counted if returned, postmarked by election day.
The point about all these arguments is that they're not conducted in a vacuum. If there were plentiful polling places for everyone on or before election day, and provision for absentee voting which wasn't actively hampered, then you would be right.
I have little doubt that a Democratic administration with control of both houses will bring in legislation to try to bring in rational rules across the nation. And no doubt that Republicans will try to stop it.
The GOP will use their 6-3 SCOTUS majority to get any laws to improve elections thrown out
Yes, the benefit of such a majority is if 1 finds it too shameless to back it doesn't matter.
But if course, that 9 times out of 10 (this is an example not analysis) people can guess the outcome for a justice based on political leanings in political cases is just coincidence and it's all about legal philosophy and precedent
So when Roberts claims to be calling "balls and strikes", he's half right ?
"Boris Johnson is not the leader I want to have for my country."
That is a sentiment 79 percent of Scottish swing voters agree with, making it the biggest factor driving those on the fence in Scotland towards backing independence. https://t.co/fWHpqCpRCU
Re.this new indy poll - surely the most simple conclusion here is that Johnson needs to go sooner rather than later? Whether that's quite twigged in the Tory party yet..
It is one of the factors why I want to see Boris replaced asap
My wife and I value the union greatly
Did not Boris win a large majority when the question was put to Conservative Party members?
The sooner Len is thrown out of the Labour Party the better and kicked out of unite, drain the swamp now or they will never do it.
Labour would be better off breaking the formal and institutional ties with the unions. Not least because that is decreasingly their core constituency nowadays.
What will the Labour look like in 10 years time ?
What fraction of the Democratic Party's funds come from organized labor ?
Global cases trending towards 600k/day with death rates increasing, was there a third wave with Spanish flu? There does not appear to be any short term solution except to develop treatments that keep people out of icu and minimize the effects. Vulnerable people take your own precautions and hunker down until the rich have had their vaccine.
Good Morning everyone. This is getting to be like British elections were, apparently, before the secret ballot. Big poster up, men going up and putting a cross beside their favoured candidate and someone keeping a tally.
IIRC, too at the beginning of the 20thC voting in UK was over several days, and some constituencies declared while others were still voting.
What was that about a functioning democracy? Shall be very glad when (if ever) this is all over!
This American system is stupid. TBH I agree with the GOP challenges that election day is the cut-off to ballots being accepted - how bloody long do people want to vote?
Bit late in the day to change that (as happened with a court ruling in Minnesota yesterday) when it's printed on the postal ballot that it will be counted if returned, postmarked by election day.
The point about all these arguments is that they're not conducted in a vacuum. If there were plentiful polling places for everyone on or before election day, and provision for absentee voting which wasn't actively hampered, then you would be right.
I have little doubt that a Democratic administration with control of both houses will bring in legislation to try to bring in rational rules across the nation. And no doubt that Republicans will try to stop it.
The GOP will use their 6-3 SCOTUS majority to get any laws to improve elections thrown out
Which would give the Dems an excuse to pack the SC.
Good Morning everyone. This is getting to be like British elections were, apparently, before the secret ballot. Big poster up, men going up and putting a cross beside their favoured candidate and someone keeping a tally.
IIRC, too at the beginning of the 20thC voting in UK was over several days, and some constituencies declared while others were still voting.
What was that about a functioning democracy? Shall be very glad when (if ever) this is all over!
This American system is stupid. TBH I agree with the GOP challenges that election day is the cut-off to ballots being accepted - how bloody long do people want to vote?
Bit late in the day to change that (as happened with a court ruling in Minnesota yesterday) when it's printed on the postal ballot that it will be counted if returned, postmarked by election day.
The point about all these arguments is that they're not conducted in a vacuum. If there were plentiful polling places for everyone on or before election day, and provision for absentee voting which wasn't actively hampered, then you would be right.
I have little doubt that a Democratic administration with control of both houses will bring in legislation to try to bring in rational rules across the nation. And no doubt that Republicans will try to stop it.
The GOP will use their 6-3 SCOTUS majority to get any laws to improve elections thrown out
Yes, the benefit of such a majority is if 1 finds it too shameless to back it doesn't matter.
But if course, that 9 times out of 10 (this is an example not analysis) people can guess the outcome for a justice based on political leanings in political cases is just coincidence and it's all about legal philosophy and precedent
So when Roberts claims to be calling "balls and strikes", he's half right ?
I don't know quite what he means by that! But I just find it improbable that such a partisan appointment process where people are chosen for partisan reasons does not end up with partisan rulings on partisan issues most of the time.
I know they don't do it every time, they're human after all, and there are limits, and it hasn't always been so bad, but when you pick people that way it seems inevitable. Even if they try hard not to act so the way they are chosen and why limits them mentally.
"Boris Johnson is not the leader I want to have for my country."
That is a sentiment 79 percent of Scottish swing voters agree with, making it the biggest factor driving those on the fence in Scotland towards backing independence. https://t.co/fWHpqCpRCU
Re.this new indy poll - surely the most simple conclusion here is that Johnson needs to go sooner rather than later? Whether that's quite twigged in the Tory party yet..
It is one of the factors why I want to see Boris replaced asap
My wife and I value the union greatly
asap? But not until after he delivers the Brexit you don't want?
The sooner Len is thrown out of the Labour Party the better and kicked out of unite, drain the swamp now or they will never do it.
Labour would be better off breaking the formal and institutional ties with the unions. Not least because that is decreasingly their core constituency nowadays.
What will the Labour look like in 10 years time ?
What fraction of the Democratic Party's funds come from organized labor ?
The political landscape in the UK could change dramatically, there may not even be a UK but it will I think be more petty nationalist, isolationist and right wing. Unlikely to be here to see it though.
Republican voters vote on average later than Democrat ones, so why are the Rs talking about not counting late postal votes?
IIUC what they've done at this point is to order any late ballots to be segregated so that they can decide how to count them later, so the court's given itself an option to wait until it knows which way they're leaning, then decide whether they should be counted.
"Boris Johnson is not the leader I want to have for my country."
That is a sentiment 79 percent of Scottish swing voters agree with, making it the biggest factor driving those on the fence in Scotland towards backing independence. https://t.co/fWHpqCpRCU
Re.this new indy poll - surely the most simple conclusion here is that Johnson needs to go sooner rather than later? Whether that's quite twigged in the Tory party yet..
It is one of the factors why I want to see Boris replaced asap
My wife and I value the union greatly
Did not Boris win a large majority when the question was put to Conservative Party members?
"Our hotel, which we picked without much thought from our travel operator’s website, is filled largely with overweight high-risk over-60s Britons. Judging from the accents, most are Tier 2 and 3 refugees who’ve had enough of Project Fear."
"Boris Johnson is not the leader I want to have for my country."
That is a sentiment 79 percent of Scottish swing voters agree with, making it the biggest factor driving those on the fence in Scotland towards backing independence. https://t.co/fWHpqCpRCU
Re.this new indy poll - surely the most simple conclusion here is that Johnson needs to go sooner rather than later? Whether that's quite twigged in the Tory party yet..
It is one of the factors why I want to see Boris replaced asap
My wife and I value the union greatly
asap? But not until after he delivers the Brexit you don't want?
"Boris Johnson is not the leader I want to have for my country."
That is a sentiment 79 percent of Scottish swing voters agree with, making it the biggest factor driving those on the fence in Scotland towards backing independence. https://t.co/fWHpqCpRCU
Re.this new indy poll - surely the most simple conclusion here is that Johnson needs to go sooner rather than later? Whether that's quite twigged in the Tory party yet..
It is one of the factors why I want to see Boris replaced asap
My wife and I value the union greatly
asap? But not until after he delivers the Brexit you don't want?
Have I got that right?
I want brexit with a deal
And is Boris more likely to deliver one as opposed to, say, Nicki Morgan?
Republican voters vote on average later than Democrat ones, so why are the Rs talking about not counting late postal votes?
Rs are considerably more likely to request a mail ballot and drop it off on in person either early or on election day (state laws permitting), especially this year.
Late-arriving mail is far more likely to be Dem, and the place where voter fraud is most likely to occur, because campaigns know who has voted and how many votes they need.
Ah that makes sense and I can see why they want to ban it now.
I've not seen a plausible reason that the Democrats get so many more votes by post than in person.
Surely you can something when you can prove there's a problem not just think it might exist because of your partisan position?
That said I'm not persuaded counting late arrival is a great idea, and feels like bolting on unnecessary procedures which delay things rather than addressing the issues which cause there to be so many late arrivals.
The individual states are reacting to events somewhat, with Covid and USPS shenanigans making a bad system worse. With a distinct lack of bipartisan interest in addressing the issues (rather than compounding them).
Just gonna do a quick podcast roundup, sorry for the repeated posts but these are all just so great if you're trying to work out what the markets are doing:
Thanks for this. I`ve just watched the bottom one - very interesting indeed. It`s astonishing how ignorant the two American guys were about the electoral college system. it took a Brit to explain it to them.
Sorry to pour cold water. Trump is gaining and if Trafalgar is correct, they were more or less right last time, he will get in by the back door of hanging onto his crucial states whilst losing the popular vote. Other pollsters are producing a similar message of Trump moving forward. The only hope for the Democrats is that sufficent numbers of their people early voted, enough to just get him over the wire, but its a slim one. What a daft electoral system they have. It is possible that if Biden wins by say 4-5 million votes or more then some of the Electoral College in States he narrowly wins may not support Trump, there were a very small number of such instances last time. But the forecast looks gloomy, I fear an authoritarian regime will follow. Re Ballots after polling day, In Australia they are still counting two weeks or more after the event, outlying areas, late deliveries and the forces, so its nothing new.
Looking at the polls I fail to see any real movement. WI,MI and PA are all pretty steady or even seen slight movement towards Biden. The lowest for the 3 States is PA which depending where you look is averaging 4.5-5 points ahead, at this point Clinton was only 2 points ahead, and the District polling suggests this is under reporting Biden's lead, in fact in all 3 states the district polling show better Biden figures. In fact district polling shows Biden leading almost across the board.
In 2016 Trafalgar was supported by the other polls showing a distinct and fairly rapid decline in Clinton's lead over the last 2 weeks, the district polling was showing even worse figures for her suggesting her statewide polls were being generous to her.
This time round that is not happening, Trafalgar have again shown Trump to be heading to a narrow victory in 2 of the 3, however this time there is no narrowing and the district polls are not leaning Trump either. So in order for Trafalgar to be correct this time round they need the average polling to be even further out with their error AND for the district polling to be even further out than the state polling.
So far the only things that seem to allow Trump to win are the pollsters being wrong by over twice that of 2016 or truly massive vote rigging/fraud, or by some miracle a very fast and steep narrowing of the polls.
It is a weird election, what with covid, voter suppression and a dozen different types of Trump related insanity.
I do think that everyone is watching the one side of the MoE curve, for a Trump victory, and ignoring the other side, for an equally likely Biden Landslide. I think the latter is where the value is.
Well indeed. A Biden victory of over 400 Electoral College votes is more probable than a Trump EC victory.
The only reason anyone thinks otherwise is that, as MysticRose (for once) correctly points out, he amazed us all in 2016 when victory looked impossible to many shrewd pundits right up until Pennsylvania went red.
Can he do again? Yes. Only a fool would write off Trump entirely. He has a fairly long history of winning electoral contests that according to the normal rules of politics are unwinnable.
Is he likely to? No. He has to do at least as well as last time and all the evidence we have suggests he’s doing worse.
He also has a number of headwinds to contend with - early voting suggesting higher turnout, a lack of an explanation for the shambolic way he’s handled Covid, a track record of not so much of draining the swamp as swamping the drain, and ultimately no track record of achievement despite four years in office to point to. None of those applied last time.
Plus, he’s up against a candidate who may be wet and ineffectual but isn’t openly divisive and nasty, or deliberately alienating the Democratic base by threatening to put them all out of work.
I’d say he has a 10-15% chance of winning. That’s not no hope, but it is low hope. Last time it was put at 25-30%, so his chances have halved.
He’s not Truman, he’s a crazier more depraved version of Heath.
Very sound post... until the last sentence. That's a terrible slur on Ted Heath.
True. One was an egotistical, sexist dinosaur with a hang up about women, who won an election against all odds, broke nearly all his election promises, did everything his opponents would have done but more incompetently, and then lost an unloseable election due to outside events.
Just gonna do a quick podcast roundup, sorry for the repeated posts but these are all just so great if you're trying to work out what the markets are doing:
Thanks for this. I`ve just watched the bottom one - very interesting indeed. It`s astonishing how ignorant the two American guys were about the electoral college system. it took a Brit to explain it to them.
Yeah, that was funny. TBF they seem to be random sports / crypto gamblers, I don't think they usually pay much attention to politics...
Sorry to pour cold water. Trump is gaining and if Trafalgar is correct, they were more or less right last time, he will get in by the back door of hanging onto his crucial states whilst losing the popular vote. Other pollsters are producing a similar message of Trump moving forward. The only hope for the Democrats is that sufficent numbers of their people early voted, enough to just get him over the wire, but its a slim one. What a daft electoral system they have. It is possible that if Biden wins by say 4-5 million votes or more then some of the Electoral College in States he narrowly wins may not support Trump, there were a very small number of such instances last time. But the forecast looks gloomy, I fear an authoritarian regime will follow. Re Ballots after polling day, In Australia they are still counting two weeks or more after the event, outlying areas, late deliveries and the forces, so its nothing new.
Quiz question for the future, who were the other 3 Labour Leaders?
"Steven Fielding @PolProfSteve Turns out Jeremy Corbyn is the 4th Labour leader to lose his party’s whip, which says quite a lot about the highly contested nature of the party’s identity. And that struggle is hardly over."
Republican voters vote on average later than Democrat ones, so why are the Rs talking about not counting late postal votes?
Rs are considerably more likely to request a mail ballot and drop it off on in person either early or on election day (state laws permitting), especially this year.
Late-arriving mail is far more likely to be Dem, and the place where voter fraud is most likely to occur, because campaigns know who has voted and how many votes they need.
Ah that makes sense and I can see why they want to ban it now.
I've not seen a plausible reason that the Democrats get so many more votes by post than in person.
Surely you can something when you can prove there's a problem not just think it might exist because of your partisan position?
That said I'm not persuaded counting late arrival is a great idea, and feels like bolting on unnecessary procedures which delay things rather than addressing the issues which cause there to be so many late arrivals.
I can't prove it and I'm not sure it happens on a big enough scale to matter, but it just seems very strange that the Democrats do so much better than the Republicans with postal votes. I read somewhere that they're leading 75% to 25% in some states on postal ballots, that seems crazy and is suspicious IMO.
You can point to the pandemic this time, but it's been a growing pattern for several elections.
Edit: Ah you meant the Republicans, well I agree that they need clearer evidence before taking action.
FPT - Tim Davie is quite right to introduce those new BBC guidelines - they are long overdue.
The question is whether management have the appetite to ensure they are enforced.
That's bollocks (if what I read is correct - big if).
BBC employees not allowed to go on Pride marches? Why the fuck not?
That's a straw man. The guidelines say that news employees should not attend any marches or demonstrations on controversial issues. That wouldn't include a LGBT BBC employee attending a pride march in a private capacity. That would cover a BBC employee attending a political march for gender self-identification for trans rights and then publicly tweeting or being interviewed about it. Common sense.
Most employers have clauses about bringing their employer into disrepute. The BBC lives or dies on its impartiality rules and the loose social media and offline activities of a small number of BBC employees have tainted the corporation's reputation.
This is some just the faux outrage of some existing BBC employees who want to discredit the guidelines before they come in so they can continue to have their cake and eat it.
Good Morning everyone. This is getting to be like British elections were, apparently, before the secret ballot. Big poster up, men going up and putting a cross beside their favoured candidate and someone keeping a tally.
IIRC, too at the beginning of the 20thC voting in UK was over several days, and some constituencies declared while others were still voting.
What was that about a functioning democracy? Shall be very glad when (if ever) this is all over!
This American system is stupid. TBH I agree with the GOP challenges that election day is the cut-off to ballots being accepted - how bloody long do people want to vote?
Bit late in the day to change that (as happened with a court ruling in Minnesota yesterday) when it's printed on the postal ballot that it will be counted if returned, postmarked by election day.
The point about all these arguments is that they're not conducted in a vacuum. If there were plentiful polling places for everyone on or before election day, and provision for absentee voting which wasn't actively hampered, then you would be right.
I have little doubt that a Democratic administration with control of both houses will bring in legislation to try to bring in rational rules across the nation. And no doubt that Republicans will try to stop it.
The GOP will use their 6-3 SCOTUS majority to get any laws to improve elections thrown out
Yes, the benefit of such a majority is if 1 finds it too shameless to back it doesn't matter.
But if course, that 9 times out of 10 (this is an example not analysis) people can guess the outcome for a justice based on political leanings in political cases is just coincidence and it's all about legal philosophy and precedent
So when Roberts claims to be calling "balls and strikes", he's half right ?
I don't know quite what he means by that! But I just find it improbable that such a partisan appointment process where people are chosen for partisan reasons does not end up with partisan rulings on partisan issues most of the time.
I know they don't do it every time, they're human after all, and there are limits, and it hasn't always been so bad, but when you pick people that way it seems inevitable. Even if they try hard not to act so the way they are chosen and why limits them mentally.
He was claiming that good judges (ie himself) act like baseball umpires, which even if you discount political bias is utter balls anyway.
The RealClearPolitics average of national polls pegs Biden’s lead at 7.4 points, 51.1 to 43.7 percent. But that’s a less discriminating measure, including as it does some mediocre surveys, some that seemed congenitally slanted toward one side or the other, and some that would be better utilized lining hamster cages
Saw it last night - very good, stellar cast. Crazy story. I would like to say Only in America but it probably happens everywhere at some level or other.
FPT - Tim Davie is quite right to introduce those new BBC guidelines - they are long overdue.
The question is whether management have the appetite to ensure they are enforced.
That's bollocks (if what I read is correct - big if).
BBC employees not allowed to go on Pride marches? Why the fuck not?
That's a straw man. The guidelines say that news employees should not attend any marches or demonstrations on controversial issues. That wouldn't include a LGBT BBC employee attending a pride march in a private capacity. That would cover a BBC employee attending a political march for gender self-identification for trans rights and then publicly tweeting or being interviewed about it. Common sense.
Most employers have clauses about bringing their employer into disrepute. The BBC lives or dies on its impartiality rules and the loose social media and offline activities of a small number of BBC employees have tainted the corporation's reputation.
This is some just the faux outrage of some existing BBC employees who want to discredit the guidelines before they come in so they can continue to have their cake and eat it.
Quiz question for the future, who were the other 3 Labour Leaders?
"Steven Fielding @PolProfSteve Turns out Jeremy Corbyn is the 4th Labour leader to lose his party’s whip, which says quite a lot about the highly contested nature of the party’s identity. And that struggle is hardly over."
Quiz question for the future, who were the other 3 Labour Leaders?
"Steven Fielding @PolProfSteve Turns out Jeremy Corbyn is the 4th Labour leader to lose his party’s whip, which says quite a lot about the highly contested nature of the party’s identity. And that struggle is hardly over."
FUMING fans have slammed Sports Personality of the Year for snubbing Jermain Defoe despite his overwhelming support for Bradley Lowery.
The Bournemouth striker struck up a heartwarming friendship with Bradley and was left devastated by the six-year-old's death in July.
Like I said yesterday, don't count on Rashford making the it to the starting line.
On the debate we had a few days back about women being represented on the shortlist, this article makes a case for the greatest cricketer of all time actually being a woman:
Latest CNN story on early voting is interesting. The Republicans have significantly cut the Democrats early voter lead in Noirth Carolina, Nevada, Iowa and Florida. It iseems to be a continuing process andcould well see them home by Tuesday night. Tends to support the polls from those States that have been conducted by Trafalgar. Think Mike you must now saaeriously reflect that Trump will win, however much it may pain..
FPT - Tim Davie is quite right to introduce those new BBC guidelines - they are long overdue.
The question is whether management have the appetite to ensure they are enforced.
That's bollocks (if what I read is correct - big if).
BBC employees not allowed to go on Pride marches? Why the fuck not?
That's a straw man. The guidelines say that news employees should not attend any marches or demonstrations on controversial issues. That wouldn't include a LGBT BBC employee attending a pride march in a private capacity. That would cover a BBC employee attending a political march for gender self-identification for trans rights and then publicly tweeting or being interviewed about it. Common sense.
Most employers have clauses about bringing their employer into disrepute. The BBC lives or dies on its impartiality rules and the loose social media and offline activities of a small number of BBC employees have tainted the corporation's reputation.
This is some just the faux outrage of some existing BBC employees who want to discredit the guidelines before they come in so they can continue to have their cake and eat it.
I was reading your description to see the "oh yes that makes sense" bit. But there was none.
"news employees should not attend any marches or demonstrations on controversial issues".
WTF is a controversial issue? And it says (you write): "attend" not "liveblog on behalf of the rebel alliance".
Get a grip man what possible problem would you have with Evan Davis "attending" a gay pride march?
Geoffrey Skeller of 538 looks at the marginal movements in the battleground states of PA FL OH and GA that are slowly trending to Biden. Georgia of particular note :
Yes, that's a good article and shows that the gap between the contestants is not diminishing even at this late stage.
I think Mike is right however that the odds are unlikely to change much before counting starts which is a bit of a puzzle. What does an elder statesman like yourself make of it all?
Personally I'm inclined to use Occam's razor and say the punters are just dumb, and have been spooked by 2016 but I wonder if your vast experience suggests a different reason.
My dear Deputy TOTY I'm of the view that many punters are still suffering from 2016 PTSD whilst others see too many parallels with that election that are not there.
It's like saying the winner of Wimbledon four years ago is in the same match up today despite have a different opponent and a rain storm has broken through the retractable roof. I am of course watching from the royal box as Biden is serving for the match at 5:4 and 15:0. Biden is heavy favourite but Trump still has a shot at the title .... oh .... 30:0 ... Trump just missed a backhand(er) down the line and hit the umpire ....
FPT - Tim Davie is quite right to introduce those new BBC guidelines - they are long overdue.
The question is whether management have the appetite to ensure they are enforced.
That's bollocks (if what I read is correct - big if).
BBC employees not allowed to go on Pride marches? Why the fuck not?
That's a straw man. The guidelines say that news employees should not attend any marches or demonstrations on controversial issues. That wouldn't include a LGBT BBC employee attending a pride march in a private capacity. That would cover a BBC employee attending a political march for gender self-identification for trans rights and then publicly tweeting or being interviewed about it. Common sense.
Most employers have clauses about bringing their employer into disrepute. The BBC lives or dies on its impartiality rules and the loose social media and offline activities of a small number of BBC employees have tainted the corporation's reputation.
This is some just the faux outrage of some existing BBC employees who want to discredit the guidelines before they come in so they can continue to have their cake and eat it.
Define a controversial issue?
I just did in my post - did you read it?
Sure, there will be grey areas - there always are in life. That's why BBC employees should check with their bosses first if they're not sure.
I post nothing political on LinkedIn in my professional life, under my real name, and I use a pseudonym on here when engaging on political discussion. Same on Twitter too. It really isn't that hard.
The issue here is that far too many BBC employees want to use the high-profile the BBC has given them to push causes and views that matter to them, and are very (sometimes deliberately) careless in how they do it.
Republican voters vote on average later than Democrat ones, so why are the Rs talking about not counting late postal votes?
Rs are considerably more likely to request a mail ballot and drop it off on in person either early or on election day (state laws permitting), especially this year.
Late-arriving mail is far more likely to be Dem, and the place where voter fraud is most likely to occur, because campaigns know who has voted and how many votes they need.
Ah that makes sense and I can see why they want to ban it now.
I've not seen a plausible reason that the Democrats get so many more votes by post than in person.
Historically, they haven't. The gap has opened quite recently.
One reason is that four of the five states to have moved to postal only voting are Democrat states, so by definition this shifts the balance a bit (and incidentally there's no evidence of the move to postal only in these areas benefitting Democrats). Another is that Trump has been extremely critical of postal voting so Republicans are less likely to trust the system. Another is that Democrats are generally much more worried about COVID and less keen to queue to vote. Another is that many cities have relatively few, relatively busy voting places (hence pictures of queues) often because GOP state governments sometimes want to suppress turnout in cities, which tend to vote Democrat. Some voters in those areas react by opting for the convenience of postal voting.
"Boris Johnson is not the leader I want to have for my country."
That is a sentiment 79 percent of Scottish swing voters agree with, making it the biggest factor driving those on the fence in Scotland towards backing independence. https://t.co/fWHpqCpRCU
Re.this new indy poll - surely the most simple conclusion here is that Johnson needs to go sooner rather than later? Whether that's quite twigged in the Tory party yet..
It is one of the factors why I want to see Boris replaced asap
My wife and I value the union greatly
The Union is doomed. That ship has sailed.
Despite the various incompetencies and scandals the SNP is going to have a romping win next year, and a further referendum is inevitable, the only question is timing.
BoZo is particularly unpopular North of the border, but I don't think that the Scots want to be ruled by English Nationalists any longer.
If you want to preserve the Union, the best chance is a Labour government, which would be slightly less toxic north of the Tweed.
Are you still remaining bullish for Trump @HYUFD ?
I think it could be the closest election since 2000, Biden will win the popular vote but while he will pick up Wisconsin and maybe Iowa and Arizona I think Trump could still win Michigan and Pennsylvania where Trafalgar still has him ahead and North Carolina, where the Republicans are closing the voting gap with the CNN poll and Trump will win Ohio.
Latest CNN story on early voting is interesting. The Republicans have significantly cut the Democrats early voter lead in Noirth Carolina, Nevada, Iowa and Florida. It iseems to be a continuing process andcould well see them home by Tuesday night. Tends to support the polls from those States that have been conducted by Trafalgar. Think Mike you must now saaeriously reflect that Trump will win, however much it may pain..
Trafalgar do not conduct polls they make numbers up.
FPT - Tim Davie is quite right to introduce those new BBC guidelines - they are long overdue.
The question is whether management have the appetite to ensure they are enforced.
That's bollocks (if what I read is correct - big if).
BBC employees not allowed to go on Pride marches? Why the fuck not?
That's a straw man. The guidelines say that news employees should not attend any marches or demonstrations on controversial issues. That wouldn't include a LGBT BBC employee attending a pride march in a private capacity. That would cover a BBC employee attending a political march for gender self-identification for trans rights and then publicly tweeting or being interviewed about it. Common sense.
Most employers have clauses about bringing their employer into disrepute. The BBC lives or dies on its impartiality rules and the loose social media and offline activities of a small number of BBC employees have tainted the corporation's reputation.
This is some just the faux outrage of some existing BBC employees who want to discredit the guidelines before they come in so they can continue to have their cake and eat it.
I was reading your description to see the "oh yes that makes sense" bit. But there was none.
"news employees should not attend any marches or demonstrations on controversial issues".
WTF is a controversial issue? And it says (you write): "attend" not "liveblog on behalf of the rebel alliance".
Get a grip man what possible problem would you have with Evan Davis "attending" a gay pride march?
You obviously didn't read my post very well, as I addressed your Evan Davis point in my third sentence. I also gave an example of a demonstration on a controversial issue which would be directly against existing government policy.
This looks to me like issue where you've already made your mind up, and aren't going to change it regardless of the arguments that are put to you.
Good Morning everyone. This is getting to be like British elections were, apparently, before the secret ballot. Big poster up, men going up and putting a cross beside their favoured candidate and someone keeping a tally.
IIRC, too at the beginning of the 20thC voting in UK was over several days, and some constituencies declared while others were still voting.
What was that about a functioning democracy? Shall be very glad when (if ever) this is all over!
This American system is stupid. TBH I agree with the GOP challenges that election day is the cut-off to ballots being accepted - how bloody long do people want to vote?
Bit late in the day to change that (as happened with a court ruling in Minnesota yesterday) when it's printed on the postal ballot that it will be counted if returned, postmarked by election day.
The point about all these arguments is that they're not conducted in a vacuum. If there were plentiful polling places for everyone on or before election day, and provision for absentee voting which wasn't actively hampered, then you would be right.
I have little doubt that a Democratic administration with control of both houses will bring in legislation to try to bring in rational rules across the nation. And no doubt that Republicans will try to stop it.
The GOP will use their 6-3 SCOTUS majority to get any laws to improve elections thrown out
Which would give the Dems an excuse to pack the SC.
By the time the Dems had passed a beefy Voting Rights Act, a legal challenge had been brought, the SCOTUS had heard the case, and SCOTUS had gutted it in a ruling, isn't there a significant risk the Dems would no longer have the votes to pack the court? Whether they add more justices or not it seems to me the Dems need to make that decision immediately.
Republican voters vote on average later than Democrat ones, so why are the Rs talking about not counting late postal votes?
Rs are considerably more likely to request a mail ballot and drop it off on in person either early or on election day (state laws permitting), especially this year.
Late-arriving mail is far more likely to be Dem, and the place where voter fraud is most likely to occur, because campaigns know who has voted and how many votes they need.
Ah that makes sense and I can see why they want to ban it now.
I've not seen a plausible reason that the Democrats get so many more votes by post than in person.
Historically, they haven't. The gap has opened quite recently.
One reason is that four of the five states to have moved to postal only voting are Democrat states, so by definition this shifts the balance a bit (and incidentally there's no evidence of the move to postal only in these areas benefitting Democrats). Another is that Trump has been extremely critical of postal voting so Republicans are less likely to trust the system. Another is that Democrats are generally much more worried about COVID and less keen to queue to vote. Another is that many cities have relatively few, relatively busy voting places (hence pictures of queues) often because GOP state governments sometimes want to suppress turnout in cities, which tend to vote Democrat. Some voters in those areas react by opting for the convenience of postal voting.
Enough plausible reasons for you?
The Democrats do better than Republicans by postal votes than in person in all states, not just postal voting only states or states run by Republicans.
This has happened for several elections so it can't be Trump and also happened before the pandemic, so that can't the reason either.
Republican voters vote on average later than Democrat ones, so why are the Rs talking about not counting late postal votes?
Rs are considerably more likely to request a mail ballot and drop it off on in person either early or on election day (state laws permitting), especially this year.
Late-arriving mail is far more likely to be Dem, and the place where voter fraud is most likely to occur, because campaigns know who has voted and how many votes they need.
Ah that makes sense and I can see why they want to ban it now.
I've not seen a plausible reason that the Democrats get so many more votes by post than in person.
Surely you can something when you can prove there's a problem not just think it might exist because of your partisan position?
That said I'm not persuaded counting late arrival is a great idea, and feels like bolting on unnecessary procedures which delay things rather than addressing the issues which cause there to be so many late arrivals.
I can't prove it and I'm not sure it happens on a big enough scale to matter, but it just seems very strange that the Democrats do so much better than the Republicans with postal votes. I read somewhere that they're leading 75% to 25% in some states on postal ballots, that seems crazy and is suspicious IMO.
You can point to the pandemic this time, but it's been a growing pattern for several elections.
Edit: Ah you meant the Republicans, well I agree that they need clearer evidence before taking action.
The Democrats have been telling all their supporters to vote early by mail all year due to Covid and avoiding queues. Republicans on the other hand do not trust mail, particularly in states with Democratic governors like Pennsylvania, which I think is the state you are referring to.
It's like saying the winner of Wimbledon four years ago is in the same match up today despite have a different opponent and a rain storm has broken through the retractable roof. I am of course watching from the royal box as Biden is serving for the match at 5:4 and 15:0. Biden is heavy favourite but Trump still has a shot at the title .... oh .... 30:0 ... Trump just missed a backhand(er) down the line and hit the umpire ....
Welcome back, Jack.
The beauty of tennis, and what makes it perfect in your analogy, is that the current score is in some sense irrelevant.
If one player wins the openings sets to love and and 40-0 up in the sixth game of a deciding set to love, it is still possible for their opponent to win.
"Boris Johnson is not the leader I want to have for my country."
That is a sentiment 79 percent of Scottish swing voters agree with, making it the biggest factor driving those on the fence in Scotland towards backing independence. https://t.co/fWHpqCpRCU
Re.this new indy poll - surely the most simple conclusion here is that Johnson needs to go sooner rather than later? Whether that's quite twigged in the Tory party yet..
It is one of the factors why I want to see Boris replaced asap
My wife and I value the union greatly
The Union is doomed. That ship has sailed.
Despite the various incompetencies and scandals the SNP is going to have a romping win next year, and a further referendum is inevitable, the only question is timing.
BoZo is particularly unpopular North of the border, but I don't think that the Scots want to be ruled by English Nationalists any longer.
If you want to preserve the Union, the best chance is a Labour government, which would be slightly less toxic north of the Tweed.
Agreed. Unfortunately, there's unlikely to be one in time to save the Union.
We should start working out the big issues, like what the rUK is going to be called. Surely anything with 'United' in the title is going to look like satire.
"Boris Johnson is not the leader I want to have for my country."
That is a sentiment 79 percent of Scottish swing voters agree with, making it the biggest factor driving those on the fence in Scotland towards backing independence. https://t.co/fWHpqCpRCU
Re.this new indy poll - surely the most simple conclusion here is that Johnson needs to go sooner rather than later? Whether that's quite twigged in the Tory party yet..
It is one of the factors why I want to see Boris replaced asap
My wife and I value the union greatly
The Union is doomed. That ship has sailed.
Despite the various incompetencies and scandals the SNP is going to have a romping win next year, and a further referendum is inevitable, the only question is timing.
BoZo is particularly unpopular North of the border, but I don't think that the Scots want to be ruled by English Nationalists any longer.
If you want to preserve the Union, the best chance is a Labour government, which would be slightly less toxic north of the Tweed.
Sunak has a +30% rating in Scotland on that poll so not all Tories are unpopular north of the border.
Plus once Scots realise independence after the UK leaves the SM and CU means a hard border with England if they rejoin the EU they oppose it
The sooner Len is thrown out of the Labour Party the better and kicked out of unite, drain the swamp now or they will never do it.
Labour would be better off breaking the formal and institutional ties with the unions. Not least because that is decreasingly their core constituency nowadays.
What will the Labour look like in 10 years time ?
What fraction of the Democratic Party's funds come from organized labor ?
I thought the great feudal overlord had already decreed on October 7th that he was keeping "his" money from a Labour Party sans Jeremy Corbyn LOTO.
OK, so that gives me a lifetime of inch-perfect Boris Johnson/Dominic Cummings Government which I can't say I am looking forward to. Sounds like that is what Len wants though.
Nutty as Chris Williamson is, I don't share the common view held by many here that this was a good move by Starmer. If anything, I think it's been his first big mis-step since becoming leader.
Nutty as Chris Williamson is, I don't share the common view held by many here that this was a good move by Starmer. If anything, I think it's been his first big mis-step since becoming leader.
Antisemitism under Corbyn was a cancer within the Labour Party.
You don't try to find a middle way of keeping a cancer within the party, you excise it. That the antisemitic Williamson wants nothing to do with Labour is progress for Starmer.
The sooner Len is thrown out of the Labour Party the better and kicked out of unite, drain the swamp now or they will never do it.
Labour would be better off breaking the formal and institutional ties with the unions. Not least because that is decreasingly their core constituency nowadays.
What will the Labour look like in 10 years time ?
What fraction of the Democratic Party's funds come from organized labor ?
I thought the great feudal overlord had already decreed on October 7th that he was keeping "his" money from a Labour Party sans Jeremy Corbyn LOTO.
OK, so that gives me a lifetime of inch-perfect Boris Johnson/Dominic Cummings Government which I can't say I am looking forward to. Sounds like that is what Len wants though.
I guess I was interested in whether the UK would morph slowly America-wards.
And we will end up with two broad parties with not a huge amount of difference between them (OK, Trump is an exception), both funded largely by wealthy corporations & individuals.
I think historically organized labor was important to the Democratic Party, but probably no longer.
Rishi Sunak however on an astonishing +30% rating in Scotland
'with Scottish swing voters'
Who decide Scottish elections
I think it's the 58% who say that they'll vote for the SNP that'll decide the next Scottish election, unless you have some Trafalgarian arithmetical formula that is going to change that?
Rishi Sunak however on an astonishing +30% rating in Scotland
'with Scottish swing voters'
Who decide Scottish elections
I think it's the 58% who say that they'll vote for the SNP that'll decide the next Scottish election, unless you have some Trafalgarian arithmetical formula that is going to change that?
Its OK he's moved on to a push poll that says if you ask a series of leading questions first then there's a tiny No majority after the leading questions were asked.
I think what's going on are the following beliefs:
1. Normalcy bias.
The belief is that because something happened in 2016 it will repeat again. There's no evidence for this. Not a scrap. But that doesn't stop people.
2. That people lean to the Right
Because some recent elections have produced surprise results on the Right, there is an assumption that when push comes to shove people generally veer that way. There's probably more truth in this.
3. Personal preference
I suspect a lot of punters are themselves right-leaning. Not all, obviously, but I think in many cases the money is coming from people who 'want' a Trump victory. This is a more theoretical explanation and I'm not wedded to it.
Re (3), yes, but imo more the other way. People who hate Trump and can barely contemplate the prospect of another 4 years betting on him to win due to their fear and innate pessimism. The emotional hedge. I had to fight this in myself to go with my stronger and long held feeling that he is unelectable this time, is the very epitome of a one term president, this intuition of mine now thankfully backed up by the polling. I'm still nervous, but not very. I think it's about the margin not who wins. And on this, my view is still that it will not be close and Trump will be less than 200 in the EC.
Nutty as Chris Williamson is, I don't share the common view held by many here that this was a good move by Starmer. If anything, I think it's been his first big mis-step since becoming leader.
Rishi Sunak however on an astonishing +30% rating in Scotland
'with Scottish swing voters'
Who decide Scottish elections
I think it's the 58% who say that they'll vote for the SNP that'll decide the next Scottish election, unless you have some Trafalgarian arithmetical formula that is going to change that?
Postal votes from people who identify as Scots but live in England or Wales?
The sooner Len is thrown out of the Labour Party the better and kicked out of unite, drain the swamp now or they will never do it.
Labour would be better off breaking the formal and institutional ties with the unions. Not least because that is decreasingly their core constituency nowadays.
What will the Labour look like in 10 years time ?
What fraction of the Democratic Party's funds come from organized labor ?
I thought the great feudal overlord had already decreed on October 7th that he was keeping "his" money from a Labour Party sans Jeremy Corbyn LOTO.
OK, so that gives me a lifetime of inch-perfect Boris Johnson/Dominic Cummings Government which I can't say I am looking forward to. Sounds like that is what Len wants though.
I guess I was interested in whether the UK would morph slowly America-wards.
And we will end up with two broad parties with not a huge amount of difference between them (OK, Trump is an exception), both funded largely by wealthy corporations & individuals.
I think historically organized labor was important to the Democratic Party, but probably no longer.
In France of course Macron now leads in effect a liberal party in En Marche having been Hollande's Finance Minister while the Left align with Melenchon and the remainder of the Socialist Party. In Canada too the NDP are to the left of Trudeau's Liberals, in Germany there is a hard left Die Linke Party to the left of the centre left SPD it is possible you could end up with Starmer and the LDs combining and leaving the Old Labour Party to breakaway, especially if we ever got electoral reform
Nutty as Chris Williamson is, I don't share the common view held by many here that this was a good move by Starmer. If anything, I think it's been his first big mis-step since becoming leader.
Antisemitism under Corbyn was a cancer within the Labour Party.
You don't try to find a middle way of keeping a cancer within the party, you excise it. That the antisemitic Williamson wants nothing to do with Labour is progress for Starmer.
He's a real threat to win the next election.
Williamson is a loon ; but Starmer stands to lose a lot more by this action than to gain. Rather than coaxing a party with a still heavily leftwing membership in his direction, he now faces the prospect of multiple kinds of acrimony. For the sake of party unity, and also to a certain extent I think in terms of strict accuracy, he would have done better to make an example of people with objectionable views still in the party, rather than Corbyn himself, who has been largely negligent and irresponsible on this particular issue rather than a hate-monger.
After six months of Starmer ascendency, the press story is now going to shift for a while from Tory incompetence to Labour splits, and Starmer is going to lose more supporters than he gains. I would expect to see Labour dip a little in the polls and see some slippage to the Greens and others, and if I was at in the higher reaches of Labour, personally, I would be thinking of some way to steady the ship.
Geoffrey Skeller of 538 looks at the marginal movements in the battleground states of PA FL OH and GA that are slowly trending to Biden. Georgia of particular note :
Yes, that's a good article and shows that the gap between the contestants is not diminishing even at this late stage.
I think Mike is right however that the odds are unlikely to change much before counting starts which is a bit of a puzzle. What does an elder statesman like yourself make of it all?
Personally I'm inclined to use Occam's razor and say the punters are just dumb, and have been spooked by 2016 but I wonder if your vast experience suggests a different reason.
My dear Deputy TOTY I'm of the view that many punters are still suffering from 2016 PTSD whilst others see too many parallels with that election that are not there.
It's like saying the winner of Wimbledon four years ago is in the same match up today despite have a different opponent and a rain storm has broken through the retractable roof. I am of course watching from the royal box as Biden is serving for the match at 5:4 and 15:0. Biden is heavy favourite but Trump still has a shot at the title .... oh .... 30:0 ... Trump just missed a backhand(er) down the line and hit the umpire ....
Nice analogy, Old Timer. Good to see you haven't lost your touch.
It's ironic the man charged with rescuing it is Gove, who accurately characterized the damage BoZo would do...
I don't think the union is doomed, and the pandemic coupled with Johnson and a lack of focus on the practicalities discussed re. Hard border/ currency/ economy are all helping the SNP. I don't disagree that The UK government seems to be doing its best to doom it - if the Tories truly cared, they'd remove Johnson.
FPT - Tim Davie is quite right to introduce those new BBC guidelines - they are long overdue.
The question is whether management have the appetite to ensure they are enforced.
That's bollocks (if what I read is correct - big if).
BBC employees not allowed to go on Pride marches? Why the fuck not?
That's a straw man. The guidelines say that news employees should not attend any marches or demonstrations on controversial issues. That wouldn't include a LGBT BBC employee attending a pride march in a private capacity. That would cover a BBC employee attending a political march for gender self-identification for trans rights and then publicly tweeting or being interviewed about it. Common sense.
Most employers have clauses about bringing their employer into disrepute. The BBC lives or dies on its impartiality rules and the loose social media and offline activities of a small number of BBC employees have tainted the corporation's reputation.
This is some just the faux outrage of some existing BBC employees who want to discredit the guidelines before they come in so they can continue to have their cake and eat it.
I was reading your description to see the "oh yes that makes sense" bit. But there was none.
"news employees should not attend any marches or demonstrations on controversial issues".
WTF is a controversial issue? And it says (you write): "attend" not "liveblog on behalf of the rebel alliance".
Get a grip man what possible problem would you have with Evan Davis "attending" a gay pride march?
You obviously didn't read my post very well, as I addressed your Evan Davis point in my third sentence. I also gave an example of a demonstration on a controversial issue which would be directly against existing government policy.
This looks to me like issue where you've already made your mind up, and aren't going to change it regardless of the arguments that are put to you.
But your interpretation is just that. Your interpretation. To make you feel better, presumably, otherwise even you would realise how absurd it is.
The sentence you started off with was as follows:
"news employees should not attend any marches or demonstrations on controversial issues".
And here's how it is being reported:
"In addition to strict new social media guidelines, Davie introduced a ban on the broadcaster’s news reporters taking part in “public demonstrations or gatherings about controversial issues” even when not marching under an identifiable BBC banner."
Rishi Sunak however on an astonishing +30% rating in Scotland
'with Scottish swing voters'
Who decide Scottish elections
I think it's the 58% who say that they'll vote for the SNP that'll decide the next Scottish election, unless you have some Trafalgarian arithmetical formula that is going to change that?
That total includes Scottish swing voters, some of them could easily swing back to Unionist parties given the right Unionist leadership
Comments
But if course, that 9 times out of 10 (this is an example not analysis) people can guess the outcome for a justice based on political leanings in political cases is just coincidence and it's all about legal philosophy and precedent
My wife and I value the union greatly
The question is whether management have the appetite to ensure they are enforced.
I think Mike is right however that the odds are unlikely to change much before counting starts which is a bit of a puzzle. What does an elder statesman like yourself make of it all?
Personally I'm inclined to use Occam's razor and say the punters are just dumb, and have been spooked by 2016 but I wonder if your vast experience suggests a different reason.
That said I'm not persuaded counting late arrival is a great idea, and feels like bolting on unnecessary procedures which delay things rather than addressing the issues which cause there to be so many late arrivals.
What fraction of the Democratic Party's funds come from organized labor ?
Which would give the Dems an excuse to pack the SC.
https://www.nationaljournal.com/s/711037?unlock=SRT6SBVCJHPBFJTS
I know they don't do it every time, they're human after all, and there are limits, and it hasn't always been so bad, but when you pick people that way it seems inevitable. Even if they try hard not to act so the way they are chosen and why limits them mentally.
Have I got that right?
In 2020 Trump is 2/1 and he should be 6/1
"Our hotel, which we picked without much thought from our travel operator’s website, is filled largely with overweight high-risk over-60s Britons. Judging from the accents, most are Tier 2 and 3 refugees who’ve had enough of Project Fear."
(Telegraph)
BBC employees not allowed to go on Pride marches? Why the fuck not?
https://twitter.com/jackblack/status/1320983476313624578
'I’d say he has a 10-15% chance of winning. That’s not no hope, but it is low hope. Last time it was put at 25-30%, so his chances have halved.'
Unusually slack math from you, dear Doctor!
A 25% chance is one in four. A 10% chance is one in ten. That isn't half, young man.
Stay behind after school and write out fifty times: Donald Trump is stuffed.
And the other - well, that remains to be seen...
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/10/29/politics/republicans-democrats-early-voting/index.html
"Steven Fielding
@PolProfSteve
Turns out Jeremy Corbyn is the 4th Labour leader to lose his party’s whip, which says quite a lot about the highly contested nature of the party’s identity. And that struggle is hardly over."
You can point to the pandemic this time, but it's been a growing pattern for several elections.
Edit: Ah you meant the Republicans, well I agree that they need clearer evidence before taking action.
If I’m wrong please demonstrate how 15% <50% of 30%.
Or alternatively, add the words ‘at least’ in front of ‘halved.’
Most employers have clauses about bringing their employer into disrepute. The BBC lives or dies on its impartiality rules and the loose social media and offline activities of a small number of BBC employees have tainted the corporation's reputation.
This is some just the faux outrage of some existing BBC employees who want to discredit the guidelines before they come in so they can continue to have their cake and eat it.
https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1322009056983339009?s=20
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5014051/sports-personality-of-the-year-2017-snubs-jermain-defoe-bradley-lowery/
FUMING fans have slammed Sports Personality of the Year for snubbing Jermain Defoe despite his overwhelming support for Bradley Lowery.
The Bournemouth striker struck up a heartwarming friendship with Bradley and was left devastated by the six-year-old's death in July.
Like I said yesterday, don't count on Rashford making the it to the starting line.
Can't possibly think who he means
Saw it last night - very good, stellar cast. Crazy story. I would like to say Only in America but it probably happens everywhere at some level or other.
https://es.pn/37TRPQC
Think Mike you must now saaeriously reflect that Trump will win, however much it may pain..
"news employees should not attend any marches or demonstrations on controversial issues".
WTF is a controversial issue? And it says (you write): "attend" not "liveblog on behalf of the rebel alliance".
Get a grip man what possible problem would you have with Evan Davis "attending" a gay pride march?
https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1322102613949796352?s=20
https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1322102615954591744?s=20
It's like saying the winner of Wimbledon four years ago is in the same match up today despite have a different opponent and a rain storm has broken through the retractable roof. I am of course watching from the royal box as Biden is serving for the match at 5:4 and 15:0. Biden is heavy favourite but Trump still has a shot at the title .... oh .... 30:0 ... Trump just missed a backhand(er) down the line and hit the umpire ....
Sure, there will be grey areas - there always are in life. That's why BBC employees should check with their bosses first if they're not sure.
I post nothing political on LinkedIn in my professional life, under my real name, and I use a pseudonym on here when engaging on political discussion. Same on Twitter too. It really isn't that hard.
The issue here is that far too many BBC employees want to use the high-profile the BBC has given them to push causes and views that matter to them, and are very (sometimes deliberately) careless in how they do it.
It's brought the BBC into disrepute.
One reason is that four of the five states to have moved to postal only voting are Democrat states, so by definition this shifts the balance a bit (and incidentally there's no evidence of the move to postal only in these areas benefitting Democrats). Another is that Trump has been extremely critical of postal voting so Republicans are less likely to trust the system. Another is that Democrats are generally much more worried about COVID and less keen to queue to vote. Another is that many cities have relatively few, relatively busy voting places (hence pictures of queues) often because GOP state governments sometimes want to suppress turnout in cities, which tend to vote Democrat. Some voters in those areas react by opting for the convenience of postal voting.
Enough plausible reasons for you?
Despite the various incompetencies and scandals the SNP is going to have a romping win next year, and a further referendum is inevitable, the only question is timing.
BoZo is particularly unpopular North of the border, but I don't think that the Scots want to be ruled by English Nationalists any longer.
If you want to preserve the Union, the best chance is a Labour government, which would be slightly less toxic north of the Tweed.
It would then all come down to Florida, again
This looks to me like issue where you've already made your mind up, and aren't going to change it regardless of the arguments that are put to you.
This has happened for several elections so it can't be Trump and also happened before the pandemic, so that can't the reason either.
The beauty of tennis, and what makes it perfect in your analogy, is that the current score is in some sense irrelevant.
If one player wins the openings sets to love and and 40-0 up in the sixth game of a deciding set to love, it is still possible for their opponent to win.
We should start working out the big issues, like what the rUK is going to be called. Surely anything with 'United' in the title is going to look like satire.
Plus once Scots realise independence after the UK leaves the SM and CU means a hard border with England if they rejoin the EU they oppose it
https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/poll-most-scots-would-reject-independence-after-considering-issues-2976093
Unsurprisingly, the posters from the English Midlands did not.
OK, so that gives me a lifetime of inch-perfect Boris Johnson/Dominic Cummings Government which I can't say I am looking forward to. Sounds like that is what Len wants though.
It might be he gets a *special* award at SPOTY, rather than SPOTY directly himself.
So, you could bet on him for SPOTY and lose as Hamilton gets it but Rashford gets the special award.
https://twitter.com/DAaronovitch/status/1321853848420495365?s=20
You don't try to find a middle way of keeping a cancer within the party, you excise it. That the antisemitic Williamson wants nothing to do with Labour is progress for Starmer.
He's a real threat to win the next election.
And we will end up with two broad parties with not a huge amount of difference between them (OK, Trump is an exception), both funded largely by wealthy corporations & individuals.
I think historically organized labor was important to the Democratic Party, but probably no longer.
After six months of Starmer ascendency, the press story is now going to shift for a while from Tory incompetence to Labour splits, and Starmer is going to lose more supporters than he gains. I would expect to see Labour dip a little in the polls and see some slippage to the Greens and others, and if I was at in the higher reaches of Labour, personally, I would be thinking of some way to steady the ship.
That's odd. I tend to just glance at the front page, and there's nothing about France on it.
The sentence you started off with was as follows:
"news employees should not attend any marches or demonstrations on controversial issues".
And here's how it is being reported:
"In addition to strict new social media guidelines, Davie introduced a ban on the broadcaster’s news reporters taking part in “public demonstrations or gatherings about controversial issues” even when not marching under an identifiable BBC banner."
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/oct/29/bbc-no-bias-rules-prevent-staff-joining-lgbt-pride-protests