Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Could the Tory 41% Bexley majority really be in danger? – politicalbetting.com

1235

Comments

  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 38,502
    edited November 2021
    MaxPB said:

    I agree with your latter point, but it clearly isn't the law in the US and you're falling into the same trap as so many others. The law isn't the same as moral right and wrong, it's the law. UK law has the concept of mens rea, I don't think the US law really covers it to the same degree as over here. Maybe it's time for a constitutional amendment to allow prosecution of intent to commit a crime.
    The law of self-defence in most US States is theoretically similar to our own. It's just that the right to bear arms makes it very different in practice.

    Either of Rittenhouse, or those who died at his hands, could have opened fire and have had a strong argument for self defence,

    As to this trial, no conscientious jury could do otherwise than acquit him of the three most serious charges.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,227
    Sean_F said:

    The law of self-defence in most US States is theoretically similar to our own. It's just that the right to bear arms makes it very different in practice.

    Either of Rittenhouse, or those who died at his hands, could have opened fire and have had a strong argument for self defence,

    As to this trial, no conscientious jury could do otherwise than acquit him of the three most serious charges.
    Wisconsin law at least looks like it has a stronger self defence provision than our own law. "lethal force" compared to our "reasonable force".
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 22,203
    Biden’s statement is regrettable, but hardly on a par with Trump. Get some perspective.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 59,376
    Pulpstar said:

    We have video, shown in court, that he pointed the gun at them before they started chasing him.

    Haven't seen that video myself, certainly nothing particularly clear.
    There was drone footage that was a little damning that the prosecution wanted to get thrown out.

    But it doesn't really matter. Rittenhouse was a dick. But he was also genuinely afraid for his life. He panicked and shot people.

    The solution is not to claim he was some kind of Uber Fuhrer, but to try to discourage people from taking guns to riots.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 59,782
    MaxPB said:

    It's a really rubbish statement, Trump undermined the election system, Biden is undermining the judicial system. What the fuck is he thinking.
    I cannot think of a statement better designed to alienate floating ‘white’ voters. Those people in the suburbs who went republican in Virginia

    This is Biden saying ‘yes I agree it is bad a white man is acquitted, and I am as angry as you’

    It’s like something from South Africa, pre or post apartheid
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,819
    Sean_F said:

    The law of self-defence in most US States is theoretically similar to our own. It's just that the right to bear arms makes it very different in practice.

    Either of Rittenhouse, or those who died at his hands, could have opened fire and have had a strong argument for self defence,

    As to this trial, no conscientious jury could do otherwise than acquit him of the three most serious charges.
    After the prosecution witness blew the case with his statement that yes, he was pointing a gun at the accused and advancing menacingly the case was all done. If Rittenhouse had shot these guys in the back while they were walking away it's an open and shut case and that the case the prosecution wanted to make, but sadly for them the jury has eyes and ears.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,227
    edited November 2021
    rcs1000 said:

    There was drone footage that was a little damning that the prosecution wanted to get thrown out.

    But it doesn't really matter. Rittenhouse was a dick. But he was also genuinely afraid for his life. He panicked and shot people.

    The solution is not to claim he was some kind of Uber Fuhrer, but to try to discourage people from taking guns to riots.
    The drone footage re strap/gun was clear as mud.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 26,622
    edited November 2021
    Interesting lack of reaction on the criminalisation of political Hamas, alongside military Hamas, in the UK.

    I think we were the last outlier relying on the Foreign Office's machiavellian categories, and we are now in line with the rest of the West.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,819

    Biden’s statement is regrettable, but hardly on a par with Trump. Get some perspective.

    I don't think they're equivalent as Trump very nearly totally destroyed American democracy. I worry that the Biden statement will sufficiently undermine the judiciary and cause riots across the US where the validity of the result is less important than their feelings or upset, the president agrees with them.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 22,203
    MaxPB said:

    I don't think they're equivalent as Trump very nearly totally destroyed American democracy. I worry that the Biden statement will sufficiently undermine the judiciary and cause riots across the US where the validity of the result is less important than their feelings or upset, the president agrees with them.
    I think it’s irresponsible.
    Mind you I thought the May government said a lot of irresponsible things about judicial process too.
  • As sending a dick pic is technically a criminal offence in the UK, and probably also in Oz, he seems an ideal guy to lead the convicts.
    The trouble with Australia is not that it is run by the descendants of convicts, but that it is run by the descendants of prison officers.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 22,203
    Having considered for a moment, I agree with the poster (Leon?) who said it is also politically stupid.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 34,295
    tlg86 said:

    Pretty appalling statement by Biden.

    GOP shouldn't have any difficulty winning both houses next year.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,227
    edited November 2021
    MaxPB said:

    I don't think they're equivalent as Trump very nearly totally destroyed American democracy. I worry that the Biden statement will sufficiently undermine the judiciary and cause riots across the US where the validity of the result is less important than their feelings or upset, the president agrees with them.
    The Venn diagram of Biden voters & people that think Rittenhouse acted in self defence is slim in the USA, and probably the ones he needs to keep onside for re-election...
    Midterms are long gone for the Dems.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 59,782

    Having considered for a moment, I agree with the poster (Leon?) who said it is also politically stupid.

    It is so politically stupid I wonder if Biden even said it. He’s quite away with the fairies, sad to say.

    Perhaps some ultra-woke member of his staff?

    Either way, an egregious, foolish and potentially dangerous error
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,819
    Leon said:

    It is so politically stupid I wonder if Biden even said it. He’s quite away with the fairies, sad to say.

    Perhaps some ultra-woke member of his staff?

    Either way, an egregious, foolish and potentially dangerous error
    Or maybe he is concerned and upset?
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 34,295
    dixiedean said:

    Not sure what relevance Rittenhouse has for the UK.
    As we don't allow folk to wander around with guns, riot or no.
    Let's keep it that way.

    True, American divisiveness should have nothing to do with anything over here.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 22,203
    MaxPB said:

    Or maybe he is concerned and upset?
    Or drowsy.

    As I noted earlier, he picked a hell of a day to have a colonoscopy.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,819

    Or drowsy.

    As I noted earlier, he picked a hell of a day to have a colonoscopy.
    Wouldn't we all be concerned and upset after a colonoscopy though?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,295
    edited November 2021
    Leon said:

    I cannot think of a statement better designed to alienate floating ‘white’ voters. Those people in the suburbs who went republican in Virginia

    This is Biden saying ‘yes I agree it is bad a white man is acquitted, and I am as angry as you’

    It’s like something from South Africa, pre or post apartheid
    I must be reading a different statement - it seems fine to me.

    Still, you culture warriors need to have something to keep stoking the anger, I guess.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 22,203
    edited November 2021
    MaxPB said:

    Wouldn't we all be concerned and upset after a colonoscopy though?
    There’s a joke in here somewhere, involving Rittenhouse, Kamala, and the colonoscopy, but I haven’t figured it out.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 9,012
     
    MaxPB said:

    Wouldn't we all be concerned and upset after a colonoscopy though?
    Depends what was seen.

  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,819

    I must be reading a different statement - it seems fine to me.

    Still you culture warriors need to have something to keep stoking the anger, I guess.
    The president has just declared himself "concerned" about the result of a jury trial. That's an extremely poor idea.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 9,012
    edited November 2021
    Actually the day before the colonoscopy would have been worse from the decision-making point of view.

    edit to explain: you must totally evacuate, which leaves you weak and often dehydrated.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 22,203

    I must be reading a different statement - it seems fine to me.

    Still, you culture warriors need to have something to keep stoking the anger, I guess.
    Ben we are fellow travellers, but the Prez shouldn’t be anywhere near criticising a jury decision.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,295
    MaxPB said:

    The president has just declared himself "concerned" about the result of a jury trial. That's an extremely poor idea.
    He also said that "we must acknowledge the jury has spoken". Which of us hasn't been angry and concerned about court verdicts?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,356

    I must be reading a different statement - it seems fine to me.

    Still, you culture warriors need to have something to keep stoking the anger, I guess.
    He, the head of the executive branch, said he was angry with the outcome of a highly sensitive trial. You can’t see the problems there?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,819

    He also said that "we must acknowledge the jury has spoken". Which of us hasn't been angry and concerned about court verdicts?
    We aren't the President though. He should ungrit his teeth as well.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 9,012

    He also said that "we must acknowledge the jury has spoken". Which of us hasn't been angry and concerned about court verdicts?
    Indeed so, but as president should he be taking sides?

  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,536

    He also said that "we must acknowledge the jury has spoken". Which of us hasn't been angry and concerned about court verdicts?
    Me.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 22,203
    RobD said:

    He, the head of the executive branch, said he was angry with the outcome of a highly sensitive trial. You can’t see the problems there?
    Also, he has a responsibility to avoid further inflaming sentiment.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,227

    He also said that "we must acknowledge the jury has spoken". Which of us hasn't been angry and concerned about court verdicts?
    No need to communicate it whilst you're the president. I don't think Biden has written the statement to be perfectly honest, looks like something from a staffer who wanted to indicate Biden is broadly on the side of the left here.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,295
    edited November 2021

    Ben we are fellow travellers, but the Prez shouldn’t be anywhere near criticising a jury decision.
    I can't agree. He's being honest.

    I cannot see it as a big deal. Certainly not even registering on the scale compared with the daily stream of effluent that was sprayed out during the Trump years.
  • I must be reading a different statement - it seems fine to me.

    Still, you culture warriors need to have something to keep stoking the anger, I guess.
    Hang on. Last year you were quite rightly attacking the Tories for attempting to undermine faith in the judiciary in this country. How come now you are happy with a US president criticising the decision of a jury trial? You and I are quite at liberty to criticise and personally I don't think any of the players came out of this trial looking good at all. But Biden is in a position of power and the last thing he should be doing is saying he is 'angry and concerned' that someone was found not guilty.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,313
    Farage, on his GB News show last night, said he’d heard Rafiq has racked up massive gambling debts
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,356

    I can't agree. He's being honest. I cannot see it as a big deal. Certainly not even registering on the scale comapred with the daily stream of effluent that was sprayed out during the Trump years.
    He should have bit his tongue, or (much more likely) sack the staffer who wrote it. It is inflammatory, and he has no business basically saying the jury was wrong.
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398
    Leon said:

    It is so politically stupid I wonder if Biden even said it. He’s quite away with the fairies, sad to say.

    Perhaps some ultra-woke member of his staff?

    Either way, an egregious, foolish and potentially dangerous error
    It would have probably been drafted for him by his staff; he signed it off probably without thinking it through. Sensible people are obviously in short supply, as was the case under Trump; there are actually many similarities between the two presidencies.

    If only we could get Obama back: much better than these clowns.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    MaxPB said:

    The president has just declared himself "concerned" about the result of a jury trial. That's an extremely poor idea.
    He didn’t though. He said “many Americans” will be concerned and angry but that the jury has spoken
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 9,012
    RobD said:

    He should have bit his tongue, or (much more likely) sack the staffer who wrote it. It is inflammatory, and he has no business basically saying the jury was wrong.
    Staffer? Wasn't Kamala in charge today? Her maybe.

  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,819


    I can't agree. He's being honest.

    I cannot see it as a big deal. Certainly not even registering on the scale compared with the daily stream of effluent that was sprayed out during the Trump years.
    Isn't the point that we're not in the Trump years now? Yet here we are with the POTUS undermining the result of a jury trial and ultimately the trial process.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,295

    Hang on. Last year you were quite rightly attacking the Tories for attempting to undermine faith in the judiciary in this country. How come now you are happy with a US president criticising the decision of a jury trial? You and I are quite at liberty to criticise and personally I don't think any of the players came out of this trial looking good at all. But Biden is in a position of power and the last thing he should be doing is saying he is 'angry and concerned' that someone was found not guilty.
    He's 'angry and concerned' but 'the jury has spoken'. He clearly accepts that the latter wins the day... no attempt to overturn or undermine that jury's decision.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 59,782
    MaxPB said:

    The president has just declared himself "concerned" about the result of a jury trial. That's an extremely poor idea.
    What’s worse, Biden made this statement about an hour after claiming he ‘hadn’t watched the trial’. So what the festering fuck is he ‘angry and concerned’ about?

    It’s so ill-advised and inflammatory I wonder if his statement was sabotaged? Either way Biden has almost no chance of being the Dem Nom in 2024
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,356
    edited November 2021
    Charles said:

    He didn’t though. He said “many Americans” will be concerned and angry but that the jury has spoken
    “… will leave many Americans concerned and angry, myself included…”
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,819
    Charles said:

    He didn’t though. He said “many Americans” will be concerned and angry but that the jury has spoken
    "While the verdict in Kenosha will leave many Americans feeling angry and concerned, myself included"

    Is the problem, Charles. He's declared himself unsatisfied with the result of a jury trial. That's a very poor idea from the President.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,819

    He's 'angry and concerned' but 'the jury has spoken'. He clearly accepts that the latter wins the day... no attempt to overturn or undermine that jury's decision.
    Then what's he concerned about?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,356
    Leon said:

    What’s worse, Biden made this statement about an hour after claiming he ‘hadn’t watched the trial’. So what the festering fuck is he ‘angry and concerned’ about?

    It’s so ill-advised and inflammatory I wonder if his statement was sabotaged? Either way Biden has almost no chance of being the Dem Nom in 2024
    He was probably told he should be concerned and angry.
  • isam said:

    Farage, on his GB News show last night, said he’d heard Rafiq has racked up massive gambling debts

    Be interesting to see if the libel suits head his way. He had better have some bloody good proof to accuse anyone, let alone a Muslim for whom gambling is strictly forbidden, of being massively in debt.

    Farage could be on very dodgy ground here.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,295
    MaxPB said:

    Isn't the point that we're not in the Trump years now? Yet here we are with the POTUS undermining the result of a jury trial and ultimately the trial process.
    No! He's not undermining it, he's expressing concern. The decision stands and is not going to be changed.

    Compare and contrast to Trump's undermining of the democratic process - now that's what I call undermining.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,227
    Leon said:

    What’s worse, Biden made this statement about an hour after claiming he ‘hadn’t watched the trial’. So what the festering fuck is he ‘angry and concerned’ about?

    It’s so ill-advised and inflammatory I wonder if his statement was sabotaged? Either way Biden has almost no chance of being the Dem Nom in 2024
    ?? Don't think that follows - people upset by the verdict and Dem primary voters are pretty much a circle.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,295
    MaxPB said:

    Then what's he concerned about?
    Same as me I guess... a man shoots two others and there's no crime committed?

    Do you honestly think there'd have been the same outcome if Rittenhouse had been black?
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 22,203

    No! He's not undermining it, he's expressing concern. The decision stands and is not going to be changed.

    Compare and contrast to Trump's undermining of the democratic process - now that's what I call undermining.
    There’s no need for a Trump comparison.

    Biden needs to respect the judicial process and to show respect for that process. That one little clause, “as do I”, is a mistake.

    It will be used against him by his enemies too, maybe for a long time.
  • He's 'angry and concerned' but 'the jury has spoken'. He clearly accepts that the latter wins the day... no attempt to overturn or undermine that jury's decision.
    Nope you don't get away with that one. It is one of those classic dog whistles you like to talk about and is designed specifically to say that he has to publicly accept the result but he thinks it is wrong and so should everyone else. You and I can say that sort of thing because we are nobodies. He can't.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,819

    Same as me I guess... a man shoots two others and there's no crime committed?

    Do you honestly think there'd have been the same outcome if Rittenhouse had been black?
    So you think the jury got it wrong then and he should have been locked up?
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,671
    With the plans for Manchester I guess it is fair to say that the Government's rail policy is literally Nonsense on Stilts.
  • Charles said:

    He didn’t though. He said “many Americans” will be concerned and angry but that the jury has spoken
    You missed out part of the quote Charles "many Americans feeling angry and concerned, myself included"
  • LeonLeon Posts: 59,782
    Farooq said:

    Lots of Biden Derangement Syndrome on here tonight.

    Actually, I think it’s more America Derangement Syndrome.

    America keeps doing crazy shit, from left and right, and it unnerves us all. It wouldn’t matter if America was Belgium or Ecuador or Norway. But it is the primary global superpower (for now, if not much longer) and the defender of western freedom. It is all very sad
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,227

    You missed out part of the quote Charles "many Americans feeling angry and concerned, myself included"
    Thing is you exclude ,myself included, and the statement is absolubtely 100% fine.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 34,295

    No! He's not undermining it, he's expressing concern. The decision stands and is not going to be changed.

    Compare and contrast to Trump's undermining of the democratic process - now that's what I call undermining.
    Maybe it would be better for elected politicians to not comment at all on trial verdicts.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,536

    Same as me I guess... a man shoots two others and there's no crime committed?

    Do you honestly think there'd have been the same outcome if Rittenhouse had been black?
    OJ.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,295
    edited November 2021
    MaxPB said:

    So you think the jury got it wrong then and he should have been locked up?
    I think the process got it wrong, yes. I think the jury was carefully selected, the judge's directions were biased, and the prosecution was poor.

    I ask again: what do you honestly think the trial outcome would have been had Rittenhouse been black?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,554
    edited November 2021
    Personally I think 'concern' would probably be fine, but being 'angry' is an unwise comment. Words can contradict each other, that's not controversial as any non-apology containing the word apology shows.

    That he is nowhere near as bad as Trump on undermining things is neither here nor there - of course he is a lot better than Trump, that's a base level expectaton. Biden remains a far far far better option for the USA,

    There's no need to do a compare and contrast, because it isn't a competition to see which is worse (at least not until the 2024). Like all the debates recently on racism and political standards - one side being worse wouldn't mean the sins of the other escape criticism, even if it was less than the other lot deservedly get.

    It's the old 'what if the other side said it' test - would it be felt unworthy of criticism then? I don't think it would have been. And very very few here are Trump fans so that's easy enough to acknowledge.

    If I was drafting the statement I'd have left out 'myself included', or say 'which I understand' instead about the anger and concern to make the same point.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,295
    Leon said:

    Actually, I think it’s more America Derangement Syndrome.

    America keeps doing crazy shit, from left and right, and it unnerves us all. It wouldn’t matter if America was Belgium or Ecuador or Norway. But it is the primary global superpower (for now, if not much longer) and the defender of western freedom. It is all very sad
    Yes, there's something in that.
  • Pulpstar said:

    Thing is you exclude ,myself included, and the statement is absolubtely 100% fine.
    Yep agreed. Though I would have liked to see him go further and stand solidly behind the result. Not because I think Rittenhouse should be exonerated, but because it is one of his most important duties to maintain absolute confidence in the judicial system. Even if privately he thinks it is wrong and Rittenhouse should be behind bars.

    All of these trappings of civilisation - elections, the judicial system and the police - only work through the consent and confidence of the people. They can go wrong and when they do politicians have to take measured steps to correct them. But just as Johnson was completely wrong for attacking the judiciary in this country or for attacking the standards commissioner in the last few weeks, Biden is wrong to cast doubt on the validity of a jury trial. He should be better than Trump but he is trying the same game - if in an admittedly rather more measured way.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,024
    edited November 2021
    kle4 said:

    Personally I think 'concern' would probably be fine, but being 'angry' is an unwise comment. Words can contradict each other, that's not controversial as any non-apology containing the word apology shows.

    That he is nowhere near as bad as Trump on undermining things is neither here nor there - of course he is a lot better than Trump, that's a base level expectaton. Biden remains a far far far better option for the USA,

    There's no need to do a compare and contrast, because it isn't a competition to see which is worse (at least not until the 2024). Like all the debates recently on racism and political standards - one side being worse wouldn't mean the sins of the other escape criticism, even if it was less than the other lot deservedly get.

    It's the old 'what if the other side said it' test - would it be felt unworthy of criticism then? I don't think it would have been. And very very few here are Trump fans so that's easy enough to acknowledge.

    If I was drafting the statement I'd have left out 'myself included', or say 'which I understand' instead about the anger and concern to make the same point.

    Biden was just firing up his base with his statement on the Rittenhouse verdict tonight as Trump regularly fired up his base as President.

    There is very little middle ground in the US today.

    O/T went to an interesting talk this evening by Joseph Kennedy III on democracy and inequality in the US

  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,819

    I think the process got it wrong, yes. I think the jury was carefully selected, the judge's directions were biased, and the prosecution was poor.

    I ask again: what do you honestly think the trial outcome would have been had Rittenhouse been black?
    Good thing you aren't the President, then. You're effectively saying that the trial result isn't legitimate.

    On your second question - I don't care. That's not what happened and if it does, maybe I'll have a think and answer.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,554
    edited November 2021
    HYUFD said:

    Biden was just firing up his base with his statement tonight as Trump fired up his base as President.

    There is very little middle ground in the US today.

    I do not think I would like to be a political nerd in the USA. The middle ground is where I feel comfortable, to seek a level of detachment from the tribalism, even if I cannot always find my way there as I'm not an automaton.
  • The most frightening thing is that the jury almost certainly got it right. It seems perfectly reasonable to me to be angry and concerned that a private citizen can legally take a gun to a demonstration and kill people.

    I have just liked your comment and I agree. But it is worth remembering that it is a very different society over there. Generally we don't worry too much in the UK that demonstrators are going to burn out whole blocks or take control of the streets from the police and attack people including using firearms. All these things have happened in the US in the last few years and it is a completely different narrative.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 59,782
    For comparison, imagine a UK prime minister saying he is ‘angry and concerned’ about a Not Guilty verdict, brought by a jury, in a highly charged and politicized Old Bailey trial - and imagine him or her saying it just two hours after the verdict.

    It just wouldn’t happen. I hope. Because we are not so corroded by the Culture Wars, yet.

    There is Separation of Powers for a reason. America is perilously close to abandoning this, besieged by the extremists on both sides

  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,295
    edited November 2021
    MaxPB said:

    Good thing you aren't the President, then. You're effectively saying that the trial result isn't legitimate.

    On your second question - I don't care. That's not what happened and if it does, maybe I'll have a think and answer.
    I do think the trial result isn't legitimate. I would still think that if I were POTUS but I wouldn't say so publicly; neither did Biden.

    Edit: I should clarify that: I acknowledge of course that the trial result is 'legitimate' in a sense that it's gone through due process, I just do not think it was a fair trial.

    On my second question you *know* the answer, you don't have to think about it, you just don't want to say it.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,024
    Jailed former Conservative MP Charles Elphicke now released but claiming universal credit and not yet able to make payments owed in court costs
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-59354059
  • kle4 said:

    I do not think I would like to be a political nerd in the USA. The middle ground is where I feel comfortable, to seek a level of detachment from the tribalism, even if I cannot always find my way there as I'm not an automaton.
    I often think that. I like the 'sport'. I have a team, sure, and I like to see my team win. As a supporter of Leeds United, I'm also capable of acknowledging when my team might be playing the game badly (I hope), but the game is more important than the team. At least through the lense of the media, this position does not seem to exist in the Titanic struggle for civilisation that is the tribal contest between the god forsaken Republican and Democratic Parties. I don't think Matt Forde's Political Party podcast could exist in America (despite looking, I've not found anything like it).
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,024
    edited November 2021
    Leon said:

    For comparison, imagine a UK prime minister saying he is ‘angry and concerned’ about a Not Guilty verdict, brought by a jury, in a highly charged and politicized Old Bailey trial - and imagine him or her saying it just two hours after the verdict.

    It just wouldn’t happen. I hope. Because we are not so corroded by the Culture Wars, yet.

    There is Separation of Powers for a reason. America is perilously close to abandoning this, besieged by the extremists on both sides

    Not yet but not far off.

    Yougov today had more 2019 Tory voters going to ReformUK than Starmer Labour or the LDs, our politics too is increasingly polarised
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,295
    edited November 2021
    HYUFD said:

    Jailed former Conservative MP Charles Elphicke now released but claiming universal credit and not yet able to make payments owed in court costs
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-59354059

    Why doesn't he get a job!

    Hang on. He's still living with his wife, and she's an MP earning far too much for him to claim UC. ?!?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,024
    edited November 2021

    Why doesn't he get a job!
    Not so easy for ex cons, though I suppose he could try washing dishes or stacking shelves if he can get a job doing that. Bit of a come down from being a former Reed Smith tax partner and Tory MP but it might help pay the bills
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,452
    IshmaelZ said:

    https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/james-ball-boris-johnson-tory-sleaze/
    Extraordinary story. The man's an even bigger shit than most of us thought.

    What was he doing at a men only club with Charles Moore and 30 male journalists. Yuk!
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,939
    HYUFD said:

    Jailed former Conservative MP Charles Elphicke now released but claiming universal credit and not yet able to make payments owed in court costs
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-59354059

    Maybe he could have found a cheaper flat?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,024
    dixiedean said:

    Maybe he could have found a cheaper flat?
    I would have thought Thanet or Harlow might have been a bit more affordable than Fulham but there we go
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,295
    HYUFD said:

    Not so easy for ex cons, though I suppose he could try washing dishes or stacking shelves if he can get a job doing that. Bit of a come down from being a former Reed Smith tax partner and Tory MP but it might help pay the bills
    We're regularly told on here by PB Tories that there are plenty of job vacancies.
  • The US is a land of entrenched institutional cruelty and many thousands of everyday, unasked for, kindnesses. It is the most foreign country I have ever been to. A place I cannot begin to understand.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,024

    We're regularly told on here by PB Tories that there are plenty of job vacancies.
    There are a number but he has the added hurdle of a criminal conviction before he gets another job
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,939
    HYUFD said:

    Not yet but not far off.

    Yougov today had more 2019 Tory voters going to ReformUK than Starmer Labour or the LDs, our politics too is increasingly polarised
    And yet. We have the most Centrist Labour leader since they left government.
    And a Tory Party who have abandoned austerity and Thatcherism in word, if not entirely in deed, for a more social democratic direction.
    We have no one to the extreme of either polling 10 % regularly either.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,785
    Leon said:

    For comparison, imagine a UK prime minister saying he is ‘angry and concerned’ about a Not Guilty verdict, brought by a jury, in a highly charged and politicized Old Bailey trial - and imagine him or her saying it just two hours after the verdict.

    It just wouldn’t happen. I hope. Because we are not so corroded by the Culture Wars, yet.

    There is Separation of Powers for a reason. America is perilously close to abandoning this, besieged by the extremists on both sides

    I agree. But although a different context, weren't many in our government and press openly critical of a judicial decision made by Lady Hale and a unanimous Supreme Court a while back? Enemies of the people, indeed.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,939
    HYUFD said:

    Not so easy for ex cons, though I suppose he could try washing dishes or stacking shelves if he can get a job doing that. Bit of a come down from being a former Reed Smith tax partner and Tory MP but it might help pay the bills
    Timpson's are pretty good for ex-cons.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 19,161
    There are lots of times when politicians express concern at the verdicts of juries. They then seek to improve the quality of the prosecution, or to change the law.

    There were many Tory MPs who sought a change in the law relating to self-defence after the Tony Martin murder trial, for example. Though I might have disagreed with that, it is part of the democratic process to discuss possible changes to the law in response to particular verdicts that seem to offend people's sense of natural justice.

    There's no reason why some people might argue for changes to the law in the US so that a similar case in the future might reach a different verdict.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,024
    dixiedean said:

    And yet. We have the most Centrist Labour leader since they left government.
    And a Tory Party who have abandoned austerity and Thatcherism in word, if not entirely in deed, for a more social democratic direction.
    We have no one to the extreme of either polling 10 % regularly either.
    RefUK are on 5% and the Greens on 10% with Yougov today, the divide is more over culture (over here including Brexit) than economics, as to some extent it increasingly is in the US too
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,295
    HYUFD said:

    There are a number but he has the added hurdle of a criminal conviction before he gets another job
    Yes, that will make it much more difficult for him.

    He won't be getting UC if he is living as a couple with his MP wife though.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,024

    Yes, that will make it much more difficult for him.

    He won't be getting UC if he is living as a couple with his MP wife though.
    He isn't now, they have separated
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,295
    Farooq said:

    The answer to your second question is OBVIOUSLY a black man would have had much poorer prospects of getting acquitted, but that does not mean this acquittal was wrong.
    That's fair.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,295
    HYUFD said:

    He isn't now, they have separated
    Ah, ok. Wikipedia is out of date then:

    "On his release from prison in September 2021 Elphicke returned to the couple's marital home."
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,939
    HYUFD said:

    RefUK are on 5% and the Greens on 10% with Yougov today, the divide is more over culture (over here including Brexit) than economics, as to some extent it increasingly is in the US too
    Is it? I think "culture" unless so broadly drawn as to be meaningless, is overblown here.
    No one on here, for example, argues for roaming the streets with an assault weapon as being fine and dandy.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 76,700
    .
    Leon said:

    For comparison, imagine a UK prime minister saying he is ‘angry and concerned’ about a Not Guilty verdict, brought by a jury, in a highly charged and politicized Old Bailey trial - and imagine him or her saying it just two hours after the verdict.

    It just wouldn’t happen. I hope. Because we are not so corroded by the Culture Wars, yet.

    There is Separation of Powers for a reason. America is perilously close to abandoning this, besieged by the extremists on both sides

    It was a clumsy statement.
    But it was preceded by this:
    "I stand by what the jury has to say. The jury system works, and we have to abide by it.”
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,785
    dixiedean said:

    Timpson's are pretty good for ex-cons.
    Yes, burglars are particularly keen on the key-cutting side of the business.

    (I jest - Timpsons is a great company for all sorts of reasons).
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,532

    Ah, ok. Wikipedia is out of date then:

    "On his release from prison in September 2021 Elphicke returned to the couple's marital home."
    You can live in the same house as somebody without cohabiting with them.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,785

    Ah, ok. Wikipedia is out of date then:

    "On his release from prison in September 2021 Elphicke returned to the couple's marital home."
    ......only to find it was empty".
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,295
    ydoethur said:

    You can live in the same house as somebody without cohabiting with them.
    True. Can be tricky to prove you are not 'living as a couple' though. UC assessors can be pretty picky.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 34,295
    What people like politicians in Austria probably don't realise is that a lot of people actively choose to live totally reclusive lifestyles, with some people never leaving their house for any reason. If you bring in mandatory vaccinations, it means agents of the state are going to be entering those people's homes and forcing them to have a vaccine which they don't need to have because they never go anywhere else.
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 5,578
    Farooq said:

    The answer to your second question is OBVIOUSLY a black man would have had much poorer prospects of getting acquitted, but that does not mean this acquittal was wrong.
    What seems to have been forgotten here (not by you Farooq) is that, in such a case like this, the prosecution has to be show beyond reasonable doubt. Even if you believe Rittenhouse was guilty on the balance of possibilities, I challenge how anyone could say he was guilty beyond reasonable doubt given the evidence presented.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 76,700
    And of course a UK prime minister would not have to speak to a situation where it's conceivable to carry an AR15 to a demonstration and shoot four people and claim self defence.
    Perfectly defensible to be angry about that irrespective of how you consider the jury's decision, given the absurd gun laws.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,295
    dixiedean said:

    Is it? I think "culture" unless so broadly drawn as to be meaningless, is overblown here.
    No one on here, for example, argues for roaming the streets with an assault weapon as being fine and dandy.
    The 'culture wars' and 'wokism' are today's equivalent of the 'commie threat' and 'reds under the bed' for modern Rightists. Gotta have something to stoke fear about.
This discussion has been closed.