politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The SNP is betting favourite to win in just 4 of the 41 LA
Options
Comments
-
Is there such a thing as an ugly violinist?0
-
Nigel kennedy...call me strange but he doesn't float my boat personallynigel4england said:Is there such a thing as an ugly violinist?
0 -
I am going into my crystal ball and will tell you what with be top of the running order tomorrow on BBC News...
First up, Police Chief says Tory cuts will endanger everybody. After that, BBC says they have got it "about right" in regards to Mantel book at bed, and Mantel will be given free ride to go mental about the Daily Mail.0 -
I once had 100ew at 25/1 on a horse called Special Envoy which was winning by a rapidly increasing 10 lengths when it clipped the top of the last hurdle at Aintree. It was trading at 1.04 when it hit the ground.isam said:
Ever backed a 20/1 shot that's now 5/2 and wish you hadn't had the bet?Peter_the_Punter said:
Paging Isam, paging Isam....AndyJS said:Breaking news — Kerry Smith has resigned as UKIP candidate for Basildon South & Thurrock East.
"During the recorded conversation, Mr Smith talks about UKIP's lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) group and he can be heard jokingly referring to it as BLT UKIP, and adds "what the old poofter groups call themselves".
He jokes about "shooting peasants" from the Essex town of Chigwell and supporting "a peasant's hunt through Chigwell village"."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30467897
Not quite the same, but close.
I take it your will be posting your cv in the morning.
0 -
Britain is still amusingly silly it is merely our "betters" who think they know best that drag us downSeanT said:
Quite. It's perfectly acceptable to unilaterally mutilate a 2 year old girl's genitals if it is "culturally appropriate" - we will never prosecute, ever - but woe betide you if you film yourself spanking your 50 year old Lancastrian wife such that she might be bruised overnight. Prison beckons.AndyJS said:At the same time, we still haven't had any convictions for FGM. Nice to know our leaders have got their priorities right.
SeanT said:Luckyguy1983 said:
Yes. It's a mistaken concept of freedom. The denizens of Hogarth's Gin Lane were exercising their personal freedom of action, but were not free in any meaningful sense. Today, Habeus Corpus and God knows what else of our fundamental constitutional rights are being swept away before our eyes, but even on this site, people are more exercised by these porn restrictions.Socrates said:
It's the difference between liberalism and libertarianism. Liberalism praises liberty and thinks we should take steps to improve it, after considering other effects. Libertarianism is a extremist philosophy that believes the only source impeding liberty is the government, and thus wants to restrict government as much as possible, whatever the consequences.Luckyguy1983 said:
Not so much liberalism as suicide then.rcs1000 said:
Obviously no.Luckyguy1983 said:
If Country A and Country B were at war, and Country A air-dropped tonnes of heroin (or any other addictive intoxicant) on Country B in order to subdue the populace, would Country B be justified in introducing strong regulations against it's possession, use, sale, etc.?rcs1000 said:I find it bizarre that anyone would care what consenting adults do in the comfort of their own home.
And that includes: pornography, homosexuality, heroin, video games, etc. etc. etc.
It may seem trivial, but when a new law potentially makes, say, 10-20 million citizens into criminals overnight then it is the law which suffers, just as much as the citizen.
That's bad for everyone.
I will be spanking my policewoman GF tomorrow night, just as a protest. We must all do our bit.
The perversity and deviance is plain to see, and it does not attach to the spankers.
Britain is a deeply silly country. It used to be amusingly silly, but now it becoming rather sad in its idiocy. Ageing and demented.
0 -
Simply not true. Libertarianism is not extreme and does not believe that the only source impeding liberty is the government. Both those contentions are absolutely false.Socrates said:
It's the difference between liberalism and libertarianism. Liberalism praises liberty and thinks we should take steps to improve it, after considering other effects. Libertarianism is a extremist philosophy that believes the only source impeding liberty is the government, and thus wants to restrict government as much as possible, whatever the consequences.Luckyguy1983 said:
Not so much liberalism as suicide then.rcs1000 said:
Obviously no.Luckyguy1983 said:
If Country A and Country B were at war, and Country A air-dropped tonnes of heroin (or any other addictive intoxicant) on Country B in order to subdue the populace, would Country B be justified in introducing strong regulations against it's possession, use, sale, etc.?rcs1000 said:I find it bizarre that anyone would care what consenting adults do in the comfort of their own home.
And that includes: pornography, homosexuality, heroin, video games, etc. etc. etc.
Libertarianism views the State as one amongst a number of institutions which have the potential to impede the freedom of the individual. It does not claim that their should be no government, merely that the powers of the State should be curtailed as much as possible whilst still allowing it to carry out certain important basic functions. It is the crucial difference between Libertarianism and Anarchism.
Liberalism believes that the State can be a source of liberty, Libertarianism believes that the State is nothing more than a tool of very limited use which should always be kept in check otherwise it will continue to grow and increase its power - something I find it hard to believe that anyone could logically disagree with.0 -
By all means get tourself excited about it. Video on Demand ie something you actually pay for, must fall in line with what's available on DVD. There are argumants to abolish censorship. Go ahead and make them. I do not see much argument in a common application of rules.ZenPagan said:
As usual you are talking bollocks. These inane laws do not affect transmission at all. People can watch all the spanking and squirting they want at any time they want. All these laws do is criminalise our own porn industry and put them at a disadvantage compared to their continental counterparts who are still free to film the face sitting and transmit it to us to their hearts content. The only people this will in fact affect is our tax payers when all our porn companies move abroad and those who will be criminalised when they are found to have filmed themselves in the bedroom for their own viewing pleasure.Flightpath said:
I think UKIP would be opposed to ostentatious spanking.SeanT said:
i want to see the UKIP policy on SPANKING. Also FACE SITTING, CANING, BONDAGE, and SQUIRTING.Richard_Tyndall said:
...isam said:
Consider changing which policy?Richard_Tyndall said:
Personally, and since it is one of the subjects used to attack UKIP so regularly, I was sorry they asked no questions about attitudes to sexuality. Maybe the organisation is worried about what the response would be - either too pro-homosexuality for them in which case they would have to consider changing policy or too anti-homosexuality in which case the results would embarrass them. Either way it was rather an obvious omission given the range of subjects they otherwise ask opinion on.
For all that I support UKIP on many - if not most - issues, I have been disappointed by their attitude to sexual freedom and equality.
Can you elucidate?
I am entirely serious. It would be nice if one serious political party had the cullions to call the New Porn Laws for what they are: utterly ridiculous.
These laws by your standards have been 'ridiculous' for quite some time and have been governed as such by the BBFC.
What individuals do in private is their business, but what people transmit as business is subject to classification. Its not new. it may be right nor wrong, interesting or worthless, but its not new and as such electronic media classification of it is hardly surprising.
little laws made by little men and women of a puritan bent0 -
Just to be clear, although probably washing my time, I said 'good honest local lad' precisely because I knew he had been kicked out in the first place for being a wrong un... Ie I was mucking about, speaking tongue in cheekTheWatcher said:
Oh dear, the 'Good honest local bigot' has gone. Shame.AndyJS said:Breaking news — Kerry Smith has resigned as UKIP candidate for Basildon South & Thurrock East.
"During the recorded conversation, Mr Smith talks about UKIP's lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) group and he can be heard jokingly referring to it as BLT UKIP, and adds "what the old poofter groups call themselves".
He jokes about "shooting peasants" from the Essex town of Chigwell and supporting "a peasant's hunt through Chigwell village"."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30467897
Still, I'm sure he was the only rotten apple in the Kipper barrel.
I posted that this would happen at the time, before he was deselected in October. Intrepid hunters of my posts won't find it hard to discover
@seanfear will be able to verify this too
Sorry to spoil the meme0 -
Bugger.AndyJS said:
Tell that to our Dear Leaders.rcs1000 said:I find it bizarre that anyone would care what consenting adults do in the comfort of their own home.
And that includes: pornography, homosexuality, heroin, video games, etc. etc. etc.
Their banning of spanking is one of the most cretinous things they've done recently, and I'm not even a fan of it.0 -
Indeed.rcs1000 said:
I think there is a very high degree of overlap between those who oppose the extension of the porn laws, those who wish the right to silence should have been preserved, those who oppose US torture of terrorist suspects, and those who oppose detention without trial.Luckyguy1983 said:
Yes. It's a mistaken concept of freedom. The denizens of Hogarth's Gin Lane were exercising their personal freedom of action, but were not free in any meaningful sense. Today, Habeus Corpus and God knows what else of our fundamental constitutional rights are being swept away before our eyes, but even on this site, people are more exercised by these porn restrictions.Socrates said:
It's the difference between liberalism and libertarianism. Liberalism praises liberty and thinks we should take steps to improve it, after considering other effects. Libertarianism is a extremist philosophy that believes the only source impeding liberty is the government, and thus wants to restrict government as much as possible, whatever the consequences.Luckyguy1983 said:
Not so much liberalism as suicide then.rcs1000 said:
Obviously no.Luckyguy1983 said:
If Country A and Country B were at war, and Country A air-dropped tonnes of heroin (or any other addictive intoxicant) on Country B in order to subdue the populace, would Country B be justified in introducing strong regulations against it's possession, use, sale, etc.?rcs1000 said:I find it bizarre that anyone would care what consenting adults do in the comfort of their own home.
And that includes: pornography, homosexuality, heroin, video games, etc. etc. etc.0 -
The state should exist to protect our rights to life, liberty and property.Richard_Tyndall said:
Simply not true. Libertarianism is not extreme and does not believe that the only source impeding liberty is the government. Both those contentions are absolutely false.Socrates said:
It's the difference between liberalism and libertarianism. Liberalism praises liberty and thinks we should take steps to improve it, after considering other effects. Libertarianism is a extremist philosophy that believes the only source impeding liberty is the government, and thus wants to restrict government as much as possible, whatever the consequences.Luckyguy1983 said:
Not so much liberalism as suicide then.rcs1000 said:
Obviously no.Luckyguy1983 said:
If Country A and Country B were at war, and Country A air-dropped tonnes of heroin (or any other addictive intoxicant) on Country B in order to subdue the populace, would Country B be justified in introducing strong regulations against it's possession, use, sale, etc.?rcs1000 said:I find it bizarre that anyone would care what consenting adults do in the comfort of their own home.
And that includes: pornography, homosexuality, heroin, video games, etc. etc. etc.
Libertarianism views the State as one amongst a number of institutions which have the potential to impede the freedom of the individual. It does not claim that their should be no government, merely that the powers of the State should be curtailed as much as possible whilst still allowing it to carry out certain important basic functions. It is the crucial difference between Libertarianism and Anarchism.
Liberalism believes that the State can be a source of liberty, Libertarianism believes that the State is nothing more than a tool of very limited use which should always be kept in check otherwise it will continue to grow and increase its power - something I find it hard to believe that anyone could logically disagree with.
0 -
Flightpath said:ZenPagan said:
Go here www,youporn.com....Flightpath said:
By all means get tourself excited about it. Video on Demand ie something you actually pay for, must fall in line with what's available on DVD. There are argumants to abolish censorship. Go ahead and make them. I do not see much argument in a common application of rules.SeanT said:
i want to see the UKIP policy on SPANKING. Also FACE SITTING, CANING, BONDAGE, and SQUIRTING.Richard_Tyndall said:
...isam said:
Consider changing which policy?Richard_Tyndall said:
Personally, and since it is one of the subjects used to attack UKIP so regularly, I was sorry they asked no questions about attitudes to sexuality. Maybe the organisation is worried about what the response would be - either too pro-homosexuality for them in which case they would have to consider changing policy or too anti-homosexuality in which case the results would embarrass them. Either way it was rather an obvious omission given the range of subjects they otherwise ask opinion on.
For all that I support UKIP on many - if not most - issues, I have been disappointed by their attitude to sexual freedom and equality.
Can you elucidate?
I am entirely serious. It would be nice if one serious political party had the cullions to call the New Porn Laws for what they are: utterly ridiculous.
As usual you are talking bollocks. These inane laws do not affect transmission at all. People can watch all the spanking and squirting they want at any time they want. All these laws do is criminalise our own porn industry and put them at a disadvantage compared to their continental counterparts who are still free to film the face sitting and transmit it to us to their hearts content. The only people this will in fact affect is our tax payers when all our porn companies move abroad and those who will be criminalised when they are found to have filmed themselves in the bedroom for their own viewing pleasure.
little laws made by little men and women of a puritan bent
You will find spanking , squirting, fisting , face sitting etc freely available for no money whatsoever. Your parties new laws will make no difference to that availablility.
All you have done is crippled our own porn producers and criminalised those who like to make selfie video's for their own consumption. Congratulation to the party you support on managing to even outdo new labour on stupidity0 -
ZenPagan said:Flightpath said:
sorry should mention that link is definitely NSFWZenPagan said:
Go here www,youporn.com....Flightpath said:
By all means get tourself excited about it. Video on Demand ie something you actually pay for, must fall in line with what's available on DVD. There are argumants to abolish censorship. Go ahead and make them. I do not see much argument in a common application of rules.SeanT said:
i want to see the UKIP policy on SPANKING. Also FACE SITTING, CANING, BONDAGE, and SQUIRTING.Richard_Tyndall said:
...isam said:
Consider changing which policy?Richard_Tyndall said:
Personally, and since it is one of the subjects used to attack UKIP so regularly, I was sorry they asked no questions about attitudes to sexuality. Maybe the organisation is worried about what the response would be - either too pro-homosexuality for them in which case they would have to consider changing policy or too anti-homosexuality in which case the results would embarrass them. Either way it was rather an obvious omission given the range of subjects they otherwise ask opinion on.
For all that I support UKIP on many - if not most - issues, I have been disappointed by their attitude to sexual freedom and equality.
Can you elucidate?
I am entirely serious. It would be nice if one serious political party had the cullions to call the New Porn Laws for what they are: utterly ridiculous.
As usual you are talking bollocks. These inane laws do not affect transmission at all. People can watch all the spanking and squirting they want at any time they want. All these laws do is criminalise our own porn industry and put them at a disadvantage compared to their continental counterparts who are still free to film the face sitting and transmit it to us to their hearts content. The only people this will in fact affect is our tax payers when all our porn companies move abroad and those who will be criminalised when they are found to have filmed themselves in the bedroom for their own viewing pleasure.
little laws made by little men and women of a puritan bent
You will find spanking , squirting, fisting , face sitting etc freely available for no money whatsoever. Your parties new laws will make no difference to that availablility.
All you have done is crippled our own porn producers and criminalised those who like to make selfie video's for their own consumption. Congratulation to the party you support on managing to even outdo new labour on stupidity0 -
Oh I could play go hard luck story top trumps all day long believe me. I can get anything beatPeter_the_Punter said:
I once had 100ew at 25/1 on a horse called Special Envoy which was winning by a rapidly increasing 10 lengths when it clipped the top of the last hurdle at Aintree. It was trading at 1.04 when it hit the ground.isam said:
Ever backed a 20/1 shot that's now 5/2 and wish you hadn't had the bet?Peter_the_Punter said:
Paging Isam, paging Isam....AndyJS said:Breaking news — Kerry Smith has resigned as UKIP candidate for Basildon South & Thurrock East.
"During the recorded conversation, Mr Smith talks about UKIP's lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) group and he can be heard jokingly referring to it as BLT UKIP, and adds "what the old poofter groups call themselves".
He jokes about "shooting peasants" from the Essex town of Chigwell and supporting "a peasant's hunt through Chigwell village"."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30467897
Not quite the same, but close.
I take it your will be posting your cv in the morning.
Hmmm well I think id be better than alas Smith and Bolter!0 -
I hope you all followed me on backing Lewis Hamilton as SPOTY.0
-
Good! He's done the decent thing and fallen on his sword: better late than never.AndyJS said:Breaking news — Kerry Smith has resigned as UKIP candidate for Basildon South & Thurrock East.
"During the recorded conversation, Mr Smith talks about UKIP's lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) group and he can be heard jokingly referring to it as BLT UKIP, and adds "what the old poofter groups call themselves".
He jokes about "shooting peasants" from the Essex town of Chigwell and supporting "a peasant's hunt through Chigwell village"."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-304678970 -
Ben Clerkin (@benclerkin)
14/12/2014 22:06
Labour MPs told not to campaign on immigration in secret Ukip strategy document fw.to/0ayci0g
Ben Clerkin (@benclerkin)
14/12/2014 22:20
Key points from Labour’s secret Ukip strategy: don't campaign on immigration and change the subject if it comes up fw.to/wka2vuT0 -
Labour MPs have been secretly ordered not to campaign on immigration because doing so could cost them the next election, the Daily Telegraph can reveal.
A private strategy document circulated by Labour HQ and seen by this newspaper warns that the bigger immigration becomes as a campaign issue the more votes the party will lose.
MPs are told to focus on "moving the conversation on" if voters express concerns about border controls to topics Labour is stronger on such as healthcare or housing.
They are also urged not to send leaflets on immigration to all voters because it could be "unhelpful" and "risks undermining the broad coalition of support we need to return to government".
The revelations are a major embarrassment for Ed Miliband, who is expected tell voters Labour understands their immigration concerns and harden the party's stance on cheap foreign workers in a major speech on Monday.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11293433/Revealed-Labour-MPs-told-not-to-campaign-on-immigration-in-secret-Ukip-strategy-document.html0 -
Leaving the way open for another rotten apple to return, Neil Hamilton.TheWatcher said:
Oh dear, the 'Good honest local bigot' has gone. Shame.AndyJS said:Breaking news — Kerry Smith has resigned as UKIP candidate for Basildon South & Thurrock East.
"During the recorded conversation, Mr Smith talks about UKIP's lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) group and he can be heard jokingly referring to it as BLT UKIP, and adds "what the old poofter groups call themselves".
He jokes about "shooting peasants" from the Essex town of Chigwell and supporting "a peasant's hunt through Chigwell village"."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30467897
Still, I'm sure he was the only rotten apple in the Kipper barrel.
0 -
Ugh, love Lewis but wrong result. He won a 2 man competition vs someone dominating a sport played by millions.0
-
Indeed but it is not, nor should it ever be, the source of those rights. Once the State starts considering itself as the source of our rights and liberties it then starts considering the possibility that it might take them away from us.Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:
The state should exist to protect our rights to life, liberty and property.Richard_Tyndall said:
Simply not true. Libertarianism is not extreme and does not believe that the only source impeding liberty is the government. Both those contentions are absolutely false.Socrates said:
It's the difference between liberalism and libertarianism. Liberalism praises liberty and thinks we should take steps to improve it, after considering other effects. Libertarianism is a extremist philosophy that believes the only source impeding liberty is the government, and thus wants to restrict government as much as possible, whatever the consequences.Luckyguy1983 said:
Not so much liberalism as suicide then.rcs1000 said:
Obviously no.Luckyguy1983 said:
If Country A and Country B were at war, and Country A air-dropped tonnes of heroin (or any other addictive intoxicant) on Country B in order to subdue the populace, would Country B be justified in introducing strong regulations against it's possession, use, sale, etc.?rcs1000 said:I find it bizarre that anyone would care what consenting adults do in the comfort of their own home.
And that includes: pornography, homosexuality, heroin, video games, etc. etc. etc.
Libertarianism views the State as one amongst a number of institutions which have the potential to impede the freedom of the individual. It does not claim that their should be no government, merely that the powers of the State should be curtailed as much as possible whilst still allowing it to carry out certain important basic functions. It is the crucial difference between Libertarianism and Anarchism.
Liberalism believes that the State can be a source of liberty, Libertarianism believes that the State is nothing more than a tool of very limited use which should always be kept in check otherwise it will continue to grow and increase its power - something I find it hard to believe that anyone could logically disagree with.0 -
Ben Riley-Smith (@benrileysmith)
14/12/2014 22:24
Full 33-page document revealing Labour's secret Ukip strategy published here: bit.ly/1vPgWp3 pic.twitter.com/ijiZrz1kmn0 -
They've the most fabulous parliament building. Superb views on a river boat trip.AndyJS said:
I was thinking of going to Budapest sometime. Haven't done any research yet.antifrank said:
I can't check, because I'm on an iPad in Hungary, but I believe Great Yarmouth also.MikeSmithson said:In what seats apart from Thurrock, Clacton, Thanet S, Boston & Skegness are UKIP favourites in the betting?
0 -
It proves no one gives a flying fig about his tax status.maaarsh said:Ugh, love Lewis but wrong result. He won a 2 man competition vs someone dominating a sport played by millions.
0 -
There we differ.Luckyguy1983 said:
And any Prime Minister reading a magazine at work (or even at home -I can't imagine Maggie flicking through Woman's Weekly rather than the contents of red boxes), is not worthy to be PM. It's about TOILING on behalf of the nation, not farting around New York disclosing Royal phone conversations or losing your daughter in pubs.Charles said:
I wouldn't look up either.HYUFD said:Classic Dominic Cummings on Cameron in today's ST Atticus, he 'wouldn't look up from Country Life if he was told every state school fell into the sea - that's how interested he is in them.'
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/comment/
But mainly because anyone who uses such hyperbole in front of the Prime Minister is clearly non-serious and hence not worthy of the time.
I'd rather the PM has something of a normal life: it helps keep them a little grounded in an very cloistered environment. I'm sure Maggie did read magazines and newspapers.
My only issue is that Country Life is deathly dull - the estate agent adverts at the front are good (and the oh-so-serious pose that the Girl in Pearls put on are always worth a giggle). But apart from that I on;y ever read Tottering-by-Gently, which has to be one of the best cartoons every developed0 -
Yup.rcs1000 said:
I think there is a very high degree of overlap between those who oppose the extension of the porn laws, those who wish the right to silence should have been preserved, those who oppose US torture of terrorist suspects, and those who oppose detention without trial.Luckyguy1983 said:
Yes. It's a mistaken concept of freedom. The denizens of Hogarth's Gin Lane were exercising their personal freedom of action, but were not free in any meaningful sense. Today, Habeus Corpus and God knows what else of our fundamental constitutional rights are being swept away before our eyes, but even on this site, people are more exercised by these porn restrictions.Socrates said:
It's the difference between liberalism and libertarianism. Liberalism praises liberty and thinks we should take steps to improve it, after considering other effects. Libertarianism is a extremist philosophy that believes the only source impeding liberty is the government, and thus wants to restrict government as much as possible, whatever the consequences.Luckyguy1983 said:
Not so much liberalism as suicide then.rcs1000 said:
Obviously no.Luckyguy1983 said:
If Country A and Country B were at war, and Country A air-dropped tonnes of heroin (or any other addictive intoxicant) on Country B in order to subdue the populace, would Country B be justified in introducing strong regulations against it's possession, use, sale, etc.?rcs1000 said:I find it bizarre that anyone would care what consenting adults do in the comfort of their own home.
And that includes: pornography, homosexuality, heroin, video games, etc. etc. etc.0 -
And my bet on Fleur each way to win X Factor at 10/1, she was second but a profit neverthelessTheScreamingEagles said:I hope you all followed me on backing Lewis Hamilton as SPOTY.
0 -
As an example of T-b-G humour...Charles said:
There we differ.Luckyguy1983 said:
And any Prime Minister reading a magazine at work (or even at home -I can't imagine Maggie flicking through Woman's Weekly rather than the contents of red boxes), is not worthy to be PM. It's about TOILING on behalf of the nation, not farting around New York disclosing Royal phone conversations or losing your daughter in pubs.Charles said:
I wouldn't look up either.HYUFD said:Classic Dominic Cummings on Cameron in today's ST Atticus, he 'wouldn't look up from Country Life if he was told every state school fell into the sea - that's how interested he is in them.'
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/comment/
But mainly because anyone who uses such hyperbole in front of the Prime Minister is clearly non-serious and hence not worthy of the time.
I'd rather the PM has something of a normal life: it helps keep them a little grounded in an very cloistered environment. I'm sure Maggie did read magazines and newspapers.
My only issue is that Country Life is deathly dull - the estate agent adverts at the front are good (and the oh-so-serious pose that the Girl in Pearls put on are always worth a giggle). But apart from that I on;y ever read Tottering-by-Gently, which has to be one of the best cartoons every developed
http://www.tottering.com/popup_image.php?pID=1296&image=00 -
Every time the state passes this sort of law they are in effect saying we are children and can't be trusted to make up your own mind. Daddy Cameron or Daddy Milibrand know best. Then they wonder why we detest themPlato said:Yup.
rcs1000 said:
I think there is a very high degree of overlap between those who oppose the extension of the porn laws, those who wish the right to silence should have been preserved, those who oppose US torture of terrorist suspects, and those who oppose detention without trial.Luckyguy1983 said:
Yes. It's a mistaken concept of freedom. The denizens of Hogarth's Gin Lane were exercising their personal freedom of action, but were not free in any meaningful sense. Today, Habeus Corpus and God knows what else of our fundamental constitutional rights are being swept away before our eyes, but even on this site, people are more exercised by these porn restrictions.Socrates said:
It's the difference between liberalism and libertarianism. Liberalism praises liberty and thinks we should take steps to improve it, after considering other effects. Libertarianism is a extremist philosophy that believes the only source impeding liberty is the government, and thus wants to restrict government as much as possible, whatever the consequences.Luckyguy1983 said:
Not so much liberalism as suicide then.rcs1000 said:
Obviously no.Luckyguy1983 said:
If Country A and Country B were at war, and Country A air-dropped tonnes of heroin (or any other addictive intoxicant) on Country B in order to subdue the populace, would Country B be justified in introducing strong regulations against it's possession, use, sale, etc.?rcs1000 said:I find it bizarre that anyone would care what consenting adults do in the comfort of their own home.
And that includes: pornography, homosexuality, heroin, video games, etc. etc. etc.
0 -
Blair been pushed under the bus by his own side...calling for him to be questioned about what he knew about US torture.
Call me cynical, but I think it is calculated move, knowing that highly unlikely Tony will ever be forced to reveal what he remembers, and looks far better to sound tough and say how terrible, we (likes of Cooper) didn't know, but Tony might.0 -
I stopped watching X Factor a few years ago.nigel4england said:
And my bet on Fleur each way to win X Factor at 10/1, she was second but a profit neverthelessTheScreamingEagles said:I hope you all followed me on backing Lewis Hamilton as SPOTY.
Who do you think will win Strictly, heart says Flackers, head says Frankie Bridge.0 -
I've just had a thought, if the MI6 anally fed a suspected terrorist and filmed it, would it fall foul of the porn laws?0
-
MIRROR: Ed - I will ban cheap foreign workers
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B42ZbsiIcAEyadz.jpg:large
I am gonna love to see how this policy on pack of a fag packet is going to legal, given that Ed is obviously not going to change our relationship with the EU.0 -
Agreed, chemicals used in all kinds of products that come into contact with living tissue can cause unexpected reactions.Luckyguy1983 said:
We know what causes cancer. There are carcinogens present in our food, food packaging, soaps, shampoos, conditioners, moisturising creams, make up, sun block (which they advise us to slather on), deodorants, detergents, etc. There are also dangers inherent (believe it or not) in mammograms and underwired bras. Corporations and Governments prefer not to concentrate on cancer prevention -instead we get a massive and emotionally exhausting hunt for funding for a 'cure', with all its fun runs etc. I've always found this bizarre. We rip asbestos out of buildings at huge cost to remove the risk of asbestosis. But we don't even highlight the risks of Sulphates in cosmetics, or applaud products that don't use them.FalseFlag said:
Not a great riposte. Very few diseases have been found to be genetic, your genes don't set out to kill you, cancer is likely to be caused by germs.SeanT said:
Fecking nonsense. Of course homosexuality is partly or wholly genetic. Everything is partly or wholly genetic.FalseFlag said:
Highly unlikely to be genetic.SeanT said:
http://jaymans.wordpress.com/2014/02/26/greg-cochrans-gay-germ-hypothesis-an-exercise-in-the-power-of-germs/
Having read some of your recent comment, it occurs to me that you are, in fact, a cretin. Cretinism is also, I believe, heritable. So at least you know who to blame.
Try reading Plague Time: The New Germ Theory of Disease by Paul Ewald, you might learn something. Revolutionised medicine.
What most people do not realise is that skin is an actual organ of the body, they just treat it as something to plaster make up to attract the opposite sex or to apply soaps and deodorants to remove natural oils and smells, all without thinking of the consequences or more probably, even knowing of them.
An extreme example is when sulphuric acid comes in contact with skin. Very painful and removes a layer of skin, quickly. Personal experience.
However the insidious use of so called safe products can build up an intolerance over a period of time. As with acids/alkalis, it is the time against the strength which counts. Stronger/Quicker - Weaker/Longer - result, a painful death.
Germs and genes are another subject altogether and to bring them into this discussion, is irrelevant.0 -
Exactly. Whilst I can't imagine ever reading 50 Shades Of Gray [given it's pulp fiction reviews] - the number of copies sold is indicative, it was almost as ubiquitous as Harry Potter covertly read on the Tube.
I genuinely can't quite believe the new porn laws are real - it's so absurd.ZenPagan said:Flightpath said:
As usual you are talking bollocks. These inane laws do not affect transmission at all. People can watch all the spanking and squirting they want at any time they want. All these laws do is criminalise our own porn industry and put them at a disadvantage compared to their continental counterparts who are still free to film the face sitting and transmit it to us to their hearts content. The only people this will in fact affect is our tax payers when all our porn companies move abroad and those who will be criminalised when they are found to have filmed themselves in the bedroom for their own viewing pleasure.SeanT said:
I think UKIP would be opposed to ostentatious spanking.Richard_Tyndall said:
i want to see the UKIP policy on SPANKING. Also FACE SITTING, CANING, BONDAGE, and SQUIRTING.isam said:
I phrased that badly and realised it when I read it back later. Lets just say that their public announcements have not been whole heartedly in support as I and others would like of the changes made by recent governments as far as equalising rights for gays goes. It would be nice to see the party fully support and endorse equal marriage rights (as an example) rather than begrudgingly accept they are here to stay.Richard_Tyndall said:
snip
Consider changing which policy?
For all that I support UKIP on many - if not most - issues, I have been disappointed by their attitude to sexual freedom and equality.
Can you elucidate?
I am entirely serious. It would be nice if one serious political party had the cullions to call the New Porn Laws for what they are: utterly ridiculous.
These laws by your standards have been 'ridiculous' for quite some time and have been governed as such by the BBFC.
What individuals do in private is their business, but what people transmit as business is subject to classification. Its not new. it may be right nor wrong, interesting or worthless, but its not new and as such electronic media classification of it is hardly surprising.
little laws made by little men and women of a puritan bent0 -
No it wouldn't because MI6 theoretically operates abroad only and therefore it would be produced outside the ukTheScreamingEagles said:I've just had a thought, if the MI6 anally fed a suspected terrorist and filmed it, would it fall foul of the porn laws?
0 -
Plato said:
Exactly. Whilst I can't imagine ever reading 50 Shades Of Gray [given it's pulp fiction reviews] - the number of copies sold is indicative, it was almost as ubiquitous as Harry Potter covertly read on the Tube.
I genuinely can't quite believe the new porn laws are real - it's so absurd.
It had a large female audience it has to be saidZenPagan said:Flightpath said:
As usual you are talking bollocks. These inane laws do not affect transmission at all. People can watch all the spanking and squirting they want at any time they want. All these laws do is criminalise our own porn industry and put them at a disadvantage compared to their continental counterparts who are still free to film the face sitting and transmit it to us to their hearts content. The only people this will in fact affect is our tax payers when all our porn companies move abroad and those who will be criminalised when they are found to have filmed themselves in the bedroom for their own viewing pleasure.SeanT said:
I think UKIP would be opposed to ostentatious spanking.Richard_Tyndall said:
i want to see the UKIP policy on SPANKING. Also FACE SITTING, CANING, BONDAGE, and SQUIRTING.isam said:
I phrased that badly and realised it when I read it back later. Lets just say that their public announcements have not been whole heartedly in support as I and others would like of the changes made by recent governments as far as equalising rights for gays goes. It would be nice to see the party fully support and endorse equal marriage rights (as an example) rather than begrudgingly accept they are here to stay.Richard_Tyndall said:
snip
Consider changing which policy?
For all that I support UKIP on many - if not most - issues, I have been disappointed by their attitude to sexual freedom and equality.
Can you elucidate?
I am entirely serious. It would be nice if one serious political party had the cullions to call the New Porn Laws for what they are: utterly ridiculous.
These laws by your standards have been 'ridiculous' for quite some time and have been governed as such by the BBFC.
What individuals do in private is their business, but what people transmit as business is subject to classification. Its not new. it may be right nor wrong, interesting or worthless, but its not new and as such electronic media classification of it is hardly surprising.
little laws made by little men and women of a puritan bent0 -
I think you are putting to much emphasis on a minority hypothesisFalseFlag said:
Highly unlikely to be genetic.SeanT said:re FPT and the debate on homosexuality: gayness is indeed clearly if partly genetic, inasmuch as it is evidenced throughout the animal kingdom, from seagulls to spiders to reindeer to robins. It is difficult to see how spider mothers could be so eerily caring they turn their sons into "queers", ergo it is impossible to conceive an entirely environmental explanation for homosex.
There is also an ev-psych explanation for the tenacity of human homosexuality: it is possible that gay sons benefit the human species by providing non sexually competitive males - Uncle Montys - who selflessly look after their nephews and nieces, as the best way of ensuring their own "genetic survival" .
I've personally witnessed this. Gay uncles can be incredibly caring for the offspring of their siblings.
http://jaymans.wordpress.com/2014/02/26/greg-cochrans-gay-germ-hypothesis-an-exercise-in-the-power-of-germs/0 -
I still think the detainee should file a complaint to the police to see how the legal arguments played out.ZenPagan said:
No it wouldn't because MI6 theoretically operates abroad only and therefore it would be produced outside the ukTheScreamingEagles said:I've just had a thought, if the MI6 anally fed a suspected terrorist and filmed it, would it fall foul of the porn laws?
0 -
Nigel Kennedy and his faux accent springs to mind.nigel4england said:
Is there such a thing as an ugly violinist?
0 -
Was there an opinion poll that said fleur was going to do well or did you use your own nous?nigel4england said:
And my bet on Fleur each way to win X Factor at 10/1, she was second but a profit neverthelessTheScreamingEagles said:I hope you all followed me on backing Lewis Hamilton as SPOTY.
0 -
Still he was around for peak Kipper.TheWatcher said:
Oh dear, the 'Good honest local bigot' has gone. Shame.AndyJS said:Breaking news — Kerry Smith has resigned as UKIP candidate for Basildon South & Thurrock East.
"During the recorded conversation, Mr Smith talks about UKIP's lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) group and he can be heard jokingly referring to it as BLT UKIP, and adds "what the old poofter groups call themselves".
He jokes about "shooting peasants" from the Essex town of Chigwell and supporting "a peasant's hunt through Chigwell village"."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30467897
Still, I'm sure he was the only rotten apple in the Kipper barrel.
Hubris came.0 -
I presume it is only a matter of time before writing in explicit detail about such activities becomes illegal too. This should be of extreme concern to anyone previously only worried about getting a Bad Sex Award....SeanT said:
Quite apart from their intrinsic, creepy, puritanical absurdity, the Porn Laws are important because they threaten to criminalise a very large minority of the population.Luckyguy1983 said:
Yes. It's a mistaken concept of freedom. The denizens of Hogarth's Gin Lane were exercising their personal freedom of action, but were not free in any meaningful sense. Today, Habeus Corpus and God knows what else of our fundamental constitutional rights are being swept away before our eyes, but even on this site, people are more exercised by these porn restrictions.Socrates said:
It's the difference between liberalism and libertarianism. Liberalism praises liberty and thinks we should take steps to improve it, after considering other effects. Libertarianism is a extremist philosophy that believes the only source impeding liberty is the government, and thus wants to restrict government as much as possible, whatever the consequences.Luckyguy1983 said:
Not so much liberalism as suicide then.rcs1000 said:
Obviously no.Luckyguy1983 said:
If Country A and Country B were at war, and Country A air-dropped tonnes of heroin (or any other addictive intoxicant) on Country B in order to subdue the populace, would Country B be justified in introducing strong regulations against it's possession, use, sale, etc.?rcs1000 said:I find it bizarre that anyone would care what consenting adults do in the comfort of their own home.
And that includes: pornography, homosexuality, heroin, video games, etc. etc. etc.
Lawyers and coppers I have spoken to believe that these laws will, in effect, make it illegal not just to produce images of bondage and spanking in the UK but also to "consume" them in the UK - i.e. to watch them online.
Given that, according to surveys, 30-60% of British adults have sexual fantasies about bondage and spanking (etc), and given that many of them will therefore have sought images of the same, online, then it is reasonable to assume millions of Brits will be criminalised by these ridiculous laws.
It may seem trivial, but when a new law potentially makes, say, 10-20 million citizens into criminals overnight then it is the law which suffers, just as much as the citizen.
That's bad for everyone.
I will be spanking my policewoman GF tomorrow night, just as a protest. We must all do our bit.
0 -
Indeed.FrancisUrquhart said:
I am going into my crystal ball and will tell you what with be top of the running order tomorrow on BBC News...
First up, Police Chief says Tory cuts will endanger everybody. After that, BBC says they have got it "about right" in regards to Mantel book at bed, and Mantel will be given free ride to go mental about the Daily Mail.0 -
That's bollocks.FalseFlag said:
Not a great riposte. Very few diseases have been found to be genetic, your genes don't set out to kill you, cancer is likely to be caused by germs.SeanT said:
Fecking nonsense. Of course homosexuality is partly or wholly genetic. Everything is partly or wholly genetic.FalseFlag said:
Highly unlikely to be genetic.SeanT said:re FPT and the debate on homosexuality: gayness is indeed clearly if partly genetic, inasmuch as it is evidenced throughout the animal kingdom, from seagulls to spiders to reindeer to robins. It is difficult to see how spider mothers could be so eerily caring they turn their sons into "queers", ergo it is impossible to conceive an entirely environmental explanation for homosex.
There is also an ev-psych explanation for the tenacity of human homosexuality: it is possible that gay sons benefit the human species by providing non sexually competitive males - Uncle Montys - who selflessly look after their nephews and nieces, as the best way of ensuring their own "genetic survival" .
I've personally witnessed this. Gay uncles can be incredibly caring for the offspring of their siblings.
http://jaymans.wordpress.com/2014/02/26/greg-cochrans-gay-germ-hypothesis-an-exercise-in-the-power-of-germs/
Having read some of your recent comment, it occurs to me that you are, in fact, a cretin. Cretinism is also, I believe, heritable. So at least you know who to blame.
Try reading Plague Time: The New Germ Theory of Disease by Paul Ewald, you might learn something. Revolutionised medicine.
There are a huge number of diseases with a genetic component, including lyposomal, autoimmume, onco-immuno and certain neurodegenerative diseases. Most work in the orphan space looks at hereditable disease elements as well.
It's really only infectious disease - be they bacterial, fungal, parasitical or viral - that have a direct external causitive agent, although many others have a environmental component that triggers a latent condition.
0 -
I can't stand X Factor but my wife watches it so thought I might make a few quid, think Fleur will join a long line of people that finished second but went on to stardom.TheScreamingEagles said:
I stopped watching X Factor a few years ago.nigel4england said:
And my bet on Fleur each way to win X Factor at 10/1, she was second but a profit neverthelessTheScreamingEagles said:I hope you all followed me on backing Lewis Hamilton as SPOTY.
Who do you think will win Strictly, heart says Flackers, head says Frankie Bridge.
No idea about Strictly, my eldest granddaughter is a dead ringer for Frankie, my youngest daughter knows Mark Wright and says he is every bit as nice as it seems, a talented lad from a talented family.
Caroline looks beautiful in some photos and like a tranny in others, hopefully the best contestant will win.0 -
Great summary. Confusing Liberals with Libertarians is a mistake made on here a lot.Richard_Tyndall said:
Simply not true. Libertarianism is not extreme and does not believe that the only source impeding liberty is the government. Both those contentions are absolutely false.Socrates said:
It's the difference between liberalism and libertarianism. Liberalism praises liberty and thinks we should take steps to improve it, after considering other effects. Libertarianism is a extremist philosophy that believes the only source impeding liberty is the government, and thus wants to restrict government as much as possible, whatever the consequences.Luckyguy1983 said:
Not so much liberalism as suicide then.rcs1000 said:
Obviously no.Luckyguy1983 said:
If Country A and Country B were at war, and Country A air-dropped tonnes of heroin (or any other addictive intoxicant) on Country B in order to subdue the populace, would Country B be justified in introducing strong regulations against it's possession, use, sale, etc.?rcs1000 said:I find it bizarre that anyone would care what consenting adults do in the comfort of their own home.
And that includes: pornography, homosexuality, heroin, video games, etc. etc. etc.
Libertarianism views the State as one amongst a number of institutions which have the potential to impede the freedom of the individual. It does not claim that their should be no government, merely that the powers of the State should be curtailed as much as possible whilst still allowing it to carry out certain important basic functions. It is the crucial difference between Libertarianism and Anarchism.
Liberalism believes that the State can be a source of liberty, Libertarianism believes that the State is nothing more than a tool of very limited use which should always be kept in check otherwise it will continue to grow and increase its power - something I find it hard to believe that anyone could logically disagree with.0 -
Which Labour voters are most likely to back Ukip? Working-class Yorkshiremen who don't have degrees, says Party HQ.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B42Zb4MIQAAs9Sh.jpg0 -
Irony alert!isam said:
Was there an opinion poll that said fleur was going to do well or did you use your own nous?nigel4england said:
And my bet on Fleur each way to win X Factor at 10/1, she was second but a profit neverthelessTheScreamingEagles said:I hope you all followed me on backing Lewis Hamilton as SPOTY.
Own nous, I seem to be half decent at this reality show rubbish.0 -
It is indeed absurd that we get this moaning about the 'westminster bubble' and then we get comments which say politicians should not even read a magazine or anything other than Red Boxes when they are at home.Charles said:
There we differ.Luckyguy1983 said:
And any Prime Minister reading a magazine at work (or even at home -I can't imagine Maggie flicking through Woman's Weekly rather than the contents of red boxes), is not worthy to be PM. It's about TOILING on behalf of the nation, not farting around New York disclosing Royal phone conversations or losing your daughter in pubs.Charles said:
I wouldn't look up either.HYUFD said:Classic Dominic Cummings on Cameron in today's ST Atticus, he 'wouldn't look up from Country Life if he was told every state school fell into the sea - that's how interested he is in them.'
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/comment/
But mainly because anyone who uses such hyperbole in front of the Prime Minister is clearly non-serious and hence not worthy of the time.
I'd rather the PM has something of a normal life: it helps keep them a little grounded in an very cloistered environment. I'm sure Maggie did read magazines and newspapers.
My only issue is that Country Life is deathly dull - the estate agent adverts at the front are good (and the oh-so-serious pose that the Girl in Pearls put on are always worth a giggle). But apart from that I on;y ever read Tottering-by-Gently, which has to be one of the best cartoons every developed0 -
Ha!Charles said:
As an example of T-b-G humour...Charles said:
There we differ.Luckyguy1983 said:
And any Prime Minister reading a magazine at work (or even at home -I can't imagine Maggie flicking through Woman's Weekly rather than the contents of red boxes), is not worthy to be PM. It's about TOILING on behalf of the nation, not farting around New York disclosing Royal phone conversations or losing your daughter in pubs.Charles said:
I wouldn't look up either.HYUFD said:Classic Dominic Cummings on Cameron in today's ST Atticus, he 'wouldn't look up from Country Life if he was told every state school fell into the sea - that's how interested he is in them.'
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/comment/
But mainly because anyone who uses such hyperbole in front of the Prime Minister is clearly non-serious and hence not worthy of the time.
I'd rather the PM has something of a normal life: it helps keep them a little grounded in an very cloistered environment. I'm sure Maggie did read magazines and newspapers.
My only issue is that Country Life is deathly dull - the estate agent adverts at the front are good (and the oh-so-serious pose that the Girl in Pearls put on are always worth a giggle). But apart from that I on;y ever read Tottering-by-Gently, which has to be one of the best cartoons every developed
http://www.tottering.com/popup_image.php?pID=1296&image=00 -
There once was a libertarian party in the uk under the leadership of Chris Mounsie from Devil's kitchen unfortunately subverted by a clique led by andrew withers who I always saw as a wrong one. Only political party I ever joined till andrew withers took overPlato said:Great summary. Confusing Liberals with Libertarians is a mistake made on here a lot.
Richard_Tyndall said:
Simply not true. Libertarianism is not extreme and does not believe that the only source impeding liberty is the government. Both those contentions are absolutely false.Socrates said:
It's the difference between liberalism and libertarianism. Liberalism praises liberty and thinks we should take steps to improve it, after considering other effects. Libertarianism is a extremist philosophy that believes the only source impeding liberty is the government, and thus wants to restrict government as much as possible, whatever the consequences.Luckyguy1983 said:
Not so much liberalism as suicide then.rcs1000 said:
Obviously no.Luckyguy1983 said:
If Country A and Country B were at war, and Country A air-dropped tonnes of heroin (or any other addictive intoxicant) on Country B in order to subdue the populace, would Country B be justified in introducing strong regulations against it's possession, use, sale, etc.?rcs1000 said:I find it bizarre that anyone would care what consenting adults do in the comfort of their own home.
And that includes: pornography, homosexuality, heroin, video games, etc. etc. etc.
Libertarianism views the State as one amongst a number of institutions which have the potential to impede the freedom of the individual. It does not claim that their should be no government, merely that the powers of the State should be curtailed as much as possible whilst still allowing it to carry out certain important basic functions. It is the crucial difference between Libertarianism and Anarchism.
Liberalism believes that the State can be a source of liberty, Libertarianism believes that the State is nothing more than a tool of very limited use which should always be kept in check otherwise it will continue to grow and increase its power - something I find it hard to believe that anyone could logically disagree with.
0 -
Final canvassing anecdote of the year from me:
Elderly gentleman: Yes?
Me: Sorry to bother you! I'll be the Labour candidate in next...
Elderly gentleman: You can stop right there. I have not voted Labour since that fellow Attlee got us in a mess.
That's an impressively long time to bear a grudge. He shut the door before I could find out what Clement had done wrong.0 -
The Govt. will subsidise them to the tune of fifty quid an hour, thereby making them all expensive foreign workers. Simples.FrancisUrquhart said:MIRROR: Ed - I will ban cheap foreign workers
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B42ZbsiIcAEyadz.jpg:large
I am gonna love to see how this policy on pack of a fag packet is going to legal, given that Ed is obviously not going to change our relationship with the EU.
The money for this will come from a levy on the bankers' bonuses......
0 -
There's a lot of info and data here leaked to the telegraph about Labour's strategy next year, in relation to UKIP.
I think Labour are worried about losing their heartlands to UKIP
http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/03138/CampaigningAgainst_3138005a.pdf0 -
Against that, if you look at the work that DeCode did in Iceland, comparing the national genetic database to the family rolls, it appears that something like 90% of Icelandii with breast cancer descended from the same monk. Which suggests a genetic component.FalseFlag said:Ewald observed, though, "If one identical twin gets breast cancer, the other's likelihood of contracting it is only around 10% to 20%. This suggests that genes are not the whole story."
Similarly, the fact that expression of the Her2 gene is critical in determining whether certain cancer drugs will work, while presence of a mutated Th2 gene indicates whether CRTh2 antagonists will be effective in the treatment of astham...
well, I'll leave you to draw your own conclusions.0 -
Haha well done... Last winner I backed on that was the girl who sang hallelujah!nigel4england said:
Irony alert!isam said:
Was there an opinion poll that said fleur was going to do well or did you use your own nous?nigel4england said:
And my bet on Fleur each way to win X Factor at 10/1, she was second but a profit neverthelessTheScreamingEagles said:I hope you all followed me on backing Lewis Hamilton as SPOTY.
Own nous, I seem to be half decent at this reality show rubbish.0 -
Thank you for the reply. Fascinating stuff!rcs1000 said:...reply to my query re: oil price/GDP model...
Re: the debate earlier tonight regarding the aetiology of cancer plus the arguments regarding genetics generally, I may be able to shed a little light on this:
Essentially, genetic theory suggests that the primary purpose of a gene is to ensure its ongoing existence. "Purpose" is the wrong word; genes lack sentience, directed goals, and moral compasses. They're a product of a chemical reaction in the distant past that just happened to create something that creates things that replicate itself. Organic Von Neumann machines.
As chromosomes become more complex, more complex ways to ensure propagation become possible. For example, more content may be passed on on a population level if genes "accept" that they won't pass on 100%, 100% of the time, but only a significant percentage. This is one underlying basis for some evolutionary arguments re: extended families, social structures, altruism, homosexuality, mood, and other things that seem superficially contradictory to propagation. Finally, remember that as long as propagation occurs before death, the genetic impact of a "flaw" (by human standards e.g. hastening death in later life) is greatly diminished.
The more we learn about behaviour - and disease, to mesh with the cancer aspect of the discussion - the more causes appear to be multifactorial, with genetics being a contributory component, but with contributions from the environment (organic, inorganic, and psychosocial) also playing a role through a variety of mechanisms. A few easy things can be slotted into 100% genetic or 100% environmental, but frankly, not many. They're stuff we figured out pretty quickly.
Cancer (an umbrella term covering a multitude of very different, aetiologically-speaking - conditions) is complexity at play. It is a genetic transcription error, but what causes that error?
For some cancers, genetics is an important risk factor; for others less so. Similarly, exposure to an environmental agent can be a powerful predictor of risk, but sometimes it's near-irrelevant. And we're just starting to realise that things like mood can affect immune systems and there's an immune component to how the body deals with cancer. And so on...
What determines whether you get cancer is a (probably Bayesian) combination of risks accumulated over one's life, plus an irreducible element of luck re: totally random transcription errors. On population level you might be able to demonstrate an excess risk over the baseline associated with one risk factor, and so suggest how many "extra" cancers might be caused by it. On an individual level, this is very rarely the case.
A betting site's readership should be very comfortable with this approach to risk, rather than seeking definite statements about causality!0 -
This is the first time I've seen election campaign effects quantified.isam said:Ben Riley-Smith (@benrileysmith)
14/12/2014 22:24
Full 33-page document revealing Labour's secret Ukip strategy published here: bit.ly/1vPgWp3 pic.twitter.com/ijiZrz1kmn
"Of the relatively few studies that have attempted to quantify the effect of local campaigns, a change in intensity of the Labour Party’s local campaign from no campaigning to the average ‘campaign intensity’ was associated with an increase in our vote share of more than 5 percentage points, even when taking other local political factors in account.
Of particular relevance to this election, there is evidence that the benefits gained from campaigning are even larger for opposition parties than they are for incumbents."
P.13
http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/03138/CampaigningAgainst_3138005a.pdf0 -
Blimey, they're on the ball.TheScreamingEagles said:There's a lot of info and data here leaked to the telegraph about Labour's strategy next year, in relation to UKIP.
I think Labour are worried about losing their heartlands to UKIP
http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/03138/CampaigningAgainst_3138005a.pdf
Another irony alert!0 -
You do realise that the vaccine industry is vastly profitable?Luckyguy1983 said:Unlike prevention, which is not lucrative to anyone -quite the opposite.
And that much of the money in Alzheimer's research (including a few pennies of my own) is being spent in prevention.0 -
Has Ed insulted Kim Jong-un?TheScreamingEagles said:Which Labour voters are most likely to back Ukip? Working-class Yorkshiremen who don't have degrees, says Party HQ.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B42Zb4MIQAAs9Sh.jpg
Was this a study carried out by 3 professors from the British Election Survey?0 -
Table 3 on page 17 has a poll and why people vote the way they do.nigel4england said:
Blimey, they're on the ball.TheScreamingEagles said:There's a lot of info and data here leaked to the telegraph about Labour's strategy next year, in relation to UKIP.
I think Labour are worried about losing their heartlands to UKIP
http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/03138/CampaigningAgainst_3138005a.pdf
Another irony alert!
Edit - Scrub that, is an old public poll0 -
I gave the Libertarian Party a few quid back when Devil's Kitchen was in charge - I loved his blog. Then he made the mistake of going public with Andrew Neil and got totally squished. Mr Neil was horrible to him.
It makes me cringe just thinking about it. There are a few of us hardcore libertarians still about from when blogging was the only way to be heard. I packed mine in just after 2010 as I thought it was job done. How wrong I was.
PS I still have my Libertarian Party keyring!ZenPagan said:Plato said:Great summary. Confusing Liberals with Libertarians is a mistake made on here a lot.
There once was a libertarian party in the uk under the leadership of Chris Mounsie from Devil's kitchen unfortunately subverted by a clique led by andrew withers who I always saw as a wrong one. Only political party I ever joined till andrew withers took overRichard_Tyndall said:
Simply not true. Libertarianism is not extreme and does not believe that the only source impeding liberty is the government. Both those contentions are absolutely false.Socrates said:
It's the difference between liberalism and libertarianism. Liberalism praises liberty and thinks we should take steps to improve it, after considering other effects. Libertarianism is a extremist philosophy that believes the only source impeding liberty is the government, and thus wants to restrict government as much as possible, whatever the consequences.Luckyguy1983 said:
Not so much liberalism as suicide then.rcs1000 said:
Obviously no.Luckyguy1983 said:
If Country A and Country B were at war, and Country A air-dropped tonnes of heroin (or any other addictive intoxicant) on Country B in order to subdue the populace, would Country B be justified in introducing strong regulations against it's possession, use, sale, etc.?rcs1000 said:I find it bizarre that anyone would care what consenting adults do in the comfort of their own home.
And that includes: pornography, homosexuality, heroin, video games, etc. etc. etc.
Libertarianism views the State as one amongst a number of institutions which have the potential to impede the freedom of the individual. It does not claim that their should be no government, merely that the powers of the State should be curtailed as much as possible whilst still allowing it to carry out certain important basic functions. It is the crucial difference between Libertarianism and Anarchism.
snip0 -
Or a huge PUA of a monk. What % of the population were _not_ descended from him?Charles said:
Against that, if you look at the work that DeCode did in Iceland, comparing the national genetic database to the family rolls, it appears that something like 90% of Icelandii with breast cancer descended from the same monk. Which suggests a genetic component.FalseFlag said:Ewald observed, though, "If one identical twin gets breast cancer, the other's likelihood of contracting it is only around 10% to 20%. This suggests that genes are not the whole story."
0 -
Menigel4england said:Is there such a thing as an ugly violinist?
Many thanks for that comment, Richard.Richard_Tyndall said:
Simply not true. Libertarianism is not extreme and does not believe that the only source impeding liberty is the government. Both those contentions are absolutely false.Socrates said:
It's the difference between liberalism and libertarianism. Liberalism praises liberty and thinks we should take steps to improve it, after considering other effects. Libertarianism is a extremist philosophy that believes the only source impeding liberty is the government, and thus wants to restrict government as much as possible, whatever the consequences.Luckyguy1983 said:
Not so much liberalism as suicide then.rcs1000 said:
Obviously no.Luckyguy1983 said:
If Country A and Country B were at war, and Country A air-dropped tonnes of heroin (or any other addictive intoxicant) on Country B in order to subdue the populace, would Country B be justified in introducing strong regulations against it's possession, use, sale, etc.?rcs1000 said:I find it bizarre that anyone would care what consenting adults do in the comfort of their own home.
And that includes: pornography, homosexuality, heroin, video games, etc. etc. etc.
Libertarianism views the State as one amongst a number of institutions which have the potential to impede the freedom of the individual. It does not claim that their should be no government, merely that the powers of the State should be curtailed as much as possible whilst still allowing it to carry out certain important basic functions. It is the crucial difference between Libertarianism and Anarchism.
Liberalism believes that the State can be a source of liberty, Libertarianism believes that the State is nothing more than a tool of very limited use which should always be kept in check otherwise it will continue to grow and increase its power - something I find it hard to believe that anyone could logically disagree with.
I was furiously and irately scrolling downthread to defend my ideals and being called an extremist (which I take great exception to) only to find that you had already explained the important differences both succinctly and eloquently.
I'm still vaguely grumpy about the "extremist" label though. To me it feels positively middle ground and uncontroversial to have a 'don't tread on me' approach.0 -
Time for Neil Hamilton to save the day... ;-)TheScreamingEagles said:Inevitably Kerry Smith resigns as UKIP candidate for South Basildon and East Thurrock
By the way (*tin foil hat at the read*) did Christine Hamilton's tweets over the last few days imply she knew this was coming...
...if so, why...?0 -
These days an extremist is someone who refuses to vote for any of the big three if you judge by the like of flightpath and his ilkGeoffM said:
Menigel4england said:Is there such a thing as an ugly violinist?
Many thanks for that comment, Richard.Richard_Tyndall said:
Simply not true. Libertarianism is not extreme and does not believe that the only source impeding liberty is the government. Both those contentions are absolutely false.Socrates said:
It's the difference between liberalism and libertarianism. Liberalism praises liberty and thinks we should take steps to improve it, after considering other effects. Libertarianism is a extremist philosophy that believes the only source impeding liberty is the government, and thus wants to restrict government as much as possible, whatever the consequences.Luckyguy1983 said:
Not so much liberalism as suicide then.rcs1000 said:
Obviously no.Luckyguy1983 said:
If Country A and Country B were at war, and Country A air-dropped tonnes of heroin (or any other addictive intoxicant) on Country B in order to subdue the populace, would Country B be justified in introducing strong regulations against it's possession, use, sale, etc.?rcs1000 said:I find it bizarre that anyone would care what consenting adults do in the comfort of their own home.
And that includes: pornography, homosexuality, heroin, video games, etc. etc. etc.
Libertarianism views the State as one amongst a number of institutions which have the potential to impede the freedom of the individual. It does not claim that their should be no government, merely that the powers of the State should be curtailed as much as possible whilst still allowing it to carry out certain important basic functions. It is the crucial difference between Libertarianism and Anarchism.
Liberalism believes that the State can be a source of liberty, Libertarianism believes that the State is nothing more than a tool of very limited use which should always be kept in check otherwise it will continue to grow and increase its power - something I find it hard to believe that anyone could logically disagree with.
I was furiously and irately scrolling downthread to defend my ideals and being called an extremist (which I take great exception to) only to find that you had already explained the important differences both succinctly and eloquently.
I'm still vaguely grumpy about the "extremist" label though. To me it feels positively middle ground and uncontroversial to have a 'don't tread on me' approach.
0 -
-
She did know, when looking back at her tweets.Charles said:
Time for Neil Hamilton to save the day... ;-)TheScreamingEagles said:Inevitably Kerry Smith resigns as UKIP candidate for South Basildon and East Thurrock
By the way (*tin foil hat at the read*) did Christine Hamilton's tweets over the last few days imply she knew this was coming...
...if so, why...?
If Neil Hamilton does become the candidate, we will know one way or another if Farage runs UKIP or if UKIP have become a rich man's play thing.
Personally, Christine Hamilton should go for it, she'd be a great candidate/MP.0 -
Mr @ChokinVase - I really must ask - how does one pronounce your screen name and what does it refer to?0
-
@Richard,
Ultimately, I think political philosophy comes down to a simple choice : does the government and the state exist at the behest of individuals, or the other way around.
Strong statists see the government as bestowing rights on individuals. Libertarians see it the other way around.0 -
McIlroy has elected to represent ROI in the Olympics - he can have few complaints.0
-
Libertarians are right. Statists are always wrongrcs1000 said:@Richard,
Ultimately, I think political philosophy comes down to a simple choice : does the government and the state exist at the behest of individuals, or the other way around.
Strong statists see the government as bestowing rights on individuals. Libertarians see it the other way around.
0 -
I agree. She comes across as a Good Egg.TheScreamingEagles said:
Personally, Christine Hamilton should go for it, she'd be a great candidate/MP.Charles said:
Time for Neil Hamilton to save the day... ;-)TheScreamingEagles said:Inevitably Kerry Smith resigns as UKIP candidate for South Basildon and East Thurrock
By the way (*tin foil hat at the read*) did Christine Hamilton's tweets over the last few days imply she knew this was coming...
...if so, why...?
0 -
You can rule out Andy Murray winning a future SPOTY.TGOHF said:McIlroy has elected to represent ROI in the Olympics - he can have few complaints.
We don't like someone one who turns their back on the UK.0 -
Didn't she win some Jungle reality TV show a few years ago? I think she's very entertaining. IIRC her Twitter handle is British Battleaxe.
I've a very unprintable anecdote about her.anotherDave said:
I agree. She comes across as a Good Egg.TheScreamingEagles said:
Personally, Christine Hamilton should go for it, she'd be a great candidate/MP.Charles said:
Time for Neil Hamilton to save the day... ;-)TheScreamingEagles said:Inevitably Kerry Smith resigns as UKIP candidate for South Basildon and East Thurrock
By the way (*tin foil hat at the read*) did Christine Hamilton's tweets over the last few days imply she knew this was coming...
...if so, why...?0 -
This seat is the ultimate poisoned chalice: first Bolter, then Neil Hamilton now the latest victim. Best vet the next one a bit more closely!TheScreamingEagles said:
She did know, when looking back at her tweets.Charles said:
Time for Neil Hamilton to save the day... ;-)TheScreamingEagles said:Inevitably Kerry Smith resigns as UKIP candidate for South Basildon and East Thurrock
By the way (*tin foil hat at the read*) did Christine Hamilton's tweets over the last few days imply she knew this was coming...
...if so, why...?
If Neil Hamilton does become the candidate, we will know one way or another if Farage runs UKIP or if UKIP have become a rich man's play thing.
Personally, Christine Hamilton should go for it, she'd be a great candidate/MP.0 -
Indeed - Rory could win overseas personality in 2016 I guess.TheScreamingEagles said:
You can rule out Andy Murray winning a future SPOTY.TGOHF said:McIlroy has elected to represent ROI in the Olympics - he can have few complaints.
We don't like someone one who turns their back on the UK.
0 -
My father won't have the Observer in the house because of how they behaved over Suez...NickPalmer said:Final canvassing anecdote of the year from me:
Elderly gentleman: Yes?
Me: Sorry to bother you! I'll be the Labour candidate in next...
Elderly gentleman: You can stop right there. I have not voted Labour since that fellow Attlee got us in a mess.
That's an impressively long time to bear a grudge. He shut the door before I could find out what Clement had done wrong.0 -
Wow, it was an absolute shellacking for Rory Mac
#SPOTY2014 votes: Hamilton 209,920, McIlroy 123,745, Pavey, 99,913.0 -
Is he from the ROI?TGOHF said:McIlroy has elected to represent ROI in the Olympics - he can have few complaints.
0 -
No - from Ulster.nigel4england said:
Is he from the ROI?TGOHF said:McIlroy has elected to represent ROI in the Olympics - he can have few complaints.
0 -
Oh please, do give us the merest hint re the anecdote!Plato said:Didn't she win some Jungle reality TV show a few years ago? I think she's very entertaining. IIRC her Twitter handle is British Battleaxe.
I've a very unprintable anecdote about her.anotherDave said:
I agree. She comes across as a Good Egg.TheScreamingEagles said:
Personally, Christine Hamilton should go for it, she'd be a great candidate/MP.Charles said:
Time for Neil Hamilton to save the day... ;-)TheScreamingEagles said:Inevitably Kerry Smith resigns as UKIP candidate for South Basildon and East Thurrock
By the way (*tin foil hat at the read*) did Christine Hamilton's tweets over the last few days imply she knew this was coming...
...if so, why...?0 -
After a day retweeting anti ukip stuff, @election_data hears of the labour leak
@election_data (@election_data)
14/12/2014 22:54
Pfffft
0 -
I always wondered that...edmundintokyo said:
Or a huge PUA of a monk. What % of the population were _not_ descended from him?Charles said:
Against that, if you look at the work that DeCode did in Iceland, comparing the national genetic database to the family rolls, it appears that something like 90% of Icelandii with breast cancer descended from the same monk. Which suggests a genetic component.FalseFlag said:Ewald observed, though, "If one identical twin gets breast cancer, the other's likelihood of contracting it is only around 10% to 20%. This suggests that genes are not the whole story."
But I just liked the factoid, so it stuck in my mind whereas the rest of the paper (from 2002, I think) didn't.
This gives some of the background
http://www.decode.com/decode-discovers-common-genetic-variants-linked-to-increased-risk-of-breast-cancer/0 -
TSE - Many thanks for that profitable steer last night to back Lewis Hamilton to win SPOTY, based on a YouGov poll showing a good many more believed he would win rather than McIlroy.TheScreamingEagles said:I hope you all followed me on backing Lewis Hamilton as SPOTY.
I've only just heard about my good fortune, having completely given up on my chances earlier this evening when the betting odds suggested that the Irishman was set to win with ease.0 -
Striking for ,e was the paucity of the show and the lack of footage. The whole event should be moved to Sky.peter_from_putney said:
TSE - Many thanks for that profitable steer last night to back Lewis Hamilton to win SPOTY, based on a YouGov poll showing a good many more believed he would win rather than McIlroy.TheScreamingEagles said:I hope you all followed me on backing Lewis Hamilton as SPOTY.
I've only just heard about my good fortune, having completely given up on my chances earlier this evening when the betting odds suggested that the Irishman was set to win with ease.0 -
Another irony alert, though this feels more like a 'Take the piss' alertpeter_from_putney said:
TSE - Many thanks for that profitable steer last night to back Lewis Hamilton to win SPOTY, based on a YouGov poll showing a good many more believed he would win rather than McIlroy.TheScreamingEagles said:I hope you all followed me on backing Lewis Hamilton as SPOTY.
I've only just heard about my good fortune, having completely given up on my chances earlier this evening when the betting odds suggested that the Irishman was set to win with ease.0 -
An extremist is clearly someone who can only make childish excuses for people not likeing the bigotry of his own partyZenPagan said:
These days an extremist is someone who refuses to vote for any of the big three if you judge by the like of flightpath and his ilkGeoffM said:
Menigel4england said:Is there such a thing as an ugly violinist?
Many thanks for that comment, Richard.Richard_Tyndall said:
Simply not true. Libertarianism is not extreme and does not believe that the only source impeding liberty is the government. Both those contentions are absolutely false.Socrates said:
...Luckyguy1983 said:
Not so much liberalism as suicide then.rcs1000 said:
Obviously no.Luckyguy1983 said:
If Country A and Country B were at war, and Country A air-dropped tonnes of heroin (or any other addictive intoxicant) on Country B in order to subdue the populace, would Country B be justified in introducing strong regulations against it's possession, use, sale, etc.?rcs1000 said:I find it bizarre that anyone would care what consenting adults do in the comfort of their own home.
And that includes: pornography, homosexuality, heroin, video games, etc. etc. etc.
Libertarianism views the State as one amongst a number of institutions which have the potential to impede the freedom of the individual. It does not claim that their should be no government, merely that the powers of the State should be curtailed as much as possible whilst still allowing it to carry out certain important basic functions. It is the crucial difference between Libertarianism and Anarchism.
Liberalism believes that the State can be a source of liberty, Libertarianism believes that the State is nothing more than a tool of very limited use which should always be kept in check otherwise it will continue to grow and increase its power - something I find it hard to believe that anyone could logically disagree with.
I was furiously and irately scrolling downthread to defend my ideals and being called an extremist (which I take great exception to) only to find that you had already explained the important differences both succinctly and eloquently.
I'm still vaguely grumpy about the "extremist" label though. To me it feels positively middle ground and uncontroversial to have a 'don't tread on me' approach.0 -
Reckless might need a new seat in 2015. Perhaps he could stand there?foxinsoxuk said:
This seat is the ultimate poisoned chalice: first Bolter, then Neil Hamilton now the latest victim. Best vet the next one a bit more closely!TheScreamingEagles said:
She did know, when looking back at her tweets.Charles said:
Time for Neil Hamilton to save the day... ;-)TheScreamingEagles said:Inevitably Kerry Smith resigns as UKIP candidate for South Basildon and East Thurrock
By the way (*tin foil hat at the read*) did Christine Hamilton's tweets over the last few days imply she knew this was coming...
...if so, why...?
If Neil Hamilton does become the candidate, we will know one way or another if Farage runs UKIP or if UKIP have become a rich man's play thing.
Personally, Christine Hamilton should go for it, she'd be a great candidate/MP.0 -
Congratulations on the self realization. It is not before timeFlightpath said:
An extremist is clearly someone who can only make childish excuses for people not likeing the bigotry of his own partyZenPagan said:
These days an extremist is someone who refuses to vote for any of the big three if you judge by the like of flightpath and his ilkGeoffM said:
Menigel4england said:Is there such a thing as an ugly violinist?
Many thanks for that comment, Richard.Richard_Tyndall said:
Simply not true. Libertarianism is not extreme and does not believe that the only source impeding liberty is the government. Both those contentions are absolutely false.Socrates said:
...Luckyguy1983 said:
Not so much liberalism as suicide then.rcs1000 said:
Obviously no.Luckyguy1983 said:
If Country A and Country B were at war, and Country A air-dropped tonnes of heroin (or any other addictive intoxicant) on Country B in order to subdue the populace, would Country B be justified in introducing strong regulations against it's possession, use, sale, etc.?rcs1000 said:I find it bizarre that anyone would care what consenting adults do in the comfort of their own home.
And that includes: pornography, homosexuality, heroin, video games, etc. etc. etc.
Libertarianism views the State as one amongst a number of institutions which have the potential to impede the freedom of the individual. It does not claim that their should be no government, merely that the powers of the State should be curtailed as much as possible whilst still allowing it to carry out certain important basic functions. It is the crucial difference between Libertarianism and Anarchism.
Liberalism believes that the State can be a source of liberty, Libertarianism believes that the State is nothing more than a tool of very limited use which should always be kept in check otherwise it will continue to grow and increase its power - something I find it hard to believe that anyone could logically disagree with.
I was furiously and irately scrolling downthread to defend my ideals and being called an extremist (which I take great exception to) only to find that you had already explained the important differences both succinctly and eloquently.
I'm still vaguely grumpy about the "extremist" label though. To me it feels positively middle ground and uncontroversial to have a 'don't tread on me' approach.
0 -
Kilroy could make a comeback ?TheWatcher said:
Reckless might need a new seat in 2015. Perhaps he could stand there?foxinsoxuk said:
This seat is the ultimate poisoned chalice: first Bolter, then Neil Hamilton now the latest victim. Best vet the next one a bit more closely!TheScreamingEagles said:
She did know, when looking back at her tweets.Charles said:
Time for Neil Hamilton to save the day... ;-)TheScreamingEagles said:Inevitably Kerry Smith resigns as UKIP candidate for South Basildon and East Thurrock
By the way (*tin foil hat at the read*) did Christine Hamilton's tweets over the last few days imply she knew this was coming...
...if so, why...?
If Neil Hamilton does become the candidate, we will know one way or another if Farage runs UKIP or if UKIP have become a rich man's play thing.
Personally, Christine Hamilton should go for it, she'd be a great candidate/MP.0 -
At 9:29 this morning I delivered a leaflet to the home of Alex Haenow, brother of X Factor winner Ben Haenow.0
-
Well, I've made my opposition to EVEL clear to you in the past so I've no problem with it. And I'm a Ukipper.Carnyx said:
Ah, thanks. Wonder what the Right in England would say if they tried that today?Alistair said:
It wasn't SNP MPs who voted against the English gay marriage bill. A big percentage of no votes came from Scottish Labour MPs. Pretty despicable.Carnyx said:
Not sure if it is more backward now but yes, both issues were very much cross party. There were some Labour MSPs very unhappy with same-sex marriage for instance.TheScreamingEagles said:
Scotland has always been (relatively speaking to England) backwards to homosexuality.Paul_Mid_Beds said:
I seem to recall that Brian Souter arranged one in Scotland over Section 28 because the Scottish Parliament wouldn't have one.TheScreamingEagles said:
I've said we should have had a referendum on same sex marriage, just to show the homophobes how out of touch they were.
31.8% of people in Scotland voted excluding spoilt ballots (as a comparison 42% voted in the UK Alternative Vote referendum in 2011 and 50% voted in the 2011 Scottish General Election.)
86.8% voted in favour of keeping Section 28, 13.2% in favour of repeal.
Amount of Votes in Favour of Keeping Section 28 in 2001: 1,096,011
Amount of Votes SNP got in 2011 Scot Parliament election: 902,915
Be careful what you wish for, you might get it.
It was Thatcher who decriminalised homosexuality in Scotland, which was one of her earliest achievements as Prime Minister.
So prior to 1980, being gay in Scotland was a crime.
Some SNP MSPs have been accused by one of their own MEPS of being mean, angry bigots (when it comes to gay equality)
This isn't a dig at Scotland or the SNP, the SNP also have introduced same sex marriage.
I understand the various religious factors in play there.0 -
@ChokinVase
A good summary. Many diseases are of the multiple hit variety, with the gene that predisposes being triggered by one or more environmental trigger, with a dose of random bad luck in addition. Even obviously genetic conditions such as sickle cell are influenced by environment.
The gene/environment discussion reminds me of the ancient theological discussion on pre-destination and free will. Either has its advocates, but in practice people believe they have free will. Similarly with diseases there is little we can do with the genetic hand of cards that we are dealt, our only influence on our health is our own environments.0 -
Would it be fair to describe you as a stalker?JohnLoony said:At 9:29 this morning I delivered a leaflet to the home of Alex Haenow, brother of X Factor winner Ben Haenow.
0 -
The other interesting question is why and who would leak such a document to the Telegraph.......?TheScreamingEagles said:There's a lot of info and data here leaked to the telegraph about Labour's strategy next year, in relation to UKIP.
I think Labour are worried about losing their heartlands to UKIP
http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/03138/CampaigningAgainst_3138005a.pdf
Someone with less than 100% faith in Ed Miliband?
That'll narrow down the list of suspects......0 -
Most of the document is fairly standard research/marketing that you'd expect any competent organisation to try to educate their salesforce about, but the quantification on that point was interesting, yes. Of course, if everyone's doing the same, it will largely cancel out, but the residual effect you note is intriguing.anotherDave said:
This is the first time I've seen election campaign effects quantified.isam said:Ben Riley-Smith (@benrileysmith)
14/12/2014 22:24
Full 33-page document revealing Labour's secret Ukip strategy published here: bit.ly/1vPgWp3 pic.twitter.com/ijiZrz1kmn
"Of the relatively few studies that have attempted to quantify the effect of local campaigns, a change in intensity of the Labour Party’s local campaign from no campaigning to the average ‘campaign intensity’ was associated with an increase in our vote share of more than 5 percentage points, even when taking other local political factors in account.
Of particular relevance to this election, there is evidence that the benefits gained from campaigning are even larger for opposition parties than they are for incumbents."
A Chokin vase was what I saw first when I looked up from my screen when I was trying to think up a username. Chokin is a type of Japanese engraving & then gilding. Pronounced as you'd read it.Plato said:Mr @ChokinVase - I really must ask - how does one pronounce your screen name and what does it refer to?
(Chokin is also the word for savings/bank deposits, with chokinbako being the word for a "savings box" ie. piggybank. I don't yet know enough Japanese to say whether the etymology/kanji is the same as that used for the art or not, but I like the idea of a gilded piggybank!)0
This discussion has been closed.