politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Lib Dem sources say the debates unlikely to happen
Comments
-
UoA collect tree samples (from cavemen tools, and building materials, and fossilized wood) from all over the world.Charles said:
I think you may be talking at cross-purposes.GeoffM said:
Plato and I have pointed out that we don't.rcs1000 said:
I have no idea, I'm just pointing out that we have an unbroken record of something going back 40,000 years which correlates quite well with temperature.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. 1000, and do those tree cores show 2014 to be the hottest year ever?
I'd be surprised, if so. Natural variation has accounted for temperatures hotter than those currently experienced, and colder than those currently experienced. There is no compelling evidence. The IPCC got its predictions drastically wrong in its 4th report, then upgraded its confidence in its own forecasts for the 5th report.
The Yarmal data set on which Michael Mann's hockey stick was thin to useless.
UoA may well have a better dataset (presumably based on the redwood) but Mann didn't use that for his theory
@Josias: I think tree samples - especially when you have them from many different locales - can be useful (presumably, it won't be a drought everywhere). But they will only ever be able to give you a rough idea. I would be interested to see how well we can impute local temperatures from tree samples today.0 -
Crossrail programme on BBC2 right now
0 -
I'll give you good odds on her becoming POTUS, if you're that way inclined...MikeK said:
I have it on good authority that Sarah Palin will make a bid to be potus candidate. So good is my info, so far, that I have laid £200 on Palin to at least run the primaries.MTimT said:
But since then he has gone on to be a caricature of himself on TV shows. I think his credibility as a serious candidate is much diminished in much the same way as Palin's.Peter_the_Punter said:
Hmmmm....I've always thought he was a pretty strong candidate.MTimT said:
Peter, I think his odds are long because no-one thinks he can beat Bush, Rubio or Walker.Peter_the_Punter said:We're pretty much on the same page there. Yokes.
Bit puzzled as to why Huckabee's odds aren't shorter. He's certainly doing OK in the polls, and it looks like he will run.
He beat Romney the time before last, didn't he?0 -
Cruz is pretty much hated by all but the 10% of the GOP who support him. DOA if he announces. Christie is toast, no matter what happens with JebHYUFD said:TimT/Yokel If Jeb does not run in the end Christie then becomes the establishment choice, Paul and Cruz are also likely conservative alternatives
0 -
Test0
-
How you Tories do love to mangle the truth, Mr Mark. You pick out isolated words and put them together to mean something quite different.MarqueeMark said:Six paragraphs - and not a single denial. Your confirmation of the story is noted, senior LibDem official strategist.... ;-)
I am not "senior" and never claimed to be. Hence, I am in no position to deny anything.
All I am saying is that the story constructed by the FT´s political correspondent has an incredibly weak basis.
In terms of telling a damaging story without much foundation, you would make a much better hand of it yourself.0 -
Hard to see why UKIP aren't odds-on in Great Grimsby. It's not as though it was exactly an impregnable Labour fortress in 2010.0
-
TimT Cruz is popular with the establishment base of the GOP, Christie is charismatic and pre Bridgegate was running away with it, as that begins to fade no reason he cannot return0
-
And I'll give you better oddsrcs1000 said:
I'll give you good odds on her becoming POTUS, if you're that way inclined...MikeK said:
I have it on good authority that Sarah Palin will make a bid to be potus candidate. So good is my info, so far, that I have laid £200 on Palin to at least run the primaries.MTimT said:
But since then he has gone on to be a caricature of himself on TV shows. I think his credibility as a serious candidate is much diminished in much the same way as Palin's.Peter_the_Punter said:
Hmmmm....I've always thought he was a pretty strong candidate.MTimT said:
Peter, I think his odds are long because no-one thinks he can beat Bush, Rubio or Walker.Peter_the_Punter said:We're pretty much on the same page there. Yokes.
Bit puzzled as to why Huckabee's odds aren't shorter. He's certainly doing OK in the polls, and it looks like he will run.
He beat Romney the time before last, didn't he?
0 -
What world do you live in if you think Cruz is popular with the GOP establishment? And Bridgegate is the least of Christie's problems - it is the State's credit rating downgrades that kill his candidacy as he cannot run on fiscal competence.HYUFD said:TimT Cruz is popular with the establishment base of the GOP, Christie is charismatic and pre Bridgegate was running away with it, as that begins to fade no reason he cannot return
0 -
In terms of trees the clue is in the name - dendrochronology. You can tell a date. Not a temperature. You cannot tell anything if you mangle the statistics.rcs1000 said:
UoA collect tree samples (from cavemen tools, and building materials, and fossilized wood) from all over the world.Charles said:
I think you may be talking at cross-purposes.GeoffM said:
Plato and I have pointed out that we don't.rcs1000 said:
I have no idea, I'm just pointing out that we have an unbroken record of something going back 40,000 years which correlates quite well with temperature.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. 1000, and do those tree cores show 2014 to be the hottest year ever?
I'd be surprised, if so. Natural variation has accounted for temperatures hotter than those currently experienced, and colder than those currently experienced. There is no compelling evidence. The IPCC got its predictions drastically wrong in its 4th report, then upgraded its confidence in its own forecasts for the 5th report.
The Yarmal data set on which Michael Mann's hockey stick was thin to useless.
UoA may well have a better dataset (presumably based on the redwood) but Mann didn't use that for his theory
@Josias: I think tree samples - especially when you have them from many different locales - can be useful (presumably, it won't be a drought everywhere). But they will only ever be able to give you a rough idea. I would be interested to see how well we can impute local temperatures from tree samples today.0 -
I assume it is a repeat?Sunil_Prasannan said:Crossrail programme on BBC2 right now
0 -
Rumours to that affect have circulated here. But she would have to take a huge pay cut and she is now no longer the force majeur she was in 2009/2010 - rather seen as either irrelevant or a joke. By the 2014 primaries, she wasn't even a kingmaker anymore.MikeK said:
I have it on good authority that Sarah Palin will make a bid to be potus candidate. So good is my info, so far, that I have laid £200 on Palin to at least run the primaries.MTimT said:
But since then he has gone on to be a caricature of himself on TV shows. I think his credibility as a serious candidate is much diminished in much the same way as Palin's.Peter_the_Punter said:
Hmmmm....I've always thought he was a pretty strong candidate.MTimT said:
Peter, I think his odds are long because no-one thinks he can beat Bush, Rubio or Walker.Peter_the_Punter said:We're pretty much on the same page there. Yokes.
Bit puzzled as to why Huckabee's odds aren't shorter. He's certainly doing OK in the polls, and it looks like he will run.
He beat Romney the time before last, didn't he?0 -
So the PM gets the debates canned and doesn't get the blame? I thought it was a huge error by the Tories to insist on Green participation.0
-
Never mind Crossrail, Sunil. How's Crossover coming along?Sunil_Prasannan said:Crossrail programme on BBC2 right now
0 -
TimT The GOP base likes him is what I meant and the Tea Party (entered establishment by mistake). I doubt most voters will be too obsessed about New Jersey's credit rating anyway, he is likely to do well in New Hampshire and if he wins there would become the establishment candidate0
-
Spurs......0
-
And there is another clue in another name: dendroclimatology. Things quite often have more than one property, and in this case we can both count tree rings, and measure them. Amazing!Flightpath said:
In terms of trees the clue is in the name - dendrochronology. You can tell a date. Not a temperature. You cannot tell anything if you mangle the statistics.rcs1000 said:
UoA collect tree samples (from cavemen tools, and building materials, and fossilized wood) from all over the world.Charles said:
I think you may be talking at cross-purposes.GeoffM said:
Plato and I have pointed out that we don't.rcs1000 said:
I have no idea, I'm just pointing out that we have an unbroken record of something going back 40,000 years which correlates quite well with temperature.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. 1000, and do those tree cores show 2014 to be the hottest year ever?
I'd be surprised, if so. Natural variation has accounted for temperatures hotter than those currently experienced, and colder than those currently experienced. There is no compelling evidence. The IPCC got its predictions drastically wrong in its 4th report, then upgraded its confidence in its own forecasts for the 5th report.
The Yarmal data set on which Michael Mann's hockey stick was thin to useless.
UoA may well have a better dataset (presumably based on the redwood) but Mann didn't use that for his theory
@Josias: I think tree samples - especially when you have them from many different locales - can be useful (presumably, it won't be a drought everywhere). But they will only ever be able to give you a rough idea. I would be interested to see how well we can impute local temperatures from tree samples today.
0 -
Could be worse. Leicester threw away a couple of precious points too, and we need them more than you.Scrapheap_as_was said:Spurs......
0 -
Man arrested in Karen Danczuk sex abuse inquiry
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-315774630 -
Well yes, Cruz would be the Tea Party candidate, but that is hardly the GOP base, particularly after the 2014 season. I disagree with you re Christie, the credit rating issue goes to fiscal competence, which is still a huge issue with most of the GOP, if less so with the population at large.HYUFD said:TimT The GOP base likes him is what I meant and the Tea Party (entered establishment by mistake). I doubt most voters will be too obsessed about New Jersey's credit rating anyway, he is likely to do well in New Hampshire and if he wins there would become the establishment candidate
You might find this article from the WP describing the four component parts of the GOP: Establishment, Tea Party, social conservative and libertarian. I agree with the thrust of the story and the main classifications, but think the proportions are wrong. Personally, I think the Establishment is probably 40-50%, Tea Party 20-25%, and social conservatives and libertarians both around the 15% mark. However, the smaller groups probably turn out disproportionately at primaries
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/02/13/ted-cruz-is-the-most-underrated-candidate-in-the-2016-field/0 -
They know there wouldn't be much left of Ed after Nicola is done with him.JPJ2 said:“Labour, while openly backing the debates, have also privately raised questions about the presence of [Nicola] Sturgeon, who will be handed a national stage as well as debating with Jim Murphy, the Scottish Labour leader.”
The usual slimy, deceitful approach that so many Scots have come to know and despise from the British Labour Party in Scotland.0 -
No, but it was delayed by a few yearsRobD said:
I assume it is a repeat?Sunil_Prasannan said:Crossrail programme on BBC2 right now
0 -
TimT In terms of who votes in GOP primaries, the majority are conservatives and a substantial proportion of them from the Tea Party. If Christie is the establishment's best hope they will put aside their reservations and go with him. Thanks for the Article, the establishment makes up at best 20-25% of GOP primary voters in my view, with probably Tea Party voters around 40%, social conservatives 25% and libertarians 10-15%0
-
The thing is it's not just the debates, there must now be a cloud over every political programme during the campaign. How are they going to navigate the minefield of potential lawsuits from anyone not invited onto something? Presumably people will only bother complaining if the programme has some importance akin to the debates. But if they don't have a degree of importance, what's the point of them?MaxPB said:So the PM gets the debates canned and doesn't get the blame? I thought it was a huge error by the Tories to insist on Green participation.
0 -
Charles - the point about the data from the Yamal peninsular was not that it was thin and then cherry picked - it is that there was additional data available collected by someone else from the same location. You will be unsurprised to know that this data did not support 20th Cent global warming. The fact that it did not when we know there actually had been rather undermines the whole 'proxy' concept.
The point of these proxies was to eliminate the medieval warm period and show a convenient uptick where it was needed. Where the proxies did not give the uptick was hidden, famously labelled in an email as 'hide the decline'. It was a decline which undid the whole of the proxy theory.0 -
@MarkSenior
'Yep , frit Dave will try and avoid any contact with real voters , how different to his attitude when he was a newly elected LofO back in 2006/2007'
I can understand how upset you must be with Clegg demoted to minor party status,assuming the debates go ahead.
What pledges are you expecting Clegg to give this time around ?0 -
The campaign will be covered exactly like all others I imagine. Last time Brown flat refused to be interviewed by Paxman. I don't think he ever has.FrankBooth said:
The thing is it's not just the debates, there must now be a cloud over every political programme during the campaign. How are they going to navigate the minefield of potential lawsuits from anyone not invited onto something? Presumably people will only bother complaining if the programme has some importance akin to the debates. But if they don't have a degree of importance, what's the point of them?MaxPB said:So the PM gets the debates canned and doesn't get the blame? I thought it was a huge error by the Tories to insist on Green participation.
0 -
Don't forget, the Tea Party consistently (Cantor excepted, but special circumstances) got its arse whipped in the primaries last year. So I think your percentages are way off. But I guess we'll just agree to disagree.0
-
All true, but she still has a massive following.MTimT said:
Rumours to that affect have circulated here. But she would have to take a huge pay cut and she is now no longer the force majeur she was in 2009/2010 - rather seen as either irrelevant or a joke. By the 2014 primaries, she wasn't even a kingmaker anymore.MikeK said:
I have it on good authority that Sarah Palin will make a bid to be potus candidate. So good is my info, so far, that I have laid £200 on Palin to at least run the primaries.MTimT said:
But since then he has gone on to be a caricature of himself on TV shows. I think his credibility as a serious candidate is much diminished in much the same way as Palin's.Peter_the_Punter said:
Hmmmm....I've always thought he was a pretty strong candidate.MTimT said:
Peter, I think his odds are long because no-one thinks he can beat Bush, Rubio or Walker.Peter_the_Punter said:We're pretty much on the same page there. Yokes.
Bit puzzled as to why Huckabee's odds aren't shorter. He's certainly doing OK in the polls, and it looks like he will run.
He beat Romney the time before last, didn't he?
0 -
Try using them as a proxy for climate change and see the mess you get into. Dendroclimatology is a bogus science.Ishmael_X said:
And there is another clue in another name: dendroclimatology. Things quite often have more than one property, and in this case we can both count tree rings, and measure them. Amazing!Flightpath said:
In terms of trees the clue is in the name - dendrochronology. You can tell a date. Not a temperature. You cannot tell anything if you mangle the statistics.rcs1000 said:
UoA collect tree samples (from cavemen tools, and building materials, and fossilized wood) from all over the world.Charles said:
I think you may be talking at cross-purposes.GeoffM said:
Plato and I have pointed out that we don't.rcs1000 said:
I have no idea, I'm just pointing out that we have an unbroken record of something going back 40,000 years which correlates quite well with temperature.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. 1000, and do those tree cores show 2014 to be the hottest year ever?
I'd be surprised, if so. Natural variation has accounted for temperatures hotter than those currently experienced, and colder than those currently experienced. There is no compelling evidence. The IPCC got its predictions drastically wrong in its 4th report, then upgraded its confidence in its own forecasts for the 5th report.
The Yarmal data set on which Michael Mann's hockey stick was thin to useless.
UoA may well have a better dataset (presumably based on the redwood) but Mann didn't use that for his theory
@Josias: I think tree samples - especially when you have them from many different locales - can be useful (presumably, it won't be a drought everywhere). But they will only ever be able to give you a rough idea. I would be interested to see how well we can impute local temperatures from tree samples today.0 -
Are you muddling her up with Kim Kardashian?MikeK said:
All true, but she still has a massive following.MTimT said:
Rumours to that affect have circulated here. But she would have to take a huge pay cut and she is now no longer the force majeur she was in 2009/2010 - rather seen as either irrelevant or a joke. By the 2014 primaries, she wasn't even a kingmaker anymore.MikeK said:
I have it on good authority that Sarah Palin will make a bid to be potus candidate. So good is my info, so far, that I have laid £200 on Palin to at least run the primaries.MTimT said:
But since then he has gone on to be a caricature of himself on TV shows. I think his credibility as a serious candidate is much diminished in much the same way as Palin's.Peter_the_Punter said:
Hmmmm....I've always thought he was a pretty strong candidate.MTimT said:
Peter, I think his odds are long because no-one thinks he can beat Bush, Rubio or Walker.Peter_the_Punter said:We're pretty much on the same page there. Yokes.
Bit puzzled as to why Huckabee's odds aren't shorter. He's certainly doing OK in the polls, and it looks like he will run.
He beat Romney the time before last, didn't he?0 -
I think that might be because UKIP came fourth in Grimsby in 2010 with 6% of the vote.Richard_Nabavi said:Hard to see why UKIP aren't odds-on in Great Grimsby. It's not as though it was exactly an impregnable Labour fortress in 2010.
0 -
To further my previous post, and with thanks to Ishmael_X for the pointer:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dendroclimatology
Hmmm. The 'Confounding factors' section is rather long ...0 -
TimT It lost a few Senate primaries in 2014, true, but only after it was largely Tea Party candidates who won the House of Representatives in 2010 and many of the Senate primaries in 2012. They are still a force, and Romney and McCain only won because the conservative vote was split. In 2012 the votes of Santorum and Gingrich combined were more than Romney achieved until Santorum dropped out. I think the establishment will still squeeze out one more nomination in 2016 to try and beat Hillary, and the nominee will be either Jeb Bush or Christie, but if that candidate loses I can see Cruz getting the nomination in 20200
-
Elections have similarities to those shrovetide football games - lots of noise and action but very little consequence.foxinsoxuk said:
Modern political campaigning is the tactical equivalent of "Catenaccio". The object is to prevent the opposition scoring. All unscripted encounters run the risk of a gaffe, and should be kept to a minimum. The defining aspect of the 2010 election was bigot-gate.MarkSenior said:
Yep , frit Dave will try and avoid any contact with real voters , how different to his attitude when he was a newly elected LofO back in 2006/2007stodge said:Evening all
Leaving the smearing of LD candidates to Tory activists who don't like canvassing in the rain, should we be surprised by any of this ?
It sounds like a bit of a negotiating ploy from the Party - I didn't think when the various formulae for debates were announced a few weeks ago that everyone or indeed anyone would be happy. It's more interesting how negatively the parties themselves view the debates given how critical they were last time.
I've always thought Cameron would be vulnerable when forced to publicly defend aspects of the Government's record - especially immigration - to a potentially hostile public audience. In all honesty, I think Cameron is weak when dealing with hostility (witness how he repeatedly twists and turns under the onslaughts from his own side) and while anyone can sound and look good in front of a friendly crowd, that can be controlled and organised.
All in all, I doubt Cameron will lose much sleep from not having a debate - he will be sent off to do stage-managed events in front of well-vetted crowds and contact with any hostile public will be kept to an absolute minimum.
Elections are generally won by organisation and attrition, very rarely by dash or flair. I think that the big 2 have the advantage if there are no debates.
0 -
-
Out of jail in the last minute yet again, how many times is taht this season?Scrapheap_as_was said:Spurs......
5 or 6?
Hull, villa, West Ham... Otomh0 -
'Dendroclimatology 101'JosiasJessop said:To further my previous post, and with thanks to Ishmael_X for the pointer:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dendroclimatology
Hmmm. The 'Confounding factors' section is rather long ...
Lesson 1 - First Find Your Tree.0 -
Evening all. Any chance England will give Scotland a decent game tonight? So far it has been pretty obvious they are getting paid by the game rather than the hour. I would like to see what this Scottish team can do when under modest pressure.
On topic the key for the debates is the head to head between Ed and Dave (which is of course why Nick is in the huff). If the tories are behind or still broadly level Cameron will want this confident that he can get the better of Miliband most of the time. If the tories move ahead, of course, then he will adopt the same position of every PM in history since the invention of the radio other than that loser Brown.
Personally, I think that if the Tories are to win they need to make this election as Presidential as possible and major on Cameron's superior ratings as an individual compared with Labour's generally superior ratings to his party. I don't personally see how avoiding a debate with Ed is consistent with such an approach and I fear that Tory overconfidence is not restricted to the betting market.0 -
You're right! But I missed the original airingRobD said:
I assume it is a repeat?Sunil_Prasannan said:Crossrail programme on BBC2 right now
0 -
Has Morris Dancer just been spotted on Top Gear? Some bloke saying he would vote for whatever politician was interested in F1 :-)0
-
"Bogus" is an unhelpful word in this context. It's data, with large uncertainties. It's better than no data, but not by a huge amount.Flightpath said:
Try using them as a proxy for climate change and see the mess you get into. Dendroclimatology is a bogus science.Ishmael_X said:
And there is another clue in another name: dendroclimatology. Things quite often have more than one property, and in this case we can both count tree rings, and measure them. Amazing!Flightpath said:
In terms of trees the clue is in the name - dendrochronology. You can tell a date. Not a temperature. You cannot tell anything if you mangle the statistics.rcs1000 said:
UoA collect tree samples (from cavemen tools, and building materials, and fossilized wood) from all over the world.Charles said:
I think you may be talking at cross-purposes.GeoffM said:
Plato and I have pointed out that we don't.rcs1000 said:
I have no idea, I'm just pointing out that we have an unbroken record of something going back 40,000 years which correlates quite well with temperature.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. 1000, and do those tree cores show 2014 to be the hottest year ever?
I'd be surprised, if so. Natural variation has accounted for temperatures hotter than those currently experienced, and colder than those currently experienced. There is no compelling evidence. The IPCC got its predictions drastically wrong in its 4th report, then upgraded its confidence in its own forecasts for the 5th report.
The Yarmal data set on which Michael Mann's hockey stick was thin to useless.
UoA may well have a better dataset (presumably based on the redwood) but Mann didn't use that for his theory
@Josias: I think tree samples - especially when you have them from many different locales - can be useful (presumably, it won't be a drought everywhere). But they will only ever be able to give you a rough idea. I would be interested to see how well we can impute local temperatures from tree samples today.
What you can do, though, is combine it with similar, but different, data from lake sediments, cave stalagmites, ocean sediments, and a variety of other sources I don't remember. That lets you extract some useful information, though still with large uncertainties.
A bit better than hanging your hat on Roman viticulture.0 -
Shame it ended 2-2isam said:East End manners
freshly baked (@_freshlybaked)
22/02/2015 18:21
How they do it at #WestHam VIDEO: How to treat fellow passengers! bit.ly/1CZo3PQ pic.twitter.com/R484sBatXK via @FootballFunnys #Chelsea
0 -
I have to disagree....Sunil_Prasannan said:
Shame it ended 2-2isam said:East End manners
freshly baked (@_freshlybaked)
22/02/2015 18:21
How they do it at #WestHam VIDEO: How to treat fellow passengers! bit.ly/1CZo3PQ pic.twitter.com/R484sBatXK via @FootballFunnys #Chelsea0 -
I was listening to the Liverpool - Southampton game on BBC World Service today, and they stopped the commentary with 5 minutes to go!
I hear FIFA wants to move the 2022 World Cup to November-December. How would this affect the European leagues seasons?0 -
To put someone else's blood pressure up (ogh) - I see the betfair most seats moves have been maintained after a wobble post spike y'day.0
-
Major wanted a debate in 1997 and I think Callaghan did in 1979.DavidL said:
On topic the key for the debates is the head to head between Ed and Dave (which is of course why Nick is in the huff). If the tories are behind or still broadly level Cameron will want this confident that he can get the better of Miliband most of the time. If the tories move ahead, of course, then he will adopt the same position of every PM in history since the invention of the radio other than that loser Brown.
0 -
It's an entertaining ride.... a sour man would point to all the gifts that arsenal continue to be given by the referees (year in, year out) but Jose has other fish to fry at the moment.isam said:
Out of jail in the last minute yet again, how many times is taht this season?Scrapheap_as_was said:Spurs......
5 or 6?
Hull, villa, West Ham... Otomh0 -
Yeah 21 lucky seasons on the trot!Scrapheap_as_was said:
It's an entertaining ride.... a sour man would point to all the gifts that arsenal continue to be given by the referees (year in, year out) but Jose has other fish to fry at the moment.isam said:
Out of jail in the last minute yet again, how many times is taht this season?Scrapheap_as_was said:Spurs......
5 or 6?
Hull, villa, West Ham... Otomh0 -
Indeed.Scrapheap_as_was said:To put someone else's blood pressure up (ogh) - I see the betfair most seats moves have been maintained after a wobble post spike y'day.
Now is an excellent time to start laying the tories.
The only consideration is whether the odds will move further towards the tories before the real money enters the market.0 -
@patrickwintour: Apologies if wrong but think big political story to break later tonight.0
-
Yes because they both knew they had nothing to lose and wanted a chance no one was minded to give them. I suspect Cameron regrets giving Brown that chance, it might well have cost him his majority. It certainly left him fighting on two separate fronts in a way he will make sure does not happen again.another_richard said:
Major wanted a debate in 1997 and I think Callaghan did in 1979.DavidL said:
On topic the key for the debates is the head to head between Ed and Dave (which is of course why Nick is in the huff). If the tories are behind or still broadly level Cameron will want this confident that he can get the better of Miliband most of the time. If the tories move ahead, of course, then he will adopt the same position of every PM in history since the invention of the radio other than that loser Brown.0 -
"It's data, with large uncertainties. It's better than no data"OblitusSumMe said:
"Bogus" is an unhelpful word in this context. It's data, with large uncertainties. It's better than no data, but not by a huge amount.Flightpath said:
Try using them as a proxy for climate change and see the mess you get into. Dendroclimatology is a bogus science.Ishmael_X said:
And there is another clue in another name: dendroclimatology. Things quite often have more than one property, and in this case we can both count tree rings, and measure them. Amazing!Flightpath said:
In terms of trees the clue is in the name - dendrochronology. You can tell a date. Not a temperature. You cannot tell anything if you mangle the statistics.rcs1000 said:
UoA collect tree samples (from cavemen tools, and building materials, and fossilized wood) from all over the world.Charles said:
I think you may be talking at cross-purposes.GeoffM said:
Plato and I have pointed out that we don't.rcs1000 said:
I have no idea, I'm just pointing out that we have an unbroken record of something going back 40,000 years which correlates quite well with temperature.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. 1000, and do those tree cores show 2014 to be the hottest year ever?
I'd be surprised, if so. Natural variation has accounted for temperatures hotter than those currently experienced, and colder than those currently experienced. There is no compelling evidence. The IPCC got its predictions drastically wrong in its 4th report, then upgraded its confidence in its own forecasts for the 5th report.
The Yarmal data set on which Michael Mann's hockey stick was thin to useless.
UoA may well have a better dataset (presumably based on the redwood) but Mann didn't use that for his theory
@Josias: I think tree samples - especially when you have them from many different locales - can be useful (presumably, it won't be a drought everywhere). But they will only ever be able to give you a rough idea. I would be interested to see how well we can impute local temperatures from tree samples today.
What you can do, though, is combine it with similar, but different, data from lake sediments, cave stalagmites, ocean sediments, and a variety of other sources I don't remember. That lets you extract some useful information, though still with large uncertainties.
A bit better than hanging your hat on Roman viticulture.
Maybe. But then no map is better than using the wrong map ...0 -
I do not see how it is helpful to use unreliable data. The data derived from the source in question was at complete variance from the known temperature record, something which undermines its uses as a proxy for the period before the known temperature record. The reasons for tree rings being what they are many and various and cannot be related to climate. A tree might grow up in the shade of its elders, and therefore grow slowly, until age or ice-storms or insects removed the elders and thus the shade. Then, with sunshine and the rotting remains of its elders to feed it, the tree could easily shoot up no matter what the climate. Try working anything out on those sort of possibilities. I call it bogus. Doubly bogus when its all reduced to one tree.OblitusSumMe said:
"Bogus" is an unhelpful word in this context. It's data, with large uncertainties. It's better than no data, but not by a huge amount.Flightpath said:
Try using them as a proxy for climate change and see the mess you get into. Dendroclimatology is a bogus science.Ishmael_X said:
And there is another clue in another name: dendroclimatology. Things quite often have more than one property, and in this case we can both count tree rings, and measure them. Amazing!Flightpath said:
In terms of trees the clue is in the name - dendrochronology. You can tell a date. Not a temperature. You cannot tell anything if you mangle the statistics.rcs1000 said:
UoA collect tree samples (from cavemen tools, and building materials, and fossilized wood) from all over the world.Charles said:
...yGeoffM said:
Plato and I have pointed out that we don't.rcs1000 said:
I have no idea, I'm just pointing out that we have an unbroken record of something going back 40,000 years which correlates quite well with temperature.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. 1000, and do those tree cores show 2014 to be the hottest year ever?
....
@Josias: I think tree samples - especially when you have them from many different locales - can be useful (presumably, it won't be a drought everywhere). But they will only ever be able to give you a rough idea. I would be interested to see how well we can impute local temperatures from tree samples today.
What you can do, though, is combine it with similar, but different, data from lake sediments, cave stalagmites, ocean sediments, and a variety of other sources I don't remember. That lets you extract some useful information, though still with large uncertainties.
A bit better than hanging your hat on Roman viticulture.0 -
Bad news for the Tories I would presume?antifrank said:@patrickwintour: Apologies if wrong but think big political story to break later tonight.
0 -
We're having a local echo of the controversy. Anna has refused any bilateral debate (quoting the Greens in support), any debate before all parties have published manifestos, and any debate organised by any NGO. This is presumably the incumbency thing, but as we're both pretty well-known and she has lots of recent QT debating practice I thought she might be tempted. Lots of teases on Twitter ("But I bought popcorn and everything, Anna...").DavidL said:
Personally, I think that if the Tories are to win they need to make this election as Presidential as possible and major on Cameron's superior ratings as an individual compared with Labour's generally superior ratings to his party. I don't personally see how avoiding a debate with Ed is consistent with such an approach and I fear that Tory overconfidence is not restricted to the betting market.
0 -
Neil, I actually posted that upthread just to prove I don't just read and post what I agree with!Neil said: 0 -
I really enjoyed watching it, but that's because I'm a massive geek.Sunil_Prasannan said:
You're right! But I missed the original airingRobD said:
I assume it is a repeat?Sunil_Prasannan said:Crossrail programme on BBC2 right now
0 -
Evening all, Patrick Wintour hinting on Twitter a major story may break tonight. Anyone any idea what it might be?
As for the debates, although I am very critical of the LibDems, I don't blame them. They may be tanking in the polls but at least they go into the GE defending 50+ seats. UKIP have 2, the SNP has 6 and the Greens 1. All the hype and froth about the SNP, UKIP or anyone else is frankly just that until they actually walk the walk and win lots of seats on 7th May.
Nicola Sturgeon should concentrate on running Scotland instead of pretending she is going to run the UK. Her government has presided over Scotland becoming a police state over the last 5 years run by a Chief Constable who thinks he is above the law.0 -
I think Chelsea are up to something. Jose made a last minute appearance on Goals on Sunday to state our case in detail, and the club website has pages devoted to yesterday's shambles, something they have never sanctioned before.Scrapheap_as_was said:
It's an entertaining ride.... a sour man would point to all the gifts that arsenal continue to be given by the referees (year in, year out) but Jose has other fish to fry at the moment.isam said:
Out of jail in the last minute yet again, how many times is taht this season?Scrapheap_as_was said:Spurs......
5 or 6?
Hull, villa, West Ham... Otomh
It must all have been done with the approval of the clubs lawyers, maybe they are set to challenge the FA?0 -
Will make it all the sweeter when that run comes to an end....isam said:
Yeah 21 lucky seasons on the trot!Scrapheap_as_was said:
It's an entertaining ride.... a sour man would point to all the gifts that arsenal continue to be given by the referees (year in, year out) but Jose has other fish to fry at the moment.isam said:
Out of jail in the last minute yet again, how many times is taht this season?Scrapheap_as_was said:Spurs......
5 or 6?
Hull, villa, West Ham... Otomh0 -
Would affect them big time. FIFA are an absolute joke if they want to try and push this through.Tim_B said:
I hear FIFA wants to move the 2022 World Cup to November-December. How would this affect the European leagues seasons?
0 -
Well putting aside how it will interfere with the individual national championships, it will trample all over the league stage of the Champions League and UEFA Cup. I'm not sure that UEFA or the TV Companies and other sponsors will be too pleased with that.Tim_B said:I was listening to the Liverpool - Southampton game on BBC World Service today, and they stopped the commentary with 5 minutes to go!
I hear FIFA wants to move the 2022 World Cup to November-December. How would this affect the European leagues seasons?
Best time for Europe would be January when many leagues are taking their mid season break. It would of course still impact the EPL and the FA Cup but there is nothing FIFA love better than rubbing the English football establishment up the wrong way!0 -
You are a teaser Nick. Tbh I am equally bemused about her tactics. Unless she can persuade the Lib Dems not to break the way everyone is predicting she has a mountain to climb and should be looking for every chance she can get.NickPalmer said:
We're having a local echo of the controversy. Anna has refused any bilateral debate (quoting the Greens in support), any debate before all parties have published manifestos, and any debate organised by any NGO. This is presumably the incumbency thing, but as we're both pretty well-known and she has lots of recent QT debating practice I thought she might be tempted. Lots of teases on Twitter ("But I bought popcorn and everything, Anna...").DavidL said:
Personally, I think that if the Tories are to win they need to make this election as Presidential as possible and major on Cameron's superior ratings as an individual compared with Labour's generally superior ratings to his party. I don't personally see how avoiding a debate with Ed is consistent with such an approach and I fear that Tory overconfidence is not restricted to the betting market.0 -
Haha yeah.. hope its when you finish 5th and we are 6th!Scrapheap_as_was said:
Will make it all the sweeter when that run comes to an end....isam said:
Yeah 21 lucky seasons on the trot!Scrapheap_as_was said:
It's an entertaining ride.... a sour man would point to all the gifts that arsenal continue to be given by the referees (year in, year out) but Jose has other fish to fry at the moment.isam said:
Out of jail in the last minute yet again, how many times is taht this season?Scrapheap_as_was said:Spurs......
5 or 6?
Hull, villa, West Ham... Otomh0 -
Inevitableisam said:
Haha yeah.. hope its when you finish 5th and we are 6th!Scrapheap_as_was said:
Will make it all the sweeter when that run comes to an end....isam said:
Yeah 21 lucky seasons on the trot!Scrapheap_as_was said:
It's an entertaining ride.... a sour man would point to all the gifts that arsenal continue to be given by the referees (year in, year out) but Jose has other fish to fry at the moment.isam said:
Out of jail in the last minute yet again, how many times is taht this season?Scrapheap_as_was said:Spurs......
5 or 6?
Hull, villa, West Ham... Otomh0 -
Would be better if Clegg and Cameron just acme out and said what you have "Its not in our self interest to debate with the other leaders as we want to hold on to power"Easterross said:Evening all, Patrick Wintour hinting on Twitter a major story may break tonight. Anyone any idea what it might be?
As for the debates, although I am very critical of the LibDems, I don't blame them. They may be tanking in the polls but at least they go into the GE defending 50+ seats. UKIP have 2, the SNP has 6 and the Greens 1. All the hype and froth about the SNP, UKIP or anyone else is frankly just that until they actually walk the walk and win lots of seats on 7th May.
Nicola Sturgeon should concentrate on running Scotland instead of pretending she is going to run the UK. Her government has presided over Scotland becoming a police state over the last 5 years run by a Chief Constable who thinks he is above the law.
Politics is so depressingly vain0 -
It cant help her that the Lib Dems and Labour are essentially offering the same fiscal plans and are both well to the left of the austerity the Tories are promising. Makes me wonder how on earth the Lib Dems could contrive to put a Tory rather than Labour Chancellor into Number 11 as well.DavidL said:
You are a teaser Nick. Tbh I am equally bemused about her tactics. Unless she can persuade the Lib Dems not to break the way everyone is predicting she has a mountain to climb and should be looking for every chance she can get.NickPalmer said:
We're having a local echo of the controversy. Anna has refused any bilateral debate (quoting the Greens in support), any debate before all parties have published manifestos, and any debate organised by any NGO. This is presumably the incumbency thing, but as we're both pretty well-known and she has lots of recent QT debating practice I thought she might be tempted. Lots of teases on Twitter ("But I bought popcorn and everything, Anna...").DavidL said:
Personally, I think that if the Tories are to win they need to make this election as Presidential as possible and major on Cameron's superior ratings as an individual compared with Labour's generally superior ratings to his party. I don't personally see how avoiding a debate with Ed is consistent with such an approach and I fear that Tory overconfidence is not restricted to the betting market.
0 -
In what court? Were Chelsea to take the FA/PL to a civil court FIFA statutes would demand the FA throw them out of the League.nigel4england said:I think Chelsea are up to something. Jose made a last minute appearance on Goals on Sunday to state our case in detail, and the club website has pages devoted to yesterday's shambles, something they have never sanctioned before.
It must all have been done with the approval of the clubs lawyers, maybe they are set to challenge the FA?0 -
What are the odds on the Scottish team touching 55 for 5?DavidL said:Evening all. Any chance England will give Scotland a decent game tonight? So far it has been pretty obvious they are getting paid by the game rather than the hour. I would like to see what this Scottish team can do when under modest pressure.
On topic the key for the debates is the head to head between Ed and Dave (which is of course why Nick is in the huff). If the tories are behind or still broadly level Cameron will want this confident that he can get the better of Miliband most of the time. If the tories move ahead, of course, then he will adopt the same position of every PM in history since the invention of the radio other than that loser Brown.
Personally, I think that if the Tories are to win they need to make this election as Presidential as possible and major on Cameron's superior ratings as an individual compared with Labour's generally superior ratings to his party. I don't personally see how avoiding a debate with Ed is consistent with such an approach and I fear that Tory overconfidence is not restricted to the betting market.0 -
Intriguing ..... what's he tweeting?Easterross said:Evening all, Patrick Wintour hinting on Twitter a major story may break tonight. Anyone any idea what it might be?
As for the debates, although I am very critical of the LibDems, I don't blame them. They may be tanking in the polls but at least they go into the GE defending 50+ seats. UKIP have 2, the SNP has 6 and the Greens 1. All the hype and froth about the SNP, UKIP or anyone else is frankly just that until they actually walk the walk and win lots of seats on 7th May.
Nicola Sturgeon should concentrate on running Scotland instead of pretending she is going to run the UK. Her government has presided over Scotland becoming a police state over the last 5 years run by a Chief Constable who thinks he is above the law.0 -
The trouble with any form of historical enquiry is that we have to work with the data we actually have, not the data we would like to have, acknowledge unreliabilities and work round them as best we can. It is well recognised that non-climactic factors influence tree growth, and the fact that you think one particular case study questionable does not make the whole discipline "bogus".Flightpath said:
I do not see how it is helpful to use unreliable data. The data derived from the source in question was at complete variance from the known temperature record, something which undermines its uses as a proxy for the period before the known temperature record. The reasons for tree rings being what they are many and various and cannot be related to climate. A tree might grow up in the shade of its elders, and therefore grow slowly, until age or ice-storms or insects removed the elders and thus the shade. Then, with sunshine and the rotting remains of its elders to feed it, the tree could easily shoot up no matter what the climate. Try working anything out on those sort of possibilities. I call it bogus. Doubly bogus when its all reduced to one tree.OblitusSumMe said:
"Bogus" e.Flightpath said:
Try using them as a proxy for climate change and see the mess you get into. Dendroclimatology is a bogus science.Ishmael_X said:
And there is another clue in another name: dendroclimatology. Things quite often have more than one property, and in this case we can both count tree rings, and measure them. Amazing!Flightpath said:
In terms of trees the clue is in the name - dendrochronology. You can tell a date. Not a temperature. You cannot tell anything if you mangle the statistics.rcs1000 said:
UoA collect tree samples (from cavemen tools, and building materials, and fossilized wood) from all over the world.Charles said:
...yGeoffM said:
Plato and I have pointed out that we don't.rcs1000 said:
I have no idea, I'm just pointing out that we have an unbroken record of something going back 40,000 years which correlates quite well with temperature.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. 1000, and do those tree cores show 2014 to be the hottest year ever?
....
@Josias: I think tree samples - especially when you have them from many different locales - can be useful (presumably, it won't be a drought everywhere). But they will only ever be able to give you a rough idea. I would be interested to see how well we can impute local temperatures from tree samples today.0 -
Is England playing some new bowlers?Charles said:
What are the odds on the Scottish team touching 55 for 5?DavidL said:Evening all. Any chance England will give Scotland a decent game tonight? So far it has been pretty obvious they are getting paid by the game rather than the hour. I would like to see what this Scottish team can do when under modest pressure.
On topic the key for the debates is the head to head between Ed and Dave (which is of course why Nick is in the huff). If the tories are behind or still broadly level Cameron will want this confident that he can get the better of Miliband most of the time. If the tories move ahead, of course, then he will adopt the same position of every PM in history since the invention of the radio other than that loser Brown.
Personally, I think that if the Tories are to win they need to make this election as Presidential as possible and major on Cameron's superior ratings as an individual compared with Labour's generally superior ratings to his party. I don't personally see how avoiding a debate with Ed is consistent with such an approach and I fear that Tory overconfidence is not restricted to the betting market.0 -
I don't think the debates had an effect in the end in 2010. The waves of the Cleggasm having dissipated by polling day.DavidL said:
Yes because they both knew they had nothing to lose and wanted a chance no one was minded to give them. I suspect Cameron regrets giving Brown that chance, it might well have cost him his majority. It certainly left him fighting on two separate fronts in a way he will make sure does not happen again.another_richard said:
Major wanted a debate in 1997 and I think Callaghan did in 1979.DavidL said:
On topic the key for the debates is the head to head between Ed and Dave (which is of course why Nick is in the huff). If the tories are behind or still broadly level Cameron will want this confident that he can get the better of Miliband most of the time. If the tories move ahead, of course, then he will adopt the same position of every PM in history since the invention of the radio other than that loser Brown.
Of course if they hadn't taken place then the leaders would have been doing other things with the media's focus still on them and there might have been something of similar magnitude to Brown's Rochdale trip.
Complacency cost Cameron a majority in 2010 and there was certainly complacency about his agreeing to the debates - expecting to beat Brown easily and not bothering to prepare properly against Clegg.
0 -
But you're biasedScrapheap_as_was said:
I have to disagree....Sunil_Prasannan said:
Shame it ended 2-2isam said:East End manners
freshly baked (@_freshlybaked)
22/02/2015 18:21
How they do it at #WestHam VIDEO: How to treat fellow passengers! bit.ly/1CZo3PQ pic.twitter.com/R484sBatXK via @FootballFunnys #Chelsea 0 -
And the civil court would promptly order the FA to do no such thing. Attempting to oust the jurisdiction of the courts goes down badly.tlg86 said:
In what court? Were Chelsea to take the FA/PL to a civil court FIFA statutes would demand the FA throw them out of the League.nigel4england said:I think Chelsea are up to something. Jose made a last minute appearance on Goals on Sunday to state our case in detail, and the club website has pages devoted to yesterday's shambles, something they have never sanctioned before.
It must all have been done with the approval of the clubs lawyers, maybe they are set to challenge the FA?0 -
I hope so. If any of them show promise they might earn consideration for Ireland's squad in the next tournament if they want to step up and play for serious contenders.DavidL said:
Is England playing some new bowlers?Charles said:
What are the odds on the Scottish team touching 55 for 5?DavidL said:Evening all. Any chance England will give Scotland a decent game tonight? So far it has been pretty obvious they are getting paid by the game rather than the hour. I would like to see what this Scottish team can do when under modest pressure.
On topic the key for the debates is the head to head between Ed and Dave (which is of course why Nick is in the huff). If the tories are behind or still broadly level Cameron will want this confident that he can get the better of Miliband most of the time. If the tories move ahead, of course, then he will adopt the same position of every PM in history since the invention of the radio other than that loser Brown.
Personally, I think that if the Tories are to win they need to make this election as Presidential as possible and major on Cameron's superior ratings as an individual compared with Labour's generally superior ratings to his party. I don't personally see how avoiding a debate with Ed is consistent with such an approach and I fear that Tory overconfidence is not restricted to the betting market.
0 -
No idea, it's probably an elaborate ruse to get Matic's red card rescinded, but they have definitely taken a confrontational stance.tlg86 said:
In what court? Were Chelsea to take the FA/PL to a civil court FIFA statutes would demand the FA throw them out of the League.nigel4england said:I think Chelsea are up to something. Jose made a last minute appearance on Goals on Sunday to state our case in detail, and the club website has pages devoted to yesterday's shambles, something they have never sanctioned before.
It must all have been done with the approval of the clubs lawyers, maybe they are set to challenge the FA?
0 -
How many people would come to see a local debate and how many of them would be floating voters ?NickPalmer said:
We're having a local echo of the controversy. Anna has refused any bilateral debate (quoting the Greens in support), any debate before all parties have published manifestos, and any debate organised by any NGO. This is presumably the incumbency thing, but as we're both pretty well-known and she has lots of recent QT debating practice I thought she might be tempted. Lots of teases on Twitter ("But I bought popcorn and everything, Anna...").DavidL said:
Personally, I think that if the Tories are to win they need to make this election as Presidential as possible and major on Cameron's superior ratings as an individual compared with Labour's generally superior ratings to his party. I don't personally see how avoiding a debate with Ed is consistent with such an approach and I fear that Tory overconfidence is not restricted to the betting market.
0 -
On the spreads, I see Spreadex (281) are a slightly better sell than Sporting (280).Pong said:
Indeed.Scrapheap_as_was said:To put someone else's blood pressure up (ogh) - I see the betfair most seats moves have been maintained after a wobble post spike y'day.
Now is an excellent time to start laying the tories.
The only consideration is whether the odds will move further towards the tories before the real money enters the market.
Btw no sign as yet of any new markets from Sporting as promised a few nights ago.0 -
I am really not sure what Labour's position is. AIUI the Lib Dems and Tories agree on the future path for deficit reduction but the Lib Dems think more of the gap should be made up of tax increases than spending cuts. That seems to me the same ground on which they have been doing deals for 5 years now.Neil said:
It cant help her that the Lib Dems and Labour are essentially offering the same fiscal plans and are both well to the left of the austerity the Tories are promising. Makes me wonder how on earth the Lib Dems could contrive to put a Tory rather than Labour Chancellor into Number 11 as well.DavidL said:
You are a teaser Nick. Tbh I am equally bemused about her tactics. Unless she can persuade the Lib Dems not to break the way everyone is predicting she has a mountain to climb and should be looking for every chance she can get.NickPalmer said:
We're having a local echo of the controversy. Anna has refused any bilateral debate (quoting the Greens in support), any debate before all parties have published manifestos, and any debate organised by any NGO. This is presumably the incumbency thing, but as we're both pretty well-known and she has lots of recent QT debating practice I thought she might be tempted. Lots of teases on Twitter ("But I bought popcorn and everything, Anna...").DavidL said:
Personally, I think that if the Tories are to win they need to make this election as Presidential as possible and major on Cameron's superior ratings as an individual compared with Labour's generally superior ratings to his party. I don't personally see how avoiding a debate with Ed is consistent with such an approach and I fear that Tory overconfidence is not restricted to the betting market.
Labour are being coy or incoherent depending on your sympathies. They will not commit themselves to specific cuts, have committed themselves to a number of increases in spending and have some token taxes on the rich to supposedly pay for it all.
Despite or because of this they are committed to a macro-economic envelope which means borrowing for investment would continue even well past the peak of the cycle and the return of a structural deficit to bite us all over again when the economy turns. I would imagine it has Danny Alexander perplexed about what on earth they are talking about.0 -
What are Clegg and Brown doing in that photo with their left legs - doing the okey cokey?0
-
Would Morgan get a game on current form?Neil said:
I hope so. If any of them show promise they might earn consideration for Ireland's squad in the next tournament if they want to step up and play for serious contenders.DavidL said:
Is England playing some new bowlers?Charles said:
What are the odds on the Scottish team touching 55 for 5?DavidL said:Evening all. Any chance England will give Scotland a decent game tonight? So far it has been pretty obvious they are getting paid by the game rather than the hour. I would like to see what this Scottish team can do when under modest pressure.
On topic the key for the debates is the head to head between Ed and Dave (which is of course why Nick is in the huff). If the tories are behind or still broadly level Cameron will want this confident that he can get the better of Miliband most of the time. If the tories move ahead, of course, then he will adopt the same position of every PM in history since the invention of the radio other than that loser Brown.
Personally, I think that if the Tories are to win they need to make this election as Presidential as possible and major on Cameron's superior ratings as an individual compared with Labour's generally superior ratings to his party. I don't personally see how avoiding a debate with Ed is consistent with such an approach and I fear that Tory overconfidence is not restricted to the betting market.0 -
Re the Patrick Wintour tweet
Tomorrow channel 4 are airing an Dispatches Investigation called "Politicians for Hire"
I wonder if it is to do with that.
I think the title is self explanatory .0 -
Hello hello hello....when will they ever learn....some random appears promising the world to be a bit dodgy, it might just be a journo...and if it isn't, a journo might get hold of the story at a later stage.TheScreamingEagles said:Re the Patrick Wintour tweet
Tomorrow channel 4 are airing an Dispatches Investigation called "Politicians for Hire"
I wonder if it is to do with that.
I think the title is self explanatory .0 -
On topic. It doesn't surprise me if the debates are canned because the second bid was a particularly stupid offer. I believe it does breach Ofcom rules (section 6.10) so even if the major parties were happy with it I doubt they would sign up to it until any court action (enter the DUP stage right) had been dealt with and the number of parties actually entitled to appear was decided. It was a serious error of judgement by the TV companies to invite the SNP, Plaid and the Greens this time around. By my reckoning if they wish to go ahead they would also have to invite the BNP, DUP and SF (who were all in terms of votes more successful than Plaid in 2010) and frankly having 10 parties on the stage will make it a nonsense.
That the Sky debate also likely breaches Ofcom rules (section 6.9) means I think there is no chance of them taking place0 -
Last time, IIRC we had six debates, with an average attendance of 70 or so. Rashly or otherwise, I agreed to every challenge (politics lives by debate IMO): the general view is that they were a score draw. My impression was that around half of every audience was genuinely curious rather than just coming to cheer their side. so a couple of hundred floating votes, but in the absence of a clear winner it won't have decided the result.another_richard said:
How many people would come to see a local debate and how many of them would be floating voters ?NickPalmer said:
We're having a local echo of the controversy. Anna has refused any bilateral debate (quoting the Greens in support), any debate before all parties have published manifestos, and any debate organised by any NGO. This is presumably the incumbency thing, but as we're both pretty well-known and she has lots of recent QT debating practice I thought she might be tempted. Lots of teases on Twitter ("But I bought popcorn and everything, Anna...").DavidL said:
Personally, I think that if the Tories are to win they need to make this election as Presidential as possible and major on Cameron's superior ratings as an individual compared with Labour's generally superior ratings to his party. I don't personally see how avoiding a debate with Ed is consistent with such an approach and I fear that Tory overconfidence is not restricted to the betting market.
But they were informative, and fun, and probably raised turnout. Should count for something.0 -
That's probably true, though I don't think it will work. Do you genuinely think that the refs are out to make Chelsea's life as difficult as possible?nigel4england said:
No idea, it's probably an elaborate ruse to get Matic's red card rescinded, but they have definitely taken a confrontational stance.tlg86 said:
In what court? Were Chelsea to take the FA/PL to a civil court FIFA statutes would demand the FA throw them out of the League.nigel4england said:I think Chelsea are up to something. Jose made a last minute appearance on Goals on Sunday to state our case in detail, and the club website has pages devoted to yesterday's shambles, something they have never sanctioned before.
It must all have been done with the approval of the clubs lawyers, maybe they are set to challenge the FA?
I follow Arsenal home and away and a few years ago (2010-11 and 2011-12) I was convinced something strange was going on with the refereeing in our games. But in the last few years it seems to have settled down.
I really don't like the secretive nature of the PGMOL and really hate Mike Riley. Given the Clattenburg incident and few other run-ins Chelsea have had with the FA, I wouldn't be hugely surprised if something was going on.0 -
Its election season (politicians hunting voters and journalists hunting politicians).TheScreamingEagles said:Re the Patrick Wintour tweet
Tomorrow channel 4 are airing an Dispatches Investigation called "Politicians for Hire"
I wonder if it is to do with that.
I think the title is self explanatory .
I guess that because Wintour is working for the Guardian and Channel 4 are a pro-Labour TV channel I think it's a story about either the Tories or UKIP.0 -
Last time they got some pretty big names...and some how they just tried to brazened it out, before eventually getting banned.Freggles said:
I wouldn't be surprised is some MPs who are stepping down or think they will lose their seat have been tempted to take some filthy cash from say a fake lobbying firm.0 -
If this is the big news that Wintour said then its a big yawn:
Mirror Politics @MirrorPolitics 14m14 minutes ago
Ukip MP Douglas Carswell accepted £20,000 after an anti-fraud probe
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ukip-mp-douglas-carswell-accepted-52108900 -
Is it not the story about the HSBC boss having his own Swiss bank account ?0
-
Usually government MPs promise the Earth.FrancisUrquhart said:
Last time they got some pretty big names...and some how they just tried to brazened it out, before eventually getting banned.Freggles said:0 -
Tories, then - who would hire a UKIP pol, and what for?Speedy said:
Its election season (politicians hunting voters and journalists hunting politicians).TheScreamingEagles said:Re the Patrick Wintour tweet
Tomorrow channel 4 are airing an Dispatches Investigation called "Politicians for Hire"
I wonder if it is to do with that.
I think the title is self explanatory .
I guess that because Wintour is working for the Guardian and Channel 4 are a pro-Labour TV channel I think it's a story about either the Tories or UKIP.
Monday is good timing if it is designed to be pmq fodder.0 -
He looks like he's communing with the AlmightyDavidL said:0
