politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Boris reminds us once again why the normal rules of politic
Comments
-
DPP now projected to get 22% compared to 20% for Venstre.0
-
Hm... the exit polls showed the overall result touch and go despite a rise from 12 to 18% in the DPP vote. That part seems likely to be achived, but the wider question still unanswered.AndyJS said:Danish TV putting the DPP on 34% in Tinglev, up 20 points on the last election.
https://twitter.com/ssoendergaard/status/6116103341729710080 -
The best is James Lee Milne recounting meeting a very old lady in the 1920s, who told him "my first husband's first wife's first husband knew Cromwell very well, and said he was a much-maligned man."MyBurningEars said:Nice BBC story about Scots at Waterloo and the first-hand accounts they left of the battle. Plus delightful, sub-Wilfred-Owen poetry. All left me wondering the type of question the PB-brainhive might be good at:
What are the earliest battles we have "everyman" eye-witnesses for? We have accounts of the Battle of Hastings, but nowt from the point of view of Edric The English Archer.
Moreover, from which Great Events (conflicts, revolutions, riots, disasters, technological or sporting firsts) are eyewitness accounts not just written, but recorded? TFOAN has some interesting pages on last survivors of historical events, last surviving European veterans by war, and a rather imposing list for all conflicts.
Often the final survivors played but peripheral roles, may never have reached an actual battlefield or even fired a shot in anger if they did. Yet it's interesting there were survivors of the French Revolution about in the 1880s, and of the Napoleonic Wars and War of 1812 to the turn of the century. The Texas Revolution and Bear Flag Revolt a few years later still. For comparison, the oldest surviving phonographs basically date from the 1880s (with the odd earlier recordings on tinfoil or phonautograph being exceptionally difficult to replay), but I doubt a "grunt's-eye-view of oral history" was one of the top priorities for the earliest recordists.
Going further, for what events do we have first-hand testimony on-screen (film or TV footage)? The last survivors of the Crimean War and War of Italian Unification were still around in the 1930s. The Zulu War, The Paris Commune, Franco-Prussian War and the US Civil War can take us through to the 40s and 50s. The Boer War, in theory, up to 1993. I've certainly seen and been very moved by TV interviews with WWI survivors and Russian Revolutionaries, and heard audio of US Civil War vets (and former slaves). Just how far back can we go?0 -
So, despite being voted down in the Commons, we are still going to have 16-17 y/o votes?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3130238/Sixteen-seventeen-year-olds-certain-vote-EU-referendum-plans-hatched-Lords.html0 -
Does that mean Rasmussen (L)'s leadership of the coalition is in doubt? How does it work?AndyJS said:DPP now projected to get 22% compared to 20% for Venstre.
0 -
A fair number of medieval monks were retired soldiers, who could give first-hand accounts to monastic historians.dr_spyn said:
I'll cross check it at some point this evening.MyBurningEars said:
That's very interesting. Wonder if any of them wrote up their memoirs. By the 19th century there's certainly some interesting material (not just from the navy, but also e.g. on whaling).dr_spyn said:@MyBurningEars N A M Roger's account of The Georgian Navy which covered the 18th Century suggested that printed recall notices were used, and enough of the crew were able to read them. Such notices were a comparatively effective way of communication.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Wooden-World-Anatomy-Georgian/dp/0393314693
0 -
The Smithsonian put this recording on youtube of Confederate veterans performing the rebel yell. But judging from the accompanying article, most of the surviving footage was of reunion festivities and the surviving interviews are scarce, brief and undertaken by newsmen rather than oral historians.
(The audio oral history for the US Civil War seems to be much better.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6jSqt39vFM0 -
Thanks for that. There's a rather funny one a few pages in: "Teen-age gangs: a great reporter reveals the truth about girl gangs and how they co-operate with the boys".MyBurningEars said:
Got it, it's Samuel J. Seymour - and here's the youtube clip. Don't think they give out prizes like that anymore!JosiasJessop said:
As an aside, there's a famous TV segment with a person who was in the theatre when Lincoln was shot. I think Plato linked to it once.
And here's the newspaper cutting which the TV researchers had picked up on.
Sadly as a witness he couldn't remember much about the incident ... except that he was very concerned for the health of Booth, who had jumped off the balcony and hurt his leg. He hadn't realised that the president had been shot.
Things haven't changed much in 61 years ...0 -
@ Sean F
Let's see. 1920 was 262 years after Cromwell's death. Say she was 110 at the time, takes us back to 1810. Say her husband was 40 years older than her, 1770. Say his wife was 40 years older than him, 1730. And her husband was 40 years older than her, 1690. Still doesn't get the birth of the oldest within 30 years of Cromwell's death in 1658. Hmm.0 -
Now 95/80, moving all the time. Another disaster for both the exit pollsters and the left. Okay, that's a bit strong, but it's poor all the same.RobD said:
What is it with polls and underestimating the right?AndyJS said:New Danish projection puts blue bloc on 92 compared to 83 for the red bloc. Another victory for Cameron if so.
0 -
I think it's based on a series of marriages between teens and people in their late 80s.MTimT said:@ Sean F
Let's see. 1920 was 262 years after Cromwell's death. Say she was 110 at the time, takes us back to 1810. Say her husband was 40 years older than her, 1770. Say his wife was 40 years older than him, 1730. And her husband was 40 years older than her, 1690. Still doesn't get the birth of the oldest within 30 years of Cromwell's death in 1658. Hmm.0 -
Do you know Andy if Dahl could be PM by the end of the night?AndyJS said:
Now 95/80, moving all the time. Another disaster for both the exit pollsters and the left. Okay, that's a bit strong, but it's poor all the same.RobD said:
What is it with polls and underestimating the right?AndyJS said:New Danish projection puts blue bloc on 92 compared to 83 for the red bloc. Another victory for Cameron if so.
0 -
The prospective PM remains Rasmussen even if DPP get more votes. Something to do with keeping the coalition of 4 parties together.TheWhiteRabbit said:
Does that mean Rasmussen (L)'s leadership of the coalition is in doubt? How does it work?AndyJS said:DPP now projected to get 22% compared to 20% for Venstre.
0 -
Sounds like a scare story. Presumably, if the Lords amend the bill, the Tories can remove the amendments in the second reading, and so on.RobD said:So, despite being voted down in the Commons, we are still going to have 16-17 y/o votes?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3130238/Sixteen-seventeen-year-olds-certain-vote-EU-referendum-plans-hatched-Lords.html
PB constitutional lawyers?0 -
So how can you f*ck off if you're dead?0
-
It's not a second reading, but yes, it can be the subject of ping-pong.MTimT said:
Sounds like a scare story. Presumably, if the Lords amend the bill, the Tories can remove the amendments in the second reading, and so on.RobD said:So, despite being voted down in the Commons, we are still going to have 16-17 y/o votes?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3130238/Sixteen-seventeen-year-olds-certain-vote-EU-referendum-plans-hatched-Lords.html
PB constitutional lawyers?
http://www.parliament.uk/about/how/laws/passage-bill/commons/coms-consideration-of-amendments/0 -
Why are 96 year-olds so keen on giving the vote to 16 year olds?RobD said:So, despite being voted down in the Commons, we are still going to have 16-17 y/o votes?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3130238/Sixteen-seventeen-year-olds-certain-vote-EU-referendum-plans-hatched-Lords.html0 -
It would have to be that for the sums to work. But then it is a cheat, as the strong tacit implication is that the lady in question is offering some first hand experience, i.e. that she knew her first husband's first wife's first husband, which she clearly could not have.Sean_F said:
I think it's based on a series of marriages between teens and people in their late 80s.MTimT said:@ Sean F
Let's see. 1920 was 262 years after Cromwell's death. Say she was 110 at the time, takes us back to 1810. Say her husband was 40 years older than her, 1770. Say his wife was 40 years older than him, 1730. And her husband was 40 years older than her, 1690. Still doesn't get the birth of the oldest within 30 years of Cromwell's death in 1658. Hmm.0 -
No I think it's Rasmussen if the blue bloc wins, whatever the distribution of seats.TheWhiteRabbit said:
Do you know Andy if Dahl could be PM by the end of the night?AndyJS said:
Now 95/80, moving all the time. Another disaster for both the exit pollsters and the left. Okay, that's a bit strong, but it's poor all the same.RobD said:
What is it with polls and underestimating the right?AndyJS said:New Danish projection puts blue bloc on 92 compared to 83 for the red bloc. Another victory for Cameron if so.
0 -
To quote the world-renowned scientist Lord Winston, ‘Let me say firmly: I think his views are lunatic’.
http://health.spectator.co.uk/roll-of-shame-mps-who-back-homeopathy-fan-david-tredinnick-for-chair-of-commons-health-committee/
Quite a few right wingers on that list. Is there a correlation between right wing politicians and anti-science beliefs such as belief in homeopathy and climate change scepticism?
But what is a medical doctor, Dr Poulter, doing on that list0 -
0
-
Yeah I saw your post seconds after my own! Nevertheless I may surrender some pennies so I don't have to worry about the vagrities of the system.AndyJS said:
No I think it's Rasmussen if the blue bloc wins, whatever the distribution of seats.TheWhiteRabbit said:
Do you know Andy if Dahl could be PM by the end of the night?AndyJS said:
Now 95/80, moving all the time. Another disaster for both the exit pollsters and the left. Okay, that's a bit strong, but it's poor all the same.RobD said:
What is it with polls and underestimating the right?AndyJS said:New Danish projection puts blue bloc on 92 compared to 83 for the red bloc. Another victory for Cameron if so.
0 -
From an piece by Simon Jenkins:MTimT said:
It would have to be that for the sums to work. But then it is a cheat, as the strong tacit implication is that the lady in question is offering some first hand experience, i.e. that she knew her first husband's first wife's first husband, which she clearly could not have.Sean_F said:
I think it's based on a series of marriages between teens and people in their late 80s.MTimT said:@ Sean F
Let's see. 1920 was 262 years after Cromwell's death. Say she was 110 at the time, takes us back to 1810. Say her husband was 40 years older than her, 1770. Say his wife was 40 years older than him, 1730. And her husband was 40 years older than her, 1690. Still doesn't get the birth of the oldest within 30 years of Cromwell's death in 1658. Hmm.
Oliver the Timelord
A man of my acquaintance was addressed, when a child, on the subject of Oliver Cromwell. The speaker was a lady of 91. She told him sternly never to speak ill of the great man. She went on: "My husband's first wife's first husband knew Oliver Cromwell - and liked him well." It was an admonition my friend has not forgotten.
At first hearing, the story is unbelievable. This was not a great-grandfather who knew a great-grandson. Here at the dawn of the new century is someone able to recall a single matrimonial generation linked directly with the mid-17th century*. I know of no comparable leap of history, no domestic arrangement that can gather dynasties, revolutions and empires so effortlessly in its embrace. We can wipe out civilisations in a flash, yet extend the experience of a single human imagination over a third of a millennium. What a thing is man (and in this case woman).
*The remark was made in 1923 by a lady born in 1832. At the age of 16 she had married an 80-year-old man named Henry. Sixty-four years earlier, in 1784, the young Henry had, for reasons obscure, married an 82-year-old woman. Her first marriage, in 1720, was to an 80-year-old who had served Cromwell before his death in 1658.
I remain skeptical. But not completely implausible. What adds to the fascination is that James Lee Milne who heard this story lived until 1998!
A rather more traditional "how many handshakes into the past" game was played out on Crooked Timber a few years back.0 -
You've never heard of Zombies?rullko said:So how can you f*ck off if you're dead?
0 -
That is because the other blue parties support Rasmussen.AndyJS said:
The prospective PM remains Rasmussen even if DPP get more votes. Something to do with keeping the coalition of 4 parties together.TheWhiteRabbit said:
Does that mean Rasmussen (L)'s leadership of the coalition is in doubt? How does it work?AndyJS said:DPP now projected to get 22% compared to 20% for Venstre.
0 -
So how do you think EU finances work ? Take from the wealthy Scottish nation and redistribute in poor southern Europe?Dair said:
The National Infrastructure Plan costs Scotland £3bn. This is substantially more than wind subsidies. Wind subsidies are one of the very few ways Scotland gets even than shabby £200m back.RobD said:
If the subsidies are costing Scotland net £2.8bn, why is it an own goal for him to scrap them?Dair said:
Given that these subsidies are one of the very few benefits Scotland gets from the National Infrastructure Plan (cost to Scotland over £3bn per annum, benefit less than £200m per annum), it is indeed perverse.Scott_P said:@BBCNormanS: Scotland First Minister @NicolaSturgeon writes to PM demanding re-think over "peverse" decision to scrap wind farm subsidies
Another own goal for Cameron.
And terrible news for consumers facing even more high cost electric reliance on nuclear in future instead of cheap and getting cheaper wind power.0 -
New Thread
0 -
There are anti-science views on both sides of the political spectrum. The religious right has scientifically-unsound objections to evolution and research on stem cells; the eco-left has scientifically-unsound objections to GMOs, genetic engineering and vaccination.logical_song said:To quote the world-renowned scientist Lord Winston, ‘Let me say firmly: I think his views are lunatic’.
http://health.spectator.co.uk/roll-of-shame-mps-who-back-homeopathy-fan-david-tredinnick-for-chair-of-commons-health-committee/
Quite a few right wingers on that list. Is there a correlation between right wing politicians and anti-science beliefs such as belief in homeopathy and climate change scepticism?
But what is a medical doctor, Dr Poulter, doing on that list0 -
Isn't being forthrightly truthful the UKIP thang?JosiasJessop said:
I only caught a few minutes of the DP interview earlier, and she was quite good but, perhaps, a little too forthrightly truthful in answers to questions.TCPoliticalBetting said:
Up there with the all time stupidest political decisions. To throw away their best presenter and the person who produced a coherent manifesto. Madness. I hope after a break, the Conservatives are able to attract her back.Scott_P said:@robindbrant: internal @UKIP email seen by BBC from senior fig ordering @SuzanneEvans1 frozen out after 'very divisive' comments http://t.co/QDMsIKecLI
0 -
Yeah but in this instance Farage is the idiot much like Robertson was then.Disraeli said:
Careful now! These "stone dead" type predictions can backfire. :-)Dair said:
I think even they now realise that Nige has killed the Kipper movement stone dead.TCPoliticalBetting said:Iain Martin @iainmartin1
Suzanne Evans is the best thing UKIP has going for it. Which means she is being forced out by the Faragists.
What do the PB Kippers have to say on this?
In 1995, Robertson said that "Devolution will kill Nationalism stone dead" while he was Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland. (wikipedia)0 -
My Mum calls me and my siblings "the children", and I'm only 58Richard_Nabavi said:
They most certainly are, in practice as well as in most international legal definitions:Dair said:16yos are not children.
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child defines child as "a human being below the age of 18 years unless under the law applicable to the child, majority is attained earlier".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child
Scotland and a couple of other minor jurisdictions are exceptions to this generally-accepted definition.0
