politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Pre “adjustment” ICM has LAB and CON level-pegging – after
Comments
-
At least he's not wearing the flasher jacket.TheScreamingEagles said:
I've clicked on your full profile pic, why are you wearing a salmon side as a tie?AlastairMeeks said:
Those sound like very wise words indeed.Alanbrooke said:
There are lots of pitfalls on PB, my advice is to have nothing to do lawyers and Ulstermen it will make your life so much easier.AlastairMeeks said:
Longtime lurker, first time poster today.Alanbrooke said:
welcome Alistair.AlastairMeeks said:I wonder whether pollsters, like generals, are always fighting the last war.
have you been on this site before ?0 -
The only two sides that mattered were the murderous scum from the PIRA vs the murderous scum from the UVF, UDA and rest of the Loyalist alphabet soup. The IRA wanted to bomb their way to a united Ireland. The Loyalists wanted to sell drugs and murder Catholics on weekends - or something like that.EPG said:
"bring both sides to the negotiating table"?Malmesbury said:Entertaining to see that just about everyone missed the reason why Corbyn blew that interview so badly.
"Shoot to kill" and "send in the army" have specific meanings for the pro Irish Republican types - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoot-to-kill_policy_in_Northern_Ireland
As I mentioned the other day, the war that was waged in NI used intelligence, informers and directed violence to bring both sides to the negotiating table. "Shoot to kill" was coined for replacing a couple of coppers trying arrest terrorists (and getting murdered) for their pains with ambushes which were carefully designed to be fatal and to have no escape. The IRA didn't like that very much - one thing to shoot off duty policeman in the back, another to have a closed casket funeral because the effects of 250 rounds from a GPMG.
Corbyn would have been off his Irish friends Christmas card lists if he'd said yes.
What does this mean in the Northern Ireland context. I did not know there were just two sides and that they both wanted to not negotiate.
The Irish government and the British government were already in agreement. The politicians on both sides of the divide knew what was coming - "Sunningdale for slow learners"
The plan was quite simply to infiltrate both groups and kill/discredit everyone who was anti peace process.
A classic was the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loughgall_ambush
The objective of which was to eliminate a very anti-talks group in the IRA.0 -
We understand perfectly well why Corbyn said what he did in the way that he did. He values his terrorist friends more than he values the obligation to keep British citizens safe from terrorists.Malmesbury said:Entertaining to see that just about everyone missed the reason why Corbyn blew that interview so badly.
"Shoot to kill" and "send in the army" have specific meanings for the pro Irish Republican types - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoot-to-kill_policy_in_Northern_Ireland
As I mentioned the other day, the war that was waged in NI used intelligence, informers and directed violence to bring both sides to the negotiating table. "Shoot to kill" was coined for replacing a couple of coppers trying arrest terrorists (and getting murdered) for their pains with ambushes which were carefully designed to be fatal and to have no escape. The IRA didn't like that very much - one thing to shoot off duty policeman in the back, another to have a closed casket funeral because the effects of 250 rounds from a GPMG.
Corbyn would have been off his Irish friends Christmas card lists if he'd said yes.
0 -
I don't think Labour have a clue what to do about him.CarlottaVance said:Raphael Behr shooting to kill:
If Corbyn was spouting incoherent gibberish, the episode would be unremarkable except as a sign of Labour’s hastening march into irrelevance. What makes it insidious is the semi-coherence, the fluency of his ellipses and the cold diffidence, mingled with didactic vanity, that seemed to urge his audience to get beyond the banal horror of the headlines, to reach the deeper insight available to those, like himself, who have been warning about interventionist folly (he reminded us) since 2001. He did not excuse the murderers. “Obviously, absolutely, blame those that did it. Absolutely, obviously Isil are totally wrong,” he said, but with a hint of impatience, making the ethical distinction between terrorist and target sound like a caveat to the more sophisticated point he was getting at.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/17/jihadism-western-policy-jeremy-corbyn-isis0 -
No, when it was weighted it had Con and Lab tied, after the adjustments for the spiral of shame did it produce a six point Tory lead.HYUFD said:Given the headline suggests a plurality of this sample vited Labour in May of course this sample hsd to be adjusted given the country voted Tory. So once it was weighted to reflect the party votrshares at the election the Tories have a six point lead once it was done scientifically. So no story here
0 -
well if they're ruling shoot to kill out, what options have they ?Casino_Royale said:
I don't think Labour have a clue what to do about him.CarlottaVance said:Raphael Behr shooting to kill:
If Corbyn was spouting incoherent gibberish, the episode would be unremarkable except as a sign of Labour’s hastening march into irrelevance. What makes it insidious is the semi-coherence, the fluency of his ellipses and the cold diffidence, mingled with didactic vanity, that seemed to urge his audience to get beyond the banal horror of the headlines, to reach the deeper insight available to those, like himself, who have been warning about interventionist folly (he reminded us) since 2001. He did not excuse the murderers. “Obviously, absolutely, blame those that did it. Absolutely, obviously Isil are totally wrong,” he said, but with a hint of impatience, making the ethical distinction between terrorist and target sound like a caveat to the more sophisticated point he was getting at.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/17/jihadism-western-policy-jeremy-corbyn-isis0 -
And malcolmg offers intelligent insightful perspective on Scottish affairs, synthesising complex issues into considered sophisticated replies:TOPPING said:
given that you're new 'n all, a word to the wise: don't go insulting George Osborne in front of @Alanbrooke, it drives him wild. He is like a rabid attack dog defending that man, goodness knows why.AlastairMeeks said:
Those sound like very wise words indeed.Alanbrooke said:
There are lots of pitfalls on PB, my advice is to have nothing to do lawyers and Ulstermen it will make your life so much easier.AlastairMeeks said:
Longtime lurker, first time poster today.Alanbrooke said:
welcome Alistair.AlastairMeeks said:I wonder whether pollsters, like generals, are always fighting the last war.
have you been on this site before ?
The campaign towards the 2014 vote, and the economic information since, has kicked the old model to death.
"The idea that you could have a Scotland with high public spending, low taxes, a stable economy and reasonable government debt was wishful a year ago - now it is deluded."
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-348371670 -
DecrepitJohnL said:
First post today and now we can't shut him up.AlastairMeeks said:
Longtime lurker, first time poster today.Alanbrooke said:
welcome Alistair.AlastairMeeks said:I wonder whether pollsters, like generals, are always fighting the last war.
have you been on this site before ?
Before you know it, he'll be writing carefully argued lengthy threads.
0 -
@HuffPostPol: Sarah Palin is considering another run for office because God wants her to use her gifts http://huff.to/1X5Ki0Q0
-
CNN is reporting that SAS men in plain clothes were at Wembley for the game, with orders to shoot to kill. If only Corbyn had been there.....Casino_Royale said:
I don't think Labour have a clue what to do about him.CarlottaVance said:Raphael Behr shooting to kill:
If Corbyn was spouting incoherent gibberish, the episode would be unremarkable except as a sign of Labour’s hastening march into irrelevance. What makes it insidious is the semi-coherence, the fluency of his ellipses and the cold diffidence, mingled with didactic vanity, that seemed to urge his audience to get beyond the banal horror of the headlines, to reach the deeper insight available to those, like himself, who have been warning about interventionist folly (he reminded us) since 2001. He did not excuse the murderers. “Obviously, absolutely, blame those that did it. Absolutely, obviously Isil are totally wrong,” he said, but with a hint of impatience, making the ethical distinction between terrorist and target sound like a caveat to the more sophisticated point he was getting at.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/17/jihadism-western-policy-jeremy-corbyn-isis
0 -
@Pulpstar
'The Lib Dem annihilation was also there in plain sight in the national polls with the obvious consequence that the Conservatives simply must benefit (Due to how the seats were set up)
Ashcroft's 2nd question was A mahoosive red herring.'
And the Lib Dems said their private polling was ' competitive', I wonder how they define uncompetitive ?
The second Ashcroft question was laughable.0 -
Apparently ICM have run a poll on the Labour party leader election rules and 97% of respondents think you're talking bollocks. Make of that what you will.HYUFD said:Given the headline suggests a plurality of this sample vited Labour in May of course this sample hsd to be adjusted given the country voted Tory. So once it was weighted to reflect the party votrshares at the election the Tories have a six point lead once it was done scientifically. So no story here
0 -
Not exactly. He has never moved beyond the 1980s students' union where shoot to kill meant a particular thing and such opinions were standard. Where the nuances and difficulties of modern, indeed real life did not need to be addressed.Cyclefree said:
We understand perfectly well why Corbyn said what he did in the way that he did. He values his terrorist friends more than he values the obligation to keep British citizens safe from terrorists.Malmesbury said:Entertaining to see that just about everyone missed the reason why Corbyn blew that interview so badly.
"Shoot to kill" and "send in the army" have specific meanings for the pro Irish Republican types - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoot-to-kill_policy_in_Northern_Ireland
As I mentioned the other day, the war that was waged in NI used intelligence, informers and directed violence to bring both sides to the negotiating table. "Shoot to kill" was coined for replacing a couple of coppers trying arrest terrorists (and getting murdered) for their pains with ambushes which were carefully designed to be fatal and to have no escape. The IRA didn't like that very much - one thing to shoot off duty policeman in the back, another to have a closed casket funeral because the effects of 250 rounds from a GPMG.
Corbyn would have been off his Irish friends Christmas card lists if he'd said yes.
Hence his backtrack double flip reverse womble afterwards.
He has spent his life espousing banal, asinine student politics and this whole Leader of the Labour Party/Leader of the Opposition thing is still new to him.
He may well shake it off and embrace the responsibility but then a) he may not; and b) it may be too late if he does.0 -
The scary thing is that if McCain hadn't plucked her from Alaska in 2008, by now people would be taking her seriously as a candidate.TheScreamingEagles said:@HuffPostPol: Sarah Palin is considering another run for office because God wants her to use her gifts http://huff.to/1X5Ki0Q
0 -
How brilliant were the fans at Wembley? Makes you proud to be English.
Hell even I joined in a rendition of La Marseillaise in front of the telly.
(For Mr Meeks, that's not a surprise, as I'm PB's leading Francophile)0 -
Why bother translating that? A moment's silence to draw breath would be more useful.JosiasJessop said:
If I recall correctly, it's not about fluency as such; it's about idioms. Let's say someone said: "He's as mad as a box of frogs'. If you translate that literally, it might not make sense. So you need to know an equivalent saying in the target language, or explain it in a dry way.Stark_Dawning said:
I suspect the translator was pulling Campbell's plonker - all Welsh speakers are as fluent in English as they are in Welsh.JosiasJessop said:
A few years back, Nicky Campbell had a R5L segment from the Welsh parliament, He was talking to a Welsh<-English translator. He asked the translator to translate an English phrase into Welsh, but the translator refused.Tim_B said:The French soccer team gave a bizarre press conference yesterday. The team captain (goalkeeper?) had an English translator sitting next to him. As he answered questions, the translator would scribble furiously and then read out the English translation. So far so good.
When the player answered questions in English, the translator would scribble furiously and then read out the French translation. Bizarre.
The reason being that the translator was an expert in English to Welsh translation, and knew the idioms for that. There were other translators for Welsh to English.
What a waste of money.
(For the purposes of this, I forget in which way the translator translated. It makes sense for it being English to Welsh)</p>
As another example: 'Jeremy Corbyn will be PM' would take some translating...
0 -
Firstly, 'the sample recalls voting in a Labour government' states OGH above. Partial refusers are all obviously silent Tories as the article makes clear too, they all voted Tory in May, just are reluctant to say to pollsters they will vote Tory, they are certainly not voting for Corbyn!TheScreamingEagles said:
No, when it was weighted it had Con and Lab tied, after the adjustments for the spiral of shame did it produce a six point Tory lead.HYUFD said:Given the headline suggests a plurality of this sample vited Labour in May of course this sample hsd to be adjusted given the country voted Tory. So once it was weighted to reflect the party votrshares at the election the Tories have a six point lead once it was done scientifically. So no story here
0 -
Yes, then it was weighted to 2015 vote share it had Con and Lab tied.HYUFD said:
Firstly, 'the sample recalls voting in a Labour government' states OGH aboveTheScreamingEagles said:
No, when it was weighted it had Con and Lab tied, after the adjustments for the spiral of shame did it produce a six point Tory lead.HYUFD said:Given the headline suggests a plurality of this sample vited Labour in May of course this sample hsd to be adjusted given the country voted Tory. So once it was weighted to reflect the party votrshares at the election the Tories have a six point lead once it was done scientifically. So no story here
0 -
Fermanagh man right?Alanbrooke said:
lolAlastairMeeks said:
Those sound like very wise words indeed.Alanbrooke said:
There are lots of pitfalls on PB, my advice is to have nothing to do lawyers and Ulstermen it will make your life so much easier.AlastairMeeks said:
Longtime lurker, first time poster today.Alanbrooke said:
welcome Alistair.AlastairMeeks said:I wonder whether pollsters, like generals, are always fighting the last war.
have you been on this site before ?0 -
BBC faces losing Formula 1, darts and snooker in new cuts to sports division
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/bbc/12001755/BBC-faces-losing-Formula-1-darts-and-snooker-in-new-cuts-to-sports-division.html0 -
Thankyou for that enlightened contributionsaddened said:
Apparently ICM have run a poll on the Labour party leader election rules and 97% of respondents think you're talking bollocks. Make of that what you will.HYUFD said:Given the headline suggests a plurality of this sample vited Labour in May of course this sample hsd to be adjusted given the country voted Tory. So once it was weighted to reflect the party votrshares at the election the Tories have a six point lead once it was done scientifically. So no story here
0 -
Speaking of Jeremy, another Jeremy and the BBC are being sued by the Top Gear producer Clarkson hit, for personal injury and racial discrimination(!), Isn't Tymon white? At 8 months after the fact this seems somewhat opportunistic.Scott_P said:
He was reported to be attendingTim_B said:If only Corbyn had been there.....
http://autoweek.com/article/car-life/jeremy-clarkson-faces-discrimination-suit-fracas-case0 -
So they are cutting all of the stuff that isn't really sport.FrancisUrquhart said:BBC faces losing Formula 1, darts and snooker in new cuts to sports division
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/bbc/12001755/BBC-faces-losing-Formula-1-darts-and-snooker-in-new-cuts-to-sports-division.html0 -
German newspaper Bild reported that French intelligence officials warned their German counterparts about a potential attack before the match.
According to the paper, a North African terror cell was planning to attack Hanover with assault rifles and suicide vests - chillingly similar to the methods used in Paris on Friday.
They also reported an Iraqi ‘sleeper agent’ may have planned the attack.0 -
Nah, they are cutting the pub games and F1SandyRentool said:
So they are cutting all of the stuff that isn't really sport.FrancisUrquhart said:BBC faces losing Formula 1, darts and snooker in new cuts to sports division
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/bbc/12001755/BBC-faces-losing-Formula-1-darts-and-snooker-in-new-cuts-to-sports-division.html0 -
I saw Ken this afternoon going down the steps at Finchley Road station. He walked like an old man. Sorely tempted to push the ghastly lizard down the steps.TheScreamingEagles said:Jeez. What is the Labour party's problem with women?
@georgeeaton: Ken Livingstone revealed tonight that he will be co-chair of Labour's defence review with Maria Eagle - pair opposed on Trident.
0 -
Not even that is clearly stated and as I said and as I quote 'the level of partial refusal (respondents who told us what they did in 2015 but don’t know/refuse to tell us what they would do next time) this month has cut into the Conservative share significantly' so clearly these voters have said they voted Tory in May but are reluctant to say who they will be voting for next time, ie they are the silent Tories the pollsters failed so badly to pick up in May, once they are included you get the more accurate Tory poll lead. So as stated, move along please, nothing to see hereTheScreamingEagles said:
Yes, then it was weighted to 2015 vote share it had Con and Lab tied.HYUFD said:
Firstly, 'the sample recalls voting in a Labour government' states OGH aboveTheScreamingEagles said:
No, when it was weighted it had Con and Lab tied, after the adjustments for the spiral of shame did it produce a six point Tory lead.HYUFD said:Given the headline suggests a plurality of this sample vited Labour in May of course this sample hsd to be adjusted given the country voted Tory. So once it was weighted to reflect the party votrshares at the election the Tories have a six point lead once it was done scientifically. So no story here
0 -
Sorry f##king Ken Livingstone is going to be in charge of Labour's defence review. Utterly bonkers.Cyclefree said:
I saw Ken this afternoon going down the steps at Finchley Road station. He walked like an old man. Sorely tempted to push the ghastly lizard down the steps.TheScreamingEagles said:Jeez. What is the Labour party's problem with women?
@georgeeaton: Ken Livingstone revealed tonight that he will be co-chair of Labour's defence review with Maria Eagle - pair opposed on Trident.0 -
Technically, F1 is a business not a sport.TheScreamingEagles said:
Nah, they are cutting the pub games and F1SandyRentool said:
So they are cutting all of the stuff that isn't really sport.FrancisUrquhart said:BBC faces losing Formula 1, darts and snooker in new cuts to sports division
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/bbc/12001755/BBC-faces-losing-Formula-1-darts-and-snooker-in-new-cuts-to-sports-division.html 0 -
Ken Livingstone's contribution should never be underestimated.Cyclefree said:
I saw Ken this afternoon going down the steps at Finchley Road station. He walked like an old man. Sorely tempted to push the ghastly lizard down the steps.TheScreamingEagles said:Jeez. What is the Labour party's problem with women?
@georgeeaton: Ken Livingstone revealed tonight that he will be co-chair of Labour's defence review with Maria Eagle - pair opposed on Trident.
He's one of that small band of exceptional people that have created the necessary framework and circumstances that have enabled the wwc to absolutely despise the Labour Party.0 -
Look at table 3 and notes and headlines therein.HYUFD said:
Not even that is clearly stated and as I said and as I quote 'the level of partial refusal (respondents who told us what they did in 2015 but don’t know/refuse to tell us what they would do next time) this month has cut into the Conservative share significantly' so clearly these voters have said they voted Tory in May but are reluctant to say who they will be voting for next time, ie they are the silent Tories the pollsters failed so badly to pick up in May, once they are included you get the more accurate Tory poll lead. So as stated, move along please, nothing to see hereTheScreamingEagles said:
Yes, then it was weighted to 2015 vote share it had Con and Lab tied.HYUFD said:
Firstly, 'the sample recalls voting in a Labour government' states OGH aboveTheScreamingEagles said:
No, when it was weighted it had Con and Lab tied, after the adjustments for the spiral of shame did it produce a six point Tory lead.HYUFD said:Given the headline suggests a plurality of this sample vited Labour in May of course this sample hsd to be adjusted given the country voted Tory. So once it was weighted to reflect the party votrshares at the election the Tories have a six point lead once it was done scientifically. So no story here
0 -
Survation EU Referendum polling
Remain 42 (+3)
Leave 40 (-3)
DK 18 (-1)0 -
He's not in charge, he's just helping out the little lady. You know what air heads they can be when they see a man in uniform.FrancisUrquhart said:
Sorry f##king Ken Livingstone is going to be in charge of Labour's defence review. Utterly bonkers.Cyclefree said:
I saw Ken this afternoon going down the steps at Finchley Road station. He walked like an old man. Sorely tempted to push the ghastly lizard down the steps.TheScreamingEagles said:Jeez. What is the Labour party's problem with women?
@georgeeaton: Ken Livingstone revealed tonight that he will be co-chair of Labour's defence review with Maria Eagle - pair opposed on Trident.0 -
I am quoting from the very notes OGH has put in from ICM, clearly some voters who said they voted Tory in 2015 are reluctant to say what they will do in 2020, ie the same silent Tories ICM and some others missed in May, once they are included to accurately reflect the parties' election scores you get the more accurate 6% Tory leadTheScreamingEagles said:
Look at table 3 and notes and headlines therein.HYUFD said:
Not even that is clearly stated and as I said and as I quote 'the level of partial refusal (respondents who told us what they did in 2015 but don’t know/refuse to tell us what they would do next time) this month has cut into the Conservative share significantly' so clearly these voters have said they voted Tory in May but are reluctant to say who they will be voting for next time, ie they are the silent Tories the pollsters failed so badly to pick up in May, once they are included you get the more accurate Tory poll lead. So as stated, move along please, nothing to see hereTheScreamingEagles said:
Yes, then it was weighted to 2015 vote share it had Con and Lab tied.HYUFD said:
Firstly, 'the sample recalls voting in a Labour government' states OGH aboveTheScreamingEagles said:
No, when it was weighted it had Con and Lab tied, after the adjustments for the spiral of shame did it produce a six point Tory lead.HYUFD said:Given the headline suggests a plurality of this sample vited Labour in May of course this sample hsd to be adjusted given the country voted Tory. So once it was weighted to reflect the party votrshares at the election the Tories have a six point lead once it was done scientifically. So no story here
0 -
They need to bring this back...TheScreamingEagles said:
Nah, they are cutting the pub games and F1SandyRentool said:
So they are cutting all of the stuff that isn't really sport.FrancisUrquhart said:BBC faces losing Formula 1, darts and snooker in new cuts to sports division
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/bbc/12001755/BBC-faces-losing-Formula-1-darts-and-snooker-in-new-cuts-to-sports-division.html
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Indoor_League
0 -
No sympathy from me.FrancisUrquhart said:BBC faces losing Formula 1, darts and snooker in new cuts to sports division
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/bbc/12001755/BBC-faces-losing-Formula-1-darts-and-snooker-in-new-cuts-to-sports-division.html
The BBC is the voice of the establishment and hates those who challenge the broad political concensus, from the left or right.
Its political correctness makes me sick.0 -
There's a poll for the Times, isn't up on their website yet, but is on their front page
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CUDDGN4W4AEFLnI.jpg:large0 -
I'll si theeSandyRentool said:
They need to bring this back...TheScreamingEagles said:
Nah, they are cutting the pub games and F1SandyRentool said:
So they are cutting all of the stuff that isn't really sport.FrancisUrquhart said:BBC faces losing Formula 1, darts and snooker in new cuts to sports division
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/bbc/12001755/BBC-faces-losing-Formula-1-darts-and-snooker-in-new-cuts-to-sports-division.html
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Indoor_League0 -
So where's the cuts to sports?FrancisUrquhart said:BBC faces losing Formula 1, darts and snooker in new cuts to sports division
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/bbc/12001755/BBC-faces-losing-Formula-1-darts-and-snooker-in-new-cuts-to-sports-division.html0 -
@tnewtondunn: Senior Labour MP texts with news about Ken Livingstone co-chairing Labour defence review... "You couldn't make this shit up".0
-
Not just the wwc.chestnut said:
Ken Livingstone's contribution should never be underestimated.Cyclefree said:
I saw Ken this afternoon going down the steps at Finchley Road station. He walked like an old man. Sorely tempted to push the ghastly lizard down the steps.TheScreamingEagles said:Jeez. What is the Labour party's problem with women?
@georgeeaton: Ken Livingstone revealed tonight that he will be co-chair of Labour's defence review with Maria Eagle - pair opposed on Trident.
He's one of that small band of exceptional people that have created the necessary framework and circumstances that have enabled the wwc to absolutely despise the Labour Party.
0 -
@tnewtondunn: Senior Labour MP texts with news about Ken Livingstone co-chairing Labour defence review... "You couldn't make this shit up".0
-
And my canvassing intelligence!!!chestnut said:
Rod was spot on, as was Tissue Price (?).Danny565 said:Actually, I partially retract the post about the polls not being wrong. There was one big exception: Ashcroft's seat-specific polls turned out to be a lot of BS.
However, the main national polls really were not that far out: it's not the polling companies' fault that people took the accurate-ish polling information, and then made their own inaccurate assumptions that there would be a uniform swing in every seat to produce their own forecasts (when in reality the Tories were doing much better in marginals than the national voting figures would indicate).
The people that were massively wrong were the ones placing their faith in Yougov.
Someone made a very poor call at Yougov at the end of March, which caused their error, and which the rest of the herd fell for right at the end.
The person who authorised/calibrated the late re-weighting there is the primary culprit in what followed.
ICM, Ashcroft and Comres frequently showed big Tory leads, as did Opinium's raw data.0 -
Ken already being collegiate, as usual...
@BBCAllegra: 2/ @EmmaReynoldsMP on @BBCNewsnight: "Our leadership should have a free vote on Syria given the divergent views that there clearly are".
@ken4london: If pro-war MPs want to support a war they should accept that there is a whip and decide whether to break it. https://t.co/PWpBOsMluI
The vote I am interested in is Ed. Does he have sleepless nights after his shameful shenanigans last time? Will he try and salve his conscience?0 -
"You couldn't make this shit up"TheScreamingEagles said:@tnewtondunn: Senior Labour MP texts with news about Ken Livingstone co-chairing Labour defence review... "You couldn't make this shit up".
Oh, you could.
Just no one would believe you.
0 -
I know just how he feels. – I’d hoped to have seen the last of Ken Livingstone back in 2008.TheScreamingEagles said:@tnewtondunn: Senior Labour MP texts with news about Ken Livingstone co-chairing Labour defence review... "You couldn't make this shit up".
0 -
The BBC has no business spending tens of millions of pounds of licence payers money on sports TV rights.FrancisUrquhart said:BBC faces losing Formula 1, darts and snooker in new cuts to sports division
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/bbc/12001755/BBC-faces-losing-Formula-1-darts-and-snooker-in-new-cuts-to-sports-division.html
Also, why not just exempt those over 75 from needing a TV license?0 -
I have just nodded off and woken up on April 1st. Is this is some attempt at April Fools gag from Hug a Jihadi Jez? Or is it that he really likes getting screamed at in PLP meetings. Maybe he likes the punishment.
It also seems that the guys from Friday night didn't seem too keen on having a cosy chat over a latte...
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/11/17/16/2E86921700000578-3321858-Final_chapter_This_is_a_bullet_pelted_shield_used_by_police_as_t-m-78_1447778281072.jpg0 -
An interesting and slightly disturbing chat with a colleague at work today. Present in the UK 25 years of Mid East origin, professional and well educated. Naturalised and votes Conservative. The sort of person Daesh would behead without a thought in their country of origin.
Nonetheless could not believe muslims could carry out the attacks in Paris. Somehow it was the Israelis and Americans behind it. No evidence of course, just the knowledge that this was the case.
Pretty astonishing really. Pretty depressing too.0 -
Times/@YouGov poll finds 76% support decision to kill Jihad John. 11% say the killing was wrong. 64% of 2015 Lab voters supported the attack0
-
Remarks like that show how deeply in trouble labour are. Deeply in trouble and totally unworthy. Labour gave ISIS a free pass and this after first indicating agreement. Labour chose to play cheap politics. Good riddance to you and the likes of you, you are beneath contemptDanny565 said:
The "shameful shenanigans" which prevented ISIS's path being made even smoother.Scott_P said:
The vote I am interested in is Ed. Does he have sleepless nights after his shameful shenanigans last time? Will he try and salve his conscience?0 -
Survation poll tonight (England)
Conservative 38%
Labour 33%
UKIP 18%
LD 7%
Green 4%
EU Ref Remain 42% Leave 40%
https://twitter.com/britainelects0 -
To be fair, I have been hitting the ban hammer on some of my social media contacts today from those expressing those kind of opinions and most were not Muslims.foxinsoxuk said:An interesting and slightly disturbing chat with a colleague at work today. Present in the UK 25 years of Mid East origin, professional and well educated. Naturalised and votes Conservative. The sort of person Daesh would behead without a thought in their country of origin.
Nonetheless could not believe muslims could carry out the attacks in Paris. Somehow it was the Israelis and Americans behind it. No evidence of course, just the knowledge that this was the case.
Pretty astonishing really. Pretty depressing too.0 -
Over 75s... ? That is what is effectively happening. The BBC now has to stand the cost of over 75s licences. The BBC has 5bn pounds of income.I cannot see where it should be struggling to put on a balance of programmes. I do not see why between them they cannot afford enough major sporting events.Tim_B said:
The BBC has no business spending tens of millions of pounds of licence payers money on sports TV rights.FrancisUrquhart said:BBC faces losing Formula 1, darts and snooker in new cuts to sports division
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/bbc/12001755/BBC-faces-losing-Formula-1-darts-and-snooker-in-new-cuts-to-sports-division.html
Also, why not just exempt those over 75 from needing a TV license?0 -
Times/@YouGov poll finds 43% (+23) of voters support Sending ground troops to fight Isis 37% (-21) disapproved. Changes since summer 140
-
Just doesn't look credible to have Labour on 33% in England. I think maybe people register a knee-jerk protest against the government in opinion polls but don't follow through in the polling booth.HYUFD said:Survation poll tonight (England)
Conservative 38%
Labour 33%
UKIP 18%
LD 7%
Green 4%
EU Ref Remain 42% Leave 40%
https://twitter.com/britainelects0 -
Times/@YouGov poll finds 56% of those asked said intelligence agencies needed greater access to the public’s communications, 29% disagreed.0
-
The popularity of the prime minister and Mr Corbyn remained largely unchanged from last month. Mr Cameron’s approval rating stood at minus 4, up 2 points, with 44 per cent of those polled saying he was doing well. Mr Corbyn’s popularity rating sank another 2 points to minus 22, with 52 per cent saying he was doing badly.
YouGov surveyed 1,688 adults online for the poll between November 16 and November 17.0 -
This is being made up isn't it? I've just come in from an evening out... You are attempting to pull our legs , right?TheScreamingEagles said:@tnewtondunn: Senior Labour MP texts with news about Ken Livingstone co-chairing Labour defence review... "You couldn't make this shit up".
0 -
I had a similar experience with someone after church who similarly seemed to place all the ills of the world at the same door, but he always has been a tinfoil hatter and Corbyn supporter. Todays conversation was more disturbing because I was surprised to hear such sentiments from such a normally sensible westernised person.FrancisUrquhart said:
To be fair, I have been hitting the ban hammer on some of my social media contacts today from those expressing those kind of opinions and most were not Muslims.foxinsoxuk said:An interesting and slightly disturbing chat with a colleague at work today. Present in the UK 25 years of Mid East origin, professional and well educated. Naturalised and votes Conservative. The sort of person Daesh would behead without a thought in their country of origin.
Nonetheless could not believe muslims could carry out the attacks in Paris. Somehow it was the Israelis and Americans behind it. No evidence of course, just the knowledge that this was the case.
Pretty astonishing really. Pretty depressing too.0 -
That 11% is Corbyn's base.TheScreamingEagles said:Times/@YouGov poll finds 76% support decision to kill Jihad John. 11% say the killing was wrong. 64% of 2015 Lab voters supported the attack
0 -
Still waiting for this wave of enthusiasm for Corbynism to kick in. If my twitter feed was to be believed, he should be on +90 popularity ratings, and it would be 100 if it wasn't for the Murdoch and the Mail.TheScreamingEagles said:The popularity of the prime minister and Mr Corbyn remained largely unchanged from last month. Mr Cameron’s approval rating stood at minus 4, up 2 points, with 44 per cent of those polled saying he was doing well. Mr Corbyn’s popularity rating sank another 2 points to minus 22, with 52 per cent saying he was doing badly.
YouGov surveyed 1,688 adults online for the poll between November 16 and November 17.0 -
Labour actually won 32% in England in May, compared to 30% nationally, for the first time it did worse in Scotland than England because of its thrashing by the SNP. The Tories won 41%, the LDs 8% and UKIP 14% and the Greens 4.2%, so there has been a small shift from Tory and LD to UKIP in England since the election and maybe from the Greens to Labour, otherwise largely unchangedAndyJS said:
Just doesn't look credible to have Labour on 33% in England. I think maybe people register a knee-jerk protest against the government in opinion polls but don't follow through in the polling booth.HYUFD said:Survation poll tonight (England)
Conservative 38%
Labour 33%
UKIP 18%
LD 7%
Green 4%
EU Ref Remain 42% Leave 40%
https://twitter.com/britainelects
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_2015_(England)0 -
Instead of texting, why doesn't find what's left of the PLP's backbone and do something?Scott_P said:@tnewtondunn: Senior Labour MP texts with news about Ken Livingstone co-chairing Labour defence review... "You couldn't make this shit up".
0 -
The shameful way Dave was prevented arming ISIS supporting rebels against ISIS fighting Assad forcesDanny565 said:
The "shameful shenanigans" which prevented ISIS's path being made even smoother.Scott_P said:
The vote I am interested in is Ed. Does he have sleepless nights after his shameful shenanigans last time? Will he try and salve his conscience?0 -
I was speaking with someone who is originally from Paris and they felt that the attacks were solely down to France's foreign policy. Nothing else, just their foreign policy. I really couldn't be bothered to ask if the wholesale slaughter of the Yazidis was also in response to France's foreign policy. I politely listened to what they had to say then excused myself.foxinsoxuk said:An interesting and slightly disturbing chat with a colleague at work today. Present in the UK 25 years of Mid East origin, professional and well educated. Naturalised and votes Conservative. The sort of person Daesh would behead without a thought in their country of origin.
Nonetheless could not believe muslims could carry out the attacks in Paris. Somehow it was the Israelis and Americans behind it. No evidence of course, just the knowledge that this was the case.
Pretty astonishing really. Pretty depressing too.0 -
Not really.AndyJS said:
That 11% is Corbyn's base.TheScreamingEagles said:Times/@YouGov poll finds 76% support decision to kill Jihad John. 11% say the killing was wrong. 64% of 2015 Lab voters supported the attack
I support the killing but
I am part of Corbyns base support0 -
Tweeting makes them feel good, the spineless losers.Cyclefree said:
Instead of texting, why doesn't find what's left of the PLP's backbone and do something?Scott_P said:@tnewtondunn: Senior Labour MP texts with news about Ken Livingstone co-chairing Labour defence review... "You couldn't make this shit up".
None of them have the balls to do anything. Not one.0 -
I'm surprised - personally I've not come across a single person who has become more likely even to support air strikes. Maybe I need to widen my social circles.TheScreamingEagles said:Times/@YouGov poll finds 43% (+23) of voters support Sending ground troops to fight Isis 37% (-21) disapproved. Changes since summer 14
0 -
MP_SE said:
I was speaking with someone who is originally from Paris and they felt that the attacks were solely down to France's foreign policy. Nothing else, just their foreign policy. I really couldn't be bothered to ask if the wholesale slaughter of the Yazidis was also in response to France's foreign policy. I politely listened to what they had to say then excused myself.foxinsoxuk said:An interesting and slightly disturbing chat with a colleague at work today. Present in the UK 25 years of Mid East origin, professional and well educated. Naturalised and votes Conservative. The sort of person Daesh would behead without a thought in their country of origin.
Nonetheless could not believe muslims could carry out the attacks in Paris. Somehow it was the Israelis and Americans behind it. No evidence of course, just the knowledge that this was the case.
Pretty astonishing really. Pretty depressing too.
Easier to blame the victim than cope with reality.
Actually a common psychological issue.
0 -
You're right (not sure we've ever agreed before!). It's thought to be unprofessional to have people translate/interpret both ways, because few people can do it to professional standard. There are exceptions (my mother was trilingual and taken for a native in all three) but they're fairly rare, and it's safest to refuse. I translate a few thousand words a week from German and Danish into English, but wouldn't dream of trying to do the reverse.Scott_P said:
Is that not standard practise?JosiasJessop said:The reason being that the translator was an expert in English to Welsh translation, and knew the idioms for that. There were other translators for Welsh to English.
What a waste of money.
Disclaimer, my knowledge of international simultaneous language translation comes from a memory of the film Charade
0 -
Managerial salaries and pension provision plus over inflated payments to talent. Salford must be costing a fortune too. Having ditched TVC for peanuts, they're short of studio space and facilities so anyone with availability is likely to be charging premium rates.flightpath01 said:
Over 75s... ? That is what is effectively happening. The BBC now has to stand the cost of over 75s licences. The BBC has 5bn pounds of income.I cannot see where it should be struggling to put on a balance of programmes. I do not see why between them they cannot afford enough major sporting events.Tim_B said:
The BBC has no business spending tens of millions of pounds of licence payers money on sports TV rights.FrancisUrquhart said:BBC faces losing Formula 1, darts and snooker in new cuts to sports division
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/bbc/12001755/BBC-faces-losing-Formula-1-darts-and-snooker-in-new-cuts-to-sports-division.html
Also, why not just exempt those over 75 from needing a TV license?0 -
Indeed, we saw it with Labour and their election of Corbyn, and on that bombshell, goodnightMarkHopkins said:MP_SE said:
I was speaking with someone who is originally from Paris and they felt that the attacks were solely down to France's foreign policy. Nothing else, just their foreign policy. I really couldn't be bothered to ask if the wholesale slaughter of the Yazidis was also in response to France's foreign policy. I politely listened to what they had to say then excused myself.foxinsoxuk said:An interesting and slightly disturbing chat with a colleague at work today. Present in the UK 25 years of Mid East origin, professional and well educated. Naturalised and votes Conservative. The sort of person Daesh would behead without a thought in their country of origin.
Nonetheless could not believe muslims could carry out the attacks in Paris. Somehow it was the Israelis and Americans behind it. No evidence of course, just the knowledge that this was the case.
Pretty astonishing really. Pretty depressing too.
Easier to blame the victim than cope with reality.
Actually a common psychological issue.0 -
The problem with those sort of questions is that they don't get to why the respondent thinks, say, Corbyn is doing well. To illustrate this further, if I were answering that question I would say that Corbyn is doing a fantastic job, but that is because I loathe and despise the Labour Party for their long term betrayal of the people the Party was set up for and for the damage Blair and his cronies did to this country. Corbyn, by making Labour unelectable, is in my book doing a great job as party leader.TheScreamingEagles said:The popularity of the prime minister and Mr Corbyn remained largely unchanged from last month. Mr Cameron’s approval rating stood at minus 4, up 2 points, with 44 per cent of those polled saying he was doing well. Mr Corbyn’s popularity rating sank another 2 points to minus 22, with 52 per cent saying he was doing badly.
YouGov surveyed 1,688 adults online for the poll between November 16 and November 17.0 -
Not surprising given how widespread the view is in the Arab world that anything bad that happens to them or anything bad done by them is the fault of Israel.foxinsoxuk said:An interesting and slightly disturbing chat with a colleague at work today. Present in the UK 25 years of Mid East origin, professional and well educated. Naturalised and votes Conservative. The sort of person Daesh would behead without a thought in their country of origin.
Nonetheless could not believe muslims could carry out the attacks in Paris. Somehow it was the Israelis and Americans behind it. No evidence of course, just the knowledge that this was the case.
Pretty astonishing really. Pretty depressing too.
See, for instance, this - http://www.palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=157&doc_id=16247
There are obvious parallels with other peoples in European history - apparently educated, civilized, intelligent - but fundamentally unhinged when it comes to one set of scapegoats for their own actions.0 -
What I meant was that if over 75s were exempt, they wouldn't be legally required to have TV licenses, therefor there would not be any cost for the BBC to cover.flightpath01 said:
Over 75s... ? That is what is effectively happening. The BBC now has to stand the cost of over 75s licences. The BBC has 5bn pounds of income.I cannot see where it should be struggling to put on a balance of programmes. I do not see why between them they cannot afford enough major sporting events.Tim_B said:
The BBC has no business spending tens of millions of pounds of licence payers money on sports TV rights.FrancisUrquhart said:BBC faces losing Formula 1, darts and snooker in new cuts to sports division
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/bbc/12001755/BBC-faces-losing-Formula-1-darts-and-snooker-in-new-cuts-to-sports-division.html
Also, why not just exempt those over 75 from needing a TV license?0 -
http://www.svt.se/nyheter/regionalt/stockholm/starka-reaktioner-mot-stockholms-satsning-mot-extremister
Wow, so the leftist alliance in Sweden has instituted a policy where returning ISIS fighters will not go to jail and instead get full welfare assistance. What a fucked up country.0 -
How can free licences for over 75's be justified?flightpath01 said:
Over 75s... ? That is what is effectively happening. The BBC now has to stand the cost of over 75s licences. The BBC has 5bn pounds of income.I cannot see where it should be struggling to put on a balance of programmes. I do not see why between them they cannot afford enough major sporting events.Tim_B said:
The BBC has no business spending tens of millions of pounds of licence payers money on sports TV rights.FrancisUrquhart said:BBC faces losing Formula 1, darts and snooker in new cuts to sports division
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/bbc/12001755/BBC-faces-losing-Formula-1-darts-and-snooker-in-new-cuts-to-sports-division.html
Also, why not just exempt those over 75 from needing a TV license?0 -
No more than under-75 145 pound licenses can be justified.bigjohnowls said:
How can free licences for over 75's be justified?flightpath01 said:
Over 75s... ? That is what is effectively happening. The BBC now has to stand the cost of over 75s licences. The BBC has 5bn pounds of income.I cannot see where it should be struggling to put on a balance of programmes. I do not see why between them they cannot afford enough major sporting events.Tim_B said:
The BBC has no business spending tens of millions of pounds of licence payers money on sports TV rights.FrancisUrquhart said:BBC faces losing Formula 1, darts and snooker in new cuts to sports division
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/bbc/12001755/BBC-faces-losing-Formula-1-darts-and-snooker-in-new-cuts-to-sports-division.html
Also, why not just exempt those over 75 from needing a TV license?0 -
Bobby Jindall has pulled out of the race apparently.0
-
Vote winner?bigjohnowls said:
How can free licences for over 75's be justified?flightpath01 said:
Over 75s... ? That is what is effectively happening. The BBC now has to stand the cost of over 75s licences. The BBC has 5bn pounds of income.I cannot see where it should be struggling to put on a balance of programmes. I do not see why between them they cannot afford enough major sporting events.Tim_B said:
The BBC has no business spending tens of millions of pounds of licence payers money on sports TV rights.FrancisUrquhart said:BBC faces losing Formula 1, darts and snooker in new cuts to sports division
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/bbc/12001755/BBC-faces-losing-Formula-1-darts-and-snooker-in-new-cuts-to-sports-division.html
Also, why not just exempt those over 75 from needing a TV license?0 -
Bobby Jindal suspends presidential campaign
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/bobby-jindal-2016-suspends-presidential-campaign-2160020 -
Yup yupAndyJS said:Bobby Jindall has pulled out of the race apparently.
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/bobby-jindal-2016-suspends-presidential-campaign-2160020 -
My scientific sample of a representative group, i.e. the blokes up the pub at lunch time, revealed a 100% support of "nuking the buggers back to the stone age" but supplementary questions also showed that "Britain's half a dozen clapped out Tornadoes were not doing any good now so what would be the point of getting them to bomb targets in Syria too" was a majority viewpoint by a big margin. Overall the motion that "This house believes 1) that we should leave it to that bastard Putin as he at least has the balls to get stuck in; and 2) Cameron is a wanker full of piss and wind" was carried unanimously.kle4 said:
I'm surprised - personally I've not come across a single person who has become more likely even to support air strikes. Maybe I need to widen my social circles.TheScreamingEagles said:Times/@YouGov poll finds 43% (+23) of voters support Sending ground troops to fight Isis 37% (-21) disapproved. Changes since summer 14
0 -
Been to see a preview of Black Mass tonight, Jonny Depp as Americas most notorious gangster.
Highly recommended watch.0 -
Bobby Jindal has just suspended his presidential campaign for the republican nomination, he last polled 0.3% on the RCP average.
He was anointed as the republican answer to Obama by the usual suspects called pundits back in early 2009, before he committed his only famous act:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmNM0oj79t8
14 candidates left.0 -
Any room for a small one?HurstLlama said:
My scientific sample of a representative group, i.e. the blokes up the pub at lunch time, revealed a 100% support of "nuking the buggers back to the stone age" but supplementary questions also showed that "Britain's half a dozen clapped out Tornadoes were not doing any good now so what would be the point of getting them to bomb targets in Syria too" was a majority viewpoint by a big margin. Overall the motion that "This house believes 1) that we should leave it to that bastard Putin as he at least has the balls to get stuck in; and 2) Cameron is a wanker full of piss and wind" was carried unanimously.kle4 said:
I'm surprised - personally I've not come across a single person who has become more likely even to support air strikes. Maybe I need to widen my social circles.TheScreamingEagles said:Times/@YouGov poll finds 43% (+23) of voters support Sending ground troops to fight Isis 37% (-21) disapproved. Changes since summer 14
0 -
I am not so polite. I tell them why I think they are wrong. And how morally repulsive I think their view is. I don't really care that it's not the done thing. I think it's important to speak out when people talk balls like that.MP_SE said:
I was speaking with someone who is originally from Paris and they felt that the attacks were solely down to France's foreign policy. Nothing else, just their foreign policy. I really couldn't be bothered to ask if the wholesale slaughter of the Yazidis was also in response to France's foreign policy. I politely listened to what they had to say then excused myself.foxinsoxuk said:An interesting and slightly disturbing chat with a colleague at work today. Present in the UK 25 years of Mid East origin, professional and well educated. Naturalised and votes Conservative. The sort of person Daesh would behead without a thought in their country of origin.
Nonetheless could not believe muslims could carry out the attacks in Paris. Somehow it was the Israelis and Americans behind it. No evidence of course, just the knowledge that this was the case.
Pretty astonishing really. Pretty depressing too.
The view that it's down to French foreign policy or British foreign policy or the US foreign policy or whatever is a very self-centred view, for all its apparent nod to the West being the bad guys. It is saying that the only people who count in the Middle East are Europeans. They are the actors. They are the ones who cause the bad things to happen. The Arabs are just passive victims. Even when they act, they are being manipulated by others - us! Or reacting to us! It's someone burnishing their own self-importance while pretending to be more insightful about the causes but in reality denying the terrorists even the credit (if that's the word) of their own moral agency. They can't even accept that the terrorists chose to do what they did without - subtly - making the Europeans the stars of the show.
Utterly vile.0 -
This is wrong. You have misread what ICM said. They did NOT say that under the old methodology the two parties would have been neck-and-neck. They said the raw sample was neck-and-neck. Not the same thing at all. (Indeed, on the basis of how the raw sample voted, Labour won the last election!)Danny565 said:
Except the ICM poll has been specifically adjusted to take account of the over-weighting of Labour support (hence the change from neck-and-neck to 6% Tory lead).Alanbrooke said:The polls were all off last time from over weighting Labour support.
Looks like they haven't changed much.0 -
Because a lot of them are poor decrepit alone and need the TV for social and information purposes.bigjohnowls said:
How can free licences for over 75's be justified?flightpath01 said:
Over 75s... ? That is what is effectively happening. The BBC now has to stand the cost of over 75s licences. The BBC has 5bn pounds of income.I cannot see where it should be struggling to put on a balance of programmes. I do not see why between them they cannot afford enough major sporting events.Tim_B said:
The BBC has no business spending tens of millions of pounds of licence payers money on sports TV rights.FrancisUrquhart said:BBC faces losing Formula 1, darts and snooker in new cuts to sports division
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/bbc/12001755/BBC-faces-losing-Formula-1-darts-and-snooker-in-new-cuts-to-sports-division.html
Also, why not just exempt those over 75 from needing a TV license?
0 -
ExactlyRichard_Nabavi said:
This is wrong. You have misread what ICM said. They did NOT say that under the old methodology the two parties would have been neck-and-neck. They said the raw sample was neck-and-neck. Not the same thing at all. (Indeed, on the basis of how the raw sample voted, Labour won the last election!)Danny565 said:
Except the ICM poll has been specifically adjusted to take account of the over-weighting of Labour support (hence the change from neck-and-neck to 6% Tory lead).Alanbrooke said:The polls were all off last time from over weighting Labour support.
Looks like they haven't changed much.0 -
Uncle Rupert has given Cameron the thumbs up...
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/6667579346768855050 -
It is difficult to be quite so forthright with someone that I have to work with on a weekly basis, someone who has excellent professional skills.Cyclefree said:
I am not so polite. I tell them why I think they are wrong. And how morally repulsive I think their view is. I don't really care that it's not the done thing. I think it's important to speak out when people talk balls like that.MP_SE said:
I was speaking with someone who is originally from Paris and they felt that the attacks were solely down to France's foreign policy. Nothing else, just their foreign policy. I really couldn't be bothered to ask if the wholesale slaughter of the Yazidis was also in response to France's foreign policy. I politely listened to what they had to say then excused myself.foxinsoxuk said:An interesting and slightly disturbing chat with a colleague at work today. Present in the UK 25 years of Mid East origin, professional and well educated. Naturalised and votes Conservative. The sort of person Daesh would behead without a thought in their country of origin.
Nonetheless could not believe muslims could carry out the attacks in Paris. Somehow it was the Israelis and Americans behind it. No evidence of course, just the knowledge that this was the case.
Pretty astonishing really. Pretty depressing too.
The view that it's down to French foreign policy or British foreign policy or the US foreign policy or whatever is a very self-centred view, for all its apparent nod to the West being the bad guys. It is saying that the only people who count in the Middle East are Europeans. They are the actors. They are the ones who cause the bad things to happen. The Arabs are just passive victims. Even when they act, they are being manipulated by others - us! Or reacting to us! It's someone burnishing their own self-importance while pretending to be more insightful about the causes but in reality denying the terrorists even the credit (if that's the word) of their own moral agency. They can't even accept that the terrorists chose to do what they did without - subtly - making the Europeans the stars of the show.
Utterly vile.
I agree though. It does deny the mid east peoples their humanity. Just depicting them as dumb pawns in a bigger game.0 -
Is not the fact that this discussion, this dispute, this dichotomy, is taking place a good indication of how worthless opinion polls are?Richard_Nabavi said:
This is wrong. You have misread what ICM said. They did NOT say that under the old methodology the two parties would have been neck-and-neck. They said the raw sample was neck-and-neck. Not the same thing at all. (Indeed, on the basis of how the raw sample voted, Labour won the last election!)Danny565 said:
Except the ICM poll has been specifically adjusted to take account of the over-weighting of Labour support (hence the change from neck-and-neck to 6% Tory lead).Alanbrooke said:The polls were all off last time from over weighting Labour support.
Looks like they haven't changed much.
I do understand that this discussion is important to betting people, but it does strike me as dangerous for punters to make decisions based on polls.0 -
Depends Mr. Owls, are you prepared to swear off the demon drink, save for medical reasons? The group at lunchtime was an extraordinary meeting of the Hurstpierpoint and District Gentlemen's Temperance Society.bigjohnowls said:
Any room for a small one?HurstLlama said:
My scientific sample of a representative group, i.e. the blokes up the pub at lunch time, revealed a 100% support of "nuking the buggers back to the stone age" but supplementary questions also showed that "Britain's half a dozen clapped out Tornadoes were not doing any good now so what would be the point of getting them to bomb targets in Syria too" was a majority viewpoint by a big margin. Overall the motion that "This house believes 1) that we should leave it to that bastard Putin as he at least has the balls to get stuck in; and 2) Cameron is a wanker full of piss and wind" was carried unanimously.kle4 said:
I'm surprised - personally I've not come across a single person who has become more likely even to support air strikes. Maybe I need to widen my social circles.TheScreamingEagles said:Times/@YouGov poll finds 43% (+23) of voters support Sending ground troops to fight Isis 37% (-21) disapproved. Changes since summer 14
The Society (of which I happen to be Hon Sec of the outings committee) would like to affiliate to the Band of Hope (which, as I am sure you know, was founded in Leeds) however I understand that there are doctrinal differences concerning the correct interpretation of Chapter 1 verse 23 of St. Paul's First Epistle to Timothy.0 -
Well, quite. Sometimes discretion is the better course of action.foxinsoxuk said:
It is difficult to be quite so forthright with someone that I have to work with on a weekly basis, someone who has excellent professional skills.Cyclefree said:
I am not so polite. I tell them why I think they are wrong. And how morally repulsive I think their view is. I don't really care that it's not the done thing. I think it's important to speak out when people talk balls like that.MP_SE said:
I was speaking with someone who is originally from Paris and they felt that the attacks were solely down to France's foreign policy. Nothing else, just their foreign policy. I really couldn't be bothered to ask if the wholesale slaughter of the Yazidis was also in response to France's foreign policy. I politely listened to what they had to say then excused myself.foxinsoxuk said:An interesting and slightly disturbing chat with a colleague at work today. Present in the UK 25 years of Mid East origin, professional and well educated. Naturalised and votes Conservative. The sort of person Daesh would behead without a thought in their country of origin.
Nonetheless could not believe muslims could carry out the attacks in Paris. Somehow it was the Israelis and Americans behind it. No evidence of course, just the knowledge that this was the case.
Pretty astonishing really. Pretty depressing too.
The view that it's down to French foreign policy or British foreign policy or the US foreign policy or whatever is a very self-centred view, for all its apparent nod to the West being the bad guys. It is saying that the only people who count in the Middle East are Europeans. They are the actors. They are the ones who cause the bad things to happen. The Arabs are just passive victims. Even when they act, they are being manipulated by others - us! Or reacting to us! It's someone burnishing their own self-importance while pretending to be more insightful about the causes but in reality denying the terrorists even the credit (if that's the word) of their own moral agency. They can't even accept that the terrorists chose to do what they did without - subtly - making the Europeans the stars of the show.
Utterly vile.
I agree though. It does deny the mid east peoples their humanity. Just depicting them as dumb pawns in a bigger game.
Still I came from a family where we argued about politics and religion and history and families and pretty much every damn thing on a nightly basis, often at volume and generally passionately. When I first encountered opera, it seemed to me like watching my family on stage. A dinner party where people talk about house prices and schools is not just deathly dull, but such a wasted opportunity!!0
