politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Sign In Register

Categories

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Remember that Iowa, the first state to decide, has a histor

SystemSystem Posts: 12,548
edited December 2015 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Remember that Iowa, the first state to decide, has a history of springing surprises

We’ve got just seven weeks to wait until the first US voters start making their choices in the 2016 White House race. As has become the custom since 1972 the first state to express a choice is Iowa with its caucuses.

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • MP_SEMP_SE Posts: 3,642
    First like Trump.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 23,108
    Snowy like Iowa in January.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 55,685
    8 years ago when I was a lot keener on Hillary than I am now the whole caucus thing struck me as very unfair and undemocratic. Most of that campaign Hillary won primaries, especially open Primaries and consistently lost caucuses. Obama's team seemed brilliant at organising them.

    It seems a peculiar method of choosing anything and I find it very hard to believe that a maverick like Trump will do well in it unless he has bought in a lot of top talent.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 54,799
    546,931 people don't believe in Free Speech
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    546,931 people don't believe in Free Speech

    451,880 don't believe in (any) immigration. Strange to tell that petition hasn't been mentioned on the BBC at all.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,703
    I'd have thought Iowa would be Cruz or Trump.
  • Kevin_McCandlessKevin_McCandless Posts: 392
    edited December 2015
    Of course, this is only the first round of the caucus, which will culminate in early summer with one big caucus at the state level. In 2012, Ron Paul supporters took over the process and ultimately got 22 of the 28 delegates. (As someone on another board put, the only people who understand how caucuses work are the old people who've been going to them for 50 years.)
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 25,039
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    546,931 people don't believe in Free Speech

    Point 1: Nobody is stopping Trump speaking nor communicating the contents of his speech
    Point 2: This is Britain. You don't have an absolute free speech right and never have (it's always been contingent on public order and security concerns). You must be confusing the UK with the US.

  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 38,989
    viewcode said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    546,931 people don't believe in Free Speech

    Point 1: Nobody is stopping Trump speaking nor communicating the contents of his speech
    Point 2: This is Britain. You don't have an absolute free speech right and never have (it's always been contingent on public order and security concerns). You must be confusing the UK with the US.

    I doubt if Trump is a threat to national security and public order.

    FPT quarterly tax returns, Osborne really is a c**t, isn't he?
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    edited December 2015
    viewcode said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    546,931 people don't believe in Free Speech

    Point 1: Nobody is stopping Trump speaking nor communicating the contents of his speech
    Point 2: This is Britain. You don't have an absolute free speech right and never have (it's always been contingent on public order and security concerns). You must be confusing the UK with the US.
    I don't think many people could make that mistake, we have the unholy alliance between students and assorted lefties that think that we should have the right to be not offended, and politicians who think that legislation like the Racial and Religious Hatred Act (2006) is a good idea, combined with the sort of idiotic prudery that gives us the recent changes on what sort of material should be available in R rated videos, as if that matters a damn in the world of almost endless on-line pr0n.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 40,236
    Just did a Populus for the BSE campaign, it looks like they are going to ramp up the project fear aspect, literally everything in there is negative, about how shit this country would be if we left the EU. All the statements they tested were negatively proposed, "if we leave this becomes more expensive". Even some rubbish about beaches, it was all pretty desperate. The only hit they had was the last statement about leaving giving Nigel Farage what he wants, I think that might hit home for a lot of the "soft leavers" in blue. Other than that if this is their campaign, it isn't going to work.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 25,039
    edited December 2015
    Sean_F said:



    ... Osborne really is a c**t, isn't he?

    Best. Post. Evah.

  • runnymederunnymede Posts: 2,536
    And what pray constitutes 'public order concerns'? If some group claims that speech of some sort will lead to them committing acts of violence (aka a threat) is that sufficient to have the said speech banned on 'public order' grounds?
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 25,039
    runnymede said:

    And what pray constitutes 'public order concerns'??

    Whatever the cops say they are?
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 54,799
    MaxPB said:

    Just did a Populus for the BSE campaign, it looks like they are going to ramp up the project fear aspect, literally everything in there is negative, about how shit this country would be if we left the EU. All the statements they tested were negatively proposed, "if we leave this becomes more expensive". Even some rubbish about beaches, it was all pretty desperate. The only hit they had was the last statement about leaving giving Nigel Farage what he wants, I think that might hit home for a lot of the "soft leavers" in blue. Other than that if this is their campaign, it isn't going to work.

    BSE Campaign? Sounds like Mad Europhile Disease :lol:
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 54,799
    viewcode said:

    runnymede said:

    And what pray constitutes 'public order concerns'??

    Whatever the cops say they are?
    You will make an Excellent Drone!
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,180
    viewcode said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    546,931 people don't believe in Free Speech

    Point 1: Nobody is stopping Trump speaking nor communicating the contents of his speech
    Point 2: This is Britain. You don't have an absolute free speech right and never have (it's always been contingent on public order and security concerns). You must be confusing the UK with the US.

    Oh dear -sense of humour deficit growing among the left. :)
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited December 2015
    There are 3 new Iowa polls coming later tonight, from PPP, DesMoines Register, and Bloomberg, here are the tea leaves in case I'm not online to post them:

    PublicPolicyPolling ‏@ppppolls Dec 11
    First night of our Iowa poll- Trump and Cruz at the top with no one else remotely close to them

    PublicPolicyPolling ‏@ppppolls Dec 11
    Trump also polling 20-25% when tested in general election match ups as an independent in Iowa

    Joshua Green ‏@JoshuaGreen 17h17 hours ago
    Wow, the Bloomberg/Ann Selzer Iowa poll coming tomorrow at 6 is gonna change the #Narrative

    Taegan Goddard ‏@politicalwire 18h18 hours ago
    Hmmm… Trump’s already trashing Des Moines Register poll out tomorrow night. Must show/think its shows Cruz winning.

    Actually the DMR and Bloomberg poll might be the same one, conducted for both of them, so 2 polls might come out.
    For Trump to be polling at 20-25% as an independent I guess PPP is very good for Trump (could be 40% in the primary), while the Bloomberg poll I guess is bad for Trump.
  • MP_SEMP_SE Posts: 3,642
    MaxPB said:

    Just did a Populus for the BSE campaign, it looks like they are going to ramp up the project fear aspect, literally everything in there is negative, about how shit this country would be if we left the EU. All the statements they tested were negatively proposed, "if we leave this becomes more expensive". Even some rubbish about beaches, it was all pretty desperate. The only hit they had was the last statement about leaving giving Nigel Farage what he wants, I think that might hit home for a lot of the "soft leavers" in blue. Other than that if this is their campaign, it isn't going to work.

    Typical of those suffering from europhilia. They can only talk the UK down.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 25,039
    runnymede said:

    And what pray constitutes 'public order concerns'? If some group claims that speech of some sort will lead to them committing acts of violence (aka a threat) is that sufficient to have the said speech banned on 'public order' grounds?

    There is a danger here that you may mistake my reportage of the different arrangements in the UK for advocacy of them. the honest answer to your questions are "what the cops say they are" and "yes, and always has been". It doesn't mean I like the situation nor approve of it.

    It feeds into a longstanding hobbyhorse of mine: people map the US system onto the UK one and assume it makes sense: hence Sunil's observance about free speech. But a right to free speech is a US thing, not a UK thing: here it's a principle that can be overriden in certain circumstances, there it's a right that requires a higher threshold to override

  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 25,039
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    MaxPB said:

    Just did a Populus for the BSE campaign, it looks like they are going to ramp up the project fear aspect, literally everything in there is negative, about how shit this country would be if we left the EU. All the statements they tested were negatively proposed, "if we leave this becomes more expensive". Even some rubbish about beaches, it was all pretty desperate. The only hit they had was the last statement about leaving giving Nigel Farage what he wants, I think that might hit home for a lot of the "soft leavers" in blue. Other than that if this is their campaign, it isn't going to work.

    BSE Campaign? Sounds like Mad Europhile Disease :lol:
    It was intended that way Sunil. The organisation is BSIE, but if you pretend the organisation is called BSE then it sounds like a disease. See also "I'd like to give her one", 70's humour, oo-er missus, etc.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    viewcode said:

    runnymede said:

    And what pray constitutes 'public order concerns'??

    Whatever the cops say they are?
    So the free speech of our country, such as it is, is in the hands of people that left school at 16 to go to Hendon and spent 20 or so years in uniform being careful to not make waves or do anything controversial so that the promotions would keep on rolling in.... fills one with confidence.
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    viewcode said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    546,931 people don't believe in Free Speech

    Point 1: Nobody is stopping Trump speaking nor communicating the contents of his speech
    Point 2: This is Britain. You don't have an absolute free speech right and never have (it's always been contingent on public order and security concerns). You must be confusing the UK with the US.

    True, Britain doesn't and never had free speech, apart perhaps from speakers corner.
    It really annoys me that America is more free than Britain.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 60,501
    Indigo said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    546,931 people don't believe in Free Speech

    451,880 don't believe in (any) immigration. Strange to tell that petition hasn't been mentioned on the BBC at all.
    Nor have they mentioned the 447,924 calling for accepting more asylum seekers.

    So, at least they are even handed at ignoring pointless petitions.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    rcs1000 said:

    Indigo said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    546,931 people don't believe in Free Speech

    451,880 don't believe in (any) immigration. Strange to tell that petition hasn't been mentioned on the BBC at all.
    Nor have they mentioned the 447,924 calling for accepting more asylum seekers.

    So, at least they are even handed at ignoring pointless petitions.
    Except apparently the Trump one.
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    rcs1000 said:

    Indigo said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    546,931 people don't believe in Free Speech

    451,880 don't believe in (any) immigration. Strange to tell that petition hasn't been mentioned on the BBC at all.
    Nor have they mentioned the 447,924 calling for accepting more asylum seekers.

    So, at least they are even handed at ignoring pointless petitions.
    Lets say there are always half a million people in this country wasting their time petitioning indifferent politicians.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 25,039
    Speedy said:

    viewcode said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    546,931 people don't believe in Free Speech

    Point 1: Nobody is stopping Trump speaking nor communicating the contents of his speech
    Point 2: This is Britain. You don't have an absolute free speech right and never have (it's always been contingent on public order and security concerns). You must be confusing the UK with the US.

    True, Britain doesn't and never had free speech, apart perhaps from speakers corner.
    It really annoys me that America is more free than Britain.
    True, but i quite like the UK. At the risk of sounding silly, it kinda works.

  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    viewcode said:

    Speedy said:

    viewcode said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    546,931 people don't believe in Free Speech

    Point 1: Nobody is stopping Trump speaking nor communicating the contents of his speech
    Point 2: This is Britain. You don't have an absolute free speech right and never have (it's always been contingent on public order and security concerns). You must be confusing the UK with the US.

    True, Britain doesn't and never had free speech, apart perhaps from speakers corner.
    It really annoys me that America is more free than Britain.
    True, but i quite like the UK. At the risk of sounding silly, it kinda works.

    Actually I hope Corbyn would promise a law enshrining the right to free speech.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,825
    On free speech, what concerns me is that it's determined by who might be offended. Some of the Muslim clerics we've had here have gotten away with preaching all sorts of offensive nonsense. But I've always felt that because the people who object to it aren't likely to kick off then the authorities are less likely to be bothered.

    If Donald Trump made a visit to the UK to give a speech or something you know that rent a mob would show up to cause trouble and thus the authorities would be more likely to intervene.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    We were in a much healthier place before New Labour's PC police
    viewcode said:

    Speedy said:

    viewcode said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    546,931 people don't believe in Free Speech

    Point 1: Nobody is stopping Trump speaking nor communicating the contents of his speech
    Point 2: This is Britain. You don't have an absolute free speech right and never have (it's always been contingent on public order and security concerns). You must be confusing the UK with the US.

    True, Britain doesn't and never had free speech, apart perhaps from speakers corner.
    It really annoys me that America is more free than Britain.
    True, but i quite like the UK. At the risk of sounding silly, it kinda works.

  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Quite.
    tlg86 said:

    On free speech, what concerns me is that it's determined by who might be offended. Some of the Muslim clerics we've had here have gotten away with preaching all sorts of offensive nonsense. But I've always felt that because the people who object to it aren't likely to kick off then the authorities are less likely to be bothered.

    If Donald Trump made a visit to the UK to give a speech or something you know that rent a mob would show up to cause trouble and thus the authorities would be more likely to intervene.

  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 85,185
    edited December 2015
    Pair held over suspected toxic gas plot in Switzerland

    Two men of Syrian origin are in custody in Switzerland suspected of manufacturing toxic gas, the attorney general’s office has said.

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/dec/12/switzerland-two-held-toxic-gas-syrian
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,703
    Plato_Says said:

    Quite.

    tlg86 said:

    On free speech, what concerns me is that it's determined by who might be offended. Some of the Muslim clerics we've had here have gotten away with preaching all sorts of offensive nonsense. But I've always felt that because the people who object to it aren't likely to kick off then the authorities are less likely to be bothered.

    If Donald Trump made a visit to the UK to give a speech or something you know that rent a mob would show up to cause trouble and thus the authorities would be more likely to intervene.

    Lock Trump in a room with Anjem Choudhary.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Very Homeland. Angela must hate the current series.
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Pair held over suspected toxic gas plot in Switzerland

    Two men of Syrian origin are in custody in Switzerland suspected of manufacturing toxic gas, the attorney general’s office has said.

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/dec/12/switzerland-two-held-toxic-gas-syrian

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,703
    rcs1000 said:

    Indigo said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    546,931 people don't believe in Free Speech

    451,880 don't believe in (any) immigration. Strange to tell that petition hasn't been mentioned on the BBC at all.
    Nor have they mentioned the 447,924 calling for accepting more asylum seekers.

    So, at least they are even handed at ignoring pointless petitions.
    Has Andy Burnham signed them both ?
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    Pulpstar said:

    Plato_Says said:

    Quite.

    tlg86 said:

    On free speech, what concerns me is that it's determined by who might be offended. Some of the Muslim clerics we've had here have gotten away with preaching all sorts of offensive nonsense. But I've always felt that because the people who object to it aren't likely to kick off then the authorities are less likely to be bothered.

    If Donald Trump made a visit to the UK to give a speech or something you know that rent a mob would show up to cause trouble and thus the authorities would be more likely to intervene.

    Lock Trump in a room with Anjem Choudhary.
    No need, just show a few of his tweets to Polis Scotland...
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    On what could be my last post for tonight (i'm planning to go out).
    I read an article about President Elect 1981&87 the PC game and how accurately it predicted the 1984 and 1988 US presidential elections:

    http://www.newyorker.com/news/sporting-scene/the-short-impressive-life-of-the-first-presidential-election-video-game

    So I downloaded it and modified it with 2016 information to see what happens in a Trump vs Clinton race, it's mostly what you've expect, the list of leaning or too close to call states are:
    Florida, Michigan, Ohio, Oregon , Pennsylvania, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin
    With Iowa to be a republican pick-up.

    The state polls roughly agree with this, so not bad for a 30 year old computer simulation.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 85,185
    edited December 2015
    There has been a ludicrous amount of space and time given to the Tyson Fury and Donald Trump "petitions".

    I noted yesterday the Guardian were still all out Fury bashing over his homophobic and sexist comments, with only a small and far less predominant article on the issue of illegal schools that have been found to be indoctrinating 100s of kids with these values.
  • WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838
    viewcode said:

    Speedy said:

    viewcode said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    546,931 people don't believe in Free Speech

    Point 1: Nobody is stopping Trump speaking nor communicating the contents of his speech
    Point 2: This is Britain. You don't have an absolute free speech right and never have (it's always been contingent on public order and security concerns). You must be confusing the UK with the US.

    True, Britain doesn't and never had free speech, apart perhaps from speakers corner.
    It really annoys me that America is more free than Britain.
    True, but i quite like the UK. At the risk of sounding silly, it kinda works.

    I'm increasingly coming round to that outlandish point of view.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 85,185
    edited December 2015
    Indigo said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Plato_Says said:

    Quite.

    tlg86 said:

    On free speech, what concerns me is that it's determined by who might be offended. Some of the Muslim clerics we've had here have gotten away with preaching all sorts of offensive nonsense. But I've always felt that because the people who object to it aren't likely to kick off then the authorities are less likely to be bothered.

    If Donald Trump made a visit to the UK to give a speech or something you know that rent a mob would show up to cause trouble and thus the authorities would be more likely to intervene.

    Lock Trump in a room with Anjem Choudhary.
    No need, just show a few of his tweets to Polis Scotland...
    I can't believe Choudary has been given bail AGAIN, after having been rearrested for breaking his bail conditions....FFS....Did Jahadi Jez write a letter to the judge or something, saying how he is really just a nice misunderstood boy?
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Pair held over suspected toxic gas plot in Switzerland

    Two men of Syrian origin are in custody in Switzerland suspected of manufacturing toxic gas, the attorney general’s office has said.

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/dec/12/switzerland-two-held-toxic-gas-syrian

    Sound like the plot from The Cassandra Crossing.
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    FPT, and people bleating about the "unconstitutionality" of Trump's remarks.

    The US has in the past banned immigration from the Chinese, Mormons, Communists and people with HIV, to name but some.

    An almost unfettered power to control immigration is one of the President's "plenary powers".

    Section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act provides:

    "Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Rod Crosby..Thank you..
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,703
    RodCrosby said:

    FPT, and people bleating about the "unconstitutionality" of Trump's remarks.

    The US has in the past banned immigration from the Chinese, Mormons, Communists and people with HIV, to name but some.

    An almost unfettered power to control immigration is one of the President's "plenary powers".

    Section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act provides:

    "Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."

    What about existing US muslim citizens coming back into the country though ?

    This part of Trump's plan looked in contradiction to the constitution to me.
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    Pulpstar said:

    RodCrosby said:

    FPT, and people bleating about the "unconstitutionality" of Trump's remarks.

    The US has in the past banned immigration from the Chinese, Mormons, Communists and people with HIV, to name but some.

    An almost unfettered power to control immigration is one of the President's "plenary powers".

    Section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act provides:

    "Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."

    What about existing US muslim citizens coming back into the country though ?

    This part of Trump's plan looked in contradiction to the constitution to me.
    Yes, he would undoubtedly have a problem there...
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,825
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    There has been a ludicrous amount of space and time given to the Tyson Fury and Donald Trump "petitions".

    I noted yesterday the Guardian were still all out Fury bashing over his homophobic and sexist comments, with only a small and far less predominant article on the issue of illegal schools that have been found to be indoctrinating 100s of kids with these values.

    I wonder if the Tyson Fury case would have been quite so prominent if he were a Muslim? Admittedly, I think Muslims tend to keep the counsel on these matters (gay marriage etc.).
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 85,185
    tlg86 said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    There has been a ludicrous amount of space and time given to the Tyson Fury and Donald Trump "petitions".

    I noted yesterday the Guardian were still all out Fury bashing over his homophobic and sexist comments, with only a small and far less predominant article on the issue of illegal schools that have been found to be indoctrinating 100s of kids with these values.

    I wonder if the Tyson Fury case would have been quite so prominent if he were a Muslim? Admittedly, I think Muslims tend to keep the counsel on these matters (gay marriage etc.).
    Well Amir Khan certainly gets a free pass and still the golden boy, despite shall we say rather mixed behaviour outside of the ring.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,703
    tlg86 said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    There has been a ludicrous amount of space and time given to the Tyson Fury and Donald Trump "petitions".

    I noted yesterday the Guardian were still all out Fury bashing over his homophobic and sexist comments, with only a small and far less predominant article on the issue of illegal schools that have been found to be indoctrinating 100s of kids with these values.

    I wonder if the Tyson Fury case would have been quite so prominent if he were a Muslim? Admittedly, I think Muslims tend to keep the counsel on these matters (gay marriage etc.).
    Amir Khan keeps getting knocked out too much for us to find out :P
  • runnymederunnymede Posts: 2,536
    We were in a much healthier place before New Labour's PC police

    The idea that people like 'Sir' (or is it 'Lord') Ian Blair should be the arbiters of free speech is pretty terrifying.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    I thought Rubio was the strong favourite a few months ago, but I'm starting to have doubts now. The thing is that, until recently, it was quite easy to explain his mediocre poll numbers by just saying the spotlight hadn't come onto him yet and so people weren't really considering him. But he actually has had a fair bit of attention recently, yet he's still treading water, which suggests there's some fundamental problems with him as a candidate for the selectorate.

    There was a good article I read yesterday (I think someone posted it here?) saying Chris Christie might be worth a punt. He's "moderate" enough in terms of policies to keep the Republican establishment on side, but at the same time has the kind of abrasive "strong-man" personality which might appeal to some Trump voters.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,564
    RodCrosby said:

    FPT, and people bleating about the "unconstitutionality" of Trump's remarks.

    The US has in the past banned immigration from the Chinese, Mormons, Communists and people with HIV, to name but some.

    An almost unfettered power to control immigration is one of the President's "plenary powers".

    Section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act provides:

    "Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."

    Just because it is a law doesn't mean it is constitutional ;) Unless it has been successfully defended in the Supreme Court, of course!
  • AndreaParma_82AndreaParma_82 Posts: 4,714
    Scottish Conservative regional lists

    Glasgow (currently 1 seat)

    1. Adam Tompkins
    2. Annie Wells
    3. Sheila Mechan
    4. Kyle Thornton
    5. John Anderson
    6. Graham Hutchison
    7. Thomas Kerr
    8. Taylor Muir
    9. Thomas Haddow

    Highlands and Islands (currently 2 seats)

    1. Douglas Ross
    2. Edward Mountain
    3. Donald Cameron
    4. Jamie Halcro-Johnston
    5. Malcolm Mackay
    6. Struan Mackie
    7. Cameron Smith

    Mid Scotland and Fife (2 seats)

    1. Murdo Fraser MSP
    2. Liz Smith MSP
    3. Dean Lockhart
    4. Alexander Stewart
    5. Huw Bell
    6. James Reekie
    7. Dave Dempsey
    8. Alex Stewart-Clark
    9. Martin Laidlaw

    North East (currently 2 seats)


    1. Alex Johnstone MSP
    2. Alexander Burnett
    3. Ross Thomson
    4. Peter Chapman
    5. Liam Kerr
    6. Bill Bowman
    7. Nicola Ross
    8. Colin Clark
    9. Derek Wann
    10. Seb Leslie

    Central Scotland (currently 1)


    1. Margaret Mitchell MSP
    2. Graham Simpson
    3. Alison Harris
    4. Andrew Morrison
    5. Callum Laidlaw
    6. Meghan Gallacher
    7. Robyn Halbert
    8. Eric Holford
    9. Anthony Newman

    Lothian (currently 2)

    1. Ruth Davidson MSP
    2. Miles Briggs
    3. Gordon Lindhurst
    4. Iain McGill/Jeremy Balfour (tie)
    6. Nick Cook
    7. Iain White
    8. Sandy Batho
    9. Charles Kennedy

    South (currently 0 regional + 3 FPTP constituencies)

    1. John Scott MSP
    2. Oliver Mundell
    3. Rachael Hamilton
    4. Finlay Carson
    5. Brian Whittle
    6. Michelle Ballantyne
    7. Alex Allison
    8. Lee Lyons

    West of Scotland (currently 2)

    1. Jackson Carlaw MSP
    2. Jamie Greene
    3. Maurice Golden
    4. Maurice Corry
    5. Andrew Polson
    6. David Wilson
    7. Paul Masterson
    8. Richard Appleton
    9. Graeme Brooks
    10. William McClure
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,564
    According to this guy the rise of the Front National is all our fault

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/12047208/Its-all-Englands-fault-the-man-who-could-stop-Marine-Le-Pen-blames-Britain.html

    Didn't realize we had that much influence in internal French politics ;)
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,541
    edited December 2015
    RobD said:

    According to this guy the rise of the Front National is all our fault

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/12047208/Its-all-Englands-fault-the-man-who-could-stop-Marine-Le-Pen-blames-Britain.html

    Didn't realize we had that much influence in internal French politics ;)

    It is our fault.

    We should have invaded France years (centuries?) ago, they'd have no Front National if we Les Rosbifs had been running France.

    I would have made a fine Viceroy of France.
  • AndreaParma_82AndreaParma_82 Posts: 4,714
    Half of the Scottish Conservative Holyrood group was retiring. The other half topped the lists. John Lamont will live or die in Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire without the regional list's rescue.
    Women didn't do well in the selection. Candidates who got the spots of retiring MSPs are all men and except for Glasgow, the first spots after the ones they already hold are male.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,693
    Good evening, everyone.

    Mr. Eagles, the Morris Dancer Party had just such a manifesto commitment.
  • DiversityIsOurGodNowDiversityIsOurGodNow Posts: 65
    RobD said:

    According to this guy the rise of the Front National is all our fault

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/12047208/Its-all-Englands-fault-the-man-who-could-stop-Marine-Le-Pen-blames-Britain.html

    Didn't realize we had that much influence in internal French politics ;)

    To the self-loathing media bedwetters, everything's Britain's fault. The whole lot of them ought to be swinging from the lampposts for the damage they've done to this country.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,541
    On topic, I'll never forget the Dean scream.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    I've updated header with news of Trump's attack on Des Moines Register poll due out tomorrow. Looks bad for him.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,541
    England v Wales in next years Euros
  • MyBurningEarsMyBurningEars Posts: 3,651
    edited December 2015
    Speedy said:

    On what could be my last post for tonight (i'm planning to go out).
    I read an article about President Elect 1981&87 the PC game and how accurately it predicted the 1984 and 1988 US presidential elections:

    http://www.newyorker.com/news/sporting-scene/the-short-impressive-life-of-the-first-presidential-election-video-game

    So I downloaded it and modified it with 2016 information to see what happens in a Trump vs Clinton race, it's mostly what you've expect, the list of leaning or too close to call states are:
    Florida, Michigan, Ohio, Oregon , Pennsylvania, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin
    With Iowa to be a republican pick-up.

    The state polls roughly agree with this, so not bad for a 30 year old computer simulation.

    Great article.

    I loved this bit: "In President Elect ’88, players could pick from sixty-nine pre-programmed Presidential candidates, including Joseph Biden, Bill Clinton, and Oliver North"

    How times have changed, or how little!
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,541
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Good evening, everyone.

    Mr. Eagles, the Morris Dancer Party had just such a manifesto commitment.

    To make me Viceroy of France? I'm honoured
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,825
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    England v Wales in next years Euros

    Provisionally scheduled for 2pm on Thursday 16 June, but the schedule can be changed to accommodate broadcasting wishes - hopefully such a change will happen!
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,541
    tlg86 said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    England v Wales in next years Euros

    Provisionally scheduled for 2pm on Thursday 16 June, but the schedule can be changed to accommodate broadcasting wishes - hopefully such a change will happen!
    Please don't let it be like this year's England v Wales Rugby World Cup match.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,693
    Mr. Eagles, your understanding of the Morris Dancer Party manifesto is as errant as your understanding of classical history.

    Well, ok, it's not quite that errant, but it's still pretty errant.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 54,799
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    On topic, I'll never forget the Dean scream.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r82fyOb8F5w
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,564
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Good evening, everyone.

    Mr. Eagles, the Morris Dancer Party had just such a manifesto commitment.

    Can one be Viceroy of the French and Directly Elected Dictator of Britain at the same time? :D
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,442
    AndreaParma_82 said:

    Scottish Conservative regional lists

    Glasgow (currently 1 seat)

    1. Adam Tompkins
    2. Annie Wells
    3. Sheila Mechan
    4. Kyle Thornton
    5. John Anderson
    6. Graham Hutchison
    7. Thomas Kerr
    8. Taylor Muir
    9. Thomas Haddow

    Highlands and Islands (currently 2 seats)

    1. Douglas Ross
    2. Edward Mountain
    3. Donald Cameron
    4. Jamie Halcro-Johnston
    5. Malcolm Mackay
    6. Struan Mackie
    7. Cameron Smith

    Mid Scotland and Fife (2 seats)

    1. Murdo Fraser MSP
    2. Liz Smith MSP
    3. Dean Lockhart
    4. Alexander Stewart
    5. Huw Bell
    6. James Reekie
    7. Dave Dempsey
    8. Alex Stewart-Clark
    9. Martin Laidlaw

    North East (currently 2 seats)


    1. Alex Johnstone MSP
    2. Alexander Burnett
    3. Ross Thomson
    4. Peter Chapman
    5. Liam Kerr
    6. Bill Bowman
    7. Nicola Ross
    8. Colin Clark
    9. Derek Wann
    10. Seb Leslie

    Central Scotland (currently 1)


    1. Margaret Mitchell MSP
    2. Graham Simpson
    3. Alison Harris
    4. Andrew Morrison
    5. Callum Laidlaw
    6. Meghan Gallacher
    7. Robyn Halbert
    8. Eric Holford
    9. Anthony Newman

    Lothian (currently 2)

    1. Ruth Davidson MSP
    2. Miles Briggs
    3. Gordon Lindhurst
    4. Iain McGill/Jeremy Balfour (tie)
    6. Nick Cook
    7. Iain White
    8. Sandy Batho
    9. Charles Kennedy

    South (currently 0 regional + 3 FPTP constituencies)

    1. John Scott MSP
    2. Oliver Mundell
    3. Rachael Hamilton
    4. Finlay Carson
    5. Brian Whittle
    6. Michelle Ballantyne
    7. Alex Allison
    8. Lee Lyons

    West of Scotland (currently 2)

    1. Jackson Carlaw MSP
    2. Jamie Greene
    3. Maurice Golden
    4. Maurice Corry
    5. Andrew Polson
    6. David Wilson
    7. Paul Masterson
    8. Richard Appleton
    9. Graeme Brooks
    10. William McClure

    What a list of 3rd raters, any party that has Tompkins at the top of a list is really scraping the barrel.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,541
    So if any of the Putin fanboys here cheer for Russia against England, I'll sign a petition to deport them to Russia.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 38,989
    Speedy said:

    viewcode said:

    Speedy said:

    viewcode said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    546,931 people don't believe in Free Speech

    Point 1: Nobody is stopping Trump speaking nor communicating the contents of his speech
    Point 2: This is Britain. You don't have an absolute free speech right and never have (it's always been contingent on public order and security concerns). You must be confusing the UK with the US.

    True, Britain doesn't and never had free speech, apart perhaps from speakers corner.
    It really annoys me that America is more free than Britain.
    True, but i quite like the UK. At the risk of sounding silly, it kinda works.

    Actually I hope Corbyn would promise a law enshrining the right to free speech.
    Corbyn? Free Speech? You're avin a laugh mate.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,703
    MikeSmithson said:

    I've updated header with news of Trump's attack on Des Moines Register poll due out tomorrow. Looks bad for him.

    Cheers, have sold him a touch.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    546,931 people don't believe in Free Speech

    That's Corbyn's base, I presume.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,672
    Speedy said:

    viewcode said:

    Speedy said:

    viewcode said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    546,931 people don't believe in Free Speech

    Point 1: Nobody is stopping Trump speaking nor communicating the contents of his speech
    Point 2: This is Britain. You don't have an absolute free speech right and never have (it's always been contingent on public order and security concerns). You must be confusing the UK with the US.

    True, Britain doesn't and never had free speech, apart perhaps from speakers corner.
    It really annoys me that America is more free than Britain.
    True, but i quite like the UK. At the risk of sounding silly, it kinda works.

    Actually I hope Corbyn would promise a law enshrining the right to free speech.

    You have got to be joking! What on earth makes you think that he's in favour of free speech?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,693
    Mr. D, Mr. Eagles' strange fantasies are as perplexing as his dress sense.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,541
    RobD said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Good evening, everyone.

    Mr. Eagles, the Morris Dancer Party had just such a manifesto commitment.

    Can one be Viceroy of the French and Directly Elected Dictator of Britain at the same time? :D
    I would make the former ex-officio of the latter.

    I mean Her Majesty is concurrently Queen and The Duke of Normandy.

    The President of France is also concurrently Co-Prince of Andorra
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    For anyone who missed it - Storyville FBI Undercover looks at potential Muslim extremists from the perspective of an informant http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b06r0wtg/storyville-20152016-10-fbi-undercover
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    edited December 2015
    RobD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    FPT, and people bleating about the "unconstitutionality" of Trump's remarks.

    The US has in the past banned immigration from the Chinese, Mormons, Communists and people with HIV, to name but some.

    An almost unfettered power to control immigration is one of the President's "plenary powers".

    Section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act provides:

    "Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."

    Just because it is a law doesn't mean it is constitutional ;) Unless it has been successfully defended in the Supreme Court, of course!
    Another part of the Act was upheld by the USSC, as well as the general principle of non-rights of aliens, in Kleindienst v Mandel 408 U.S. 753 (1972)

    BLACKMUN, J., delivered the opinion of the Court
    "It is clear that ... an unadmitted and nonresident alien, had no constitutional right of entry to this country as a nonimmigrant or otherwise. The appellees concede this."
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    If Trump collapses does Cruz get his supporters?
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    This is my scream - Trump
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,541
    edited December 2015
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. D, Mr. Eagles' strange fantasies are as perplexing as his dress sense.

    You should see the shirt I've ordered for the Christmas do next Friday.

    Someone said it were if Salvador Dali and Jackson Pollock had gotten into a drunken fight with a photocopier inside a paint factory, whilst doing drugs
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    Alistair said:

    If Trump collapses does Cruz get his supporters?

    I think Cruz is more likely to collapse than Trump.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 85,185
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. D, Mr. Eagles' strange fantasies are as perplexing as his dress sense.

    You should see the shirt I've ordered for the Christmas do next Friday.

    Someone said it were if Salvador Dal and Jackson Pollock had gotten into a drunk fight with a photocopier inside a paint factory, whilst doing drugs
    So it isn't from The White Company then? ;-)
  • MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
    Trump is habitually contemptuous of the press. His comments on the Des Moines Register and its political hack are nothing out of the ordinary for him.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,703
    edited December 2015
    Danny565 said:

    Alistair said:

    If Trump collapses does Cruz get his supporters?

    I think Cruz is more likely to collapse than Trump.
    Hmm Trump is ahead but he's also more likely to collapse I reckon. I think Cruz takes Iowa.
    I like Cruz's manner - he seems very personable.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,564
    edited December 2015
    RodCrosby said:

    RobD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    FPT, and people bleating about the "unconstitutionality" of Trump's remarks.

    The US has in the past banned immigration from the Chinese, Mormons, Communists and people with HIV, to name but some.

    An almost unfettered power to control immigration is one of the President's "plenary powers".

    Section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act provides:

    "Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."

    Just because it is a law doesn't mean it is constitutional ;) Unless it has been successfully defended in the Supreme Court, of course!
    Another part of the Act was upheld by the USSC, as well as the general principle of non-rights of aliens, in Kleindienst v Mandel 408 U.S. 753 (1972)

    BLACKMUN, J., delivered the opinion of the Court
    "It is clear that ... an unadmitted and nonresident alien, had no constitutional right of entry to this country as a nonimmigrant or otherwise. The appellees concede this."
    Yeah, but that has no bearing on the part of the act in question ;)
    Edit: oops, you mentioned the principle of non-rights of aliens. Hm, fair enough. I should probably be worried as an alien living in the US!
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,541
    edited December 2015
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. D, Mr. Eagles' strange fantasies are as perplexing as his dress sense.

    You should see the shirt I've ordered for the Christmas do next Friday.

    Someone said it were if Salvador Dali and Jackson Pollock had gotten into a drunk fight with a photocopier inside a paint factory, whilst doing drugs
    So it isn't from The White Company then? ;-)
    Nope, here it is.

    http://bit.ly/1NhYykL

    If you're lucky, I'll post a picture of it here on Friday night
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,564
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    RobD said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Good evening, everyone.

    Mr. Eagles, the Morris Dancer Party had just such a manifesto commitment.

    Can one be Viceroy of the French and Directly Elected Dictator of Britain at the same time? :D
    I would make the former ex-officio of the latter.

    I mean Her Majesty is concurrently Queen and The Duke of Normandy.

    The President of France is also concurrently Co-Prince of Andorra
    Quite right. Time for HM to put the fleur de lis back on the coat of arms? :p
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    So, who's watching the X Factor Final tonight?

    Cough.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,703
    edited December 2015
    Danny565 said:

    So, who's watching the X Factor Final tonight?

    Cough.

    I'm watching the boxing before I head round to a friends.

    Louisa Johnson looks a shoo in according to Betfair.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 85,185
    edited December 2015
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. D, Mr. Eagles' strange fantasies are as perplexing as his dress sense.

    You should see the shirt I've ordered for the Christmas do next Friday.

    Someone said it were if Salvador Dali and Jackson Pollock had gotten into a drunk fight with a photocopier inside a paint factory, whilst doing drugs
    So it isn't from The White Company then? ;-)
    Nope, here it is.

    http://bit.ly/1NhYykL

    If you're lucky, I'll post a picture of it here on Friday night
    Jesus H Christ...my eyes...my eyes....and that was before I saw the price ;-)
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,541
    Danny565 said:

    So, who's watching the X Factor Final tonight?

    Cough.

    Strictly for me
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,825
    edited December 2015
    rcs1000 said:

    Indigo said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    546,931 people don't believe in Free Speech

    451,880 don't believe in (any) immigration. Strange to tell that petition hasn't been mentioned on the BBC at all.
    Nor have they mentioned the 447,924 calling for accepting more asylum seekers.

    So, at least they are even handed at ignoring pointless petitions.
    Thanks for that Bob - it makes an even better comparison with the 'stop all immigration' petition:

    Derby N – 785 / 523
    Gower – 537 / 417
    Croydon Central – 568 / 679
    Vale Of Clwyd – 592 / 256
    Bury North – 643 / 447
    Morley & Outwood – 1033 / 400
    Pymouth Sutton & Devonport – 1119 / 977
    Thurrock – 1664 / 195
    Brighton Kemptown – 821 / 1288
    Bolton West – 995 / 389
    Telford – 888 / 248
    Weaver Vale – 717 / 466
    Bedford – 536 / 667
    Plymouth Moor View – 1167 / 270
    Lincoln – 876 / 586
    Cardiff North – 345 / 845
    Peterborough - 699 / 465
    Corby – 737 / 427
    Waveney – 998 / 331
    Warrington South – 736 / 690
    Southampton Itchen – 1021 / 582
    Keighley – 653 / 599
    Warwickshire North – 797 / 246
    Carlisle – 691 / 359
    Halesowen – 769 / 293

    Average - 815 / 506

    Islington North - 176 / 3271

    A near identical match with the YES vote in the AV referendum:

    http://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=105991&area=gb

    http://tinyurl.com/zeruycv
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,693
    Mr. Urquhart, the White Company? The medieval mercenary company?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Company
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    I've got it set to record - no spoilers!!
    Danny565 said:

    So, who's watching the X Factor Final tonight?

    Cough.

  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 85,185
    edited December 2015
    MonikerDiCanio said:

    Trump is habitually contemptuous of the press. His comments on the Des Moines Register and its political hack are nothing out of the ordinary for him.

    I was going to say. Is OGH reading too much into this. Is there a news outlet he hasn't go ape shit on yet? Fox News perhaps? And this paper, he had a dust up with them a few months ago and they wrote an editorial telling him to shut up shop on his campaign. So it isn't like he is coming to town without an axe to grind already.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    Plato_Says said:

    I've got it set to record - no spoilers!!

    Danny565 said:

    So, who's watching the X Factor Final tonight?

    Cough.

    Are you also hoping for a Reggie & Bolli win? ;)
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    RobD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    RobD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    FPT, and people bleating about the "unconstitutionality" of Trump's remarks.

    The US has in the past banned immigration from the Chinese, Mormons, Communists and people with HIV, to name but some.

    An almost unfettered power to control immigration is one of the President's "plenary powers".

    Section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act provides:

    "Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."

    Just because it is a law doesn't mean it is constitutional ;) Unless it has been successfully defended in the Supreme Court, of course!
    Another part of the Act was upheld by the USSC, as well as the general principle of non-rights of aliens, in Kleindienst v Mandel 408 U.S. 753 (1972)

    BLACKMUN, J., delivered the opinion of the Court
    "It is clear that ... an unadmitted and nonresident alien, had no constitutional right of entry to this country as a nonimmigrant or otherwise. The appellees concede this."
    Yeah, but that has no bearing on the part of the act in question ;)
    Edit: oops, you mentioned the principle of non-rights of aliens. Hm, fair enough. I should probably be worried as an alien living in the US!
    Thank-you. The US Constitution does not bestow its rights on the whole of humanity...
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,541
    edited December 2015
    Danny565 said:

    Plato_Says said:

    I've got it set to record - no spoilers!!

    Danny565 said:

    So, who's watching the X Factor Final tonight?

    Cough.

    Are you also hoping for a Reggie & Bolli win? ;)
    Tonight is my favourite bit of The X Factor.

    The f#%*ing end.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    edited December 2015
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Danny565 said:

    Plato_Says said:

    I've got it set to record - no spoilers!!

    Danny565 said:

    So, who's watching the X Factor Final tonight?

    Cough.

    Are you also hoping for a Reggie & Bolli win? ;)
    Tonight is my favourite bit of The X Factor.

    The f#%*ing end.
    'Fraid that's tomorrow :p
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 38,989
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. Urquhart, the White Company? The medieval mercenary company?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Company

    Also an excellent story by Conan Doyle.
This discussion has been closed.