politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A second EURef phone poll has REMAIN with huge lead

RodCrosby said:

Casino_Royale said:

MarqueeMark said:

Just realising I have never seen On Her Majesty's Secret Service before. Lazenby slapping Emma Peel about. Would have remembered that...

It's one of my favourite Bond films.

If you put aside Lazenby's slightly wooden acting, and the awful 40 minutes of dubbing of him as Sir Hilary Bray, it's fantastic.

The guy who played Draco died last month. He was dubbed too.

Yeah, but not shitly.

Casino_Royale said:

Pulpstar said:

Casino_Royale said:

Pulpstar said:

Trump seems to have plateaued slightly.

But his position is good enough to do that.

Has he?

His price on Betfair has never been shorter.

I make his position almost as strong as Hilary with Cruz having most of the rest of the market. Rubio should be at Jeb's price.

I've heavily laid Rubio, and am very exposed on Bush.

Green on everyone else, and very good on Trump, Cruz and Kasich.

11.0 Ted Cruz. Blimey, I have no idea whose laid that but I've taken it anyway.

Pulpstar said:

Tim_B said:

It's the Iowa Caucuses on Monday. TV has been explaining how it works - the Democratic Leader's Guide is over 50 pages.

In essence you meet in a Church Hall, someone's living room or basement, talk politics for a couple of hours or so, then decide who you support.

If you're at a democratic caucus, if you support Sanders stand here, Clinton stand there etc. Then they take a head count, fill out the sheet and call it in.

If you're at a republican caucus you still talk politics as at the dems caucus, but then you have a secret ballot, which is tallied and reported via a smart phone app, developed since the debacle of 4 years ago.

What time will the results be known by ?

I have absolutely no idea. It will be a late night on Monday I suspect.

Daily Mail — Lord Lucan shot himself and the body was fed to one of John Aspinall's tigers at his Kent zoo.

AndyJS said:

Daily Mail — Lord Lucan shot himself and the body was fed to one of John Aspinall's tigers at his Kent zoo.

And what happened to the bones?

Tim_B said:

viewcode said:

flightpath01 said:

RodCrosby said:

Casino_Royale said:

MarqueeMark said:

Just realising I have never seen On Her Majesty's Secret Service before. Lazenby slapping Emma Peel about. Would have remembered that...

It's one of my favourite Bond films.

If you put aside Lazenby's slightly wooden acting, and the awful 40 minutes of dubbing of him as Sir Hilary Bray, it's fantastic.

The guy who played Draco died last month. He was dubbed too.

No end of people were dubbed in Bond films. Ursula Andress for one.

The whole of Das Boot's sound was dubbed, ADR'd and Foley'd in post. The original sound was unusable.

Not a lot of people know that...

I have the dvds of the 6 part TV show. It's a great show even with reworked sound.

Don't most movies these days have some degree of ADR and Foley work?

Yes they do, and more than you think: it's like CGI in that it's prevalent and unnoticed. However Das Boot was unusual because *all* the sound was recreated

Jesus f##king christ...FFS

In Harvard, the term "house master" for those running college houses has been ditched, because of connotations with slavery and "human subjugation".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-35441074

Also....

"But these rows are showing no signs of stopping. They are a potent mix of identity politics, social media lobbying and consumer power."

No BBC...It is social media bullying. And of course they can't help themselves on the impartiality front...It is quite clear which side the journo is on with this last paragraph.

"She argued in her inaugural speech that university needed to be intellectually stretching and meant students "engaging with ideas they find objectionable". And statues too?"

AndyJS said:

flightpath01 said:

RodCrosby said:

Casino_Royale said:

MarqueeMark said:

Just realising I have never seen On Her Majesty's Secret Service before. Lazenby slapping Emma Peel about. Would have remembered that...

It's one of my favourite Bond films.

If you put aside Lazenby's slightly wooden acting, and the awful 40 minutes of dubbing of him as Sir Hilary Bray, it's fantastic.

The guy who played Draco died last month. He was dubbed too.

No end of people were dubbed in Bond films. Ursula Andress for one.

Ursula Andress? I don't believe it. I always thought that was her real voice.

And Daniela Bianchi in From Russia With Love

FrancisUrquhart said:

Tim_B said:

The court ordered dump of Clinton emails from her private insecure server on the last working day of the month happened today - partially.

The US Intel Community insisted that 22 emails cannot be made public at all, even in a redacted form. They contain info on SAPs (Special Access Programs), a classification higher than Top Secret, and one email classified "HCS-O" containing info from or about human spies on the ground. The latter can get agents on the ground identified or killed.

For the first time, the White House admitted that these emails contained classified info.

Over the past week, the news networks have been saying they get the sense that the FBI investigation is snowballing - gathering in intensity. Then today's revelations.

The FBI is furious at Josh Earnest's comments today about the investigation not looking like it's moving towards an indictment. They insist the WH has not been briefed about progress in the investigation.

We are getting perilously close to political interference from the White House in an active FBI investigation.

BBC are repeating Team Clinton spinning that when they were sent they weren't classified. Maybe you can fill us in on what exactly is the spin, as this claim sounds like total BS. I am presuming the spin is something like no emails are classified on sending.

Clinton's own words these days is that she did nothing that was prohibited. That she sent no classified emails and that none of the emails on her server were classified at the time.

There is one email from her, asking an aide who is having trouble sending something over classified comms to "If they can't, turn into nonpaper w no identifying heading and send nonsecure." There is no proof that the aide did.

So the suspicion to those on the outside of the investigation who are not prone to believe every word out of Team Clinton is that there was a practice of reformatting data so that it could be sent without classification. That would also explain why other agencies are now having to classify stuff from the server that was unmarked - if information (that should have remained classified) from their documents had been reformatted by Clinton aides into unclassified talking points or aide memoires, then they are correcting the (unauthorized) declassification.

Richard_Tyndall said:

Serious question. What sort of phone numbers do the Polling companies use? If it is any of the 0800 type numbers then there are swathes of people who will not answer them. Back when phones did not display numbers - as is still the case with many home phones - this would not have been an issue but every mobile now displays the number calling and personally I automatically ignore and then block any 0800 type numbers. I have no idea if this would make any difference one way or another bur here will certainly be a large portion of the population who are not being reached by phone polling if this us the case.

I ignore most numbers I - or my phone - don't recognize. If it's important from someone I don't know, they'll leave a message.

MTimT said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Serious question. What sort of phone numbers do the Polling companies use? If it is any of the 0800 type numbers then there are swathes of people who will not answer them. Back when phones did not display numbers - as is still the case with many home phones - this would not have been an issue but every mobile now displays the number calling and personally I automatically ignore and then block any 0800 type numbers. I have no idea if this would make any difference one way or another bur here will certainly be a large portion of the population who are not being reached by phone polling if this us the case.

I ignore most numbers I - or my phone - don't recognize. If it's important from someone I don't know, they'll leave a message.

Quite. Many of my (senior citizen) friends do the same. I sometimes answer an “unknown” number if I’m bored and fancy an argument, but not often. The last time I answered someone like that it was a firm advertsing will-writing services, and I don’t even fancy arguing about that!

Morning all.

Panic - not to mention denial - in Brussels: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/12130843/EU-leaders-No-link-between-Cologne-sex-attacks-and-migrant-crisis.html

Cyclefree said:

Morning all.

Panic - not to mention denial - in Brussels: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/12130843/EU-leaders-No-link-between-Cologne-sex-attacks-and-migrant-crisis.html

Jess Philips thinks the same things take place in Birmingham.

No politicians have attracted as much scrutiny as the clintons. Remarkable really.

Not sure if anyone else has seen this yet but HMPO closures announced very quietly. (I only saw it on the PCS news section)

http://www.pcs.org.uk/en/news_and_events/pcs_comment/pcs_comment.cfm/mass-passport-office-closure-announced

Excellent that the public sector is being reduced further - I just hope the March budget has more surprises.

Jonathan said:

No politicians have attracted as much scrutiny as the clintons. Remarkable really.

Only because they have survived more scandals than other politicians. But many politicians have suffered the same intensity of scrutiny - and fallen as a result.

tlg86 said:

ydoethur said:

My instinct is that Hilary is probably just OK unless something dramatic happens, but even if she is, she's already gifted about a million attack lines to the Republicans.

It seems to me that the only reason she hasn't been ditched by the Democrats is that they've put all their eggs in her basket. As you say, this is an open goal for whoever the Republican candidate is.

I suggested before that the Republicans should produce a poster for the new House of Cards, with the Clintons' heads replacing Kevin Spacey and Robin Wright.*

If Hilary is the Democrat candidate then the election will be incredibly nasty and personal. especially so if it's between her and Trump, both 'Marmite' candidates. Trump will try and portray her as completely corrupt and unfit for office at every turn.

* I want a royalty for that idea!

david_herdson said:

HYUFD said:

Cruz shifts negative ads from Trump to Rubio in Iowa

'Senator Ted Cruz, scrambling to put down a growing threat in Iowa from Senator Marco Rubio, is shifting nearly all of his negative advertising from Donald J. Trump to Mr. Rubio for the final three days of the caucuses.
Mr. Cruz intends to direct his firepower at his Senate colleague after days of seeing Mr. Rubio inch up both in public polling and his own private surveys, according to two advisers to Mr. Cruz who spoke on the condition of anonymity. After leading in the polls in Iowa for much of the last month, Mr. Cruz has slipped into second behind Mr. Trump in most public surveys.'
http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2016/01/29/ted-cruzs-negative-ads-go-after-marco-rubio-rather-than-donald-trump/?_r=0

Do the rest all *want* Trump to win?

Feels like people are angling for VP.

MTimT said:

Jonathan said:

No politicians have attracted as much scrutiny as the clintons. Remarkable really.

Only because they have survived more scandals than other politicians. But many politicians have suffered the same intensity of scrutiny - and fallen as a result.

Well that's my point, they've been under the most intense spotlight for over 20 years. And thus far they win. Hilary even managed to turn the Obama defeat into a victory. Remarkable people.

Jonathan said:

MTimT said:

Jonathan said:

No politicians have attracted as much scrutiny as the clintons. Remarkable really.

Only because they have survived more scandals than other politicians. But many politicians have suffered the same intensity of scrutiny - and fallen as a result.

Well that's my point, they've been under the most intense spotlight for over 20 years. And thus far they win. Hilary even managed to turn the Obama defeat into a victory. Remarkable people.

Remarkable indeed. Not the same as admirable.

Cyclefree said:

Sean_F said:

Cyclefree said:

Morning all.

Panic - not to mention denial - in Brussels: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/12130843/EU-leaders-No-link-between-Cologne-sex-attacks-and-migrant-crisis.html

Jess Philips thinks the same things take place in Birmingham.

It is undoubtedly the case that sexual assaults on women didn't start with the arrival of migrants. And if there were no migrants such crimes would still happen.

But it is curious - actually, repulsive would be a better word - that those who claim to be concerned about sexual crimes against women are so sanguine about inviting into the country those from mysogynistic cultures and, as a result, with a propensity to commit such crimes (though that does not apply to all the individuals from those cultures, of course).

It's as if such concern is only useful if it can be used against certain groups and that concern for women is dialled up or down - or into nothingness, in some cases - depending on the perpetrators.

Repulsive.

Very well said.

It's amazing that those hardcore feminists are completely ambivalent about sexual assault of women, because of the perps being migrants. It's "Rotherham" all over again, but on steroids.

Sandpit said:

Cyclefree said:

Sean_F said:

Cyclefree said:

Morning all.

Panic - not to mention denial - in Brussels: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/12130843/EU-leaders-No-link-between-Cologne-sex-attacks-and-migrant-crisis.html

Jess Philips thinks the same things take place in Birmingham.

It is undoubtedly the case that sexual assaults on women didn't start with the arrival of migrants. And if there were no migrants such crimes would still happen.

But it is curious - actually, repulsive would be a better word - that those who claim to be concerned about sexual crimes against women are so sanguine about inviting into the country those from mysogynistic cultures and, as a result, with a propensity to commit such crimes (though that does not apply to all the individuals from those cultures, of course).

It's as if such concern is only useful if it can be used against certain groups and that concern for women is dialled up or down - or into nothingness, in some cases - depending on the perpetrators.

Repulsive.

Very well said.

It's amazing that those hardcore feminists are completely ambivalent about sexual assault of women, because of the perps being migrants. It's "Rotherham" all over again, but on steroids.

Spinners would rather spin than admit they were wrong, that's why no one ever does anything about immigration... Doesn't affect them and they don't want to lose face

isam said:

Sandpit said:

Cyclefree said:

Sean_F said:

Cyclefree said:

Morning all.

Panic - not to mention denial - in Brussels: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/12130843/EU-leaders-No-link-between-Cologne-sex-attacks-and-migrant-crisis.html

Jess Philips thinks the same things take place in Birmingham.

It is undoubtedly the case that sexual assaults on women didn't start with the arrival of migrants. And if there were no migrants such crimes would still happen.

But it is curious - actually, repulsive would be a better word - that those who claim to be concerned about sexual crimes against women are so sanguine about inviting into the country those from mysogynistic cultures and, as a result, with a propensity to commit such crimes (though that does not apply to all the individuals from those cultures, of course).

It's as if such concern is only useful if it can be used against certain groups and that concern for women is dialled up or down - or into nothingness, in some cases - depending on the perpetrators.

Repulsive.

Very well said.

It's amazing that those hardcore feminists are completely ambivalent about sexual assault of women, because of the perps being migrants. It's "Rotherham" all over again, but on steroids.

Spinners would rather spin than admit they were wrong, that's why no one ever does anything about immigration... Doesn't affect them and they don't want to lose face

Yes, we see the same in Calais, where certain groups think that somehow people in France are Britain's problem.

Also in the EU negotiations, where it's as if other leaders want to punish Cameron in his negotiations for being the one leader to call the problem correctly and propose what's now clearly the most obvious and effective solution. I still have half a feeling, maybe just wishful, that the EU leaders are going to try and call Cameron's bluff on the referendum, and he will go all in holding aces and recommend we leave.

Whoever is victorious, the debate we are having isn’t matching the significance of the vote, and that seems to be a permanent feature of referendums.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/12129134/The-EU-referendum-is-going-to-be-a-massive-disappointment.html

blackburn63 said:

Sandpit said:

isam said:

Sandpit said:

Cyclefree said:

Sean_F said:

Cyclefree said:

Morning all.

Panic - not to mention denial - in Brussels: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/12130843/EU-leaders-No-link-between-Cologne-sex-attacks-and-migrant-crisis.html

Jess Philips thinks the same things take place in Birmingham.

It is undoubtedly the case that sexual assaults on women didn't start with the arrival of migrants. And if there were no migrants such crimes would still happen.

But it is curious - actually, repulsive would be a better word - that those who claim to be concerned about sexual crimes against women are so sanguine about inviting into the country those from mysogynistic cultures and, as a result, with a propensity to commit such crimes (though that does not apply to all the individuals from those cultures, of course).

It's as if such concern is only useful if it can be used against certain groups and that concern for women is dialled up or down - or into nothingness, in some cases - depending on the perpetrators.

Repulsive.

Very well said.

It's amazing that those hardcore feminists are completely ambivalent about sexual assault of women, because of the perps being migrants. It's "Rotherham" all over again, but on steroids.

Spinners would rather spin than admit they were wrong, that's why no one ever does anything about immigration... Doesn't affect them and they don't want to lose face

Yes, we see the same in Calais, where certain groups think that somehow people in France are Britain's problem.

Also in the EU negotiations, where it's as if other leaders want to punish Cameron in his negotiations for being the one leader to call the problem correctly and propose what's now clearly the most obvious and effective solution. I still have half a feeling, maybe just wishful, that the EU leaders are going to try and call Cameron's bluff on the referendum, and he will go all in holding aces and recommend we leave.

I would love that scenario Mr Sandpit but its never going to happen.

We can always wish!

chestnut said:

Comres poll outcomes say Corbyn has Labour closer to the Tories than Miliband did.

It's findings should be judged on whether that is believable. What do the leader ratings imply?

I think, however, if we compare the polling Miliband had at this stage of the last Parliament Labour are about 9 points down. *

If THAT were to be repeated at a general election, which surely it wouldn't be, Labour would be running the real risk of coming third in the popular vote for the first time in a normal election since December 1910.

*edit - I don't have the figures to hand, so I could be wrong. If anyone has time to look them up I'd be interested to see them.

Took the words out of my mouth. Urgh.

DavidL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

FYI, ICYMI, and don't want to sleep tonight

Jeremy Corbyn “showed off” a naked Diane Abbott to impress his Left-wing friends when he was a young Labour activist, a new book has revealed.

The Labour leader invited fellow activists to his London flat where they were “shaken” to find Ms Abbott in his bed, one of his friends recalled

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/12130795/Revealed-Jeremy-Corbyn-showed-off-naked-Diane-Abbott-to-impress-Left-wing-friends.html

You can all thank me later.

The man brings his pals around to show off his naked girlfriend in his bed because she is black and that demonstrates how cool he is?

What an odious little creep.

ydoethur said:

chestnut said:

Comres poll outcomes say Corbyn has Labour closer to the Tories than Miliband did.

It's findings should be judged on whether that is believable. What do the leader ratings imply?

I think, however, if we compare the polling Miliband had at this stage of the last Parliament Labour are about 9 points down. *

If THAT were to be repeated at a general election, which surely it wouldn't be, Labour would be running the real risk of coming third in the popular vote for the first time in a normal election since December 1910.

*edit - I don't have the figures to hand, so I could be wrong. If anyone has time to look them up I'd be interested to see them.

You're making the double counting mistake - ComRes have adjusted their weightings to reflect the turnout differentiation which seems to have led to over-rating Labour in the last Parliament (which is also why the raw sample isn't significant because it's before adjusting for sample bias - that's why it's called raw). You're comparing with pre-correction polling and then applying the adjustment again.

The real Labour problem is a different one. Miliband was - whether consciously or not - following the 35% strategy, essentially taking the Labour core vote and hoping to add a bit by this and that initiative. He largely failed, and even the core vote wasn't very impressed and didn't all turn out. Corbyn has enthused part of the core vote to the point that the assumptions of low turnout among younger voters in particular may have over-corrected. But he's not winning over many others apart from Greens.

So it's perfectly plausible that Labour's over 30%, as nearly all the polls show and local by-election results on the whole suggest. Getting another 5-10% is difficult, though.

NickPalmer said:

ydoethur said:

chestnut said:

Comres poll outcomes say Corbyn has Labour closer to the Tories than Miliband did.

It's findings should be judged on whether that is believable. What do the leader ratings imply?

I think, however, if we compare the polling Miliband had at this stage of the last Parliament Labour are about 9 points down. *

If THAT were to be repeated at a general election, which surely it wouldn't be, Labour would be running the real risk of coming third in the popular vote for the first time in a normal election since December 1910.

*edit - I don't have the figures to hand, so I could be wrong. If anyone has time to look them up I'd be interested to see them.

You're making the double counting mistake - ComRes have adjusted their weightings to reflect the turnout differentiation which seems to have led to over-rating Labour in the last Parliament (which is also why the raw sample isn't significant because it's before adjusting for sample bias - that's why it's called raw). You're comparing with pre-correction polling and then applying the adjustment again.

The real Labour problem is a different one. Miliband was - whether consciously or not - following the 35% strategy, essentially taking the Labour core vote and hoping to add a bit by this and that initiative. He largely failed, and even the core vote wasn't very impressed and didn't all turn out. Corbyn has enthused part of the core vote to the point that the assumptions of low turnout among younger voters in particular may have over-corrected. But he's not winning over many others apart from Greens.

So it's perfectly plausible that Labour's over 30%, as nearly all the polls show and local by-election results on the whole suggest. Getting another 5-10% is difficult, though.

A not wholly unreasonable point. But I would still have said that when the best case scenario you can posit on the data is that Labour are standing still after nine months of weak and controversial government following your worst election result in 32 years it is still by any standard an absolutely pathetic performance.

blackburn63 said:

Plato_Says said:

Took the words out of my mouth. Urgh.

DavidL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

FYI, ICYMI, and don't want to sleep tonight

Jeremy Corbyn “showed off” a naked Diane Abbott to impress his Left-wing friends when he was a young Labour activist, a new book has revealed.

The Labour leader invited fellow activists to his London flat where they were “shaken” to find Ms Abbott in his bed, one of his friends recalled

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/12130795/Revealed-Jeremy-Corbyn-showed-off-naked-Diane-Abbott-to-impress-Left-wing-friends.html

You can all thank me later.

The man brings his pals around to show off his naked girlfriend in his bed because she is black and that demonstrates how cool he is?

What an odious little creep.

Oh come on, there's no suggestion it because she's black, the nerd just couldn't believe his luck at pulling.

I think any attraction might have been deeper than looks: they were both believers. Kindred spirits in the struggle.

Some of the comments on this thread, whilst funny, have been somewhat shallow. People can fall for looks, intellect, money : attraction comes in many forms.

I, of course, married a woman with beauty, intellect, and a healthy income.

Cyclefree said:

Sean_F said:

Cyclefree said:

Morning all.

Panic - not to mention denial - in Brussels: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/12130843/EU-leaders-No-link-between-Cologne-sex-attacks-and-migrant-crisis.html

Jess Philips thinks the same things take place in Birmingham.

It is undoubtedly the case that sexual assaults on women didn't start with the arrival of migrants. And if there were no migrants such crimes would still happen.

But it is curious - actually, repulsive would be a better word - that those who claim to be concerned about sexual crimes against women are so sanguine about inviting into the country those from mysogynistic cultures and, as a result, with a propensity to commit such crimes (though that does not apply to all the individuals from those cultures, of course).

It's as if such concern is only useful if it can be used against certain groups and that concern for women is dialled up or down - or into nothingness, in some cases - depending on the perpetrators.

Repulsive.

I think it's just a case of people on the Centre and Right having a different world outlook to people on the Left. To many of the latter, the world is divided into Oppressor groups and Oppressed groups, and that's it.

ydoethur said:

NickPalmer said:

ydoethur said:

chestnut said:

Comres poll outcomes say Corbyn has Labour closer to the Tories than Miliband did.

It's findings should be judged on whether that is believable. What do the leader ratings imply?

I think, however, if we compare the polling Miliband had at this stage of the last Parliament Labour are about 9 points down. *

If THAT were to be repeated at a general election, which surely it wouldn't be, Labour would be running the real risk of coming third in the popular vote for the first time in a normal election since December 1910.

*edit - I don't have the figures to hand, so I could be wrong. If anyone has time to look them up I'd be interested to see them.

You're making the double counting mistake - ComRes have adjusted their weightings to reflect the turnout differentiation which seems to have led to over-rating Labour in the last Parliament (which is also why the raw sample isn't significant because it's before adjusting for sample bias - that's why it's called raw). You're comparing with pre-correction polling and then applying the adjustment again.

The real Labour problem is a different one. Miliband was - whether consciously or not - following the 35% strategy, essentially taking the Labour core vote and hoping to add a bit by this and that initiative. He largely failed, and even the core vote wasn't very impressed and didn't all turn out. Corbyn has enthused part of the core vote to the point that the assumptions of low turnout among younger voters in particular may have over-corrected. But he's not winning over many others apart from Greens.

So it's perfectly plausible that Labour's over 30%, as nearly all the polls show and local by-election results on the whole suggest. Getting another 5-10% is difficult, though.

A not wholly unreasonable point. But I would still have said that when the best case scenario you can posit on the data is that Labour are standing still after nine months of weak and controversial government following your worst election result in 32 years it is still by any standard an absolutely pathetic performance.

Nick is right that they have abandoned the 35% strategy. The problem is they've replaced it with a 25% strategy.

Edit: Great minds, Mr @SquareRoot

Londons booming they say

https://twitter.com/standardnews/status/693359151439831040

Off-topic:

An interesting and thought-provoking article in the LRB about the Iran-Iraq war, and its repercussions for the Syrian conflict today.

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v38/n03/joost-hiltermann/chemical-wonders

What emerges is that the mindsets driving state policy in Iran and Iraq today, or the actions of sub-state actors, including Islamic State, are largely rooted in the instincts that propelled the war in the 1980s. The war wasn’t simply a conflict between two states but a clash between two cultural traditions, political philosophies and nations – all intertwined – that transcended state borders: Arab v. Persian, Sunni v. Shia, secular v. theocratic.

foxinsoxuk said:

blackburn63 said:

Plato_Says said:

Took the words out of my mouth. Urgh.

DavidL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

FYI, ICYMI, and don't want to sleep tonight

Jeremy Corbyn “showed off” a naked Diane Abbott to impress his Left-wing friends when he was a young Labour activist, a new book has revealed.

The Labour leader invited fellow activists to his London flat where they were “shaken” to find Ms Abbott in his bed, one of his friends recalled

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/12130795/Revealed-Jeremy-Corbyn-showed-off-naked-Diane-Abbott-to-impress-Left-wing-friends.html

You can all thank me later.

The man brings his pals around to show off his naked girlfriend in his bed because she is black and that demonstrates how cool he is?

What an odious little creep.

Oh come on, there's no suggestion it because she's black, the nerd just couldn't believe his luck at pulling.

To be fair Jezza is on his 3rd wife, all of them lookers as well as intelligent, as well as Miss Abbott. His charms may be lost on pb, but work on the ladies it seems!

True true

Cyclefree said:

Sean_F said:

Cyclefree said:

Morning all.

Panic - not to mention denial - in Brussels: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/12130843/EU-leaders-No-link-between-Cologne-sex-attacks-and-migrant-crisis.html

Jess Philips thinks the same things take place in Birmingham.

It is undoubtedly the case that sexual assaults on women didn't start with the arrival of migrants. And if there were no migrants such crimes would still happen.

But it is curious - actually, repulsive would be a better word - that those who claim to be concerned about sexual crimes against women are so sanguine about inviting into the country those from mysogynistic cultures and, as a result, with a propensity to commit such crimes (though that does not apply to all the individuals from those cultures, of course).

It's as if such concern is only useful if it can be used against certain groups and that concern for women is dialled up or down - or into nothingness, in some cases - depending on the perpetrators.

Repulsive.

Have you ever visited any of these misogynistic cultures and could you share with us your experiences?

Because so many on here agree with you doesn't make your brand of prejudice less repulsive. It just shows the level of poster these days

They're eating their five-a-day though.

isam said:

Londons booming they say

https://twitter.com/standardnews/status/693359151439831040

blackburn63 said:

According to the Times the EU is drawing up legislation to prosecute tourists if they help migrants entering Greece.

PB would go into faux outrage meltdown if Farage had called for the arrest of the bloke carrying that toddler up the beach.

Oh well, Dave says Remain so lets all do as we're told.

You think farage is capable of calling for the prosecution of a policeman carrying g a corpse? Wierd.

ydoethur said:

Malmesbury said:

It's worth noting that the Clintons, like Blair, have a long record of using legally-correct-but-not-actually-meaningful statements as defenses. Probably the legal background.

I think that's a slight exaggeration. The Clinton career seems more to be focussed on evading answers on what can be proved, and flat denials of what can't be. This would certainly seem to fit that paradigm. Nobody is denying this business with the server now, but still insisting that what was on it wasn't important.

The question is does this resemble Whitewater, where their behaviour was unethical rather than illegal, or Monicagate, where Clinton was clearly guilty of repeatedly lying to the public (unless having your penis sucked does not count as 'sexual relations'). My instinct is that Hilary is probably just OK unless something dramatic happens, but even if she is, she's already gifted about a million attack lines to the Republicans.

The standard Clinton defenses is a statement that sounds flat and final. But which turns out to be true, but misleading. Classic lawyer speak.

Hillary broke the rules - special compartmented stuff floating about the place etc. People have lost jobs, security clearances and gone to prison for this. Note that Clinton supporters are selling the line that this is old news, she was just trying to do her job and we should all move along.

The problem is the emails exist - can't be wished away

Digging into Corbyn's romantic past seems not only unnecessary but pointless; no-one seems in any dispute that on a personal level he can be quite engaging and, I suspect, charming, and the rest is easily dismissed as hearsay and partisan spin. It reminds me of that bizarre splash page on Ed M's lovelife: "Look at these accomplished, intelligent and attractive women Ed M has been involved with - what a weirdo he is though, right?" was how it came across given the general focus on him.

felix said:

isam said:

Londons booming they say

https://twitter.com/standardnews/status/693359151439831040

Not sure 'dickensian' is a good description of a room full of fresh fruit and other goodies.

'Dickensian squalor' on the other hand would work and is a common phrase.

Malmesbury said:

ydoethur said:

Malmesbury said:

It'sd.

I t.

The problem is the emails exist - can't be wished away

I'd assumed if she was ever charged she would step down or be handily defeated by a late entrant, and some of what has come out has made it sound like she should be charged with something, but now I'm not sure. It's so late in the day now I fear if there was a charge her supporters might just be powerful enough to claim it was all political - the timing would look it, truthfully or not - and she'd take her chances. As I say, I presumed that would never happen, but although she's not a strong candidate it seems, her supporters seem entirely unconcerned.

NickPalmer said:

We've had one thread full of comments on Jeremy and Diane's love life and appearance several decades ago. Could we maybe now leave that aspect of politics to the Mail?

You mean that you don't want an open discussion on the Labour leaders male dominated and chauvinistic exploitation of vulnerable women and ethnic minorities for his own personal self gratification and dominance having then spent all his life shouting at others for doing anything remotely similar?



Ok .....

Roger said:

AndyJS said:

Roger said:

Cyclefree said:

Sean_F said:

Cyclefree said:

Morning all.

Panic - not to mention denial - in Brussels: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/12130843/EU-leaders-No-link-between-Cologne-sex-attacks-and-migrant-crisis.html

Jess Philips thinks the same things take place in Birmingham.

It is undoubtedly the case that sexual assaults on women didn't start with the arrival of migrants. And if there were no migrants such crimes would still happen.

But it is curious - actually, repulsive would be a better word - that those who claim to be concerned about sexual crimes against women are so sanguine about inviting into the country those from mysogynistic cultures and, as a result, with a propensity to commit such crimes (though that does not apply to all the individuals from those cultures, of course).

It's as if such concern is only useful if it can be used against certain groups and that concern for women is dialled up or down - or into nothingness, in some cases - depending on the perpetrators.

Repulsive.

Have you ever visited any of these misogynistic cultures and could you share with us your experiences?

Because so many on here agree with you doesn't make your brand of prejudice less repulsive. It just shows the level of poster these days

You are out of touch with reality.

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

I was in Egypt in about 2005 and the big topic of conversation was whether or not a sentence of death on five teenagers who had raped two girls was fair. It was explaned to me that rape was so rare and the death penalty was so infrequently used that it was considered a serious issue.

The idea that Egyptians who I know to be a hugely cultured people with years of civilization behind them should have a greater proclivity to rape than the alcohol fuelled English is just ignorant prejudice.

You say 'ignorant' prejudice, but you say the misogynistic culture claim is ridiculous, others who have been to those places, and thus not ignorant, say it is not ridiculous - who am I, as someone who has not been to those cultures, to believe?