Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » LAB might be struggling in Stoke but don’t risk your money bas

SystemSystem Posts: 11,014
edited January 2017 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » LAB might be struggling in Stoke but don’t risk your money based on this so called “poll”

How the Express is reporting the Stoke central "poll" which wasn't. I'm told it was Facebook survey of 179 people pic.twitter.com/pVlmrSXTu5

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    Hang on, we're talking about the Express here. Surly Diana is set to win in Stoke.
  • Options
    I feel sorry for those who punters last night who bet based on this bullshit.
  • Options
    JobabobJobabob Posts: 3,807
    Jonathan said:

    Hang on, we're talking about the Express here. Surly Diana is set to win in Stoke.

    I fancy Angry Kate
  • Options
    SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,704
    Jonathan said:

    Hang on, we're talking about the Express here. Surly Diana is set to win in Stoke.

    Strange to think this year will be 20 years since she died. Time flies.
  • Options
    I had to quickly survey 179 Facebookers on my chances of coming first on this thread, which has resulted in me not being first.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,973
    Mr. Jonathan, sounds like one of Vettel's car names (my favourite was Kate's Dirty Sister).
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937
    Doesn't even deserve consideration.

    Although if Nuttall did win, it would be a point of evidence to something that's been opined on here before: that Farage was a drag on his own and UKIP's vote. People could vote to leave the EU because people in other parties held the same position: voting for Farage as a candidate was a vote for *him*.

    And he is poison to many.

    In that regard, I'd quite like Nuttall to win. Firstly, because UKIP's vote share should have more representation. But mostly because he'd have beaten the unelectable (*) Farage

    (*) Yes, he's an MEP, but that's a party list system.
  • Options
    old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238
    Jonathan said:

    Hang on, we're talking about the Express here. Surly Diana is set to win in Stoke.

    Nah, she's living in a secret love nest with Lord Lucan.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Mr. Jonathan, sounds like one of Vettel's car names (my favourite was Kate's Dirty Sister).

    hehe. Surly Diana is a perfect fit for this dark political age.
  • Options
    Blue_rogBlue_rog Posts: 2,019
    FPT

    Whilst I completely condemn these juvenile threats, probably made by some uninformed wannabe, I can understand the frustration that people that voted leave are feeling.

    I see that the now the SC verdict has been given, the remainer 'deplorables' are shedding their false colours and creeping out the woodwork. 'Of course we'll vote for article 50...but only if x, y, and z are conceded'.

    The vote on article 50 is not a done deal. The views of the majority of people that voted in the referendum are now held to ransom by the mechanics of the HoC and HoL where compromise and deal making dilutes and demeans the original vote.

    Thanks for the reply MD

    SeanT Her most recent announcements are to put further restrictions on triggering article 50 grr
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    SeanT said:

    fpt on the sainted Gina Miller


    Threats against her are obviously vile and wrong, but she is a fucking liar.

    Here she is in the Guardian today, bleating away about how her legal campaign had nothing to do with stopping Brexit.


    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/24/supreme-court-brexit-judgment-constitution-gina-miller

    "Throughout this entire legal saga, I have kept resolutely to the facts. I have also, from the start, made it clear that I respect the unambiguous decision that the people of the United Kingdom took in the referendum on 23 June 2016."

    Really, Gina? Is that actually true? Here you are in an interview with Reuters just after you launched your challenge.

    "Gina Miller, a co-founder of London fund manager SCM Private, is the main claimant in a growing queue of litigants hoping to force Prime Minister Theresa May to let parliament decide when, how and WHETHER to leave the EU, rather than taking such decisions herself following last month's referendum.

    In her first interview since taking her case to London's High Court, Miller said she wanted Britain to remain in the EU and the best decision would be to renegotiate membership and reform the EU...

    Miller outlined three possible outcomes [of her legal challenge]: Brexit, but arrived at in a considered manner followed by triggering Article 50; the middle ground of a so called "Brexit-Lite"; or another type of EU membership."


    "I would prefer us to have a different sort of membership," she said."

    Just a total, total liar.

    Two posts in a row about death threats, both seeking to minimise their significance. Some posters need urgently to recalibrate their morality.
  • Options
    PongPong Posts: 4,693
    edited January 2017
    edit

  • Options
    SeanT said:

    fpt on the sainted Gina Miller


    Threats against her are obviously vile and wrong, but she is a fucking liar.

    Here she is in the Guardian today, bleating away about how her legal campaign had nothing to do with stopping Brexit.


    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/24/supreme-court-brexit-judgment-constitution-gina-miller

    "Throughout this entire legal saga, I have kept resolutely to the facts. I have also, from the start, made it clear that I respect the unambiguous decision that the people of the United Kingdom took in the referendum on 23 June 2016."

    Really, Gina? Is that actually true? Here you are in an interview with Reuters just after you launched your challenge.

    "Gina Miller, a co-founder of London fund manager SCM Private, is the main claimant in a growing queue of litigants hoping to force Prime Minister Theresa May to let parliament decide when, how and WHETHER to leave the EU, rather than taking such decisions herself following last month's referendum.

    In her first interview since taking her case to London's High Court, Miller said she wanted Britain to remain in the EU and the best decision would be to renegotiate membership and reform the EU...

    Miller outlined three possible outcomes [of her legal challenge]: Brexit, but arrived at in a considered manner followed by triggering Article 50; the middle ground of a so called "Brexit-Lite"; or another type of EU membership."


    "I would prefer us to have a different sort of membership," she said."

    Just a total, total liar.

    I don't see any contradiction here, she has a personal opinion which is that she'd have preferred Britain to remain in the EU. She's also been involved in a court case about asserting the sovereignty of Parliament over the government.

    Why does the former point mean she can't be involved in the latter?
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,596
    Story about 'sexist dress rules' on the BBC this morning.

    Too right there are sexist dress rules - just look in parliament - men trussed up in tie and jacket while women can turn up in a frock or jumper, or pretty much whatever they feel like wearing.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    We live in dark times. An MP was killed on the street.

    Everyone has a responsibility to dial it down.

  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937
    SeanT said:

    fpt on the sainted Gina Miller


    Threats against her are obviously vile and wrong, but she is a fucking liar.

    Here she is in the Guardian today, bleating away about how her legal campaign had nothing to do with stopping Brexit.


    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/24/supreme-court-brexit-judgment-constitution-gina-miller

    "Throughout this entire legal saga, I have kept resolutely to the facts. I have also, from the start, made it clear that I respect the unambiguous decision that the people of the United Kingdom took in the referendum on 23 June 2016."

    Really, Gina? Is that actually true? Here you are in an interview with Reuters just after you launched your challenge.

    "Gina Miller, a co-founder of London fund manager SCM Private, is the main claimant in a growing queue of litigants hoping to force Prime Minister Theresa May to let parliament decide when, how and WHETHER to leave the EU, rather than taking such decisions herself following last month's referendum.

    In her first interview since taking her case to London's High Court, Miller said she wanted Britain to remain in the EU and the best decision would be to renegotiate membership and reform the EU...

    Miller outlined three possible outcomes [of her legal challenge]: Brexit, but arrived at in a considered manner followed by triggering Article 50; the middle ground of a so called "Brexit-Lite"; or another type of EU membership."


    "I would prefer us to have a different sort of membership," she said."

    Just a total, total liar.

    Sean, if saying contradictory things makes you a liar, then what do your different and contradictory comments on a whole range of topics - often held simultaneously - say about you? ;)

    You have to split the point of law from the reason the case was brought. I think I'm in the same position as Mr Tyndall on this (*): I'm glad she took this to court, and the lords came to the correct answer. I don't particularly like her reasons for bringing the case.

    It should be said that I have much less sympathy for some of the other cases that might be appearing.

    (*) I hope I've got his position right.
  • Options
    Blue_rogBlue_rog Posts: 2,019

    SeanT said:

    fpt on the sainted Gina Miller


    Threats against her are obviously vile and wrong, but she is a fucking liar.

    Here she is in the Guardian today, bleating away about how her legal campaign had nothing to do with stopping Brexit.


    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/24/supreme-court-brexit-judgment-constitution-gina-miller

    "Throughout this entire legal saga, I have kept resolutely to the facts. I have also, from the start, made it clear that I respect the unambiguous decision that the people of the United Kingdom took in the referendum on 23 June 2016."

    Really, Gina? Is that actually true? Here you are in an interview with Reuters just after you launched your challenge.

    "Gina Miller, a co-founder of London fund manager SCM Private, is the main claimant in a growing queue of litigants hoping to force Prime Minister Theresa May to let parliament decide when, how and WHETHER to leave the EU, rather than taking such decisions herself following last month's referendum.

    In her first interview since taking her case to London's High Court, Miller said she wanted Britain to remain in the EU and the best decision would be to renegotiate membership and reform the EU...

    Miller outlined three possible outcomes [of her legal challenge]: Brexit, but arrived at in a considered manner followed by triggering Article 50; the middle ground of a so called "Brexit-Lite"; or another type of EU membership."


    "I would prefer us to have a different sort of membership," she said."

    Just a total, total liar.

    Two posts in a row about death threats, both seeking to minimise their significance. Some posters need urgently to recalibrate their morality.
    Don't be ridiculous! You can abhor the threat of violence but also fundamentally disagree with the political position a person has taken. If you say we can't, then what's the point of any parliamentary debate.

    I agree with SeanT that Ms Miller is a liar but this doesn't mean that I want her dead or minimise the seriousness of the threats made against her. If anything, these threats reduce the power of other arguments.
  • Options
    logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,709
    Blue_rog said:

    FPT

    Whilst I completely condemn these juvenile threats, probably made by some uninformed wannabe, I can understand the frustration that people that voted leave are feeling.

    I see that the now the SC verdict has been given, the remainer 'deplorables' are shedding their false colours and creeping out the woodwork. 'Of course we'll vote for article 50...but only if x, y, and z are conceded'.

    The vote on article 50 is not a done deal. The views of the majority of people that voted in the referendum are now held to ransom by the mechanics of the HoC and HoL where compromise and deal making dilutes and demeans the original vote.

    Thanks for the reply MD

    SeanT Her most recent announcements are to put further restrictions on triggering article 50 grr

    The referendum was very close. Those voting to Remain knew what they would get. Those voting Leave were voting for a whole array of different destinations. Some on here specifically said they wanted EEA or EFTA.
    It's the destination that is to be decided by Parliament. That isn't diluting the original vote, the original vote was NOT for extreme hard Brexit.
  • Options

    SeanT said:

    fpt on the sainted Gina Miller


    Threats against her are obviously vile and wrong, but she is a fucking liar.

    Here she is in the Guardian today, bleating away about how her legal campaign had nothing to do with stopping Brexit.


    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/24/supreme-court-brexit-judgment-constitution-gina-miller

    "Throughout this entire legal saga, I have kept resolutely to the facts. I have also, from the start, made it clear that I respect the unambiguous decision that the people of the United Kingdom took in the referendum on 23 June 2016."

    Really, Gina? Is that actually true? Here you are in an interview with Reuters just after you launched your challenge.

    "Gina Miller, a co-founder of London fund manager SCM Private, is the main claimant in a growing queue of litigants hoping to force Prime Minister Theresa May to let parliament decide when, how and WHETHER to leave the EU, rather than taking such decisions herself following last month's referendum.

    In her first interview since taking her case to London's High Court, Miller said she wanted Britain to remain in the EU and the best decision would be to renegotiate membership and reform the EU...

    Miller outlined three possible outcomes [of her legal challenge]: Brexit, but arrived at in a considered manner followed by triggering Article 50; the middle ground of a so called "Brexit-Lite"; or another type of EU membership."


    "I would prefer us to have a different sort of membership," she said."

    Just a total, total liar.

    Two posts in a row about death threats, both seeking to minimise their significance. Some posters need urgently to recalibrate their morality.
    “I have used the extra time to take up shooting again. I find that when I shoot a few Borises and Michaels I feel a whole lot better.”

    Cameron is already acting out his bloody fantasies and psychopaths often progress from animals to humans. I hope the police deal with this heavily armed menace.
  • Options
    CD13CD13 Posts: 6,351
    The legal case reinforces the view of many about the establishment. They're out to cheat us. The details don't matter.

    In the end, it was full of sound and fury signifying nothing, but it feeds into the conspiracy theories.

    Ukip won't win Stoke, but more days like yesterday and I'll start to think they might.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Blue_rog said:

    SeanT said:

    fpt on the sainted Gina Miller


    Threats against her are obviously vile and wrong, but she is a fucking liar.

    Here she is in the Guardian today, bleating away about how her legal campaign had nothing to do with stopping Brexit.


    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/24/supreme-court-brexit-judgment-constitution-gina-miller

    "Throughout this entire legal saga, I have kept resolutely to the facts. I have also, from the start, made it clear that I respect the unambiguous decision that the people of the United Kingdom took in the referendum on 23 June 2016."

    Really, Gina? Is that actually true? Here you are in an interview with Reuters just after you launched your challenge.

    "Gina Miller, a co-founder of London fund manager SCM Private, is the main claimant in a growing queue of litigants hoping to force Prime Minister Theresa May to let parliament decide when, how and WHETHER to leave the EU, rather than taking such decisions herself following last month's referendum.

    In her first interview since taking her case to London's High Court, Miller said she wanted Britain to remain in the EU and the best decision would be to renegotiate membership and reform the EU...

    Miller outlined three possible outcomes [of her legal challenge]: Brexit, but arrived at in a considered manner followed by triggering Article 50; the middle ground of a so called "Brexit-Lite"; or another type of EU membership."


    "I would prefer us to have a different sort of membership," she said."

    Just a total, total liar.

    Two posts in a row about death threats, both seeking to minimise their significance. Some posters need urgently to recalibrate their morality.
    Don't be ridiculous! You can abhor the threat of violence but also fundamentally disagree with the political position a person has taken. If you say we can't, then what's the point of any parliamentary debate.

    I agree with SeanT that Ms Miller is a liar but this doesn't mean that I want her dead or minimise the seriousness of the threats made against her. If anything, these threats reduce the power of other arguments.
    We have already seen one prominent Remainer killed in cold blood. Leavers have a responsibility to condemn such threats without qualification.

    "Bad about the death threats but she's a bad woman" doesn't cut it.
  • Options
    Blue_rogBlue_rog Posts: 2,019

    Blue_rog said:

    FPT

    Whilst I completely condemn these juvenile threats, probably made by some uninformed wannabe, I can understand the frustration that people that voted leave are feeling.

    I see that the now the SC verdict has been given, the remainer 'deplorables' are shedding their false colours and creeping out the woodwork. 'Of course we'll vote for article 50...but only if x, y, and z are conceded'.

    The vote on article 50 is not a done deal. The views of the majority of people that voted in the referendum are now held to ransom by the mechanics of the HoC and HoL where compromise and deal making dilutes and demeans the original vote.

    Thanks for the reply MD

    SeanT Her most recent announcements are to put further restrictions on triggering article 50 grr

    The referendum was very close. Those voting to Remain knew what they would get. Those voting Leave were voting for a whole array of different destinations. Some on here specifically said they wanted EEA or EFTA.
    It's the destination that is to be decided by Parliament. That isn't diluting the original vote, the original vote was NOT for extreme hard Brexit.
    I disagree. I think those voting for remain had many reasons ranging from retaining the status quo to a full embrace of the whole European project including EU army, joining the Euro etc. The British people had a full range of opinions
  • Options
    SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,704

    Story about 'sexist dress rules' on the BBC this morning.

    Too right there are sexist dress rules - just look in parliament - men trussed up in tie and jacket while women can turn up in a frock or jumper, or pretty much whatever they feel like wearing.

    The case in question was that of a receptionist I believe. To be honest in that job, and that role, I would actually think that an employer would be in their rights to proscribe a set dress code in the manner of what they did. They are the 'front face' of that company and are there to set a impression.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937
    This poll is rubbish.

    However, it does bring to mind conversations on here after the 2015 GE. Google and Facebook control a large amount of information on me (so do Amazon and Microsoft, but they're less relevant).

    If they were to mine that data: if FB were to analyse all my posts, and Google my searches and media posts, then they'll be able to tell an awful lot about me. My address, age, martial status, my interests, occupation, etc, etc. Even for some people the way they voted last time.

    It would not surprise me if, by GE 2020, they could mine this data in such a way that polls could be made much more accurate. Some of this was done in 2015, but they'll have much more data and practice in 2020.

    But it'd cost.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    SeanT said:

    Blue_rog said:

    SeanT said:

    fpt on the sainted Gina Miller


    Threats against her are obviously vile and wrong, but she is a fucking liar.

    Here she is in the Guardian today, bleating away about how her legal campaign had nothing to do with stopping Brexit.


    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/24/supreme-court-brexit-judgment-constitution-gina-miller

    "Throughout this entire legal saga, I have kept resolutely to the facts. I have also, from the start, made it clear that I respect the unambiguous decision that the people of the United Kingdom took in the referendum on 23 June 2016."

    Really, Gina? Is that actually true? Here you are in an interview with Reuters just after you launched your challenge.

    "Gina Miller, a co-founder of London fund manager SCM Private, is the main claimant in a growing queue of litigants hoping to force Prime Minister Theresa May to let parliament decide when, how and WHETHER to leave the EU, rather than taking such decisions herself following last month's referendum.

    In her first interview since taking her case to London's High Court, Miller said she wanted Britain to remain in the EU and the best decision would be to renegotiate membership and reform the EU...

    Miller outlined three possible outcomes [of her legal challenge]: Brexit, but arrived at in a considered manner followed by triggering Article 50; the middle ground of a so called "Brexit-Lite"; or another type of EU membership."


    "I would prefer us to have a different sort of membership," she said."

    Just a total, total liar.

    Two posts in a row about death threats, both seeking to minimise their significance. Some posters need urgently to recalibrate their morality.
    Don't be ridiculous! You can abhor the threat of violence but also fundamentally disagree with the political position a person has taken. If you say we can't, then what's the point of any parliamentary debate.

    I agree with SeanT that Ms Miller is a liar but this doesn't mean that I want her dead or minimise the seriousness of the threats made against her. If anything, these threats reduce the power of other arguments.
    We have already seen one prominent Remainer killed in cold blood. Leavers have a responsibility to condemn such threats without qualification.

    "Bad about the death threats but she's a bad woman" doesn't cut it.
    lol. This is PB, you pompous dork. It's not the floor of the House of Commons. Get over yourself.
    If a Muslim were to come on here and write "yes, ISIS's death threats against the West are deplorable but Brutain is degenerate and immoral", you'd explode so hard with fury they'd be clearing up your entrails from the walls of your hotel room.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937
    CD13 said:

    The legal case reinforces the view of many about the establishment. They're out to cheat us. The details don't matter.

    In the end, it was full of sound and fury signifying nothing, but it feeds into the conspiracy theories.

    Ukip won't win Stoke, but more days like yesterday and I'll start to think they might.

    That's the whole point: if this case had been lost, the 'establishment' (*) would have been able to cheat us much more in the future.

    (*) Which by now includes everyone in the country aside from Mr Harvey Pleb, of Ordinary Street, Immingham.
  • Options
    CD13CD13 Posts: 6,351
    Mr Song,

    "It's the destination that is to be decided by Parliament."

    Wot? No negotiation with the EU?

    The destination is Out. The details will be decided by negotiation with the EU. Parliament will offer a wish-list. Some designed to wreck the negotiations. They will be discarded on that basis.

    I propose we insist on apple pie and motherhood in the recipe.

    But if Parliament insists on wrecking additions, it shouldn't act surprised when we leave with Hard Brexit. But they will, blaming poor negotiating on the outcome, and demanding we either revert to staying or re-apply to join.


    I've been here before.

  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,936
    This is the one that looks like a mini Paul Nuttall?

    Sensible.
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    edited January 2017
    We have already seen one prominent Remainer killed in cold blood. Leavers have a responsibility to condemn such threats without qualification.

    "Bad about the death threats but she's a bad woman" doesn't cut it.
    Do you say the same about lefty threats and violence towards those on the right? Kill Thatcher, Farage is scum, the making of universities unsafe for non-progressives, muggings of Trump supporters in the USA, Momentum bricks through moderate Labour MPs windows, etc? If we're all a bit honest it's the left that has threatened and delivered violence far, far more than the right historically. This ugly new phenomenon is a bit shocking because it is the first time we have seen violence threatened by non-progressives. That you only now find it shocking says alot.
  • Options

    SeanT said:

    fpt on the sainted Gina Miller


    Threats against her are obviously vile and wrong, but she is a fucking liar.

    Here she is in the Guardian today, bleating away about how her legal campaign had nothing to do with stopping Brexit.


    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/24/supreme-court-brexit-judgment-constitution-gina-miller

    "Throughout this entire legal saga, I have kept resolutely to the facts. I have also, from the start, made it clear that I respect the unambiguous decision that the people of the United Kingdom took in the referendum on 23 June 2016."

    Really, Gina? Is that actually true? Here you are in an interview with Reuters just after you launched your challenge.

    "Gina Miller, a co-founder of London fund manager SCM Private, is the main claimant in a growing queue of litigants hoping to force Prime Minister Theresa May to let parliament decide when, how and WHETHER to leave the EU, rather than taking such decisions herself following last month's referendum.

    In her first interview since taking her case to London's High Court, Miller said she wanted Britain to remain in the EU and the best decision would be to renegotiate membership and reform the EU...

    Miller outlined three possible outcomes [of her legal challenge]: Brexit, but arrived at in a considered manner followed by triggering Article 50; the middle ground of a so called "Brexit-Lite"; or another type of EU membership."


    "I would prefer us to have a different sort of membership," she said."

    Just a total, total liar.

    Two posts in a row about death threats, both seeking to minimise their significance. Some posters need urgently to recalibrate their morality.
    I seem to remember quite a few PBers having a collective prolapse because some saddo tweeted that was J.K.Rowling a c*** or somesuch pre Indy referendum. Heartening to see their moral consistency in these matters.
  • Options
    Ally_BAlly_B Posts: 185
    SeanT said:

    fpt on the sainted Gina Miller

    "Throughout this entire legal saga, I have kept resolutely to the facts. I have also, from the start, made it clear that I respect the unambiguous decision that the people of the United Kingdom took in the referendum on 23 June 2016."

    Really, Gina? Is that actually true?

    (I edited your post to make my point)

    The answer is without any doubt whatsoever false. The referendum never gave an unambiguous result because it was never intended to return a no result! All we know from the referendum was that 48% supported staying in the EU whilst 52% voted for 'something else'. What makes it confusing is that the 'something else' ranges across the spectrum from WTO rules to EEA membership and all that I can most certainly be certain of is that 52% din't vote for what the PM is proposing. (That certainty comes from me speaking to a number of Leavers all of whom have different ideas about where they want us to end up). Had the referendum offered a choice of, say five different outcomes it is a moot point whether any of the no options would have exceeded the vote for the single yes choice but I digress.

    Clearly the PM is not the right person to decide on the outcome, that is Parliament's responsibility. That is why they need a bill to trigger the start of negotiations and why it is right and proper for our elected representatives to make their concerns, checks and balances known and taken into account throughout the whole process. If anyone does like that then perhaps you should move to a more authoritarian state, like Turkey.
  • Options
    Mortimer said:

    This is the one that looks like a mini Paul Nuttall?

    Sensible.
    That's the one.

    Speaking as a working class Northener, is a shame that we don't have more working class Northerners in Parliament.
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383

    Story about 'sexist dress rules' on the BBC this morning.

    Too right there are sexist dress rules - just look in parliament - men trussed up in tie and jacket while women can turn up in a frock or jumper, or pretty much whatever they feel like wearing.

    The case in question was that of a receptionist I believe. To be honest in that job, and that role, I would actually think that an employer would be in their rights to proscribe a set dress code in the manner of what they did. They are the 'front face' of that company and are there to set a impression.
    I find this whole thing implausible as a serious issue. I placed thousands of people in jobs over 6yrs in the 80/90s - I never once had this come up. I'd two experiences of racism - one by Ms Abbot who wanted a black secretary, and an old fashioned bloke who asked for an English rose for his PA.

    If I never encountered this in Croydon, Crawley or Brighton then - I doubt it's an issue now.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Patrick said:

    We have already seen one prominent Remainer killed in cold blood. Leavers have a responsibility to condemn such threats without qualification.

    "Bad about the death threats but she's a bad woman" doesn't cut it.
    Do you say the same about lefty threats and violence towards those on the right? Kill Thatcher, Farage is scum, the making of universities unsafe for non-progressives, muggings of Trump supporters in the USA, Momentum bricks through moderate Labour MPs windows, etc? If we're all a bit honest it's the left that has threatened and delivered violence far, far more than the right historically. This ugly new phenomenon is a bit shocking because it is the first time we have seen violence threatened by non-progressives. That you only now find it shocking says alot.

    I say the same about all such threats when real. I have no idea why you think I wouldn't.
  • Options
    Patrick said:

    We have already seen one prominent Remainer killed in cold blood. Leavers have a responsibility to condemn such threats without qualification.

    "Bad about the death threats but she's a bad woman" doesn't cut it.
    Do you say the same about lefty threats and violence towards those on the right? Kill Thatcher, Farage is scum, the making of universities unsafe for non-progressives, muggings of Trump supporters in the USA, Momentum bricks through moderate Labour MPs windows, etc? If we're all a bit honest it's the left that has threatened and delivered violence far, far more than the right historically. This ugly new phenomenon is a bit shocking because it is the first time we have seen violence threatened by non-progressives. That you only now find it shocking says alot.

    Are you being serious? Or are you telling me that the skinhead National Front gangs of the 70s and early 80s were peaceful and law-abiding, or that the Black Shirts back in the 1930s strolled through the East End and other areas of high Jewish immigration seeking merely to pass the time of day?
  • Options
    MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,584
    SeanT said:

    fpt on the sainted Gina Miller


    Threats against her are obviously vile and wrong, but she is a fucking liar.

    Here she is in the Guardian today, bleating away about how her legal campaign had nothing to do with stopping Brexit.


    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/24/supreme-court-brexit-judgment-constitution-gina-miller

    "Throughout this entire legal saga, I have kept resolutely to the facts. I have also, from the start, made it clear that I respect the unambiguous decision that the people of the United Kingdom took in the referendum on 23 June 2016."

    Really, Gina? Is that actually true? Here you are in an interview with Reuters just after you launched your challenge.

    "Gina Miller, a co-founder of London fund manager SCM Private, is the main claimant in a growing queue of litigants hoping to force Prime Minister Theresa May to let parliament decide when, how and WHETHER to leave the EU, rather than taking such decisions herself following last month's referendum.

    In her first interview since taking her case to London's High Court, Miller said she wanted Britain to remain in the EU and the best decision would be to renegotiate membership and reform the EU...

    Miller outlined three possible outcomes [of her legal challenge]: Brexit, but arrived at in a considered manner followed by triggering Article 50; the middle ground of a so called "Brexit-Lite"; or another type of EU membership."


    "I would prefer us to have a different sort of membership," she said."

    Just a total, total liar.


    Miller: "wanted Britain to remain in the EU and the best decision would be to renegotiate membership and reform the EU"

    Cameron tried that. It failed. That's why we voted to Leave.

    Dingbat.

  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,096

    Blue_rog said:

    SeanT said:

    fpt on the sainted Gina Miller


    Threats against her are obviously vile and wrong, but she is a fucking liar.

    Here she is in the Guardian today, bleating away about how her legal campaign had nothing to do with stopping Brexit.


    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/24/supreme-court-brexit-judgment-constitution-gina-miller

    "Throughout this entire legal saga, I have kept resolutely to the facts. I have also, from the start, made it clear that I respect the unambiguous decision that the people of the United Kingdom took in the referendum on 23 June 2016."

    Really, Gina? Is that actually true? Here you are in an interview with Reuters just after you launched your challenge.

    "Gina Miller, a co-founder of London fund manager SCM Private, is the main claimant in a growing queue of litigants hoping to force Prime Minister Theresa May to let parliament decide when, how and WHETHER to leave the EU, rather than taking such decisions herself following last month's referendum.

    In her first interview since taking her case to London's High Court, Miller said she wanted Britain to remain in the EU and the best decision would be to renegotiate membership and reform the EU...

    Miller outlined three possible outcomes [of her legal challenge]: Brexit, but arrived at in a considered manner followed by triggering Article 50; the middle ground of a so called "Brexit-Lite"; or another type of EU membership."


    "I would prefer us to have a different sort of membership," she said."

    Just a total, total liar.

    Two posts in a row about death threats, both seeking to minimise their significance. Some posters need urgently to recalibrate their morality.
    Don't be ridiculous! You can abhor the threat of violence but also fundamentally disagree with the political position a person has taken. If you say we can't, then what's the point of any parliamentary debate.

    I agree with SeanT that Ms Miller is a liar but this doesn't mean that I want her dead or minimise the seriousness of the threats made against her. If anything, these threats reduce the power of other arguments.
    We have already seen one prominent Remainer killed in cold blood. Leavers have a responsibility to condemn such threats without qualification.

    "Bad about the death threats but she's a bad woman" doesn't cut it.
    "Prominent" is over egging it a bit. "She wasn't yet a household name" as Prime Minister Cameron said.

    The prominence of her views came from her being killed in cold blood.
  • Options

    SeanT said:

    Blue_rog said:

    SeanT said:

    fpt on the sainted Gina Miller


    Threats against her are obviously vile and wrong, but she is a fucking liar.

    Here she is in the Guardian today, bleating away about how her legal campaign had nothing to do with stopping Brexit.


    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/24/supreme-court-brexit-judgment-constitution-gina-miller

    "Throughout 2016."

    Really, Gina? Is that actually true? Here you are in an interview with Reuters just after you launched your challenge.

    "Gina referendum.

    In her first interview since taking her case to London's High Court, Miller said she wanted Britain to remain in the EU and the best decision would be to renegotiate membership and reform the EU...

    Miller outlined three possible outcomes [of her legal challenge]: Brexit, but arrived at in a considered manner followed by triggering Article 50; the middle ground of a so called "Brexit-Lite"; or another type of EU membership."


    "I would prefer us to have a different sort of membership," she said."

    Just a total, total liar.

    Two posts in a row about death threats, both seeking to minimise their significance. Some posters need urgently to recalibrate their morality.
    Don't debate.

    I agree with SeanT that Ms Miller is a liar but this doesn't mean that I want her dead or minimise the seriousness of the threats made against her. If anything, these threats reduce the power of other arguments.
    We have already seen one prominent Remainer killed in cold blood. Leavers have a responsibility to condemn such threats without qualification.

    "Bad about the death threats but she's a bad woman" doesn't cut it.
    lol. This is PB, you pompous dork. It's not the floor of the House of Commons. Get over yourself.
    If a Muslim were to come on here and write "yes, ISIS's death threats against the West are deplorable but Brutain is degenerate and immoral", you'd explode so hard with fury they'd be clearing up your entrails from the walls of your hotel room.

    He'd explode, but not with fury. The sheer, unadulterated pleasure such a statement would provoke would be something to see. It would be this morning's posts to the power of 893.

  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,910
    edited January 2017

    Mortimer said:

    This is the one that looks like a mini Paul Nuttall?

    Sensible.
    That's the one.

    Speaking as a working class Northener, is a shame that we don't have more working class Northerners in Parliament.
    I'd say you're more middle class.

    Private schooling and your Dad being a Doctor in Dore isn't errm "working class" !
    Now if your Dad had come here and headed down the pits whilst living in Shirebrook...
  • Options
    stodgestodge Posts: 12,841
    Morning again all :)

    I'm tempted to cut and paste my previous from the previous thread but other people do it so I won't. It's on the previous thread at the top (or the bottom if you re going through Vanilla).

    Thank you to rottenborough for the kind word.

    "Redefining social democracy for the 2020s" - a task to keep anyone alive and active I would say.

    I've no problem with Gina Miller, her case or the outcome. I sometimes think all some people have is the anger - no solutions, respect or compassion, just anger. If we could take the anger and convert it to useful energy, we'd have no worries. The problem is you can't run a coherent society just by being angry every time someone says or does something you don't like.

    May will trigger A50 as and when and she'll have plenty of support in Parliament - the LDs may vote against, others may abstain but she has plenty of votes to work with.

    The question of a referendum on the final treaty hangs in the air - nobody wants it now because they are still tired from the 2016 referendum and simply want May to "get on with it" but what comes out the other side of A50 is of huge political and economic significance.

    It requires proper and extensive Parliamentary scrutiny as a minimum but as I've often argued, it's more than a dry economic document. Its style and tone will define Britain to the world and to ourselves in the 2020s and beyond and that requires a proper national debate.

    If all the Conservatives have to offer in the 2020s is low tax, low regulation, minimal public services and a sweat shop economy as the only way to attract foreign business and investment, that's not a country I want to live in and a policy I could support.

    May has said she respects workers' rights but only "under her leadership". I fear a future Conservative leader sacrificing employment laws and protection on the altar of competitiveness in a global economy (or Union bashing).
  • Options
    logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,709
    Ally_B said:

    SeanT said:

    fpt on the sainted Gina Miller

    "Throughout this entire legal saga, I have kept resolutely to the facts. I have also, from the start, made it clear that I respect the unambiguous decision that the people of the United Kingdom took in the referendum on 23 June 2016."

    Really, Gina? Is that actually true?

    (I edited your post to make my point)

    The answer is without any doubt whatsoever false. The referendum never gave an unambiguous result because it was never intended to return a no result! All we know from the referendum was that 48% supported staying in the EU whilst 52% voted for 'something else'. What makes it confusing is that the 'something else' ranges across the spectrum from WTO rules to EEA membership and all that I can most certainly be certain of is that 52% din't vote for what the PM is proposing. (That certainty comes from me speaking to a number of Leavers all of whom have different ideas about where they want us to end up). Had the referendum offered a choice of, say five different outcomes it is a moot point whether any of the no options would have exceeded the vote for the single yes choice but I digress.

    Clearly the PM is not the right person to decide on the outcome, that is Parliament's responsibility. That is why they need a bill to trigger the start of negotiations and why it is right and proper for our elected representatives to make their concerns, checks and balances known and taken into account throughout the whole process. If anyone does like that then perhaps you should move to a more authoritarian state, like Turkey.
    "48% supported staying in the EU whilst 52% voted for 'something else'"
    That is undoubtedly the case and that is why Parliament must decide (unless you Leavers would like another referendum with a list of options - decided by AV?)
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,302
    On Gina Miller, I unreservedly condemn those who wish her harm. As I also condemned the dangerous and irresponsible headlines against the High Court judges and their judgement last year. I am also pleased - and proud - of how the Supreme Court went about deliberating and issuing their judgement. It puts both the US Supreme Court and the ECJ to shame.

    However, that doesn't mean I can't have my own personal opinion of Gina Miller: I think she acted with a haughty disdain for the referendum vote, and her motive was clearly to obfuscate or block it. In addition, in her interviews yesterday she came across with a self-assured sense of superiority and arrogance.

    She may have actually ended up doing all of us a favour, by clarifying the legalities of Brexit, but let's not pretend she's a Saint taking a hit for the team for the cause of constitutional integrity.
  • Options
    Pulpstar said:

    Mortimer said:

    This is the one that looks like a mini Paul Nuttall?

    Sensible.
    That's the one.

    Speaking as a working class Northener, is a shame that we don't have more working class Northerners in Parliament.
    I'd say you're more middle class.

    Private schooling and your Dad being a Doctor in Dore isn't errm "working class" !
    Now if your Dad had come here and headed down the pits whilst living in Shirebrook...
    It's a joke. On another forum someone couldn't quite comprehend that I was of immigrant stock.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937
    SeanT said:

    I see my link to that July 20th Reuters piece on Gina Miller has disappeared.


    Here it is. Just for the historical record, to show I'm not fibbing.

    http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-legal-idUKKCN10119V

    Has it just disappeared this morning (cue conspiracy theories), did you have it written down somewhere, or did you get the information from another source?
  • Options
    Blue_rogBlue_rog Posts: 2,019
    SeanT said:

    Patrick said:

    We have already seen one prominent Remainer killed in cold blood. Leavers have a responsibility to condemn such threats without qualification.

    "Bad about the death threats but she's a bad woman" doesn't cut it.
    Do you say the same about lefty threats and violence towards those on the right? Kill Thatcher, Farage is scum, the making of universities unsafe for non-progressives, muggings of Trump supporters in the USA, Momentum bricks through moderate Labour MPs windows, etc? If we're all a bit honest it's the left that has threatened and delivered violence far, far more than the right historically. This ugly new phenomenon is a bit shocking because it is the first time we have seen violence threatened by non-progressives. That you only now find it shocking says alot.

    Are you being serious? Or are you telling me that the skinhead National Front gangs of the 70s and early 80s were peaceful and law-abiding, or that the Black Shirts back in the 1930s strolled through the East End and other areas of high Jewish immigration seeking merely to pass the time of day?
    Have to agree with you there. Both far left and far right have historically dished out plenty of threats and violence.

    What is shocking about today's climate is that these threats and menaces, hitherto confined to extremes, have now become acceptable discourse in mainstream politics. And this is where the Left leads the way - the vile abuse WITHIN Labour circles has no parallel within the Tory party. Yet.
    I blame twitter
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,910
    I think in hindsight Miller's case was very welcome indeed.

    It has given some legal clarity on Brexit, and proscribed the devolved parliaments roles (Though I'm still a bit unsure regarding the Northern Ireland para).

    A legal challenge would probably have just come at a later stage which would have meant alot less clarity also.

    If a side effect of Brexit is to have those eleven fine legal minds ultimately deciding more of the law than Brussels, that will be no bad thing.
  • Options
    John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503
    edited January 2017
    SeanT said:

    Patrick said:

    We have already seen one prominent Remainer killed in cold blood. Leavers have a responsibility to condemn such threats without qualification.

    "Bad about the death threats but she's a bad woman" doesn't cut it.
    Do you say the same about lefty threats and violence towards those on the right? Kill Thatcher, Farage is scum, the making of universities unsafe for non-progressives, muggings of Trump supporters in the USA, Momentum bricks through moderate Labour MPs windows, etc? If we're all a bit honest it's the left that has threatened and delivered violence far, far more than the right historically. This ugly new phenomenon is a bit shocking because it is the first time we have seen violence threatened by non-progressives. That you only now find it shocking says alot.

    Are you being serious? Or are you telling me that the skinhead National Front gangs of the 70s and early 80s were peaceful and law-abiding, or that the Black Shirts back in the 1930s strolled through the East End and other areas of high Jewish immigration seeking merely to pass the time of day?
    Have to agree with you there. Both far left and far right have historically dished out plenty of threats and violence.

    What is shocking about today's climate is that these threats and menaces, hitherto confined to extremes, have now become acceptable discourse in mainstream politics. And this is where the Left leads the way - the vile abuse WITHIN Labour circles has no parallel within the Tory party. Yet.
    I haven't always cleaved to it, but my rule of thumb is 'would I say this if we were arguing in the pub face to face?'. Sadly, both Roger and Tyson are my occasional kryptonite :s.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,600
    Russia is seeking to influence the outcome of several key elections in European countries this year with fake news, a special task force set up by the European Union has warned.

    The EU is reportedly allocating more funds to its East StratCom task force to counter the disinformation, amid fears Russia will target elections in France, Germany and the Netherlands

    “There is an enormous, far-reaching, at least partly organized, disinformation campaign against the EU, its politicians and its principles,” a source close to the task force told Germany’s Spiegel magazine.


    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/24/russia-targetting-european-elections-fake-news-eu-task-force/
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,302
    edited January 2017
    Ally_B said:

    SeanT said:

    fpt on the sainted Gina Miller

    "Throughout this entire legal saga, I have kept resolutely to the facts. I have also, from the start, made it clear that I respect the unambiguous decision that the people of the United Kingdom took in the referendum on 23 June 2016."

    Really, Gina? Is that actually true?

    (I edited your post to make my point)

    All we know from the referendum was that 48% supported staying in the EU whilst 52% voted for 'something else'.
    The 52% voted to Leave the European Union. Implicit within that was removing the UK from the jurisdiction of the ECJ, ceasing major budgetary contributions to the EU, obtaining freedom over trade, and regaining decisions over border control. All of which were prominent in the campaign materials of Leave.

    The public overwhelmingly support Theresa May's position.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,911
    edited January 2017

    I feel sorry for those who punters last night who bet based on this bullshit.

    Why feel sorry for people? I bet based on it by laying Ukip/backing labour to take some of the edge off my earlier back of Ukip at 2.6.

    In the right hands it was v handy.

  • Options
    SeanT said:

    Patrick said:

    We have already seen one prominent Remainer killed in cold blood. Leavers have a responsibility to condemn such threats without qualification.

    "Bad about the death threats but she's a bad woman" doesn't cut it.
    Do you say the same about lefty threats and violence towards those on the right? Kill Thatcher, Farage is scum, the making of universities unsafe for non-progressives, muggings of Trump supporters in the USA, Momentum bricks through moderate Labour MPs windows, etc? If we're all a bit honest it's the left that has threatened and delivered violence far, far more than the right historically. This ugly new phenomenon is a bit shocking because it is the first time we have seen violence threatened by non-progressives. That you only now find it shocking says alot.

    Are you being serious? Or are you telling me that the skinhead National Front gangs of the 70s and early 80s were peaceful and law-abiding, or that the Black Shirts back in the 1930s strolled through the East End and other areas of high Jewish immigration seeking merely to pass the time of day?
    Have to agree with you there. Both far left and far right have historically dished out plenty of threats and violence.

    What is shocking about today's climate is that these threats and menaces, hitherto confined to extremes, have now become acceptable discourse in mainstream politics. And this is where the Left leads the way - the vile abuse WITHIN Labour circles has no parallel within the Tory party. Yet.

    Labour has a long tradition of playing the man not the ball. It's entwined in the party's political culture. It reflects part of where it came from. The Methodists and the Fabians might grimace, but working men and women have always called a spade a spade in conversations with each other: it's the language of the shop-floor. What we have seen over recent years is entryism from the far left and that has altered the tone and increased the violence of the language - and social media has amplified it. It's impossible to compare today with yesterday because things like Twitter, Facebook and the rolling 24 hour news cycle have changed everything.

  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    On topic, it's always wise to look carefully at sources of such data. "Polls" in the Express have an ignoble history. The purported headline figures of this particular "poll" looked fishy and no pollster was named nor tables released. I can't say I have much sympathy with those who placed money on the basis of it - they knew, or should have known, the risks.

    Labour Leave have probably shot themselves in the foot.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,910
    isam said:

    I feel sorry for those who punters last night who bet based on this bullshit.

    Why feel sorry for people? I bet based on it by laying Ukip/backing labour to take some of the edge off my earlier back of Ukip at 2.6.

    In the right hands it was v handy.

    Serendipitous :)

    It's sent me a touch underwater ;)
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,302
    Jonathan said:

    We live in dark times. An MP was killed on the street.

    Everyone has a responsibility to dial it down.

    Amen to that.
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    edited January 2017
    SeanT said:

    Patrick said:

    We have already seen one prominent Remainer killed in cold blood. Leavers have a responsibility to condemn such threats without qualification.

    "Bad about the death threats but she's a bad woman" doesn't cut it.
    Do you say the same about lefty threats and violence towards those on the right? Kill Thatcher, Farage is scum, the making of universities unsafe for non-progressives, muggings of Trump supporters in the USA, Momentum bricks through moderate Labour MPs windows, etc? If we're all a bit honest it's the left that has threatened and delivered violence far, far more than the right historically. This ugly new phenomenon is a bit shocking because it is the first time we have seen violence threatened by non-progressives. That you only now find it shocking says alot.

    Are you being serious? Or are you telling me that the skinhead National Front gangs of the 70s and early 80s were peaceful and law-abiding, or that the Black Shirts back in the 1930s strolled through the East End and other areas of high Jewish immigration seeking merely to pass the time of day?
    Have to agree with you there. Both far left and far right have historically dished out plenty of threats and violence.

    What is shocking about today's climate is that these threats and menaces, hitherto confined to extremes, have now become acceptable discourse in mainstream politics. And this is where the Left leads the way - the vile abuse WITHIN Labour circles has no parallel within the Tory party. Yet.
    The MAGAs got sick of being vilified after many weeks and started disrupting HRC events with Bill is a R....... signs and chants. The Right simply stopped turning the other cheek - they've never descended to the levels of Leftists that I can see so far.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,182
    edited January 2017
    Pulpstar said:

    Mortimer said:

    This is the one that looks like a mini Paul Nuttall?

    Sensible.
    That's the one.

    Speaking as a working class Northener, is a shame that we don't have more working class Northerners in Parliament.
    I'd say you're more middle class.

    Private schooling and your Dad being a Doctor in Dore isn't errm "working class" !
    Now if your Dad had come here and headed down the pits whilst living in Shirebrook...
    Cllr Dr Hitchin ‏@stephen_hitchin Jan 15
    More
    Having spoken to family, friends & colleagues in Stoke, I've decided to apply to be the Labour candidate in the forthcoming by-election #NHS
    43 replies 112 retweets 217 likes
    Reply 43 Retweet 112
    Like 217

    Cllr Dr Hitchin ‏@stephen_hitchin 56m56 minutes ago
    More
    With all sincerity, I withdraw my candidacy for #StokeCentral . Hope you can understand my reasons. Thank you & BW.
  • Options
    MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,584

    On Gina Miller, I unreservedly condemn those who wish her harm. As I also condemned the dangerous and irresponsible headlines against the High Court judges and their judgement last year. I am also pleased - and proud - of how the Supreme Court went about deliberating and issuing their judgement. It puts both the US Supreme Court and the ECJ to shame.

    However, that doesn't mean I can't have my own personal opinion of Gina Miller: I think she acted with a haughty disdain for the referendum vote, and her motive was clearly to obfuscate or block it. In addition, in her interviews yesterday she came across with a self-assured sense of superiority and arrogance.

    She may have actually ended up doing all of us a favour, by clarifying the legalities of Brexit, but let's not pretend she's a Saint taking a hit for the team for the cause of constitutional integrity.


    So we should describe the benefits of this case, and add to them: Despite Miller.

  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,910

    On topic, it's always wise to look carefully at sources of such data. "Polls" in the Express have an ignoble history. The purported headline figures of this particular "poll" looked fishy and no pollster was named nor tables released. I can't say I have much sympathy with those who placed money on the basis of it - they knew, or should have known, the risks.

    Labour Leave have probably shot themselves in the foot.

    Bit of an annoying "poll" when you've already backed Labour/laid UKIP tho :p
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,302
    On topic, is the Daily Express ever right about anything?

    It's amazing anyone buys the paper.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,938
    PlatoSaid said:

    SeanT said:

    Patrick said:

    We have already seen one prominent Remainer killed in cold blood. Leavers have a responsibility to condemn such threats without qualification.

    "Bad about the death threats but she's a bad woman" doesn't cut it.
    Do you say the same about lefty threats and violence towards those on the right? Kill Thatcher, Farage is scum, the making of universities unsafe for non-progressives, muggings of Trump supporters in the USA, Momentum bricks through moderate Labour MPs windows, etc? If we're all a bit honest it's the left that has threatened and delivered violence far, far more than the right historically. This ugly new phenomenon is a bit shocking because it is the first time we have seen violence threatened by non-progressives. That you only now find it shocking says alot.

    Are you being serious? Or are you telling me that the skinhead National Front gangs of the 70s and early 80s were peaceful and law-abiding, or that the Black Shirts back in the 1930s strolled through the East End and other areas of high Jewish immigration seeking merely to pass the time of day?
    Have to agree with you there. Both far left and far right have historically dished out plenty of threats and violence.

    What is shocking about today's climate is that these threats and menaces, hitherto confined to extremes, have now become acceptable discourse in mainstream politics. And this is where the Left leads the way - the vile abuse WITHIN Labour circles has no parallel within the Tory party. Yet.
    The MAGAs got sick of being vilified after many weeks and started disrupting HRC events with Bill is a R....... signs and chants. The Right simply stopped turning the other cheek - they've never descended to the levels of Leftists that I can see so far.
    Yes of course, the Left started it all, and it's all their fault.

    It all makes sense now.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,910

    Pulpstar said:

    Mortimer said:

    This is the one that looks like a mini Paul Nuttall?

    Sensible.
    That's the one.

    Speaking as a working class Northener, is a shame that we don't have more working class Northerners in Parliament.
    I'd say you're more middle class.

    Private schooling and your Dad being a Doctor in Dore isn't errm "working class" !
    Now if your Dad had come here and headed down the pits whilst living in Shirebrook...
    Cllr Dr Hitchin ‏@stephen_hitchin Jan 15
    More
    Having spoken to family, friends & colleagues in Stoke, I've decided to apply to be the Labour candidate in the forthcoming by-election #NHS
    43 replies 112 retweets 217 likes
    Reply 43 Retweet 112
    Like 217

    Cllr Dr Hitchin ‏@stephen_hitchin 56m56 minutes ago
    More
    With all sincerity, I withdraw my candidacy for #StokeCentral . Hope you can understand my reasons. Thank you & BW.
    I'm sure he was fine, looking like Paul Nuttall Junior probably wasn't a good thing though. Sensible.
  • Options
    John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503

    On topic, is the Daily Express ever right about anything?

    It's amazing anyone buys the paper.

    The Express is just the Right's mad, racist aunt reincarnated as a newspaper.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,938

    Jonathan said:

    We live in dark times. An MP was killed on the street.

    Everyone has a responsibility to dial it down.

    Amen to that.
    +1

    Sometimes I'm reminded of my six year old. Whenever anyone does anything he doesn't like (like snatching a toy he's playing with) he has a tendency to react with violence, to lash out, and then to justify their behaviour saying it's just "payback".

    Instead of blaming "the other side" (Trump supporter, Remoaners, etc. etc. etc.), perhaps we'd be better off not feeding the cycle of recriminations.
  • Options
    stodgestodge Posts: 12,841
    Politics has always been a "rough trade" as John Major once said.

    Indeed, some of what has gone on in the name of political discourse in the past makes what is happening now seem tame.

    On reflection, I'd rather have the sound than silence. For too long, too many people had no voice at all. Now, technology has given more people a voice than ever before and democracy, perversely, benefits if more voices are heard.

    Yes, it's discordant and at times dangerous but I'd rather hear the anger than silence. If you can hear and feel the anger, you can try to understand it and deal with it. You may not be able to reason with it but perhaps as the angry hear other voices, they might reason with it themselves.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Mortimer said:

    This is the one that looks like a mini Paul Nuttall?

    Sensible.
    That's the one.

    Speaking as a working class Northener, is a shame that we don't have more working class Northerners in Parliament.
    I'd say you're more middle class.

    Private schooling and your Dad being a Doctor in Dore isn't errm "working class" !
    Now if your Dad had come here and headed down the pits whilst living in Shirebrook...
    Cllr Dr Hitchin ‏@stephen_hitchin Jan 15
    More
    Having spoken to family, friends & colleagues in Stoke, I've decided to apply to be the Labour candidate in the forthcoming by-election #NHS
    43 replies 112 retweets 217 likes
    Reply 43 Retweet 112
    Like 217

    Cllr Dr Hitchin ‏@stephen_hitchin 56m56 minutes ago
    More
    With all sincerity, I withdraw my candidacy for #StokeCentral . Hope you can understand my reasons. Thank you & BW.
    I'm sure he was fine, looking like Paul Nuttall Junior probably wasn't a good thing though. Sensible.
    Sensible for him: it'd be stupid to become an MP (which is a highly unusual and public job) unless your heart is really in it. Good luck to him and his family.

    On the other hand, if he'd won and then resigned later (as happened in Corby) then we'd have had another by-election in a few years and more betting opportunities. Damned selfish of him, if you ask me. ;)
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,302

    On Gina Miller, I unreservedly condemn those who wish her harm. As I also condemned the dangerous and irresponsible headlines against the High Court judges and their judgement last year. I am also pleased - and proud - of how the Supreme Court went about deliberating and issuing their judgement. It puts both the US Supreme Court and the ECJ to shame.

    However, that doesn't mean I can't have my own personal opinion of Gina Miller: I think she acted with a haughty disdain for the referendum vote, and her motive was clearly to obfuscate or block it. In addition, in her interviews yesterday she came across with a self-assured sense of superiority and arrogance.

    She may have actually ended up doing all of us a favour, by clarifying the legalities of Brexit, but let's not pretend she's a Saint taking a hit for the team for the cause of constitutional integrity.


    So we should describe the benefits of this case, and add to them: Despite Miller.

    Yes, that said: one can only but admire her tenacity in pursuing the case.

    But, I expect I wouldn't get on with her down the pub. It wouldn't be a meeting of minds and the sort of things she'd say about Leavers in private would probably make even the most ardent pb Remainers blush.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,910
    edited January 2017
    If it was a Facebook poll on the express' page then Labour being 10 points behind is probably very good.

    I'd expect Nuttall to get 80+% of the vote !

    Leave got 80+% on various football fan forums voodoo polls.
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    rcs1000 said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    SeanT said:

    Patrick said:

    We have already seen one prominent Remainer killed in cold blood. Leavers have a responsibility to condemn such threats without qualification.

    "Bad about the death threats but she's a bad woman" doesn't cut it.
    Do you say the same about lefty threats and violence towards those on the right? Kill Thatcher, Farage is scum, the making of universities unsafe for non-progressives, muggings of Trump supporters in the USA, Momentum bricks through moderate Labour MPs windows, etc? If we're all a bit honest it's the left that has threatened and delivered violence far, far more than the right historically. This ugly new phenomenon is a bit shocking because it is the first time we have seen violence threatened by non-progressives. That you only now find it shocking says alot.

    Are you being serious? Or are you telling me that the skinhead National Front gangs of the 70s and early 80s were peaceful and law-abiding, or that the Black Shirts back in the 1930s strolled through the East End and other areas of high Jewish immigration seeking merely to pass the time of day?
    Have to agree with you there. Both far left and far right have historically dished out plenty of threats and violence.

    What is shocking about today's climate is that these threats and menaces, hitherto confined to extremes, have now become acceptable discourse in mainstream politics. And this is where the Left leads the way - the vile abuse WITHIN Labour circles has no parallel within the Tory party. Yet.
    The MAGAs got sick of being vilified after many weeks and started disrupting HRC events with Bill is a R....... signs and chants. The Right simply stopped turning the other cheek - they've never descended to the levels of Leftists that I can see so far.
    Yes of course, the Left started it all, and it's all their fault.

    It all makes sense now.
    Are you using Imperial or European shoe sizes here? As you well know, my observation is that when pushed too far, good manners go out the window - and there are a great many examples of false stories about Trumpers fabricated by the Left.

    I find their behaviour awful - yet somehow its the Right's fault that they responded a bit.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,910
    SeanT said:

    rcs1000 said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    SeanT said:

    Patrick said:

    We have already seen one prominent Remainer killed in cold blood. Leavers have a responsibility to condemn such threats without qualification.

    "Bad about the death threats but she's a bad woman" doesn't cut it.
    Do you say the same about lefty threats and violence towards those on the right? Kill Thatcher, Farage is scum, the making of universities unsafe for non-progressives, muggings of Trump supporters in the USA, Momentum bricks through moderate Labour MPs windows, etc? If we're all a bit honest it's the left that has threatened and delivered violence far, far more than the right historically. This ugly new phenomenon is a bit shocking because it is the first time we have seen violence threatened by non-progressives. That you only now find it shocking says alot.

    Are you being serious? Or are you telling me that the skinhead National Front gangs of the 70s and early 80s were peaceful and law-abiding, or that the Black Shirts back in the 1930s strolled through the East End and other areas of high Jewish immigration seeking merely to pass the time of day?
    Have to agree with you there. Both far left and far right have historically dished out plenty of threats and violence.

    What is shocking about today's climate is that these threats and menaces, hitherto confined to extremes, have now become acceptable discourse in mainstream politics. And this is where the Left leads the way - the vile abuse WITHIN Labour circles has no parallel within the Tory party. Yet.
    The MAGAs got sick of being vilified after many weeks and started disrupting HRC events with Bill is a R....... signs and chants. The Right simply stopped turning the other cheek - they've never descended to the levels of Leftists that I can see so far.
    Yes of course, the Left started it all, and it's all their fault.

    It all makes sense now.
    The Left is worse now, I'd say. Check that Twitter vid of the alt right guy getting punched, and the joyous celebrations right across social media. Sensible, serious people were saying it's great he got assaulted. Quite amazing.
    They tracked the puncher down. He's a cuckolded accountant whose hobby is 'subscat'...
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937
    stodge said:

    Politics has always been a "rough trade" as John Major once said.

    Indeed, some of what has gone on in the name of political discourse in the past makes what is happening now seem tame.

    On reflection, I'd rather have the sound than silence. For too long, too many people had no voice at all. Now, technology has given more people a voice than ever before and democracy, perversely, benefits if more voices are heard.

    Yes, it's discordant and at times dangerous but I'd rather hear the anger than silence. If you can hear and feel the anger, you can try to understand it and deal with it. You may not be able to reason with it but perhaps as the angry hear other voices, they might reason with it themselves.

    We may be hearing more voices than before. However what we're hearing are those who shout the loudest.

    It can make others, who may be quieter but still have valid contributions to make, less likely to take part because the reaction to even reasonable views can be so visceral.

    There is not a 1:1 correlation between the loudmouths and the angry.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,938
    SeanT said:

    Pulpstar said:

    SeanT said:

    rcs1000 said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    SeanT said:

    Patrick said:

    We have already seen one prominent Remainer killed in cold blood. Leavers have a responsibility to condemn such threats without qualification.

    "Bad about the death threats but she's a bad woman" doesn't cut it.
    Do you say the same about lefty threats and violence towards those on the right? Kill Thatcher, Farage is scum, the making of universities unsafe for non-progressives, muggings of Trump supporters in the USA, Momentum bricks through moderate Labour MPs windows, etc? If we're all a bit honest it's the left that has threatened and delivered violence far, far more than the right historically. This ugly new phenomenon is a bit shocking because it is the first time we have seen violence threatened by non-progressives. That you only now find it shocking says alot.

    Are you being serious? Or are you telling me that the skinhead National Front gangs of the 70s and early 80s were peaceful and law-abiding, or that the Black Shirts back in the 1930s strolled through the East End and other areas of high Jewish immigration seeking merely to pass the time of day?
    Have to agree with you there. Both far left and far right have historically dished out plenty of threats and violence.

    What is shocking about today's climate is that these threats and menaces, hitherto confined to extremes, have now become acceptable discourse in mainstream politics. And this is where the Left leads the way - the vile abuse WITHIN Labour circles has no parallel within the Tory party. Yet.
    The MAGAs got sick of being vilified after many weeks and started disrupting HRC events with Bill is a R....... signs and chants. The Right simply stopped turning the other cheek - they've never descended to the levels of Leftists that I can see so far.
    Yes of course, the Left started it all, and it's all their fault.

    It all makes sense now.
    The Left is worse now, I'd say. Check that Twitter vid of the alt right guy getting punched, and the joyous celebrations right across social media. Sensible, serious people were saying it's great he got assaulted. Quite amazing.
    They tracked the puncher down. He's a cuckolded accountant whose hobby is 'subscat'...
    subscat????
    Don't be coy, Sean
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,910
    edited January 2017
    SeanT said:

    Pulpstar said:

    SeanT said:

    rcs1000 said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    SeanT said:

    Patrick said:

    We have already seen one prominent Remainer killed in cold blood. Leavers have a responsibility to condemn such threats without qualification.

    "Bad about the death threats but she's a bad woman" doesn't cut it.
    Do you say the same about lefty threats and violence towards those on the right? Kill Thatcher, Farage is scum, the making of universities unsafe for non-progressives, muggings of Trump supporters in the USA, Momentum bricks through moderate Labour MPs windows, etc? If we're all a bit honest it's the left that has threatened and delivered violence far, far more than the right historically. This ugly new phenomenon is a bit shocking because it is the first time we have seen violence threatened by non-progressives. That you only now find it shocking says alot.

    Are you being serious? Or are you telling me that the skinhead National Front gangs of the 70s and early 80s were peaceful and law-abiding, or that the Black Shirts back in the 1930s strolled through the East End and other areas of high Jewish immigration seeking merely to pass the time of day?
    Have to agree with you there. Both far left and far right have historically dished out plenty of threats and violence.

    What is shocking about today's climate is that these threats and menaces, hitherto confined to extremes, have now become acceptable discourse in mainstream politics. And this is where the Left leads the way - the vile abuse WITHIN Labour circles has no parallel within the Tory party. Yet.
    The MAGAs got sick of being vilified after many weeks and started disrupting HRC events with Bill is a R....... signs and chants. The Right simply stopped turning the other cheek - they've never descended to the levels of Leftists that I can see so far.
    Yes of course, the Left started it all, and it's all their fault.

    It all makes sense now.
    The Left is worse now, I'd say. Check that Twitter vid of the alt right guy getting punched, and the joyous celebrations right across social media. Sensible, serious people were saying it's great he got assaulted. Quite amazing.
    They tracked the puncher down. He's a cuckolded accountant whose hobby is 'subscat'...
    subscat????
    Submissus stersus

    Zwei Damen einen Tasse.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    SeanT said:

    rcs1000 said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    SeanT said:

    Patrick said:

    We have already seen one prominent Remainer killed in cold blood. Leavers have a responsibility to condemn such threats without qualification.

    "Bad about the death threats but she's a bad woman" doesn't cut it.
    Do you say the same about lefty threats and violence towards those on the right? Kill Thatcher, Farage is scum, the making of universities unsafe for non-progressives, muggings of Trump supporters in the USA, Momentum bricks through moderate Labour MPs windows, etc? If we're all a bit honest it's the left that has threatened and delivered violence far, far more than the right historically. This ugly new phenomenon is a bit shocking because it is the first time we have seen violence threatened by non-progressives. That you only now find it shocking says alot.

    Are you being serious? Or are you telling me that the skinhead National Front gangs of the 70s and early 80s were peaceful and law-abiding, or that the Black Shirts back in the 1930s strolled through the East End and other areas of high Jewish immigration seeking merely to pass the time of day?
    Have to agree with you there. Both far left and far right have historically dished out plenty of threats and violence.

    What is shocking about today's climate is that these threats and menaces, hitherto confined to extremes, have now become acceptable discourse in mainstream politics. And this is where the Left leads the way - the vile abuse WITHIN Labour circles has no parallel within the Tory party. Yet.
    The MAGAs got sick of being vilified after many weeks and started disrupting HRC events with Bill is a R....... signs and chants. The Right simply stopped turning the other cheek - they've never descended to the levels of Leftists that I can see so far.
    Yes of course, the Left started it all, and it's all their fault.

    It all makes sense now.
    The Left is worse now, I'd say. Check that Twitter vid of the alt right guy getting punched, and the joyous celebrations right across social media. Sensible, serious people were saying it's great he got assaulted. Quite amazing.
    It's not a left-right thing. It's an in-office, out-of-office thing. When Blair was in power, the right were angry.

    What's new is that the Web had given a public voice and permanent record to people who might have just impotently shouted abuse at Question Time.

  • Options
    CD13CD13 Posts: 6,351
    "It requires proper and extensive Parliamentary scrutiny as a minimum."

    No, it doesn't. All you'll get is political theatre. Labour prefacing everything with "of course, we accept the referendum result, but ..." and the LDs already refusing to invoke Article 50 no matter what.

    And the SNP having 50 amendments without even seeing the bill.

    All the world may be a stage, but we've already seen this play. In other words, it's a waste of time.

    The current government will take us out. If we don't like the deal, we'll probably vote against them at the next GE.

    We don't need a practice for the GE campaign now.

    Just get on with it.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,182

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Mortimer said:

    This is the one that looks like a mini Paul Nuttall?

    Sensible.
    That's the one.

    Speaking as a working class Northener, is a shame that we don't have more working class Northerners in Parliament.
    I'd say you're more middle class.

    Private schooling and your Dad being a Doctor in Dore isn't errm "working class" !
    Now if your Dad had come here and headed down the pits whilst living in Shirebrook...
    Cllr Dr Hitchin ‏@stephen_hitchin Jan 15
    More
    Having spoken to family, friends & colleagues in Stoke, I've decided to apply to be the Labour candidate in the forthcoming by-election #NHS
    43 replies 112 retweets 217 likes
    Reply 43 Retweet 112
    Like 217

    Cllr Dr Hitchin ‏@stephen_hitchin 56m56 minutes ago
    More
    With all sincerity, I withdraw my candidacy for #StokeCentral . Hope you can understand my reasons. Thank you & BW.
    I'm sure he was fine, looking like Paul Nuttall Junior probably wasn't a good thing though. Sensible.
    Sensible for him: it'd be stupid to become an MP (which is a highly unusual and public job) unless your heart is really in it. Good luck to him and his family.

    On the other hand, if he'd won and then resigned later (as happened in Corby) then we'd have had another by-election in a few years and more betting opportunities. Damned selfish of him, if you ask me. ;)
    His constituency is going under proposed plans. He could have done three years and then back to A&E.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,800
    Pulpstar said:

    SeanT said:

    rcs1000 said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    SeanT said:

    Patrick said:

    We have already seen one prominent Remainer killed in cold blood. Leavers have a responsibility to condemn such threats without qualification.

    "Bad about the death threats but she's a bad woman" doesn't cut it.
    Do you say the same about lefty threats and violence towards those on the right? Kill Thatcher, Farage is scum, the making of universities unsafe for non-progressives, muggings of Trump supporters in the USA, Momentum bricks through moderate Labour MPs windows, etc? If we're all a bit honest it's the left that has threatened and delivered violence far, far more than the right historically. This ugly new phenomenon is a bit shocking because it is the first time we have seen violence threatened by non-progressives. That you only now find it shocking says alot.

    Are you being serious? Or are you telling me that the skinhead National Front gangs of the 70s and early 80s were peaceful and law-abiding, or that the Black Shirts back in the 1930s strolled through the East End and other areas of high Jewish immigration seeking merely to pass the time of day?
    Have to agree with you there. Both far left and far right have historically dished out plenty of threats and violence.

    What is shocking about today's climate is that these threats and menaces, hitherto confined to extremes, have now become acceptable discourse in mainstream politics. And this is where the Left leads the way - the vile abuse WITHIN Labour circles has no parallel within the Tory party. Yet.
    The MAGAs got sick of being vilified after many weeks and started disrupting HRC events with Bill is a R....... signs and chants. The Right simply stopped turning the other cheek - they've never descended to the levels of Leftists that I can see so far.
    Yes of course, the Left started it all, and it's all their fault.

    It all makes sense now.
    The Left is worse now, I'd say. Check that Twitter vid of the alt right guy getting punched, and the joyous celebrations right across social media. Sensible, serious people were saying it's great he got assaulted. Quite amazing.
    They tracked the puncher down. He's a cuckolded accountant whose hobby is 'subscat'...
    In the USA, too many people regard their political opponents being subhuman.
  • Options
    MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,584
    SeanT said:

    Pulpstar said:

    SeanT said:

    rcs1000 said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    SeanT said:

    Patrick said:

    We have already seen one prominent Remainer killed in cold blood. Leavers have a responsibility to condemn such threats without qualification.

    "Bad about the death threats but she's a bad woman" doesn't cut it.
    Do you say the same about lefty threats and violence towards those on the right? Kill Thatcher, Farage is scum, the making of universities unsafe for non-progressives, muggings of Trump supporters in the USA, Momentum bricks through moderate Labour MPs windows, etc? If we're all a bit honest it's the left that has threatened and delivered violence far, far more than the right historically. This ugly new phenomenon is a bit shocking because it is the first time we have seen violence threatened by non-progressives. That you only now find it shocking says alot.

    Are you being serious? Or are you telling me that the skinhead National Front gangs of the 70s and early 80s were peaceful and law-abiding, or that the Black Shirts back in the 1930s strolled through the East End and other areas of high Jewish immigration seeking merely to pass the time of day?
    Have to agree with you there. Both far left and far right have historically dished out plenty of threats and violence.

    What is shocking about today's climate is that these threats and menaces, hitherto confined to extremes, have now become acceptable discourse in mainstream politics. And this is where the Left leads the way - the vile abuse WITHIN Labour circles has no parallel within the Tory party. Yet.
    The MAGAs got sick of being vilified after many weeks and started disrupting HRC events with Bill is a R....... signs and chants. The Right simply stopped turning the other cheek - they've never descended to the levels of Leftists that I can see so far.
    Yes of course, the Left started it all, and it's all their fault.

    It all makes sense now.
    The Left is worse now, I'd say. Check that Twitter vid of the alt right guy getting punched, and the joyous celebrations right across social media. Sensible, serious people were saying it's great he got assaulted. Quite amazing.
    They tracked the puncher down. He's a cuckolded accountant whose hobby is 'subscat'...
    subscat????

    Looking after the feline on the Trident submarines?

  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    Pulpstar said:

    SeanT said:

    rcs1000 said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    SeanT said:

    Patrick said:

    We have already seen one prominent Remainer killed in cold blood. Leavers have a responsibility to condemn such threats without qualification.

    "Bad about the death threats but she's a bad woman" doesn't cut it.
    Do you say the same about lefty threats and violence towards those on the right? Kill Thatcher, Farage is scum, the making of universities unsafe for non-progressives, muggings of Trump supporters in the USA, Momentum bricks through moderate Labour MPs windows, etc? If we're all a bit honest it's the left that has threatened and delivered violence far, far more than the right historically. This ugly new phenomenon is a bit shocking because it is the first time we have seen violence threatened by non-progressives. That you only now find it shocking says alot.

    Are you being serious? Or are you telling me that the skinhead National Front gangs of the 70s and early 80s were peaceful and law-abiding, or that the Black Shirts back in the 1930s strolled through the East End and other areas of high Jewish immigration seeking merely to pass the time of day?
    Have to agree with you there. Both far left and far right have historically dished out plenty of threats and violence.

    What is shocking about today's climate is that these threats and menaces, hitherto confined to extremes, have now become acceptable discourse in mainstream politics. And this is where the Left leads the way - the vile abuse WITHIN Labour circles has no parallel within the Tory party. Yet.
    The MAGAs got sick of being vilified after many weeks and started disrupting HRC events with Bill is a R....... signs and chants. The Right simply stopped turning the other cheek - they've never descended to the levels of Leftists that I can see so far.
    Yes of course, the Left started it all, and it's all their fault.

    It all makes sense now.
    The Left is worse now, I'd say. Check that Twitter vid of the alt right guy getting punched, and the joyous celebrations right across social media. Sensible, serious people were saying it's great he got assaulted. Quite amazing.
    They tracked the puncher down. He's a cuckolded accountant whose hobby is 'subscat'...
    And IIRC, @websearchr got banned by Twitter for asking who he was so could be reported to police. It's a weird world out there in @jack land
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,182

    On topic, is the Daily Express ever right about anything?

    It's amazing anyone buys the paper.

    Sometimes it does snow slightly when they say on front page that worst arctic blast in living memory will destroy Britain.
  • Options
    SeanT said:

    Pulpstar said:

    SeanT said:

    rcs1000 said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    SeanT said:

    Patrick said:

    We have already seen one prominent Remainer killed in cold blood. Leavers have a responsibility to condemn such threats without qualification.

    "Bad about the death threats but she's a bad woman" doesn't cut it.
    Do you say the same about lefty threats and violence towards those on the right? Kill Thatcher, Farage is scum, the making of universities unsafe for non-progressives, muggings of Trump supporters in the USA, Momentum bricks through moderate Labour MPs windows, etc? If we're all a bit honest it's the left that has threatened and delivered violence far, far more than the right historically. This ugly new phenomenon is a bit shocking because it is the first time we have seen violence threatened by non-progressives. That you only now find it shocking says alot.

    Are you being serious? Or are you telling me that the skinhead National Front gangs of the 70s and early 80s were peaceful and law-abiding, or that the Black Shirts back in the 1930s strolled through the East End and other areas of high Jewish immigration seeking merely to pass the time of day?
    Have to agree with you there. Both far left and far right have historically dished out plenty of threats and violence.

    What is shocking about today's climate is that these threats and menaces, hitherto confined to extremes, have now become acceptable discourse in mainstream politics. And this is where the Left leads the way - the vile abuse WITHIN Labour circles has no parallel within the Tory party. Yet.
    The MAGAs got sick of being vilified after many weeks and started disrupting HRC events with Bill is a R....... signs and chants. The Right simply stopped turning the other cheek - they've never descended to the levels of Leftists that I can see so far.
    Yes of course, the Left started it all, and it's all their fault.

    It all makes sense now.
    The Left is worse now, I'd say. Check that Twitter vid of the alt right guy getting punched, and the joyous celebrations right across social media. Sensible, serious people were saying it's great he got assaulted. Quite amazing.
    They tracked the puncher down. He's a cuckolded accountant whose hobby is 'subscat'...
    subscat????
    Don't google it on a work laptop. The shit will hit the fan.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,302

    SeanT said:

    Patrick said:

    We have already seen one prominent Remainer killed in cold blood. Leavers have a responsibility to condemn such threats without qualification.

    "Bad about the death threats but she's a bad woman" doesn't cut it.
    Do you say the same about lefty threats and violence towards those on the right? Kill Thatcher, Farage is scum, the making of universities unsafe for non-progressives, muggings of Trump supporters in the USA, Momentum bricks through moderate Labour MPs windows, etc? If we're all a bit honest it's the left that has threatened and delivered violence far, far more than the right historically. This ugly new phenomenon is a bit shocking because it is the first time we have seen violence threatened by non-progressives. That you only now find it shocking says alot.

    Are you being serious? Or are you telling me that the skinhead National Front gangs of the 70s and early 80s were peaceful and law-abiding, or that the Black Shirts back in the 1930s strolled through the East End and other areas of high Jewish immigration seeking merely to pass the time of day?
    Have to agree with you there. Both far left and far right have historically dished out plenty of threats and violence.

    What is shocking about today's climate is that these threats and menaces, hitherto confined to extremes, have now become acceptable discourse in mainstream politics. And this is where the Left leads the way - the vile abuse WITHIN Labour circles has no parallel within the Tory party. Yet.

    Labour has a long tradition of playing the man not the ball. It's entwined in the party's political culture. It reflects part of where it came from. The Methodists and the Fabians might grimace, but working men and women have always called a spade a spade in conversations with each other: it's the language of the shop-floor. What we have seen over recent years is entryism from the far left and that has altered the tone and increased the violence of the language - and social media has amplified it. It's impossible to compare today with yesterday because things like Twitter, Facebook and the rolling 24 hour news cycle have changed everything.

    That's very true. And on that, Labour should recognise that working men and women might also use that same frank language with respect to immigration in a way that might make the more painfully right-on urbane Labourites blush.

    That doesn't make their base fascists or racists. But it is the sort of thing that is causing their relationship with Labour to fracture.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937

    SeanT said:

    Pulpstar said:

    SeanT said:

    rcs1000 said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    SeanT said:

    Patrick said:

    We have already seen one prominent Remainer killed in cold blood. Leavers have a responsibility to condemn such threats without qualification.

    "Bad about the death threats but she's a bad woman" doesn't cut it.
    Do you say the same about lefty threats and violence towards those on the right? Kill Thatcher, Farage is scum, the making of universities unsafe for non-progressives, muggings of Trump supporters in the USA, Momentum bricks through moderate Labour MPs windows, etc? If we're all a bit honest it's the left that has threatened and delivered violence far, far more than the right historically. This ugly new phenomenon is a bit shocking because it is the first time we have seen violence threatened by non-progressives. That you only now find it shocking says alot.

    Are you being serious? Or are you telling me that the skinhead National Front gangs of the 70s and early 80s were peaceful and law-abiding, or that the Black Shirts back in the 1930s strolled through the East End and other areas of high Jewish immigration seeking merely to pass the time of day?
    Have to agree with you there. Both far left and far right have historically dished out plenty of threats and violence.

    What is shocking about today's climate is that these threats and menaces, hitherto confined to extremes, have now become acceptable discourse in mainstream politics. And this is where the Left leads the way - the vile abuse WITHIN Labour circles has no parallel within the Tory party. Yet.
    The MAGAs got sick of being vilified after many weeks and started disrupting HRC events with Bill is a R....... signs and chants. The Right simply stopped turning the other cheek - they've never descended to the levels of Leftists that I can see so far.
    Yes of course, the Left started it all, and it's all their fault.

    It all makes sense now.
    The Left is worse now, I'd say. Check that Twitter vid of the alt right guy getting punched, and the joyous celebrations right across social media. Sensible, serious people were saying it's great he got assaulted. Quite amazing.
    They tracked the puncher down. He's a cuckolded accountant whose hobby is 'subscat'...
    subscat????
    Don't google it on a work laptop. The shit will hit the fan.
    Still none the wiser. It can't be worse than what's in my imagination...
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383

    SeanT said:

    Pulpstar said:

    SeanT said:

    rcs1000 said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    SeanT said:

    Patrick said:

    We have already seen one prominent Remainer killed in cold blood. Leavers have a responsibility to condemn such threats without qualification.

    "Bad about the death threats but she's a bad woman" doesn't cut it.
    Do you say the same about lefty threats and violence towards those on the right? Kill Thatcher, Farage is scum, the making of universities unsafe for non-progressives, muggings of Trump supporters in the USA, Momentum bricks through moderate Labour MPs windows, etc? If we're all a bit honest it's the left that has threatened and delivered violence far, far more than the right historically. This ugly new phenomenon is a bit shocking because it is the first time we have seen violence threatened by non-progressives. That you only now find it shocking says alot.

    Are you being serious? Or are you telling me that the skinhead National Front gangs of the 70s and early 80s were peaceful and law-abiding, or that the Black Shirts back in the 1930s strolled through the East End and other areas of high Jewish immigration seeking merely to pass the time of day?
    Have to agree with you there. Both far left and far right have historically dished out plenty of threats and violence.

    What is shocking about today's climate is that these threats and menaces, hitherto confined to extremes, have now become acceptable discourse in mainstream politics. And this is where the Left leads the way - the vile abuse WITHIN Labour circles has no parallel within the Tory party. Yet.
    The MAGAs got sick of being vilified after many weeks and started disrupting HRC events with Bill is a R....... signs and chants. The Right simply stopped turning the other cheek - they've never descended to the levels of Leftists that I can see so far.
    Yes of course, the Left started it all, and it's all their fault.

    It all makes sense now.
    The Left is worse now, I'd say. Check that Twitter vid of the alt right guy getting punched, and the joyous celebrations right across social media. Sensible, serious people were saying it's great he got assaulted. Quite amazing.
    They tracked the puncher down. He's a cuckolded accountant whose hobby is 'subscat'...
    subscat????

    Looking after the feline on the Trident submarines?

    :smiley: I have pix of submarine cats with tiny hammocks
  • Options

    SeanT said:

    Pulpstar said:

    SeanT said:

    rcs1000 said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    SeanT said:

    Patrick said:

    We have already seen one prominent Remainer killed in cold blood. Leavers have a responsibility to condemn such threats without qualification.

    "Bad about the death threats but she's a bad woman" doesn't cut it.
    Do you say the same about lefty threats and violence towards those on the right? Kill Thatcher, Farage is scum, the making of universities unsafe for non-progressives, muggings of Trump supporters in the USA, Momentum bricks through moderate Labour MPs windows, etc? If we're all a bit honest it's the left that has threatened and delivered violence far, far more than the right historically. This ugly new phenomenon is a bit shocking because it is the first time we have seen violence threatened by non-progressives. That you only now find it shocking says alot.

    Are you being serious? Or are you telling me that the skinhead National Front gangs of the 70s and early 80s were peaceful and law-abiding, or that the Black Shirts back in the 1930s strolled through the East End and other areas of high Jewish immigration seeking merely to pass the time of day?
    Have to agree with you there. Both far left and far right have historically dished out plenty of threats and violence.

    What is shocking about today's climate is that these threats and menaces, hitherto confined to extremes, have now become acceptable discourse in mainstream politics. And this is where the Left leads the way - the vile abuse WITHIN Labour circles has no parallel within the Tory party. Yet.
    The MAGAs got sick of being vilified after many weeks and started disrupting HRC events with Bill is a R....... signs and chants. The Right simply stopped turning the other cheek - they've never descended to the levels of Leftists that I can see so far.
    Yes of course, the Left started it all, and it's all their fault.

    It all makes sense now.
    The Left is worse now, I'd say. Check that Twitter vid of the alt right guy getting punched, and the joyous celebrations right across social media. Sensible, serious people were saying it's great he got assaulted. Quite amazing.
    They tracked the puncher down. He's a cuckolded accountant whose hobby is 'subscat'...
    subscat????
    Don't google it on a work laptop. The shit will hit the fan.
    Still none the wiser. It can't be worse than what's in my imagination...
    Think of it as a pound shop Mark Oaten.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Mortimer said:

    This is the one that looks like a mini Paul Nuttall?

    Sensible.
    That's the one.

    Speaking as a working class Northener, is a shame that we don't have more working class Northerners in Parliament.
    I'd say you're more middle class.

    Private schooling and your Dad being a Doctor in Dore isn't errm "working class" !
    Now if your Dad had come here and headed down the pits whilst living in Shirebrook...
    Cllr Dr Hitchin ‏@stephen_hitchin Jan 15
    More
    Having spoken to family, friends & colleagues in Stoke, I've decided to apply to be the Labour candidate in the forthcoming by-election #NHS
    43 replies 112 retweets 217 likes
    Reply 43 Retweet 112
    Like 217

    Cllr Dr Hitchin ‏@stephen_hitchin 56m56 minutes ago
    More
    With all sincerity, I withdraw my candidacy for #StokeCentral . Hope you can understand my reasons. Thank you & BW.
    I'm sure he was fine, looking like Paul Nuttall Junior probably wasn't a good thing though. Sensible.
    Sensible for him: it'd be stupid to become an MP (which is a highly unusual and public job) unless your heart is really in it. Good luck to him and his family.

    On the other hand, if he'd won and then resigned later (as happened in Corby) then we'd have had another by-election in a few years and more betting opportunities. Damned selfish of him, if you ask me. ;)
    His constituency is going under proposed plans. He could have done three years and then back to A&E.
    A good point.

    Though Mensch only managed two years in Corby. There's time for him t get the job and give us a brilliantly meaningless by-election. ;)
  • Options
    logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,709
    rcs1000 said:

    Jonathan said:

    We live in dark times. An MP was killed on the street.

    Everyone has a responsibility to dial it down.

    Amen to that.
    +1

    Sometimes I'm reminded of my six year old. Whenever anyone does anything he doesn't like (like snatching a toy he's playing with) he has a tendency to react with violence, to lash out, and then to justify their behaviour saying it's just "payback".

    Instead of blaming "the other side" (Trump supporter, Remoaners, etc. etc. etc.), perhaps we'd be better off not feeding the cycle of recriminations.
    Plus another one.
    Minor point - why 'Remoaner', why not 'Remainer'?
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,302
    John_M said:

    On topic, is the Daily Express ever right about anything?

    It's amazing anyone buys the paper.

    The Express is just the Right's mad, racist aunt reincarnated as a newspaper.
    I am very much of the Right. So I don't go in for clichéd Left's caricatures.

    I just think it's a really, really crap newspaper.

    By contrast, the Daily Mail is actually quite impressive journalism - and painfully effective in promoting its causes - which explains why it is actively hated by the Left, whereas the Express is just laughed at.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,096
    CD13 said:

    And the SNP having 50 amendments without even seeing the bill.

    Word is, four of those 50 SNP amendments have er, financial irregularities - and so will have to become independent amendments....
  • Options
    SeanT said:

    Brilliant. I googled "subscat". I kind of guessed, from the word, but....

    Thanks PB. Eeesh.

    I forgot you were one of PB's innocents.
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,596

    CD13 said:

    And the SNP having 50 amendments without even seeing the bill.

    Word is, four of those 50 SNP amendments have er, financial irregularities - and so will have to become independent amendments....
    50 Shades of Tartan
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,302
    rcs1000 said:

    Jonathan said:

    We live in dark times. An MP was killed on the street.

    Everyone has a responsibility to dial it down.

    Amen to that.
    +1

    Sometimes I'm reminded of my six year old. Whenever anyone does anything he doesn't like (like snatching a toy he's playing with) he has a tendency to react with violence, to lash out, and then to justify their behaviour saying it's just "payback".

    Instead of blaming "the other side" (Trump supporter, Remoaners, etc. etc. etc.), perhaps we'd be better off not feeding the cycle of recriminations.
    As Humans, that is our starting point for natural justice and is linked to our survival instinct because we instinctively want others to know their actions have consequences.

    But, we were also given rather large brains to overcome our more animalistic brain stems for a reason. It just takes time to learn how to use them.
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    SeanT said:

    Patrick said:

    We have already seen one prominent Remainer killed in cold blood. Leavers have a responsibility to condemn such threats without qualification.

    "Bad about the death threats but she's a bad woman" doesn't cut it.
    Do you say the same about lefty threats and violence towards those on the right? Kill Thatcher, Farage is scum, the making of universities unsafe for non-progressives, muggings of Trump supporters in the USA, Momentum bricks through moderate Labour MPs windows, etc? If we're all a bit honest it's the left that has threatened and delivered violence far, far more than the right historically. This ugly new phenomenon is a bit shocking because it is the first time we have seen violence threatened by non-progressives. That you only now find it shocking says alot.

    Are you being serious? Or are you telling me that the skinhead National Front gangs of the 70s and early 80s were peaceful and law-abiding, or that the Black Shirts back in the 1930s strolled through the East End and other areas of high Jewish immigration seeking merely to pass the time of day?
    Have to agree with you there. Both far left and far right have historically dished out plenty of threats and violence.

    What is shocking about today's climate is that these threats and menaces, hitherto confined to extremes, have now become acceptable discourse in mainstream politics. And this is where the Left leads the way - the vile abuse WITHIN Labour circles has no parallel within the Tory party. Yet.
    You're right, left wingers are murdering Tory MPs all the time.
  • Options

    John_M said:

    On topic, is the Daily Express ever right about anything?

    It's amazing anyone buys the paper.

    The Express is just the Right's mad, racist aunt reincarnated as a newspaper.
    I am very much of the Right. So I don't go in for clichéd Left's caricatures.

    I just think it's a really, really crap newspaper.

    By contrast, the Daily Mail is actually quite impressive journalism - and painfully effective in promoting its causes - which explains why it is actively hated by the Left, whereas the Express is just laughed at.
    As someone of the Left, I fully agree.

    The Express is an example of what happens when you run a business purely on the basis of short term profit.
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Flipping heck, multiple anti trump protestors have been shot over the last few months without comment then one Nazi gets punched in the face and it's the end of civilisation
  • Options
    John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503
    OT: Was just looking at the ONS mortality rates for 2015 published today. My county has the lowest mortality rate in Wales. I live 25 miles from the area that has the highest (896 vs 1195 per 100k). I find this simple fact mind boggling. For contrast, central London has the lowest figure I could find - 524/100k.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937
    Off-topic:

    The police often get criticised on here, and that criticism is often valid. It's therefore good to read a story where the police seem to have got everything right. They were lucky, but they made most of their luck:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-5667c315-a69c-4e5d-a683-e4e7771eb04d

    (Warning: it's one of the Beeb's scrolling multimedia stories)
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,096
    SeanT said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Jonathan said:

    We live in dark times. An MP was killed on the street.

    Everyone has a responsibility to dial it down.

    Amen to that.
    +1

    Sometimes I'm reminded of my six year old. Whenever anyone does anything he doesn't like (like snatching a toy he's playing with) he has a tendency to react with violence, to lash out, and then to justify their behaviour saying it's just "payback".

    Instead of blaming "the other side" (Trump supporter, Remoaners, etc. etc. etc.), perhaps we'd be better off not feeding the cycle of recriminations.
    Plus another one.
    Minor point - why 'Remoaner', why not 'Remainer'?
    Remoaner is a brilliant word, and the PB attempt to ban it (now sensibly abandoned?) was absurd.

    Because it has all the attributes of an excellent neologism: it describes a new social phenomenon - the Remain voter who will not except the vote, and hopes to thwart it - in a simple, memorable, three syllable way. The sure sign of a great coinage is that the Remoaners themselves are using it.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/24/remoaner-article-50-brexit-labour

    "Remoaner" is the "Whig" or "Tory" of our time, I predict this word will enter the OED in the next intake.
    "who will not except accept the vote...."

    tut tut...good job you're not a writer!
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,600
    Happy Burns Night!

    https://twitter.com/foreignoffice/status/824189760721866752

    There's a message from Mrs McTurnip too....but she drones on about internationalism, kinship & brotherhood....so obvious "a child might understand, The Deil had business on his hand."
This discussion has been closed.