Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Suddenly Oprah Winfrey becomes second favourite for next Presi

13

Comments

  • JohnOJohnO Posts: 3,136

    FF43 said:

    Scott_P said:
    The Minister for Winging It has rather let the cat out of the bag on what the government really thinks about a No Deal Brexit.

    Still there's something odd about that letter where David Davis wants to sue the EU Commission for implementing Article 50. I know Davis isn't the smartest cookie, but what is he on about, who leaked the letter and why?
    He is, quite rightly, complaining that they are illegally advocating the favouring of non-UK firms (for example in procurement) whilst we still remain full members. There is absolutely no doubt that he is right that this is discrimination against the UK, which is supposed to be forbidden under EU law. Of course there's not a snowflake's chance in hell of successfully challenging this in the ECJ, but that isn't the point. It's a political/negotiating point, a counter to the EU trying to claim that we can't engage in trade talks with non-EU countries under EU law whilst we remain members (and more importantly, during the transition). Sauce for geese and ganders.
    I see your MP has been given TWO jobs!
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 35,854

    He is, quite rightly, complaining that they are illegally advocating the favouring of non-UK firms (for example in procurement) whilst we still remain full members.



    They wanted to enshrine it in UK law...
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 4,980

    Is there nothing for Mercer? Or have I missed it?

    Mercy?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694
    Sean_F said:

    TOPPING said:

    Sean_F said:

    TOPPING said:

    DavidL said:

    TOPPING said:

    DavidL said:

    TOPPING said:

    DavidL said:

    TOPPING said:

    DavidL said:



    @ DavidL They're all too busy ogling the actresses in little black dresses and no underwear on the Mail sidebar.

    @Cyclefree was talking about that yesterday. The mind set of actor folk is truly bizarre. I am wearing black because I am serious and have something to say but have you noticed my body piercings and new tattoo (henna natch)?
    What does it matter what they wear?
    Ask the Daily Mail. It seems to think that it does. And tens of millions of internet users seem to agree.

    But showing off a lot of the body you have worked so hard to achieve whilst complaining about the objectification of women strikes me as amusing. I should be less immature.
    They are complaining about abuse. What would you prefer them to wear?
    You really shouldn't mistake me wact is these celebrities sell sex and sex appeal. Nothing excuses the Harvey Weinsteins of this world but there are much murkier waters to traverse.
    So in other words you are saying that women should cover up if they are being abused and exploited. They can sell sex and sex appeal all day long and wear only a straw hat and a big smile and that should make no difference.

    Because you know we don't want to go down the "th** we** as**** f** *t" route, do we?
    .
    1st The Cyclefree Dragoon Guards notwithstanding ( :smile: ), my point is that I started to pen a response yesterday about the Golden Globes which said much the same thing: for women objecting about being objectified they seemed to be wearing very few clothes.

    .

    And the cryptic bit was: they were asking for it.
    That reminds me of when David Starkey did his phone in programme on LBC. One caller said she liked to go to nightclubs dressed as a medieval wench, at the same time, complaining about the attention she got from men. Starkey replied that unfortunately, most men haven't taken degrees in feminist sociology.
    What is the moral of that story?
    That if you're trying to attract attention to yourself, don't complain about attracting attention to yourself.
    Am I the only one who remembers this, from a decade ago?

  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 10,335
    FWIW I try to avoid companies (from cafes to barbers) who only offer the Mail and the Sun, but with trains being a natural monopoly on most routes I don't have that option. I can imagine how annoying it would be for, say, Casino Royale if they only offered the Guardian and the Morning Star.

    I'd have thought that just quietly deciding and not making a thing of it would be their best policy, but that's a matter for their brand image department. Since most of us don't have a choice, they can actually do whatever they like within the limits of their licence without any redress. Monopoly capitalism sucks, eh?

    On topic, I'd think 10-1 is pretty skimpy at this stage when we don't even know if she wants to run, let alone what happens when the media have done their usual muckraking. She might be fine but it's early to say. 20-1 sounds more like it.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 32,240
    edited January 9

    FF43 said:

    Scott_P said:
    The Minister for Winging It has rather let the cat out of the bag on what the government really thinks about a No Deal Brexit.

    Still there's something odd about that letter where David Davis wants to sue the EU Commission for implementing Article 50. I know Davis isn't the smartest cookie, but what is he on about, who leaked the letter and why?
    He is, quite rightly, complaining that they are illegally advocating the favouring of non-UK firms (for example in procurement) whilst we still remain full members. There is absolutely no doubt that he is right that this is discrimination against the UK, which is supposed to be forbidden under EU law. Of course there's not a snowflake's chance in hell of successfully challenging this in the ECJ, but that isn't the point. It's a political/negotiating point, a counter to the EU trying to claim that we can't engage in trade talks with non-EU countries under EU law whilst we remain members (and more importantly, during the transition). Sauce for geese and ganders.
    Don’t waste your breath. To them the EU can do no wrong.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,493
    edited January 9

    Rory Stewart MP becomes Minister of State at Ministry of Justice.

    How long until he decides this politics lark is a waste of time?

    He is prisons minister which is actually an important role in an area that interests him
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694
    DavidL said:

    On topic, 10/1 is about right. And about 60% of that uncertainty is whether or not she runs. If she does, much depends on what happens on the other side of the ticket. If she takes on Trump, she wins. But Trump may be brought down in office (unlikely) or in primaries (more likely but still well under 50%).

    If there's a non-Trump GOP candidate, a more conventional Dem politician might be a better bet. But - and this is a big but - what Oprah said and did at the Golden Globes cannot be unsaid or undone. She was a voice for millions (and in a way and on a subject that Hillary could never really be, given Bill's history).

    Is there anyone else that could do that? Bernie, perhaps. But Bernie is old and his politics of niche appeal. Oprah has genuinely lived the American Dream. Daddy didn't set her up in business. In fact, daddy and mummy gave her a rotten start in life.

    If she wants it, her weakest card is her inexperience in politics, coming after Trump has demonstrated the dangers of a non-professional politician. But Oprah is a very very different character to Trump and might be able to assuage fears on that score. We should take the prospect of her becoming the 46th president very seriously.

    I can see the merits of your arguments but 10/1 strikes me as extremely skinny for a person unlikely to run. She has an extremely successful brand and business that has made her fabulously wealthy, almost certainly way wealthier than Trump. Why would she want to risk that by entering partisan politics? I think it is more like 20-30/1 that she will even run. If she did and really went for it she would be a contender.
    Quite. Definitely a lay at 10 or 11. I doubt she’ll run, she’s nothing to gain and an awful lot to lose from the scrutiny of standing for public office.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,493
    JohnO said:

    Is there nothing for Mercer? Or have I missed it?

    Nothing for Johnny (not even the whips office) nor Rees-Mogg (but was he offered a job and declined?).
    Jacob Rees Mogg is staying out of this government ready to take over as Leader of the Opposition as and when the time comes
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 13,789
    DavidL said:

    On topic, 10/1 is about right. And about 60% of that uncertainty is whether or not she runs. If she does, much depends on what happens on the other side of the ticket. If she takes on Trump, she wins. But Trump may be brought down in office (unlikely) or in primaries (more likely but still well under 50%).

    If there's a non-Trump GOP candidate, a more conventional Dem politician might be a better bet. But - and this is a big but - what Oprah said and did at the Golden Globes cannot be unsaid or undone. She was a voice for millions (and in a way and on a subject that Hillary could never really be, given Bill's history).

    Is there anyone else that could do that? Bernie, perhaps. But Bernie is old and his politics of niche appeal. Oprah has genuinely lived the American Dream. Daddy didn't set her up in business. In fact, daddy and mummy gave her a rotten start in life.

    If she wants it, her weakest card is her inexperience in politics, coming after Trump has demonstrated the dangers of a non-professional politician. But Oprah is a very very different character to Trump and might be able to assuage fears on that score. We should take the prospect of her becoming the 46th president very seriously.

    I can see the merits of your arguments but 10/1 strikes me as extremely skinny for a person unlikely to run. She has an extremely successful brand and business that has made her fabulously wealthy, almost certainly way wealthier than Trump. Why would she want to risk that by entering partisan politics? I think it is more like 20-30/1 that she will even run. If she did and really went for it she would be a contender.
    There is a momentum to her speech that may ultimately if not force her to run, then certainly make it difficult and damaging not to. I agree that 10/1 looks skinny but I think she comfortably beats any Democrat that's been speculated about until now.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 8,081
    Is Greening now perfectly positioned to challenge May? She could play Thatcher to May's Heath.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 35,854
    RobD said:

    Don’t waste your breath. To them the EU can do no wrong.

    LOL

    The EU are planning for "Brexit means Brexit" and "No Deal is better than a bad deal", and somehow you are pissed at them, not at the fuckwits in Government who came up with those lines?
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 6,651

    FF43 said:

    Scott_P said:
    The Minister for Winging It has rather let the cat out of the bag on what the government really thinks about a No Deal Brexit.

    Still there's something odd about that letter where David Davis wants to sue the EU Commission for implementing Article 50. I know Davis isn't the smartest cookie, but what is he on about, who leaked the letter and why?
    He is, quite rightly, complaining that they are illegally advocating the favouring of non-UK firms (for example in procurement) whilst we still remain full members. There is absolutely no doubt that he is right that this is discrimination against the UK, which is supposed to be forbidden under EU law. Of course there's not a snowflake's chance in hell of successfully challenging this in the ECJ, but that isn't the point. It's a political/negotiating point, a counter to the EU trying to claim that we can't engage in trade talks with non-EU countries under EU law whilst we remain members (and more importantly, during the transition). Sauce for geese and ganders.
    No. Davis' complaint is that the EU are telling companies that certain contracts will lapse along with our EU treaties as mandated by Article 50. The EU advice isn't illegal as David reluctantly admits. His real complaint is that the EU doesn't allow for possible extensions of arrangements during transition or in the eventual trade deal. But in terms of the risk and the principle that nothing is agreed until it is agreed, the EU is correct. Those contracts will lapse unless otherwise negotiated.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,493
    edited January 9
    Jonathan said:

    Is Greening now perfectly positioned to challenge May? She could play Thatcher to May's Heath.

    Except she is even more Heath than May and there is now a no confidence vote not a direct challenge
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 13,789
    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Cyclefree said:

    On topic, I know very little about Oprah. If Trump can be President I don't see why Oprah can't.

    Still I can't help being surprised at what makes someone papabile these days. One fine speech? Is that it?

    I have made ca. 100 very fine speeches to a variety of audiences globally (from Australia to the US) over the last 4 years. If fine speech-making is the measure of things and one speech = US Presidential candidate, what does 100 speeches get you? Dictatorette / Dictatrix / Leaderene (?) of the World?

    PS Don't worry. Fat chance.

    PPS Apologies for the badly disguised plug for my business. A girl has gotta eat. And I have an expensive gardening and shoe habit to fund.

    :)

    I think you also need to be a billionaire:
    https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/09/2020-wealthy-democrats-steyer-winfrey-trump-328187

    (Not to mention a US citizen.)

    Still, that's good news for those who want to enjoy an innocent sprinkle unmolested, I suppose...
    Trump was the first billionaire to be elected President (though JFK was son of a billionaire in today's terms). If it is Trump then Oprah that would be back to back billionaires, which is why Sanders still has a shot as a populist outsider against big money and big business
    Oprah, if elected, would have the humblest background of any president. More so even than Lincoln.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 23,986
    Jonathan said:

    Is Greening now perfectly positioned to challenge May? She could play Thatcher to May's Heath.

    Post of the year.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 18,218
    JohnO said:

    I see your MP has been given TWO jobs!

    So she has! Excellent.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 35,854
    FF43 said:

    His real complaint is that the EU doesn't allow for possible extensions of arrangements during transition or in the eventual trade deal.

    We are still a 3rd country during transition, or we have not left.

    This is what the Brexiteers have been pitching all along. We are out in March 2019.

    And now they are whining about the consequences
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 9,910
    DavidL said:

    Cyclefree said:

    On topic, I know very little about Oprah. If Trump can be President I don't see why Oprah can't.

    Still I can't help being surprised at what makes someone papabile these days. One fine speech? Is that it?

    I have made ca. 100 very fine speeches to a variety of audiences globally (from Australia to the US) over the last 4 years. If fine speech-making is the measure of things and one speech = US Presidential candidate, what does 100 speeches get you? Dictatorette / Dictatrix / Leaderene (?) of the World?

    PS Don't worry. Fat chance.

    PPS Apologies for the badly disguised plug for my business. A girl has gotta eat. And I have an expensive gardening and shoe habit to fund.

    :)

    Dictatrix sounds good. Until I remember your extreme views on cappuccinos.
    My darlings, I am a liberal. Drink your cappuccinos to your heart's content. Sprinkle them with ground up Mars Bars for all I care. Just don't offer me one.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 9,910

    Cyclefree said:

    On topic, I know very little about Oprah. If Trump can be President I don't see why Oprah can't.

    Still I can't help being surprised at what makes someone papabile these days. One fine speech? Is that it?

    I have made ca. 100 very fine speeches to a variety of audiences globally (from Australia to the US) over the last 4 years. If fine speech-making is the measure of things and one speech = US Presidential candidate, what does 100 speeches get you? Dictatorette / Dictatrix / Leaderene (?) of the World?

    PS Don't worry. Fat chance.

    PPS Apologies for the badly disguised plug for my business. A girl has gotta eat. And I have an expensive gardening and shoe habit to fund.

    :)

    I beat you on PowerPoint presentations.

    My views on Powerpoint presentations make my views on cappuccinos seem like soft fluffy nonsense!

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,846

    DavidL said:

    On topic, 10/1 is about right. And about 60% of that uncertainty is whether or not she runs. If she does, much depends on what happens on the other side of the ticket. If she takes on Trump, she wins. But Trump may be brought down in office (unlikely) or in primaries (more likely but still well under 50%).

    If there's a non-Trump GOP candidate, a more conventional Dem politician might be a better bet. But - and this is a big but - what Oprah said and did at the Golden Globes cannot be unsaid or undone. She was a voice for millions (and in a way and on a subject that Hillary could never really be, given Bill's history).

    Is there anyone else that could do that? Bernie, perhaps. But Bernie is old and his politics of niche appeal. Oprah has genuinely lived the American Dream. Daddy didn't set her up in business. In fact, daddy and mummy gave her a rotten start in life.

    If she wants it, her weakest card is her inexperience in politics, coming after Trump has demonstrated the dangers of a non-professional politician. But Oprah is a very very different character to Trump and might be able to assuage fears on that score. We should take the prospect of her becoming the 46th president very seriously.

    I can see the merits of your arguments but 10/1 strikes me as extremely skinny for a person unlikely to run. She has an extremely successful brand and business that has made her fabulously wealthy, almost certainly way wealthier than Trump. Why would she want to risk that by entering partisan politics? I think it is more like 20-30/1 that she will even run. If she did and really went for it she would be a contender.
    There is a momentum to her speech that may ultimately if not force her to run, then certainly make it difficult and damaging not to. I agree that 10/1 looks skinny but I think she comfortably beats any Democrat that's been speculated about until now.
    I'm old fashioned. I like my politicians to have experience of running public bodies, of developing policy in the public sphere and having some understanding of how alliances are put together to get things done. For all her remarkable business acumen Oprah has none of this but after Trump anything is possible. Her name recognition is certainly in the stratosphere compared with any possible contender including Bernie.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 35,854
    Cyclefree said:

    My views on Powerpoint presentations make my views on cappuccinos seem like soft fluffy nonsense!

    https://www.edwardtufte.com/tufte/powerpoint
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 18,479

    Jonathan said:

    Is Greening now perfectly positioned to challenge May? She could play Thatcher to May's Heath.

    Post of the year.
    I could imagine May saying, "You'll lose," without looking up.
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 7,427
    Oprah 6/1 for the Dem's nomination (BF). What implied chance does that make her having got the nom?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,846
    Scott_P said:
    The case for my private members bill gets stronger yet. Brilliant.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,516
    @Cyclefree nails it on both cappuccinos and powerpoint. Truly a woman for world dictatrix.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 9,910
    edited January 9
    Can I just say, apropos the Daily Mail/Virgin spat, that it is nice to see an example of the point I was making in this header, only the other day - http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2018/01/03/challenges-challenges/.

    "The self-righteous intolerance of those seeking to deny others a voice is its shrill companion. In truth, both have a curiously religious approach to the idea of debate. The all too frequently used “You can’t say that.” / “I am offended” / “Bigoted” / “He’s a Marxist” / “hate speech” mantras are in danger of making mini-Torquemadas of us all.")

    Curious that "the Daily Mail appeaser of Hitler in the 1930's" line is regularly trotted out and yet "the Communists allied with Hitler while Britain was fighting him" line is never used against those who, ooh, I don't know, think that Stalin was misunderstood (the Opposition Leader's press spokesman) for instance or against those who speak at rallies with flags of Stalin behind them (the Shadow Chancellor and Leader of the Opposition) for instance.

  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 18,218

    @Cyclefree nails it on both cappuccinos and powerpoint. Truly a woman for world dictatrix.

    And she nails it on the Daily Mail/Virgin spat.

    I'm hopeful that she will show no mercy on the pineapple/pizza issue, though.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 9,910
    Nigelb said:

    Cyclefree said:

    On topic, I know very little about Oprah. If Trump can be President I don't see why Oprah can't.

    Still I can't help being surprised at what makes someone papabile these days. One fine speech? Is that it?

    I have made ca. 100 very fine speeches to a variety of audiences globally (from Australia to the US) over the last 4 years. If fine speech-making is the measure of things and one speech = US Presidential candidate, what does 100 speeches get you? Dictatorette / Dictatrix / Leaderene (?) of the World?

    PS Don't worry. Fat chance.

    PPS Apologies for the badly disguised plug for my business. A girl has gotta eat. And I have an expensive gardening and shoe habit to fund.

    :)

    I think you also need to be a billionaire:
    https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/09/2020-wealthy-democrats-steyer-winfrey-trump-328187

    (Not to mention a US citizen.)

    Still, that's good news for those who want to enjoy an innocent sprinkle unmolested, I suppose...
    For one brief moment I thought you were referring to some obscure sexual practice. And then I remembered. Chocolate.

    I solemnly promise you that if I ever stand for public office let alone have the misfortune to be elected, I will positively encourage the sprinkling of chocolate on coffee, in a spirit of serendipitous diversity.

    :)
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,009
    Another interesting thread from Mr Smithson.

    I have been thinking about this today. Funnily enough, I think Oprah's ideal opponent is Trumpton – thanks to her world-class media skills she would best him on telly and in the debates and, as a living embodiment of the American Dream (a self-made woman), she neutralises his entrepreneurial advantage that played so well in 2016 ("Trump isn't in anyone's pocket – he is independently wealthy").

    Why then do I think she is too short at 10-1? Because I am far from convinced that Trumpton will run in 2020. If he thinks he will get beat (which is quite likely against a decent Democratic opponent) I think he'll back out on health grounds*. Oprah is less effective against a professional politician who can wind her up as being another fluffy sleb rather than a serious candidate.

    (*In fact, this might be genuine. He will be 74 by then and has a terrible diet based on cheeseburgers and milkshakes, albeit a teetotal one.)
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 4,527
    Official website list of Cabinet Ministers - Lidington shown in number 2 position and I note he was also sitting opposite May in number 2 position - so looks like he'll be the PMQs stand-in.

    Other notable big rise is Gauke - now in number 8 position - looks to me as if Hammond were to go at any point (with May still PM) then Gauke (former Chief Sec) could well be favourite to be next Chancellor.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/ministers
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 35,854
    Anazina said:

    Why then do I think she is too short at 10-1? Because I am far from convinced that Trumpton will run in 2020. If he thinks he will get beat (which is quite likely against a decent Democratic opponent) I think he'll back out on health grounds*. Oprah is less effective against a professional politician who can wind her up as being another fluffy sleb rather than a serious candidate.

  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 9,910

    JohnO said:

    Is there nothing for Mercer? Or have I missed it?

    Nothing for Johnny (not even the whips office) nor Rees-Mogg (but was he offered a job and declined?).
    Surprised really. He's become a bit of a presence in the media, generally a good communicator on social media as well. Perhaps his stance on defence cuts recently went against him...a
    He's written a very good book on the border area between Cumbria and Scotland where his family are from (Crieff). The Marches. I'm just finishing it. It contains a very loving and touching portrait of his father.

    He's wasted in Justice. He should be in a department where his expertise and his knowledge of his constituency would be an asset. I think he is not in the right gang or does not have someone to promote him and have his back.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 5,492
    Scott_P said:
    So what?. different jobs , different level of responsibility..
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 35,854

    So what?. different jobs , different level of responsibility..

    Because the government have been touting gender equality...
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 14,486
    HYUFD said:

    Rory Stewart MP becomes Minister of State at Ministry of Justice.

    How long until he decides this politics lark is a waste of time?

    He is prisons minister which is actually an important role in an area that interests him
    I was wondering about this move. Surely he is a foreign affairs guy through and through? Good to get experience elsewhere I suppose. Maybe Gauke specifically asked for him when given Justice?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 14,486
    HYUFD said:

    Rory Stewart MP becomes Minister of State at Ministry of Justice.

    How long until he decides this politics lark is a waste of time?

    He is prisons minister which is actually an important role in an area that interests him
    Although only one major prison riot away from ending his ministerial career. So a tough gig.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,846
    Cyclefree said:

    JohnO said:

    Is there nothing for Mercer? Or have I missed it?

    Nothing for Johnny (not even the whips office) nor Rees-Mogg (but was he offered a job and declined?).
    Surprised really. He's become a bit of a presence in the media, generally a good communicator on social media as well. Perhaps his stance on defence cuts recently went against him...a
    He's written a very good book on the border area between Cumbria and Scotland where his family are from (Crieff). The Marches. I'm just finishing it. It contains a very loving and touching portrait of his father.

    He's wasted in Justice. He should be in a department where his expertise and his knowledge of his constituency would be an asset. I think he is not in the right gang or does not have someone to promote him and have his back.
    Err...Crieff is quite a long way from the borders. It is in Perthshire, more than 100 miles north of the borders. I had the misfortune of spending 2 miserable years at boarding school there a long time ago when Nicky Fairbairn was MP there. Now there was a character.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 27,772
    Scott_P said:

    twitter.com/mailonline/status/950775675186794497

    Couldn’t happen to a nicer chap....
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 9,910
    DavidL said:

    Cyclefree said:

    JohnO said:

    Is there nothing for Mercer? Or have I missed it?

    Nothing for Johnny (not even the whips office) nor Rees-Mogg (but was he offered a job and declined?).
    Surprised really. He's become a bit of a presence in the media, generally a good communicator on social media as well. Perhaps his stance on defence cuts recently went against him...a
    He's written a very good book on the border area between Cumbria and Scotland where his family are from (Crieff). The Marches. I'm just finishing it. It contains a very loving and touching portrait of his father.

    He's wasted in Justice. He should be in a department where his expertise and his knowledge of his constituency would be an asset. I think he is not in the right gang or does not have someone to promote him and have his back.
    Err...Crieff is quite a long way from the borders. It is in Perthshire, more than 100 miles north of the borders. I had the misfortune of spending 2 miserable years at boarding school there a long time ago when Nicky Fairbairn was MP there. Now there was a character.
    His father lived there and the book is about his walks from Hadrian's Wall up to there and from Cumbria into the borders. I bought it for my other half for Xmas; he started reading it - and then I picked it up and loved it - so he is moaning that I've stolen his present.

    (I have promised him a cappuccino in recompense but he is still harrumphing.....)
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 9,910

    @Cyclefree nails it on both cappuccinos and powerpoint. Truly a woman for world dictatrix.

    And she nails it on the Daily Mail/Virgin spat.

    I'm hopeful that she will show no mercy on the pineapple/pizza issue, though.

    I'm a Dictatrix. Not Miss Whiplash.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 18,894
    DavidL said:

    Cyclefree said:

    JohnO said:

    Is there nothing for Mercer? Or have I missed it?

    Nothing for Johnny (not even the whips office) nor Rees-Mogg (but was he offered a job and declined?).
    Surprised really. He's become a bit of a presence in the media, generally a good communicator on social media as well. Perhaps his stance on defence cuts recently went against him...a
    He's written a very good book on the border area between Cumbria and Scotland where his family are from (Crieff). The Marches. I'm just finishing it. It contains a very loving and touching portrait of his father.

    He's wasted in Justice. He should be in a department where his expertise and his knowledge of his constituency would be an asset. I think he is not in the right gang or does not have someone to promote him and have his back.
    Err...Crieff is quite a long way from the borders. It is in Perthshire, more than 100 miles north of the borders. I had the misfortune of spending 2 miserable years at boarding school there a long time ago when Nicky Fairbairn was MP there. Now there was a character.
    LOL, I am always amazed at the encyclopedic knowledge on here regarding Scotland.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694
    edited January 9

    Scott_P said:

    twitter.com/mailonline/status/950775675186794497

    Couldn’t happen to a nicer chap....
    In a big diplomatic bag heading for Heathrow, or dumped on the street outside into the hands of the Met Police?

    If it’s the latter, may I suggest that there won’t be a queue of luvvies willing to post bail for him this time around ;)
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,846
    Cyclefree said:

    DavidL said:

    Cyclefree said:

    JohnO said:

    Is there nothing for Mercer? Or have I missed it?

    Nothing for Johnny (not even the whips office) nor Rees-Mogg (but was he offered a job and declined?).
    Surprised really. He's become a bit of a presence in the media, generally a good communicator on social media as well. Perhaps his stance on defence cuts recently went against him...a
    He's written a very good book on the border area between Cumbria and Scotland where his family are from (Crieff). The Marches. I'm just finishing it. It contains a very loving and touching portrait of his father.

    He's wasted in Justice. He should be in a department where his expertise and his knowledge of his constituency would be an asset. I think he is not in the right gang or does not have someone to promote him and have his back.
    Err...Crieff is quite a long way from the borders. It is in Perthshire, more than 100 miles north of the borders. I had the misfortune of spending 2 miserable years at boarding school there a long time ago when Nicky Fairbairn was MP there. Now there was a character.
    His father lived there and the book is about his walks from Hadrian's Wall up to there and from Cumbria into the borders. I bought it for my other half for Xmas; he started reading it - and then I picked it up and loved it - so he is moaning that I've stolen his present.

    (I have promised him a cappuccino in recompense but he is still harrumphing.....)
    I loved the places in between. It was beautifully written and paced. I will have to try The Marches.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 23,986
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    On topic, I know very little about Oprah. If Trump can be President I don't see why Oprah can't.

    Still I can't help being surprised at what makes someone papabile these days. One fine speech? Is that it?

    I have made ca. 100 very fine speeches to a variety of audiences globally (from Australia to the US) over the last 4 years. If fine speech-making is the measure of things and one speech = US Presidential candidate, what does 100 speeches get you? Dictatorette / Dictatrix / Leaderene (?) of the World?

    PS Don't worry. Fat chance.

    PPS Apologies for the badly disguised plug for my business. A girl has gotta eat. And I have an expensive gardening and shoe habit to fund.

    :)

    I beat you on PowerPoint presentations.

    My views on Powerpoint presentations make my views on cappuccinos seem like soft fluffy nonsense!

    You sound a difficult lady to please.

    I'm avoiding you at the Golden Globes.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 2,225
    Jonathan said:

    Is Greening now perfectly positioned to challenge May? She could play Thatcher to May's Heath.

    I wonder too. Parties tend to favour previous oponents when the regime changes. She may benefit from that.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 27,772
    edited January 9
    Sandpit said:

    Scott_P said:

    twitter.com/mailonline/status/950775675186794497

    Couldn’t happen to a nicer chap....
    In a big diplomatic bag heading for Heathrow, or dumped on the street outside into the hands of the Met Police?

    If it’s the latter, may I suggest that there won’t be a queue of luvvies willing to post bail for him this time around ;)
    All the guardianistas have gone very quiet over their support for assange in the past couple of years...I have no idea why!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,493
    Foxy said:

    Jonathan said:

    Is Greening now perfectly positioned to challenge May? She could play Thatcher to May's Heath.

    I wonder too. Parties tend to favour previous oponents when the regime changes. She may benefit from that.
    If May goes the Tory membership will in all probability elect someone to her right and a Leaver, Greening is neither
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,493

    HYUFD said:

    Rory Stewart MP becomes Minister of State at Ministry of Justice.

    How long until he decides this politics lark is a waste of time?

    He is prisons minister which is actually an important role in an area that interests him
    I was wondering about this move. Surely he is a foreign affairs guy through and through? Good to get experience elsewhere I suppose. Maybe Gauke specifically asked for him when given Justice?
    He has expressed concern about veterans ending up in prison
  • OchEyeOchEye Posts: 1,087
    DavidL said:

    Cyclefree said:

    JohnO said:

    Is there nothing for Mercer? Or have I missed it?

    Nothing for Johnny (not even the whips office) nor Rees-Mogg (but was he offered a job and declined?).
    Surprised really. He's become a bit of a presence in the media, generally a good communicator on social media as well. Perhaps his stance on defence cuts recently went against him...a
    He's written a very good book on the border area between Cumbria and Scotland where his family are from (Crieff). The Marches. I'm just finishing it. It contains a very loving and touching portrait of his father.

    He's wasted in Justice. He should be in a department where his expertise and his knowledge of his constituency would be an asset. I think he is not in the right gang or does not have someone to promote him and have his back.
    Err...Crieff is quite a long way from the borders. It is in Perthshire, more than 100 miles north of the borders. I had the misfortune of spending 2 miserable years at boarding school there a long time ago when Nicky Fairbairn was MP there. Now there was a character.
    Met Nicky a couple of times, stone cold sober, highly intelligent and very polite, and totally pissed bouncing off the side of a train at Waverley Station, walking along the platform. Totally wasted at Westminster, probably the best analytical and legal mind of his generation.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,493

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Cyclefree said:

    On topic, I know very little about Oprah. If Trump can be President I don't see why Oprah can't.

    Still I can't help being surprised at what makes someone papabile these days. One fine speech? Is that it?

    I have made ca. 100 very fine speeches to a variety of audiences globally (from Australia to the US) over the last 4 years. If fine speech-making is the measure of things and one speech = US Presidential candidate, what does 100 speeches get you? Dictatorette / Dictatrix / Leaderene (?) of the World?

    PS Don't worry. Fat chance.

    PPS Apologies for the badly disguised plug for my business. A girl has gotta eat. And I have an expensive gardening and shoe habit to fund.

    :)

    I think you also need to be a billionaire:
    https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/09/2020-wealthy-democrats-steyer-winfrey-trump-328187

    (Not to mention a US citizen.)

    Still, that's good news for those who want to enjoy an innocent sprinkle unmolested, I suppose...
    Trump was the first billionaire to be elected President (though JFK was son of a billionaire in today's terms). If it is Trump then Oprah that would be back to back billionaires, which is why Sanders still has a shot as a populist outsider against big money and big business
    Oprah, if elected, would have the humblest background of any president. More so even than Lincoln.
    Reagan and LBJ and Truman and Clinton also had pretty humble backgrounds but what she represents now is the billionaire class Hollywood elite, just as Trump represent the corporate elite, Sanders can present himself as neither
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 23,986
    Cyclefree said:

    @Cyclefree nails it on both cappuccinos and powerpoint. Truly a woman for world dictatrix.

    And she nails it on the Daily Mail/Virgin spat.

    I'm hopeful that she will show no mercy on the pineapple/pizza issue, though.

    I'm a Dictatrix. Not Miss Whiplash.
    *mindbleach*
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 23,986
    Cyclefree said:

    Can I just say, apropos the Daily Mail/Virgin spat, that it is nice to see an example of the point I was making in this header, only the other day - http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2018/01/03/challenges-challenges/.

    "The self-righteous intolerance of those seeking to deny others a voice is its shrill companion. In truth, both have a curiously religious approach to the idea of debate. The all too frequently used “You can’t say that.” / “I am offended” / “Bigoted” / “He’s a Marxist” / “hate speech” mantras are in danger of making mini-Torquemadas of us all.")

    Curious that "the Daily Mail appeaser of Hitler in the 1930's" line is regularly trotted out and yet "the Communists allied with Hitler while Britain was fighting him" line is never used against those who, ooh, I don't know, think that Stalin was misunderstood (the Opposition Leader's press spokesman) for instance or against those who speak at rallies with flags of Stalin behind them (the Shadow Chancellor and Leader of the Opposition) for instance.

    Ooooh, you have skeletons. That sounds interesting.

    What are they? ;-)
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 7,427
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Cyclefree said:

    On topic, I know very little about Oprah. If Trump can be President I don't see why Oprah can't.

    Still I can't help being surprised at what makes someone papabile these days. One fine speech? Is that it?

    I have made ca. 100 very fine speeches to a variety of audiences globally (from Australia to the US) over the last 4 years. If fine speech-making is the measure of things and one speech = US Presidential candidate, what does 100 speeches get you? Dictatorette / Dictatrix / Leaderene (?) of the World?

    PS Don't worry. Fat chance.

    PPS Apologies for the badly disguised plug for my business. A girl has gotta eat. And I have an expensive gardening and shoe habit to fund.

    :)

    I think you also need to be a billionaire:
    https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/09/2020-wealthy-democrats-steyer-winfrey-trump-328187

    (Not to mention a US citizen.)

    Still, that's good news for those who want to enjoy an innocent sprinkle unmolested, I suppose...
    Trump was the first billionaire to be elected President (though JFK was son of a billionaire in today's terms). If it is Trump then Oprah that would be back to back billionaires, which is why Sanders still has a shot as a populist outsider against big money and big business
    Oprah, if elected, would have the humblest background of any president. More so even than Lincoln.
    Reagan and LBJ and Truman and Clinton also had pretty humble backgrounds but what she represents now is the billionaire class Hollywood elite, just as Trump represent the corporate elite, Sanders can present himself as neither
    Nixon probably another example of a seemingly middle class/well-educated president with rather more humble beginnings
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 12,962
    DavidL said:

    I'm old fashioned. I like my politicians to have experience of running public bodies, of developing policy in the public sphere and having some understanding of how alliances are put together to get things done. For all her remarkable business acumen Oprah has none of this but after Trump anything is possible. Her name recognition is certainly in the stratosphere compared with any possible contender including Bernie.

    Bernie may have experience as a Senator but what experience does he have of actually RUNNING public bodies? As far as I was aware the closest he's got to that is chairing the Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee (not insignificant, but not running a public body).

    That's why former Governor's can frequently make the transition to President better than former Senators, because they have executive experience.

    Oprah in her own way has executive experience. Far more than the Donald does.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 6,651
    DavidL said:



    There is a momentum to her speech that may ultimately if not force her to run, then certainly make it difficult and damaging not to. I agree that 10/1 looks skinny but I think she comfortably beats any Democrat that's been speculated about until now.

    I'm old fashioned. I like my politicians to have experience of running public bodies, of developing policy in the public sphere and having some understanding of how alliances are put together to get things done. For all her remarkable business acumen Oprah has none of this but after Trump anything is possible. Her name recognition is certainly in the stratosphere compared with any possible contender including Bernie.
    Hillary Clinton was all those things. She was a reasonably competent and certainly hardworking public servant. It didn't do her any good. The same could be said of Trump's primary challengers - Rubio, Jeb Bush and others.

    Oprah would be a values candidate, taking Trump head on. I think she would win because her values are a lot more attractive than his.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,493

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Cyclefree said:

    On topic, I know very little about Oprah. If Trump can be President I don't see why Oprah can't.

    Still I can't help being surprised at what makes someone papabile these days. One fine speech? Is that it?

    I have made ca. 100 very fine speeches to a variety of audiences globally (from Australia to the US) over the last 4 years. If fine speech-making is the measure of things and one speech = US Presidential candidate, what does 100 speeches get you? Dictatorette / Dictatrix / Leaderene (?) of the World?

    PS Don't worry. Fat chance.

    PPS Apologies for the badly disguised plug for my business. A girl has gotta eat. And I have an expensive gardening and shoe habit to fund.

    :)

    I think you also need to be a billionaire:
    https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/09/2020-wealthy-democrats-steyer-winfrey-trump-328187

    (Not to mention a US citizen.)

    Still, that's good news for those who want to enjoy an innocent sprinkle unmolested, I suppose...
    Trump was the first billionaire to be elected President (though JFK was son of a billionaire in today's terms). If it is Trump then Oprah that would be back to back billionaires, which is why Sanders still has a shot as a populist outsider against big money and big business
    Oprah, if elected, would have the humblest background of any president. More so even than Lincoln.
    Reagan and LBJ and Truman and Clinton also had pretty humble backgrounds but what she represents now is the billionaire class Hollywood elite, just as Trump represent the corporate elite, Sanders can present himself as neither
    Nixon probably another example of a seemingly middle class/well-educated president with rather more humble beginnings
    Nixon certainly liked to think of himself as having worked his way up by his bootstraps in contrast to the elitist Kennedys
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 30,365
    Scott_P said:

    hps://twitter.com/mailonline/status/950775675186794497

    Heartbreaking.

    No doubt many will be bemoaning his terrible treatment when he has already been 'punished' for years, despite no such thing having happened.
    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    Cyclefree said:

    JohnO said:

    Is there nothing for Mercer? Or have I missed it?

    Nothing for Johnny (not even the whips office) nor Rees-Mogg (but was he offered a job and declined?).
    Surprised really. He's become a bit of a presence in the media, generally a good communicator on social media as well. Perhaps his stance on defence cuts recently went against him...a
    He's written a very good book on the border area between Cumbria and Scotland where his family are from (Crieff). The Marches. I'm just finishing it. It contains a very loving and touching portrait of his father.

    He's wasted in Justice. He should be in a department where his expertise and his knowledge of his constituency would be an asset. I think he is not in the right gang or does not have someone to promote him and have his back.
    Err...Crieff is quite a long way from the borders. It is in Perthshire, more than 100 miles north of the borders. I had the misfortune of spending 2 miserable years at boarding school there a long time ago when Nicky Fairbairn was MP there. Now there was a character.
    LOL, I am always amazed at the encyclopedic knowledge on here regarding Scotland.
    I think Scotland is in the north, and that's about all I'm prepared to state with confidence.

    @Cyclefree nails it on both cappuccinos and powerpoint. Truly a woman for world dictatrix.

    And she nails it on the Daily Mail/Virgin spat.

    I'm hopeful that she will show no mercy on the pineapple/pizza issue, though.
    I hope she is, my new year's resolution is to be more open to pineapple on pizza, or at least more open to those who do enjoy it.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 2,225

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Cyclefree said:

    On topic, I know very little about Oprah. If Trump can be President I don't see why Oprah can't.

    Still I can't help being surprised at what makes someone papabile these days. One fine speech? Is that it?

    I have made ca. 100 very fine speeches to a variety of audiences globally (from Australia to the US) over the last 4 years. If fine speech-making is the measure of things and one speech = US Presidential candidate, what does 100 speeches get you? Dictatorette / Dictatrix / Leaderene (?) of the World?

    PS Don't worry. Fat chance.

    PPS Apologies for the badly disguised plug for my business. A girl has gotta eat. And I have an expensive gardening and shoe habit to fund.

    :)

    I think you also need to be a billionaire:
    https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/09/2020-wealthy-democrats-steyer-winfrey-trump-328187

    (Not to mention a US citizen.)

    Still, that's good news for those who want to enjoy an innocent sprinkle unmolested, I suppose...
    Trump was the first billionaire to be elected President (though JFK was son of a billionaire in today's terms). If it is Trump then Oprah that would be back to back billionaires, which is why Sanders still has a shot as a populist outsider against big money and big business
    Oprah, if elected, would have the humblest background of any president. More so even than Lincoln.
    Reagan and LBJ and Truman and Clinton also had pretty humble backgrounds but what she represents now is the billionaire class Hollywood elite, just as Trump represent the corporate elite, Sanders can present himself as neither
    Nixon probably another example of a seemingly middle class/well-educated president with rather more humble beginnings
    Jimmy Carter was the previous anti-establishment Democrat who won a cynical electorate sick of Nixon subterfuges. A good man, and a peanut farmer, albeit with a big farm.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 9,910

    Cyclefree said:

    Can I just say, apropos the Daily Mail/Virgin spat, that it is nice to see an example of the point I was making in this header, only the other day - http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2018/01/03/challenges-challenges/.

    "The self-righteous intolerance of those seeking to deny others a voice is its shrill companion. In truth, both have a curiously religious approach to the idea of debate. The all too frequently used “You can’t say that.” / “I am offended” / “Bigoted” / “He’s a Marxist” / “hate speech” mantras are in danger of making mini-Torquemadas of us all.")

    Curious that "the Daily Mail appeaser of Hitler in the 1930's" line is regularly trotted out and yet "the Communists allied with Hitler while Britain was fighting him" line is never used against those who, ooh, I don't know, think that Stalin was misunderstood (the Opposition Leader's press spokesman) for instance or against those who speak at rallies with flags of Stalin behind them (the Shadow Chancellor and Leader of the Opposition) for instance.

    Ooooh, you have skeletons. That sounds interesting.

    What are they? ;-)
    Well, of course I have. Doesn't everyone? If they've lived a full life. (Try anything once, except incest and folk-dancing, as someone once said.)

    But I am also old and wise enough not to answer such a question.

    Nice try, though. :)
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 9,910

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    On topic, I know very little about Oprah. If Trump can be President I don't see why Oprah can't.

    Still I can't help being surprised at what makes someone papabile these days. One fine speech? Is that it?

    I have made ca. 100 very fine speeches to a variety of audiences globally (from Australia to the US) over the last 4 years. If fine speech-making is the measure of things and one speech = US Presidential candidate, what does 100 speeches get you? Dictatorette / Dictatrix / Leaderene (?) of the World?

    PS Don't worry. Fat chance.

    PPS Apologies for the badly disguised plug for my business. A girl has gotta eat. And I have an expensive gardening and shoe habit to fund.

    :)

    I beat you on PowerPoint presentations.

    My views on Powerpoint presentations make my views on cappuccinos seem like soft fluffy nonsense!

    You sound a difficult lady to please.

    I'm avoiding you at the Golden Globes.

    Any woman who is worth it is difficult to please.

    It will be easy to spot me at the Golden Globes. I will be fully (and elegantly) dressed.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 23,986
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Can I just say, apropos the Daily Mail/Virgin spat, that it is nice to see an example of the point I was making in this header, only the other day - http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2018/01/03/challenges-challenges/.

    "The self-righteous intolerance of those seeking to deny others a voice is its shrill companion. In truth, both have a curiously religious approach to the idea of debate. The all too frequently used “You can’t say that.” / “I am offended” / “Bigoted” / “He’s a Marxist” / “hate speech” mantras are in danger of making mini-Torquemadas of us all.")

    Curious that "the Daily Mail appeaser of Hitler in the 1930's" line is regularly trotted out and yet "the Communists allied with Hitler while Britain was fighting him" line is never used against those who, ooh, I don't know, think that Stalin was misunderstood (the Opposition Leader's press spokesman) for instance or against those who speak at rallies with flags of Stalin behind them (the Shadow Chancellor and Leader of the Opposition) for instance.

    Ooooh, you have skeletons. That sounds interesting.

    What are they? ;-)
    Well, of course I have. Doesn't everyone? If they've lived a full life. (Try anything once, except incest and folk-dancing, as someone once said.)

    But I am also old and wise enough not to answer such a question.

    Nice try, though. :)
    Oh, indeed. And such things seem to rule you out of public office.

    I'd much prefer if they didn't, but that's never going to happen.

    I'll ask again next time I see you after a few gin and tonics ;-)
  • MattWMattW Posts: 1,846
    Scott_P said:
    Surely the solution to that is simply to put him out one night like a recalcitrant cat, such that he is no longer a fugitive from justice?
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 9,910
    MattW said:

    Scott_P said:
    Surely the solution to that is simply to put him out one night like a recalcitrant cat, such that he is no longer a fugitive from justice?
    Judging by what has been said about his personal habits, they will have to fumigate the place once he leaves.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 30,365
    MattW said:

    Scott_P said:
    Surely the solution to that is simply to put him out one night like a recalcitrant cat, such that he is no longer a fugitive from justice?
    Certainly I don't see why it should be so complicated

    The South American country is looking for a third-party mediator to help them work out a settlement with Britain regarding Assange, the foreign minister said on Tuesday.

    Even if they don't want to be seen to be dumping him purely in response to negative comments he has made, or be seen to back down after housing him for years, it doesn't seem beyond the wit of man to resolve.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 23,986
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    On topic, I know very little about Oprah. If Trump can be President I don't see why Oprah can't.

    Still I can't help being surprised at what makes someone papabile these days. One fine speech? Is that it?

    I have made ca. 100 very fine speeches to a variety of audiences globally (from Australia to the US) over the last 4 years. If fine speech-making is the measure of things and one speech = US Presidential candidate, what does 100 speeches get you? Dictatorette / Dictatrix / Leaderene (?) of the World?

    PS Don't worry. Fat chance.

    PPS Apologies for the badly disguised plug for my business. A girl has gotta eat. And I have an expensive gardening and shoe habit to fund.

    :)

    I beat you on PowerPoint presentations.

    My views on Powerpoint presentations make my views on cappuccinos seem like soft fluffy nonsense!

    You sound a difficult lady to please.

    I'm avoiding you at the Golden Globes.

    Any woman who is worth it is difficult to please.

    It will be easy to spot me at the Golden Globes. I will be fully (and elegantly) dressed.
    I'd be dressed like the early 80s synth-pop band Imagination.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,493
    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Cyclefree said:

    On topic, I know very little about Oprah. If Trump can be President I don't see why Oprah can't.

    Still I can't help being surprised at what makes someone papabile these days. One fine speech? Is that it?

    I have made ca. 100 very fine speeches to a variety of audiences globally (from Australia to the US) over the last 4 years. If fine speech-making is the measure of things and one speech = US Presidential candidate, what does 100 speeches get you? Dictatorette / Dictatrix / Leaderene (?) of the World?

    PS Don't worry. Fat chance.

    PPS Apologies for the badly disguised plug for my business. A girl has gotta eat. And I have an expensive gardening and shoe habit to fund.

    :)

    I think you also need to be a billionaire:
    https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/09/2020-wealthy-democrats-steyer-winfrey-trump-328187

    (Not to mention a US citizen.)

    Still, that's good news for those who want to enjoy an innocent sprinkle unmolested, I suppose...
    Trump was the first billionaire to be elected President (though JFK was son of a billionaire in today's terms). If it is Trump then Oprah that would be back to back billionaires, which is why Sanders still has a shot as a populist outsider against big money and big business
    Oprah, if elected, would have the humblest background of any president. More so even than Lincoln.
    Reagan and LBJ and Truman and Clinton also had pretty humble backgrounds but what she represents now is the billionaire class Hollywood elite, just as Trump represent the corporate elite, Sanders can present himself as neither
    Nixon probably another example of a seemingly middle class/well-educated president with rather more humble beginnings
    Jimmy Carter was the previous anti-establishment Democrat who won a cynical electorate sick of Nixon subterfuges. A good man, and a peanut farmer, albeit with a big farm.
    Nixon of course was re elected, Carter only served one term.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 9,910
    edited January 9

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Can I just say, apropos the Daily Mail/Virgin spat, that it is nice to see an example of the point I was making in this header, only the other day - http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2018/01/03/challenges-challenges/.

    "The self-righteous intolerance of those seeking to deny others a voice is its shrill companion. In truth, both have a curiously religious approach to the idea of debate. The all too frequently used “You can’t say that.” / “I am offended” / “Bigoted” / “He’s a Marxist” / “hate speech” mantras are in danger of making mini-Torquemadas of us all.")

    Curious that "the Daily Mail appeaser of Hitler in the 1930's" line is regularly trotted out and yet "the Communists allied with Hitler while Britain was fighting him" line is never used against those who, ooh, I don't know, think that Stalin was misunderstood (the Opposition Leader's press spokesman) for instance or against those who speak at rallies with flags of Stalin behind them (the Shadow Chancellor and Leader of the Opposition) for instance.

    Ooooh, you have skeletons. That sounds interesting.

    What are they? ;-)
    Well, of course I have. Doesn't everyone? If they've lived a full life. (Try anything once, except incest and folk-dancing, as someone once said.)

    But I am also old and wise enough not to answer such a question.

    Nice try, though. :)
    Oh, indeed. And such things seem to rule you out of public office.

    I'd much prefer if they didn't, but that's never going to happen.

    I'll ask again next time I see you after a few gin and tonics ;-)
    I suspect that I am of the generation that could have skeletons and still go into public office, precisely because social media did not exist for most of my life. My depravities are all stored in my memory not in some digital archive somewhere.

    And, having grown up at a time when most people understood the distinction between what is suitable for a private life / intimacy and what is suitable in public, I have never understood - let alone felt the need to - share banal, let alone intimate, details of my life with all and sundry.

    It is why I have spent a fair amount of my professional time in recent years trying to explain to (mostly) young men and women that what they put on chat, email and other media lasts, can be recovered and is usually read by lawyers, judges, regulators and self-appointed busybodies, all of whom are notorious for having no sense of humour and not much sympathy for human folly and frailty either.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 23,986
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Can I just say, apropos the Daily Mail/Virgin spat, that it is nice to see an example of the point I was making in this header, only the other day - http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2018/01/03/challenges-challenges/.

    "The self-righteous intolerance of those seeking to deny others a voice is its shrill companion. In truth, both have a curiously religious approach to the idea of debate. The all too frequently used “You can’t say that.” / “I am offended” / “Bigoted” / “He’s a Marxist” / “hate speech” mantras are in danger of making mini-Torquemadas of us all.")

    Curious that "the Daily Mail appeaser of Hitler in the 1930's" line is regularly trotted out and yet "the Communists allied with Hitler while Britain was fighting him" line is never used against those who, ooh, I don't know, think that Stalin was misunderstood (the Opposition Leader's press spokesman) for instance or against those who speak at rallies with flags of Stalin behind them (the Shadow Chancellor and Leader of the Opposition) for instance.

    Ooooh, you have skeletons. That sounds interesting.

    What are they? ;-)
    Well, of course I have. Doesn't everyone? If they've lived a full life. (Try anything once, except incest and folk-dancing, as someone once said.)

    But I am also old and wise enough not to answer such a question.

    Nice try, though. :)
    Oh, indeed. And such things seem to rule you out of public office.

    I'd much prefer if they didn't, but that's never going to happen.

    I'll ask again next time I see you after a few gin and tonics ;-)
    I suspect that I am of the generation that could have skeletons and still go into public office, precisely because social media did not exist for most of my life. My depravities are all stored in my memory not in some digital archive somewhere.

    And, having grown up at a time when most people understood the distinction between what is suitable for a private life / intimacy and what is suitable in public, I have never understood - let alone felt the need to - share banal, let alone intimate, details of my life with all and sundry.

    It is why I have spent a fair amount of my professional time in recent years trying to explain to (mostly) young men and women that what they put on chat, email and other media lasts, can be recovered and is usually read by lawyers, judges, regulators and self-appointed busybodies, all of whom are notorious for having no sense of humour and not much sympathy for human folly and frailty either.
    I think social media imprisons far more than it liberates.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 10,335
    Scott_P said:
    In fairness it should be noted that he was (I understand) cleared. We should approve of people who stand aside while investigations are made being welcomed back if the suspicions prove unfounded. We assume accusations=guilt rather too readily.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 9,688

    Scott_P said:
    In fairness it should be noted that he was (I understand) cleared. We should approve of people who stand aside while investigations are made being welcomed back if the suspicions prove unfounded. We assume accusations=guilt rather too readily.
    +1
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 30,365

    Scott_P said:
    We assume accusations=guilt rather too readily.
    Indeed - and problematically the police were instructed to do so as well!
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694
    edited January 9

    Sandpit said:

    Scott_P said:

    twitter.com/mailonline/status/950775675186794497

    Couldn’t happen to a nicer chap....
    In a big diplomatic bag heading for Heathrow, or dumped on the street outside into the hands of the Met Police?

    If it’s the latter, may I suggest that there won’t be a queue of luvvies willing to post bail for him this time around ;)
    All the guardianistas have gone very quiet over their support for assange in the past couple of years...I have no idea why!
    Almost my favourite part of the Assange story was the long list of media types who lost over a quarter of a million between them when he went AWOL from court in London.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,135
    OchEye said:

    DavidL said:

    Cyclefree said:

    JohnO said:

    Is there nothing for Mercer? Or have I missed it?

    Nothing for Johnny (not even the whips office) nor Rees-Mogg (but was he offered a job and declined?).
    Surprised really. He's become a bit of a presence in the media, generally a good communicator on social media as well. Perhaps his stance on defence cuts recently went against him...a
    He's written a very good book on the border area between Cumbria and Scotland where his family are from (Crieff). The Marches. I'm just finishing it. It contains a very loving and touching portrait of his father.

    He's wasted in Justice. He should be in a department where his expertise and his knowledge of his constituency would be an asset. I think he is not in the right gang or does not have someone to promote him and have his back.
    Err...Crieff is quite a long way from the borders. It is in Perthshire, more than 100 miles north of the borders. I had the misfortune of spending 2 miserable years at boarding school there a long time ago when Nicky Fairbairn was MP there. Now there was a character.
    Met Nicky a couple of times, stone cold sober, highly intelligent and very polite, and totally pissed bouncing off the side of a train at Waverley Station, walking along the platform. Totally wasted at Westminster, probably the best analytical and legal mind of his generation.
    My mother sat next to him at the annual dinner of Hendon North Conservatives. He spent the evening trying to seduce her.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,135
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Can I just say, apropos the Daily Mail/Virgin spat, that it is nice to see an example of the point I was making in this header, only the other day - http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2018/01/03/challenges-challenges/.

    "The self-righteous intolerance of those seeking to deny others a voice is its shrill companion. In truth, both have a curiously religious approach to the idea of debate. The all too frequently used “You can’t say that.” / “I am offended” / “Bigoted” / “He’s a Marxist” / “hate speech” mantras are in danger of making mini-Torquemadas of us all.")

    Curious that "the Daily Mail appeaser of Hitler in the 1930's" line is regularly trotted out and yet "the Communists allied with Hitler while Britain was fighting him" line is never used against those who, ooh, I don't know, think that Stalin was misunderstood (the Opposition Leader's press spokesman) for instance or against those who speak at rallies with flags of Stalin behind them (the Shadow Chancellor and Leader of the Opposition) for instance.

    Ooooh, you have skeletons. That sounds interesting.

    What are they? ;-)
    Well, of course I have. Doesn't everyone? If they've lived a full life. (Try anything once, except incest and folk-dancing, as someone once said.)

    But I am also old and wise enough not to answer such a question.

    Nice try, though. :)
    Don't knock incest or folk-dancing till you've tried them.
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 6,466

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Can I just say, apropos the Daily Mail/Virgin spat, that it is nice to see an example of the point I was making in this header, only the other day - http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2018/01/03/challenges-challenges/.

    "The self-righteous intolerance of those seeking to deny others a voice is its shrill companion. In truth, both have a curiously religious approach to the idea of debate. The all too frequently used “You can’t say that.” / “I am offended” / “Bigoted” / “He’s a Marxist” / “hate speech” mantras are in danger of making mini-Torquemadas of us all.")

    Ooooh, you have skeletons. That sounds interesting.

    What are they? ;-)
    Well, of course I have. Doesn't everyone? If they've lived a full life. (Try anything once, except incest and folk-dancing, as someone once said.)

    But I am also old and wise enough not to answer such a question.

    Nice try, though. :)
    Oh, indeed. And such things seem to rule you out of public office.

    I'd much prefer if they didn't, but that's never going to happen.

    I'll ask again next time I see you after a few gin and tonics ;-)
    I suspect that I am of the generation that could have skeletons and still go into public office, precisely because social media did not exist for most of my life. My depravities are all stored in my memory not in some digital archive somewhere.

    And, having grown up at a time when most people understood the distinction between what is suitable for a private life / intimacy and what is suitable in public, I have never understood - let alone felt the need to - share banal, let alone intimate, details of my life with all and sundry.

    It is why I have spent a fair amount of my professional time in recent years trying to explain to (mostly) young men and women that what they put on chat, email and other media lasts, can be recovered and is usually read by lawyers, judges, regulators and self-appointed busybodies, all of whom are notorious for having no sense of humour and not much sympathy for human folly and frailty either.
    I think social media imprisons far more than it liberates.
    Quite. My reputation as mature, urbane, personable bon vivant is safe from any ghastly relevations from my allegedly misspent youth.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,135
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Can I just say, apropos the Daily Mail/Virgin spat, that it is nice to see an example of the point I was making in this header, only the other day - http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2018/01/03/challenges-challenges/.

    "The self-righteous intolerance of those seeking to deny others a voice is its shrill companion. In truth, both have a curiously religious approach to the idea of debate. The all too frequently used “You can’t say that.” / “I am offended” / “Bigoted” / “He’s a Marxist” / “hate speech” mantras are in danger of making mini-Torquemadas of us all.")

    Curious that "the Daily Mail appeaser of Hitler in the 1930's" line is regularly trotted out and yet "the Communists allied with Hitler while Britain was fighting him" line is never used against those who, ooh, I don't know, think that Stalin was misunderstood (the Opposition Leader's press spokesman) for instance or against those who speak at rallies with flags of Stalin behind them (the Shadow Chancellor and Leader of the Opposition) for instance.

    Ooooh, you have skeletons. That sounds interesting.

    What are they? ;-)
    Well, of course I have. Doesn't everyone? If they've lived a full life. (Try anything once, except incest and folk-dancing, as someone once said.)

    But I am also old and wise enough not to answer such a question.

    Nice try, though. :)
    Oh, indeed. And such things seem to rule you out of public office.

    I'd much prefer if they didn't, but that's never going to happen.

    I'll ask again next time I see you after a few gin and tonics ;-)
    I suspect that I am of the generation that could have skeletons and still go into public office, precisely because social media did not exist for most of my life. My depravities are all stored in my memory not in some digital archive somewhere.

    And, having grown up at a time when most people understood the distinction between what is suitable for a private life / intimacy and what is suitable in public, I have never understood - let alone felt the need to - share banal, let alone intimate, details of my life with all and sundry.

    It is why I have spent a fair amount of my professional time in recent years trying to explain to (mostly) young men and women that what they put on chat, email and other media lasts, can be recovered and is usually read by lawyers, judges, regulators and self-appointed busybodies, all of whom are notorious for having no sense of humour and not much sympathy for human folly and frailty either.
    Try to persuade not to post pictures of their private parts on social media.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:


    Ooooh, you have skeletons. That sounds interesting.

    What are they? ;-)
    Well, of course I have. Doesn't everyone? If they've lived a full life. (Try anything once, except incest and folk-dancing, as someone once said.)

    But I am also old and wise enough not to answer such a question.

    Nice try, though. :)
    Oh, indeed. And such things seem to rule you out of public office.

    I'd much prefer if they didn't, but that's never going to happen.

    I'll ask again next time I see you after a few gin and tonics ;-)
    I suspect that I am of the generation that could have skeletons and still go into public office, precisely because social media did not exist for most of my life. My depravities are all stored in my memory not in some digital archive somewhere.

    And, having grown up at a time when most people understood the distinction between what is suitable for a private life / intimacy and what is suitable in public, I have never understood - let alone felt the need to - share banal, let alone intimate, details of my life with all and sundry.

    It is why I have spent a fair amount of my professional time in recent years trying to explain to (mostly) young men and women that what they put on chat, email and other media lasts, can be recovered and is usually read by lawyers, judges, regulators and self-appointed busybodies, all of whom are notorious for having no sense of humour and not much sympathy for human folly and frailty either.
    It's fun trying to explain these things to people who have grown up knowing nothing else than posting to the world what they're doing a dozen times a day, when they suddenly get a job and realise that there's quite a lot of them online that they'd prefer wasn't - and the internet doesn't have a delete button! :D
  • OchEyeOchEye Posts: 1,087
    Sean_F said:

    OchEye said:

    DavidL said:

    Cyclefree said:

    JohnO said:

    Is there nothing for Mercer? Or have I missed it?

    Nothing for Johnny (not even the whips office) nor Rees-Mogg (but was he offered a job and declined?).
    Surprised really. He's become a bit of a presence in the media, generally a good communicator on social media as well. Perhaps his stance on defence cuts recently went against him...a
    He's written a very good book on the border area between Cumbria and Scotland where his family are from (Crieff). The Marches. I'm just finishing it. It contains a very loving and touching portrait of his father.

    He's wasted in Justice. He should be in a department where his expertise and his knowledge of his constituency would be an asset. I think he is not in the right gang or does not have someone to promote him and have his back.
    Err...Crieff is quite a long way from the borders. It is in Perthshire, more than 100 miles north of the borders. I had the misfortune of spending 2 miserable years at boarding school there a long time ago when Nicky Fairbairn was MP there. Now there was a character.
    Met Nicky a couple of times, stone cold sober, highly intelligent and very polite, and totally pissed bouncing off the side of a train at Waverley Station, walking along the platform. Totally wasted at Westminster, probably the best analytical and legal mind of his generation.
    My mother sat next to him at the annual dinner of Hendon North Conservatives. He spent the evening trying to seduce her.
    Always nice to meet the son of a famous person..... ROFL.. (I think you should have added a few more words..) .
  • OchEyeOchEye Posts: 1,087
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Can I just say, apropos the Daily Mail/Virgin spat, that it is nice to see an example of the point I was making in this header, only the other day - http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2018/01/03/challenges-challenges/.

    "The self-righteous intolerance of those seeking to deny others a voice is its shrill companion. In truth, both have a curiously religious approach to the idea of debate. The all too frequently used “You can’t say that.” / “I am offended” / “Bigoted” / “He’s a Marxist” / “hate speech” mantras are in danger of making mini-Torquemadas of us all.")

    Curious that "the Daily Mail appeaser of Hitler in the 1930's" line is regularly trotted out and yet "the Communists allied with Hitler while Britain was fighting him" line is never used against those who, ooh, I don't know, think that Stalin was misunderstood (the Opposition Leader's press spokesman) for instance or against those who speak at rallies with flags of Stalin behind them (the Shadow Chancellor and Leader of the Opposition) for instance.

    Ooooh, you have skeletons. That sounds interesting.

    What are they? ;-)
    Well, of course I have. Doesn't everyone? If they've lived a full life. (Try anything once, except incest and folk-dancing, as someone once said.)

    But I am also old and wise enough not to answer such a question.

    Nice try, though. :)
    Oh, indeed. And such things seem to rule you out of public office.

    I'd much prefer if they didn't, but that's never going to happen.

    I'll ask again next time I see you after a few gin and tonics ;-)
    I suspect that I am of the generation that could have skeletons and still go into public office, precisely because social media did not exist for most of my life. My depravities are all stored in my memory not in some digital archive somewhere.

    And, having grown up at a time when most people understood the distinction between what is suitable for a private life / intimacy and what is suitable in public, I have never understood - let alone felt the need to - share banal, let alone intimate, details of my life with all and sundry.

    It is why I have spent a fair amount of my professional time in recent years trying to explain to (mostly) young men and women that what they put on chat, email and other media lasts, can be recovered and is usually read by lawyers, judges, regulators and self-appointed busybodies, all of whom are notorious for having no sense of humour and not much sympathy for human folly and frailty either.
    +1
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 9,910

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:



    Ooooh, you have skeletons. That sounds interesting.

    What are they? ;-)
    Well, of course I have. Doesn't everyone? If they've lived a full life. (Try anything once, except incest and folk-dancing, as someone once said.)

    But I am also old and wise enough not to answer such a question.

    Nice try, though. :)
    Oh, indeed. And such things seem to rule you out of public office.

    I'd much prefer if they didn't, but that's never going to happen.

    I'll ask again next time I see you after a few gin and tonics ;-)
    I suspect that I am of the generation that could have skeletons and still go into public office, precisely because social media did not exist for most of my life. My depravities are all stored in my memory not in some digital archive somewhere.

    And, having grown up at a time when most people understood the distinction between what is suitable for a private life / intimacy and what is suitable in public, I have never understood - let alone felt the need to - share banal, let alone intimate, details of my life with all and sundry.

    It is why I have spent a fair amount of my professional time in recent years trying to explain to (mostly) young men and women that what they put on chat, email and other media lasts, can be recovered and is usually read by lawyers, judges, regulators and self-appointed busybodies, all of whom are notorious for having no sense of humour and not much sympathy for human folly and frailty either.
    I think social media imprisons far more than it liberates.
    It too often seems to liberate things which should remain imprisoned.

    It is - or can be - a useful tool, provided you understand it and use it, rather than let it use you.

    It is worth remembering that 99% of what is in most peoples' heads is not worth making public.

    Opinions are like bottoms. Everyone has them. But it does not follow that all should be inspected. As someone once said.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 3,171
    Toby Young gets 90k a year from the public purse .As head of government funded New Schools network .The NSN is designed to encourage free school applications but none have applied or have been approved by the DofE since before the last election.https://www.theguardian.com/education/2018/jan/09/toby-young-how-barrage-of-nudges-made-ofs-position-untenable
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 9,910
    Sean_F said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Can I just say, apropos the Daily Mail/Virgin spat, that it is nice to see an example of the point I was making in this header, only the other day - http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2018/01/03/challenges-challenges/.

    "The self-righteous intolerance of those seeking to deny others a voice is its shrill companion. In truth, both have a curiously religious approach to the idea of debate. The all too frequently used “You can’t say that.” / “I am offended” / “Bigoted” / “He’s a Marxist” / “hate speech” mantras are in danger of making mini-Torquemadas of us all.")

    Curious that "the Daily Mail appeaser of Hitler in the 1930's" line is regularly trotted out and yet "the Communists allied with Hitler while Britain was fighting him" line is never used against those who, ooh, I don't know, think that Stalin was misunderstood (the Opposition Leader's press spokesman) for instance or against those who speak at rallies with flags of Stalin behind them (the Shadow Chancellor and Leader of the Opposition) for instance.

    Ooooh, you have skeletons. That sounds interesting.

    What are they? ;-)
    Well, of course I have. Doesn't everyone? If they've lived a full life. (Try anything once, except incest and folk-dancing, as someone once said.)

    But I am also old and wise enough not to answer such a question.

    Nice try, though. :)
    Oh, indeed. And such things seem to rule you out of public office.

    I'd much prefer if they didn't, but that's never going to happen.

    I'll ask again next time I see you after a few gin and tonics ;-)
    I suspect that I am of the generation that could have skeletons and still go into public office, precisely because social media did not exist for most of my life. My depravities are all stored in my memory not in some digital archive somewhere.

    And, having grown up at a time when most people understood the distinction between what is suitable for a private life / intimacy and what is suitable in public, I have never understood - let alone felt the need to - share banal, let alone intimate, details of my life with all and sundry.

    It is why I have spent a fair amount of my professional time in recent years trying to explain to (mostly) young men and women that what they put on chat, email and other media lasts, can be recovered and is usually read by lawyers, judges, regulators and self-appointed busybodies, all of whom are notorious for having no sense of humour and not much sympathy for human folly and frailty either.
    Try to persuade not to post pictures of their private parts on social media.
    I've had to advise them not to do much worse than that!
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,135
    OchEye said:

    Sean_F said:

    OchEye said:

    DavidL said:

    Cyclefree said:

    JohnO said:

    Is there nothing for Mercer? Or have I missed it?

    Nothing for Johnny (not even the whips office) nor Rees-Mogg (but was he offered a job and declined?).
    Surprised really. He's become a bit of a presence in the media, generally a good communicator on social media as well. Perhaps his stance on defence cuts recently went against him...a
    He's written a very good book on the border area between Cumbria and Scotland where his family are from (Crieff). The Marches. I'm just finishing it. It contains a very loving and touching portrait of his father.

    He's wasted in Justice. He should be in a department where his expertise and his knowledge of his constituency would be an asset. I think he is not in the right gang or does not have someone to promote him and have his back.
    Err...Crieff is quite a long way from the borders. It is in Perthshire, more than 100 miles north of the borders. I had the misfortune of spending 2 miserable years at boarding school there a long time ago when Nicky Fairbairn was MP there. Now there was a character.
    Met Nicky a couple of times, stone cold sober, highly intelligent and very polite, and totally pissed bouncing off the side of a train at Waverley Station, walking along the platform. Totally wasted at Westminster, probably the best analytical and legal mind of his generation.
    My mother sat next to him at the annual dinner of Hendon North Conservatives. He spent the evening trying to seduce her.
    Always nice to meet the son of a famous person..... ROFL.. (I think you should have added a few more words..) .
    He was a bit more subtle about it than either Mark Garnier or Stephen Crabbe.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,434
    Sean_F said:



    Try to persuade not to post pictures of their private parts on social media.

    That's actually quite a low risk thing to do, given the extent to which one thing looks like another. Much more important, if your wife shops you for dishonesty over speeding points and you want to have a chat with your son about it, do it face to face and not by bloody text. And if you are planning to poison your spouse refrain from googling "best way to poison your spouse".
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 30,365
    Oh god, another Roy Moore?!

    Joe Arpaio, who was convicted of criminal contempt and later pardoned by Donald Trump, will run as a Republican to replace retiring Senator Jeff Flake.

    The 85-year-old was found guilty of violating a 2011 order to stop detaining migrants.


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-42624410

    Will they learn?
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 9,215
    Only on PB could a private business stopping stocking a badly selling newspaper be a sign of oppression.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 8,318
    kle4 said:

    Oh god, another Roy Moore?!

    Joe Arpaio, who was convicted of criminal contempt and later pardoned by Donald Trump, will run as a Republican to replace retiring Senator Jeff Flake.

    The 85-year-old was found guilty of violating a 2011 order to stop detaining migrants.


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-42624410

    Will they learn?

    85-year-old? Sanders is just a young whippersnapper by contrast.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 9,215
    kle4 said:

    Oh god, another Roy Moore?!

    Joe Arpaio, who was convicted of criminal contempt and later pardoned by Donald Trump, will run as a Republican to replace retiring Senator Jeff Flake.

    The 85-year-old was found guilty of violating a 2011 order to stop detaining migrants.


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-42624410

    Will they learn?

    No. No. No.

    Lay all day every day.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 30,365
    Alistair said:

    kle4 said:

    Oh god, another Roy Moore?!

    Joe Arpaio, who was convicted of criminal contempt and later pardoned by Donald Trump, will run as a Republican to replace retiring Senator Jeff Flake.

    The 85-year-old was found guilty of violating a 2011 order to stop detaining migrants.


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-42624410

    Will they learn?

    No. No. No.

    Lay all day every day.
    To lay would be to say they have learned, surely, as he won't end up as the Republican candidate!
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,135
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Sean_F said:



    Try to persuade not to post pictures of their private parts on social media.

    That's actually quite a low risk thing to do, given the extent to which one thing looks like another. Much more important, if your wife shops you for dishonesty over speeding points and you want to have a chat with your son about it, do it face to face and not by bloody text. And if you are planning to poison your spouse refrain from googling "best way to poison your spouse".
    As Richard Dreyfus put it "I got that beat."

    A firm I worked for had a client called Ken Richardson who owned Doncaster Rovers, and its ground. He wanted to sell the ground to a supermarket, for an enormous profit, but the council would not grant planning permission.

    So, he decided to force the council's hand by burning down the football stadium. He hired an arsonist who claimed to be ex-SAS. He and his mooks got themselves filmed on CCTV, filling up jerry cans with petrol at a local petrol station. Better still, one of them left his mobile phone behind in a rucksack at the stadium. Then he topped it off by leaving a message on Richardson's answer phone "I've done that job for you, Ken."

  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 12,962

    Apparently on all the services where papers are available Virgin sold only 70 copies each day.

    Thanks. Do you have a source for that?
    It's in the article you linked to!
    Sorry, my bad, I must have missed the number in that article originally.
    Virgin refusing to stock the Mail for commercial reasons alone is a sound business move. They weren't making any money from the sales of it I'm sure and most commuters who want one can (and probably do) get it from the station before boarding anyway.

    But even if it were just a boycott as a free business they're free to do that too. Just like Liverpool newsagents have been free as a business to boycot The Sun for decades now.

    A right to free speech is not the same as a right for other commercial companies to have to carry your speech. There's also a big difference between commercial companies making commercial decisions and eg universities where free speech is supposed to be protected.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 9,910
    Sean_F said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Sean_F said:



    Try to persuade not to post pictures of their private parts on social media.

    That's actually quite a low risk thing to do, given the extent to which one thing looks like another. Much more important, if your wife shops you for dishonesty over speeding points and you want to have a chat with your son about it, do it face to face and not by bloody text. And if you are planning to poison your spouse refrain from googling "best way to poison your spouse".
    As Richard Dreyfus put it "I got that beat."

    A firm I worked for had a client called Ken Richardson who owned Doncaster Rovers, and its ground. He wanted to sell the ground to a supermarket, for an enormous profit, but the council would not grant planning permission.

    So, he decided to force the council's hand by burning down the football stadium. He hired an arsonist who claimed to be ex-SAS. He and his mooks got themselves filmed on CCTV, filling up jerry cans with petrol at a local petrol station. Better still, one of them left his mobile phone behind in a rucksack at the stadium. Then he topped it off by leaving a message on Richardson's answer phone "I've done that job for you, Ken."

    One of my favourite LIBOR chats was the trader at Rabobank who wrote something like: "There's bigger crooks than us out there!" to one of his co-conspirators.

    How right he was. The moron.

  • Sean_F said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Sean_F said:



    Try to persuade not to post pictures of their private parts on social media.

    That's actually quite a low risk thing to do, given the extent to which one thing looks like another. Much more important, if your wife shops you for dishonesty over speeding points and you want to have a chat with your son about it, do it face to face and not by bloody text. And if you are planning to poison your spouse refrain from googling "best way to poison your spouse".
    As Richard Dreyfus put it "I got that beat."

    A firm I worked for had a client called Ken Richardson who owned Doncaster Rovers, and its ground. He wanted to sell the ground to a supermarket, for an enormous profit, but the council would not grant planning permission.

    So, he decided to force the council's hand by burning down the football stadium. He hired an arsonist who claimed to be ex-SAS. He and his mooks got themselves filmed on CCTV, filling up jerry cans with petrol at a local petrol station. Better still, one of them left his mobile phone behind in a rucksack at the stadium. Then he topped it off by leaving a message on Richardson's answer phone "I've done that job for you, Ken."

    I don't suppose he hired them again, did he?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,607

    HYUFD said:

    Rory Stewart MP becomes Minister of State at Ministry of Justice.

    How long until he decides this politics lark is a waste of time?

    He is prisons minister which is actually an important role in an area that interests him
    Although only one major prison riot away from ending his ministerial career. So a tough gig.
    As long as he doesn't want to machine-gun the rioters, he'll be better than one of his predecessors.....
This discussion has been closed.