Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Whilst it is understandable national campaigning has been susp

1246789

Comments

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 25,247

    Apparently Abbott has been appearing on TV without clearance from Labour. Rumour is she has now been explicitly banned!

    Will that ban continue if she's Home Secretary, in charge of domestic security, by the weekend?
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 17,102

    Apparently Abbott has been appearing on TV without clearance from Labour. Rumour is she has now been explicitly banned!

    She's the Shadow Home Secretary. Part of the top team that Corbyn put forward as the best people to be in government. We're entitled to know how she behaves iin relation to matters which are squarely within her brief.

    If May can rightly be criticised for hiding from the public, so can Abbott and Labour for hiding her.

    Supposing she's Home Secretary on Fruday and on Saturday there's a terrorist attack. Will they ban her from the airwaves then?
  • SaltireSaltire Posts: 491
    I don't know if this has been linked to already today and if so apologises if it has but Nate Silver has his take on the UK polling on 538.

    https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/are-the-u-k-polls-skewed/

    His final analysis is since there is a wide range then focus on the average of the polls and not any individual one but be prepared for a wide range of outcomes!
    I do note that the average of the polls from yesterday added 4.6% to the lead of the Tories from the raw figures.
  • TravelJunkieTravelJunkie Posts: 431
    lynton crosby is a fucking cunt.

    using terrorist attack for tory political gain.
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 2,849
    PMTM has officially suspended her national campaign, but the reality is she's announcing a new counter-terrorism manifesto in all but name in this speech. Hinting at significant internet controls etc. Light on detail of course, but interesting decision to go beyond speaking about this specific attack.
  • AlsoIndigoAlsoIndigo Posts: 1,852
    IanB2 said:

    JonWC said:

    My theory is these people are of the more insular and cynical kind, like to keep themselves to themselves, lean conservative, and are surely likely to be especially unimpressed by the views of Jezza and co?

    That would describe that vast majority of the very elderly, who also we are told slew overwhelmingly to the right. None of my elderly relatives accept cold calls, and to the best of my knowledge they all have unknown calls barred, and the majority are either not online, or use the internet only for ordering their supermarket delivery, personal emails and looking at family pictures on facebook. The few that do have mobile phones only turn them on when they occasionally go out the house. They people are almost uniformly blue rinse Tories, and unreachable by pollsters.

    But they are more likely to be at home, particularly in the daytime when pollsters often call, and more likely to have a landline.

    Anyway, the pollsters will make sure that their final sample includes the right number of the elderly. The question is whether the elderly who are included are representative of the demographic.
    They are more likely to be at home but unreachable having barred unknown numbers (phone polling) and being very limited in their online useage (online polls). The ones the pollsters catch will be those that are interest in being polled - ie. the politically engaged. We have a few members here in the 75+ bracket who I wager are on polling panels, but they are about as unrepresentative of their age groups as you can get. Also because so few elders are likely to be available, the few that are, are going to get scaled up outrageously by attempts to balance the model.
  • jonny83jonny83 Posts: 833

    This is a political speech, not a statement about the events last night.

    Yep, statement on last night and now pitching a vision of what she wants to do. See the custodial sentences bit.
  • JonWCJonWC Posts: 165
    IanB2 said:

    JonWC said:

    A polling and betting post.. to distract me from the horrors.



    With that in mind I've had a few relatively modest bets on the bigger Tory majorities while the odds are good.

    Your first half hits the nail. Except that doorstep polling, because it is expensive, needs a lot of questions to be answered at once, and hence it quite intrusive. I had kantar round last month and doing their poll in my living room took up half an hour. And the demographics of people who are a) likely to be at home, and b) willing to do this, is at least as biased as the other methods.

    Your second part makes a lot of assumptions with rather less evidence; you may be right that there is a bias towards the right amongst the unengaged (although in the past at least many wwc would fall into that box and have leaned left), but there is no way of knowing whether it is big or small.
    IanB2 said:

    JonWC said:

    A polling and betting post.. to distract me from the horrors.


    My theory is these people are of the more insular and cynical kind, like to keep themselves to themselves, lean conservative, and are surely likely to be especially unimpressed by the views of Jezza and co?

    I think you can also start to understand why the main parties still seem to believe in a big Tory win, because they will be registering this in canvass returns.

    With that in mind I've had a few relatively modest bets on the bigger Tory majorities while the odds are good.

    Your first half hits the nail. Except that doorstep polling, because it is expensive, needs a lot of questions to be answered at once, and hence it quite intrusive. I had kantar round last month and doing their poll in my living room took up half an hour. And the demographics of people who are a) likely to be at home, and b) willing to do this, is at least as biased as the other methods.

    Your second part makes a lot of assumptions with rather less evidence; you may be right that there is a bias towards the right amongst the unengaged (although in the past at least many wwc would fall into that box and have leaned left), but there is no way of knowing whether it is big or small.
    Agree I am making assumptions, though I don't think unengaged is really the right word for it They might be more engaged for all I know, just less open (struggling for the precise word).
  • CovfefeCovfefe Posts: 3
    DavidL said:



    I was at a licensing seminar in Glasgow on Friday. The most interesting talk was on immigration and the incredibly onerous duties being put on employers, particularly in an industry dependent upon a large number of casual workers. The latest Immigration Act specifically sets out it is intended to make things hostile for illegal immigrants. It does this by making it risky to employ them, rent them housing, allow them to travel etc etc.

    The most startling statistic was that between 2010 and 2015 there were no less than 45k changes to immigration rules and guidance, roughly 5 a day. Immigration judges and advisers cannot keep up, appeals are everywhere and the system is on the edge of chaos.

    Some of this might work in the medium term but May as Home Secretary let loose a tidal wave of changes to try and drive immigration down. It strongly suggests a bureaucratic mindset to problem solving I instinctively have little affiliation with.

    And then there are the prisons. As Home Secretary, these were under her control. But not saint theresa just went cut cut cut and the result is chaos and complete lawlessness 'inside' as documentary after documentary makes clear. Meanwhile in the Netherlands, prisons are running out of prisoners. There, they treat those who fall over in life and break laws etc as human beings and do their utmost to ensure that they are able to recover fully and lead a life worth living. The re-offending rate is a fraction of ours. Now that is good policy. It costs more money, but which is more sensible? Increasing lawlessness 'inside' and therefore, inevitably, in society generally? Or a well thought out plan that leads to rehabilitation? Clearly it is a good thing to build a society where people are all treated as human beings. Because we all are.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 22,257
    edited June 2017

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Cyan said:

    Tory canvasser's lie about Jeremy Corbyn meets a voter's response:

    One in the "no" category I guess..
    You occasionally meet someone like that.

    You wait till their rant is finished, smile, thank them, and leave their doorstep as quickly and politely as possible.
    Ye - think the canvasser was a bit poor there really with the IRA stuff. That isn't a wavering voter.
    Absolutely no point spending any time with such a core Labour voter.

    None.
    Spend just a moment with the slightest hint of a condescending smile on your lips, thank them, and on to the next one.
  • isamisam Posts: 30,800
    edited June 2017
    surbiton said:

    surbiton said:

    More support for @isam's theory. Read this thread in full:

    I'll repost this, turnout filters may not actually be acting as turnout filters but as a polling enthusiasm filter. Maybe not perfect so they might still be a bit off, but perhaps closer to the mark than others.



    If the initial sample does represent the voting population, then why tinker to make the sample representative of the national population to include people who will not vote ?
    The abstract of Prosser's paper at this link gives a clearer explanation imo -- the polls are not finding enough non-voters, which means their weighting knocks out too many voters.

    https://academic.oup.com/poq/article-abstract/doi/10.1093/poq/nfx015/3852137/Missing-Nonvoters-and-Misweighted?redirectedFrom=fulltext

    Maybe I did not elaborate enough. Their contention is that many people cannot be contacted by polls. However, these people usually do not vote either.

    So, rather than weight the sample to represent the population as a whole, they should weight the sample to represent the voting population

    The ICM's of this world appears to weight the sample to represent the population as per Census etc., then adjust again to get rid of people who are not likely to vote.

    So, why do the first bit ?
    Plenty of people are 9/10 10/10 to vote but 4/10 5/10 politically engaged (my parents)

    Many politically engaged don't vote (Peter Hitchens is one)

    I would treat the politically engaged as non voters
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 16,300
    MaxPB said:

    JackW said:

    I notice the labour spinners on here have been attacking tory government over police numbers in response to terrorist attack.

    Let's just remember for a second. What did jez do when asked if he would support an ISIS fund raiser release from prison for Christmas, go absolutely no bloody way. Of course not, he supported them. FFS...Robbing old ladies to fund ISIS and jezza goes into bat for them.

    Then Of course we have mcIRA who supported getting rid of the spooks. 10k more plods in panda cars but no F##king intelligence agencies, that will do the trick.

    These people disgust me.

    It's not Labour spin to note that the Conservative government and Home Secretary May have cut 20,000 from police numbers and significantly denuded the armed forces. Opposition parties and some Tory MP's and PBers have been critical of this foolishness for years.

    The Conservative government seems to have forgotten their first duty, which most certainly is not calling a totally unnecessary general election for purely party interest
    Lots of us have been very critical of May's border and police cuts and have been damning over Tory defence cuts. The issue is that I don't think Labour would have done anything differently and Jez would most definitely make everything worse.

    I do hope that the government reverse all of the defence cuts and domestic security cuts over the next few years.
    And where's the money going to come from ?

    Here where:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/timeseries/hbop/pnbp

    Over the last five years the UK has had a balance of payments deficit of nearly £400bn.

    Instead of pissing that money away on imported consumer tat and foreign holidays that money could have been spent on infrastructure investment, house building and public services.

    But are British people prepared to live within their means and reduce their consumption of imported consumer tat and foreign holidays ?
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,005

    This is a political speech, not a statement about the events last night.

    Very true political campaigning was not totally suspended.
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,557
    The age of tolerance and hand-wringing has to come to an end. It doesn't make us any safer.

    Virtue signalling, vigils and candles do not defeat hate

    We cannot appease our way to peace
  • Covfefe said:

    DavidL said:



    I was at a licensing seminar in Glasgow on Friday. The most interesting talk was on immigration and the incredibly onerous duties being put on employers, particularly in an industry dependent upon a large number of casual workers. The latest Immigration Act specifically sets out it is intended to make things hostile for illegal immigrants. It does this by making it risky to employ them, rent them housing, allow them to travel etc etc.

    The most startling statistic was that between 2010 and 2015 there were no less than 45k changes to immigration rules and guidance, roughly 5 a day. Immigration judges and advisers cannot keep up, appeals are everywhere and the system is on the edge of chaos.

    Some of this might work in the medium term but May as Home Secretary let loose a tidal wave of changes to try and drive immigration down. It strongly suggests a bureaucratic mindset to problem solving I instinctively have little affiliation with.

    And then there are the prisons. As Home Secretary, these were under her control. But not saint theresa just went cut cut cut and the result is chaos and complete lawlessness 'inside' as documentary after documentary makes clear. Meanwhile in the Netherlands, prisons are running out of prisoners. There, they treat those who fall over in life and break laws etc as human beings and do their utmost to ensure that they are able to recover fully and lead a life worth living. The re-offending rate is a fraction of ours. Now that is good policy. It costs more money, but which is more sensible? Increasing lawlessness 'inside' and therefore, inevitably, in society generally? Or a well thought out plan that leads to rehabilitation? Clearly it is a good thing to build a society where people are all treated as human beings. Because we all are.
    Prisons are the responsibility of the Justice Secretary not the Home Secretary
  • brokenwheelbrokenwheel Posts: 2,958
    IanB2 said:

    JonWC said:

    A polling and betting post.. to distract me from the horrors.

    Like many others I'm thinking about the relationship between the polls and reality.

    It is clear that there are a substantial group of people in society who are effectively unreachable by any poll, either by phone (thanks partly to cold calling) or internet. Door-step canvassing can reach them though, even if they are probably rather defensive.

    How big is it? I don't know but must be tens of pct, and growing all the time.

    All polling must assume that the ebbs and flows of opinion within this group are perfectly correlated with the same demographic within the part of the electorate that polls can reach. Suppose that resistance to being polled is actually a key characteristic in itself, and these people don't actually correlate especially well with the rest. The polls will all be wrong, in different ways depending on the assumptions that they make.

    My theory is these people are of the more insular and cynical kind, like to keep themselves to themselves, lean conservative, and are surely likely to be especially unimpressed by the views of Jezza and co?

    I think you can also start to understand why the main parties still seem to believe in a big Tory win, because they will be registering this in canvass returns.

    With that in mind I've had a few relatively modest bets on the bigger Tory majorities while the odds are good.

    Your first half hits the nail. Except that doorstep polling, because it is expensive, needs a lot of questions to be answered at once, and hence it quite intrusive. I had kantar round last month and doing their poll in my living room took up half an hour. And the demographics of people who are a) likely to be at home, and b) willing to do this, is at least as biased as the other methods.

    Your second part makes a lot of assumptions with rather less evidence; you may be right that there is a bias towards the right amongst the unengaged (although in the past at least many wwc would fall into that box and have leaned left), but there is no way of knowing whether it is big or small.
    It doesn't really matter that much the views of the under-sampled, it is simply that the over-sampled are likely to be more Labour than average.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 25,247
    PM confirms incident lasted eight minutes. Seven dead, plus three attackers, 48 injured, some critically. Attackers were wearing fake explosive belts.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 52,926
    Mr. Covfefe, aren't prisons the realm of the Justice Secretary?

    Welcome to pb.com.

    Mr. Quincel, fantastic. Because defeating terrorism means increasing restrictions on free speech...

    Enforcing existing laws on incitement to violence and investigating crimes, even when culturally sensitive, would be wiser.

    Anyway, I must be off.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 30,971
    Covfefe said:

    DavidL said:



    I was at a licensing seminar in Glasgow on Friday. The most interesting talk was on immigration and the incredibly onerous duties being put on employers, particularly in an industry dependent upon a large number of casual workers. The latest Immigration Act specifically sets out it is intended to make things hostile for illegal immigrants. It does this by making it risky to employ them, rent them housing, allow them to travel etc etc.

    The most startling statistic was that between 2010 and 2015 there were no less than 45k changes to immigration rules and guidance, roughly 5 a day. Immigration judges and advisers cannot keep up, appeals are everywhere and the system is on the edge of chaos.

    Some of this might work in the medium term but May as Home Secretary let loose a tidal wave of changes to try and drive immigration down. It strongly suggests a bureaucratic mindset to problem solving I instinctively have little affiliation with.

    And then there are the prisons. As Home Secretary, these were under her control. But not saint theresa just went cut cut cut and the result is chaos and complete lawlessness 'inside' as documentary after documentary makes clear. Meanwhile in the Netherlands, prisons are running out of prisoners. There, they treat those who fall over in life and break laws etc as human beings and do their utmost to ensure that they are able to recover fully and lead a life worth living. The re-offending rate is a fraction of ours. Now that is good policy. It costs more money, but which is more sensible? Increasing lawlessness 'inside' and therefore, inevitably, in society generally? Or a well thought out plan that leads to rehabilitation? Clearly it is a good thing to build a society where people are all treated as human beings. Because we all are.
    Actually, no, prisons were nothing to do with May. The Justice dept was split from Home Office a good number of years ago.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 24,348
    Cyan said:

    Nigelb said:

    Cyan said:

    Cyan said:

    * Put the army on to the streets
    Give them a role protecting all crowded places such as shopping centres, sporting events, and concerts. Ensure that all security staff have regular contact with the military. Increase defence education. Today it is bombs at concerts and marauders with vehicles; tomorrow it may be men with AK-47s at schools or hospitals, as in the Caucasus. Make readiness and defence more than words: mobilise the population.

    The army is cut to absolute bare bones, heading for 70k men, already badly overreached

    There is no army to put on the streets.
    Your second sentence is an exaggeration. As for the first - yes indeed! Cut other commitments. There are still British forces in Afghanistan. They can defend Britain better if brought home.

    Enormous resources are spent on NATO involvement too.
    Reneging on our NATO commitments in response to this would be down there with cancelling the election. Possibly even more stupid.
    What a shame you don't provide any reason for your opinion. Britain's military forces are overstretched and there is a growing need to defend this country on its own territory.

    Who's talking about reneging? Britain could file Article 13 to leave NATO a year later. That is in accordance with the Treaty.

    "there is a growing need to defend this country on its own territory."

    Which should not be performed by soldiers, except in very extreme circumstances.

    As long as there has been terrorism, there has been international terrorism that needs to be tackled internationally. Pulling out of international agreements seems counter-productive to say the least.

    People need to get a grip. What's happened are a couple of tragedies, but of thankfully small scale. Would we call off an election if there was a plane crash from technical problems that killed a couple of hundred people? Of course not.

    We should not let our reactions to such tragedies give evil-doers a victory.
  • RobinWiggsRobinWiggs Posts: 608
    Strong statement.

    The only thing missing was to invite the other parties to join the review of counter terrorism strategy as it is a national issue not a political one.
  • jonny83jonny83 Posts: 833
    "If we need to increase length of custodial sentences, even apparently less serious offences, that is what we’ll do"

    Interesting to see exactly what she has in mind...
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 42,504
    edited June 2017
    Sandpit said:

    PM confirms incident lasted eight minutes. Seven dead, plus three attackers, 48 injured, some critically. Attackers were wearing fake explosive belts.

    Thank God they got all the terrorists so quickly and they didn't have guns or proper suicide vest.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 26,819
    tlg86 said:

    I see Andrew Marr has been cancelled, but Sunday Politics still listed for 11 am.

    One ray of sunshine
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 30,971
    edited June 2017
    jonny83 said:

    This is a political speech, not a statement about the events last night.

    Yep, statement on last night and now pitching a vision of what she wants to do. See the custodial sentences bit.
    It was a speech by the Prime Minister, a job she still holds, even though not an MP. Seemed reasonable to me, although I have concerns about this talk of regulating the Internet and taking on Facebook and so on.
  • AlsoIndigoAlsoIndigo Posts: 1,852
    surbiton said:

    Maybe I did not elaborate enough. Their contention is that many people cannot be contacted by polls. However, these people usually do not vote either.

    I am not sure that follows. At lot of the 75+ age group will be almost impossible to poll (phone barring, limited internet useage, not opening the doors to strangers) and yet are known to be very dedicated voters, and generally speaking support rightwing parties.

  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 2,849

    The age of tolerance and hand-wringing has to come to an end. It doesn't make us any safer.

    Virtue signalling, vigils and candles do not defeat hate

    We cannot appease our way to peace

    The truth is we've had a multi-pronged approach since 9/11. There's been a huge reluctance at times to explicitly discuss Islam's role, but it hasn't all been a PC approach. There's been major expansion of anti-terror laws and powers, major military interventions in the regions the threats arise from, and so on.

    If we'd just done one thing and it had failed that would be one thing. But knowing what levers we should have pulled harder and which we shouldn't have touched is unclear.After 9/11 we invaded Afghanistan, but 7/7 still happened. Should we have used more military force, or different use of force, or did we do right thing but just got unlucky? It's difficult to say.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 25,460
    edited June 2017
    JonWC said:

    IanB2 said:

    JonWC said:





    es.



    Your second part makes a lot of assumptions with rather less evidence; you may be right that there is a bias towards the right amongst the unengaged (although in the past at least many wwc would fall into that box and have leaned left), but there is no way of knowing whether it is big or small.
    IanB2 said:

    JonWC said:

    A polling and betting post.. to distract me from the horrors.


    My theory is these people are of the more insular and cynical kind, like to keep themselves to themselves, lean conservative, and are surely likely to be especially unimpressed by the views of Jezza and co?

    I think you can also start to understand why the main parties still seem to believe in a big Tory win, because they will be registering this in canvass returns.

    With that in mind I've had a few relatively modest bets on the bigger Tory majorities while the odds are good.

    Your first half hits the nail. Except that doorstep polling, because it is expensive, needs a lot of questions to be answered at once, and hence it quite intrusive. I had kantar round last month and doing their poll in my living room took up half an hour. And the demographics of people who are a) likely to be at home, and b) willing to do this, is at least as biased as the other methods.

    Your second part makes a lot of assumptions with rather less evidence; you may be right that there is a bias towards the right amongst the unengaged (although in the past at least many wwc would fall into that box and have leaned left), but there is no way of knowing whether it is big or small.
    Agree I am making assumptions, though I don't think unengaged is really the right word for it They might be more engaged for all I know, just less open (struggling for the precise word).
    Being specific, it's about whether and how people who are willing to be polled might be different from people who are not. I was simply pointing out that, beyond that point, your post was mainly speculation. I could match your caricature of the insular elderly Tory lady who doesn't answer cold calls with left-leaning caricatures of people who might not be bothered, or be too busy, to respond to a poll. Basically we are just guessing.

    In terms of the models, there are credible reasons for thinking Survation has Labour too high (too many young people) but also why ComRes and ICM have them too low (the young will beat 2015 turnout). So a midpoint between the two is the best guess.

    The bottom line is that this election depends like never before on the turnout of the young. Lots of scope for anecdotal PB'er reports on Thursday of polling stations that feel like the school dinner queue....(to us oldies, anyway)
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 26,819
    Quincel said:

    PMTM has officially suspended her national campaign, but the reality is she's announcing a new counter-terrorism manifesto in all but name in this speech. Hinting at significant internet controls etc. Light on detail of course, but interesting decision to go beyond speaking about this specific attack.

    Typical Tories, will use any vile method to get an advantage over their rivals. Cancelling events today gives them a whole day in the limelight pretending they will actually do something other than reduce police , reduce security etc etc.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 4,156
    FF43 said:

    calum said:

    As the Scottish polls start to catch up with Corbynmania, I think SCON are now set to come 3rd behind SLAB in the National vote. With the UK polls closing this will present tactical voters with quite a number of dilemmas.

    https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/the-corbyn-effect-poll-shows-rise-in-scots-support-as-snp-warn-over-letting-in-tories-in-by-back-door/

    Is there any reason to suppose that Scottish Labour is doing dramatically better than it was one or two weeks ago, other than one opinion poll?

    Besides anything else, Panelbase have also, apparently, reported this morning (details further down thread) and still have the Tories 10pts ahead of Labour in second.
    The subsamples of the UK polls show a small drift from the SNP to Labour for this election, which is backed up by this Scottish poll. There are more SNP to Labour switchers than SNP to Conservative. Having made their point at the last Westminster election, independence supporting ex Labour voters are more willing to consider returning to Labour for UK-wide reasons. It doesn't necessarily mean they have given up on the SNP however.
    We shall see what happens in the coming election; however, in the longer term I suspect that one of the following three scenarios will play out in Scotland:

    1. Independence
    2. The SNP fails to get independence, but most of the 45% stick with it (or the Greens at Holyrood, which largely amounts to the same thing) indefinitely
    3. Scots genuinely fall out of love with the SNP - and traipse straight back to Labour

    More hard-headed folk in the Conservative Party in England need to start thinking about how to get rid of Scotland as quickly as possible. I'd favour the axing of the Barnett Formula and its replacement with something that's actually fair (which would inevitably take a great chunk of money off the Scots and give it to the Welsh.) If I'm right in my suspicion, which is that most Scots don't give a fuck about the UK and that the No campaign only won in 2014 because of bribery, then that should do the trick.
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,557

    jonny83 said:

    This is a political speech, not a statement about the events last night.

    Yep, statement on last night and now pitching a vision of what she wants to do. See the custodial sentences bit.
    It was a speech by the Prime Minister, a job she still holds, even though not an MP. Seemed reasonable to me, although I have concerns about this talk of regulating the Internet and taking on Facebook and so on.
    Disrupting communication networks is vital for counter-terrorism. We have to bring our laws and actions into line with the reality of how the internet is being abused.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 26,819

    Cyan said:

    Nigelb said:

    Cyan said:

    Cyan said:

    * Put the army on to the streets
    Give them a role protecting all crowded places such as shopping centres, sporting events, and concerts. Ensure that all security staff have regular contact with the military. Increase defence education. Today it is bombs at concerts and marauders with vehicles; tomorrow it may be men with AK-47s at schools or hospitals, as in the Caucasus. Make readiness and defence more than words: mobilise the population.

    The army is cut to absolute bare bones, heading for 70k men, already badly overreached

    There is no army to put on the streets.
    Your second sentence is an exaggeration. As for the first - yes indeed! Cut other commitments. There are still British forces in Afghanistan. They can defend Britain better if brought home.

    Enormous resources are spent on NATO involvement too.
    Reneging on our NATO commitments in response to this would be down there with cancelling the election. Possibly even more stupid.
    What a shame you don't provide any reason for your opinion. Britain's military forces are overstretched and there is a growing need to defend this country on its own territory.

    Who's talking about reneging? Britain could file Article 13 to leave NATO a year later. That is in accordance with the Treaty.

    "there is a growing need to defend this country on its own territory."

    Which should not be performed by soldiers, except in very extreme circumstances.

    As long as there has been terrorism, there has been international terrorism that needs to be tackled internationally. Pulling out of international agreements seems counter-productive to say the least.

    People need to get a grip. What's happened are a couple of tragedies, but of thankfully small scale. Would we call off an election if there was a plane crash from technical problems that killed a couple of hundred people? Of course not.

    We should not let our reactions to such tragedies give evil-doers a victory.
    Usual Tory bed wetters , wobbling like jellies.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 33,872
    edited June 2017
    Barking's only a couple of miles from Ilford North :open_mouth:
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 26,819

    Strong statement.

    The only thing missing was to invite the other parties to join the review of counter terrorism strategy as it is a national issue not a political one.

    Vacuous empty words as ever.
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,223
    The BBC already has a 'security expert' criticising Prevent. Give me strength.
  • jonny83jonny83 Posts: 833
    Marr had some small interviews on the BBC news channel this morning with David Davis and then Emily Thornberry. The channel cut to the studio.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 24,348

    Sandpit said:

    PM confirms incident lasted eight minutes. Seven dead, plus three attackers, 48 injured, some critically. Attackers were wearing fake explosive belts.

    Thank God they got all the terrorists so quickly and they didn't have guns or proper suicide vest.
    Which in itself is probably a 'success' for the police and security services. It could have been much worse, and in some other countries would have been.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    surbiton said:


    The abstract of Prosser's paper at this link gives a clearer explanation imo -- the polls are not finding enough non-voters, which means their weighting knocks out too many voters.

    https://academic.oup.com/poq/article-abstract/doi/10.1093/poq/nfx015/3852137/Missing-Nonvoters-and-Misweighted?redirectedFrom=fulltext

    Maybe I did not elaborate enough. Their contention is that many people cannot be contacted by polls. However, these people usually do not vote either.

    So, rather than weight the sample to represent the population as a whole, they should weight the sample to represent the voting population

    The ICM's of this world appears to weight the sample to represent the population as per Census etc*., then adjust again to get rid of people who are not likely to vote.

    So, why do the first bit ?

    * to include those unlikely to vote
    If you like; I was just saying it is clearer to look at the problem the other way round -- the way Prosser put it in the paper is clearer than the inverted explanation he tweeted, but your conclusion would remain the same: the thing to be modelled is the voting population rather than the census population. The other takeaway is that self-reported likelihood to vote is reliable.

    [Note -- I've had to trim this for length which means ditching the OP we are discussing.]
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 25,460

    Barking's only a couple of miles from Ilford North :open_mouth:

    Four or five at least
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 10,283
    fuck off Thornberry - that is all
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 19,557

    Covfefe said:

    DavidL said:



    I was at a licensing seminar in Glasgow on Friday. The most interesting talk was on immigration and the incredibly onerous duties being put on employers, particularly in an industry dependent upon a large number of casual workers. The latest Immigration Act specifically sets out it is intended to make things hostile for illegal immigrants. It does this by making it risky to employ them, rent them housing, allow them to travel etc etc.

    The most startling statistic was that between 2010 and 2015 there were no less than 45k changes to immigration rules and guidance, roughly 5 a day. Immigration judges and advisers cannot keep up, appeals are everywhere and the system is on the edge of chaos.

    Some of this might work in the medium term but May as Home Secretary let loose a tidal wave of changes to try and drive immigration down. It strongly suggests a bureaucratic mindset to problem solving I instinctively have little affiliation with.

    And then there are the prisons. As Home Secretary, these were under her control. But not saint theresa just went cut cut cut and the result is chaos and complete lawlessness 'inside' as documentary after documentary makes clear. Meanwhile in the Netherlands, prisons are running out of prisoners. There, they treat those who fall over in life and break laws etc as human beings and do their utmost to ensure that they are able to recover fully and lead a life worth living. The re-offending rate is a fraction of ours. Now that is good policy. It costs more money, but which is more sensible? Increasing lawlessness 'inside' and therefore, inevitably, in society generally? Or a well thought out plan that leads to rehabilitation? Clearly it is a good thing to build a society where people are all treated as human beings. Because we all are.
    Actually, no, prisons were nothing to do with May. The Justice dept was split from Home Office a good number of years ago.
    Apart from the misdirected (for once) attack on May, I agree with the sentiments of the post. Interestingly, in his fairly brief time as Justice Secretary, Gove showed signs of moving in this direction - given time, he might have proved as good a Justice Secretary as he was poor at Education.
  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    A new poll for you all Norstat

    Con 39
    Lab 35
    LD 8
    UKIP 6
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 18,230
    Shome misthtake?

    'Former Labour ministers call for ban on pre-election polls to be considered'

    http://tinyurl.com/ycvpnlmp

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 52,908
    malcolmg said:

    Quincel said:

    PMTM has officially suspended her national campaign, but the reality is she's announcing a new counter-terrorism manifesto in all but name in this speech. Hinting at significant internet controls etc. Light on detail of course, but interesting decision to go beyond speaking about this specific attack.

    Typical Tories, will use any vile method to get an advantage over their etc etc.
    You seem to assume the method does give them an advantage. It didn't before, even if nefarious moves are behind it.

    FF43 said:

    calum said:

    As the Scottish polls start to catch up with Corbynmania, I think SCON are now set to come 3rd behind SLAB in the National vote. With the UK polls closing this will present tactical voters with quite a number of dilemmas.

    https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/the-corbyn-effect-poll-shows-rise-in-scots-support-as-snp-warn-over-letting-in-tories-in-by-back-door/

    Besides anything else, Panelbase have also, apparently, reported this morning (details further down thread) and still have the Tories 10pts ahead of Labour in second.
    The subsamples of the UK polls show a small drift from the SNP to Labour for this election, which is backed up by this Scottish poll. There are more SNP to Labour switchers than SNP to Conservative. Having made their point at the last Westminster election, independence supporting ex Labour voters are more willing to consider returning to Labour for UK-wide reasons. It doesn't necessarily mean they have given up on the SNP however.
    We shall see what happens in the coming election; however, in the longer term I suspect that one of the following three scenarios will play out in Scotland:

    1. Independence
    2. The SNP fails to get independence, but most of the 45% stick with it (or the Greens at Holyrood, which largely amounts to the same thing) indefinitely
    3. Scots genuinely fall out of love with the SNP - and traipse straight back to Labour

    More hard-headed folk in the Conservative Party in England need to start thinking about how to get rid of Scotland as quickly as possible. I'd favour the axing of the Barnett Formula and its replacement with something that's actually fair (which would inevitably take a great chunk of money off the Scots and give it to the Welsh.) If I'm right in my suspicion, which is that most Scots don't give a fuck about the UK and that the No campaign only won in 2014 because of bribery, then that should do the trick.
    ANy party that does not seemingly or overtly give up on the UK Union has gone a long way to securing my vote. I would be hard pressed to repeat my intention on June 8th if the Tories did so.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 10,283
    Thornberry just get off the tv you stupid arse
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 52,908

    Shome misthtake?

    'Former Labour ministers call for ban on pre-election polls to be considered'

    http://tinyurl.com/ycvpnlmp

    Oops!
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 25,460
    edited June 2017

    FF43 said:

    calum said:

    As the Scottish polls start to catch up with Corbynmania, I think SCON are now set to come 3rd behind SLAB in the National vote. With the UK polls closing this will present tactical voters with quite a number of dilemmas.

    https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/the-corbyn-effect-poll-shows-rise-in-scots-support-as-snp-warn-over-letting-in-tories-in-by-back-door/

    Is there any reason to suppose that Scottish Labour is doing dramatically better than it was one or two weeks ago, other than one opinion poll?

    Besides anything else, Panelbase have also, apparently, reported this morning (details further down thread) and still have the Tories 10pts ahead of Labour in second.
    The subsamples of the UK polls show a small drift from the SNP to Labour for this election, which is backed up by this Scottish poll. There are more SNP to Labour switchers than SNP to Conservative. Having made their point at the last Westminster election, independence supporting ex Labour voters are more willing to consider returning to Labour for UK-wide reasons. It doesn't necessarily mean they have given up on the SNP however.
    We shall see what happens in the coming election; however, in the longer term I suspect that one of the following three scenarios will play out in Scotland:

    1. Independence
    2. The SNP fails to get independence, but most of the 45% stick with it (or the Greens at Holyrood, which largely amounts to the same thing) indefinitely
    3. Scots genuinely fall out of love with the SNP - and traipse straight back to Labour

    More hard-headed folk in the Conservative Party in England need to start thinking about how to get rid of Scotland as quickly as possible. I'd favour the axing of the Barnett Formula and its replacement with something that's actually fair (which would inevitably take a great chunk of money off the Scots and give it to the Welsh.) If I'm right in my suspicion, which is that most Scots don't give a fuck about the UK and that the No campaign only won in 2014 because of bribery, then that should do the trick.
    Minor problem being that presiding over the break up of the union would put the Unionist Party out of power for a generation.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 26,819

    FF43 said:

    calum said:

    As the Scottish polls start to catch up with Corbynmania, I think SCON are now set to come 3rd behind SLAB in the National vote. With the UK polls closing this will present tactical voters with quite a number of dilemmas.

    https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/the-corbyn-effect-poll-shows-rise-in-scots-support-as-snp-warn-over-letting-in-tories-in-by-back-door/

    Is there any reason to suppose that Scottish Labour is doing dramatically better than it was one or two weeks ago, other than one opinion poll?

    Besides anything else, Panelbase have also, apparently, reported this morning (details further down thread) and still have the Tories 10pts ahead of Labour in second.
    The subsamples of the UK polls show a small drift from the SNP to Labour for this election, which is backed up by this Scottish poll. There are more SNP to Labour switchers than SNP to Conservative. Having made their point at the last Westminster election, independence supporting ex Labour voters are more willing to consider returning to Labour for UK-wide reasons. It doesn't necessarily mean they have given up on the SNP however.
    We shall see what happens in the coming election; however, in the longer term I suspect that one of the following three scenarios will play out in Scotland:

    1. Independence
    2. The SNP fails to get independence, but most of the 45% stick with it (or the Greens at Holyrood, which largely amounts to the same thing) indefinitely
    3. Scots genuinely fall out of love with the SNP - and traipse straight back to Labour

    More hard-headed folk in the Conservative Party in England need to start thinking about how to get rid of Scotland as quickly as possible. I'd favour the axing of the Barnett Formula and its replacement with something that's actually fair (which would inevitably take a great chunk of money off the Scots and give it to the Welsh.) If I'm right in my suspicion, which is that most Scots don't give a fuck about the UK and that the No campaign only won in 2014 because of bribery, then that should do the trick.
    LOL, Little Englander beats the drum. You halfwit you are hanging on like grim death because you are milking us. You sad F***s will soon be left on your jack jones with only yourselves to turn on.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 42,504
    RoyalBlue said:

    The BBC already has a 'security expert' criticising Prevent. Give me strength.

    ARe they not worrying about the non-existant backlash yet?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 52,908

    A new poll for you all Norstat

    Con 39
    Lab 35
    LD 8
    UKIP 6

    If that one and its trend is right, Corbyn could end up most votes on Thursday, as the Tories have little time to Change the narrative of doing badly.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 25,460
    kle4 said:

    malcolmg said:

    Quincel said:

    PMTM has officially suspended her national campaign, but the reality is she's announcing a new counter-terrorism manifesto in all but name in this speech. Hinting at significant internet controls etc. Light on detail of course, but interesting decision to go beyond speaking about this specific attack.

    tc.
    You seem to assume the method does give them an advantage. It didn't before, even if nefarious moves are behind it.

    FF43 said:

    calum said:

    As the Scottish polls start to catch up with Corbynmania, I think SCON are now set to come 3rd behind SLAB in the National vote. With the UK polls closing this will present tactical voters with quite a number of dilemmas.

    https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/the-corbyn-effect-poll-shows-rise-in-scots-support-as-snp-warn-over-letting-in-tories-in-by-back-door/

    Besides anything else, Panelbase have also, apparently, reported this morning (details further down thread) and still have the Tories 10pts ahead of Labour in second.
    The subsamples of the UK polls show a small drift from the SNP to Labour for this election, which is backed up by this Scottish poll. There are more SNP to Labour switchers than SNP to Conservative. Having made their point at the last Westminster election, independence supporting ex Labour voters are more willing to consider returning to Labour for UK-wide reasons. It doesn't necessarily mean they have given up on the SNP however.
    We shall see what happens in the coming election; however, in the longer term I suspect that one of the following three scenarios will play out in Scotland:

    1. Independence
    2. The SNP fails to get independence, but most of the 45% stick with it (or the Greens at Holyrood, which largely amounts to the same thing) indefinitely
    3. Scots genuinely fall out of love with the SNP - and traipse straight back to Labour

    More hard-headed folk in the Conservative Party in England need to start thinking about how to get rid of Scotland as quickly as possible. I'd favour the axing of the Barnett Formula and its replacement with something that's actually fair (which would inevitably take a great chunk of money off the Scots and give it to the Welsh.) If I'm right in my suspicion, which is that most Scots don't give a fuck about the UK and that the No campaign only won in 2014 because of bribery, then that should do the trick.
    ANy party that does not seemingly or overtly give up on the UK Union has gone a long way to securing my vote. I would be hard pressed to repeat my intention on June 8th if the Tories did so.
    You don't sound like a Tory, kle? Why add to their majority?
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 17,102
    Completely off topic so apologies in advance.

    Is there anywhere where I can find a handy guide to the differences between self-employment as an individual and providing one's services through a company e.g. on tax, NI, VAT etc?

    Thanks.

    A VM will do to save clogging up the thread.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 26,819
    edited June 2017

    jonny83 said:

    This is a political speech, not a statement about the events last night.

    Yep, statement on last night and now pitching a vision of what she wants to do. See the custodial sentences bit.
    It was a speech by the Prime Minister, a job she still holds, even though not an MP. Seemed reasonable to me, although I have concerns about this talk of regulating the Internet and taking on Facebook and so on.
    Disrupting communication networks is vital for counter-terrorism. We have to bring our laws and actions into line with the reality of how the internet is being abused.
    Yes the state running every facet of our life and spying on us 24x7 is a great Tory ideal. Get agrip wobbly , it was 3 nutters in a van not an invading army.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 52,908
    RoyalBlue said:

    The BBC already has a 'security expert' criticising Prevent. Give me strength.

    I'm sure the Labour manifesto promises to review Prevent. I cannot speak as to it actually being effective or not, though it seems to be used as a bogeyman a lot.
  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    kle4 said:

    A new poll for you all Norstat

    Con 39
    Lab 35
    LD 8
    UKIP 6

    If that one and its trend is right, Corbyn could end up most votes on Thursday, as the Tories have little time to Change the narrative of doing badly.
    Only 1 previous poll from this Norwegian company back on April 23rd .
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 20,894



    Anyway

    nows Jezzas big chance, TNT discovered in Dublin linked to PIRA and Sinn Fein

    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/six-kilos-of-tnt-discovered-in-dublin-could-have-made-30-bombs-35786074.html
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 17,102
    RoyalBlue said:

    The BBC already has a 'security expert' criticising Prevent. Give me strength.

    Well worth reading what the CPS prosecutor, himself a Muslim, said on this in his Times interview yesterday.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 13,533

    People need to get a grip. What's happened are a couple of tragedies, but of thankfully small scale. Would we call off an election if there was a plane crash from technical problems that killed a couple of hundred people? Of course not.

    Don't worry, the Prime Minister is going to keep calm and carry on with the agenda that she's always had regardless of terrorism, which is to try to control and censor the internet.
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,223
    kle4 said:

    A new poll for you all Norstat

    Con 39
    Lab 35
    LD 8
    UKIP 6

    If that one and its trend is right, Corbyn could end up most votes on Thursday, as the Tories have little time to Change the narrative of doing badly.
    Pull yourself together! Most people have already decided how to vote. Even those figures when Baxtered show the Tory majority increasing, without accounting for gains in Scotland.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 13,599

    The age of tolerance and hand-wringing has to come to an end. It doesn't make us any safer.

    Virtue signalling, vigils and candles do not defeat hate

    We cannot appease our way to peace

    The Manchester bomber was reported 5 times by his local community to the security services.

    What are you proposing?
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 10,283

    Mrs wobbley better get that bloody podium out in downing Street and have a clear message of action. God forbid it is a terrorist sympathizer doing this next time.

    It will be the usual waffle with no concrete changes.
    She'll restate her plans to further slash police and armed forced budgets whilst claiming Labour's plans to restore them threaten national security.
    And yet Thornberry is the one not wanting to talk about events - she must see this as a real positive

    Still want to disarm the police and shut down MI5 do you?

    Oh, does Abbott still cheer every victory for our enemies?
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 33,872

    A new poll for you all Norstat

    Con 39
    Lab 35
    LD 8
    UKIP 6

    Tories sub-40%? MUST be an outlier :)
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 26,819




    Anyway

    nows Jezzas big chance, TNT discovered in Dublin linked to PIRA and Sinn Fein

    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/six-kilos-of-tnt-discovered-in-dublin-could-have-made-30-bombs-35786074.html

    Alan, are they home grown or immigrants.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    jonny83 said:

    This is a political speech, not a statement about the events last night.

    Yep, statement on last night and now pitching a vision of what she wants to do. See the custodial sentences bit.
    It was a speech by the Prime Minister, a job she still holds, even though not an MP. Seemed reasonable to me, although I have concerns about this talk of regulating the Internet and taking on Facebook and so on.
    Disrupting communication networks is vital for counter-terrorism. We have to bring our laws and actions into line with the reality of how the internet is being abused.
    Weakening encryption undermines ecommerce and security. The secret squirrels can already tell who is talking to whom -- so can identify networks. Weakening encryption would add little but would facilitate more cyberattacks like the ransomware one the other day which, luckily for us, went off at half-cock.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 4,156
    malcolmg said:

    FF43 said:

    calum said:

    As the Scottish polls start to catch up with Corbynmania, I think SCON are now set to come 3rd behind SLAB in the National vote. With the UK polls closing this will present tactical voters with quite a number of dilemmas.

    https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/the-corbyn-effect-poll-shows-rise-in-scots-support-as-snp-warn-over-letting-in-tories-in-by-back-door/

    Is there any reason to suppose that Scottish Labour is doing dramatically better than it was one or two weeks ago, other than one opinion poll?

    Besides anything else, Panelbase have also, apparently, reported this morning (details further down thread) and still have the Tories 10pts ahead of Labour in second.
    The subsamples of the UK polls show a small drift from the SNP to Labour for this election, which is backed up by this Scottish poll. There are more SNP to Labour switchers than SNP to Conservative. Having made their point at the last Westminster election, independence supporting ex Labour voters are more willing to consider returning to Labour for UK-wide reasons. It doesn't necessarily mean they have given up on the SNP however.
    We shall see what happens in the coming election; however, in the longer term I suspect that one of the following three scenarios will play out in Scotland:

    1. Independence
    2. The SNP fails to get independence, but most of the 45% stick with it (or the Greens at Holyrood, which largely amounts to the same thing) indefinitely
    3. Scots genuinely fall out of love with the SNP - and traipse straight back to Labour

    More hard-headed folk in the Conservative Party in England need to start thinking about how to get rid of Scotland as quickly as possible. I'd favour the axing of the Barnett Formula and its replacement with something that's actually fair (which would inevitably take a great chunk of money off the Scots and give it to the Welsh.) If I'm right in my suspicion, which is that most Scots don't give a fuck about the UK and that the No campaign only won in 2014 because of bribery, then that should do the trick.
    LOL, Little Englander beats the drum. You halfwit you are hanging on like grim death because you are milking us. You sad F***s will soon be left on your jack jones with only yourselves to turn on.
    Go fuck yourself you pathetic little shit.
  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699

    A new poll for you all Norstat

    Con 39
    Lab 35
    LD 8
    UKIP 6

    Tories sub-40%? MUST be an outlier :)
    Probably includes NI so add 1 to Con and Lab
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 10,283
    May blames “the single evil ideology of Islamist extremism”, calls for an international crackdown on internet companies, vows no safe spaces for extremists, an end to tolerance of extremism, says “enough is enough… things need to change”.

    Nice words, but words are cheap - lets see some tangible action
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 18,230
    Alistair said:

    The age of tolerance and hand-wringing has to come to an end. It doesn't make us any safer.

    Virtue signalling, vigils and candles do not defeat hate

    We cannot appease our way to peace

    The Manchester bomber was reported 5 times by his local community to the security services.

    What are you proposing?
    A new non-appeasing & rigorous '6 times & your nicked' policy I'd imagine.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 2,269
    RoyalBlue said:

    kle4 said:

    A new poll for you all Norstat

    Con 39
    Lab 35
    LD 8
    UKIP 6

    If that one and its trend is right, Corbyn could end up most votes on Thursday, as the Tories have little time to Change the narrative of doing badly.
    Pull yourself together! Most people have already decided how to vote. Even those figures when Baxtered show the Tory majority increasing, without accounting for gains in Scotland.
    TMICIPM
  • OchEyeOchEye Posts: 1,469
    chloe said:
    The police responded very quickly indeed. So was there intelligence available or were the services on "critical" or black? It costs a great deal of money for the police and special services to be kept at this fast response level. There is no way that this level of response would be available normally on a week end. Which leaves the questions that will be asked, were the services aware of the general possibility or did they allow the attack to take place. I, personally prefer the first option, but that then begs the question, if the general possibility was there, why wasn't the level retained or renewed to critical?
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 20,894
    malcolmg said:




    Anyway

    nows Jezzas big chance, TNT discovered in Dublin linked to PIRA and Sinn Fein

    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/six-kilos-of-tnt-discovered-in-dublin-could-have-made-30-bombs-35786074.html

    Alan, are they home grown or immigrants.
    home grown

    In Ireland the Scots are the immigrants :-)
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,223
    Cyclefree said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    The BBC already has a 'security expert' criticising Prevent. Give me strength.

    Well worth reading what the CPS prosecutor, himself a Muslim, said on this in his Times interview yesterday.
    I'm certainly not saying it's perfect, but Jezza and co would scrap it and replace it with nothing.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 26,819

    malcolmg said:

    FF43 said:

    calum said:

    As the Scottish polls start to catch up with Corbynmania, I think SCON are now set to come 3rd behind SLAB in the National vote. With the UK polls closing this will present tactical voters with quite a number of dilemmas.

    https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/the-corbyn-effect-poll-shows-rise-in-scots-support-as-snp-warn-over-letting-in-tories-in-by-back-door/

    Is there any reason to suppose that Scottish Labour is doing dramatically better than it was one or two weeks ago, other than one opinion poll?

    Besides anything else, Panelbase have also, apparently, reported this morning (details further down thread) and still have the Tories 10pts ahead of Labour in second.
    The subsamples of the UK polls show a small drift from the SNP to Labour for this election, which is backed up by this Scottish poll. There are more SNP to Labour switchers than SNP to Conservative. Having made their point at the last Westminster election, independence supporting ex Labour voters are more willing to consider returning to Labour for UK-wide reasons. It doesn't necessarily mean they have given up on the SNP however.
    We shall see what happens in the coming election; however, in the longer term I suspect that one of the following three scenarios will play out in Scotland:

    1. Independence
    2. The SNP fails to get independence, but most of the 45% stick with it (or the Greens at Holyrood, which largely amounts to the same thing) indefinitely
    3. Scots genuinely fall out of love with the SNP - and traipse straight back to Labour

    More hard-headed folk in the Conservative Party in England need to start thinking about how to get rid of Scotland as quickly as possible. I'd favour the axing of the Barnett Formula and its replacement with something that's actually fair (which would inevitably take a great chunk of money off the Scots and give it to the Welsh.) If I'm right in my suspicion, which is that most Scots don't give a fuck about the UK and that the No campaign only won in 2014 because of bribery, then that should do the trick.
    LOL, Little Englander beats the drum. You halfwit you are hanging on like grim death because you are milking us. You sad F***s will soon be left on your jack jones with only yourselves to turn on.
    Go fuck yourself you pathetic little shit.
    Go polish your jackboots saddo
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 31,558
    Alistair said:

    The age of tolerance and hand-wringing has to come to an end. It doesn't make us any safer.

    Virtue signalling, vigils and candles do not defeat hate

    We cannot appease our way to peace

    The Manchester bomber was reported 5 times by his local community to the security services.

    What are you proposing?
    The Police have denied any contact was made
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300




    Anyway

    nows Jezzas big chance, TNT discovered in Dublin linked to PIRA and Sinn Fein

    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/six-kilos-of-tnt-discovered-in-dublin-could-have-made-30-bombs-35786074.html

    If you read the story, it seems to be feuding criminal gangs rather than terrorists.
  • ab195ab195 Posts: 477
    OchEye said:

    chloe said:
    The police responded very quickly indeed. So was there intelligence available or were the services on "critical" or black? It costs a great deal of money for the police and special services to be kept at this fast response level. There is no way that this level of response would be available normally on a week end. Which leaves the questions that will be asked, were the services aware of the general possibility or did they allow the attack to take place. I, personally prefer the first option, but that then begs the question, if the general possibility was there, why wasn't the level retained or renewed to critical?
    The armed police response really is just that quick in London.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 4,156
    IanB2 said:

    FF43 said:

    calum said:

    As the Scottish polls start to catch up with Corbynmania, I think SCON are now set to come 3rd behind SLAB in the National vote. With the UK polls closing this will present tactical voters with quite a number of dilemmas.

    https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/the-corbyn-effect-poll-shows-rise-in-scots-support-as-snp-warn-over-letting-in-tories-in-by-back-door/

    Is there any reason to suppose that Scottish Labour is doing dramatically better than it was one or two weeks ago, other than one opinion poll?

    Besides anything else, Panelbase have also, apparently, reported this morning (details further down thread) and still have the Tories 10pts ahead of Labour in second.
    The subsamples of the UK polls show a small drift from the SNP to Labour for this election, which is backed up by this Scottish poll. There are more SNP to Labour switchers than SNP to Conservative. Having made their point at the last Westminster election, independence supporting ex Labour voters are more willing to consider returning to Labour for UK-wide reasons. It doesn't necessarily mean they have given up on the SNP however.
    We shall see what happens in the coming election; however, in the longer term I suspect that one of the following three scenarios will play out in Scotland:

    1. Independence
    2. The SNP fails to get independence, but most of the 45% stick with it (or the Greens at Holyrood, which largely amounts to the same thing) indefinitely
    3. Scots genuinely fall out of love with the SNP - and traipse straight back to Labour

    More hard-headed folk in the Conservative Party in England need to start thinking about how to get rid of Scotland as quickly as possible. I'd favour the axing of the Barnett Formula and its replacement with something that's actually fair (which would inevitably take a great chunk of money off the Scots and give it to the Welsh.) If I'm right in my suspicion, which is that most Scots don't give a fuck about the UK and that the No campaign only won in 2014 because of bribery, then that should do the trick.
    Minor problem being that presiding over the break up of the union would put the Unionist Party out of power for a generation.
    Why should it? I can't imagine there'll be *that* much wailing about the fate of the Union in this day and age.

    All of the Barnett money could be spent in those parts of the country (Wales, and much of the North of England) which have not done so well in recent years. Quite a lot of the wavering and ex-Labour voters that the Tories are trying to target in those regions would probably be quite pleased.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 33,872
    edited June 2017
    IanB2 said:

    Barking's only a couple of miles from Ilford North :open_mouth:

    Four or five at least
    Nope, Three miles from that block of flats to Gants Hill.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 13,533
    edited June 2017
    Alistair said:

    The age of tolerance and hand-wringing has to come to an end. It doesn't make us any safer.

    Virtue signalling, vigils and candles do not defeat hate

    We cannot appease our way to peace

    The Manchester bomber was reported 5 times by his local community to the security services.

    What are you proposing?
    The obvious proposal to push if you're an intolerant person with a fondness for things that turn out to be counter-productive, would be internment.

    You've got a few tens of thousands of potential suspects on a watch list, some of them are going to blow things up but you don't know which, you can't keep your eye on them all, so lock them all up.

    Seems like something UKIP could be running on right now: It'll get them back in the news, it's too far for the Tories to follow them, and a *lot* of British voters would agree with them.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 19,557
    Cyan said:

    Nigelb said:

    Cyan said:

    Cyan said:

    * Put the army on to the streets
    Give them a role protecting all crowded places such as shopping centres, sporting events, and concerts. Ensure that all security staff have regular contact with the military. Increase defence education. Today it is bombs at concerts and marauders with vehicles; tomorrow it may be men with AK-47s at schools or hospitals, as in the Caucasus. Make readiness and defence more than words: mobilise the population.

    The army is cut to absolute bare bones, heading for 70k men, already badly overreached

    There is no army to put on the streets.
    Your second sentence is an exaggeration. As for the first - yes indeed! Cut other commitments. There are still British forces in Afghanistan. They can defend Britain better if brought home.

    Enormous resources are spent on NATO involvement too.
    Reneging on our NATO commitments in response to this would be down there with cancelling the election. Possibly even more stupid.
    What a shame you don't provide any reason for your opinion. Britain's military forces are overstretched and there is a growing need to defend this country on its own territory.

    Who's talking about reneging? Britain could file Article 13 and leave NATO a year later. That is in accordance with the Treaty.

    If you don't see the value in NATO, then I don't have time to argue with you today - got stuff to do now. What seemed foolish to me was contemplating abandoning an alliance of nearly seventy years, to no obvious benefit, on the basis of the events of the past couple of weeks.

  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 4,156
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    FF43 said:

    calum said:

    As the Scottish polls start to catch up with Corbynmania, I think SCON are now set to come 3rd behind SLAB in the National vote. With the UK polls closing this will present tactical voters with quite a number of dilemmas.

    https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/the-corbyn-effect-poll-shows-rise-in-scots-support-as-snp-warn-over-letting-in-tories-in-by-back-door/

    Is there any reason to suppose that Scottish Labour is doing dramatically better than it was one or two weeks ago, other than one opinion poll?

    Besides anything else, Panelbase have also, apparently, reported this morning (details further down thread) and still have the Tories 10pts ahead of Labour in second.
    The subsamples of the UK polls show a small drift from the SNP to Labour for this election, which is backed up by this Scottish poll. There are more SNP to Labour switchers than SNP to Conservative. Having made their point at the last Westminster election, independence supporting ex Labour voters are more willing to consider returning to Labour for UK-wide reasons. It doesn't necessarily mean they have given up on the SNP however.
    We shall see what happens in the coming election; however, in the longer term I suspect that one of the following three scenarios will play out in Scotland:

    1. Independence
    2. The SNP fails to get independence, but most of the 45% stick with it (or the Greens at Holyrood, which largely amounts to the same thing) indefinitely
    3. Scots genuinely fall out of love with the SNP - and traipse straight back to Labour

    More hard-headed folk in the Conservative Party in England need to start thinking about how to get rid of Scotland as quickly as possible. I'd favour the axing of the Barnett Formula and its replacement with something that's actually fair (which would inevitably take a great chunk of money off the Scots and give it to the Welsh.) If I'm right in my suspicion, which is that most Scots don't give a fuck about the UK and that the No campaign only won in 2014 because of bribery, then that should do the trick.
    LOL, Little Englander beats the drum. You halfwit you are hanging on like grim death because you are milking us. You sad F***s will soon be left on your jack jones with only yourselves to turn on.
    Go fuck yourself you pathetic little shit.
    Go polish your jackboots saddo
    No, you go and polish yours. Your attitude has always been apparent and it stinks. Nasty, cruel, malignant, pathetic, disgusting, fascistic, petty blood-and-soil nationalist. Sick, depraved fuck. Go fuck yourself.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 20,894




    Anyway

    nows Jezzas big chance, TNT discovered in Dublin linked to PIRA and Sinn Fein

    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/six-kilos-of-tnt-discovered-in-dublin-could-have-made-30-bombs-35786074.html

    If you read the story, it seems to be feuding criminal gangs rather than terrorists.
    are you daft ?

    the paramilitaries run the crims and always have done, where do you think the money comes from to run a military campaign ?
  • I've just sent an email to members suspending campaigning locally until tomorrow evening.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 20,911

    Alistair said:

    The age of tolerance and hand-wringing has to come to an end. It doesn't make us any safer.

    Virtue signalling, vigils and candles do not defeat hate

    We cannot appease our way to peace

    The Manchester bomber was reported 5 times by his local community to the security services.

    What are you proposing?
    The obvious proposal to push if you're an intolerant person with a fondness for things that turn out to be counter-productive, would be internment.

    You've got a few tens of thousands of potential suspects on a watch list, some of them are going to blow things up but you don't know which, you can't keep your eye on them all, so lock them all up.

    Seems like something UKIP could be running on right now: It'll get them back in the news, it's too far for the Tories to follow them, and a *lot* of British voters would agree with them.
    Of course we all know how well that worked last time we tried it in NI. I would hope even Nuttall would not be that dumb.
  • AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,457
    OchEye said:


    The police responded very quickly indeed. So was there intelligence available or were the services on "critical" or black? It costs a great deal of money for the police and special services to be kept at this fast response level. There is no way that this level of response would be available normally on a week end.

    That's the norm nowadays - in London there are permanently deployed armed police circling around in cars 24/7.


  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 13,599
    When proposing radical solutions remember that it is ISIS's stated aim to make it intolerable for Muslims to live in the West.

    The primary purpose of these attacks is specifically to generate an anti-muslim backlash.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 25,460

    IanB2 said:

    FF43 said:

    calum said:

    As the Scottish polls start to catch up with Corbynmania, I think SCON are now set to come 3rd behind SLAB in the National vote. With the UK polls closing this will present tactical voters with quite a number of dilemmas.

    https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/the-corbyn-effect-poll-shows-rise-in-scots-support-as-snp-warn-over-letting-in-tories-in-by-back-door/

    Is there any reason to suppose that Scottish Labour is doing dramatically better than it was one or two weeks ago, other than one opinion poll?

    Besides anything else, Panelbase have also, apparently, reported this morning (details further down thread) and still have the Tories 10pts ahead of Labour in second.
    The subsamples of the UK polls show a small drift from the SNP to Labour for this election, which is backed up by this Scottish poll. There are more SNP to Labour switchers than SNP to Conservative. Having made their point at the last Westminster election, independence supporting ex Labour voters are more willing to consider returning to Labour for UK-wide reasons. It doesn't necessarily mean they have given up on the SNP however.
    We shall see what happens in the coming election; however, in the longer term I suspect that one of the following three scenarios will play out in Scotland:

    1. Independence
    2. The SNP fails to get independence, but most of the 45% stick with it (or the Greens at Holyrood, which largely amounts to the same thing) indefinitely
    3. Scots genuinely fall out of love with the SNP - and traipse straight back to Labour

    More hard-headed folk in the Conservative Party in England need to start thinking about how to get rid of Scotland as quickly as possible. I'd favour the axing of the Barnett Formula and its replacement with something that's actually fair (which would inevitably take a great chunk of money off the Scots and give it to the Welsh.) If I'm right in my suspicion, which is that most Scots don't give a fuck about the UK and that the No campaign only won in 2014 because of bribery, then that should do the trick.
    Minor problem being that presiding over the break up of the union would put the Unionist Party out of power for a generation.
    Why should it? I can't imagine there'll be *that* much wailing about the fate of the Union in this day and age.

    All of the Barnett money could be spent in those parts of the country (Wales, and much of the North of England) which have not done so well in recent years. Quite a lot of the wavering and ex-Labour voters that the Tories are trying to target in those regions would probably be quite pleased.
    You need a cunning plan to get Labour into power and preside over it.
  • OchEyeOchEye Posts: 1,469
    ab195 said:

    OchEye said:

    chloe said:
    The police responded very quickly indeed. So was there intelligence available or were the services on "critical" or black? It costs a great deal of money for the police and special services to be kept at this fast response level. There is no way that this level of response would be available normally on a week end. Which leaves the questions that will be asked, were the services aware of the general possibility or did they allow the attack to take place. I, personally prefer the first option, but that then begs the question, if the general possibility was there, why wasn't the level retained or renewed to critical?
    The armed police response really is just that quick in London.
    Not maintained at that level without authorisation. Only one person in the UK has that, and she lives in 10 Downing Street.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,005

    Alistair said:

    The age of tolerance and hand-wringing has to come to an end. It doesn't make us any safer.

    Virtue signalling, vigils and candles do not defeat hate

    We cannot appease our way to peace

    The Manchester bomber was reported 5 times by his local community to the security services.

    What are you proposing?
    The obvious proposal to push if you're an intolerant person with a fondness for things that turn out to be counter-productive, would be internment.

    You've got a few tens of thousands of potential suspects on a watch list, some of them are going to blow things up but you don't know which, you can't keep your eye on them all, so lock them all up.

    Seems like something UKIP could be running on right now: It'll get them back in the news, it's too far for the Tories to follow them, and a *lot* of British voters would agree with them.
    Totally agree UKip could get a lot of support regarding that approach .I believe they have not suspended their campaign .However do not think they will get any media airtime.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 10,265

    FF43 said:

    calum said:

    As the Scottish polls start to catch up with Corbynmania, I think SCON are now set to come 3rd behind SLAB in the National vote. With the UK polls closing this will present tactical voters with quite a number of dilemmas.

    https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/the-corbyn-effect-poll-shows-rise-in-scots-support-as-snp-warn-over-letting-in-tories-in-by-back-door/

    Is there any reason to suppose that Scottish Labour is doing dramatically better than it was one or two weeks ago, other than one opinion poll?

    Besides anything else, Panelbase have also, apparently, reported this morning (details further down thread) and still have the Tories 10pts ahead of Labour in second.
    The subsamples of the UK polls show a small drift from the SNP to Labour for this election, which is backed up by this Scottish poll. There are more SNP to Labour switchers than SNP to Conservative. Having made their point at the last Westminster election, independence supporting ex Labour voters are more willing to consider returning to Labour for UK-wide reasons. It doesn't necessarily mean they have given up on the SNP however.
    We shall see what happens in the coming election; however, in the longer term I suspect that one of the following three scenarios will play out in Scotland:

    1. Independence
    2. The SNP fails to get independence, but most of the 45% stick with it (or the Greens at Holyrood, which largely amounts to the same thing) indefinitely
    3. Scots genuinely fall out of love with the SNP - and traipse straight back to Labour

    More hard-headed folk in the Conservative Party in England need to start thinking about how to get rid of Scotland as quickly as possible. I'd favour the axing of the Barnett Formula and its replacement with something that's actually fair (which would inevitably take a great chunk of money off the Scots and give it to the Welsh.) If I'm right in my suspicion, which is that most Scots don't give a fuck about the UK and that the No campaign only won in 2014 because of bribery, then that should do the trick.
    If the English get fed up with Scotland, the gig's up for the United Kingdom. We diminish ourselves each time. First leaving the EU then breaking the UK.
  • RobinWiggsRobinWiggs Posts: 608
    OchEye said:

    chloe said:
    . Which leaves the questions that will be asked, were the services aware of the general possibility or did they allow the attack to take place.
    Really? Tin foil hat stuff that.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 13,533

    Alistair said:

    The age of tolerance and hand-wringing has to come to an end. It doesn't make us any safer.

    Virtue signalling, vigils and candles do not defeat hate

    We cannot appease our way to peace

    The Manchester bomber was reported 5 times by his local community to the security services.

    What are you proposing?
    The obvious proposal to push if you're an intolerant person with a fondness for things that turn out to be counter-productive, would be internment.

    You've got a few tens of thousands of potential suspects on a watch list, some of them are going to blow things up but you don't know which, you can't keep your eye on them all, so lock them all up.

    Seems like something UKIP could be running on right now: It'll get them back in the news, it's too far for the Tories to follow them, and a *lot* of British voters would agree with them.
    Of course we all know how well that worked last time we tried it in NI. I would hope even Nuttall would not be that dumb.
    You know and I know, but what about the voters?
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300




    Anyway

    nows Jezzas big chance, TNT discovered in Dublin linked to PIRA and Sinn Fein

    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/six-kilos-of-tnt-discovered-in-dublin-could-have-made-30-bombs-35786074.html

    If you read the story, it seems to be feuding criminal gangs rather than terrorists.
    are you daft ?

    the paramilitaries run the crims and always have done, where do you think the money comes from to run a military campaign ?
    Yes there is clear overlap but in this case the story is clear that it is crime that is the important factor, not the IRA from a decade ago and not even so-called dissident republicans now. Reading between the lines, the police initially thought it was semtex which has a clear IRA link but have now found it is TNT.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 26,819

    IanB2 said:

    FF43 said:

    calum said:

    As the Scottish polls start to catch up with Corbynmania, I think SCON are now set to come 3rd behind SLAB in the National vote. With the UK polls closing this will present tactical voters with quite a number of dilemmas.

    https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/the-corbyn-effect-poll-shows-rise-in-scots-support-as-snp-warn-over-letting-in-tories-in-by-back-door/

    Is there any reason to suppose that Scottish Labour is doing dramatically better than it was one or two weeks ago, other than one opinion poll?

    Besides anything else, Panelbase have also, apparently, reported this morning (details further down thread) and still have the Tories 10pts ahead of Labour in second.
    The subsamples of the UK polls show a small drift from the SNP to Labour for this election, which is backed up by this Scottish poll. There are more SNP to Labour switchers than SNP to Conservative. Having made their point at the last Westminster election, independence supporting ex Labour voters are more willing to consider returning to Labour for UK-wide reasons. It doesn't necessarily mean they have given up on the SNP however.
    We shall see what happens in the coming election; however, in the longer term I suspect that one of the following three scenarios will play out in Scotland:

    1. Independence
    2. The SNP fails to get independence, but most of the 45% stick with it (or the Greens at Holyrood, which largely amounts to the same thing) indefinitely
    3. Scots genuinely fall out of love with the SNP - and traipse straight back to Labour

    More hard-headed folk in the Conservative Party in England need to start thinking about how to get rid of Scotland as quickly as possible. I'd favour the axing of the Barnett Formula and its replacement with something that's actually fair (which would inevitably take a great chunk of money off the Scots and give it to the Welsh.) If I'm right in my suspicion, which is that most Scots don't give a fuck about the UK and that the No campaign only won in 2014 because of bribery, then that should do the trick.
    .
    Why should it? I can't imagine there'll be *that* much wailing about the fate of the Union in this day and age.

    All of the Barnett money could be spent in those parts of the country (Wales, and much of the North of England) which have not done so well in recent years. Quite a lot of the wavering and ex-Labour voters that the Tories are trying to target in those regions would probably be quite pleased.
    You half witted cretinous moron, there would be no Barnett money as you would not be robbing u sof substantially more. Thick twunt.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 25,460
    Alistair said:

    When proposing radical solutions remember that it is ISIS's stated aim to make it intolerable for Muslims to live in the West.

    The primary purpose of these attacks is specifically to generate an anti-muslim backlash.

    Exactly. Which is why there is a debate about Prevent - which has anecdotal reports of both successes and counter-productive outcomes, with hard data difficult to come by. And why we need to restrain our inner SeanT and avoid escalating wider community tensions unhelpfully.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 13,533
    Yorkcity said:


    Totally agree UKip could get a lot of support regarding that approach .I believe they have not suspended their campaign .However do not think they will get any media airtime.

    They'd definitely get airtime if they advocated internment, the media love controversial shiny things.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 52,908
    IanB2 said:



    You don't sound like a Tory, kle? Why add to their majority?

    1) I won't be since i live in a safe seat anyway
    2) If we exclude political compass which seems to think I am closest to Plaid Cymru, I usually seem to come somewhere between Tory and LD
    3) While the LD manifesto was more realistic than the Labour one and included costings, their campaign has been terrible, and I do not know they deserve my vote, and in any case they might be dead in a week, and some of their supporters antipathy for the coalition years puts me off, as a coalition supporter. I know the candidate, a good and hardworking man, so I really considered it and I have never voted Tory before. But
    4) While the social care policy no doubt needs tweaking, I appreciated that the Tory manifesto was attempting something for now, not vague words about a national care service and not much else (and not even sure how it would be funded in the labour one, nor even done in their first term), and that with it and the triple lock drop and WFA, the Tories were brave enough to tell some of their core supporters that they cannot have their freebies, that social care is a problem that needs a solution now, even if it costs them. Their campaign has also been terrible, and May is not great, but they were willing to be honest about some challenges, not just pretend its simple and easy.
    5) Corbyn is surging. I do not think he will win, I do not think Labour will win most seats or get most votes, I think the Tories will have a majority of 30-50, but the surge is real, and in a polarised election, when the LDs are not making any impact at all and I cannot help them anyway, I feel I need to acknowledge that the prospect of Corbyn winning, or even just doing well enough to continue on as Labour leader, which now seems likely, does concern me, in a way I was never concerned with Ed M or Gordon Brown winning. To be blunt, for the first time I feel compelled into the sort of negative 'least worst' choice that many have faced before. Rather than the easy way out - vote LD, and share no blame for what the next Tory government does.

    I'll vote Tory on June 8th, but that doesn't make me a Tory, anymore than voting LD 3 times made me a LD. What I'd prefer is a socially liberal, economically conservative, strongly UK Union party. (Which also supports some form of PR for preference)
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 2,655

    Alistair said:

    The age of tolerance and hand-wringing has to come to an end. It doesn't make us any safer.

    Virtue signalling, vigils and candles do not defeat hate

    We cannot appease our way to peace

    The Manchester bomber was reported 5 times by his local community to the security services.

    What are you proposing?
    The obvious proposal to push if you're an intolerant person with a fondness for things that turn out to be counter-productive, would be internment.

    You've got a few tens of thousands of potential suspects on a watch list, some of them are going to blow things up but you don't know which, you can't keep your eye on them all, so lock them all up.

    Seems like something UKIP could be running on right now: It'll get them back in the news, it's too far for the Tories to follow them, and a *lot* of British voters would agree with them.
    Apart from the fact that everywhere internment has been tried, it has been spectacularly ineffective and acted as an excellent recruitment tool. More importantly, it is very effective in making the "normal" people in the target community extremely hostile to the authorities and virtually ends voluntary cooperation with them.
  • scoopscoop Posts: 64
    Alistair said:

    The age of tolerance and hand-wringing has to come to an end. It doesn't make us any safer.

    Virtue signalling, vigils and candles do not defeat hate

    We cannot appease our way to peace

    The Manchester bomber was reported 5 times by his local community to the security services.

    What are you proposing?
    I understood there was no record of any reports to the security services .
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 26,819

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    FF43 said:

    calum said:

    As the Scottish polls start to catch up with Corbynmania, I think SCON are now set to come 3rd behind SLAB in the National vote. With the UK polls closing this will present tactical voters with quite a number of dilemmas.

    https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/the-corbyn-effect-poll-shows-rise-in-scots-support-as-snp-warn-over-letting-in-tories-in-by-back-door/

    Is there any reason to suppose that Scottish Labour is doing dramatically better than it was one or two weeks ago, other than one opinion poll?

    Besides anything else, Panelbase have also, apparently, reported this morning (details further down thread) and still have the Tories 10pts ahead of Labour in second.
    The subsamples of the UK polls show a small drift from the SNP to Labour for this election, which is backed up by this Scottish poll. There are more SNP to Labour switchers than SNP to Conservative. Having made their point at the last Westminster election, independence supporting ex Labour voters are more willing to consider returning to Labour for UK-wide reasons. It doesn't necessarily mean they have given up on the SNP however.
    We shall see what happens in the coming election; however, in the longer term I suspect that one of the following three scenarios will play out in Scotland:

    1. Independence
    2. The SNP fails to get independence, but most of the 45% stick with it (or the Greens at Holyrood, which largely amounts to the same thing) indefinitely
    3. Scots genuinely fall out of love with the SNP - and traipse straight back to Labour

    More hard-headed folk in the Conservative Party in England need to start thinking about how to get rid of Scotland as quickly as possible. I'd favour the axing of the Barnett Formula and
    LOL, Little Englander beats the drum. You halfwit you are hanging on like grim death because you are milking us. You sad F***s will soon be left on your jack jones with only yourselves to turn on.
    Go fuck yourself you pathetic little shit.
    Go polish your jackboots saddo
    No, you go and polish yours. Your attitude has always been apparent and it stinks. Nasty, cruel, malignant, pathetic, disgusting, fascistic, petty blood-and-soil nationalist. Sick, depraved fuck. Go fuck yourself.
    Get out of the wrong side of bed saddo and then mummy would not let you have coco pops, poor diddums
This discussion has been closed.