Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If the DUP can make Martin McGuinness Deputy First Minister of

SystemSystem Posts: 5,841
edited March 18 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If the DUP can make Martin McGuinness Deputy First Minister of Northern Ireland then we shouldn’t rule them out making Corbyn Prime Minister

Over the last few years many observers on politics, myself included, have made assumptions that turned out be very wrong. Lib Dem incumbency would save them from a catastrophic seat loss in 2015, the electorate wouldn’t vote to make themselves poorer by Leaving the European Union, and Jeremy Corbyn’s backstory & a divided Labour party would see a Corbyn led Labour party pummelled at the 2017 general election to name but three assumption that proved hugely wrong.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • RobDRobD Posts: 32,200
    edited March 18
    Never, never, never!

    No, not a quote from Paisely, but a quote from TSE when asked if he'd like a slice of pineapple pizza. :p

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,657
    Second, like Corbyn and the Shinners.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 9,058
    I love the Paisley quotes. It's easy to forget that Trump wasn't the first elected leader who was stark raving bonkers.....
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,520
    Off-topic:

    For those of you who may be terminally bored, here's an excellent analysis of the bridge that collapsed in America.

    http://happypontist.blogspot.co.uk/2018/03/the-collapse-of-fiu-sweetwater.html

    It also includes some excellent technical diagrams, which are far better than the artists renderings I had seen.

    The bridge appears to have been designed to be self-supporting, with the pylon and cable stays essentially being non-load bearing (hence why they thought it could span the road without them). As I surmised. ;)
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,657

    Off-topic:

    For those of you who may be terminally bored, here's an excellent analysis of the bridge that collapsed in America.

    http://happypontist.blogspot.co.uk/2018/03/the-collapse-of-fiu-sweetwater.html

    It also includes some excellent technical diagrams, which are far better than the artists renderings I had seen.

    The bridge appears to have been designed to be self-supporting, with the pylon and cable stays essentially being non-load bearing (hence why they thought it could span the road without them). As I surmised. ;)

    That’s a very interesting read. It’s somewhat surprising that there was talk about cracks in the bridge for a couple of days, yet no-one thought to put a support under the crack location to reduce the load, nor to close the road to traffic. But then hindsight is wonderful sometimes.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 8,297
    Whilst you can argue that Ian Paisley’s time has gone

    Well he is dead.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 26,184
    Martin McGuinness was a Provo and, let’s not forget, a Catholic, too. As we have seen in the US, protestant evangelicals do not let religious belief get in the way of politics. Rees Mogg will have no problem at all with the DUP.

    Sinn Fein and DUP voters in Northern Ireland are largely working class. Take away the nationalism and there is a hell of a lot of overlap. They know how the other side thinks and operates, and share the same experiences, including going through the Troubles. Corbyn, on the other hand, is from another planet. He backed the IRA from a safe place. What’s more he’s not an anti-British republican, he’s an anti-British Brit. That makes him worse than anyone from Sinn Fein in DUP eyes. They will never go near him.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 26,184
    Hat-gate rolls on. The anti-BBC right are getting the chance to peer into the Looking Glass. Some might pause to consider that the way Corbynistas are coming across now over Jezza’s hat is how they come across when they cry conspiracy over the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation. But they won’t, of course.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,520
    Sandpit said:

    Off-topic:

    For those of you who may be terminally bored, here's an excellent analysis of the bridge that collapsed in America.

    http://happypontist.blogspot.co.uk/2018/03/the-collapse-of-fiu-sweetwater.html

    It also includes some excellent technical diagrams, which are far better than the artists renderings I had seen.

    The bridge appears to have been designed to be self-supporting, with the pylon and cable stays essentially being non-load bearing (hence why they thought it could span the road without them). As I surmised. ;)

    That’s a very interesting read. It’s somewhat surprising that there was talk about cracks in the bridge for a couple of days, yet no-one thought to put a support under the crack location to reduce the load, nor to close the road to traffic. But then hindsight is wonderful sometimes.
    Indeed. It's interesting to note that part of the structure us post-tensioned, whilst others are more conventionally prestressed. I wonder which part(s) the cracks were soon on, and whether it collapsed during tensioning operations?

    (In post-tensioining, 'cables' are put through ducts before casting. Once the cast concrete is in place, the cables are stressed by pulling them and anchored).

    As for supporting: AIUI simply supporting a structure under a potential failure point is not simple or quick, and would itself need to be designed - hopefully quickly. You do not just need to factor in thee loads on the temporary support and bridge, but also on the ground below. You might run into problems if you put a support above a sewer drain.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,520

    Hat-gate rolls on. The anti-BBC right are getting the chance to peer into the Looking Glass. Some might pause to consider that the way Corbynistas are coming across now over Jezza’s hat is how they come across when they cry conspiracy over the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation. But they won’t, of course.

    As Jimmy Saville and other scandals show, the people who put the BBC on a pedestal and absolve and deflect it of any criticism frequently look very silly. ;)
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,657

    Hat-gate rolls on. The anti-BBC right are getting the chance to peer into the Looking Glass. Some might pause to consider that the way Corbynistas are coming across now over Jezza’s hat is how they come across when they cry conspiracy over the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation. But they won’t, of course.
    ttps://twitter.com/jamin2g/status/975143798186696704?s=21

    It’s much more fun watching the various factions of the left eating each other over something so trivial.

    Hopefully this was the week the mask slipped and Corbyn was shown for who he really is among the ‘faithful’.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 8,297

    Hat-gate rolls on. The anti-BBC right are getting the chance to peer into the Looking Glass. Some might pause to consider that the way Corbynistas are coming across now over Jezza’s hat is how they come across when they cry conspiracy over the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation. But they won’t, of course.

    Go on, give us the right wing equivalent of hat gate...
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 11,010
    tlg86 said:

    Whilst you can argue that Ian Paisley’s time has gone

    Well he is dead.

    Like father, like son. Although, to be fair, Junior doesn’t seem QUITE the ranter his father was
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 26,184
    Sandpit said:

    Hat-gate rolls on. The anti-BBC right are getting the chance to peer into the Looking Glass. Some might pause to consider that the way Corbynistas are coming across now over Jezza’s hat is how they come across when they cry conspiracy over the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation. But they won’t, of course.
    ttps://twitter.com/jamin2g/status/975143798186696704?s=21

    It’s much more fun watching the various factions of the left eating each other over something so trivial.

    Hopefully this was the week the mask slipped and Corbyn was shown for who he really is among the ‘faithful’.

    Not a chance.

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,657

    Sandpit said:

    Off-topic:

    For those of you who may be terminally bored, here's an excellent analysis of the bridge that collapsed in America.

    http://happypontist.blogspot.co.uk/2018/03/the-collapse-of-fiu-sweetwater.html

    It also includes some excellent technical diagrams, which are far better than the artists renderings I had seen.

    The bridge appears to have been designed to be self-supporting, with the pylon and cable stays essentially being non-load bearing (hence why they thought it could span the road without them). As I surmised. ;)

    That’s a very interesting read. It’s somewhat surprising that there was talk about cracks in the bridge for a couple of days, yet no-one thought to put a support under the crack location to reduce the load, nor to close the road to traffic. But then hindsight is wonderful sometimes.
    Indeed. It's interesting to note that part of the structure us post-tensioned, whilst others are more conventionally prestressed. I wonder which part(s) the cracks were soon on, and whether it collapsed during tensioning operations?

    (In post-tensioining, 'cables' are put through ducts before casting. Once the cast concrete is in place, the cables are stressed by pulling them and anchored).

    As for supporting: AIUI simply supporting a structure under a potential failure point is not simple or quick, and would itself need to be designed - hopefully quickly. You do not just need to factor in thee loads on the temporary support and bridge, but also on the ground below. You might run into problems if you put a support above a sewer drain.
    Yes, it’s certainly an unconventional design, and you raise a point about strengthening - as a temporary fix finding the largest wheeled crane around and taking some of the load off the stressed area might have been enough.

    I’m assuming, as the bridge was over a public road, that the local highways department would have approved the plan and that the collapse will be investigated by the NTSB (National Transportation Safety Board) as with a train or plane accident - so we should get an idea of the nature of the failure pretty quickly, with a comprehensive report and safety recommendations following a year or two later.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 26,184
    edited March 18

    Hat-gate rolls on. The anti-BBC right are getting the chance to peer into the Looking Glass. Some might pause to consider that the way Corbynistas are coming across now over Jezza’s hat is how they come across when they cry conspiracy over the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation. But they won’t, of course.

    As Jimmy Saville and other scandals show, the people who put the BBC on a pedestal and absolve and deflect it of any criticism frequently look very silly. ;)

    Everyone criticises the BBC. Only the loons of the left and right claim it is biased. As for Jimmy Saville, he fooled a lot of people for a long time. God knows how, though.
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/revealed-jimmy-saviles-close-friendship-with-margaret-thatcher-8432351.html
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 724
    edited March 18

    Hat-gate rolls on. The anti-BBC right are getting the chance to peer into the Looking Glass. Some might pause to consider that the way Corbynistas are coming across now over Jezza’s hat is how they come across when they cry conspiracy over the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation. But they won’t, of course.

    As far as I can tell the complaints centre around the hat looking a bit bigger and losing its definition, well the hat related complaint, the other aspect of the complaint seems to be how Corbyn is blended into the image whereas Gavin Williamson isn't when he is shown on the background.

    The complaints, or at least some of the ones I've seen aren't that the BBC are showing him wearing the hat that he is wearing in the first image and has worn in lots of other photographs. The complaints are that it has been made to look different to that hat by looking bigger and losing its definiton

    I don't believe the BBC went out of its way to try and smear Corbyn here but you can understand some suspicions on behalf of the Corbyn fans given this sort of looks like the BBC backing the right wing presses message.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,657
    tlg86 said:

    Hat-gate rolls on. The anti-BBC right are getting the chance to peer into the Looking Glass. Some might pause to consider that the way Corbynistas are coming across now over Jezza’s hat is how they come across when they cry conspiracy over the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation. But they won’t, of course.

    Go on, give us the right wing equivalent of hat gate...
    Apparently we get annoyed when they have Vince Cable “versus” Lord Adonis, “debating” whether we should either stay in the SM and CU, or just abandon Brexit altogether because it’s as stupid as those who voted for it.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 26,184

    Hat-gate rolls on. The anti-BBC right are getting the chance to peer into the Looking Glass. Some might pause to consider that the way Corbynistas are coming across now over Jezza’s hat is how they come across when they cry conspiracy over the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation. But they won’t, of course.

    As far as I can tell the complaints centre around the hat looking a bit bigger and losing its definition, well the hat related complaint, the other aspect of the complaint seems to be how Corbyn is blended into the image whereas Gavin Williamson isn't when he is shown on the background.

    I don't know if you've actually compared those 2 images and we know your track record with tweets but whilst the hat in both images start at the same place the Corbyn's finish in different places. In the second image Corbyn's chin is lower than the first image, the place where the difference seems to be is the hat.

    The complaints, or at least some of the ones I've seen aren't that the BBC are showing him wearing the hat that he is wearing in the first image and has worn in lots of other photographs. The complaints are that it has been made to look different to that hat by looking bigger and losing its definiton

    I don't believe the BBC went out of its way to try and smear Corbyn here but you can understand some suspicions on behalf of the Corbyn fans given this sort of looks like the BBC backing the right wing presses message.

    I think we all know why the Corbynistas are crying foul over the Hat. It’s very Trumpian and pretty smart given how badly Corbyn has been exposed over the last week.

  • RobDRobD Posts: 32,200

    Hat-gate rolls on. The anti-BBC right are getting the chance to peer into the Looking Glass. Some might pause to consider that the way Corbynistas are coming across now over Jezza’s hat is how they come across when they cry conspiracy over the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation. But they won’t, of course.

    As far as I can tell the complaints centre around the hat looking a bit bigger and losing its definition, well the hat related complaint, the other aspect of the complaint seems to be how Corbyn is blended into the image whereas Gavin Williamson isn't when he is shown on the background.

    The complaints, or at least some of the ones I've seen aren't that the BBC are showing him wearing the hat that he is wearing in the first image and has worn in lots of other photographs. The complaints are that it has been made to look different to that hat by looking bigger and losing its definiton

    I don't believe the BBC went out of its way to try and smear Corbyn here but you can understand some suspicions on behalf of the Corbyn fans given this sort of looks like the BBC backing the right wing presses message.
    The hat looks the same size in both images.
  • JWisemannJWisemann Posts: 1,037
    edited March 18

    Hat-gate rolls on. The anti-BBC right are getting the chance to peer into the Looking Glass. Some might pause to consider that the way Corbynistas are coming across now over Jezza’s hat is how they come across when they cry conspiracy over the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation. But they won’t, of course.

    As far as I can tell the complaints centre around the hat looking a bit bigger and losing its definition, well the hat related complaint, the other aspect of the complaint seems to be how Corbyn is blended into the image whereas Gavin Williamson isn't when he is shown on the background.

    I don't know if you've actually compared those 2 images and we know your track record with tweets but whilst the hat in both images start at the same place the Corbyn's finish in different places. In the second image Corbyn's chin is lower than the first image, the place where the difference seems to be is the hat.

    The complaints, or at least some of the ones I've seen aren't that the BBC are showing him wearing the hat that he is wearing in the first image and has worn in lots of other photographs. The complaints are that it has been made to look different to that hat by looking bigger and losing its definiton

    I don't believe the BBC went out of its way to try and smear Corbyn here but you can understand some suspicions on behalf of the Corbyn fans given this sort of looks like the BBC backing the right wing presses message.

    I think we all know why the Corbynistas are crying foul over the Hat. It’s very Trumpian and pretty smart given how badly Corbyn has been exposed over the last week.

    Christ, you really are a deluded right wing nutcase, whatever other claims you might make, arent you?
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 724
    RobD said:

    Hat-gate rolls on. The anti-BBC right are getting the chance to peer into the Looking Glass. Some might pause to consider that the way Corbynistas are coming across now over Jezza’s hat is how they come across when they cry conspiracy over the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation. But they won’t, of course.

    As far as I can tell the complaints centre around the hat looking a bit bigger and losing its definition, well the hat related complaint, the other aspect of the complaint seems to be how Corbyn is blended into the image whereas Gavin Williamson isn't when he is shown on the background.

    The complaints, or at least some of the ones I've seen aren't that the BBC are showing him wearing the hat that he is wearing in the first image and has worn in lots of other photographs. The complaints are that it has been made to look different to that hat by looking bigger and losing its definiton

    I don't believe the BBC went out of its way to try and smear Corbyn here but you can understand some suspicions on behalf of the Corbyn fans given this sort of looks like the BBC backing the right wing presses message.
    The hat looks the same size in both images.
    I'm struggling to see the shadow from the first image...
  • RobDRobD Posts: 32,200

    RobD said:

    Hat-gate rolls on. The anti-BBC right are getting the chance to peer into the Looking Glass. Some might pause to consider that the way Corbynistas are coming across now over Jezza’s hat is how they come across when they cry conspiracy over the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation. But they won’t, of course.

    As far as I can tell the complaints centre around the hat looking a bit bigger and losing its definition, well the hat related complaint, the other aspect of the complaint seems to be how Corbyn is blended into the image whereas Gavin Williamson isn't when he is shown on the background.

    The complaints, or at least some of the ones I've seen aren't that the BBC are showing him wearing the hat that he is wearing in the first image and has worn in lots of other photographs. The complaints are that it has been made to look different to that hat by looking bigger and losing its definiton

    I don't believe the BBC went out of its way to try and smear Corbyn here but you can understand some suspicions on behalf of the Corbyn fans given this sort of looks like the BBC backing the right wing presses message.
    The hat looks the same size in both images.
    I'm struggling to see the shadow from the first image...
    So the complaint is that the hat goes further down on his forehead than in the original image? Wow.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 26,184
    JWisemann said:

    Hat-gate rolls on. The anti-BBC right are getting the chance to peer into the Looking Glass. Some might pause to consider that the way Corbynistas are coming across now over Jezza’s hat is how they come across when they cry conspiracy over the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation. But they won’t, of course.

    As far as I can tell the complaints centre around the hat looking a bit bigger and losing its definition, well the hat related complaint, the other aspect of the complaint seems to be how Corbyn is blended into the image whereas Gavin Williamson isn't when he is shown on the background.

    I don't know if you've actually compared those 2 images and we know your track record with tweets but whilst the hat in both images start at the same place the Corbyn's finish in different places. In the second image Corbyn's chin is lower than the first image, the place where the difference seems to be is the hat.

    The complaints, or at least some of the ones I've seen aren't that the BBC are showing him wearing the hat that he is wearing in the first image and has worn in lots of other photographs. The complaints are that it has been made to look different to that hat by looking bigger and losing its definiton

    I don't believe the BBC went out of its way to try and smear Corbyn here but you can understand some suspicions on behalf of the Corbyn fans given this sort of looks like the BBC backing the right wing presses message.

    I think we all know why the Corbynistas are crying foul over the Hat. It’s very Trumpian and pretty smart given how badly Corbyn has been exposed over the last week.

    Christ, you really are a deluded right wing nutcase, whatever other claims you might make, arent you?

    Of course - anyone who opposes Corbyn and the far left as enablers of this miserable, incompetent, destructive government is right wing. Of course :-D

  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 8,297
    Sandpit said:

    tlg86 said:

    Hat-gate rolls on. The anti-BBC right are getting the chance to peer into the Looking Glass. Some might pause to consider that the way Corbynistas are coming across now over Jezza’s hat is how they come across when they cry conspiracy over the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation. But they won’t, of course.

    Go on, give us the right wing equivalent of hat gate...
    Apparently we get annoyed when they have Vince Cable “versus” Lord Adonis, “debating” whether we should either stay in the SM and CU, or just abandon Brexit altogether because it’s as stupid as those who voted for it.
    I certainly wouldn't object to such a debate. I think that would call for popcorn!
  • RobDRobD Posts: 32,200
    edited March 18

    JWisemann said:

    Hat-gate rolls on. The anti-BBC right are getting the chance to peer into the Looking Glass. Some might pause to consider that the way Corbynistas are coming across now over Jezza’s hat is how they come across when they cry conspiracy over the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation. But they won’t, of course.

    As far as I can tell the complaints centre around the hat looking a bit bigger and losing its definition, well the hat related complaint, the other aspect of the complaint seems to be how Corbyn is blended into the image whereas Gavin Williamson isn't when he is shown on the background.

    I don't know if you've actually compared those 2 images and we know your track record with tweets but whilst the hat in both images start at the same place the Corbyn's finish in different places. In the second image Corbyn's chin is lower than the first image, the place where the difference seems to be is the hat.

    The complaints, or at least some of the ones I've seen aren't that the BBC are showing him wearing the hat that he is wearing in the first image and has worn in lots of other photographs. The complaints are that it has been made to look different to that hat by looking bigger and losing its definiton

    I don't believe the BBC went out of its way to try and smear Corbyn here but you can understand some suspicions on behalf of the Corbyn fans given this sort of looks like the BBC backing the right wing presses message.

    I think we all know why the Corbynistas are crying foul over the Hat. It’s very Trumpian and pretty smart given how badly Corbyn has been exposed over the last week.

    Christ, you really are a deluded right wing nutcase, whatever other claims you might make, arent you?

    Of course - anyone who opposes Corbyn and the far left as enablers of this miserable, incompetent, destructive government is right wing. Of course :-D

    Face it SO, you're a PB Tory now. :smiley:
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 724
    edited March 18
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Hat-gate rolls on. The anti-BBC right are getting the chance to peer into the Looking Glass. Some might pause to consider that the way Corbynistas are coming across now over Jezza’s hat is how they come across when they cry conspiracy over the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation. But they won’t, of course.

    As far as I can tell the complaints centre around the hat looking a bit bigger and losing its definition, well the hat related complaint, the other aspect of the complaint seems to be how Corbyn is blended into the image whereas Gavin Williamson isn't when he is shown on the background.

    The complaints, or at least some of the ones I've seen aren't that the BBC are showing him wearing the hat that he is wearing in the first image and has worn in lots of other photographs. The complaints are that it has been made to look different to that hat by looking bigger and losing its definiton

    I don't believe the BBC went out of its way to try and smear Corbyn here but you can understand some suspicions on behalf of the Corbyn fans given this sort of looks like the BBC backing the right wing presses message.
    The hat looks the same size in both images.
    I'm struggling to see the shadow from the first image...
    So the complaint is that the hat goes further down on his forehead than in the original image? Wow.
    To be honest I think the complaint is about the whole image including the hat it just makes more sense for centrists to point at the hat part and shout conspiracy theory...

    I'd complain but quite frankly there seems to be a loop whereby the less attention Labour pay to some of the centrists the more crazy their claims become and the less attention etc.

    As someone on the left of the Labour party there is a win win element here, it might mean a bit of negative attention for Jezza but that wouldn't be a first.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 26,184



    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Hat-gate rolls on. The anti-BBC right are getting the chance to peer into the Looking Glass. Some might pause to consider that the way Corbynistas are coming across now over Jezza’s hat is how they come across when they cry conspiracy over the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation. But they won’t, of course.

    As far as I can tell the complaints centre around the hat looking a bit bigger and losing its definition, well the hat related complaint, the other aspect of the complaint seems to be how Corbyn is blended into the image whereas Gavin Williamson isn't when he is shown on the background.

    The complaints, or at least some of the ones I've seen aren't that the BBC are showing him wearing the hat that he is wearing in the first image and has worn in lots of other photographs. The complaints are that it has been made to look different to that hat by looking bigger and losing its definiton

    I don't believe the BBC went out of its way to try and smear Corbyn here but you can understand some suspicions on behalf of the Corbyn fans given this sort of looks like the BBC backing the right wing presses message.
    The hat looks the same size in both images.
    I'm struggling to see the shadow from the first image...
    So the complaint is that the hat goes further down on his forehead than in the original image? Wow.
    To be honest I think the complaint is about the whole image including the hat it just makes more sense for centrists to point at the hat part and shout conspiracy theory...

    I'd complain but quite frankly there seems to be a loop whereby the less attention Labour pay to some of the centrists the more crazy their claims become and the less attention etc.

    As someone on the left of the Labour party there is a win win element here, it might mean a bit of negative attention for Jezza but that wouldn't be a first.

    I am enjoying the way you are paying no attention to Jezza’s hat :-D

  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 724
    edited March 18
    In SO's defence I don't think he's a Tory.

    I just think he is one of those that have been driven mad by Corbyn in the same way some people have been driven mad by Brexit, say Lord Adonis for example or I saw (or maybe heard) Matthew Paris say the he'd been driven mad by it.

    Edit: SO I mentioned the hat in my first 2 or 3 posts on it...
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 26,184

    In SO's defence I don't think he's a Tory.

    I just think he is one of those that have been driven mad by Corbyn in the same way some people have been driven mad by Brexit, say Lord Adonis for example or I saw (or maybe heard) Matthew Paris say the he'd been driven mad by it.

    Edit: SO I mentioned the hat in my first 2 or 3 posts on it...

    Yep, Corbyn does drive me mad. He ensures continued Tory governments. I’d prefer that didn’t happen.

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,520

    Hat-gate rolls on. The anti-BBC right are getting the chance to peer into the Looking Glass. Some might pause to consider that the way Corbynistas are coming across now over Jezza’s hat is how they come across when they cry conspiracy over the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation. But they won’t, of course.

    As Jimmy Saville and other scandals show, the people who put the BBC on a pedestal and absolve and deflect it of any criticism frequently look very silly. ;)

    Everyone criticises the BBC. Only the loons of the left and right claim it is biased.

    (Snip)
    Of course the BBC are biased. I'm biased; you're biased, and organisations are biased one way or another. This can be by design or accident, and can infect culture

    The keys are in recognising that bias, and understanding whether that bias *matters*.

    The BBC claim that their output is unbiased over the full output. That means individual programs or interviews can display a bias, but that will be countered elsewhere in the output. As they say this, then they must have studies and figures that show it is the case, and processes to ensure it. AFAIAA they've never released any such information, which makes me suspect the claim is b/s.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 724
    edited March 18
    The centrists within Labour have done far more towards that end than the left of the Labour party. With the greatest of respect if you think one of the centrists would have done better in the recent election I think you are kidding yourself. That is without taking into account all the actions they have undertaken to ensure that continuance of Tory government. Their complaints are about not being in charge and getting what they want.

    Edit: which in fairness you can argue is from their POV what is best for the country but pragmatically at this point they must know it isn't going to be their politics as an option for the electorate.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 26,184

    Hat-gate rolls on. The anti-BBC right are getting the chance to peer into the Looking Glass. Some might pause to consider that the way Corbynistas are coming across now over Jezza’s hat is how they come across when they cry conspiracy over the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation. But they won’t, of course.

    As Jimmy Saville and other scandals show, the people who put the BBC on a pedestal and absolve and deflect it of any criticism frequently look very silly. ;)

    Everyone criticises the BBC. Only the loons of the left and right claim it is biased.

    (Snip)
    Of course the BBC are biased. I'm biased; you're biased, and organisations are biased one way or another. This can be by design or accident, and can infect culture

    The keys are in recognising that bias, and understanding whether that bias *matters*.

    The BBC claim that their output is unbiased over the full output. That means individual programs or interviews can display a bias, but that will be countered elsewhere in the output. As they say this, then they must have studies and figures that show it is the case, and processes to ensure it. AFAIAA they've never released any such information, which makes me suspect the claim is b/s.

    I am an individual, you are an individual. Institutions are not. Claiming institutional bias is a very different thing to accepting individuals have biases.

  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 9,723
    RobD said:

    Never, never, never!

    No, not a quote from Paisely, but a quote from TSE when asked if he'd like a slice of pineapple pizza. :p

    Although he loves Pasta (farians)

  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 724

    Hat-gate rolls on. The anti-BBC right are getting the chance to peer into the Looking Glass. Some might pause to consider that the way Corbynistas are coming across now over Jezza’s hat is how they come across when they cry conspiracy over the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation. But they won’t, of course.

    As Jimmy Saville and other scandals show, the people who put the BBC on a pedestal and absolve and deflect it of any criticism frequently look very silly. ;)

    Everyone criticises the BBC. Only the loons of the left and right claim it is biased.

    (Snip)
    Of course the BBC are biased. I'm biased; you're biased, and organisations are biased one way or another. This can be by design or accident, and can infect culture

    The keys are in recognising that bias, and understanding whether that bias *matters*.

    The BBC claim that their output is unbiased over the full output. That means individual programs or interviews can display a bias, but that will be countered elsewhere in the output. As they say this, then they must have studies and figures that show it is the case, and processes to ensure it. AFAIAA they've never released any such information, which makes me suspect the claim is b/s.
    I do think the BBC generally tries to be unbiased, this doesn't mean they don't display bias over issues or people or events, they do. It means they are better than most, that however doesn't make them above complaint or reproach.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 26,184
    As I said a while back, given the current odds Laura Pidcock is a very good bet for next Labour leader.
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 4,343
    Mr Observer,

    Only just woke up and I read "As for Jimmy Saville, he fooled a lot of people for a long time. God knows how, though." as starting 'As for Jeremy Corbin ... "

    It seems to fit.

    Peter Sellers used to do a nice line in loons having their simplistic statements mistaken for great wisdom. Jezza hasn't changed but once the rose-tinged spectacles vanish, it's more ... "He's not very bright, is he?"

    It doesn't make him a nasty person, but his politics could have that effect.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,520
    RobD said:

    JWisemann said:

    Hat-gate rolls on. The anti-BBC right are getting the chance to peer into the Looking Glass. Some might pause to consider that the way Corbynistas are coming across now over Jezza’s hat is how they come across when they cry conspiracy over the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation. But they won’t, of course.

    As far as I can tell the complaints centre around the hat looking a bit bigger and losing its definition, well the hat related complaint, the other aspect of the complaint seems to be how Corbyn is blended into the image whereas Gavin Williamson isn't when he is shown on the background.

    I don't know if you've actually compared those 2 images and we know your track record with tweets but whilst the hat in both images start at the same place the Corbyn's finish in different places. In the second image Corbyn's chin is lower than the first image, the place where the difference seems to be is the hat.

    The complaints, or at least some of the ones I've seen aren't that the BBC are showing him wearing the hat that he is wearing in the first image and has worn in lots of other photographs. The complaints are that it has been made to look different to that hat by looking bigger and losing its definiton

    I don't believe the BBC went out of its way to try and smear Corbyn here but you can understand some suspicions on behalf of the Corbyn fans given this sort of looks like the BBC backing the right wing presses message.

    I think we all know why the Corbynistas are crying foul over the Hat. It’s very Trumpian and pretty smart given how badly Corbyn has been exposed over the last week.

    Christ, you really are a deluded right wing nutcase, whatever other claims you might make, arent you?

    Of course - anyone who opposes Corbyn and the far left as enablers of this miserable, incompetent, destructive government is right wing. Of course :-D

    Face it SO, you're a PB Tory now. :smiley:
    We are all PB Tories now, comrade!
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,428

    Hat-gate rolls on. The anti-BBC right are getting the chance to peer into the Looking Glass. Some might pause to consider that the way Corbynistas are coming across now over Jezza’s hat is how they come across when they cry conspiracy over the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation. But they won’t, of course.

    As far as I can tell the complaints centre around the hat looking a bit bigger and losing its definition, well the hat related complaint, the other aspect of the complaint seems to be how Corbyn is blended into the image whereas Gavin Williamson isn't when he is shown on the background.

    The complaints, or at least some of the ones I've seen aren't that the BBC are showing him wearing the hat that he is wearing in the first image and has worn in lots of other photographs. The complaints are that it has been made to look different to that hat by looking bigger and losing its definiton

    I don't believe the BBC went out of its way to try and smear Corbyn here but you can understand some suspicions on behalf of the Corbyn fans given this sort of looks like the BBC backing the right wing presses message.
    I believe someone has put the image through a ”posterize” filter. There's lots of programs which have such a filter but the only one you would use is Photoshop unless you couldn't afford it. The BBC can afford it. So technically it has Photoshopped, whether or not they have done anything other than apply that filter.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 9,723
    RobD said:

    JWisemann said:

    Hat-gate rolls on. The anti-BBC right are getting the chance to peer into the Looking Glass. Some might pause to consider that the way Corbynistas are coming across now over Jezza’s hat is how they come across when they cry conspiracy over the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation. But they won’t, of course.

    As far as I can tell the complaints centre around the hat looking a bit bigger and losing its definition, well the hat related complaint, the other aspect of the complaint seems to be how Corbyn is blended into the image whereas Gavin Williamson isn't when he is shown on the background.

    I don't know if you've actually compared those 2 images and we know your track record with tweets but whilst the hat in both images start at the same place the Corbyn's finish in different places. In the second image Corbyn's chin is lower than the first image, the place where the difference seems to be is the hat.

    The complaints, or at least some of the ones I've seen aren't that the BBC are showing him wearing the hat that he is wearing in the first image and has worn in lots of other photographs. The complaints are that it has been made to look different to that hat by looking bigger and losing its definiton

    I don't believe the BBC went out of its way to try and smear Corbyn here but you can understand some suspicions on behalf of the Corbyn fans given this sort of looks like the BBC backing the right wing presses message.

    I think we all know why the Corbynistas are crying foul over the Hat. It’s very Trumpian and pretty smart given how badly Corbyn has been exposed over the last week.

    Christ, you really are a deluded right wing nutcase, whatever other claims you might make, arent you?

    Of course - anyone who opposes Corbyn and the far left as enablers of this miserable, incompetent, destructive government is right wing. Of course :-D

    Face it SO, you're a PB Tory now. :smiley:
    SO was the original SteveF.

    Although admittedly a much better poster.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 26,184

    The centrists within Labour have done far more towards that end than the left of the Labour party. With the greatest of respect if you think one of the centrists would have done better in the recent election I think you are kidding yourself. That is without taking into account all the actions they have undertaken to ensure that continuance of Tory government. Their complaints are about not being in charge and getting what they want.

    Edit: which in fairness you can argue is from their POV what is best for the country but pragmatically at this point they must know it isn't going to be their politics as an option for the electorate.

    The choice of Labour leader is not between Jeremy Corbyn and a centrist, whatever a centrist is.

  • CD13CD13 Posts: 4,343
    I regard the BBC as trying to eliminate their bias to being liberal and middle-class, despite living in that echo chamber. It's a difficult task, akin to a dog trying to walk on two legs, and they sometimes stutter and fall.
  • saddosaddo Posts: 417
    I don't really get the hat outrage coming from Corbyn's cult following. I thought the one thing that nobody would ever argue about him is his support for all things Soviet Russia.
  • felixfelix Posts: 7,402
    JWisemann said:

    Hat-gate rolls on. The anti-BBC right are getting the chance to peer into the Looking Glass. Some might pause to consider that the way Corbynistas are coming across now over Jezza’s hat is how they come across when they cry conspiracy over the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation. But they won’t, of course.

    As far as I can tell the complaints centre around the hat looking a bit bigger and losing its definition, well the hat related complaint, the other aspect of the complaint seems to be how Corbyn is blended into the image whereas Gavin Williamson isn't when he is shown on the background.

    I don't know if you've actually compared those 2 images and we know your track record with tweets but whilst the hat in both images start at the same place the Corbyn's finish in different places. In the second image Corbyn's chin is lower than the first image, the place where the difference seems to be is the hat.

    The complaints, or at least some of the ones I've seen aren't that the BBC are showing him wearing the hat that he is wearing in the first image and has worn in lots of other photographs. The complaints are that it has been made to look different to that hat by looking bigger and losing its definiton

    I don't believe the BBC went out of its way to try and smear Corbyn here but you can understand some suspicions on behalf of the Corbyn fans given this sort of looks like the BBC backing the right wing presses message.

    I think we all know why the Corbynistas are crying foul over the Hat. It’s very Trumpian and pretty smart given how badly Corbyn has been exposed over the last week.

    Christ, you really are a deluded right wing nutcase, whatever other claims you might make, arent you?
    Lol - funny to see the left eating it's own.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,520

    Hat-gate rolls on. The anti-BBC right are getting the chance to peer into the Looking Glass. Some might pause to consider that the way Corbynistas are coming across now over Jezza’s hat is how they come across when they cry conspiracy over the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation. But they won’t, of course.

    As Jimmy Saville and other scandals show, the people who put the BBC on a pedestal and absolve and deflect it of any criticism frequently look very silly. ;)

    Everyone criticises the BBC. Only the loons of the left and right claim it is biased.

    (Snip)
    Of course the BBC are biased. I'm biased; you're biased, and organisations are biased one way or another. This can be by design or accident, and can infect culture

    The keys are in recognising that bias, and understanding whether that bias *matters*.

    The BBC claim that their output is unbiased over the full output. That means individual programs or interviews can display a bias, but that will be countered elsewhere in the output. As they say this, then they must have studies and figures that show it is the case, and processes to ensure it. AFAIAA they've never released any such information, which makes me suspect the claim is b/s.

    I am an individual, you are an individual. Institutions are not. Claiming institutional bias is a very different thing to accepting individuals have biases.
    A very poor attempt at deflection. If you're claiming any institution is free of all bias then you're being ridiculous. They can only try to be. Plenty of BBC insiders - e.g. Marr - have spoken of a cultural bias at the BBC.

    The odd thing is that I don't think we're too far apart in our positions. I utterly agree that many people go too far in their criticisms of the BBC (I for one do not regret a penny of the licence fee - I get more than my money's worth). However I'd argue that you go too far in blindly defending them, when the people complaining might have a point.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 9,723

    The centrists within Labour have done far more towards that end than the left of the Labour party. With the greatest of respect if you think one of the centrists would have done better in the recent election I think you are kidding yourself. That is without taking into account all the actions they have undertaken to ensure that continuance of Tory government. Their complaints are about not being in charge and getting what they want.

    Edit: which in fairness you can argue is from their POV what is best for the country but pragmatically at this point they must know it isn't going to be their politics as an option for the electorate.

    The choice of Labour leader is not between Jeremy Corbyn and a centrist, whatever a centrist is.

    A centrist would be someone well to the left of Kendall and Cooper.

    Maybe Thornberry
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,179

    In SO's defence I don't think he's a Tory.

    I just think he is one of those that have been driven mad by Corbyn in the same way some people have been driven mad by Brexit, say Lord Adonis for example or I saw (or maybe heard) Matthew Paris say the he'd been driven mad by it.

    Edit: SO I mentioned the hat in my first 2 or 3 posts on it...

    Sustained, principled opposition to a leadership with terrible principles isn't being "driven mad".
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,179

    The centrists within Labour have done far more towards that end than the left of the Labour party. With the greatest of respect if you think one of the centrists would have done better in the recent election I think you are kidding yourself. That is without taking into account all the actions they have undertaken to ensure that continuance of Tory government. Their complaints are about not being in charge and getting what they want.

    Edit: which in fairness you can argue is from their POV what is best for the country but pragmatically at this point they must know it isn't going to be their politics as an option for the electorate.

    The choice of Labour leader is not between Jeremy Corbyn and a centrist, whatever a centrist is.

    A centrist would be someone well to the left of Kendall and Cooper.

    Maybe Thornberry
    If the vast majority of MPs and the public are to the right of your "centre" you haven't adjusted your scale very welw.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 26,184

    Hat-gate rolls on. The anti-BBC right are getting the chance to peer into the Looking Glass. Some might pause to consider that the way Corbynistas are coming across now over Jezza’s hat is how they come across when they cry conspiracy over the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation. But they won’t, of course.

    As Jimmy Saville and other scandals show, the people who put the BBC on a pedestal and absolve and deflect it of any criticism frequently look very silly. ;)

    Everyone criticises the BBC. Only the loons of the left and right claim it is biased.

    (Snip)
    Of course the BBC are biased. I'm biased; you're biased, and organisations are biased one way or another. This can be by design or accident, and can infect culture

    The keys are in recognising that bias, and understanding whether that bias *matters*.

    The BBC claim that their output is unbiased over the full output. That means individual programs or interviews can display a bias, but that will be countered elsewhere in the output. As they say this, then they must have studies and figures that show it is the case, and processes to ensure it. AFAIAA they've never released any such information, which makes me suspect the claim is b/s.

    I am an individual, you are an individual. Institutions are not. Claiming institutional bias is a very different thing to accepting individuals have biases.
    A very poor attempt at deflection. If you're claiming any institution is free of all bias then you're being ridiculous. They can only try to be. Plenty of BBC insiders - e.g. Marr - have spoken of a cultural bias at the BBC.

    The odd thing is that I don't think we're too far apart in our positions. I utterly agree that many people go too far in their criticisms of the BBC (I for one do not regret a penny of the licence fee - I get more than my money's worth). However I'd argue that you go too far in blindly defending them, when the people complaining might have a point.

    I am not deflecting. I am giving an opinion. An institutional bias is a very different thing to a personal bias in my view. I have not at any stage said that the BBC does not have biases. It is undoubtedly pro-monarchy and pro-capitalism, for starters. However, that is very different to believing that as an institution the BBC has specific political biases that lead it to deliberately report news stories in a certain way (or to overlook them).

  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 9,723
    Somebody on 5 live talking about CSE"s Took me over a minute to realise it wasn't the type of CSE I got in RE. Good job it's CSE awareness day.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 1,501
    saddo said:

    I don't really get the hat outrage coming from Corbyn's cult following. I thought the one thing that nobody would ever argue about him is his support for all things Soviet Russia.

    He's a trot not a tankie.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 14,189
    Can someone explain why the Corbynistas are so upset that he's been pictures wearing a hat?

    I feel like I've missed something here.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 32,200
    edited March 18

    As I said a while back, given the current odds Laura Pidcock is a very good bet for next Labour leader.

    How exactly was it photoshopped to make more Russian? There is hardly any difference between the two images, apart from the shadow on his forehead being more saturated.
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,179
    What is most astonishing about hat gate is that there was no photo shopping. It was a genuine image of Corbyn. They are doing the Trumpian tactic of repeating a lie.so frequently people assume it is the truth. The BBC has some mild biases, but they are those generic to a London/Manchester media sector, and they do try to correct for them.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,410
    Good morning, everyone.

    May you be touched by His Noodley Appendage.

    F1: going to peruse the markets before deciding on a betting post, but think it unlikely. So, if it goes up it'll be today, otherwise the first article will be (probably) Friday.

    I think the race starts at 6.10am, which is a stupid time. Of course, it's probably convenient in America, so they haven't changed it (beyond the pointless 10 minute delay). Which is a shame, because 7.10am would be a lot more convenient for me.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,520
    saddo said:

    I don't really get the hat outrage coming from Corbyn's cult following. I thought the one thing that nobody would ever argue about him is his support for all things Soviet Russia.

    Nick Palmer denied it a while back on here, saying Corbyn preferred a different form of leftist [email protected] :)
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,179
    RobD said:

    As I said a while back, given the current odds Laura Pidcock is a very good bet for next Labour leader.

    How exactly was it photoshopped to make more Russian? There is hardly any difference between the two images, apart from the shadow on his forehead being more saturated.
    It was tinted in Labour red?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 14,189
    Elliot said:

    The centrists within Labour have done far more towards that end than the left of the Labour party. With the greatest of respect if you think one of the centrists would have done better in the recent election I think you are kidding yourself. That is without taking into account all the actions they have undertaken to ensure that continuance of Tory government. Their complaints are about not being in charge and getting what they want.

    Edit: which in fairness you can argue is from their POV what is best for the country but pragmatically at this point they must know it isn't going to be their politics as an option for the electorate.

    The choice of Labour leader is not between Jeremy Corbyn and a centrist, whatever a centrist is.

    A centrist would be someone well to the left of Kendall and Cooper.

    Maybe Thornberry
    If the vast majority of MPs and the public are to the right of your "centre" you haven't adjusted your scale very welw.
    Labour got 40% at the last election, so I don't think that's right.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 9,723
    Elliot said:

    The centrists within Labour have done far more towards that end than the left of the Labour party. With the greatest of respect if you think one of the centrists would have done better in the recent election I think you are kidding yourself. That is without taking into account all the actions they have undertaken to ensure that continuance of Tory government. Their complaints are about not being in charge and getting what they want.

    Edit: which in fairness you can argue is from their POV what is best for the country but pragmatically at this point they must know it isn't going to be their politics as an option for the electorate.

    The choice of Labour leader is not between Jeremy Corbyn and a centrist, whatever a centrist is.

    A centrist would be someone well to the left of Kendall and Cooper.

    Maybe Thornberry
    If the vast majority of MPs and the public are to the right of your "centre" you haven't adjusted your scale very welw.
    I don't accept that the vast majority of Labour voters are to the right of the 2017 manifesto. The majority I canvassed thought it was a welcome return to Labour's centre ground. ie on the side of the many.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 724
    edited March 18
    @Ishmael_Z

    Yeah I was reluctant to say photoshopped as they haven't completely invented the image or added bits which might be the impression people get if you say that but it has been photoshopped, only lightly. (Edit: or changed using some editing software)
    Dura_Ace said:

    saddo said:

    I don't really get the hat outrage coming from Corbyn's cult following. I thought the one thing that nobody would ever argue about him is his support for all things Soviet Russia.

    He's a trot not a tankie.
    He was a trot earlier on when that was useful... now he has clearly become a committed Stalinist and Putinist...

    @MaxPB

    If you really care I sort of went through it a few posts up.
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,179
    A rather good take down of the Craig Murray/Godfrey Bloom/other loons on Russia conspiracy theories.

    http://www.iflscience.com/chemistry/scientist-brilliantly-tears-conspiracy-theory-about-russian-spy-to-shreds/
  • RobDRobD Posts: 32,200
    Elliot said:

    RobD said:

    As I said a while back, given the current odds Laura Pidcock is a very good bet for next Labour leader.

    How exactly was it photoshopped to make more Russian? There is hardly any difference between the two images, apart from the shadow on his forehead being more saturated.
    It was tinted in Labour red?
    But the hat was black in both?
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,179

    Elliot said:

    The centrists within Labour have done far more towards that end than the left of the Labour party. With the greatest of respect if you think one of the centrists would have done better in the recent election I think you are kidding yourself. That is without taking into account all the actions they have undertaken to ensure that continuance of Tory government. Their complaints are about not being in charge and getting what they want.

    Edit: which in fairness you can argue is from their POV what is best for the country but pragmatically at this point they must know it isn't going to be their politics as an option for the electorate.

    The choice of Labour leader is not between Jeremy Corbyn and a centrist, whatever a centrist is.

    A centrist would be someone well to the left of Kendall and Cooper.

    Maybe Thornberry
    If the vast majority of MPs and the public are to the right of your "centre" you haven't adjusted your scale very welw.
    I don't accept that the vast majority of Labour voters are to the right of the 2017 manifesto. The majority I canvassed thought it was a welcome return to Labour's centre ground. ie on the side of the many.
    So the political spectrum is calibrated to just one pary's voters?
  • MetatronMetatron Posts: 124
    Should the Corbyn crowd become the next govt and within 5 years Britain becomes a left wing `Stasiland` type police state I wonder how history will judge todays mainstream TV/Radio political coverage of dometics politics
    There is something disturbing going on out there.
    Left wing activists are wearing balaclavas and trying to physically no platform opponents but the police does not arrest them.A sizeable amount of the left hate the Daily Mail so much that they are clearly looking to ban it.
    Whilst the Home Office last week detained and deported 2 young `alt-right` foreign journalists for basically holding `Rod Liddle/Douglas Murray` type views.
    i.e If Rod Liddle & Douglas Murray were foreign journalists the current Home Office would be looking to ban them.This is under a conservative govt.
    I
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 26,184
    MaxPB said:

    Elliot said:

    The centrists within Labour have done far more towards that end than the left of the Labour party. With the greatest of respect if you think one of the centrists would have done better in the recent election I think you are kidding yourself. That is without taking into account all the actions they have undertaken to ensure that continuance of Tory government. Their complaints are about not being in charge and getting what they want.

    Edit: which in fairness you can argue is from their POV what is best for the country but pragmatically at this point they must know it isn't going to be their politics as an option for the electorate.

    The choice of Labour leader is not between Jeremy Corbyn and a centrist, whatever a centrist is.

    A centrist would be someone well to the left of Kendall and Cooper.

    Maybe Thornberry
    If the vast majority of MPs and the public are to the right of your "centre" you haven't adjusted your scale very welw.
    Labour got 40% at the last election, so I don't think that's right.

    The vast majority of the MPs elected at the last election are to the right of BJO. In an FPTP system people are as likely - perhaps more likely - to vote against a party as for one.

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 26,184
    RobD said:

    As I said a while back, given the current odds Laura Pidcock is a very good bet for next Labour leader.

    How exactly was it photoshopped to make more Russian? There is hardly any difference between the two images, apart from the shadow on his forehead being more saturated.

    She’s fibbing. The point is that she is doing it publicly and without a care in the world.

  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 724

    Elliot said:

    The centrists within Labour have done far more towards that end than the left of the Labour party. With the greatest of respect if you think one of the centrists would have done better in the recent election I think you are kidding yourself. That is without taking into account all the actions they have undertaken to ensure that continuance of Tory government. Their complaints are about not being in charge and getting what they want.

    Edit: which in fairness you can argue is from their POV what is best for the country but pragmatically at this point they must know it isn't going to be their politics as an option for the electorate.

    The choice of Labour leader is not between Jeremy Corbyn and a centrist, whatever a centrist is.

    A centrist would be someone well to the left of Kendall and Cooper.

    Maybe Thornberry
    If the vast majority of MPs and the public are to the right of your "centre" you haven't adjusted your scale very welw.
    I don't accept that the vast majority of Labour voters are to the right of the 2017 manifesto. The majority I canvassed thought it was a welcome return to Labour's centre ground. ie on the side of the many.
    TBH the idea that 40% voted for a far left party seems a bit odd, might suggest the definitions being used are wrong.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,410
    Mr. Metatron, I share your concerns, about both the present and the future.

    Technology can be used to repress as well as enable free speech, as we've seen with student social media being scoured for using Wrongspeak.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 9,723
    Metatron said:

    Should the Corbyn crowd become the next govt and within 5 years Britain becomes a left wing `Stasiland` type police state I wonder how history will judge todays mainstream TV/Radio political coverage of dometics politics
    There is something disturbing going on out there.
    Left wing activists are wearing balaclavas and trying to physically no platform opponents but the police does not arrest them.A sizeable amount of the left hate the Daily Mail so much that they are clearly looking to ban it.
    Whilst the Home Office last week detained and deported 2 young `alt-right` foreign journalists for basically holding `Rod Liddle/Douglas Murray` type views.
    i.e If Rod Liddle & Douglas Murray were foreign journalists the current Home Office would be looking to ban them.This is under a conservative govt.
    I

    FFS get a grip.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,520

    I am not deflecting. I am giving an opinion. An institutional bias is a very different thing to a personal bias in my view. I have not at any stage said that the BBC does not have biases. It is undoubtedly pro-monarchy and pro-capitalism, for starters. However, that is very different to believing that as an institution the BBC has specific political biases that lead it to deliberately report news stories in a certain way (or to overlook them).

    "An institutional bias is a very different thing to a personal bias in my view."

    Yes, but there are also many similarities, particularly in the way it affects behaviour.

    WRT your last sentence, I fear that you are giving the BBC far too much credit.

    As I've said before many times, the BBC should have figures to who they are politically unbiased, to support their claims that they are. It'd be good to see them. If they don't have them, then they've no way of knowing if they're politically biased and their assurances are worthless. If they have figures and are not releasing them, then we need to ask why.

    A big problem with your position is that the biases you mention - e.g. being pro-monarchy and pro-capitalism - impinge on political beliefs, and therefore on politics directly.
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,179

    RobD said:

    As I said a while back, given the current odds Laura Pidcock is a very good bet for next Labour leader.

    How exactly was it photoshopped to make more Russian? There is hardly any difference between the two images, apart from the shadow on his forehead being more saturated.

    She’s fibbing. The point is that she is doing it publicly and without a care in the world.

    The press attacks, manipulated outrage and creation of alternative facts are spreading beyond the Corbynista sect to the rest of the party to ingratiate themselves with the leadership.

    This is exactly what has happened to the Republicans under Trump.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 724
    Elliot said:

    RobD said:

    As I said a while back, given the current odds Laura Pidcock is a very good bet for next Labour leader.

    How exactly was it photoshopped to make more Russian? There is hardly any difference between the two images, apart from the shadow on his forehead being more saturated.

    She’s fibbing. The point is that she is doing it publicly and without a care in the world.

    The press attacks, manipulated outrage and creation of alternative facts
    We talking about the centrist Labour here right?

    This is pretty much the reason they've been pushed out of the Labour mainstream.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 26,184

    I am not deflecting. I am giving an opinion. An institutional bias is a very different thing to a personal bias in my view. I have not at any stage said that the BBC does not have biases. It is undoubtedly pro-monarchy and pro-capitalism, for starters. However, that is very different to believing that as an institution the BBC has specific political biases that lead it to deliberately report news stories in a certain way (or to overlook them).

    "An institutional bias is a very different thing to a personal bias in my view."

    Yes, but there are also many similarities, particularly in the way it affects behaviour.

    WRT your last sentence, I fear that you are giving the BBC far too much credit.

    As I've said before many times, the BBC should have figures to who they are politically unbiased, to support their claims that they are. It'd be good to see them. If they don't have them, then they've no way of knowing if they're politically biased and their assurances are worthless. If they have figures and are not releasing them, then we need to ask why.

    A big problem with your position is that the biases you mention - e.g. being pro-monarchy and pro-capitalism - impinge on political beliefs, and therefore on politics directly.

    Yep, to the extent that people complain the BBC is pro-monarchy and pro-capitalism they undoubtedly have a point. But if everyone is biased - as you and I agree they are - what would be the value of figures on bias that have been compiled by human beings to parameters set by human beings?

  • CD13CD13 Posts: 4,343
    edited March 18
    Being scientific, we have to accept we all have biases, and this applies to science too. That's why we attempt to reduce them by, for example, using double-blind studies where possible. Incidentally, randomness needs to be worked at, it doesn't just occur in real life.

    Of course, the BBC will be biased, its staff selection will be biased. The 'like us' tendency. You can introduce quotas (be they ethnicity, class, sex) but that will remove one bias (possibly only) and ignore many more.

    The aim should be to be aware that bias is present - known and unknown.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 2,195

    Elliot said:

    The centrists within Labour have done far more towards that end than the left of the Labour party. With the greatest of respect if you think one of the centrists would have done better in the recent election I think you are kidding yourself. That is without taking into account all the actions they have undertaken to ensure that continuance of Tory government. Their complaints are about not being in charge and getting what they want.

    Edit: which in fairness you can argue is from their POV what is best for the country but pragmatically at this point they must know it isn't going to be their politics as an option for the electorate.

    The choice of Labour leader is not between Jeremy Corbyn and a centrist, whatever a centrist is.

    A centrist would be someone well to the left of Kendall and Cooper.

    Maybe Thornberry
    If the vast majority of MPs and the public are to the right of your "centre" you haven't adjusted your scale very welw.
    I don't accept that the vast majority of Labour voters are to the right of the 2017 manifesto. The majority I canvassed thought it was a welcome return to Labour's centre ground. ie on the side of the many.
    It just depends on whether "centrist" is meant in Labour party terms or national ones. So Kendall is right wing within the Labour party, but left wing on the national spectrum.

    Personally, I occupy the sensible centre position between the extremes of Marxism and of Anarcho-Syndiclalism :)
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 26,184
    Elliot said:

    RobD said:

    As I said a while back, given the current odds Laura Pidcock is a very good bet for next Labour leader.

    How exactly was it photoshopped to make more Russian? There is hardly any difference between the two images, apart from the shadow on his forehead being more saturated.

    She’s fibbing. The point is that she is doing it publicly and without a care in the world.

    The press attacks, manipulated outrage and creation of alternative facts are spreading beyond the Corbynista sect to the rest of the party to ingratiate themselves with the leadership.

    This is exactly what has happened to the Republicans under Trump.

    No, Laura’s a true believer. And well worth a small bet to be next Labour leader given the odds.

  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 2,195
    edited March 18
    On topic, while nothing is impossible, I cannot see the DUP supporting a Corbyn Premiership. It is not inconceivable that they could collapse the May government and indirectly bring Corbyn to power unintentionally.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 26,184

    Elliot said:

    The centrists within Labour have done far more towards that end than the left of the Labour party. With the greatest of respect if you think one of the centrists would have done better in the recent election I think you are kidding yourself. That is without taking into account all the actions they have undertaken to ensure that continuance of Tory government. Their complaints are about not being in charge and getting what they want.

    Edit: which in fairness you can argue is from their POV what is best for the country but pragmatically at this point they must know it isn't going to be their politics as an option for the electorate.

    The choice of Labour leader is not between Jeremy Corbyn and a centrist, whatever a centrist is.

    A centrist would be someone well to the left of Kendall and Cooper.

    Maybe Thornberry
    If the vast majority of MPs and the public are to the right of your "centre" you haven't adjusted your scale very welw.
    I don't accept that the vast majority of Labour voters are to the right of the 2017 manifesto. The majority I canvassed thought it was a welcome return to Labour's centre ground. ie on the side of the many.

    The 2017 manifesto was essentially a rehash of the 2015 one. It even accepted many of the Tory welfare cuts.

  • saddosaddo Posts: 417

    Elliot said:

    RobD said:

    As I said a while back, given the current odds Laura Pidcock is a very good bet for next Labour leader.

    How exactly was it photoshopped to make more Russian? There is hardly any difference between the two images, apart from the shadow on his forehead being more saturated.

    She’s fibbing. The point is that she is doing it publicly and without a care in the world.

    The press attacks, manipulated outrage and creation of alternative facts are spreading beyond the Corbynista sect to the rest of the party to ingratiate themselves with the leadership.

    This is exactly what has happened to the Republicans under Trump.

    No, Laura’s a true believer. And well worth a small bet to be next Labour leader given the odds.

    And she's a full on red princess too with daddy getting her a seat on the council he ran.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 8,075
    Corbyn is not a centrist. When the communists are behind him, there is not a soul to the left of him. By definition you can't be centrist.

  • CD13CD13 Posts: 4,343
    Mr Owls,

    "The majority I canvassed thought it was a welcome return to Labour's centre."

    Do you mean economically or socially?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,410
    Mr. Observer, a true believer, indeed. She certainly isn't a thinker.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 8,075

    Elliot said:

    RobD said:

    As I said a while back, given the current odds Laura Pidcock is a very good bet for next Labour leader.

    How exactly was it photoshopped to make more Russian? There is hardly any difference between the two images, apart from the shadow on his forehead being more saturated.

    She’s fibbing. The point is that she is doing it publicly and without a care in the world.

    The press attacks, manipulated outrage and creation of alternative facts are spreading beyond the Corbynista sect to the rest of the party to ingratiate themselves with the leadership.

    This is exactly what has happened to the Republicans under Trump.

    No, Laura’s a true believer. And well worth a small bet to be next Labour leader given the odds.

    She is also very ambitious .
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 2,195

    Elliot said:

    The centrists within Labour have done far more towards that end than the left of the Labour party. With the greatest of respect if you think one of the centrists would have done better in the recent election I think you are kidding yourself. That is without taking into account all the actions they have undertaken to ensure that continuance of Tory government. Their complaints are about not being in charge and getting what they want.

    Edit: which in fairness you can argue is from their POV what is best for the country but pragmatically at this point they must know it isn't going to be their politics as an option for the electorate.

    The choice of Labour leader is not between Jeremy Corbyn and a centrist, whatever a centrist is.

    A centrist would be someone well to the left of Kendall and Cooper.

    Maybe Thornberry
    If the vast majority of MPs and the public are to the right of your "centre" you haven't adjusted your scale very welw.
    I don't accept that the vast majority of Labour voters are to the right of the 2017 manifesto. The majority I canvassed thought it was a welcome return to Labour's centre ground. ie on the side of the many.

    The 2017 manifesto was essentially a rehash of the 2015 one. It even accepted many of the Tory welfare cuts.

    Inevitability it was a rush job so was a bit cut and paste. Tuition fee abolition and nationalisation were new, and popular.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 35,796
    Owen Bennett - @owenjbennett: Oh my god I’ve just realised it’s a dead hat strategy to distract from Corbyn’s position on Russia. Genius.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 26,184
    Foxy said:

    Elliot said:

    The centrists within Labour have done far more towards that end than the left of the Labour party. With the greatest of respect if you think one of the centrists would have done better in the recent election I think you are kidding yourself. That is without taking into account all the actions they have undertaken to ensure that continuance of Tory government. Their complaints are about not being in charge and getting what they want.

    Edit: which in fairness you can argue is from their POV what is best for the country but pragmatically at this point they must know it isn't going to be their politics as an option for the electorate.

    The choice of Labour leader is not between Jeremy Corbyn and a centrist, whatever a centrist is.

    A centrist would be someone well to the left of Kendall and Cooper.

    Maybe Thornberry
    If the vast majority of MPs and the public are to the right of your "centre" you haven't adjusted your scale very welw.
    I don't accept that the vast majority of Labour voters are to the right of the 2017 manifesto. The majority I canvassed thought it was a welcome return to Labour's centre ground. ie on the side of the many.

    The 2017 manifesto was essentially a rehash of the 2015 one. It even accepted many of the Tory welfare cuts.

    Inevitability it was a rush job so was a bit cut and paste. Tuition fee abolition and nationalisation were new, and popular.

    The Labour party’s most important asset last June was not being the Conservative party. And vice versa, of course.

  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 8,075
    Foxy said:

    Elliot said:

    The centrists within Labour have done far more towards that end than the left of the Labour party. With the greatest of respect if you think one of the centrists would have done better in the recent election I think you are kidding yourself. That is without taking into account all the actions they have undertaken to ensure that continuance of Tory government. Their complaints are about not being in charge and getting what they want.

    Edit: which in fairness you can argue is from their POV what is best for the country but pragmatically at this point they must know it isn't going to be their politics as an option for the electorate.

    The choice of Labour leader is not between Jeremy Corbyn and a centrist, whatever a centrist is.

    A centrist would be someone well to the left of Kendall and Cooper.

    Maybe Thornberry
    If the vast majority of MPs and the public are to the right of your "centre" you haven't adjusted your scale very welw.
    I don't accept that the vast majority of Labour voters are to the right of the 2017 manifesto. The majority I canvassed thought it was a welcome return to Labour's centre ground. ie on the side of the many.

    The 2017 manifesto was essentially a rehash of the 2015 one. It even accepted many of the Tory welfare cuts.

    Inevitability it was a rush job so was a bit cut and paste. Tuition fee abolition and nationalisation were new, and popular.
    Hardly new.
  • felixfelix Posts: 7,402
    RobD said:

    As I said a while back, given the current odds Laura Pidcock is a very good bet for next Labour leader.

    How exactly was it photoshopped to make more Russian? There is hardly any difference between the two images, apart from the shadow on his forehead being more saturated.
    I love the irony of Owen Jones campaign this week for his hero Corbyn . Surely he must know how despised he and his type are by the true believers .
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,179
    CD13 said:

    Being scientific, we have to accept we all have biases, and this applies to science too. That's why we attempt to reduce them by, for example, using double-blind studies where possible. Incidentally, randomness needs to be worked at, it doesn't just occur in real life.

    Of course, the BBC will be biased, its staff selection will be biased. The 'like us' tendency. You can introduce quotas (be they ethnicity, class, sex) but that will remove one bias (possibly only) and ignore many more.

    The aim should be to be aware that bias is present - known and unknown.

    One of the unusual issues the BBC faces is that (rightful) attempts to be less biased ethnically and regionally tends to accentuate the philosophical bias. I imagine their South Eastern white men still lean left, and attempts to diversify with more views from northern cities and ethnic minorities adds more left leaning voting blocs.
  • JWisemann said:

    Hat-gate rolls on. The anti-BBC right are getting the chance to peer into the Looking Glass. Some might pause to consider that the way Corbynistas are coming across now over Jezza’s hat is how they come across when they cry conspiracy over the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation. But they won’t, of course.

    As far as I can tell the complaints centre around the hat looking a bit bigger and losing its definition, well the hat related complaint, the other aspect of the complaint seems to be how Corbyn is blended into the image whereas Gavin Williamson isn't when he is shown on the background.

    I don't know if you've actually compared those 2 images and we know your track record with tweets but whilst the hat in both images start at the same place the Corbyn's finish in different places. In the second image Corbyn's chin is lower than the first image, the place where the difference seems to be is the hat.

    The complaints, or at least some of the ones I've seen aren't that the BBC are showing him wearing the hat that he is wearing in the first image and has worn in lots of other photographs. The complaints are that it has been made to look different to that hat by looking bigger and losing its definiton

    I don't believe the BBC went out of its way to try and smear Corbyn here but you can understand some suspicions on behalf of the Corbyn fans given this sort of looks like the BBC backing the right wing presses message.

    I think we all know why the Corbynistas are crying foul over the Hat. It’s very Trumpian and pretty smart given how badly Corbyn has been exposed over the last week.

    Christ, you really are a deluded right wing nutcase, whatever other claims you might make, arent you?
    Like your good-self SoWo does not have enough brain-cells to be either a 'nutter' nor 'right-wing'. Trot on son...!

    :tumbleweed:
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 26,184
    Scott_P said:

    Owen Bennett - @owenjbennett: Oh my god I’ve just realised it’s a dead hat strategy to distract from Corbyn’s position on Russia. Genius.

    Durr. It’s straight out of the Trump playbook, designed only for the true believers.

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,657

    Good morning, everyone.

    May you be touched by His Noodley Appendage.

    F1: going to peruse the markets before deciding on a betting post, but think it unlikely. So, if it goes up it'll be today, otherwise the first article will be (probably) Friday.

    I think the race starts at 6.10am, which is a stupid time. Of course, it's probably convenient in America, so they haven't changed it (beyond the pointless 10 minute delay). Which is a shame, because 7.10am would be a lot more convenient for me.

    The start is 16:10 local time, so difficult to push it much later given the four hour window rule. Also remember your clocks go forward next Sunday morning, so it’s really 05:10 body clock time!
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,410
    Mr. Jonathan, so was King John. Sadly, ambition and competence do not necessarily coincide.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,410
    Syria: a city has fallen to Turkish-backed forces, with Kurds being driven out:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-43447624
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,520

    I am not deflecting. I am giving an opinion. An institutional bias is a very different thing to a personal bias in my view. I have not at any stage said that the BBC does not have biases. It is undoubtedly pro-monarchy and pro-capitalism, for starters. However, that is very different to believing that as an institution the BBC has specific political biases that lead it to deliberately report news stories in a certain way (or to overlook them).

    "An institutional bias is a very different thing to a personal bias in my view."

    Yes, but there are also many similarities, particularly in the way it affects behaviour.

    WRT your last sentence, I fear that you are giving the BBC far too much credit.

    As I've said before many times, the BBC should have figures to who they are politically unbiased, to support their claims that they are. It'd be good to see them. If they don't have them, then they've no way of knowing if they're politically biased and their assurances are worthless. If they have figures and are not releasing them, then we need to ask why.

    A big problem with your position is that the biases you mention - e.g. being pro-monarchy and pro-capitalism - impinge on political beliefs, and therefore on politics directly.

    Yep, to the extent that people complain the BBC is pro-monarchy and pro-capitalism they undoubtedly have a point. But if everyone is biased - as you and I agree they are - what would be the value of figures on bias that have been compiled by human beings to parameters set by human beings?
    That same argument can be used for many things, and is bogus. It is at least a step up from just blindly claiming they are unbiased, which is what they are doing (and appears to be a lie).

    It also allows you to check for biases in the methodology, and improve it.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,817
    Foxy said:

    On topic, while nothing is impossible, I cannot see the DUP supporting a Corbyn Premiership. It is not inconceivable that they could collapse the May government and indirectly bring Corbyn to power unintentionally.

    Short of an election, they would have to actively support Corbyn for him to command a majority.

    I can't see that. The crucial thing the thread header overlooks is that under power sharing the DUP were *leading* the Stormont government. Therefore, in exchange for taking on and in their eyes neutering their enemies (Paisley boasted in his last interview that Sinn Fein had ceased to be a Republican Party as a result of power-sharing) they gained real power to shape the future of Northern Ireland the way they wanted to, within the British state.

    Corbyn would not offer them that. He would instead be leading away from what they want (and undoubtedly would be willing to hand Northern Ireland over to Ireland to ensure Brexit - indeed, he might see it as a good opportunity to secure something he has always supported). The risks involved for the DUP in supporting him would be appalling and there would be no noticeable or measurable gains.

    It is also worth considering that while the DUP regarded Sinn Fein as enemies fighting a war, they see Corbyn and his ilk as traitors undermining their own side. That's far worse.

    A more likely scenario is that they accidentally precipitate an election by over-reaching themselves which allowed Corbyn to cobble together a government. But for the reasons above I think they will be very careful about doing so until we have finally left the EU.

    (Incidentally may I say that the moment PB's most Fascistic poster, somebody whose dishonesty would cause even David Irving to blench, accused somebody else of being a right wing fake news peddler was the moment satire officially died.)
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 18,894

    I am not deflecting. I am giving an opinion. An institutional bias is a very different thing to a personal bias in my view. I have not at any stage said that the BBC does not have biases. It is undoubtedly pro-monarchy and pro-capitalism, for starters. However, that is very different to believing that as an institution the BBC has specific political biases that lead it to deliberately report news stories in a certain way (or to overlook them).

    "An institutional bias is a very different thing to a personal bias in my view."

    Yes, but there are also many similarities, particularly in the way it affects behaviour.

    WRT your last sentence, I fear that you are giving the BBC far too much credit.

    As I've said before many times, the BBC should have figures to who they are politically unbiased, to support their claims that they are. It'd be good to see them. If they don't have them, then they've no way of knowing if they're politically biased and their assurances are worthless. If they have figures and are not releasing them, then we need to ask why.

    A big problem with your position is that the biases you mention - e.g. being pro-monarchy and pro-capitalism - impinge on political beliefs, and therefore on politics directly.
    They are certainly biased in Scotland , anti independence unionist arse lickers.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,520

    Mr. Jonathan, so was King John. Sadly, ambition and competence do not necessarily coincide.

    When I walked through King's Lynn at the end of the Ouse Valley Way on Wednesday, I was surprised to see a statue of King John in the centre of town. There cannot be too many of him about.

    It turns out it's because he granted them a town charter, and in return they gave him the dysentery that killed him. ;)
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 8,297
    What the BBC should now do is set the record straight on the Six O'Clock News. They should issue a full apology for any manipulation of the image.

    I'm sure the Corbynistas would appreciate that.
This discussion has been closed.