OGH: Tories take the lead with Survation - the pollster that's been showing the best figures for LAB CON 41% +1 LAB 40% = LD 8% -1 UKIP 3% = SNP 3% = GRE 2% +1
I've also had the "just because you are both paying for everything it doesn't mean you can do whatever you want at your wedding" talk from my mum. It took all of my patience not to start yelling at her.
It's no surprise many of the loudest voices against grammar schools are those with public school backgrounds, people who had an easy pathway to privilege. Perhaps we should listen to those who attended grammar schools (like myself!), the vast majority of whom have positive experiences. Indeed in Kent where grammar schools are prevalent they are thought of in very positive terms, but perhaps less so in other areas where understanding is purely anecdotal.
Grammar schools do not have to lead to a drop in the quality of local comps, in fact much the opposite if done well - my school shared facilities and resources as part of a partnership with a struggling South London comp and the partnership was mutually beneficial.
I’m not sure we’d have a viable government on those Survation numbers.
I think in practice either the TOries or Labour would outperform slightly to deliver one.
As it is that's VInce Cable's choice of Government, so most likely a Labour minority with confidence and supply from the SNP and the Lib Dems. It'd probably last about 2 years.
OGH: Tories take the lead with Survation - the pollster that's been showing the best figures for LAB CON 41% +1 LAB 40% = LD 8% -1 UKIP 3% = SNP 3% = GRE 2% +1
OGH: Tories take the lead with Survation - the pollster that's been showing the best figures for LAB CON 41% +1 LAB 40% = LD 8% -1 UKIP 3% = SNP 3% = GRE 2% +1
I'm puzzled as to how it can be said that Labour did slightly worse last week than in 2014 when they gained a further 77 council seats on top of the 330 plus gains they made then.
A level result to 2014 would be better for Labour in London and slightly worse elsewhere compared to 2014.
I may not be the brightest of buttons but how can the 2014 results be better for Labour in London when 2018 was the best results for them in London since 1971? Also how can the results in the rest oc the country be slightly worse when they gained 17 seats on top of the ones they won in 2014? I just don't get it.
Broadly there are two factors delivering that - firstly the UKIP collapse effect, which I think is fairly obvious - everyone got to pick at a few bones (except the Lab leader of Derby council!)
Secondly there is the differential Brexit effect. Because the seats up were disproportionately Remain the headline numbers were better for Labour, but the nationally-adjusted results compensate for that. To be fair, it's more the Conservatives outperforming here than Labour doing that badly, but it's the differential that matters.
Thanks for that explanation but I still can't get my head around Conservatives "outperforming" can lead to Labour gaining seats over and above those gained in their bumper year of 2014.
Labour performed disproportionately well in 'all-up' areas, where you can gain 3 seats in one ward. Meanwhile the Tories did better in areas that were electing by thirds, so not as many gains to be made.
Does that provide something of an explanation?
Not really. No.
This is what happens when 11+ failures try posting on PB. Send her back to Labour Uncut.
The weird thing about the grammar school discussion is that selecting at 11 is obviously a bit mad, but you can make a decent case for selecting around 14, which lots of countries do, with pretty much the same kind of arguments.
What the fixation on selecting at 11 tells me is that the whole thing is about nostalgia, not education.
Doesn't it simply reflect the existing primary/secondary divide ?
KS3 is at 14, we already have exams there.
This rather writes itself.
While I think selective schools are a good thing, its because of related issues not selection per se. They typically tend to have better discipline, typically have a better ethos and the parents are typically more involved. If you could replicate that in non-selective schools, you'd be in for a winner.
Maybe special schools for the utter gobshoites that make everyone else's life a misery?
As has been said, its the other 17 hours that are key. Look at what happens to the cohort over the summer holidays. Kids from different households do markedly different things, leading to differences in the next summer.
Sajid Javid has overtaken Jeremy Hunt and Michael Gove in the next prime minister betting market. He's now number 4 behind Corbyn, Rees Mogg and Johnson.
I’m not sure we’d have a viable government on those Survation numbers.
I think in practice either the TOries or Labour would outperform slightly to deliver one.
As it is that's VInce Cable's choice of Government, so most likely a Labour minority with confidence and supply from the SNP and the Lib Dems. It'd probably last about 2 years.
Will Cable stand again in 2022? he will be 79 in May of that year.
I’m not sure we’d have a viable government on those Survation numbers.
I think in practice either the TOries or Labour would outperform slightly to deliver one.
As it is that's VInce Cable's choice of Government, so most likely a Labour minority with confidence and supply from the SNP and the Lib Dems. It'd probably last about 2 years.
Will Cable stand again in 2022? he will be 79 in May of that year.
The weird thing about the grammar school discussion is that selecting at 11 is obviously a bit mad, but you can make a decent case for selecting around 14, which lots of countries do, with pretty much the same kind of arguments.
What the fixation on selecting at 11 tells me is that the whole thing is about nostalgia, not education.
Doesn't it simply reflect the existing primary/secondary divide ?
KS3 is at 14, we already have exams there.
This rather writes itself.
While I think selective schools are a good thing, its because of related issues not selection per se. They typically tend to have better discipline, typically have a better ethos and the parents are typically more involved. If you could replicate that in non-selective schools, you'd be in for a winner.
Maybe special schools for the utter gobshoites that make everyone else's life a misery?
As has been said, its the other 17 hours that are key. Look at what happens to the cohort over the summer holidays. Kids from different households do markedly different things, leading to differences in the next summer.
Sajid Javid has overtaken Jeremy Hunt and Michael Gove in the next prime minister betting market. He's now number 4 behind Corbyn, Rees Mogg and Johnson.
The weird thing about the grammar school discussion is that selecting at 11 is obviously a bit mad, but you can make a decent case for selecting around 14, which lots of countries do, with pretty much the same kind of arguments.
What the fixation on selecting at 11 tells me is that the whole thing is about nostalgia, not education.
Doesn't it simply reflect the existing primary/secondary divide ?
KS3 is at 14, we already have exams there....
I was referring to the physical infrastructure. But, as I said, the existence of large multi academy trusts would make local experimentation much easier than hitherto. Government would simply have to provide suitable incentives - and oversight.
I'm not a massive fan of the growth of MATs, but we might at least make imaginative use of them.
My parents are trying to fight back against our small wedding plans. Apparently we've cut the family guest list too far because loads of my more distant relatives aren't getting invited but loads of our friends are. Honestly, this is a nightmare. I feel like eloping.
As my mother said ‘You’ll have the wedding of your dreams as soon as you have kids that get married’
I've told my mum to, politely, get lost.
Good for you - nothing more difficult than telling your own parents they are nuts!
Sajid Javid has overtaken Jeremy Hunt and Michael Gove in the next prime minister betting market. He's now number 4 behind Corbyn, Rees Mogg and Johnson.
The weird thing about the grammar school discussion is that selecting at 11 is obviously a bit mad, but you can make a decent case for selecting around 14, which lots of countries do, with pretty much the same kind of arguments.
What the fixation on selecting at 11 tells me is that the whole thing is about nostalgia, not education.
Doesn't it simply reflect the existing primary/secondary divide ?
KS3 is at 14, we already have exams there.
This rather writes itself.
While I think selective schools are a good thing, its because of related issues not selection per se. They typically tend to have better discipline, typically have a better ethos and the parents are typically more involved. If you could replicate that in non-selective schools, you'd be in for a winner.
Maybe special schools for the utter gobshoites that make everyone else's life a misery?
They are called Pupil Referral Units... And are overflowing in many local authorities.
As an aside, Cameron's closure of special schools, without providing sufficient funding for the pupils who then entered mainstream education, has created its own set of problems.
Sajid Javid has overtaken Jeremy Hunt and Michael Gove in the next prime minister betting market. He's now number 4 behind Corbyn, Rees Mogg and Johnson.
Not only would that be very profitable but the reaction of some on the left to the Tories having the first BAME PM will be great.
I don'y know if I count as 'The Left' but I would be delighted to see it, for a raft of reasons.
1. He'd be far superior to the incumbent who would be better employed as a geography teacher in a girls' school (nothing wrong with geography by the way, I also read it at university)
2. He's directly rejected god-bothering. An atheist PM needs to happen soon.
3. He seems like a nice enough bloke.
4. He isn't Jacob Crackers or Boris Twat, which is a strong mark in the pro column in and of itself.
"Bank of England governor Mark Carney says the UK economy will pick up
In an interview with the BBC, Bank of England governor Mark Carney says the UK economy will pick up, largely due to export growth and business investment."
Sajid Javid has overtaken Jeremy Hunt and Michael Gove in the next prime minister betting market. He's now number 4 behind Corbyn, Rees Mogg and Johnson.
Not only would that be very profitable but the reaction of some on the left to the Tories having the first BAME PM will be great.
I don'y know if I count as 'The Left' but I would be delighted to see it, for a raft of reasons.
1. He'd be far superior to the incumbent who would be better employed as a geography teacher in a girls' school (nothing wrong with geography by the way, I also read it at university)
2. He's directly rejected god-bothering. An atheist PM needs to happen soon.
3. He seems like a nice enough bloke.
4. He isn't Jacob Crackers or Boris Twat, which is a strong mark in the pro column in and of itself.
Sajid Javid has overtaken Jeremy Hunt and Michael Gove in the next prime minister betting market. He's now number 4 behind Corbyn, Rees Mogg and Johnson.
The Tories gained 541 seats in 2015 and Labour lost 203 seats. Liberals lost 411. The Tories will have over 5500 seats up for re-election.
The NEV was Con 35%, Lab 29%, LD 11%, UKIP 13%.
UKIP still won 202 seats. I don't know how many are still councillors. 2019 could be interesting.
Very interesting, I should say. 2015 local elections coincided with the general election, when the Tories were throwing money around right left and centre. (And getting their accounts all mixed up afterwards.)
If next year`s local elections are not fixed to coincide with a general election (or vice versa), there will be limits on how much the Tory candidates can spend. Though the Tories got round spending limits this year, didn`t they? with that infamous letter from Mrs May, which even went to Scottish voters.
"Bank of England governor Mark Carney says the UK economy will pick up
In an interview with the BBC, Bank of England governor Mark Carney says the UK economy will pick up, largely due to export growth and business investment."
That doesn’t tell us anything. On the other hand, the data don’t lie.
The weird thing about the grammar school discussion is that selecting at 11 is obviously a bit mad, but you can make a decent case for selecting around 14, which lots of countries do, with pretty much the same kind of arguments.
What the fixation on selecting at 11 tells me is that the whole thing is about nostalgia, not education.
I believe German schools select at 10. The difference is that they have the ability to re-track kids if it is obvious they are performing better or worse than expected.
Sajid Javid has overtaken Jeremy Hunt and Michael Gove in the next prime minister betting market. He's now number 4 behind Corbyn, Rees Mogg and Johnson.
Not only would that be very profitable but the reaction of some on the left to the Tories having the first BAME PM will be great.
I don'y know if I count as 'The Left' but I would be delighted to see it, for a raft of reasons.
1. He'd be far superior to the incumbent who would be better employed as a geography teacher in a girls' school (nothing wrong with geography by the way, I also read it at university)
2. He's directly rejected god-bothering. An atheist PM needs to happen soon.
3. He seems like a nice enough bloke.
4. He isn't Jacob Crackers or Boris Twat, which is a strong mark in the pro column in and of itself.
Agreed on all counts.
It took Labour until 1987 to get their first non-white MP. The Tories, Whigs, Liberals and even the Communist Party had them before.
My parents are trying to fight back against our small wedding plans. Apparently we've cut the family guest list too far because loads of my more distant relatives aren't getting invited but loads of our friends are. Honestly, this is a nightmare. I feel like eloping.
Hold firm - we had a cousins argument over all or none vs the ones we actually socialised with to some degree. And we argued over spending on a professional video recording, we chose to do that to avoid father-in-law prancing around the wedding with his. And I still had to accidentally on-purpose lock his camcorder away in a car boot at an opportune moment to prevent his doing just that.
It’s not worthy skimping - we were paying for ours so saved a couple of grand by not getting the service recorded (had the Westminster Abbey Choir) - really regret that now
I note that Earl Baldwin of Bewdley retired from the House of Lords (too much Brexit probably) earlier this week.
As he was an elected hereditary crossbencher there will be a by-election to replace him. The electorate will be the current 31 hereditary crossbenchers.
The weird thing about the grammar school discussion is that selecting at 11 is obviously a bit mad, but you can make a decent case for selecting around 14, which lots of countries do, with pretty much the same kind of arguments.
What the fixation on selecting at 11 tells me is that the whole thing is about nostalgia, not education.
It’s a perfect proxy for Brexit.
Anecdote, not data-led. Nostalgic, not progressive. Divisive, not consensual. Promoted with righteous indignation by certain noisy groups.
It seems a very pernicious belief, and no evidence seems to change minds.
Maybe because the extensive evidence I have been quoting actually supports Grammar schools rather than detracts from them. Of course the real analogy might be between Remainers and those who oppose Grammar schools, both of whom are happy to ignore evidence when it fails to support their case.
Do you think the alumni of grammars were more leave or remain?
Absolutely no idea. My comment was directed towards the way they address evidence rather than their specific views.
Sajid Javid has overtaken Jeremy Hunt and Michael Gove in the next prime minister betting market. He's now number 4 behind Corbyn, Rees Mogg and Johnson.
Sajid Javid has overtaken Jeremy Hunt and Michael Gove in the next prime minister betting market. He's now number 4 behind Corbyn, Rees Mogg and Johnson.
Not only would that be very profitable but the reaction of some on the left to the Tories having the first BAME PM will be great.
I don'y know if I count as 'The Left' but I would be delighted to see it, for a raft of reasons.
1. He'd be far superior to the incumbent who would be better employed as a geography teacher in a girls' school (nothing wrong with geography by the way, I also read it at university)
2. He's directly rejected god-bothering. An atheist PM needs to happen soon.
3. He seems like a nice enough bloke.
4. He isn't Jacob Crackers or Boris Twat, which is a strong mark in the pro column in and of itself.
Agreed on all counts.
He is also a very sharp cookie according to a family member, who has him as their MP and has met him a few times.
Using the very useful election results map to look again at the Leeds results. There are 4 split wards where Labour sneaked the 3rd seat, plus 1 where we were 2nd & 3rd behind a LD winner. These will be more tricky to hold on to next year - on zero swing we lose.
So it looks like Labour benefited from the all-out elections, taking seats in wards where we would normally be runners up every year.
(And there was me thinking we'd lose seats as a result!)
Sajid Javid has overtaken Jeremy Hunt and Michael Gove in the next prime minister betting market. He's now number 4 behind Corbyn, Rees Mogg and Johnson.
Not only would that be very profitable but the reaction of some on the left to the Tories having the first BAME PM will be great.
They'd go coconuts.
Indeed, so would some Tory voters not seeing the positive of another glass ceiling shattering. If Javid becomes PM, then it would mark an interesting point in social mobility despite the negative opinion of some experts on where we currently find ourselves. I suppose the detractors would say he was lucky in that he made his way in life before policies began to impede social progress again.
It's no surprise many of the loudest voices against grammar schools are those with public school backgrounds, people who had an easy pathway to privilege. Perhaps we should listen to those who attended grammar schools (like myself!), the vast majority of whom have positive experiences. Indeed in Kent where grammar schools are prevalent they are thought of in very positive terms, but perhaps less so in other areas where understanding is purely anecdotal.
Grammar schools do not have to lead to a drop in the quality of local comps, in fact much the opposite if done well - my school shared facilities and resources as part of a partnership with a struggling South London comp and the partnership was mutually beneficial.
Well, my good self and my Sibs all went to Comps, one being a high flier in a London Economics job who haad failed his 11+ and was destined to a Sec Modern. He did rather well at LSE. My other Sib got an exhibition at Cambridge and finished his PhD there. Mrs Foxy went to a Lincs Grammar and hated it, leaving without A levels, while my Dad went to a Lancs Grammar in the fifties and loathed it. He was very glad that my elder sib escaped a Sec Modern due to Comprehensivisation the same year. We all have anecdotes.
Or it could be because they have incorrectly rounded down 40.8% to 40%, and it really is 41 plays 41?
I *think* that's probably an artefact of the separate Scottish input they have put in to Baxter. I think it's very unlikely they'd report their headline figure wrong.
Or it could be because they have incorrectly rounded down 40.8% to 40%, and it really is 41 plays 41?
I *think* that's probably an artefact of the separate Scottish input they have put in to Baxter. I think it's very unlikely they'd report their headline figure wrong.
Could be. You would think they'd add a sentence of explanation to prevent us wonks getting into a tiz!
Sajid Javid has overtaken Jeremy Hunt and Michael Gove in the next prime minister betting market. He's now number 4 behind Corbyn, Rees Mogg and Johnson.
What’s interesting there is that people in the counties that *have* grammar schools seem to be strongly in favour.
That’s a pretty good reason to keep them, even when the statistical evidence for them seems quite variable.
I went to the local comp in a rough neighbourhood. I’m bound to say it never did me any harm, but I don’t think it’s true. I would have benefited hugely from being sent to a selective school.
Most people would benefit from going to selective school. Unfortunately most people can’t go to a selective school. By definition.
What’s interesting there is that people in the counties that *have* grammar schools seem to be strongly in favour.
That’s a pretty good reason to keep them, even when the statistical evidence for them seems quite variable.
I went to the local comp in a rough neighbourhood. I’m bound to say it never did me any harm, but I don’t think it’s true. I would have benefited hugely from being sent to a selective school.
Most people would benefit from going to selective school. Unfortunately most people can’t go to a selective school. By definition.
I don't think many people benefit from going to a Secondary Modern selective school!
Grammar schools serve a useful purpose in stimulating the economy for tutoring and wine sales to stressed parents of 10 yr olds.
The admissions system is totally distorted by parents who self or pay for excessive tutoring.
Johnny Clever from the sink estate has no chance of beating dim but tutored Jemima from Acacia Avenue.
That is not true.
The 11+ is effectively an iq test, if you are dim you will not pass it however rich your parents are and how much you are tutored
Whether the assessments are an accurate indicator of dimness or not (I doubt it personally), no-one likes to be told their kid is dim and therefore binned educationally. Telling parents we will give their kids the best education available goes down a lot better.
Except the Sutton Trust evidence is that kids who fail the 11+ are not 'binned' as the schools they go to instead are no better or worse whether they are alongside a Grammar school or not. Creaming does not effect the overall results of those schools.
My comment was about perceptions and whether grammar schools are popular. I suggest they are unpopular with the wrong demographic from a Tory PoV.
The Sutton Trust research interesting and it's worth drilling into their reports. They think Grammar Schools do such a bad job of identifying smart but poor students that ironically it leaves them to improve average standards in non-selective schools. In most places there are not enough grammar schools to have a substantial negative effect on remaining schools. The conclusion from their 2016 report:
While the research is mixed on this issue, the consensus remains that grammar schools certainly don’t have a positive effect on overall attainment, and are likely to have a small negative effect, particularly in more selective areas, and for pupils from poorer backgrounds. As to the long term effects of selection on mobility, longitudinal research has also shown that selective education increases income inequality, with those on low incomes who were brought up in selective areas earning less than their counterparts in comprehensive areas.
Sajid Javid has overtaken Jeremy Hunt and Michael Gove in the next prime minister betting market. He's now number 4 behind Corbyn, Rees Mogg and Johnson.
What’s interesting there is that people in the counties that *have* grammar schools seem to be strongly in favour.
That’s a pretty good reason to keep them, even when the statistical evidence for them seems quite variable.
I went to the local comp in a rough neighbourhood. I’m bound to say it never did me any harm, but I don’t think it’s true. I would have benefited hugely from being sent to a selective school.
Most people would benefit from going to selective school. Unfortunately most people can’t go to a selective school. By definition.
I don't think many people benefit from going to a Secondary Modern selective school!
John Prescott probably did, without having a chip on his shoulder the size of a bus at failing his 11+ he may not have had the drive to become Deputy Labour Leader and Deputy PM
It's funny how specific words can set different expectations. One of my favourite TV shows has been cancelled, and the BBC write up describes it thusly:
"The show, which developed a cult following after launching in September 2013, has been praised for its "intersectional representation" and "inclusive humour".
Which, frankly, does not sound like a show I'd want to watch, if that is the most important thing people had to say about it. It would never have occurred to me to have described the show that way, for all, on reflection, it is not inaccurate. I feel like maybe I was focusing more on it just being funny and heartwarming.
First Tory lead with hold standard Survation since just after the general election
To my aged eyes, the figures now look the same as the figures from the beginning of July 2017 when the Conservatives briefly held a 1% lead.
Also worth noting the Labour vote share hasn't dropped below 40%.
Yet.
It's not like it matters much if it does. Except, I guess, perhaps making Tory rebels (of either variety) think they can take the risk to destabilise things with less risk of accidentally leading to a Corbyn government?
It's no surprise many of the loudest voices against grammar schools are those with public school backgrounds, people who had an easy pathway to privilege. Perhaps we should listen to those who attended grammar schools (like myself!), the vast majority of whom have positive experiences. Indeed in Kent where grammar schools are prevalent they are thought of in very positive terms, but perhaps less so in other areas where understanding is purely anecdotal.
Grammar schools do not have to lead to a drop in the quality of local comps, in fact much the opposite if done well - my school shared facilities and resources as part of a partnership with a struggling South London comp and the partnership was mutually beneficial.
Well I’m a grammar school boy and I think the concept is rubbish, and although I did okay my subsequent career doesn't suggest to me that it got me off to the best possible start. And it worked really badly for some of my friends. I am glad your experience was as a positive one but it isn't necessarily representative.
With 2 million comments we can’t humanly read them all. We have tried out the latest expensive AI software and it is not good enough or not trained enough yet on British idiom to deal with obsesssive racists who bore on about Sadiq Khan, David Lammy and Diane Abbott endlessly. Twats who think they are being witty when they are just crass, saddos who game the moderation to insult “musl1ms”. We frankly don’t want them, like them or need them. Breitbart are welcome to them.
It's no surprise many of the loudest voices against grammar schools are those with public school backgrounds, people who had an easy pathway to privilege. Perhaps we should listen to those who attended grammar schools (like myself!), the vast majority of whom have positive experiences. Indeed in Kent where grammar schools are prevalent they are thought of in very positive terms, but perhaps less so in other areas where understanding is purely anecdotal.
Grammar schools do not have to lead to a drop in the quality of local comps, in fact much the opposite if done well - my school shared facilities and resources as part of a partnership with a struggling South London comp and the partnership was mutually beneficial.
Well, my good self and my Sibs all went to Comps, one being a high flier in a London Economics job who haad failed his 11+ and was destined to a Sec Modern. He did rather well at LSE. My other Sib got an exhibition at Cambridge and finished his PhD there. Mrs Foxy went to a Lincs Grammar and hated it, leaving without A levels, while my Dad went to a Lancs Grammar in the fifties and loathed it. He was very glad that my elder sib escaped a Sec Modern due to Comprehensivisation the same year. We all have anecdotes.
Just for the record I went to a grammar and whilst I think it benefited me academically, it did was a hindrance for social and personal development. My brother went to the same grammar and it certainly hurt his academic development. All in all, I am not a fan.
Sajid Javid has overtaken Jeremy Hunt and Michael Gove in the next prime minister betting market. He's now number 4 behind Corbyn, Rees Mogg and Johnson.
With 2 million comments we can’t humanly read them all. We have tried out the latest expensive AI software and it is not good enough or not trained enough yet on British idiom to deal with obsesssive racists who bore on about Sadiq Khan, David Lammy and Diane Abbott endlessly. Twats who think they are being witty when they are just crass, saddos who game the moderation to insult “musl1ms”. We frankly don’t want them, like them or need them. Breitbart are welcome to them.
It may just have proven too hard to manage.
I'd glanced at the comments on a few recent threads and it seems to have made a difference in that a lot of the comments were not complimentary of the host.
Sajid Javid has overtaken Jeremy Hunt and Michael Gove in the next prime minister betting market. He's now number 4 behind Corbyn, Rees Mogg and Johnson.
Not only would that be very profitable but the reaction of some on the left to the Tories having the first BAME PM will be great.
It would probably cause more consternation on the left to see the Tories have the first women prime minister and the first non-white PM as well.
Some on this site seem obsessed with this topic, it’s odd. Especially since Conservatives state that they dislike identity politics.
Ha! Indeed. Other weird PB Tory obsessions I have noted with dismay include:
1. Writing “it’s a view” when they mean “I disagree” - deeply overused and unfunny 2. Invoking the five stages of grief (usually at Remainers) - deeply overused and unfunny 3. Telling us, over and again, how they didn’t like the Tube scene in His Darkest Hour
With 2 million comments we can’t humanly read them all. We have tried out the latest expensive AI software and it is not good enough or not trained enough yet on British idiom to deal with obsesssive racists who bore on about Sadiq Khan, David Lammy and Diane Abbott endlessly. Twats who think they are being witty when they are just crass, saddos who game the moderation to insult “musl1ms”. We frankly don’t want them, like them or need them. Breitbart are welcome to them.
It may just have proven too hard to manage.
One of the comments from this story.....
"A dog can be born in a stable, but don't put any money on it to win one of the classics. And what kind of fine Catholic name is Opuku-Gimhya anyway?"
Sajid Javid has overtaken Jeremy Hunt and Michael Gove in the next prime minister betting market. He's now number 4 behind Corbyn, Rees Mogg and Johnson.
Not only would that be very profitable but the reaction of some on the left to the Tories having the first BAME PM will be great.
It would probably cause more consternation on the left to see the Tories have the first women prime minister and the first non-white PM as well.
Some on this site seem obsessed with this topic, it’s odd. Especially since Conservatives state that they dislike identity politics.
Ha! Indeed. Other weird PB Tory obsessions I have noted with dismay include:
1. Writing “it’s a view” when they mean “I disagree” - deeply overused and unfunny 2. Invoking the five stages of grief (usually at Remainers) - deeply overused and unfunny 3. Telling us, over and again, how they didn’t like the Tube scene in His Darkest Hour
With 2 million comments we can’t humanly read them all. We have tried out the latest expensive AI software and it is not good enough or not trained enough yet on British idiom to deal with obsesssive racists who bore on about Sadiq Khan, David Lammy and Diane Abbott endlessly. Twats who think they are being witty when they are just crass, saddos who game the moderation to insult “musl1ms”. We frankly don’t want them, like them or need them. Breitbart are welcome to them.
It may just have proven too hard to manage.
One of the comments from this story.....
"A dog can be born in a stable, but don't put any money on it to win one of the classics. And what kind of fine Catholic name is Opuku-Gimhya anyway?"
That's not hard to manage.
I don't know how his moderation currently works - what I meant was if the software wasn't working, and they cannot physically read all of the comments, terrible stuff is going to get through. I see they are considering pre-moderation, facebook or just not having comments at all, which at least says something about being sick to death of the sewer.
Sajid Javid has overtaken Jeremy Hunt and Michael Gove in the next prime minister betting market. He's now number 4 behind Corbyn, Rees Mogg and Johnson.
Not only would that be very profitable but the reaction of some on the left to the Tories having the first BAME PM will be great.
It would probably cause more consternation on the left to see the Tories have the first women prime minister and the first non-white PM as well.
Some on this site seem obsessed with this topic, it’s odd. Especially since Conservatives state that they dislike identity politics.
Ha! Indeed. Other weird PB Tory obsessions I have noted with dismay include:
1. Writing “it’s a view” when they mean “I disagree” - deeply overused and unfunny 2. Invoking the five stages of grief (usually at Remainers) - deeply overused and unfunny 3. Telling us, over and again, how they didn’t like the Tube scene in His Darkest Hour 4. Unspoofable - yuk!!
Sajid Javid has overtaken Jeremy Hunt and Michael Gove in the next prime minister betting market. He's now number 4 behind Corbyn, Rees Mogg and Johnson.
Not only would that be very profitable but the reaction of some on the left to the Tories having the first BAME PM will be great.
It would probably cause more consternation on the left to see the Tories have the first women prime minister and the first non-white PM as well.
Some on this site seem obsessed with this topic, it’s odd. Especially since Conservatives state that they dislike identity politics.
Ha! Indeed. Other weird PB Tory obsessions I have noted with dismay include:
1. Writing “it’s a view” when they mean “I disagree” - deeply overused and unfunny 2. Invoking the five stages of grief (usually at Remainers) - deeply overused and unfunny 3. Telling us, over and again, how they didn’t like the Tube scene in His Darkest Hour
4. Banging on about grammar schools. 5. Calling Theresa May “Tessy” 6. Having an ill-conceived hard-on for Donald Trump
Sajid Javid has overtaken Jeremy Hunt and Michael Gove in the next prime minister betting market. He's now number 4 behind Corbyn, Rees Mogg and Johnson.
Not only would that be very profitable but the reaction of some on the left to the Tories having the first BAME PM will be great.
It would probably cause more consternation on the left to see the Tories have the first women prime minister and the first non-white PM as well.
Some on this site seem obsessed with this topic, it’s odd. Especially since Conservatives state that they dislike identity politics.
Ha! Indeed. Other weird PB Tory obsessions I have noted with dismay include:
1. Writing “it’s a view” when they mean “I disagree” - deeply overused and unfunny 2. Invoking the five stages of grief (usually at Remainers) - deeply overused and unfunny 3. Telling us, over and again, how they didn’t like the Tube scene in His Darkest Hour
Well, it's a view. Memes almost by definition become overused, I think obsessing over other people obsessed by them is little different than simply being obsessed by them. One might call another obsession how broad the use of the label PB Tory is, since I highly doubt 1, 2 or 3 are exclusive to Tories. 1. isn;t even political for heaven's sake, am I to believe only Tories have ever used it? And while 2. seems more likely to be used by Tories at least with the remain specificity, not all leavers are Tories, so that too seems improbable, particularly if used with another example - no one else uses the 5 stages of grief cliche? That a political thing now? For 3. I have no idea, I presume that is a more recent and thus specific complaint.
Or it could be because they have incorrectly rounded down 40.8% to 40%, and it really is 41 plays 41?
Indeed I spotted this earlier, maybe this random number generator, sorry, pollster has a policy of rounding all his numbers down?
Fake news. The data tables (http://survation.com/vi-tables-may-11th-3/) show it wasn't an incorrect rounding (40.7% vs 40.1%). Baxter must take the poll and modify it slightly, which causes the votes in that table to be different.
Or it could be because they have incorrectly rounded down 40.8% to 40%, and it really is 41 plays 41?
Indeed I spotted this earlier, maybe this random number generator, sorry, pollster has a policy of rounding all his numbers down?
Fake news. The data tables (http://survation.com/vi-tables-may-11th-3/) show it wasn't an incorrect rounding (40.7% vs 40.1%). Baxter must take the poll and modify it slightly, which causes the votes in that table to be different.
I was simply reading from his tweet. So the actual difference is 0.6% in a midterm poll - is that what you are saying? Who the fuck cares?
It's no surprise many of the loudest voices against grammar schools are those with public school backgrounds, people who had an easy pathway to privilege. Perhaps we should listen to those who attended grammar schools (like myself!), the vast majority of whom have positive experiences. Indeed in Kent where grammar schools are prevalent they are thought of in very positive terms, but perhaps less so in other areas where understanding is purely anecdotal.
Grammar schools do not have to lead to a drop in the quality of local comps, in fact much the opposite if done well - my school shared facilities and resources as part of a partnership with a struggling South London comp and the partnership was mutually beneficial.
Well, my good self and my Sibs all went to Comps, one being a high flier in a London Economics job who haad failed his 11+ and was destined to a Sec Modern. He did rather well at LSE. My other Sib got an exhibition at Cambridge and finished his PhD there. Mrs Foxy went to a Lincs Grammar and hated it, leaving without A levels, while my Dad went to a Lancs Grammar in the fifties and loathed it. He was very glad that my elder sib escaped a Sec Modern due to Comprehensivisation the same year. We all have anecdotes.
Just for the record I went to a grammar and whilst I think it benefited me academically, it did was a hindrance for social and personal development. My brother went to the same grammar and it certainly hurt his academic development. All in all, I am not a fan.
Where would your brother have gone otherwise? - that clearly must have been better. So let's build some of those!
The academic record of the education sector is awful. On average we inflict on our children people who we'd go home early to avoid at dinner parties.
Sajid Javid has overtaken Jeremy Hunt and Michael Gove in the next prime minister betting market. He's now number 4 behind Corbyn, Rees Mogg and Johnson.
Not only would that be very profitable but the reaction of some on the left to the Tories having the first BAME PM will be great.
It would probably cause more consternation on the left to see the Tories have the first women prime minister and the first non-white PM as well.
Some on this site seem obsessed with this topic, it’s odd. Especially since Conservatives state that they dislike identity politics.
Ha! Indeed. Other weird PB Tory obsessions I have noted with dismay include:
1. Writing “it’s a view” when they mean “I disagree” - deeply overused and unfunny 2. Invoking the five stages of grief (usually at Remainers) - deeply overused and unfunny 3. Telling us, over and again, how they didn’t like the Tube scene in His Darkest Hour
LOL at that last one. ‘Unspoofable’ is another favourite of PB Tories as well, as well as something of an obsession with WWC. Also agree with GardenWalker’s observations, especially number 3.
Or it could be because they have incorrectly rounded down 40.8% to 40%, and it really is 41 plays 41?
Indeed I spotted this earlier, maybe this random number generator, sorry, pollster has a policy of rounding all his numbers down?
Fake news. The data tables (http://survation.com/vi-tables-may-11th-3/) show it wasn't an incorrect rounding (40.7% vs 40.1%). Baxter must take the poll and modify it slightly, which causes the votes in that table to be different.
I was simply reading from his tweet. So the actual difference is 0.6% in a midterm poll - is that what you are saying? Who the fuck cares?
Comments
CON 41% +1
LAB 40% =
LD 8% -1
UKIP 3% =
SNP 3% =
GRE 2% +1
Paging Owen Jones, paging, paging.....momentum...anybody there???
He who pays the piper calls the tune.
Grammar schools do not have to lead to a drop in the quality of local comps, in fact much the opposite if done well - my school shared facilities and resources as part of a partnership with a struggling South London comp and the partnership was mutually beneficial.
As it is that's VInce Cable's choice of Government, so most likely a Labour minority with confidence and supply from the SNP and the Lib Dems. It'd probably last about 2 years.
Will add 15% in the campaign just like last time.
This rather writes itself.
While I think selective schools are a good thing, its because of related issues not selection per se. They typically tend to have better discipline, typically have a better ethos and the parents are typically more involved. If you could replicate that in non-selective schools, you'd be in for a winner.
Maybe special schools for the utter gobshoites that make everyone else's life a misery?
As has been said, its the other 17 hours that are key. Look at what happens to the cohort over the summer holidays. Kids from different households do markedly different things, leading to differences in the next summer.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.125575094
They were another bunch of liars who lied about the NHS to win a referendum.
But, as I said, the existence of large multi academy trusts would make local experimentation much easier than hitherto. Government would simply have to provide suitable incentives - and oversight.
I'm not a massive fan of the growth of MATs, but we might at least make imaginative use of them.
And are overflowing in many local authorities.
As an aside, Cameron's closure of special schools, without providing sufficient funding for the pupils who then entered mainstream education, has created its own set of problems.
1. He'd be far superior to the incumbent who would be better employed as a geography teacher in a girls' school (nothing wrong with geography by the way, I also read it at university)
2. He's directly rejected god-bothering. An atheist PM needs to happen soon.
3. He seems like a nice enough bloke.
4. He isn't Jacob Crackers or Boris Twat, which is a strong mark in the pro column in and of itself.
"Bank of England governor Mark Carney says the UK economy will pick up
In an interview with the BBC, Bank of England governor Mark Carney says the UK economy will pick up, largely due to export growth and business investment."
If next year`s local elections are not fixed to coincide with a general election (or vice versa), there will be limits on how much the Tory candidates can spend. Though the Tories got round spending limits this year, didn`t they? with that infamous letter from Mrs May, which even went to Scottish voters.
https://twitter.com/edconwaysky/status/994945460174573568?s=21
https://order-order.com/2018/05/11/lewisham-labour-frontrunner-compared-palestine-to-holocaust/
As he was an elected hereditary crossbencher there will be a by-election to replace him. The electorate will be the current 31 hereditary crossbenchers.
No date has been announced for this by-election.
http://www.britishpollingcouncil.org/british-polling-council-introduces-new-rule-on-uncertainty-attached-to-polls/
Not as good as the Hunt bet, but still will be tasty.
So it looks like Labour benefited from the all-out elections, taking seats in wards where we would normally be runners up every year.
(And there was me thinking we'd lose seats as a result!)
Labour are going to deliver secure jobs for people.
Secure jobs. Imagine that. You'll never be at risk of unemployment, even if your company goes bust.
https://order-order.com/2018/05/11/lewisham-labour-frontrunner-compared-palestine-to-holocaust/
Also worth noting the Labour vote share hasn't dropped below 40%.
Yet.
"The show, which developed a cult following after launching in September 2013, has been praised for its "intersectional representation" and "inclusive humour".
Which, frankly, does not sound like a show I'd want to watch, if that is the most important thing people had to say about it. It would never have occurred to me to have described the show that way, for all, on reflection, it is not inaccurate. I feel like maybe I was focusing more on it just being funny and heartwarming. It's not like it matters much if it does. Except, I guess, perhaps making Tory rebels (of either variety) think they can take the risk to destabilise things with less risk of accidentally leading to a Corbyn government?
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/05/10/can-the-democrats-win-the-2018-senate-midterms-218330
https://order-order.com/youvebeenbanned/
With 2 million comments we can’t humanly read them all. We have tried out the latest expensive AI software and it is not good enough or not trained enough yet on British idiom to deal with obsesssive racists who bore on about Sadiq Khan, David Lammy and Diane Abbott endlessly. Twats who think they are being witty when they are just crass, saddos who game the moderation to insult “musl1ms”. We frankly don’t want them, like them or need them. Breitbart are welcome to them.
It may just have proven too hard to manage.
"He's not really an ethnic minority"! "Coconut"!
1. Writing “it’s a view” when they mean “I disagree” - deeply overused and unfunny
2. Invoking the five stages of grief (usually at Remainers) - deeply overused and unfunny
3. Telling us, over and again, how they didn’t like the Tube scene in His Darkest Hour
"A dog can be born in a stable, but don't put any money on it to win one of the classics. And what kind of fine Catholic name is Opuku-Gimhya anyway?"
That's not hard to manage.
5. Calling Theresa May “Tessy”
6. Having an ill-conceived hard-on for Donald Trump
The academic record of the education sector is awful. On average we inflict on our children people who we'd go home early to avoid at dinner parties.
NEW THREAD and there's a first there for the taking.