Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » My 760/1 shot for WH2020 raises $12m in 5 days after her stron

135

Comments

  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,852
    malcolmg said:

    Bollox , a couple of beers a day is perfectly all right, nothing worse than an evangalistic convert who could not control themselves preaching to sensible people the evils of a few beers.
    He will never get beyond sober on 2 beers you halfwit.

    I'm not preaching! Would never do that. And especially not on the topic of problem drinking. I'm just wishing a fellow poster all the best with keeping on top of it. Which it sounds like he is. It's a good news story all round.
  • King Cole, all embryos start off as female then switch (or not) to male. It's why men have nipples, even though male breastfeeding isn't exactly the norm.

    Mr. B, there are lots of intersex people. That doesn't make a claim that babies don't have a sex other than ludicrous.
  • isamisam Posts: 40,731
    kinabalu said:

    Yeah so maybe she meant something slightly more nuanced.

    Richard Madeley channeling his Johnny Mathis there.
    Yes and Dawn B bringing it into the 20s with ‘When a Child is conceived’
  • I'm certainly cutting back on my drinking at least. Not that i'm a 'big' drinker, but need to watch the calories etc.

    It's great to have a drink with a meal out, or at the weekend to relax, but i find if you're getting into the habit of just drinking for no reason, then just noting if that's the best thing for you can't be a bad thing.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,852

    It’s also fun, Kinabalu. Like lots of things in life fun is necessary and just needs to be moderated. You can’t absolve all risk from life or it becomes monochrome and dull.

    I wouldn’t have had nearly as many amazing parties or as much sex without it.

    Totally. Of course. Although being out of it 24/7 can also be monochrome and dull. It's probably better to be tee-total than to slide down that route.

    Anyway I think we're moving on. Malcolm has got the wrong end of the stick and is lambasting me when all I was being was empathetic.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842

    malcolmg said:

    kinabalu said:

    I barely have a pint or two after work during the week.

    Every day? That's not great. Trust me, I know. Not too late for you though. First try and limit to 2 pints and only on Thursdays. Then when that regime is stabilized think about the next step. Sobriety can be wonderful.
    Bollox , a couple of beers a day is perfectly all right, nothing worse than an evangalistic convert who could not control themselves preaching to sensible people the evils of a few beers.
    He will never get beyond sober on 2 beers you halfwit.
    Risky arguing with you, I know, Malc, but for a 'real' alcoholic one beer is too many. If a drinker hasn't hit that level though, and can manage their drinking I'd agree with you.
    Mrs C and I have one alcohol-free day per week. Most of the time. Sometimes we have two, but that's unusual!!!!
    The idea that for alcoholics it's either complete abstinence or alcoholism is something of a myth popularized by Alcoholics Anonymous. There's no reason why a hard-core alcoholic shouldn't just become a moderate drinker. But, obviously, the danger is they'd be back on the slippery slope again.
    I have a pint every Thursday, most weeks that's it.
  • I'm certainly cutting back on my drinking at least. Not that i'm a 'big' drinker, but need to watch the calories etc.

    It's great to have a drink with a meal out, or at the weekend to relax, but i find if you're getting into the habit of just drinking for no reason, then just noting if that's the best thing for you can't be a bad thing.

    If you're posting name is in anyway indicative then that's probably wise.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,286
    Trump approval rating with registered voters up to just a touch below 45%.

    https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/voters/
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,723

    malcolmg said:

    kinabalu said:

    I barely have a pint or two after work during the week.

    Every day? That's not great. Trust me, I know. Not too late for you though. First try and limit to 2 pints and only on Thursdays. Then when that regime is stabilized think about the next step. Sobriety can be wonderful.
    Bollox , a couple of beers a day is perfectly all right, nothing worse than an evangalistic convert who could not control themselves preaching to sensible people the evils of a few beers.
    He will never get beyond sober on 2 beers you halfwit.
    Risky arguing with you, I know, Malc, but for a 'real' alcoholic one beer is too many. If a drinker hasn't hit that level though, and can manage their drinking I'd agree with you.
    Mrs C and I have one alcohol-free day per week. Most of the time. Sometimes we have two, but that's unusual!!!!
    I just feel too dehydrated after 3-4 glasses or 4-5 pints so I am naturally self-regulating.

    At uni I could knock ‘em back on a sports night or Friday and then endure a hangover for the best part of 36 hours.

    That wasn’t being an alcoholic either. It was been a nineteen year old having fun in a big city.
    I have similar memories from student days. Have never drunk Barley Wine again after one memorable (when post-event) experience.
  • Daily Mail:

    "Labour activists ditch Corbynism: More than HALF of local associations that backed outgoing leader in 2015 endorse moderate Keir Starmer instead of hard-Left choice Rebecca Long-Bailey"
  • MaxPB said:

    Lol, Dan Hodges wrong again. It's an ITV studios program. The BBC doesn't make it.
    Actually he is right. It is made by World Productions which was purchased by ITV in 2017 but it is commissioned (and always has been) by the BBC.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,723

    King Cole, all embryos start off as female then switch (or not) to male. It's why men have nipples, even though male breastfeeding isn't exactly the norm.

    Mr. B, there are lots of intersex people. That doesn't make a claim that babies don't have a sex other than ludicrous.

    Not quite; the chromosome XY/XX mix is defined at conception.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,676

    malcolmg said:

    kinabalu said:

    I barely have a pint or two after work during the week.

    Every day? That's not great. Trust me, I know. Not too late for you though. First try and limit to 2 pints and only on Thursdays. Then when that regime is stabilized think about the next step. Sobriety can be wonderful.
    Bollox , a couple of beers a day is perfectly all right, nothing worse than an evangalistic convert who could not control themselves preaching to sensible people the evils of a few beers.
    He will never get beyond sober on 2 beers you halfwit.
    Risky arguing with you, I know, Malc, but for a 'real' alcoholic one beer is too many. If a drinker hasn't hit that level though, and can manage their drinking I'd agree with you.
    Mrs C and I have one alcohol-free day per week. Most of the time. Sometimes we have two, but that's unusual!!!!
    OKC, Obviously if an alcoholic then it should be avoided totally. However Casino was only talking about having one or two beers and no mention of having had any problems previously.
    Also good to have a day or two off if you can, have to say after work I do like a beer, but if in moderation we do not need these nanny goats whining and whinging about it.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,676
    kinabalu said:

    It’s also fun, Kinabalu. Like lots of things in life fun is necessary and just needs to be moderated. You can’t absolve all risk from life or it becomes monochrome and dull.

    I wouldn’t have had nearly as many amazing parties or as much sex without it.

    Totally. Of course. Although being out of it 24/7 can also be monochrome and dull. It's probably better to be tee-total than to slide down that route.

    Anyway I think we're moving on. Malcolm has got the wrong end of the stick and is lambasting me when all I was being was empathetic.
    Apologies then , one of my pet hates is people chastising others about having a few drinks.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,852

    The idea that for alcoholics it's either complete abstinence or alcoholism is something of a myth popularized by Alcoholics Anonymous. There's no reason why a hard-core alcoholic shouldn't just become a moderate drinker. But, obviously, the danger is they'd be back on the slippery slope again.

    Going personal for a second, I agree with this. In the past (many years now) I lost it with the booze and it took me to places both fabulous and dreadful. I twice did AA and although it did no harm I did not find the total abstinence route to be attractive long term. Good as a "breaker" but there was then (for me) a need for an MO involving alcohol, which I now have and all is good. Apart from the fags.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,768

    King Cole, all embryos start off as female then switch (or not) to male. It's why men have nipples, even though male breastfeeding isn't exactly the norm.

    Mr. B, there are lots of intersex people. That doesn't make a claim that babies don't have a sex other than ludicrous.

    Not quite; the chromosome XY/XX mix is defined at conception.
    I prefer Morris Dancer's idea. After all, a gentleman always lets a woman come first.
  • Andy_JS said:

    Trump approval rating with registered voters up to just a touch below 45%.

    https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/voters/

    Same as Nov 2018
  • Is it possible that the PM and his chief advisor are briefing against each other?

    I know we are in Alice in Wonderland world now, so maybe it is.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,676
    kinabalu said:

    The idea that for alcoholics it's either complete abstinence or alcoholism is something of a myth popularized by Alcoholics Anonymous. There's no reason why a hard-core alcoholic shouldn't just become a moderate drinker. But, obviously, the danger is they'd be back on the slippery slope again.

    Going personal for a second, I agree with this. In the past (many years now) I lost it with the booze and it took me to places both fabulous and dreadful. I twice did AA and although it did no harm I did not find the total abstinence route to be attractive long term. Good as a "breaker" but there was then (for me) a need for an MO involving alcohol, which I now have and all is good. Apart from the fags.
    Certainly if it is causing problems , like gambling and other such addictive things if you cannot control it then only option is to stop it totally.
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    kinabalu said:

    Good to order this now to avoid queues. It will be required reading for anyone with an interest in what makes the Left tick -


    Big news everyone!

    My third book, THIS LAND: THE STORY OF A MOVEMENT, comes out this September.

    It's the inside story of the Corbyn project: its rise, what it was up against, what went wrong - and what's the future for the left.

    Better write it then!https://t.co/kW4umtsZ5T

    — Owen Jones🌹 (@OwenJones84) February 17, 2020
    Owen Jones spent every media appearance on election night balefully repeating 'It wasn't the policies! It wasn't the policies! It wasn't the policies! It wasn't the policies!' as the Labour Party's policies - championed so passionately and monomaniacally by Jones - dragged it down to one of its worst defeats in history. I wouldn't waste a penny on a book whose every syllable can be predicted in advance.

    One of the most accurate comments I read about the appearance of Jones and Sarkar on ITV that night was that they looked like a pair of guilty teenagers as they came to the horrified realization that they'd just burned their parents' house down...
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,286
    According to Wikipedia Bloomberg is the 8th richest person in the USA with $50 billion. By comparison Trump comes in at number 248 with $3 billion.
  • King Cole, ha, you're right. A better way of phrasing it would've been that the developmental path starts off female then takes a turn, or not.
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    On the one hand, one of Cummings' provocative hires just resigned, and he dresses as if he bought his entire wardrobe as a job lot from Oxfam.

    On the other, he crushed all political opposition to Brexit and the Conservative Party in this country with the merest flick of his hand.

    Which one d'you suppose is more significant? :wink:
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,852
    edited February 2020

    Owen Jones spent every media appearance on election night balefully repeating 'It wasn't the policies! It wasn't the policies! It wasn't the policies! It wasn't the policies!' as the Labour Party's policies - championed so passionately and monomaniacally by Jones - dragged it down to one of its worst defeats in history. I wouldn't waste a penny on a book whose every syllable can be predicted in advance.

    One of the most accurate comments I read about the appearance of Jones and Sarkar on ITV that night was that they looked like a pair of guilty teenagers as they came to the horrified realization that they'd just burned their parents' house down...

    The policies, Brexit fatigue, Corbyn himself, the appeal of "Boris" to WWC leavers, all of this is validly in the mix when assessing why the GE went the way it did.

    However, OJ's book on the (now over) Corbyn project is likely to be a valuable insight into what it was meant to be all about for those who have an interest, regardless of their politics. But it's not compulsory. As they say, you can lead a horse to water ...

    That last comment is fine but it is also a straight lift of the "teenage arsonists" one about Gove and Johnson the day after the EU ref.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    Wait, Mayor Pete used to work at McKinsey? How has he got this far in the nomination process without hat turning into a really horrible situation for him?
  • Looks like Dominic Cummings is the new Brexit. And will probably soon get just as boring.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,286
    Did Andrew Sabisky super-forecast his own resignation/sacking?
  • novanova Posts: 525

    kinabalu said:

    Good to order this now to avoid queues. It will be required reading for anyone with an interest in what makes the Left tick -


    Big news everyone!

    My third book, THIS LAND: THE STORY OF A MOVEMENT, comes out this September.

    It's the inside story of the Corbyn project: its rise, what it was up against, what went wrong - and what's the future for the left.

    Better write it then!https://t.co/kW4umtsZ5T

    — Owen Jones🌹 (@OwenJones84) February 17, 2020
    Owen Jones spent every media appearance on election night balefully repeating 'It wasn't the policies! It wasn't the policies! It wasn't the policies! It wasn't the policies!' as the Labour Party's policies - championed so passionately and monomaniacally by Jones - dragged it down to one of its worst defeats in history. I wouldn't waste a penny on a book whose every syllable can be predicted in advance.

    One of the most accurate comments I read about the appearance of Jones and Sarkar on ITV that night was that they looked like a pair of guilty teenagers as they came to the horrified realization that they'd just burned their parents' house down...

    I may be wrong, but Jones' relationship to the Corbyn project appears to have been far too close and personal, as a lot of the young media Corbynites appear to be very close friends.

    He'd drifted and become a doubter of Corbyn before the 2017 election, and his writing post election felt like it was driven by peer pressure and the need to be brought back into the fold.

    I don't expect commentators who are close to parties to be objective, but it all seemed like to be very much about him.
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831
    kinabalu said:

    Owen Jones spent every media appearance on election night balefully repeating 'It wasn't the policies! It wasn't the policies! It wasn't the policies! It wasn't the policies!' as the Labour Party's policies - championed so passionately and monomaniacally by Jones - dragged it down to one of its worst defeats in history. I wouldn't waste a penny on a book whose every syllable can be predicted in advance.

    One of the most accurate comments I read about the appearance of Jones and Sarkar on ITV that night was that they looked like a pair of guilty teenagers as they came to the horrified realization that they'd just burned their parents' house down...

    The policies, Brexit fatigue, Corbyn himself, the appeal of "Boris" to WWC leavers, all of this is validly in the mix when assessing why the GE went the way it did.

    However, OJ's book on the (now over) Corbyn project is likely to be a valuable insight into what it was meant to be all about for those who have an interest, regardless of their politics. But it's not compulsory. As they say, you can lead a horse to water ...

    That last comment is fine but it is also a straight lift of the "teenage arsonists" one about Gove and Johnson the day after the EU ref.
    I am not convinced it will be that valuable. Jones isn't yet capable of taking a dispassionate view on this period - maybe never.

    Being self-reflective is not his style of thinking.

    It will be more about self-justification rather than a proper examination of the inner workings of this failure.

    Sure, people will read it and he will get more media appearances out of it.

    But it won't be valuable
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    MaxPB said:

    Wait, Mayor Pete used to work at McKinsey? How has he got this far in the nomination process without hat turning into a really horrible situation for him?

    Is there some big elephant in the room I'm missing with McKinsey ?

    "Management consultants help businesses improve their performance and grow by solving problems and finding new and better ways of doing things."

    Sounds laudable enough (For a fee I suppose...) . Can you spell out any err issues with them ?
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 23,938
    edited February 2020


    Owen Jones spent every media appearance on election night balefully repeating 'It wasn't the policies! It wasn't the policies! It wasn't the policies! It wasn't the policies!' as the Labour Party's policies - championed so passionately and monomaniacally by Jones - dragged it down to one of its worst defeats in history. I wouldn't waste a penny on a book whose every syllable can be predicted in advance.

    One of the most accurate comments I read about the appearance of Jones and Sarkar on ITV that night was that they looked like a pair of guilty teenagers as they came to the horrified realization that they'd just burned their parents' house down...

    Hold on though. It wasn't Labour's policies that led to defeat if we are to believe the polling that it was Jeremy Corbyn's personal toxicity, or if we believe reports of what canvassers were told on the doorstep, which also was that Corbyn himself was unelectable.

    This is the great paradox. RLB is condemned for saying Corbyn was 10/10 but ironically that must mean RLB agrees with you that it was policies that were to blame.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,165
    Pulpstar said:

    MaxPB said:

    Wait, Mayor Pete used to work at McKinsey? How has he got this far in the nomination process without hat turning into a really horrible situation for him?

    Is there some big elephant in the room I'm missing with McKinsey ?

    "Management consultants help businesses improve their performance and grow by solving problems and finding new and better ways of doing things."

    Sounds laudable enough (For a fee I suppose...) . Can you spell out any err issues with them ?
    It can't be as funny as this:

    https://www.wired.com/2015/05/carly-fiorina-website-mistake/
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    Pulpstar said:

    MaxPB said:

    Wait, Mayor Pete used to work at McKinsey? How has he got this far in the nomination process without hat turning into a really horrible situation for him?

    Is there some big elephant in the room I'm missing with McKinsey ?

    "Management consultants help businesses improve their performance and grow by solving problems and finding new and better ways of doing things."

    Sounds laudable enough (For a fee I suppose...) . Can you spell out any err issues with them ?
    If there's a fan blowing shit, then you can bet it's a McKinsey consultant pouring the shit into the fan.
  • On the one hand, one of Cummings' provocative hires just resigned, and he dresses as if he bought his entire wardrobe as a job lot from Oxfam.

    On the other, he crushed all political opposition to Brexit and the Conservative Party in this country with the merest flick of his hand.

    Which one d'you suppose is more significant? :wink:
    On the third hand, I am not sure I approve of the media doorstepping politicos and celebs outside their homes.
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 7,981
    edited February 2020

    King Cole, all embryos start off as female then switch (or not) to male. It's why men have nipples, even though male breastfeeding isn't exactly the norm.

    Mr. B, there are lots of intersex people. That doesn't make a claim that babies don't have a sex other than ludicrous.

    Not quite; the chromosome XY/XX mix is defined at conception.
    Indeed, but the other issue is that the XY/XX does not always define the apparent sex. There people with Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome who are XY but nobody would call them male. There are also men with XX chromosomes where the gene for maleness has migrated from the Y chromosome to one of the X's

  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818
    Andy_JS said:

    Did Andrew Sabisky super-forecast his own resignation/sacking?

    Cummings' diagnosis of the civil service's problems is compelling, but his solutions are much less so.

    He wants to hand the running of the machine over to mathematicians and scientists.

    Trouble is, the global financials markets did something very similar in the run up to 2008. and it was the products designed and operated by such people that crashed the system.

    In some cases the mass of derivatives a given bank had was so complex it was reportedly exceeedingtly difficult to determine its risk profile, even for mathematicians.

    Its fine to upskill in terms of numeracy in the civil service, but its not a panacea and there are risks.

  • Be warned, if my bet comes in you'll never stop hearing about it hear from me again!
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    kinabalu said:

    Owen Jones spent every media appearance on election night balefully repeating 'It wasn't the policies! It wasn't the policies! It wasn't the policies! It wasn't the policies!' as the Labour Party's policies - championed so passionately and monomaniacally by Jones - dragged it down to one of its worst defeats in history. I wouldn't waste a penny on a book whose every syllable can be predicted in advance.

    One of the most accurate comments I read about the appearance of Jones and Sarkar on ITV that night was that they looked like a pair of guilty teenagers as they came to the horrified realization that they'd just burned their parents' house down...

    The policies, Brexit fatigue, Corbyn himself, the appeal of "Boris" to WWC leavers, all of this is validly in the mix when assessing why the GE went the way it did.

    However, OJ's book on the (now over) Corbyn project is likely to be a valuable insight into what it was meant to be all about for those who have an interest, regardless of their politics. But it's not compulsory. As they say, you can lead a horse to water ...

    That last comment is fine but it is also a straight lift of the "teenage arsonists" one about Gove and Johnson the day after the EU ref.
    I'll probably pick it up second-hand from Amazon eventually, just for the behind-the-scenes stuff.

    It'll have to be bloody well-written to win any sympathy, though. People like him thought they were going to be the young Red Guards of the new revolution - instead they turned out to just be the serfs following Pugachev into oblivion.

    Still, I'm sure there'll be plenty of future work for all the self-confessed fans of Marx and Lenin - they never get cancelled, do they?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,768
    A rare moment of self awareness there in telling us not to read anything he writes.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    malcolmg said:

    kinabalu said:

    I barely have a pint or two after work during the week.

    Every day? That's not great. Trust me, I know. Not too late for you though. First try and limit to 2 pints and only on Thursdays. Then when that regime is stabilized think about the next step. Sobriety can be wonderful.
    Bollox , a couple of beers a day is perfectly all right, nothing worse than an evangalistic convert who could not control themselves preaching to sensible people the evils of a few beers.
    He will never get beyond sober on 2 beers you halfwit.
    Risky arguing with you, I know, Malc, but for a 'real' alcoholic one beer is too many. If a drinker hasn't hit that level though, and can manage their drinking I'd agree with you.
    Mrs C and I have one alcohol-free day per week. Most of the time. Sometimes we have two, but that's unusual!!!!
    The idea that for alcoholics it's either complete abstinence or alcoholism is something of a myth popularized by Alcoholics Anonymous. There's no reason why a hard-core alcoholic shouldn't just become a moderate drinker. But, obviously, the danger is they'd be back on the slippery slope again.
    There is a physical component to addiction that doesn’t work like that
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,852

    I am not convinced it will be that valuable. Jones isn't yet capable of taking a dispassionate view on this period - maybe never.

    Being self-reflective is not his style of thinking.

    It will be more about self-justification rather than a proper examination of the inner workings of this failure.

    Sure, people will read it and he will get more media appearances out of it.

    But it won't be valuable

    He is actually quite critical of his own side of things sometimes. Certainly more than most of his ilk (by which I mean very committed activists of any hue). But no, it won't be a neutral assessment - of course it won't - it will be an insider's account of the Project. Assuming it's well written and honest from his perspective - both of which I would expect it to be - that is only not valuable if (i) you understand it already or (ii) you have little interest. The first I would doubt. The second is fair enough but this IS a politics site so I imagine that many would be interested. But as I say, I'm just flagging it. I won't be mailing any copies out come September.
  • Gabs3Gabs3 Posts: 836
    edited February 2020
    Pulpstar said:

    MaxPB said:

    Wait, Mayor Pete used to work at McKinsey? How has he got this far in the nomination process without hat turning into a really horrible situation for him?

    Is there some big elephant in the room I'm missing with McKinsey ?

    "Management consultants help businesses improve their performance and grow by solving problems and finding new and better ways of doing things."

    Sounds laudable enough (For a fee I suppose...) . Can you spell out any err issues with them ?
    People hate well paid professionals, be they bankers, consultants or lawyers. Especially when they are young.
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556

    Be warned, if my bet comes in you'll never stop hearing about it hear from me again!

    Reminds me of Trump's (unintentional?) witticism: 'Now some people will say that I'm giving them a warning, but it's not true. That's not a warning - it's a threat!'
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    edited February 2020
    Pulpstar said:

    MaxPB said:

    Wait, Mayor Pete used to work at McKinsey? How has he got this far in the nomination process without hat turning into a really horrible situation for him?

    Is there some big elephant in the room I'm missing with McKinsey ?

    "Management consultants help businesses improve their performance and grow by solving problems and finding new and better ways of doing things."

    Sounds laudable enough (For a fee I suppose...) . Can you spell out any err issues with them ?
    Was reading Cameron's autobiography yesterday and apparently he had a job interview at McKinsey and was interviewed by William Hague after leaving Oxford but did not get the job
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,852
    nova said:

    I may be wrong, but Jones' relationship to the Corbyn project appears to have been far too close and personal, as a lot of the young media Corbynites appear to be very close friends.

    He'd drifted and become a doubter of Corbyn before the 2017 election, and his writing post election felt like it was driven by peer pressure and the need to be brought back into the fold.

    I don't expect commentators who are close to parties to be objective, but it all seemed like to be very much about him.

    You are not wrong. Owen turned against Jeremy in 2016 and argued that he could not do well in a GE. Then 2017 happened, proving him wrong, leaving him feeling guilty and foolish. He then overcompensated by becoming VERY supportive and he has held that position ever since. But his book will probably nevertheless be good. He is one of the modern metropolitan Left's most articulate voices.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,676
    Gabs3 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    MaxPB said:

    Wait, Mayor Pete used to work at McKinsey? How has he got this far in the nomination process without hat turning into a really horrible situation for him?

    Is there some big elephant in the room I'm missing with McKinsey ?

    "Management consultants help businesses improve their performance and grow by solving problems and finding new and better ways of doing things."

    Sounds laudable enough (For a fee I suppose...) . Can you spell out any err issues with them ?
    People hate well paid professionals, be they bankers, consultants or lawyers. Especially when they are young.
    That is because they are almost always snakeoil salesmen peddling shit
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    Wages back above pre 2008 levels
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556


    Owen Jones spent every media appearance on election night balefully repeating 'It wasn't the policies! It wasn't the policies! It wasn't the policies! It wasn't the policies!' as the Labour Party's policies - championed so passionately and monomaniacally by Jones - dragged it down to one of its worst defeats in history. I wouldn't waste a penny on a book whose every syllable can be predicted in advance.

    One of the most accurate comments I read about the appearance of Jones and Sarkar on ITV that night was that they looked like a pair of guilty teenagers as they came to the horrified realization that they'd just burned their parents' house down...

    Hold on though. It wasn't Labour's policies that led to defeat if we are to believe the polling that it was Jeremy Corbyn's personal toxicity, or if we believe reports of what canvassers were told on the doorstep, which also was that Corbyn himself was unelectable.

    This is the great paradox. RLB is condemned for saying Corbyn was 10/10 but ironically that must mean RLB agrees with you that it was policies that were to blame.
    Yes, I know the polling laid the main blame on Corbyn, but that's not as definitive a distinction as might be hoped for in diagnosing Labour's defeat. Yes, some leaders will be more charismatic, more intelligent, better-looking than others, but apart from that the leader symbolizes the entire political platform on which he is running.

    That's why Jones' denial that far-left policies sunk Labour is so obtuse. Corbyn's whole life has been a far-left political project - he is the avatar of an instinctively anti-capitalist, anti-Western, anti-patriotic outlook that covers all foreign and domestic policy. His personal defeat _is_ the defeat of all those policies.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,852
    malcolmg said:

    Certainly if it is causing problems , like gambling and other such addictive things if you cannot control it then only option is to stop it totally.

    Exactly. Control - and recognizing if you don't really have it rather than pretending that you do. Any case, one is not a proper member of this forum until one has been called a "halfwit" by you, so I'm chuffed and no mistake. :smile:
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,961

    Budget will be on the 11th March

    Average earnings back to pre crisis peak

    I'd rather be at Cheltenham on the 11th.

    More significantly, the budget date (unchanged since The Saj set it) is another thing, like Sabisky, on which the government could not comment yesterday or over the weekend but has now found its voice.

    Are the grown-ups back in charge?
    Rishi Sanuk having an away day at Chevening with his team today.

    Presumably they looked at The Saj's numbers, just stuck a few noughts on the end of what Boris can spend and said "Nah, that'll do - stick with the 11th...."
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,961

    On the one hand, one of Cummings' provocative hires just resigned, and he dresses as if he bought his entire wardrobe as a job lot from Oxfam.

    On the other, he crushed all political opposition to Brexit and the Conservative Party in this country with the merest flick of his hand.

    Which one d'you suppose is more significant? :wink:
    On the third hand, I am not sure I approve of the media doorstepping politicos and celebs outside their homes.
    On the fourth hand....time to move from Sellafield....
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,676
    HYUFD said:

    Wages back above pre 2008 levels

    only took 12 years of misery under the Tory yoke.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,676
    kinabalu said:

    malcolmg said:

    Certainly if it is causing problems , like gambling and other such addictive things if you cannot control it then only option is to stop it totally.

    Exactly. Control - and recognizing if you don't really have it rather than pretending that you do. Any case, one is not a proper member of this forum until one has been called a "halfwit" by you, so I'm chuffed and no mistake. :smile:
    ;)
  • sarissasarissa Posts: 1,752
    DavidL said:

    Whats all this about Nicola Sturgeon.. is it serious?

    The Salmond trial is next month. There is at least a suspicion that some of the complainers might well have gone to her for help and support and basically been swept under the carpet. She was deputy leader, her husband was running the SNP, she was closely involved with Salmond for decades, if the allegations against Salmond stand up it seems very, very unlikely that she didn't know and condoned this for the greater good.

    She commented at the weekend that the #metoo campaign had opened up her eyes to male behaviour that she had tolerated when she shouldn't have done. She seemed to be talking about a journalist at the time but Salmond can't have been far from her thoughts.
    There could also be over-compensation on her part - she might have felt she had to allow letting loose (and backing) Scottish Government Permanent Secretary, Leslie Evans, Liz Lloyd, her Chief of Staff, and avowed activist feminists like Judith Mackinnon, Head of People Advice at the Scottish Government. The latter of these acted as witchfinder general and was the prime proponent of the recently introduced First Minister Code which was is the vehicle for the initial investigation. Mackinnon therefore encouraged the complaints, investigated the complaints and drafted the code changes which made the complaints actionable.

    I expect the role of all three in the investigation, including contacts with the complainants and Police Scotland, will be a significant feature of Salmonds's defence.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,676
    sarissa said:

    DavidL said:

    Whats all this about Nicola Sturgeon.. is it serious?

    The Salmond trial is next month. There is at least a suspicion that some of the complainers might well have gone to her for help and support and basically been swept under the carpet. She was deputy leader, her husband was running the SNP, she was closely involved with Salmond for decades, if the allegations against Salmond stand up it seems very, very unlikely that she didn't know and condoned this for the greater good.

    She commented at the weekend that the #metoo campaign had opened up her eyes to male behaviour that she had tolerated when she shouldn't have done. She seemed to be talking about a journalist at the time but Salmond can't have been far from her thoughts.
    There could also be over-compensation on her part - she might have felt she had to allow letting loose (and backing) Scottish Government Permanent Secretary, Leslie Evans, Liz Lloyd, her Chief of Staff, and avowed activist feminists like Judith Mackinnon, Head of People Advice at the Scottish Government. The latter of these acted as witchfinder general and was the prime proponent of the recently introduced First Minister Code which was is the vehicle for the initial investigation. Mackinnon therefore encouraged the complaints, investigated the complaints and drafted the code changes which made the complaints actionable.

    I expect the role of all three in the investigation, including contacts with the complainants and Police Scotland, will be a significant feature of Salmonds's defence.
    Yes the possible stitch up will feature heavily in the trial, they acted as judge , jury and executioner and even changed the rules/law so they could charge him. In my humble opinion it smells fishy.
  • novanova Posts: 525


    Owen Jones spent every media appearance on election night balefully repeating 'It wasn't the policies! It wasn't the policies! It wasn't the policies! It wasn't the policies!' as the Labour Party's policies - championed so passionately and monomaniacally by Jones - dragged it down to one of its worst defeats in history. I wouldn't waste a penny on a book whose every syllable can be predicted in advance.

    One of the most accurate comments I read about the appearance of Jones and Sarkar on ITV that night was that they looked like a pair of guilty teenagers as they came to the horrified realization that they'd just burned their parents' house down...

    Hold on though. It wasn't Labour's policies that led to defeat if we are to believe the polling that it was Jeremy Corbyn's personal toxicity, or if we believe reports of what canvassers were told on the doorstep, which also was that Corbyn himself was unelectable.

    This is the great paradox. RLB is condemned for saying Corbyn was 10/10 but ironically that must mean RLB agrees with you that it was policies that were to blame.
    Yes, I know the polling laid the main blame on Corbyn, but that's not as definitive a distinction as might be hoped for in diagnosing Labour's defeat. Yes, some leaders will be more charismatic, more intelligent, better-looking than others, but apart from that the leader symbolizes the entire political platform on which he is running.

    That's why Jones' denial that far-left policies sunk Labour is so obtuse. Corbyn's whole life has been a far-left political project - he is the avatar of an instinctively anti-capitalist, anti-Western, anti-patriotic outlook that covers all foreign and domestic policy. His personal defeat _is_ the defeat of all those policies.
    Clearly it was Corbyn, Brexit and the policies.

    Corbyn was unpopular, Labour were in a lose/lose with Brexit, so they threw everything into the mix policywise.

    The problem now is all that superficial polling that suggests the individual policies are popular. They're the equivalent of asking someone if they'd like an ice cream, without telling them the cost, or the fact that they have to climb a hill to get it, or that it's marmite flavoured.
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092
    It's not going to be Buttigieg, it's not going to be Klobuchar.
  • It's not going to be Buttigieg, it's not going to be Klobuchar.

    Give us a clue then?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,584

    Andy_JS said:

    Did Andrew Sabisky super-forecast his own resignation/sacking?

    Cummings' diagnosis of the civil service's problems is compelling, but his solutions are much less so.

    He wants to hand the running of the machine over to mathematicians and scientists.

    Trouble is, the global financials markets did something very similar in the run up to 2008. and it was the products designed and operated by such people that crashed the system.

    In some cases the mass of derivatives a given bank had was so complex it was reportedly exceeedingtly difficult to determine its risk profile, even for mathematicians.

    Its fine to upskill in terms of numeracy in the civil service, but its not a panacea and there are risks.

    Compelling in a similar manner to Marx’s critique of capitalism...
    And similarly deficient in realistic remedies.
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    nova said:


    Owen Jones spent every media appearance on election night balefully repeating 'It wasn't the policies! It wasn't the policies! It wasn't the policies! It wasn't the policies!' as the Labour Party's policies - championed so passionately and monomaniacally by Jones - dragged it down to one of its worst defeats in history. I wouldn't waste a penny on a book whose every syllable can be predicted in advance.

    One of the most accurate comments I read about the appearance of Jones and Sarkar on ITV that night was that they looked like a pair of guilty teenagers as they came to the horrified realization that they'd just burned their parents' house down...

    Hold on though. It wasn't Labour's policies that led to defeat if we are to believe the polling that it was Jeremy Corbyn's personal toxicity, or if we believe reports of what canvassers were told on the doorstep, which also was that Corbyn himself was unelectable.

    This is the great paradox. RLB is condemned for saying Corbyn was 10/10 but ironically that must mean RLB agrees with you that it was policies that were to blame.
    Yes, I know the polling laid the main blame on Corbyn, but that's not as definitive a distinction as might be hoped for in diagnosing Labour's defeat. Yes, some leaders will be more charismatic, more intelligent, better-looking than others, but apart from that the leader symbolizes the entire political platform on which he is running.

    That's why Jones' denial that far-left policies sunk Labour is so obtuse. Corbyn's whole life has been a far-left political project - he is the avatar of an instinctively anti-capitalist, anti-Western, anti-patriotic outlook that covers all foreign and domestic policy. His personal defeat _is_ the defeat of all those policies.
    Clearly it was Corbyn, Brexit and the policies.

    Corbyn was unpopular, Labour were in a lose/lose with Brexit, so they threw everything into the mix policywise.

    The problem now is all that superficial polling that suggests the individual policies are popular. They're the equivalent of asking someone if they'd like an ice cream, without telling them the cost, or the fact that they have to climb a hill to get it, or that it's marmite flavoured.
    That last point is crucial I think. My favourite analogy for that is thinking that if someone likes a spoonful of sugar in their tea, they're going to LOVE it when you tip in the whole 500g bag...
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092

    It's not going to be Buttigieg, it's not going to be Klobuchar.

    Give us a clue then?
    Sanders or Bloomberg, most likely. Biden still on the table- his prospects will be much clearer after Nevada and SC.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603

    It's not going to be Buttigieg, it's not going to be Klobuchar.

    Give us a clue then?
    Feel the Bern.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614

    On the one hand, one of Cummings' provocative hires just resigned, and he dresses as if he bought his entire wardrobe as a job lot from Oxfam.

    On the other, he crushed all political opposition to Brexit and the Conservative Party in this country with the merest flick of his hand.

    Which one d'you suppose is more significant? :wink:
    On the third hand, I am not sure I approve of the media doorstepping politicos and celebs outside their homes.
    Politicians and celebs are fair game. Members of their staff, less so.
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092
    MaxPB said:

    It's not going to be Buttigieg, it's not going to be Klobuchar.

    Give us a clue then?
    Feel the Bern.
    Yeah, Bernie's chances are higher than Bloomberg's, especially if you're talking about who goes into the convention with the most delegates. But Bloomberg's polling is decent, and his strategy is so unconventional that there's a lot of room for uncertainty in how it'll play out, including on the upside.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Pulpstar said:

    MaxPB said:

    Wait, Mayor Pete used to work at McKinsey? How has he got this far in the nomination process without hat turning into a really horrible situation for him?

    Is there some big elephant in the room I'm missing with McKinsey ?

    "Management consultants help businesses improve their performance and grow by solving problems and finding new and better ways of doing things."

    Sounds laudable enough (For a fee I suppose...) . Can you spell out any err issues with them ?
    They are as pure as Goldman Sachs
  • TGOHF666 said:
    Has Brendan penned some kind of defence of Sabisky yet? I'll be amazed if he doesn't.
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556

    MaxPB said:

    It's not going to be Buttigieg, it's not going to be Klobuchar.

    Give us a clue then?
    Feel the Bern.
    Yeah, Bernie's chances are higher than Bloomberg's, especially if you're talking about who goes into the convention with the most delegates. But Bloomberg's polling is decent, and his strategy is so unconventional that there's a lot of room for uncertainty in how it'll play out, including on the upside.
    Bloomberg is going to be radioactive with the Dem progressive base, arguably more so than Clinton was. If Sanders gets the plurality but has the nomination snatched away from him at the convention, a lot of them will stay home in November or vote for some fringe 3rd party.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,852

    That last point is crucial I think. My favourite analogy for that is thinking that if someone likes a spoonful of sugar in their tea, they're going to LOVE it when you tip in the whole 500g bag...

    Here's how to do this. Thought experiment -

    GE19. Assume it's all the same (Get Brexit Done, "Boris", LDs Revoke, Lab Ref2 etc) apart from 2 things. (1) Labour has a moderate Leader. (2) Labour has moderate policies.

    What's the result?

    I'll go first. LDs about the same. Lab 25 better. Con majority of 30.

    Corbyn and Corbynism cost 25 seats.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,234
    TGOHF666 said:
    I normally shy away from this kind of discussion, but that's just too interesting a statistic to gnore. Are 90% of giraffes gay? Are there any studies as to the incidence of homosexuality amongst giraffes, and how is it assessed? If 90% is wrong, then what is the actual number? Goddamn it, this is the kind of thing that gets stuck in my head - the concept, that is, not the (redacted). It's the mental equivalent of an earworm. Aaargh!
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092
    edited February 2020
  • kinabalu said:

    That last point is crucial I think. My favourite analogy for that is thinking that if someone likes a spoonful of sugar in their tea, they're going to LOVE it when you tip in the whole 500g bag...

    Here's how to do this. Thought experiment -

    GE19. Assume it's all the same (Get Brexit Done, "Boris", LDs Revoke, Lab Ref2 etc) apart from 2 things. (1) Labour has a moderate Leader. (2) Labour has moderate policies.

    What's the result?

    I'll go first. LDs about the same. Lab 25 better. Con majority of 30.

    Corbyn and Corbynism cost 25 seats.
    LDs would have done much better without fear of Corbyn.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,234
    Sandpit said:

    On the one hand, one of Cummings' provocative hires just resigned, and he dresses as if he bought his entire wardrobe as a job lot from Oxfam.

    On the other, he crushed all political opposition to Brexit and the Conservative Party in this country with the merest flick of his hand.

    Which one d'you suppose is more significant? :wink:
    On the third hand, I am not sure I approve of the media doorstepping politicos and celebs outside their homes.
    Politicians and celebs are fair game. Members of their staff, less so.
    I'd argue that celebs are not fair game. Given that Dom is appointed not elected, arguably he should not be doorstepped either.
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092

    MaxPB said:

    It's not going to be Buttigieg, it's not going to be Klobuchar.

    Give us a clue then?
    Feel the Bern.
    Yeah, Bernie's chances are higher than Bloomberg's, especially if you're talking about who goes into the convention with the most delegates. But Bloomberg's polling is decent, and his strategy is so unconventional that there's a lot of room for uncertainty in how it'll play out, including on the upside.
    Bloomberg is going to be radioactive with the Dem progressive base, arguably more so than Clinton was. If Sanders gets the plurality but has the nomination snatched away from him at the convention, a lot of them will stay home in November or vote for some fringe 3rd party.
    Or they might vote for the less racist candidate with fewer sexual harassment allegations, Trump.
  • TGOHF666 said:
    Has Brendan penned some kind of defence of Sabisky yet? I'll be amazed if he doesn't.
    I take it all back! Brendan is rather cool on Sabisky.

    https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/02/18/the-right-is-flirting-with-some-dangerous-ideas/

    Interesting.
  • viewcode said:

    TGOHF666 said:
    I normally shy away from this kind of discussion, but that's just too interesting a statistic to gnore. Are 90% of giraffes gay? Are there any studies as to the incidence of homosexuality amongst giraffes, and how is it assessed? If 90% is wrong, then what is the actual number? Goddamn it, this is the kind of thing that gets stuck in my head - the concept, that is, not the (redacted). It's the mental equivalent of an earworm. Aaargh!
    You just had to make me look, didncha?

    'Giraffes. Male giraffes have been observed to engage in remarkably high frequencies of homosexual behavior. After aggressive "necking", it is common for two male giraffes to caress and court each other, leading up to mounting and climax.'

    https://tinyurl.com/tddwzy4
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,852

    LDs would have done much better without fear of Corbyn.

    So you think a hung parliament was doable?
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,234
    nova said:


    Owen Jones spent every media appearance on election night balefully repeating 'It wasn't the policies! It wasn't the policies! It wasn't the policies! It wasn't the policies!' as the Labour Party's policies - championed so passionately and monomaniacally by Jones - dragged it down to one of its worst defeats in history. I wouldn't waste a penny on a book whose every syllable can be predicted in advance.

    One of the most accurate comments I read about the appearance of Jones and Sarkar on ITV that night was that they looked like a pair of guilty teenagers as they came to the horrified realization that they'd just burned their parents' house down...

    Hold on though. It wasn't Labour's policies that led to defeat if we are to believe the polling that it was Jeremy Corbyn's personal toxicity, or if we believe reports of what canvassers were told on the doorstep, which also was that Corbyn himself was unelectable.

    This is the great paradox. RLB is condemned for saying Corbyn was 10/10 but ironically that must mean RLB agrees with you that it was policies that were to blame.
    Yes, I know the polling laid the main blame on Corbyn, but that's not as definitive a distinction as might be hoped for in diagnosing Labour's defeat. Yes, some leaders will be more charismatic, more intelligent, better-looking than others, but apart from that the leader symbolizes the entire political platform on which he is running.

    That's why Jones' denial that far-left policies sunk Labour is so obtuse. Corbyn's whole life has been a far-left political project - he is the avatar of an instinctively anti-capitalist, anti-Western, anti-patriotic outlook that covers all foreign and domestic policy. His personal defeat _is_ the defeat of all those policies.
    Clearly it was Corbyn, Brexit and the policies.

    Corbyn was unpopular, Labour were in a lose/lose with Brexit, so they threw everything into the mix policywise.

    The problem now is all that superficial polling that suggests the individual policies are popular. They're the equivalent of asking someone if they'd like an ice cream, without telling them the cost, or the fact that they have to climb a hill to get it, or that it's marmite flavoured.
    The weird thing was they had one achievable policy that would have made a difference - forgiving student debt - and they ignored it entirely.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,852
    What's your view on whether Trump will win the general?
  • viewcode said:

    TGOHF666 said:
    I normally shy away from this kind of discussion, but that's just too interesting a statistic to gnore. Are 90% of giraffes gay? Are there any studies as to the incidence of homosexuality amongst giraffes, and how is it assessed? If 90% is wrong, then what is the actual number? Goddamn it, this is the kind of thing that gets stuck in my head - the concept, that is, not the (redacted). It's the mental equivalent of an earworm. Aaargh!
    You just had to make me look, didncha?

    'Giraffes. Male giraffes have been observed to engage in remarkably high frequencies of homosexual behavior. After aggressive "necking", it is common for two male giraffes to caress and court each other, leading up to mounting and climax.'

    https://tinyurl.com/tddwzy4
    I thought that everyone knew that giraffes were light on their hooves.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,286
    MaxPB said:

    It's not going to be Buttigieg, it's not going to be Klobuchar.

    Give us a clue then?
    Feel the Bern.
    Looks like either Bernie or Bloomberg at the moment.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 39,756
    edited February 2020

    TGOHF666 said:
    Has Brendan penned some kind of defence of Sabisky yet? I'll be amazed if he doesn't.
    I take it all back! Brendan is rather cool on Sabisky.

    https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/02/18/the-right-is-flirting-with-some-dangerous-ideas/

    Interesting.
    Also interesting is that for a Trotskyist Marxist and former member of the Revolutionary Communist Party, Big Bren now seems to take a somewhat proprietorial attitude to 'The Right'.
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818
    Nigelb said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Did Andrew Sabisky super-forecast his own resignation/sacking?

    Cummings' diagnosis of the civil service's problems is compelling, but his solutions are much less so.

    He wants to hand the running of the machine over to mathematicians and scientists.

    Trouble is, the global financials markets did something very similar in the run up to 2008. and it was the products designed and operated by such people that crashed the system.

    In some cases the mass of derivatives a given bank had was so complex it was reportedly exceeedingtly difficult to determine its risk profile, even for mathematicians.

    Its fine to upskill in terms of numeracy in the civil service, but its not a panacea and there are risks.

    Compelling in a similar manner to Marx’s critique of capitalism...
    And similarly deficient in realistic remedies.
    Quite Mr Nigel, and similar too to Corbyn's critique of the wealthy. He's right. They are too wealthy relative to the rest of us.

    But you won;t make the poor rich by making the rich poor. And the tories deem similarly devoid of solutions too.

    Indeed, I have never heard a good suggestion from anyone on how to restore the balance.
  • TGOHF666TGOHF666 Posts: 2,052
    malcolmg said:

    Very interesting , he will be a shoe in , I also expect him to be next SNP leader.

    Angus Robertson: Why I hope to become SNP MSP for Edinburgh Central
    Edinburgh is a world-class city that should be the capital of an independent country, writes Angus Robertson as he announces his bid to become the SNP candidate for Edinburgh Central in the 2021 Holyrood election.
    Every resident who normally supports the Labour Party, Liberal Democrats and the Greens will have the chance to use their vote to get rid of the Tories and elect a progressive pro-European candidate from the SNP who will prioritise public services over Tory austerity.

    So Mr Robertson - can you clarify when you were told about Mr Salmonds incidents at Edinburgh airport and what were your subsequent actions ?
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,234

    viewcode said:

    TGOHF666 said:
    I normally shy away from this kind of discussion, but that's just too interesting a statistic to gnore. Are 90% of giraffes gay? Are there any studies as to the incidence of homosexuality amongst giraffes, and how is it assessed? If 90% is wrong, then what is the actual number? Goddamn it, this is the kind of thing that gets stuck in my head - the concept, that is, not the (redacted). It's the mental equivalent of an earworm. Aaargh!
    You just had to make me look, didncha?

    'Giraffes. Male giraffes have been observed to engage in remarkably high frequencies of homosexual behavior. After aggressive "necking", it is common for two male giraffes to caress and court each other, leading up to mounting and climax.'

    https://tinyurl.com/tddwzy4
    You just know I'm going to ask for a number on this. Expressed as a percentage of all giraffe courtship/sexual behaviour, what is the proportion of such behaviour that is same-sex?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    viewcode said:

    TGOHF666 said:
    I normally shy away from this kind of discussion, but that's just too interesting a statistic to gnore. Are 90% of giraffes gay? Are there any studies as to the incidence of homosexuality amongst giraffes, and how is it assessed? If 90% is wrong, then what is the actual number? Goddamn it, this is the kind of thing that gets stuck in my head - the concept, that is, not the (redacted). It's the mental equivalent of an earworm. Aaargh!
    Isn’t it more of an “87.35% of statistics cited on the internet are made up” type of comment?
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556

    kinabalu said:

    That last point is crucial I think. My favourite analogy for that is thinking that if someone likes a spoonful of sugar in their tea, they're going to LOVE it when you tip in the whole 500g bag...

    Here's how to do this. Thought experiment -

    GE19. Assume it's all the same (Get Brexit Done, "Boris", LDs Revoke, Lab Ref2 etc) apart from 2 things. (1) Labour has a moderate Leader. (2) Labour has moderate policies.

    What's the result?

    I'll go first. LDs about the same. Lab 25 better. Con majority of 30.

    Corbyn and Corbynism cost 25 seats.
    LDs would have done much better without fear of Corbyn.
    Indeed - as Stephen Bush likes to point out, the public generally consider the Labour leader to be the de facto LD leader, since many will vote LD only if they can stomach Lab in power. LD could have gained perhaps 10-15 more seats. Con maj 10-0.

    Most importantly, a moderate leader with moderate policies wouldn't have made the strategic blunders of the past 3 years that placed Labour in a virtually unwinnable position.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,234
    Charles said:

    viewcode said:

    TGOHF666 said:
    I normally shy away from this kind of discussion, but that's just too interesting a statistic to gnore. Are 90% of giraffes gay? Are there any studies as to the incidence of homosexuality amongst giraffes, and how is it assessed? If 90% is wrong, then what is the actual number? Goddamn it, this is the kind of thing that gets stuck in my head - the concept, that is, not the (redacted). It's the mental equivalent of an earworm. Aaargh!
    Isn’t it more of an “87.35% of statistics cited on the internet are made up” type of comment?
    Considering the source, I'm sure that it is! Although perhaps less sure after @Theuniondivvie 's googling, it has to be said. But I am now encaptured by the challenge of assessing it: how do you measure the incidence of giraffe same-sex activity. It's a pickle and no mistake.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    TGOHF666 said:
    I normally shy away from this kind of discussion, but that's just too interesting a statistic to gnore. Are 90% of giraffes gay? Are there any studies as to the incidence of homosexuality amongst giraffes, and how is it assessed? If 90% is wrong, then what is the actual number? Goddamn it, this is the kind of thing that gets stuck in my head - the concept, that is, not the (redacted). It's the mental equivalent of an earworm. Aaargh!
    You just had to make me look, didncha?

    'Giraffes. Male giraffes have been observed to engage in remarkably high frequencies of homosexual behavior. After aggressive "necking", it is common for two male giraffes to caress and court each other, leading up to mounting and climax.'

    https://tinyurl.com/tddwzy4
    You just know I'm going to ask for a number on this. Expressed as a percentage of all giraffe courtship/sexual behaviour, what is the proportion of such behaviour that is same-sex?
    According to that link in one study it was “up to 94%” but that was mounting so could just have been an expression of dominance

    At any time 5% are involved in “non-combative necking”

    But the longest subsection is on homosexual behaviour in bats. I mean WTF?!
  • The NV polling is bananas. I guess if you have like 6 people on 5% to 20% and pollsters who think 256 is a good sample size you end up with the leader within the MoE of being last.

    That being said, please note the latest poll shows a KLOBUCHAR SURGE
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,234
    eadric said:

    viewcode said:

    TGOHF666 said:
    I normally shy away from this kind of discussion, but that's just too interesting a statistic to gnore. Are 90% of giraffes gay? Are there any studies as to the incidence of homosexuality amongst giraffes, and how is it assessed? If 90% is wrong, then what is the actual number? Goddamn it, this is the kind of thing that gets stuck in my head - the concept, that is, not the (redacted). It's the mental equivalent of an earworm. Aaargh!
    I doubt that "90% of giraffes are gay" BUT zoology is revealing ever more diverse sexuality (in all kinds of animals), from rape to incest to "pedophilia" to transvestism (seriously) to bonobo chimps using sex toys.

    Animals are as kinky as hell

    A brilliant, exhaustive book on the subject:

    https://www.amazon.co.uk/Biological-Exuberance-Homosexuality-Diversity-Stonewall/dp/031225377X/ref=sr_1_1?crid=2993360DU9DG&keywords=bagemihl&qid=1582032061&s=books&sprefix=bagemih,stripbooks,146&sr=1-1
    Thank you. I'm in the work canteen at the moment so I will click on it when there is less chance of Siobhan from accounts screaming "oh my god" when she looks over my shoulder.
  • TGOHF666 said:

    malcolmg said:

    Very interesting , he will be a shoe in , I also expect him to be next SNP leader.

    Angus Robertson: Why I hope to become SNP MSP for Edinburgh Central
    Edinburgh is a world-class city that should be the capital of an independent country, writes Angus Robertson as he announces his bid to become the SNP candidate for Edinburgh Central in the 2021 Holyrood election.
    Every resident who normally supports the Labour Party, Liberal Democrats and the Greens will have the chance to use their vote to get rid of the Tories and elect a progressive pro-European candidate from the SNP who will prioritise public services over Tory austerity.

    So Mr Robertson - can you clarify when you were told about Mr Salmonds incidents at Edinburgh airport and what were your subsequent actions ?
    Careful, you've only just regained use of your..er..writing hand after Cutegate.



    I hope you've let your contact @WATPFTP1690 that he knows feck all about Glasgow politics.

    https://twitter.com/SusaninLangside/status/1229477335159758852?s=20


  • kinabalu said:

    That last point is crucial I think. My favourite analogy for that is thinking that if someone likes a spoonful of sugar in their tea, they're going to LOVE it when you tip in the whole 500g bag...

    Here's how to do this. Thought experiment -

    GE19. Assume it's all the same (Get Brexit Done, "Boris", LDs Revoke, Lab Ref2 etc) apart from 2 things. (1) Labour has a moderate Leader. (2) Labour has moderate policies.

    What's the result?

    I'll go first. LDs about the same. Lab 25 better. Con majority of 30.

    Corbyn and Corbynism cost 25 seats.
    LDs would have done much better without fear of Corbyn.
    I think that's true.
    Boris was lucky that Corbyn was leader and his popularity is fairly thin, the 80 seat majority doesn't reflect and real enthusiasm for Boris and Cummings policies. People may be surprised that after having 'Got Brexit Done' there is another crisis in December.
    With a new moderate Labour leader (and a new LibDem leader) politics will look a lot different in 2021/22.
This discussion has been closed.