• limpid

      Just visiting?   27/12/16

      Please click "Sign Up" and login to use the full functionality of the site.


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


blandy last won the day on November 4 2016

blandy had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

5,964 Excellent

About blandy

  • Rank
    Player Manager
  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    Fettling, Cricket, Ale, Music.

Contact Methods

  • Twitter

Recent Profile Visitors

2,978 profile views
  1. Ashley Westwood

    That's pretty much proof of scapegoating, right there. Someone who didn't see the game deciding that the problem was Ashley Westwood.
  2. Like I say, semantics, but in order to be "entitled" to vote, you have to be registered. The entitlement is bestowed by being on the register. Not on the register, not entitled, not part of the electorate. if you're of voting age and meet the other criteria, but don't register then you are most definitely not part of the electorate. You're excluded.
  3. It's maybe semantics, but the electorate is the people entitled to vote. To be entitled you have to registered. There is no unregistered electorate. Those who would be entitled if only they were registered are not part of the electorate in any sense.
  4. They're not eligible if they're not registered but yes, that.
  5. Point of order - They don't, though. The tories got just under 37% of those who voted in the last election. Just under 60% of those who voted voted for "not tory" parties and there were also a small number of votes for independents. the turnout was something like 66%.So all in all 24% of those elligible to vote, voted for a tory. The tories won more than half the seats available on that 24%. Broken system. less than a quarter of the country votes for them and they get pretty much free reign on the back of it.
  6. This is an excellent post. Just looking at the "Leave" people. In no particular order, there's the UKIPs Farage and funder Aaron Banks A 20 year + career politician (MEP) with a background as a City trader, a Millionaire CEO of an Insurance company. Then there's the likes of Boris Johnson, Michael Gove, Jacob Rees-Mogg, Zak Goldsmith and so on - these are the old etonians, sons of millionaires, the sons of Newspaper editors, the Tory establishment, The former Conservative Secretary of State for education... all supported by the Daily Telegraph, the Sunday Times, the Daily Mail, the Sun, the Express - all owned by various billionaire media moguls. With a small number of exceptions - people who are "only" normal members of Parliament -the leave campaign is as "establishment" as you can get. Maybe it worked, but the portrayal of Leave as the unorthodox rejection of the establishement is a total manipulation, it's a lie. There's plenty wrong with the EU, there are plenty of reasons for leaving, or changing it, but anyone doing so to give the finger to the toffs in the establishment has been fooled, big time. There's a large group of "leave" backing businessmen waiting to feast on their rewards - reduced protection for workers, the environment and such like. Us little people, we barely enter their consideration.
  7. We've heard that the disgraced Liam Fox says they are, which hopefully is the same thing. But anyway, suppose that in 2 years + we do agree some sort of free trade deals with them (and hopefully others, too). My sort of question/itch is "what exactly are these deals going to entail that's suddenly going to make all those places buy loads more of our "stuff". I can see that currently the Eurozone place is struggling a bit, and so until it recovers the demand they have for our stuff has been a bit depressed, so we only now do 44% of our exports to them. I would imagine, seeing as Mayday has said we're not going to do single market with them any more to keep out the nasty foreigners, that our trade with them will dip further. How will all these other places fill in for, or overtake that drop off? It just all seems a bit of a wing and a prayer to me. India has the hump because we won't give them decent immigration access (who'd a thunk it!), China is a protectionist, IPR stealing nightmare, America is going all protectionist, too (even more so than now) and the other places are mostly lovely but small. We're just going to sit in the corner and scowl at everyone aren't we?
  8. Yeah, probably - though as HV says it's a bit windy. And realistically in "News" terms the loss of 1000 jobs is "news" someone expecting them to be restored somewhere down the line isn't "news". Man bites dog v Dog bites man etc. It's nothing on the Heil and the Express etc. That "pound soars" one was a cracker. And neither of them have gone with any kind of line of "May to destroy Thatcher's single market legacy" I can't think why not.
  9. Things that piss you off that shouldn't

    way to keep the secret. I found out where they were from
  10. Perhaps not, but the article did say which is kind of a similar point.
  11. That's kind of wierd, cus I was told Labour had, well, um, "gone to live on a farm". I mean it's was pretty old when it was last seen, and in dog years that's very old indeed. So in some ways it shouldn't have been a surprise. Even it's owner, a man called Jeremy, was looking a bit sad and bewildered when last spotted. I think it was probably for the best, and I'm sure we can get another one soon. Perhaps one that can bite and bark properly and scare off the nasty people who want to steal all our stuff and sell it to the City folk. Maybe they could get a better carer of it, though. Someone who isn't so clueless? someone who could look after it and nurture it.
  12. contains offensive terminology. But it's a parody of ...well. hopefully you get it now.
  13. Short term, definitely. It won't have done any harm all the supportive media coverage she's had. We can't know for certain, but I bet if a survey was done on the comments of the various EU bods who've said (I paraphrase) "ha, ha, dream on May" that the survey results would show everyone thinks the Yurpeens are quite beastly. In other words, what's currently being commented on is people's reactions to talk about what various parties want, not what they actually ended up getting and what the consequences of that are. In due course, when stuff actually starts changing, that's what really matters.
  14. That's fair enough, the jobs haven't yet actually been moved as of today and I suspect you're right in the implication that there will be more talk of jobs going than actual jobs moving at the end of the day (if we're lucky). I was responding to this bit, really With my link to a video of him mentioning 1,000 jobs and an article directly quoting him mentioning 1000 jobs and pointing out that it wasn't made up by the BBC. It's so easy for people to look for things that confirm their own views on Brexit - leave or remain, and as you hint and HV implies, the media isn't doing a great job of genuine straight reporting - everything seems nuanced one way or the other.