Re: Saturday 2nd & Sunday 3rd May 2015
Posted: Sat 02 May, 2015 5:54 pm
Royal Baby names: latest odds.
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Perhaps there needs to be the name of a place / country on that list - just to satisfy the anti Katie Hopkins urge. Should be properly UK, British mind.AngryAsWell wrote:Royal Baby names: latest odds.
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Well I do after what those overpaid *******s I support did today!letsskiptotheleft wrote: to you too yahayah, and everyone else who needs one.
Gutted for you - play off place there for the taking and...it's gone. Not sure it's as bad as us (L.Orient) - lost last year's play-off final and look like we're down tomorrow.frightful_oik wrote:Well I do after what those overpaid *******s I support did today!letsskiptotheleft wrote: to you too yahayah, and everyone else who needs one.
Reading!? I mean bloody Reading!
No offence ohso
A look back at the life story so far of The Baby I expect.utopiandreams wrote:Blimey I've just switched on the telly and scrolled through the channel list and see there was a two hours forty minute ITV News Special bulletin! Rhetorical question: what's that all about?
Very good point.letsskiptotheleft wrote:Funny how no one mentions Sheffield when it comes to the SNP and celebrating too early.
You want to see Cheltenham.RogerOThornhill wrote:frightful_oik wrote:Well I do after what those overpaid *******s I support did today!letsskiptotheleft wrote: to you too yahayah, and everyone else who needs one.
Reading!? I mean bloody Reading!
No offence ohso
Gutted for you - play off place there for the taking and...it's gone. Not sure it's as bad as us (L.Orient) - lost last year's play-off final and look like we're down tomorrow.
Good luck tomorrow Roger. We just had too many injuries. And, as you know, it's never the useless ones that get injured is it.RogerOThornhill wrote:Gutted for you - play off place there for the taking and...it's gone. Not sure it's as bad as us (L.Orient) - lost last year's play-off final and look like we're down tomorrow.frightful_oik wrote:Well I do after what those overpaid *******s I support did today!letsskiptotheleft wrote: to you too yahayah, and everyone else who needs one.
Reading!? I mean bloody Reading!
No offence ohso
letsskiptotheleft wrote: to you too yahayah, and everyone else who needs one.
AngryAsWell wrote:#VoteCameronOut already at No. 3 trending
Snap!AngryAsWell wrote:#VoteCameronOut Now at No 1 having knocked Prince George off the top!
Not sure Ed Balls would thank you for equating Norwich with the Tories.RobertSnozers wrote:I know we're not supposed to talk about football here, so I won't. But I shall offer a football-based analogy to the forthcoming general election where a team, let's call it Ipswich Town, standing here for Labour, aren't quite able to get the most goals, or seats in the final match, or campaign, but because of the wider mathematics of the Championship, or parliament, are able to move forward to the play-offs, or post-election talks. So I think that analogy should give hope to all 'Ipswich Town' fans even if they still have to overcome Norwich City, or the ToryscumParty
Mike Smithson @MSmithsonPB · 1m 1 minute ago
If it continues this close then LAB looks set to win most seats
Jon Trickett @jon_trickett 7m7 minutes ago
Two polls so far. Neck and neck nationally. But I am quite certain we are ahead in our key seats. All out for a Labour victory. #ToriesOut
What a title.Isabel Oakeshott retweeted
Lord Ashcroft @LordAshcroft 12m12 minutes ago
"Call me Dave"-the unauthorised biography of David Cameron by myself and @IsabelOakeshott can be pre-ordered here https://www.bitebackpublishing.com/books/call-me-dave" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; … …
Expect:rebeccariots2 wrote:Mike Smithson @MSmithsonPB · 1m 1 minute ago
If it continues this close then LAB looks set to win most seats
Don't postal votes get counted at the same time as every other vote?rebeccariots2 wrote:For those of you not feeling very optimistic or grounded today - I advise not following any links to the Labour Uncut article that people are beginning to tweet about. It claims that Milibrand rushed off to do the interview with Russell Brand because initial postal vote tallies suggested Labour weren't doing well and his team went into a panic.
Lots of people are rubbishing Labour Uncut as an unreliable / biased source. Best not to let this tangential (trying to be polite but might have actually made up a word there) view into the mix IMO.
I don't know, but given the mechanisms of the count I would suggest so.Spacedone wrote:Don't postal votes get counted at the same time as every other vote?rebeccariots2 wrote:For those of you not feeling very optimistic or grounded today - I advise not following any links to the Labour Uncut article that people are beginning to tweet about. It claims that Milibrand rushed off to do the interview with Russell Brand because initial postal vote tallies suggested Labour weren't doing well and his team went into a panic.
Lots of people are rubbishing Labour Uncut as an unreliable / biased source. Best not to let this tangential (trying to be polite but might have actually made up a word there) view into the mix IMO.
Ah well there you go. But that Brand interview was pretty early in the process.citizenJA wrote:Postal vote opening sessions
When are postal votes opened and how do you
know when an opening session is taking place?
It is likely that several opening sessions will take place before
polling day, as well as on polling day itself.
The Constituency Returning Officer must give election agents at
least 48 hours’ notice of when and where the sessions will take
place. They will also tell them how many postal voting agents will
be allowed to attend each session.
There will be a final opening session after the polls have closed to open any postal votes delivered to polling stations.
This session may be held at the count venue or in another location.
Duty to maintain secrecy
Anyone attending an opening session must not attempt to look
at identifying marks or numbers on ballot papers, disclose how
any particular ballot paper has been marked or pass on any
such information gained from the session. Anyone found guilty of
breaching these requirements can face a fine of up to £5,000, or
may be imprisoned for up to six months.
http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/_ ... voting.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
There were similar allegations during the referendum - but it was Ruth Davidson in the limelight:Spacedone wrote:Don't postal votes get counted at the same time as every other vote?rebeccariots2 wrote:For those of you not feeling very optimistic or grounded today - I advise not following any links to the Labour Uncut article that people are beginning to tweet about. It claims that Milibrand rushed off to do the interview with Russell Brand because initial postal vote tallies suggested Labour weren't doing well and his team went into a panic.
Lots of people are rubbishing Labour Uncut as an unreliable / biased source. Best not to let this tangential (trying to be polite but might have actually made up a word there) view into the mix IMO.
They're making it up.TechnicalEphemera wrote:I don't know, but given the mechanisms of the count I would suggest so.Spacedone wrote:Don't postal votes get counted at the same time as every other vote?rebeccariots2 wrote:For those of you not feeling very optimistic or grounded today - I advise not following any links to the Labour Uncut article that people are beginning to tweet about. It claims that Milibrand rushed off to do the interview with Russell Brand because initial postal vote tallies suggested Labour weren't doing well and his team went into a panic.
Lots of people are rubbishing Labour Uncut as an unreliable / biased source. Best not to let this tangential (trying to be polite but might have actually made up a word there) view into the mix IMO.
I would also ask when have we ever had a by-election where people knew ahead of the count the running total of postal votes?
And finally as a panic measure doing an interview with Brand doesn't cut it.
Mike Smithson @MSmithsonPB 44 mins44 minutes agoohsocynical wrote:John McTernan retweeted
Lord Ashcroft @LordAshcroft 46 secs46 seconds ago
ComRes poll CON 33% LAB 33% UKIP 13% LDEM 8% GRNS 7%
Night PF.PorFavor wrote:Goodnight, everyone.
Goodnight, PF.PorFavor wrote:Goodnight, everyone.
Sampling is pretty dubious, in a tight election probably very subject to confirmation bias.Eric_WLothian wrote:There were similar allegations during the referendum - but it was Ruth Davidson in the limelight:Spacedone wrote:Don't postal votes get counted at the same time as every other vote?rebeccariots2 wrote:For those of you not feeling very optimistic or grounded today - I advise not following any links to the Labour Uncut article that people are beginning to tweet about. It claims that Milibrand rushed off to do the interview with Russell Brand because initial postal vote tallies suggested Labour weren't doing well and his team went into a panic.
Lots of people are rubbishing Labour Uncut as an unreliable / biased source. Best not to let this tangential (trying to be polite but might have actually made up a word there) view into the mix IMO.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-s ... s-29489288
They get 'verified' in batches in advance. Verification is checking they are valid numbers / names for the constituency register ... and party reps are present for it. But they are not supposed to allocate them towards parties. However, it is apparently fairly easy to keep a kind of tally if you are watching the process.Spacedone wrote:Don't postal votes get counted at the same time as every other vote?rebeccariots2 wrote:For those of you not feeling very optimistic or grounded today - I advise not following any links to the Labour Uncut article that people are beginning to tweet about. It claims that Milibrand rushed off to do the interview with Russell Brand because initial postal vote tallies suggested Labour weren't doing well and his team went into a panic.
Lots of people are rubbishing Labour Uncut as an unreliable / biased source. Best not to let this tangential (trying to be polite but might have actually made up a word there) view into the mix IMO.
Personally I feel that both Labour and Tories are freebooters, гражданка, although Miliband does seem a little different, albeit he won't decry the Trident replacement. It got me thinking about human rights and nuclear weapons and led me to 'Weapons of Mass Destruction and Human Rights' from The International and Security Network: http://www.isn.ethz.ch/Digital-Library/ ... n&id=48001.citizenJA wrote:... Tories are pilfering freebooters. Labour have planned ahead...
But it's against the rules to discuss what has been tallied, isn't it?rebeccariots2 wrote:They get 'verified' in batches in advance. Verification is checking they are valid numbers / names for the constituency register ... and party reps are present for it. But they are not supposed to allocate them towards parties. However, it is apparently fairly easy to keep a kind of tally if you are watching the process.Spacedone wrote:Don't postal votes get counted at the same time as every other vote?rebeccariots2 wrote:For those of you not feeling very optimistic or grounded today - I advise not following any links to the Labour Uncut article that people are beginning to tweet about. It claims that Milibrand rushed off to do the interview with Russell Brand because initial postal vote tallies suggested Labour weren't doing well and his team went into a panic.
Lots of people are rubbishing Labour Uncut as an unreliable / biased source. Best not to let this tangential (trying to be polite but might have actually made up a word there) view into the mix IMO.
I know some of this because we were discussing the various processes today after our stint on the doorsteps.
PorFavor wrote:Goodnight, everyone.
Yes, I believe so. But I also seem to remember some pretty hefty rumours about postal votes being leaked out before the last election here. I'll have to check with others locally to see if my memory is right or not.citizenJA wrote:But it's against the rules to discuss what has been tallied, isn't it?rebeccariots2 wrote:They get 'verified' in batches in advance. Verification is checking they are valid numbers / names for the constituency register ... and party reps are present for it. But they are not supposed to allocate them towards parties. However, it is apparently fairly easy to keep a kind of tally if you are watching the process.Spacedone wrote: Don't postal votes get counted at the same time as every other vote?
I know some of this because we were discussing the various processes today after our stint on the doorsteps.
I'm sure everything was done lawfully. I'm not just saying that. TE is correct.rebeccariots2 wrote:Yes, I believe so. But I also seem to remember some pretty hefty rumours about postal votes being leaked out before the last election here. I'll have to check with others locally to see if my memory is right or not.citizenJA wrote:But it's against the rules to discuss what has been tallied, isn't it?rebeccariots2 wrote: They get 'verified' in batches in advance. Verification is checking they are valid numbers / names for the constituency register ... and party reps are present for it. But they are not supposed to allocate them towards parties. However, it is apparently fairly easy to keep a kind of tally if you are watching the process.
I know some of this because we were discussing the various processes today after our stint on the doorsteps.