Monday 16th March 2015

Post by **refitman** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 7:15 am

Morning all.

danesclose · Post by **danesclose** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 8:35 am

Morning all. Anyone else getting fed up with the wall to wall media coverage of the Grant Shapps lied about a 2nd job and being an internet conman story?

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 8:39 am

Morning.

I haven't watched any TV for days now

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 8:54 am

RobertSnozers wrote:Morning

Anyone else distinctly fed up with the wall-to-wall TV and billboard ads proclaiming how wonderful the government is? You sometimes see more than one in a single advert break. That's our money they're spending! Money they insist we don't have. Any idea how much? Not too late for an FOI request.

Annoying and possibly dubious.

Fraser Nelson is quite upset about it.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 8:59 am

Morning all.

Narxist. Definitely adding that to my dictionary.
https://kittysjones.wordpress.com/2015/03/15/narxism/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 9:16 am

RobertSnozers wrote:Morning

Anyone else distinctly fed up with the wall-to-wall TV and billboard ads proclaiming how wonderful the government is? You sometimes see more than one in a single advert break. That's our money they're spending! Money they insist we don't have. Any idea how much? Not too late for an FOI request.

Yes - I've been moaning about it here for a little while. I've counted six different ads but there may be more. Do you have a running total?

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 9:25 am

danesclose wrote:Morning all. Anyone else getting fed up with the wall to wall media coverage of the Grant Shapps lied about a 2nd job and being an internet conman story?

Yes, but how, I wonder does he explain this:

https://twitter.com/MGreenHowToCorp

Official account of Michael Green, multi-millionaire internet marketer and founder of http://HowToCorp.org" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Most recent tweet. 10 hours ago.

And:
http://www.howtocorp.org/video.htm His still-live website... Wound down? But not closed-down.

Unless he's going to claim that he's been spoofed? He's really an example of why if you're going to be a liar you need to make sure you've got a really good memory – short-, medium-, and long-term memory at that!

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 9:26 am

Grant Shapps in "I'm a Tory spiv who masquerades as someone else and sells shit on the internet that gullible twats buy while still an MP" shocker.

But apparently it is anti-business to condemn him as he's an "entrepreneur" another word that should be binned along with "progressive".

James O'Brien is getting stuck in, Con Futures not amused, anti business blah blah and blah.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 9:45 am

RobertSnozers wrote:
letsskiptotheleft wrote:Grant Shapps in "I'm a Tory spiv who masquerades as someone else and sells shit on the internet that gullible twats buy while still an MP" shocker.

But apparently it is anti-business to condemn him as he's an "entrepreneur" another word that should be binned along with "progressive".

James O'Brien is getting stuck in, Con Futures not amused, anti business blah blah and blah.
Jeremy Hunt tweeted: "Unbelievable Lab/Guard/BBC attack on @grantshapps. His sin not 2 use pseudonym but 2 write books about how 2 create wealth - shock horror..."

No Jeremy, he lied about it.

Create wealth ? It's about how to grab a fast buck at the expense of others, it is parasitical behaviour.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 9:46 am

Danny Alexander getting bandwidth for his renouncement of a "Review" into Business Rates.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... ate-review" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I have two questions about this?

Firstly, is it Tory policy, Lib Dem policy or both?

Second, if the Review is established by the Treasury, will it get in the way of Labour's promise to cut Business Rates?

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 9:46 am

yahyah wrote:
RobertSnozers wrote:
letsskiptotheleft wrote:Grant Shapps in "I'm a Tory spiv who masquerades as someone else and sells shit on the internet that gullible twats buy while still an MP" shocker.

But apparently it is anti-business to condemn him as he's an "entrepreneur" another word that should be binned along with "progressive".

James O'Brien is getting stuck in, Con Futures not amused, anti business blah blah and blah.
Jeremy Hunt tweeted: "Unbelievable Lab/Guard/BBC attack on @grantshapps. His sin not 2 use pseudonym but 2 write books about how 2 create wealth - shock horror..."

No Jeremy, he lied about it.

Create wealth ? It's about how to grab a fast buck at the expense of others, it is parasitical behaviour.

Or theft.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 9:47 am

On a lighter note, a dreary weather day in Colne Valley is about to be brightened by the arrival of Harriet Harman and the Pink Bus in Slaithwaite

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 9:50 am

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Danny Alexander getting bandwidth for his renouncement of a "Review" into Business Rates.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... ate-review" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I have two questions about this?

Firstly, is it Tory policy, Lib Dem policy or both?

Second, if the Review is established by the Treasury, will it get in the way of Labour's promise to cut Business Rates?

Thirdly, why wait until 51 days before the election to push it ?
They've been in power for five years.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 9:55 am

yahyah wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Danny Alexander getting bandwidth for his renouncement of a "Review" into Business Rates.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... ate-review" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I have two questions about this?

Firstly, is it Tory policy, Lib Dem policy or both?

Second, if the Review is established by the Treasury, will it get in the way of Labour's promise to cut Business Rates?

Thirdly, why wait until 51 days before the election to push it ?
They've been in power for five years.

And why is he not being asked these questions by interviewers?

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 10:05 am

Re-posting my late-night post from the early hours of this morning. I've edited the last line to account for the passage of time.

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015 ... tudy-shows

The study, published on Monday in the Journal of Public Health, finds that worries around debt, rent arrears and the prospect of being forced to move from their family home produced a sense of “hopelessness verging on desperation”. They reported being trapped in a “vicious cycle” of loneliness and isolation; they could often no longer afford to go to the pub or cafe, or even carry out family roles such as grandparenting.

Contrary to the government’s assertion when the policy was introduced that it would have no negative impact on health and wellbeing, the study concludes that the bedroom tax has “increased poverty and had broad-ranging adverse effects on health, wellbeing and social relationships”.

Comments have not been opened on this article by Patrick Butler but it's had 714 shares since he posted it at three-minutes-past-midnight, not including this one.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 10:12 am

http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index. ... -the-past/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Relatively large number of undecideds combined with a high expectancy of the debates influencing voting intentions.
The debates Dave, the debates. Did Crosby get paid up front or by results?

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 10:16 am

Now it's "I over firmly denied something".

Spiv is too good a word for him.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 10:20 am

The Greens are advertising a minimum donation £1,000 a ticket black tie fundraiser with Natalie Bennett later this month. Champagne socialists only need apply.
[Although, confusingly, some mere snip at £500 tickets are available].
A 'premium' table reservation is £15,000.

The more you see of them the more it becomes obvious they are no different from other parties.
Their minimum donation suggestion is double that of the recent Tory bash for the rich.

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 10:33 am

In their defence the Greens have to get cash from somewhere. Fundraising dinners are one way to do it, I think it unlikely that anybody will be seeking to gain influence by getting access to Bennett.

I will be intrigued to see how much funding is channelled their way from Tory slush funds, surely worth a couple of million of that Tory war chest.

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 10:40 am

Steerpike says the Green fundraiser has been cancelled:

However, after news of the planned fundraiser broke on Friday, party members complained that the the ball was at odds with the Green party’s policy to redistribute wealth.

Now, Mr S hears that the event has been cancelled as a result of the public backlash. ‘After feedback from our membership, supporters and donors, the Green Party Executive decided not proceed with this event,’ a party spokesman tells Steerpike.

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/steerpike/ ... m-members/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 10:46 am

This can also be filed under ''Politicians all the same'' file.

Alex Salmond's referendum diaries are being serialised by the Scottish Sun this week, the book published by William Collins on Thursday, both of course owned by Rupert Murdoch, the owner of the Sun which had Nicola Sturgeon photo-shopped in tartan bikini astride a wrecking ball. Of course there will be no out cry about Salmond cosying up to Murdoch by those nationalists who are so much more left wing than us further down south, there never has been.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/comment/c ... .120705629" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 10:59 am

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Danny Alexander getting bandwidth for his renouncement of a "Review" into Business Rates.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... ate-review" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I have two questions about this?

Firstly, is it Tory policy, Lib Dem policy or both?

Second, if the Review is established by the Treasury, will it get in the way of Labour's promise to cut Business Rates?

Morning all.

Both the Tories and Libdems have so blurred the lines between party policy pledges for the next parliament and government announcements for this parliament that I have no idea what's policy and what's pledge anymore.

As to whether it will get in the way of Labour's promise to cut Business Rates, I don't see why it would. You can cut rates straight away and then respond to the review as and when it reports. It will get in the way of Labour's campaign message that is aimed at being small business friendly who the current government have ignored, of course, but then that's the point, isn't it?

Eric_WLothian · Post by **Eric_WLothian** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 11:05 am

letsskiptotheleft wrote:This can also be filed under ''Politicians all the same'' file.

Alex Salmond's referendum diaries are being serialised by the Scottish Sun this week, the book published by William Collins on Thursday, both of course owned by Rupert Murdoch, the owner of the Sun which had Nicola Sturgeon photo-shopped in tartan bikini astride a wrecking ball. Of course there will be no out cry about Salmond cosying up to Murdoch by those nationalists who are so much more left wing than us further down south, there never has been.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/comment/c ... .120705629" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The quotes in the Scotsman indicate (if we need any more evidence) what a bad loser Salmond is. What a bitter little man he appears to be (imo, of course). A perfect partner for Murdoch.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/t ... -1-3719266

Edited to add that that cartoon of Sturgeon apparently wasn't in the Scottish edition of the Sun. Seems Murdoch is more anti-Labour than pro-SNP!

http://www.scotsman.com/news/brian-wils ... -1-3718741

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 11:11 am

Oh, I forgot to say (I thought it but forgot to type it) -

Good morfternoon.

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 11:23 am

RobertSnozers wrote:You probably all know this anyway, but according to Twitter, the Guardian editorship is down to two, Kath Viner - and bloody Ian Katz from Newsnight!!!!

What the....

So Katz went to the BBC from the Graun & now he's in the running for the main job back at the Graun ????

If he gets it, I reckon it would be fair to say the Graun won't be recommending a Labour vote in the 2015 GE.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 11:32 am

Morning all.

Given the what I thought was well-known support that the Graun had for the Lib Dems, you have to wonder at the sheer dimwittery of this:

Nadhim Zahawi ✔ @nadhimzahawi
Follow
@grantshapps is clearly scaring the Labour Party, hence the hatchet job this am from @guardian. Old story rehashed to help out hapless Eds.
10:50 AM - 16 Mar 2015

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 11:34 am

Grant Shapps is currently trending on Twitter. Not bad for a Westminster bubble "non-story".

http://politicalscrapbook.net/2015/03/g ... ice-probe/
If lying in media interviews and using the threat of legal action to force a constituent to issue a misleading statement is serious — one wonders what exactly Shapps told the police about his work for his family company, whose dodgy Google-manipulating software was subject to an investigation which concluded its sale may have constituted “an offence of fraud”.

Not that the 34% or so of people who are currently saying they will vote Tory will give a stuff, I suspect. If they're willing to live with all the other scandals that have been brushed under the carpet I doubt this will shift them. Will it motivate the non-voters to get out and make a choice, that's the real question? With so many undecideds out there, this election is wide open.

frightful_oik · Post by **frightful_oik** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 11:35 am

RobertSnozers wrote:
PorFavor wrote:
RobertSnozers wrote:Morning

Anyone else distinctly fed up with the wall-to-wall TV and billboard ads proclaiming how wonderful the government is? You sometimes see more than one in a single advert break. That's our money they're spending! Money they insist we don't have. Any idea how much? Not too late for an FOI request.
Yes - I've been moaning about it here for a little while. I've counted six different ads but there may be more. Do you have a running total?
No, I should have made a note, but I can think of Pensionwise, Help to Buy, Automatic enrolment - not only things the coalition has introduced, but are strongly associated with the coalition (especially the Tories).

Pensionwise
Help to Buy
Automatic enrolment
I'll see those and raise you
Superfast Broadband
We're cracking down on Tax Dodgers

edited to add: Good morning each.

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 11:43 am

RogerOThornhill wrote:Morning all.

Given the what I thought was well-known support that the Graun had for the Lib Dems, you have to wonder at the sheer dimwittery of this:

Nadhim Zahawi ✔ @nadhimzahawi
Follow
@grantshapps is clearly scaring the Labour Party, hence the hatchet job this am from @guardian. Old story rehashed to help out hapless Eds.
10:50 AM - 16 Mar 2015

So the MP who claimed expenses for heating for his stables is sending out tweets in support of Shapps?!

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 11:46 am

StephenDolan wrote:Morning all.

Narxist. Definitely adding that to my dictionary.
https://kittysjones.wordpress.com/2015/03/15/narxism/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Been watching one of them whine all weekend on Twitter, spitting bile at anybody who dares to be Labour, saying anybody who blocks him is obviously afraid of debate and then blocking anybody who dares to answer back!!

Some people seem to have forgotten who the real enemy is.

Re. Shapps, despite the shrillness of people like Rhyming Slang this morning attempting to bury this, it won't be going away quickly; the little detail they are forgetting to mention is not simply that Shapps lied about this, but that he also threatened to sue people who propagated the story. The odious little man has been exposed as the nasty money grubbing little spiv he is, and not before time.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 11:55 am

Downing Street has welcomed Grant Shapps’ decision to admit that he was wrong to say that he never had a second job while he was an MP.

✔ @patrickwintour
Follow

PM spokesman The PM thinks Grant Shapps has done the right thing in acknowledging he has made a mistake. (Andrew Sparrow, Guardian)

Well, he didn't have much choice, did he?

David Cameron, unsurprisingly, is said by a No 10 spokesperson to have full confidence in Grant Shapps. Presumably he's heard both the recorded interviews?

Edited to add -

Although I take issue with the term "mistake" - unless he means it was a mistake to try to cover up his activities with a lie (or whatever we're calling such things these days). By the way - how much worse than a white lie is a green lie? Is there a colour chart available?

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 11:59 am

Latest YouGov has London VI Conservatives 37%, Labour 37%.

Whaaaaaaa?

Paper adjustments.
Scum/Star 194 to 335
Guardian/Independent 167 to 73.

frightful_oik · Post by **frightful_oik** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 12:02 pm

StephenDolan wrote:Latest YouGov has London VI Conservatives 37%, Labour 37%.

Whaaaaaaa?

Is that a new poll or the ST one Stephen?

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 12:06 pm

StephenDolan wrote:Latest YouGov has London VI Conservatives 37%, Labour 37%.

Whaaaaaaa?

Tiny sample size < 200 wasn't it ?

I think the margin of error changes with the size of the samples so the smaller the sample, the higher the MOE.

Of course, there are always rogue polls too....

Don't get too hung up on it.

tinybgoat · Post by **tinybgoat** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 12:07 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Danny Alexander getting bandwidth for his renouncement of a "Review" into Business Rates.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... ate-review" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I have two questions about this?

Firstly, is it Tory policy, Lib Dem policy or both?

Second, if the Review is established by the Treasury, will it get in the way of Labour's promise to cut Business Rates?

Reminds me of an Estonian's reply when asked about difference between Perestroika and Glasnost,
If you step in it with your left foot it's Perestroika,
right foot it's Glasnost.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 12:07 pm

frightful_oik wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:Latest YouGov has London VI Conservatives 37%, Labour 37%.

Whaaaaaaa?
Is that a new poll or the ST one Stephen?

It is yesterday's Sunday Times poll. However you cut it that London figure is not credible, Yougov have finally sacrificed the right to be taken seriously.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 12:09 pm

frightful_oik wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:Latest YouGov has London VI Conservatives 37%, Labour 37%.

Whaaaaaaa?
Is that a new poll or the ST one Stephen?

It's the ST one.

Post by **adam** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 12:12 pm

Can someone remind Shapps and his yay-sayers about this

Before this concession, Shapps had gone to extraordinary lengths to insist he had never been Michael Green. Last November, the Tory party chairman used legal threats to force a local constituent and ex-Labour councillor to delete an allegedly libellous post on a Facebook group about his use of the pseudonym and replace it with an apology that explicitly states that he was not using the Michael Green pseudonym when he was an MP.

In papers seen by the Guardian, Shapp’s lawyers wrote to the constituent noting “your agreement to post an apology requires you [to] make a ‘new’ post [ie a post on the ‘homepage’ of the group, and not a comment on another post]”. The lawyers said Shapps wanted the apology to read: “Mr Shapps MP has at no time misled over the use of a pen name. Indeed, I now understand that he openly published his full name alongside business publications making it clear that he used a pen name merely to separate business and politics, prior to entering parliament.”

Fromthe Guardian article that broke the story.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 12:17 pm

adam wrote:Can someone remind Shapps and his yay-sayers about this

Before this concession, Shapps had gone to extraordinary lengths to insist he had never been Michael Green. Last November, the Tory party chairman used legal threats to force a local constituent and ex-Labour councillor to delete an allegedly libellous post on a Facebook group about his use of the pseudonym and replace it with an apology that explicitly states that he was not using the Michael Green pseudonym when he was an MP.

In papers seen by the Guardian, Shapp’s lawyers wrote to the constituent noting “your agreement to post an apology requires you [to] make a ‘new’ post [ie a post on the ‘homepage’ of the group, and not a comment on another post]”. The lawyers said Shapps wanted the apology to read: “Mr Shapps MP has at no time misled over the use of a pen name. Indeed, I now understand that he openly published his full name alongside business publications making it clear that he used a pen name merely to separate business and politics, prior to entering parliament.”
Fromthe Guardian article that broke the story.

Can you believe that shit?
Demanding a made-to-order apology with legal threats & all the while the little piece of work still lying?
It's unacceptable for some people to get away with intimidating others using their position of authority.

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 12:19 pm

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
frightful_oik wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:Latest YouGov has London VI Conservatives 37%, Labour 37%.

Whaaaaaaa?
Is that a new poll or the ST one Stephen?
It is yesterday's Sunday Times poll. However you cut it that London figure is not credible, Yougov have finally sacrificed the right to be taken seriously.

That is harsh on YouGov.

Rule one of polling is you cannot split up bits of a poll and claim it tells you much about the thing you are looking at. Over the whole poll sampling errors will largely cancel each other out, but within a small sample they may be huge. Remember when arch muppet Harris played this game to "show" Tories were ahead with young people?

The only way to know how London is going to vote is to poll it, which YouGov have done. The London poll showed a decent Labour lead.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 12:22 pm

citizenJA wrote:
adam wrote:Can someone remind Shapps and his yay-sayers about this

Before this concession, Shapps had gone to extraordinary lengths to insist he had never been Michael Green. Last November, the Tory party chairman used legal threats to force a local constituent and ex-Labour councillor to delete an allegedly libellous post on a Facebook group about his use of the pseudonym and replace it with an apology that explicitly states that he was not using the Michael Green pseudonym when he was an MP.

In papers seen by the Guardian, Shapp’s lawyers wrote to the constituent noting “your agreement to post an apology requires you [to] make a ‘new’ post [ie a post on the ‘homepage’ of the group, and not a comment on another post]”. The lawyers said Shapps wanted the apology to read: “Mr Shapps MP has at no time misled over the use of a pen name. Indeed, I now understand that he openly published his full name alongside business publications making it clear that he used a pen name merely to separate business and politics, prior to entering parliament.”
Fromthe Guardian article that broke the story.
Can you believe that shit?
Demanding a made-to-order apology with legal threats & all the while the little piece of work still lying?
It's unacceptable for some people to get away with intimidating others using their position of authority.

That paper needs publishing.

As for the polls I guess I suffer from confirmation bias, I need to allow the narrative of choice to wash over me.

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 12:25 pm

Populus VI: Lab 34 (+2), Con 34 (+5), LD 8 (-), UKIP 15 (-3), Greens 5 (-1), Others 5 (-2)

Friday's -3 for the Cons always did look like an outlier

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 12:29 pm

TechnicalEphemera wrote:
TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
frightful_oik wrote: Is that a new poll or the ST one Stephen?
It is yesterday's Sunday Times poll. However you cut it that London figure is not credible, Yougov have finally sacrificed the right to be taken seriously.
That is harsh on YouGov.

Rule one of polling is you cannot split up bits of a poll and claim it tells you much about the thing you are looking at. Over the whole poll sampling errors will largely cancel each other out, but within a small sample they may be huge. Remember when arch muppet Harris played this game to "show" Tories were ahead with young people?

The only way to know how London is going to vote is to poll it, which YouGov have done. The London poll showed a decent Labour lead.

I fully understand that the London figures may be due to disproportionate old and male voters. All factors should be expected to cancel themselves out if the weightings are a) correct, b) applied correctly.

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 12:30 pm

Dead important this, vote for the national bird of Britain.

Torn between a blackbird, lovely song, red kite, see them while out in the garden, kingfisher, always a delight, though only see a flash of azure blue, or a robin, who always puts a smile on my chops.

Decisions, decisions.

http://www.votenationalbird.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 12:33 pm

letsskiptotheleft wrote:Dead important this, vote for the national bird of Britain.

Torn between a blackbird, lovely song, red kite, see them while out in the garden, kingfisher, always a delight, though only see a flash of azure blue, or a robin, who always puts a smile on my chops.

Decisions, decisions.

http://www.votenationalbird.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I voted for Blackbird, my choice in the first round as well

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 12:35 pm

Barn Owl, Wren or Robin

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 12:41 pm

AngryAsWell wrote:
letsskiptotheleft wrote:Dead important this, vote for the national bird of Britain.

Torn between a blackbird, lovely song, red kite, see them while out in the garden, kingfisher, always a delight, though only see a flash of azure blue, or a robin, who always puts a smile on my chops.

Decisions, decisions.

http://www.votenationalbird.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I voted for Blackbird, my choice in the first round as well

After hand wringing of Simon Hughes proportions I went for the Kite, spend a lovely half hour on a side of a road, near Aberystwyth last year, watched 7 or 8 of them swirling about, lovely, so that swayed it.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 12:42 pm

"London Tory MP tells backers: 'Don't mention David Cameron' in letters of support"
A Tory MP in a key London marginal seat has told backers not to “mention the Conservative Party or David Cameron” in letters of support.
Croydon Central MP Gavin Barwell made the plea when he asked local people to sign letters to friends and neighbours endorsing his re-election.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics ... 10723.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 12:42 pm

letsskiptotheleft wrote:Dead important this, vote for the national bird of Britain.

Torn between a blackbird, lovely song, red kite, see them while out in the garden, kingfisher, always a delight, though only see a flash of azure blue, or a robin, who always puts a smile on my chops.

Decisions, decisions.

http://www.votenationalbird.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Too hard to choose......I like all of them as birds, but ended up going with the barn owl because owls have a special place in British culture from brownies to 'The owl who was afraid of the dark' to Harry Potter. Still wondering if I should have gone with blue tit though.....

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 12:43 pm

AngryAsWell wrote:
letsskiptotheleft wrote:Dead important this, vote for the national bird of Britain.

Torn between a blackbird, lovely song, red kite, see them while out in the garden, kingfisher, always a delight, though only see a flash of azure blue, or a robin, who always puts a smile on my chops.

Decisions, decisions.

http://www.votenationalbird.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I voted for Blackbird, my choice in the first round as well

Ditto. The Venn diagram of mine v John Humphrys views has a sliver of overlap