Tuesday 7th October 2014
Forum rules
Welcome to FTN. New posters are welcome to join the conversation. You can follow us on Twitter @FlythenestHaven You are responsible for the content you post. This is a public forum. Treat it as if you are speaking in a crowded room. Site admin and Moderators are volunteers who will respond as quickly as they are able to when made aware of any complaints. Please do not post copyrighted material without the original authors permission.
Welcome to FTN. New posters are welcome to join the conversation. You can follow us on Twitter @FlythenestHaven You are responsible for the content you post. This is a public forum. Treat it as if you are speaking in a crowded room. Site admin and Moderators are volunteers who will respond as quickly as they are able to when made aware of any complaints. Please do not post copyrighted material without the original authors permission.
- tinyclanger2
- Prime Minister
- Posts: 9714
- Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 9:18 pm
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
RS - have sent you a message but don't know if it's actually "sent". Technology not my biggest strength.
LET'S FACE IT I'M JUST 'KIN' SEETHIN'
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
They had airfields 5 mins flying time from Warsaw, and they refused RAF/USAAF planes permission to land on soviet held airfields to resupply the poles. They had also had near complete air superiority as the Luftwaffe was broken by Sept 44. Stalin ordered his forces to cut off any polish partisans from reinforcing Warsaw; there was no way he was going to allow a successful Polish uprising. It had to be the Red Army to liberate Eastern Europe so he could play out his post war ambitions.TechnicalEphemera wrote:That is a little unfair on the Red Army.RobertSnozers wrote:An apposite and terrifying analogy. I have a new mantra: F*** geopolitics.Temulkar wrote: The situation with the Kurds at the moment reminds me somewhat of the Warsaw Rising. With the Turks playing the Red Army.
At the Warsaw uprising they had no air cover, and were at the end of supply lines (with worn out spearheads). They were hundreds of miles west of the jumping off points from operation Bagration (which wiped out Army Group Centre, Germany's biggest defeat of the war). Even if they had been motivated they could have done sod all.
The Russians didn't lift a finger to help Warsaw; they could, and should have, but it was just another sacrifice for Stalin.
- AngryAsWell
- Prime Minister
- Posts: 5852
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:35 pm
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
I'll have a larger shandy pleaseHobiejoe wrote:Oi! Demarcation dispute here!
If anyone's going to be dispensing drinks around here, it'll be LetSkip or myself. We're professionals, don'tcha know.
As to whether Labour should campaign hard, well I think it has to be seen to be fighting, although "seen" and "actually" can be two different things.
On a wider point, and one that I'm very aware of, being in Wollaston's constituency, which required a protest vote to the LD's pre-2010, is that my labour vote may actually be quite important on a wider stage as there is an awful lot of talk of "overall vote share" should there be another hung parliament, so I take some comfort that my useless constituency vote (and I've never voted for a winning MP - I was at Uni in Runnymede, and I'm a Devon boy at heart) might actually have some impact in the wider scheme of things.
So, yes, while resources need to allocated carefully, I reckon a good solid national vote across the country is important.
- TechnicalEphemera
- Speaker of the House
- Posts: 2967
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:21 pm
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
Stalin had no interest in helping the Poles, but those airfields wouldn't have been much use to the RAF. The Red Army had air superiority by mid 44, but not operating at extended distances from their bases. They certainly wouldn't have had enough to support a city assault. This is a consequence of operating a long way from the supply bases.Temulkar wrote:They had airfields 5 mins flying time from Warsaw, and they refused RAF/USAAF planes permission to land on soviet held airfields to resupply the poles. They had also had near complete air superiority as the Luftwaffe was broken by Sept 44. Stalin ordered his forces to cut off any polish partisans from reinforcing Warsaw; there was no way he was going to allow a successful Polish uprising. It had to be the Red Army to liberate Eastern Europe so he could play out his post war ambitions.TechnicalEphemera wrote:That is a little unfair on the Red Army.RobertSnozers wrote: An apposite and terrifying analogy. I have a new mantra: F*** geopolitics.
At the Warsaw uprising they had no air cover, and were at the end of supply lines (with worn out spearheads). They were hundreds of miles west of the jumping off points from operation Bagration (which wiped out Army Group Centre, Germany's biggest defeat of the war). Even if they had been motivated they could have done sod all.
The Russians didn't lift a finger to help Warsaw; they could, and should have, but it was just another sacrifice for Stalin.
Could the Red Army have taken the city, not likely off the march at the end of a big offensive. Did Stalin care - no. Was he going to let the RAF get in the way in a futile attempt to support a doomed uprising - also no.
Stalin not a nice person true, the Red Army could have taken Warsaw right then, false.
Release the Guardvarks.
- TheGrimSqueaker
- Speaker of the House
- Posts: 2192
- Joined: Thu 28 Aug, 2014 12:23 pm
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
I'm sure people have seen this one before, but it never gets old imo ....
http://www.thepoke.co.uk/wp-content/upl ... -clegg.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.thepoke.co.uk/wp-content/upl ... -clegg.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
COWER BRIEF MORTALS. HO. HO. HO.
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
It was a direct order from Stalin that stopped the tanks in July 44, 10 miles from warsaw, German forces in the area were weak, the Russians could have easily supported the uprising. Not only did they not support it, they actively moved against it, stopping reinforcement by land by independent Polish forces and limiting supplies from the air. All orders that came directly from Stalin. It was very much part of his post-war plan.TechnicalEphemera wrote:Stalin had no interest in helping the Poles, but those airfields wouldn't have been much use to the RAF. The Red Army had air superiority by mid 44, but not operating at extended distances from their bases. They certainly wouldn't have had enough to support a city assault. This is a consequence of operating a long way from the supply bases.Temulkar wrote:They had airfields 5 mins flying time from Warsaw, and they refused RAF/USAAF planes permission to land on soviet held airfields to resupply the poles. They had also had near complete air superiority as the Luftwaffe was broken by Sept 44. Stalin ordered his forces to cut off any polish partisans from reinforcing Warsaw; there was no way he was going to allow a successful Polish uprising. It had to be the Red Army to liberate Eastern Europe so he could play out his post war ambitions.TechnicalEphemera wrote: That is a little unfair on the Red Army.
At the Warsaw uprising they had no air cover, and were at the end of supply lines (with worn out spearheads). They were hundreds of miles west of the jumping off points from operation Bagration (which wiped out Army Group Centre, Germany's biggest defeat of the war). Even if they had been motivated they could have done sod all.
The Russians didn't lift a finger to help Warsaw; they could, and should have, but it was just another sacrifice for Stalin.
Could the Red Army have taken the city, not likely off the march at the end of a big offensive. Did Stalin care - no. Was he going to let the RAF get in the way in a futile attempt to support a doomed uprising - also no.
Stalin not a nice person true, the Red Army could have taken Warsaw right then, false.
-
- Prime Minister
- Posts: 9949
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:18 pm
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
He'll lie about having hauled the country back from the brink. At which point, someone ought to say "That Alistair Darling looks younger every time I see him".RogerOThornhill wrote:Ah but will he mention the deficit?rebeccariots2 wrote:Well you would reckon that, wouldn't you ....Patrick Wintour @patrickwintour 1m1 minute ago
Reckon the Clegger has the best, if not the most political, announcement of the conference season in his speech tomorrow.
http://mainlymacro.blogspot.co.uk/2014/ ... risis.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
In a sane world, Darling should be sliding back into the Shadow Cabinet, to a warm welcome. Instead, he seems to be finished because he was uninspiring in the Referendum, and the poorest areas voted Yes.
Never mind that most macroeconomists (including Wren-Lewis, Portes, Coppolla) think the poorest areas would have had a dose extra austerity if the vote was YES, and without a Central Bank.
- AngryAsWell
- Prime Minister
- Posts: 5852
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:35 pm
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
@Hobiejoe
Is this your pub ? (Only kiddin)
http://t.co/GHmNM96G6S" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Is this your pub ? (Only kiddin)
http://t.co/GHmNM96G6S" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
- TechnicalEphemera
- Speaker of the House
- Posts: 2967
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:21 pm
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
No the Red Army was not just stopped in its tracks, Warsaw wasn't an objective and they were at the end of their supply lines. German counter attacks had snipped off Russian spearheads before, there was no incentive to take a risk and fighting in a city without first surrounding it is a mugs game.Temulkar wrote:It was a direct order from Stalin that stopped the tanks in July 44, 10 miles from warsaw, German forces in the area were weak, the Russians could have easily supported the uprising. Not only did they not support it, they actively moved against it, stopping reinforcement by land by independent Polish forces and limiting supplies from the air. All orders that came directly from Stalin. It was very much part of his post-war plan.TechnicalEphemera wrote:Stalin had no interest in helping the Poles, but those airfields wouldn't have been much use to the RAF. The Red Army had air superiority by mid 44, but not operating at extended distances from their bases. They certainly wouldn't have had enough to support a city assault. This is a consequence of operating a long way from the supply bases.Temulkar wrote: They had airfields 5 mins flying time from Warsaw, and they refused RAF/USAAF planes permission to land on soviet held airfields to resupply the poles. They had also had near complete air superiority as the Luftwaffe was broken by Sept 44. Stalin ordered his forces to cut off any polish partisans from reinforcing Warsaw; there was no way he was going to allow a successful Polish uprising. It had to be the Red Army to liberate Eastern Europe so he could play out his post war ambitions.
The Russians didn't lift a finger to help Warsaw; they could, and should have, but it was just another sacrifice for Stalin.
Could the Red Army have taken the city, not likely off the march at the end of a big offensive. Did Stalin care - no. Was he going to let the RAF get in the way in a futile attempt to support a doomed uprising - also no.
Stalin not a nice person true, the Red Army could have taken Warsaw right then, false.
However it was definitely Stalins objective to absorb Poland as a client state, so taking risks to help his opponents not likely to be his style.
Release the Guardvarks.
- AngryAsWell
- Prime Minister
- Posts: 5852
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:35 pm
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
http://politicalscrapbook.net/2014/10/p ... onference/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;“How many of you are unapologetic, unreformed Thatcherites?”
“This is what Valhalla looks like!”
- AngryAsWell
- Prime Minister
- Posts: 5852
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:35 pm
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;Ignore the gutter/Murdoch Press attempts to divide Labour. Here is what Andy Burnham really thinks about Ed Miliband
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
Got it in one! Yes, we're the Foxgone Arms, in the little village of Banhunting On The Marsh - congratulations, you've won a horse brass and your own pewter mug!AngryAsWell wrote:@Hobiejoe
Is this your pub ? (Only kiddin)
http://t.co/GHmNM96G6S" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Last edited by Hobiejoe on Tue 07 Oct, 2014 10:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- AngryAsWell
- Prime Minister
- Posts: 5852
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:35 pm
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
Political Scrapbook @PSbook · 1 min1 minute ago
To whoever sent us that Lib Dem thing around 11am: thanks ... we're looking into it. Others can tip anonymously here: http://politicalscrapbook.net/contact/tips/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Interesting ?
To whoever sent us that Lib Dem thing around 11am: thanks ... we're looking into it. Others can tip anonymously here: http://politicalscrapbook.net/contact/tips/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Interesting ?
- AngryAsWell
- Prime Minister
- Posts: 5852
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:35 pm
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
Hobiejoe wrote:Got it in one! Yes, we're the Foxgone Arms, in the little village of Banhunting On The Marsh - congratulations, you've won a horse brass and your own pewter mug!AngryAsWell wrote:@Hobiejoe
Is this your pub ? (Only kiddin)
http://t.co/GHmNM96G6S" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
That was SO not the link it should have been.....
Back in a bit...
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
And I'll have an even larger one.AngryAsWell wrote:I'll have a larger shandy pleaseHobiejoe wrote:Oi! Demarcation dispute here!
If anyone's going to be dispensing drinks around here, it'll be LetSkip or myself. We're professionals, don'tcha know.
As to whether Labour should campaign hard, well I think it has to be seen to be fighting, although "seen" and "actually" can be two different things.
On a wider point, and one that I'm very aware of, being in Wollaston's constituency, which required a protest vote to the LD's pre-2010, is that my labour vote may actually be quite important on a wider stage as there is an awful lot of talk of "overall vote share" should there be another hung parliament, so I take some comfort that my useless constituency vote (and I've never voted for a winning MP - I was at Uni in Runnymede, and I'm a Devon boy at heart) might actually have some impact in the wider scheme of things.
So, yes, while resources need to allocated carefully, I reckon a good solid national vote across the country is important.
I still believe in a town called Hope
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
Two drums and a cymbal fall off a cliff.
I still believe in a town called Hope
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
The Soviet archives disagree with you I'm afraid. The tanks were stopped on a direct order from Stalin.TechnicalEphemera wrote:No the Red Army was not just stopped in its tracks, Warsaw wasn't an objective and they were at the end of their supply lines. German counter attacks had snipped off Russian spearheads before, there was no incentive to take a risk and fighting in a city without first surrounding it is a mugs game.Temulkar wrote:It was a direct order from Stalin that stopped the tanks in July 44, 10 miles from warsaw, German forces in the area were weak, the Russians could have easily supported the uprising. Not only did they not support it, they actively moved against it, stopping reinforcement by land by independent Polish forces and limiting supplies from the air. All orders that came directly from Stalin. It was very much part of his post-war plan.TechnicalEphemera wrote: Stalin had no interest in helping the Poles, but those airfields wouldn't have been much use to the RAF. The Red Army had air superiority by mid 44, but not operating at extended distances from their bases. They certainly wouldn't have had enough to support a city assault. This is a consequence of operating a long way from the supply bases.
Could the Red Army have taken the city, not likely off the march at the end of a big offensive. Did Stalin care - no. Was he going to let the RAF get in the way in a futile attempt to support a doomed uprising - also no.
Stalin not a nice person true, the Red Army could have taken Warsaw right then, false.
However it was definitely Stalins objective to absorb Poland as a client state, so taking risks to help his opponents not likely to be his style.
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
https://twitter.com/stridingedge/status ... 4322471936
Come on PM, do the decent thing and answer Maddy
Last edited by gilsey on Tue 07 Oct, 2014 9:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
One world, like it or not - John Martyn
- AngryAsWell
- Prime Minister
- Posts: 5852
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:35 pm
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
Try this oneAngryAsWell wrote:Hobiejoe wrote:Got it in one! Yes, we're the Foxgone Arms, in the little village of Banhunting On The Marsh - congratulations, you've won a horse brass and your own pewter mug!AngryAsWell wrote:@Hobiejoe
Is this your pub ? (Only kiddin)
http://t.co/GHmNM96G6S" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
That was SO not the link it should have been.....
Back in a bit...
'Staff will nail your kids to table' - is this most offensive pub sign ever?
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
(Not that I think you would nail kids to a table, but I thought it funny - my sense of humour is a bit skew-wib - and you were the first landlord I could think of to share it with)
- AngryAsWell
- Prime Minister
- Posts: 5852
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:35 pm
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
adam wrote:And I'll have an even larger one.AngryAsWell wrote:I'll have a larger shandy pleaseHobiejoe wrote:Oi! Demarcation dispute here!
If anyone's going to be dispensing drinks around here, it'll be LetSkip or myself. We're professionals, don'tcha know.
As to whether Labour should campaign hard, well I think it has to be seen to be fighting, although "seen" and "actually" can be two different things.
On a wider point, and one that I'm very aware of, being in Wollaston's constituency, which required a protest vote to the LD's pre-2010, is that my labour vote may actually be quite important on a wider stage as there is an awful lot of talk of "overall vote share" should there be another hung parliament, so I take some comfort that my useless constituency vote (and I've never voted for a winning MP - I was at Uni in Runnymede, and I'm a Devon boy at heart) might actually have some impact in the wider scheme of things.
So, yes, while resources need to allocated carefully, I reckon a good solid national vote across the country is important.
that little rascal "r" moonlighting again - wait till he gets home and I get my hands on him.....
Last edited by AngryAsWell on Tue 07 Oct, 2014 9:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- TechnicalEphemera
- Speaker of the House
- Posts: 2967
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:21 pm
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
Of course the Tanks were stopped on a direct order of Stalin. He had strategic control of the offensive and he ran the war on a day to day basis. It doesn't mean that had they carried on they could have taken Warsaw.Temulkar wrote:
The Soviet archives disagree with you I'm afraid. The tanks were stopped on a direct order from Stalin.
Release the Guardvarks.
-
- Prime Minister
- Posts: 27400
- Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 12:40 am
- Location: Three quarters way to hell
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
Barbara Keeley bringing forward a Ten Minute Rule Bill next Tuesday that exempts Carers from the Bedroom Tax.
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
Of course nobody can tell what would have happened had he not ordered them to stop. The point remains that he did not have to order them to stop, he did not have to stop the reinforcement of Warsaw by Polish units, he did not have to stop the resupply of Warsaw from the air. He chose all of those actions and, because local tactical difficulties were of little concern to him, he chose them for his strategic reasons. Namely control of post-war Poland. Supporting the rising would have cost the Soviet forces, but there is no evidence of Stalin caring much for casualties or exhausted units as long as his strategic objectives were met.TechnicalEphemera wrote:Of course the Tanks were stopped on a direct order of Stalin. He had strategic control of the offensive and he ran the war on a day to day basis. It doesn't mean that had they carried on they could have taken Warsaw.Temulkar wrote:
The Soviet archives disagree with you I'm afraid. The tanks were stopped on a direct order from Stalin.
I think the fact that the Red Army was ordered to stop all reinforcements by independent units pretty much exposes Stalin's motivation. Active opposition to the uprising, not impotent inactivity.
-
- Prime Minister
- Posts: 27400
- Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 12:40 am
- Location: Three quarters way to hell
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
FWIW Yougov has Labour with a two point lead 34/32
- AngryAsWell
- Prime Minister
- Posts: 5852
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:35 pm
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
@election_data retweeted
Ian @Mancman10 · 3 mins3 minutes ago
Tonight's YouGov/Sun poll: LAB 34% CON 32% UKIP 15% LIBDEM 8%
Ian @Mancman10 · 3 mins3 minutes ago
Tonight's YouGov/Sun poll: LAB 34% CON 32% UKIP 15% LIBDEM 8%
- AngryAsWell
- Prime Minister
- Posts: 5852
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:35 pm
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
My time says 9.32 for both of us! Snap!HindleA wrote:FWIW Yougov has Labour with a two point lead 34/32
(No idea why my time is at 9.32 when its 22.34.... )
- AngryAsWell
- Prime Minister
- Posts: 5852
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:35 pm
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
Night all
-
- Prime Minister
- Posts: 27400
- Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 12:40 am
- Location: Three quarters way to hell
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
AngryAsWell wrote:My time says 9.32 for both of us! Snap!HindleA wrote:FWIW Yougov has Labour with a two point lead 34/32
(No idea why my time is at 9.32 when its 22.34.... )
It's 1987 here .
-
- Prime Minister
- Posts: 27400
- Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 12:40 am
- Location: Three quarters way to hell
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
Goodnight.AngryAsWell wrote:Night all
- rebeccariots2
- Prime Minister
- Posts: 14038
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 8:20 pm
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
Feels like it's worth quite a lot.HindleA wrote:FWIW Yougov has Labour with a two point lead 34/32
Phew.
Working on the wild side.
-
- Prime Minister
- Posts: 27400
- Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 12:40 am
- Location: Three quarters way to hell
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
Another disasterous poll for Miliband as Populus gives 37/31 split.
Smithson thinks it's just effects of the Conference season,time will tell.
Smithson thinks it's just effects of the Conference season,time will tell.
- TechnicalEphemera
- Speaker of the House
- Posts: 2967
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:21 pm
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
OMG - Tory vote collapses after Cameron hammered on human rights fiasco.rebeccariots2 wrote:Feels like it's worth quite a lot.HindleA wrote:FWIW Yougov has Labour with a two point lead 34/32
Phew.
Or some such linkage of random poll variations with the first political event that I can think of.
Release the Guardvarks.
- TechnicalEphemera
- Speaker of the House
- Posts: 2967
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:21 pm
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
To be fair Populus have been consistent, to them conference season has had no impact whatsoever.HindleA wrote:Another disasterous poll for Miliband as Populus gives 37/31 split.
Smithson thinks it's just effects of the Conference season,time will tell.
Release the Guardvarks.
-
- Prime Minister
- Posts: 27400
- Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 12:40 am
- Location: Three quarters way to hell
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
TechnicalEphemera wrote:To be fair Populus have been consistent, to them conference season has had no impact whatsoever.HindleA wrote:Another disasterous poll for Miliband as Populus gives 37/31 split.
Smithson thinks it's just effects of the Conference season,time will tell.
You are correct,sorry.Smithson was referring to Yougov.
- TechnicalEphemera
- Speaker of the House
- Posts: 2967
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:21 pm
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
Only one thing to say about this.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens ... s-why.html
Simon's wife is way way out of his league.
How old was she when they married??
As for the rest of it, attractive woman posts pictures of herself fully clothed.
Move along nothing newsworthy here.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens ... s-why.html
Simon's wife is way way out of his league.
How old was she when they married??
As for the rest of it, attractive woman posts pictures of herself fully clothed.
Move along nothing newsworthy here.
Release the Guardvarks.
- TechnicalEphemera
- Speaker of the House
- Posts: 2967
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:21 pm
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
No need to apologise, it was merely the random musings of a busy man.HindleA wrote:TechnicalEphemera wrote:To be fair Populus have been consistent, to them conference season has had no impact whatsoever.HindleA wrote:Another disasterous poll for Miliband as Populus gives 37/31 split.
Smithson thinks it's just effects of the Conference season,time will tell.
You are correct,sorry.Smithson was referring to Yougov.
So why is Populus returning consistent figures when YouGov is all over the place? Ashcroft is pretty hopeless on national polls anyway.
Release the Guardvarks.
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 8331
- Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:27 pm
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
Hi AAWAngryAsWell wrote:My time says 9.32 for both of us! Snap!HindleA wrote:FWIW Yougov has Labour with a two point lead 34/32
(No idea why my time is at 9.32 when its 22.34.... )
You're not on Summer Time
If you want to change it go to User Control Panel (top left of screen) then Board Preferences (left of screen) and check the Summer Time box. If you're lucky the ghost of Ella Fitzgerald will then start singing to you.
Or you may just want to sit it out for a couple of weeks and wait for the rest of us to join you on GMT
- LadyCentauria
- Speaker of the House
- Posts: 2437
- Joined: Fri 05 Sep, 2014 10:25 am
- Location: Set within 3,500 acres of leafy public land in SW London
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
Also, Google+ has Hangouts on Air. Coded in lightning quick time by Google+'s chief engineer Chee Chew's team after he dropped into a Hangout concert Daria Musk was giving (the first ever on what was then a brand new social-network), which a couple of G+ users were daisy-chaining in G+ and via their UStream accounts, so that more than 9 people at a time could watch it. Chee was alerted by the team who were monitoring the site that night and dropped in to see what was causing such a massive spike of traffic in what was then still a pretty small, invitation-only network. A matter of weeks later, and she gave the first Hangouts on Air concert and since then it's been widely used for all sorts of things including Obama doing a Town Hall HoA with questions from G+ users – and to enable The Dalai Lama (and the public) to be a guest at Desmond Tutu's 90th Birthday after South Africa refused him a visitors visa to attend in person. Standard Hangouts are private - person who starts it and up to 9 guests – but HOsA stream live via a shareable player on G+ and through your youtube channel so millions can watch live, if it's shared widely enough, and can be watched later both platforms. And all for free. It's a really useful resource!StephenDolan wrote:And for those like myself that don't Facebook or Twitter, a Google+ quick share link, perfect.AngryAsWell wrote:All policies on the "Issue" pages have a link to tweet or FB, so if for instance I want to publicise Labour house building plans, details from hereAngryAsWell wrote:Labour Issues, these are the policies so far decided (I think)
http://www.labour.org.uk/issues" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.labour.org.uk/issues/detail/house-building" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I can just tweet them
As an aside Google+ has a massive political community, the presence and engagement of American figures like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren puts the UK politicians to shame.
All the main UK parties have G+ pages, as do the party leaders, but they hadn't yet really caught on to the engagement that is possible. Too tied up in thinking FB and Twitter were the only places to be, probably, but I'm really pleased that Labour have finally caught on that there are a lot of UK people on G+ (and always were) and have added its share-button to their site. I'm there – don't use Twitter and have barely visited FB since G+ launched.
This time, I'm gonna be stronger I'm not giving in...
- LadyCentauria
- Speaker of the House
- Posts: 2437
- Joined: Fri 05 Sep, 2014 10:25 am
- Location: Set within 3,500 acres of leafy public land in SW London
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
Writ hasn't been called yet. Labour have got a good local lass as their PPC, Naushabah Khan, if I've spelt it correctly.ErnstRemarx wrote:No idea - but the local Labour bods should be out there IMO. I've been in H&M and will be back this week to do what I can. The bugger of it is MsRemarx is off for the next few days at a conference, so I'll either have to sort out childcare (not easy) or take the little bugger out canvassing with me (then you need to know where all the local loos are).pk1 wrote:The writ hasn't been called yet has it ?ErnstRemarx wrote: Apparently, the party aren't going to serious contest Rochester and Strood. Were it me, I'd be calling up the activists, although I understand the temptation to let UKIP beat the Tories and spark off a wave of trouble and defections for Cameron.
This time, I'm gonna be stronger I'm not giving in...
-
- Prime Minister
- Posts: 27400
- Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 12:40 am
- Location: Three quarters way to hell
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
Clegg promises Mental Health boost with 120 million funding.
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014 ... nick-clegg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Burnham response
http://press.labour.org.uk/post/9943867 ... tal-health" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014 ... nick-clegg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Burnham response
http://press.labour.org.uk/post/9943867 ... tal-health" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
- LadyCentauria
- Speaker of the House
- Posts: 2437
- Joined: Fri 05 Sep, 2014 10:25 am
- Location: Set within 3,500 acres of leafy public land in SW London
Re: Tuesday 7th October 2014
He was claiming, recently, at a London Assembly meeting that he had to do it because crowds had got so big that the policing costs were going through the roof whilst, at the same time, claiming that the £10 ticket cost would just break even on the costs of issuing them. I had some difficulty in understanding quite how much the police wanted in order to handle the growing crowds, or whether or not the police would be more likely to put a high-ish bill in for a paid-ticket event than a free one, and also whether the fact that there will be no free travel on tubes and buses this NYE might have been expected to somewhat reduce the crowds anyway. Not that I've ever noticed any particular coherence from Bojo-the-clown at any London Assembly meeting I've seen...AngryAsWell wrote:http://ymlp.com/znhYFn" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;Fiasco over fireworks - another Boris Johnson failure
Despite warnings from the Assembly, Boris Johnson has pushed ahead with his ill-thought out plans to limit the number of people attending London's New Year's Eve fireworks by imposing tickets and a £10 charge without putting adequate measures in place to curb ticket touts.
This time, I'm gonna be stronger I'm not giving in...