neilm
Non-Aligned
Posts: 25,023
|
Post by neilm on Nov 23, 2014 1:39:54 GMT
I lean the other way, Lab and Lib voting UKIP for a laugh and the Tory vote holding up well. Will this be classed as a Tory hold when they regain the seat at the GE. It ought to be classed as a Con regain if that does happen. No, Con hold. I appreciate this is illogical. |
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Nov 23, 2014 4:27:54 GMT
There is nothing wrong with a journalist having a photo taken with a politician (even a controversial or far-right one). Even politicians and journalists are human and might be excited at meeting famous people, and might want to have photos taken with them.
Nick Robinson's mistake here is not that he did the photo, but that he says he didn't realise who she was. As a journalist covering the by-election, it was his job to know and to recognise all the candidates. He should have googled her at least several days in advance and become familiar with who she was, to the extent that he should have recognised her immediately without needing to notice the "candidate" label.
|
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Nov 23, 2014 9:37:23 GMT
I lean the other way, Lab and Lib voting UKIP for a laugh and the Tory vote holding up well. Will this be classed as a Tory hold when they regain the seat at the GE. I didn't know you had that inclination? |
|
|
|
Post by Devonian on Nov 23, 2014 11:49:14 GMT
There is nothing wrong with a journalist having a photo taken with a politician (even a controversial or far-right one). Even politicians and journalists are human and might be excited at meeting famous people, and might want to have photos taken with them. Nick Robinson's mistake here is not that he did the photo, but that he says he didn't realise who she was. As a journalist covering the by-election, it was his job to know and to recognise all the candidates. He should have googled her at least several days in advance and become familiar with who she was, to the extent that he should have recognised her immediately without needing to notice the "candidate" label. Why should he have done this? In addition to the five main party candidates, who I agree it would be reasonable for him to expect to recognise, there were eight other fringe candidates. Should he really have spent time in his busy schedule to memorise the names and faces of all of them? I mean he could do this if he wanted to but I'm at a loss to known why it would have been necessary. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,889
|
Post by The Bishop on Nov 23, 2014 11:58:05 GMT
He should at least have been *aware* of who was standing (he is the BBC political editor, after all)
And thus, when he saw her ruddy great "CANDIDATE" badge, ascertained who she was to avoid any possible embarrassment.
Ask yourself this - how much latitude would a politician from one of the "mainstream" parties been afforded after such a faux pas?
|
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Nov 23, 2014 12:24:02 GMT
There is nothing wrong with a journalist having a photo taken with a politician (even a controversial or far-right one). Even politicians and journalists are human and might be excited at meeting famous people, and might want to have photos taken with them. Nick Robinson's mistake here is not that he did the photo, but that he says he didn't realise who she was. As a journalist covering the by-election, it was his job to know and to recognise all the candidates. He should have googled her at least several days in advance and become familiar with who she was, to the extent that he should have recognised her immediately without needing to notice the "candidate" label. I entirely agree with this. I'm no fan of Britain First (not sure many of us are), but a) I'm sure she's not the only candidate to ever have a snap with him and b) are people determined to pretend it's some kind of endorsement? |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Nov 23, 2014 12:25:04 GMT
He should at least have been *aware* of who was standing (he is the BBC political editor, after all) And thus, when he saw her ruddy great "CANDIDATE" badge, ascertained who she was to avoid any possible embarrassment. Ask yourself this - how much latitude would a politician from one of the "mainstream" parties been afforded after such a faux pas? We did get a lot of faux outrage after that snap of her with the UKIP activists. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Nov 23, 2014 12:37:54 GMT
He should at least have been *aware* of who was standing (he is the BBC political editor, after all) And thus, when he saw her ruddy great "CANDIDATE" badge, ascertained who she was to avoid any possible embarrassment. Ask yourself this - how much latitude would a politician from one of the "mainstream" parties been afforded after such a faux pas? What!! Stand next to a perfectly legal party candidate and that is a 'faux pas'? A new form of Thornberry is born. Labour has people it despises (the prole syndrome) Colour it disapproves of......White Parties it disapproves of.........Many Property is disapproves of.........small terraced owner occupied Flags it disapproves of.........Union Flag and St. George's Views it disapproves of.........patriotism, self sufficiency, nationalism, tradition So what does it actually like then? Foreigners Rainbows The proper approved left Run down inner city dilapidation Flags with stars and crescents Apologizing for anything English Imports Taxes Regulations Terminal national decline Stroll on into oblivion. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2014 12:41:30 GMT
The idea of Nick Robinson endorsing Britain First is quite hilarious.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2014 12:43:07 GMT
He should at least have been *aware* of who was standing (he is the BBC political editor, after all) And thus, when he saw her ruddy great "CANDIDATE" badge, ascertained who she was to avoid any possible embarrassment. Ask yourself this - how much latitude would a politician from one of the "mainstream" parties been afforded after such a faux pas? Labour UKIP has people it despises likes (the prole syndrome) Colour it disapproves of......White Parties it disapproves of......... Many None Property is disapproves of.........small terraced owner occupied Flags it disapproves of.........Union Flag and St. George's Views it disapproves of.........patriotism, self sufficiency, nationalism, tradition So what does it actually like despise then? Foreigners Rainbows Homosexuals (say what you mean!) The proper approved left and right Run down inner city dilapidation Flags with stars and crescents Muslims Apologizing for anything English Imports TaxesRegulations
Terminal national decline
Stroll on into oblivion. Hence why I don't like either of your parties. I find both labour and ukip to be very divisive. Although it is about opposite issues you seem fairly similar to me. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Nov 23, 2014 12:52:52 GMT
Labour UKIP has people it despises likes (the prole syndrome) Colour it disapproves of......White Parties it disapproves of......... Many None Property is disapproves of.........small terraced owner occupied Flags it disapproves of.........Union Flag and St. George's Views it disapproves of.........patriotism, self sufficiency, nationalism, tradition So what does it actually like despise then? Foreigners Rainbows The proper approved left Run down inner city dilapidation Flags with stars and crescents Apologizing for anything English Imports Taxes Regulations Terminal national decline Stroll on into oblivion. Hence why I don't like either of your parties. I find both labour and ukip to be very divisive. Although it is about opposite issues you seem fairly similar to me. If I am up your nose I am doing something right. And I am happy to fully accept the second list up to a certain point as being accurate. You see it as a blot and i see it as credit. I am not too unhappy with the first list either. That is one of the reasons there was a need for a new party because the big two feel tainted by the common and the naff and no longer wish to be associated with, but will deign to represent, if at barge-pole length. We have more actual empathy than sympathy and that is the whole of the difference. |
|
|
|
Post by Richard Cromwell on Nov 23, 2014 13:28:58 GMT
Ask yourself this - how much latitude would a politician from one of the "mainstream" parties been afforded after such a faux pas? It doesn't really matter, does it? If, let's say, a "mainstream" politician posed for a picture with his far-right/left opponent because, regardless of ideology, they were both polite and/or friendly people any, and all, press outrage would be completely absurd. The fact that, regardless of it being so absurd, there would be press outrage should have no baring on this, or any other, instance. Perhaps, however, I'm biased. I spent my teenage years (the latter, in part, observed here) hurtling from the far-right over to the extreme left (and not stopping for too long anywhere in between). Are people supposed to avoid shaking my hand, for fear of being infected with fascism? Either you believe ( somehow) that Nick Robinson was endorsing Britain First's particular brand of authoritarian nationalism or you believe he should apply an arbitrary ideological litmus test in personal interaction. Should he refuse to get his picture taken with a communist? What about an anarchist? A libertarian? A fundamentalist? Or, are we going to draw up a list of all candidates whom he is allowed to act like a human being towards? Otherwise, some could slip through the cracks, couldn't they? Some Tories, I'm sure, still think fondly of Enoch Powell. That's not on, is it? And George Galloway, he's a bit of a nutter, isn't he? No Respect candidate hand-shakes for Mr Robinson. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2014 13:38:22 GMT
Medway Rochester and Strood  |
|
|
|
Post by andrewteale on Nov 23, 2014 13:46:10 GMT
Try looking at the x-axis again.
|
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Nov 23, 2014 14:06:11 GMT
Medway Rochester and Strood I have wondering why I find these graphs so deeply unsatisfying and thought it might be because I am an artist and there is something too blunt over large? But, in fact, it is because instead of the graph giving a quick answer or demonstrating a hidden truth..........in fact one needs to fully undertand the situation in order to fathom the graph. It is a reverse aid. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2014 14:15:28 GMT
Try looking at the x-axis again. Noted. If that's the most wrong with the graph, I'm happy  |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Nov 23, 2014 14:53:40 GMT
Ask yourself this - how much latitude would a politician from one of the "mainstream" parties been afforded after such a faux pas? It doesn't really matter, does it? If, let's say, a "mainstream" politician posed for a picture with his far-right/left opponent because, regardless of ideology, they were both polite and/or friendly people any, and all, press outrage would be completely absurd. The fact that, regardless of it being so absurd, there would be press outrage should have no baring on this, or any other, instance. Well, exactly. And it doesn't take long to find photos of politicians of very differing political viewpoints happily having a snap taken together. |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Nov 23, 2014 14:58:51 GMT
As good an excuse as any to drop in this photo of Chirac and Mitterrand going to watch a PSG match together. Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Nov 23, 2014 15:10:51 GMT
As good an excuse as any to drop in this photo of Chirac and Mitterrand going to watch a PSG match together. caption competition? |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Nov 23, 2014 15:47:07 GMT
Labour UKIP has people it despises likes (the prole syndrome) Colour it disapproves of......White Parties it disapproves of......... Many None Property is disapproves of.........small terraced owner occupied Flags it disapproves of.........Union Flag and St. George's Views it disapproves of.........patriotism, self sufficiency, nationalism, tradition So what does it actually like despise then? Foreigners Rainbows Homosexuals (say what you mean!) The proper approved left and right Run down inner city dilapidation Flags with stars and crescents Muslims Apologizing for anything English Imports TaxesRegulations
Terminal national decline
Stroll on into oblivion. Hence why I don't like either of your parties. I find both labour and ukip to be very divisive. Although it is about opposite issues you seem fairly similar to me. Your second edit goes too far Joe. Luckily my response to state one preserves it on the thread. By rainbows I was alluding to the colour symbolism of white or anything but also conflating with the US concept of election through a coalition of all the odds and sods that are not heartland America. On flags it was more EU that Muslim but meant to compare and contrast the blindingly obvious fact that the Thornberrys and Joes would never dare have been rude about an obviously Asian-style house with gaudy trimmings, garish colours and gold leaf. You are rapidly moving into that very small sector of the right I really don't think I want to meet. |
|
