What is that "mate" of mine Sadiq Khan trying to achieve ?

 

You lost you demented little cretin, get over it and concentrate on your job you terrorist sympathiser.

14 minutes ago, Not in Crawley said:

Bolty Fact Check.

Really, the only time we've had one labour term, then a conservative term, was in 1925 with Ramsey McDonald. Followed by a Lib/Lab pact and then the First National Goverment led by McDonald formed because of the great depression.

Then post war Atlee gvt still held onto power (just) in 1940  after winning in 1945 but due to the silm minority called an election again in 1951. 

Wilson had two terms, Wilson and Callaghan had two terms between them (albeit on with a minority gvt) 

Then Blair to Brown - three terms.

So, all in all, bog all of a recurring theme.

 

It’s all football to him.

23 minutes ago, kent_white said:

No - I think the same thing.

It's just a convenient trope to blame the BBC for everything.

They get criticism from everybody - which means they're probably doing a good job. 

Al Jazeera translates as 'the Island' apparently. They get the same treatment as the BBC in the Arab world. Which again - probably means they're being politically impartial. 

I would agree that the BBC has a socially liberal bias though. In that it favours inclusivity and multi culturalism and pushes that agenda. 

That's not the same thing though. Although it's often conflated as being.

 

That is very true, and it that way it does stick to it's reithian values.

My uncle was complaining about the 'balance' on programmes at that it's not reflective of rhte whole country because it overly represents minorities. But then, in some parts of the country those minorities are over-represented. Also, I'm not sure what the problem is. I see loads of white, male, middle class british people on TV that look similar to me, and I bore myself.

Think people are confusing making somone accountable for their actions with a generic bias.

I think the problem with "balance" on the BBC - and it's not just them - is that they often have a qualified expert on one side and then a random social media personality on the other.

I think they should probably drop the attempts at "balance" and steer more towards straightforward factual reporting.

I generally think wanting the BBC to be abolished is a good indication a person is a wrong'un, though. It's by no means perfect but it performs an important role and we'd definitely miss it if it was gone.

it's like a republican watching bbc news for a week after the queen died then complaining they were bias and royalist

 

2 hours ago, gonzo said:

Think people are confusing making somone accountable for their actions with a generic bias.

I find it odd that someone supports a party all their life. My mum and dad both do. One blue one red will never change. Think I’ve voted for all 3 in my life so far. No allegiance whatsoever.

3 minutes ago, tomski said:

I find it odd that someone supports a party all their life. My mum and dad both do. One blue one red will never change. Think I’ve voted for all 3 in my life so far. No allegiance whatsoever.

In reality, that's how it should be, as people and their situations change. To blindly vote for a party because one "always has", is the act of a simpleton.

So far, I've voted for 2 of the 3, mostly Conservative as I've said before, but I think I'm changing as I get older and steering more toward the middle ground, which clearly the Tories are moving away from

3 minutes ago, tomski said:

I find it odd that someone supports a party all their life. My mum and dad both do. One blue one red will never change. Think I’ve voted for all 3 in my life so far. No allegiance whatsoever.

It’s what happens when there’s a reluctance, or in some cases a lack of cognitive ability, to weigh up the offerings from all parties.

Bolty will not have read a Labour Party manifesto in his entire life. He’s picked his ship and he’ll sink with it if needs be.

There are plenty like him, and you have to take a certain amount of pity on them. Because it nullifies totally any arguments they may have and becomes a screeching “better dead than red” chant that ultimately means nothing, but makes them feel good.

2 minutes ago, Sweep said:

In reality, that's how it should be, as people and their situations change. To blindly vote for a party because one "always has", is the act of a simpleton.

So far, I've voted for 2 of the 3, mostly Conservative as I've said before, but I think I'm changing as I get older and steering more toward the middle ground, which clearly the Tories are moving away from

You are getting older? Do you still go to the B swan on Fridays. If so I refute this claim.

30 minutes ago, tomski said:

You are getting older? Do you still go to the B swan on Fridays. If so I refute this claim.

I was there about 5 weeks ago, with @DazBob  -  and the big titted Pikey was in there as well 😍

I also went about a two weeks ago, and sadly she wasn't in that time

1 hour ago, Spider said:

It’s what happens when there’s a reluctance, or in some cases a lack of cognitive ability, to weigh up the offerings from all parties.

Bolty will not have read a Labour Party manifesto in his entire life. He’s picked his ship and he’ll sink with it if needs be.

There are plenty like him, and you have to take a certain amount of pity on them. Because it nullifies totally any arguments they may have and becomes a screeching “better dead than red” chant that ultimately means nothing, but makes them feel good.

FWIW I think the loyalty to one party is based as much as what the party stands for as specific policies. 
Simplistically I have always thought Labour was about supporting the 'working man' directly whereas the Tories are about supporting more of the business side and believe having a strong economy will ultimately benefit the ' working man' by providing jobs and economic welfare.

Both sides have their appeal and both sides have their flaws, which is why people will flick from one to another. So here policies and personalities come into play. IMO the Labour Party under Corbyn seemed to have lost touch with the issues affecting the 'working man' they would rather be discussing the price of organic coffee in Angola and making  sure  one legged lesbians had a say in the distribution of profits. Champagne Socialists. The Tories by promising to deliver Brexit connected to people in a way the Labour Party could not. Unfortunately their track record since the election is appalling. They seem more intent on infighting and lining the pockets of their mates than running the country. May was weak, Boris a serial liar and Truss so out of touch it has been embarrassing. 
The massive challenge now is that MPs in marginal seats will need a Government that only makes decisions that are vote winners with the 'working man' so  for instance limiting increases in benefits might be what Truss wants to do but won't get through , so back to rounds of infighting.

Labour can just sit there and let the Tories implode. Be interesting to see how the fringe parties support moves in next few weeks. 

3 hours ago, tomski said:

I find it odd that someone supports a party all their life. My mum and dad both do. One blue one red will never change. Think I’ve voted for all 3 in my life so far. No allegiance whatsoever.

I've no allegiance either.

Although I've never voted for those shits.

Going back to schools, seems like we're doing our own family social experiment as the youngest didn't want to do the 11 plus so we'll see what difference it makes her going to the local comp and the other two at a grammar.

I'm betting not that much, although the eldest now wants to do classics at A Level, which it seems they don't offer at the high school - but the food tech lab is loads better!

WtF is the 11 plus? Would be nice to have a choice.

2 minutes ago, Winchester White said:

WtF is the 11 plus? Would be nice to have a choice.

Sorry, Kent Test.

It's not nice. There is nothing to prove it does anything for the young people of Canterbury.

Interestingly, the kids who go to the High School do a quick 11 plus light before they go and it helps the teachers see where they might be at that point academically.

Then they get set like we all did at comps. Those in the top sets then study alongside the boys grammar school (of my other kids girls equivalent) They've done it like.this for 10 years and every year the High School students have come out with better grades than their grammar school peers. The head of the grammar was most proud of this, saying it shows you can't define intelligence at 11 based on 1 test.

But if you aren't academically bent, in year 9 you can stream into more practical subjects - construction, business etc if you are exceptional in the arts the school will work with you to develop you with professional agents.

All very different from when I was at a comp and it got me thinking about is there also a postcode lottery in terms of decent state education and in a small city like Canterbury the joined up educational network seems really strong.

Oh and if at 12/13 you are academically doing well you can transfer to a grammar if you want.

3 minutes ago, Not in Crawley said:

Oh and if at 12/13 you are academically doing well you can transfer to a grammar if you want.

The intention of the Butler Act was that further entry to GS at 12/13 should take place but that very rarely happened.

16 minutes ago, MalcolmW said:

The intention of the Butler Act was that further entry to GS at 12/13 should take place but that very rarely happened.

I know, my mum failed the 11 plus, and then got offered a place in her second year at a grammar, didn't take it as she had her friends and already felt like a failure. Left school with not very much.

Met my Dad, after we were at school gave her the confidence to apply for university.

She ended up being a lead examiner for AQA.

It was a flawed system then, it still is now.

See it with my eldest two, they really look down on those who go to the comp. Which is why I made them come to the open day tonight, both of them thought it was great. But passing the 11 plus gives you innate (and unwarranted) confidence which still goes a long way when you are sat in meetings and interviews. 

Both mine went to tutors to pass. I'm very pleased my youngest has the maturity to say it not for her and she has dreams of opening a cafe and going into the catering stream they provide.

1 hour ago, Winchester White said:

WtF is the 11 plus? Would be nice to have a choice.

You don't. My nipper went through it. It's horrible 

31 minutes ago, mickbrown said:

You don't. My nipper went through it. It's horrible 

And about as much a measure of intelligence as arguing the sky is green on a sunny day.

Even Bolty passed it.

3 hours ago, Winchester White said:

WtF is the 11 plus? Would be nice to have a choice.

We still have the 11-plus here in Lancashire (and grammar schools)

17 hours ago, Nowack said:

I think this has happened once in the seventies, and I don't think I have ever heard of Thatcher described as contrite.

You are only considering one country.

17 hours ago, gonzo said:

Is it just me that doesnt think The BBC has a labour bias?

Sky normally run all the same stories and analysis. Are they bias too?

Sky are more left wing than the BBC. Look at all the people they jettisoned to replace with politically correct quota's of BAME, LGBTRXZQY alphabetties etc. Unsurprisingly, most - including the very reputable Adam Boulton - have followed Frangopoulos to GB News. The only news channel worth watching these days.

So yes - both you mention have significant left wing bias as do ITV which is slightly less blatant about it. Unfortunately, like most, it seems that you can't see the wood for the trees and are willing to swallow news slanted towards the wishes of Hollywood and the New York Times.

17 hours ago, jmjhb said:

I think I saw them play at Manchester Academy once

This surprises me not one bit.

17 hours ago, Ani said:

The BBC must be bias every day they are reporting another fuck up by the Tories. Never said a bad word about Jeremy Corbyn
 

They started by reporting back handers for PPC contracts, the appointment of a minsters wife to run track and trace, Dominic Cummings, funding of number 10 redecoration ( and the cost) , Boris telling lies, number 10 hosting parties, Boris telling more lies, the pound tanking, interest rates going up, issues with Brexit and the Irish border. 
 

The fact is whatever side someone is on they accuse the BBC of bias against them. 
 

You have to be wearing the bluest blinkers in the world to think this lot have not fucked up. The infighting is almost Labour like for its self destruction. IMO they have grown complacent in power and are totally self indulgent. The fiasco of the mini budget highlights this. The OBR is there to verify Govt numbers how dysfunctional do you have to be to think you can just ignore them ? But when you have gotten away with ignoring your own Standards Governance whenever it suited why not ? 

Gotten? FFS.