Guest TPAFKATS Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Didn't Lamont claim about 2 or 3 weeks ago that she wasn't quitting? Then once she had, Murphy said he wouldn't be standing for branch leader...and now Sarwar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Red Ed and Murf both sent out bags to the food bank collection that socialist protestors had set up outside venue. Milibands contained porridge, shortbread, baxters soup and tunnocks tea cakes. What a f**king twat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopCat Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 David Cameron and George Osbourne must be absolutely delighted at the state Scottish Labour have got themselves into. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 David Cameron and George Osbourne must be absolutely delighted at the state Scottish Labour have got themselves into.It was a no lose deal for them. Lose referendum and blame it on labour as they ran the show; or win and claim glory. Watching labour implode is an unexpected encore for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WirralSaint Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 I wish people would stop putting 'Anas' and 'taking one for the team in the same sentence' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopCat Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Link away - but link to definitions of it, not to journalists using it incorrectly. If you can't admit you're wrong then I'll just assume that you are Dorothy and will refer to you as such from now on - or I might call you Dorothy2, just for clarification for others. I've already explained about language evolving, if you're not capable of understanding plain English then that is your failing, not mine, and I don't have the time or inclination to educate you to Primary school level. So the journalists and commentators are all wrong, and you're right? You can call me whatever floats your boat petal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Pityme Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 You hope my charity is looking forward to the donation... Wait a minute, you're saying you're going to lose? : Well you are going to lose, never expected such a quick concession though! Sneaky bum time TC??? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-29820483 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopCat Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 It was a no lose deal for them. Lose referendum and blame it on labour as they ran the show; or win and claim glory. Watching labour implode is an unexpected encore for them. Yep, they've came out of this as the real winners. Not only will Labour lose seats in Scotland next year, the Conservatives will pick some up. With this and Miliband lurching from one disaster to the next, 5 more years of a Conservative government is looking more and more likely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopCat Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Sneaky bum time TC??? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-29820483 Not at all. If you want to increase the wager, let me know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Pityme Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Not at all. If you want to increase the wager, let me know. naw just stick with the £10 you are scheduled to pay into the charity of my choice Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopCat Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 naw just stick with the £10 you are scheduled to pay into the charity of my choice To be fair to you, you're the only one who has backed up your claims with hard cash. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopCat Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Sorry,... eh,... where are the links? Several others you said. Is that several others that disagree with you like the Washington Post one you supplied? I'm waiting, Dorothy2. The Washington Post which cites the Bradley effect whilst discussing the Scottish referendum? Says people may be saying one thing to pollsters while intending to do another - ie the Bradley effect? No mention of black candidates? http://nicktickner.wordpress.com/2014/09/08/will-they-stay-or-will-they-go/ Here's one from an American blogger. But the phrase originated in America, how dare he use it wrongly1!1!1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Pityme Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 To be fair to you, you're the only one who has backed up your claims with hard cash. They are not claims so much as clinical observation and conclusion of momentum and direction TC. I'm not a rabid Nat or Labourite... but I can see a Scottish political party holding sway on who governs the UK next may. Labour north of the border have been in terminal decline for years, the referendum has only served to speed that up to a point where they will fall off a cliff next may. there is a strong realisation among those who voted Yes last month that they can change the shape of UK politics forever next year, and see our country represented only by Scottish political parties! we do need choice, some will flatter to deceive (Sheridan etc) but others will arise to challenge the SNP. There wont be any Tory gains either, the vow between the main UK parties on the eve of the vote that Cameron tore up an hour after the result has put paid to that. There is no trust in Westminster any more, to the point that the old tribal loyalties seem now pathetic, outdated, head in the sand, intransigent nonsense that the Scottish electorate have finally shaken off. Come next May I predict Cameron and Co will be wishing there had been a Yes vote, because they will be forced to dance to a tune not of their choosing! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shull Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 A Jim Murphy Speech Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barney Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 David Cameron and George Osbourne must be absolutely delighted at the state Scottish Labour have got themselves into. I think UKIP will make great gains in the number of voters in scotland, and that's not great news for the tories or labour. Loads of older people are now terrified of foreigners, asylum seekers, benefit scroungers and the uk "subsidising"europe. Its not as if the media have been scaring the shit out of them or anything…. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopCat Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 I've already posted this but here goes again. From YOUR link to the Washington Post:- "But there is also the well-known “Bradley Effect,” where survey respondents are unwilling to admit that they will vote against black politicians. It can lead pollsters to paint too rosy a picture of support for black candidates." Are you still going to claim that they don't mention black candidates, they actually use the exact phrase. I asked you for links to "definitions" of the Bradley effect and specifically not just journalists (or blogger in this case) using the phrase. Besides that, the guy is South African, not American as you claim. From his "About" page - "I’m Nick Tickner. Actuary, relocated from Cape Town to Hollywood. That’s Hollywood, south of Birmingham, UK, rather than the slightly more famous one." Another of your links that prove you wrong. Why don't you quote the rest of the article, and not just the first part? It explains what the Bradley effect is, then applies it to the Scottish referendum. Me getting where the blogger is from does not prove me wrong FFS You're really getting desperate here, aren't you? Here's another couple of articles: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/pity-the-pollsters-the-scotland-independence-referendum-is-a-tough-one/ http://theonlywinningmove.net/2014/09/18/why-so-many-still-undecided-scotland/ Let me guess, they're all wrong too, and you're right? What makes you so smart compared to all these people? Maybe you're wrong...? How many more examples do you want of it being used in relation to the Scottish referendum before you give up? You want a definition, how about one from the Collins dictionary? http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/bradley-effect ' The distortion of opinion polls caused by the reluctance of respondents to admit to a preference that is regarded as socially unacceptable ' There's the dictionary definition folks. Nothing to do with skin colour in that. It was seen as socially unacceptable by some no voters to be saying they were voting no. Hence bradley effect well and truly in play in the Scottish referendum. Hence commentators, journalists and bloggers using it. That will be game, set and match. Good night! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 You've really got yourself in a state here, haven't you? Relax, it's just a term. If people like myself and numerous others want to use it in relation to the Scottish referendum we can. I know what it means when I read it, and so do others. Language evolves, no need to get so worked up about it. If you understood the difference between a similie and a metaphor it might help your cause here. You are presenting the Bradley effect as one when in fact it is the other when applied to the Scottish independence vote.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopCat Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 (edited) Lol. I just wrote a long reply to that with links and everything then lost it when I tried to post - I'll get back to it tomorrow. Suffice it to say for now, you're still wrong.The dictionary is wrong too!?FFS Time to take a step back here pal. It's one thing arguing with peoples use of the term. It's quite another arguing with the fecking dictionary definition of it. Time to hold your hands up and admit you got it wrong. Edited October 31, 2014 by TopCat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopCat Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 (edited) A dictionary (there is more than one, you know) does not contain the full definition of the Bradley Effect. In an exam you would probably get half marks for that definition. I'm a bit busy just now, might not get back to it until I get home but the post that I lost contained links to a political dictionary, a politic text book and, your favourite, a blogger, among others. It also mentioned how you sidestepped admitting you were wrong on the "margin of error" bit from the same post. You really are Dorothy2. So the dictionary is wrong too? Absolutely shameless! To sum up this argument so far, I've used the Bradley effect in relation to our referendum. Slab has said that's wrong and it can only be used in relation to race. I've them given him numerous examples of people and journalists using it in relation to the referendum. He said they're all wrong too. I've then given him a dictionary definition of the term, that's also wrong according to him! FFS! Some people will just never ever accept they're wrong. You clearly won't ever be convinced, I've done all I can and I've proven I'm correct using multiple sources. You're wrong and this discussion is over. Thanks for playing anyway Edited October 31, 2014 by TopCat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayrshire Saints Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 I think UKIP will make great gains in the number of voters in scotland, and that's not great news for the tories or labour. Loads of older people are now terrified of foreigners, asylum seekers, benefit scroungers and the uk "subsidising"europe. Its not as if the media have been scaring the shit out of them or anything…. I think the average scot, pensionable age or otherwise has a wee bit more inteligence and backbone than you credit them with here. UKIP pray on the "middle englanders" where they know immigration is a far bigger, more obvious day-to-day issue than it is up here. The Labour implosion will benefit neither UKIP or the Tories in Scotland. It would be hillarious to see the seething of said middle englanders if the SNP formed a coalition at Westminster after the general election but the way it's going for Labour I can only see another Tory majority govenrment unfortuantely. I will wait up all night and then some to watch live the guaranteed close up on Alistair Darlings face when they are announcing the result which sees him losing his seat - karma !!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopCat Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 UKIP will certainly get no Scottish seats. They will also get less seats than not only the SNP, but they will get less than Plaid Cymru and the DUP too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isle Of Bute Saint Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 UKIP will certainly get no Scottish seats. They will also get less seats than not only the SNP, but they will get less than Plaid Cymru and the DUP too. UKIP will certainly get no Scottish seats. They will also get less seats than not only the SNP, but they will get less than Plaid Cymru and the DUP too.From today's Scotsman........ A YouGov study for The Times put the SNP on 43%, which would give them 47 seats in Westminster, with Labour on 27%, which would leave them with 10 MPs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a50lennyc Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 I'm a bit busy just now, Big queues in Burger King today I take it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a50lennyc Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 From today's Scotsman........ A YouGov study for The Times put the SNP on 43%, which would give them 47 seats in Westminster, with Labour on 27%, which would leave them with 10 MPs. As someone who doesn't know the difference between the debt and the deficit, I think we can safely ignore your posts... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a50lennyc Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 I think the average scot, We aren't talking about the 'average' person when we talk about UKIP voters however.... I think the number of UKIP voters in Scotland will suprise you come the general election. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.