Full bodied red
Full Member
You need a good heat wave. Get rid of a few of them.
That's ageist....
You need a good heat wave. Get rid of a few of them.
Youth vote across the UK is similar. 70% of those aged 18-24 are planning to vote labour
http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.ne...f3ruqo8k0q/SundayTimesResults_170602_VI_W.pdf
Problem is those aged 64+ are voting 3:1 Tory to Labour. And we have an aging population. And old people are more likely to vote.
So no. Labour don't have a chance.
Was a bit like Brexit. The old dinosaurs destroying the country for the youth. But hey, that's another story for another day.
It is rather odd that those three in particular get away with such little criticism, given the obsession with accuracy Diane Abbott's critics have isn't it?Maybe Hammond, Gove and Mitchell could join them?
Problem was, Diane Abbott's was a car crash. She got it wrong again, and again, and again, and again. She was orders of magnitude out. And she kept changing her figures. And then saying she hadn't said them.It is rather odd that those three in particular get away with such little criticism, given the obsession with accuracy Diane Abbott's critics have isn't it?
Diane Abbott was 'orders of magnitude out'. Hammond was just the £20BILLION off.Problem was, Diane Abbott's was a car crash. She got it wrong again, and again, and again, and again. She was orders of magnitude out. And she kept changing her figures. And then saying she hadn't said them.
Gove just didn't know the £1000/£2000 figure. He was called out in it, but it still wasn't that bad, he was in the right ball park (a bit cringey though)
Hammond said 32 instead of 52.
Mitchell's was awful, but he isn't in the cabinet.
Do you know what an order of magnitude is?Diane Abbott was 'orders of magnitude out'. Hammond was just the £20bn off.
A pretty crap excuse by the looks of it.Do you know what an order of magnitude is?
ChristA pretty crap excuse by the looks of it.
It is rather odd that those three in particular get away with such little criticism, given the obsession with accuracy Diane Abbott's critics have isn't it?
I've only been living in the UK for eight months but it's so abundantly clear, for the future of young people, that another Conservative government will be a disaster. I have a good feeling about Labour though. This whole election is quite reminiscent of the Marriage Equality referendum in Ireland last year. I'm expecting record numbers of young voters to turn out tomorrow and give everyone quite a shock.
Yeah. It isn't as if Hammond is Chancellor of the Exchequer having previously been Secretary of State for Transport so he'd have no reason not to know the cost of the country's biggest transport project.But in her case, it's been pretty obvious for years that even if she is a good local, constituency MP, she couldn't run a whelk stall let alone a Government Ministry.
Feck off back to Ireland.
Let's say you get 3 people in a room, and gave them all a quiz question.A pretty crap excuse by the looks of it.
But if you stop to think about it, it's obvious that Person 2 and Person 3 were a lot closer than Person 1. Person 1 had no concept of what a Litre even was.
Let's say you get 3 people in a room, and gave them all a quiz question.
Question: How many Litres does this tank hold
It's a hard question. The human brain does not deal with large numbers well at all, and the cylindrical shape makes things more difficult. There is also little sense of scale. Still nonetheless, everyone gives it their best shot.
Person 1 goes first. He has no idea what a litre is, so says 100 litres. Everyone else laughs.
Person 2 goes next. He thinks about it for a long time and then says 1 million litres. Person 1 goes a bit pale in the face.
Person 3 divides the two and says 500,000 litres, confident that Person 1 was over, but not way over.
The quiz master reveals the answer; 100,000 litres.
Everyone stops to think for a second before releasing that Person 1 has won. He's only 99,900 litres out. Person 3 is next closest being 400,000 litres out.
But if you stop to think about it, it's obvious that Person 2 and Person 3 were a lot closer than Person 1. Person 1 had no concept of what a Litre even was.
There are two ways to deal with this; percentages and orders of magnitude.
As a percentage, Person 1 was 99.9% out. Person 3 was 80% out. But Person 1 argues Person 3 wasn't 80% out, but 400% out.
The better way to deal with this is with orders of magnitude. Person 1 was 3 orders of magnitude out, Person 3 less than one order of magnitude out (0.69)
None of this has anything to do with the General Election, other than to say, Diane Abbott's an idiot. I try to defend her, we all have off days, (Barack Obama said he was a Muslim when he had a cold). But there is a non insignificant difference in saying something costs 50000 times less than it will do, and getting a single digit wrong.
Like Brexit?the biggest issues facing this country can be traced back to a Labour government
No. The tank could well have held 500,000 litres. It would only have had to be about twice as tall. It's not a crazy answerNo they weren't, Person 1 was closer than either of them. The question didn't ask for an explanation of what a litre was, it asked for the volume of the tank. It might be the result of blind luck, but it doesn't invalidate Person 1's answer being closest.
I'd also call this a good example of the importance of humility. Person 2 and 3 believed their understanding of what a litre and volume were was considerably more accurate than Person 1. It turns out they were extremely mistaken. If 100 litres seems like a ridiculous answer when the tank holds 100,000 litres, then guessing 400,000 litres more (or indeed 900,000) shows that they also don't know what a litre is, and more so than Person 1.
Like Brexit?
Let's say you get 3 people in a room, and gave them all a quiz question.
Question: How many Litres does this tank hold
It's a hard question. The human brain does not deal with large numbers well at all, and the cylindrical shape makes things more difficult. There is also little sense of scale. Still nonetheless, everyone gives it their best shot.
Person 1 goes first. He has no idea what a litre is, so says 100 litres. Everyone else laughs.
Person 2 goes next. He thinks about it for a long time and then says 1 million litres. Person 1 goes a bit pale in the face.
Person 3 divides the two and says 500,000 litres, confident that Person 1 was over, but not way over.
The quiz master reveals the answer; 100,000 litres.
Everyone stops to think for a second before releasing that Person 1 has won. He's only 99,900 litres out. Person 3 is next closest being 400,000 litres out.
But if you stop to think about it, it's obvious that Person 2 and Person 3 were a lot closer than Person 1. Person 1 had no concept of what a Litre even was.
There are two ways to deal with this; percentages and orders of magnitude.
As a percentage, Person 1 was 99.9% out. Person 3 was 80% out. But Person 1 argues Person 3 wasn't 80% out, but 400% out.
The better way to deal with this is with orders of magnitude. Person 1 was 3 orders of magnitude out, Person 3 less than one order of magnitude out (0.69)
None of this has anything to do with the General Election, other than to say, Diane Abbott's an idiot. I try to defend her, we all have off days, (Barack Obama said he was a Muslim when he had a cold). But there is a non insignificant difference in saying something costs 50000 times less than it will do, and getting a single digit wrong.
No. The tank could well have held 500,000 litres. It would only have had to be about twice as tall. It's not a crazy answer
For it to hold 1000 litres, it would have been smaller than a human
Diane Abbott's an idiot.
She's also a bit of a liar as well - only 'ill' when it suits her.
Remember when she ' had a migraine ' during the BREXIT vote, but was seen drinking in the Commons Bar ?
And the other day, 'too ill' to appear on a radio programme but was photographed in an underground station less than five minutes walk from the studio ?
Only on the Opposition Front Bench because she was Crobyn's bed partner in their youth and he owes her.
So you're voting for the party that has nearly doubled the debt. That'll show 'em. The party of 6.8p breakfasts and a Home Secretary that claims the average police officers wage is £40,000 is the only logical choice.
Brexit had very little to do with the Lisbon Treaty, it was a split on the Tory right and Cameron gambled the country's future on a referendum to consolidate his position.Well ya will sign that Lisbon Treaty!
Economically speaking, Labour's record is fine (despite the biggest financial collapse in history, which wasn't of Labour's making).
If the quiz was to be the closest, then of course Person 1 has won.Yet he was closest, and they weren't.
"Diane Abbott has been diagnosed with “a serious, long-term condition”, Barry Gardiner, the shadow international trade secretary, has told the Huffington Post."
But which only seems to affect her when it suits her....
And an expert told her she had an illness and we all know how anti-Britain they are!But which only seems to affect her when it suits her....
Like Brexit?
How many stars are there in the milky way galaxy?
Diane Abbott; well about 4.
Phillip Hammond; err, 1 trillion.
Surprisingly Diane Abbott has won!
Only on the Opposition Front Bench because she was Crobyn's bed partner in their youth and he owes her.