|
How are you going to vote on May 7th? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Conservative |
|
72 | 6.22% |
| Labour |
|
410 | 35.41% |
| Liberal Democrat |
|
46 | 3.97% |
| UKIP |
|
69 | 5.96% |
| Green |
|
199 | 17.18% |
| SNP |
|
121 | 10.45% |
| DUP |
|
0 | 0% |
| Sinn Fein |
|
35 | 3.02% |
| Plaid Cymru |
|
20 | 1.73% |
| Respect |
|
3 | 0.26% |
| Monster Raving Loony |
|
56 | 4.84% |
| BNP |
|
23 | 1.99% |
| Some flavour of socialist party |
|
37 | 3.20% |
| Some flavour of communist party |
|
27 | 2.33% |
| Independent |
|
3 | 0.26% |
| Other |
|
37 | 3.20% |
| Total: | 1158 votes | ||
|
Jippa posted:Frankie Boyle on cameron: a quick look in America demonstrates the resounding and longstanding popularity of state interposition, only of course in the EU it is a real thing so it's not necessary to say that Cameron is an evil genius for HRA repeal to be a votewinner
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2015 10:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 5, 2024 15:19 |
|
|
Zephro posted:Yeah this is what I had in mind. I think they even had some competition recently to design the best warehouse robot you could. Yep, you can see the winner in action here: http://www.engadget.com/2015/06/01/amazon-picking-challenge-winner/ Still an order of magnitude slower than humans.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2015 10:07
|
|
|
Dabir posted:Why not wear both? It'd be kind of heavy and hard to move?
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2015 10:07
|
|
|
A nice read on Charles Kennedy from Alistair Campbell, who was a personal friend of his regardless of politics. http://www.alastaircampbell.org/blog/2015/06/02/charles-kennedy-a-lovely-man-a-talented-politician-a-great-friend-with-a-shared-enemy/ Sad to see one of the good ones go, politics could have used a few more people with actual principles.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2015 10:10
|
|
|
 Charles KennedyTeddybear posted:I don't suppose anyone has released a cause of death; I assume they're dancing around the s-word.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2015 10:18
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:
Sturgeon.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2015 10:26
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:
Sirrhosis.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2015 10:55
|
|
|
SNAKES N CAKES posted:Sirrhosis.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2015 11:00
|
|
|
So sad to hear about Charles Kennedy. He was the reason I was a Lib Dem. I do wonder about what sort of support politicians that are kicked out of office get, especially those with pre-existing conditions that could be exacerbated, and whether it's enough. Most of them might be bastards, but they're still people.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2015 11:15
|
|
|
Like reintegrating prisoners into society?
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2015 11:16
|
|
|
Politicians that are defeated for re-election get a golden parachute. It's why Mike Hancock stood even if it meant being kicked out of his party. Gutted for Charlie, though. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2015 11:21
|
|
|
edit: nm, apparently this is wrong
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2015 11:38
|
|
|
Pasco posted:So sad to hear about Charles Kennedy. He was the reason I was a Lib Dem. They get some financial support, that wasn't very popular itt when we had a debate on it a few weeks back. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32689770 Edit: Taking the opportunity to be a Grumpy Old Man and have a bitch about compensation, with reference to this story. For those who don't follow F1, Maria (presumably as a result of driver error) accelerated the car into the back of a (stationary) support truck, leading to serious injuries. It's not clear exactly how she subsequently died a couple of years later - the family say they were told it was linked to those injuries, although she had been cleared to begin driving again at that point. The F1 team held an internal investigation (with an external forensic investigator) that ruled out the car as a factor in the crash. The Health & Safety Executive has now completed its multi-year investigation and found no reason to take action against the company, presumably confirming the 'driver error' cause (I don't think it's been publicly released yet). Maria's family now say: quote:Ms De Villota's family said they had been aware of the HSE's decision, adding: "To date, we are still waiting to see the contents of the report, and therefore the findings of the investigation, which are crucial to learn from. I seem to see this a lot in news stories - there always has to be someone responsible; never such a thing as an 'accident', 'mistake', or 'bad luck'. In this case, (i) By claiming compensation from "those responsible", I'm assuming they mean "someone other than our daughter". But what if she was the only person responsible? (ii) For a cash strapped team like Marussia, why should they be held responsible for supplying compensation to the family, if the HSE has found them not at fault? (iii) Should the many employees be put at risk of redundancy as a result, assuming the compensation would be a Large Number? (iv) How will giving the family a wad of cash ensure that other drivers don't accidentally accelerate into the back of lorries, which they claim is the aim of the compensation? Anyway, I get that I'm being a grumpy old sod and it's a tragic case that I'm only picking on because it's right in front of me, but has anyone else noticed similar trends? Prince John fucked around with this message at 13:37 on Jun 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2015 13:01
|
|
|
Charles Kennedy was a nice enough bloke I suppose, however I felt his performance addressing the crowd in Hyde Park at the biggest anti war rally was his biggest missed opportunity. I think most people were ready for a party leader who had the courage of their convictions to be firmly and resolutely opposed to the intervention, which has clearly proven to be catastrophic. He was evidently worse for wear and took something of a cowardly political position which distinctly underwhelmed the crowd. A chance to get hundreds of thousands of people on his side and he missed it. No-one will mention this in the formal obituaries but it's my abiding memory of the guy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2015 14:26
|
|
JFairfax posted:Charles Kennedy was a nice enough bloke I suppose, however I felt his performance addressing the crowd in Hyde Park at the biggest anti war rally was his biggest missed opportunity. What on earth are you on about? Every LD voted against the war, and he was the only major party leader against it. There is nothing cowardly about the position 'no intervention anywhere without UN authorisation'.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2015 14:28
|
|
|
Have you ever driven an automatic car? You'd notice how you can only press on the accelerator if the you've also got the brake pedal pushed down. Back in the 80's (maybe 90's?) there were a small number of cases of people crashing their new automatic cars into walls, other cars, etc. that they claimed was due to a faulty accelerator system. That is, that there was a fault which meant that the accelerator would engage on its own. The car companies tested, tested and tested and couldn't find any fault either with the cars involved in the accidents or with others being produced. So they threw in this safety thing to stop people being numpties and accidentally accelerating into walls. This was of course done in the name of greater driver safety to guard against future faults. Or rather it was to stop people suing car companies every time they made a mistake with their car because of course they're not bad drivers, they'd never do something like have a minor accident due to clumsiness or absentmindedness.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2015 14:31
|
|
|
RIP Charles Kennedy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2015 14:38
|
|
|
 Charlie Kennedy, poo poo news to wake up to, he was one of the few who seemed to have and care about principles.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2015 14:39
|
|
|
Disinterested posted:What on earth are you on about? Every LD voted against the war, and he was the only major party leader against it. There is nothing cowardly about the position 'no intervention anywhere without UN authorisation'. Depends on your point of view. It certainly came across in the speech that his opposition to the war was procedural, rather than rooted in strategic, moral or practical opposition to starting a war for no good reason. It felt like the lib dems were covering both bases, could oppose it but if the UN approved then they would fall in line and support. Then there was the issue that the Kennedy was clearly hungover to gently caress delivering it, or possibly suffering from the DTs, and failed singularly to excite or inspire the biggest audience he would ever address in person. Nice guy though, didn't really have the time of day for us when he showed up when we were out canvassing on a grey day in Liverpool, but I'll put that down to him again being hungover to gently caress and jonesing for a Burger King.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2015 14:59
|
|
|
A would-be Lib Dem leader wants to legalise cannabis. All seems well and good except for describing the Lib Dems as a 'major political party'.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2015 15:01
|
|
|
Prince John posted:Taking the opportunity to be a Grumpy Old Man and have a bitch about compensation, with reference to this story. For those who don't follow F1, Maria (presumably as a result of driver error) accelerated the car into the back of a (stationary) support truck, leading to serious injuries. It's possible for both her to be ultimately responsible for the accident and for others to have made mistakes leading to her injury and death. For example, if the back of that support truck was up, or even just a few inches higher, she would certainly still be alive. Why do you have the backs of trucks at head height when an F1 car is driving around, when it takes seconds to make that a complete non-factor?
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2015 15:13
|
|
|
MrL_JaKiri posted:It's possible for both her to be ultimately responsible for the accident and for others to have made mistakes leading to her injury and death. For example, if the back of that support truck was up, or even just a few inches higher, she would certainly still be alive. If I had to guess, I'd suggest that it was so it could be stepped up into because it was being in use? (Head height for an F1 driver being leg height for a standing person). You can't reasonably foresee every random possibility. She might have driven into the wall, or a person, had the truck been not there. Jules Bianchi is brain dead after going underneath a large vehicle - do we start to say that the team should have no vehicles present when an F1 car is in the area in case they accidentally contribute to a fluke death? Prince John fucked around with this message at 16:02 on Jun 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2015 15:57
|
|
|
wow, there are now two worst threads
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2015 16:05
|
|
|
Prince John posted:You can't reasonably foresee every random possibility. She might have driven into the wall, or a person, had the truck been not there. Jules Bianchi is brain dead after going underneath a large vehicle - do we start to say that the team should have no vehicles present when an F1 car is in the area in case they accidentally contribute to a fluke death? If the truck had been there, but the back had been up, she'd not have suffered a deadly head injury. Driving into a wall, or the truck, at that kind of speed (around 30-40 miles per hour, which is basically walking speed in an F1 car) is 100% survivable. Bianchi hit a truck at over 130 miles per hour (about 20 times the amount of energy), and the rules of F1 have been changed so that that kind of accident can't occur again. Driving fast cars is dangerous, but that doesn't mean that there aren't a few obvious things you can't do to make it safer - I'd include "not have something that can hit the driver at head height without impacting the rest of the car" as one of those.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2015 16:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 5, 2024 15:19 |
|
|
New thread for June here: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3723640
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2015 16:41
|
|