Just want to congratulate Diane Abbott on winning her seat with a majority of 35,139, more than 100 times the size of her opponent, Amber Rudd's majority.
It would be nice to recognise the achievements of people handling a condition, rather than throw petty, spiteful accusations at them.
it's hard to say without knowing the full circumstances BUT having had diabetes for two years it would seem she wasn't 'handling' her condition as well as she should have been. And I say that as a fellow diabetic of 23 years so not a spiteful, petty comment.
We should probably avoid comments around their illnesses - if there is a suspision that the illness may be causing them problems, we should try to be sympathetic. That should apply to May or Abbott. There is no political capital to be gained by attacking Abbott after the election so it seems a bit petty doing so. If May was taken ill due to her diabetes, I would be sympathetic as we should all be.
Just want to congratulate Diane Abbott on winning her seat with a majority of 35,139, more than 100 times the size of her opponent, Amber Rudd's majority.
It would be nice to recognise the achievements of people handling a condition, rather than throw petty, spiteful accusations at them.
it's hard to say without knowing the full circumstances BUT having had diabetes for two years it would seem she wasn't 'handling' her condition as well as she should have been. And I say that as a fellow diabetic of 23 years so not a spiteful, petty comment.
I'm sure you'd agree that there have been petty and spiteful comments made to her.
Just want to congratulate Diane Abbott on winning her seat with a majority of 35,139, more than 100 times the size of her opponent, Amber Rudd's majority.
It would be nice to recognise the achievements of people handling a condition, rather than throw petty, spiteful accusations at them.
Shall we also jointly congratulate Theresa May for living with Type 1 as PM?
Not a dig at Abbott, but we haven't heard a whisper about May. And she hasnt exactly been out the firing line either.
Yes. Theresa May has also made very little of her condition. And, her (pyrrhic) victory should also be acknowledged: she too won her seat, albeit on a reduced majority.
Assuming people actually change their voting intention at a specific age. Because, if they don't then the Tories will lose their predominance in the higher age groups and will be, indeed, as you say, fooked.
I found it quite interesting reading if not that surprising. It would be really informative if we had say that data from 40 years ago to see how people have (or haven't) changed their vote.
I do wonder if in general as I think I said before there is a % who will always vote Labour or Conservative or Lib Dem etc. Just as an example say that's 25% each for Conservative & Labour. It then comes down to trying to get another 10-15% (or thereabouts) to get your majority (of seats for outright control).
In my view, the older generation are less likely to change their voting habits, as we get older we generally become a little more set in our ways and suspect that applies to voting.
on the basis of how the age groups voted I expect the conservative policies predominantly to give away to the younger age group next time around, 'Dementia Tax' seemed to have no real effect.
here's 2015's in a slightly different age band although UKIP took a lot of votes then.
Wisdom and intelligence do not necessarily correlate - just look at Roland & Katrien! Both have degrees, so are presumably intelligent, but a more foolish pair would be hard to find.
Wisdom and intelligence do not necessarily correlate - just look at Roland & Katrien! Both have degrees, so are presumably intelligent, but a more foolish pair would be hard to find.
Wait. Are you saying it's actually possible for Katrien to get *more* stupid as she gets older..?
What is interesting is that the only group that the majority voted conservative were the required. The majority of Full time workers and Part-time workers voted Labour.
Here is the education split - just for you Dippenhall
What is interesting is that the only group that the majority voted conservative were the required. The majority of Full time workers and Part-time workers voted Labour.
Here is the education split - just for you Dippenhall
So if the retirement age keeps rising, then the Tory share of the vote will fall?
Here you are @Chizz. Corbyn harnessed the fluid intelligencia who can believe anything they want to, are susceptible to brainwashing and free to make rash decisions, that's what the young are programmed to do, otherwise nothing would ever change.
Fine as long as it is individualistic new thinking and you experiment new ideas yourself. But as us crystallised intelligent old gits know, cult leaders and politicians are more or less in the same league, and you have to keep your distance in buying into every word they utter. They both say they are the only ones who can deliver their promises and will paint non-followers as the enemy.
Corbyn has masterfully employed the tactics of the cult leader to boost membership and support. A politician has to at try and make promises that are half believable to the sceptics, but the cult leader can discard believability. He just has to promise whatever his followers want, convince them who is the enemy with enough passion that excites them into a frenzy that displaces healthy scepticism.
Why @MuttleyCAFC do you assume that going to university means you are more intelligent? You are subjected to the influence of the teachings of lecturers whose only life experience is gained from being at school, reading books to pass exams and acquiring mostly useless facts that have no value in working for a living. It simply delays your maturation into crystallised intelligence.
What is interesting is that the only group that the majority voted conservative were the required. The majority of Full time workers and Part-time workers voted Labour.
Here is the education split - just for you Dippenhall
The required@MuttleyCAFC! Surely we where all required to vote for the Maybot (in the national interest) it is just some people didn't.
What is interesting is that the only group that the majority voted conservative were the required. The majority of Full time workers and Part-time workers voted Labour.
Here is the education split - just for you Dippenhall
Cheers Mutts...always knew I was bloody intelligent!!
Perhaps this is why the Cons ramped up the uni fees so much when in coalition. Too many youngsters going to Uni and getting themselves an edgeukayshun would be a doomsday scenario for the Tories within a generation!!!
Here you are @Chizz. Corbyn harnessed the fluid intelligencia who can believe anything they want to, are susceptible to brainwashing and free to make rash decisions, that's what the young are programmed to do, otherwise nothing would ever change.
Fine as long as it is individualistic new thinking and you experiment new ideas yourself. But as us crystallised intelligent old gits know, cult leaders and politicians are more or less in the same league, and you have to keep your distance in buying into every word they utter. They both say they are the only ones who can deliver their promises and will paint non-followers as the enemy.
Corbyn has masterfully employed the tactics of the cult leader to boost membership and support. A politician has to at try and make promises that are half believable to the sceptics, but the cult leader can discard believability. He just has to promise whatever his followers want, convince them who is the enemy with enough passion that excites them into a frenzy that displaces healthy scepticism.
Why @MuttleyCAFC do you assume that going to university means you are more intelligent? You are subjected to the influence of the teachings of lecturers whose only life experience is gained from being at school, reading books to pass exams and acquiring mostly useless facts that have no value in working for a living. It simply delays your maturation into crystallised intelligence.
Ironically this is possibly the most idiotic post in this thread.
What is interesting is that the only group that the majority voted conservative were the required. The majority of Full time workers and Part-time workers voted Labour.
Here is the education split - just for you Dippenhall
Cheers Mutts...always knew I was bloody intelligent!!
Perhaps this is why the Cons ramped up the uni fees so much when in coalition. Too many youngsters going to Uni and getting themselves an edgeukayshun would be a doomsday scenario for the Tories within a generation!!!
I see the winky face, so know it's tongue in cheek, but I still need to respond. From the all the figures I've seen, university attendance has grown rapidly after fees were introduced. At first that seem counter-intuitive, and if fees continue to rise it probably will be there case. At the moment though it's resulted in universities lowering entrance standards and offering a wider range of courses (I won't disparage individual courses, but there are plenty that appear fairly mickey mouse from outside). They've done this to get their hands on the tuition fees, pure and simple.
So there's no reason dropping tuition fees would result in a rise in student numbers, if it meant a return to stricter entrance criteria then it would actually achieve the opposite. Really depends on what the government regulations are designed to achieve. As has been noted on this thread and the Latimer Road thread, we could really do with more practical qualifications similar to Germany, where simply claiming your a builder or engineer needs to be backed up by a legally recognised qualification.
Is that crystallised like the rock, hard and immobile? It's not too far removed from fossilised.
I might be inclined to prefer a more fluid intelligence.
And, as an aside, anyone I know who lectures in university knows all about working for a living (and while much of university learning is not vocational, it has application in the real world, even if only in terms of the skills gained when developing one's critical faculties).
What is interesting is that the only group that the majority voted conservative were the required. The majority of Full time workers and Part-time workers voted Labour.
Here is the education split - just for you Dippenhall
Jokes aside on intelligence I don't read too much into the educational split due to the dramatic changes in numbers going onto higher education and university. It's a very different world now in that respect.
What percentage in the last 5-15 (or maybe longer) years of 18 year olds have gone to Uni? (is it roughly 40%?) compared to say 40 years ago? Doesn't mean those in their 50's/60's/70's etc aren't of Degree intelligence (whatever that is). Also is there a male factor back then, Woman weren't 'expected' to go to University.
Around 75 of the 250 kids in my year at 16 stayed on to do A Levels, I'd be surprised if half that went to onto University.
For my parents (late 40's birth) I don't think university would even have been on the radar/an option.
You become wiser and more intelligent the older you get.
I like the fact that you used a 50 cent GIF as a reply to Dippenhall. Having had the pleasure of having a pint with Dippenhall after the upbeats walk, you can be rest assured he be down wit that yo.....
What is interesting is that the only group that the majority voted conservative were the required. The majority of Full time workers and Part-time workers voted Labour.
Here is the education split - just for you Dippenhall
Jokes aside on intelligence I don't read too much into the educational split due to the dramatic changes in numbers going onto higher education and university. It's a very different world now in that respect.
What percentage in the last 5-15 (or maybe longer) years of 18 year olds have gone to Uni? (is it roughly 40%?) compared to say 40 years ago? Doesn't mean those in their 50's/60's/70's etc aren't of Degree intelligence (whatever that is). Also is there a male factor back then, Woman weren't 'expected' to go to University.
Around 75 of the 250 kids in my year at 16 stayed on to do A Levels, I'd be surprised if half that went to onto University.
For my parents (late 40's birth) I don't think university would even have been on the radar/an option.
Personal anecdotes can't easily be extrapolated though. All of the 75 people in my year at 16 went on to do A Levels. One of them became a Government Minister. I don't suppose that is universal across all schools.
Here you are @Chizz. Corbyn harnessed the fluid intelligencia who can believe anything they want to, are susceptible to brainwashing and free to make rash decisions, that's what the young are programmed to do, otherwise nothing would ever change.
Fine as long as it is individualistic new thinking and you experiment new ideas yourself. But as us crystallised intelligent old gits know, cult leaders and politicians are more or less in the same league, and you have to keep your distance in buying into every word they utter. They both say they are the only ones who can deliver their promises and will paint non-followers as the enemy.
Corbyn has masterfully employed the tactics of the cult leader to boost membership and support. A politician has to at try and make promises that are half believable to the sceptics, but the cult leader can discard believability. He just has to promise whatever his followers want, convince them who is the enemy with enough passion that excites them into a frenzy that displaces healthy scepticism.
Why @MuttleyCAFC do you assume that going to university means you are more intelligent? You are subjected to the influence of the teachings of lecturers whose only life experience is gained from being at school, reading books to pass exams and acquiring mostly useless facts that have no value in working for a living. It simply delays your maturation into crystallised intelligence.
When I went to university no matter how hard the lecturer tried to influence my understanding of the subject I still found that as Theresa May might say Physics was physics.
What is interesting is that the only group that the majority voted conservative were the required. The majority of Full time workers and Part-time workers voted Labour.
Here is the education split - just for you Dippenhall
Jokes aside on intelligence I don't read too much into the educational split due to the dramatic changes in numbers going onto higher education and university. It's a very different world now in that respect.
What percentage in the last 5-15 (or maybe longer) years of 18 year olds have gone to Uni? (is it roughly 40%?) compared to say 40 years ago? Doesn't mean those in their 50's/60's/70's etc aren't of Degree intelligence (whatever that is). Also is there a male factor back then, Woman weren't 'expected' to go to University.
Around 75 of the 250 kids in my year at 16 stayed on to do A Levels, I'd be surprised if half that went to onto University.
For my parents (late 40's birth) I don't think university would even have been on the radar/an option.
Personal anecdotes can't easily be extrapolated though. All of the 75 people in my year at 16 went on to do A Levels. One of them became a Government Minister. I don't suppose that is universal across all schools.
That is true, so 3.4% attending uni in 1950 compared to today? Or as recent as 2005 around 25% or better still 1960-1974 average of 6%? So anyone now roughly 60 - 75only 6%?went. So not really a surprise when you look at the election and voting split by education level.....
You could argue your academic achievement is not the same as emotional intelligence or other sorts of intelligence - I just put up tongue in cheek - I don't assume it at all. I was no academic and didn't go to university - so I woud be puttingmyself down I even spell retired as required !!!!
What is interesting is that the only group that the majority voted conservative were the required. The majority of Full time workers and Part-time workers voted Labour.
Here is the education split - just for you Dippenhall
Jokes aside on intelligence I don't read too much into the educational split due to the dramatic changes in numbers going onto higher education and university. It's a very different world now in that respect.
What percentage in the last 5-15 (or maybe longer) years of 18 year olds have gone to Uni? (is it roughly 40%?) compared to say 40 years ago? Doesn't mean those in their 50's/60's/70's etc aren't of Degree intelligence (whatever that is). Also is there a male factor back then, Woman weren't 'expected' to go to University.
Around 75 of the 250 kids in my year at 16 stayed on to do A Levels, I'd be surprised if half that went to onto University.
For my parents (late 40's birth) I don't think university would even have been on the radar/an option.
Personal anecdotes can't easily be extrapolated though. All of the 75 people in my year at 16 went on to do A Levels. One of them became a Government Minister. I don't suppose that is universal across all schools.
That is true, so 3.4% attending uni in 1950 compared to today? Or as recent as 2005 around 25% or better still 1960-1974 average of 6%? So anyone now roughly 60 - 75only 6%?went. So not really a surprise when you look at the election and voting split by education level.....
I'm totally baffled by the point you're making. I wish I'd gone to university.
What is interesting is that the only group that the majority voted conservative were the required. The majority of Full time workers and Part-time workers voted Labour.
Here is the education split - just for you Dippenhall
Jokes aside on intelligence I don't read too much into the educational split due to the dramatic changes in numbers going onto higher education and university. It's a very different world now in that respect.
What percentage in the last 5-15 (or maybe longer) years of 18 year olds have gone to Uni? (is it roughly 40%?) compared to say 40 years ago? Doesn't mean those in their 50's/60's/70's etc aren't of Degree intelligence (whatever that is). Also is there a male factor back then, Woman weren't 'expected' to go to University.
Around 75 of the 250 kids in my year at 16 stayed on to do A Levels, I'd be surprised if half that went to onto University.
For my parents (late 40's birth) I don't think university would even have been on the radar/an option.
Personal anecdotes can't easily be extrapolated though. All of the 75 people in my year at 16 went on to do A Levels. One of them became a Government Minister. I don't suppose that is universal across all schools.
That is true, so 3.4% attending uni in 1950 compared to today? Or as recent as 2005 around 25% or better still 1960-1974 average of 6%? So anyone now roughly 60 - 75only 6%?went. So not really a surprise when you look at the election and voting split by education level.....
I'm totally baffled by the point you're making. I wish I'd gone to university.
Did you not have the opportunity? Or just didn't fancy it?
Comments
I found it quite interesting reading if not that surprising. It would be really informative if we had say that data from 40 years ago to see how people have (or haven't) changed their vote.
I do wonder if in general as I think I said before there is a % who will always vote Labour or Conservative or Lib Dem etc. Just as an example say that's 25% each for Conservative & Labour. It then comes down to trying to get another 10-15% (or thereabouts) to get your majority (of seats for outright control).
In my view, the older generation are less likely to change their voting habits, as we get older we generally become a little more set in our ways and suspect that applies to voting.
on the basis of how the age groups voted I expect the conservative policies predominantly to give away to the younger age group next time around, 'Dementia Tax' seemed to have no real effect.
here's 2015's in a slightly different age band although UKIP took a lot of votes then.
Here is the education split - just for you Dippenhall
Fine as long as it is individualistic new thinking and you experiment new ideas yourself. But as us crystallised intelligent old gits know, cult leaders and politicians are more or less in the same league, and you have to keep your distance in buying into every word they utter. They both say they are the only ones who can deliver their promises and will paint non-followers as the enemy.
Corbyn has masterfully employed the tactics of the cult leader to boost membership and support. A politician has to at try and make promises that are half believable to the sceptics, but the cult leader can discard believability. He just has to promise whatever his followers want, convince them who is the enemy with enough passion that excites them into a frenzy that displaces healthy scepticism.
Why @MuttleyCAFC do you assume that going to university means you are more intelligent? You are subjected to the influence of the teachings of lecturers whose only life experience is gained from being at school, reading books to pass exams and acquiring mostly useless facts that have no value in working for a living. It simply delays your maturation into crystallised intelligence.
Perhaps this is why the Cons ramped up the uni fees so much when in coalition. Too many youngsters going to Uni and getting themselves an edgeukayshun would be a doomsday scenario for the Tories within a generation!!!
So there's no reason dropping tuition fees would result in a rise in student numbers, if it meant a return to stricter entrance criteria then it would actually achieve the opposite. Really depends on what the government regulations are designed to achieve. As has been noted on this thread and the Latimer Road thread, we could really do with more practical qualifications similar to Germany, where simply claiming your a builder or engineer needs to be backed up by a legally recognised qualification.
I might be inclined to prefer a more fluid intelligence.
And, as an aside, anyone I know who lectures in university knows all about working for a living (and while much of university learning is not vocational, it has application in the real world, even if only in terms of the skills gained when developing one's critical faculties).
What percentage in the last 5-15 (or maybe longer) years of 18 year olds have gone to Uni? (is it roughly 40%?) compared to say 40 years ago? Doesn't mean those in their 50's/60's/70's etc aren't of Degree intelligence (whatever that is). Also is there a male factor back then, Woman weren't 'expected' to go to University.
Around 75 of the 250 kids in my year at 16 stayed on to do A Levels, I'd be surprised if half that went to onto University.
For my parents (late 40's birth) I don't think university would even have been on the radar/an option.
Maybe @MuttleyCAFC you've stumbled onto the real issue here as @Dippenhall explains....