The Lounge
The place to relax and chat about anything.
22,630 topics in this forum
-
- 6 replies
- 510 views
-
- 0 replies
- 360 views
-
- 113 replies
- 6.3k views
-
- 4 replies
- 668 views
-
- 10 replies
- 830 views
-
- 345 replies
- 15.8k views
-
- 3 replies
- 1.8k views
-
- 68 replies
- 3.6k views
-
- 16 replies
- 1.6k views
-
- 4 replies
- 1k views
-
- 3 replies
- 1k views
-
- 12 replies
- 803 views
-
- 18 replies
- 1.7k views
-
- 5 replies
- 3.3k views
-
- 4 replies
- 595 views
-
- 4 replies
- 921 views
-
- 6 replies
- 1.4k views
-
- 16 replies
- 1.7k views
-
- 4 replies
- 951 views
-
- 4 replies
- 541 views
-
- 0 replies
- 960 views
-
- 0 replies
- 371 views
-
- 109 replies
- 10.8k views
-
- 1 reply
- 1.1k views
-
- 2 replies
- 367 views
-
-
Latest Discussions
-
As you quite rightly say a sample of 500 is extremely small. (actually unrepresentative in the scheme of things) Now corbyn has his own party or should that be Party, it'll be interesting to see if it is merely a "think tank" or if it contests seats and then if they win any and if they chase currently held seats by Labour. It'll be even more amusing if it unseats current Labour Ministers though. -
First of all, conversations with people who aren't Corbyn supporters are obviously going to tell you why those people didn't vote for him, aren't they? Second (and I don't know why I have to keep on saying this) the electoral system worked against him in terms of seats lost. If you look at the actual numbers of votes per party, yes Labour was behind, but not by as much as it appeared if just seats were counted. Thirdly, that poll was of "nearly 500" people who stopped voting Labour. That's not a very big sample, is it? Of those, 35% said it was because of Jeremy Corbyn's leadership (i.e. 65% had other reasons). Even upping the numbers to 500 people, 35% is 175. 10,269,051 people did actually vote Labour in that election. It's a long time since I used statistics for anything, so please correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think anything you have said is "evidence"! -
By Earl Aelfheah · Posted
Dog kennel isn't a great name for a school. I agree that it's ridiculous for the name to put anyone off going there, but don't see any issue with them rebranding if the parents and children prefer a new name. The school is surrounded by historical 'groves' (reflected in the names of Camberwell Grove, Grove park and Grove Vale for example), so it's not a totally random name. -
It might help if there are body cams to record evidence and a presence maybe a deterrent but I very much doubt a park warden would intervene with obnoxious and violent thugs - children or not. We need police for that.
-