![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Brumfondl:
Rikkitic:
woman with the phobia about grizzly bears
To be fair, it is perfectly reasonable to be afraid of grizzly bears...
Sideface
freitasm:
Trump's meeting about North Korea, in public view, posted on Facebook, with his "advisers" using smartphone flashlights to read - smartphones with cameras - and a member of his "country club" taking photos with the aide-de-camp that carries the Nuclear Football. ...
This guy's lacks the minimum to be involved in "security".
Imagine how many foreign intelligence officers bought those $200,000 membership to the country club just for an opportunity like this?
Sideface
Brumfondl:Rikkitic:woman with the phobia about grizzly bears
To be fair, it is perfectly reasonable to be afraid of grizzly bears...
Just received from Petitions: UK Government and Parliament
"You’re receiving this email because you signed this petition: “Prevent Donald Trump from making a State Visit to the United Kingdom.”.
"Dear #####,
"The Government has responded to the petition you signed – “Prevent Donald Trump from making a State Visit to the United Kingdom.”.
HM Government believes the President of the United States should be extended the full courtesy of a State Visit. We look forward to welcoming President Trump once dates and arrangements are finalised.
HM Government recognises the strong views expressed by the many* signatories of this petition, but does not support this petition.
During her visit to the United States on 27 January 2017, the Prime Minister, on behalf of Her Majesty the Queen, invited President Trump for a State Visit to the UK later this year. The invitation was accepted. This invitation reflects the importance of the relationship between the United States of America and the United Kingdom. At this stage, final dates have not yet been agreed for the State Visit.
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
This petition has over 100,000 signatures. The Petitions Committee will consider it for a debate. They can also gather further evidence and press the government for action.
The Committee is made up of 11 MPs, from political parties in government and in opposition. It is entirely independent of the Government.
Thanks,
The Petitions team
UK Government and Parliament
Sideface
Sideface:
Just received from Petitions: UK Government and Parliament
"You’re receiving this email because you signed this petition: “Prevent Donald Trump from making a State Visit to the United Kingdom.”.
"Dear #####,
"The Government has responded to the petition you signed – “Prevent Donald Trump from making a State Visit to the United Kingdom.”.
* More than 1.8 million Brits signed this petition.
If it's anything like the previous "We don't like the Brexit result petition", you will find that 1.5 million signed it in Gibraltar!
DaveB:
Sideface:
Just received from Petitions: UK Government and Parliament
"You’re receiving this email because you signed this petition: “Prevent Donald Trump from making a State Visit to the United Kingdom.”.
"Dear #####,
"The Government has responded to the petition you signed – “Prevent Donald Trump from making a State Visit to the United Kingdom.”.
* More than 1.8 million Brits signed this petition.
If it's anything like the previous "We don't like the Brexit result petition", you will find that 1.5 million signed it in Gibraltar!
Not so.
See Petition Map.
Sideface
Sideface:
Just received from Petitions: UK Government and Parliament
"You’re receiving this email because you signed this petition: “Prevent Donald Trump from making a State Visit to the United Kingdom.”.
"Dear #####,
"The Government has responded to the petition you signed – “Prevent Donald Trump from making a State Visit to the United Kingdom.”.
HM Government believes the President of the United States should be extended the full courtesy of a State Visit. We look forward to welcoming President Trump once dates and arrangements are finalised.
HM Government recognises the strong views expressed by the many* signatories of this petition, but does not support this petition.
During her visit to the United States on 27 January 2017, the Prime Minister, on behalf of Her Majesty the Queen, invited President Trump for a State Visit to the UK later this year. The invitation was accepted. This invitation reflects the importance of the relationship between the United States of America and the United Kingdom. At this stage, final dates have not yet been agreed for the State Visit.
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
This petition has over 100,000 signatures. The Petitions Committee will consider it for a debate. They can also gather further evidence and press the government for action.
The Committee is made up of 11 MPs, from political parties in government and in opposition. It is entirely independent of the Government.
Thanks,
The Petitions team
UK Government and Parliament
* More than 1.8 million Brits signed this petition.
Ergo more than 62 million Brits did not sign this petition...
What is the ratio again? For everyone who bothers to sign a petition, another 100 agree with it. Or something like that.
Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos
Rikkitic:
What is the ratio again? For everyone who bothers to sign a petition, another 100 agree with it. Or something like that.
What would that make it? 180 million brits?! :D
Jarle Dahl Bergersen | Referral Links: Want $50 off when you join Octopus Energy? Use this referral code
Are you happy with what you get from Geekzone? Please consider supporting us by making a donation or subscribing.
Rikkitic:
What is the ratio again? For everyone who bothers to sign a petition, another 100 agree with it. Or something like that.
I don't see that at all. You would need just a mere 1% to establish a 100% agreement.
There will be many or some that agree but don't sign, but they cannot be very strong with that agreement, if they can't be bothered signing. Its a numbers game, nothing can be implied.
clinty: An interesting comparison
Original article was in Bloomberg
Trump compared to Muldoon
Clint
tdgeek:
Rikkitic:
What is the ratio again? For everyone who bothers to sign a petition, another 100 agree with it. Or something like that.
I don't see that at all. You would need just a mere 1% to establish a 100% agreement.
There will be many or some that agree but don't sign, but they cannot be very strong with that agreement, if they can't be bothered signing. Its a numbers game, nothing can be implied.
In this day and age, there will also be a proportion who sign just because other people they know signed and they do not want to be the only non-joiners...
Combined with the fact that clicking a quick mouse button etc is not much of an effort and you'll certainly have a another proportion who aren't THAT bothered but it was easy to do and their husband, wife, partner, girlfriend or whatever was doing it so they thought they would.
Compare it with the Countryside March when Blair was banning fox hunting: 300,000 - 400,000 actual people (depending on who's count you believe) turned up in London (i.e. the entire population of Wellington!) to the largest protest rally Britain had ever seen - and they were ignored...! I would not really expect an online petition to be much more than opium for the masses.
gzt:clinty: An interesting comparison
Original article was in Bloomberg
Trump compared to Muldoon
Clint
Interesting but largely off base. The biggest clanger:
"Because New Zealand's parliamentary system of government has fewer checks and balances than the American system, Muldoon got more done than Trump likely will."
Interesting. Trump is GOP, as is the Senate and Upper House. Should be plain sailing, but in this isolated case, Trump is the check and balance.
Geektastic:
tdgeek:
Rikkitic:
What is the ratio again? For everyone who bothers to sign a petition, another 100 agree with it. Or something like that.
I don't see that at all. You would need just a mere 1% to establish a 100% agreement.
There will be many or some that agree but don't sign, but they cannot be very strong with that agreement, if they can't be bothered signing. Its a numbers game, nothing can be implied.
In this day and age, there will also be a proportion who sign just because other people they know signed and they do not want to be the only non-joiners...
Combined with the fact that clicking a quick mouse button etc is not much of an effort and you'll certainly have a another proportion who aren't THAT bothered but it was easy to do and their husband, wife, partner, girlfriend or whatever was doing it so they thought they would.
Compare it with the Countryside March when Blair was banning fox hunting: 300,000 - 400,000 actual people (depending on who's count you believe) turned up in London (i.e. the entire population of Wellington!) to the largest protest rally Britain had ever seen - and they were ignored...! I would not really expect an online petition to be much more than opium for the masses.
Where I was coming from was the squeaky wheel syndrome. If everyone had to vote, you get a result. Representative. If you don't have to vote, the desire is the "had to vote" result, but as many cant be arsed, its raining, its not that important, they don't vote. But all of the aggressive, ardent followers vote, which skews the result. Its similar to a degree to those who say Trump only won 25% of the vote. Or those who say he won as the majority voted for him under the electoral system. If Hillary had won, the same applies, she only got 25% of the vote, and so on.
Take the Flag vote here . Those who voted for the new flag, voted for the new flag as I'd like it, time for a change, good idea. A low turnout. But those who wanted the old flag came out in force, as its LIKE HELL WE ARE LOSING THE NZ FLAG. But the actual desired result may well have been quite different.
Wet weather on NZ election day. ALL National voters will vote whatever the weather. Labour voters, its too cold. Their fault, but again the result is not representative.
There is often a bias, that does not represent the desire of the populous. Compulsory voting is the answer.
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |