Posted on 22 September, 2016 by Mathew
Jeremy Corbyn is said to have contradicted himself this week, saying he is anti-sugar answering ‘mumsnet’s biscuit question’, despite listing jam-making among his hobbies. This human-like contradiction has thrown media types into a spin. It is part of a bold media-strategy to seem honest and genuine? Doesn’t he have people to prevent such straight forward answers? Gordon Brown famously took 24 hours to answer the same question when asked by mumsnet, but forewarned can be forearmed… we can therefore speculate on the layers of hidden meaning in Jeremy’s answer.
Mathew Norman at the Independent same up with some plausibly explanations
Michael Deacon at the telegraph thought readers wouldn’t be impressed with the answer
Russia today reported ‘internet loses it’
Melanie McDonagh in the spectator said that his biscuit answer made her like him
The Times reported that “Corbyn crumbles in face of Mumsnet cookie quiz”, and the Sun’s headline was “THAT TAKES THE BISCUIT Jeremy Corbyn slated by Mumsnet users after saying he was ‘anti-sugar’ when asked what his favourite biscuit was”.
By User:Dave souza – Own work, CC BY-SA 2.5, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=1513232
His answer was Shortbread biscuits, for US readers, in the UK a biscuit is like a cookie, not a scone. Was this simply an appeal to Scottish voters?
Filed under: Politics, UK | Tagged: Corbyn, interviews, Labour Party, media, mumsnet, News, Tough Questions, UK | Leave a comment »
Posted on 21 September, 2016 by Mathew
Hillary Clinton’s campaign for president features the side glancing blow at her opponent Donald Trimp, with the campaign slogan “Love trumps hate” sometimes capitalized “LOVE TRUMPS HATE”, but surely reminding the voting public of the existence of your opponent is a bad move? How has this tactic been used in the past, and what was the result?
Love Trumps Hate, a slogan of the Hillary campaign.
Previous use of the opponents name in campaign slogans has usually had less potential for puns… In 1844 Henry Clay ran with the slogan “Who is James K. Polk”, the campaign resulted in election of James Polk, who was a dark horse candidate appointed as a result of a split democratic convention. This slogan elevated the relatively unknown Polk who won the election!
In 1884 both Presidential campaigns made reference to the other. Grover Cleveland ran with “Blaine, Blaine, James G. Blaine, The Continental Liar from the State of Maine”, while James Blaine accused that Grover had an illegitimate child in Buffalo NY with the slogan “Ma, Ma, Where’s my Pa?”. The race resulted in a close result for Grover Cleveland.
Vote Cox and Cocktails — presidential campaign slogan used by Warren G. Harding in 1920.
In 1920 Warren G. Harding made reference to his anti-Prohibition candidate “Cox and Cocktails” and still managed to win the campaign, presumably his over slogan “A return to normalcy” was a lot more appealing at the time. Warren G. Harding won the campaign but died in office (reputably his drinking was a factor) and Calvin Cooleridge become president.
According to this list I found on the internet all three of these slogans are among the top ten worst campaign slogans of all time. It seems it is still possible to win if you mention your opponent, as shown by Harding. However the result from the Clay/ Polk election shows the danger this tactic presents, if you are better known it would be a mistake to make a campaign about your opponent if you fail to make a positive case for yourself.
Filed under: Politics | Tagged: Election Campains, Hillary2016, Presidential Election, Slogans, Trump, US Elections 2016, US Politics, US Presidential Campain 2016 | Leave a comment »
Posted on 18 September, 2016 by Mathew
The first thing that Teresa May wanted to make clear on becoming the Prime Minister of the UK, was that “Brexit means Brexit”. (e.g. Link to video). She has repeated this whenever asked about Brexit. During the G20 summit in Hangzhou China, she further explained in a press conference, “The reason I’ve been saying Brexit means Brexit is precisely because it means it does”.
To help anyone who still isn’t sure about what Brexit means I have written a computer program to illuminate you.
The output of the program is as follows:
Want to know what Brexit means?
‘Brexit’ means Brexit
Want to know what ‘Brexit’ means Brexit means?
”Brexit’ means Brexit’ means ‘Brexit’ means Brexit
Want to know what ”Brexit’ means Brexit’ means ‘Brexit’ means Brexit means?
”’Brexit’ means Brexit’ means ‘Brexit’ means Brexit’ means ”Brexit’ means Brexit’ means ‘Brexit’ means Brexit
Want to know what ”’Brexit’ means Brexit’ means ‘Brexit’ means Brexit’ means ”Brexit’ means Brexit’ means ‘Brexit’ means Brexit means?
””Brexit’ means Brexit’ means ‘Brexit’ means Brexit’ means ”Brexit’ means Brexit’ means ‘Brexit’ means Brexit’ means ”’Brexit’ means Brexit’ means ‘Brexit’ means Brexit’ means ”Brexit’ means Brexit’ means ‘Brexit’ means Brexit
Want to know what ””Brexit’ means Brexit’ means ‘Brexit’ means Brexit’ means ”Brexit’ means Brexit’ means ‘Brexit’ means Brexit’ means ”’Brexit’ means Brexit’ means ‘Brexit’ means Brexit’ means ”Brexit’ means Brexit’ means ‘Brexit’ means Brexit means?
The code in Python3 is as follows:
# -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
Created on Sun Sep 18 14:24:10 2016
Program to show what Brexit means.
@author: Mathew Peet
iWantToKnow = True
while iWantToKnow == True:
print(“Want to know what”,str,” means?”)
ans = ans.lower()
if ans==’y’ or ans==’yes’:
str=”‘”+str+”‘”+’ means ‘+str
Filed under: Politics, programs, Scripts | Tagged: Brexit, Command Line, Python, Python3, Simple Computer Program | Leave a comment »
Posted on 6 May, 2016 by Mathew
My Problem, and I think why I have often been in trouble in politics, is that I had no interest in politics when I left school, I spent eight years working as a junior technician in a cancer research unit. The scientists I worked with, put a culture in my brain that you find out the truth and you say it. Otherwise you don’t find a cure for anything. Then I moved into politics and it’s almost like you just say what you believe, you don’t bother to check the facts.
Filed under: Politics, Science | Leave a comment »
Posted on 25 February, 2016 by Mathew
David Cameron and Jeremy Corbyn clashed other what their mothers would say during Prime Ministers question time… Here David Cameron runs the risk that someone will actually ask his mum.
They then went on to speculate what Nye Bevan might have thought about the current NHS.
Filed under: Politics | Leave a comment »
Posted on 30 March, 2015 by Mathew
Swedish Foreign minister Margot Wallström made the impolitic mistake of criticising the human right record of Saudia Arabia. She seems to be under pressure from arms exporters and the Swedish king to reach some sort of compromise with Saudi, after they called back their ambassador and stopped issuing visa’s for Swedish business men.
Filed under: Politics | Leave a comment »
Posted on 8 January, 2015 by Mathew
Charlie Hebdo is a satirical magazine, priding itself for being dumb and nasty (bête et méchant).
On the 7th January 2015, at least twelve people were murdered in the magazines offices in Paris, after an attack by three gunmen. Another 11 people are seriously wounded, 5 are in critical condition. Those murdered include the editor, editorial staff and main cartoonists.
It is assumed that the attack was by “religious fundamentalists”.
Charlie Hebdo on Gay Marriage – The father, the son and the holy ghost.
The French government has banned the magazine in the past (resulting in a change in name) after the magazine made satire of the reporting of the death of Charles de Gaulle who died eight days after a fire killing 146 people in a nightclub.
In September 2012, the newspaper published a series of satirical cartoons of Muhammed, some of which feature nude caricatures of him. Riot police had to surround the offices of the magazine to protect against possible attacks, and the magazine was criticised by the French minister of the interior.
One thing I don’t understand is how people know that those cartoons are of Prophet Muhammed if it’s not possible to draw cartoons of him — how can he be recognised?
Charlie Hebdo is regarded as being left-wing, the attack on their offices is feared to lead a lurch to the right in France.
Filed under: France, Politics | Tagged: Attack, cartoons, Charlie Hebdo, France, JeSuisCharlie, Politics | 2 Comments »