trousers

Fair point. Ok, replace 'guns' with 'cars' then....let's have no driving laws because it's easy for those so inclined to get hold of a car and break the law in it. I'm gonna crack this analogy malarkey one of these days...

They just did one of those Peter Snow-esque "What if?" scenarios on the BBC election coverage and they demonstrated that IF the Tories were to get 42% of the national vote and Labour 31% (in a general election) then the Tories would only just get a majority (by 20 seats) whereas if Labour were to poll 42% and the Tories 31% then Labour's majority would be 100 seats. I knew the balance of votes vs seats was in Labour's favour but I didn't realise it was so significantly biased against the Tories. Not an intentionally partisan view on my part, just passing on an observation from our friends at the BBC.

@pn_neil_allen: RT @pn_Emma_Judd: Former #Pompey administrator has been fined for insolvency naughtiness: http://t.co/DqW7lSdO ICAEW severely reprimands and fines UHY Hacker Young's Andrew Andronikou over client proceedings. A £5,000 FINE has been dished out to UHY Hacker Young partner Andrew Andronikou for "manifestly inappropriate" conduct in relation to a client going through personal insolvency proceedings. In a consent order made with the ICAEW, Andronikou was severely reprimanded, fined £5,000 and paid costs of £6,500 in relation to his role as a nominee and supervisor of an insolvent individual in 2007. The institute's investigation committee said that the complaint against him related to wrongly recommending a creditors' meeting should be summoned, in that he had not undertaken sufficient investigations into the validity of certain creditor claims. Court proceedings to set aside a decision of the creditors' meeting by a third party saw his conduct as "manifestly inappropriate" relating to evidence filed by him on the respondent's behalf. He was reprimanded and fined £500 last year by the ICAEW in a consent order for failing to meet insolvency reporting requirements. Andronikou became well-known as a joint administrator of Portsmouth Football Club.

I know who my MP is and I'm not all that bright....The exception that proves the rule I guess...

I know. So, just to be clear, voting on personality and not policy is clever, nor stupid... It's good to agree... ;-)

But if people are clever enough they'll be able to see through this personality facade and the policies will shine through... ;-)

Are we saying we shouldn't have gun ownership laws because people can always get hold of a gun if they really want to?

Breaking the law of the land is probably a good starting point....

Indeed. 'Youth unemployment' went up 40% under Labour (IIRC). I'm not sure who has the biggest history wiping airbrush....Pompey or the Labour Party :-) P.s. I think the Tories could be doing better too...

Damn...there was I looking for a debate and you go and agree with me. FFS :-)

Devil's Advocate alert... Given Labour planned to cut £8 for every £9 that the ConDems have cut, how would things have panned out radically different? I thought this ongoing economic crisis was global, or was it only 'global' when Labour were at the helm and now it's just domestic...?

So, in other words, Londoners aren't clever enough to suss out that Boris is fooling them into liking him...?

A "free country" should allow all crime?

How is the Gibraltar Football Association funded...?

"Professional"....? Lol

You've left out Messi FFS

I'll give it 67 pages

@solentsport: BREAKING: #Pompey defender Jason Pearce has signed for Leeds on a four-year deal - fee undisclosed #lufc

@solentsport: #AFCB will receive a sell-on fee from #Pompey's sale of Jason Pearce to Leeds - thought to be a nominal five-figure sum That's a shame....would've covered TBH's wages for another week or so..,

I'm guessing there is some kind of 'syndrome' whereby you play out a certain scenario so thoroughly that you end up mentally convincing yourself that the scenario actually happened.

Maybe it's "ruined" by the people that bite rather than those setting the bait..?

...

I thought it was £4m? And, reading between the lines, my understanding is that we weren't legally bound to repay it...Aviva got what they were legally due via the administration process...but that there was some kind of "gentleman's agreement" to pay back what aviva lost as a result of admin if/when we got back to the premier league. Don't know how much truth there is in that. Just a hunch.

Fair point. There's no perfect solution I guess. The same question applies the other way around....when you count the votes currently, how do you differentiate between those who really really liked each candidate versus those who voted through a sense of civil duty for the person they disliked least?