-Removed-It's new day, geester. You nominate the best person for the job, period. Like Trump. If you had made Biden president, for instance, he would have NOT stopped travel from China, and your friends would be dropping dead all around you. And think how horrible it would be if we'd picked Hillary, who, ...ahem....might have been a bit more self-serving than you accuse Trump of being. Don't you know?!?!
@averagejoe1 saidYeah 180.000+ dead... trump’s doing such a great job...
It's new day, geester. You nominate the best person for the job, period. Like Trump. If you had made Biden president, for instance, he would have NOT stopped travel from China, and your friends would be dropping dead all around you. And think how horrible it would be if we'd picked Hillary, who, ...ahem....might have been a bit more self-serving than you accuse Trump of being. Don't you know?!?!
-Removed-What are you highlighting here dive?
Is it the fact that it’s a Man or the fact that they’re a Knight because you can be Knighted and still be a man of the people, whatever that means.
He attended a fee paying independent day school ‘Nottingham High School’. He Lost his solicitor father and school teacher mother by the age of 15 and went on to get a first at Oxford. I would imagine Boris and the other ex Bullingdon Club boys in the Tory party view Him as an absolute peasant.
-Removed-Well it depends what they got knighted for I suppose. There were only two people who wanted the job and his ‘let’s get our 💩together’ attitude probably makes him the better of the two options for the LibDems in the long run but they’ll be a political non entity until they can actually figure out who their natural audience are. The fact that both main parties seem to moving in from their extremes and with the SNP mopping up the Scottish vote it’s no wonder he didn’t have climb over any dead bodies to get the job.
-Removed-1. Perhaps being knighted shows that you contribute to society?
2. Men ... 50% of population. The chances of two parties having a man ... 25%
3. White? Most of UK is white.
I don't believe in "positive discrimination" so I believe there is no need to
promote blacks over whites, women over men, or whatevers over medians.
Ability and philosophy is what counts.
@earl-of-trumps saidGO AWAY.
Oh... my... GOD!! Not another WHITE MALE!!!! [shakes-hate-fist]
What is this world to do?! There ought to be laws to eliminate them
You haven't a clue about US politics and certainly
should not comment on anything outside your US bubble.
@wolfgang59 said2. Men ... 50% of population. The chances of two parties having a man ... 25%.
1. Perhaps being knighted shows that you contribute to society?
2. Men ... 50% of population. The chances of two parties having a man ... 25%
3. White? Most of UK is white.
I don't believe in "positive discrimination" so I believe there is no need to
promote blacks over whites, women over men, or whatevers over medians.
Ability and philosophy is what counts.
Sorry to be that guy, but it's not that simple. It cannot be assumed that this is a binomially distributed random variable with p = 0.5. Even if it were, the probability of getting two parties with a female leader would only be 25% if the number of parties were 2, which is not the case (perhaps you meant if there were only two parties?). I already explained that the probability of the intersection of two events is only equal to the product of the probabilities of the individual events if they are independent. That's clearly not true in politics. You, D64 and I already discussed something similar ~61 weeks ago, although then the subject matter was police in Phoenix.
This is not an example of classical probability, and 50% is intuitively not the empirical probability of a woman becoming the leader of a party, even if we do not use historical data (due to the changes in attitudes) and instead use the current gender breakdown of the parties (or, more generally, the House of Commons). In other words, even if one assumes that male and female MPs have an equal chance of being selected as their party leaders, only about a third of MPs are women. Without getting into party-by-party specifics, it's clear that even with a record number of female MPs, women would have to be favoured 2:1 on average to bring the probability up to 50%. I could at most accept that men and women are equally favoured, but it seems contrary to common sense to think that we prefer women, even in 2020. We should note, however, that every party of significance bar Labour has had at least one female leader. This is true even in Northern Ireland (a bastion of bigotry), where all the leaders bar the SDLP's are women.
The point is that you shouldn't bother to attach probabilities to outcomes based on such simple models - it is nothing more than subjective probability.
I concur that physical characteristics should not influence someone's chances.
