aaid

Like all polls it will be those people who were polled who are a representative of the targeted demographic. In this case people over the age of 16, eligible to vote who live in Scotland. But then you knew that anyway, so I’m struggling to think what the point of your question is 🤔

Skeeter Davis/Waylon Jennings tribute act

I spent a week in Nashville around 15 years ago. I doubt it's changed that much. I'd add in the Ryman Auditorium, Country Music Hall of Fame - there's a lot of rock 'n' roll stuff in there as well. Ernest Tubb Record Store. The Broadway strip is legendary, you just bar-hop from bar to bar, no cover charge as the bands play for tips. I see you mentioned Tootsies - which is legendary. I'd also mention Legends Corner and Roberts Western World. These are all famous bars as their back doors are all on the street immediately opposite the stage door at the Ryman and so big stars used to pop in after their shows and often would play a few numbers. When I was there Skeeter Jennings did a few songs.

SNP's Westminster group submits accounts on time - BBC News

Wales haven't finalised their regulations yet but they are proposing glass should be included. It's also a u-turn by the Tories in Westminster as glass was a manifesto commitment in 2019 for them.

This is a style of interviewing where the interviewer plays devil's advocate and attacks the interviewee's point of view and gets them to justify it. I've no idea whether or not he believes that to be true. The problem lies when the alternate position cannot be questioned in the same manner as the opponent refuses to be interviewed.

Absolutely scandalous interview on the Sunday Show with Lorna Slater on this. Martin Geissler, who in general I think is pretty fair and decent tends to take "devil's advocate" approach to interviewing - particularly - politicians which generally along the lines of "You're an idiot and this is all your fault". He's not alone in that style. I've no issue with that style of interviewing, politicians need to challenged and put under pressure and I think Slater did a reasonable job of dealing with those and getting her point across. However, after that interview, Geissler said that "of course, there's two sides to this and we asked the UKG to come on and they refused". I think they really have to address this style of interviewing when one side refuses to appear and answer questions on their side. I'm not saying that - in this case - Lorna Slater should've been given an easy ride but perhaps the temperature should've been dialled down a bit.

It’s a pattern. The Tories, aided by the Scottish establishment and the pliable unionist media are trying to make Scotland ungovernable by hyping up objection to any legislation passed by or proposed by Holyrood and stymieing it. I’m not suggesting that the GRR bill didn’t cover some difficult or controversial ground but someone needs to explain to me why out of the multiple similar countries that have passed similar legislation with little of the fuss that’s happened in Scotland. DRS *should not* be controversial legislation. Dig deeper into who is actually opposing it. HPMA and judicial reform bills are both at the early stages of their development but are being touted as absolutely evil.

Of course, there's always a tweet. https://twitter.com/ScotTories/status/1091990677557256192?s=20

DRS haters out there. UKG are saying they will grant approval to the Scottish DRS Scheme if glass bottles are removed, but there's no problem with glass bottles in the proposed Welsh scheme. Wake up and smell the coffee folks.

A contemporary account. 10 jurors to 2 found him not guilty of murder. https://www.getreading.co.uk/news/local-news/robert-brown-murder-trial-full-4213482

I imagine there's a lot of facts in mitigation that have been omitted from that article.

If he'd been having a consensual affair with an 18 year old girl would public opinion not be on his side or would it be a case of "eh, Phil, what's he like"? A bit of a whiff of homophobia about a lot of the reporting of this.

I remember this case as it was not far from where I live. While I'm not necessarily saying I disagree with the basic premise of the article, it's a pretty one side piece. I think you'd really need to go back to the original trial and sentencing remarks to get an understanding of why he was charged or convicted with manslaughter rather than murder and all that flows from that. I suspect its not that clear cut or straight forwards and is slightly more nuanced.

I think what’s happened is that the UKG have fucked up here. The UKG controls the business and so it’s up to them to bring the motion. It should’ve been called today, which is coincidentally the last day before recess (English half term holidays) and as the majority of MPs would have knocked off early to get away, there weren’t many MPs actually in Westminster. They got wind of enough Tory MPs who were planning on voting against it - and that’s all down to Boris Johnson - and so they had to pull it. It’s mildly embarrassing for the SNP is she’s thrown out but if she retains her seat due to rebel Tories then it backfires on them. I suspect it’s only delaying the inevitable. I’m not sure the Tories really care who wins the by-election, it’s a bit of a no lose for them.