UKIP leader

To me it looks as if she is taking the blame whether or not she was responsible. No doubt a deal has been struck whereby she gets some post in the future in exchange for carrying the can.
Even if she wrote it (?) he is still responsible for checking the veracity of the contents . The website bears HIS name so the proverbial buck stops with him.

Wow! Nuttall's just lot a lot more votes, courtesy of Arron Banks.

skwawkbox.org/2017/02/14/ukip-in-meltdown-as-arronbanks-pours-petrol-on-nuttalls-hillsborough-pyre/

It would appear that Lynda Roughley's offer to resign has not been accepted:

www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/paul-nuttalls-press-officer-offers-12605984

I wonder how many of the other claims he's made on his website were (allegedly) written by his staff.

Actually, the plot thickens.

Silly, silly man!

Sorry for another Swalkbox link, but this is a BBC interview that Nuttall gave in 2011.

skwawkbox.org/2017/02/14/heres-proof-that-nuttalls-hillsborough-claim-was-a-lie-not-an-aides-slip/

So didn't Paul Nuttall speak to the BBC in person in 2011? Was his press officer responsible for being the ventriloquist's dummy?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-14562573

Paul Nuttall, North West Euro MP for UKIP, said: "This is a cover-up of a cover-up.

"What are the Tories frightened of? The people of Liverpool will be disgusted by these cowardly moves to hide the truth.

"Revealing the facts on Hillsborough is hardly a matter of national security, it is a matter of natural justice."

"The briefings in question are the private memos that were sent to the then Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher.

"Without them being made public we will never get to the bottom of that appalling tragedy when 96 Liverpool fans including close personal friends of mine lost their lives."

Lynda Roughley only wrote what Paul Nuttall had allegedly said.

Worrying thing is, I wonder if UKIP voters really care if the candidate is a lying scumbag,.? If DT , Brexit etc is any thing to go by, they won't.

Lynda Roughley only wrote what Paul Nuttall had allegedly said

How do you know that? How do we the general public know that?

It has been said that Donald Trump has 10 tweeters to help him with tweets.

How do we know how much of that he wrote/thinks/wrote himself/checks/realys something to someone who misheard/relays to someone who mistweets/relays to someone who misunderstands etc

If someone does a press conference their words are out there for all to hear, straight from the horse's mouth so to speak. Even then though, as with the written word, someone can get the wrong end of the stick/misconstrues in the first instance.

But tweeting/writing something somewhere is not necessarily, or maybe has no hope of being verified by a busy or very busy person.

This gives a getout clause for Trump/Nuttall etc.

Their teams presumably write stuff for them and on behalf of them all the time.
Can they manage to verify it on all occasions? I dont think they can.
Big problem.

Lies have to be proven.
If they are properly proven[and a lie is not a lie if that person thought the statement was true at the time of saying it], then it is pretty safe to assume that there are more lies being said.

Poor people of Stoke, choice between Nutall and Corbyn , the Libs should get in there

There are actually 10 candidates. Just about always, people have more choice than they think.
Last time around, I voted for an outsider. He didnt get in, but I thought he deserved my vote.
There is choice there.

Yeah right -rocks and hard places spring to mind.
(I think Anniebach has it right! )

Big problem ???

That's a favourite Trump phrase. Have we been infiltrated?

I know there are many candidates, but the outsiders will not win, it is a fight between labour and UKIP

Like many of us, I was disappointed when it seemed the LibDem coalition with the tories wasn't holding back some policies I saw as just wrong. It's now clear that in fact the LibDems were able to influence in some ways and were walking that fine line between pushing for the things that were achievable and standing back on others. I do feel the way they voted with the government on the bedroom tax 3 times, only to "suddenly" realise it was an unfair, unworkable tax after the coalition ended will be something I find hard to forget or forgive.
But - I'm with Annie and MawBroon, I'd like to see the Libs win Stoke. It isn't likely to happen but the choices of the Ukip leader of the Labour candidate are not inspiring.

Just a quote on a couple of candidates - there's "choice" and there's "choice"
The Christian Peoples Alliance chose Godfrey Davies, a retired Merchant Navy deck officer from Congleton, Cheshire. Davies, whose party is pro-Brexit, plans to revive Stoke's ceramics industry, in addition to standing for conservative positions on marriage and abortion
Independent candidate Barbara Fielding-Morriss (standing under the name Barbara Fielding)[21] is the registered leader of the party "Abolish Magna Carta, Reinstate Monarchy"[22] and is recorded as a vexatious litigant.[23]
BNP candidate David Furness previously stood for the party in the London Mayoral election in 2016, finishing tenth with 13,325 votes (0.5%).[24] He has also contested two parliamentary by-elections: Feltham and Heston in 2011 and Batley and Spen in 2016, polling 540 (2.3%) and 548 votes (2.7%) respectively
(Wikipedia, by the way)

All isn't lost * annie*. Labour have come up with the answer to their woes: they're going to send Diane Abbott round the country.

Independent. Mohammad Akram
Liberal DemocratZulfiqar Ali
ConservativeJack Brereton
Monster Raving LoonyThe Incredible Flying Brick
GreenAdam Colclough
Christian PeoplesGodfrey Davies
IndependentBarbara Fielding
BNPDavid Furness
UKIPPaul Nuttall
LabourGareth Snell

So if we discount The Incredible Flying Brick ( and why I hear someone cry) that's not a lot left

Green if it floats your boat
Christian if it floats your boat
Independent Mohammad if it floats your boat

Plus the others. It is choice.

People complain about politics going extreme in the uk and elsewhere. But it doesnt have to be so.

The LDs won't win Stoke. MoreUnited, which many saw as a front for the LDs, has (reluctantly) agreed to support Labour - to keep UKIP out.

Petra.

I find it hard to believe I am hoping labour comes third

It was also "choice" Ankers when Marie Antoinette, on hearing that the poor had no bread, is reported to have said "Let them eat brioche/cake" (depending on your preferred version)

No that wasnt.

And yes this is.

Unless you are saying that the candidates people are complaining about are actually better candidates than the others.

In which case, reality needs to kick in, and the voters of Stoke have to make do with a bad job indeed.

But I doubt that many people have paid much attention to absolutely all the candidates.

What is with the punctuated

pronouncements

Ankers

Are they meant to be more effective

or emphatic?

We could have a (virtual) bet/flutter on the outcome, who will be first with their tenner and their choice of winner?