Local news says that UKHSA isn’t just dumping historic positive tests into the SW figures, but there are huge jumps. If it’s not backfilling, then it must be retests, and will surely be an artificial hump. We hope...
Even if it isn't there's not really a lot to do other than ramp up booster shots. That wasted 4 weeks looks worse and worse in hindsight. The JCVI really have a lot to answer for.
Murdo Fraser @murdo_fraser · 2m Interesting to see on the BBC News - and confirmed to me by those attending - that fans arriving at Celtic Park today faced no rigorous vaccine passport checks, simply a glance at a phone screen or a paper print-out. So what’s the point?
Labour, as well as dumping Keir, need a Scottish gambit.
The road to Westminster runs through Scotland.
Unless Labour look like a viable player in Scotland, the Tories will play the “Sturgeon’s puppet” card - and win.
Labour should announce now they plan to target the “Magnificent Seven” - the top seven Scottish targets they might hope to turn from the SNP.
And they need to position the SNP as aiders and abettors of Tory rule (and as we know there is truth to the idea that Boris and Nicola exist in symbiotic stasis).
I’m summary, a successful strategy for Labour looks like:
1. Dumping Keir 2. A de facto anti-Tory alliance with the Lib Dems 3. Publicly targeting the “Magnificent Seven”.
There is a decent possibility - 25%? - that a Lab/Lib tally could outperform the Tories.
I agree that number 1 might work, but who is the Labour figure the public is crying out for? I just don't see anyone with Blair's or Wilson's political genius. And changing a leader who hasn't even faced the public yet looks a bit like panic. Or opportunism. Or both.
2 might be counterproductive, and I'm not sure the Lib Dems, hoping to win soft Tory votes in the south would be up for it.
And 3 would doubtless help, but seven seats is noise compared with the huge numbers of English small town midlands and southern marginals they need to win back.
1. Nandy, Nandy, Nandy
2. De facto, not de jure. It needs to be organised via a few symbolic but meaningful gestures. The Lib Dems should be given implicit license to go for it in 20 odd Tory seats
3. I said “magnificent seven” because it’s memorable. it’s about focusing Labour’s efforts in Scotland but most importantly deflecting the inevitable criticism by the Tories (and their compliant friends in the media).
Your strategy won't work. To target a mere 7 seats when you only have 1 would be seen as an admission of defeat. It would make things worse, not better. Labour has to aspire to recover a majority of Scottish seats.
The only way for Labour to take on the separatists is to play the long game. Make it absolutely clear prior to the GE that Labour will give absolutely nothing more to them and will call another GE if Sturgeon makes it impossible for a Labour-led government to govern on a programme that would appeal to former Labour-voting Scots. And it has to be a two stage strategy, being willing to gamble on a 2nd GE in the expectation of being brought down by the SNP, just as happened in 1979, rather than expecting much of a recovery in the first GE.
Miliband shillied and shallied rather than call the SNP's bluff prior to the 2015 GE. I don't think Starmer will make the same mistake.
Murdo Fraser @murdo_fraser · 2m Interesting to see on the BBC News - and confirmed to me by those attending - that fans arriving at Celtic Park today faced no rigorous vaccine passport checks, simply a glance at a phone screen or a paper print-out. So what’s the point?
Depends what you mean by rigorous. When I travel by train the check is simply a glance at a phone screen or a paper print-out. It's enough to make me buy a ticket. What more do they want?
Short of an SNP implosion, the best way to deal with 'puppet of Sturgeon' attack is to give of the impression you wouldn't let her walk all over you in a hung parliament situation. Much of the reason it worked on Ed in 2015 was because swing voters believed - wrongly IMHO - he didn't have the strength of character to stand up a forceful SNP and Sturgeon.
Anyone who hasn’t realised that the Tory’s game is to put up taxes now in order to bring them down just before the election is not paying attention.
And what they'll do is raise taxes on working people with NI and lower income tax. It will be a net transfer of wealth from working people to retired people.
Murdo Fraser @murdo_fraser · 2m Interesting to see on the BBC News - and confirmed to me by those attending - that fans arriving at Celtic Park today faced no rigorous vaccine passport checks, simply a glance at a phone screen or a paper print-out. So what’s the point?
None and I believe Sturgeon has banned the idea of the word Mother
The most beautiful word there is
I do not speak about woke normally but this is world class level nonsense
Labour, as well as dumping Keir, need a Scottish gambit.
The road to Westminster runs through Scotland.
Unless Labour look like a viable player in Scotland, the Tories will play the “Sturgeon’s puppet” card - and win.
Labour should announce now they plan to target the “Magnificent Seven” - the top seven Scottish targets they might hope to turn from the SNP.
And they need to position the SNP as aiders and abettors of Tory rule (and as we know there is truth to the idea that Boris and Nicola exist in symbiotic stasis).
I’m summary, a successful strategy for Labour looks like:
1. Dumping Keir 2. A de facto anti-Tory alliance with the Lib Dems 3. Publicly targeting the “Magnificent Seven”.
There is a decent possibility - 25%? - that a Lab/Lib tally could outperform the Tories.
I agree that number 1 might work, but who is the Labour figure the public is crying out for? I just don't see anyone with Blair's or Wilson's political genius. And changing a leader who hasn't even faced the public yet looks a bit like panic. Or opportunism. Or both.
2 might be counterproductive, and I'm not sure the Lib Dems, hoping to win soft Tory votes in the south would be up for it.
And 3 would doubtless help, but seven seats is noise compared with the huge numbers of English small town midlands and southern marginals they need to win back.
1. Nandy, Nandy, Nandy
2. De facto, not de jure. It needs to be organised via a few symbolic but meaningful gestures. The Lib Dems should be given implicit license to go for it in 20 odd Tory seats
3. I said “magnificent seven” because it’s memorable. it’s about focusing Labour’s efforts in Scotland but most importantly deflecting the inevitable criticism by the Tories (and their compliant friends in the media).
Your strategy won't work. To target a mere 7 seats when you only have 1 would be seen as an admission of defeat. It would make things worse, not better. Labour has to aspire to recover a majority of Scottish seats.
The only way for Labour to take on the separatists is to play the long game. Make it absolutely clear prior to the GE that Labour will give absolutely nothing more to them and will call another GE if Sturgeon makes it impossible for a Labour-led government to govern on a programme that would appeal to former Labour-voting Scots. And it has to be a two stage strategy, being willing to gamble on a 2nd GE in the expectation of being brought down by the SNP, just as happened in 1979, rather than expecting much of a recovery in the first GE.
Miliband shillied and shallied rather than call the SNP's bluff prior to the 2015 GE. I don't think Starmer will make the same mistake.
But it’s not realistic for Labour to target “a majority of seats” in Scotland (para 1).
Nevertheless we are in rough agreement, certainly in para 2.
Murdo Fraser @murdo_fraser · 2m Interesting to see on the BBC News - and confirmed to me by those attending - that fans arriving at Celtic Park today faced no rigorous vaccine passport checks, simply a glance at a phone screen or a paper print-out. So what’s the point?
None and I believe Sturgeon has banned the idea of the word Mother
The most beautiful word there is
I do not speak about woke normally but this is world class level nonsense
Murdo Fraser @murdo_fraser · 2m Interesting to see on the BBC News - and confirmed to me by those attending - that fans arriving at Celtic Park today faced no rigorous vaccine passport checks, simply a glance at a phone screen or a paper print-out. So what’s the point?
None and I believe Sturgeon has banned the idea of the word Mother
The most beautiful word there is
I do not speak about woke normally but this is world class level nonsense
They say that cat Shaft is a bad mutha… Shut your mouth!
Murdo Fraser @murdo_fraser · 2m Interesting to see on the BBC News - and confirmed to me by those attending - that fans arriving at Celtic Park today faced no rigorous vaccine passport checks, simply a glance at a phone screen or a paper print-out. So what’s the point?
Depends what you mean by rigorous. When I travel by train the check is simply a glance at a phone screen or a paper print-out. It's enough to make me buy a ticket. What more do they want?
Murdo Fraser @murdo_fraser · 2m Interesting to see on the BBC News - and confirmed to me by those attending - that fans arriving at Celtic Park today faced no rigorous vaccine passport checks, simply a glance at a phone screen or a paper print-out. So what’s the point?
Because vaccine passports are psychological pressure to get vaccinated.
Anyone who hasn’t realised that the Tory’s game is to put up taxes now in order to bring them down just before the election is not paying attention.
And what they'll do is raise taxes on working people with NI and lower income tax. It will be a net transfer of wealth from working people to retired people.
Yep. Already baked in. And docilely accepted by much of the population.
Eventually gerontocracies run out of younger people’s money…
What trigger do we expect the government to pull first and when? Personally I think Bozza will be quite reluctant to mandate mask usage, with the possible exception of public transport, because it will be hard to undo and is unpopular with his backbenchers. I give this 70% chance on trains by mid Nov, 20% in other settings.
Given Scotland has them, and given Gover is still a bright light in the govt, I can well imagine vaccine passports for large indoor gatherings. Not a lot of rationality in it I don’t think but it’s a signal that will discourage a percentage from going in the first place. 50% chance at the same time, felt to me like Cabinet was split down the middle.
And from Plan B that just leaves “communicating clearly that the risk has increased and the need to behave more cautiously”, which is wishy washy but really means office workers will be work from home again if they want, in language that disguises from the PM that this is what is really meant. I’d give this the same chance as masks on trains.
And they’ll hope that all that is enough to keep the show on the road until third doses right the ship again. Which I am pretty sure it will be, 90% I guess.
Murdo Fraser @murdo_fraser · 2m Interesting to see on the BBC News - and confirmed to me by those attending - that fans arriving at Celtic Park today faced no rigorous vaccine passport checks, simply a glance at a phone screen or a paper print-out. So what’s the point?
None and I believe Sturgeon has banned the idea of the word Mother
The most beautiful word there is
I do not speak about woke normally but this is world class level nonsense
Do you have a source for that, or is it all a bit Winterval?
Murdo Fraser @murdo_fraser · 2m Interesting to see on the BBC News - and confirmed to me by those attending - that fans arriving at Celtic Park today faced no rigorous vaccine passport checks, simply a glance at a phone screen or a paper print-out. So what’s the point?
None and I believe Sturgeon has banned the idea of the word Mother
The most beautiful word there is
I do not speak about woke normally but this is world class level nonsense
Do you have a source for that, or is it all a bit Winterval?
Murdo Fraser @murdo_fraser · 2m Interesting to see on the BBC News - and confirmed to me by those attending - that fans arriving at Celtic Park today faced no rigorous vaccine passport checks, simply a glance at a phone screen or a paper print-out. So what’s the point?
None and I believe Sturgeon has banned the idea of the word Mother
The most beautiful word there is
I do not speak about woke normally but this is world class level nonsense
I prefer kipepeo, swahili for butterfly. As others have observed, mother needs a suffix before it's really a contender.
Murdo Fraser @murdo_fraser · 2m Interesting to see on the BBC News - and confirmed to me by those attending - that fans arriving at Celtic Park today faced no rigorous vaccine passport checks, simply a glance at a phone screen or a paper print-out. So what’s the point?
None and I believe Sturgeon has banned the idea of the word Mother
The most beautiful word there is
I do not speak about woke normally but this is world class level nonsense
Do you have a source for that, or is it all a bit Winterval?
Murdo Fraser @murdo_fraser · 2m Interesting to see on the BBC News - and confirmed to me by those attending - that fans arriving at Celtic Park today faced no rigorous vaccine passport checks, simply a glance at a phone screen or a paper print-out. So what’s the point?
None and I believe Sturgeon has banned the idea of the word Mother
The most beautiful word there is
I do not speak about woke normally but this is world class level nonsense
I prefer kipepeo, swahili for butterfly. As others have observed, mother needs a suffix before it's really a contender.
I too prefer the word motherhood (with occasional apple pie).
Anyone who hasn’t realised that the Tory’s game is to put up taxes now in order to bring them down just before the election is not paying attention.
And what they'll do is raise taxes on working people with NI and lower income tax. It will be a net transfer of wealth from working people to retired people.
Anyone who hasn’t realised that the Tory’s game is to put up taxes now in order to bring them down just before the election is not paying attention.
And what they'll do is raise taxes on working people with NI and lower income tax. It will be a net transfer of wealth from working people to retired people.
The sophistication of the new energy paradigm LOL - until they get an automated smart grid far enough down the road.
Tonight people on Octopus Agile Tariff will be paid 2.21p per unit to use electricity. So I forecast it will be windy.
Plunge pricing alert for Octopus Agile electricity. First time in weeks that the price has dipped below the 35p/unit cap ** by more than a couple of pence.
Tomorrow morning they’ll pay 2.21/unit (just for 30 mins) but between midnight and 06:00 the average unit price is 5.602p.
Sunamp *, washing machine and dishwasher will be in the starting blocks at midnight.
* A Sunamp is a phase change heat battery, that stores energy far more effectively than an insulated hot water tank. But is still rather expensive. ** The 35p per unit relates to the price around the peak period in the evening. You need to be able to time shift loads to avoid it.
Anyone who hasn’t realised that the Tory’s game is to put up taxes now in order to bring them down just before the election is not paying attention.
And what they'll do is raise taxes on working people with NI and lower income tax. It will be a net transfer of wealth from working people to retired people.
Murdo Fraser @murdo_fraser · 2m Interesting to see on the BBC News - and confirmed to me by those attending - that fans arriving at Celtic Park today faced no rigorous vaccine passport checks, simply a glance at a phone screen or a paper print-out. So what’s the point?
None and I believe Sturgeon has banned the idea of the word Mother
The most beautiful word there is
I do not speak about woke normally but this is world class level nonsense
Do you have a source for that, or is it all a bit Winterval?
Anyone who hasn’t realised that the Tory’s game is to put up taxes now in order to bring them down just before the election is not paying attention.
And what they'll do is raise taxes on working people with NI and lower income tax. It will be a net transfer of wealth from working people to retired people.
Corbyn really did bequeath Starmer a toxic legacy.
The problem is that Starmer isn't up to the job either.
Nonsense. I am not a Labour supporter, but Starmer has a great deal more credibility than the Clown that currently occupies No10. It is a long time before the next election. The big problem that Starmer has is not his own ability or credibility, it is that there is still a large part of the Labour Party that is even more ludicrous than many of those of the current government benches. History will judge how he does the long haul.
He reminds me a lot of Cameron: Massively underestimated by those in his own party that would rather have someone else, and derided by his opponents because they are simply too tribal or plain stupid to realise that he might just make it.
I agree with some of that: but Cameron always had a vision - even if you disagreed with it. Starmer seems unable to project any vision he may have without writing a WORN (*) magnum opus. Events haven't helped him, as the country and media are concentrating on bigger events.
Blair was a salesman. Cameron was also a salesman, to a lesser extent. Starmer doesn't appear to be one - and he needs to sell his vision for the country, to both the country and his own party.
(*) Write Once, Read Never. A common form of computer documentation.
"Blair was a salesman. Cameron was also a salesman, to a lesser extent. Starmer doesn't appear to be one - and he needs to sell his vision for the country, to both the country and his own party." - pretty much the whole reason I think Sir Keir won't be PM - plus the fact he is up against a very charismatic salesman
In a way, they appear polar opposites. Starmer may have a vision (I've no idea given he seems incapable of saying it); Boris doesn't have a vision beyond the end of his nose, but can sell the snot that dribbles out by the barrel-load.
We need a hideous scientific experiment where the two are merged together. Starson or Johnmer.
(I actually quite like Starson. Very sci-fi)
I saw a clip of Blair as LotO at PMQs the other day, and he seemed like he was bossing it vs Major (the famous one "I lead my party, he follows his", seems so horribly smug watching it now), and to an extent Cameron did with Brown, from what I can recall.
Miliband and Sir Keir always seem like they are earnestly whining about it being so unfair to me; maybe it's just the lack of gravitas in their voices. They seem like kids complaining about their parents, in comparison to the last couple of LotOs who became PM
No, he doesn't come over as whining to his parents about it being so unfair. The "wooden" critique is fair enough but you're just indulging yourself with this. Surprised you haven't as yet found fault with his eyebrows btw. Or have I missed that?
Comes over to me as whining to his parents about it being so unfair. He has a whiny voice, like Ed Miliband has, and coupled with his whole schtik being how nasty the govt and Boris are, it seems a bit "poor me"
Don't know about his eyebrows - he looks like a Teddy Boy who likes a beer to me, but Boris is no pin up either, so it doesn't really affect things
A deathly dull teddy boy with a whiny voice who likes a beer. It's pouring out now.
No point opposing such naked prejudice with reason, I've learnt this, but just on the voice - it's not whiny, it's a touch flat & nasal, which is completely different.
And what about your man "Boris". How does HE come over to you? Eg when he stands up and says he's going to "get social care done". Does this sort of thing come across as dynamic and determined, or like he has no clue what he's talking about and operates on pure bullshit?
Murdo Fraser @murdo_fraser · 2m Interesting to see on the BBC News - and confirmed to me by those attending - that fans arriving at Celtic Park today faced no rigorous vaccine passport checks, simply a glance at a phone screen or a paper print-out. So what’s the point?
None and I believe Sturgeon has banned the idea of the word Mother
The most beautiful word there is
I do not speak about woke normally but this is world class level nonsense
Do you have a source for that, or is it all a bit Winterval?
Some "Bit of fun" noodling with Electoral Calculus on the new boundaries. Leave everything except C and L roughly fixed, and then-
C share L share C seats L seats 42 37 325 242 41 38 317 247 40 39 308 256 39 40 294 270 38 41 281 281 37 42 273 288
Intuitively, they seem about right, don't they?
In which case, C +5 is a bare Conservative majority. C +3 is 2017 redux. Anything between C+3 and L+3 is Coalition of Chaos, but BoJo out. L+3 or better means that the SNP would have to actively support the Conservatives (surely not going to happen?).
Lots of things wrong with EC at that level (BXP to Cons collapse, less inefficient tactical voting on the left), but it's a bit of fun and intuitively feels right.
And Labour need an insane lead for a majority of their own.
Corbyn really did bequeath Starmer a toxic legacy.
The problem is that Starmer isn't up to the job either.
Nonsense. I am not a Labour supporter, but Starmer has a great deal more credibility than the Clown that currently occupies No10. It is a long time before the next election. The big problem that Starmer has is not his own ability or credibility, it is that there is still a large part of the Labour Party that is even more ludicrous than many of those of the current government benches. History will judge how he does the long haul.
He reminds me a lot of Cameron: Massively underestimated by those in his own party that would rather have someone else, and derided by his opponents because they are simply too tribal or plain stupid to realise that he might just make it.
You've made this fallacious comparison more than a few times.
Cameron wasn't underestimated. He led in the polls consistently for all but 3 months of his leadership from when he became Leader of the Opposition, to when he became Prime Minister. Only for a small 3 month window was he not in the lead. Chart
Starmer has never achieved crossover to lead in the polls for the rolling average. Not once. Chart
Starmer isn't remotely in the same league as Cameron.
Yes, as soon as the public saw Cameron vs Brown instead of Cameron vs Blair, he never looked back. I think Brown led Cameron at first, during recess, but once Parliament started again, if I have got my dates right, Cameron took the lead forever
Actually Cameron consistently led versus Blair too. He took the lead immediately as soon as he became LOTO.
Cameron led in the polls the entire time he was Leader of the Opposition, apart from a very brief interregnum while Brown became PM.
A year and a half after Cameron was elected leader, ie the equivalent stage Starmer is at now, in June 2007 Mori had Labour ahead 39% to 36% for the Tories and Yougov had the Tories ahead on 37% to 35% for Labour.
Nice attempt to cherrypick data but you've got your dates wrong. Cameron became LOTO at the start of December 2005 so a year and a half after was May 2007 not June 2007. In May 2007 Cameron's Conservatives were beating Blair's Labour in every single poll.
In fact at this stage of his leadership not only did he lead in every single poll, he had led his party into the lead in every single poll not just in May but every single poll for the entire year to date. Indeed his party had led in the polls in almost every single poll in the past twelve months by this stage.
It was only when Brown became PM in June that things temporarily changed.
No, 6 months added onto December 2005 is June 2007.
Brown did take the lead from June yes but even in May 2007 the last 2 polls only gave the Tories a 5% lead and a 4% lead.
Once Brown took over on June 27th Labour led every single poll bar one which gave the Tories a 1% lead until after Osborne's IHT cut proposal at the Tory conference in the first week of October
You're right I made a mistake on my months, oops. So correction, at this stage of June 2007 the Tories were in the leed with every single pollster except IPSOS MORI. So that's Populous, YouGov, ICM and Communicate (now ComRes) all showing them in the lead.
Also by this stage of June 2007 the Tories were in the lead overall in the rolling averages and had been without interruption for well over a year.
By this stage of Starmer's leadership, Starmer's Labour isn't in the lead with any pollsters and has never been in the lead in the rolling averages.
There's absolutely no comparison between Starmer and Cameron, and the brief interregnum when Brown had a fleeting lead was the exception not the rule.
Anyone who hasn’t realised that the Tory’s game is to put up taxes now in order to bring them down just before the election is not paying attention.
And what they'll do is raise taxes on working people with NI and lower income tax. It will be a net transfer of wealth from working people to retired people.
Some "Bit of fun" noodling with Electoral Calculus on the new boundaries. Leave everything except C and L roughly fixed, and then-
C share L share C seats L seats 42 37 325 242 41 38 317 247 40 39 308 256 39 40 294 270 38 41 281 281 37 42 273 288
Intuitively, they seem about right, don't they?
In which case, C +5 is a bare Conservative majority. C +3 is 2017 redux. Anything between C+3 and L+3 is Coalition of Chaos, but BoJo out. L+3 or better means that the SNP would have to actively support the Conservatives (surely not going to happen?).
Lots of things wrong with EC at that level (BXP to Cons collapse, less inefficient tactical voting on the left), but it's a bit of fun and intuitively feels right.
And Labour need an insane lead for a majority of their own.
39 38 or 38 37 is where it gets interesting.
Indeed it was just such noodling that triggered my post about the Scottish gambit.
Murdo Fraser @murdo_fraser · 2m Interesting to see on the BBC News - and confirmed to me by those attending - that fans arriving at Celtic Park today faced no rigorous vaccine passport checks, simply a glance at a phone screen or a paper print-out. So what’s the point?
None and I believe Sturgeon has banned the idea of the word Mother
The most beautiful word there is
I do not speak about woke normally but this is world class level nonsense
I prefer kipepeo, swahili for butterfly. As others have observed, mother needs a suffix before it's really a contender.
I too prefer the word motherhood (with occasional apple pie).
The coronavirus numbers this evening aren't inspiring - yet we can't go back. For too many people and you see it often on here, the very concept of a return to restrictions is anathema.
The prevailing ethos now is we "live with" the virus which I suppose we could have done in March 2020. We have nearly 80% of those aged 12 and above doubly vaccinated. In Newham, I estimate 55,000 people over 12 are not yet doubly vaccinated so there's still plenty of fuel for the virus.
I confess I'm starting to get concerned about the pace of the booster rollout. @MaxPB was waxing lyrical about getting 2.5 million vaccinated per week - I see little sign of that currently. Mrs Stodge and I are approaching five months since our second vaccination and I'm getting concerned the immunity the second vaccination provided will be wearing off in a few weeks.
Unless we get the booster programme moving, we'll be back in a bad position with weakly protected or unprotected people mixing indoors as we move into late autumn and winter.
Murdo Fraser @murdo_fraser · 2m Interesting to see on the BBC News - and confirmed to me by those attending - that fans arriving at Celtic Park today faced no rigorous vaccine passport checks, simply a glance at a phone screen or a paper print-out. So what’s the point?
None and I believe Sturgeon has banned the idea of the word Mother
The most beautiful word there is
I do not speak about woke normally but this is world class level nonsense
Do you have a source for that, or is it all a bit Winterval?
The coronavirus numbers this evening aren't inspiring - yet we can't go back. For too many people and you see it often on here, the very concept of a return to restrictions is anathema.
The prevailing ethos now is we "live with" the virus which I suppose we could have done in March 2020. We have nearly 80% of those aged 12 and above doubly vaccinated. In Newham, I estimate 55,000 people over 12 are not yet doubly vaccinated so there's still plenty of fuel for the virus.
I confess I'm starting to get concerned about the pace of the booster rollout. @MaxPB was waxing lyrical about getting 2.5 million vaccinated per week - I see little sign of that currently. Mrs Stodge and I are approaching five months since our second vaccination and I'm getting concerned the immunity the second vaccination provided will be wearing off in a few weeks.
Unless we get the booster programme moving, we'll be back in a bad position with weakly protected or unprotected people mixing indoors as we move into late autumn and winter.
Much of Europe is moving faster on both kids and boosters; if we are not careful the position last spring will reverse, and even PB Tories will have to stop going on about our vaccination triumph…
The coronavirus numbers this evening aren't inspiring - yet we can't go back. For too many people and you see it often on here, the very concept of a return to restrictions is anathema.
The prevailing ethos now is we "live with" the virus which I suppose we could have done in March 2020. We have nearly 80% of those aged 12 and above doubly vaccinated. In Newham, I estimate 55,000 people over 12 are not yet doubly vaccinated so there's still plenty of fuel for the virus.
I confess I'm starting to get concerned about the pace of the booster rollout. @MaxPB was waxing lyrical about getting 2.5 million vaccinated per week - I see little sign of that currently. Mrs Stodge and I are approaching five months since our second vaccination and I'm getting concerned the immunity the second vaccination provided will be wearing off in a few weeks.
Unless we get the booster programme moving, we'll be back in a bad position with weakly protected or unprotected people mixing indoors as we move into late autumn and winter.
I don't think antibody immunity falls off a cliff like you describe, rather it's a gentle decline. You definitely can't pin it down to the couple of week timeframe. This also doesn't consider immunity conferred by T-cells.
Corbyn really did bequeath Starmer a toxic legacy.
The problem is that Starmer isn't up to the job either.
Nonsense. I am not a Labour supporter, but Starmer has a great deal more credibility than the Clown that currently occupies No10. It is a long time before the next election. The big problem that Starmer has is not his own ability or credibility, it is that there is still a large part of the Labour Party that is even more ludicrous than many of those of the current government benches. History will judge how he does the long haul.
He reminds me a lot of Cameron: Massively underestimated by those in his own party that would rather have someone else, and derided by his opponents because they are simply too tribal or plain stupid to realise that he might just make it.
I agree with some of that: but Cameron always had a vision - even if you disagreed with it. Starmer seems unable to project any vision he may have without writing a WORN (*) magnum opus. Events haven't helped him, as the country and media are concentrating on bigger events.
Blair was a salesman. Cameron was also a salesman, to a lesser extent. Starmer doesn't appear to be one - and he needs to sell his vision for the country, to both the country and his own party.
(*) Write Once, Read Never. A common form of computer documentation.
"Blair was a salesman. Cameron was also a salesman, to a lesser extent. Starmer doesn't appear to be one - and he needs to sell his vision for the country, to both the country and his own party." - pretty much the whole reason I think Sir Keir won't be PM - plus the fact he is up against a very charismatic salesman
In a way, they appear polar opposites. Starmer may have a vision (I've no idea given he seems incapable of saying it); Boris doesn't have a vision beyond the end of his nose, but can sell the snot that dribbles out by the barrel-load.
We need a hideous scientific experiment where the two are merged together. Starson or Johnmer.
(I actually quite like Starson. Very sci-fi)
I saw a clip of Blair as LotO at PMQs the other day, and he seemed like he was bossing it vs Major (the famous one "I lead my party, he follows his", seems so horribly smug watching it now), and to an extent Cameron did with Brown, from what I can recall.
Miliband and Sir Keir always seem like they are earnestly whining about it being so unfair to me; maybe it's just the lack of gravitas in their voices. They seem like kids complaining about their parents, in comparison to the last couple of LotOs who became PM
No, he doesn't come over as whining to his parents about it being so unfair. The "wooden" critique is fair enough but you're just indulging yourself with this. Surprised you haven't as yet found fault with his eyebrows btw. Or have I missed that?
Comes over to me as whining to his parents about it being so unfair. He has a whiny voice, like Ed Miliband has, and coupled with his whole schtik being how nasty the govt and Boris are, it seems a bit "poor me"
Don't know about his eyebrows - he looks like a Teddy Boy who likes a beer to me, but Boris is no pin up either, so it doesn't really affect things
A deathly dull teddy boy with a whiny voice who likes a beer. It's pouring out now.
No point opposing such naked prejudice with reason, I've learnt this, but just on the voice - it's not whiny, it's a touch flat & nasal, which is completely different.
And what about your man "Boris". How does HE come over to you? Eg when he stands up and says he's going to "get social care done". Does this sort of thing come across as dynamic and determined, or like he has no clue what he's talking about and operates on pure bullshit?
Ooh, prejudice!!!
I used to absolute despise Boris, based almost solely on a combination of class hatred and inability to see how anyone could fall for his bluster - I wouldn't say he was my man now, I voted for him with a heavy heart and a lot of sadness at finally going over to the dark side. But he was the only one offering to honour the referendum result. As I have got older I can appreciate that a bit of charisma and optimism goes a long way, and dreary righteousness is unappealing
The Nandy-doubters haven’t been following her closely enough.
She’s Worcester woman’s younger neice, with a good education. She’s passionate, but doesn’t frighten the horses.
A belligerent person like Jess Philips or Angela Rayner might “bring the fight to the Tories” but will turn off middle Britain.
It's interesting how just about every Lab member on here (inc me) voted for Nandy as leader.
I’m not a labour member. Indeed, I have never voted for them. They are too statist for me.
But, yeh.
What's the vote you felt best about in the past GW?
For me, and admittedly I'm cheating is that I wanted to vote 'Coalition' in 2015. Clearly I couldn't.
I've always felt very happy and comfortable voting Tory otherwise. (And I actually like the voting process - it feels good to march down to your local voting station and place a tick on a piece of paper,)
The coronavirus numbers this evening aren't inspiring - yet we can't go back. For too many people and you see it often on here, the very concept of a return to restrictions is anathema.
The prevailing ethos now is we "live with" the virus which I suppose we could have done in March 2020. We have nearly 80% of those aged 12 and above doubly vaccinated. In Newham, I estimate 55,000 people over 12 are not yet doubly vaccinated so there's still plenty of fuel for the virus.
I confess I'm starting to get concerned about the pace of the booster rollout. @MaxPB was waxing lyrical about getting 2.5 million vaccinated per week - I see little sign of that currently. Mrs Stodge and I are approaching five months since our second vaccination and I'm getting concerned the immunity the second vaccination provided will be wearing off in a few weeks.
Unless we get the booster programme moving, we'll be back in a bad position with weakly protected or unprotected people mixing indoors as we move into late autumn and winter.
Much of Europe is moving faster on both kids and boosters; if we are not careful the position last spring will reverse, and even PB Tories will have to stop going on about our vaccination triumph…
What is happening with the booster programme? Is it hesitation? Or is it admin cock up?
The coronavirus numbers this evening aren't inspiring - yet we can't go back. For too many people and you see it often on here, the very concept of a return to restrictions is anathema.
The prevailing ethos now is we "live with" the virus which I suppose we could have done in March 2020. We have nearly 80% of those aged 12 and above doubly vaccinated. In Newham, I estimate 55,000 people over 12 are not yet doubly vaccinated so there's still plenty of fuel for the virus.
I confess I'm starting to get concerned about the pace of the booster rollout. @MaxPB was waxing lyrical about getting 2.5 million vaccinated per week - I see little sign of that currently. Mrs Stodge and I are approaching five months since our second vaccination and I'm getting concerned the immunity the second vaccination provided will be wearing off in a few weeks.
Unless we get the booster programme moving, we'll be back in a bad position with weakly protected or unprotected people mixing indoors as we move into late autumn and winter.
Much of Europe is moving faster on both kids and boosters; if we are not careful the position last spring will reverse, and even PB Tories will have to stop going on about our vaccination triumph…
It’s too late, isn’t it? We’re behind Western Europe now.
I say this provocatively in the hopes someone will correct me.
It's aligned with the South at the top (so Scandinavia, Britain and Ireland bottom right) and has these descriptions of England and Scotland alongside them
"Note that in ancient times Anglia [England] was inhabited by giants, but some Trojans who had survived the slaughter of Troy came to this island, fought its inhabitants and defeated them; after their prince, Brutus, it was named Britannia. But later the Saxons and the Germans conquered it, and after one of their queens, Angela, called it Anglia. And these peoples were converted to the Faith by means of St. Gregory the pope, who sent them a bishop called Augustine."
"As it is shown, Scotia [Scotland] appears contiguous to Anglia, but in its southern part it is divided from it by water and mountains. The people are of easy morals and are fierce and cruel against their enemies; and they prefer death to servitude. The island is very fertile in pastures, rivers, springs and animals and all other things; and it is like Anglia."
The coronavirus numbers this evening aren't inspiring - yet we can't go back. For too many people and you see it often on here, the very concept of a return to restrictions is anathema.
The prevailing ethos now is we "live with" the virus which I suppose we could have done in March 2020. We have nearly 80% of those aged 12 and above doubly vaccinated. In Newham, I estimate 55,000 people over 12 are not yet doubly vaccinated so there's still plenty of fuel for the virus.
I confess I'm starting to get concerned about the pace of the booster rollout. @MaxPB was waxing lyrical about getting 2.5 million vaccinated per week - I see little sign of that currently. Mrs Stodge and I are approaching five months since our second vaccination and I'm getting concerned the immunity the second vaccination provided will be wearing off in a few weeks.
Unless we get the booster programme moving, we'll be back in a bad position with weakly protected or unprotected people mixing indoors as we move into late autumn and winter.
I don’t the the waning immunity is that serious. Protection against serious disease and death is not waning as quickly as protection against infection, and to be honest I think some of the infections we are seeing in vaccinated people are down to the greater infectiousness of delta. The boosters are happening - my dad’s had his for example, but there does seem a lot less urgency from the powers that be and that is frustrating. Re the unvaccinated cohorts eg in Newham, many if not most will have had Covid by now, and I believe this is the unspoken government plan, and why we are not looking at bringing restrictions in again.
Corbyn really did bequeath Starmer a toxic legacy.
The problem is that Starmer isn't up to the job either.
Nonsense. I am not a Labour supporter, but Starmer has a great deal more credibility than the Clown that currently occupies No10. It is a long time before the next election. The big problem that Starmer has is not his own ability or credibility, it is that there is still a large part of the Labour Party that is even more ludicrous than many of those of the current government benches. History will judge how he does the long haul.
He reminds me a lot of Cameron: Massively underestimated by those in his own party that would rather have someone else, and derided by his opponents because they are simply too tribal or plain stupid to realise that he might just make it.
You've made this fallacious comparison more than a few times.
Cameron wasn't underestimated. He led in the polls consistently for all but 3 months of his leadership from when he became Leader of the Opposition, to when he became Prime Minister. Only for a small 3 month window was he not in the lead. Chart
Starmer has never achieved crossover to lead in the polls for the rolling average. Not once. Chart
Starmer isn't remotely in the same league as Cameron.
Yes, as soon as the public saw Cameron vs Brown instead of Cameron vs Blair, he never looked back. I think Brown led Cameron at first, during recess, but once Parliament started again, if I have got my dates right, Cameron took the lead forever
Actually Cameron consistently led versus Blair too. He took the lead immediately as soon as he became LOTO.
Cameron led in the polls the entire time he was Leader of the Opposition, apart from a very brief interregnum while Brown became PM.
A year and a half after Cameron was elected leader, ie the equivalent stage Starmer is at now, in June 2007 Mori had Labour ahead 39% to 36% for the Tories and Yougov had the Tories ahead on 37% to 35% for Labour.
Nice attempt to cherrypick data but you've got your dates wrong. Cameron became LOTO at the start of December 2005 so a year and a half after was May 2007 not June 2007. In May 2007 Cameron's Conservatives were beating Blair's Labour in every single poll.
In fact at this stage of his leadership not only did he lead in every single poll, he had led his party into the lead in every single poll not just in May but every single poll for the entire year to date. Indeed his party had led in the polls in almost every single poll in the past twelve months by this stage.
It was only when Brown became PM in June that things temporarily changed.
No, 6 months added onto December 2005 is June 2007.
Brown did take the lead from June yes but even in May 2007 the last 2 polls only gave the Tories a 5% lead and a 4% lead.
Once Brown took over on June 27th Labour led every single poll bar one which gave the Tories a 1% lead until after Osborne's IHT cut proposal at the Tory conference in the first week of October
You're right I made a mistake on my months, oops. So correction, at this stage of June 2007 the Tories were in the leed with every single pollster except IPSOS MORI. So that's Populous, YouGov, ICM and Communicate (now ComRes) all showing them in the lead.
Also by this stage of June 2007 the Tories were in the lead overall in the rolling averages and had been without interruption for well over a year.
By this stage of Starmer's leadership, Starmer's Labour isn't in the lead with any pollsters and has never been in the lead in the rolling averages.
There's absolutely no comparison between Starmer and Cameron, and the brief interregnum when Brown had a fleeting lead was the exception not the rule.
Starmer is still polling about 35-37% in most polls, roughly where Cameron was polling at this stage.
Both therefore had a chance of a hung parliament but unlikely to get a majority given the strength of the Tories still now and the strength of the LDs still pre 2010
The coronavirus numbers this evening aren't inspiring - yet we can't go back. For too many people and you see it often on here, the very concept of a return to restrictions is anathema.
The prevailing ethos now is we "live with" the virus which I suppose we could have done in March 2020. We have nearly 80% of those aged 12 and above doubly vaccinated. In Newham, I estimate 55,000 people over 12 are not yet doubly vaccinated so there's still plenty of fuel for the virus.
I confess I'm starting to get concerned about the pace of the booster rollout. @MaxPB was waxing lyrical about getting 2.5 million vaccinated per week - I see little sign of that currently. Mrs Stodge and I are approaching five months since our second vaccination and I'm getting concerned the immunity the second vaccination provided will be wearing off in a few weeks.
Unless we get the booster programme moving, we'll be back in a bad position with weakly protected or unprotected people mixing indoors as we move into late autumn and winter.
Much of Europe is moving faster on both kids and boosters; if we are not careful the position last spring will reverse, and even PB Tories will have to stop going on about our vaccination triumph…
It’s too late, isn’t it? We’re behind Western Europe now.
I say this provocatively in the hopes someone will correct me.
The Nandy-doubters haven’t been following her closely enough.
She’s Worcester woman’s younger neice, with a good education. She’s passionate, but doesn’t frighten the horses.
A belligerent person like Jess Philips or Angela Rayner might “bring the fight to the Tories” but will turn off middle Britain.
It's interesting how just about every Lab member on here (inc me) voted for Nandy as leader.
I’m not a labour member. Indeed, I have never voted for them. They are too statist for me.
But, yeh.
What's the vote you felt best about in the past GW?
For me, and admittedly I'm cheating is that I wanted to vote 'Coalition' in 2015. Clearly I couldn't.
I've always felt very happy and comfortable voting Tory otherwise. (And I actually like the voting process - it feels good to march down to your local voting station and place a tick on a piece of paper,)
In a FPTP system one is never truly happy with one’s vote.
I live in a safe Labour seat, so what I vote doesn’t matter (I’ve voted Lib Dem since 2010 and did not vote before that).
Last NZ election I voted Green in my constituency (best candidate - and she won!) and Act the free market liberals with my party vote.
A very unusual vote split as the two parties tend to be diametrically opposed, but I was v happy with it.
The coronavirus numbers this evening aren't inspiring - yet we can't go back. For too many people and you see it often on here, the very concept of a return to restrictions is anathema.
The prevailing ethos now is we "live with" the virus which I suppose we could have done in March 2020. We have nearly 80% of those aged 12 and above doubly vaccinated. In Newham, I estimate 55,000 people over 12 are not yet doubly vaccinated so there's still plenty of fuel for the virus.
I confess I'm starting to get concerned about the pace of the booster rollout. @MaxPB was waxing lyrical about getting 2.5 million vaccinated per week - I see little sign of that currently. Mrs Stodge and I are approaching five months since our second vaccination and I'm getting concerned the immunity the second vaccination provided will be wearing off in a few weeks.
Unless we get the booster programme moving, we'll be back in a bad position with weakly protected or unprotected people mixing indoors as we move into late autumn and winter.
Much of Europe is moving faster on both kids and boosters; if we are not careful the position last spring will reverse, and even PB Tories will have to stop going on about our vaccination triumph…
It’s too late, isn’t it? We’re behind Western Europe now.
I say this provocatively in the hopes someone will correct me.
I think yes, although caveat to accuracy of population figures. There was data somewhere with some countries achieving over 100% vaccination rates in some ages, which is clearly a nonsense. So yes I think some have passed us, by doing the kids sooner, there are also grey areas about the actual numbers in some places too.
No, 6 months added onto December 2005 is June 2007.
Brown did take the lead from June yes but even in May 2007 the last 2 polls only gave the Tories a 5% lead and a 4% lead.
Once Brown took over on June 27th Labour led every single poll bar one which gave the Tories a 1% lead until after Osborne's IHT cut proposal at the Tory conference in the first week of October
I think Osborne's IHT speech at the 2007 Conservative Conference was the last significant game-changing speech made at a party conference. They are now such low-key asinine events as to be barely worth our consideration.
They were significant once - Kinnock's bravura denunciation of Militant and Thatcher's famous 1981 speech are the stuff of political legend. It was Kinnock's finest hour as Labour leader (in my view) and Thatcher's refusal to compromise was epic political theatre for all it might have split the party under other circumstances.
I think the coronavirus episode makes comparisons with previous parliaments irrelevant - this is a very different parliament where, I suspect, the mid-term will arrive later and be perhaps shorter and sharper. Assuming no election before 2024 (I don't think 2023 will be favourable enough for Johnson to risk his majority), you'd still not want to bet on a Labour majority - as to a hung parliament versus a tiny Conservative majority (less than 15) I think it's 5/6 each of two (10/11 in a place).
All I know there's a lot of water to flow under a lot of bridges before the election.
Corbyn really did bequeath Starmer a toxic legacy.
The problem is that Starmer isn't up to the job either.
Nonsense. I am not a Labour supporter, but Starmer has a great deal more credibility than the Clown that currently occupies No10. It is a long time before the next election. The big problem that Starmer has is not his own ability or credibility, it is that there is still a large part of the Labour Party that is even more ludicrous than many of those of the current government benches. History will judge how he does the long haul.
He reminds me a lot of Cameron: Massively underestimated by those in his own party that would rather have someone else, and derided by his opponents because they are simply too tribal or plain stupid to realise that he might just make it.
You've made this fallacious comparison more than a few times.
Cameron wasn't underestimated. He led in the polls consistently for all but 3 months of his leadership from when he became Leader of the Opposition, to when he became Prime Minister. Only for a small 3 month window was he not in the lead. Chart
Starmer has never achieved crossover to lead in the polls for the rolling average. Not once. Chart
Starmer isn't remotely in the same league as Cameron.
Yes, as soon as the public saw Cameron vs Brown instead of Cameron vs Blair, he never looked back. I think Brown led Cameron at first, during recess, but once Parliament started again, if I have got my dates right, Cameron took the lead forever
Actually Cameron consistently led versus Blair too. He took the lead immediately as soon as he became LOTO.
Cameron led in the polls the entire time he was Leader of the Opposition, apart from a very brief interregnum while Brown became PM.
A year and a half after Cameron was elected leader, ie the equivalent stage Starmer is at now, in June 2007 Mori had Labour ahead 39% to 36% for the Tories and Yougov had the Tories ahead on 37% to 35% for Labour.
Nice attempt to cherrypick data but you've got your dates wrong. Cameron became LOTO at the start of December 2005 so a year and a half after was May 2007 not June 2007. In May 2007 Cameron's Conservatives were beating Blair's Labour in every single poll.
In fact at this stage of his leadership not only did he lead in every single poll, he had led his party into the lead in every single poll not just in May but every single poll for the entire year to date. Indeed his party had led in the polls in almost every single poll in the past twelve months by this stage.
It was only when Brown became PM in June that things temporarily changed.
No, 6 months added onto December 2005 is June 2007.
Brown did take the lead from June yes but even in May 2007 the last 2 polls only gave the Tories a 5% lead and a 4% lead.
Once Brown took over on June 27th Labour led every single poll bar one which gave the Tories a 1% lead until after Osborne's IHT cut proposal at the Tory conference in the first week of October
You're right I made a mistake on my months, oops. So correction, at this stage of June 2007 the Tories were in the leed with every single pollster except IPSOS MORI. So that's Populous, YouGov, ICM and Communicate (now ComRes) all showing them in the lead.
Also by this stage of June 2007 the Tories were in the lead overall in the rolling averages and had been without interruption for well over a year.
By this stage of Starmer's leadership, Starmer's Labour isn't in the lead with any pollsters and has never been in the lead in the rolling averages.
There's absolutely no comparison between Starmer and Cameron, and the brief interregnum when Brown had a fleeting lead was the exception not the rule.
Starmer is still polling about 35-37% in most polls, roughly where Cameron was polling at this stage.
Both therefore had a chance of a hung parliament but unlikely to get a majority given the strength of the Tories still now and the strength of the LDs still pre 2010
Except Keir is crap and Cameron’s star quality was obvious from the off.
The Nandy-doubters haven’t been following her closely enough.
She’s Worcester woman’s younger neice, with a good education. She’s passionate, but doesn’t frighten the horses.
A belligerent person like Jess Philips or Angela Rayner might “bring the fight to the Tories” but will turn off middle Britain.
It's interesting how just about every Lab member on here (inc me) voted for Nandy as leader.
I’m not a labour member. Indeed, I have never voted for them. They are too statist for me.
But, yeh.
What's the vote you felt best about in the past GW?
For me, and admittedly I'm cheating is that I wanted to vote 'Coalition' in 2015. Clearly I couldn't.
I've always felt very happy and comfortable voting Tory otherwise. (And I actually like the voting process - it feels good to march down to your local voting station and place a tick on a piece of paper,)
In a FPTP system one is never truly happy with one’s vote.
I live in a safe Labour seat, so what I vote doesn’t matter (I’ve voted Lib Dem since 2010 and did not vote before that).
Last NZ election I voted Green in my constituency (best candidate - and she won!) and Act the free market liberals with my party vote.
A very unusual vote split as the two parties tend to be diametrically opposed, but I was v happy with it.
Do you like voting? I do. And I do simply because it makes me precisely as self-important as I should be. One vote.
Corbyn really did bequeath Starmer a toxic legacy.
The problem is that Starmer isn't up to the job either.
Nonsense. I am not a Labour supporter, but Starmer has a great deal more credibility than the Clown that currently occupies No10. It is a long time before the next election. The big problem that Starmer has is not his own ability or credibility, it is that there is still a large part of the Labour Party that is even more ludicrous than many of those of the current government benches. History will judge how he does the long haul.
He reminds me a lot of Cameron: Massively underestimated by those in his own party that would rather have someone else, and derided by his opponents because they are simply too tribal or plain stupid to realise that he might just make it.
You've made this fallacious comparison more than a few times.
Cameron wasn't underestimated. He led in the polls consistently for all but 3 months of his leadership from when he became Leader of the Opposition, to when he became Prime Minister. Only for a small 3 month window was he not in the lead. Chart
Starmer has never achieved crossover to lead in the polls for the rolling average. Not once. Chart
Starmer isn't remotely in the same league as Cameron.
Yes, as soon as the public saw Cameron vs Brown instead of Cameron vs Blair, he never looked back. I think Brown led Cameron at first, during recess, but once Parliament started again, if I have got my dates right, Cameron took the lead forever
Actually Cameron consistently led versus Blair too. He took the lead immediately as soon as he became LOTO.
Cameron led in the polls the entire time he was Leader of the Opposition, apart from a very brief interregnum while Brown became PM.
A year and a half after Cameron was elected leader, ie the equivalent stage Starmer is at now, in June 2007 Mori had Labour ahead 39% to 36% for the Tories and Yougov had the Tories ahead on 37% to 35% for Labour.
Nice attempt to cherrypick data but you've got your dates wrong. Cameron became LOTO at the start of December 2005 so a year and a half after was May 2007 not June 2007. In May 2007 Cameron's Conservatives were beating Blair's Labour in every single poll.
In fact at this stage of his leadership not only did he lead in every single poll, he had led his party into the lead in every single poll not just in May but every single poll for the entire year to date. Indeed his party had led in the polls in almost every single poll in the past twelve months by this stage.
It was only when Brown became PM in June that things temporarily changed.
No, 6 months added onto December 2005 is June 2007.
Brown did take the lead from June yes but even in May 2007 the last 2 polls only gave the Tories a 5% lead and a 4% lead.
Once Brown took over on June 27th Labour led every single poll bar one which gave the Tories a 1% lead until after Osborne's IHT cut proposal at the Tory conference in the first week of October
You're right I made a mistake on my months, oops. So correction, at this stage of June 2007 the Tories were in the leed with every single pollster except IPSOS MORI. So that's Populous, YouGov, ICM and Communicate (now ComRes) all showing them in the lead.
Also by this stage of June 2007 the Tories were in the lead overall in the rolling averages and had been without interruption for well over a year.
By this stage of Starmer's leadership, Starmer's Labour isn't in the lead with any pollsters and has never been in the lead in the rolling averages.
There's absolutely no comparison between Starmer and Cameron, and the brief interregnum when Brown had a fleeting lead was the exception not the rule.
Starmer is still polling about 35-37% in most polls, roughly where Cameron was polling at this stage.
Both therefore had a chance of a hung parliament but unlikely to get a majority given the strength of the Tories still now and the strength of the LDs still pre 2020
LOL really clutching at straws to compare them now.
Starmer's party are polling ~35 with their opposing party ~40. Cameron's party was polling ~37 with their opposing party ~32.
The coronavirus numbers this evening aren't inspiring - yet we can't go back. For too many people and you see it often on here, the very concept of a return to restrictions is anathema.
The prevailing ethos now is we "live with" the virus which I suppose we could have done in March 2020. We have nearly 80% of those aged 12 and above doubly vaccinated. In Newham, I estimate 55,000 people over 12 are not yet doubly vaccinated so there's still plenty of fuel for the virus.
I confess I'm starting to get concerned about the pace of the booster rollout. @MaxPB was waxing lyrical about getting 2.5 million vaccinated per week - I see little sign of that currently. Mrs Stodge and I are approaching five months since our second vaccination and I'm getting concerned the immunity the second vaccination provided will be wearing off in a few weeks.
Unless we get the booster programme moving, we'll be back in a bad position with weakly protected or unprotected people mixing indoors as we move into late autumn and winter.
Yes indeed, UK vaccination levels are not exactly dire yet but they are certainly stagnating. France and Italy have already surpassed us in terms of shots per head of population and are still currently vaccinating at 2 and 3 times the UK rate, so in a few weeks the gap will be a lot greater. Spain and Portugal already have even higher rates of vaccinations and are maintaining the gap. Others are rapidly catching up.
So deaths are rising and A&E remains in crisis as we get into the winter. Meanwhile our government faffs around with the booster programme, fails (in England) to bring in real consequences to incentivist the recalcitrant selfish hold out idiots who have yet to get vaccinated at all ("I'm young and so I'm safe, what does it matter if an older person dies...") and has signalled that in terms of public health in public places pretty well anything now goes in England.
Remember that poll from a couple of threads ago on the Opinium poll that showed that the public thought that Labour would have done better in every area bar the vaccine roll out? That won't last if other countries achieve very high overall vaccination rates while rates her are increasingly seen as stagnating.
The Nandy-doubters haven’t been following her closely enough.
She’s Worcester woman’s younger neice, with a good education. She’s passionate, but doesn’t frighten the horses.
A belligerent person like Jess Philips or Angela Rayner might “bring the fight to the Tories” but will turn off middle Britain.
It's interesting how just about every Lab member on here (inc me) voted for Nandy as leader.
I’m not a labour member. Indeed, I have never voted for them. They are too statist for me.
But, yeh.
What's the vote you felt best about in the past GW?
For me, and admittedly I'm cheating is that I wanted to vote 'Coalition' in 2015. Clearly I couldn't.
I've always felt very happy and comfortable voting Tory otherwise. (And I actually like the voting process - it feels good to march down to your local voting station and place a tick on a piece of paper,)
Forgot to add, I also enjoy voting very much. It’s a civic ritual. The only one left.
The coronavirus numbers this evening aren't inspiring - yet we can't go back. For too many people and you see it often on here, the very concept of a return to restrictions is anathema.
The prevailing ethos now is we "live with" the virus which I suppose we could have done in March 2020. We have nearly 80% of those aged 12 and above doubly vaccinated. In Newham, I estimate 55,000 people over 12 are not yet doubly vaccinated so there's still plenty of fuel for the virus.
I confess I'm starting to get concerned about the pace of the booster rollout. @MaxPB was waxing lyrical about getting 2.5 million vaccinated per week - I see little sign of that currently. Mrs Stodge and I are approaching five months since our second vaccination and I'm getting concerned the immunity the second vaccination provided will be wearing off in a few weeks.
Unless we get the booster programme moving, we'll be back in a bad position with weakly protected or unprotected people mixing indoors as we move into late autumn and winter.
Much of Europe is moving faster on both kids and boosters; if we are not careful the position last spring will reverse, and even PB Tories will have to stop going on about our vaccination triumph…
It’s too late, isn’t it? We’re behind Western Europe now.
I say this provocatively in the hopes someone will correct me.
Of course, Europe was behind us with first dose timings, and therefore won't get to the six month mark with most of their populations until the very end of this year. So, I'd expect us to "win" this one comfortably.
Given that AZ + Pfizer seems to generate the best immune response, we should be in really good shape. Once we get people their boosters.
The coronavirus numbers this evening aren't inspiring - yet we can't go back. For too many people and you see it often on here, the very concept of a return to restrictions is anathema.
The prevailing ethos now is we "live with" the virus which I suppose we could have done in March 2020. We have nearly 80% of those aged 12 and above doubly vaccinated. In Newham, I estimate 55,000 people over 12 are not yet doubly vaccinated so there's still plenty of fuel for the virus.
I confess I'm starting to get concerned about the pace of the booster rollout. @MaxPB was waxing lyrical about getting 2.5 million vaccinated per week - I see little sign of that currently. Mrs Stodge and I are approaching five months since our second vaccination and I'm getting concerned the immunity the second vaccination provided will be wearing off in a few weeks.
Unless we get the booster programme moving, we'll be back in a bad position with weakly protected or unprotected people mixing indoors as we move into late autumn and winter.
Much of Europe is moving faster on both kids and boosters; if we are not careful the position last spring will reverse, and even PB Tories will have to stop going on about our vaccination triumph…
It’s too late, isn’t it? We’re behind Western Europe now.
I say this provocatively in the hopes someone will correct me.
tl;dr
UK has a big waning immunity problem — bigger than Western Europe because of starting vax earlier — which is much more likely than masks to explain UK’s ongoing higher case & death rates https://t.co/8ofsYZjYR2
Potentially we're heading for fairly deep doohdooh and the "it's over" attitude isn't helping.
1000 deaths a week is 10% of all deaths, roughly. I'm not sure we should be as chilled about this as we are; it feels like the borderline between "sad but hey-ho" and "f@#* this is bad".
It's aligned with the South at the top (so Scandinavia, Britain and Ireland bottom right) and has these descriptions of England and Scotland alongside them
"Note that in ancient times Anglia [England] was inhabited by giants, but some Trojans who had survived the slaughter of Troy came to this island, fought its inhabitants and defeated them; after their prince, Brutus, it was named Britannia. But later the Saxons and the Germans conquered it, and after one of their queens, Angela, called it Anglia. And these peoples were converted to the Faith by means of St. Gregory the pope, who sent them a bishop called Augustine."
"As it is shown, Scotia [Scotland] appears contiguous to Anglia, but in its southern part it is divided from it by water and mountains. The people are of easy morals and are fierce and cruel against their enemies; and they prefer death to servitude. The island is very fertile in pastures, rivers, springs and animals and all other things; and it is like Anglia."
Re the unvaccinated cohorts eg in Newham, many if not most will have had Covid by now, and I believe this is the unspoken government plan, and why we are not looking at bringing restrictions in again.
I'm sure that's true and in case numbers Newham is well behind the national average and has been for some time. My only question is just as one can get flu every year if one isn't vaccinated, I presume it's possible at some point even if one has had coronavirus to be vulnerable to re-infection.
In other words, protection derived from infection must wear off as protection derived from vaccination.
Corbyn really did bequeath Starmer a toxic legacy.
The problem is that Starmer isn't up to the job either.
Nonsense. I am not a Labour supporter, but Starmer has a great deal more credibility than the Clown that currently occupies No10. It is a long time before the next election. The big problem that Starmer has is not his own ability or credibility, it is that there is still a large part of the Labour Party that is even more ludicrous than many of those of the current government benches. History will judge how he does the long haul.
He reminds me a lot of Cameron: Massively underestimated by those in his own party that would rather have someone else, and derided by his opponents because they are simply too tribal or plain stupid to realise that he might just make it.
You've made this fallacious comparison more than a few times.
Cameron wasn't underestimated. He led in the polls consistently for all but 3 months of his leadership from when he became Leader of the Opposition, to when he became Prime Minister. Only for a small 3 month window was he not in the lead. Chart
Starmer has never achieved crossover to lead in the polls for the rolling average. Not once. Chart
Starmer isn't remotely in the same league as Cameron.
Yes, as soon as the public saw Cameron vs Brown instead of Cameron vs Blair, he never looked back. I think Brown led Cameron at first, during recess, but once Parliament started again, if I have got my dates right, Cameron took the lead forever
Actually Cameron consistently led versus Blair too. He took the lead immediately as soon as he became LOTO.
Cameron led in the polls the entire time he was Leader of the Opposition, apart from a very brief interregnum while Brown became PM.
A year and a half after Cameron was elected leader, ie the equivalent stage Starmer is at now, in June 2007 Mori had Labour ahead 39% to 36% for the Tories and Yougov had the Tories ahead on 37% to 35% for Labour.
Nice attempt to cherrypick data but you've got your dates wrong. Cameron became LOTO at the start of December 2005 so a year and a half after was May 2007 not June 2007. In May 2007 Cameron's Conservatives were beating Blair's Labour in every single poll.
In fact at this stage of his leadership not only did he lead in every single poll, he had led his party into the lead in every single poll not just in May but every single poll for the entire year to date. Indeed his party had led in the polls in almost every single poll in the past twelve months by this stage.
It was only when Brown became PM in June that things temporarily changed.
No, 6 months added onto December 2005 is June 2007.
Brown did take the lead from June yes but even in May 2007 the last 2 polls only gave the Tories a 5% lead and a 4% lead.
Once Brown took over on June 27th Labour led every single poll bar one which gave the Tories a 1% lead until after Osborne's IHT cut proposal at the Tory conference in the first week of October
You're right I made a mistake on my months, oops. So correction, at this stage of June 2007 the Tories were in the leed with every single pollster except IPSOS MORI. So that's Populous, YouGov, ICM and Communicate (now ComRes) all showing them in the lead.
Also by this stage of June 2007 the Tories were in the lead overall in the rolling averages and had been without interruption for well over a year.
By this stage of Starmer's leadership, Starmer's Labour isn't in the lead with any pollsters and has never been in the lead in the rolling averages.
There's absolutely no comparison between Starmer and Cameron, and the brief interregnum when Brown had a fleeting lead was the exception not the rule.
Starmer is still polling about 35-37% in most polls, roughly where Cameron was polling at this stage.
Both therefore had a chance of a hung parliament but unlikely to get a majority given the strength of the Tories still now and the strength of the LDs still pre 2020
LOL really clutching at straws to compare them now.
Starmer's party are polling ~35 with their opposing party ~40. Cameron's party was polling ~37 with their opposing party ~32.
That's not the same thing at all.
The demise of the LDs and UKIP makes comparisons difficult.
The coronavirus numbers this evening aren't inspiring - yet we can't go back. For too many people and you see it often on here, the very concept of a return to restrictions is anathema.
The prevailing ethos now is we "live with" the virus which I suppose we could have done in March 2020. We have nearly 80% of those aged 12 and above doubly vaccinated. In Newham, I estimate 55,000 people over 12 are not yet doubly vaccinated so there's still plenty of fuel for the virus.
I confess I'm starting to get concerned about the pace of the booster rollout. @MaxPB was waxing lyrical about getting 2.5 million vaccinated per week - I see little sign of that currently. Mrs Stodge and I are approaching five months since our second vaccination and I'm getting concerned the immunity the second vaccination provided will be wearing off in a few weeks.
Unless we get the booster programme moving, we'll be back in a bad position with weakly protected or unprotected people mixing indoors as we move into late autumn and winter.
Much of Europe is moving faster on both kids and boosters; if we are not careful the position last spring will reverse, and even PB Tories will have to stop going on about our vaccination triumph…
It’s too late, isn’t it? We’re behind Western Europe now.
I say this provocatively in the hopes someone will correct me.
tl;dr
UK has a big waning immunity problem — bigger than Western Europe because of starting vax earlier — which is much more likely than masks to explain UK’s ongoing higher case & death rates https://t.co/8ofsYZjYR2
Potentially we're heading for fairly deep doohdooh and the "it's over" attitude isn't helping.
1000 deaths a week is 10% of all deaths, roughly. I'm not sure we should be as chilled about this as we are; it feels like the borderline between "sad but hey-ho" and "f@#* this is bad".
This is also my sneaking suspicion. Although I am mostly trying to ignore it because - frankly - un-lockdown suits me.
It's aligned with the South at the top (so Scandinavia, Britain and Ireland bottom right) and has these descriptions of England and Scotland alongside them
"Note that in ancient times Anglia [England] was inhabited by giants, but some Trojans who had survived the slaughter of Troy came to this island, fought its inhabitants and defeated them; after their prince, Brutus, it was named Britannia. But later the Saxons and the Germans conquered it, and after one of their queens, Angela, called it Anglia. And these peoples were converted to the Faith by means of St. Gregory the pope, who sent them a bishop called Augustine."
"As it is shown, Scotia [Scotland] appears contiguous to Anglia, but in its southern part it is divided from it by water and mountains. The people are of easy morals and are fierce and cruel against their enemies; and they prefer death to servitude. The island is very fertile in pastures, rivers, springs and animals and all other things; and it is like Anglia."
The coronavirus numbers this evening aren't inspiring - yet we can't go back. For too many people and you see it often on here, the very concept of a return to restrictions is anathema.
The prevailing ethos now is we "live with" the virus which I suppose we could have done in March 2020. We have nearly 80% of those aged 12 and above doubly vaccinated. In Newham, I estimate 55,000 people over 12 are not yet doubly vaccinated so there's still plenty of fuel for the virus.
I confess I'm starting to get concerned about the pace of the booster rollout. @MaxPB was waxing lyrical about getting 2.5 million vaccinated per week - I see little sign of that currently. Mrs Stodge and I are approaching five months since our second vaccination and I'm getting concerned the immunity the second vaccination provided will be wearing off in a few weeks.
Unless we get the booster programme moving, we'll be back in a bad position with weakly protected or unprotected people mixing indoors as we move into late autumn and winter.
Much of Europe is moving faster on both kids and boosters; if we are not careful the position last spring will reverse, and even PB Tories will have to stop going on about our vaccination triumph…
It’s too late, isn’t it? We’re behind Western Europe now.
I say this provocatively in the hopes someone will correct me.
tl;dr
UK has a big waning immunity problem — bigger than Western Europe because of starting vax earlier — which is much more likely than masks to explain UK’s ongoing higher case & death rates https://t.co/8ofsYZjYR2
Potentially we're heading for fairly deep doohdooh and the "it's over" attitude isn't helping.
1000 deaths a week is 10% of all deaths, roughly. I'm not sure we should be as chilled about this as we are; it feels like the borderline between "sad but hey-ho" and "f@#* this is bad".
Why should we not be chilled about ~1000 deaths a week? Close to ten times that many die of natural causes anyway every single week even pre-Covid and we never freaked out about that.
People will be dying until the end of humanity of one thing or another and as this is now endemic, we're never going to see zero Covid deaths again potentially.
The vaccines have done the job in giving us enough herd immunity to prevent exponential growth kicking off and overwhelming the NHS again, but there'll still be cases especially amongst antivaxxers and still be breakthrough illnesses that could kill off some elderly vulnerable people.
Corbyn really did bequeath Starmer a toxic legacy.
The problem is that Starmer isn't up to the job either.
Nonsense. I am not a Labour supporter, but Starmer has a great deal more credibility than the Clown that currently occupies No10. It is a long time before the next election. The big problem that Starmer has is not his own ability or credibility, it is that there is still a large part of the Labour Party that is even more ludicrous than many of those of the current government benches. History will judge how he does the long haul.
He reminds me a lot of Cameron: Massively underestimated by those in his own party that would rather have someone else, and derided by his opponents because they are simply too tribal or plain stupid to realise that he might just make it.
You've made this fallacious comparison more than a few times.
Cameron wasn't underestimated. He led in the polls consistently for all but 3 months of his leadership from when he became Leader of the Opposition, to when he became Prime Minister. Only for a small 3 month window was he not in the lead. Chart
Starmer has never achieved crossover to lead in the polls for the rolling average. Not once. Chart
Starmer isn't remotely in the same league as Cameron.
Yes, as soon as the public saw Cameron vs Brown instead of Cameron vs Blair, he never looked back. I think Brown led Cameron at first, during recess, but once Parliament started again, if I have got my dates right, Cameron took the lead forever
Actually Cameron consistently led versus Blair too. He took the lead immediately as soon as he became LOTO.
Cameron led in the polls the entire time he was Leader of the Opposition, apart from a very brief interregnum while Brown became PM.
A year and a half after Cameron was elected leader, ie the equivalent stage Starmer is at now, in June 2007 Mori had Labour ahead 39% to 36% for the Tories and Yougov had the Tories ahead on 37% to 35% for Labour.
Nice attempt to cherrypick data but you've got your dates wrong. Cameron became LOTO at the start of December 2005 so a year and a half after was May 2007 not June 2007. In May 2007 Cameron's Conservatives were beating Blair's Labour in every single poll.
In fact at this stage of his leadership not only did he lead in every single poll, he had led his party into the lead in every single poll not just in May but every single poll for the entire year to date. Indeed his party had led in the polls in almost every single poll in the past twelve months by this stage.
It was only when Brown became PM in June that things temporarily changed.
No, 6 months added onto December 2005 is June 2007.
Brown did take the lead from June yes but even in May 2007 the last 2 polls only gave the Tories a 5% lead and a 4% lead.
Once Brown took over on June 27th Labour led every single poll bar one which gave the Tories a 1% lead until after Osborne's IHT cut proposal at the Tory conference in the first week of October
You're right I made a mistake on my months, oops. So correction, at this stage of June 2007 the Tories were in the leed with every single pollster except IPSOS MORI. So that's Populous, YouGov, ICM and Communicate (now ComRes) all showing them in the lead.
Also by this stage of June 2007 the Tories were in the lead overall in the rolling averages and had been without interruption for well over a year.
By this stage of Starmer's leadership, Starmer's Labour isn't in the lead with any pollsters and has never been in the lead in the rolling averages.
There's absolutely no comparison between Starmer and Cameron, and the brief interregnum when Brown had a fleeting lead was the exception not the rule.
Starmer is still polling about 35-37% in most polls, roughly where Cameron was polling at this stage.
Both therefore had a chance of a hung parliament but unlikely to get a majority given the strength of the Tories still now and the strength of the LDs still pre 2020
LOL really clutching at straws to compare them now.
Starmer's party are polling ~35 with their opposing party ~40. Cameron's party was polling ~37 with their opposing party ~32.
That's not the same thing at all.
It is exactly the same thing.
The LDs were polling 15-21% in mid 2007 ie significantly higher than they are now. So it was not enough for Cameron to have a clear lead over Labour to get a majority as 2010 proved, he also needed to win large numbers of LD seats, especially in the South West too, something he only achieved in 2015.
Starmer's party may be less likely to win most seats in a hung parliament than Cameron but if it deprives the Tories of a majority it has more potential allies than Cameron too, not just the LDs but the SNP, the Greens, PC, the SDLP and Alliance. Cameron only had the LDs and DUP, Boris will not have the LDs and and maybe not even the DUP either unless he removes the Irish Sea border.
The latest Redfield and Wilton also puts Labour on 37% ie exactly the same voteshare as Cameron was polling in 2007
Exclusive by me in @theipaper: Sage has met just 3 times since July, is only meeting once a month, because of a lessened demand from ministers for their advice. This is despite fears of a winter wave, with cases, admissions and deaths all rising right now:
Probably because life is back to normal for most people. Morbidity is a fraction of what it was pre-vaccine and most people are learning to live with an endemic virus. In much of London, it’s like the pandemic never happened.
It's different to that in Devon, where I visited last week. More oldies maybe. Where I live in Midlands it's between those two extremes I guess.
In Devon the ridiculous walk to the restaurant/cafe table then mask off thing is still alive and kicking. A friend, who broadly agrees with me over this, says he does it if he can see many others are wearing masks. When I asked why he said "conformity I guess - not because I think there is a point to it". So the previous stage of obedience to state authority is being replaced by an obedience to what is deemed polite.
I find both stages very worrying. As far as I am concerned it is no longer polite to wear a mask if you are vaccinated.
It's regarded as pretty serious down here in Surrey. The Royal Surrey Hospital up the road has declared a level 4 emergency - they are out of beds for all the cases pending. Note also:
With respect to Anabobazina and others - I think that what you'd like to be true is driving your assessment, but the more we behave as if the virus never happened, the worse the winter will be. And, as usual, the Government will doze along until they suddenly leap into emergency restrictions.
I generally agree, but the problem with leaping to emergency restrictions is that there is very little appetite out there for them. I went into Huntingdon for my flu jab this morning (followed by the obligatory run), and mask usage was very varied. Everyone in the pharmacy wore them; in other shops I was the only person. A woman was coughing her lungs up in one shop, sans mask, and without covering her face with her elbow or hand.
How quickly old habits return ...
If Labour think emergency restrictions are needed now, then they should be saying so, loudly, volubly and with certainty.
A clear Ministerial lead would be better even if one takes the opposite view and thinks things are basically fine. People really want clear advice.
I’m not sure as many people as you think want endless advice from politicians and/or the health lobby, especially given we are doing better than their best case scenario.
A lot of us - left and right - just want to be left to get on with our lives without the endless drumbeat, thanks.
I don't see any coherent 'health lobby'. The average GP or even CMO seems to know lots about drugs, nothing about preserving one's own health. So I stay away from them. Tom Watson ex-MP ignored NHS advice in order to recover his own health and reverse his type 2 diabetes.
The coronavirus numbers this evening aren't inspiring - yet we can't go back. For too many people and you see it often on here, the very concept of a return to restrictions is anathema.
The prevailing ethos now is we "live with" the virus which I suppose we could have done in March 2020. We have nearly 80% of those aged 12 and above doubly vaccinated. In Newham, I estimate 55,000 people over 12 are not yet doubly vaccinated so there's still plenty of fuel for the virus.
I confess I'm starting to get concerned about the pace of the booster rollout. @MaxPB was waxing lyrical about getting 2.5 million vaccinated per week - I see little sign of that currently. Mrs Stodge and I are approaching five months since our second vaccination and I'm getting concerned the immunity the second vaccination provided will be wearing off in a few weeks.
Unless we get the booster programme moving, we'll be back in a bad position with weakly protected or unprotected people mixing indoors as we move into late autumn and winter.
Much of Europe is moving faster on both kids and boosters; if we are not careful the position last spring will reverse, and even PB Tories will have to stop going on about our vaccination triumph…
It’s too late, isn’t it? We’re behind Western Europe now.
I say this provocatively in the hopes someone will correct me.
tl;dr
UK has a big waning immunity problem — bigger than Western Europe because of starting vax earlier — which is much more likely than masks to explain UK’s ongoing higher case & death rates https://t.co/8ofsYZjYR2
Potentially we're heading for fairly deep doohdooh and the "it's over" attitude isn't helping.
1000 deaths a week is 10% of all deaths, roughly. I'm not sure we should be as chilled about this as we are; it feels like the borderline between "sad but hey-ho" and "f@#* this is bad".
This is also my sneaking suspicion. Although I am mostly trying to ignore it because - frankly - un-lockdown suits me.
The ONS infection survey doesn't support this hypothesis. If there was waning immunity, we would be seeing an increase in the prevalence amongst older people. That has been completely flat for the past few months. The kids are to blame...
Anyone who hasn’t realised that the Tory’s game is to put up taxes now in order to bring them down just before the election is not paying attention.
And what they'll do is raise taxes on working people with NI and lower income tax. It will be a net transfer of wealth from working people to retired people.
That's actually a tax from the poor to the rich given the NI upper threshold. Not sure what retired people have to do with it.
You're right on the first point but retired people exacerbate the effect of the NI upper threshold because they don't pay NI at all. And there aren't many poor pensioners around nowadays, halving pensioner poverty was one of the successes of Brown's economic and social policy.
The Nandy-doubters haven’t been following her closely enough.
She’s Worcester woman’s younger neice, with a good education. She’s passionate, but doesn’t frighten the horses.
A belligerent person like Jess Philips or Angela Rayner might “bring the fight to the Tories” but will turn off middle Britain.
It's interesting how just about every Lab member on here (inc me) voted for Nandy as leader.
I’m not a labour member. Indeed, I have never voted for them. They are too statist for me.
But, yeh.
I know you aren't a member but I didn't know you'd never voted Labour. Gosh. Although actually, doesn't matter, what we need for next time is the most efficient anti-Con vote in each seat. That will, I hope, eject BoJo.
The coronavirus numbers this evening aren't inspiring - yet we can't go back. For too many people and you see it often on here, the very concept of a return to restrictions is anathema.
The prevailing ethos now is we "live with" the virus which I suppose we could have done in March 2020. We have nearly 80% of those aged 12 and above doubly vaccinated. In Newham, I estimate 55,000 people over 12 are not yet doubly vaccinated so there's still plenty of fuel for the virus.
I confess I'm starting to get concerned about the pace of the booster rollout. @MaxPB was waxing lyrical about getting 2.5 million vaccinated per week - I see little sign of that currently. Mrs Stodge and I are approaching five months since our second vaccination and I'm getting concerned the immunity the second vaccination provided will be wearing off in a few weeks.
Unless we get the booster programme moving, we'll be back in a bad position with weakly protected or unprotected people mixing indoors as we move into late autumn and winter.
Much of Europe is moving faster on both kids and boosters; if we are not careful the position last spring will reverse, and even PB Tories will have to stop going on about our vaccination triumph…
It’s too late, isn’t it? We’re behind Western Europe now.
I say this provocatively in the hopes someone will correct me.
tl;dr
UK has a big waning immunity problem — bigger than Western Europe because of starting vax earlier — which is much more likely than masks to explain UK’s ongoing higher case & death rates https://t.co/8ofsYZjYR2
Potentially we're heading for fairly deep doohdooh and the "it's over" attitude isn't helping.
1000 deaths a week is 10% of all deaths, roughly. I'm not sure we should be as chilled about this as we are; it feels like the borderline between "sad but hey-ho" and "f@#* this is bad".
Why should we not be chilled about ~1000 deaths a week? Close to ten times that many die of natural causes anyway every single week even pre-Covid and we never freaked out about that.
People will be dying until the end of humanity of one thing or another and as this is now endemic, we're never going to see zero Covid deaths again potentially.
The vaccines have done the job in giving us enough herd immunity to prevent exponential growth kicking off and overwhelming the NHS again, but there'll still be cases especially amongst antivaxxers and still be breakthrough illnesses that could kill off some elderly vulnerable people.
That can't and shouldn't be stopped.
I have a lot of sympathy with that view.
But what is infuriating is that the UK could have started on teenagers three months ago, and could have started really pushing boosters at the start of last month. If they had done both those things, then we wouldn't have started to have the hospitals filling.
And right now, the hospitals aren't too full. And it's OK. And we don't need to consider new measures. (And half term is just a week away.)
But the hospitalisation situation doesn't have to get that much worse before we do need to start worrying.
Re the unvaccinated cohorts eg in Newham, many if not most will have had Covid by now, and I believe this is the unspoken government plan, and why we are not looking at bringing restrictions in again.
I'm sure that's true and in case numbers Newham is well behind the national average and has been for some time. My only question is just as one can get flu every year if one isn't vaccinated, I presume it's possible at some point even if one has had coronavirus to be vulnerable to re-infection.
In other words, protection derived from infection must wear off as protection derived from vaccination.
SARS still has lingering immunity 20 years on. I suspect Covid will be similar. We will still catch Covid, but probably as a mild to moderate illness for most. Some older, weakened immune system patients will still succumb.
Corbyn really did bequeath Starmer a toxic legacy.
The problem is that Starmer isn't up to the job either.
Nonsense. I am not a Labour supporter, but Starmer has a great deal more credibility than the Clown that currently occupies No10. It is a long time before the next election. The big problem that Starmer has is not his own ability or credibility, it is that there is still a large part of the Labour Party that is even more ludicrous than many of those of the current government benches. History will judge how he does the long haul.
He reminds me a lot of Cameron: Massively underestimated by those in his own party that would rather have someone else, and derided by his opponents because they are simply too tribal or plain stupid to realise that he might just make it.
You've made this fallacious comparison more than a few times.
Cameron wasn't underestimated. He led in the polls consistently for all but 3 months of his leadership from when he became Leader of the Opposition, to when he became Prime Minister. Only for a small 3 month window was he not in the lead. Chart
Starmer has never achieved crossover to lead in the polls for the rolling average. Not once. Chart
Starmer isn't remotely in the same league as Cameron.
Yes, as soon as the public saw Cameron vs Brown instead of Cameron vs Blair, he never looked back. I think Brown led Cameron at first, during recess, but once Parliament started again, if I have got my dates right, Cameron took the lead forever
Actually Cameron consistently led versus Blair too. He took the lead immediately as soon as he became LOTO.
Cameron led in the polls the entire time he was Leader of the Opposition, apart from a very brief interregnum while Brown became PM.
A year and a half after Cameron was elected leader, ie the equivalent stage Starmer is at now, in June 2007 Mori had Labour ahead 39% to 36% for the Tories and Yougov had the Tories ahead on 37% to 35% for Labour.
Nice attempt to cherrypick data but you've got your dates wrong. Cameron became LOTO at the start of December 2005 so a year and a half after was May 2007 not June 2007. In May 2007 Cameron's Conservatives were beating Blair's Labour in every single poll.
In fact at this stage of his leadership not only did he lead in every single poll, he had led his party into the lead in every single poll not just in May but every single poll for the entire year to date. Indeed his party had led in the polls in almost every single poll in the past twelve months by this stage.
It was only when Brown became PM in June that things temporarily changed.
No, 6 months added onto December 2005 is June 2007.
Brown did take the lead from June yes but even in May 2007 the last 2 polls only gave the Tories a 5% lead and a 4% lead.
Once Brown took over on June 27th Labour led every single poll bar one which gave the Tories a 1% lead until after Osborne's IHT cut proposal at the Tory conference in the first week of October
You're right I made a mistake on my months, oops. So correction, at this stage of June 2007 the Tories were in the leed with every single pollster except IPSOS MORI. So that's Populous, YouGov, ICM and Communicate (now ComRes) all showing them in the lead.
Also by this stage of June 2007 the Tories were in the lead overall in the rolling averages and had been without interruption for well over a year.
By this stage of Starmer's leadership, Starmer's Labour isn't in the lead with any pollsters and has never been in the lead in the rolling averages.
There's absolutely no comparison between Starmer and Cameron, and the brief interregnum when Brown had a fleeting lead was the exception not the rule.
Starmer is still polling about 35-37% in most polls, roughly where Cameron was polling at this stage.
Both therefore had a chance of a hung parliament but unlikely to get a majority given the strength of the Tories still now and the strength of the LDs still pre 2020
LOL really clutching at straws to compare them now.
Starmer's party are polling ~35 with their opposing party ~40. Cameron's party was polling ~37 with their opposing party ~32.
That's not the same thing at all.
It is exactly the same thing.
The LDs were polling 15-21% in mid 2007 ie significantly higher than they are now. So it was not enough for Cameron to have a clear lead over Labour to get a majority as 2010 proved, he also needed to win large numbers of LD seats, especially in the South West too, something he only achieved in 2015.
Starmer's party may be less likely to win most seats in a hung parliament than Cameron but if it deprives the Tories of a majority it has more potential allies than Cameron too, not just the LDs but the SNP, the Greens, PC, the SDLP and Alliance. Cameron only had the LDs and DUP, Boris will not have the LDs and and maybe not even the DUP either unless he removes the Irish Sea border.
The latest Redfield and Wilton also puts Labour on 37% ie exactly the same voteshare as Cameron was polling in 2007
Its not exactly the same thing. The third party vote has crumbled in recent years to the benefit of both main parties. So 37% today is much worse than 37% when Cameron got it.
What matters under FPTP is the relative lead of your party against the opposition. If like Cameron you've got 37 versus 32 then you're getting 54% of the primary parties vote share.
If like Starmer you're getting 35 versus 40 then you're getting 47% of the primary parties vote share.
One is election winning, the other election losing.
As an aside, looking through the FT's Twitter thread, it's noticeable that AZ is not performing as well as Pfizer. We therefore would be well advised to be a bit more aggressive at making sure that people who got AZ in Jan/Feb/Mar/Apr get a shot of Pfizer/Moderna asap.
Murdo Fraser @murdo_fraser · 2m Interesting to see on the BBC News - and confirmed to me by those attending - that fans arriving at Celtic Park today faced no rigorous vaccine passport checks, simply a glance at a phone screen or a paper print-out. So what’s the point?
None and I believe Sturgeon has banned the idea of the word Mother
The most beautiful word there is
I do not speak about woke normally but this is world class level nonsense
Do you have a source for that, or is it all a bit Winterval?
SARS still has lingering immunity 20 years on. I suspect Covid will be similar. We will still catch Covid, but probably as a mild to moderate illness for most. Some older, weakened immune system patients will still succumb.
I thought coronavirus was going to become the dominant flu strain for the next couple of decades supplanting existing viruses until the next "surprise" comes along.
Comments
@murdo_fraser
·
2m
Interesting to see on the BBC News - and confirmed to me by those attending - that fans arriving at Celtic Park today faced no rigorous vaccine passport checks, simply a glance at a phone screen or a paper print-out. So what’s the point?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10107211/Boris-Johnson-hints-tax-cuts-general-election.html
The only way for Labour to take on the separatists is to play the long game. Make it absolutely clear prior to the GE that Labour will give absolutely nothing more to them and will call another GE if Sturgeon makes it impossible for a Labour-led government to govern on a programme that would appeal to former Labour-voting Scots. And it has to be a two stage strategy, being willing to gamble on a 2nd GE in the expectation of being brought down by the SNP, just as happened in 1979, rather than expecting much of a recovery in the first GE.
Miliband shillied and shallied rather than call the SNP's bluff prior to the 2015 GE. I don't think Starmer will make the same mistake.
Much of the reason it worked on Ed in 2015 was because swing voters believed - wrongly IMHO - he didn't have the strength of character to stand up a forceful SNP and Sturgeon.
The most beautiful word there is
I do not speak about woke normally but this is world class level nonsense
Nevertheless we are in rough agreement, certainly in para 2.
You had me.
But I never had you.
Shut your mouth!
And docilely accepted by much of the population.
Eventually gerontocracies run out of younger people’s money…
Given Scotland has them, and given Gover is still a bright light in the govt, I can well imagine vaccine passports for large indoor gatherings. Not a lot of rationality in it I don’t think but it’s a signal that will discourage a percentage from going in the first place. 50% chance at the same time, felt to me like Cabinet was split down the middle.
And from Plan B that just leaves “communicating clearly that the risk has increased and the need to behave more cautiously”, which is wishy washy but really means office workers will be work from home again if they want, in language that disguises from the PM that this is what is really meant. I’d give this the same chance as masks on trains.
And they’ll hope that all that is enough to keep the show on the road until third doses right the ship again. Which I am pretty sure it will be, 90% I guess.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/10/15/scotlands-civil-service-deletes-mother-maternity-policy-stonewall/
That's actually a tax from the poor to the rich given the NI upper threshold. Not sure what retired people have to do with it.
This has been much discussed on here.
Edit; I realise this sounds a bit rude. I was terse because I am eating a pork chop.
Working people pay NI, and workers tend to be poorer.
Unearned income, and pensioners, do not pay NI, and they tend to be richer.
Our Google Store went down during the #Pixel6Launch. We apologize and are working on it. We will let you know when it’s back up.
https://twitter.com/madebygoogle/status/1450525148583399430
But you all agree that, given the NI upper income threshold, that NI tax rise is a transfer of wealth from the poor to the wealthy; I take it?
No point opposing such naked prejudice with reason, I've learnt this, but just on the voice - it's not whiny, it's a touch flat & nasal, which is completely different.
And what about your man "Boris". How does HE come over to you? Eg when he stands up and says he's going to "get social care done". Does this sort of thing come across as dynamic and determined, or like he has no clue what he's talking about and operates on pure bullshit?
C share L share C seats L seats
42 37 325 242
41 38 317 247
40 39 308 256
39 40 294 270
38 41 281 281
37 42 273 288
Intuitively, they seem about right, don't they?
In which case,
C +5 is a bare Conservative majority.
C +3 is 2017 redux.
Anything between C+3 and L+3 is Coalition of Chaos, but BoJo out.
L+3 or better means that the SNP would have to actively support the Conservatives (surely not going to happen?).
Lots of things wrong with EC at that level (BXP to Cons collapse, less inefficient tactical voting on the left), but it's a bit of fun and intuitively feels right.
And Labour need an insane lead for a majority of their own.
Also by this stage of June 2007 the Tories were in the lead overall in the rolling averages and had been without interruption for well over a year.
By this stage of Starmer's leadership, Starmer's Labour isn't in the lead with any pollsters and has never been in the lead in the rolling averages.
There's absolutely no comparison between Starmer and Cameron, and the brief interregnum when Brown had a fleeting lead was the exception not the rule.
Indeed it was just such noodling that triggered my post about the Scottish gambit.
The coronavirus numbers this evening aren't inspiring - yet we can't go back. For too many people and you see it often on here, the very concept of a return to restrictions is anathema.
The prevailing ethos now is we "live with" the virus which I suppose we could have done in March 2020. We have nearly 80% of those aged 12 and above doubly vaccinated. In Newham, I estimate 55,000 people over 12 are not yet doubly vaccinated so there's still plenty of fuel for the virus.
I confess I'm starting to get concerned about the pace of the booster rollout. @MaxPB was waxing lyrical about getting 2.5 million vaccinated per week - I see little sign of that currently. Mrs Stodge and I are approaching five months since our second vaccination and I'm getting concerned the immunity the second vaccination provided will be wearing off in a few weeks.
Unless we get the booster programme moving, we'll be back in a bad position with weakly protected or unprotected people mixing indoors as we move into late autumn and winter.
Indeed, I have never voted for them.
They are too statist for me.
But, yeh.
Cutting Income Tax would be adding insult to injury.
I used to absolute despise Boris, based almost solely on a combination of class hatred and inability to see how anyone could fall for his bluster - I wouldn't say he was my man now, I voted for him with a heavy heart and a lot of sadness at finally going over to the dark side. But he was the only one offering to honour the referendum result. As I have got older I can appreciate that a bit of charisma and optimism goes a long way, and dreary righteousness is unappealing
For me, and admittedly I'm cheating is that I wanted to vote 'Coalition' in 2015. Clearly I couldn't.
I've always felt very happy and comfortable voting Tory otherwise. (And I actually like the voting process - it feels good to march down to your local voting station and place a tick on a piece of paper,)
We’re behind Western Europe now.
I say this provocatively in the hopes someone will correct me.
It's aligned with the South at the top (so Scandinavia, Britain and Ireland bottom right) and has these descriptions of England and Scotland alongside them
"Note that in ancient times Anglia [England] was inhabited by giants, but some Trojans who had survived the slaughter of Troy came to this island, fought its inhabitants and defeated them; after their prince, Brutus, it was named Britannia. But later the Saxons and the Germans conquered it, and after one of their queens, Angela, called it Anglia. And these peoples were converted to the Faith by means of St. Gregory the pope, who sent them a bishop called Augustine."
"As it is shown, Scotia [Scotland] appears contiguous to Anglia, but in its southern part it is divided from it by water and mountains. The people are of easy morals and are fierce and cruel against their enemies; and they prefer death to servitude. The island is very fertile in pastures, rivers, springs and animals and all other things; and it is like Anglia."
The boosters are happening - my dad’s had his for example, but there does seem a lot less urgency from the powers that be and that is frustrating.
Re the unvaccinated cohorts eg in Newham, many if not most will have had Covid by now, and I believe this is the unspoken government plan, and why we are not looking at bringing restrictions in again.
Both therefore had a chance of a hung parliament but unlikely to get a majority given the strength of the Tories still now and the strength of the LDs still pre 2010
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/covid-vaccine-booster-doses-per-capita?yScale=log&country=ITA~DEU~FRA~USA~ISR~ESP~LUX~AUT
The UK is at 7%, so well ahead of most others.
I live in a safe Labour seat, so what I vote doesn’t matter (I’ve voted Lib Dem since 2010 and did not vote before that).
Last NZ election I voted Green in my constituency (best candidate - and she won!) and Act the free market liberals with my party vote.
A very unusual vote split as the two parties tend to be diametrically opposed, but I was v happy with it.
Manchester Airport announce a controlled evacuation is taking place following a suspicious package in terminal 2
They were significant once - Kinnock's bravura denunciation of Militant and Thatcher's famous 1981 speech are the stuff of political legend. It was Kinnock's finest hour as Labour leader (in my view) and Thatcher's refusal to compromise was epic political theatre for all it might have split the party under other circumstances.
I think the coronavirus episode makes comparisons with previous parliaments irrelevant - this is a very different parliament where, I suspect, the mid-term will arrive later and be perhaps shorter and sharper. Assuming no election before 2024 (I don't think 2023 will be favourable enough for Johnson to risk his majority), you'd still not want to bet on a Labour majority - as to a hung parliament versus a tiny Conservative majority (less than 15) I think it's 5/6 each of two (10/11 in a place).
All I know there's a lot of water to flow under a lot of bridges before the election.
Starmer's party are polling ~35 with their opposing party ~40.
Cameron's party was polling ~37 with their opposing party ~32.
That's not the same thing at all.
So deaths are rising and A&E remains in crisis as we get into the winter. Meanwhile our government faffs around with the booster programme, fails (in England) to bring in real consequences to incentivist the recalcitrant selfish hold out idiots who have yet to get vaccinated at all ("I'm young and so I'm safe, what does it matter if an older person dies...") and has signalled that in terms of public health in public places pretty well anything now goes in England.
Remember that poll from a couple of threads ago on the Opinium poll that showed that the public thought that Labour would have done better in every area bar the vaccine roll out? That won't last if other countries achieve very high overall vaccination rates while rates her are increasingly seen as stagnating.
It’s a civic ritual. The only one left.
That’s why I’m kind of against postal voting.
Given that AZ + Pfizer seems to generate the best immune response, we should be in really good shape. Once we get people their boosters.
UK has a big waning immunity problem — bigger than Western Europe because of starting vax earlier — which is much more likely than masks to explain UK’s ongoing higher case & death rates
https://t.co/8ofsYZjYR2
Potentially we're heading for fairly deep doohdooh and the "it's over" attitude isn't helping.
1000 deaths a week is 10% of all deaths, roughly. I'm not sure we should be as chilled about this as we are; it feels like the borderline between "sad but hey-ho" and "f@#* this is bad".
http://visualoop.com/media/2014/09/WILLIAM-FRAZER-The-Fra-Mauro-World-Map-of-circa-1450-1804-credit-British-Library.jpg
In other words, protection derived from infection must wear off as protection derived from vaccination.
We don't have a clear view how the re-testing is skewing the numbers.
https://twitter.com/strickdc/status/1450477711663767556
Should Mandelson and Osborne be worried?
As in, Big G needed to have his tea first.
Although I am mostly trying to ignore it because - frankly - un-lockdown suits me.
People will be dying until the end of humanity of one thing or another and as this is now endemic, we're never going to see zero Covid deaths again potentially.
The vaccines have done the job in giving us enough herd immunity to prevent exponential growth kicking off and overwhelming the NHS again, but there'll still be cases especially amongst antivaxxers and still be breakthrough illnesses that could kill off some elderly vulnerable people.
That can't and shouldn't be stopped.
Just imagine how twitter would have been with 43,000 false positives
You do get personal at times
The LDs were polling 15-21% in mid 2007 ie significantly higher than they are now. So it was not enough for Cameron to have a clear lead over Labour to get a majority as 2010 proved, he also needed to win large numbers of LD seats, especially in the South West too, something he only achieved in 2015.
Starmer's party may be less likely to win most seats in a hung parliament than Cameron but if it deprives the Tories of a majority it has more potential allies than Cameron too, not just the LDs but the SNP, the Greens, PC, the SDLP and Alliance. Cameron only had the LDs and DUP, Boris will not have the LDs and and maybe not even the DUP either unless he removes the Irish Sea border.
The latest Redfield and Wilton also puts Labour on 37% ie exactly the same voteshare as Cameron was polling in 2007
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/10/18/booster-vaccines-rollout-slow/
are nearly as harsh as on the 'sceptic' websites.
I don't see any coherent 'health lobby'. The average GP or even CMO seems to know lots about drugs, nothing about preserving one's own health. So I stay away from them. Tom Watson ex-MP ignored NHS advice in order to recover his own health and reverse his type 2 diabetes.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveypilot/15october2021 (Figure 4).
I was very impressed to learn earlier that you were a policeman in Scotland in the early 60s.
But what is infuriating is that the UK could have started on teenagers three months ago, and could have started really pushing boosters at the start of last month. If they had done both those things, then we wouldn't have started to have the hospitals filling.
And right now, the hospitals aren't too full. And it's OK. And we don't need to consider new measures. (And half term is just a week away.)
But the hospitalisation situation doesn't have to get that much worse before we do need to start worrying.
What matters under FPTP is the relative lead of your party against the opposition. If like Cameron you've got 37 versus 32 then you're getting 54% of the primary parties vote share.
If like Starmer you're getting 35 versus 40 then you're getting 47% of the primary parties vote share.
One is election winning, the other election losing.
Oooops, not allowed.