"While everyone is talking about "Stop The War Coalition", a reminder that when the Yazidi minority in Iraq were being massacred by Islamic State in 2014, the organisation was claiming the genocide was "mythical", and was designed to distract attention from "Palestinians in Gaza"."
I don’t know if evil is the right word, but “organisation with very misleading name for one stuffed and controlled by overseas branch of the grumpy peoples front for the liberation of Palestine from Jewish Occupation” is probably the right sentence.
(Not wishing to wake Big John Knolls from his cave too early) the weakness of Di Abbotts attack on Starmer today is its based on too much fiction, not enough fact - Starmer is pro all war, would have voted not just for Blair’s invasion of Iraq but would have willingly thrown UK troops into Vietnam, would have liked nothing better than to join the whites against the reds in 1917, and wouldn’t have hesitated to back Churchill to the hilt over Tonypandy.
Is that all you got Labour Left, making things up?
No. Dismissing the Yazidi genocide as a myth, whatever your warped purposes, is EVIL
More than anything they are just naive and annoying. They normally believe in a simplistic narrative that the 'west' is always evil, and anyone who doubts that has been brainwashed by the media, who are controlled by governments and corporations. The second part of the belief structure is that, if the west stop being evil then the human race will become more peaceful and enlightened.
This wrong headed thinking is very common right across the labour party - until Starmer has purged the labour party of a large proportion of its membership, you can't completely trust labour on matters of war and peace.
1. Anglophobia. Within the intelligentsia, a derisive and mildly hostile attitude towards Britain is more or less compulsory, but it is an unfaked emotion in many cases. During the war it was manifested in the defeatism of the intelligentsia, which persisted long after it had become clear that the Axis powers could not win. Many people were undisguisedly pleased when Singapore fell or when the British were driven out of Greece, and there was a remarkable unwillingness to believe in good news, e.g. el Alamein, or the number of German planes shot down in the Battle of Britain. English left-wing intellectuals did not, of course, actually want the Germans or Japanese to win the war, but many of them could not help getting a certain kick out of seeing their own country humiliated, and wanted to feel that the final victory would be due to Russia, or perhaps America, and not to Britain. In foreign politics many intellectuals follow the principle that any faction backed by Britain must be in the wrong. As a result, ‘enlightened’ opinion is quite largely a mirror-image of Conservative policy. Anglophobia is always liable to reversal, hence that fairly common spectacle, the pacifist of one war who is a bellicist in the next.
Aren't they just two cheeks of the same arse? People who think their country is always in the wrong are no more or less likely to be correct than those who think their country is always in the right. STW may be full of twats but they were correct about the Iraq War, for instance, while centrist and right wing opinion was wrong.
Arch centrists the Lib Dems were consistently right about the Iraq war from the start. All wings of the party with very few exceptions.
Were they? The LDs backed the war in Afghanistan but opposed the war in Iraq.
Iraq is now a democracy free of Saddam's brutal dictatorship. Afghanistan has returned to the control of the Taliban.
Even Bin Laden was killed in Pakistan not Afghanistan
The Afghan invasion helped stymie the outflow of Islamofascist terror to the West, which was its intention. The Iraq invasion unleashed more of it on us, and its intentions were malign.
By those tokens, yes, the Lib Dems were spot on in their support/lack of support for each. Of course, they can't take much credit or blame for the implementation, being out of power for all but 5 years of the last 19, and only as a junior coalition party then. But yes, they made the right calls.
Also, @HYUFD, can you please stop referring to Iraq as a democracy. By any reasonable measure it is absolutely not. You've been called out on this before, and you keep on with the same lie. The Economist can help signpost the way to the sorts of things you should and should not call democracies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index
It is a democracy in comparison with most of its neighbours in the Middle East ie Iran, Saudi Arabia and Syria. That is the only measure that counts.
Under Saddam it was the most brutal dictatorship in the Middle East.
"That's the only measure that counts"? Good grief, man. No. Are you drunk?
Of course it is. Nobody could have expected Iraq to become Sweden, Germany or New Zealand or Israel overnight. ' However of the major Arab nations in the Middle East, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Egypt, even on the link you provided Iraq is now the least authoritarian and most democratic
Nobody expected it to become Sweden overnight. Aye, mebbe. So why do you pretend that it is anywhere close? You said Iraq is a democracy. It is not. Don't twist the truth to fit the point you're trying to make.
Iraq elects its own President and Parliament in competitive multi party elections, that is a democracy even if not a perfect democracy.
Iraq did not elect its President and Parliament in competitive elections under Saddam, so my point stands
Holding a vote is not the same as having free and fair elections. Even Vladimir Putin plays pretendy democracy.
Nope, it is a democracy.
Russia is also a democracy, if not a perfect one, certainly more so than under Stalin for instance.
My point stands. Iraq is now one of the most democratic nations in the Middle East, under Saddam it was the most authoritarian and repressed nation in the Middle East.
The Johnson lead in a much-reduced voter pool needs to be considered in the light of how many 2019 Tories have been lost, but would return with Sunak.
I personally don't think many of those lost since 2019 are coming back if Boris leads the Tories into the next election. It will be a bloody hard sell on the doorstep.
Many (of us) left not only because of Boris but because he cleared out what we had regarded as the Cameroonian wing of the party. It left the party with the Dorries Rees-Moggs, Raabs et al as ascendant.
As it is often pointed out, the new 2019 Cons MPs all signed the Brexit pledge and the Cons are now more than ever a hard Brexit party. Of course Brexit is done (talking to you, @Leon ) but the character of the party is significantly different even from 2017.
Not to say that a change of leader wouldn't help and probably lead to personnel changes but the guts of the party I (we?) knew and liked have been removed.
No, it is not the party of R. A. Butler.
Butler was a Tory MP from 1929-65, during the entirety of which the UK was not even in the EEC.
Boris' economic policies are also closer to Macmillan's than Thatcher's
Huh? I never mentioned Europe.
Have you not come across "Butskellism" and the "Post War Consensus"? I don't believe Johnson would fit into any post-war consensus, except perhaps when he was Mayor of London, and that seems like a political lifetime ago. He is now a Trumpian populist.
P.S. Johnson's economic policies are closer to Dave Nellist's than Mrs Thatcher's.
Johnson is a big spender who wants to build more houses, his economic policies are closer to Macmillan and Butler's Tory Party than Thatcher's. Boris described himself as a 'Brexity Hezza' which is pretty accurate.
Obviously however he is not a socialist like Nellist though, he is not nationalising industries, is not raising income tax and inheritance tax and nor is he allowing unions to strike at will, nor is he abolishing Eton or Marlborough, which he and Macmillan and Butler attended. Nellist and Militant wanted to do all that. Boris also complains a six figure income is not even enough for him, Nellist only took the average wage as an MP.
Indeed after Thatcher in 1983 and 1987, the Tory leaders who have won the biggest general election majorities for their party since WW2 are Macmillan in 1959 and Boris in 2019
You've sold me on Dave Nellist. Coventry's finest! If only I lived in Erdington.
Even though Nellist’s views were slightly different from mine, I always respected that he took an average worker’s salary
I believe Nadia Whittome does that as well.
Never really saw the need, since being an MP is not being an average worker even if you eschew taking the full salary, but it is at least a significant gesture.
"While everyone is talking about "Stop The War Coalition", a reminder that when the Yazidi minority in Iraq were being massacred by Islamic State in 2014, the organisation was claiming the genocide was "mythical", and was designed to distract attention from "Palestinians in Gaza"."
I don’t know if evil is the right word, but “organisation with very misleading name for one stuffed and controlled by overseas branch of the grumpy peoples front for the liberation of Palestine from Jewish Occupation” is probably the right sentence.
(Not wishing to wake Big John Knolls from his cave too early) the weakness of Di Abbotts attack on Starmer today is its based on too much fiction, not enough fact - Starmer is pro all war, would have voted not just for Blair’s invasion of Iraq but would have willingly thrown UK troops into Vietnam, would have liked nothing better than to join the whites against the reds in 1917, and wouldn’t have hesitated to back Churchill to the hilt over Tonypandy.
Is that all you got Labour Left, making things up?
No. Dismissing the Yazidi genocide as a myth, whatever your warped purposes, is EVIL
More than anything they are just naive and annoying. They normally believe in a simplistic narrative that the 'west' is always evil, and anyone who doubts that has been brainwashed by the media, who are controlled by governments and corporations. The second part of the belief structure is that, if the west stop being evil then the human race will become more peaceful and enlightened.
This wrong headed thinking is very common right across the labour party - until Starmer has purged the labour party of a large proportion of its membership, you can't completely trust labour on matters of war and peace.
1. Anglophobia. Within the intelligentsia, a derisive and mildly hostile attitude towards Britain is more or less compulsory, but it is an unfaked emotion in many cases. During the war it was manifested in the defeatism of the intelligentsia, which persisted long after it had become clear that the Axis powers could not win. Many people were undisguisedly pleased when Singapore fell or when the British were driven out of Greece, and there was a remarkable unwillingness to believe in good news, e.g. el Alamein, or the number of German planes shot down in the Battle of Britain. English left-wing intellectuals did not, of course, actually want the Germans or Japanese to win the war, but many of them could not help getting a certain kick out of seeing their own country humiliated, and wanted to feel that the final victory would be due to Russia, or perhaps America, and not to Britain. In foreign politics many intellectuals follow the principle that any faction backed by Britain must be in the wrong. As a result, ‘enlightened’ opinion is quite largely a mirror-image of Conservative policy. Anglophobia is always liable to reversal, hence that fairly common spectacle, the pacifist of one war who is a bellicist in the next.
Aren't they just two cheeks of the same arse? People who think their country is always in the wrong are no more or less likely to be correct than those who think their country is always in the right. STW may be full of twats but they were correct about the Iraq War, for instance, while centrist and right wing opinion was wrong.
Arch centrists the Lib Dems were consistently right about the Iraq war from the start. All wings of the party with very few exceptions.
Were they? The LDs backed the war in Afghanistan but opposed the war in Iraq.
Iraq is now a democracy free of Saddam's brutal dictatorship. Afghanistan has returned to the control of the Taliban.
Even Bin Laden was killed in Pakistan not Afghanistan
The Afghan invasion helped stymie the outflow of Islamofascist terror to the West, which was its intention. The Iraq invasion unleashed more of it on us, and its intentions were malign.
By those tokens, yes, the Lib Dems were spot on in their support/lack of support for each. Of course, they can't take much credit or blame for the implementation, being out of power for all but 5 years of the last 19, and only as a junior coalition party then. But yes, they made the right calls.
Also, @HYUFD, can you please stop referring to Iraq as a democracy. By any reasonable measure it is absolutely not. You've been called out on this before, and you keep on with the same lie. The Economist can help signpost the way to the sorts of things you should and should not call democracies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index
It is a democracy in comparison with most of its neighbours in the Middle East ie Iran, Saudi Arabia and Syria. That is the only measure that counts.
Under Saddam it was the most brutal dictatorship in the Middle East.
"That's the only measure that counts"? Good grief, man. No. Are you drunk?
Of course it is. Nobody could have expected Iraq to become Sweden, Germany or New Zealand or Israel overnight. ' However of the major Arab nations in the Middle East, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Egypt, even on the link you provided Iraq is now the least authoritarian and most democratic
Nobody expected it to become Sweden overnight. Aye, mebbe. So why do you pretend that it is anywhere close? You said Iraq is a democracy. It is not. Don't twist the truth to fit the point you're trying to make.
Iraq elects its own President and Parliament in competitive multi party elections, that is a democracy even if not a perfect democracy.
Iraq did not elect its President and Parliament in competitive elections under Saddam, so my point stands
Holding a vote is not the same as having free and fair elections. Even Vladimir Putin plays pretendy democracy.
Russia is also a democracy, if not a perfect one, certainly more so than under Stalin for instance.
I think even authoritarian regimes generally wouldn't think they deserve praise for being more democratic than Joseph Stalin. Even for them that's a low bar to clear.
"While everyone is talking about "Stop The War Coalition", a reminder that when the Yazidi minority in Iraq were being massacred by Islamic State in 2014, the organisation was claiming the genocide was "mythical", and was designed to distract attention from "Palestinians in Gaza"."
I don’t know if evil is the right word, but “organisation with very misleading name for one stuffed and controlled by overseas branch of the grumpy peoples front for the liberation of Palestine from Jewish Occupation” is probably the right sentence.
(Not wishing to wake Big John Knolls from his cave too early) the weakness of Di Abbotts attack on Starmer today is its based on too much fiction, not enough fact - Starmer is pro all war, would have voted not just for Blair’s invasion of Iraq but would have willingly thrown UK troops into Vietnam, would have liked nothing better than to join the whites against the reds in 1917, and wouldn’t have hesitated to back Churchill to the hilt over Tonypandy.
Is that all you got Labour Left, making things up?
No. Dismissing the Yazidi genocide as a myth, whatever your warped purposes, is EVIL
More than anything they are just naive and annoying. They normally believe in a simplistic narrative that the 'west' is always evil, and anyone who doubts that has been brainwashed by the media, who are controlled by governments and corporations. The second part of the belief structure is that, if the west stop being evil then the human race will become more peaceful and enlightened.
This wrong headed thinking is very common right across the labour party - until Starmer has purged the labour party of a large proportion of its membership, you can't completely trust labour on matters of war and peace.
1. Anglophobia. Within the intelligentsia, a derisive and mildly hostile attitude towards Britain is more or less compulsory, but it is an unfaked emotion in many cases. During the war it was manifested in the defeatism of the intelligentsia, which persisted long after it had become clear that the Axis powers could not win. Many people were undisguisedly pleased when Singapore fell or when the British were driven out of Greece, and there was a remarkable unwillingness to believe in good news, e.g. el Alamein, or the number of German planes shot down in the Battle of Britain. English left-wing intellectuals did not, of course, actually want the Germans or Japanese to win the war, but many of them could not help getting a certain kick out of seeing their own country humiliated, and wanted to feel that the final victory would be due to Russia, or perhaps America, and not to Britain. In foreign politics many intellectuals follow the principle that any faction backed by Britain must be in the wrong. As a result, ‘enlightened’ opinion is quite largely a mirror-image of Conservative policy. Anglophobia is always liable to reversal, hence that fairly common spectacle, the pacifist of one war who is a bellicist in the next.
Aren't they just two cheeks of the same arse? People who think their country is always in the wrong are no more or less likely to be correct than those who think their country is always in the right. STW may be full of twats but they were correct about the Iraq War, for instance, while centrist and right wing opinion was wrong.
Arch centrists the Lib Dems were consistently right about the Iraq war from the start. All wings of the party with very few exceptions.
Were they? The LDs backed the war in Afghanistan but opposed the war in Iraq.
Iraq is now a democracy free of Saddam's brutal dictatorship. Afghanistan has returned to the control of the Taliban.
Even Bin Laden was killed in Pakistan not Afghanistan
The Afghan invasion helped stymie the outflow of Islamofascist terror to the West, which was its intention. The Iraq invasion unleashed more of it on us, and its intentions were malign.
By those tokens, yes, the Lib Dems were spot on in their support/lack of support for each. Of course, they can't take much credit or blame for the implementation, being out of power for all but 5 years of the last 19, and only as a junior coalition party then. But yes, they made the right calls.
Also, @HYUFD, can you please stop referring to Iraq as a democracy. By any reasonable measure it is absolutely not. You've been called out on this before, and you keep on with the same lie. The Economist can help signpost the way to the sorts of things you should and should not call democracies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index
It is a democracy in comparison with most of its neighbours in the Middle East ie Iran, Saudi Arabia and Syria. That is the only measure that counts.
Under Saddam it was the most brutal dictatorship in the Middle East.
"That's the only measure that counts"? Good grief, man. No. Are you drunk?
Of course it is. Nobody could have expected Iraq to become Sweden, Germany or New Zealand or Israel overnight. ' However of the major Arab nations in the Middle East, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Egypt, even on the link you provided Iraq is now the least authoritarian and most democratic
Nobody expected it to become Sweden overnight. Aye, mebbe. So why do you pretend that it is anywhere close? You said Iraq is a democracy. It is not. Don't twist the truth to fit the point you're trying to make.
Iraq elects its own President and Parliament in competitive multi party elections, that is a democracy even if not a perfect democracy.
Iraq did not elect its President and Parliament in competitive elections under Saddam, so my point stands
Holding a vote is not the same as having free and fair elections. Even Vladimir Putin plays pretendy democracy.
Nope, it is a democracy.
Russia is also a democracy, if not a perfect one, certainly more so than under Stalin for instance.
My point stands. Iraq is now one of the most democratic nations in the Middle East, under Saddam it was the most authoritarian and repressed
On topic, I think that poll (if it’s a true reflection so caveat required) mirrors what a few of us having been saying for a while namely Sunak - and the whole “Dishy Rishi” thing - is over-proportionally appealing to the chattering classes who are very unlikely to vote Conservative in the first place.
I am not enthusiastic about him, but would return to the Conservatives (my natural political home) if he replaced The Clown.
I believe you need Hercules to clear out the Conservatives' Augean stables after Johnson has finally vacated. A period in opposition to remove the smell of corruption would be well deserved for the Conservative Party.
You could be right, but the thought of a bossy Labour government doesn't fill me with joy. My ideal is to have a genuine Conservative government that is keen on good governance with a reasonably plausible non-clownish leader.
You have an odd perception of what a Labour government would entail, Nigel.
And on another matter - I do hope you're exercising enough and getting your five a day?
Labour governments are always bossy. They like to tell people how to live their lives. Labour politicians are essentially instinctively bossy people who primarily look after those in the public sector. That doesn't necessarily mean all bad, and Labour has done some great things when in power, but I will always view them with great distrust. Would I trust Starmer more than The Clown, yes, most definitely. Would I vote Labour if The Clown is still PM, yes quite possibly
No idea whatsoever, what your other comment references tho.
Someone once described @kinabalu as being a poster who would swim out to sea and attach a hook personally to a fish before coming back to the shore and attempting to reel it in.
I'm sure his latter comments are the beginning of some long, tortuous, attempted "gotcha" enterprise.
The Johnson lead in a much-reduced voter pool needs to be considered in the light of how many 2019 Tories have been lost, but would return with Sunak.
I personally don't think many of those lost since 2019 are coming back if Boris leads the Tories into the next election. It will be a bloody hard sell on the doorstep.
Many (of us) left not only because of Boris but because he cleared out what we had regarded as the Cameroonian wing of the party. It left the party with the Dorries Rees-Moggs, Raabs et al as ascendant.
As it is often pointed out, the new 2019 Cons MPs all signed the Brexit pledge and the Cons are now more than ever a hard Brexit party. Of course Brexit is done (talking to you, @Leon ) but the character of the party is significantly different even from 2017.
Not to say that a change of leader wouldn't help and probably lead to personnel changes but the guts of the party I (we?) knew and liked have been removed.
No, it is not the party of R. A. Butler.
Butler was a Tory MP from 1929-65, during the entirety of which the UK was not even in the EEC.
Boris' economic policies are also closer to Macmillan's than Thatcher's
Huh? I never mentioned Europe.
Have you not come across "Butskellism" and the "Post War Consensus"? I don't believe Johnson would fit into any post-war consensus, except perhaps when he was Mayor of London, and that seems like a political lifetime ago. He is now a Trumpian populist.
P.S. Johnson's economic policies are closer to Dave Nellist's than Mrs Thatcher's.
Johnson is a big spender who wants to build more houses, his economic policies are closer to Macmillan and Butler's Tory Party than Thatcher's. Boris described himself as a 'Brexity Hezza' which is pretty accurate.
Obviously however he is not a socialist like Nellist though, he is not nationalising industries, is not raising income tax and inheritance tax and nor is he allowing unions to strike at will, nor is he abolishing Eton or Marlborough, which he and Macmillan and Butler attended. Nellist and Militant wanted to do all that. Boris also complains a six figure income is not even enough for him, Nellist only took the average wage as an MP.
Indeed after Thatcher in 1983 and 1987, the Tory leaders who have won the biggest general election majorities for their party since WW2 are Macmillan in 1959 and Boris in 2019
You've sold me on Dave Nellist. Coventry's finest! If only I lived in Erdington.
Even though Nellist’s views were slightly different from mine, I always respected that he took an average worker’s salary
I believe Nadia Whittome does that as well.
Never really saw the need, since being an MP is not being an average worker even if you eschew taking the full salary, but it is at least a significant gesture.
A pointless one IMO. I would never trust anyone who went around shouting that they wear a hair shirt.
She nicked the idea - Cressida moaning about fictional TV portrayals of the police - from PB. I wrote that as long ago as last June.
Not the first time PB headers get "borrowed" from by paid journalists.They could at least credit PB, OGH and his wonderful header writers. (Or share their fee .....?)
Which given the high proportion of unvaxxed in the covid fatality stats presumably means for the covid boosted flu would actually have a higher IFR than covid.
She nicked the idea - Cressida moaning about fictional TV portrayals of the police - from PB. I wrote that as long ago as last June.
Not the first time PB headers get "borrowed" from by paid journalists.They could at least credit PB, OGH and his wonderful header writers. (Or share their fee .....?)
Humph ....😡
I have seen a few things in Hyde articles that have appeared on here, both articles and comments.
The Johnson lead in a much-reduced voter pool needs to be considered in the light of how many 2019 Tories have been lost, but would return with Sunak.
I personally don't think many of those lost since 2019 are coming back if Boris leads the Tories into the next election. It will be a bloody hard sell on the doorstep.
Many (of us) left not only because of Boris but because he cleared out what we had regarded as the Cameroonian wing of the party. It left the party with the Dorries Rees-Moggs, Raabs et al as ascendant.
As it is often pointed out, the new 2019 Cons MPs all signed the Brexit pledge and the Cons are now more than ever a hard Brexit party. Of course Brexit is done (talking to you, @Leon ) but the character of the party is significantly different even from 2017.
Not to say that a change of leader wouldn't help and probably lead to personnel changes but the guts of the party I (we?) knew and liked have been removed.
No, it is not the party of R. A. Butler.
Butler was a Tory MP from 1929-65, during the entirety of which the UK was not even in the EEC.
Boris' economic policies are also closer to Macmillan's than Thatcher's
Huh? I never mentioned Europe.
Have you not come across "Butskellism" and the "Post War Consensus"? I don't believe Johnson would fit into any post-war consensus, except perhaps when he was Mayor of London, and that seems like a political lifetime ago. He is now a Trumpian populist.
P.S. Johnson's economic policies are closer to Dave Nellist's than Mrs Thatcher's.
Johnson is a big spender who wants to build more houses, his economic policies are closer to Macmillan and Butler's Tory Party than Thatcher's. Boris described himself as a 'Brexity Hezza' which is pretty accurate.
Obviously however he is not a socialist like Nellist though, he is not nationalising industries, is not raising income tax and inheritance tax and nor is he allowing unions to strike at will, nor is he abolishing Eton or Marlborough, which he and Macmillan and Butler attended. Nellist and Militant wanted to do all that. Boris also complains a six figure income is not even enough for him, Nellist only took the average wage as an MP.
Indeed after Thatcher in 1983 and 1987, the Tory leaders who have won the biggest general election majorities for their party since WW2 are Macmillan in 1959 and Boris in 2019
You've sold me on Dave Nellist. Coventry's finest! If only I lived in Erdington.
Even though Nellist’s views were slightly different from mine, I always respected that he took an average worker’s salary
I believe Nadia Whittome does that as well.
Never really saw the need, since being an MP is not being an average worker even if you eschew taking the full salary, but it is at least a significant gesture.
A pointless one IMO. I would never trust anyone who went around shouting that they wear a hair shirt.
Nellist to be fair to him is consistent, he also wants to abolish private schools and tuition fees for university and nationalise most of industry and tax the rich and high earners significantly more to expand the public sector and welfare state.
Even if his views are far from mine. He is also quite personable, I had a teacher who was a Thatcherite who knew Nellist and got on well with him even if they disagreed on virtually everything politically.
[The Met's defence] observed that the press reports did not identify who had been at the gatherings, no one had come forward to admit presence at any of the gatherings, and there was no evidence from social media showing these gatherings taking place, and from which those present could be identified.
It followed that if these events had taken place, the organisers could not be identified from the material available to the police at that time and nor could [the officer] draw any conclusions as to whether the gatherings breached the Covid regulations, and if so, whether those present at the gatherings had no reasonable excuse for their presence at the gatherings.
On topic, I think that poll (if it’s a true reflection so caveat required) mirrors what a few of us having been saying for a while namely Sunak - and the whole “Dishy Rishi” thing - is over-proportionally appealing to the chattering classes who are very unlikely to vote Conservative in the first place.
I am not enthusiastic about him, but would return to the Conservatives (my natural political home) if he replaced The Clown.
I believe you need Hercules to clear out the Conservatives' Augean stables after Johnson has finally vacated. A period in opposition to remove the smell of corruption would be well deserved for the Conservative Party.
You could be right, but the thought of a bossy Labour government doesn't fill me with joy. My ideal is to have a genuine Conservative government that is keen on good governance with a reasonably plausible non-clownish leader.
You have an odd perception of what a Labour government would entail, Nigel.
And on another matter - I do hope you're exercising enough and getting your five a day?
Labour governments are always bossy. They like to tell people how to live their lives. Labour politicians are essentially instinctively bossy people who primarily look after those in the public sector. That doesn't necessarily mean all bad, and Labour has done some great things when in power, but I will always view them with great distrust. Would I trust Starmer more than The Clown, yes, most definitely. Would I vote Labour if The Clown is still PM, yes quite possibly
No idea whatsoever, what your other comment references tho.
I was being bossy! - sorry, too subtle.
But no, I don't go with that generalization. The Thatcher/Major governments were less bossy than Blair/Brown? Can't see how that is evidenced.
Anyway, all good, I sense you're genuinely floating rather only pretending to be. And of course you know as well as I do that Johnson has rather fucked up the whole party so just replacing him won't fix things in time for the election. It has to be Labour really. Certainly if I were you, knowing what I know about you, which is an awful lot, I'd be voting Labour.
Which given the high proportion of unvaxxed in the covid fatality stats presumably means for the covid boosted flu would actually have a higher IFR than covid.
The conversation that this data proceeds are.. interesting.
1) Cases are down - Case numbers don't mean anything 2) Hospitalisations are down - Better treatments - it's still there 3) Deaths are down - You are a Trumpian COVID denier. Plus Long COVID
On topic, I think that poll (if it’s a true reflection so caveat required) mirrors what a few of us having been saying for a while namely Sunak - and the whole “Dishy Rishi” thing - is over-proportionally appealing to the chattering classes who are very unlikely to vote Conservative in the first place.
I am not enthusiastic about him, but would return to the Conservatives (my natural political home) if he replaced The Clown.
I believe you need Hercules to clear out the Conservatives' Augean stables after Johnson has finally vacated. A period in opposition to remove the smell of corruption would be well deserved for the Conservative Party.
You could be right, but the thought of a bossy Labour government doesn't fill me with joy. My ideal is to have a genuine Conservative government that is keen on good governance with a reasonably plausible non-clownish leader.
You have an odd perception of what a Labour government would entail, Nigel.
And on another matter - I do hope you're exercising enough and getting your five a day?
Labour governments are always bossy. They like to tell people how to live their lives. Labour politicians are essentially instinctively bossy people who primarily look after those in the public sector. That doesn't necessarily mean all bad, and Labour has done some great things when in power, but I will always view them with great distrust. Would I trust Starmer more than The Clown, yes, most definitely. Would I vote Labour if The Clown is still PM, yes quite possibly
No idea whatsoever, what your other comment references tho.
Someone once described @kinabalu as being a poster who would swim out to sea and attach a hook personally to a fish before coming back to the shore and attempting to reel it in.
I'm sure his latter comments are the beginning of some long, tortuous, attempted "gotcha" enterprise.
If only. It was, in fact, an attempt at a nice little non-edgy joke which fell flat. Bit embarrassing for me.
I think we have already seen the Tory nadir in polling where they bottomed out at 27% (which is unlikely to be repeated IMO) and the Labour lead seems to have stabilised at around 8% for the time being.
This polling doesn't shock me too much as Johnson must still have a lot of positive support in places like the Midlands and Essex as HYUFD has been arguing even if the new found Tory support in the north is quite a bit softer.
Labour’s major issue is that their polling seems to be entirely driven by perceptions of the Conservative. Labour’s core vote - currently - is probably not far off the Tories’ 30pc. Their issue is the natural default for softer voters is the Conservatives. Chances are, if the news becomes more positive, Labour’s lead reverses out quickly.
Hmmm. Stranger things have happened, I daresay. However for Johnson to recover personally he needs something positive to happen, like singlehandedly defeating the Russian army, or throwing some really right-on red meat to the hoi poloi. I have suggested capital punishment for nonces, but you might have some tastier red meat to offer. Otherwise I don't see it.
Labour's support is soft and the Conservative position post Johnson is hopeful, but for the economic catastrophe heading our way. I have always agreed with the notion that Governments lose elections, Oppositions don't win them, and at the moment Johnson is making a pretty good hand of confirming that idea.
Good discussion and I broadly agree. There is something of a slow race going on between Labour getting some concrete, attractive proposals well-known and the Conservatives sorting themselves out and saying "Now, forward with this!"
Labour has lots of low-profile policies but both the delays in internal policy process and the difficulty of oppositions in getting coverage are hampering the process - the closest we've got is probably scrapping VAT on energy, which ticks both the "help living standards" and "use Brexit constructively" boxes (though green voters purse their lips dubiously). But it still feels more like tactics than strategy.
The closest the Tories have got is Gove's levelling-up programme, which got a "not ambitious enough" reception rather than outright rejection, but was obscured by Partygate. I do think that the Tories are more than Labour in danger of a sense of drift and decline - people don't really expect the Opposition to be full of practical ideas for the next few months, but they notice if the Government isn't.
Meanwhile the LibDems have Labour's problem only more so, and arguably their strength in by-elections is masking the underlying issue that there aren't a lot of people who know what direction they're going. I doubt if their national poll ratings will improve until that becomes clearer.
Interesting and very plausible. All I would say is beware the economy.
There is a view that the Tories will soon be in trouble over the economy. This could well be. BUT - there is a but. Instinctively, when jobs and livelihoods seem at risk, people turn to the Conservatives. It's just a thing. The economy being first and foremost in people's mind is not necessarily going to be good for Starmer. Also, BJ, to be fair, always gives an impression of dynamism and getting things done. Starmer doesn't - not at all. I imagine this is why Dom considers him a dud.
And, the danger Labour could fall into, is if they blame the downturn on Brexit. Not a good way of winning back the Red Wall. The Tories, in any event, have the ready-made excuse of Covid. There's everything to play for.
Korean companies have about 30% of the market, Japanese 15%, and Chinese most of the rest.
Interesting. Battery Electric Vehicles were one-eighth of UK new car registrations this January.
To supply 100% of the UK car market would need about 44% of the current global car battery production (which implies the UK is currently receiving about 5.5% of global car battery production). So there's a lot of growth in production capacity to come for car batteries...
I think we have already seen the Tory nadir in polling where they bottomed out at 27% (which is unlikely to be repeated IMO) and the Labour lead seems to have stabilised at around 8% for the time being.
This polling doesn't shock me too much as Johnson must still have a lot of positive support in places like the Midlands and Essex as HYUFD has been arguing even if the new found Tory support in the north is quite a bit softer.
Labour’s major issue is that their polling seems to be entirely driven by perceptions of the Conservative. Labour’s core vote - currently - is probably not far off the Tories’ 30pc. Their issue is the natural default for softer voters is the Conservatives. Chances are, if the news becomes more positive, Labour’s lead reverses out quickly.
Hmmm. Stranger things have happened, I daresay. However for Johnson to recover personally he needs something positive to happen, like singlehandedly defeating the Russian army, or throwing some really right-on red meat to the hoi poloi. I have suggested capital punishment for nonces, but you might have some tastier red meat to offer. Otherwise I don't see it.
Labour's support is soft and the Conservative position post Johnson is hopeful, but for the economic catastrophe heading our way. I have always agreed with the notion that Governments lose elections, Oppositions don't win them, and at the moment Johnson is making a pretty good hand of confirming that idea.
Good discussion and I broadly agree. There is something of a slow race going on between Labour getting some concrete, attractive proposals well-known and the Conservatives sorting themselves out and saying "Now, forward with this!"
Labour has lots of low-profile policies but both the delays in internal policy process and the difficulty of oppositions in getting coverage are hampering the process - the closest we've got is probably scrapping VAT on energy, which ticks both the "help living standards" and "use Brexit constructively" boxes (though green voters purse their lips dubiously). But it still feels more like tactics than strategy.
The closest the Tories have got is Gove's levelling-up programme, which got a "not ambitious enough" reception rather than outright rejection, but was obscured by Partygate. I do think that the Tories are more than Labour in danger of a sense of drift and decline - people don't really expect the Opposition to be full of practical ideas for the next few months, but they notice if the Government isn't.
Meanwhile the LibDems have Labour's problem only more so, and arguably their strength in by-elections is masking the underlying issue that there aren't a lot of people who know what direction they're going. I doubt if their national poll ratings will improve until that becomes clearer.
Interesting and very plausible. All I would say is beware the economy.
There is a view that the Tories will soon be in trouble over the economy. This could well be. BUT - there is a but. Instinctively, when jobs and livelihoods seem at risk, people turn to the Conservatives. It's just a thing. The economy being first and foremost in people's mind is not necessarily going to be good for Starmer. Also, BJ, to be fair, always gives an impression of dynamism and getting things done. Starmer doesn't - not at all. I imagine this is why Dom considers him a dud.
And, the danger Labour could fall into, is if they blame the downturn on Brexit. Not a good way of winning back the Red Wall. The Tories, in any event, have the ready-made excuse of Covid. There's everything to play for.
Shame really that both sides seem more interested in working out what will play to their political advantage than pondering what might be in the best interests of the country.
She nicked the idea - Cressida moaning about fictional TV portrayals of the police - from PB. I wrote that as long ago as last June.
Not the first time PB headers get "borrowed" from by paid journalists.They could at least credit PB, OGH and his wonderful header writers. (Or share their fee .....?)
Humph ....😡
I have seen a few things in Hyde articles that have appeared on here, both articles and comments.
She nicked the idea - Cressida moaning about fictional TV portrayals of the police - from PB. I wrote that as long ago as last June.
Not the first time PB headers get "borrowed" from by paid journalists.They could at least credit PB, OGH and his wonderful header writers. (Or share their fee .....?)
Humph ....😡
Influencing journalists used to be the point of pb. Around 2010 I used to wonder if I was the only PBer who was not a CCHQ-sponsored astroturfer, especially on Wednesday lunchtimes when pb would be full of messages about David Cameron's triumph at PMQs, even when it was clear he'd been KO'd by the clunking great fist.
Saied is doing to Tunisia what Sisi has done to Egypt. Both used popular disenchantment against Islamist governments to manufacture a coup which would wipe away the liberals who supported their power grab
1) Cases are down - Case numbers don't mean anything 2) Hospitalisations are down - Better treatments - it's still there 3) Deaths are down - You are a Trumpian COVID denier. Plus Long COVID
On the subject of these three stats, is there a good explanation of why they have such completely different shapes in the national graphs? In particular why have deaths been a very slowly declining plateau that has now suddenly dropped precipitously, rather than looking more like the gradually-declining admissions graph?
(My tealeaf-based theory for the shapes of cases vs admissions is that the latter is following cases-in-over-60s, which didn't peak so high at Christmas -- less socializing than the under-30s -- and didn't have a January plateau -- which was mostly driven by kids in school. But as I say that's tealeaf and rune-reading, not evidence based.)
I think we have already seen the Tory nadir in polling where they bottomed out at 27% (which is unlikely to be repeated IMO) and the Labour lead seems to have stabilised at around 8% for the time being.
This polling doesn't shock me too much as Johnson must still have a lot of positive support in places like the Midlands and Essex as HYUFD has been arguing even if the new found Tory support in the north is quite a bit softer.
Labour’s major issue is that their polling seems to be entirely driven by perceptions of the Conservative. Labour’s core vote - currently - is probably not far off the Tories’ 30pc. Their issue is the natural default for softer voters is the Conservatives. Chances are, if the news becomes more positive, Labour’s lead reverses out quickly.
Hmmm. Stranger things have happened, I daresay. However for Johnson to recover personally he needs something positive to happen, like singlehandedly defeating the Russian army, or throwing some really right-on red meat to the hoi poloi. I have suggested capital punishment for nonces, but you might have some tastier red meat to offer. Otherwise I don't see it.
Labour's support is soft and the Conservative position post Johnson is hopeful, but for the economic catastrophe heading our way. I have always agreed with the notion that Governments lose elections, Oppositions don't win them, and at the moment Johnson is making a pretty good hand of confirming that idea.
Good discussion and I broadly agree. There is something of a slow race going on between Labour getting some concrete, attractive proposals well-known and the Conservatives sorting themselves out and saying "Now, forward with this!"
Labour has lots of low-profile policies but both the delays in internal policy process and the difficulty of oppositions in getting coverage are hampering the process - the closest we've got is probably scrapping VAT on energy, which ticks both the "help living standards" and "use Brexit constructively" boxes (though green voters purse their lips dubiously). But it still feels more like tactics than strategy.
The closest the Tories have got is Gove's levelling-up programme, which got a "not ambitious enough" reception rather than outright rejection, but was obscured by Partygate. I do think that the Tories are more than Labour in danger of a sense of drift and decline - people don't really expect the Opposition to be full of practical ideas for the next few months, but they notice if the Government isn't.
Meanwhile the LibDems have Labour's problem only more so, and arguably their strength in by-elections is masking the underlying issue that there aren't a lot of people who know what direction they're going. I doubt if their national poll ratings will improve until that becomes clearer.
Interesting and very plausible. All I would say is beware the economy.
There is a view that the Tories will soon be in trouble over the economy. This could well be. BUT - there is a but. Instinctively, when jobs and livelihoods seem at risk, people turn to the Conservatives. It's just a thing. The economy being first and foremost in people's mind is not necessarily going to be good for Starmer. Also, BJ, to be fair, always gives an impression of dynamism and getting things done. Starmer doesn't - not at all. I imagine this is why Dom considers him a dud.
And, the danger Labour could fall into, is if they blame the downturn on Brexit. Not a good way of winning back the Red Wall. The Tories, in any event, have the ready-made excuse of Covid. There's everything to play for.
Shame really that both sides seem more interested in working out what will play to their political advantage than pondering what might be in the best interests of the country.
I think we're trying to forecast what may happen electorally. The purpose of the site, no?
1) Cases are down - Case numbers don't mean anything 2) Hospitalisations are down - Better treatments - it's still there 3) Deaths are down - You are a Trumpian COVID denier. Plus Long COVID
On the subject of these three stats, is there a good explanation of why they have such completely different shapes in the national graphs? In particular why have deaths been a very slowly declining plateau that has now suddenly dropped precipitously, rather than looking more like the gradually-declining admissions graph?
(My tealeaf-based theory for the shapes of cases vs admissions is that the latter is following cases-in-over-60s, which didn't peak so high at Christmas -- less socializing than the under-30s -- and didn't have a January plateau -- which was mostly driven by kids in school. But as I say that's tealeaf and rune-reading, not evidence based.)
The sudden collapse in deaths is interesting, yes. The new treatments?
The Johnson lead in a much-reduced voter pool needs to be considered in the light of how many 2019 Tories have been lost, but would return with Sunak.
I personally don't think many of those lost since 2019 are coming back if Boris leads the Tories into the next election. It will be a bloody hard sell on the doorstep.
An honest and probably correct assessment, I think. I marked you down as a Tory to take notice of for betting purposes some time back.
Sorry, maybe I misread the poll header but doesn’t it say of the 2019 GE Tory voters ie those who voted Tory in the GE and therefore regardless of lost or still there?
1) Cases are down - Case numbers don't mean anything 2) Hospitalisations are down - Better treatments - it's still there 3) Deaths are down - You are a Trumpian COVID denier. Plus Long COVID
On the subject of these three stats, is there a good explanation of why they have such completely different shapes in the national graphs? In particular why have deaths been a very slowly declining plateau that has now suddenly dropped precipitously, rather than looking more like the gradually-declining admissions graph?
(My tealeaf-based theory for the shapes of cases vs admissions is that the latter is following cases-in-over-60s, which didn't peak so high at Christmas -- less socializing than the under-30s -- and didn't have a January plateau -- which was mostly driven by kids in school. But as I say that's tealeaf and rune-reading, not evidence based.)
The path to death is longer than the path to being cured which is longer than path to shaking off mild illness?
1) Cases are down - Case numbers don't mean anything 2) Hospitalisations are down - Better treatments - it's still there 3) Deaths are down - You are a Trumpian COVID denier. Plus Long COVID
On the subject of these three stats, is there a good explanation of why they have such completely different shapes in the national graphs? In particular why have deaths been a very slowly declining plateau that has now suddenly dropped precipitously, rather than looking more like the gradually-declining admissions graph?
(My tealeaf-based theory for the shapes of cases vs admissions is that the latter is following cases-in-over-60s, which didn't peak so high at Christmas -- less socializing than the under-30s -- and didn't have a January plateau -- which was mostly driven by kids in school. But as I say that's tealeaf and rune-reading, not evidence based.)
My own view is that a couple of generations of doctoral students will be studying how, and why, the various strategies in various countries had such different effects during the various waves, or even in individual countries.
Adding in economic effects, the 'winner' may not be known for a couple of decades, and even then be biased by pre-existing trends.
I think we have already seen the Tory nadir in polling where they bottomed out at 27% (which is unlikely to be repeated IMO) and the Labour lead seems to have stabilised at around 8% for the time being.
This polling doesn't shock me too much as Johnson must still have a lot of positive support in places like the Midlands and Essex as HYUFD has been arguing even if the new found Tory support in the north is quite a bit softer.
Labour’s major issue is that their polling seems to be entirely driven by perceptions of the Conservative. Labour’s core vote - currently - is probably not far off the Tories’ 30pc. Their issue is the natural default for softer voters is the Conservatives. Chances are, if the news becomes more positive, Labour’s lead reverses out quickly.
Hmmm. Stranger things have happened, I daresay. However for Johnson to recover personally he needs something positive to happen, like singlehandedly defeating the Russian army, or throwing some really right-on red meat to the hoi poloi. I have suggested capital punishment for nonces, but you might have some tastier red meat to offer. Otherwise I don't see it.
Labour's support is soft and the Conservative position post Johnson is hopeful, but for the economic catastrophe heading our way. I have always agreed with the notion that Governments lose elections, Oppositions don't win them, and at the moment Johnson is making a pretty good hand of confirming that idea.
Good discussion and I broadly agree. There is something of a slow race going on between Labour getting some concrete, attractive proposals well-known and the Conservatives sorting themselves out and saying "Now, forward with this!"
Labour has lots of low-profile policies but both the delays in internal policy process and the difficulty of oppositions in getting coverage are hampering the process - the closest we've got is probably scrapping VAT on energy, which ticks both the "help living standards" and "use Brexit constructively" boxes (though green voters purse their lips dubiously). But it still feels more like tactics than strategy.
The closest the Tories have got is Gove's levelling-up programme, which got a "not ambitious enough" reception rather than outright rejection, but was obscured by Partygate. I do think that the Tories are more than Labour in danger of a sense of drift and decline - people don't really expect the Opposition to be full of practical ideas for the next few months, but they notice if the Government isn't.
Meanwhile the LibDems have Labour's problem only more so, and arguably their strength in by-elections is masking the underlying issue that there aren't a lot of people who know what direction they're going. I doubt if their national poll ratings will improve until that becomes clearer.
Interesting and very plausible. All I would say is beware the economy.
There is a view that the Tories will soon be in trouble over the economy. This could well be. BUT - there is a but. Instinctively, when jobs and livelihoods seem at risk, people turn to the Conservatives. It's just a thing. The economy being first and foremost in people's mind is not necessarily going to be good for Starmer. Also, BJ, to be fair, always gives an impression of dynamism and getting things done. Starmer doesn't - not at all. I imagine this is why Dom considers him a dud.
And, the danger Labour could fall into, is if they blame the downturn on Brexit. Not a good way of winning back the Red Wall. The Tories, in any event, have the ready-made excuse of Covid. There's everything to play for.
Shame really that both sides seem more interested in working out what will play to their political advantage than pondering what might be in the best interests of the country.
I think we're trying to forecast what may happen electorally. The purpose of the site, no?
*We* may be.
The parties themselves, and their more factional supporters? I haven't seen too much sign of that.
Interesting article for anyone who was addicted to the show in the late 80s / early 90s — such as about a third of the UK population, which was more than the entire population of Australia at the time.
I’ve had loads of wagyu burgers before. They are a staple of posh burger joints and pop-ups around the world
I sincerely think this Sri Lankan guy is a genius. If he was British or French or American he’d be world famous. He also did this wasabi soaked sushi rice covered in olive oil and sweet sashimi with an egg in the middle which he then drenched in just fried garlic and oil poured it over making everything sort of crunchy. Omffffg
Interesting article for anyone who was addicted to the show in the late 80s / early 90s — such as about a third of the UK population, which was more than the entire population of Australia at the time.
An astonishing 58% of UK voters have watched an episode of Neighbours.
However only 14% of 18 to 24 year olds have watched the soap
"Labour MP Rosie Duffield: Keir Starmer no better than Jeremy Corbyn and it could make me defect Canterbury MP accuses Labour leader of failing to tackle local activists who mounted harassment campaign"
1) Cases are down - Case numbers don't mean anything 2) Hospitalisations are down - Better treatments - it's still there 3) Deaths are down - You are a Trumpian COVID denier. Plus Long COVID
On the subject of these three stats, is there a good explanation of why they have such completely different shapes in the national graphs? In particular why have deaths been a very slowly declining plateau that has now suddenly dropped precipitously, rather than looking more like the gradually-declining admissions graph?
(My tealeaf-based theory for the shapes of cases vs admissions is that the latter is following cases-in-over-60s, which didn't peak so high at Christmas -- less socializing than the under-30s -- and didn't have a January plateau -- which was mostly driven by kids in school. But as I say that's tealeaf and rune-reading, not evidence based.)
You're looking at the wrong deaths graph. Look at deaths by date of death, rather than death by date reported. It's a pleasing dome shape.
NEW: The US believes Russian President Vladimir Putin has decided to invade Ukraine, and has communicated that decision to the Russian military, three Western and defense officials tell me.
The subsidiary questions are interesting and encouraging for Brexiteers, in that apparently most people feel we lavished lots of fair treatment on the EU and they were beastly to us in return. Not my perception at all, but I recognise my personal bias...
The Johnson lead in a much-reduced voter pool needs to be considered in the light of how many 2019 Tories have been lost, but would return with Sunak.
I personally don't think many of those lost since 2019 are coming back if Boris leads the Tories into the next election. It will be a bloody hard sell on the doorstep.
You were quite a big Johnson supporter as I recall and I'm interested in what's changed it for you. Was it Peppa Pig? Paterson? the NIC hike? The parties? The lying to parliament? Or was it a case of all of it acting cumulatively and drip drip to replace in your mind's eye what you imagined Boris Johnson to be with what he actually is?
Lying to Parliament. I simply do not believe his "there were no parties" line and so by convention, he must resign.
I believe he knows he is banged to rights, but refuses to go because he does not want to give Cummings the glee of getting his scalp.
"Labour MP Rosie Duffield: Keir Starmer no better than Jeremy Corbyn and it could make me defect Canterbury MP accuses Labour leader of failing to tackle local activists who mounted harassment campaign"
She has an interesting view of the Tories: ""They have factions as well, but they don't tear it apart; they don't hate each other inside the party in the way that we do in some of our branches."
NEW: The US believes Russian President Vladimir Putin has decided to invade Ukraine, and has communicated that decision to the Russian military, three Western and defense officials tell me.
"Labour MP Rosie Duffield: Keir Starmer no better than Jeremy Corbyn and it could make me defect Canterbury MP accuses Labour leader of failing to tackle local activists who mounted harassment campaign"
She has an interesting view of the Tories: ""They have factions as well, but they don't tear it apart; they don't hate each other inside the party in the way that we do in some of our branches."
The Johnson lead in a much-reduced voter pool needs to be considered in the light of how many 2019 Tories have been lost, but would return with Sunak.
I personally don't think many of those lost since 2019 are coming back if Boris leads the Tories into the next election. It will be a bloody hard sell on the doorstep.
You were quite a big Johnson supporter as I recall and I'm interested in what's changed it for you. Was it Peppa Pig? Paterson? the NIC hike? The parties? The lying to parliament? Or was it a case of all of it acting cumulatively and drip drip to replace in your mind's eye what you imagined Boris Johnson to be with what he actually is?
Lying to Parliament. I simply do not believe his "there were no parties" line and so by convention, he must resign.
I believe he knows he is banged to rights, but refuses to go because he does not want to give Cummings the glee of getting his scalp.
The subsidiary questions are interesting and encouraging for Brexiteers, in that apparently most people feel we lavished lots of fair treatment on the EU and they were beastly to us in return. Not my perception at all, but I recognise my personal bias...
Perfectly understandable and predictable though, Nick.
Brexit is not going well, so whose fault could it be but the EU?
The Johnson lead in a much-reduced voter pool needs to be considered in the light of how many 2019 Tories have been lost, but would return with Sunak.
I personally don't think many of those lost since 2019 are coming back if Boris leads the Tories into the next election. It will be a bloody hard sell on the doorstep.
You were quite a big Johnson supporter as I recall and I'm interested in what's changed it for you. Was it Peppa Pig? Paterson? the NIC hike? The parties? The lying to parliament? Or was it a case of all of it acting cumulatively and drip drip to replace in your mind's eye what you imagined Boris Johnson to be with what he actually is?
Lying to Parliament. I simply do not believe his "there were no parties" line and so by convention, he must resign.
I believe he knows he is banged to rights, but refuses to go because he does not want to give Cummings the glee of getting his scalp.
I agree. The thing is though, what on earth was he thinking of when all these social gatherings were taking place at No. 10, often at exactly the same time as he was delivering sombre briefings to the nation that we must avoid all unnecessary social interactions? I mean, he's not stupid. And even if he is, there must have been some folk around saying to him "PM, this really isn't a good idea". They can't have really believed that there'd be no leaks, whether from Cummings or elsewhere. It defies belief.
Korean companies have about 30% of the market, Japanese 15%, and Chinese most of the rest.
Interesting. Battery Electric Vehicles were one-eighth of UK new car registrations this January.
To supply 100% of the UK car market would need about 44% of the current global car battery production (which implies the UK is currently receiving about 5.5% of global car battery production). So there's a lot of growth in production capacity to come for car batteries...
I'm ordering a Tesla Model Y as soon as I get my contract confirmed. Spent an hour in a 3 - a compelling platform in need of a little more space (hence a Y).
The Johnson lead in a much-reduced voter pool needs to be considered in the light of how many 2019 Tories have been lost, but would return with Sunak.
I personally don't think many of those lost since 2019 are coming back if Boris leads the Tories into the next election. It will be a bloody hard sell on the doorstep.
You were quite a big Johnson supporter as I recall and I'm interested in what's changed it for you. Was it Peppa Pig? Paterson? the NIC hike? The parties? The lying to parliament? Or was it a case of all of it acting cumulatively and drip drip to replace in your mind's eye what you imagined Boris Johnson to be with what he actually is?
Lying to Parliament. I simply do not believe his "there were no parties" line and so by convention, he must resign.
I believe he knows he is banged to rights, but refuses to go because he does not want to give Cummings the glee of getting his scalp.
I agree. The thing is though, what on earth was he thinking of when all these social gatherings were taking place at No. 10, often at exactly the same time as he was delivering sombre briefings to the nation that we must avoid all unnecessary social interactions? I mean, he's not stupid. And even if he is, there must have been some folk around saying to him "PM, this really isn't a good idea". They can't have really believed that there'd be no leaks, whether from Cummings or elsewhere. It defies belief.
I can actually believe no one said that to him (though it would be no excuse). Most people know to say that they want truthful advice and to be told what's up, but in reality they do not react well to party poopers (literally in this case) and people soon learn not to bring things up.
"Labour MP Rosie Duffield: Keir Starmer no better than Jeremy Corbyn and it could make me defect Canterbury MP accuses Labour leader of failing to tackle local activists who mounted harassment campaign"
She has an interesting view of the Tories: ""They have factions as well, but they don't tear it apart; they don't hate each other inside the party in the way that we do in some of our branches."
Hmm, I guess she missed the last 5 years.
The Tory Brexiteers don't hate and abominate the Tory Remainers in the way the Labour factions do, ie, the Corbynites and Labour Right. Yes, Boris booted out some of his internal opponents but, on the whole (Grieve excepted), it wasn't really malicious and probably regretted on a personal level. Just the necessities of realpolitik.
If I may be allowed a paternal boast. Gratz to older daughter who got almost straight 9s in her mock GCSEs, from English to geography to science
I have no idea what that means - 9?! - but apparently it’s A star.
Super bright. Well done lass
An 8 is an A*. A 9 is an extra grade above that designed to distinguish the very brightest.
Awarding it however is rather more complex than 'this would be a 9 as it was a 9 last year.' I tend not to give out marks above an 8 in mocks, as a result.
Bear in mind for many subjects this will only be the second year of using these grades - only in Maths and English did we get three series of exams before Covid hit.
But it's an impressive achievement. Congratulations to her.
US BELIEVES PUTIN HAS DECIDED TO INVADE UKRAINE, EXPECT INVASION TO BEGIN NEXT WEEK - NBC
They've been saying that for months. May be true, but still seems to me totally bonkers purely from the perspective of Putin's interest. The negatives seem to vastly outweigh the positives - ruined relations, largely hostile country, huge costs, sanctions vs some sort of nationalist gratification.
But I appreciate that Putin's mind may work in some mysteriously different way.
The Johnson lead in a much-reduced voter pool needs to be considered in the light of how many 2019 Tories have been lost, but would return with Sunak.
I personally don't think many of those lost since 2019 are coming back if Boris leads the Tories into the next election. It will be a bloody hard sell on the doorstep.
You were quite a big Johnson supporter as I recall and I'm interested in what's changed it for you. Was it Peppa Pig? Paterson? the NIC hike? The parties? The lying to parliament? Or was it a case of all of it acting cumulatively and drip drip to replace in your mind's eye what you imagined Boris Johnson to be with what he actually is?
Lying to Parliament. I simply do not believe his "there were no parties" line and so by convention, he must resign.
I believe he knows he is banged to rights, but refuses to go because he does not want to give Cummings the glee of getting his scalp.
I agree. The thing is though, what on earth was he thinking of when all these social gatherings were taking place at No. 10, often at exactly the same time as he was delivering sombre briefings to the nation that we must avoid all unnecessary social interactions? I mean, he's not stupid. And even if he is, there must have been some folk around saying to him "PM, this really isn't a good idea". They can't have really believed that there'd be no leaks, whether from Cummings or elsewhere. It defies belief.
Indeed it does. I'm sure he felt that the people invited to those parties were doing an extraordinary job of saving the country from Covid, working crazy hours under crazy pressure.
But so were the NHS staff, and they weren't having bottle parties down at radiography. Because nobody would cut them slack.
And HM the Q alone on the evening of Philip's funeral as his staff partied was just so damned toxic with his normal base.
If I may be allowed a paternal boast. Gratz to older daughter who got almost straight 9s in her mock GCSEs, from English to geography to science
I have no idea what that means - 9?! - but apparently it’s A star.
Super bright. Well done lass
An 8 is an A*. A 9 is an extra grade above that designed to distinguish the very brightest.
Awarding it however is rather more complex than 'this would be a 9 as it was a 9 last year.' I tend not to give out marks above an 8 in mocks, as a result.
Bear in mind for many subjects this will only be the second year of using these grades - only in Maths and English did we get three series of exams before Covid hit.
But it's an impressive achievement. Congratulations to her.
She is exceptionally bright. She was reading complex Julian Barnes novels aged 12-13
What particularly delights me is that she got 8 in maths and 9 in science. We always knew she was highly articulate and literate, but it’s very gratifying to see she can do it on the other side of the brain
Just mocks, of course, so who knows. But nice. V nice
US BELIEVES PUTIN HAS DECIDED TO INVADE UKRAINE, EXPECT INVASION TO BEGIN NEXT WEEK - NBC
They've been saying that for months. May be true, but still seems to me totally bonkers purely from the perspective of Putin's interest. The negatives seem to vastly outweigh the positives - ruined relations, largely hostile country, huge costs, sanctions vs some sort of nationalist gratification.
But I appreciate that Putin's mind may work in some mysteriously different way.
US BELIEVES PUTIN HAS DECIDED TO INVADE UKRAINE, EXPECT INVASION TO BEGIN NEXT WEEK - NBC
They've been saying that for months. May be true, but still seems to me totally bonkers purely from the perspective of Putin's interest. The negatives seem to vastly outweigh the positives - ruined relations, largely hostile country, huge costs, sanctions vs some sort of nationalist gratification.
But I appreciate that Putin's mind may work in some mysteriously different way.
Retweeting reports of impending Russian invasion of Ukraine resulted in a flurry of pro-Russian trolls and bots casting shade on US intelligence. Dunno about you, but I take this as confirmation that the reports are true.
US BELIEVES PUTIN HAS DECIDED TO INVADE UKRAINE, EXPECT INVASION TO BEGIN NEXT WEEK - NBC
They've been saying that for months. May be true, but still seems to me totally bonkers purely from the perspective of Putin's interest. The negatives seem to vastly outweigh the positives - ruined relations, largely hostile country, huge costs, sanctions vs some sort of nationalist gratification.
But I appreciate that Putin's mind may work in some mysteriously different way.
People can lead themselves into situations which they know are dumb and damaging, but have forced themselves into nonetheless (like pretending you didn't know a party was a party for example).
I don't know Putin's mind either, but he has gathered up a lot of armed forces with the minimum intent of threatening to invade (whilst silmultaneously claiming he isn't, but that he will stand down if others give in), and so if he didn't get what he thought out of that threat, who the hell knows what he might do? One might well argue it was dumb to go after Eastern Ukraine (Crimea seems to have been an easy win), but he still did it.
And they haven't been saying he will invade 'next week' for months. It's been said he was preparing for invasion, which is not quite the same thing.
US BELIEVES PUTIN HAS DECIDED TO INVADE UKRAINE, EXPECT INVASION TO BEGIN NEXT WEEK - NBC
They've been saying that for months. May be true, but still seems to me totally bonkers purely from the perspective of Putin's interest. The negatives seem to vastly outweigh the positives - ruined relations, largely hostile country, huge costs, sanctions vs some sort of nationalist gratification.
But I appreciate that Putin's mind may work in some mysteriously different way.
Normalcy bias? Dunno
It’s not looking good. Guardian headline:
“Foreign Office tells Britons in Ukraine to leave country now Guidance comes a day after Joe Biden told US citizens in Ukraine ‘things could go crazy very quickly’”
She nicked the idea - Cressida moaning about fictional TV portrayals of the police - from PB. I wrote that as long ago as last June.
Not the first time PB headers get "borrowed" from by paid journalists.They could at least credit PB, OGH and his wonderful header writers. (Or share their fee .....?)
Humph ....😡
Influencing journalists used to be the point of pb. Around 2010 I used to wonder if I was the only PBer who was not a CCHQ-sponsored astroturfer, especially on Wednesday lunchtimes when pb would be full of messages about David Cameron's triumph at PMQs, even when it was clear he'd been KO'd by the clunking great fist.
Talking of GCHQ-sponsored astroturfers what on earth has happened to Philip Thompson? The story so far.....
from being the most prolific poster since records began his output dried up. This coincided with Partygate.
He then returned in the guise of Bartholomew Roberts (wasn't that Thatcher's maiden name?) but with a much reduced output.
Either he REALLY was a GCHQ-sponsored astroturfer who was cleared out with the bathwater of Partygate or a genuine crazy propagandist who couldn't face seeing the man he considered the greatest Prime Minister since Churchill being revealed as a buffoon.
If I may be allowed a paternal boast. Gratz to older daughter who got almost straight 9s in her mock GCSEs, from English to geography to science
I have no idea what that means - 9?! - but apparently it’s A star.
Super bright. Well done lass
An 8 is an A*. A 9 is an extra grade above that designed to distinguish the very brightest.
Awarding it however is rather more complex than 'this would be a 9 as it was a 9 last year.' I tend not to give out marks above an 8 in mocks, as a result.
Bear in mind for many subjects this will only be the second year of using these grades - only in Maths and English did we get three series of exams before Covid hit.
But it's an impressive achievement. Congratulations to her.
She is exceptionally bright. She was reading complex Julian Barnes novels aged 12-13
What particularly delights me is that she got 8 in maths and 9 in science. We always knew she was highly articulate and literate, but it’s very gratifying to see she can do it on the other side of the brain
Just mocks, of course, so who knows. But nice. V nice
These aren't ordinary mocks. We're still braced for Covid disruption and these mocks are designed to be exam substitutes if necessary. So doing well in them is really important to her. You've every reason to be pleased. I just thought you might like some more info on how the grades work!
That Russian news puts party gate into perspective.
Yes and No. The pettiness of the scandal here is part of the point, the needlessness of it, the carelessness, the arrogance of it for so little gain.
Someone who cares about professional standards, and the importance of maintaining the appearence as well as the reality of those standards, is even more important if we are entering a much more chaotic and dangerous period.
US BELIEVES PUTIN HAS DECIDED TO INVADE UKRAINE, EXPECT INVASION TO BEGIN NEXT WEEK - NBC
They've been saying that for months. May be true, but still seems to me totally bonkers purely from the perspective of Putin's interest. The negatives seem to vastly outweigh the positives - ruined relations, largely hostile country, huge costs, sanctions vs some sort of nationalist gratification.
But I appreciate that Putin's mind may work in some mysteriously different way.
There's rumours that Putin's become increasingly isolated during covid. I also saw claims recently from the US that the Kremlin was quite spooked by the intelligence regarding a possible false flag attack. It does seem odd that Zelensky seems more relaxed than the US/UK. I've given trying to work out what really might be going on.
If I may be allowed a paternal boast. Gratz to older daughter who got almost straight 9s in her mock GCSEs, from English to geography to science
I have no idea what that means - 9?! - but apparently it’s A star.
Super bright. Well done lass
An 8 is an A*. A 9 is an extra grade above that designed to distinguish the very brightest.
Awarding it however is rather more complex than 'this would be a 9 as it was a 9 last year.' I tend not to give out marks above an 8 in mocks, as a result.
Bear in mind for many subjects this will only be the second year of using these grades - only in Maths and English did we get three series of exams before Covid hit.
But it's an impressive achievement. Congratulations to her.
She is exceptionally bright. She was reading complex Julian Barnes novels aged 12-13
What particularly delights me is that she got 8 in maths and 9 in science. We always knew she was highly articulate and literate, but it’s very gratifying to see she can do it on the other side of the brain
Just mocks, of course, so who knows. But nice. V nice
These aren't ordinary mocks. We're still braced for Covid disruption and these mocks are designed to be exam substitutes if necessary. So doing well in them is really important to her. You've every reason to be pleased. I just thought you might like some more info on how the grades work!
She nicked the idea - Cressida moaning about fictional TV portrayals of the police - from PB. I wrote that as long ago as last June.
Not the first time PB headers get "borrowed" from by paid journalists.They could at least credit PB, OGH and his wonderful header writers. (Or share their fee .....?)
Humph ....😡
Influencing journalists used to be the point of pb. Around 2010 I used to wonder if I was the only PBer who was not a CCHQ-sponsored astroturfer, especially on Wednesday lunchtimes when pb would be full of messages about David Cameron's triumph at PMQs, even when it was clear he'd been KO'd by the clunking great fist.
Talking of GCHQ-sponsored astroturfers what on earth has happened to Philip Thompson? The story so far.....
from being the most prolific poster since records began his output dried up. This coincided with Partygate.
He then returned in the guise of Bartholomew Roberts (wasn't that Thatcher's maiden name?) but with a much reduced output.
Either he REALLY was a GCHQ-sponsored astroturfer who was cleared out with the bathwater of Partygate or a genuine crazy propagandist who couldn't face seeing the man he considered the greatest Prime Minister since Churchill being revealed as a buffoon.
That Russian news puts party gate into perspective.
OK - I think we’re about to enter into a really hostile, unprecedented period since ww2. No idea how it will pan out.
It depends on what Putin's planning to achieve.
If he tries to conquer all of Ukraine, he will almost certainly tie up enough of his army and the Belorussian army for long enough to destabilise the very fragile pro-Moscow regimes in Minsk and possibly also Nur Sultan and maybe other places too.
If he tries to annexe the Donbass, it's unlikely he could go far wrong although probably it would cause a serious financial hit to Russia in the short term.
The questions are, is he in charge, and is he sane? If the answer to either question is no...
The Johnson lead in a much-reduced voter pool needs to be considered in the light of how many 2019 Tories have been lost, but would return with Sunak.
I personally don't think many of those lost since 2019 are coming back if Boris leads the Tories into the next election. It will be a bloody hard sell on the doorstep.
An honest and probably correct assessment, I think. I marked you down as a Tory to take notice of for betting purposes some time back.
Kind of you to say so. I like political knockabout on here, but I have always tried to be scrupulous when talking of anything that has betting implications.
If I may be allowed a paternal boast. Gratz to older daughter who got almost straight 9s in her mock GCSEs, from English to geography to science
I have no idea what that means - 9?! - but apparently it’s A star.
Super bright. Well done lass
An 8 is an A*. A 9 is an extra grade above that designed to distinguish the very brightest.
Awarding it however is rather more complex than 'this would be a 9 as it was a 9 last year.' I tend not to give out marks above an 8 in mocks, as a result.
Bear in mind for many subjects this will only be the second year of using these grades - only in Maths and English did we get three series of exams before Covid hit.
But it's an impressive achievement. Congratulations to her.
She is exceptionally bright. She was reading complex Julian Barnes novels aged 12-13
What particularly delights me is that she got 8 in maths and 9 in science. We always knew she was highly articulate and literate, but it’s very gratifying to see she can do it on the other side of the brain
Just mocks, of course, so who knows. But nice. V nice
These aren't ordinary mocks. We're still braced for Covid disruption and these mocks are designed to be exam substitutes if necessary. So doing well in them is really important to her. You've every reason to be pleased. I just thought you might like some more info on how the grades work!
I am. And Thankyou
Incidentally - for your daughter's sake and for all of Year 11 and 13 - I do hope that if Covid isolation rules are relaxed, so are the dumbarse requirements for a third round of mocks in the summer term.
That could lead to serious exam fatigue at exactly the wrong moment. Better to keep them in lessons preparing. Better for their mental health too.
While European countries had held out on advising their citizens to leave Ukraine, amid reports out of Washington that an invasion may be imminent, just today #NATO allies Norway, the Netherlands and the UK are all advising their nationals to do so.
That Russian news puts party gate into perspective.
OK - I think we’re about to enter into a really hostile, unprecedented period since ww2. No idea how it will pan out.
It depends on what Putin's planning to achieve.
If he tries to conquer all of Ukraine, he will almost certainly tie up enough of his army and the Belorussian army for long enough to destabilise the very fragile pro-Moscow regimes in Minsk and possibly also Nur Sultan and maybe other places too.
If he tries to annexe the Donbass, it's unlikely he could go far wrong although probably it would cause a serious financial hit to Russia in the short term.
The questions are, is he in charge, and is he sane? If the answer to either question is no...
The persuasive argument for me is that the downsides of retreat, for him, are now more significantly damaging and important than doing *something* positive. Invasion is therefore “better”
He’s built his career around a Strongman Image, the guy who is restoring Russian pride (and rebuilding the USSR)
Suddenly he backs down when he has built overwhelming military superiority?
Comments
Russia is also a democracy, if not a perfect one, certainly more so than under Stalin for instance.
My point stands. Iraq is now one of the most democratic nations in the Middle East, under Saddam it was the most authoritarian and repressed nation in the Middle East.
First, adding another two weeks of ONS data means Covid’s infection fatality rate has now crossed below the "2x flu" line.
Latest IFR is roughly 60% higher than flu and still falling.
https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1492138139103768576
Boris Johnson urged to distance himself from selection of new Met police chief https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/feb/11/boris-johnson-urged-distance-himself-selection-new-met-police-chief?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
I'm sure his latter comments are the beginning of some long, tortuous, attempted "gotcha" enterprise.
Not the first time PB headers get "borrowed" from by paid journalists.They could at least credit PB, OGH and his wonderful header writers. (Or share their fee .....?)
Humph ....😡
Even if his views are far from mine. He is also quite personable, I had a teacher who was a Thatcherite who knew Nellist and got on well with him even if they disagreed on virtually everything politically.
It followed that if these events had taken place, the organisers could not be identified from the material available to the police at that time and nor could [the officer] draw any conclusions as to whether the gatherings breached the Covid regulations, and if so, whether those present at the gatherings had no reasonable excuse for their presence at the gatherings.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2022/feb/11/cressida-dick-resigns-sadiq-khan-boris-johnson-uk-politics-live
If it isn't on social media it probably didn't happen, say the Met in response to Good Law Project JR proceedings
But no, I don't go with that generalization. The Thatcher/Major governments were less bossy than Blair/Brown? Can't see how that is evidenced.
Anyway, all good, I sense you're genuinely floating rather only pretending to be. And of course you know as well as I do that Johnson has rather fucked up the whole party so just replacing him won't fix things in time for the election. It has to be Labour really. Certainly if I were you, knowing what I know about you, which is an awful lot, I'd be voting Labour.
1) Cases are down - Case numbers don't mean anything
2) Hospitalisations are down - Better treatments - it's still there
3) Deaths are down - You are a Trumpian COVID denier. Plus Long COVID
https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/tunisia-coup-saied-problems-desperation-mount
I'm sure the disappearances will start shortly.
"Lassa fever: Patient dies at Bedfordshire hospital"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-60353207
https://insideevs.com/news/566626/global-xev-battery-market-2021/
Korean companies have about 30% of the market, Japanese 15%, and Chinese most of the rest.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/s?k=lifeline+Dr+Barry+Monk&crid=2XRKH17E60MIA&sprefix=lifeline+dr+barry+monk,aps,179&ref=nb_sb_noss
There is a view that the Tories will soon be in trouble over the economy. This could well be. BUT - there is a but. Instinctively, when jobs and livelihoods seem at risk, people turn to the Conservatives. It's just a thing. The economy being first and foremost in people's mind is not necessarily going to be good for Starmer. Also, BJ, to be fair, always gives an impression of dynamism and getting things done. Starmer doesn't - not at all. I imagine this is why Dom considers him a dud.
And, the danger Labour could fall into, is if they blame the downturn on Brexit. Not a good way of winning back the Red Wall. The Tories, in any event, have the ready-made excuse of Covid. There's everything to play for.
To supply 100% of the UK car market would need about 44% of the current global car battery production (which implies the UK is currently receiving about 5.5% of global car battery production). So there's a lot of growth in production capacity to come for car batteries...
Liberals always lose out in these situations.
(My tealeaf-based theory for the shapes of cases vs admissions is that the latter is following cases-in-over-60s, which didn't peak so high at Christmas -- less socializing than the under-30s -- and didn't have a January plateau -- which was mostly driven by kids in school. But as I say that's tealeaf and rune-reading, not evidence based.)
Adding in economic effects, the 'winner' may not be known for a couple of decades, and even then be biased by pre-existing trends.
The parties themselves, and their more factional supporters? I haven't seen too much sign of that.
"Why I’ll miss the madness of Neighbours
The Aussie soap had a rich vein of surrealism under its sunny surface.
Daniel Raven"
https://www.spiked-online.com/2022/02/10/why-ill-miss-the-madness-of-neighbours/
Interesting article for anyone who was addicted to the show in the late 80s / early 90s — such as about a third of the UK population, which was more than the entire population of Australia at the time.
.....So not a good day for Brazillian commuters
I sincerely think this Sri Lankan guy is a genius. If he was British or French or American he’d be world famous. He also did this wasabi soaked sushi rice covered in olive oil and sweet sashimi with an egg in the middle which he then drenched in just fried garlic and oil poured it over making everything sort of crunchy. Omffffg
However only 14% of 18 to 24 year olds have watched the soap
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/media/survey-results/daily/2022/02/08/3e0dc/2
Canterbury MP accuses Labour leader of failing to tackle local activists who mounted harassment campaign"
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/02/11/labour-mp-rosie-duffield-keir-starmer-no-better-jeremy-corbyn/
Lab 41% (+1)
Con 33% (+1)
LD 9% (-1)
SNP 4% (-)
Green 6% (-)
Oth 7% (-1)
(changes from 1-2 Feb)
https://www.techneuk.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/R4-UK-2022-2-11-DATA.pdf
https://twitter.com/patrickwintour/status/1492203933003128833?s=21
https://twitter.com/nickschifrin/status/1492203844155150339?s=20&t=FySfs6wcGBvUmoKIGHqymw
The subsidiary questions are interesting and encouraging for Brexiteers, in that apparently most people feel we lavished lots of fair treatment on the EU and they were beastly to us in return. Not my perception at all, but I recognise my personal bias...
I believe he knows he is banged to rights, but refuses to go because he does not want to give Cummings the glee of getting his scalp.
I have no idea what that means - 9?! - but apparently it’s A star.
Super bright. Well done lass
Brexit is not going well, so whose fault could it be but the EU?
Economic sanctions on Russia will follow and further military reinforcements sent by NATO to Poland and the Baltic States
Awarding it however is rather more complex than 'this would be a 9 as it was a 9 last year.' I tend not to give out marks above an 8 in mocks, as a result.
Video here explains it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5RVOydPszQ
Bear in mind for many subjects this will only be the second year of using these grades - only in Maths and English did we get three series of exams before Covid hit.
But it's an impressive achievement. Congratulations to her.
But I appreciate that Putin's mind may work in some mysteriously different way.
But so were the NHS staff, and they weren't having bottle parties down at radiography. Because nobody would cut them slack.
And HM the Q alone on the evening of Philip's funeral as his staff partied was just so damned toxic with his normal base.
https://i.redd.it/c04d72voa8h81.jpg
Would be interested in comments from learned (or otherwise) PBers?
What particularly delights me is that she got 8 in maths and 9 in science. We always knew she was highly articulate and literate, but it’s very gratifying to see she can do it on the other side of the brain
Just mocks, of course, so who knows. But nice. V nice
OK - I think we’re about to enter into a really hostile, unprecedented period since ww2. No idea how it will pan out.
https://twitter.com/Frances_Coppola/status/1492210101285007366
I don't know Putin's mind either, but he has gathered up a lot of armed forces with the minimum intent of threatening to invade (whilst silmultaneously claiming he isn't, but that he will stand down if others give in), and so if he didn't get what he thought out of that threat, who the hell knows what he might do? One might well argue it was dumb to go after Eastern Ukraine (Crimea seems to have been an easy win), but he still did it.
And they haven't been saying he will invade 'next week' for months. It's been said he was preparing for invasion, which is not quite the same thing.
It’s not looking good. Guardian headline:
“Foreign Office tells Britons in Ukraine to leave country now
Guidance comes a day after Joe Biden told US citizens in Ukraine ‘things could go crazy very quickly’”
from being the most prolific poster since records began his output dried up. This coincided with Partygate.
He then returned in the guise of Bartholomew Roberts (wasn't that Thatcher's maiden name?) but with a much reduced output.
Either he REALLY was a GCHQ-sponsored astroturfer who was cleared out with the bathwater of Partygate or a genuine crazy propagandist who couldn't face seeing the man he considered the greatest Prime Minister since Churchill being revealed as a buffoon.
If I don't like it, to whom do I apply for my refund, you or Franklyn?
Someone who cares about professional standards, and the importance of maintaining the appearence as well as the reality of those standards, is even more important if we are entering a much more chaotic and dangerous period.
If he tries to conquer all of Ukraine, he will almost certainly tie up enough of his army and the Belorussian army for long enough to destabilise the very fragile pro-Moscow regimes in Minsk and possibly also Nur Sultan and maybe other places too.
If he tries to annexe the Donbass, it's unlikely he could go far wrong although probably it would cause a serious financial hit to Russia in the short term.
The questions are, is he in charge, and is he sane? If the answer to either question is no...
That could lead to serious exam fatigue at exactly the wrong moment. Better to keep them in lessons preparing. Better for their mental health too.
https://twitter.com/terischultz/status/1492207324760576005?s=20&t=FySfs6wcGBvUmoKIGHqymw
He’s built his career around a Strongman Image, the guy who is restoring Russian pride (and rebuilding the USSR)
Suddenly he backs down when he has built overwhelming military superiority?
Hmm. Maybe. But that’s not his style