Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The polls aren’t moving but Labour shouldn’t be too concerned

123468

Comments

  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 57,252
    But it doesn't.

    I really think the Government is misreading this polling: it's a "when did you stop beating your wife?" type of question. Who wants to sound callous?

    People think the lockdown 'in general' might need to continue but it's the behaviour of *other* people they're worried about, not them. They don't want it to affect them. Many have had enough waiting.

    The Government has two choices:

    (1) Start a managed loosening of the lockdown and lead the public with them on a gradual path

    (2) Try and follow what they think is public opinion and risk a substantial minority of people ignoring the lockdown entirely, taking matters into their own hands, and doing it in an uncontrolled manner.

    In my view it's a foolish strategy. They missed the boat, which sailed on Thursday.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,118
    kinabalu said:

    isam said:

    Cyclefree said:



    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    I wanted to respond to Cyclefree's excellent contribution on the previous thread.

    I understand her frustration at the VE-day celebrations. We emphasise this rather than VJ-day and there was still a major conflict going on in Asia when we were celebrating the defeat of Nazi Germany.

    Yet Liberation Day (and that in many ways is far more appropriate a title) is still celebrated every year in the Channel Islands and we have little or no perception of what it is like to be conquered and the sheer unalloyed joy of liberation and the restoration of freedom.

    Apart from countries which were neutral in both World Wars only Britain of all the nations of Europe has never experienced what it is like to be conquered in modern times. To have hostile foreign troops walking down your streets, to be told what you do and when to do it by "the enemy" and to be second class citizens in your own country.

    I think it's right we continue to celebrate our liberation and that of the world from the darkness of Naziism and celebrate all those who contributed to that including the USSR and the various resistance groups. We were alone for a while but we won with the help of large parts of the rest of the world. As someone said the Americans provided the money, the Russians provided the blood and we provided the time.

    Indeed, even Berlin is celebrating VE Day today as liberation from Nazi rule.

    The only people who are not seem to be a few diehard Remainers like Alistair Meeks and Cyclefree who refuse to join Brexiteers in celebrating anything and the AfD in Germany who refuse to celebrate a German defeat, even if it was the Nazis defeated

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-52574748
    You really are an ignorant so and so. One who cannot read either. Honour the dead I said. And I do and did today. I went down to our village green where some schoolchildren played the Last Post. Very beautifully. One of their close friends, a young man who works part-time in my daughter’s business, lost his mother two days ago - from a brain aneurism. Mid-40’s - leaving behind 3 children aged 13 to 18. The 18 year old became 18 the day after his mother’s death. So it was also a tribute to her.

    But I am not going to be party to people like you misusing history and the fighting done by people like my father for party political reasons. Just as you did in your response in which you suggested that commemorating liberation was something that only those in favour of Brexit did. Or that those who don't like this misuse of history are like Nazis.

    What a disgustingly narrow-minded and ignorant thing to say. People like my parents who lived through the war, fought in it and knew what occupation really meant had a far more generous vision of what Britain at its best could be than people like you.

    There is a part of Britain which has such a limited view and knowledge of its own history let alone that of Europe or the Empire that it misuses that history for its own narrow purposes. I refuse to be part of that. It is utterly adolescent and ignorant. Britain needs to stop behaving like a country thinking that the apogee of its achievements occurred in the years between the Battle of Britain and the creation of the NHS. It is pathetic. Like some 65 year old boring you about the top marks they go in their O-levels decades earlier.

    Honour those who made sacrifices. Remember the events which shape our history. Try and think intelligently about the lessons such events might teach us. All these are worthwhile.

    Sanctimoniously waving your Union Jack knickers in the air at those who refuse to be part of some pretendy patriotic game-playing is not how you do this.
    It's another example of "not wanting to go as far as the herd" being wilfully misrepresented as "complete disagreement".

    If you are in a room where the volume on the music is turned up to 10 and say you'd prefer it to be on 7 so you can talk, it doesn't mean "So what you're saying is you want to sit here in silence"

    The same old ripostes are made to Lockdown easing & immigration control, with I guess the inverse made from the right about raising taxes and government spending
    I go up to 11.
    Lick my love pump!
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,875

    kinabalu said:

    I don't think Labour position is that bad. Anyone who wants to make predictions whilst we have two existential crises - Brexit and Covid 19 - going on is a bit mad.

    The support for the government is shallow. Given the complexity of Brexit and Scotland, piecing together a majority will no doubt be a difficult challenge though. Starmer seems off to a good start. Written an inoffensive article in the Telegraph for VE Day.

    Anybody who thinks Labour have little chance next time is miles off the consensus view - which is that they have an excellent chance. Please see the odds for largest party next GE for confirmation of this.
    I think that is just as daft a position to hold as thinking they will automatically lose.

    There is absolutely no way anyone can predict what the political landscape will look like in 4 years.
    Well I'm not betting real money either way - so yes I agree with you.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,118
    edited May 2020

    But it doesn't.

    I really think the Government is misreading this polling: it's a "when did you stop beating your wife?" type of question. Who wants to sound callous?

    People think the lockdown 'in general' might need to continue but it's the behaviour of *other* people they're worried about, not them. They don't want it to affect them. Many have had enough waiting.

    The Government has two choices:

    (1) Start a managed loosening of the lockdown and lead the public with them on a gradual path

    (2) Try and follow what they think is public opinion and risk a substantial minority of people ignoring the lockdown entirely, taking matters into their own hands, and doing it in an uncontrolled manner.

    In my view it's a foolish strategy. They missed the boat, which sailed on Thursday.
    The speed limit is 30mph so people dont drive at 40

    They say dont drink more than 14 units a week so you dont drink 30

    If the government had loosened the lockdown the night before a warm and sunny BH people would have taken the absolute piss, so the best way is to not loosen it at all, and not prosecute those who overstep the mark
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 21,503
    Cyclefree said:



    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    I wanted to respond to Cyclefree's excellent contribution on the previous thread.

    I understand her frustration at the VE-day celebrations. We emphasise this rather than VJ-day and there was still a major conflict going on in Asia when we were celebrating the defeat of Nazi Germany.

    Yet Liberation Day (and that in many ways is far more appropriate a title) is still celebrated every year in the Channel Islands and we have little or no perception of what it is like to be conquered and the sheer unalloyed joy of liberation and the restoration of freedom.

    Apart from countries which were neutral in both World Wars only Britain of all the nations of Europe has never experienced what it is like to be conquered in modern times. To have hostile foreign troops walking down your streets, to be told what you do and when to do it by "the enemy" and to be second class citizens in your own country.

    I think it's right we continue to celebrate our liberation and that of the world from the darkness of Naziism and celebrate all those who contributed to that including the USSR and the various resistance groups. We were alone for a while but we won with the help of large parts of the rest of the world. As someone said the Americans provided the money, the Russians provided the blood and we provided the time.

    Indeed, even Berlin is celebrating VE Day today as liberation from Nazi rule.

    The only people who are not seem to be a few diehard Remainers like Alistair Meeks and Cyclefree who refuse to join Brexiteers in celebrating anything and the AfD in Germany who refuse to celebrate a German defeat, even if it was the Nazis defeated

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-52574748
    You really are an ignorant so and so. One who cannot read either. Honour the dead I said. And I do and did today. I went down to our village green where some schoolchildren played the Last Post. Very beautifully. One of their close friends, a young man who works part-time in my daughter’s business, lost his mother two days ago - from a brain aneurism. Mid-40’s - leaving behind 3 children aged 13 to 18. The 18 year old became 18 the day after his mother’s death. So it was also a tribute to her.

    But I am not going to be party to people like you misusing history and the fighting done by people like my father for party political reasons. Just as you did in your response in which you suggested that commemorating liberation was something that only those in favour of Brexit did. Or that those who don't like this misuse of history are like Nazis.

    What a disgustingly narrow-minded and ignorant thing to say. People like my parents who lived through the war, fought in it and knew what occupation really meant had a far more generous vision of what Britain at its best could be than people like you.

    There is a part of Britain which has such a limited view and knowledge of its own history let alone that of Europe or the Empire that it misuses that history for its own narrow purposes. I refuse to be part of that. It is utterly adolescent and ignorant. Britain needs to stop behaving like a country thinking that the apogee of its achievements occurred in the years between the Battle of Britain and the creation of the NHS. It is pathetic. Like some 65 year old boring you about the top marks they go in their O-levels decades earlier.

    Honour those who made sacrifices. Remember the events which shape our history. Try and think intelligently about the lessons such events might teach us. All these are worthwhile.

    Sanctimoniously waving your Union Jack knickers in the air at those who refuse to be part of some pretendy patriotic game-playing is not how you do this.
    Well said. 80-90% of the country get this right, there are those on either extreme who sadly make it seem otherwise.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 77,957
    If government do "listen to the public", loosens the rules, despite 20k new infections a day and the death rate shoots up, i wonder who gets the blame?
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,888

    TOPPING said:

    Just a general point, since 2008, the UK has had 4 general elections, 3 referenda, 3 sets of european elections, and increasingly high profile local elections every year.

    This has been accompanied with ever pervasive social media and a distinct coarsening in tone of the campaigns.

    One thing has remained near constant - the 'left' argument has lost. It might have won seemingly vital wins at points in between the elections. It might have near complete air superiority on Twitter but, when things mattered, well, the results are below:

    2009 - 3rd place in the Euros, UKIP 1st
    2010 - lost power
    2011 - AV rejected
    2014 - 2nd place in the Euros, UKIP 1st
    2014 - scottish independence rejected
    2015 - actually went backwards (!)
    2016 - Brexit
    2017 - did not win majority
    2019 - 3rd place (again) in the Euros, UKIP Brexit Part 1st
    2019 - hammered

    As far as I have seen, there has been no self reflection on the argument, the tactics, any of it. The message of Starmer's election was "we need unity, we all get behind the new new thing and ONE MORE HEAVE".

    What's really telling is that the tactics, such as they are, have not yet changed this spring. Set to transmit, TRY HARDER, chase those ambulances.

    You're trying to apply the fruits of reason and falsifiability to what for these people is a religion.

    It ain't gonna work! :wink:
    Yeah, I'll be honest, I was hoping my post would be 'fisked' and subsequently ignored.

    Don't interrupt an opponent when he's making a mistake.
    It was a good post.
    Cheers!

    I mean, the rest was tedium, but those first 5 words - bang on.

    Yes I appreciate that when your central premise is debunked it can be annoying.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,875
    isam said:



    Or you could say that to win an election in a democracy you need to build a coalition.

    In some countries, that it is a literal coalition of parties.

    Most often, in the UK, it is a coalition within a party. Neither Labour or Conservatives (or Liberal Democrats!) can win on their core vote. So they need to reach out to floating voters.

    Blair was successful in this, by constructing a coalition of "Social Democrats".

    Corbyn wanted a party of true believers. All others not welcome.

    I can't be bothered with rival retrospective assessments in general, but that last point is simply untrue. Corbyn could certainly have organised deselection of critics big time, and there were plenty of people on the left who were urging it on him. He disagreed, saying that it was better to persuade than to replace, and the number of anti-Corbyn MPs who were deselected was zero (though a few walked of their own accord, as was their right, of course). Nor, with a few exceptions, was there the usual effort to impose candidates from the centre.

    As isam says, he's a principled politician who didn't see gaining power as the first priority. One can argue, as many here have done, that gaining power is always the first priority as you can't do anything without it. But it's not the only possible view.
    Well said Nick

    One mans 7 time Westminster Seat failure is another mans most important politician of the last 50 years
    Nick lost SEVEN times? I did not realize that.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,888

    If government do "listen to the public", loosens the rules, despite 20k new infections a day and the death rate shoots up, i wonder who gets the blame?

    The government. They are in charge. They can listen to the science or the man on the Clapham omnibus. It's their fault either way.
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,448
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Shaun Bailey fails to win Hammersmith by 3,000 votes. Andy Slaughter holds the seat for Labour.

    Hammersmith was a seat Conservatives had been very confident of winning.

    Their failure to do so was a turning point on long term Conservative strategy.
    Having worked with Shaun in Hammersmith for that very election I don't remember anyone being confident. Let alone very confident
    They were on the internet.

    And Shaun Bailey was confident enough to be a 'Tatler Tory'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/2711375/Society-magazine-Tatler-unveils-line-up-of-top-Tory-totty.html

    He was a 'future Home Secretary'.
    Which PPC is not confident in their utterances?
    Not every PPC appears in Tatler described as a 'future Home Secretary'.

    And it seems other local Conservatives also expected to gain Hammersmith in 2010:

    This is the constituency I live in and where I am a councillor. It was a seat I was confident we would gain from Labour and thus see the excellent Shaun Bailey returned to the House of Commons and the egregious Andrew Slaughter removed. It was not to be. Indeed after the most dishonest campaign Slaughter won quite easily – with a majority of over 3,500.

    https://www.conservativehome.com/localgovernment/2010/05/fraser-nelson-has-got-it-wrong-on-the-battle-for-hammersmith.html
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,888

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Shaun Bailey fails to win Hammersmith by 3,000 votes. Andy Slaughter holds the seat for Labour.

    Hammersmith was a seat Conservatives had been very confident of winning.

    Their failure to do so was a turning point on long term Conservative strategy.
    Having worked with Shaun in Hammersmith for that very election I don't remember anyone being confident. Let alone very confident
    They were on the internet.

    And Shaun Bailey was confident enough to be a 'Tatler Tory'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/2711375/Society-magazine-Tatler-unveils-line-up-of-top-Tory-totty.html

    He was a 'future Home Secretary'.
    Which PPC is not confident in their utterances?
    Not every PPC appears in Tatler described as a 'future Home Secretary'.

    And it seems other local Conservatives also expected to gain Hammersmith in 2010:

    This is the constituency I live in and where I am a councillor. It was a seat I was confident we would gain from Labour and thus see the excellent Shaun Bailey returned to the House of Commons and the egregious Andrew Slaughter removed. It was not to be. Indeed after the most dishonest campaign Slaughter won quite easily – with a majority of over 3,500.

    https://www.conservativehome.com/localgovernment/2010/05/fraser-nelson-has-got-it-wrong-on-the-battle-for-hammersmith.html
    You're not quite getting how it all works are you.
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 21,503

    Anecdata: just got back from my area's socially distanced street party.

    Next door neighbour out by himself. Asked him about his son (he's been with him for six weeks and was doing DIY only on Wednesday) he told me he quit yesterday and went to move in with his girlfriend: he'd had enough.

    Other neighbours (other side) gave up trying to keep their 6 year old and 9 year old apart and just let them play together.

    Adults all apart from each other but lots of frustration being expressed, apart from the very old and retired ( who didn't come out).

    The polling isn't picking this up. It's breaking down.

    Lots of reports and anecdotes to this effect.

    It's possible with the polling that those asked are thinking about schools and businesses, not about their own private behaviour.
    It just isnt a realistic question as it is binary whereas there are probably 100 gradual and different steps that will be taken to end this lockdown.

    Ask can we do the first 2 or 3 steps out of a hundred this week and you may (or may not!) get a completely different answer.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 77,957
    TOPPING said:

    If government do "listen to the public", loosens the rules, despite 20k new infections a day and the death rate shoots up, i wonder who gets the blame?

    The government. They are in charge. They can listen to the science or the man on the Clapham omnibus. It's their fault either way.
    That was my point.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 77,957
    One of the last survivors of the Battle of Britain, Flight Lieutenant Terry Clark, has died aged 101.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,888

    TOPPING said:

    If government do "listen to the public", loosens the rules, despite 20k new infections a day and the death rate shoots up, i wonder who gets the blame?

    The government. They are in charge. They can listen to the science or the man on the Clapham omnibus. It's their fault either way.
    That was my point.
    Yes I knew that mine was to illustrate that neither can it hide behind "the science" as it seems to want to.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,686

    If government do "listen to the public", loosens the rules, despite 20k new infections a day and the death rate shoots up, i wonder who gets the blame?

    The problem is that we're in a position where our policy measures are resulting in 20k new infections per day. What has gone wrong for the last few weeks we've been in serious lockdown that we're still registering so many new cases. Why are we not isolating known cases properly in quarantine? Where is the policy to stop letting people into the country without mandatory quarantine?
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 48,081
    edited May 2020

    stodge said:


    The Government has no-one to blame but itself.

    It’s been heavily trailing all sorts of loosening in the papers over the last few days (those articles saying that unlimited socially-distanced outdoor activity, picnics and sunbathing, and permitted mixing with only one other chosen household from Downing Street “sources” weren’t just conjured up out of thin air) but it wasn’t sure how popular it was due to far too literal reading of headline polling numbers and then chickened out at the 11th hour due to ‘care homes’, which is a disaster of its own making.

    They should have made the announcement yesterday at 8pm after their review. Instead, they’ve decided to do it late on Sunday night and only give the benefits to the oldies.

    It’s really pissed people off. Many were really looking forward to this weekend, and are happy to continue to act responsibly but want the Government to be reasonable.

    The Government haven’t been reasonable (instead trying to tell people to “keep going” in adds yesterday) and so people have had enough and are now taking matters into their own hands.

    The problem is Johnson is terrified of being unpopular (he's not used to it) and is therefore incapable of saying what he thinks people don't want to hear.

    On Wednesday he tried to placate both the pro-lockdown and anti-lockdown groups and ended up annoying them both. Sunak's flip-flopping on the furlough money also suggests division and drift in the Cabinet. There's obviously a faction who thinks this has gone on long enough and the economic damage unsupportable.

    This chimes with US stock market sentiment (the DJIA goes on rising and NASDAQ is positive for the year) which thinks the re-opening in several states will lead to a surge in economic activity such that in a few months the US economy will be humming along, Trump will get re-elected and all this will seem a bad dream.

    Perhaps but indications are after an early surge activity remains slack - people are scared still and the US case numbers don't inspire confidence. We'll see.
    That's a good summary.

    My view is Johnson's chickens are going to come home to roost sooner than he thinks.

    I'm still betting on him being gone before the next election.
    He was made for the effortlessly good times, not a real national crisis; despite a lifetime of wanting to be Churchill, he’s always really been Macmillan.
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,448
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Shaun Bailey fails to win Hammersmith by 3,000 votes. Andy Slaughter holds the seat for Labour.

    Hammersmith was a seat Conservatives had been very confident of winning.

    Their failure to do so was a turning point on long term Conservative strategy.
    Having worked with Shaun in Hammersmith for that very election I don't remember anyone being confident. Let alone very confident
    They were on the internet.

    And Shaun Bailey was confident enough to be a 'Tatler Tory'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/2711375/Society-magazine-Tatler-unveils-line-up-of-top-Tory-totty.html

    He was a 'future Home Secretary'.
    Which PPC is not confident in their utterances?
    Not every PPC appears in Tatler described as a 'future Home Secretary'.

    And it seems other local Conservatives also expected to gain Hammersmith in 2010:

    This is the constituency I live in and where I am a councillor. It was a seat I was confident we would gain from Labour and thus see the excellent Shaun Bailey returned to the House of Commons and the egregious Andrew Slaughter removed. It was not to be. Indeed after the most dishonest campaign Slaughter won quite easily – with a majority of over 3,500.

    https://www.conservativehome.com/localgovernment/2010/05/fraser-nelson-has-got-it-wrong-on-the-battle-for-hammersmith.html
    You're not quite getting how it all works are you.
    I can see when someone was comfortably beaten when his side was confident of winning.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,101
    Interesting - Jersey have done antibody testing which suggests that the actual infection rate is approximately ten times the detected rate - suggesting a large pool of asymptomatic or only very mildly symptomatic recovered.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 77,957
    MaxPB said:

    If government do "listen to the public", loosens the rules, despite 20k new infections a day and the death rate shoots up, i wonder who gets the blame?

    The problem is that we're in a position where our policy measures are resulting in 20k new infections per day. What has gone wrong for the last few weeks we've been in serious lockdown that we're still registering so many new cases. Why are we not isolating known cases properly in quarantine? Where is the policy to stop letting people into the country without mandatory quarantine?
    The lack of any seeming plan on airports is quite incredible. Stuff like getting PPE is a lot harder said than done, but airports, totally in their control and loads of "cover" about claims of nasty racist behaviour given everybody has done it.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,875
    edited May 2020
    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    Just a general point, since 2008, the UK has had 4 general elections, 3 referenda, 3 sets of european elections, and increasingly high profile local elections every year.

    This has been accompanied with ever pervasive social media and a distinct coarsening in tone of the campaigns.

    One thing has remained near constant - the 'left' argument has lost. It might have won seemingly vital wins at points in between the elections. It might have near complete air superiority on Twitter but, when things mattered, well, the results are below:

    2009 - 3rd place in the Euros, UKIP 1st
    2010 - lost power
    2011 - AV rejected
    2014 - 2nd place in the Euros, UKIP 1st
    2014 - scottish independence rejected
    2015 - actually went backwards (!)
    2016 - Brexit
    2017 - did not win majority
    2019 - 3rd place (again) in the Euros, UKIP Brexit Part 1st
    2019 - hammered

    As far as I have seen, there has been no self reflection on the argument, the tactics, any of it. The message of Starmer's election was "we need unity, we all get behind the new new thing and ONE MORE HEAVE".

    What's really telling is that the tactics, such as they are, have not yet changed this spring. Set to transmit, TRY HARDER, chase those ambulances.

    You're trying to apply the fruits of reason and falsifiability to what for these people is a religion.

    It ain't gonna work! :wink:
    Yeah, I'll be honest, I was hoping my post would be 'fisked' and subsequently ignored.

    Don't interrupt an opponent when he's making a mistake.
    It was a good post. Apart from you thinking Brexit was a loss for the left wing. It was a huge victory. Arguably the biggest one for them of our age, as the remainder of your list illustrates.
    Brexit was a loss for modern liberals, not the left specifically. There is a difference, I'd say brexit was a win for the old left, definitely.
    I'm modern metro left and I can tell you straight that Brexit was a kick in the goolies. If that's what a win feels like, all I can say is I hope it's lose lose lose from here ever onwards.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,888
    edited May 2020
    MaxPB said:

    If government do "listen to the public", loosens the rules, despite 20k new infections a day and the death rate shoots up, i wonder who gets the blame?

    The problem is that we're in a position where our policy measures are resulting in 20k new infections per day. What has gone wrong for the last few weeks we've been in serious lockdown that we're still registering so many new cases. Why are we not isolating known cases properly in quarantine? Where is the policy to stop letting people into the country without mandatory quarantine?
    I'm just queueing, distanced appropriately, at my pub for a takeaway. There is a group of four lads, definitely not from the same household having a few beers while they queue.

    Looking at everyone here (10 or so), none of them look to be above 60. Most under 50. No wonder the lockdown is at risk as these people have relatively little to fear and are being told to severely curtail their lives.
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 61,033

    But it doesn't.

    I really think the Government is misreading this polling: it's a "when did you stop beating your wife?" type of question. Who wants to sound callous?

    People think the lockdown 'in general' might need to continue but it's the behaviour of *other* people they're worried about, not them. They don't want it to affect them. Many have had enough waiting.

    The Government has two choices:

    (1) Start a managed loosening of the lockdown and lead the public with them on a gradual path

    (2) Try and follow what they think is public opinion and risk a substantial minority of people ignoring the lockdown entirely, taking matters into their own hands, and doing it in an uncontrolled manner.

    In my view it's a foolish strategy. They missed the boat, which sailed on Thursday.
    I expect Boris to follow number 1

    However, I do not know the figures but are Scotland and Wales not doing as well or otherwise to England and will that create a different type of release from lockdown

    Also, questions should be asked of Sturgeon and Drakeford why they are following a perceived stricter policy

    I would also comment that Boris does not look well and of course that could be an issue if he does not recover fully soon

  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,888

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Shaun Bailey fails to win Hammersmith by 3,000 votes. Andy Slaughter holds the seat for Labour.

    Hammersmith was a seat Conservatives had been very confident of winning.

    Their failure to do so was a turning point on long term Conservative strategy.
    Having worked with Shaun in Hammersmith for that very election I don't remember anyone being confident. Let alone very confident
    They were on the internet.

    And Shaun Bailey was confident enough to be a 'Tatler Tory'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/2711375/Society-magazine-Tatler-unveils-line-up-of-top-Tory-totty.html

    He was a 'future Home Secretary'.
    Which PPC is not confident in their utterances?
    Not every PPC appears in Tatler described as a 'future Home Secretary'.

    And it seems other local Conservatives also expected to gain Hammersmith in 2010:

    This is the constituency I live in and where I am a councillor. It was a seat I was confident we would gain from Labour and thus see the excellent Shaun Bailey returned to the House of Commons and the egregious Andrew Slaughter removed. It was not to be. Indeed after the most dishonest campaign Slaughter won quite easily – with a majority of over 3,500.

    https://www.conservativehome.com/localgovernment/2010/05/fraser-nelson-has-got-it-wrong-on-the-battle-for-hammersmith.html
    You're not quite getting how it all works are you.
    I can see when someone was comfortably beaten when his side was confident of winning.
    Good point. But not as many of your links to a party who was not vocally confident of winning an election.
  • Options
    Personally I think Johnson isn't popular at all, he was just less unpopular than Corbyn. I think with a popular Labour leader he will struggle. He's not that far ahead of Starmer - and Starmer's recognition is increasing his rating as it goes on, Johnson has very little room to move up.
  • Options
    Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 4,714
    If people are to be allowed to visit garden centres in Wales, and to walk around links golf courses without restriction, and to visit superstores to buy pretty well anything they like without restrictions it seems, and to go on long distance cycle rides or to run around unrestricted probably passing people every minute, why on earth will they still be barred from playing golf for 4 hours in splendid isolation from the rest of the world?

    I look after the finances of my local members club. We may be able to limp on if we can reopen the course if not the clubhouse by mid May. If things carry on unchanged until June we are going to be seriously f**ked. I support a continuance of the lockdown but I'll be intensely angry on Sunday if on this point of detail the Welsh announcement is mirrored in England on Sunday.

    https://www.thegolfbusiness.co.uk/2020/05/welsh-assembly-relaxes-exercising-rule-but-seemingly-excludes-golf-from-it/
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,888
    kinabalu said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    Just a general point, since 2008, the UK has had 4 general elections, 3 referenda, 3 sets of european elections, and increasingly high profile local elections every year.

    This has been accompanied with ever pervasive social media and a distinct coarsening in tone of the campaigns.

    One thing has remained near constant - the 'left' argument has lost. It might have won seemingly vital wins at points in between the elections. It might have near complete air superiority on Twitter but, when things mattered, well, the results are below:

    2009 - 3rd place in the Euros, UKIP 1st
    2010 - lost power
    2011 - AV rejected
    2014 - 2nd place in the Euros, UKIP 1st
    2014 - scottish independence rejected
    2015 - actually went backwards (!)
    2016 - Brexit
    2017 - did not win majority
    2019 - 3rd place (again) in the Euros, UKIP Brexit Part 1st
    2019 - hammered

    As far as I have seen, there has been no self reflection on the argument, the tactics, any of it. The message of Starmer's election was "we need unity, we all get behind the new new thing and ONE MORE HEAVE".

    What's really telling is that the tactics, such as they are, have not yet changed this spring. Set to transmit, TRY HARDER, chase those ambulances.

    You're trying to apply the fruits of reason and falsifiability to what for these people is a religion.

    It ain't gonna work! :wink:
    Yeah, I'll be honest, I was hoping my post would be 'fisked' and subsequently ignored.

    Don't interrupt an opponent when he's making a mistake.
    It was a good post. Apart from you thinking Brexit was a loss for the left wing. It was a huge victory. Arguably the biggest one for them of our age, as the remainder of your list illustrates.
    Brexit was a loss for modern liberals, not the left specifically. There is a difference, I'd say brexit was a win for the old left, definitely.
    I'm modern metro left and I can tell you straight that Brexit was a kick in the goolies. If that's what a win feels like, all I can say is I hope it's lose lose lose from here ever onwards.
    Speaks a Jezza fan. Jezza, who for his entire life had wanted to leave the EU.
  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,161
    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    Just a general point, since 2008, the UK has had 4 general elections, 3 referenda, 3 sets of european elections, and increasingly high profile local elections every year.

    This has been accompanied with ever pervasive social media and a distinct coarsening in tone of the campaigns.

    One thing has remained near constant - the 'left' argument has lost. It might have won seemingly vital wins at points in between the elections. It might have near complete air superiority on Twitter but, when things mattered, well, the results are below:

    2009 - 3rd place in the Euros, UKIP 1st
    2010 - lost power
    2011 - AV rejected
    2014 - 2nd place in the Euros, UKIP 1st
    2014 - scottish independence rejected
    2015 - actually went backwards (!)
    2016 - Brexit
    2017 - did not win majority
    2019 - 3rd place (again) in the Euros, UKIP Brexit Part 1st
    2019 - hammered

    As far as I have seen, there has been no self reflection on the argument, the tactics, any of it. The message of Starmer's election was "we need unity, we all get behind the new new thing and ONE MORE HEAVE".

    What's really telling is that the tactics, such as they are, have not yet changed this spring. Set to transmit, TRY HARDER, chase those ambulances.

    You're trying to apply the fruits of reason and falsifiability to what for these people is a religion.

    It ain't gonna work! :wink:
    Yeah, I'll be honest, I was hoping my post would be 'fisked' and subsequently ignored.

    Don't interrupt an opponent when he's making a mistake.
    It was a good post. Apart from you thinking Brexit was a loss for the left wing. It was a huge victory. Arguably the biggest one for them of our age, as the remainder of your list illustrates.
    Brexit was a loss for modern liberals, not the left specifically. There is a difference, I'd say brexit was a win for the old left, definitely.
    Yes. As exemplified by one J. Corbyn.
    It's long been forgotten that on 24th June 2016 Jeremy Corbyn called for the immediate invoking of Article 50
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 77,957
    The Spanish government has refused the Madrid region permission to loosen its coronavirus lockdown, saying the area is not yet ready to move to the next phase of de-escalation.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,686

    If people are to be allowed to visit garden centres in Wales, and to walk around links golf courses without restriction, and to visit superstores to buy pretty well anything they like without restrictions it seems, and to go on long distance cycle rides or to run around unrestricted probably passing people every minute, why on earth will they still be barred from playing golf for 4 hours in splendid isolation from the rest of the world?

    I look after the finances of my local members club. We may be able to limp on if we can reopen the course if not the clubhouse by mid May. If things carry on unchanged until June we are going to be seriously f**ked. I support a continuance of the lockdown but I'll be intensely angry on Sunday if on this point of detail the Welsh announcement is mirrored in England on Sunday.

    https://www.thegolfbusiness.co.uk/2020/05/welsh-assembly-relaxes-exercising-rule-but-seemingly-excludes-golf-from-it/

    Golf without the club house seems like a no-brainer. It's social isolation the sport.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 77,957
    MaxPB said:

    If people are to be allowed to visit garden centres in Wales, and to walk around links golf courses without restriction, and to visit superstores to buy pretty well anything they like without restrictions it seems, and to go on long distance cycle rides or to run around unrestricted probably passing people every minute, why on earth will they still be barred from playing golf for 4 hours in splendid isolation from the rest of the world?

    I look after the finances of my local members club. We may be able to limp on if we can reopen the course if not the clubhouse by mid May. If things carry on unchanged until June we are going to be seriously f**ked. I support a continuance of the lockdown but I'll be intensely angry on Sunday if on this point of detail the Welsh announcement is mirrored in England on Sunday.

    https://www.thegolfbusiness.co.uk/2020/05/welsh-assembly-relaxes-exercising-rule-but-seemingly-excludes-golf-from-it/

    Golf without the club house seems like a no-brainer. It's social isolation the sport.
    You can easily say groups of only two or three balls. And keep you distance from other groups. Seems incredibly low risk.
  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,161
    IanB2 said:

    stodge said:


    The Government has no-one to blame but itself.

    It’s been heavily trailing all sorts of loosening in the papers over the last few days (those articles saying that unlimited socially-distanced outdoor activity, picnics and sunbathing, and permitted mixing with only one other chosen household from Downing Street “sources” weren’t just conjured up out of thin air) but it wasn’t sure how popular it was due to far too literal reading of headline polling numbers and then chickened out at the 11th hour due to ‘care homes’, which is a disaster of its own making.

    They should have made the announcement yesterday at 8pm after their review. Instead, they’ve decided to do it late on Sunday night and only give the benefits to the oldies.

    It’s really pissed people off. Many were really looking forward to this weekend, and are happy to continue to act responsibly but want the Government to be reasonable.

    The Government haven’t been reasonable (instead trying to tell people to “keep going” in adds yesterday) and so people have had enough and are now taking matters into their own hands.

    The problem is Johnson is terrified of being unpopular (he's not used to it) and is therefore incapable of saying what he thinks people don't want to hear.

    On Wednesday he tried to placate both the pro-lockdown and anti-lockdown groups and ended up annoying them both. Sunak's flip-flopping on the furlough money also suggests division and drift in the Cabinet. There's obviously a faction who thinks this has gone on long enough and the economic damage unsupportable.

    This chimes with US stock market sentiment (the DJIA goes on rising and NASDAQ is positive for the year) which thinks the re-opening in several states will lead to a surge in economic activity such that in a few months the US economy will be humming along, Trump will get re-elected and all this will seem a bad dream.

    Perhaps but indications are after an early surge activity remains slack - people are scared still and the US case numbers don't inspire confidence. We'll see.
    That's a good summary.

    My view is Johnson's chickens are going to come home to roost sooner than he thinks.

    I'm still betting on him being gone before the next election.
    He was made for the effortlessly good times, not a real national crisis; despite a lifetime of wanting to be Churchill, he’s always really been Macmillan.
    I don't think he's MacMillan either actually. He's a bombastic newspaper columnist with, I admit, a certain appeal to people.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 77,957
    The problem i can see if you say ok to golf, it will be like oldies clain8ng discrimination...some twats will claim discrimination against sports poorer people more likely to play rather than traditionally middle class golf.

    Guardian would have an article up in about 5 ms.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,875
    isam said:

    kinabalu said:

    isam said:

    Cyclefree said:



    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    I wanted to respond to Cyclefree's excellent contribution on the previous thread.

    I understand her frustration at the VE-day celebrations. We emphasise this rather than VJ-day and there was still a major conflict going on in Asia when we were celebrating the defeat of Nazi Germany.

    Yet Liberation Day (and that in many ways is far more appropriate a title) is still celebrated every year in the Channel Islands and we have little or no perception of what it is like to be conquered and the sheer unalloyed joy of liberation and the restoration of freedom.

    Apart from countries which were neutral in both World Wars only Britain of all the nations of Europe has never experienced what it is like to be conquered in modern times. To have hostile foreign troops walking down your streets, to be told what you do and when to do it by "the enemy" and to be second class citizens in your own country.

    I think it's right we continue to celebrate our liberation and that of the world from the darkness of Naziism and celebrate all those who contributed to that including the USSR and the various resistance groups. We were alone for a while but we won with the help of large parts of the rest of the world. As someone said the Americans provided the money, the Russians provided the blood and we provided the time.

    Indeed, even Berlin is celebrating VE Day today as liberation from Nazi rule.

    The only people who are not seem to be a few diehard Remainers like Alistair Meeks and Cyclefree who refuse to join Brexiteers in celebrating anything and the AfD in Germany who refuse to celebrate a German defeat, even if it was the Nazis defeated

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-52574748
    You really are an ignorant so and so. One who cannot read either. Honour the dead I said. And I do and did today. I went down to our village green where some schoolchildren played the Last Post. Very beautifully. One of their close friends, a young man who works part-time in my daughter’s business, lost his mother two days ago - from a brain aneurism. Mid-40’s - leaving behind 3 children aged 13 to 18. The 18 year old became 18 the day after his mother’s death. So it was also a tribute to her.

    But I am not going to be party to people like you misusing history and the fighting done by people like my father for party political reasons. Just as you did in your response in which you suggested that commemorating liberation was something that only those in favour of Brexit did. Or that those who don't like this misuse of history are like Nazis.

    What a disgustingly narrow-minded and ignorant thing to say. People like my parents who lived through the war, fought in it and knew what occupation really meant had a far more generous vision of what Britain at its best could be than people like you.

    There is a part of Britain which has such a limited view and knowledge of its own history let alone that of Europe or the Empire that it misuses that history for its own narrow purposes. I refuse to be part of that. It is utterly adolescent and ignorant. Britain needs to stop behaving like a country thinking that the apogee of its achievements occurred in the years between the Battle of Britain and the creation of the NHS. It is pathetic. Like some 65 year old boring you about the top marks they go in their O-levels decades earlier.

    Honour those who made sacrifices. Remember the events which shape our history. Try and think intelligently about the lessons such events might teach us. All these are worthwhile.

    Sanctimoniously waving your Union Jack knickers in the air at those who refuse to be part of some pretendy patriotic game-playing is not how you do this.
    It's another example of "not wanting to go as far as the herd" being wilfully misrepresented as "complete disagreement".

    If you are in a room where the volume on the music is turned up to 10 and say you'd prefer it to be on 7 so you can talk, it doesn't mean "So what you're saying is you want to sit here in silence"

    The same old ripostes are made to Lockdown easing & immigration control, with I guess the inverse made from the right about raising taxes and government spending
    I go up to 11.
    Lick my love pump!
    Not happening. I sniff glove and that is as far as it goes. Lockdown.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,404
    kinabalu said:

    isam said:



    One mans 7 time Westminster Seat failure is another mans most important politician of the last 50 years

    Nick lost SEVEN times? I did not realize that.
    No, he's talking about Farage, I think? - very influential despite never winning.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,686

    The problem i can see if you say ok to golf, it will be like oldies clain8ng discrimination...some twats will claim discrimination against sports poorer people more likely to play rather than traditionally middle class golf.

    Guardian would have an article up in about 5 ms.

    I'd allow singles tennis and other non-contact sports. Ultimately we can't allow contact sports until this is over or sufficiently under control.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 77,957
    Over 82% of 4,167 people who died with Covid-19 in Canada have been elderly residents of long-term care homes, a report from Canada’s National Institute on Aging says
  • Options
    justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    IanB2 said:

    isam said:

    DavidL said:

    What Starmer offers is a slightly boring, mildly competent, reasonably intelligent alternative. That gives the people a choice that was frankly not there in the Corbyn years and those that supported that regime should really reflect deeply about it no matter how distasteful they find the Tory alternative.

    This government faces very difficult choices, very difficult trade offs and will inevitably be vulnerable to the benefits of hindsight on top of the usual patina of incompetence. At the moment the majority seem to recognise this and give them the benefit of the doubt. It may not always be like that and now that there is an alternative that could have very negative consequences.

    I also think that one of the possible side effects of this wretched virus is a stronger sense of community, of all being in it together and the unacceptability of life and death itself being determined by inequality, poor housing and health inequality. After WW2, which we remember today, the country went left in response to such communitarian sentiments. It could happen again. Boris at least is alert to the danger and the zeitgeist. Whether enough of his party is likewise remains to be seen.

    Corbyn’s Labour’s vote number was incredible. Why do people assume someone else would have done, or could do, better?
    Because Labour’s dirty secret is that they can only win (under our warped electoral system) when they are sufficiently inoffensive to allow many Tories to feel safe enough to vote Liberal.
    It did not quite work out like that in 1983 and 1987.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    isam said:

    But it doesn't.

    I really think the Government is misreading this polling: it's a "when did you stop beating your wife?" type of question. Who wants to sound callous?

    People think the lockdown 'in general' might need to continue but it's the behaviour of *other* people they're worried about, not them. They don't want it to affect them. Many have had enough waiting.

    The Government has two choices:

    (1) Start a managed loosening of the lockdown and lead the public with them on a gradual path

    (2) Try and follow what they think is public opinion and risk a substantial minority of people ignoring the lockdown entirely, taking matters into their own hands, and doing it in an uncontrolled manner.

    In my view it's a foolish strategy. They missed the boat, which sailed on Thursday.
    The speed limit is 30mph so people dont drive at 40

    They say dont drink more than 14 units a week so you dont drink 30

    If the government had loosened the lockdown the night before a warm and sunny BH people would have taken the absolute piss, so the best way is to not loosen it at all, and not prosecute those who overstep the mark
    I agree.
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 15,340

    stodge said:


    The Government has no-one to blame but itself.

    It’s been heavily trailing all sorts of loosening in the papers over the last few days (those articles saying that unlimited socially-distanced outdoor activity, picnics and sunbathing, and permitted mixing with only one other chosen household from Downing Street “sources” weren’t just conjured up out of thin air) but it wasn’t sure how popular it was due to far too literal reading of headline polling numbers and then chickened out at the 11th hour due to ‘care homes’, which is a disaster of its own making.

    They should have made the announcement yesterday at 8pm after their review. Instead, they’ve decided to do it late on Sunday night and only give the benefits to the oldies.

    It’s really pissed people off. Many were really looking forward to this weekend, and are happy to continue to act responsibly but want the Government to be reasonable.

    The Government haven’t been reasonable (instead trying to tell people to “keep going” in adds yesterday) and so people have had enough and are now taking matters into their own hands.

    The problem is Johnson is terrified of being unpopular (he's not used to it) and is therefore incapable of saying what he thinks people don't want to hear.

    On Wednesday he tried to placate both the pro-lockdown and anti-lockdown groups and ended up annoying them both. Sunak's flip-flopping on the furlough money also suggests division and drift in the Cabinet. There's obviously a faction who thinks this has gone on long enough and the economic damage unsupportable.

    This chimes with US stock market sentiment (the DJIA goes on rising and NASDAQ is positive for the year) which thinks the re-opening in several states will lead to a surge in economic activity such that in a few months the US economy will be humming along, Trump will get re-elected and all this will seem a bad dream.

    Perhaps but indications are after an early surge activity remains slack - people are scared still and the US case numbers don't inspire confidence. We'll see.
    That's a good summary.

    My view is Johnson's chickens are going to come home to roost sooner than he thinks.

    I'm still betting on him being gone before the next election.
    I think you're right- temperamentally, BoJo needs to be liked, and the PM role isn't about that. However...

    Boris has a record of failing, then moving sideways then upwards. What does he do here at a personal level?

    The Conservative party position is a logical mess, held together by BoJo's charisma. Remove him, and what do they do?
  • Options
    BantermanBanterman Posts: 287
    Regardless of what is said publically, I suspect Boris is still nowhere near 100% at the moment and its likely to be a couple more months until he is. A buddy of mine had it early doors, in ICU for 3 days, still recovering 6 weeks later and it will take some more time. Most of us would still be resting at home, let alone be the PM.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,875
    @Cyclefree

    Eloquent - but a touch of "cracking butterfly on a wheel". I don't think he was being serious.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,404


    But it doesn't.

    I really think the Government is misreading this polling: it's a "when did you stop beating your wife?" type of question. Who wants to sound callous?

    People think the lockdown 'in general' might need to continue but it's the behaviour of *other* people they're worried about, not them. They don't want it to affect them. Many have had enough waiting.

    The Government has two choices:

    (1) Start a managed loosening of the lockdown and lead the public with them on a gradual path

    (2) Try and follow what they think is public opinion and risk a substantial minority of people ignoring the lockdown entirely, taking matters into their own hands, and doing it in an uncontrolled manner.

    In my view it's a foolish strategy. They missed the boat, which sailed on Thursday.

    I think public opinion is in favour of relaxarion when it's safe, but (mostly) not before. But the Government and media have made people unsure - is it kind of OK now, or still very dangerous? Round here in Godalming it's as quiet as the grave, in London evidently less so.

    I think Johnson can regain the narrative if he announces a series of relaxations, without dates except for the first one, and stresses that speeding up is dangerous. But if he indulges his tendency to waffle and express non-specific optimism, people will start to get irritated and then, I think the lockdown will indeed start to crumble.

    We need the prospect of a return to a sort of normality and clear, calm advice on how to get there. He is not the first person you'd think of as a source of clear, calm advice, but he's adaptable. We'll see.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,118
    kinabalu said:

    @Cyclefree

    Eloquent - but a touch of "cracking butterfly on a wheel". I don't think he was being serious.

    Which MP is most associated with that phrase?
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 26,101
    edited May 2020
    Not necessarily.

    Boris trying to think on his feet on Wednesday has opened a huge can of worms over releasing lock down. Remember Boris doesn't do thinking on his feet very well.

    Boris was being absolutely slaughtered at PMQs, so he needed to think quickly to win the day. He did this by blurting out that lockdown would be eased on Monday. Boom, an injury time winner for Boris!

    However the ramifications of his late victory was that the red tops took his words to be code for 'rejoice, lockdown is over'. I have also heard ( hearsay and unsubstantiated) that No 10 (Cummings?) launched some lockdown kites by briefing the press to see how they would fly. So if it is just garden centres and CA sites are open from Monday a lot of people will not just be disappointed but incandescent with rage.

    I just wish Boris would forget about popularity politics, he is a million points
    ahead of anyone else in the polls anyway and just concentrate on doing what is right. If he does get this right there is another 5 years waiting for him in 2024. If he dicks it up the Conservatives will enter the wilderness for years.

  • Options
    justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527

    HYUFD said:

    Back on Topic

    Labour votes at all GE's this Millennium

    2001 Blair 10,724,952

    2005 Blair 9,552,436

    2010 Brown 8,609,526

    2015 EICIPM 9,436,273

    2017 Jezza 12,868,460

    2019 Jezza 10,269,051

    Ranking in terms of total votes Jezza 1st and 3rd "most unpopular leader of all time"

    Blair "the great vote winner" 2nd and 4th

    EICIPM 5th

    Gordy 6th

    Anyone fancy SKS chances of getting to 12,868,460

    Note you conveniently missed out Blair's 13.5 million votes in 1997.

    Kinnock also got 11.5 million votes in 1992 as did Callaghan in 1979 ie more than Corbyn got in 2019
    Joff thinks Corbyn is the least successful leader in Lab ever.

    Do the 2017 numbers support that view?
    In 2017 he outperformed both of Kinnock's elections of 1987 & 1992, Millband's 2015 election, Brown in 2010 and Foot in 1983.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,118

    MaxPB said:

    If people are to be allowed to visit garden centres in Wales, and to walk around links golf courses without restriction, and to visit superstores to buy pretty well anything they like without restrictions it seems, and to go on long distance cycle rides or to run around unrestricted probably passing people every minute, why on earth will they still be barred from playing golf for 4 hours in splendid isolation from the rest of the world?

    I look after the finances of my local members club. We may be able to limp on if we can reopen the course if not the clubhouse by mid May. If things carry on unchanged until June we are going to be seriously f**ked. I support a continuance of the lockdown but I'll be intensely angry on Sunday if on this point of detail the Welsh announcement is mirrored in England on Sunday.

    https://www.thegolfbusiness.co.uk/2020/05/welsh-assembly-relaxes-exercising-rule-but-seemingly-excludes-golf-from-it/

    Golf without the club house seems like a no-brainer. It's social isolation the sport.
    You can easily say groups of only two or three balls. And keep you distance from other groups. Seems incredibly low risk.
    “We’ll be socially distancing the entire 18 holes the way you drive Brucie! Hoho!”
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 77,957
    According to The Telegraph the PM wants to ease some restrictions and assess them fortnightly before relaxing any more.

    He hopes to bring in small changes such as relaxing limits on exercise and picnics before looking at analysis to see what impact it has.

    A Government source said: "It means we could lift restrictions once a fortnight rather than reviewing the lockdown every three weeks, as is currently the case."

    Change a measure, measure R, rinse and repeat....should be just about free for when it comes back in the Autumn.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,875

    kinabalu said:

    isam said:



    One mans 7 time Westminster Seat failure is another mans most important politician of the last 50 years

    Nick lost SEVEN times? I did not realize that.
    No, he's talking about Farage, I think? - very influential despite never winning.
    Ah right. In which case good argument. He has been massively influential. Definitely shows how a politician can change the country without winning elections.
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 21,251
    My grandparents bought a VE Day souvenir. A half pint beer mug with a 'V' on each side.

    This evening I'm drinking from it for the first time ever.

    Cheers to all those who did what had to be done.
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 21,503
    edited May 2020

    According to The Telegraph the PM wants to ease some restrictions and assess them fortnightly before relaxing any more.

    He hopes to bring in small changes such as relaxing limits on exercise and picnics before looking at analysis to see what impact it has.

    A Government source said: "It means we could lift restrictions once a fortnight rather than reviewing the lockdown every three weeks, as is currently the case."

    Change a measure, measure R, rinse and repeat....should be just about free for when it comes back in the Autumn.

    What are the restrictions on exercise!?

    Picnics and sunbathing should be fine - but park officials should be given the right to move people on if its too crowded.

    And this is what most countries are doing or planning so hardly any kind of Telegraph scoop.
  • Options
    BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556

    IanB2 said:

    stodge said:


    The Government has no-one to blame but itself.

    It’s been heavily trailing all sorts of loosening in the papers over the last few days (those articles saying that unlimited socially-distanced outdoor activity, picnics and sunbathing, and permitted mixing with only one other chosen household from Downing Street “sources” weren’t just conjured up out of thin air) but it wasn’t sure how popular it was due to far too literal reading of headline polling numbers and then chickened out at the 11th hour due to ‘care homes’, which is a disaster of its own making.

    They should have made the announcement yesterday at 8pm after their review. Instead, they’ve decided to do it late on Sunday night and only give the benefits to the oldies.

    It’s really pissed people off. Many were really looking forward to this weekend, and are happy to continue to act responsibly but want the Government to be reasonable.

    The Government haven’t been reasonable (instead trying to tell people to “keep going” in adds yesterday) and so people have had enough and are now taking matters into their own hands.

    The problem is Johnson is terrified of being unpopular (he's not used to it) and is therefore incapable of saying what he thinks people don't want to hear.

    On Wednesday he tried to placate both the pro-lockdown and anti-lockdown groups and ended up annoying them both. Sunak's flip-flopping on the furlough money also suggests division and drift in the Cabinet. There's obviously a faction who thinks this has gone on long enough and the economic damage unsupportable.

    This chimes with US stock market sentiment (the DJIA goes on rising and NASDAQ is positive for the year) which thinks the re-opening in several states will lead to a surge in economic activity such that in a few months the US economy will be humming along, Trump will get re-elected and all this will seem a bad dream.

    Perhaps but indications are after an early surge activity remains slack - people are scared still and the US case numbers don't inspire confidence. We'll see.
    That's a good summary.

    My view is Johnson's chickens are going to come home to roost sooner than he thinks.

    I'm still betting on him being gone before the next election.
    He was made for the effortlessly good times, not a real national crisis; despite a lifetime of wanting to be Churchill, he’s always really been Macmillan.
    I don't think he's MacMillan either actually. He's a bombastic newspaper columnist with, I admit, a certain appeal to people.
    The MacMillan - Boris parallels are amusingly close on a bare summary of the facts:

    Eton
    Eton

    Balliol (Lit Hum)
    Balliol (Lit Hum)

    Becomes Tory PM without a general election
    Becomes Tory PM without a general election

    Increases Tory majority 8 years into power and wins 365 seats
    Increases Tory majority 9 years into power and wins 365 seats

    Resigns after an epic sex scandal that had nothing to do with him
    ?????????????????????

    It's spooky, I tell you! :wink:
  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,161
    I was surprised to hear David Starkey say he thought Boris Johnson was safe for a decade in power thanks to a majority of 80. The Tories ditched Maggie when she had won a majority over 100! He may be up against the most popular Labour leader for 20 years and if he looks like a loser why wouldn't they ditch him? I don't imagine he's got much of a personal vote.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 57,252
    It's worth remembering that the Government's *main adgv
    isam said:

    But it doesn't.

    I really think the Government is misreading this polling: it's a "when did you stop beating your wife?" type of question. Who wants to sound callous?

    People think the lockdown 'in general' might need to continue but it's the behaviour of *other* people they're worried about, not them. They don't want it to affect them. Many have had enough waiting.

    The Government has two choices:

    (1) Start a managed loosening of the lockdown and lead the public with them on a gradual path

    (2) Try and follow what they think is public opinion and risk a substantial minority of people ignoring the lockdown entirely, taking matters into their own hands, and doing it in an uncontrolled manner.

    In my view it's a foolish strategy. They missed the boat, which sailed on Thursday.
    The speed limit is 30mph so people dont drive at 40

    They say dont drink more than 14 units a week so you dont drink 30

    If the government had loosened the lockdown the night before a warm and sunny BH people would have taken the absolute piss, so the best way is to not loosen it at all, and not prosecute those who overstep the mark
    I disagree with that entirely, but it's reflective of the views of many.
  • Options
    Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    According to The Telegraph the PM wants to ease some restrictions and assess them fortnightly before relaxing any more.

    He hopes to bring in small changes such as relaxing limits on exercise and picnics before looking at analysis to see what impact it has.

    A Government source said: "It means we could lift restrictions once a fortnight rather than reviewing the lockdown every three weeks, as is currently the case."

    Change a measure, measure R, rinse and repeat....should be just about free for when it comes back in the Autumn.

    I don't understand why the disease would suddenly reappear in the Autumn *IF* the measures to control it are implemented successfully.

    It's far more likely that the Government screws up and it gets started again sooner than that.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,875
    TOPPING said:

    kinabalu said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    Just a general point, since 2008, the UK has had 4 general elections, 3 referenda, 3 sets of european elections, and increasingly high profile local elections every year.

    This has been accompanied with ever pervasive social media and a distinct coarsening in tone of the campaigns.

    One thing has remained near constant - the 'left' argument has lost. It might have won seemingly vital wins at points in between the elections. It might have near complete air superiority on Twitter but, when things mattered, well, the results are below:

    2009 - 3rd place in the Euros, UKIP 1st
    2010 - lost power
    2011 - AV rejected
    2014 - 2nd place in the Euros, UKIP 1st
    2014 - scottish independence rejected
    2015 - actually went backwards (!)
    2016 - Brexit
    2017 - did not win majority
    2019 - 3rd place (again) in the Euros, UKIP Brexit Part 1st
    2019 - hammered

    As far as I have seen, there has been no self reflection on the argument, the tactics, any of it. The message of Starmer's election was "we need unity, we all get behind the new new thing and ONE MORE HEAVE".

    What's really telling is that the tactics, such as they are, have not yet changed this spring. Set to transmit, TRY HARDER, chase those ambulances.

    You're trying to apply the fruits of reason and falsifiability to what for these people is a religion.

    It ain't gonna work! :wink:
    Yeah, I'll be honest, I was hoping my post would be 'fisked' and subsequently ignored.

    Don't interrupt an opponent when he's making a mistake.
    It was a good post. Apart from you thinking Brexit was a loss for the left wing. It was a huge victory. Arguably the biggest one for them of our age, as the remainder of your list illustrates.
    Brexit was a loss for modern liberals, not the left specifically. There is a difference, I'd say brexit was a win for the old left, definitely.
    I'm modern metro left and I can tell you straight that Brexit was a kick in the goolies. If that's what a win feels like, all I can say is I hope it's lose lose lose from here ever onwards.
    Speaks a Jezza fan. Jezza, who for his entire life had wanted to leave the EU.
    Well he was wrong on that. And I would tell him to his lovely wise old face.
  • Options
    fox327fox327 Posts: 367
    MaxPB said:

    If government do "listen to the public", loosens the rules, despite 20k new infections a day and the death rate shoots up, i wonder who gets the blame?

    The problem is that we're in a position where our policy measures are resulting in 20k new infections per day. What has gone wrong for the last few weeks we've been in serious lockdown that we're still registering so many new cases. Why are we not isolating known cases properly in quarantine? Where is the policy to stop letting people into the country without mandatory quarantine?
    I do not believe that there are around 20,000 new cases per day in the UK. The government gets its advice from public sector statisticians who seem to operate mainly as adminstrators rather than as statisticians at the cutting edge. Yesterday there were 30,615 deaths and 26,771 deaths a week earlier giving a 7 day average of 549 deaths. The infective fatality rate of COVID can be roughly estimated at about 1% or lower, so this average death rate implies that there are 50-60,000 new cases a day in the UK, or even more. The estimate given of 18-20,000 cases/day implies a mortality rate of 2.7%-3.1%. Many estimates have been given for the IFR in the range 0.36% to 1%. The WHO estimated it at 0.94% in February but now gives no figure. The government statisticians are assuming a much higher figure but are giving no justification for this. One might wonder if they are erring on the side of caution, but they should be giving unbiased advice to ministers.

    Reading today's Times front page it seems that the Sunday broadcast from Boris Johnson will contain almost no specific measures to lift the lockdown, and there will be no future commitments given. It is fine for him to say what steps can be taken and in what order, but if he shows no intention of taking these steps then what will be the point of the broadcast? Possibly the Times report could be wrong and he will set out a timetable. However, it seems that there has been constant rethinking of the government's plans right up to the last moment, and almost everything could still be cancelled. if he has no significant proposals to make, then I think this broadcast may not go ahead even though he said that it would at Prime Minister's Questions this week.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 57,252


    But it doesn't.

    I really think the Government is misreading this polling: it's a "when did you stop beating your wife?" type of question. Who wants to sound callous?

    People think the lockdown 'in general' might need to continue but it's the behaviour of *other* people they're worried about, not them. They don't want it to affect them. Many have had enough waiting.

    The Government has two choices:

    (1) Start a managed loosening of the lockdown and lead the public with them on a gradual path

    (2) Try and follow what they think is public opinion and risk a substantial minority of people ignoring the lockdown entirely, taking matters into their own hands, and doing it in an uncontrolled manner.

    In my view it's a foolish strategy. They missed the boat, which sailed on Thursday.

    I think public opinion is in favour of relaxarion when it's safe, but (mostly) not before. But the Government and media have made people unsure - is it kind of OK now, or still very dangerous? Round here in Godalming it's as quiet as the grave, in London evidently less so.

    I think Johnson can regain the narrative if he announces a series of relaxations, without dates except for the first one, and stresses that speeding up is dangerous. But if he indulges his tendency to waffle and express non-specific optimism, people will start to get irritated and then, I think the lockdown will indeed start to crumble.

    We need the prospect of a return to a sort of normality and clear, calm advice on how to get there. He is not the first person you'd think of as a source of clear, calm advice, but he's adaptable. We'll see.
    I agree, and I think your first and second paragraph are fair ones.

    He'll probably end up playing catch-up and he's not far off losing control.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 57,252
    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    If government do "listen to the public", loosens the rules, despite 20k new infections a day and the death rate shoots up, i wonder who gets the blame?

    The problem is that we're in a position where our policy measures are resulting in 20k new infections per day. What has gone wrong for the last few weeks we've been in serious lockdown that we're still registering so many new cases. Why are we not isolating known cases properly in quarantine? Where is the policy to stop letting people into the country without mandatory quarantine?
    I'm just queueing, distanced appropriately, at my pub for a takeaway. There is a group of four lads, definitely not from the same household having a few beers while they queue.

    Looking at everyone here (10 or so), none of them look to be above 60. Most under 50. No wonder the lockdown is at risk as these people have relatively little to fear and are being told to severely curtail their lives.
    The young are rebelling.
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 21,503

    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    If government do "listen to the public", loosens the rules, despite 20k new infections a day and the death rate shoots up, i wonder who gets the blame?

    The problem is that we're in a position where our policy measures are resulting in 20k new infections per day. What has gone wrong for the last few weeks we've been in serious lockdown that we're still registering so many new cases. Why are we not isolating known cases properly in quarantine? Where is the policy to stop letting people into the country without mandatory quarantine?
    I'm just queueing, distanced appropriately, at my pub for a takeaway. There is a group of four lads, definitely not from the same household having a few beers while they queue.

    Looking at everyone here (10 or so), none of them look to be above 60. Most under 50. No wonder the lockdown is at risk as these people have relatively little to fear and are being told to severely curtail their lives.
    The young are rebelling.
    It says something for this site when a mix of 50-60 and under 50s count as the young.
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 25,400


    But it doesn't.

    I really think the Government is misreading this polling: it's a "when did you stop beating your wife?" type of question. Who wants to sound callous?

    People think the lockdown 'in general' might need to continue but it's the behaviour of *other* people they're worried about, not them. They don't want it to affect them. Many have had enough waiting.

    The Government has two choices:

    (1) Start a managed loosening of the lockdown and lead the public with them on a gradual path

    (2) Try and follow what they think is public opinion and risk a substantial minority of people ignoring the lockdown entirely, taking matters into their own hands, and doing it in an uncontrolled manner.

    In my view it's a foolish strategy. They missed the boat, which sailed on Thursday.

    I think public opinion is in favour of relaxarion when it's safe, but (mostly) not before. But the Government and media have made people unsure - is it kind of OK now, or still very dangerous? Round here in Godalming it's as quiet as the grave, in London evidently less so.

    I think Johnson can regain the narrative if he announces a series of relaxations, without dates except for the first one, and stresses that speeding up is dangerous. But if he indulges his tendency to waffle and express non-specific optimism, people will start to get irritated and then, I think the lockdown will indeed start to crumble.

    We need the prospect of a return to a sort of normality and clear, calm advice on how to get there. He is not the first person you'd think of as a source of clear, calm advice, but he's adaptable. We'll see.
    We do need more science on how the virus actually spreads but pending this, Boris will also have the advantage of seeing what Germany and other countries are doing, which will give him, the Cabinet and SAGE a menu from which to choose.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 57,252

    Anecdata: just got back from my area's socially distanced street party.

    Next door neighbour out by himself. Asked him about his son (he's been with him for six weeks and was doing DIY only on Wednesday) he told me he quit yesterday and went to move in with his girlfriend: he'd had enough.

    Other neighbours (other side) gave up trying to keep their 6 year old and 9 year old apart and just let them play together.

    Adults all apart from each other but lots of frustration being expressed, apart from the very old and retired ( who didn't come out).

    The polling isn't picking this up. It's breaking down.

    Lots of reports and anecdotes to this effect.

    It's possible with the polling that those asked are thinking about schools and businesses, not about their own private behaviour.
    I think that's exactly what happens.

    It's like you want everyone else to be taxed more to pay for better public services.

    Except you. And then in the polling booth you vote Tory.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,875
    isam said:

    kinabalu said:

    @Cyclefree

    Eloquent - but a touch of "cracking butterfly on a wheel". I don't think he was being serious.

    Which MP is most associated with that phrase?
    Moggers!
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 57,252

    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    If government do "listen to the public", loosens the rules, despite 20k new infections a day and the death rate shoots up, i wonder who gets the blame?

    The problem is that we're in a position where our policy measures are resulting in 20k new infections per day. What has gone wrong for the last few weeks we've been in serious lockdown that we're still registering so many new cases. Why are we not isolating known cases properly in quarantine? Where is the policy to stop letting people into the country without mandatory quarantine?
    I'm just queueing, distanced appropriately, at my pub for a takeaway. There is a group of four lads, definitely not from the same household having a few beers while they queue.

    Looking at everyone here (10 or so), none of them look to be above 60. Most under 50. No wonder the lockdown is at risk as these people have relatively little to fear and are being told to severely curtail their lives.
    The young are rebelling.
    It says something for this site when a mix of 50-60 and under 50s count as the young.
    This site is pretty unrepresentative. We are all on this website for one (who else 'normal' is?) and were older, wealthier, better educated and politically engaged than most and we're a bit aspergey. Many don't like real socialising even when it's normal.

    So you have to put it through a bit of a sanity filter.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 26,101

    97,029 tests yesterday

    0 today? Royal Mail are not working!
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,269
    kinabalu said:

    @Cyclefree

    Eloquent - but a touch of "cracking butterfly on a wheel". I don't think he was being serious.

    I think he was. And it’s not the first time he’s misrepresented my position despite being told not to, several times. At any event, I’m fed up with all this forced ra-ra / clapathons and the rest of it. The Look at Me insincerity of it all grates and it is doing our political culture no good at all.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 28,634
    edited May 2020
    If the point of the lockdown was to keep deaths under 20,000 it hasn't worked by a heavy margin. If most of the deaths are in care homes, is the lockdown achieving anything? Because it probably isn't having an effect on what does or doesn't happen in care homes.
  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,161
    On Johnson/MacMillan, I can't help but think Supermac would be horrified at the comparison.

    Saying that, some people like to compare May to Anthony Eden. Though I've always found the idea that he was a disastrous PM a bit silly too.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 57,252

    According to The Telegraph the PM wants to ease some restrictions and assess them fortnightly before relaxing any more.

    He hopes to bring in small changes such as relaxing limits on exercise and picnics before looking at analysis to see what impact it has.

    A Government source said: "It means we could lift restrictions once a fortnight rather than reviewing the lockdown every three weeks, as is currently the case."

    Change a measure, measure R, rinse and repeat....should be just about free for when it comes back in the Autumn.

    I don't understand why the disease would suddenly reappear in the Autumn *IF* the measures to control it are implemented successfully.

    It's far more likely that the Government screws up and it gets started again sooner than that.
    Even those who haven't bothered (Sweden ) and those are going for the total knob-jockey strategy (Trump's US) are seeing the curves flattening out.

    This virus just isn't the end of days. It's very nasty if it decides to go for you. If your immune system overreacts, you can be toast. But it's still a very small minority of the population affected and, even then, the vast majority over 60.

    Personally I find cancer far scarier and we're racking up the extra deaths on that right now.

    Are 40,000 extra Covid-19 deaths worth it to avoid an extra 25,000 cancer deaths and the destruction of the economy for 20 years and millions of young lives ruined, possibly for good?

    In my view, yes.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,269

    IanB2 said:

    stodge said:


    The Government has no-one to blame but itself.

    It’s been heavily trailing all sorts of loosening in the papers over the last few days (those articles saying that unlimited socially-distanced outdoor activity, picnics and sunbathing, and permitted mixing with only one other chosen household from Downing Street “sources” weren’t just conjured up out of thin air) but it wasn’t sure how popular it was due to far too literal reading of headline polling numbers and then chickened out at the 11th hour due to ‘care homes’, which is a disaster of its own making.

    They should have made the announcement yesterday at 8pm after their review. Instead, they’ve decided to do it late on Sunday night and only give the benefits to the oldies.

    It’s really pissed people off. Many were really looking forward to this weekend, and are happy to continue to act responsibly but want the Government to be reasonable.

    The Government haven’t been reasonable (instead trying to tell people to “keep going” in adds yesterday) and so people have had enough and are now taking matters into their own hands.

    The problem is Johnson is terrified of being unpopular (he's not used to it) and is therefore incapable of saying what he thinks people don't want to hear.

    On Wednesday he tried to placate both the pro-lockdown and anti-lockdown groups and ended up annoying them both. Sunak's flip-flopping on the furlough money also suggests division and drift in the Cabinet. There's obviously a faction who thinks this has gone on long enough and the economic damage unsupportable.

    This chimes with US stock market sentiment (the DJIA goes on rising and NASDAQ is positive for the year) which thinks the re-opening in several states will lead to a surge in economic activity such that in a few months the US economy will be humming along, Trump will get re-elected and all this will seem a bad dream.

    Perhaps but indications are after an early surge activity remains slack - people are scared still and the US case numbers don't inspire confidence. We'll see.
    That's a good summary.

    My view is Johnson's chickens are going to come home to roost sooner than he thinks.

    I'm still betting on him being gone before the next election.
    He was made for the effortlessly good times, not a real national crisis; despite a lifetime of wanting to be Churchill, he’s always really been Macmillan.
    I don't think he's MacMillan either actually. He's a bombastic newspaper columnist with, I admit, a certain appeal to people.
    The MacMillan - Boris parallels are amusingly close on a bare summary of the facts:

    Eton
    Eton

    Balliol (Lit Hum)
    Balliol (Lit Hum)

    Becomes Tory PM without a general election
    Becomes Tory PM without a general election

    Increases Tory majority 8 years into power and wins 365 seats
    Increases Tory majority 9 years into power and wins 365 seats

    Resigns after an epic sex scandal that had nothing to do with him
    ?????????????????????

    It's spooky, I tell you! :wink:
    You forgot to add “Undermined his party leader”.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,269


    But it doesn't.

    I really think the Government is misreading this polling: it's a "when did you stop beating your wife?" type of question. Who wants to sound callous?

    People think the lockdown 'in general' might need to continue but it's the behaviour of *other* people they're worried about, not them. They don't want it to affect them. Many have had enough waiting.

    The Government has two choices:

    (1) Start a managed loosening of the lockdown and lead the public with them on a gradual path

    (2) Try and follow what they think is public opinion and risk a substantial minority of people ignoring the lockdown entirely, taking matters into their own hands, and doing it in an uncontrolled manner.

    In my view it's a foolish strategy. They missed the boat, which sailed on Thursday.

    I think public opinion is in favour of relaxarion when it's safe, but (mostly) not before. But the Government and media have made people unsure - is it kind of OK now, or still very dangerous? Round here in Godalming it's as quiet as the grave, in London evidently less so.

    I think Johnson can regain the narrative if he announces a series of relaxations, without dates except for the first one, and stresses that speeding up is dangerous. But if he indulges his tendency to waffle and express non-specific optimism, people will start to get irritated and then, I think the lockdown will indeed start to crumble.

    We need the prospect of a return to a sort of normality and clear, calm advice on how to get there. He is not the first person you'd think of as a source of clear, calm advice, but he's adaptable. We'll see.
    For someone one of whose qualities is meant to be his good communication skills he’s really poor at this. Government communications strategy is - and has been for a while - an absolute shambles.
  • Options
    BannedinnParisBannedinnParis Posts: 1,884
    watching Channel 5, the videos of VE day - every male of drinking age is absolutely banjaxed.

    makes your proud.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,686

    According to The Telegraph the PM wants to ease some restrictions and assess them fortnightly before relaxing any more.

    He hopes to bring in small changes such as relaxing limits on exercise and picnics before looking at analysis to see what impact it has.

    A Government source said: "It means we could lift restrictions once a fortnight rather than reviewing the lockdown every three weeks, as is currently the case."

    Change a measure, measure R, rinse and repeat....should be just about free for when it comes back in the Autumn.

    I don't understand why the disease would suddenly reappear in the Autumn *IF* the measures to control it are implemented successfully.

    It's far more likely that the Government screws up and it gets started again sooner than that.
    Even those who haven't bothered (Sweden ) and those are going for the total knob-jockey strategy (Trump's US) are seeing the curves flattening out.

    This virus just isn't the end of days. It's very nasty if it decides to go for you. If your immune system overreacts, you can be toast. But it's still a very small minority of the population affected and, even then, the vast majority over 60.

    Personally I find cancer far scarier and we're racking up the extra deaths on that right now.

    Are 40,000 extra Covid-19 deaths worth it to avoid an extra 25,000 cancer deaths and the destruction of the economy for 20 years and millions of young lives ruined, possibly for good?

    In my view, yes.
    I think the problem is that untamed that extra 40k turns into an extra 400k in a country lie the UK which is sociable and densely populated. What works in Sweden just won't work here. When I see my female friends we hug as a hello, when I see my male ones it's a firm handshake. We sit around small tables in the pub and talk loudly and drink a lot. Our culture just doesn't suit voluntary social distancing measures.
  • Options
    BannedinnParisBannedinnParis Posts: 1,884
    weren't there people on here last week saying it was low-key? have a watch of this, its a level more mental than I ever imagined.
  • Options
    squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,428
    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Back on Topic

    Labour votes at all GE's this Millennium

    2001 Blair 10,724,952

    2005 Blair 9,552,436

    2010 Brown 8,609,526

    2015 EICIPM 9,436,273

    2017 Jezza 12,868,460

    2019 Jezza 10,269,051

    Ranking in terms of total votes Jezza 1st and 3rd "most unpopular leader of all time"

    Blair "the great vote winner" 2nd and 4th

    EICIPM 5th

    Gordy 6th

    Anyone fancy SKS chances of getting to 12,868,460

    Note you conveniently missed out Blair's 13.5 million votes in 1997.

    Kinnock also got 11.5 million votes in 1992 as did Callaghan in 1979 ie more than Corbyn got in 2019
    Joff thinks Corbyn is the least successful leader in Lab ever.

    Do the 2017 numbers support that view?
    In 2017 he outperformed both of Kinnock's elections of 1987 & 1992, Millband's 2015 election, Brown in 2010 and Foot in 1983.
    He was really successful in people thinking he was a complete and utter cnut. Even labour folk thought that!!!
  • Options
    DeClareDeClare Posts: 483

    According to The Telegraph the PM wants to ease some restrictions and assess them fortnightly before relaxing any more.

    He hopes to bring in small changes such as relaxing limits on exercise and picnics before looking at analysis to see what impact it has.

    A Government source said: "It means we could lift restrictions once a fortnight rather than reviewing the lockdown every three weeks, as is currently the case."

    Change a measure, measure R, rinse and repeat....should be just about free for when it comes back in the Autumn.

    I don't understand why the disease would suddenly reappear in the Autumn *IF* the measures to control it are implemented successfully.

    It's far more likely that the Government screws up and it gets started again sooner than that.
    Even those who haven't bothered (Sweden ) and those are going for the total knob-jockey strategy (Trump's US) are seeing the curves flattening out.

    This virus just isn't the end of days. It's very nasty if it decides to go for you. If your immune system overreacts, you can be toast. But it's still a very small minority of the population affected and, even then, the vast majority over 60.

    Personally I find cancer far scarier and we're racking up the extra deaths on that right now.

    Are 40,000 extra Covid-19 deaths worth it to avoid an extra 25,000 cancer deaths and the destruction of the economy for 20 years and millions of young lives ruined, possibly for good?

    In my view, yes.
    In 1968/69 there was a epidemic called 'Hong Kong Flu' it killed 80,000 people in the UK but there was no lockdown.

    Apparently the railways and the post were disrupted, so no change there.
  • Options
    ChrisChris Posts: 11,418
    fox327 said:

    MaxPB said:

    If government do "listen to the public", loosens the rules, despite 20k new infections a day and the death rate shoots up, i wonder who gets the blame?

    The problem is that we're in a position where our policy measures are resulting in 20k new infections per day. What has gone wrong for the last few weeks we've been in serious lockdown that we're still registering so many new cases. Why are we not isolating known cases properly in quarantine? Where is the policy to stop letting people into the country without mandatory quarantine?
    I do not believe that there are around 20,000 new cases per day in the UK. The government gets its advice from public sector statisticians who seem to operate mainly as adminstrators rather than as statisticians at the cutting edge. Yesterday there were 30,615 deaths and 26,771 deaths a week earlier giving a 7 day average of 549 deaths. The infective fatality rate of COVID can be roughly estimated at about 1% or lower, so this average death rate implies that there are 50-60,000 new cases a day in the UK, or even more. The estimate given of 18-20,000 cases/day implies a mortality rate of 2.7%-3.1%. Many estimates have been given for the IFR in the range 0.36% to 1%. The WHO estimated it at 0.94% in February but now gives no figure. The government statisticians are assuming a much higher figure but are giving no justification for this. One might wonder if they are erring on the side of caution, but they should be giving unbiased advice to ministers.
    I'd like to know why on earth we are still having to take wild guesses at these figures, despite allegedly now having huge excess testing capacity. A relatively tiny amount of daily random sampling would quickly give is good estimates for the number of active cases, and the likely amount of immunity in the population. It could have been done weeks ago. Instead we still seem to be essentially flying blind.

  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,018
    Andy_JS said:

    If the point of the lockdown was to keep deaths under 20,000 it hasn't worked by a heavy margin. If most of the deaths are in care homes, is the lockdown achieving anything? Because it probably isn't having an effect on what does or doesn't happen in care homes.

    20,000 deaths was basically considered the absolute lowest scenario, wasn't it?

    The lockdown was to ensure we didn't exceed ICU capacity.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,404

    Over 82% of 4,167 people who died with Covid-19 in Canada have been elderly residents of long-term care homes, a report from Canada’s National Institute on Aging says

    I think that younger people are drawing conclusions from this sort of stat to think that they'll be fine if they catch it - whereas they'll probably survive but may well have permanent (?) lung damage. Personally that actually worries me more - I'll die sometime anyuway, but I'd rather not have years of lung trouble.

    I wonder if there's a city/non-city split - there's so much more to do in London that people are missing out on. Here in sleepy Godalming, I'm missing out on going to the pub to play poker, meh.
  • Options
    squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,428

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Back on Topic

    Labour votes at all GE's this Millennium

    2001 Blair 10,724,952

    2005 Blair 9,552,436

    2010 Brown 8,609,526

    2015 EICIPM 9,436,273

    2017 Jezza 12,868,460

    2019 Jezza 10,269,051

    Ranking in terms of total votes Jezza 1st and 3rd "most unpopular leader of all time"

    Blair "the great vote winner" 2nd and 4th

    EICIPM 5th

    Gordy 6th

    Anyone fancy SKS chances of getting to 12,868,460

    Note you conveniently missed out Blair's 13.5 million votes in 1997.

    Kinnock also got 11.5 million votes in 1992 as did Callaghan in 1979 ie more than Corbyn got in 2019
    Joff thinks Corbyn is the least successful leader in Lab ever.

    Do the 2017 numbers support that view?
    In 2017 he outperformed both of Kinnock's elections of 1987 & 1992, Millband's 2015 election, Brown in 2010 and Foot in 1983.
    He was really successful in people thinking he was a complete and utter cnut. Even labour folk thought that!!!
    .. and even tho Foot was loathed .. he was an intelligent man.
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 25,400

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Back on Topic

    Labour votes at all GE's this Millennium

    2001 Blair 10,724,952

    2005 Blair 9,552,436

    2010 Brown 8,609,526

    2015 EICIPM 9,436,273

    2017 Jezza 12,868,460

    2019 Jezza 10,269,051

    Ranking in terms of total votes Jezza 1st and 3rd "most unpopular leader of all time"

    Blair "the great vote winner" 2nd and 4th

    EICIPM 5th

    Gordy 6th

    Anyone fancy SKS chances of getting to 12,868,460

    Note you conveniently missed out Blair's 13.5 million votes in 1997.

    Kinnock also got 11.5 million votes in 1992 as did Callaghan in 1979 ie more than Corbyn got in 2019
    Joff thinks Corbyn is the least successful leader in Lab ever.

    Do the 2017 numbers support that view?
    In 2017 he outperformed both of Kinnock's elections of 1987 & 1992, Millband's 2015 election, Brown in 2010 and Foot in 1983.
    He was really successful in people thinking he was a complete and utter cnut. Even labour folk thought that!!!
    Not in 2017. In 2017 he did so well that Boris nicked his entire platform.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 26,101
    isam said:

    isam said:

    IanB2 said:

    isam said:

    DavidL said:

    What Starmer offers is a slightly boring, mildly competent, reasonably intelligent alternative. That gives the people a choice that was frankly not there in the Corbyn years and those that supported that regime should really reflect deeply about it no matter how distasteful they find the Tory alternative.

    This government faces very difficult choices, very difficult trade offs and will inevitably be vulnerable to the benefits of hindsight on top of the usual patina of incompetence. At the moment the majority seem to recognise this and give them the benefit of the doubt. It may not always be like that and now that there is an alternative that could have very negative consequences.

    I also think that one of the possible side effects of this wretched virus is a stronger sense of community, of all being in it together and the unacceptability of life and death itself being determined by inequality, poor housing and health inequality. After WW2, which we remember today, the country went left in response to such communitarian sentiments. It could happen again. Boris at least is alert to the danger and the zeitgeist. Whether enough of his party is likewise remains to be seen.

    Corbyn’s Labour’s vote number was incredible. Why do people assume someone else would have done, or could do, better?
    Because Labour’s dirty secret is that they can only win (under our warped electoral system) when they are sufficiently inoffensive to allow many Tories to feel safe enough to vote Liberal.
    Or the SNP don’t clean up in Scotland
    Or you could say that to win an election in a democracy you need to build a coalition.

    In some countries, that it is a literal coalition of parties.

    Most often, in the UK, it is a coalition within a party. Neither Labour or Conservatives (or Liberal Democrats!) can win on their core vote. So they need to reach out to floating voters.

    Blair was successful in this, by constructing a coalition of "Social Democrats".

    Corbyn wanted a party of true believers. All others not welcome.
    Yeah and his supporters online denouncing their own voters as Red Tories and telling them to go. So they did.

    You can see that with intolerant people in other parties too. Wanting those who aren't true blue hardcore conservative to vote for other parties. That is a recipe for losing.
    But look how Starmer fans treat Corbynites - much the same way as the reverse. The blind faith that their slither of centrism is the virtuous path leads to constant denouncements of everyone else.
    Much the same as Boris then, who ejected the naysayers from the Conservative Party. The notion that 'we don't want quislings like Philip Lee in our party' still keeps cropping up during the Covid-19 crisis on PB. If that is OK, Starmer not letting Chris Williamson back insde the Labour tent should also be OK.

    What's good for the goose etc.

    P.S. Not that it is fair to compare Philip Lee to Williamson. Philip Lee is a Doctor, Williamson is a ****!
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,018

    Over 82% of 4,167 people who died with Covid-19 in Canada have been elderly residents of long-term care homes, a report from Canada’s National Institute on Aging says

    I think that younger people are drawing conclusions from this sort of stat to think that they'll be fine if they catch it - whereas they'll probably survive but may well have permanent (?) lung damage. Personally that actually worries me more - I'll die sometime anyuway, but I'd rather not have years of lung trouble.

    I wonder if there's a city/non-city split - there's so much more to do in London that people are missing out on. Here in sleepy Godalming, I'm missing out on going to the pub to play poker, meh.
    A contact in London told me it is deserted today. Admittedly, they do live in the city - where not many others do....
  • Options
    2017 Labour performance is an interesting one and is surely something Starmer should be able to repeat.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,730
    kinabalu said:

    isam said:

    kinabalu said:

    @Cyclefree

    Eloquent - but a touch of "cracking butterfly on a wheel". I don't think he was being serious.

    Which MP is most associated with that phrase?
    Moggers!
    I guess Alexander Pope might have been an MP apart from the then insurmountable detriment of being a Catholic.
  • Options
    justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527

    Coming in very late once again because of work.
    But another excellent header from SO.

    Right now there is absolutely nothing that Labour can do that will shift the polls and absolutely loads they need to do to make sure they do shift at the right time.

    At the moment everything is about the Government.

    If they come out of the crisis at some point over the next 12 - 18 months looking like they have done their best and without any real failings that can be stuck on them (a very big ask I believe) then they will win the next election no matter what Starmer and Labour do.

    If they come out looking like they have made a mess of things for the wrong reasons (ignored scientific advise or made decisions outside of the scope of the advice that was clearly wrong) then they will suffer badly.

    At that point Starmer needs to show that he has a party that is a Government in waiting. In all honesty there is no way Johnson should have won the 2019 election. Labour let him. What Labour need to do now is look competent, united, reasonable and appeal to a wide base. That isn't the same as moving to the centre. Parties make the centre anew at each election. What they have to do is show people that they can run things better than the Tories.

    So Starmer has a huge amount to do. But none of it is likely to show up in the polling. He needs to ignore that for the next 2 years and then make sure that for the 2 years before the election he has gives himself the opportunity to challenge the Tories if they start to falter.

    It was the LibDems and SNP who handed Johnson the 2019 election - simply by agreeing to it. Corbyn lost his veto once it became clear that a single clause Bill to override the FTPA was going to pass. How different things would have looked now had the minor Opposition parties allowed the Brexit saga to continue into 2020. No oelection would then have been likely before late February - by which time Coronavirus and the NHS would have become key issues pushing Brexit into the background.
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 25,400
    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    stodge said:


    The Government has no-one to blame but itself.

    It’s been heavily trailing all sorts of loosening in the papers over the last few days (those articles saying that unlimited socially-distanced outdoor activity, picnics and sunbathing, and permitted mixing with only one other chosen household from Downing Street “sources” weren’t just conjured up out of thin air) but it wasn’t sure how popular it was due to far too literal reading of headline polling numbers and then chickened out at the 11th hour due to ‘care homes’, which is a disaster of its own making.

    They should have made the announcement yesterday at 8pm after their review. Instead, they’ve decided to do it late on Sunday night and only give the benefits to the oldies.

    It’s really pissed people off. Many were really looking forward to this weekend, and are happy to continue to act responsibly but want the Government to be reasonable.

    The Government haven’t been reasonable (instead trying to tell people to “keep going” in adds yesterday) and so people have had enough and are now taking matters into their own hands.

    The problem is Johnson is terrified of being unpopular (he's not used to it) and is therefore incapable of saying what he thinks people don't want to hear.

    On Wednesday he tried to placate both the pro-lockdown and anti-lockdown groups and ended up annoying them both. Sunak's flip-flopping on the furlough money also suggests division and drift in the Cabinet. There's obviously a faction who thinks this has gone on long enough and the economic damage unsupportable.

    This chimes with US stock market sentiment (the DJIA goes on rising and NASDAQ is positive for the year) which thinks the re-opening in several states will lead to a surge in economic activity such that in a few months the US economy will be humming along, Trump will get re-elected and all this will seem a bad dream.

    Perhaps but indications are after an early surge activity remains slack - people are scared still and the US case numbers don't inspire confidence. We'll see.
    That's a good summary.

    My view is Johnson's chickens are going to come home to roost sooner than he thinks.

    I'm still betting on him being gone before the next election.
    He was made for the effortlessly good times, not a real national crisis; despite a lifetime of wanting to be Churchill, he’s always really been Macmillan.
    I don't think he's MacMillan either actually. He's a bombastic newspaper columnist with, I admit, a certain appeal to people.
    The MacMillan - Boris parallels are amusingly close on a bare summary of the facts:

    Eton
    Eton

    Balliol (Lit Hum)
    Balliol (Lit Hum)

    Becomes Tory PM without a general election
    Becomes Tory PM without a general election

    Increases Tory majority 8 years into power and wins 365 seats
    Increases Tory majority 9 years into power and wins 365 seats

    Resigns after an epic sex scandal that had nothing to do with him
    ?????????????????????

    It's spooky, I tell you! :wink:
    You forgot to add “Undermined his party leader”.
    Macmillan resigned after being hospitalised. Boris might yet do the same.
  • Options
    Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    MaxPB said:

    According to The Telegraph the PM wants to ease some restrictions and assess them fortnightly before relaxing any more.

    He hopes to bring in small changes such as relaxing limits on exercise and picnics before looking at analysis to see what impact it has.

    A Government source said: "It means we could lift restrictions once a fortnight rather than reviewing the lockdown every three weeks, as is currently the case."

    Change a measure, measure R, rinse and repeat....should be just about free for when it comes back in the Autumn.

    I don't understand why the disease would suddenly reappear in the Autumn *IF* the measures to control it are implemented successfully.

    It's far more likely that the Government screws up and it gets started again sooner than that.
    Even those who haven't bothered (Sweden ) and those are going for the total knob-jockey strategy (Trump's US) are seeing the curves flattening out.

    This virus just isn't the end of days. It's very nasty if it decides to go for you. If your immune system overreacts, you can be toast. But it's still a very small minority of the population affected and, even then, the vast majority over 60.

    Personally I find cancer far scarier and we're racking up the extra deaths on that right now.

    Are 40,000 extra Covid-19 deaths worth it to avoid an extra 25,000 cancer deaths and the destruction of the economy for 20 years and millions of young lives ruined, possibly for good?

    In my view, yes.
    I think the problem is that untamed that extra 40k turns into an extra 400k in a country lie the UK which is sociable and densely populated. What works in Sweden just won't work here. When I see my female friends we hug as a hello, when I see my male ones it's a firm handshake. We sit around small tables in the pub and talk loudly and drink a lot. Our culture just doesn't suit voluntary social distancing measures.
    In the event of an out-of-control massacre, it would probably carry off a lot more than 400,000. Bear in mind that the original imperative of lockdown was to stop the health service collapsing. If it gets swamped with cases then a lot of Covid patients (and those suffering from other acute conditions and in need to critical care) will find that there is no capacity to treat them. Then they, as well as the genuinely hopeless Covid cases, will die of neglect. Along, of course, with cancer patients who aren't getting screened or treated. And people suffering from any number of other ailments.

    Put simply, the disease has to be suppressed to avoid this dire outcome. But I'm not a lockdown ultra: I know that it has to be eased eventually for the economic reasons that you describe, and because people simply can't put up with this for God knows how long whilst we wait for a vaccine or treatment (a year? two years? five years?) in any event. It's why it's vital that the Government gets the easing of the generalised lockdown *and* the implementation of alternative measures (track and trace, better shielding for care homes, and possibly selective lockdown for the old and infirm) right at the first attempt.

    Failure leads to a collapse in public faith in the Government's strategy, any attempt to reimpose lockdown will then fail because much of the population will ignore it, and mass death will ensue.
  • Options
    justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Back on Topic

    Labour votes at all GE's this Millennium

    2001 Blair 10,724,952

    2005 Blair 9,552,436

    2010 Brown 8,609,526

    2015 EICIPM 9,436,273

    2017 Jezza 12,868,460

    2019 Jezza 10,269,051

    Ranking in terms of total votes Jezza 1st and 3rd "most unpopular leader of all time"

    Blair "the great vote winner" 2nd and 4th

    EICIPM 5th

    Gordy 6th

    Anyone fancy SKS chances of getting to 12,868,460

    Note you conveniently missed out Blair's 13.5 million votes in 1997.

    Kinnock also got 11.5 million votes in 1992 as did Callaghan in 1979 ie more than Corbyn got in 2019
    Joff thinks Corbyn is the least successful leader in Lab ever.

    Do the 2017 numbers support that view?
    In 2017 he outperformed both of Kinnock's elections of 1987 & 1992, Millband's 2015 election, Brown in 2010 and Foot in 1983.
    He was really successful in people thinking he was a complete and utter cnut. Even labour folk thought that!!!
    There are many Tories who think that of Johnson.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,730

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Back on Topic

    Labour votes at all GE's this Millennium

    2001 Blair 10,724,952

    2005 Blair 9,552,436

    2010 Brown 8,609,526

    2015 EICIPM 9,436,273

    2017 Jezza 12,868,460

    2019 Jezza 10,269,051

    Ranking in terms of total votes Jezza 1st and 3rd "most unpopular leader of all time"

    Blair "the great vote winner" 2nd and 4th

    EICIPM 5th

    Gordy 6th

    Anyone fancy SKS chances of getting to 12,868,460

    Note you conveniently missed out Blair's 13.5 million votes in 1997.

    Kinnock also got 11.5 million votes in 1992 as did Callaghan in 1979 ie more than Corbyn got in 2019
    Joff thinks Corbyn is the least successful leader in Lab ever.

    Do the 2017 numbers support that view?
    In 2017 he outperformed both of Kinnock's elections of 1987 & 1992, Millband's 2015 election, Brown in 2010 and Foot in 1983.
    He was really successful in people thinking he was a complete and utter cnut. Even labour folk thought that!!!
    .. and even tho Foot was loathed .. he was an intelligent man.
    Foot was loathed? Get a grip.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,686
    Mortimer said:

    Over 82% of 4,167 people who died with Covid-19 in Canada have been elderly residents of long-term care homes, a report from Canada’s National Institute on Aging says

    I think that younger people are drawing conclusions from this sort of stat to think that they'll be fine if they catch it - whereas they'll probably survive but may well have permanent (?) lung damage. Personally that actually worries me more - I'll die sometime anyuway, but I'd rather not have years of lung trouble.

    I wonder if there's a city/non-city split - there's so much more to do in London that people are missing out on. Here in sleepy Godalming, I'm missing out on going to the pub to play poker, meh.
    A contact in London told me it is deserted today. Admittedly, they do live in the city - where not many others do....
    Hampstead was extremely busy this afternoon.
  • Options
    squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,428

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Back on Topic

    Labour votes at all GE's this Millennium

    2001 Blair 10,724,952

    2005 Blair 9,552,436

    2010 Brown 8,609,526

    2015 EICIPM 9,436,273

    2017 Jezza 12,868,460

    2019 Jezza 10,269,051

    Ranking in terms of total votes Jezza 1st and 3rd "most unpopular leader of all time"

    Blair "the great vote winner" 2nd and 4th

    EICIPM 5th

    Gordy 6th

    Anyone fancy SKS chances of getting to 12,868,460

    Note you conveniently missed out Blair's 13.5 million votes in 1997.

    Kinnock also got 11.5 million votes in 1992 as did Callaghan in 1979 ie more than Corbyn got in 2019
    Joff thinks Corbyn is the least successful leader in Lab ever.

    Do the 2017 numbers support that view?
    In 2017 he outperformed both of Kinnock's elections of 1987 & 1992, Millband's 2015 election, Brown in 2010 and Foot in 1983.
    He was really successful in people thinking he was a complete and utter cnut. Even labour folk thought that!!!
    Not in 2017. In 2017 he did so well that Boris nicked his entire platform.
    If you think defest was a success then good luck to you. Just like Corbyn the message was more important gha5n winning.... Corbyn would have been thrashrd has it not been f6ir the loony Tory manifesto.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    edited May 2020
    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    isam said:



    One mans 7 time Westminster Seat failure is another mans most important politician of the last 50 years

    Nick lost SEVEN times? I did not realize that.
    No, he's talking about Farage, I think? - very influential despite never winning.
    Ah right. In which case good argument. He has been massively influential. Definitely shows how a politician can change the country without winning elections.
    Except he didn't, not single handedly. Tory MPs wanted the referendum. Cameron's Tory majority made it possible. Vote leave winning the referendum permitted Brexit. May winning enough seats to stay in Downing Street kept it alive, barely. Boris winning a majority made Brexit actually happen.

    All of it required winning.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 46,006

    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    stodge said:


    The Government has no-one to blame but itself.

    It’s been heavily trailing all sorts of loosening in the papers over the last few days (those articles saying that unlimited socially-distanced outdoor activity, picnics and sunbathing, and permitted mixing with only one other chosen household from Downing Street “sources” weren’t just conjured up out of thin air) but it wasn’t sure how popular it was due to far too literal reading of headline polling numbers and then chickened out at the 11th hour due to ‘care homes’, which is a disaster of its own making.

    They should have made the announcement yesterday at 8pm after their review. Instead, they’ve decided to do it late on Sunday night and only give the benefits to the oldies.

    It’s really pissed people off. Many were really looking forward to this weekend, and are happy to continue to act responsibly but want the Government to be reasonable.

    The Government haven’t been reasonable (instead trying to tell people to “keep going” in adds yesterday) and so people have had enough and are now taking matters into their own hands.

    The problem is Johnson is terrified of being unpopular (he's not used to it) and is therefore incapable of saying what he thinks people don't want to hear.

    On Wednesday he tried to placate both the pro-lockdown and anti-lockdown groups and ended up annoying them both. Sunak's flip-flopping on the furlough money also suggests division and drift in the Cabinet. There's obviously a faction who thinks this has gone on long enough and the economic damage unsupportable.

    This chimes with US stock market sentiment (the DJIA goes on rising and NASDAQ is positive for the year) which thinks the re-opening in several states will lead to a surge in economic activity such that in a few months the US economy will be humming along, Trump will get re-elected and all this will seem a bad dream.

    Perhaps but indications are after an early surge activity remains slack - people are scared still and the US case numbers don't inspire confidence. We'll see.
    That's a good summary.

    My view is Johnson's chickens are going to come home to roost sooner than he thinks.

    I'm still betting on him being gone before the next election.
    He was made for the effortlessly good times, not a real national crisis; despite a lifetime of wanting to be Churchill, he’s always really been Macmillan.
    I don't think he's MacMillan either actually. He's a bombastic newspaper columnist with, I admit, a certain appeal to people.
    The MacMillan - Boris parallels are amusingly close on a bare summary of the facts:

    Eton
    Eton

    Balliol (Lit Hum)
    Balliol (Lit Hum)

    Becomes Tory PM without a general election
    Becomes Tory PM without a general election

    Increases Tory majority 8 years into power and wins 365 seats
    Increases Tory majority 9 years into power and wins 365 seats

    Resigns after an epic sex scandal that had nothing to do with him
    ?????????????????????

    It's spooky, I tell you! :wink:
    You forgot to add “Undermined his party leader”.
    Macmillan resigned after being hospitalised. Boris might yet do the same.
    MacMillan had a distinguished war record, having been wounded on the Somme.

    Johnson hosted a TV panel show...
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,018

    MaxPB said:

    According to The Telegraph the PM wants to ease some restrictions and assess them fortnightly before relaxing any more.

    He hopes to bring in small changes such as relaxing limits on exercise and picnics before looking at analysis to see what impact it has.

    A Government source said: "It means we could lift restrictions once a fortnight rather than reviewing the lockdown every three weeks, as is currently the case."

    Change a measure, measure R, rinse and repeat....should be just about free for when it comes back in the Autumn.

    I don't understand why the disease would suddenly reappear in the Autumn *IF* the measures to control it are implemented successfully.

    It's far more likely that the Government screws up and it gets started again sooner than that.
    Even those who haven't bothered (Sweden ) and those are going for the total knob-jockey strategy (Trump's US) are seeing the curves flattening out.

    This virus just isn't the end of days. It's very nasty if it decides to go for you. If your immune system overreacts, you can be toast. But it's still a very small minority of the population affected and, even then, the vast majority over 60.

    Personally I find cancer far scarier and we're racking up the extra deaths on that right now.

    Are 40,000 extra Covid-19 deaths worth it to avoid an extra 25,000 cancer deaths and the destruction of the economy for 20 years and millions of young lives ruined, possibly for good?

    In my view, yes.
    I think the problem is that untamed that extra 40k turns into an extra 400k in a country lie the UK which is sociable and densely populated. What works in Sweden just won't work here. When I see my female friends we hug as a hello, when I see my male ones it's a firm handshake. We sit around small tables in the pub and talk loudly and drink a lot. Our culture just doesn't suit voluntary social distancing measures.
    In the event of an out-of-control massacre, it would probably carry off a lot more than 400,000. Bear in mind that the original imperative of lockdown was to stop the health service collapsing. If it gets swamped with cases then a lot of Covid patients (and those suffering from other acute conditions and in need to critical care) will find that there is no capacity to treat them. Then they, as well as the genuinely hopeless Covid cases, will die of neglect. Along, of course, with cancer patients who aren't getting screened or treated. And people suffering from any number of other ailments.

    Put simply, the disease has to be suppressed to avoid this dire outcome. But I'm not a lockdown ultra: I know that it has to be eased eventually for the economic reasons that you describe, and because people simply can't put up with this for God knows how long whilst we wait for a vaccine or treatment (a year? two years? five years?) in any event. It's why it's vital that the Government gets the easing of the generalised lockdown *and* the implementation of alternative measures (track and trace, better shielding for care homes, and possibly selective lockdown for the old and infirm) right at the first attempt.

    Failure leads to a collapse in public faith in the Government's strategy, any attempt to reimpose lockdown will then fail because much of the population will ignore it, and mass death will ensue.
    Absolutely agree.
  • Options
    eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,987
    DeClare said:

    According to The Telegraph the PM wants to ease some restrictions and assess them fortnightly before relaxing any more.

    He hopes to bring in small changes such as relaxing limits on exercise and picnics before looking at analysis to see what impact it has.

    A Government source said: "It means we could lift restrictions once a fortnight rather than reviewing the lockdown every three weeks, as is currently the case."

    Change a measure, measure R, rinse and repeat....should be just about free for when it comes back in the Autumn.

    I don't understand why the disease would suddenly reappear in the Autumn *IF* the measures to control it are implemented successfully.

    It's far more likely that the Government screws up and it gets started again sooner than that.
    Even those who haven't bothered (Sweden ) and those are going for the total knob-jockey strategy (Trump's US) are seeing the curves flattening out.

    This virus just isn't the end of days. It's very nasty if it decides to go for you. If your immune system overreacts, you can be toast. But it's still a very small minority of the population affected and, even then, the vast majority over 60.

    Personally I find cancer far scarier and we're racking up the extra deaths on that right now.

    Are 40,000 extra Covid-19 deaths worth it to avoid an extra 25,000 cancer deaths and the destruction of the economy for 20 years and millions of young lives ruined, possibly for good?

    In my view, yes.
    In 1968/69 there was a epidemic called 'Hong Kong Flu' it killed 80,000 people in the UK but there was no lockdown.

    Apparently the railways and the post were disrupted, so no change there.
    That was over two years. The corona virus has been killing people in the UK for just two months and is already at 31 000
  • Options
    ChrisChris Posts: 11,418
    Andy_JS said:

    If the point of the lockdown was to keep deaths under 20,000 it hasn't worked by a heavy margin. If most of the deaths are in care homes, is the lockdown achieving anything? Because it probably isn't having an effect on what does or doesn't happen in care homes.

    What a bizarre thing to say.

    If the lockdown has kept the level of infection in the general population in the first wave down to (say) 15%, then of course it has had a huge effect on care homes. BECAUSE THE PEOPLE WHO WORK IN CARE HOMES LIVE IN THE GENERAL POPULATION WHEN THEY'RE NOT AT WORK.

    That's why the idea of letting the virus rip through the "non-vulnerable" section of the population while miraculously "shielding" the most vulnerable was such an absolute nonsense.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,730
    More visits to Scotland? Has any Labour leader said this before?

    https://twitter.com/ScotNational/status/1258669717306273795?s=20
This discussion has been closed.