The big drop in approval for Johnson and the government in the Sevanta poll happened following the "Stay Alert" fiasco. The Cummings affair has only reinforced a negative trend and doesn't seem a game changer in itself. My suspicion is that a general awareness of a government not in control of events is playing out rather than a particular outrage.
The logic driving lockdown is that is prevents the spread of Corona and reduces its incidence. It follows, therefore, that a relaxation of lockdown will result in more Corona. and more incidence.
So relaxations actually confront the original premise. They are always going to look awkward
Only if the relaxation reverts the situation back to status quo ante. Not sure that's exactly happening.
Well if that's not happening then the relationship between lockdown and Corona simply cannot be what its proponents claim. Otherwise partial reversions to status quo will occur as relaxations are stepped up. IE the second peak
That is the logic of what we have been told and it is still what many on here adhere to,
Didn’t both South Korea and Hokkaido have second peaks after relaxation that they had to jump on again as well?
But the genie is out of the bottle lockdown 2 will not be accepted in many environments, I doubt it would be in Spain despite the high level of policing so it will become a personal decision as to where you go and who you meet with. Sensible people will wear masks and only go places where they real safe.
No we on the left continue to support the party and do everything we can to beat the Tories
You and Rochdale clearly not capable of doing that for the last 5 years have a whiff of the Cummings hypocrisy about you and continue to be factional at every turn.
No tack-spitting here. Starmer's still broadly enjoying a honeymoon with us Corbynites as well, of course with exceptions. We recognise the need to professionalise the party.
Took half-day off today, went for a walk through town and out onto the Heath. Lovely weather, blue skies, skylarks. Well worth the trip.
A lot of people out as well, despite it being 2pm on a Monday and most folk still having jobs to do. Based on what I've seen, I'd say that the 2m rule is still very much alive but people have well and truly had it with staying at home.
Not that they will necessarily be interested in the non-essential shops when they open back up, of course. I've been watching the news report about this. You can't make a day of it (you have to go round on your own, and there are still no cafes and restaurants to stop at for lunch.) You can't try on clothes. You're not meant to touch anything, so Lord alone knows how you're meant to rummage the rails and get a proper look at anything. You'll have to queue to get into anywhere you want to visit.
I reckon there'll be an initial dash by some shoppers, reflecting some pent-up demand and the novelty of stores being open again, but after one or two weekends trade will drop right back off. If you take practically all the advantages of physical retail away then why would people not stick to online?
It’s Tuesday!
Bad Day at Black Rook
My bad I doubt I'm the first person to have lost track of what day of the week it is during all of this.
I changed my computer prompt to include the day of the week: Tuesday $
Mr. Max, Starmer's wibbling on carving England into pieces with the knife of devolution is off-putting.
What has he said?
And are you even in the slightest bit aware of what an utterly dysfunctional political entity England is? Do you have no concept of how vaguely civilised countries run their affairs?
About as much use as the one that resulted in the CPS deciding that providing Ms Arcuri with free foreign jollies at the taxpayers expense and her business with free public money despite having moved back to the USA was all above board.
The inquiry properly concluded Boris did not influence the committee but that the committee was influenced by Boris. Sounds fair to me.
Took half-day off today, went for a walk through town and out onto the Heath. Lovely weather, blue skies, skylarks. Well worth the trip.
A lot of people out as well, despite it being 2pm on a Monday and most folk still having jobs to do. Based on what I've seen, I'd say that the 2m rule is still very much alive but people have well and truly had it with staying at home.
Not that they will necessarily be interested in the non-essential shops when they open back up, of course. I've been watching the news report about this. You can't make a day of it (you have to go round on your own, and there are still no cafes and restaurants to stop at for lunch.) You can't try on clothes. You're not meant to touch anything, so Lord alone knows how you're meant to rummage the rails and get a proper look at anything. You'll have to queue to get into anywhere you want to visit.
I reckon there'll be an initial dash by some shoppers, reflecting some pent-up demand and the novelty of stores being open again, but after one or two weekends trade will drop right back off. If you take practically all the advantages of physical retail away then why would people not stick to online?
It’s Tuesday!
Bad Day at Black Rook
My bad I doubt I'm the first person to have lost track of what day of the week it is during all of this.
If I can cheer you up, I spent most of yesterday on business calls to South Africa, having failed to realise it was a Bank Holiday here until Friday. I’m supposed to be retired.
The big drop in approval for Johnson and the government in the Sevanta poll happened following the "Stay Alert" fiasco. The Cummings affair has only reinforced a negative trend and doesn't seem a game changer in itself. My suspicion is that a general awareness of a government not in control of events is playing out rather than a particular outrage.
The logic driving lockdown is that is prevents the spread of Corona and reduces its incidence. It follows, therefore, that a relaxation of lockdown will result in more Corona. and more incidence.
So relaxations actually confront the original premise. They are always going to look awkward
A higher incidence than it would have been if no relaxation had occurred. The entire point is to find a way of maximising our freedoms while minimising R. The Germans seem to be doing a good job of it so far, which can be encouraging. There are also certainly low hanging fruits where the affect on increasing R is minimal but the benefits socially and economically are far higher; they’re trying to find them.
If, at any point, incidence starts to actually increase, that’s worrying, because it could signal reimposition of restrictions. But the original premise (ie the germ theory of disease) is well established.
No sorry the imposition of a lockdown presupposes its effectivness. Otherwise it certainly would not have happened.
And the withdrawal of a lockdown, for those who support that lockdown, will mean the opposite effect (assuming Corona has not been eradicated).
Lockdowners fear a second spike precisely for this reason. Which makes you wonder why they are supporting any relaxation at all.
Semmelweiss found massive resistance to the germ theory, because it was extremely inconvenient to the doctors of the time. They could come up with all sorts of handwavy excuses.
You’ve had the mechanics of infectivity and restrictions explained to you time and again, as well as the economics of pandemics and lockdowns, including links to both the theory and evidence behind them and to the overwhelming economist views.
Yet you continue to ignore them and repeat your already-debunked stuff again and again. I can only conclude that your simply an anonymous internet troll of the worst kind.
No I simply support the conclusion of the Oxford Epidemiologist Group under Prof Gupta.
You don;t want to accept them and that's your right. Its also my right to assert their increasingly persuasive arguments, as the events surrounding the disease play out, and prove the relationship you see between lockdown and disease path as simply incorrect.
In fairness, the police have to investigate any remotely serious allegation. It shouldn't be taken to imply proof or its absence.
Indeed. I think its reasonable to let a free and fair investigation settle the matter. If he gets convicted of any offence he should go, if he doesn't he should stay.
The big drop in approval for Johnson and the government in the Sevanta poll happened following the "Stay Alert" fiasco. The Cummings affair has only reinforced a negative trend and doesn't seem a game changer in itself. My suspicion is that a general awareness of a government not in control of events is playing out rather than a particular outrage.
The logic driving lockdown is that is prevents the spread of Corona and reduces its incidence. It follows, therefore, that a relaxation of lockdown will result in more Corona. and more incidence.
So relaxations actually confront the original premise. They are always going to look awkward
Only if the relaxation reverts the situation back to status quo ante. Not sure that's exactly happening.
Well if that's not happening then the relationship between lockdown and Corona simply cannot be what its proponents claim. Otherwise partial reversions to status quo will occur as relaxations are stepped up. IE the second peak
That is the logic of what we have been told and it is still what many on here adhere to,
OK so why are we re-opening if that is the relationship between the virus and lockdown?
all we are doing is kicking the second peak can down the road, if you are right.
Well, it seems that saying "All well now! Go party!" (the Georgian approach) results in a second peak. While slowly removing restrictions (see Italy and Germany) does not.
The point is to understand where the biggest "bang for the buck is". What are the restrictions that can be removed without seeing the virus explode.
I don't think that this is particularly complicated.
Love the idea that the job of government as well as making up the law without the help of parliament (Virus Regs 2020) are allowed to interpret it as they go along, undermine it at will and decide by themselves to vary sentence and quash conviction. Move over Divisional Court and Court of Appeal (Criminal Division), the government is going to do it for you.
That's pretty much how they run it in North Korea.
Hmm I always assumed with the Gov't assuming emergency powers there was an "unspoken" requirement to err be well reasonable and fair in their operation.
I'd assumed (from far away) that police were mostly telling people to go home, rather than issuing fines - other than in the most egregious cases such as people hosting noisy house parties and pubs that wouldn't shut??
I think as a general rule, the police will be understanding if you apologise, and explain that while you are technically breaking the rules, it's a family emergency.
If on the other hand, you tell them you've done nothing wrong, and demand to know why they stopped you, then you'll find them much less sympathetic.
If you want a measure of this, UK Police had imposed a little under 15k fines between March 27th and May 11th. That is, about 350 a day. (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-52674192)
' a month after re-opening, Georgia new cases continue slow and steady'
so...
I don;t know if you would call that a second peak.
even CNN can't magic up the relationship between lockdown and the virus that you do,
18 May is the highest single day for CV-19 cases in the state of Georgia, with 965 cases. (There are reporting delays between tests happening and results coming back so it may be that more recent days are higher.)
If your highest ever date for positive results is in the second half of May, I think you need to accept that there's a second peak, whatever the CNN headline says.
Laura avoids Covid at the Covid briefing and sticks to Dom.
Move on love.
I think your last sentence is demeaning and misogynistic
There is only one thing that allow us to move on
The fact this has been running for 5 days without resolution is disgraceful.
We are agreeing BJO
Cummings goes or Boris does, or even both
I am furious over this
Even HYUFD has been pretty quiet.
I think if Cummings goes Tories will continue a healthy lead in the polls
Tells you all you need to know that the only 3 posters still trying to sell this bullshit are TGOHF, BluestBlue and Philip Thompson. All the saner Tories have understood the damage being done.
Love the idea that the job of government as well as making up the law without the help of parliament (Virus Regs 2020) are allowed to interpret it as they go along, undermine it at will and decide by themselves to vary sentence and quash conviction. Move over Divisional Court and Court of Appeal (Criminal Division), the government is going to do it for you.
That's pretty much how they run it in North Korea.
Hmm I always assumed with the Gov't assuming emergency powers there was an "unspoken" requirement to err be well reasonable and fair in their operation.
I'd assumed (from far away) that police were mostly telling people to go home, rather than issuing fines - other than in the most egregious cases such as people hosting noisy house parties and pubs that wouldn't shut??
I think as a general rule, the police will be understanding if you apologise, and explain that while you are technically breaking the rules, it's a family emergency.
If on the other hand, you tell them you've done nothing wrong, and demand to know why they stopped you, then you'll find them much less sympathetic.
Yes - an apology goes a long way even if you don't mean it.
Cummings and Johnson could have exploited this fact. They could have been Hugh Grant with Robert Peston as Oprah Winfrey.
Too late now. They are chained together and doomed.
My wife (not political, hence I discuss politics here) said 'he should have just said he'd done what he'd done for his family, apologised for upsetting people and offered to make a donation to an NHS charity'.
Not a bad suggestion. If that had been done first thing then I think it would have taken the sting out of it completely.
Mr. Max, Starmer's wibbling on carving England into pieces with the knife of devolution is off-putting.
What has he said?
And are you even in the slightest bit aware of what an utterly dysfunctional political entity England is? Do you have no concept of how vaguely civilised countries run their affairs?
Apparently England used to be split into 4 parts, but that ended up with Europeans running most of the country.* Or something
* except for a boggy little island in the Summer Country
Right now, Keir seems to be popular despite the Labour Party, hence why his popularity seems to go up more than Labour's does. His job is to convert his approval into votes.
I think the polls are baloney because...
No way is the gap between the government and Labour bigger now than it was at the GE, and thats what the polls say
No way is Keir Starmer so much more popular than Corbyn and Johnson so less popular than he was while he still leads as most preferred PM by Boris>Corbyn levels, which is also what they say
Hypothetical polls are nonsense, whether they are good for your side or bad.
In fairness, the police have to investigate any remotely serious allegation. It shouldn't be taken to imply proof or its absence.
Indeed. I think its reasonable to let a free and fair investigation settle the matter. If he gets convicted of any offence he should go, if he doesn't he should stay.
Convictions matter. Witch hunts don't.
Do you think anyone should have resigned over Cash-for-Honours out of interest?
No we on the left continue to support the party and do everything we can to beat the Tories
You and Rochdale clearly not capable of doing that for the last 5 years have a whiff of the Cummings hypocrisy about you and continue to be factional at every turn.
I remeber from when I was previously on here that you are a decent bloke, surely you cannot support twats like this. Makes me wonder who the nasty party really is:
Right now, Keir seems to be popular despite the Labour Party, hence why his popularity seems to go up more than Labour's does. His job is to convert his approval into votes.
I think the polls are baloney because...
No way is the gap between the government and Labour bigger now than it was at the GE, and thats what the polls say
No way is so much more popular than Corbyn and Johnson so less popular than he was while he still leads as most preferred PM by Boris>Corbyn levels, which is also what they say
Hypothetical polls are nonsense, whether they are good for your side or bad.
Indeed, but... you'd rather the nonsense polls were showing you a dozen points clear than a dozen points behind.
Love the idea that the job of government as well as making up the law without the help of parliament (Virus Regs 2020) are allowed to interpret it as they go along, undermine it at will and decide by themselves to vary sentence and quash conviction. Move over Divisional Court and Court of Appeal (Criminal Division), the government is going to do it for you.
That's pretty much how they run it in North Korea.
Hmm I always assumed with the Gov't assuming emergency powers there was an "unspoken" requirement to err be well reasonable and fair in their operation.
I'd assumed (from far away) that police were mostly telling people to go home, rather than issuing fines - other than in the most egregious cases such as people hosting noisy house parties and pubs that wouldn't shut??
I think as a general rule, the police will be understanding if you apologise, and explain that while you are technically breaking the rules, it's a family emergency.
If on the other hand, you tell them you've done nothing wrong, and demand to know why they stopped you, then you'll find them much less sympathetic.
Yes - an apology goes a long way even if you don't mean it.
Cummings and Johnson could have exploited this fact. They could have been Hugh Grant with Robert Peston as Oprah Winfrey.
Too late now. They are chained together and doomed.
My wife (not political, hence I discuss politics here) said 'he should have just said he'd done what he'd done for his family, apologised for upsetting people and offered to make a donation to an NHS charity'.
Not a bad suggestion. If that had been done first thing then I think it would have taken the sting out of it completely.
The apology needed to be "I did the wrong thing. I see that now. I am sorry."
Saying sorry for "upsetting people" is weasel and palpably phoney.
NEW Survation Poll – Westminster Voting Intention: CON 46% (-2) LAB 33% (+3) LD 8% (-) GRN 4% (-1) SNP 5% (-) BXP <1% (-) OTH 4% (-)
Nearly all fieldwork post Cummings
Great result for Tories</p>
We discussed this about 4 hours ago
Did you what was the conclusion?
That I had expected the gap to have closed more although Chris from YouGov said to wait for more polls so I am awaiting those taken entirely post speech to make a judgment.
I also said that I would expect polling parity by the end of the year and the usual suspects laughed at me, so I am clearly doing a great job
Favourability ratings for Boris and the government are dropping significantly and Starmer's favourability is improving. Changes in party support are lagging at the moment but may not continue to do so. As SO has said elsewhere the Labour Party is not going to restore trust overnight. My guess is that by the end of the year Starmer will have comfortably better ratings than Boris (if he's still there) and the gap between the parties will be very narrow.
Replacing the Corbynista Jenny Formby with David Evans as the new General Secretary today is another step in the right direction.
Right now, Keir seems to be popular despite the Labour Party, hence why his popularity seems to go up more than Labour's does. His job is to convert his approval into votes.
I think the polls are baloney because...
No way is the gap between the government and Labour bigger now than it was at the GE, and thats what the polls say
No way is Keir Starmer so much more popular than Corbyn and Johnson so less popular than he was while he still leads as most preferred PM by Boris>Corbyn levels, which is also what they say
Hypothetical polls are nonsense, whether they are good for your side or bad.
Anyone that bases their betting on whatever the polls say is a gullible idiot, and very easy to take money from
There are fewer than 400 new cases a day in Italy now.
So a month of 0.8<R<0.9 gets rid of 80% of the virus. That sounds encouraging. We dont need R around 0.5 or anything like that to make good progress (obviously great if it was).
Right now, Keir seems to be popular despite the Labour Party, hence why his popularity seems to go up more than Labour's does. His job is to convert his approval into votes.
I think the polls are baloney because...
No way is the gap between the government and Labour bigger now than it was at the GE, and thats what the polls say
No way is so much more popular than Corbyn and Johnson so less popular than he was while he still leads as most preferred PM by Boris>Corbyn levels, which is also what they say
Hypothetical polls are nonsense, whether they are good for your side or bad.
Indeed, but... you'd rather the nonsense polls were showing you a dozen points clear than a dozen points behind.
I missed out the words "Keir Starmer" in the first line of the third paragraph their by the way.
I guess so, but it beggars belief doesn't it? Labour have a leader who is apparently miles more popular than his predecessor, yet is doing worse in hypothetical polls than they didnt in the GE at a time of completely unprecedented crisis.
Where are the other 7% that voted for Jezza in 2017?
Love the idea that the job of government as well as making up the law without the help of parliament (Virus Regs 2020) are allowed to interpret it as they go along, undermine it at will and decide by themselves to vary sentence and quash conviction. Move over Divisional Court and Court of Appeal (Criminal Division), the government is going to do it for you.
That's pretty much how they run it in North Korea.
Hmm I always assumed with the Gov't assuming emergency powers there was an "unspoken" requirement to err be well reasonable and fair in their operation.
I'd assumed (from far away) that police were mostly telling people to go home, rather than issuing fines - other than in the most egregious cases such as people hosting noisy house parties and pubs that wouldn't shut??
I think as a general rule, the police will be understanding if you apologise, and explain that while you are technically breaking the rules, it's a family emergency.
If on the other hand, you tell them you've done nothing wrong, and demand to know why they stopped you, then you'll find them much less sympathetic.
Yes - an apology goes a long way even if you don't mean it.
Cummings and Johnson could have exploited this fact. They could have been Hugh Grant with Robert Peston as Oprah Winfrey.
Too late now. They are chained together and doomed.
My wife (not political, hence I discuss politics here) said 'he should have just said he'd done what he'd done for his family, apologised for upsetting people and offered to make a donation to an NHS charity'.
Not a bad suggestion. If that had been done first thing then I think it would have taken the sting out of it completely.
Yep. But the things you suggest obviously didn't factor in the game theory that Cummings was running last Friday.
NEW Survation Poll – Westminster Voting Intention: CON 46% (-2) LAB 33% (+3) LD 8% (-) GRN 4% (-1) SNP 5% (-) BXP <1% (-) OTH 4% (-)
Nearly all fieldwork post Cummings
Great result for Tories</p>
We discussed this about 4 hours ago
Did you what was the conclusion?
That I had expected the gap to have closed more although Chris from YouGov said to wait for more polls so I am awaiting those taken entirely post speech to make a judgment.
I also said that I would expect polling parity by the end of the year and the usual suspects laughed at me, so I am clearly doing a great job
Favourability ratings for Boris and the government are dropping significantly and Starmer's favourability is improving. Changes in party support are lagging at the moment but may not continue to do so. As SO has said elsewhere the Labour Party is not going to restore trust overnight. My guess is that by the end of the year Starmer will have comfortably better ratings than Boris (if he's still there) and the gap between the parties will be very narrow.
Replacing the Corbynista Jenny Formby with David Evans as the new General Secretary today is another step in the right direction.
Boris is beating him on "preferred PM" by 17%. That cant be right given the leader ratings
Labour got 40% with Jezza in charge
It seems to be popular to dismiss that inconvenient fact, and peddle a myth of "trust that will take time to be restored", but a fact it remains. He took the party from 30.4% in 2015 to 40% in 2017
In fairness, the police have to investigate any remotely serious allegation. It shouldn't be taken to imply proof or its absence.
Indeed. I think its reasonable to let a free and fair investigation settle the matter. If he gets convicted of any offence he should go, if he doesn't he should stay.
Convictions matter. Witch hunts don't.
Do you think anyone should have resigned over Cash-for-Honours out of interest?
It was murky but no convictions were there? No, I seem to recall from memory Blair was questioned by the Police but never charged and he never resigned.
No we on the left continue to support the party and do everything we can to beat the Tories
You and Rochdale clearly not capable of doing that for the last 5 years have a whiff of the Cummings hypocrisy about you and continue to be factional at every turn.
Onwards together BJO. I never had you standing shoulder-to-shoulder with the Bastanis of this world. Keir's to the left of me, but he is rational, smart, does not wince at the sight of a Union Jack and does not hang out with anti-Semites. Rejoice.
There are fewer than 400 new cases a day in Italy now.
So a month of 0.8
The type of person who is getting infected is also important.
If its the young and healthy, because they are 'out and about', it doesn't matter much as they will put little strain on health resources while helping build herd immunity.
I am in the Gupta of Oxford hypothesis camp, as in I think and certainly hope there is enough natural immunity and asymptomatic stuff to pretty much avoid a 2nd. But I am not betting on it.
There are fewer than 400 new cases a day in Italy now.
So a month of 0.8
The type of person who is getting infected is also important.
If its the young and healthy, because they are 'out and about', it doesn't matter much as they will put little strain on health resources while helping build herd immunity.
Unless their out and about ness increases the R because they're asymptomatic and keep going out and about,....
Right now, Keir seems to be popular despite the Labour Party, hence why his popularity seems to go up more than Labour's does. His job is to convert his approval into votes.
I think the polls are baloney because...
No way is the gap between the government and Labour bigger now than it was at the GE, and thats what the polls say
No way is so much more popular than Corbyn and Johnson so less popular than he was while he still leads as most preferred PM by Boris>Corbyn levels, which is also what they say
Hypothetical polls are nonsense, whether they are good for your side or bad.
Indeed, but... you'd rather the nonsense polls were showing you a dozen points clear than a dozen points behind.
I missed out the words "Keir Starmer" in the first line of the third paragraph their by the way.
I guess so, but it beggars belief doesn't it? Labour have a leader who is apparently miles more popular than his predecessor, yet is doing worse in hypothetical polls than they didnt in the GE at a time of completely unprecedented crisis.
Where are the other 7% that voted for Jezza in 2017?
It feels like the historical behaviours have been broken. The period between 2010-2015 looks like the last classical period where the popular Labour party stormed into a lead before seeing it gradually diminish as the election approached.
I will be genuinely surprised if there are any people who've been fined for travelling to arrange emergency childcare. To my thinking, the police would just wave you on.
I wonder, though, if any have been fined for travelling from their primary address to a second home nearer to family with their child?
And I wonder if any of those has had symptoms at the time?
"Is Cummings a twat?" So I hear.
"Did he flout the rules?" I guess so.
"Should he be fined £100?" I'd make it £200, just in case.
"Should he lose his job?" What? Over a £200 civil penalty? What planet are you on?
That is a rather silly remark.
There are people on here who say Cummings didn't break the rules. But I don't think many are seriously suggesting that, if he did, he should not resign or be sacked (as have others in a prominent position who have breached the rules).
I think even the vast majority of his defenders would accept that it's really important that figures involved in setting the approach on this crisis don't undermine rules intended to protect public health by breaking the rules, as this clearly makes it much more difficult to secure compliance by the public to the rules and guidance as they develop.
Even if Cummings did technically obey the rules when interpreted in fullest flexibility, in light of his particular circumstances, he still damaged the core message about the importance of staying at home if a family member has symptoms. He undermined the credibility of HMG just when it needs the public to respond to its public health advice. You can insist you're in the right on a very narrow individual level, yet know from the ensuing storm you've committed a political wrong: if you have to go for that, you might draw comfort from whatever personal justification you feel, but why expect it to save you?
If you work in politics you need to be able to play good politics. It’s a team game even if you don’t want it to be, particularly for those working at the top end rather than maverick backbenchers and one-man thinktankers. If you screw up basic politics and score an own goal, you’ve let down your allies, your cause, anyone who invested political capital in you, and every poor sod whose duty it’s now become to stick their head above the parapet to defend you for the indefensible. There are rules you were expected to follow. Don’t be seen to be hypocritical. Hold your tongue rather than say something outrage-provoking but in your view true, especially at a sensitive time. Don’t break cabinet responsibility. Don’t openly attack the leadership of your own party unless you think it’s time for a coup and you reckon you’ve got the numbers for it. Stay relentlessly on-message. Don’t create unnecessary drama. Don’t do your opponents’ work for you.
Dom Cummings just handed a king-sized gift-wrapped present to every opposition party. Even if what he did was legal on a technicality, even if it was the best thing for his family. Every government minister and MP called up to face the media rounds the last few days and defend the minutiae of Barnard Castlegate must feel like wringing his neck.
I’m not claiming those rules have deep moral authority, just that resigning and firing matters are best judged against them. I'm not even saying they're "good" rules. I’d rather MPs behaved less like mindless automata in their quest for promotion, and I think governments would enact fewer stupid policies if they faced more flak from their own side. Many attacks on political leaders are justified – even, perhaps especially, friendly-fire. Often politicians are too afraid to speak the honest truth on sensitive topics because they worry how it will go down with swing voters and focus groups, and the cementing of “unspeakable topics” means vital issues go uninvestigated. Hypocrisy can be the result of trying to do the right thing for you and your loved ones (in your judgement, but not necessarily the judgement of your colleagues, their policies, or the voters you face). Still, all these rules have evolved for a reason – politics is a brutal sport, and its dynamics punish those who breach them, whatever individual justification is invoked for each such infraction.
I am in the Gupta of Oxford hypothesis camp, as in I think and certainly hope there is enough natural immunity and asymptomatic stuff to pretty much avoid a 2nd. But I am not betting on it.
Morgan is yearning for a second peak.
He doesn't even realise that lockdown ended two weeks ago.
I will be genuinely surprised if there are any people who've been fined for travelling to arrange emergency childcare. To my thinking, the police would just wave you on.
I wonder, though, if any have been fined for travelling from their primary address to a second home nearer to family with their child?
And I wonder if any of those has had symptoms at the time?
"Is Cummings a twat?" So I hear.
"Did he flout the rules?" I guess so.
"Should he be fined £100?" I'd make it £200, just in case.
"Should he lose his job?" What? Over a £200 civil penalty? What planet are you on?
In fairness, the police have to investigate any remotely serious allegation. It shouldn't be taken to imply proof or its absence.
Indeed. I think its reasonable to let a free and fair investigation settle the matter. If he gets convicted of any offence he should go, if he doesn't he should stay.
Convictions matter. Witch hunts don't.
Do you think anyone should have resigned over Cash-for-Honours out of interest?
It was murky but no convictions were there? No, I seem to recall from memory Blair was questioned by the Police but never charged and he never resigned.
The timing of Blair's departure was very much influenced by Cash-for-Honours. It's obviously not in his resignation letter, but yes it was a big part of him going that early in the term.
I'm genuinely interested in your approach to it - to be clear, you just think "no foul, no resignation, says nothing about the state of politics and the Labour Party in 2007, all a witch-hunt really as it turns out"?
Love the idea that the job of government as well as making up the law without the help of parliament (Virus Regs 2020) are allowed to interpret it as they go along, undermine it at will and decide by themselves to vary sentence and quash conviction. Move over Divisional Court and Court of Appeal (Criminal Division), the government is going to do it for you.
That's pretty much how they run it in North Korea.
Hmm I always assumed with the Gov't assuming emergency powers there was an "unspoken" requirement to err be well reasonable and fair in their operation.
I'd assumed (from far away) that police were mostly telling people to go home, rather than issuing fines - other than in the most egregious cases such as people hosting noisy house parties and pubs that wouldn't shut??
I think as a general rule, the police will be understanding if you apologise, and explain that while you are technically breaking the rules, it's a family emergency.
If on the other hand, you tell them you've done nothing wrong, and demand to know why they stopped you, then you'll find them much less sympathetic.
Yes - an apology goes a long way even if you don't mean it.
Cummings and Johnson could have exploited this fact. They could have been Hugh Grant with Robert Peston as Oprah Winfrey.
Too late now. They are chained together and doomed.
My wife (not political, hence I discuss politics here) said 'he should have just said he'd done what he'd done for his family, apologised for upsetting people and offered to make a donation to an NHS charity'.
Not a bad suggestion. If that had been done first thing then I think it would have taken the sting out of it completely.
Yep. But the things you suggest obviously didn't factor in the game theory that Cummings was running last Friday.
Not my suggestion, I was passing it on as I found it interesting.
Personally I think he's been overly honest over the whole thing. He's basically from the start responded with a "f***k off, leave me alone and mind your own business" - which I can understand given what he'd been through but it was awful politics.
If you can believe the ONS survey, their estimate of daily new cases in the UK is about 9000.
Saw what seemed like a reasonable rule of thumb: high-testing countries will detect maybe half of symptomatics, then add 50% for the rest. That'd put us on ~6k/day today, and declining at ~5%/day (or ~80%/month). Be nice if that rate continued for a bit, really stamp this thing into the ground.
There are fewer than 400 new cases a day in Italy now.
So a month of 0.8
The type of person who is getting infected is also important.
If its the young and healthy, because they are 'out and about', it doesn't matter much as they will put little strain on health resources while helping build herd immunity.
Unless their out and about ness increases the R because they're asymptomatic and keep going out and about,....
There have been asymptomatic people throughout.
After a while they stop infecting other people and many of the people they do infect will not be asymptomatic and who will consequently self-isolate when they suspect they are infected.
In fairness, the police have to investigate any remotely serious allegation. It shouldn't be taken to imply proof or its absence.
Indeed. I think its reasonable to let a free and fair investigation settle the matter. If he gets convicted of any offence he should go, if he doesn't he should stay.
Convictions matter. Witch hunts don't.
Do you think anyone should have resigned over Cash-for-Honours out of interest?
It was murky but no convictions were there? No, I seem to recall from memory Blair was questioned by the Police but never charged and he never resigned.
The timing of Blair's departure was very much influenced by Cash-for-Honours. It's obviously not in his resignation letter, but yes it was a big part of him going that early in the term.
I'm genuinely interested in your approach to it - to be clear, you just think "no foul, no resignation, says nothing about the state of politics and the Labour Party in 2007, all a witch-hunt really as it turns out"?
It was murky and there was a foul in that money was returned etc, but yeah I don't think anyone had to resign over it. Had anyone been convicted they obviously would have had to.
I am in the Gupta of Oxford hypothesis camp, as in I think and certainly hope there is enough natural immunity and asymptomatic stuff to pretty much avoid a 2nd. But I am not betting on it.
Morgan is yearning for a second peak.
He doesn't even realise that lockdown ended two weeks ago.
He's a prat. He wants to be in the story, not reporting the story.
No we on the left continue to support the party and do everything we can to beat the Tories
You and Rochdale clearly not capable of doing that for the last 5 years have a whiff of the Cummings hypocrisy about you and continue to be factional at every turn.
No tack-spitting here. Starmer's still broadly enjoying a honeymoon with us Corbynites as well, of course with exceptions. We recognise the need to professionalise the party.
I'm incredulous Nick.... Corbyn and his group of malcontents turned the Labour Party into a joke...a sort of student protest group....
I really hope the Corbynites become so disillusioned that they just fuck off to some fringe organisation where they belong....
I'm still in no mood for reconciliation comrade....
As I said, fine him the same as everyone else - the equivalent of a parking ticket
Broke the lockdown to pop round my parents earlier, sat in the garden for an hour,,, they're both 73 and my 76 yr old uncle was there. When I asked about Cummings, my Dad said "hate him", when I disagreed my Mum had to go inside out of disgust! Their take was that he should be the last person to break the rules, having had a hand in creating them.
I pointed out that we were all breaking lockdown rules at that very moment, but it didn't cut any ice. My Tory voting uncle agreed with me and thought it was a storm in a teacup, but the conservatives cant count on persuading my 100% Labour voting parents to change the habit of a lifetime in 2024
You have a very sensible family, Sam, nothing more than we've been telling you all this time.
Just looking through the by specimen date testing data and I think England is definitely through the worst of it. Under 1000 new cases per day in England and dropping rapidly down to just 500 per day.
The by death date hospital deaths report has a very similar story, I think we're actually under 100 hospital deaths per day in England and under 150 total deaths per day. Interestingly there hasn't been a rise in community transmission after the VE Day celebrations that everyone was so worried about. In fact new cases and deaths have continued to fall fairly rapidly since then. I also think that the lockdown since then has been extremely loose and we've not seen a rise in new cases.
It's a real shame that the government is getting distracted by this Cummings bullshit because there is finally some really positive news on the virus and I think as a nation our sacrifices have begun to pay off and we can start getting back to normal. Social distancing indoors and do what you like outdoors seems to result in an R of around 0.8-0.9 which means it will take 5-6 more weeks to get the new cases down to a negligible amount but it means we can open up beer gardens, cafés and other outdoor venues.
Shamefully we're now going to spend the next week on whether or not one arsehole gets the sack or not instead of finally moving on from lockdown.
Talking this over with the in laws as well as my own folks, I think the reason I cant get angry about Cummings is that I wouldn't care even if he (and the same goes for the Scottish CMO, and Prince Charles, and the Queen) had just gone to his second home for lockdown because it was nicer. Ultimately I think people with second homes should have been allowed to go there if they wanted to, and the only reason this was not permitted was to blind us to the fact the virus puts a "stealth tax" on the poor and relief to the rich.
In fairness, the police have to investigate any remotely serious allegation. It shouldn't be taken to imply proof or its absence.
Indeed. I think its reasonable to let a free and fair investigation settle the matter. If he gets convicted of any offence he should go, if he doesn't he should stay.
Convictions matter. Witch hunts don't.
Do you think anyone should have resigned over Cash-for-Honours out of interest?
It was murky but no convictions were there? No, I seem to recall from memory Blair was questioned by the Police but never charged and he never resigned.
The timing of Blair's departure was very much influenced by Cash-for-Honours. It's obviously not in his resignation letter, but yes it was a big part of him going that early in the term.
I'm genuinely interested in your approach to it - to be clear, you just think "no foul, no resignation, says nothing about the state of politics and the Labour Party in 2007, all a witch-hunt really as it turns out"?
If Blair was unconcerned about the Bernie Ecclestone bung I doubt he was overly bothered about cash for honours.
In fairness, the police have to investigate any remotely serious allegation. It shouldn't be taken to imply proof or its absence.
Indeed. I think its reasonable to let a free and fair investigation settle the matter. If he gets convicted of any offence he should go, if he doesn't he should stay.
Convictions matter. Witch hunts don't.
Do you think anyone should have resigned over Cash-for-Honours out of interest?
It was murky but no convictions were there? No, I seem to recall from memory Blair was questioned by the Police but never charged and he never resigned.
The timing of Blair's departure was very much influenced by Cash-for-Honours. It's obviously not in his resignation letter, but yes it was a big part of him going that early in the term.
I'm genuinely interested in your approach to it - to be clear, you just think "no foul, no resignation, says nothing about the state of politics and the Labour Party in 2007, all a witch-hunt really as it turns out"?
It was murky and there was a foul in that money was returned etc, but yeah I don't think anyone had to resign over it. Had anyone been convicted they obviously would have had to.
You've not actually answered my question... which is your prerogative but, in case you missed it:
Do you personally think there should have been no resignations? And do you really yourself think, "no foul, no resignation, says nothing about the state of politics and the Labour Party in 2007, all a witch-hunt really as it turns out"?
I mean, it's the clear logic of your position, but seems extremely odd as a position to me.
Maybe we should all put a note in our diaries to look back in this three months from now, compare it to the prorogation debate/senseless arm-thrashing, and see if there's anything to learn from comparing these two events.
Talking this over with the in laws as well as my own folks, I think the reason I cant get angry about Cummings is that I wouldn't care even if he (and the same goes for the Scottish CMO) had just gone to his parents for liockdown because it was nicer. Ultimately I think people with second homes should have been allowed to go there if they wanted to, and the only reason this was not permitted was to blind us to the "stealth tax" the virus puts on the poor and relief it gives to the rich. But that's just life
I quite agree. It's probably better for people to be in second homes as they tend to be in the country, and it's probably more difficult to spread a virus if people are in low density areas than in big cities.
The other reason I can't particularly give a damn is that I've been ignoring lockdown restrictions myself so it would be hypocritical of me to care if he does.
Didn't May suffer from the same problem? So utterly reliant on a tiny tiny set of advisors that she could not listen to anyone else or bear the thought of them not being in the room at every meeting.
Talking this over with the in laws as well as my own folks, I think the reason I cant get angry about Cummings is that I wouldn't care even if he (and the same goes for the Scottish CMO) had just gone to his parents for liockdown because it was nicer. Ultimately I think people with second homes should have been allowed to go there if they wanted to, and the only reason this was not permitted was to blind us to the "stealth tax" the virus puts on the poor and relief it gives to the rich. But that's just life
I quite agree. It's probably better for people to be in second homes as they tend to be in the country, and it's probably more difficult to spread a virus if people are in low density areas than in big cities.
The other reason I can't particularly give a damn is that I've been ignoring lockdown restrictions myself so it would be hypocritical of me to care if he does.
The issue is that services are distributed on usually resident population. There was a potential danger of hospitals away from London being put under pressure by having to deal with more people than expected.
In fairness, the police have to investigate any remotely serious allegation. It shouldn't be taken to imply proof or its absence.
Indeed. I think its reasonable to let a free and fair investigation settle the matter. If he gets convicted of any offence he should go, if he doesn't he should stay.
Convictions matter. Witch hunts don't.
Do you think anyone should have resigned over Cash-for-Honours out of interest?
It was murky but no convictions were there? No, I seem to recall from memory Blair was questioned by the Police but never charged and he never resigned.
The timing of Blair's departure was very much influenced by Cash-for-Honours. It's obviously not in his resignation letter, but yes it was a big part of him going that early in the term.
I'm genuinely interested in your approach to it - to be clear, you just think "no foul, no resignation, says nothing about the state of politics and the Labour Party in 2007, all a witch-hunt really as it turns out"?
If Blair was unconcerned about the Bernie Ecclestone bung I doubt he was overly bothered about cash for honours.
It's not whether Blair was somehow morally bothered or not. The fact is that the whiff of sleaze and corruption around the then PM enabled Brown to lever him out a good couple of years before he'd intended to go.
Talking this over with the in laws as well as my own folks, I think the reason I cant get angry about Cummings is that I wouldn't care even if he (and the same goes for the Scottish CMO) had just gone to his parents for liockdown because it was nicer. Ultimately I think people with second homes should have been allowed to go there if they wanted to, and the only reason this was not permitted was to blind us to the "stealth tax" the virus puts on the poor and relief it gives to the rich. But that's just life
I quite agree. It's probably better for people to be in second homes as they tend to be in the country, and it's probably more difficult to spread a virus if people are in low density areas than in big cities.
The other reason I can't particularly give a damn is that I've been ignoring lockdown restrictions myself so it would be hypocritical of me to care if he does.
The issue is that services are distributed on usually resident population. There was a potential danger of hospitals away from London being put under pressure by having to deal with more people than expected.
But I don't think hospital capacity has been short anywhere, has it? Though the government has been incredibly cagey with those statistics.
Talking this over with the in laws as well as my own folks, I think the reason I cant get angry about Cummings is that I wouldn't care even if he (and the same goes for the Scottish CMO) had just gone to his parents for liockdown because it was nicer. Ultimately I think people with second homes should have been allowed to go there if they wanted to, and the only reason this was not permitted was to blind us to the "stealth tax" the virus puts on the poor and relief it gives to the rich. But that's just life
I quite agree. It's probably better for people to be in second homes as they tend to be in the country, and it's probably more difficult to spread a virus if people are in low density areas than in big cities.
The other reason I can't particularly give a damn is that I've been ignoring lockdown restrictions myself so it would be hypocritical of me to care if he does.
The issue is that services are distributed on usually resident population. There was a potential danger of hospitals away from London being put under pressure by having to deal with more people than expected.
If people pay council tax in both their homes then there shouldn't be a problem.
Talking this over with the in laws as well as my own folks, I think the reason I cant get angry about Cummings is that I wouldn't care even if he (and the same goes for the Scottish CMO, and Prince Charles, and the Queen) had just gone to his second home for lockdown because it was nicer. Ultimately I think people with second homes should have been allowed to go there if they wanted to, and the only reason this was not permitted was to blind us to the fact the virus puts a "stealth tax" on the poor and relief to the rich.
But that's life.
Second homers come out of London, say, infection hotspot. Go To rural location And then have to go to local supermarket spreading the infection if they have it. Not a good idea which is why we didn’t want the second homers from Madrid to come
Just looking through the by specimen date testing data and I think England is definitely through the worst of it. Under 1000 new cases per day in England and dropping rapidly down to just 500 per day.
The by death date hospital deaths report has a very similar story, I think we're actually under 100 hospital deaths per day in England and under 150 total deaths per day. Interestingly there hasn't been a rise in community transmission after the VE Day celebrations that everyone was so worried about. In fact new cases and deaths have continued to fall fairly rapidly since then. I also think that the lockdown since then has been extremely loose and we've not seen a rise in new cases.
It's a real shame that the government is getting distracted by this Cummings bullshit because there is finally some really positive news on the virus and I think as a nation our sacrifices have begun to pay off and we can start getting back to normal. Social distancing indoors and do what you like outdoors seems to result in an R of around 0.8-0.9 which means it will take 5-6 more weeks to get the new cases down to a negligible amount but it means we can open up beer gardens, cafés and other outdoor venues.
Shamefully we're now going to spend the next week on whether or not one arsehole gets the sack or not instead of finally moving on from lockdown.
The numbers are moving in the right direction but if I am any guide a lot of people are still very wary and keeping contact with others to a minimum and respecting social distancing.
There have been a minority who I suspect have not throughout all this but out on my walk today people generally playing by the rules and if that continues we can gradually ease through the summer.
Behaviours have changed and people have adapted. That is something human beings are very good at. Thee still seems some primal urge among a minority to go back to status quo ante but that doesn't recognise or understand the world has changed and is changing.
Talking this over with the in laws as well as my own folks, I think the reason I cant get angry about Cummings is that I wouldn't care even if he (and the same goes for the Scottish CMO) had just gone to his parents for liockdown because it was nicer. Ultimately I think people with second homes should have been allowed to go there if they wanted to, and the only reason this was not permitted was to blind us to the "stealth tax" the virus puts on the poor and relief it gives to the rich. But that's just life
I quite agree. It's probably better for people to be in second homes as they tend to be in the country, and it's probably more difficult to spread a virus if people are in low density areas than in big cities.
The other reason I can't particularly give a damn is that I've been ignoring lockdown restrictions myself so it would be hypocritical of me to care if he does.
The issue is that services are distributed on usually resident population. There was a potential danger of hospitals away from London being put under pressure by having to deal with more people than expected.
If people pay council tax in both their homes then there shouldn't be a problem.
True, though I guess that's not applicable to Cummings.
Talking this over with the in laws as well as my own folks, I think the reason I cant get angry about Cummings is that I wouldn't care even if he (and the same goes for the Scottish CMO, and Prince Charles, and the Queen) had just gone to his second home for lockdown because it was nicer. Ultimately I think people with second homes should have been allowed to go there if they wanted to, and the only reason this was not permitted was to blind us to the fact the virus puts a "stealth tax" on the poor and relief to the rich.
But that's life.
Of course. And they were allowed to go there. Or were not forbidden in law from going.
It's just that I can't get past the do as I say not as I do thing. There were only a few people involved in actually setting up the law and he was one of them.
Just looking through the by specimen date testing data and I think England is definitely through the worst of it. Under 1000 new cases per day in England and dropping rapidly down to just 500 per day.
The by death date hospital deaths report has a very similar story, I think we're actually under 100 hospital deaths per day in England and under 150 total deaths per day. Interestingly there hasn't been a rise in community transmission after the VE Day celebrations that everyone was so worried about. In fact new cases and deaths have continued to fall fairly rapidly since then. I also think that the lockdown since then has been extremely loose and we've not seen a rise in new cases.
It's a real shame that the government is getting distracted by this Cummings bullshit because there is finally some really positive news on the virus and I think as a nation our sacrifices have begun to pay off and we can start getting back to normal. Social distancing indoors and do what you like outdoors seems to result in an R of around 0.8-0.9 which means it will take 5-6 more weeks to get the new cases down to a negligible amount but it means we can open up beer gardens, cafés and other outdoor venues.
Shamefully we're now going to spend the next week on whether or not one arsehole gets the sack or not instead of finally moving on from lockdown.
The media may be losing their minds, but we are moving on. Both my children are returning to education next week [nursery has been in touch now to confirm they're reopening]. Shops are reopening soon. The media may not know what matters, but I think people do.
The media wants blood but people are looking to the future not the past. Next week expect more announcements on lifting the lockdown and only an idiot will still be talking about Cummings by the end of next week IMHO. Already the sting has gone.
Talking this over with the in laws as well as my own folks, I think the reason I cant get angry about Cummings is that I wouldn't care even if he (and the same goes for the Scottish CMO, and Prince Charles, and the Queen) had just gone to his second home for lockdown because it was nicer. Ultimately I think people with second homes should have been allowed to go there if they wanted to, and the only reason this was not permitted was to blind us to the fact the virus puts a "stealth tax" on the poor and relief to the rich.
But that's life.
Second homers come out of London, say, infection hotspot. Go To rural location And then have to go to local supermarket spreading the infection if they have it. Not a good idea which is why we didn’t want the second homers from Madrid to come
Don't the English second homers bring their food with them as its unavailable at the local Asda ?
Comments
' a month after re-opening, Georgia new cases continue slow and steady'
so...
I don;t know if you would call that a second peak.
even CNN can't magic up the relationship between lockdown and the virus that you do,
And are you even in the slightest bit aware of what an utterly dysfunctional political entity England is? Do you have no concept of how vaguely civilised countries run their affairs?
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1265345934268956672?s=20
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1265342099160829952?s=20
You don;t want to accept them and that's your right. Its also my right to assert their increasingly persuasive arguments, as the events surrounding the disease play out, and prove the relationship you see between lockdown and disease path as simply incorrect.
And that's lagged data, that peak is going to grow.
Convictions matter. Witch hunts don't.
The point is to understand where the biggest "bang for the buck is". What are the restrictions that can be removed without seeing the virus explode.
I don't think that this is particularly complicated.
(https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-52674192)
Compare that with Spain issuing 1million and 10k fines by May 20th.
https://en.as.com/en/2020/05/20/other_sports/1590007192_285496.html
On the whole the UK police have done a good, policing by consent, job.
(From a skeptic wrt our recent police culture.)
If your highest ever date for positive results is in the second half of May, I think you need to accept that there's a second peak, whatever the CNN headline says.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/coronavirus-covid-19-scientific-evidence-supporting-the-uk-government-response
https://www.theverge.com/2020/5/26/21270290/youtube-deleting-comments-censorship-chinese-communist-party-ccp
Not a bad suggestion. If that had been done first thing then I think it would have taken the sting out of it completely.
* except for a boggy little island in the Summer Country
No way is the gap between the government and Labour bigger now than it was at the GE, and thats what the polls say
No way is Keir Starmer so much more popular than Corbyn and Johnson so less popular than he was while he still leads as most preferred PM by Boris>Corbyn levels, which is also what they say
Hypothetical polls are nonsense, whether they are good for your side or bad.
1Basildon
2Bassetlaw
3Boston
4Broxbourne
5Chichester
6City of London
7Craven
8East Cambridgeshire
9East Devon
10East Lindsey
11Epsom and Ewell
12Gosport
13Malvern Hills
14Milton Keynes
15North East Lincolnshire
16North Kesteven
17North Lincolnshire
18Rutland
19Sevenoaks
20South Cambridgeshire
21South Gloucestershire
22South Hams
23South Holland
24South Kesteven
25Southend-on-Sea
26Stevenage
27Stratford-on-Avon
28Tandridge
29Teignbridge
30Torbay
31Torridge
32West Devon
33West Lindsey
https://twitter.com/cricketwyvern/status/1265317629486604289
https://order-order.com/2020/05/26/guardian-and-mirror-writer-threatens-to-assault-michael-gove-in-front-of-his-children/
Saying sorry for "upsetting people" is weasel and palpably phoney.
Little doubt that Italy has fewer new cases than the UK, but not by a factor of 20+.
Favourability ratings for Boris and the government are dropping significantly and Starmer's favourability is improving. Changes in party support are lagging at the moment but may not continue to do so. As SO has said elsewhere the Labour Party is not going to restore trust overnight. My guess is that by the end of the year Starmer will have comfortably better ratings than Boris (if he's still there) and the gap between the parties will be very narrow.
Replacing the Corbynista Jenny Formby with David Evans as the new General Secretary today is another step in the right direction.
I guess so, but it beggars belief doesn't it? Labour have a leader who is apparently miles more popular than his predecessor, yet is doing worse in hypothetical polls than they didnt in the GE at a time of completely unprecedented crisis.
Where are the other 7% that voted for Jezza in 2017?
https://twitter.com/cricketwyvern/status/126531816220942745
which has had by far the highest infection rate in England:
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/#category=ltlas&map=rate
Labour got 40% with Jezza in charge
It seems to be popular to dismiss that inconvenient fact, and peddle a myth of "trust that will take time to be restored", but a fact it remains. He took the party from 30.4% in 2015 to 40% in 2017
https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1265328468067311616?s=20
If its the young and healthy, because they are 'out and about', it doesn't matter much as they will put little strain on health resources while helping build herd immunity.
https://twitter.com/piersmorgan/status/1265354055301443587
I am in the Gupta of Oxford hypothesis camp, as in I think and certainly hope there is enough natural immunity and asymptomatic stuff to pretty much avoid a 2nd. But I am not betting on it.
Be there or be square.
If you work in politics you need to be able to play good politics. It’s a team game even if you don’t want it to be, particularly for those working at the top end rather than maverick backbenchers and one-man thinktankers. If you screw up basic politics and score an own goal, you’ve let down your allies, your cause, anyone who invested political capital in you, and every poor sod whose duty it’s now become to stick their head above the parapet to defend you for the indefensible. There are rules you were expected to follow. Don’t be seen to be hypocritical. Hold your tongue rather than say something outrage-provoking but in your view true, especially at a sensitive time. Don’t break cabinet responsibility. Don’t openly attack the leadership of your own party unless you think it’s time for a coup and you reckon you’ve got the numbers for it. Stay relentlessly on-message. Don’t create unnecessary drama. Don’t do your opponents’ work for you.
Dom Cummings just handed a king-sized gift-wrapped present to every opposition party. Even if what he did was legal on a technicality, even if it was the best thing for his family. Every government minister and MP called up to face the media rounds the last few days and defend the minutiae of Barnard Castlegate must feel like wringing his neck.
I’m not claiming those rules have deep moral authority, just that resigning and firing matters are best judged against them. I'm not even saying they're "good" rules. I’d rather MPs behaved less like mindless automata in their quest for promotion, and I think governments would enact fewer stupid policies if they faced more flak from their own side. Many attacks on political leaders are justified – even, perhaps especially, friendly-fire. Often politicians are too afraid to speak the honest truth on sensitive topics because they worry how it will go down with swing voters and focus groups, and the cementing of “unspeakable topics” means vital issues go uninvestigated. Hypocrisy can be the result of trying to do the right thing for you and your loved ones (in your judgement, but not necessarily the judgement of your colleagues, their policies, or the voters you face). Still, all these rules have evolved for a reason – politics is a brutal sport, and its dynamics punish those who breach them, whatever individual justification is invoked for each such infraction.
It's total bollocks
He doesn't even realise that lockdown ended two weeks ago.
Across all parties this is far and away the worst group of politicians I have known in my lifetime, only surpassed by the disgusting media
I'm genuinely interested in your approach to it - to be clear, you just think "no foul, no resignation, says nothing about the state of politics and the Labour Party in 2007, all a witch-hunt really as it turns out"?
Personally I think he's been overly honest over the whole thing. He's basically from the start responded with a "f***k off, leave me alone and mind your own business" - which I can understand given what he'd been through but it was awful politics.
After a while they stop infecting other people and many of the people they do infect will not be asymptomatic and who will consequently self-isolate when they suspect they are infected.
Corbyn and his group of malcontents turned the Labour Party into a joke...a sort of student protest group....
I really hope the Corbynites become so disillusioned that they just fuck off to some fringe organisation where they belong....
I'm still in no mood for reconciliation comrade....
https://twitter.com/Channel4News/status/1265356727601565703
Still at the rebellious phase perhaps?
Or are you a big square?
The by death date hospital deaths report has a very similar story, I think we're actually under 100 hospital deaths per day in England and under 150 total deaths per day. Interestingly there hasn't been a rise in community transmission after the VE Day celebrations that everyone was so worried about. In fact new cases and deaths have continued to fall fairly rapidly since then. I also think that the lockdown since then has been extremely loose and we've not seen a rise in new cases.
It's a real shame that the government is getting distracted by this Cummings bullshit because there is finally some really positive news on the virus and I think as a nation our sacrifices have begun to pay off and we can start getting back to normal. Social distancing indoors and do what you like outdoors seems to result in an R of around 0.8-0.9 which means it will take 5-6 more weeks to get the new cases down to a negligible amount but it means we can open up beer gardens, cafés and other outdoor venues.
Shamefully we're now going to spend the next week on whether or not one arsehole gets the sack or not instead of finally moving on from lockdown.
But that's life.
Do you personally think there should have been no resignations? And do you really yourself think, "no foul, no resignation, says nothing about the state of politics and the Labour Party in 2007, all a witch-hunt really as it turns out"?
I mean, it's the clear logic of your position, but seems extremely odd as a position to me.
The other reason I can't particularly give a damn is that I've been ignoring lockdown restrictions myself so it would be hypocritical of me to care if he does.
Sounds f*cking familiar to me.
Net favourability (Survation):
Wales +28
Scotland +23
England +16
NI -8
The Scottish splits are utterly horrific for the SCons: a poor 3rd and heading for wipeout. Again.
SLab will be tremendously encouraged by these polls.
Clearly will run and run - so see you next Tuesday basically.
There have been a minority who I suspect have not throughout all this but out on my walk today people generally playing by the rules and if that continues we can gradually ease through the summer.
Behaviours have changed and people have adapted. That is something human beings are very good at. Thee still seems some primal urge among a minority to go back to status quo ante but that doesn't recognise or understand the world has changed and is changing.
Labour however had a majority of seats in Scotland just 10 years ago
It's just that I can't get past the do as I say not as I do thing. There were only a few people involved in actually setting up the law and he was one of them.
The media wants blood but people are looking to the future not the past. Next week expect more announcements on lifting the lockdown and only an idiot will still be talking about Cummings by the end of next week IMHO. Already the sting has gone.
Or so its claimed.