The attitude of the hardcore Cummings supporters (I won't say "defenders" because virtually all of them are just saying "Yeah, so what?") is illustrative. The only difference between them and the hardcore Corbyn supporters on the antisemitism problems is simply that they chose a different team to start with. Exactly the same refusal to accept that maybe, just maybe, the issue could be something other than "the media have got it in for our hero," and that just maybe, their hero fucked up and got people angry and disgusted.
Well, there's one issue: they're (mainly) less inclined to even bother with trying to explain it away with more and more far-reaching "explanations"
But it does show whose morality and ideology is completely subservient to their adherence.
(And I wonder how many of them have registered that if Cummings was in a position where dropping them would be the best for his worldview and his benefit, their heads would spin with the speed by which he would demonstrate that there's no place for gratitude in his game)
No. The Cummings story is a 100% media phenomenon for the simple reason that if no-one had read about it no-one would care and no-one would be grandstanding and threatening to infect their granny because of him. By contrast the Corbyn anti-semitism meme was barely mentioned in most national media (leading Newsnight? I don't think so) though the victims were (and are) real.
Even yesterday on this site a slight increase in the number of peeople who had died from Covid 3 days ago in England's hospitals was blamed on the Cummings effect . I am afraid this country and this site has just gone mental and everything now will be Cummings fault. 4 years of rancid anti semitism in the opposition party of the UK barely got a mention compared to the coverage the Cummings story has. Clearly anti semitism on an enormous scale is far less important than man drives to Durham with his wife and child and self isolates.
If what you say is true what would/can an effective govt and PM do to help the nation? Sack him, fair or not.
There could be any number of reasons for that, most not application related.
Fair comment. And we do still have 4 days to deliver that world beating system.
From the minister's description on this morning's radio, the system is entirely manual. Someone talks to the victim and attempts to identify everyone they have been in contact with, and then tries to make contact with them. The App is receding into the background; the manual system is being launched now because a working App clearly hasn't been landed in time.
A world beating manual system then.
All the places being lauded for track and trace are basically using manual systems, giving thousands of public health staff access to public and private data sources and then having them chase up contacts. Essentially nobody is relying on an "app" magically solving the problem. The "app" is a red herring.
Laughable. How many people read those papers, or take notice of them? Few if any of those I have spoken to.
Ms Maitless works for the state broadcaster.
If yesterday's News at Ten was anything to go by, she works for the state run broadcaster.
The edit during Laura's piece made Boris' performance in the afternoon look like he fully grasped all the issues and was running a well-oiled machine. I had seen the car crash in all its glory, Johnson, when I watched it in the afternoon, demonstrated he neither grasped the issues nor ran a well-oiled machine
That is, to be fair, a very difficult problem for them.
I watched the actual thing live, and was utterly dismayed by his lack of capacity.
But to have done an edit which displayed that would have been arguably editorialising in the other direction (and would certainly have been seen as such by government loyalists). And there is an argument that a state broadcaster has some responsibility, alongside challenging its mistakes, to preserve confidence in a government in the middle of a national crisis, and a long way from the next election.
On the other hand I agree entirely that the edit was an utter misrepresentation of his actual performance.
As could be seen at the election (the Cenotaph etc.) the BBC casts Johnson, where it can with a neutral edit, even when he has been dire. I suspect this is no conspiracy just a misguided attempt at impartiality.
Isn’t there a psychological phenomenon whereby people tend to overcompensate for their own known biases?
I.e. if you support a football team, you grossly underestimate their chances of victory because you don’t want to allow your bias to colour your judgement
There is, but there is also the opposite phenomenon where people overestimate what they want to happen.
I've come to the conclusion that Cummings is actually quite stupid and anyone who thinks he's clever must therefore be even stupider. Is he useful to BJ? In much the same way as Thomas Cromwell was useful to Henry VIII. Someone should write a book about it.
The alternative view: the media could have spent the last week talking about 20,000 deaths in care homes - 20,000 that some will argue could have been avoided.
One of these stories has the capacity to do terminal damage to the Government. Cummings knows which it is...
The thing is that story can be brought up at any time, it only takes a new(ish) fact and a second journalist to pick up the story and run with it.
There could be any number of reasons for that, most not application related.
Fair comment. And we do still have 4 days to deliver that world beating system.
From the minister's description on this morning's radio, the system is entirely manual. Someone talks to the victim and attempts to identify everyone they have been in contact with, and then tries to make contact with them. The App is receding into the background; the manual system is being launched now because a working App clearly hasn't been landed in time.
A world beating manual system then.
All the places being lauded for track and trace are basically using manual systems, giving thousands of public health staff access to public and private data sources and then having them chase up contacts. Essentially nobody is relying on an "app" magically solving the problem. The "app" is a red herring.
The app is a very useful tool for contact tracing as it is an easily verifiable way of knowing when two people have been near each other in an indoor space.
Because it appears that Johnson cannot function without him.
This is the big takeout. I sense that Gove and Cummings are running the government with Johnson surplus to requirements.
I don't surplus to requirements is correct. Hors d 'combat may be.
A bit of a disadvantage when we're very much in the middle of said combat. A war-losing disadvantage possibly..
Its not ideal but trying to change the rider mid gallop might just be worse. The question remains whether Boris is permanently impaired by the virus or temporarily. No real evidence one way or the other at the moment.
What happens at 8 in the morning? This site goes from reasonable debating forum to partisan diatribe within minutes, is there a quota of pro your side quotes that have to be made in a day, it’s purple boring and pathetic.
I think the Govt, in its messages today, has missed the point re people obeying the rules. It is pleading with people to do the right thing regardless of the Cummings issue. Those that believe it is the right thing will almost certainly do so even if they are angry about Cummings.
However there are two other groups of people who largely followed the rules who may now not.
There are those who don't give a toss, but didn't want to get into trouble.
There are those who think the lockdown is nonsense, or has gone too far or who want the economy to get going again, but again didn't want to get into trouble.
These people aren't angry with Cummings, but may well break the rules in greater numbers. Boris won't lose these people's vote, and the former may well be non-voters anyway.
Those that are angry, will probably not break the rules, but Boris will probably lose their vote. But as people say the next election is a long way off.
Its a flippant answer, but valid. The vast majority of the evidence still suggests something similar was necessary but we could have been smarter in how we went about it. And Norway is not the UK at all, it is far more remote with a far lower population density and a better educated public more willing to do their duty.
Let's never cross the road again because of the small chance that one may not spot some nutter who comes rushing from around the corner at double the speed limit. Better safe than sorry. Even though it might mean losing one's job due to unauthorized absence.
What is crystal clear is that for whatever reasons, and incompetence and ineptitude certainly play their part, the R number for the next few months is going to be hovering at or slightly above 1. Anything that helps control it needs careful consideration and international travellers are an obvious potential source of risk. Again there are economic consequences from further disrupting international travel but I do not think that this is a risk that we can take. But then I have thought this since February.
Except that we are left with the mystery as to precisely why rates are falling as they are, and particularly why R in London and New York is now lower than other parts of their respective countries.
Because a combination of lockdown measures (especially wrt public transport) and high levels of fear engendered by the particularly severe early outbreaks there) have led to bigger and more persistent changes in people's behaviour? I live in London and all members of our household have barely left the house since mid-March. Our opportunities for catching the disease are dramatically lower than they were before.
Remember we are comparing London with the same changes across the rest of the country. My evidence is also anecdotal (both personal and from the media) and I am sceptical that the effectiveness of the lockdown is significantly better in London than in the provinces. Indeed, the opposite, since the nature of London makes it more difficult to keep people apart.
I suspect the changes to behaviour in London have been greater, particularly with respect to public transport usage and greater recourse to WFH. I would think London's R0 is higher than elsewhere owing to higher population density and more commuting (and for longer times) by public transport, and the changes in travel behaviour in particular should have had a big impact. I would guess outside of London the main risk factors are an older and less healthy population (especially more overweight - sorry to say this but always the thing that most strikes me when I venture outside the London bubble, everyone is so bloody fat!) And these factors won't have changed much (maybe got worse!)
The difference between actual R and R0 is the nub of the matter. The rest of that is mostly not relevant.
Exactly. What I am saying is that I think London has an above average R0 but a below average R currently, because there have been greater behavioural changes reflecting bigger changes in commuting practices and more fear because our first wave was worse. The factors that contribute positively to R0 outside London may be harder to change (eg a less healthy population so more symptomatic and hence infectious individuals) and so R is higher even though R0 is lower.
I refer you to the fact that I predicted this outcome from Day 1. If it were up to me, the story would have died there, but it has received such fanatical media attention, not to mention 50 squillion consecutive headers on here, until this one, that I don't feel the slightest bit bad about rubbing it in.
Not a prediction game, though. The discussion has been hardly at all about whether Cummings will go or not, it's about whether he is a lying little shit or not. You have the same problem as the dimmer warmists who defended those lying little shits at UEA, of not appreciating that not every hill is worth dying on. A more intelligent tory like, um, myself would recognize that Johnson's failure either to sack him or to enforce a swift admission, apology and offer of resignation) is the worst aspect of the whole matter.
I think the Govt, in its messages today, has missed the point re people obeying the rules. It is pleading with people to do the right thing regardless of the Cummings issue. Those that believe it is the right thing will almost certainly do so even if they are angry about Cummings.
However there are two other groups of people who largely followed the rules who may now not.
There are those who don't give a toss, but didn't want to get into trouble.
There are those who think the lockdown is nonsense, or has gone too far or who want the economy to get going again, but again didn't want to get into trouble.
These people aren't angry with Cummings, but may well break the rules in greater numbers. Boris won't lose these people's vote, and the former may well be non-voters anyway.
Those that are angry, will probably not break the rules, but Boris will probably lose their vote. But as people say the next election is a long way off.
Personally, I wouldn't break the rules because of Cummings but I will be much more inclined to follow my own intuition and judge for myself what I consider reasonable.
The attitude of the hardcore Cummings supporters (I won't say "defenders" because virtually all of them are just saying "Yeah, so what?") is illustrative. The only difference between them and the hardcore Corbyn supporters on the antisemitism problems is simply that they chose a different team to start with. Exactly the same refusal to accept that maybe, just maybe, the issue could be something other than "the media have got it in for our hero," and that just maybe, their hero fucked up and got people angry and disgusted.
Well, there's one issue: they're (mainly) less inclined to even bother with trying to explain it away with more and more far-reaching "explanations"
But it does show whose morality and ideology is completely subservient to their adherence.
(And I wonder how many of them have registered that if Cummings was in a position where dropping them would be the best for his worldview and his benefit, their heads would spin with the speed by which he would demonstrate that there's no place for gratitude in his game)
No. The Cummings story is a 100% media phenomenon for the simple reason that if no-one had read about it no-one would care and no-one would be grandstanding and threatening to infect their granny because of him. By contrast the Corbyn anti-semitism meme was barely mentioned in most national media (leading Newsnight? I don't think so) though the victims were (and are) real.
Even yesterday on this site a slight increase in the number of peeople who had died from Covid 3 days ago in England's hospitals was blamed on the Cummings effect . I am afraid this country and this site has just gone mental and everything now will be Cummings fault. 4 years of rancid anti semitism in the opposition party of the UK barely got a mention compared to the coverage the Cummings story has. Clearly anti semitism on an enormous scale is far less important than man drives to Durham with his wife and child and self isolates.
There could be any number of reasons for that, most not application related.
Fair comment. And we do still have 4 days to deliver that world beating system.
From the minister's description on this morning's radio, the system is entirely manual. Someone talks to the victim and attempts to identify everyone they have been in contact with, and then tries to make contact with them. The App is receding into the background; the manual system is being launched now because a working App clearly hasn't been landed in time.
A world beating manual system then.
All the places being lauded for track and trace are basically using manual systems, giving thousands of public health staff access to public and private data sources and then having them chase up contacts. Essentially nobody is relying on an "app" magically solving the problem. The "app" is a red herring.
The app is a very useful tool for contact tracing as it is an easily verifiable way of knowing when two people have been near each other in an indoor space.
If the app worked it would be useful - sadly it doesn't.
Its a flippant answer, but valid. The vast majority of the evidence still suggests something similar was necessary but we could have been smarter in how we went about it. And Norway is not the UK at all, it is far more remote with a far lower population density and a better educated public more willing to do their duty.
Let's never cross the road again because of the small chance that one may not spot some nutter who comes rushing from around the corner at double the speed limit. Better safe than sorry. Even though it might mean losing one's job due to unauthorized absence.
There could be any number of reasons for that, most not application related.
Fair comment. And we do still have 4 days to deliver that world beating system.
From the minister's description on this morning's radio, the system is entirely manual. Someone talks to the victim and attempts to identify everyone they have been in contact with, and then tries to make contact with them. The App is receding into the background; the manual system is being launched now because a working App clearly hasn't been landed in time.
A world beating manual system then.
All the places being lauded for track and trace are basically using manual systems, giving thousands of public health staff access to public and private data sources and then having them chase up contacts. Essentially nobody is relying on an "app" magically solving the problem. The "app" is a red herring.
I wonder if foreign govts and private data firms have sent people to work on test, track and trace in order to steal masses of data from said data sources.
My guess is yes they have and no they wont have been properly vetted. I dont know how secure our systems are, but imagine not very.
Broadly speaking, Biden needs to win Florida to get the keys to the White House and if he does get Florida he will probably do well enough elsewhere to win the presidency. His entire campaign including VP pick should be focused on what will win Florida.
I think he has several routes to victory but the mid western states that went to Trump by tiny margins where Clinton neglected to campaign are probably the easiest. Then probably Pennsylvania, then Florida.
Barring a major upset, Biden should hang onto all the states that went Clinton last time. Pennsylvania is also looking good for him, if by no means a certainty. Beyond that he needs to win either Florida or several Mid West states that went Trump last time. If he gets Florida he should be in the clear. So that looks like Florida should be the absolute focus of his campaign.
Although, that would risk repeating Hillary’s strategic error of ignoring the Midwest.
The Midwest states are notionally easier for him than FL, although admittedly the polling in FL looks (surprisingly) good at the moment.
The problem with Florida from the Democrat point of view is that the voting regulations are very much stacked against them, considerably more than in other states. I would be worried that the polls are not totally representative of the desired population i.e. those who are allowed to and do vote. The Dem strategy should be to push hard in other swing states and if FL does change then it will be in the bag.
I think the Govt, in its messages today, has missed the point re people obeying the rules. It is pleading with people to do the right thing regardless of the Cummings issue. Those that believe it is the right thing will almost certainly do so even if they are angry about Cummings.
However there are two other groups of people who largely followed the rules who may now not.
There are those who don't give a toss, but didn't want to get into trouble.
There are those who think the lockdown is nonsense, or has gone too far or who want the economy to get going again, but again didn't want to get into trouble.
These people aren't angry with Cummings, but may well break the rules in greater numbers. Boris won't lose these people's vote, and the former may well be non-voters anyway.
Those that are angry, will probably not break the rules, but Boris will probably lose their vote. But as people say the next election is a long way off.
Personally, I wouldn't break the rules because of Cummings but I will be much more inclined to follow my own intuition and judge for myself what I consider reasonable.
Which is fine but most people are idiots and so will make decisions that to other people look completely insane.
Our next door neighbour (who has finished chemo) having friends round is one such example.
"Why we remember wars but forget plagues Pandemics aren't represented in film or literature because they're too boring, too horrific and too depressing By Sean Thomas"
It is a weird skill. He doesn't use any words I don't know and although I agree with his argument here, he isn't always the most logical, but he can do with words what I can not imagine doing. And even when he isn't the most logical he still does it with panache.
It's a fine article although I'm unconvinced by his citing of the extracts from Eliot and Yeats. I don't think they had much to do with Spanish flu.
I think the Govt, in its messages today, has missed the point re people obeying the rules. It is pleading with people to do the right thing regardless of the Cummings issue. Those that believe it is the right thing will almost certainly do so even if they are angry about Cummings.
However there are two other groups of people who largely followed the rules who may now not.
There are those who don't give a toss, but didn't want to get into trouble.
There are those who think the lockdown is nonsense, or has gone too far or who want the economy to get going again, but again didn't want to get into trouble.
These people aren't angry with Cummings, but may well break the rules in greater numbers. Boris won't lose these people's vote, and the former may well be non-voters anyway.
Those that are angry, will probably not break the rules, but Boris will probably lose their vote. But as people say the next election is a long way off.
What I hate in this is hypocrisy. I wonder how many people who are on Furlough are actually working? I am coming across it on an hourly basis. "Yeah im on Furlough but I am working a bit" I wonder how many of those people are saying Cummings should get the sack?
No, because I don't think any Tory MP would vote against the Government, they would find technology failed them at the critical moment so they couldn't vote.
So SKS wouldn't need 40 MPs to rebel he would need nearer 150.
Out of the Nordic countries (Norway, Sweden, Denmark - with similar climates, culture, societies, economies, population densities, and physical connectivity, and healthcare quality - all the factors that feed into infectivity and death tolls):
Per capita death rates:
Economic impact forecast:
And Sweden were hoping to protect their care homes and elderly - which has completely failed. They were hoping to get sufficient herd immunity to protect against a second wave - and they're nowhere near.
And their death rate has plateaued around 60-70 per day (which would be around 400-500 per day scaled up to the UK).
If Norway did lock down too hard, then that means they've now got far more scope going forwards, and they erred on the side of saving a hell of a lot more lives and preserving their economies better, at the cost of a couple of difficult months. Best side on which to err, really.
I think the Govt, in its messages today, has missed the point re people obeying the rules. It is pleading with people to do the right thing regardless of the Cummings issue. Those that believe it is the right thing will almost certainly do so even if they are angry about Cummings.
However there are two other groups of people who largely followed the rules who may now not.
There are those who don't give a toss, but didn't want to get into trouble.
There are those who think the lockdown is nonsense, or has gone too far or who want the economy to get going again, but again didn't want to get into trouble.
These people aren't angry with Cummings, but may well break the rules in greater numbers. Boris won't lose these people's vote, and the former may well be non-voters anyway.
Those that are angry, will probably not break the rules, but Boris will probably lose their vote. But as people say the next election is a long way off.
Personally, I wouldn't break the rules because of Cummings but I will be much more inclined to follow my own intuition and judge for myself what I consider reasonable.
Exactly this. And the net impact across the country will be less compliance with the "rules" than would otherwise have been the case. Impossible to think otherwise.
Starmer's big idea is a Bill of Attainder against Cummings? 'Cos that's never been used as a tool of autocrats and won't look like a partisan witch-hunt at all!
Let him go ahead. As long as he realizes that he'll be declaring total war on a government with a landslide majority and zero fucks to give.
The evidence shows in the UK that R was below 1 on the day we went into lockdown.
What evidence? Hopefully not Alistair Haimes' work of fiction. It looked to me like we managed to push it below 2 on the run-up to lockdown (the week we went for maximum social distancing short of lockdown) and nicely under one when we locked down.
Its a flippant answer, but valid. The vast majority of the evidence still suggests something similar was necessary but we could have been smarter in how we went about it. And Norway is not the UK at all, it is far more remote with a far lower population density and a better educated public more willing to do their duty.
Let's never cross the road again because of the small chance that one may not spot some nutter who comes rushing from around the corner at double the speed limit. Better safe than sorry. Even though it might mean losing one's job due to unauthorized absence.
It clearly wasnt a small, near negligible chance. It was a near certainty to hit us when lockdown started, there were already hundreds dead ffs.
Just because you make a comparison doesnt make it relevant, and yours just isnt.
Im not a fan of lockdown, and want parts of it loosened asap, just a realist, it was either necessary or so close to necessary that better safe than sorry applied.
Re: Cummings. Whilst I get that people are very angry I still doubt that most have really more than a peripheral knowledge of the story, beyond the facts that he had (or suspected he had coronavirus), that he travelled to isolate with his parents rather than stay at home, and made some sort of trip to Barnard castle.
However, unless you genuinely believe that the travel to Durham was for any other reason than concern for how he and his wife would cope with their child if they both became seriously ill, then most of the cases of people complaining that they followed the rules when he didn’t are probably actually probably not directly comparable.
Interestingly I recall somebody in this site WAS in a very similar situation and was out of their mind with how they would cope (whether they theoretically had such a parental “option” I don’t know).
I've actually been surprised how much people have followed the saga and understood it. Maybe it's because there's no sport on and people are listening to the news more.
Without the Guardian and Mirror spinning the story as hard as they could then adding in blatant lies regarding second visits, which the anti Boris broadcasters all amplified, the Cummings story would have had the same impact as the Kinnocks doing the birthday visit, ie hardly any.
Maitlis is just the cherry on top of the media cake of shame.
The Mail was and is attacking Cummings every bit as hard as the Guardian and the Mirror but why like the facts getting in the way of your prejudices.
Starmer's big idea is a Bill of Attainder against Cummings? 'Cos that's never been used as a tool of autocrats and won't look like a partisan witch-hunt at all!
Let him go ahead. As long as he realizes that he'll be declaring total war on a government with a landslide majority and zero fucks to give.
Hope it's worth it, Keir!
SKS isn't that stupid. He is fully aware of the adage when your enemy is making mistakes to leave them to it.
If that was the trauma he's been through then that does begin to explain the behaviour (Scott not Mr Icke).
So what's your excuse ?
Bourbon for breakfast.
Should lay off the biccies for brekky.
A Portrait of TGOHF?
Union is obsessed with religion and masons - I'm completely ambivalent about such matters - I hate all religions equally.
Not sure if you've quite cracked the meaning of the word ambivalent.
'I have mixed feelings or contradictory ideas about all religions, especially Catholicism which I hate.'
Catholicism is certainly one of the more pernicious as many young choirboys have found to their cost.
Plus any cult that has a random geezer sitting in a city palace stuffed with gold and riches lecturing us about poverty and climate change should get in the sea.
The attitude of the hardcore Cummings supporters (I won't say "defenders" because virtually all of them are just saying "Yeah, so what?") is illustrative. The only difference between them and the hardcore Corbyn supporters on the antisemitism problems is simply that they chose a different team to start with. Exactly the same refusal to accept that maybe, just maybe, the issue could be something other than "the media have got it in for our hero," and that just maybe, their hero fucked up and got people angry and disgusted.
Well, there's one issue: they're (mainly) less inclined to even bother with trying to explain it away with more and more far-reaching "explanations"
But it does show whose morality and ideology is completely subservient to their adherence.
(And I wonder how many of them have registered that if Cummings was in a position where dropping them would be the best for his worldview and his benefit, their heads would spin with the speed by which he would demonstrate that there's no place for gratitude in his game)
No. The Cummings story is a 100% media phenomenon for the simple reason that if no-one had read about it no-one would care and no-one would be grandstanding and threatening to infect their granny because of him. By contrast the Corbyn anti-semitism meme was barely mentioned in most national media (leading Newsnight? I don't think so) though the victims were (and are) real.
Even yesterday on this site a slight increase in the number of peeople who had died from Covid 3 days ago in England's hospitals was blamed on the Cummings effect . I am afraid this country and this site has just gone mental and everything now will be Cummings fault. 4 years of rancid anti semitism in the opposition party of the UK barely got a mention compared to the coverage the Cummings story has. Clearly anti semitism on an enormous scale is far less important than man drives to Durham with his wife and child and self isolates.
If what you say is true what would/can an effective govt and PM do to help the nation? Sack him, fair or not.
If Boris had sacked him do you think that would be the end of it? Thr press would want to know when Boris knew and why he did not sack him then, They would be after Boris's head. The media should not run the country, we did not vote for them. but they are trying too. Boris was right not to sack him.
I think the Govt, in its messages today, has missed the point re people obeying the rules. It is pleading with people to do the right thing regardless of the Cummings issue. Those that believe it is the right thing will almost certainly do so even if they are angry about Cummings.
However there are two other groups of people who largely followed the rules who may now not.
There are those who don't give a toss, but didn't want to get into trouble.
There are those who think the lockdown is nonsense, or has gone too far or who want the economy to get going again, but again didn't want to get into trouble.
These people aren't angry with Cummings, but may well break the rules in greater numbers. Boris won't lose these people's vote, and the former may well be non-voters anyway.
Those that are angry, will probably not break the rules, but Boris will probably lose their vote. But as people say the next election is a long way off.
Personally, I wouldn't break the rules because of Cummings but I will be much more inclined to follow my own intuition and judge for myself what I consider reasonable.
As you should. The problem with that Peter is you are clearly sensible (I know I have read your posts), but idiots will be doing the same thing and coming to completely irrational conclusions. Most safety regulations are there for the idiots.
The evidence shows in the UK that R was below 1 on the day we went into lockdown.
What evidence? Hopefully not Alistair Haimes' work of fiction. It looked to me like we managed to push it below 2 on the run-up to lockdown (the week we went for maximum social distancing short of lockdown) and nicely under one when we locked down.
Because it appears that Johnson cannot function without him.
This is the big takeout. I sense that Gove and Cummings are running the government with Johnson surplus to requirements.
I don't surplus to requirements is correct. Hors d 'combat may be.
A bit of a disadvantage when we're very much in the middle of said combat. A war-losing disadvantage possibly..
Its not ideal but trying to change the rider mid gallop might just be worse. The question remains whether Boris is permanently impaired by the virus or temporarily. No real evidence one way or the other at the moment.
We changed Prime Ministers during both world wars.
Starmer's big idea is a Bill of Attainder against Cummings? 'Cos that's never been used as a tool of autocrats and won't look like a partisan witch-hunt at all!
Let him go ahead. As long as he realizes that he'll be declaring total war on a government with a landslide majority and zero fucks to give.
Hope it's worth it, Keir!
Again, it is not a game, and certainly not a primary school playground game. One really doesn't expect to find adults celebrating the fact that the government formed by their party has "zero fucks to give."
Out of the Nordic countries (Norway, Sweden, Denmark - with similar climates, culture, societies, economies, population densities, and physical connectivity, and healthcare quality - all the factors that feed into infectivity and death tolls):
Per capita death rates:
Economic impact forecast:
And Sweden were hoping to protect their care homes and elderly - which has completely failed. They were hoping to get sufficient herd immunity to protect against a second wave - and they're nowhere near.
And their death rate has plateaued around 60-70 per day (which would be around 400-500 per day scaled up to the UK).
If Norway did lock down too hard, then that means they've now got far more scope going forwards, and they erred on the side of saving a hell of a lot more lives and preserving their economies better, at the cost of a couple of difficult months. Best side on which to err, really.
Point of order, Denmarks population density is completely different to Norway and Sweden.
Norway 15 P/km2 Sweden 25 P/Km2 Denmark 137 P/Km2
Denmark is more densely populated than France or Spain for example.
Sweden doing so much worse than Denmark is a big problem for those who think lockdown wasnt important.
There could be any number of reasons for that, most not application related.
Fair comment. And we do still have 4 days to deliver that world beating system.
From the minister's description on this morning's radio, the system is entirely manual. Someone talks to the victim and attempts to identify everyone they have been in contact with, and then tries to make contact with them. The App is receding into the background; the manual system is being launched now because a working App clearly hasn't been landed in time.
A world beating manual system then.
All the places being lauded for track and trace are basically using manual systems, giving thousands of public health staff access to public and private data sources and then having them chase up contacts. Essentially nobody is relying on an "app" magically solving the problem. The "app" is a red herring.
Lots to be said for good old fashioned legwork. And perhaps this is what our perspicacious PM meant when he said a "world beating system" by 1st June. Certainly no App is better than a bad App.
The evidence shows in the UK that R was below 1 on the day we went into lockdown.
What evidence? Hopefully not Alistair Haimes' work of fiction. It looked to me like we managed to push it below 2 on the run-up to lockdown (the week we went for maximum social distancing short of lockdown) and nicely under one when we locked down.
The peak of deaths was the 8th April.
Peak of NHS deaths was. I think overall peak was a week or two after that.
The evidence shows in the UK that R was below 1 on the day we went into lockdown.
What evidence? Hopefully not Alistair Haimes' work of fiction. It looked to me like we managed to push it below 2 on the run-up to lockdown (the week we went for maximum social distancing short of lockdown) and nicely under one when we locked down.
He changed his method of calculation a few days later when calculating Sweden's R. Then shortly afterwards said you shouldn't attempt calculate R at all.
Out of the Nordic countries (Norway, Sweden, Denmark - with similar climates, culture, societies, economies, population densities, and physical connectivity, and healthcare quality - all the factors that feed into infectivity and death tolls):
Per capita death rates:
Economic impact forecast:
And Sweden were hoping to protect their care homes and elderly - which has completely failed. They were hoping to get sufficient herd immunity to protect against a second wave - and they're nowhere near.
And their death rate has plateaued around 60-70 per day (which would be around 400-500 per day scaled up to the UK).
If Norway did lock down too hard, then that means they've now got far more scope going forwards, and they erred on the side of saving a hell of a lot more lives and preserving their economies better, at the cost of a couple of difficult months. Best side on which to err, really.
Point of order, Denmarks population density is completely different to Norway and Sweden.
Norway 15 P/km2 Sweden 25 P/Km2 Denmark 137 P/Km2
Sweden doing so much worse than Denmark is a big problem for those who think lockdown wasnt important.
...over to Dominic Cummings from the UK delegation.
Because it appears that Johnson cannot function without him.
This is the big takeout. I sense that Gove and Cummings are running the government with Johnson surplus to requirements.
I don't surplus to requirements is correct. Hors d 'combat may be.
A bit of a disadvantage when we're very much in the middle of said combat. A war-losing disadvantage possibly..
Its not ideal but trying to change the rider mid gallop might just be worse. The question remains whether Boris is permanently impaired by the virus or temporarily. No real evidence one way or the other at the moment.
We changed Prime Ministers during both world wars.
Its a flippant answer, but valid. The vast majority of the evidence still suggests something similar was necessary but we could have been smarter in how we went about it. And Norway is not the UK at all, it is far more remote with a far lower population density and a better educated public more willing to do their duty.
Norway's covid response is often compared favourably with Sweden's when people suggest severe lockdown might not have been necessary.
Starmer's big idea is a Bill of Attainder against Cummings? 'Cos that's never been used as a tool of autocrats and won't look like a partisan witch-hunt at all!
Let him go ahead. As long as he realizes that he'll be declaring total war on a government with a landslide majority and zero fucks to give.
Hope it's worth it, Keir!
SKS isn't that stupid.
Agree - he's played this brilliantly from the start "never interrupt your enemy while he is making mistakes" - from a political point of view its better for Labour if Cummings stays - an eternal reminder of "one law for them, another for us". A more difficult calculus for SKS is what's in the national interest.....he may conclude "A Labour government from 2024" and find that coincides with what's best for Labour...
I think the Govt, in its messages today, has missed the point re people obeying the rules. It is pleading with people to do the right thing regardless of the Cummings issue. Those that believe it is the right thing will almost certainly do so even if they are angry about Cummings.
However there are two other groups of people who largely followed the rules who may now not.
There are those who don't give a toss, but didn't want to get into trouble.
There are those who think the lockdown is nonsense, or has gone too far or who want the economy to get going again, but again didn't want to get into trouble.
These people aren't angry with Cummings, but may well break the rules in greater numbers. Boris won't lose these people's vote, and the former may well be non-voters anyway.
Those that are angry, will probably not break the rules, but Boris will probably lose their vote. But as people say the next election is a long way off.
What I hate in this is hypocrisy. I wonder how many people who are on Furlough are actually working? I am coming across it on an hourly basis. "Yeah im on Furlough but I am working a bit" I wonder how many of those people are saying Cummings should get the sack?
You are allowed to work whilst on furlough - as long as it is not for the employer that furloughed you.
The attitude of the hardcore Cummings supporters (I won't say "defenders" because virtually all of them are just saying "Yeah, so what?") is illustrative. The only difference between them and the hardcore Corbyn supporters on the antisemitism problems is simply that they chose a different team to start with. Exactly the same refusal to accept that maybe, just maybe, the issue could be something other than "the media have got it in for our hero," and that just maybe, their hero fucked up and got people angry and disgusted.
Well, there's one issue: they're (mainly) less inclined to even bother with trying to explain it away with more and more far-reaching "explanations"
But it does show whose morality and ideology is completely subservient to their adherence.
(And I wonder how many of them have registered that if Cummings was in a position where dropping them would be the best for his worldview and his benefit, their heads would spin with the speed by which he would demonstrate that there's no place for gratitude in his game)
No. The Cummings story is a 100% media phenomenon for the simple reason that if no-one had read about it no-one would care and no-one would be grandstanding and threatening to infect their granny because of him. By contrast the Corbyn anti-semitism meme was barely mentioned in most national media (leading Newsnight? I don't think so) though the victims were (and are) real.
Even yesterday on this site a slight increase in the number of peeople who had died from Covid 3 days ago in England's hospitals was blamed on the Cummings effect . I am afraid this country and this site has just gone mental and everything now will be Cummings fault. 4 years of rancid anti semitism in the opposition party of the UK barely got a mention compared to the coverage the Cummings story has. Clearly anti semitism on an enormous scale is far less important than man drives to Durham with his wife and child and self isolates.
If what you say is true what would/can an effective govt and PM do to help the nation? Sack him, fair or not.
If Boris had sacked him do you think that would be the end of it? Thr press would want to know when Boris knew and why he did not sack him then, They would be after Boris's head. The media should not run the country, we did not vote for them. but they are trying too. Boris was right not to sack him.
Orville saying I was almost dying with covid because idiots like my former adviser were spreading it 350 miles across the nation around might have got him out of that one.
Was Cummings the reason the rocket launch was delayed last night?
No delay - Scott was here nice and early to post his tweets.
Funny you should say that because I have always found it odd that both you and Philip Thompson tell us you have young children yet appear to spend all day, every day posting on here.
Was Cummings the reason the rocket launch was delayed last night?
No delay - Scott was here nice and early to post his tweets.
Funny you should say that because I have always found it odd that both you and Philip Thompson tell us you have young children yet appear to spend all day, every day posting on here.
The evidence shows in the UK that R was below 1 on the day we went into lockdown.
Yet in the UK it is barely under 1 after 9 weeks of lockdown. Care to guess where it would have been after 9 weeks of do as you like? Because guesses is all we have...
Quite probably R would have been lower after 9 weeks of do as you like as it would have burnt out.
But the body count then might have been hundreds of thousands.
Flattening the curve also elongated the curve but it saved lives.
I think the Govt, in its messages today, has missed the point re people obeying the rules. It is pleading with people to do the right thing regardless of the Cummings issue. Those that believe it is the right thing will almost certainly do so even if they are angry about Cummings.
However there are two other groups of people who largely followed the rules who may now not.
There are those who don't give a toss, but didn't want to get into trouble.
There are those who think the lockdown is nonsense, or has gone too far or who want the economy to get going again, but again didn't want to get into trouble.
These people aren't angry with Cummings, but may well break the rules in greater numbers. Boris won't lose these people's vote, and the former may well be non-voters anyway.
Those that are angry, will probably not break the rules, but Boris will probably lose their vote. But as people say the next election is a long way off.
What I hate in this is hypocrisy. I wonder how many people who are on Furlough are actually working? I am coming across it on an hourly basis. "Yeah im on Furlough but I am working a bit" I wonder how many of those people are saying Cummings should get the sack?
You are allowed to work whilst on furlough - as long as it is not for the employer that furloughed you.
I know, these are working for the company they are on Furlough from. I am sure it is very common throughout the UK.
I think the Govt, in its messages today, has missed the point re people obeying the rules. It is pleading with people to do the right thing regardless of the Cummings issue. Those that believe it is the right thing will almost certainly do so even if they are angry about Cummings.
However there are two other groups of people who largely followed the rules who may now not.
There are those who don't give a toss, but didn't want to get into trouble.
There are those who think the lockdown is nonsense, or has gone too far or who want the economy to get going again, but again didn't want to get into trouble.
These people aren't angry with Cummings, but may well break the rules in greater numbers. Boris won't lose these people's vote, and the former may well be non-voters anyway.
Those that are angry, will probably not break the rules, but Boris will probably lose their vote. But as people say the next election is a long way off.
What I hate in this is hypocrisy. I wonder how many people who are on Furlough are actually working? I am coming across it on an hourly basis. "Yeah im on Furlough but I am working a bit" I wonder how many of those people are saying Cummings should get the sack?
You raise an interesting point. Money Box was reporting widespread abuse by employers this week (the implication was small employers). Even employees finding out they were furloughed only after receiving their payslip. It is particularly hard for employees of small companies to whistleblow. Even though they are protected in law, the practicalities are difficult.
Dom might need to amend that Powerpoint slide for the next time he uses it.
No, the key words are "almost always". A few do, which become Important and Memorable.
Part of the Cummings Thesis is that politicians overreact to scandals which don't have an impact on the public. And that government would be better ignoring them.
What he may have missed is that it's like insurance. For most people, most months, it's a waste of money. But when the balloon goes up, people are jolly glad they have it.
Because it appears that Johnson cannot function without him.
This is the big takeout. I sense that Gove and Cummings are running the government with Johnson surplus to requirements.
I don't surplus to requirements is correct. Hors d 'combat may be.
A bit of a disadvantage when we're very much in the middle of said combat. A war-losing disadvantage possibly..
Its not ideal but trying to change the rider mid gallop might just be worse. The question remains whether Boris is permanently impaired by the virus or temporarily. No real evidence one way or the other at the moment.
We changed Prime Ministers during both world wars.
And both times at the moment of maximum crisis.
Indeed.
So who is the Leo Amery de nos jours?
I’ve nearly completed a thread comparing Boris Johnson to Lord Halifax.
I refer you to the fact that I predicted this outcome from Day 1. If it were up to me, the story would have died there, but it has received such fanatical media attention, not to mention 50 squillion consecutive headers on here, until this one, that I don't feel the slightest bit bad about rubbing it in.
Not a prediction game, though. The discussion has been hardly at all about whether Cummings will go or not, it's about whether he is a lying little shit or not. You have the same problem as the dimmer warmists who defended those lying little shits at UEA, of not appreciating that not every hill is worth dying on. A more intelligent tory like, um, myself would recognize that Johnson's failure either to sack him or to enforce a swift admission, apology and offer of resignation) is the worst aspect of the whole matter.
Oh, there were many, many posters predicting that Cummings was gone, from the moment the story broke to last night, so I'm afraid that part is rather inaccurate.
As for choosing a hill to die on, I wouldn't have picked this one, but it should be obvious to any intelligent person that the stakes in this particular game were not those of any ordinary resignation. This was a direct attack on the Government's programme, its chief policy adviser, and on the PM himself. It was designed to reassert the media's authority to control government decision-making and direct the course of events.
As such, stopping them is worth any temporary polling hit. Now the next time the media cooks up a scandal out of nothing - and they will - the Government can defy them with ease because, after all, they threw everything they had at Cummings and still failed to unseat him.
Of course, if your only obsession is short-term popularity and not long-term strategic victory, I can see how an otherwise intelligent person might have come to your conclusions...
Its a flippant answer, but valid. The vast majority of the evidence still suggests something similar was necessary but we could have been smarter in how we went about it. And Norway is not the UK at all, it is far more remote with a far lower population density and a better educated public more willing to do their duty.
Norway's covid response is often compared favourably with Sweden's when people suggest severe lockdown might not have been necessary.
Now Norway is saying lockdown wasn't necessary
It may not have been in Norway. Its population density is 15-20 times lower than ours. It doesnt have the worlds most connected city. It didnt have as many cases at the start of lockdown.
If theirs was marginal, which appears to be what they are saying, ours would have been needed.
"Why we remember wars but forget plagues Pandemics aren't represented in film or literature because they're too boring, too horrific and too depressing By Sean Thomas"
Terrific piece by Sean. I pretty-much agree with him. A month or so back my Agent said he was looking forward to first-hand writing on this virus and I thought at the time, 'oh no.' I've just forwarded him Sean's essay.
I don't think Coronavirus lit will be filling up people's Christmas stockings this year.
Sean did miss the film Contagion, which is more like a documentary and well worth watching, as well as a host of other virus films:
Because it appears that Johnson cannot function without him.
This is the big takeout. I sense that Gove and Cummings are running the government with Johnson surplus to requirements.
I don't surplus to requirements is correct. Hors d 'combat may be.
A bit of a disadvantage when we're very much in the middle of said combat. A war-losing disadvantage possibly..
Its not ideal but trying to change the rider mid gallop might just be worse. The question remains whether Boris is permanently impaired by the virus or temporarily. No real evidence one way or the other at the moment.
We changed Prime Ministers during both world wars.
BJ more Asquith than Neville, especially in the trusting them to drive your daughter home stakes.
That - or the police really can't be arsed to police it any more. After they weren't allowed to taser anybody out on the streets, they never seem to have got the hang of it...
True but why try and do an impossible task - and Boris has made policing any lockdown impossible - remember your personal desires override any greater good (Copyright Philip Thompson)..
I've never said that. I said you need to follow your personal judgement in complex scenarios, not your personal desires.
Which includes judging that when you are perfectly healthy you may use your judgement to act as if you are on deaths door. Which pretty much opens it up for anyones personal desires as long as they are willing to mislead about it.
If people are willing to mislead about it that's neither here nor there, they will find a way to do so.
If people want to do the right thing they will do.
I don't want to give up the requirement and right to use personal judgement because some people are pricks.
Problem is some people are pricks and as a result you have already given up personal judgment. My personal judgment was that I was a very good driver even before I passed my test. The State disagrees. I am sure I would be wholly safe and responsible with a gun. The State disagrees. I would like to smoke a joint every so often. The State disagrees.
The State made a judgment that those who were contagious with a deadly virus could kill immunocompromised children (though contact with their parents, and their parents friends etc etc) and other vulnerable people and thus instructed everyone to stay at home. Certain people decided that potentially killing already very ill children didn’t matter to them. Asking social services to help them was just tooo ghastly and plebeian dharling
Social services are a last resort not a first resort. Insulting someone for having family look after their children is like insulting someone for having family look after someone with dementia and suggesting they're wrong for not taking them to a care home.
Social services, like care homes, have a place as a last resort.
Because it appears that Johnson cannot function without him.
This is the big takeout. I sense that Gove and Cummings are running the government with Johnson surplus to requirements.
I don't surplus to requirements is correct. Hors d 'combat may be.
A bit of a disadvantage when we're very much in the middle of said combat. A war-losing disadvantage possibly..
Its not ideal but trying to change the rider mid gallop might just be worse. The question remains whether Boris is permanently impaired by the virus or temporarily. No real evidence one way or the other at the moment.
We changed Prime Ministers during both world wars.
And both times at the moment of maximum crisis.
Indeed.
So who is the Leo Amery de nos jours?
I’ve nearly completed a thread comparing Boris Johnson to Lord Halifax.
That seems a bit harsh. Halifax may have been wrong on several key points but he was at least acting in what he thought was the national interest.
Starmer's big idea is a Bill of Attainder against Cummings? 'Cos that's never been used as a tool of autocrats and won't look like a partisan witch-hunt at all!
Let him go ahead. As long as he realizes that he'll be declaring total war on a government with a landslide majority and zero fucks to give.
Hope it's worth it, Keir!
SKS isn't that stupid.
Agree - he's played this brilliantly from the start "never interrupt your enemy while he is making mistakes" - from a political point of view its better for Labour if Cummings stays - an eternal reminder of "one law for them, another for us". A more difficult calculus for SKS is what's in the national interest.....he may conclude "A Labour government from 2024" and find that coincides with what's best for Labour...
The smart move is to completely sideline the government and PM and make an appeal directly to the people about civic duty. Acknowledge that it's even more difficult to live by these rules because of the government's position on Cummings but make clear that they are still the right rules.
"Today I'm asking the people of the UK to continue observing the social distancing rules and to comply with contact tracers if they are asked to isolate. I know this is something that is even more difficult to do now than it was last week because of actions taken by the PM and Mr Cummings, but it is still the right thing to do. I believe that all of the people in the UK have an extraordinary capacity to do the right thing when asked. This doesn't mean we are letting the government or Mr Cummings off the hook and neither should you, but these actions by him should not be allowed to interfere with our ability to reopen the economy and keep our people and NHS safe from this virus."
That kind of statement makes Starmer the de facto PM and people will see him as PM material.
There could be any number of reasons for that, most not application related.
Fair comment. And we do still have 4 days to deliver that world beating system.
From the minister's description on this morning's radio, the system is entirely manual. Someone talks to the victim and attempts to identify everyone they have been in contact with, and then tries to make contact with them. The App is receding into the background; the manual system is being launched now because a working App clearly hasn't been landed in time.
A world beating manual system then.
All the places being lauded for track and trace are basically using manual systems, giving thousands of public health staff access to public and private data sources and then having them chase up contacts. Essentially nobody is relying on an "app" magically solving the problem. The "app" is a red herring.
Lots to be said for good old fashioned legwork. And perhaps this is what our perspicacious PM meant when he said a "world beating system" by 1st June. Certainly no App is better than a bad App.
One of the reasons S Korea's system works so well is that the data sources they have for finding contacts are much more comprehensive than those available to us.
I think the Govt, in its messages today, has missed the point re people obeying the rules. It is pleading with people to do the right thing regardless of the Cummings issue. Those that believe it is the right thing will almost certainly do so even if they are angry about Cummings.
However there are two other groups of people who largely followed the rules who may now not.
There are those who don't give a toss, but didn't want to get into trouble.
There are those who think the lockdown is nonsense, or has gone too far or who want the economy to get going again, but again didn't want to get into trouble.
These people aren't angry with Cummings, but may well break the rules in greater numbers. Boris won't lose these people's vote, and the former may well be non-voters anyway.
Those that are angry, will probably not break the rules, but Boris will probably lose their vote. But as people say the next election is a long way off.
What I hate in this is hypocrisy. I wonder how many people who are on Furlough are actually working? I am coming across it on an hourly basis. "Yeah im on Furlough but I am working a bit" I wonder how many of those people are saying Cummings should get the sack?
Rank hypocrisy at the top of government does not matter because lots of the public are not free of hypocrisy? C'mon. That's a nonsense argument. And you miss the key point about this one. It is not about Cummings staying in post. The issue is Johnson's response.
"He acted as he thought best for himself and his family and I will not mark him down for that."
With this he destroyed a great deal of the trust and faith of the public in the government's messaging. Piss poor leadership. One has a right to expect better. If you don't think so, I suggest you raise your standards.
I refer you to the fact that I predicted this outcome from Day 1. If it were up to me, the story would have died there, but it has received such fanatical media attention, not to mention 50 squillion consecutive headers on here, until this one, that I don't feel the slightest bit bad about rubbing it in.
Not a prediction game, though. The discussion has been hardly at all about whether Cummings will go or not, it's about whether he is a lying little shit or not. You have the same problem as the dimmer warmists who defended those lying little shits at UEA, of not appreciating that not every hill is worth dying on. A more intelligent tory like, um, myself would recognize that Johnson's failure either to sack him or to enforce a swift admission, apology and offer of resignation) is the worst aspect of the whole matter.
Oh, there were many, many posters predicting that Cummings was gone, from the moment the story broke to last night, so I'm afraid that part is rather inaccurate.
As for choosing a hill to die on, I wouldn't have picked this one, but it should be obvious to any intelligent person that the stakes in this particular game were not those of any ordinary resignation. This was a direct attack on the Government's programme, its chief policy adviser, and on the PM himself. It was designed to reassert the media's authority to control government decision-making and direct the course of events.
As such, stopping them is worth any temporary polling hit. Now the next time the media cooks up a scandal out of nothing - and they will - the Government can defy them with ease because, after all, they threw everything they had at Cummings and still failed to unseat him.
Of course, if your only obsession is short-term popularity and not long-term strategic victory, I can see how an otherwise intelligent person might have come to your conclusions...
The majority of posters complaining about him, thought he would stay, I cant actually recall many if any saying he would definitely go, Im sure there are some. The betting tips posters made (not me) were either backing him to go at 9/4+ or backing him to stay at rates as low as 1/3, and generally value at the times of posting (helped by star sports offering arbitrage of course).
Was Cummings the reason the rocket launch was delayed last night?
No delay - Scott was here nice and early to post his tweets.
Funny you should say that because I have always found it odd that both you and Philip Thompson tell us you have young children yet appear to spend all day, every day posting on here.
Its half term fella.
So your young children are at home and you spend all day making comments on a political blog. Just don't think that's what I would be doing but each to his own.
Given that the vast majority of those who got a positive test yesterday will be in care homes or around the NHS - the benefit of the app is pretty limited at this stage.
Was Cummings the reason the rocket launch was delayed last night?
No delay - Scott was here nice and early to post his tweets.
Funny you should say that because I have always found it odd that both you and Philip Thompson tell us you have young children yet appear to spend all day, every day posting on here.
What is odd about that? When you're at home with kids having adult conversations is a relief ...
I've been at home observing lock down since it began. My wife is a key worker, I'm not, so I've taken up all childcare duties and I can be on my phone while I'm not doing their education or Joe Wicks exercises etc ... More time to talk to people here.
Broadly speaking, Biden needs to win Florida to get the keys to the White House and if he does get Florida he will probably do well enough elsewhere to win the presidency. His entire campaign including VP pick should be focused on what will win Florida.
I think he has several routes to victory but the mid western states that went to Trump by tiny margins where Clinton neglected to campaign are probably the easiest. Then probably Pennsylvania, then Florida.
Barring a major upset, Biden should hang onto all the states that went Clinton last time. Pennsylvania is also looking good for him, if by no means a certainty. Beyond that he needs to win either Florida or several Mid West states that went Trump last time. If he gets Florida he should be in the clear. So that looks like Florida should be the absolute focus of his campaign.
Although, that would risk repeating Hillary’s strategic error of ignoring the Midwest.
The Midwest states are notionally easier for him than FL, although admittedly the polling in FL looks (surprisingly) good at the moment.
I would suggest Biden spending 50% of effort on Florida; 30% on Trump Mid West states + Penn; 20% on Hillary heartlands to ensure they stay in the fold.
He should pick the VP full time for the Florida effort, while he will also cover the Rust Belt.
Starmer's big idea is a Bill of Attainder against Cummings? 'Cos that's never been used as a tool of autocrats and won't look like a partisan witch-hunt at all!
Let him go ahead. As long as he realizes that he'll be declaring total war on a government with a landslide majority and zero fucks to give.
Hope it's worth it, Keir!
SKS isn't that stupid.
Agree - he's played this brilliantly from the start "never interrupt your enemy while he is making mistakes" - from a political point of view its better for Labour if Cummings stays - an eternal reminder of "one law for them, another for us". A more difficult calculus for SKS is what's in the national interest.....he may conclude "A Labour government from 2024" and find that coincides with what's best for Labour...
The smart move is to completely sideline the government and PM and make an appeal directly to the people about civic duty. Acknowledge that it's even more difficult to live by these rules because of the government's position on Cummings but make clear that they are still the right rules.
"Today I'm asking the people of the UK to continue observing the social distancing rules and to comply with contact tracers if they are asked to isolate. I know this is something that is even more difficult to do now than it was last week because of actions taken by the PM and Mr Cummings, but it is still the right thing to do. I believe that all of the people in the UK have an extraordinary capacity to do the right thing when asked. This doesn't mean we are letting the government or Mr Cummings off the hook and neither should you, but these actions by him should not be allowed to interfere with our ability to reopen the economy and keep our people and NHS safe from this virus."
That kind of statement makes Starmer the de facto PM and people will see him as PM material.
"Starmer the de facto PM"
Good job he leads a party in Parliament with a majority to pass legislation then. Oh...wait....
There could be any number of reasons for that, most not application related.
Fair comment. And we do still have 4 days to deliver that world beating system.
From the minister's description on this morning's radio, the system is entirely manual. Someone talks to the victim and attempts to identify everyone they have been in contact with, and then tries to make contact with them. The App is receding into the background; the manual system is being launched now because a working App clearly hasn't been landed in time.
A world beating manual system then.
All the places being lauded for track and trace are basically using manual systems, giving thousands of public health staff access to public and private data sources and then having them chase up contacts. Essentially nobody is relying on an "app" magically solving the problem. The "app" is a red herring.
Lots to be said for good old fashioned legwork. And perhaps this is what our perspicacious PM meant when he said a "world beating system" by 1st June. Certainly no App is better than a bad App.
One of the reasons S Korea's system works so well is that the data sources they have for finding contacts are much more comprehensive than those available to us.
One thing I thought about last week is that I suspect they wouldn't be able to contact me if they wanted to except via my car registration. And a lot of people will be in the same position, they will be able to identify their friends but no-one else.
Comments
Which simple solution, if adopted by Johnson, would have prevented the whole mess.
Even many who oppose Cummings think Maitlis' airing of her own very important views are a mistake when it comes to current affairs coverage.
However there are two other groups of people who largely followed the rules who may now not.
There are those who don't give a toss, but didn't want to get into trouble.
There are those who think the lockdown is nonsense, or has gone too far or who want the economy to get going again, but again didn't want to get into trouble.
These people aren't angry with Cummings, but may well break the rules in greater numbers. Boris won't lose these people's vote, and the former may well be non-voters anyway.
Those that are angry, will probably not break the rules, but Boris will probably lose their vote. But as people say the next election is a long way off.
'I have mixed feelings or contradictory ideas about all religions, especially Catholicism which I hate.'
My guess is yes they have and no they wont have been properly vetted. I dont know how secure our systems are, but imagine not very.
Can anyone put my cynical mind at rest?
Our next door neighbour (who has finished chemo) having friends round is one such example.
https://twitter.com/Andrew_Adonis/status/1265918936287260678
https://twitter.com/GerryHassan/status/1265932055331966976?s=20
So SKS wouldn't need 40 MPs to rebel he would need nearer 150.
https://thecritic.co.uk/live-free-and-die-swedens-coronavirus-experience/
Out of the Nordic countries (Norway, Sweden, Denmark - with similar climates, culture, societies, economies, population densities, and physical connectivity, and healthcare quality - all the factors that feed into infectivity and death tolls):
Per capita death rates:
Economic impact forecast:
And Sweden were hoping to protect their care homes and elderly - which has completely failed.
They were hoping to get sufficient herd immunity to protect against a second wave - and they're nowhere near.
And their death rate has plateaued around 60-70 per day (which would be around 400-500 per day scaled up to the UK).
If Norway did lock down too hard, then that means they've now got far more scope going forwards, and they erred on the side of saving a hell of a lot more lives and preserving their economies better, at the cost of a couple of difficult months. Best side on which to err, really.
Let him go ahead. As long as he realizes that he'll be declaring total war on a government with a landslide majority and zero fucks to give.
Hope it's worth it, Keir!
Hopefully not Alistair Haimes' work of fiction.
It looked to me like we managed to push it below 2 on the run-up to lockdown (the week we went for maximum social distancing short of lockdown) and nicely under one when we locked down.
https://twitter.com/AlexInAir/status/1265933245969043458?s=20
Just because you make a comparison doesnt make it relevant, and yours just isnt.
Im not a fan of lockdown, and want parts of it loosened asap, just a realist, it was either necessary or so close to necessary that better safe than sorry applied.
Plus any cult that has a random geezer sitting in a city palace stuffed with gold and riches lecturing us about poverty and climate change should get in the sea.
The media should not run the country, we did not vote for them. but they are trying too. Boris was right not to sack him.
Norway 15 P/km2
Sweden 25 P/Km2
Denmark 137 P/Km2
Denmark is more densely populated than France or Spain for example.
Sweden doing so much worse than Denmark is a big problem for those who think lockdown wasnt important.
OK, having read this morning’s comments on Cummings’ lack of brainpower, I am now feeling officially smug.
Now Norway is saying lockdown wasn't necessary
But the body count then might have been hundreds of thousands.
Flattening the curve also elongated the curve but it saved lives.
https://twitter.com/pietercleppe/status/1265935319314116611?s=20
https://twitter.com/pietercleppe/status/1265935317200179201?s=20
Wonder what our share would have been....?
Part of the Cummings Thesis is that politicians overreact to scandals which don't have an impact on the public. And that government would be better ignoring them.
What he may have missed is that it's like insurance. For most people, most months, it's a waste of money. But when the balloon goes up, people are jolly glad they have it.
So who is the Leo Amery de nos jours?
I’ve nearly completed a thread comparing Boris Johnson to Lord Halifax.
As for choosing a hill to die on, I wouldn't have picked this one, but it should be obvious to any intelligent person that the stakes in this particular game were not those of any ordinary resignation. This was a direct attack on the Government's programme, its chief policy adviser, and on the PM himself. It was designed to reassert the media's authority to control government decision-making and direct the course of events.
As such, stopping them is worth any temporary polling hit. Now the next time the media cooks up a scandal out of nothing - and they will - the Government can defy them with ease because, after all, they threw everything they had at Cummings and still failed to unseat him.
Of course, if your only obsession is short-term popularity and not long-term strategic victory, I can see how an otherwise intelligent person might have come to your conclusions...
If theirs was marginal, which appears to be what they are saying, ours would have been needed.
Social services, like care homes, have a place as a last resort.
"Today I'm asking the people of the UK to continue observing the social distancing rules and to comply with contact tracers if they are asked to isolate. I know this is something that is even more difficult to do now than it was last week because of actions taken by the PM and Mr Cummings, but it is still the right thing to do. I believe that all of the people in the UK have an extraordinary capacity to do the right thing when asked. This doesn't mean we are letting the government or Mr Cummings off the hook and neither should you, but these actions by him should not be allowed to interfere with our ability to reopen the economy and keep our people and NHS safe from this virus."
That kind of statement makes Starmer the de facto PM and people will see him as PM material.
https://twitter.com/NJ_Timothy/status/1265713628860354568?s=20
Timms was in the Treasury at the time....
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/27/dido-harding-super-driven-to-make-track-and-trace-scheme-work
One of the reasons S Korea's system works so well is that the data sources they have for finding contacts are much more comprehensive than those available to us.
https://twitter.com/NJ_Timothy/status/1265917428174815232?s=20
Said our media.
"He acted as he thought best for himself and his family and I will not mark him down for that."
With this he destroyed a great deal of the trust and faith of the public in the government's messaging. Piss poor leadership. One has a right to expect better. If you don't think so, I suggest you raise your standards.
Not particularly edifying.
I've been at home observing lock down since it began. My wife is a key worker, I'm not, so I've taken up all childcare duties and I can be on my phone while I'm not doing their education or Joe Wicks exercises etc ... More time to talk to people here.
He should pick the VP full time for the Florida effort, while he will also cover the Rust Belt.
Good job he leads a party in Parliament with a majority to pass legislation then. Oh...wait....