All the media's fault apparently: on the one hand asking our wonderful HMG stupid questions which makes them look bad, on the other hand giving wee Jimmy Krankie Mcnippyface an easy ride.
Two electorates brainwashed in entirely different directions.
To be honest I don't understand why Nicola is getting such great ratings compared to Boris.
She hasn't done anything substantially different policy wise. She's just presented it better.
I understand why Nicola is getting such great ratings compared to Boris.
Politics is, unfortunately, 90% trappings and 10% substance.
So, even if the substantive differences are small (but arguably important), they are vastly outweighed by the zeitgeist.
BoZo is a diminished, untrustworthy and confused dud. Sturgeon is a reasonable, pleasant and competent leader.
In the harsh world of politics, that is enough.
The Tories were on 45% across the UK and the SNP 47% in Scotland last weekend, little difference
That was prior to the YouGov fieldwork. Even English people think Scotland handled Covid19 better.
”Which country do you think has handled the coronavirus outbreak better between England and Scotland?“
Respondents saying “England”:
London 13% Rest of South 16% Midlands 16% North 14%
All the media's fault apparently: on the one hand asking our wonderful HMG stupid questions which makes them look bad, on the other hand giving wee Jimmy Krankie Mcnippyface an easy ride.
Two electorates brainwashed in entirely different directions.
To be honest I don't understand why Nicola is getting such great ratings compared to Boris.
She hasn't done anything substantially different policy wise. She's just presented it better.
I understand why Nicola is getting such great ratings compared to Boris.
Politics is, unfortunately, 90% trappings and 10% substance.
So, even if the substantive differences are small (but arguably important), they are vastly outweighed by the zeitgeist.
BoZo is a diminished, untrustworthy and confused dud. Sturgeon is a reasonable, pleasant and competent leader.
In the harsh world of politics, that is enough.
The Tories were on 45% across the UK and the SNP 47% in Scotland last weekend, little difference
That was prior to the YouGov fieldwork. Even English people think Scotland handled Covid19 better.
”Which country do you think has handled the coronavirus outbreak better between England and Scotland?“
Respondents saying “England”:
London 13% Rest of South 16% Midlands 16% North 14%
So what, your point was about Boris and Tory popularity compared to Sturgeon and SNP popularity.
As I said Tory UK voteshare little different to SNP Scottish voteshare
Yes and no.
As you will be well aware, the main SNP focus is the Scottish general election next year, where our latest VI is 53%.
So, SNP voting intention in Scotland is significantly higher than Con voting intention in England. Stands to reason.
SNP voting intention just 47% in Scotland last weekend with Opinium
So, Westminster 2024 VI sub-sample out-trumps Holyrood 2021 VI full-sample.
Keep taking the tablets HY. The only person you are fooling is yourself.
(And incidentally, 47% is still bigger than 43%.)
SCon and SLab on 50% with Opinium combined which is certainly bigger than 47% and Holyrood has PR unlike Westminster
You really are a special kind of fruitcake. Once again you cite Westminster 2024 voting intention sub-samples and apply them to next year’s Scottish general election.
The last full-sample, properly-weighted BPC poll of Holyrood voting intention was:
SNP 53% SCon 23% SLab 15% SLD 5% Grn 3%
Which easily return another pro-Scotland SNP+Grn increased majority.
Consistently troubling the mainstream journalists have a weaker grasp of science, maths, and politics than PBers...
or the basics of finding where the information is.
Better to rush to twitter and pretend there's a scandal.
Genuinely sick of most of them, and the mouth breathers that incoherently and indefensibly retweet every single brain fart.
There was a clown on the radio asking what would happen if the "R ratio didn't keep on falling". When told that R isn't a ratio and that if it remained below 1, but static the number of cases would fall..
He responded with - "that would mean an increase in cases". Yes, literally that.
The number of cases would increase of course, assuming that someone who had the disease and has recovered or is recovering is still classed as a case. So if R was 0.9 there would still be new cases every week.
Actually there would be a net decrease in cases. Deaths + recoveries > new cases. That's at anything below 1.
Oh dear. Though I wonder how many PBers this will go over the heads of. My experience is that English incomers to Scotland find it very slow to even appreciate the existence of such, erm, narratives that my Belfast-born friend or any Scot at all familiar with the West Central Belt will instantly detect.
Years ago I was headhunted by a large Glasgow firm. I took it fairly seriously and we looked at housing around Glasgow. When we asked about the local schooling I was asked, well are you catholic or are you protestant? Even as an east coast Scot I found the whole thing deeply depressing and eventually chose not to take up the offer.
Blimey. Stop the clocks. The Government may have got something right.
I think even if the science says technically 1m is enough, if you tell people 3ft they will often end up much closer. If you tell people 6ft, even if people do on occasion get a bit closer, still exceed it.
Wouldn't be surprised if behavioural eggheads influenced this decision.
I find it depressing that science education is so poor people are arguing the toss 1m or 2m as if there is actually an "answer". I think this largely stems from the scientifically illiterate media looking for a story.
A lot of the crap from the last three months can be put down to scientifically illiterate media looking for a story.
This struck me as wishful thinking from the EU, to be honest. Similar article in the Times.
Both sides engage in wishful thinking. Evidence doesnt suggest unfavourable media headlines are something the government seeks to avoid. Sometimes they even choose them deliberately to further division in the country and enhance the biased media narrative.
Oh dear. Though I wonder how many PBers this will go over the heads of. My experience is that English incomers to Scotland find it very slow to even appreciate the existence of such, erm, narratives that my Belfast-born friend or any Scot at all familiar with the West Central Belt will instantly detect.
Yep, I had one PBer insisting that use of the term 'loyalist' was a SNP slur. He scuttled off when I listed a few Orange lodges and bands with the words loyal and loyalist in their names.
Oh dear. Though I wonder how many PBers this will go over the heads of. My experience is that English incomers to Scotland find it very slow to even appreciate the existence of such, erm, narratives that my Belfast-born friend or any Scot at all familiar with the West Central Belt will instantly detect.
I'm not justifying the violence just pointing out the irony that the gun-toting people who do advocate violence as a solution and were happy to see armed individuals storm a states Congress last month are in uproar if the "wrong type of people" are armed.
Are they in uproar about the wrong type of people being armed? From what I see they're mostly advocating people getting guns to protect their homes and taking the piss out of Antifa kids who don't know how to use guns.
People who turned a blind eye to the lynching of Ahmaud Arbery and the murder of George Floyd are horrified when others turn to violence and carry weapons.
There's no excuse for violence but then there's no excuse for murdering unarmed civilians either.
All those who commit violent atrocities should be prosecuted which should include charging the three other Police Officers involved with Floyd's death with being accessories to murder.
Who is saying they shouldn't? Literally no one. Also who is turning a blind eye to the murder of George Floyd? Are you just making stuff up?
That isn't what this is about. People aren't looting Nike and Louis Vuitton or setting fire to homes over George Floyd.
When mass civil unrest takes off there is always an element of opportunistic looting and of people who get a kick out of violence indulging that perversion. You can easily, therefore, relate stories of this happening and get pictures in the same vein. Which will be true and ought to be condemned. But that is NOT what this is about. It is about racist policing in America.
That seems like a good thing to me. We want to move on from partisan hatred in Ireland.
It's great news.
Maybe not so much for the Minister for the Union, whose name escapes me for the moment.
I believe that Minister has tried to develop a good working relationship with Varadkar, from spending time one on one with him in the Wirral onwards, so I doubt he cares an iota about this poll.
The Clown’s brain is so fuzzy that I doubt he remembers his stroll in the Wirral.
Progress. Unionism is a complex entity. No UK wide party shows any signs of supporting NI unionism. They don't organise and don't stand candidates in NI. The idea that Britain is one island and Ireland is another is obvious. Look at a map. The idea that each island has two sensible choices: two states, Ireland and Britain, or one state called UK of Britain and Ireland (the New Zealand solution - works OK there) is increasingly obvious. Politics, history and the EU problem make the one state solution, sadly, impossible for now, leaving only one sensible solution. A state called Britain and a state called Ireland. Now, or very soon, is the moment.
Its an option but there is no need whatsoever for states to be all of an island or contiguous, many aren't.
I see no desire in Alaska to rush off to join Canada.
There is currently no desire in West Timor to leave Indonesia and join Timor-Leste (East Timor) for a unified island state of Timor.
Oh dear. Though I wonder how many PBers this will go over the heads of. My experience is that English incomers to Scotland find it very slow to even appreciate the existence of such, erm, narratives that my Belfast-born friend or any Scot at all familiar with the West Central Belt will instantly detect.
Blimey. Stop the clocks. The Government may have got something right.
I think even if the science says technically 1m is enough, if you tell people 3ft they will often end up much closer. If you tell people 6ft, even if people do on occasion get a bit closer, still exceed it.
Wouldn't be surprised if behavioural eggheads influenced this decision.
I find it depressing that science education is so poor people are arguing the toss 1m or 2m as if there is actually an "answer". I think this largely stems from the scientifically illiterate media looking for a story.
A lot of the crap from the last three months can be put down to scientifically illiterate media looking for a story.
Possibly, but what is unscientific in believing that there is a perfectly good scientific answer to the question of the relative merits of 1 vs 2 metre spacing?
Oh dear. Though I wonder how many PBers this will go over the heads of. My experience is that English incomers to Scotland find it very slow to even appreciate the existence of such, erm, narratives that my Belfast-born friend or any Scot at all familiar with the West Central Belt will instantly detect.
Yep, I had one PBer insisting that use of the term 'loyalist' was a SNP slur. He scuttled off when I listed a few Orange lodges and bands with the words loyal and loyalist in their names.
I’m not sure there’s enough rocks in the Mourne Mountains for all the PB snakes to slither under.
All the media's fault apparently: on the one hand asking our wonderful HMG stupid questions which makes them look bad, on the other hand giving wee Jimmy Krankie Mcnippyface an easy ride.
Two electorates brainwashed in entirely different directions.
To be honest I don't understand why Nicola is getting such great ratings compared to Boris.
She hasn't done anything substantially different policy wise. She's just presented it better.
I understand why Nicola is getting such great ratings compared to Boris.
Politics is, unfortunately, 90% trappings and 10% substance.
So, even if the substantive differences are small (but arguably important), they are vastly outweighed by the zeitgeist.
BoZo is a diminished, untrustworthy and confused dud. Sturgeon is a reasonable, pleasant and competent leader.
In the harsh world of politics, that is enough.
The Tories were on 45% across the UK and the SNP 47% in Scotland last weekend, little difference
That was prior to the YouGov fieldwork. Even English people think Scotland handled Covid19 better.
”Which country do you think has handled the coronavirus outbreak better between England and Scotland?“
Respondents saying “England”:
London 13% Rest of South 16% Midlands 16% North 14%
All the media's fault apparently: on the one hand asking our wonderful HMG stupid questions which makes them look bad, on the other hand giving wee Jimmy Krankie Mcnippyface an easy ride.
Two electorates brainwashed in entirely different directions.
To be honest I don't understand why Nicola is getting such great ratings compared to Boris.
She hasn't done anything substantially different policy wise. She's just presented it better.
I understand why Nicola is getting such great ratings compared to Boris.
Politics is, unfortunately, 90% trappings and 10% substance.
So, even if the substantive differences are small (but arguably important), they are vastly outweighed by the zeitgeist.
BoZo is a diminished, untrustworthy and confused dud. Sturgeon is a reasonable, pleasant and competent leader.
In the harsh world of politics, that is enough.
The Tories were on 45% across the UK and the SNP 47% in Scotland last weekend, little difference
That was prior to the YouGov fieldwork. Even English people think Scotland handled Covid19 better.
”Which country do you think has handled the coronavirus outbreak better between England and Scotland?“
Respondents saying “England”:
London 13% Rest of South 16% Midlands 16% North 14%
So what, your point was about Boris and Tory popularity compared to Sturgeon and SNP popularity.
As I said Tory UK voteshare little different to SNP Scottish voteshare
Yes and no.
As you will be well aware, the main SNP focus is the Scottish general election next year, where our latest VI is 53%.
So, SNP voting intention in Scotland is significantly higher than Con voting intention in England. Stands to reason.
SNP voting intention just 47% in Scotland last weekend with Opinium
So, Westminster 2024 VI sub-sample out-trumps Holyrood 2021 VI full-sample.
Keep taking the tablets HY. The only person you are fooling is yourself.
(And incidentally, 47% is still bigger than 43%.)
SCon and SLab on 50% with Opinium combined which is certainly bigger than 47% and Holyrood has PR unlike Westminster
You really are a special kind of fruitcake. Once again you cite Westminster 2024 voting intention sub-samples and apply them to next year’s Scottish general election.
The last full-sample, properly-weighted BPC poll of Holyrood voting intention was:
SNP 53% SCon 23% SLab 15% SLD 5% Grn 3%
Which easily return another pro-Scotland SNP+Grn increased majority.
And that was before Cummings.
(Panelbase; 1-5 May)
The Opinium poll was taken post Cummings.
If reflected at Holyrood there is a good chance of a Unionist majority in 2021
F1 is very well suited to get going again from the perspective of the armchair audience. No crowd will make virtually no difference to the TV experience of watching the race.
@Theuniondivvie - I'm not usually bothered by what people choose as avatars - but don't you think a picture of an alleged murder might be more than a little insensitive?
Unless you click on it, it's only a picture of a gormless looking cop. I won't be keeping it permanently but I think people should see the inarguable truth of what happened, in fact the 'pre-existing condition, we shouldn't call it murder yet' merchants should have their noses rubbed in it. Sensitivity can take a wee hike for a couple of weeks.
Please UnionD, have some decorum over this fiendishly complicated case. So many variables are at play that the video showing exactly what happened cannot possibly be sufficient to determine what happened. So many possibilities. Let us not rush to judgement.
Oh dear. Though I wonder how many PBers this will go over the heads of. My experience is that English incomers to Scotland find it very slow to even appreciate the existence of such, erm, narratives that my Belfast-born friend or any Scot at all familiar with the West Central Belt will instantly detect.
Yep, I had one PBer insisting that use of the term 'loyalist' was a SNP slur. He scuttled off when I listed a few Orange lodges and bands with the words loyal and loyalist in their names.
Did any PBers claim that the SNP were anti-RC? Like that composer chappie? Or the tales of Labour canvassers tellign auld wifies that the SNP would deport them to the auld sod - or were those merely apocryphal?
I remember pictures like this from when I was a child and the freedom riders were being beaten up on arrival and having dogs set upon them. It is quite, quite staggering that we are seeing this again in 2020.
Progress. Unionism is a complex entity. No UK wide party shows any signs of supporting NI unionism. They don't organise and don't stand candidates in NI. The idea that Britain is one island and Ireland is another is obvious. Look at a map. The idea that each island has two sensible choices: two states, Ireland and Britain, or one state called UK of Britain and Ireland (the New Zealand solution - works OK there) is increasingly obvious. Politics, history and the EU problem make the one state solution, sadly, impossible for now, leaving only one sensible solution. A state called Britain and a state called Ireland. Now, or very soon, is the moment.
The Tories stand in Northern Ireland.
52% of Northern Irish voters oppose a United Ireland, only 29% in favour according to a February poll
Progress. Unionism is a complex entity. No UK wide party shows any signs of supporting NI unionism. They don't organise and don't stand candidates in NI. The idea that Britain is one island and Ireland is another is obvious. Look at a map. The idea that each island has two sensible choices: two states, Ireland and Britain, or one state called UK of Britain and Ireland (the New Zealand solution - works OK there) is increasingly obvious. Politics, history and the EU problem make the one state solution, sadly, impossible for now, leaving only one sensible solution. A state called Britain and a state called Ireland. Now, or very soon, is the moment.
The Tories stand in Northern Ireland.
52% of Northern Irish voters oppose a United Ireland, only 29% in favour according to a February poll
I'm honestly not sure how America goes back to normal from here.
If there was someone other than president dickbag in charge there would be plenty of ways to get this settled but there just seems to be no way out other than letting the riots burn out over the next couple of weeks and hoping some other racist cop doesn't step up and gun down an innocent black person.
Oh dear. Though I wonder how many PBers this will go over the heads of. My experience is that English incomers to Scotland find it very slow to even appreciate the existence of such, erm, narratives that my Belfast-born friend or any Scot at all familiar with the West Central Belt will instantly detect.
It seems to me that anyone who was familiar with the Risk Register for the local duck pond preservation trust would think that for a state with the resources and brains of the UK, right at the top of their Risk Register in bright red would be a previously unknown infection which killed lots of people and didn't act exactly like any previously known one. It would be right at the top of this list in terms of both likelihood that one day it will occur AND potential devastating consequences.
The government has been incredibly lucky. If we have this much unpreparedness for Covid 19, how would we be getting on if this new disease happened to kill healthy children and young people in large numbers, be highly infectious, be completely untreatable, have universal symptoms like ebola and nearly always fatal? It is not as if we had not been warned. And suppose Labour had won the election in 2019, would they have been any better prepared? And if so, how?
And if AIDS and ebola were not enough warning, what would be?
I'm actually (as part of my straw-clutching) viewing this as something that may, in the long run, be looked back upon as the luckiest break we've ever had.
Because after this, we damn well will prepare for Disease X. Could have happened as you describe, and eventually will happen that way, but we'll actually end up taking preparation for it seriously.
I think part of it is the incessant desire to signal that "the greatest threat is climate change/terrorism" (delete accordingly) rather than tackle the mundane like viruses.
One of my greatest criticisms of HMGs response has been the inability to make progress on more than one thing at a time. There's a whole number of things that we should be preparing for/acting on and if we've found out that we were badly prepared for a virus we might wonder whether we're badly prepared for other things too.
Oh dear. Though I wonder how many PBers this will go over the heads of. My experience is that English incomers to Scotland find it very slow to even appreciate the existence of such, erm, narratives that my Belfast-born friend or any Scot at all familiar with the West Central Belt will instantly detect.
Years ago I was headhunted by a large Glasgow firm. I took it fairly seriously and we looked at housing around Glasgow. When we asked about the local schooling I was asked, well are you catholic or are you protestant? Even as an east coast Scot I found the whole thing deeply depressing and eventually chose not to take up the offer.
A friend of mine is from a (now former) mining area in Fife. He had some interesting comments on the culture clash which happened when the NCB imported miners en masse from closed western pits to the new superpits postwar, and the locals encountered the WCB way of thinking.
Progress. Unionism is a complex entity. No UK wide party shows any signs of supporting NI unionism. They don't organise and don't stand candidates in NI. The idea that Britain is one island and Ireland is another is obvious. Look at a map. The idea that each island has two sensible choices: two states, Ireland and Britain, or one state called UK of Britain and Ireland (the New Zealand solution - works OK there) is increasingly obvious. Politics, history and the EU problem make the one state solution, sadly, impossible for now, leaving only one sensible solution. A state called Britain and a state called Ireland. Now, or very soon, is the moment.
The Tories stand in Northern Ireland.
52% of Northern Irish voters oppose a United Ireland, only 29% in favour according to a February poll
Blimey. Stop the clocks. The Government may have got something right.
I think even if the science says technically 1m is enough, if you tell people 3ft they will often end up much closer. If you tell people 6ft, even if people do on occasion get a bit closer, still exceed it.
Wouldn't be surprised if behavioural eggheads influenced this decision.
I find it depressing that science education is so poor people are arguing the toss 1m or 2m as if there is actually an "answer". I think this largely stems from the scientifically illiterate media looking for a story.
A lot of the crap from the last three months can be put down to scientifically illiterate media looking for a story.
Its more a chronic lack of numeracy. It is not unreasonable that journalists don't have a good grasp of the ACE2 enzyme and its potential as a means for the virus entering the body but they can't read a bar chart, have no grasp of the most basic assumptions that underlie the numbers of it and have an almost wilful disregard of the fact that they are not comparing like with like.
It seems to me that anyone who was familiar with the Risk Register for the local duck pond preservation trust would think that for a state with the resources and brains of the UK, right at the top of their Risk Register in bright red would be a previously unknown infection which killed lots of people and didn't act exactly like any previously known one. It would be right at the top of this list in terms of both likelihood that one day it will occur AND potential devastating consequences.
The government has been incredibly lucky. If we have this much unpreparedness for Covid 19, how would we be getting on if this new disease happened to kill healthy children and young people in large numbers, be highly infectious, be completely untreatable, have universal symptoms like ebola and nearly always fatal? It is not as if we had not been warned. And suppose Labour had won the election in 2019, would they have been any better prepared? And if so, how?
And if AIDS and ebola were not enough warning, what would be?
I'm actually (as part of my straw-clutching) viewing this as something that may, in the long run, be looked back upon as the luckiest break we've ever had.
Because after this, we damn well will prepare for Disease X. Could have happened as you describe, and eventually will happen that way, but we'll actually end up taking preparation for it seriously.
I think part of it is the incessant desire to signal that "the greatest threat is climate change/terrorism" (delete accordingly) rather than tackle the mundane like viruses.
One of my greatest criticisms of HMGs response has been the inability to make progress on more than one thing at a time. There's a whole number of things that we should be preparing for/acting on and if we've found out that we were badly prepared for a virus we might wonder whether we're badly prepared for other things too.
Each senior cabinet minister should have been given a clear area of responsibility. Instead Hancock has had to do NHS, Care homes, PPE, Testing and Test, track and trace. Bizarre and obviously leads to mistakes and lack of attention in some of those key areas.
I do have a concern with the constant focus on the number of deaths rather than the number of hospitalisations. It's totally understandable, because the deaths are irreversible, tragic, and signify the loss of many years of life for all those sadly lost (and the media instinctively go for the most tragic stories) - but the focus has led to some in the younger demographics concluding that because their demographics aren't showing up as much in the death statistics, they must therefore be all-but-immune.
Rather than being far more likely to eventually recover, which is the main driver of the differential death rates. They're a little less likely to need hospitalisation (whereas they seem to assume that they automatically would get a mild enough case for it to be like a "normal" flu), still reasonably likely to need ICU, but overall far more likely to not actually die - as long as they receive that help. Which they wouldn't if the virus was allowed to let rip in any demographic.
(And then they automatically gloss over the issue of them infecting the more vulnerable demographics, anyway)
True up to a point.
However, one must remember that the risk even of hospitalisation for the young remains very low indeed.
Oh dear. Though I wonder how many PBers this will go over the heads of. My experience is that English incomers to Scotland find it very slow to even appreciate the existence of such, erm, narratives that my Belfast-born friend or any Scot at all familiar with the West Central Belt will instantly detect.
Mr Trump's mum was from the orthern part of the Long Isle IIRC - almost wall to wall Free Kirks (exactly which one would depend on time and place, and their splits and mergers with the United Presbyterians and latterly with the C of S). Unless you were the laird or a servant thereof in which case you might go to the Episcopalian place in Stornoway/Steòrnabhagh.
This will only stop when they start shooting the looters. Which they will
Surprised they have not so far. Need to state anyone on street after curfew will be shot , stop pussyfooting about.
We tried that in Basra. At one point we were shooting anyone with a beard (so males 10 and over, females 50 and over) who was on the street after the dusk call to prayer. To the great surprise of the self styled counter-insurgency experts of the British Army this did not calm the city.
Indeed.
Experience tells us that extrajudicial military execution of civilians never works out well. The Gàidhealtachd is still trying to recover from the horrific events 1746-48 at the hands of the king’s son Prince William, Duke of Cumberland. Events which resulted in his Tory opponents naming him Butcher Cumberland.
The wholesale sell-out of their leaders resulting in the Highland Clearances didn't help the recovery, either.
Why did it not work out well? It silenced the Scots and stopped them invading England
This’ll be the “best of both worlds” and being an “equal partner” within the Union promised by the Conservative/Labour/LibDem/UKIP/BNP axis in 2014.
Lord grant that Marshal Wade May by thy mighty aid Victory bring. May he sedition hush, And like a torrent rush, Rebellious Scots to crush. God save the Queen!
General Wade's network of roads and bridges may have been designed to 'bring victory' but actually it brought unprecedented trade and economic activity to the remotest parts of Scotland.
It must be tricky arguing for Scottish separation from a historical angle, when the 19th century was Scotland's most prosperous and successful era, as the faded grandeur of hundreds of towns (in common with hundreds in England) shows.
Vote BetterTogether2 for General Wade’s roads and faded town centres!
You might want to come up with a more catchy slogan.
Not at all, I think any arguments for the Union should be based on the future, but there is strong historical slant within the indy movement toward Scotland being seen as a colonial victim, in which case one would expect to see the ruins of its rennaissance glory and the rest to look like Scunthorpe.
A casual look at anywhere here tells you the 19th century was Scotland's heyday, a time when enterprising Scots achieved unprecedented industrial and engineering success, travelled the world and colonised much of it, and adorned their towns and cities with grand churches, halls, parks, monuments and roads. Sadly (for you) they seemed to do so quite happily as part of the United Kingdom.
19th century Scottish engineers, industrialists, colonial servants, architects, sculptors and landscape gardeners have, understandably, been removed from the Electoral Rolls. Sadly (for you).
Indeed, so hopefully (for you) their near descendents forget their ebullient, high achieving, successful embrace of the Union and fall for the lugubrious and historically bogus tale of unending misery (since 1707) that you're peddling.
Without crowds I wonder how that will affect the finances of Silverstone compared to a normal year where it would be once but with crowds.
They've done a special deal, F1 are paying Silverstone to rent the track for this year's events.
Usually Silverstone pays F1 to host the race, and gets revenue from tickets and catering sales.
The two races at Austria and Silverstone are to minimise the travel and catch up on races due to events that were cancelled. 8 is the minimum required for a season, but they are looking for 15 to avoid having to pay back sponsors and TV revenues.
All the media's fault apparently: on the one hand asking our wonderful HMG stupid questions which makes them look bad, on the other hand giving wee Jimmy Krankie Mcnippyface an easy ride.
Two electorates brainwashed in entirely different directions.
To be honest I don't understand why Nicola is getting such great ratings compared to Boris.
She hasn't done anything substantially different policy wise. She's just presented it better.
I understand why Nicola is getting such great ratings compared to Boris.
Politics is, unfortunately, 90% trappings and 10% substance.
So, even if the substantive differences are small (but arguably important), they are vastly outweighed by the zeitgeist.
BoZo is a diminished, untrustworthy and confused dud. Sturgeon is a reasonable, pleasant and competent leader.
In the harsh world of politics, that is enough.
The Tories were on 45% across the UK and the SNP 47% in Scotland last weekend, little difference
That was prior to the YouGov fieldwork. Even English people think Scotland handled Covid19 better.
”Which country do you think has handled the coronavirus outbreak better between England and Scotland?“
Respondents saying “England”:
London 13% Rest of South 16% Midlands 16% North 14%
All the media's fault apparently: on the one hand asking our wonderful HMG stupid questions which makes them look bad, on the other hand giving wee Jimmy Krankie Mcnippyface an easy ride.
Two electorates brainwashed in entirely different directions.
To be honest I don't understand why Nicola is getting such great ratings compared to Boris.
She hasn't done anything substantially different policy wise. She's just presented it better.
I understand why Nicola is getting such great ratings compared to Boris.
Politics is, unfortunately, 90% trappings and 10% substance.
So, even if the substantive differences are small (but arguably important), they are vastly outweighed by the zeitgeist.
BoZo is a diminished, untrustworthy and confused dud. Sturgeon is a reasonable, pleasant and competent leader.
In the harsh world of politics, that is enough.
The Tories were on 45% across the UK and the SNP 47% in Scotland last weekend, little difference
That was prior to the YouGov fieldwork. Even English people think Scotland handled Covid19 better.
”Which country do you think has handled the coronavirus outbreak better between England and Scotland?“
Respondents saying “England”:
London 13% Rest of South 16% Midlands 16% North 14%
So what, your point was about Boris and Tory popularity compared to Sturgeon and SNP popularity.
As I said Tory UK voteshare little different to SNP Scottish voteshare
Yes and no.
As you will be well aware, the main SNP focus is the Scottish general election next year, where our latest VI is 53%.
So, SNP voting intention in Scotland is significantly higher than Con voting intention in England. Stands to reason.
SNP voting intention just 47% in Scotland last weekend with Opinium
So, Westminster 2024 VI sub-sample out-trumps Holyrood 2021 VI full-sample.
Keep taking the tablets HY. The only person you are fooling is yourself.
(And incidentally, 47% is still bigger than 43%.)
SCon and SLab on 50% with Opinium combined which is certainly bigger than 47% and Holyrood has PR unlike Westminster
You really are a special kind of fruitcake. Once again you cite Westminster 2024 voting intention sub-samples and apply them to next year’s Scottish general election.
The last full-sample, properly-weighted BPC poll of Holyrood voting intention was:
SNP 53% SCon 23% SLab 15% SLD 5% Grn 3%
Which easily return another pro-Scotland SNP+Grn increased majority.
And that was before Cummings.
(Panelbase; 1-5 May)
The Opinium poll was taken post Cummings.
If reflected at Holyrood there is a good chance of a Unionist majority in 2021
Not a properly functioning test and trace system with a 24hr turnaround thats for sure if Hancocks record is anything to go by
The letter merits a careful read, and supports what I have said previously. It is saying that the data presented on testing is wholly inadequate, and reading between the (civil service) lines that this is not a result just of incompetence or even disingenuity, but is more or less wilfully misleading. For example, the daily presentation "gives an artifically low impression of the proportion of tests returning a positive diagnosis". The criticisms are damning, were made in Norgrove's previous letter to Hancock, and the government really doesn't care as long as the data seems to show that targets have been met.
This does make is harder to have the requisite information to tackle the virus. And it adds to the impression of a government machine that is, at best, careless with the truth.
I do have a concern with the constant focus on the number of deaths rather than the number of hospitalisations. It's totally understandable, because the deaths are irreversible, tragic, and signify the loss of many years of life for all those sadly lost (and the media instinctively go for the most tragic stories) - but the focus has led to some in the younger demographics concluding that because their demographics aren't showing up as much in the death statistics, they must therefore be all-but-immune.
Rather than being far more likely to eventually recover, which is the main driver of the differential death rates. They're a little less likely to need hospitalisation (whereas they seem to assume that they automatically would get a mild enough case for it to be like a "normal" flu), still reasonably likely to need ICU, but overall far more likely to not actually die - as long as they receive that help. Which they wouldn't if the virus was allowed to let rip in any demographic.
(And then they automatically gloss over the issue of them infecting the more vulnerable demographics, anyway)
True up to a point.
However, one must remember that the risk even of hospitalisation for the young remains very low indeed.
So, to some degree they are being quite rational.
Well, for the under-twenties, anyway. Still not that low for the 30-40 and 20-30 contingent (although females do seem less at risk than males in many areas)
No matter how tooled up you make the police policing only works by consent. There is far more public than there are police.
If the public want to seriously get violent there is nothing the police can do.
If say 80% to 90% of the population want a revolution maybe.
However when at least 40%+ of US voters still support Trump and a majority of US voters oppose looting and rioting that is a totally different matter.
US voters want law and order
They do. But they also want a society that is not forever on the edge of the opposite. People thinking this plays good for Trump are wrong. It's yet another crisis exposing his inadequacies. He is slip sliding away in the POTUS market and I expect this to continue. I predict that come the autumn you will be able to back him for re-election at 3 point something in Betfair parlance. Maybe even 4. At which price he will be a lay.
On PT people were wondering what you call a Flat White in America. Well I can tell you the answer to this. The answer is Donald Trump and his neanderthal "base" on 4th November.
Latest US poll Biden 50% Trump 45%, latest Michigan poll Biden 50% Trump 44%. I still think it will be very close
Oh dear. Though I wonder how many PBers this will go over the heads of. My experience is that English incomers to Scotland find it very slow to even appreciate the existence of such, erm, narratives that my Belfast-born friend or any Scot at all familiar with the West Central Belt will instantly detect.
Yep, I had one PBer insisting that use of the term 'loyalist' was a SNP slur. He scuttled off when I listed a few Orange lodges and bands with the words loyal and loyalist in their names.
I suspect the recently banned hard rightwing PBer Harry of Orange might be sympathetic to Rangers Loyal (South of England branch)
My sense is that those of my Six Ells ilk are fewer and farer between these days.
Leans Left – Lightly Libertarian – Largely Liberal
We seem to have quite a few socially conservative lefties (some quite disgustingly so) and quite a few socially liberal righties but fewer from my tradition.
This will only stop when they start shooting the looters. Which they will
Surprised they have not so far. Need to state anyone on street after curfew will be shot , stop pussyfooting about.
We tried that in Basra. At one point we were shooting anyone with a beard (so males 10 and over, females 50 and over) who was on the street after the dusk call to prayer. To the great surprise of the self styled counter-insurgency experts of the British Army this did not calm the city.
Indeed.
Experience tells us that extrajudicial military execution of civilians never works out well. The Gàidhealtachd is still trying to recover from the horrific events 1746-48 at the hands of the king’s son Prince William, Duke of Cumberland. Events which resulted in his Tory opponents naming him Butcher Cumberland.
The wholesale sell-out of their leaders resulting in the Highland Clearances didn't help the recovery, either.
Oh, absolutely. This was the great irony, that the Tory and Episcopalian nobles who had so disastrously fermented and encouraged the risings, then crushed the remaining Gaels under foot in their greedy dash for quick cash. The word “Tory” has been dirt in Scotland ever since, and led to the Liberals, then Labour, dominating the country.
The name of the Tories was so muddy that they won outright majorities in Scotland in the following elections:
1900 1924 1931 1935 1955
And were the largest party in 1918 and 1951 (the latter case, jointly with Labour with the Liberal in Orkney making up the balance).
That hardly equates to 'the Liberals and then Labour dominating the country.' Labour have been dominant since the early 1960s, but not earlier.
I also missed out the SNP. I was not intending on creating a comprehensive political history of the country for the past quarter of a millennium.
Incidentally, those Scottish “Tory” factoids you listed do not stand up to scrutiny. In order to achieve that you have to add in an astonishing concoction of Unionists, independents, liberals and a patchwork of other MPs, none of whom had the word “Tory” or “Conservative” on the ballot paper!
Until 1970, no candidates had any party names on the ballot paper, you idiot. That's how Gwilym Lloyd George kept calling himself a Liberal even when he took the Tory whip.
The reason for Tory strength was anti-Irish feeling in Glasgow and the Highlands. It wasn't enough to be totally dominant as Labour were, but it was enough to keep them consistently in the game.
Mr. Meeks, an upside, in current circumstances, of some circuits is that they're not city centres, making it easier to stay within the travelling bubble. Spa's relatively isolated, for example.
I do have a concern with the constant focus on the number of deaths rather than the number of hospitalisations. It's totally understandable, because the deaths are irreversible, tragic, and signify the loss of many years of life for all those sadly lost (and the media instinctively go for the most tragic stories) - but the focus has led to some in the younger demographics concluding that because their demographics aren't showing up as much in the death statistics, they must therefore be all-but-immune.
Rather than being far more likely to eventually recover, which is the main driver of the differential death rates. They're a little less likely to need hospitalisation (whereas they seem to assume that they automatically would get a mild enough case for it to be like a "normal" flu), still reasonably likely to need ICU, but overall far more likely to not actually die - as long as they receive that help. Which they wouldn't if the virus was allowed to let rip in any demographic.
(And then they automatically gloss over the issue of them infecting the more vulnerable demographics, anyway)
True up to a point.
However, one must remember that the risk even of hospitalisation for the young remains very low indeed.
So, to some degree they are being quite rational.
Well, for the under-twenties, anyway. Still not that low for the 30-40 and 20-30 contingent (although females do seem less at risk than males in many areas)
The risk of hospitalisation for healthy under 50s is very low. Sure, if you are 47 and obese your risk is higher. But overall for the healthy under 50 cohort the risk is low. There are much greater risks faced in daily life.
Andy Cooke said "some in the younger demographics conclude that because their demographics aren't showing up as much in the death statistics, they must therefore be all-but-immune". One might think it good if it were appreciated how truly miniscule is the-risk-of death-if-infected for 90% of the population and for 99.9% of the not-clinically-vulnerable in the younger demographics. If people had to be scared into their homes for fear of an overwhelmed NHS, then, if that fear is out of the way, don't people need to be encouraged to leave their homes by an awareness of the risk even if they can't be guaranteed immune from infection?.
Comments
The last full-sample, properly-weighted BPC poll of Holyrood voting intention was:
SNP 53%
SCon 23%
SLab 15%
SLD 5%
Grn 3%
Which easily return another pro-Scotland SNP+Grn increased majority.
And that was before Cummings.
(Panelbase; 1-5 May)
https://twitter.com/F1/status/1267743256672174080
I see no desire in Alaska to rush off to join Canada.
There is currently no desire in West Timor to leave Indonesia and join Timor-Leste (East Timor) for a unified island state of Timor.
If reflected at Holyrood there is a good chance of a Unionist majority in 2021
52% of Northern Irish voters oppose a United Ireland, only 29% in favour according to a February poll
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-nireland-poll/poll-shows-northern-ireland-majority-against-united-ireland-idUKKBN20C0WF.
Unionists only like Varadkar as Sinn Fein hate him on the basis the enemy of my enemy is my friend
Whatever next.
Not a properly functioning test and trace system with a 24hr turnaround thats for sure if Hancocks record is anything to go by
Without crowds I wonder how that will affect the finances of Silverstone compared to a normal year where it would be once but with crowds.
If there was someone other than president dickbag in charge there would be plenty of ways to get this settled but there just seems to be no way out other than letting the riots burn out over the next couple of weeks and hoping some other racist cop doesn't step up and gun down an innocent black person.
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13140856-50-ways-the-world-is-going-to-end
However, one must remember that the risk even of hospitalisation for the young remains very low indeed.
So, to some degree they are being quite rational.
Mr Trump's mum was from the orthern part of the Long Isle IIRC - almost wall to wall Free Kirks (exactly which one would depend on time and place, and their splits and mergers with the United Presbyterians and latterly with the C of S). Unless you were the laird or a servant thereof in which case you might go to the Episcopalian place in Stornoway/Steòrnabhagh.
Usually Silverstone pays F1 to host the race, and gets revenue from tickets and catering sales.
The two races at Austria and Silverstone are to minimise the travel and catch up on races due to events that were cancelled. 8 is the minimum required for a season, but they are looking for 15 to avoid having to pay back sponsors and TV revenues.
Westminster VI
Holyrood VI
sub-sample
full-sample
?
We are here to help you.
This does make is harder to have the requisite information to tackle the virus. And it adds to the impression of a government machine that is, at best, careless with the truth.
Who do you think will win?
My sense is that those of my Six Ells ilk are fewer and farer between these days.
Leans Left – Lightly Libertarian – Largely Liberal
We seem to have quite a few socially conservative lefties (some quite disgustingly so) and quite a few socially liberal righties but fewer from my tradition.
The reason for Tory strength was anti-Irish feeling in Glasgow and the Highlands. It wasn't enough to be totally dominant as Labour were, but it was enough to keep them consistently in the game.
Mr. Meeks, an upside, in current circumstances, of some circuits is that they're not city centres, making it easier to stay within the travelling bubble. Spa's relatively isolated, for example.
One might think it good if it were appreciated how truly miniscule is the-risk-of death-if-infected for 90% of the population and for 99.9% of the not-clinically-vulnerable in the younger demographics. If people had to be scared into their homes for fear of an overwhelmed NHS, then, if that fear is out of the way, don't people need to be encouraged to leave their homes by an awareness of the risk even if they can't be guaranteed immune from infection?.