You know, I have been wondering about the entire denialist thing.
- It's not an issue, the death rate's no worse than any other year - oops, try... - It's only killing those at death's door. Okay, maybe not, let's try... - The lockdown isn't working, so forget doing it, the death rate should have turned by now. Oh. Let's try... - Only one in ten thousand will really die, we won't have... oh... - The infection rate turned around quite quickly after lockdown, so counting back, it was probably only the fact we got almost everyone possible working from home, closed restaurants, cinemas, schools, pubs, sports facilities, gyms, and instituted social distancing that did it instead. So we don't need any of that. Hang on. Ummm. - It's unnecessary, look at Sweden, their economy is... oh, worse than their neighbours who locked down and had a tenth the death rate. Um. - Look, if you're younger and without any co-morbidities, and get hospital assistance if it's needed, you'll almost certainly recover (like if you're shot by a pistol somewhere other than your head or chest). So it's as if your completely unaffected, and who cares about infecting other people, anyway? Just gloss over the fact that getting so ill you'll be hospitalised isn't as vanishingly unlikely as we'd like you to think, forget about the poor bastards you'd infect, and ignore the way so many people have lingering damage and on-going health problems over all demographics. Why can't we pretend nothing's happened and go to the pub just like before and stuff?
I did assume it was all the "I'm all right Jack, I want to be able to do whatever I could do before because I had it nice then, thank you very much," without caring for the other poor bastards that aren't as healthy, but the hospitalisation rates across demographics and the lingering effects made that look unlikely.
Now I think it's a combination of fear and a desperate desire for things to be as they were.
After all, it's an invisible menace. It's out there. You don't know where. You don't know when you'll be affected - or if you'll be affected. But if it just so happened that I happen to be safe from it, by my age and health, then it's okay. Nothing to fear. And, actually, if I can convince myself of this, then it's only a short step to convincing myself that we can go back to normal and I can resume my happy, comfortable life. Oh, others may die, but, as Lord Farquad said in Shrek, for many people: "That's a sacrifice I'm willing to make."
Humans rationalise - we pick the conclusion we want and come up with a route to get there. We can convince ourselves of almost anything, if we close our eyes and try hard enough. Cherry pick the facts you want to believe. Make those who say what you want to hear into authoritative prophets. Torture the data and it will admit anything. And hey, I'm fine with people doing whatever they need to do to overcome fear.
Just not with them peddling dangerous bollocks afterwards.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!"
GUARDIAN: Britons are prepared to pay higher taxes to turn the country into a kinder, more equal and supportive place to live after the coronavirus pandemic is over, according to new research set to be published this week. A poll carried out for the strategy consultancy BritainThinks reveals that just 12% of people want life to return to normal “exactly as it was before” once the pandemic is over.
The research shows three clear priorities are emerging: better funding for the NHS, better treatment and pay for essential workers, and an economic recovery that doesn’t just focus on London. There is also an appetite for a kinder society that prioritises better support for people struggling with mental or physical health problems, allows workers more time off with family and friends, cares about the environment and ensures high levels of employment.
The assumption that paying higher taxes is going to accomplish all those things, particularly in the aftermath of an extremely deep recession, is somewhat.... optimistic.
These surveys are meaningless.
Do you want to pay key workers more? Do you want an economic recovery for everyone? Do you want workers to have more time off? Do you like motherhood? How about apple pie?
No one can answer in the negative without looking like a complete heel
Quite so. Though I'm actually not a fan of apple pie.
Also surprised at the use of wrestling lingo (unless heel also comes from other areas)
According the the Cambridge English dictionary (I know) it is old-fashioned & informal...
Much like Professional Wrestling.
I grew up in the era of Big Daddy
Giant Haystack , Mick McManus and Billy Two Rivers fond memories
My stepgran was a big McManus fan. Very into the wrestling generally but especially him.
Granny loved Jackie Pallo(?sp) with his pony-tail.
On topic and a point I made on David's Saturday thread. A plurality of voters don't care whether Johnson is competent, has the nation's interests at heart, is principled etc. As long as that's the case, he and not Starmer will be PM.
Voters are making choices. They are choosing the charlatan. And it seems they know he is such.
Spot on. Let's stop giving the public an easy ride. They need to grow up.
It's the classic left-wing response - those nasty voters going blue.
It's the classic response of somebody who cares about this country and despairs of the dumbing down of its politics.
There's a word of difference between understanding why the public are making the choices they are, and figuring out how to persuade them to make different choices, and petulantly whining that the public are idiots who don't know what is good for them.
Starmer seems like he is attempting the former. I suspect many others are still indulging in the latter, because it makes them feel better as it is not then their fault for being unpersuasive.
As for despairing at the dumbing down of politics, I'm pretty sure all parties peddle unreaslistically simple and easy solutions to things, so I don't think anyone is in a position to throw stones at dumbing things down.
Perhaps I'm a hopeless idealist but when it comes to the dumbing down of politics - the fact of which I think is close to undeniable - I am not content to always be just shrugging my shoulders and saying "Oh well, that's how it is these days." If everyone does that it will only get worse. Some of the vox pops are so depressing. I want the public to wise up and take things a bit more seriously. I can't see how expressing that fervent hope is petulant. Maybe it's always been like this - I'm open to that notion - but I strongly sense not. And in any case this is now and now is what's most important.
I think it has always been like this. I've observed it for many years though vox pop have become more popular in recent years. I always tune out for vox pop. They irritate me so much. Yet very occasionally you get a pearl of wisdom.
Most popular chat in the UK is about football and gossip - in contrast to say most pubs in ireland where you can have a decent political argument.
I don't think YOU can change it. You can try talking politics in a UK pub but the response is likely to be "boring" or aggressive.
It's the culture. Perhaps if the soaps included decent political discussions. 'Til Death Do Us Part used to feature some fascinating political discussions.
It's odd. Being "apolitical" is generally deemed a positive thing. To me it totally isn't - it's a character flaw - but others don't see it that way. When people say "I'm not really into politics" it's usually with an air of self-congratulation. Offered in the same spirit as "When I have any spare time I love to bake a cake."
On topic and a point I made on David's Saturday thread. A plurality of voters don't care whether Johnson is competent, has the nation's interests at heart, is principled etc. As long as that's the case, he and not Starmer will be PM.
Voters are making choices. They are choosing the charlatan. And it seems they know he is such.
Spot on. Let's stop giving the public an easy ride. They need to grow up.
It's the classic left-wing response - those nasty voters going blue.
It's the classic response of somebody who cares about this country and despairs of the dumbing down of its politics.
There's a word of difference between understanding why the public are making the choices they are, and figuring out how to persuade them to make different choices, and petulantly whining that the public are idiots who don't know what is good for them.
Starmer seems like he is attempting the former. I suspect many others are still indulging in the latter, because it makes them feel better as it is not then their fault for being unpersuasive.
As for despairing at the dumbing down of politics, I'm pretty sure all parties peddle unreaslistically simple and easy solutions to things, so I don't think anyone is in a position to throw stones at dumbing things down.
Perhaps I'm a hopeless idealist but when it comes to the dumbing down of politics - the fact of which I think is close to undeniable - I am not content to always be just shrugging my shoulders and saying "Oh well, that's how it is these days." If everyone does that it will only get worse. Some of the vox pops are so depressing. I want the public to wise up and take things a bit more seriously. I can't see how expressing that fervent hope is petulant. Maybe it's always been like this - I'm open to that notion - but I strongly sense not. And in any case this is now and now is what's most important.
I think it has always been like this. I've observed it for many years though vox pop have become more popular in recent years. I always tune out for vox pop. They irritate me so much. Yet very occasionally you get a pearl of wisdom.
Most popular chat in the UK is about football and gossip - in contrast to say most pubs in ireland where you can have a decent political argument.
I don't think YOU can change it. You can try talking politics in a UK pub but the response is likely to be "boring" or aggressive.
It's the culture. Perhaps if the soaps included decent political discussions. 'Til Death Do Us Part used to feature some fascinating political discussions.
The obvious problem with vox pops is how on earth do they know they're getting a representative sample of views?
BTW do the people who want compulsory mask wearing in shops wear masks themselves when away from their homes ?
I rather suspect they don't.
But if they want to encourage mask wearing they should do.
Don't follow your 'logic'. I would imagine that people who want compulsory masks in shops would also wear masks when they go to shops. They may not want masks when outside, e.g. for a walk, as they are apparently needed less when outside. Why suspect others of being hypocrites? 'Projection'?
Because of the low numbers who actually wear masks in shops, less than 10% in my experience.
Which suggests that if there are significant numbers of people who want to make mask wearing compulsory then they're not putting their mask where their mouth is so to speak.
Of course its possible that 'make masks compulsory in shops' support is concentrated among people currently cowering in their own homes.
Whether making masks compulsory in shops would encourage such people to venture beyond their front door is somewhat doubtful.
To be fair to Starmer , his first 100 days have been in national trying circumstances to say the least . Also never been a fan of this 100 day thing (its crept into the corporate world as well with executives assessed on their first 100 days). Its a bit wanky and American.
Yes and no on the relevance of the wanky Americanism of 100 days.
For a US President, it does make a lot of sense in that of the 2922 days of a two term presidency, none offers more opportunities to progress your agenda in a checks and balances system than the first 100. You normally come in with a reasonably favourable Congress (as the last election was the day you were elected for the House, and a third of the Senate) and it normally only gets worse. You normally come in with goodwill (even Trump was just above water on favourability when he came in). And there is a long time stretching ahead when your patronage matters a lot (rather than being a fag end Presidency, certainly at the back end of the eight years, but to some extent for Trump where there are fairly serious doubts over reelection). Flunking the first 100 days not only means you miss the lowest hanging fruit, but also simply reflects poorly on your ability to make a good fist of the remaining 2822.
It matters much less here... but first impressions do still matter. Leaders don't fully escape early impressions. For Hague, for example, he never escaped being a lightweight prick in a baseball cap (even though his period as Foreign Secretary rather gave the lie to that). For Corbyn, he will always be seen as scruffy and tetchy, even though his stylists and media trainers largely corrected it over time - he was actually conspicuously well dressed towards the end of his leadership.
For Johnson, there was the slightly mixed blessing of a ruthlessness coming out that people hadn't seen before - he emerged a much less likable, avuncular figure, but probably also a more serious one. For Starmer, he's pretty clearly made a decent overall impression in terms of competence, but there's some danger of being seen as the competent leader of a shambolic party - which is clearly capping Labour's rating.
On topic and a point I made on David's Saturday thread. A plurality of voters don't care whether Johnson is competent, has the nation's interests at heart, is principled etc. As long as that's the case, he and not Starmer will be PM.
Voters are making choices. They are choosing the charlatan. And it seems they know he is such.
Spot on. Let's stop giving the public an easy ride. They need to grow up.
It's the classic left-wing response - those nasty voters going blue.
It's the classic response of somebody who cares about this country and despairs of the dumbing down of its politics.
There's a word of difference between understanding why the public are making the choices they are, and figuring out how to persuade them to make different choices, and petulantly whining that the public are idiots who don't know what is good for them.
Starmer seems like he is attempting the former. I suspect many others are still indulging in the latter, because it makes them feel better as it is not then their fault for being unpersuasive.
As for despairing at the dumbing down of politics, I'm pretty sure all parties peddle unreaslistically simple and easy solutions to things, so I don't think anyone is in a position to throw stones at dumbing things down.
Perhaps I'm a hopeless idealist but when it comes to the dumbing down of politics - the fact of which I think is close to undeniable - I am not content to always be just shrugging my shoulders and saying "Oh well, that's how it is these days." If everyone does that it will only get worse. Some of the vox pops are so depressing. I want the public to wise up and take things a bit more seriously. I can't see how expressing that fervent hope is petulant. Maybe it's always been like this - I'm open to that notion - but I strongly sense not. And in any case this is now and now is what's most important.
I think it has always been like this. I've observed it for many years though vox pop have become more popular in recent years. I always tune out for vox pop. They irritate me so much. Yet very occasionally you get a pearl of wisdom.
Most popular chat in the UK is about football and gossip - in contrast to say most pubs in ireland where you can have a decent political argument.
I don't think YOU can change it. You can try talking politics in a UK pub but the response is likely to be "boring" or aggressive.
It's the culture. Perhaps if the soaps included decent political discussions. 'Til Death Do Us Part used to feature some fascinating political discussions.
The obvious problem with vox pops is how on earth do they know they're getting a representative sample of views?
Quite. Who chooses them? Who edits them? They are presented as the popular view. But they are usually ignorant and banal. Maybe that is the popular view?
Excellent news imo . Totally not needed at this stage .
According to the Guardian wearing a mask in public is now mandatory in 120 countries. Having done sod all about it for months Boris's merry men have decided to leave it to the common sense of the British public. What could possibly go wrong?
Seems to me that we're back to pre-lockdown levels of PR from the Government, where they just say lots of things and hope the public listens to some of it. This can only end in disaster, the public as a whole are utter morons.
Seems to me that we're back to pre-lockdown levels of PR from the Government, where they just say lots of things and hope the public listens to some of it. This can only end in disaster, the public as a whole are utter morons.
And that attitude is why labour will never form a government
Excellent news imo . Totally not needed at this stage .
According to the Guardian wearing a mask in public is now mandatory in 120 countries. Having done sod all about it for months Boris's merry men have decided to leave it to the common sense of the British public. What could possibly go wrong?
Liz Truss is the new Amber Rudd: out of the loop on Brexit negotiations and mistakenly thinking Johnson and Cummings are serious about it.
Well Nigel always reckoned Cummings didn't really care about Brexit
Cummings doesn't want a No Deal Brexit. That was the problem with Farrage and Bernard Jenkin. That was why Jenkin was the first to stick the knife into Cummings over Barnard Castle.
It's also the reason I'm glad Cummings is still in place and confident we won't have a No Deal Brexit. They're playing the hand the same way as last time. But the EU are onto them and are playing hardball.
You know, I have been wondering about the entire denialist thing. ... Just not with them peddling dangerous bollocks afterwards.
Broadly agree with this. Covid denial hews closely to the forms of conspiracy theory thinking. In general conspiracy theorist fall into two groups: to feel safe; to feel important.
The first group construct conspiracy theories because they are scared by the wider world and a conspiracy theory imposes order on what are otherwise chaotic and frightening events. The 'feel important group' construct conspiracy theories as a reaction against, well, those damn 'elites' who control everything. The conspiracy theory acts as a way of feeling superior to others - you have knowledge and insight that other don't.
You can see both types in the ranks of the Covid Data Wranglers.
Excellent news imo . Totally not needed at this stage .
According to the Guardian wearing a mask in public is now mandatory in 120 countries. Having done sod all about it for months Boris's merry men have decided to leave it to the common sense of the British public. What could possibly go wrong?
I trust the common sense of the British people.
And your idea of common sense is the Corona Virus is no big deal and the economic damage due to a lockdown is much worse than the economic damage due to an unfettered Covid Pandemic.
On topic and a point I made on David's Saturday thread. A plurality of voters don't care whether Johnson is competent, has the nation's interests at heart, is principled etc. As long as that's the case, he and not Starmer will be PM.
Voters are making choices. They are choosing the charlatan. And it seems they know he is such.
Spot on. Let's stop giving the public an easy ride. They need to grow up.
It's the classic left-wing response - those nasty voters going blue.
It's the classic response of somebody who cares about this country and despairs of the dumbing down of its politics.
There's a word of difference between understanding why the public are making the choices they are, and figuring out how to persuade them to make different choices, and petulantly whining that the public are idiots who don't know what is good for them.
Starmer seems like he is attempting the former. I suspect many others are still indulging in the latter, because it makes them feel better as it is not then their fault for being unpersuasive.
As for despairing at the dumbing down of politics, I'm pretty sure all parties peddle unreaslistically simple and easy solutions to things, so I don't think anyone is in a position to throw stones at dumbing things down.
Perhaps I'm a hopeless idealist but when it comes to the dumbing down of politics - the fact of which I think is close to undeniable - I am not content to always be just shrugging my shoulders and saying "Oh well, that's how it is these days." If everyone does that it will only get worse. Some of the vox pops are so depressing. I want the public to wise up and take things a bit more seriously. I can't see how expressing that fervent hope is petulant. Maybe it's always been like this - I'm open to that notion - but I strongly sense not. And in any case this is now and now is what's most important.
Who says we should shrug our shoulders and say 'that's how it is'? Of course the dumbing of politics should be reversed. Nor did I say you were petulant, I said 'many others' were doing that by indulging in petulant whinging, which they absolutely are. But you were not expressing fervent or idealist hope about addressing it either, since your comment was 'they need to grow up', which is hardly taking a serious approach to the problem, as it displays no care to think about why people are attracted to dumbed down politics as you put it.
We should all hope politics is not dumbed down anymore than is necessary for we the public to actually understand significant issues, since we can hardly all be experts in everything, and it will be a long and not easy fight to do it. But I seriously doubt most people care to address the issue, since they respond to the dumbing down by dumbing things down differently, for instance by claiming it is just a matter of the public needing to grow up.
It's like when people say they want politicians to cooperate and compromise. Most of the time they don't, they want the other side to do what they want. And I have a suspicion that while there are idealists, many times people don't want less dumbed down politics, they want politics to align to what they want, and if that happens to not be dumbed down all the better.
Mostly fair comment. But I don't accept that saying "the public need to grow up" was a dumbed down comment. It was short, yes, but it was sincere and I think expresses accurately enough what I mean. Many of them, for example, are of the view that Boris Johnson "speaks his mind" and "tells it like it is". This is so clearly confusing a faintly risque, amiable persona with honesty. He is by all objective standards a particularly dishonest politician. People should know this if they took even the most rudimentary interest in the substance of things. So either they don't trouble to really think for themselves or they try but lack the wherewithal or - and this is perhaps the worst and was FF43's point that I was responding positively to in my original post - they have sussed him as a charlatan but they DO NOT CARE cos he's a bit of a laugh, he's a bit different, he's "Boris". And this makes me want to wring their necks. So there you go. That's ME telling it like it is. It's not PC, I know, but it's how I see it.
It's true the majority of the public are utter morons. I however am not advising Labour to take that attitude (definitely should not), or to air those views.
Luckily I am not a representative of the Labour Party, hence I can say what I want. The public are on the whole utter morons and that includes many Labour voters.
Look at leftie Twitter for a start, bunch of morons on there.
Misleading to say that more people consider Keir Starmer likeable than do Boris Johnson.
The question was "to what extent do you agree that xxx xxx is likeable"
40% said they agreed with that statement for Boris, and 40% said so for Starmer (although more said they "strongly agreed" for Boris so he edges it)
The don't know/don't cares were 23% for Boris and 39% for Starmer.
Boris is considered "brave" by more people (35/30), yet the net score favours Starmer. Nonsense if you are using it to think about who might win more votes!
I don't think it's the net score that matters, but the positives. Ed Miliband was more likeable than Nigel Farage, but was a less successful leader of his party
If two mates were on the pull, and walked into a bar where one was considered attractive by 40% , ugly by 40% and 20% had no opinion, they would be better off than the other being considered attractive by 30% ugly by 28% with 42% not caring, despite the net score favouring the latter
BTW do the people who want compulsory mask wearing in shops wear masks themselves when away from their homes ?
I rather suspect they don't.
But if they want to encourage mask wearing they should do.
Don't follow your 'logic'. I would imagine that people who want compulsory masks in shops would also wear masks when they go to shops. They may not want masks when outside, e.g. for a walk, as they are apparently needed less when outside. Why suspect others of being hypocrites? 'Projection'?
Because of the low numbers who actually wear masks in shops, less than 10% in my experience.
Which suggests that if there are significant numbers of people who want to make mask wearing compulsory then they're not putting their mask where their mouth is so to speak.
Of course its possible that 'make masks compulsory in shops' support is concentrated among people currently cowering in their own homes.
Whether making masks compulsory in shops would encourage such people to venture beyond their front door is somewhat doubtful.
Mask wearing in public mandatory now in 120 countries whilst we are still having a nice debate about it. IMO it should have been done as a temporary precaution as shops reopened
Given how bad this government's record is so far vis a vis other countries Johnson is taking a hell of a risk. When the dust settles Trump, Bolsarno and Johnson are going to be the 3 leaders that will be considered to have failed in their response.
It's true the majority of the public are utter morons. I however am not advising Labour to take that attitude (definitely should not), or to air those views.
Luckily I am not a representative of the Labour Party, hence I can say what I want. The public are on the whole utter morons and that includes many Labour voters.
Look at leftie Twitter for a start, bunch of morons on there.
I bet I will get some conflicted responses to this post
Excellent news imo . Totally not needed at this stage .
According to the Guardian wearing a mask in public is now mandatory in 120 countries. Having done sod all about it for months Boris's merry men have decided to leave it to the common sense of the British public. What could possibly go wrong?
BTW do the people who want compulsory mask wearing in shops wear masks themselves when away from their homes ?
I rather suspect they don't.
But if they want to encourage mask wearing they should do.
Don't follow your 'logic'. I would imagine that people who want compulsory masks in shops would also wear masks when they go to shops. They may not want masks when outside, e.g. for a walk, as they are apparently needed less when outside. Why suspect others of being hypocrites? 'Projection'?
Because of the low numbers who actually wear masks in shops, less than 10% in my experience.
Which suggests that if there are significant numbers of people who want to make mask wearing compulsory then they're not putting their mask where their mouth is so to speak.
Of course its possible that 'make masks compulsory in shops' support is concentrated among people currently cowering in their own homes.
Whether making masks compulsory in shops would encourage such people to venture beyond their front door is somewhat doubtful.
Mask wearing in public mandatory now in 120 countries whilst we are still having a nice debate about it. IMO it should have been done as a temporary precaution as shops reopened
Given how bad this government's record is so far vis a vis other countries Johnson is taking a hell of a risk. When the dust settles Trump, Bolsarno and Johnson are going to be the 3 leaders that will be considered to have failed in their response.
You know, I have been wondering about the entire denialist thing.
- It's not an issue, the death rate's no worse than any other year - oops, try... - It's only killing those at death's door. Okay, maybe not, let's try... - The lockdown isn't working, so forget doing it, the death rate should have turned by now. Oh. Let's try... - Only one in ten thousand will really die, we won't have... oh... - The infection rate turned around quite quickly after lockdown, so counting back, it was probably only the fact we got almost everyone possible working from home, closed restaurants, cinemas, schools, pubs, sports facilities, gyms, and instituted social distancing that did it instead. So we don't need any of that. Hang on. Ummm. - It's unnecessary, look at Sweden, their economy is... oh, worse than their neighbours who locked down and had a tenth the death rate. Um. - Look, if you're younger and without any co-morbidities, and get hospital assistance if it's needed, you'll almost certainly recover (like if you're shot by a pistol somewhere other than your head or chest). So it's as if your completely unaffected, and who cares about infecting other people, anyway? Just gloss over the fact that getting so ill you'll be hospitalised isn't as vanishingly unlikely as we'd like you to think, forget about the poor bastards you'd infect, and ignore the way so many people have lingering damage and on-going health problems over all demographics. Why can't we pretend nothing's happened and go to the pub just like before and stuff?
I did assume it was all the "I'm all right Jack, I want to be able to do whatever I could do before because I had it nice then, thank you very much," without caring for the other poor bastards that aren't as healthy, but the hospitalisation rates across demographics and the lingering effects made that look unlikely.
Now I think it's a combination of fear and a desperate desire for things to be as they were.
After all, it's an invisible menace. It's out there. You don't know where. You don't know when you'll be affected - or if you'll be affected. But if it just so happened that I happen to be safe from it, by my age and health, then it's okay. Nothing to fear. And, actually, if I can convince myself of this, then it's only a short step to convincing myself that we can go back to normal and I can resume my happy, comfortable life. Oh, others may die, but, as Lord Farquad said in Shrek, for many people: "That's a sacrifice I'm willing to make."
Humans rationalise - we pick the conclusion we want and come up with a route to get there. We can convince ourselves of almost anything, if we close our eyes and try hard enough. Cherry pick the facts you want to believe. Make those who say what you want to hear into authoritative prophets. Torture the data and it will admit anything. And hey, I'm fine with people doing whatever they need to do to overcome fear.
Just not with them peddling dangerous bollocks afterwards.
Thank you for putting it so well. What is so frustrating with the "denialist" arguments is that no matter how often the argumets are rebutted, the original arguments are just repeated and repeated.
"The NHS didn't meltdown" - "That's because the government imposed a lockdown" "There have only been 44,000 deaths from Covid in the UK" - "That's because the government imposed a lockdown" "The NHS didn't meltdown" - "That's because the government imposed a lockdown" "There have only been 44,000 deaths from Covid in the UK" - "That's because the government imposed a lockdown"
Excellent news imo . Totally not needed at this stage .
According to the Guardian wearing a mask in public is now mandatory in 120 countries. Having done sod all about it for months Boris's merry men have decided to leave it to the common sense of the British public. What could possibly go wrong?
I trust the common sense of the British people.
I really hope that is meant to be ironic.
Yeah I got attacked for saying the public are morons (which I thought was actually pretty fair, I didn't say any particular voting group was full of morons, just on the whole people are) but you look at some of the things people do and you have to find it difficult to conclude otherwise.
"COVID-19 Cases Are Rising, So Why Are Deaths Flatlining? The gap between soaring cases and falling deaths is being weaponized by the right to claim a hollow victory in the face of shameless failure. What’s really going on?
Excellent news imo . Totally not needed at this stage .
According to the Guardian wearing a mask in public is now mandatory in 120 countries. Having done sod all about it for months Boris's merry men have decided to leave it to the common sense of the British public. What could possibly go wrong?
I trust the common sense of the British people.
I really hope that is meant to be ironic.
Yeah I got attacked for saying the public are morons (which I thought was actually pretty fair, I didn't say any particular voting group was full of morons, just on the whole people are) but you look at some of the things people do and you have to find it difficult to conclude otherwise.
BTW do the people who want compulsory mask wearing in shops wear masks themselves when away from their homes ?
I rather suspect they don't.
But if they want to encourage mask wearing they should do.
Don't follow your 'logic'. I would imagine that people who want compulsory masks in shops would also wear masks when they go to shops. They may not want masks when outside, e.g. for a walk, as they are apparently needed less when outside. Why suspect others of being hypocrites? 'Projection'?
Because of the low numbers who actually wear masks in shops, less than 10% in my experience.
Which suggests that if there are significant numbers of people who want to make mask wearing compulsory then they're not putting their mask where their mouth is so to speak.
Of course its possible that 'make masks compulsory in shops' support is concentrated among people currently cowering in their own homes.
Whether making masks compulsory in shops would encourage such people to venture beyond their front door is somewhat doubtful.
Mask wearing in public mandatory now in 120 countries whilst we are still having a nice debate about it. IMO it should have been done as a temporary precaution as shops reopened
Given how bad this government's record is so far vis a vis other countries Johnson is taking a hell of a risk. When the dust settles Trump, Bolsarno and Johnson are going to be the 3 leaders that will be considered to have failed in their response.
Glad I don't live in England nowadays.
Don't worry, according to Andy JS the common sense of the general public will see us through. Nothing to worry about then. I suspect that Andy JS has not mingled much with the general public over the last few months.
The BXP response to the Tory capitulation will be interesting.
Recall that BXP a year ago had lead some of the opinion polls, with the Tories on what, sub 25%?
All eyes on Nigel in the coming few months
I had a twitter debate with a pro-Brexit chap. Insisted there would be no problems at the ports - no delays, no costs and therefore no worries. Even posted a link to Dover's document detailing that trucks would have to do a load of paperwork (cost) and wouldn't be allowed near the port until it was all sorted and a QR code ready to be scanned (delay). Like the MP for Ashford he didn't get that building a huge fuck-off truck park at Ashford was neccesary to park them all up and get the paperwork done so that Dover doesn't immediately clog up. Also, we can have faith because Calais says the border will operate smoothly. Yes, smoothly like the external border with checks, not smoothly like there is no border now.
The government knows all this.
So the question as to whether they capitulate is this. Do they think Farage is irrelevant? Its easy to do a deal that hands your arse to the EU, not understand that and then claim victory. They did so when sticking a border down the Irish Sea. So a deal with the EU where we formally exit the EEA but remain directly adjacent to the EEA with an open door could be spun as WE HAVE LEFT. With our sovereign choices made to leave the door wide open as Shitty Priti did whilst "they can't shut their border" states shut theirs. Whether it will be depends on the Nigel.
As we have seen, certain Tories don't give a monkeys toss about this country. Only about the Tory Party. If that means destroying the economy and the union, why would the Conservative and Unionist Party not want to do that if it means power?
"COVID-19 Cases Are Rising, So Why Are Deaths Flatlining? The gap between soaring cases and falling deaths is being weaponized by the right to claim a hollow victory in the face of shameless failure. What’s really going on?
"COVID-19 Cases Are Rising, So Why Are Deaths Flatlining? The gap between soaring cases and falling deaths is being weaponized by the right to claim a hollow victory in the face of shameless failure. What’s really going on?
I've only come on to say that I think the government are a complete bunch of morons. Having people work from home as much as possible is the single easiest and beneficial thing you can do to control Covid, and to say that people should be back commuting to offices is the stupidest thing I've ever heard.
The best chance of being able to have schools back in full, and keep the virus under control, is to do as much as possible elsewhere to reduce the virus spread. It's almost like they don't want to be left out of the second waves picking up all over the place.
Such nonsense to show it like this when more people agree that Boris is "brave"
These are the positive scores. Keir edges it overall
As more people have got to know Keir, the MORE positive his ratings have become. So playing the odds, he's got more popularity to gain (or if you're cynical, lose). Johnson does not, most people know who he is.
Excellent news imo . Totally not needed at this stage .
According to the Guardian wearing a mask in public is now mandatory in 120 countries. Having done sod all about it for months Boris's merry men have decided to leave it to the common sense of the British public. What could possibly go wrong?
I trust the common sense of the British people.
I really hope that is meant to be ironic.
Yeah I got attacked for saying the public are morons (which I thought was actually pretty fair, I didn't say any particular voting group was full of morons, just on the whole people are) but you look at some of the things people do and you have to find it difficult to conclude otherwise.
If you want to lose confidence in the public
People on the whole may well be morons, I know I am sometimes, but politicians and their supporters cannot say they are morons and treat them like morons if they are going to gain their support. That doesn't mean blowing smoke up their arses, that will only work so far and for so long, but it requires an amount of tact and understanding that we're all a little dumb sometimes.
Excellent news imo . Totally not needed at this stage .
According to the Guardian wearing a mask in public is now mandatory in 120 countries. Having done sod all about it for months Boris's merry men have decided to leave it to the common sense of the British public. What could possibly go wrong?
I trust the common sense of the British people.
I really hope that is meant to be ironic.
Yeah I got attacked for saying the public are morons (which I thought was actually pretty fair, I didn't say any particular voting group was full of morons, just on the whole people are) but you look at some of the things people do and you have to find it difficult to conclude otherwise.
If you want to lose confidence in the public
People on the whole may well be morons, I know I am sometimes, but politicians and their supporters cannot say they are morons and treat them like morons if they are going to gain their support. That doesn't mean blowing smoke up their arses, that will only work so far and for so long, but it requires an amount of tact and understanding that we're all a little dumb sometimes.
And I acknowledged that above - I am not advising Labour to take my advice, I am just stating what I perceive to the be the case.
As carlottavance says I'm surprised the number is not higher. Be pretty funny if the votes from here swung the election. I recall from some foreign elections how the expat vote can be highly polarised, but in different ways, from country to country.
Excellent news imo . Totally not needed at this stage .
According to the Guardian wearing a mask in public is now mandatory in 120 countries. Having done sod all about it for months Boris's merry men have decided to leave it to the common sense of the British public. What could possibly go wrong?
I trust the common sense of the British people.
Very few masks in evidence round here today, and a very marked decline even from yesterday. Not sure why tbh. Though if flying ants carry the coronavirus, we'll all be dead by August; ants are everywhere today.
"COVID-19 Cases Are Rising, So Why Are Deaths Flatlining? The gap between soaring cases and falling deaths is being weaponized by the right to claim a hollow victory in the face of shameless failure. What’s really going on?
Excellent news imo . Totally not needed at this stage .
According to the Guardian wearing a mask in public is now mandatory in 120 countries. Having done sod all about it for months Boris's merry men have decided to leave it to the common sense of the British public. What could possibly go wrong?
I trust the common sense of the British people.
I really hope that is meant to be ironic.
Yeah I got attacked for saying the public are morons (which I thought was actually pretty fair, I didn't say any particular voting group was full of morons, just on the whole people are) but you look at some of the things people do and you have to find it difficult to conclude otherwise.
Misleading to say that more people consider Keir Starmer likeable than do Boris Johnson.
The question was "to what extent do you agree that xxx xxx is likeable"
40% said they agreed with that statement for Boris, and 40% said so for Starmer (although more said they "strongly agreed" for Boris so he edges it)
The don't know/don't cares were 23% for Boris and 39% for Starmer.
Boris is considered "brave" by more people (35/30), yet the net score favours Starmer. Nonsense if you are using it to think about who might win more votes!
I don't think it's the net score that matters, but the positives. Ed Miliband was more likeable than Nigel Farage, but was a less successful leader of his party
If two mates were on the pull, and walked into a bar where one was considered attractive by 40% , ugly by 40% and 20% had no opinion, they would be better off than the other being considered attractive by 30% ugly by 28% with 42% not caring, despite the net score favouring the latter
That does depend on there being no correlation between not caring or knowing and not voting.
OT the wildely-trailed programme about the 13-year-old girl who did the sums to prove Spitfires and Hurricanes needed eight machine guns rather than the four originally planned was disappointing: a rambling, repetitive and heavily padded half hour badly in need of editing down to ten minutes that actually told the story.
BBC News Channel today, Sunday 12th July at 10:30am and 4:30pm.
Yep, the BBC really seem to have the bit between their teeth on that one. The maths of four .303 Brownings (a fairly weedy offensive weapon) v. eight doesn't seem that complicated, even with eight mgs RAF pilots reported problems in destroying the enemy. The 109Es they were flying against had either four mgs or two mgs & two cannons, there doesn't seem to be any conclusive evidence that they suffered for it.
In a spasm of insomnia I caught a weird BBC World Service programme called The People's Plane, apparently an 11 (!) part series on the Spitfire. After them saying the Spit as the world's fastest and most powerful fighter made a decisive difference in the BoB shooting down Luftwaffe aircraft with its six machine guns, I kinda gave up.
The Spitfire appears to have become a semi-religious fetish object (Vera Lynn funeral, Colonel Tom flypast, Thank U NHS guff) for the Anglo-British tribe, Dom's probably factored the BoB flight into his strategising: reach for the sky voters, rather than look at the mess of pottage that you sold your vote for.
Excellent news imo . Totally not needed at this stage .
According to the Guardian wearing a mask in public is now mandatory in 120 countries. Having done sod all about it for months Boris's merry men have decided to leave it to the common sense of the British public. What could possibly go wrong?
I trust the common sense of the British people.
I really hope that is meant to be ironic.
I just left the park and there was some family who had lugged a gas cylinder and full sized barbecue there, and were setting it all up right under a tree, with people exercising their dogs all around.
Excellent news imo . Totally not needed at this stage .
According to the Guardian wearing a mask in public is now mandatory in 120 countries. Having done sod all about it for months Boris's merry men have decided to leave it to the common sense of the British public. What could possibly go wrong?
I trust the common sense of the British people.
Very few masks in evidence round here today, and a very marked decline even from yesterday. Not sure why tbh. Though if flying ants carry the coronavirus, we'll all be dead by August; ants are everywhere today.
There were a few people without masks in Tesco’s this morning. As this is Stalig Scotland this is illegal but no one seemed that bothered about it. I had one on because I comply with even stupid laws on the whole. It makes the experience even more unpleasant and that is saying something. Given the level of Covid infection in Tayside I am not sure any lives were saved.
The polls are hardly moving right now - everything is MoE. The Tory lead could be anything from four points to 10 points, but Sunak's mini budget did not give them a lift, despite the waterfalls of cash and the adulatory headlines.
Four months after Corbyn, Tory hubris, arrogance and incompetence have given Labour a lift because the party has a credible leader. But Labour will have to start doing some heavy lifting itself at some point. Starmer cannot do it alone. The party as a whole has spent years losing the trust of key demographics. Voters will need to see real and sustained evidence of top to bottom change before Labour starts leading in the polls.
I rather disagree. Labour was leading under Corbyn - despite all the baggage he carried - as late as May 2019.
Misleading to say that more people consider Keir Starmer likeable than do Boris Johnson.
The question was "to what extent do you agree that xxx xxx is likeable"
40% said they agreed with that statement for Boris, and 40% said so for Starmer (although more said they "strongly agreed" for Boris so he edges it)
The don't know/don't cares were 23% for Boris and 39% for Starmer.
Boris is considered "brave" by more people (35/30), yet the net score favours Starmer. Nonsense if you are using it to think about who might win more votes!
I don't think it's the net score that matters, but the positives. Ed Miliband was more likeable than Nigel Farage, but was a less successful leader of his party
If two mates were on the pull, and walked into a bar where one was considered attractive by 40% , ugly by 40% and 20% had no opinion, they would be better off than the other being considered attractive by 30% ugly by 28% with 42% not caring, despite the net score favouring the latter
That does depend on there being no correlation between not caring or knowing and not voting.
"COVID-19 Cases Are Rising, So Why Are Deaths Flatlining? The gap between soaring cases and falling deaths is being weaponized by the right to claim a hollow victory in the face of shameless failure. What’s really going on?
If you look at the number of deaths in the USA there has been a clear increase over the last week.
Yes, but much less than you would expect, given that some states started spiking weeks back. That article gives a useful overview of other issues also in play.
Re- the prospect of masks soon being required in shops. I see that those with respiratory conditions would be exempt from such regulations, but the term 'respiratory condition' has not been clearly defined. Would asthmatics or sufferers of COPD - or anyone relying on an inhaler - be exempt?
Dominic Cummings is recruiting a new team of crack data scientists who will soon prove the silent (because unpolled) majority supports Boris. This is, after all, how Brexit was won.
Oh no, imagine the horror of governments making decisions based on data and science.
Much better to just ask all the PPE and liberal arts graduates how they *feel* about any given subject.
Cummings knows nothing about science. He uses pseudo scientific cliches to dress up his opinions and justify his ideological schemes.
They’re recruiting actual scientists.
You can recruit all the 'actual' you want but if they are managed by a control freak with a specific world view who demands totally loyalty, zero dissent and enforced group think then you aren't going to get decent answers.
The one campaign where we know he used data scientists he unexpectedly won.
That does suggest he works well with them or has an ability to spot patterns no one else sees. I suspect the former
Unexpectedly won? The side that regularly polled ahead over the previous decade. That posted regular poll leads during the campaign period. That had the majority of the press on its side?
That one?
Unexpectedly?
The one where bettors made a lot of money by betting against the political consensus. Yep.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing my friend
It's not hindsight to observe that most of the polling in the lead up to referendum day indicated that Leave would win.
And yet, somehow, it came as a shock to the political and media classes.
Expectations are not necessarily aligned with facts.
And it is *precisely* hindsight to say “oh but it was obvious” and pick out the data that proves it
It was obvious. That the political and media class missed it is not a huge surprise. The privileged elites that control this country are not exactly tuned in. They seem to be missing what is going on in Scotland currently, too.
It came as a surprise to me. I thought we'd get close, something like 46-48%, but I thought Remain would edge it.
2015 saw a huge shift towards Remain in polling. Granted, the MORI poll showing Remain ahead by 44% was an outlier, but there were a lot showing Remain ahead 20 - 25%. The lead narrowed in 2016, but Leave only moved ahead about three weeks before the vote, and then the polls swung back to Remain in the last week. I expected the status quo to prevail.
Re- the prospect of masks soon being required in shops. I see that those with respiratory conditions would be exempt from such regulations, but the term 'respiratory condition' has not been clearly defined. Would asthmatics or sufferers of COPD - or anyone relying on an inhaler - be exempt?
In the park last year we had a clutch of seven ducklings, one of which was albino and yellow when young (technically I think it was leucism rather than albinism). Three of them made it to adulthood including the yellow one, which grew up almost white.
Anyhow this year it’s now a mother, with five ducklings, four of which are completely yellow and one is the normal brown. I am surprised that this mutation passed on so readily, given how rare such ducks are generally.
Misleading to say that more people consider Keir Starmer likeable than do Boris Johnson.
The question was "to what extent do you agree that xxx xxx is likeable"
40% said they agreed with that statement for Boris, and 40% said so for Starmer (although more said they "strongly agreed" for Boris so he edges it)
The don't know/don't cares were 23% for Boris and 39% for Starmer.
Boris is considered "brave" by more people (35/30), yet the net score favours Starmer. Nonsense if you are using it to think about who might win more votes!
I don't think it's the net score that matters, but the positives. Ed Miliband was more likeable than Nigel Farage, but was a less successful leader of his party
If two mates were on the pull, and walked into a bar where one was considered attractive by 40% , ugly by 40% and 20% had no opinion, they would be better off than the other being considered attractive by 30% ugly by 28% with 42% not caring, despite the net score favouring the latter
That does depend on there being no correlation between not caring or knowing and not voting.
And not caring and having sex I suppose.
Isam is assuming that voting is like making love to a beautiful woman.
Not sure it is myself. It's not your civic duty to make love to a beautiful woman.
Misleading to say that more people consider Keir Starmer likeable than do Boris Johnson.
The question was "to what extent do you agree that xxx xxx is likeable"
40% said they agreed with that statement for Boris, and 40% said so for Starmer (although more said they "strongly agreed" for Boris so he edges it)
The don't know/don't cares were 23% for Boris and 39% for Starmer.
Boris is considered "brave" by more people (35/30), yet the net score favours Starmer. Nonsense if you are using it to think about who might win more votes!
I don't think it's the net score that matters, but the positives. Ed Miliband was more likeable than Nigel Farage, but was a less successful leader of his party
If two mates were on the pull, and walked into a bar where one was considered attractive by 40% , ugly by 40% and 20% had no opinion, they would be better off than the other being considered attractive by 30% ugly by 28% with 42% not caring, despite the net score favouring the latter
That does depend on there being no correlation between not caring or knowing and not voting.
And not caring and having sex I suppose.
Isam is assuming that voting is like making love to a beautiful woman.
Not sure it is myself. It's not your civic duty to make love to a beautiful woman.
Re- the prospect of masks soon being required in shops. I see that those with respiratory conditions would be exempt from such regulations, but the term 'respiratory condition' has not been clearly defined. Would asthmatics or sufferers of COPD - or anyone relying on an inhaler - be exempt?
Covid-19 is a respiratory condition. Or it can be.
Labour on Marr: now is not the time to be putting up taxes
Hmmm
Labour have been caught out before when telling something slightly true about tax rises. I don't think they will try that again. And they need top keep thier indignation dry for if and when taxes do rise. BTW the debt and the deficit is so huge that steep tax rises in the ordinary sense would not begin to deal with it.
Whoever is in government when the luck runs out on borrowing, interest rates etc is in for an interesting time.
Misleading to say that more people consider Keir Starmer likeable than do Boris Johnson.
The question was "to what extent do you agree that xxx xxx is likeable"
40% said they agreed with that statement for Boris, and 40% said so for Starmer (although more said they "strongly agreed" for Boris so he edges it)
The don't know/don't cares were 23% for Boris and 39% for Starmer.
Boris is considered "brave" by more people (35/30), yet the net score favours Starmer. Nonsense if you are using it to think about who might win more votes!
I don't think it's the net score that matters, but the positives. Ed Miliband was more likeable than Nigel Farage, but was a less successful leader of his party
If two mates were on the pull, and walked into a bar where one was considered attractive by 40% , ugly by 40% and 20% had no opinion, they would be better off than the other being considered attractive by 30% ugly by 28% with 42% not caring, despite the net score favouring the latter
That does depend on there being no correlation between not caring or knowing and not voting.
And not caring and having sex I suppose.
Isam is assuming that voting is like making love to a beautiful woman.
Not sure it is myself. It's not your civic duty to make love to a beautiful woman.
The polls are hardly moving right now - everything is MoE. The Tory lead could be anything from four points to 10 points, but Sunak's mini budget did not give them a lift, despite the waterfalls of cash and the adulatory headlines.
Four months after Corbyn, Tory hubris, arrogance and incompetence have given Labour a lift because the party has a credible leader. But Labour will have to start doing some heavy lifting itself at some point. Starmer cannot do it alone. The party as a whole has spent years losing the trust of key demographics. Voters will need to see real and sustained evidence of top to bottom change before Labour starts leading in the polls.
I rather disagree. Labour was leading under Corbyn - despite all the baggage he carried - as late as May 2019.
Yes. People do not give enough credit to Johnson for turning it around so completely. And to the extent he was gifted it it was more by the Remain Alliance in parliament than by Jeremy Corbyn imo. Still, we've done this one to death.
Dominic Cummings is recruiting a new team of crack data scientists who will soon prove the silent (because unpolled) majority supports Boris. This is, after all, how Brexit was won.
Oh no, imagine the horror of governments making decisions based on data and science.
Much better to just ask all the PPE and liberal arts graduates how they *feel* about any given subject.
Cummings knows nothing about science. He uses pseudo scientific cliches to dress up his opinions and justify his ideological schemes.
They’re recruiting actual scientists.
You can recruit all the 'actual' you want but if they are managed by a control freak with a specific world view who demands totally loyalty, zero dissent and enforced group think then you aren't going to get decent answers.
The one campaign where we know he used data scientists he unexpectedly won.
That does suggest he works well with them or has an ability to spot patterns no one else sees. I suspect the former
Unexpectedly won? The side that regularly polled ahead over the previous decade. That posted regular poll leads during the campaign period. That had the majority of the press on its side?
That one?
Unexpectedly?
The one where bettors made a lot of money by betting against the political consensus. Yep.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing my friend
It's not hindsight to observe that most of the polling in the lead up to referendum day indicated that Leave would win.
And yet, somehow, it came as a shock to the political and media classes.
Expectations are not necessarily aligned with facts.
And it is *precisely* hindsight to say “oh but it was obvious” and pick out the data that proves it
It was obvious. That the political and media class missed it is not a huge surprise. The privileged elites that control this country are not exactly tuned in. They seem to be missing what is going on in Scotland currently, too.
It came as a surprise to me. I thought we'd get close, something like 46-48%, but I thought Remain would edge it.
2015 saw a huge shift towards Remain in polling. Granted, the MORI poll showing Remain ahead by 44% was an outlier, but there were a lot showing Remain ahead 20 - 25%. The lead narrowed in 2016, but Leave only moved ahead about three weeks before the vote, and then the polls swung back to Remain in the last week. I expected the status quo to prevail.
Leave didn't go odds on to win until the votes were in, and were 10/1 or bigger on the day. That makes it more unexpected than expected to me
OT the wildely-trailed programme about the 13-year-old girl who did the sums to prove Spitfires and Hurricanes needed eight machine guns rather than the four originally planned was disappointing: a rambling, repetitive and heavily padded half hour badly in need of editing down to ten minutes that actually told the story.
BBC News Channel today, Sunday 12th July at 10:30am and 4:30pm.
Yep, the BBC really seem to have the bit between their teeth on that one. The maths of four .303 Brownings (a fairly weedy offensive weapon) v. eight doesn't seem that complicated, even with eight mgs RAF pilots reported problems in destroying the enemy. The 109Es they were flying against had either four mgs or two mgs & two cannons, there doesn't seem to be any conclusive evidence that they suffered for it.
In a spasm of insomnia I caught a weird BBC World Service programme called The People's Plane, apparently an 11 (!) part series on the Spitfire. After them saying the Spit as the world's fastest and most powerful fighter made a decisive difference in the BoB shooting down Luftwaffe aircraft with its six machine guns, I kinda gave up.
The Spitfire appears to have become a semi-religious fetish object (Vera Lynn funeral, Colonel Tom flypast, Thank U NHS guff) for the Anglo-British tribe, Dom's probably factored the BoB flight into his strategising: reach for the sky voters, rather than look at the mess of pottage that you sold your vote for.
I genuinely believe that England is in the grip of some sort of mass psychosis of which the 1940sisation of everything is just one manifestation.
Although Starmer is popular, Johnson's ratings are still pretty good. Hence, he's preferred as PM, and the Conservatives lead.
GE tomorrow - Cons by 50 seats.
I'm always fairly sceptical about that line when there so obviously isn't going to be an election tomorrow (and almost certainly isn't until 2024 as the Government has a large majority).
Of course a party would always prefer to be a few points ahead in the polls than a few behind, and thus have the comfort blanket of "if there was an election tomorrow..." But at this point in the electoral cycle, I think a party would probably prefer the strong leadership ratings (which might not YET translate to party support but represents a receptive audience) than a slight lead but with poor ratings.
Remember Miliband's Labour led for long periods 2010-15 without ever really convincing people he was a credible prospective PM (and he ultimately fell short mainly for that reason).
It's really hard to say in a world where doors aren't being knocked on etc. But it does feel as if there are a lot of people with positive views about Starmer who are not yet sold on Labour but are willing to have a conversation about it for the first time in a while.
Starmer/Labour seems to be trying its very best to currently not commit to anything - and right now polling wise for Starmer that's working but of course Labour is still way behind.
So at some point Starmer is going to have to tell us what he thinks. But perhaps that view is going to upset a lot of people in the Labour Party, hence why he is staying quiet for now
With respect an average Tory lead of 5%/6% does not mean that Labour is 'way behind' - it is already pretty close in most polls!
Although Starmer is popular, Johnson's ratings are still pretty good. Hence, he's preferred as PM, and the Conservatives lead.
GE tomorrow - Cons by 50 seats.
I'm always fairly sceptical about that line when there so obviously isn't going to be an election tomorrow (and almost certainly isn't until 2024 as the Government has a large majority).
Of course a party would always prefer to be a few points ahead in the polls than a few behind, and thus have the comfort blanket of "if there was an election tomorrow..." But at this point in the electoral cycle, I think a party would probably prefer the strong leadership ratings (which might not YET translate to party support but represents a receptive audience) than a slight lead but with poor ratings.
Remember Miliband's Labour led for long periods 2010-15 without ever really convincing people he was a credible prospective PM (and he ultimately fell short mainly for that reason).
It's really hard to say in a world where doors aren't being knocked on etc. But it does feel as if there are a lot of people with positive views about Starmer who are not yet sold on Labour but are willing to have a conversation about it for the first time in a while.
Miliband also led on leader ratings (with IPSOS MORI at least) for a year or so
Excellent news imo . Totally not needed at this stage .
According to the Guardian wearing a mask in public is now mandatory in 120 countries. Having done sod all about it for months Boris's merry men have decided to leave it to the common sense of the British public. What could possibly go wrong?
I trust the common sense of the British people.
I really hope that is meant to be ironic.
Yeah I got attacked for saying the public are morons (which I thought was actually pretty fair, I didn't say any particular voting group was full of morons, just on the whole people are) but you look at some of the things people do and you have to find it difficult to conclude otherwise.
If you want to lose confidence in the public
People on the whole may well be morons, I know I am sometimes, but politicians and their supporters cannot say they are morons and treat them like morons if they are going to gain their support. That doesn't mean blowing smoke up their arses, that will only work so far and for so long, but it requires an amount of tact and understanding that we're all a little dumb sometimes.
The Tories seem to be doing very well indeed on it so far.
The polls are hardly moving right now - everything is MoE. The Tory lead could be anything from four points to 10 points, but Sunak's mini budget did not give them a lift, despite the waterfalls of cash and the adulatory headlines.
Four months after Corbyn, Tory hubris, arrogance and incompetence have given Labour a lift because the party has a credible leader. But Labour will have to start doing some heavy lifting itself at some point. Starmer cannot do it alone. The party as a whole has spent years losing the trust of key demographics. Voters will need to see real and sustained evidence of top to bottom change before Labour starts leading in the polls.
I rather disagree. Labour was leading under Corbyn - despite all the baggage he carried - as late as May 2019.
Yes. People do not give enough credit to Johnson for turning it around so completely. And to the extent he was gifted it it was more by the Remain Alliance in parliament than by Jeremy Corbyn imo. Still, we've done this one to death.
Indeed - though I suspect that support for Johnson personally has unwound to a greater extent than you suggest. Many who voted for him now see him as a malign shyster.
Comments
...is at the root of much of this, I think.
https://twitter.com/JamesCrisp6/status/1282060190695784450?s=20
https://twitter.com/JamesCrisp6/status/1282060207447834627?s=20
https://twitter.com/JamesCrisp6/status/1282060222517915649?s=20
Grandad was a big Kendo Nagasaki man.
Which suggests that if there are significant numbers of people who want to make mask wearing compulsory then they're not putting their mask where their mouth is so to speak.
Of course its possible that 'make masks compulsory in shops' support is concentrated among people currently cowering in their own homes.
Whether making masks compulsory in shops would encourage such people to venture beyond their front door is somewhat doubtful.
Minister’s comments spark confusion over government plans to stem spread of Covid-19"
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/12/face-masks-shops-will-not-be-mandatory-england-gove-suggests
For a US President, it does make a lot of sense in that of the 2922 days of a two term presidency, none offers more opportunities to progress your agenda in a checks and balances system than the first 100. You normally come in with a reasonably favourable Congress (as the last election was the day you were elected for the House, and a third of the Senate) and it normally only gets worse. You normally come in with goodwill (even Trump was just above water on favourability when he came in). And there is a long time stretching ahead when your patronage matters a lot (rather than being a fag end Presidency, certainly at the back end of the eight years, but to some extent for Trump where there are fairly serious doubts over reelection). Flunking the first 100 days not only means you miss the lowest hanging fruit, but also simply reflects poorly on your ability to make a good fist of the remaining 2822.
It matters much less here... but first impressions do still matter. Leaders don't fully escape early impressions. For Hague, for example, he never escaped being a lightweight prick in a baseball cap (even though his period as Foreign Secretary rather gave the lie to that). For Corbyn, he will always be seen as scruffy and tetchy, even though his stylists and media trainers largely corrected it over time - he was actually conspicuously well dressed towards the end of his leadership.
For Johnson, there was the slightly mixed blessing of a ruthlessness coming out that people hadn't seen before - he emerged a much less likable, avuncular figure, but probably also a more serious one. For Starmer, he's pretty clearly made a decent overall impression in terms of competence, but there's some danger of being seen as the competent leader of a shambolic party - which is clearly capping Labour's rating.
Go with adequate of money.
Buy normal selection of goods.
Do you have 0% of it or 40% of it left?
It's also the reason I'm glad Cummings is still in place and confident we won't have a No Deal Brexit. They're playing the hand the same way as last time. But the EU are onto them and are playing hardball.
The first group construct conspiracy theories because they are scared by the wider world and a conspiracy theory imposes order on what are otherwise chaotic and frightening events. The 'feel important group' construct conspiracy theories as a reaction against, well, those damn 'elites' who control everything. The conspiracy theory acts as a way of feeling superior to others - you have knowledge and insight that other don't.
You can see both types in the ranks of the Covid Data Wranglers.
Luckily I am not a representative of the Labour Party, hence I can say what I want. The public are on the whole utter morons and that includes many Labour voters.
Look at leftie Twitter for a start, bunch of morons on there.
The question was "to what extent do you agree that xxx xxx is likeable"
40% said they agreed with that statement for Boris, and 40% said so for Starmer (although more said they "strongly agreed" for Boris so he edges it)
The don't know/don't cares were 23% for Boris and 39% for Starmer.
Boris is considered "brave" by more people (35/30), yet the net score favours Starmer. Nonsense if you are using it to think about who might win more votes!
I don't think it's the net score that matters, but the positives. Ed Miliband was more likeable than Nigel Farage, but was a less successful leader of his party
If two mates were on the pull, and walked into a bar where one was considered attractive by 40% , ugly by 40% and 20% had no opinion, they would be better off than the other being considered attractive by 30% ugly by 28% with 42% not caring, despite the net score favouring the latter
Given how bad this government's record is so far vis a vis other countries Johnson is taking a hell of a risk. When the dust settles Trump, Bolsarno and Johnson are going to be the 3 leaders that will be considered to have failed in their response.
Hmmm
Recall that BXP a year ago had lead some of the opinion polls, with the Tories on what, sub 25%?
All eyes on Nigel in the coming few months
"The NHS didn't meltdown" - "That's because the government imposed a lockdown"
"There have only been 44,000 deaths from Covid in the UK" - "That's because the government imposed a lockdown"
"The NHS didn't meltdown" - "That's because the government imposed a lockdown"
"There have only been 44,000 deaths from Covid in the UK" - "That's because the government imposed a lockdown"
ad infinitum
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbZhs9W4zO4
If you want to lose confidence in the public
The gap between soaring cases and falling deaths is being weaponized by the right to claim a hollow victory in the face of shameless failure. What’s really going on?
Derek Thompson"
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/07/why-covid-death-rate-down/613945/
I grew up in the age of the Iron Curtain. The sight of Poles voting in a free election was (and is) remarkable to me.
The government knows all this.
So the question as to whether they capitulate is this. Do they think Farage is irrelevant? Its easy to do a deal that hands your arse to the EU, not understand that and then claim victory. They did so when sticking a border down the Irish Sea. So a deal with the EU where we formally exit the EEA but remain directly adjacent to the EEA with an open door could be spun as WE HAVE LEFT. With our sovereign choices made to leave the door wide open as Shitty Priti did whilst "they can't shut their border" states shut theirs. Whether it will be depends on the Nigel.
As we have seen, certain Tories don't give a monkeys toss about this country. Only about the Tory Party. If that means destroying the economy and the union, why would the Conservative and Unionist Party not want to do that if it means power?
Just explained to another journalist the difference between "date of specimen" and "reporting date". Sigh.
These are the positive scores. Keir edges it overall
The best chance of being able to have schools back in full, and keep the virus under control, is to do as much as possible elsewhere to reduce the virus spread. It's almost like they don't want to be left out of the second waves picking up all over the place.
Never forget.
In a spasm of insomnia I caught a weird BBC World Service programme called The People's Plane, apparently an 11 (!) part series on the Spitfire. After them saying the Spit as the world's fastest and most powerful fighter made a decisive difference in the BoB shooting down Luftwaffe aircraft with its six machine guns, I kinda gave up.
The Spitfire appears to have become a semi-religious fetish object (Vera Lynn funeral, Colonel Tom flypast, Thank U NHS guff) for the Anglo-British tribe, Dom's probably factored the BoB flight into his strategising: reach for the sky voters, rather than look at the mess of pottage that you sold your vote for.
Promising stuff with a deep recession and massive unemployment still to come.
I can hardly wait!
2015 saw a huge shift towards Remain in polling. Granted, the MORI poll showing Remain ahead by 44% was an outlier, but there were a lot showing Remain ahead 20 - 25%. The lead narrowed in 2016, but Leave only moved ahead about three weeks before the vote, and then the polls swung back to Remain in the last week. I expected the status quo to prevail.
Anyhow this year it’s now a mother, with five ducklings, four of which are completely yellow and one is the normal brown. I am surprised that this mutation passed on so readily, given how rare such ducks are generally.
Not sure it is myself. It's not your civic duty to make love to a beautiful woman.
Whoever is in government when the luck runs out on borrowing, interest rates etc is in for an interesting time.
Of course a party would always prefer to be a few points ahead in the polls than a few behind, and thus have the comfort blanket of "if there was an election tomorrow..." But at this point in the electoral cycle, I think a party would probably prefer the strong leadership ratings (which might not YET translate to party support but represents a receptive audience) than a slight lead but with poor ratings.
Remember Miliband's Labour led for long periods 2010-15 without ever really convincing people he was a credible prospective PM (and he ultimately fell short mainly for that reason).
It's really hard to say in a world where doors aren't being knocked on etc. But it does feel as if there are a lot of people with positive views about Starmer who are not yet sold on Labour but are willing to have a conversation about it for the first time in a while.