politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Sunak still leads Starmer in “Best PM” polling but the gap is closing
We have referred before to this polling series from newbie pollsters Redfield Wilson which asks those sampled to choose between Starmer and Sunak as “Best PM”.
I just think if you’re a sociable person - I’m a software eng but quite sociable which is quite rare believe me - and I’ve found ways to socialise without work.
Online political discussion boards don't count though
Do WoW guilds though ?
Doe WoW still exist? I last played it before I got married, and I've been married for fourteen years now.
I preferred the original base-building strategy Warcraft games before WoW. Played the original, II and III and think a shame with WoW taking off is there's never been a IV as a result.
That style of strategy game used to be quite common and well made, don't get many of them nowadays it seems. Now most strategy games like that seem to be online, build and then wait or pay premium currency to not wait types instead.
Agreed. Dune II, Command & Conquer, Stronghold, Age of Empires, Warcraft II, Total Annihilation.. there were loads of them.
A great list of games there! Hoping that Tiberian Sun and Red Alert 2 get remasters. RA2 has got to be my favourite RTS game of all time. So many wasted hours!
You can get them all now on Origin, if you sign up.
Re:WFH. I get that obviously many people, particularly those in established jobs, working in established teams, are enjoying it. But I don’t see how it is good as changes start happening in the workforce and I think it will become increasingly difficult to integrate new employees, particularly those with training needs.
Also, as somebody who has been working from home for six months, it feels increasingly like i’m existing in a social media type bubble - I know what’s going on (mostly) with those I work most directly with, but already feel like i’m becoming detached from the wider organisation, and what’s going on. Which in the long run will make me much less effective - particularly as i’m the sort of person who regularly gets involved in things outside of my immediate role.There are people with whom I would have had regular contact and who I often assist informally, with whom I have had virtually no contact for months.
I just think if you’re a sociable person - I’m a software eng but quite sociable which is quite rare believe me - and I’ve found ways to socialise without work.
Online political discussion boards don't count though
Do WoW guilds though ?
Doe WoW still exist? I last played it before I got married, and I've been married for fourteen years now.
I preferred the original base-building strategy Warcraft games before WoW. Played the original, II and III and think a shame with WoW taking off is there's never been a IV as a result.
That style of strategy game used to be quite common and well made, don't get many of them nowadays it seems. Now most strategy games like that seem to be online, build and then wait or pay premium currency to not wait types instead.
Agreed. Dune II, Command & Conquer, Stronghold, Age of Empires, Warcraft II, Total Annihilation.. there were loads of them.
Yes I loved all of those.
I don't know why that genre doesn't sell much anymore, it's a shame.
It is underrepresented but if you look you can find a modern RTS with sizeable followings.
CoH2, DOW, SC2,
Starcraft 2, is definitely the most popular of this era and has the strongest professional scene with players grossing 6 figures at big tournaments. And its now ftp.
I loved CoH1, but struggled with CoH2. Ultimately, the Russia campaign just wasn't engaging enough for me and I felt like I was just throwing thousands of troops at the problem.
Re:WFH. I get that obviously many people, particularly those in established jobs, working in established teams, are enjoying it. But I don’t see how it is good as changes start happening in the workforce and I think it will become increasingly difficult to integrate new employees, particularly those with training needs.
Also, as somebody who has been working from home for six months, it feels increasingly like i’m existing in a social media type bubble - I know what’s going on (mostly) with those I work most directly with, but already feel like i’m becoming detached from the wider organisation, and what’s going on. Which in the long run will make me much less effective - particularly as i’m the sort of person who regularly gets involved in things outside of my immediate role.There are people with whom I would have had regular contact and who I often assist informally, with whom I have had virtually no contact for months.
Agreed. I think more will be missed or lost that is being overlooked by some who are euphoric at certain aspects of the changes
Businesses need to be adapting and realise that commuting might not ever return like it was before - and frankly that could be a good thing.
There's nothing wrong with that other than the fact that a huge portion of "adapting" here really just equates to "massive downsizing".
Maybe in the long run it will be a good thing, but not in the short term.
The other problem is a lot of the public transport is not going to be in much better shape without commuters in the logn run.
The government's best bet is to do an equivalent to "Eat out to help out" for trains etc. to get people going back to city centres. Not even necessarily just to commute for work but for recreation, shopping trips, cinema trips, weekend socialising etc.
Who would go into a city centre for recreation? If I live in the sticks there are pubs near me, restaurants near me. The exception might be the draw of london.
Massive downsizing doesnt matter because their will now be jobs crying out for staff as those commuter town boarded up shops get taken over to launch cafes etc as they now actually have a clientele. Those staff that move outwards will also find their cost of living reduced. Those that demand to live and work in london will merely find they have less choice
The draw of socialising in the city is of course the range and variety of entertainment options, and the fact you are more likely to be able to get there, and subsequently move around, by public transport. I can get to London cheaper than I can get a taxi to most of my local pubs. Also your local pub in the sticks might be crap.
Although in the long run, it may very well encourage services in rural areas and commuter towns that are currently losing them. Having been working from home for a number of months now, and as I live on my own, I find that major weekend social activities aren't a problem, but something local midweek to break up the monotony of the same four walls would be nice. At least when I commuted, I saw somewhere different, got to use different shops, had at east a passing conversation with work colleagues, and, in summer at least, had a nice drive home from one of the offices on country roads.
That is certainly the draw in london and maybe manchester and birmingham too. Outside those 3 most cities are pretty poorly served for entertainement choices and public transport
I just think if you’re a sociable person - I’m a software eng but quite sociable which is quite rare believe me - and I’ve found ways to socialise without work.
Online political discussion boards don't count though
Do WoW guilds though ?
Doe WoW still exist? I last played it before I got married, and I've been married for fourteen years now.
I preferred the original base-building strategy Warcraft games before WoW. Played the original, II and III and think a shame with WoW taking off is there's never been a IV as a result.
That style of strategy game used to be quite common and well made, don't get many of them nowadays it seems. Now most strategy games like that seem to be online, build and then wait or pay premium currency to not wait types instead.
Agreed. Dune II, Command & Conquer, Stronghold, Age of Empires, Warcraft II, Total Annihilation.. there were loads of them.
Yes I loved all of those.
I don't know why that genre doesn't sell much anymore, it's a shame.
It is underrepresented but if you look you can find a modern RTS with sizeable followings.
CoH2, DOW, SC2,
Starcraft 2, is definitely the most popular of this era and has the strongest professional scene with players grossing 6 figures at big tournaments. And its now ftp.
I loved CoH1, but struggled with CoH2. Ultimately, the Russia campaign just wasn't engaging enough for me and I felt like I was just throwing thousands of troops at the problem.
I just think if you’re a sociable person - I’m a software eng but quite sociable which is quite rare believe me - and I’ve found ways to socialise without work.
Online political discussion boards don't count though
Do WoW guilds though ?
Doe WoW still exist? I last played it before I got married, and I've been married for fourteen years now.
I preferred the original base-building strategy Warcraft games before WoW. Played the original, II and III and think a shame with WoW taking off is there's never been a IV as a result.
That style of strategy game used to be quite common and well made, don't get many of them nowadays it seems. Now most strategy games like that seem to be online, build and then wait or pay premium currency to not wait types instead.
Agreed. Dune II, Command & Conquer, Stronghold, Age of Empires, Warcraft II, Total Annihilation.. there were loads of them.
A great list of games there! Hoping that Tiberian Sun and Red Alert 2 get remasters. RA2 has got to be my favourite RTS game of all time. So many wasted hours!
You can get them all now on Origin, if you sign up.
It's worth it.
Wouldnt be without mine but avoid the oculus as they are requiring facebook now. The HP Reverb2 is out in october for a start
Re:WFH. I get that obviously many people, particularly those in established jobs, working in established teams, are enjoying it. But I don’t see how it is good as changes start happening in the workforce and I think it will become increasingly difficult to integrate new employees, particularly those with training needs.
Also, as somebody who has been working from home for six months, it feels increasingly like i’m existing in a social media type bubble - I know what’s going on (mostly) with those I work most directly with, but already feel like i’m becoming detached from the wider organisation, and what’s going on. Which in the long run will make me much less effective - particularly as i’m the sort of person who regularly gets involved in things outside of my immediate role.There are people with whom I would have had regular contact and who I often assist informally, with whom I have had virtually no contact for months.
I think the end state will be something of a hybrid model, with people working a couple of days a week in the office, or a week or so a month. Something similar was announced by a couple of big City firms yesterday.
You're right to identify issues such as people changing teams, interacting with other departments and integrating new recruits leading to job dissatisfaction and reductions in efficiency.
Re:WFH. I get that obviously many people, particularly those in established jobs, working in established teams, are enjoying it. But I don’t see how it is good as changes start happening in the workforce and I think it will become increasingly difficult to integrate new employees, particularly those with training needs.
Also, as somebody who has been working from home for six months, it feels increasingly like i’m existing in a social media type bubble - I know what’s going on (mostly) with those I work most directly with, but already feel like i’m becoming detached from the wider organisation, and what’s going on. Which in the long run will make me much less effective - particularly as i’m the sort of person who regularly gets involved in things outside of my immediate role.There are people with whom I would have had regular contact and who I often assist informally, with whom I have had virtually no contact for months.
I think the end state will be something of a hybrid model, with people working a couple of days a week in the office, or a week or so a month. Something similar was announced by a couple of big City firms yesterday.
You're right to identify issues such as people changing teams, interacting with other departments and integrating new recruits leading to job dissatisfaction and reductions in efficiency.
Not so sure, my team were chatting about it today and the view was 2 days a week in the office wasnt much different to 5. Still meant they had to live in commute difference. Our boss has been left in no doubt if its back to the office even 2 days a week we are looking for other jobs that don't require it. None of us feel being in the office adds anything as we actually talk more now than we did when we were there
I genuinely can't think of anything positive to say about Trump. There is no aspect of the man that I could describe as good. There is something deeply wrong with America that instead of saying "we screwed up" there are tens of millions of people planning on spinning the cylinder, pointing the pistol to their head, and pulling the trigger again. God help us all.
I just think if you’re a sociable person - I’m a software eng but quite sociable which is quite rare believe me - and I’ve found ways to socialise without work.
Online political discussion boards don't count though
Do WoW guilds though ?
Doe WoW still exist? I last played it before I got married, and I've been married for fourteen years now.
I preferred the original base-building strategy Warcraft games before WoW. Played the original, II and III and think a shame with WoW taking off is there's never been a IV as a result.
That style of strategy game used to be quite common and well made, don't get many of them nowadays it seems. Now most strategy games like that seem to be online, build and then wait or pay premium currency to not wait types instead.
Agreed. Dune II, Command & Conquer, Stronghold, Age of Empires, Warcraft II, Total Annihilation.. there were loads of them.
Yes I loved all of those.
I don't know why that genre doesn't sell much anymore, it's a shame.
It is underrepresented but if you look you can find a modern RTS with sizeable followings.
CoH2, DOW, SC2,
Starcraft 2, is definitely the most popular of this era and has the strongest professional scene with players grossing 6 figures at big tournaments. And its now ftp.
I loved CoH1, but struggled with CoH2. Ultimately, the Russia campaign just wasn't engaging enough for me and I felt like I was just throwing thousands of troops at the problem.
The other two expansions are worth playing if you're feeling nostalgic.
For me the multiplayer 1v1 was v good. Exploiting the map as it evolves + the unit veterancy dynamic made every fight so important.
Re:WFH. I get that obviously many people, particularly those in established jobs, working in established teams, are enjoying it. But I don’t see how it is good as changes start happening in the workforce and I think it will become increasingly difficult to integrate new employees, particularly those with training needs.
Also, as somebody who has been working from home for six months, it feels increasingly like i’m existing in a social media type bubble - I know what’s going on (mostly) with those I work most directly with, but already feel like i’m becoming detached from the wider organisation, and what’s going on. Which in the long run will make me much less effective - particularly as i’m the sort of person who regularly gets involved in things outside of my immediate role.There are people with whom I would have had regular contact and who I often assist informally, with whom I have had virtually no contact for months.
I think the end state will be something of a hybrid model, with people working a couple of days a week in the office, or a week or so a month. Something similar was announced by a couple of big City firms yesterday.
You're right to identify issues such as people changing teams, interacting with other departments and integrating new recruits leading to job dissatisfaction and reductions in efficiency.
Not so sure, my team were chatting about it today and the view was 2 days a week in the office wasnt much different to 5. Still meant they had to live in commute difference. Our boss has been left in no doubt if its back to the office even 2 days a week we are looking for other jobs that don't require it. None of us feel being in the office adds anything as we actually talk more now than we did when we were there
Yes, one week a month allows many more options than two days a week.
You could live pretty much anywhere and be in for one week a month (inc Scotland, France and Spain), but two days a week means you're stuck a couple of hours at best away from the office - and two peak-time train tickets a week isn't much cheaper than a full season ticket over the course of a year.
There does need to be some physical interaction as outlined above, especially as the composition of teams changes over time.
Something about that method just doesn't smell right to me.
Perfectly feasible to detect the virus in waste water. I take issue with the before it happened. In reality they have kept an outbreak small, and stopped it becoming a bigger outbreak.
Re:WFH. I get that obviously many people, particularly those in established jobs, working in established teams, are enjoying it. But I don’t see how it is good as changes start happening in the workforce and I think it will become increasingly difficult to integrate new employees, particularly those with training needs.
Also, as somebody who has been working from home for six months, it feels increasingly like i’m existing in a social media type bubble - I know what’s going on (mostly) with those I work most directly with, but already feel like i’m becoming detached from the wider organisation, and what’s going on. Which in the long run will make me much less effective - particularly as i’m the sort of person who regularly gets involved in things outside of my immediate role.There are people with whom I would have had regular contact and who I often assist informally, with whom I have had virtually no contact for months.
I think the end state will be something of a hybrid model, with people working a couple of days a week in the office, or a week or so a month. Something similar was announced by a couple of big City firms yesterday.
You're right to identify issues such as people changing teams, interacting with other departments and integrating new recruits leading to job dissatisfaction and reductions in efficiency.
Not so sure, my team were chatting about it today and the view was 2 days a week in the office wasnt much different to 5. Still meant they had to live in commute difference. Our boss has been left in no doubt if its back to the office even 2 days a week we are looking for other jobs that don't require it. None of us feel being in the office adds anything as we actually talk more now than we did when we were there
Yes, one week a month allows many more options than two days a week.
You could live pretty much anywhere and be in for one week a month (inc Scotland, France and Spain), but two days a week means you're stuck a couple of hours at best away from the office - and two peak-time train tickets a week isn't much cheaper than a full season ticket over the course of a year.
There does need to be some physical interaction as outlined above, especially as the composition of teams changes over time.
Most of the above doesnt apply to us we wouldnt be allowed to change teams and when we have lost people they haven't been replaced nor is there any recruitment planned currently as the rest of us have managed to pick up the slack
Something about that method just doesn't smell right to me.
Perfectly feasible to detect the virus in waste water. I take issue with the before it happened. In reality they have kept an outbreak small, and stopped it becoming a bigger outbreak.
Thanks - I wasn't expecting such effluent response.
Second- in 2016, Trump's path to the White House was already pretty narrow. G-string narrow, so to speak. It's fairly clear that there are some voters who have moved Trump to notTrump. Who are the voters who have gone the other way?
How do we explain this given all the Government's problems?
Possibly BLM / Proms related - ie even when people think Boris is incompetent / lazy / hopeless enough people will still vote for him as they support his values and think his heart is in the right place.
I just think if you’re a sociable person - I’m a software eng but quite sociable which is quite rare believe me - and I’ve found ways to socialise without work.
Online political discussion boards don't count though
Do WoW guilds though ?
Doe WoW still exist? I last played it before I got married, and I've been married for fourteen years now.
I preferred the original base-building strategy Warcraft games before WoW. Played the original, II and III and think a shame with WoW taking off is there's never been a IV as a result.
That style of strategy game used to be quite common and well made, don't get many of them nowadays it seems. Now most strategy games like that seem to be online, build and then wait or pay premium currency to not wait types instead.
Agreed. Dune II, Command & Conquer, Stronghold, Age of Empires, Warcraft II, Total Annihilation.. there were loads of them.
Yes I loved all of those.
I don't know why that genre doesn't sell much anymore, it's a shame.
It is underrepresented but if you look you can find a modern RTS with sizeable followings.
CoH2, DOW, SC2,
Starcraft 2, is definitely the most popular of this era and has the strongest professional scene with players grossing 6 figures at big tournaments. And its now ftp.
I loved CoH1, but struggled with CoH2. Ultimately, the Russia campaign just wasn't engaging enough for me and I felt like I was just throwing thousands of troops at the problem.
Realistic, though.
That's true.
But also - frankly - boring.
CoH had some really great missions - trying to hang on in Cataran as you got whittled down and whittled down was fantastic, particularly on the higher difficulty levels.
Cultural marxism == antisemitic therefore is something the left like to claim without much foundation as far as I can see
"He saw clearly the logical consequence of accepting the Two Worlds thesis and how this thesis can lead on from an artificial, to a deliberate separation of the races, culminating in either a ' pogrom ' or the extermination camps: "
He doesn't extend the furlough scheme he's going to become very unpopular very quickly.
Questions to which I do not know the answer, but would be interested to:
1. What proportion of the workforce is still being paid under the furlough scheme? 2. Is there any indication of targeted support in the pipeline, to help those sectors that are still completely shuttered or incapable of breaking even because of social distancing? (but which might be viable again when conditions improve?) 3. Beyond that, how many of the jobs being supported are effectively already defunct and will disappear whenever furlough is withdrawn - i.e. if Sunak were to volte-face and extend the scheme, how many of those being helped by it would simply be on a stay of execution?
He doesn't extend the furlough scheme he's going to become very unpopular very quickly.
If Rishi were as ruthless and shameless as Boris, he'd be looking for a confected reason to storm out of Cabinet and become King Over The Water around now, just before the fan is covered in something unpleasant.
But that would require Rishi to be as terrible a person as Boris, and that seems unlikely.
How do we explain Trump closing the gap with Betfair punters?
People are anticipating the gap closing between him and Biden with the protests. The thing is, a closing of the gap was already priced in. Biden just like in the nomination race for ages is undervalued.
He doesn't extend the furlough scheme he's going to become very unpopular very quickly.
Furlough made sense in the spring and summer when we were in lockdown and businesses couldn't legally trade, but given that lockdown has been lifted now why is it still required?
Surely (barring some extreme cases which maybe should be dealt with separately) any businesses still furloughing simply are failed businesses unlikely to reopen now?
How do we explain this given all the Government's problems?
Possibly BLM / Proms related - ie even when people think Boris is incompetent / lazy / hopeless enough people will still vote for him as they support his values and think his heart is in the right place.
He doesn't extend the furlough scheme he's going to become very unpopular very quickly.
Furlough made sense in the spring and summer when we were in lockdown and businesses couldn't legally trade, but given that lockdown has been lifted now why is it still required?
Surely (barring some extreme cases which maybe should be dealt with separately) any businesses still furloughing simply are failed businesses unlikely to reopen now?
I know some focus groups taking place, and the view of plenty of voters is that the elite bailed out bankers, then anyone losing their jobs when furlough ends should also get bailed out.
How do we explain this given all the Government's problems?
Possibly BLM / Proms related - ie even when people think Boris is incompetent / lazy / hopeless enough people will still vote for him as they support his values and think his heart is in the right place.
Labour's Far Left experiment has done it an awful lot of damage. In a very real sense it may no longer matter how bad the Government is - it may simply be that the percentage of the electorate willing to consider voting Labour has fallen. Likely causes: the perception that it is no longer interested in the welfare of parts of its old base, that it rejects their values, and can't be trusted not to make the Corbyn mistake twice having already done it once.
Interestingly in two minutes it doesn't even seem to name Trump, only a couple of images shown in contrast, instead making it positive about Biden instead. I wonder if it will work?
Relentless negativity doesn't work. Hope does work - its the one thread that links Obama, Boris, Dave and Trump is in their own different ways they inspired hope in their supporters - and this seems to be about building hope. I think its good.
He doesn't extend the furlough scheme he's going to become very unpopular very quickly.
Furlough made sense in the spring and summer when we were in lockdown and businesses couldn't legally trade, but given that lockdown has been lifted now why is it still required?
Surely (barring some extreme cases which maybe should be dealt with separately) any businesses still furloughing simply are failed businesses unlikely to reopen now?
I know some focus groups taking place, and the view of plenty of voters is that the elite bailed out bankers, then anyone losing their jobs when furlough ends should also get bailed out.
He doesn't extend the furlough scheme he's going to become very unpopular very quickly.
Furlough made sense in the spring and summer when we were in lockdown and businesses couldn't legally trade, but given that lockdown has been lifted now why is it still required?
Surely (barring some extreme cases which maybe should be dealt with separately) any businesses still furloughing simply are failed businesses unlikely to reopen now?
I know some focus groups taking place, and the view of plenty of voters is that the elite bailed out bankers, then anyone losing their jobs when furlough ends should also get bailed out.
People will always say things like that. What specifics though?
He doesn't extend the furlough scheme he's going to become very unpopular very quickly.
Furlough made sense in the spring and summer when we were in lockdown and businesses couldn't legally trade, but given that lockdown has been lifted now why is it still required?
Surely (barring some extreme cases which maybe should be dealt with separately) any businesses still furloughing simply are failed businesses unlikely to reopen now?
I know some focus groups taking place, and the view of plenty of voters is that the elite bailed out bankers, then anyone losing their jobs when furlough ends should also get bailed out.
How?
Extending the furlough, government taking stakes in such business, loans etc.
He doesn't extend the furlough scheme he's going to become very unpopular very quickly.
Furlough made sense in the spring and summer when we were in lockdown and businesses couldn't legally trade, but given that lockdown has been lifted now why is it still required?
Surely (barring some extreme cases which maybe should be dealt with separately) any businesses still furloughing simply are failed businesses unlikely to reopen now?
I know some focus groups taking place, and the view of plenty of voters is that the elite bailed out bankers, then anyone losing their jobs when furlough ends should also get bailed out.
When populism collides head-first with the core Conservative ideology of capitalism.
He doesn't extend the furlough scheme he's going to become very unpopular very quickly.
Furlough made sense in the spring and summer when we were in lockdown and businesses couldn't legally trade, but given that lockdown has been lifted now why is it still required?
Surely (barring some extreme cases which maybe should be dealt with separately) any businesses still furloughing simply are failed businesses unlikely to reopen now?
Still required because the government does not wish to go down in a record landslide defeat in the next election, possibly?
Cultural marxism == antisemitic therefore is something the left like to claim without much foundation as far as I can see
"He saw clearly the logical consequence of accepting the Two Worlds thesis and how this thesis can lead on from an artificial, to a deliberate separation of the races, culminating in either a ' pogrom ' or the extermination camps: "
Farage is no demagogue. He's just some bloke that found himself in politics.
He doesn't extend the furlough scheme he's going to become very unpopular very quickly.
Furlough made sense in the spring and summer when we were in lockdown and businesses couldn't legally trade, but given that lockdown has been lifted now why is it still required?
Surely (barring some extreme cases which maybe should be dealt with separately) any businesses still furloughing simply are failed businesses unlikely to reopen now?
As an example, event venues that can now hold a maximum of 8 people, that used to be able to hold events for 50, are not 'failed' businesses, they are businesses that cannot operate profitably due to the imposition of Government regulations.
He doesn't extend the furlough scheme he's going to become very unpopular very quickly.
Furlough made sense in the spring and summer when we were in lockdown and businesses couldn't legally trade, but given that lockdown has been lifted now why is it still required?
Surely (barring some extreme cases which maybe should be dealt with separately) any businesses still furloughing simply are failed businesses unlikely to reopen now?
Still required because the government does not wish to go down in a record landslide defeat in the next election, possibly?
If companies that can survive and reopen have done so now that lockdown is lifted then I'm not sure how extending furlough to zombie companies does anything. Are you suggesting that it be kept going until 2025 to take us through the next election? Or is it going to be switched off at some point between now and then?
Interestingly in two minutes it doesn't even seem to name Trump, only a couple of images shown in contrast, instead making it positive about Biden instead. I wonder if it will work?
Relentless negativity doesn't work. Hope does work - its the one thread that links Obama, Boris, Dave and Trump is in their own different ways they inspired hope in their supporters - and this seems to be about building hope. I think its good.
Second- in 2016, Trump's path to the White House was already pretty narrow. G-string narrow, so to speak. It's fairly clear that there are some voters who have moved Trump to notTrump. Who are the voters who have gone the other way?
There will be some.
Plus, he may do a better of getting his core vote out. He's proved loyal to his followers, maybe they will be loyal to him.
Interestingly in two minutes it doesn't even seem to name Trump, only a couple of images shown in contrast, instead making it positive about Biden instead. I wonder if it will work?
Relentless negativity doesn't work. Hope does work - its the one thread that links Obama, Boris, Dave and Trump is in their own different ways they inspired hope in their supporters - and this seems to be about building hope. I think its good.
Remember how Jezza Corbyn, before he became Nasty Jez, was Magic Grandpa?
That might be exactly what America needs right now, and Grandpa Joe could do that, provided the team around him aren't fruitloops.
How do we explain Trump closing the gap with Betfair punters?
People are anticipating the gap closing between him and Biden with the protests. The thing is, a closing of the gap was already priced in. Biden just like in the nomination race for ages is undervalued.
He doesn't extend the furlough scheme he's going to become very unpopular very quickly.
Furlough made sense in the spring and summer when we were in lockdown and businesses couldn't legally trade, but given that lockdown has been lifted now why is it still required?
Surely (barring some extreme cases which maybe should be dealt with separately) any businesses still furloughing simply are failed businesses unlikely to reopen now?
I know some focus groups taking place, and the view of plenty of voters is that the elite bailed out bankers, then anyone losing their jobs when furlough ends should also get bailed out.
How?
Extending the furlough, government taking stakes in such business, loans etc.
Which might work for strategic industries, for example Rolls Royce Aero who just posted a £5bn loss, but it doesn't work for Pret and similar City support businesses, who face an inevitable bankruptcy no matter what government support is extended. No-one is going to argue for government taking shares in restaurants.
Interestingly in two minutes it doesn't even seem to name Trump, only a couple of images shown in contrast, instead making it positive about Biden instead. I wonder if it will work?
Relentless negativity doesn't work. Hope does work - its the one thread that links Obama, Boris, Dave and Trump is in their own different ways they inspired hope in their supporters - and this seems to be about building hope. I think its good.
Remember how Jezza Corbyn, before he became Nasty Jez, was Magic Grandpa?
That might be exactly what America needs right now, and Grandpa Joe could do that, provided the team around him aren't fruitloops.
He doesn't extend the furlough scheme he's going to become very unpopular very quickly.
Furlough made sense in the spring and summer when we were in lockdown and businesses couldn't legally trade, but given that lockdown has been lifted now why is it still required?
Surely (barring some extreme cases which maybe should be dealt with separately) any businesses still furloughing simply are failed businesses unlikely to reopen now?
Still required because the government does not wish to go down in a record landslide defeat in the next election, possibly?
If companies that can survive and reopen have done so now that lockdown is lifted then I'm not sure how extending furlough to zombie companies does anything. Are you suggesting that it be kept going until 2025 to take us through the next election? Or is it going to be switched off at some point between now and then?
If so, then why not now?
Not my problem, squire. You're the supporter of this government, not me. Many would say, though, that we've been keeping zombie companies on life support since 2008 via silly interest rates, so this is just business as usual.
He doesn't extend the furlough scheme he's going to become very unpopular very quickly.
Furlough made sense in the spring and summer when we were in lockdown and businesses couldn't legally trade, but given that lockdown has been lifted now why is it still required?
Surely (barring some extreme cases which maybe should be dealt with separately) any businesses still furloughing simply are failed businesses unlikely to reopen now?
I know some focus groups taking place, and the view of plenty of voters is that the elite bailed out bankers, then anyone losing their jobs when furlough ends should also get bailed out.
How?
Extending the furlough, government taking stakes in such business, loans etc.
Which might work for strategic industries, for example Rolls Royce Aero who just posted a £5bn loss, but it doesn't work for Pret and similar City support businesses, who face an inevitable bankruptcy no matter what government support is extended. No-one is going to argue for government taking shares in restaurants.
People working in restaurants/hospitality industries will argue for government taking shares or some other support.
He doesn't extend the furlough scheme he's going to become very unpopular very quickly.
Furlough made sense in the spring and summer when we were in lockdown and businesses couldn't legally trade, but given that lockdown has been lifted now why is it still required?
Surely (barring some extreme cases which maybe should be dealt with separately) any businesses still furloughing simply are failed businesses unlikely to reopen now?
I know some focus groups taking place, and the view of plenty of voters is that the elite bailed out bankers, then anyone losing their jobs when furlough ends should also get bailed out.
How?
Extending the furlough, government taking stakes in such business, loans etc.
They've U-turned on everything else, I don't expect this to be any different (at least partially).
He doesn't extend the furlough scheme he's going to become very unpopular very quickly.
Furlough made sense in the spring and summer when we were in lockdown and businesses couldn't legally trade, but given that lockdown has been lifted now why is it still required?
Surely (barring some extreme cases which maybe should be dealt with separately) any businesses still furloughing simply are failed businesses unlikely to reopen now?
I know some focus groups taking place, and the view of plenty of voters is that the elite bailed out bankers, then anyone losing their jobs when furlough ends should also get bailed out.
When populism collides head-first with the core Conservative ideology of capitalism.
I wonder what will happen.
Not sure. Logically you would think they'd replace furlough with specific support for businesses still unable to trade, or at any rate unable to do enough trade to break even, because of ongoing Covid restrictions - and allow other concerns to die a natural death. We should remember at this juncture that this is what's happened to a very great extent already, notably with so many high street retailers contracting or folding altogether.
However,,, with this lot, of course, you more often than not have no idea what they're going to come out with next.
Interestingly in two minutes it doesn't even seem to name Trump, only a couple of images shown in contrast, instead making it positive about Biden instead. I wonder if it will work?
Relentless negativity doesn't work. Hope does work - its the one thread that links Obama, Boris, Dave and Trump is in their own different ways they inspired hope in their supporters - and this seems to be about building hope. I think its good.
It's a little bit woke about 80 seconds in but, yes, otherwise it's a very good ad.
He doesn't extend the furlough scheme he's going to become very unpopular very quickly.
Furlough made sense in the spring and summer when we were in lockdown and businesses couldn't legally trade, but given that lockdown has been lifted now why is it still required?
Surely (barring some extreme cases which maybe should be dealt with separately) any businesses still furloughing simply are failed businesses unlikely to reopen now?
I know some focus groups taking place, and the view of plenty of voters is that the elite bailed out bankers, then anyone losing their jobs when furlough ends should also get bailed out.
How?
Extending the furlough, government taking stakes in such business, loans etc.
Which might work for strategic industries, for example Rolls Royce Aero who just posted a £5bn loss, but it doesn't work for Pret and similar City support businesses, who face an inevitable bankruptcy no matter what government support is extended. No-one is going to argue for government taking shares in restaurants.
People working in restaurants/hospitality industries will argue for government taking shares or some other support.
Or they'll go find another job. Its a high churn industry at the best of times.
During lockdown that wasn't viable but now lockdown is over it is.
He doesn't extend the furlough scheme he's going to become very unpopular very quickly.
Furlough made sense in the spring and summer when we were in lockdown and businesses couldn't legally trade, but given that lockdown has been lifted now why is it still required?
Surely (barring some extreme cases which maybe should be dealt with separately) any businesses still furloughing simply are failed businesses unlikely to reopen now?
I know some focus groups taking place, and the view of plenty of voters is that the elite bailed out bankers, then anyone losing their jobs when furlough ends should also get bailed out.
How?
Extending the furlough, government taking stakes in such business, loans etc.
Which might work for strategic industries, for example Rolls Royce Aero who just posted a £5bn loss, but it doesn't work for Pret and similar City support businesses, who face an inevitable bankruptcy no matter what government support is extended. No-one is going to argue for government taking shares in restaurants.
People working in restaurants/hospitality industries will argue for government taking shares or some other support.
A very long list of major retailers, restaurant chains, airlines, banks and manufacturers, and Lord alone knows how many other smaller concerns, have already announced hundreds of thousands of job losses. The calls for Government to take equity stakes or offer bailout loans have been minimal. I'm not sure why this would suddenly change.
Seems like standard campaing material to me. Good, for Biden supporters and will persuade some swing voters for a few days, but it is no knockout punch.
How do we explain this given all the Government's problems?
Possibly BLM / Proms related - ie even when people think Boris is incompetent / lazy / hopeless enough people will still vote for him as they support his values and think his heart is in the right place.
Labour's Far Left experiment has done it an awful lot of damage. In a very real sense it may no longer matter how bad the Government is - it may simply be that the percentage of the electorate willing to consider voting Labour has fallen. Likely causes: the perception that it is no longer interested in the welfare of parts of its old base, that it rejects their values, and can't be trusted not to make the Corbyn mistake twice having already done it once.
On the other hand they came within a whisker of being able to form a potential coalition in 2017. It's easy to forget that.
Seems like standard campaing material to me. Good, for Biden supporters and will persuade some swing voters for a few days, but it is no knockout punch.
Lockdown is over now
People must get back to work. Furlough and UC can be stopped now
ISTR there was a story about this in Italy from way back in April. Everyone should be testing their waste water.
Yes, I think I might have posted it.
It’s only of great utility in preventing spread of infection, though, when it can be followed up by large scale rapid testing. If we had mass availability of cheap antigen tests capable of results within an hour (and they do now exist), we wouldn’t have to worry about further lockdowns.
He doesn't extend the furlough scheme he's going to become very unpopular very quickly.
Furlough made sense in the spring and summer when we were in lockdown and businesses couldn't legally trade, but given that lockdown has been lifted now why is it still required?
Surely (barring some extreme cases which maybe should be dealt with separately) any businesses still furloughing simply are failed businesses unlikely to reopen now?
I know some focus groups taking place, and the view of plenty of voters is that the elite bailed out bankers, then anyone losing their jobs when furlough ends should also get bailed out.
How?
Extending the furlough, government taking stakes in such business, loans etc.
Which might work for strategic industries, for example Rolls Royce Aero who just posted a £5bn loss, but it doesn't work for Pret and similar City support businesses, who face an inevitable bankruptcy no matter what government support is extended. No-one is going to argue for government taking shares in restaurants.
People working in restaurants/hospitality industries will argue for government taking shares or some other support.
Okay, no-one apart from hospitality industry lobbyists. The days of millions of daily commuters into the City aren't coming back, government supporting zombie businesses in central London and Manchester is throwing good money after bad.
I'd let them go bust and spend the government money in training the unemployed for the jobs we'll need as the recession ends, with all the accelerated behavioral changes we've seen this year and those that are coming down the line.
Offering anyone unemployed a tuition fee discount on university admissions and professional training courses, alongside benefits support, will be cheaper than keeping them sat at home unproductive while their employers are dead in the medium term anyway.
How do we explain this given all the Government's problems?
Possibly BLM / Proms related - ie even when people think Boris is incompetent / lazy / hopeless enough people will still vote for him as they support his values and think his heart is in the right place.
Labour's Far Left experiment has done it an awful lot of damage. In a very real sense it may no longer matter how bad the Government is - it may simply be that the percentage of the electorate willing to consider voting Labour has fallen. Likely causes: the perception that it is no longer interested in the welfare of parts of its old base, that it rejects their values, and can't be trusted not to make the Corbyn mistake twice having already done it once.
On the other hand they came within a whisker of being able to form a potential coalition in 2017. It's easy to forget that.
I don't think anyone's forgotten 2017. That's part of Labour's problem. The closer it gets to turfing the Tories out, the more motivated the "never Labour" voters will be to turn out to stop it: after coming that close to danger there's no room for complacency. Using Scottish Nationalism as a stick with which to beat Labour in England ought to help, too.
He doesn't extend the furlough scheme he's going to become very unpopular very quickly.
Furlough made sense in the spring and summer when we were in lockdown and businesses couldn't legally trade, but given that lockdown has been lifted now why is it still required?
Surely (barring some extreme cases which maybe should be dealt with separately) any businesses still furloughing simply are failed businesses unlikely to reopen now?
I know some focus groups taking place, and the view of plenty of voters is that the elite bailed out bankers, then anyone losing their jobs when furlough ends should also get bailed out.
How?
Extending the furlough, government taking stakes in such business, loans etc.
Which might work for strategic industries, for example Rolls Royce Aero who just posted a £5bn loss, but it doesn't work for Pret and similar City support businesses, who face an inevitable bankruptcy no matter what government support is extended. No-one is going to argue for government taking shares in restaurants.
People working in restaurants/hospitality industries will argue for government taking shares or some other support.
Or they'll go find another job. Its a high churn industry at the best of times.
During lockdown that wasn't viable but now lockdown is over it is.
That will only work, rather obviously, for those people who actually manage to find another job. One rather suspects that there'll be a great deal fewer vacancies than increasingly desperate applicants for quite a long time to come.
How do we explain this given all the Government's problems?
Possibly BLM / Proms related - ie even when people think Boris is incompetent / lazy / hopeless enough people will still vote for him as they support his values and think his heart is in the right place.
Labour's Far Left experiment has done it an awful lot of damage. In a very real sense it may no longer matter how bad the Government is - it may simply be that the percentage of the electorate willing to consider voting Labour has fallen. Likely causes: the perception that it is no longer interested in the welfare of parts of its old base, that it rejects their values, and can't be trusted not to make the Corbyn mistake twice having already done it once.
On the other hand they came within a whisker of being able to form a potential coalition in 2017. It's easy to forget that.
I don't think anyone's forgotten 2017. That's part of Labour's problem. The closer it gets to turfing the Tories out, the more motivated the "never Labour" voters will be to turn out to stop it: after coming that close to danger there's no room for complacency. Using Scottish Nationalism as a stick with which to beat Labour in England ought to help, too.
The 2017 Tory campaign will always be an example of how not to run a campaign when you start off 20% ahead. Far worse than Labour's 2019 effort.
Interestingly in two minutes it doesn't even seem to name Trump, only a couple of images shown in contrast, instead making it positive about Biden instead. I wonder if it will work?
Relentless negativity doesn't work. Hope does work - its the one thread that links Obama, Boris, Dave and Trump is in their own different ways they inspired hope in their supporters - and this seems to be about building hope. I think its good.
Remember how Jezza Corbyn, before he became Nasty Jez, was Magic Grandpa?
That might be exactly what America needs right now, and Grandpa Joe could do that, provided the team around him aren't fruitloops.
They could adopt the song 'Oh, Joseph R. Biden'.
To the tune of "Seven Nation Army"? That actually fits quite well.
Seems like standard campaing material to me. Good, for Biden supporters and will persuade some swing voters for a few days, but it is no knockout punch.
He's polling over 50% - he doesn't need a knockout punch he needs some good quality standard campaigning material and to get out the vote.
How do we explain this given all the Government's problems?
Possibly BLM / Proms related - ie even when people think Boris is incompetent / lazy / hopeless enough people will still vote for him as they support his values and think his heart is in the right place.
Labour's Far Left experiment has done it an awful lot of damage. In a very real sense it may no longer matter how bad the Government is - it may simply be that the percentage of the electorate willing to consider voting Labour has fallen. Likely causes: the perception that it is no longer interested in the welfare of parts of its old base, that it rejects their values, and can't be trusted not to make the Corbyn mistake twice having already done it once.
On the other hand they came within a whisker of being able to form a potential coalition in 2017. It's easy to forget that.
I don't think anyone's forgotten 2017. That's part of Labour's problem. The closer it gets to turfing the Tories out, the more motivated the "never Labour" voters will be to turn out to stop it: after coming that close to danger there's no room for complacency. Using Scottish Nationalism as a stick with which to beat Labour in England ought to help, too.
The 2017 Tory campaign will always be an example of how not to run a campaign when you start off 20% ahead. Far worse than Labour's 2019 effort.
I did actually feel sorry to some extent for TM in 2017.
She took the opportunity of a massive lead to introduce something that has been on the political too-difficult-list for a couple of decades - but completely screwed up the messaging around it.
With hindsight, social care reform a couple of years ago might have made a substantial difference to the pandemic outcome.
Fuck me. What a total twat we have for a Prime Minister.
Eh? What is twattish?
If someone has a job and doesn't want it . . . . . . and if someone else wants a job but doesn't have it . . .
Then I see a very, very simple solution. 🤷🏻♂️
I think you have been misled by the headline.
Indeed, if everyone at my office went to work we wouldn't be able to engage in social distancing, so we're allowed to work from home for at least next March.
We seem to have absent-mindedly elected a Government that feels it can tell employers what to do. We surveyed staff, found they overwhelmingly didn't want to go back to the office, so it's staying shut. Our decision is literally none of Ministers' business.
Okay, no-one apart from hospitality industry lobbyists. The days of millions of daily commuters into the City aren't coming back, government supporting zombie businesses in central London and Manchester is throwing good money after bad.
I'd let them go bust and spend the government money in training the unemployed for the jobs we'll need as the recession ends, with all the accelerated behavioral changes we've seen this year and those that are coming down the line.
I heard the boss of the CBI arguing that "we must return to work to save the coffee shops" more or less. Why though? No industry has a right to continue to exist if circumstances change. If we only need 50% of the shops in city centres for the next few years, and maybe longer than that, why do they have to be saved? I'm sorry for the people working in them, but if your job is gone and not coming back for years and maybe forever, then there's little point in trying to save it. Help the employees, let the businesses decide whether to continue or not, but don't throw money at industries that are in decline or on the way out.
We seem to have absent-mindedly elected a Government that feels it can tell employers what to do. We surveyed staff, found they overwhelmingly didn't want to go back to the office, so it's staying shut. Our decision is literally none of Ministers' business.
We seem to have absent-mindedly elected a Government that feels it can tell employers what to do. We surveyed staff, found they overwhelmingly didn't want to go back to the office, so it's staying shut. Our decision is literally none of Ministers' business.
There's going to be a lot of redundancies in London support services when the furlough scheme ends, the government can't afford to keep it running indefinitely, and they don't want to see the inevitable massive spike in unemployment when the furlough scheme ends.
They seem to have missed that the forced WFH experiment has been largely successful for those working from home for the last few months.
The determination of the government to try and get people back to commuting is one of their worst authoritarian instincts.
Comments
So I wasted a good opportunity to say nothing.
edit! Though for general approval in current posts.
As it was in the previous poll!
Also, as somebody who has been working from home for six months, it feels increasingly like i’m existing in a social media type bubble - I know what’s going on (mostly) with those I work most directly with, but already feel like i’m becoming detached from the wider organisation, and what’s going on. Which in the long run will make me much less effective - particularly as i’m the sort of person who regularly gets involved in things outside of my immediate role.There are people with whom I would have had regular contact and who I often assist informally, with whom I have had virtually no contact for months.
https://twitter.com/cfishman/status/1299049476288544768
You're right to identify issues such as people changing teams, interacting with other departments and integrating new recruits leading to job dissatisfaction and reductions in efficiency.
I'm working to a par of 60/40 in Biden's favour, Trump is IMO a lay below that price.
For me the multiplayer 1v1 was v good. Exploiting the map as it evolves + the unit veterancy dynamic made every fight so important.
You could live pretty much anywhere and be in for one week a month (inc Scotland, France and Spain), but two days a week means you're stuck a couple of hours at best away from the office - and two peak-time train tickets a week isn't much cheaper than a full season ticket over the course of a year.
There does need to be some physical interaction as outlined above, especially as the composition of teams changes over time.
He doesn't extend the furlough scheme he's going to become very unpopular very quickly.
Yes, really.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/08/27/thank-bbc-inspiring-silent-majority-stand-cultural-revolution/
Second- in 2016, Trump's path to the White House was already pretty narrow. G-string narrow, so to speak. It's fairly clear that there are some voters who have moved Trump to notTrump. Who are the voters who have gone the other way?
Con lead back up to 7%.
Con 43 (+3)
Lab 36 (-2)
How do we explain this given all the Government's problems?
Possibly BLM / Proms related - ie even when people think Boris is incompetent / lazy / hopeless enough people will still vote for him as they support his values and think his heart is in the right place.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2020/08/26/voting-intention-con-43-lab-36-24-25-aug
But also - frankly - boring.
CoH had some really great missions - trying to hang on in Cataran as you got whittled down and whittled down was fantastic, particularly on the higher difficulty levels.
Gramsci was critical of the two world theory which led to pogroms
https://www.marxists.org/subject/jewish/gramsci-jews.pdf
Cultural marxism == antisemitic therefore is something the left like to claim without much foundation as far as I can see
"He saw clearly the logical consequence of accepting the Two Worlds thesis and how this thesis can lead
on from an artificial, to a deliberate separation of the races, culminating in
either a ' pogrom ' or the extermination camps:
"
1. What proportion of the workforce is still being paid under the furlough scheme?
2. Is there any indication of targeted support in the pipeline, to help those sectors that are still completely shuttered or incapable of breaking even because of social distancing? (but which might be viable again when conditions improve?)
3. Beyond that, how many of the jobs being supported are effectively already defunct and will disappear whenever furlough is withdrawn - i.e. if Sunak were to volte-face and extend the scheme, how many of those being helped by it would simply be on a stay of execution?
But that would require Rishi to be as terrible a person as Boris, and that seems unlikely.
Surely (barring some extreme cases which maybe should be dealt with separately) any businesses still furloughing simply are failed businesses unlikely to reopen now?
When the f*ck are people going to wake up to this nonsense??
https://twitter.com/IanSams/status/1298990902682107904
Interestingly in two minutes it doesn't even seem to name Trump, only a couple of images shown in contrast, instead making it positive about Biden instead. I wonder if it will work?
Relentless negativity doesn't work. Hope does work - its the one thread that links Obama, Boris, Dave and Trump is in their own different ways they inspired hope in their supporters - and this seems to be about building hope. I think its good.
I wonder what will happen.
If so, then why not now?
Plus, he may do a better of getting his core vote out. He's proved loyal to his followers, maybe they will be loyal to him.
Remember how Jezza Corbyn, before he became Nasty Jez, was Magic Grandpa?
That might be exactly what America needs right now, and Grandpa Joe could do that, provided the team around him aren't fruitloops.
https://twitter.com/planetjedward/status/1299065839803600896
However,,, with this lot, of course, you more often than not have no idea what they're going to come out with next.
During lockdown that wasn't viable but now lockdown is over it is.
People must get back to work. Furlough and UC can be stopped now
Stop benefits and people will return to work.
It’s only of great utility in preventing spread of infection, though, when it can be followed up by large scale rapid testing.
If we had mass availability of cheap antigen tests capable of results within an hour (and they do now exist), we wouldn’t have to worry about further lockdowns.
I'd let them go bust and spend the government money in training the unemployed for the jobs we'll need as the recession ends, with all the accelerated behavioral changes we've seen this year and those that are coming down the line.
Offering anyone unemployed a tuition fee discount on university admissions and professional training courses, alongside benefits support, will be cheaper than keeping them sat at home unproductive while their employers are dead in the medium term anyway.
If someone has a job and doesn't want it . . .
. . . and if someone else wants a job but doesn't have it . . .
Then I see a very, very simple solution. 🤷🏻♂️
Why do idiots say stupid stuff like that? Why are you sharing it? Is it to shine a light on the stupidity?
She took the opportunity of a massive lead to introduce something that has been on the political too-difficult-list for a couple of decades - but completely screwed up the messaging around it.
With hindsight, social care reform a couple of years ago might have made a substantial difference to the pandemic outcome.
But seriously, is this chap really inviting us to liken his classroom to a rave or something?
Thank you, Bozo.
For once, I agree with you!
They seem to have missed that the forced WFH experiment has been largely successful for those working from home for the last few months.
The determination of the government to try and get people back to commuting is one of their worst authoritarian instincts.