Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

The US polling that’s putting the focus on the key group that backs Trump – evangelical Chrisitans –

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited September 21 in General
The US polling that’s putting the focus on the key group that backs Trump – evangelical Chrisitans – politicalbetting.com

Extraordinary polling in the US about how White Evangelicals, Trump’s biggest backer view refugees pic.twitter.com/Cr0ZXyusMG

Read the full story here

«134

Comments

  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 36,727
    1st?

    Or 10th if using a PCR test.
  • 2nd like lockdown
  • Last orders.....last orders....
  • Speaking of religion, was unaware that the President is a devoted follower of the theology of the late Rev. Dr. Edward Pusey, one of the leading lights of the Oxford Movement.

    Thanks are in order to OGH for enlightening PBers as to the Puseyite grounding of Trumpsky's world view.
  • Its OK, he's an Old Etonian so the rules don't apply to him.
  • isamisam Posts: 34,038
    Is he going to be performing a violin duet with Quentin Cook via Zoom?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 33,190
    That article could have been written by pretty much any serious PB-er!
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 42,596
    edited September 21
    Will Boris Johnson eat some humble pie when he announces the new restrictions on Tuesday? Will he in any way admit he got things wrong or show a shamelessness that his enemies think is his defining political credo? There is some good news in the shape of the tracing app finally arriving this Thursday and more testing labs opening. Crucially, during the first wave, many voters were willing to give Johnson the benefit of the doubt.

    However, if that second wave crashes over our shores and leaves many more dead, they may be very unforgiving indeed. As the old saying goes: “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.” The next election is four long years away, but if the British public feel they’ve been made fools of in entrusting Johnson with their lives and livelihoods, the shockwaves could last for quite some time.


    https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/did-boris-johnsons-summer-policies-hasten-a-second-wave_uk_5f690e6cc5b6f7e41b0064c7?9df

    Johnson won't be standing in 2024 - the question is, how much damage will he have done to the Conservatives by then?
  • glwglw Posts: 6,699

    Will Boris Johnson eat some humble pie when he announces the new restrictions on Tuesday? Will he in any way admit he got things wrong or show a shamelessness that his enemies think is his defining political credo? There is some good news in the shape of the tracing app finally arriving this Thursday and more testing labs opening. Crucially, during the first wave, many voters were willing to give Johnson the benefit of the doubt.

    However, if that second wave crashes over our shores and leaves many more dead, they may be very unforgiving indeed. As the old saying goes: “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.” The next election is four long years away, but if the British public feel they’ve been made fools of in entrusting Johnson with their lives and livelihoods, the shockwaves could last for quite some time.


    https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/did-boris-johnsons-summer-policies-hasten-a-second-wave_uk_5f690e6cc5b6f7e41b0064c7?9df

    You would be a fool to trust BoJo to water your plants when you are on holiday, he's really not cut out for doing anything important.
  • isamisam Posts: 34,038

    Will Boris Johnson eat some humble pie when he announces the new restrictions on Tuesday? Will he in any way admit he got things wrong or show a shamelessness that his enemies think is his defining political credo? There is some good news in the shape of the tracing app finally arriving this Thursday and more testing labs opening. Crucially, during the first wave, many voters were willing to give Johnson the benefit of the doubt.

    However, if that second wave crashes over our shores and leaves many more dead, they may be very unforgiving indeed. As the old saying goes: “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.” The next election is four long years away, but if the British public feel they’ve been made fools of in entrusting Johnson with their lives and livelihoods, the shockwaves could last for quite some time.


    https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/did-boris-johnsons-summer-policies-hasten-a-second-wave_uk_5f690e6cc5b6f7e41b0064c7?9df

    Johnson won't be standing in 2024 - the question is, how much damage will he have done to the Conservatives by then?

    If only someone else had been Prime Minister, there might have been 0.1% fewer deaths, or maybe 0.1% more
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 78,329
    edited September 21
    Sounds a bit like most Tory members and supporters



    As a non evangelical Anglican personally I welcome genuine refugees, indeed we are even housing a number from the Home Office at a hotel outside Epping but they must be genuinely fleeing persecution, not illegal immigrants
  • stodgestodge Posts: 7,479
    Evening all :)

    Yet another U-turn from the Government - it seems local Government re-organisation is off the agenda:

    https://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey-news/surrey-county-council-live-unitary-18970570
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 36,727
    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Yet another U-turn from the Government - it seems local Government re-organisation is off the agenda:

    https://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey-news/surrey-county-council-live-unitary-18970570

    good.

    obviously johnson has been told tory mps want stand for it.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 56,922
    edited September 21
    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Yet another U-turn from the Government - it seems local Government re-organisation is off the agenda:

    https://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey-news/surrey-county-council-live-unitary-18970570

    Unfortunate, but not unsurprising given how many councils dislike such ideas and locals resent them, which can cost local politicos their majorities as a result. A bit like reforming planning it upsets the grass roots much of the time, and unlike planning probably cannot push on through the objections (though I'm not persuaded the gov will not fold on anything beyond tweaking planning either).

    It's a good idea that should be seriously looked at, although in fairness that particular example did seem a very big one.
  • Curse of the new thread:

    IanB2 said:


    Only a third of those regard themselves as “religiously active”, which makes my point.

    Anyhow I think we can safely put answering an option poll question down as lip service.

    Although we are drifting into religion here, my wife is staunch CoE. I am a staunch atheist. I go to church because my wife goes to church (though not at the moment due to it still being closed).

    My daughter goes to a local CoE school that you can only get in by church attendence. We attended. We STILL attend, five years later.
    Of those other parents who attended 'religiously' (oh the pun) during my daughters Nursery year, not one of them now attend.

    Despite 'official' figures suggesting atheism is only running at about 10-15%, I'd strongly suggest religion doesn't really feature in many people's lives anymore, until they're older and its something to do and because they then fear their own mortality and think that suddenly getting back to church will somehow see them in heaven.

    People are a lot less religious than they say they are.
    Religiously yes but I think people are culturally Christian.

    Lots still get christened, married and have funerals in local churches. Many go to carol concerts. I even enjoy Good Friday and harvest festival.

    I have better things to do on a Sunday morning each week though.
    Perhaps, but I question why people do this.
    People have their child baptised because its an excuse for a party.
    I really don't see many carol concerts round our way, and my wife is forever scanning the papers to see what IS going on. [1]
    The other festivals. Easter is a good excuse to chuff a load of choccie eggs and if its mid-late April a nice barbeque in the back garden with a lot of beer.
    Christmas is great for presents and an excuse for Dad to fall asleep in the arm chair pretending to listen to the Queen drone on about inclusion and what character the British people have shown this year in light of the [select important event from year].
    Harvest festival? Haven't seen one of those in decades.
    Our school and church tries to DISCOURAGE Halloween (Pagan festival). Doesn't seem to work as my daughter has been trick or treating every year since 2014.

    [1] But I'm in Bootle, where everyone is a good Communist, and remembering that Religion is the opiate of the masses bit.....
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 6,933
    edited September 21

    Fascinating how it's always the migrant Jocks who think that the SNP are obsessed by Bannockburn and Braveheart. Shows how long they've been away from Scotland I guess.
    I can't remember the last time (apart from that very strange vandalism of the statue which convinced nobody) that 1314 came up in Scottish discourse, outside said self-exiles, apart from the MoD trying to wreck the 1314 commemoration in 2014 by putting on jets at a suddenly arranged armed forces day nearby. The irony was it was the National Trust for Scotland who were doing the event. An organization which let Neil Oliver inveigh against indy in his spare time, at least when he later (?) became convener, (but which got rid of him for other political sins latterly).

    PS I did enjoy Dr OLiver's battlefields research, to give him full credit.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 11,624
    Carnyx said:

    Fascinating how it's always the migrant Jocks who think that the SNP are obsessed by Bannockburn and Braveheart. Shows how long they've been away from Scotland I guess.
    I can't remember the last time (apart from that very strange vandalism of the statue which convinced nobody) that 1314 came up in Scottish discourse, outside said self-exiles, apart from the MoD trying to wreck the 1314 commemoration in 2014 by putting on jets at a suddenly arranged armed forces day nearby. The irony was it was the National Trust for Scotland who were doing the event. An organization which let Neil Oliver inveigh against indy in his spare time, at least when he later (?) became convener, (but which got rid of him for other political sins latterly).

    PS I did enjoy Dr OLiver's battlefields research, to give him full credit.
    I mostly agree, but we're still left with that grim anthem...
  • stodgestodge Posts: 7,479
    kle4 said:


    Unfortunate, but not unsurprising given how many councils dislike such ideas and locals resent them, which can cost local politicos their majorities as a result. A bit like reforming planning it upsets the grass roots much of the time, and unlike planning probably cannot push on through the objections (though I'm not persuaded the gov will not fold on anything beyond tweaking planning either).

    It's a good idea that should be seriously looked at, although in fairness that particular example did seem a very big one.

    The problem was the Government didn't really recommend anything. The large County Councils such as Surrey decided they knew best and set out showing that. as unitary authorities, they could do it all cheaper and better.

    The District and Borough Councils argued they were closer to the residents and also argued smaller authorities were more effective so the options are a single authority for 1.2 million people or three authorities of roughly 400,000 each.

    Which is the better option? Should it be a one-size-fits-all approach?

  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 36,727
    stodge said:

    kle4 said:


    Unfortunate, but not unsurprising given how many councils dislike such ideas and locals resent them, which can cost local politicos their majorities as a result. A bit like reforming planning it upsets the grass roots much of the time, and unlike planning probably cannot push on through the objections (though I'm not persuaded the gov will not fold on anything beyond tweaking planning either).

    It's a good idea that should be seriously looked at, although in fairness that particular example did seem a very big one.

    The problem was the Government didn't really recommend anything. The large County Councils such as Surrey decided they knew best and set out showing that. as unitary authorities, they could do it all cheaper and better.

    The District and Borough Councils argued they were closer to the residents and also argued smaller authorities were more effective so the options are a single authority for 1.2 million people or three authorities of roughly 400,000 each.

    Which is the better option? Should it be a one-size-fits-all approach?

    I prefer a council that is closer to people. More power should be being devolved downwards not taken upwards.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 6,933
    FF43 said:

    Carnyx said:

    Fascinating how it's always the migrant Jocks who think that the SNP are obsessed by Bannockburn and Braveheart. Shows how long they've been away from Scotland I guess.
    I can't remember the last time (apart from that very strange vandalism of the statue which convinced nobody) that 1314 came up in Scottish discourse, outside said self-exiles, apart from the MoD trying to wreck the 1314 commemoration in 2014 by putting on jets at a suddenly arranged armed forces day nearby. The irony was it was the National Trust for Scotland who were doing the event. An organization which let Neil Oliver inveigh against indy in his spare time, at least when he later (?) became convener, (but which got rid of him for other political sins latterly).

    PS I did enjoy Dr OLiver's battlefields research, to give him full credit.
    I mostly agree, but we're still left with that grim anthem...
    Well, some people prefer to sing about Flodden, but I prefer 'A man's a man for a that' myself!
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 2,498

    Speaking of religion, was unaware that the President is a devoted follower of the theology of the late Rev. Dr. Edward Pusey, one of the leading lights of the Oxford Movement.

    Thanks are in order to OGH for enlightening PBers as to the Puseyite grounding of Trumpsky's world view.

    It turns out that Trump has been misquoted and maligned for many years: he obviously said that he likes to 'grab them by the Pusey', an expression signifying his commitment to vigorous theological debate...
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 2,498
    No basis in fact? What the fuck happened in the spring then?
  • Table service only in pubs...a bit of class at last coming to your local spoons.

    BBC News - Covid: Pubs and restaurants in England to have 10pm closing times
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54242634
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 6,933

    Speaking of religion, was unaware that the President is a devoted follower of the theology of the late Rev. Dr. Edward Pusey, one of the leading lights of the Oxford Movement.

    Thanks are in order to OGH for enlightening PBers as to the Puseyite grounding of Trumpsky's world view.

    It turns out that Trump has been misquoted and maligned for many years: he obviously said that he likes to 'grab them by the Pusey', an expression signifying his commitment to vigorous theological debate...
    That's right, he liked to press copies of Tract XC upon any ladies that looked remotely in need of it.
  • isam said:

    Will Boris Johnson eat some humble pie when he announces the new restrictions on Tuesday? Will he in any way admit he got things wrong or show a shamelessness that his enemies think is his defining political credo? There is some good news in the shape of the tracing app finally arriving this Thursday and more testing labs opening. Crucially, during the first wave, many voters were willing to give Johnson the benefit of the doubt.

    However, if that second wave crashes over our shores and leaves many more dead, they may be very unforgiving indeed. As the old saying goes: “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.” The next election is four long years away, but if the British public feel they’ve been made fools of in entrusting Johnson with their lives and livelihoods, the shockwaves could last for quite some time.


    https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/did-boris-johnsons-summer-policies-hasten-a-second-wave_uk_5f690e6cc5b6f7e41b0064c7?9df

    Johnson won't be standing in 2024 - the question is, how much damage will he have done to the Conservatives by then?

    If only someone else had been Prime Minister, there might have been 0.1% fewer deaths, or maybe 0.1% more
    Sorry, but that's just tosh. Had the March lockdown started a week earlier, the number of infections (and hence deaths) would have more than halved. And, because the up and down waves weren't symmetrical, the initial lockdown could have been released about a month earlier than it was.

    Would every potential PM have grasped this? Probably not.

    Did Johnson's instincts (distracted, not very numerate, a bit lazy, loath to impose restrictions) mean that he was about the worst possible person to have in the hot seat at the time? Would some plausible alternatives (say Rory Stewart, who had experience of managing an epidemic) have done a substantially better job? Hell yes.
  • I think it going to be big tomorrow, Boris is doing a big 8pm address the nation.
  • isamisam Posts: 34,038
    Pretty incredible - purposely scaring the horses
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 62,066
    edited September 21

    I think it going to be big tomorrow, Boris is doing a big 8pm address the nation.

    What. To announce the pubs are shutting at 10 ?
  • HYUFD said:
    I can't imagine Witty and Valance onboard with that. They were really clear today they wanted much more limited interactions between different households.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 62,066

    No basis in fact? What the fuck happened in the spring then?
    Thirsty bunch journos, they'll be feeling the pub closures more than most.
  • isam said:

    Pretty incredible - purposely scaring the horses
    I watched the briefing live on Sky. When that slide came up, we were specifically told that the red (future) bars were "not a forecast" but an indication of what *might* happen if no action is taken. I knew then that all the press would talk about was tens of thousands of more deaths coming. In my view this is because this is a science story being reported on by political journalists. It's rubbish.
  • isamisam Posts: 34,038
    Pulpstar said:

    I think it going to be big tomorrow, Boris is doing a big 8pm address the nation.

    What. To announce the pubs are shutting at 10 ?
    I don't even like going to the pub until 10! Had a stinker
  • Pulpstar said:

    I think it going to be big tomorrow, Boris is doing a big 8pm address the nation.

    What. To announce the pubs are shutting at 10 ?
    If that is the extent of it, he will be laughed at. You have to save you prime time address the nation for the big shit. If we end up getting him appearing before EastEnders every other week to announce some tinkering with the rules, nobody will take any notice.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 11,624
    Carnyx said:

    FF43 said:

    Carnyx said:

    Fascinating how it's always the migrant Jocks who think that the SNP are obsessed by Bannockburn and Braveheart. Shows how long they've been away from Scotland I guess.
    I can't remember the last time (apart from that very strange vandalism of the statue which convinced nobody) that 1314 came up in Scottish discourse, outside said self-exiles, apart from the MoD trying to wreck the 1314 commemoration in 2014 by putting on jets at a suddenly arranged armed forces day nearby. The irony was it was the National Trust for Scotland who were doing the event. An organization which let Neil Oliver inveigh against indy in his spare time, at least when he later (?) became convener, (but which got rid of him for other political sins latterly).

    PS I did enjoy Dr OLiver's battlefields research, to give him full credit.
    I mostly agree, but we're still left with that grim anthem...
    Well, some people prefer to sing about Flodden, but I prefer 'A man's a man for a that' myself!
    Burns is always worth it. Maybe not the easiest song for group singing?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 78,329

    HYUFD said:
    I can't imagine Witty and Valance onboard with that. They were really clear today they wanted much more limited interactions between different households.
    Yes well they don't have to think about the economy or peoples' mental health, a balance needed to be struck, social distancing and small groups yes but not another full lockdown
  • LadyGLadyG Posts: 1,928
    I don't give a fuck any more. I don't care how many old crappy demented people die. Enough. We are crucifying the economy and society for a disease that is about 5 times worse than flu. It is not the Black Fucking Death

    Come and arrest me you Gestapo fucks. I am going to drink with my friends and my lovers and if we snuff it, so be it.
  • Pulpstar said:

    I think it going to be big tomorrow, Boris is doing a big 8pm address the nation.

    What. To announce the pubs are shutting at 10 ?
    If that is the extent of it, he will be laughed at. You have to save you prime time address the nation for the big shit. If we end up getting him appearing before EastEnders every other week to announce some tinkering with the rules, nobody will take any notice.
    When was that televised speech where you could tell that he'd really wanted to sound the all-clear, but the numbers didn't support it, and it ended up as a garbled mess?
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    I can't imagine Witty and Valance onboard with that. They were really clear today they wanted much more limited interactions between different households.
    Yes well they don't have to think about the economy or peoples' mental health, a balance needed to be struck, social distancing and small groups yes but not another full lockdown
    I presumed they were more talking about having different sets of mates over every day to watch the footy etc.

    Rule of 6 is no good if every morning, noon and night you hang out with a different set of 6.
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    I can't imagine Witty and Valance onboard with that. They were really clear today they wanted much more limited interactions between different households.
    Yes well they don't have to think about the economy or peoples' mental health, a balance needed to be struck, social distancing and small groups yes but not another full lockdown
    The trouble is that the best way to ensure that cases go through the roof, and we have no choice but to do another megalockdown, is to have delayed and half-hearted measures now.

    The "OK, you have one final chance" speech fails much more frequently than it succeeds.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 49,135
    If you watched it, you will know he prefaced it saying it was "not a projection".
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 7,453
    I don't understand the 10pm thing. It would make more sense to close down pubs altogether.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 78,329

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    I can't imagine Witty and Valance onboard with that. They were really clear today they wanted much more limited interactions between different households.
    Yes well they don't have to think about the economy or peoples' mental health, a balance needed to be struck, social distancing and small groups yes but not another full lockdown
    The trouble is that the best way to ensure that cases go through the roof, and we have no choice but to do another megalockdown, is to have delayed and half-hearted measures now.

    The "OK, you have one final chance" speech fails much more frequently than it succeeds.
    There should never be another megalockdown full stop, whatever the circumstances, it would destroy the economy just stick to the rule of 6 and mask wearing in shops and transport and enforce it
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    I can't imagine Witty and Valance onboard with that. They were really clear today they wanted much more limited interactions between different households.
    Yes well they don't have to think about the economy or peoples' mental health, a balance needed to be struck, social distancing and small groups yes but not another full lockdown
    The trouble is that the best way to ensure that cases go through the roof, and we have no choice but to do another megalockdown, is to have delayed and half-hearted measures now.

    The "OK, you have one final chance" speech fails much more frequently than it succeeds.
    The thing is that R is not that much above 1 and was below it recently.

    If people behave properly then there is little reason R can't go back to below 1 without draconian actions.

    A "this shit is serious, pull yourselves together and be responsible" speech without a draconian lockdown could be the best situation from here.

    Treat people as responsible adults and encourage them to be responsible.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 78,329

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    I can't imagine Witty and Valance onboard with that. They were really clear today they wanted much more limited interactions between different households.
    Yes well they don't have to think about the economy or peoples' mental health, a balance needed to be struck, social distancing and small groups yes but not another full lockdown
    I presumed they were more talking about having different sets of mates over every day to watch the footy etc.

    Rule of 6 is no good if every morning, noon and night you hang out with a different set of 6.
    As long as you stay 2 metres apart, no problem
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    I can't imagine Witty and Valance onboard with that. They were really clear today they wanted much more limited interactions between different households.
    Yes well they don't have to think about the economy or peoples' mental health, a balance needed to be struck, social distancing and small groups yes but not another full lockdown
    The trouble is that the best way to ensure that cases go through the roof, and we have no choice but to do another megalockdown, is to have delayed and half-hearted measures now.

    The "OK, you have one final chance" speech fails much more frequently than it succeeds.
    If they try the parent "i'm warning you" act again, it will be like last time, way too many people just ignoring it, then when the harsher restrictions come in, the same people blame the government for being too slow.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 7,453
    A few days ago I was at a pub in London that was still allowing people to order drinks at the bar. That's going to be outlawed now.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 78,329
    Andy_JS said:

    I don't understand the 10pm thing. It would make more sense to close down pubs altogether.

    No it wouldn't given the economic damage, it just limits opening hours especially avoiding busy Friday and Saturday nights which often end at midnight or later
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 1,346
    edited September 21
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    I can't imagine Witty and Valance onboard with that. They were really clear today they wanted much more limited interactions between different households.
    Yes well they don't have to think about the economy or peoples' mental health, a balance needed to be struck, social distancing and small groups yes but not another full lockdown
    The trouble is that the best way to ensure that cases go through the roof, and we have no choice but to do another megalockdown, is to have delayed and half-hearted measures now.

    The "OK, you have one final chance" speech fails much more frequently than it succeeds.
    There should never be another megalockdown full stop, whatever the circumstances, it would destroy the economy just stick to the rule of 6 and mask wearing in shops and transport and enforce it
    And if that turns out to slow, but not stop the current increase?

    To be clear, I don't want another lockdown either. It would be hugely damaging and a complete failure of government. But you can't just say "we mustn't have another lockdown". You need a robust setup so that we don't end up where we ended up in March.
  • LadyGLadyG Posts: 1,928
    edited September 21
    Andy_JS said:

    I don't understand the 10pm thing. It would make more sense to close down pubs altogether.

    Can you imagine a British winter without British pubs?? It is unthinkable. We might as well commit suicide.
  • Andy_JS said:

    I don't understand the 10pm thing. It would make more sense to close down pubs altogether.

    That would be much more draconian and would put many pubs out of business for good.

    A great many pubs will get the vast majority of their income before 10pm and from responsible drinkers who aren't a threat to anyone.

    My bigger concern is that a 10pm closure just leads to people thinking "lets continue this at yours" and leads to home drinking without any precautions.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 78,329
    edited September 21

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    I can't imagine Witty and Valance onboard with that. They were really clear today they wanted much more limited interactions between different households.
    Yes well they don't have to think about the economy or peoples' mental health, a balance needed to be struck, social distancing and small groups yes but not another full lockdown
    The trouble is that the best way to ensure that cases go through the roof, and we have no choice but to do another megalockdown, is to have delayed and half-hearted measures now.

    The "OK, you have one final chance" speech fails much more frequently than it succeeds.
    There should never be another megalockdown full stop, whatever the circumstances, it would destroy the economy just stick to the rule of 6 and mask wearing in shops and transport and enforce it
    And if that turns out to slow, but not stop the current increase?
    So what, it is not black death, just keep the elderly and those with pre existing conditions indoors as much as possible.

    If we do not get a vaccine soon we could be living with this for years, even decades
  • LadyGLadyG Posts: 1,928

    Andy_JS said:

    I don't understand the 10pm thing. It would make more sense to close down pubs altogether.

    That would be much more draconian and would put many pubs out of business for good.

    A great many pubs will get the vast majority of their income before 10pm and from responsible drinkers who aren't a threat to anyone.

    My bigger concern is that a 10pm closure just leads to people thinking "lets continue this at yours" and leads to home drinking without any precautions.
    Just let us all catch the stupid disease and let those who will die, die.
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    I can't imagine Witty and Valance onboard with that. They were really clear today they wanted much more limited interactions between different households.
    Yes well they don't have to think about the economy or peoples' mental health, a balance needed to be struck, social distancing and small groups yes but not another full lockdown
    The trouble is that the best way to ensure that cases go through the roof, and we have no choice but to do another megalockdown, is to have delayed and half-hearted measures now.

    The "OK, you have one final chance" speech fails much more frequently than it succeeds.
    There should never be another megalockdown full stop, whatever the circumstances, it would destroy the economy just stick to the rule of 6 and mask wearing in shops and transport and enforce it
    And if that turns out to slow, but not stop the current increase?
    If it slows it then it will have done the job considering that the increase isn't that far above 1. We aren't at the stage of an R of 3 or doubling every 3 days like we were in February/early March.
  • And another stupid start / stop decision. We all knew this was coming a week ago, but they still went ahead with it

  • LadyGLadyG Posts: 1,928

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    I can't imagine Witty and Valance onboard with that. They were really clear today they wanted much more limited interactions between different households.
    Yes well they don't have to think about the economy or peoples' mental health, a balance needed to be struck, social distancing and small groups yes but not another full lockdown
    The trouble is that the best way to ensure that cases go through the roof, and we have no choice but to do another megalockdown, is to have delayed and half-hearted measures now.

    The "OK, you have one final chance" speech fails much more frequently than it succeeds.
    There should never be another megalockdown full stop, whatever the circumstances, it would destroy the economy just stick to the rule of 6 and mask wearing in shops and transport and enforce it
    And if that turns out to slow, but not stop the current increase?
    If it slows it then it will have done the job considering that the increase isn't that far above 1. We aren't at the stage of an R of 3 or doubling every 3 days like we were in February/early March.
    What we need is an R nought of about 7, so everyone gets it very quick, and those who are doomed can be buried in mass graves covered with lime. The rest of us, or you, can then get on with normal life.

    We are paralysing ourselves for a disease which would have made our medieval ancestors, who built the great Gothic cathedrals of Europe, the finest artistic creations on earth, snigger in total derision.
  • Francis - I hope that means the Premier League rolls out televising every single live game of this season, at least unless or until fans are allowed back in the stadum.

    Though I've wanted every PL game televised legally for years, it is absolutely bonkers not to televise the 3pm Saturday games when there are no fans at 3pm Saturday games.
  • LadyGLadyG Posts: 1,928

    And another stupid start / stop decision. We all knew this was coming a week ago, but they still went ahead with it

    To be fair to HMG, every government in the WEst is making these mad choices. Cf Paris and the Tour de France.
  • Francis - I hope that means the Premier League rolls out televising every single live game of this season, at least unless or until fans are allowed back in the stadum.

    Though I've wanted every PL game televised legally for years, it is absolutely bonkers not to televise the 3pm Saturday games when there are no fans at 3pm Saturday games.

    This really should be the kick up the arse to get into real world, where everybody knows all the 3pm games are streamed illegally.

    Just offer reasonable priced access to all games, do a red zone type show where we get to switch between game footage / instant highlights (rather than having to listen to Robbie Savage scream at a monitor).
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 8,776
    edited September 21

    HYUFD said:
    I can't imagine Witty and Valance onboard with that. They were really clear today they wanted much more limited interactions between different households.
    In effect they are tightening restrictions only in the areas of lowest incidence. Just under half the country, the half which has the most disease, already has pubs closing early!
    So the PM will use political capital announcing new measures to annoy those in low risk regions. And announce nothing new at all for high risk areas!
    Genius.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 42,679
    edited September 21
    LadyG said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    I can't imagine Witty and Valance onboard with that. They were really clear today they wanted much more limited interactions between different households.
    Yes well they don't have to think about the economy or peoples' mental health, a balance needed to be struck, social distancing and small groups yes but not another full lockdown
    The trouble is that the best way to ensure that cases go through the roof, and we have no choice but to do another megalockdown, is to have delayed and half-hearted measures now.

    The "OK, you have one final chance" speech fails much more frequently than it succeeds.
    There should never be another megalockdown full stop, whatever the circumstances, it would destroy the economy just stick to the rule of 6 and mask wearing in shops and transport and enforce it
    And if that turns out to slow, but not stop the current increase?
    If it slows it then it will have done the job considering that the increase isn't that far above 1. We aren't at the stage of an R of 3 or doubling every 3 days like we were in February/early March.
    What we need is an R nought of about 7, so everyone gets it very quick, and those who are doomed can be buried in mass graves covered with lime. The rest of us, or you, can then get on with normal life.

    We are paralysing ourselves for a disease which would have made our medieval ancestors, who built the great Gothic cathedrals of Europe, the finest artistic creations on earth, snigger in total derision.
    You've changed your tune.

    If we were going to do that we should have done that six months ago when you were getting your knickers in a twist, complaining about why people here were talking about care homes.

    To do that now when a vaccine is probably just weeks away from being announced as being successful seems . . . odd timing.
  • LadyG said:

    And another stupid start / stop decision. We all knew this was coming a week ago, but they still went ahead with it

    To be fair to HMG, every government in the WEst is making these mad choices. Cf Paris and the Tour de France.
    Tour de France was just insane...with Macron riding along in the officials car waving.

    I am genuinely surprised a rider didn't test positive after somebody screaming in their face as they went up a mountain.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 62,066
    edited September 21
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    I can't imagine Witty and Valance onboard with that. They were really clear today they wanted much more limited interactions between different households.
    Yes well they don't have to think about the economy or peoples' mental health, a balance needed to be struck, social distancing and small groups yes but not another full lockdown
    The trouble is that the best way to ensure that cases go through the roof, and we have no choice but to do another megalockdown, is to have delayed and half-hearted measures now.

    The "OK, you have one final chance" speech fails much more frequently than it succeeds.
    There should never be another megalockdown full stop, whatever the circumstances, it would destroy the economy just stick to the rule of 6 and mask wearing in shops and transport and enforce it
    And if that turns out to slow, but not stop the current increase?
    So what, it is not black death, just keep the elderly and those with pre existing conditions indoors as much as possible.

    If we do not get a vaccine soon we could be living with this for years, even decades
    We'll be getting trial data on vaccines shortly, should we not at least wait for that ?
  • dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:
    I can't imagine Witty and Valance onboard with that. They were really clear today they wanted much more limited interactions between different households.
    In effect they are tightening restrictions only in the areas of lowest incidence. Just under half the country, the half which has the most disease, already has pubs closing early!
    So the PM will use political capital announcing new measures to annoy those in low risk regions. And announce nothing new at all for high risk areas!
    Genius.
    I think what the PM has to say will be about more than just restrictions. It will be about imploring people to be more careful which matters far more than restrictions.

    Treat people like grown ups and they will behave like grown ups.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 8,776
    RobD said:

    If you watched it, you will know he prefaced it saying it was "not a projection".
    I listened to it.
    They were explicit.
    A worst case scenario if nothing was done. So not a prediction at all.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 78,329
    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    I can't imagine Witty and Valance onboard with that. They were really clear today they wanted much more limited interactions between different households.
    Yes well they don't have to think about the economy or peoples' mental health, a balance needed to be struck, social distancing and small groups yes but not another full lockdown
    The trouble is that the best way to ensure that cases go through the roof, and we have no choice but to do another megalockdown, is to have delayed and half-hearted measures now.

    The "OK, you have one final chance" speech fails much more frequently than it succeeds.
    There should never be another megalockdown full stop, whatever the circumstances, it would destroy the economy just stick to the rule of 6 and mask wearing in shops and transport and enforce it
    And if that turns out to slow, but not stop the current increase?
    So what, it is not black death, just keep the elderly and those with pre existing conditions indoors as much as possible.

    If we do not get a vaccine soon we could be living with this for years, even decades
    We'll be getting trial data on vaccines shortly, should we not at least wait for that ?
    At most wait for the 6 months the government says we need to wait, if not then we just have to get back to normal as far as possible while keeping the social distancing and masks
  • dixiedean said:

    RobD said:

    If you watched it, you will know he prefaced it saying it was "not a projection".
    I listened to it.
    They were explicit.
    A worst case scenario if nothing was done. So not a prediction at all.
    He even said "not a projection" about 3 or 4 times from memory.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 8,776

    LadyG said:

    And another stupid start / stop decision. We all knew this was coming a week ago, but they still went ahead with it

    To be fair to HMG, every government in the WEst is making these mad choices. Cf Paris and the Tour de France.
    Tour de France was just insane...with Macron riding along in the officials car waving.

    I am genuinely surprised a rider didn't test positive after somebody screaming in their face as they went up a mountain.
    And yet they didn't.
    There is still no confirmed case of outdoor transmission...
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 56,922
    stodge said:

    kle4 said:


    Unfortunate, but not unsurprising given how many councils dislike such ideas and locals resent them, which can cost local politicos their majorities as a result. A bit like reforming planning it upsets the grass roots much of the time, and unlike planning probably cannot push on through the objections (though I'm not persuaded the gov will not fold on anything beyond tweaking planning either).

    It's a good idea that should be seriously looked at, although in fairness that particular example did seem a very big one.

    The problem was the Government didn't really recommend anything. The large County Councils such as Surrey decided they knew best and set out showing that. as unitary authorities, they could do it all cheaper and better.

    The District and Borough Councils argued they were closer to the residents and also argued smaller authorities were more effective so the options are a single authority for 1.2 million people or three authorities of roughly 400,000 each.

    Which is the better option? Should it be a one-size-fits-all approach?

    Not one size fits all, no, but my personal opinion is that in many places you could combine authorities into some number of unitaries for much administrative and governance gain with minimal if any actual loss in terms of effective community representation. The county and one district in my area pushed ahead with it despite the MPs and the party of the ruling group being against it at the time, and I really haven't seen a diminution of representation.

    I think when you get down to a certain level of powers and money, there is not much additional benefit to be gained from devolving it down still further to more localised elements, even though localism in general is a good thing. I think politicians and people, being conservative, instinctively oppose such things even if they have no genuine attachment to, say, a local government district, but the harm they fear is vastly overblown.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 62,066
    dixiedean said:

    LadyG said:

    And another stupid start / stop decision. We all knew this was coming a week ago, but they still went ahead with it

    To be fair to HMG, every government in the WEst is making these mad choices. Cf Paris and the Tour de France.
    Tour de France was just insane...with Macron riding along in the officials car waving.

    I am genuinely surprised a rider didn't test positive after somebody screaming in their face as they went up a mountain.
    And yet they didn't.
    There is still no confirmed case of outdoor transmission...
    I think there have been confirmed cases from (Absolubtely packed) beer gardens.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 7,453

    Francis - I hope that means the Premier League rolls out televising every single live game of this season, at least unless or until fans are allowed back in the stadum.

    Though I've wanted every PL game televised legally for years, it is absolutely bonkers not to televise the 3pm Saturday games when there are no fans at 3pm Saturday games.

    This really should be the kick up the arse to get into real world, where everybody knows all the 3pm games are streamed illegally.

    Just offer reasonable priced access to all games, do a red zone type show where we get to switch between game footage / instant highlights (rather than having to listen to Robbie Savage scream at a monitor).
    I didn't know about the streams, although I'm not a football fan so I wouldn't.
  • dixiedean said:

    LadyG said:

    And another stupid start / stop decision. We all knew this was coming a week ago, but they still went ahead with it

    To be fair to HMG, every government in the WEst is making these mad choices. Cf Paris and the Tour de France.
    Tour de France was just insane...with Macron riding along in the officials car waving.

    I am genuinely surprised a rider didn't test positive after somebody screaming in their face as they went up a mountain.
    And yet they didn't.
    There is still no confirmed case of outdoor transmission...
    Well that isn't true. For starters, there was a large outbreak at a pub in Stone. The "super spreader" attended twice, once drinking in the beer garden (they set up a bar out there) and once for a party. 10s of people from both those nights were infected.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 56,922
    LadyG said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I don't understand the 10pm thing. It would make more sense to close down pubs altogether.

    That would be much more draconian and would put many pubs out of business for good.

    A great many pubs will get the vast majority of their income before 10pm and from responsible drinkers who aren't a threat to anyone.

    My bigger concern is that a 10pm closure just leads to people thinking "lets continue this at yours" and leads to home drinking without any precautions.
    Just let us all catch the stupid disease and let those who will die, die.
    Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 8,776

    dixiedean said:

    LadyG said:

    And another stupid start / stop decision. We all knew this was coming a week ago, but they still went ahead with it

    To be fair to HMG, every government in the WEst is making these mad choices. Cf Paris and the Tour de France.
    Tour de France was just insane...with Macron riding along in the officials car waving.

    I am genuinely surprised a rider didn't test positive after somebody screaming in their face as they went up a mountain.
    And yet they didn't.
    There is still no confirmed case of outdoor transmission...
    Well that isn't true. For starters, there was a large outbreak at a pub in Stone. The "super spreader" attended twice, once drinking in the beer garden (they set up a bar out there) and once for a party. 10s of people from both those nights were infected.
    In which case I withdraw as I am obviously mistaken. Am now trying to remember where I heard that.
    Sounded very convincing at the time.
  • dodradedodrade Posts: 495
    On topic, presumably these evangelicals would have sent Mary, Joseph and the baby Jesus back to Herod?
  • LadyG said:

    I don't give a fuck any more. I don't care how many old crappy demented people die. Enough. We are crucifying the economy and society for a disease that is about 5 times worse than flu. It is not the Black Fucking Death

    Come and arrest me you Gestapo fucks. I am going to drink with my friends and my lovers and if we snuff it, so be it.

    Cheerio then.
  • dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    LadyG said:

    And another stupid start / stop decision. We all knew this was coming a week ago, but they still went ahead with it

    To be fair to HMG, every government in the WEst is making these mad choices. Cf Paris and the Tour de France.
    Tour de France was just insane...with Macron riding along in the officials car waving.

    I am genuinely surprised a rider didn't test positive after somebody screaming in their face as they went up a mountain.
    And yet they didn't.
    There is still no confirmed case of outdoor transmission...
    Well that isn't true. For starters, there was a large outbreak at a pub in Stone. The "super spreader" attended twice, once drinking in the beer garden (they set up a bar out there) and once for a party. 10s of people from both those nights were infected.
    In which case I withdraw as I am obviously mistaken. Am now trying to remember where I heard that.
    Sounded very convincing at the time.
    I think early on in the pandemic, initial studies didn't find any cases. I don't think it is in doubt that transmission is much harder outside, but it has definitely happened.
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 2,498
    kle4 said:

    LadyG said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I don't understand the 10pm thing. It would make more sense to close down pubs altogether.

    That would be much more draconian and would put many pubs out of business for good.

    A great many pubs will get the vast majority of their income before 10pm and from responsible drinkers who aren't a threat to anyone.

    My bigger concern is that a 10pm closure just leads to people thinking "lets continue this at yours" and leads to home drinking without any precautions.
    Just let us all catch the stupid disease and let those who will die, die.
    Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius.
    Monstrous. A crime against humanity.

    Using the indicative in a indirect question? And eius to refer to the subject of the sentence, rather than a form of suus? These people were truly barbarians.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 18,691
    HYUFD said:
    Daughter’s business has been doing table service only since reopening on 4 July. So nothing new there.

    And in our area there has been no Covid for months now.
    Andy_JS said:

    I don't understand the 10pm thing. It would make more sense to close down pubs altogether.

    They’d have to continue with furlough and/or provide further support. They don’t want to do that.
  • Given the coverage of tomorrow's announcement in the press and on Twitter, we clearly still have government policies being leaked out to the favoured press in dribs and drabs, despite the Speaker insisting that such announcements should be made in the House of Commons. I wonder what the source of the leaks is? It's a poor way to govern, whatever. They (the government and advisors) should shut up until BJ addresses the Commons and then has his press conference in the evening.
  • Cyclefree said:

    HYUFD said:
    Daughter’s business has been doing table service only since reopening on 4 July. So nothing new there.

    And in our area there has been no Covid for months now.
    Andy_JS said:

    I don't understand the 10pm thing. It would make more sense to close down pubs altogether.

    They’d have to continue with furlough and/or provide further support. They don’t want to do that.
    I can't see how they be able to close the furlough scheme now. I mean they folded on school meals from a bit of bad PR, no way they will hold out under the outrage of making all those people unemployed due to the new restrictions.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 8,776

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    LadyG said:

    And another stupid start / stop decision. We all knew this was coming a week ago, but they still went ahead with it

    To be fair to HMG, every government in the WEst is making these mad choices. Cf Paris and the Tour de France.
    Tour de France was just insane...with Macron riding along in the officials car waving.

    I am genuinely surprised a rider didn't test positive after somebody screaming in their face as they went up a mountain.
    And yet they didn't.
    There is still no confirmed case of outdoor transmission...
    Well that isn't true. For starters, there was a large outbreak at a pub in Stone. The "super spreader" attended twice, once drinking in the beer garden (they set up a bar out there) and once for a party. 10s of people from both those nights were infected.
    In which case I withdraw as I am obviously mistaken. Am now trying to remember where I heard that.
    Sounded very convincing at the time.
    I think early on in the pandemic, initial studies didn't find any cases. I don't think it is in doubt that transmission is much harder outside, but it has definitely happened.
    Maybe I did just hear it early on.
    6 months, 6 weeks and 6 days ago don't seem that different as of late.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 15,142
    I fear the government hasn’t had a COVID policy for a while. It seemed to con itself into believing that it had gone away by itself.

    There are three possible policies...

    1) Minimise disruption, do nothing/herd immunity
    2) Minimise economic and social impact, manage it to within NHS capacity
    3) Minimise casualties, aim for eradication

    That’s about it. You have to pick either 1,2 or 3.




  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 12,246
    WFH if you can is a total no-brainer. For those who cycle and take a packed lunch it doesn't even hurt Northern Trains or Greggs.

    (Other train operators and lunch vendors are available)

    Night all
  • Given the coverage of tomorrow's announcement in the press and on Twitter, we clearly still have government policies being leaked out to the favoured press in dribs and drabs, despite the Speaker insisting that such announcements should be made in the House of Commons. I wonder what the source of the leaks is? It's a poor way to govern, whatever. They (the government and advisors) should shut up until BJ addresses the Commons and then has his press conference in the evening.

    I am also not really sure what it achieves. Leaking the budget is about getting some positive news cycles. You don't get extra brownie points for saying you will close the boozer an hour early.

    This is about public health and people already get confused from hearing this, then that. You need the message to be clear and concise.
  • isamisam Posts: 34,038

    Francis - I hope that means the Premier League rolls out televising every single live game of this season, at least unless or until fans are allowed back in the stadum.

    Though I've wanted every PL game televised legally for years, it is absolutely bonkers not to televise the 3pm Saturday games when there are no fans at 3pm Saturday games.

    There are fans at lower league 3pm games though, probably a lot more than there used to be
This discussion has been closed.