This is the kind of stuff we've needed for a while, a bit of flag waving
Turns me off a bit, I have to say. But my vote is safe (if not my membership) and it clearly is the case that the party under Corbyn was perceived as lacking in "proud to be British" sentiment and that this did cost votes and seats. It's important to counter this now and win a proportion of those voters back. So to this extent, I approve. "Go Keir. Wave that wi... flag."
But caution is required - because it's undeniable that xenophobic attitudes were a factor in taking some of these erstwhile Labour voters down the Brexit and UKIP-to-Tory path and Starmer should not imo be chasing this constituency. For 2 reasons. (i) Such attitudes are at odds with the core values of the party. (ii) It would backfire. The support picked up by pandering to xenophobic variety "patriotism" would be outweighed by the support lost in the party's new metropolitan base.
I don't think Starmer is pandering to anti-foreigner xenophobic patriotism but appealing to the middle of the road proud to be British patriotism.
Most of the party's new metropolitan base are bright enough to recognise that this is a route to power and won't be put off by it. It might even appeal to some.
I do hope and expect he will get things right. The risk I'm highlighting - of chasing Red Wall and losing Red Metro - is one he will have given far more thought to than I have. But I do fret about it. The shift to the left in 2015 turned me from a loyal Labour voter into a party member.
The answer to that will depend on whether he thinks the number of party members or the number of votes for his party at a general election is the more important statistic.
Oh the answer will be votes. No question. He will only take a direction if he is confident that the Red Wall gained will be bigger than the Red Metro lost. And of course in an ideal world - or even in this world if things go his way - he will gain both.
But how much Red Metro is there to actually lose at a GE? I’d say not much at all.
Why do you say that? Labour has become the party of the big cities and affluent uni towns. This is the new base - educated, urban, diverse, socially liberal - and it's bigger (now) than the old trad one that has drifted away on culture issues. There is a risk of overreaction to the loss of the Red Wall. That's my point. I'm sure Keir is aware of it. Certainly hope he is. Let's remember that a ton of votes are coming our way next time just purely based on integrity and competence. Johnson is being exposed as mendacious and utterly clueless. So, reap that harvest, by all means alter the mood music on "patriotism" so it doesn't turn people off unnecessarily, but do not make "Britain First" a key part of the offering, above all stay radical and socially liberal, do NOT lose people like me. There are loads of us. Ok, so we don't own a Union Jack or a St George, and we don't race whippets, but we vote.
How many seats will they lose at a GE, from those metropolitan and university towns? I suspect very few. If Starmer moves a little right from Corbyn you’re all voting for him and not the Tory, aren’t you?
The problem is that, to a large number of your metropolitan lefty friends, “socially liberal” means calling all white people racist, knocking down statues and saying that boys are girls. That goes down like a cup of cold sick in the Red Wall Seats, and will continue to go down like a cup of cold sick at the next election, unless Labour moves away from the far left.
They don’t need you to appeal to you to vote for them because you will anyway, they need me to vote for them if they want a majority.
Labour should be thinking about the Tory's soft underbelly. When sun finally sets on this administration there will be rich pickings. Scotland and the Red Wall taught us there are no safe seats.
There are plenty of Tory seats where a fresh start and a new face is loooong overdue.
Anecdotally, I have been surprised by the reaction of lots of my friends' parents, most of whom are lifelong Tories.
Just one example, one of my friend's mum has voted Tory all her life, voted Leave, reads the Daily Mail.
Said to her daughter: "I quite like that Keir Starmer, I would think about voting for him."
He seems to have an appeal from the kind of Tory that likes a conventional, MOR bloke in a nice suit.
The Tory leader is also far out in front for patriotism, backed by 68 per cent, compared with just 43 per cent who said it of Sir Keir.
A large gap but significantly smaller than under Corbyn
Johnson has sold himself as Churchill. Some are still buying the lie.
I don't know much about Starmer's laying his life down for his country credentials. Johnson from what I have read would sell us all down the river for personal enrichment ( not financial of course, but power related, or even for a crafty shag).
But then it is up to those families to form a support bubble and limit contact with the rest of us to ensure granny and grandpa don't die. As I said, there are too many people who believe in cakeism (ironic, I know) and want to have normal social lives but also be in regular contact with their parents and grandparents who are vulnerable and have a high chance of death of they catch the virus and a very high chance of severe ongoing problems if they don't die.
It just seems as though no one in the country is willing to have this conversation in a grown up way without calling everyone who thinks risk segmentation has a role to play a bunch of heartless Nazis or something like that.
And it's not really that difficult it's an either or question. You can socialise or see vulnerable people just don't do both...
But why do you regard the parents and grandparents as lacking agency? A demented 80 year old in a care home needs protection for sure, including from their own children and grandchildren if necessary. Most people are not demented, not even if they are of bus pass age, and can make their own minds up. We mustn't elide at higher risk into vulnerable into helpless.
Boris sounds a bit more awake and clear today. Be interesting to see if he has run out of energy / focus by time of his address to the nation this evening.
Starmer's speech has gone over really well with the pundits and the Labour mainstream, while the left are generally observing a polite silence. In normal circs I think it'd make a big impact. But currently I doubt if either party's pseudo-conference will change much. We may be locked into the current political stasis until the virus starts to fade from attention, as it did briefly in the summer (which is when Labour caught up in the polls).
Right now he's certainly looking much much better than Boris for sure.
Anyone looks better than "Boris", except Corbyn. As a politically homeless person since the Conservative Party ditched being Conservative, I thought Starmer sounded impressive. A ruthless personal attack on Johnson shows he is not "boring" as the Johnson fanbois have tried to suggest. I am still concerned about the class obsessed, countryside and business hating lefties that are in the Labour Party, but if Starmer carries on this way I might lend him my vote next time round
Only 15 is very good indeed for Boris. If that's the level of revolt when he's beset by crises on all sides and asking his troops to march through fire, then fantasies of his imminent demise are rather premature, to say the least
I am not sure your excitement is shared by those who fear for the heart and future of the Conservative Party.
The heart of the Conservative Party has been ripped out and it's future placed on a bonfire of vanity by the most unsuitable PM in history.
Labour should be thinking about the Tory's soft underbelly. When sun finally sets on this administration there will be rich pickings. Scotland and the Red Wall taught us there are no safe seats.
There are plenty of Tory seats where a fresh start and a new face is loooong overdue.
Anecdotally, I have been surprised by the reaction of lots of my friends' parents, most of whom are lifelong Tories.
Just one example, one of my friend's mum has voted Tory all her life, voted Leave, reads the Daily Mail.
Said to her daughter: "I quite like that Keir Starmer, I would think about voting for him."
He seems to have an appeal from the kind of Tory that likes a conventional, MOR bloke in a nice suit.
Yes my father and mother are both Tory Leave voters and have said they are impressed by Starmer and my father has reservations about Boris' competence though he quite likes Sunak. I doubt either would ever vote Labour though, my mother like me always votes Tory, however my father sometimes votes LD locally so might be persuaded nationally to vote LD too now Starmer not Corbyn is the alternative.
My Remain voting sister hates Boris and lives in Beckenham, she will likely vote Labour or LD or Green next time, she voted for May in 2017 but did not vote Tory in 2015 or 2019
That's because there is far more testing now, so there are far more asymptomatic cases captured and also cases are bring identified far earlier in the illness. Back in March and April people were testing positive while they were seriously ill in hospital and many died soon after. On a comparable basis the number of cases is far lower than in mid March but it will continue to increase sharply and deaths will follow unless action is taken. Although I doubt it will explode in the same way as before because there are already far more things being done to slow the spread, including WFH, face masks, bubbles at school, less use of public transport and better hand hygiene.
How long did it take to go from 1% to 20% back in March?
Subtract a few weeks’ lag and you’ll have an idea of how many people are being infected today, who will die in October if people don’t start reducing their contact levels.
The contact levels now are completely different to the contact levels in February. Trains are empty, buses are empty, the tube is empty, museums and leisure facilities are empty. No one is allowed to attend sporting fixtures. Councils are shut, a large proportion of people work from home. Anecdote, a work colleage visited the Tower of London last week. He spoke to guy on the gate. This time last year they had 12,000 visitors per day in September. So far this year they are averaging 130.
The drop is probably due to people wearing masks.....
But then it is up to those families to form a support bubble and limit contact with the rest of us to ensure granny and grandpa don't die. As I said, there are too many people who believe in cakeism (ironic, I know) and want to have normal social lives but also be in regular contact with their parents and grandparents who are vulnerable and have a high chance of death of they catch the virus and a very high chance of severe ongoing problems if they don't die.
It just seems as though no one in the country is willing to have this conversation in a grown up way without calling everyone who thinks risk segmentation has a role to play a bunch of heartless Nazis or something like that.
And it's not really that difficult it's an either or question. You can socialise or see vulnerable people just don't do both...
What if you have a school age child or a risky job and vulnerable parents who need daily care?
Should people that work in a care home be banned from meeting anyone? They are badly paid enough already. Why would you continue to work there if you had to lock down with the residents for a long time (not just during a spike of a month or so)?
Risk segmentation sounds simple, but really, it isn't. It is impossible.
Did Starmer really travel all the way to Doncaster this morning just to stand in front of a red wall, only to come back to London by lunchtime to respond to Boris in the commons?
All that CO2 saved from not eating meat quickly being offset.
Can’t imagine his weight added too much to that of the train which was going anyway.
(I’m assuming he wasn’t silly enough to go by car?)
Starmer's speech has gone over really well with the pundits and the Labour mainstream, while the left are generally observing a polite silence. In normal circs I think it'd make a big impact. But currently I doubt if either party's pseudo-conference will change much. We may be locked into the current political stasis until the virus starts to fade from attention, as it did briefly in the summer (which is when Labour caught up in the polls).
Right now he's certainly looking much much better than Boris for sure.
Anyone looks better than "Boris", except Corbyn. As a politically homeless person since the Conservative Party ditched being Conservative, I thought Starmer sounded impressive. A ruthless personal attack on Johnson shows he is not "boring" as the Johnson fanbois have tried to suggest. I am still concerned about the class obsessed, countryside and business hating lefties that are in the Labour Party, but if Starmer carries on this way I might lend him my vote next time round
Starmer's speech has gone over really well with the pundits and the Labour mainstream, while the left are generally observing a polite silence. In normal circs I think it'd make a big impact. But currently I doubt if either party's pseudo-conference will change much. We may be locked into the current political stasis until the virus starts to fade from attention, as it did briefly in the summer (which is when Labour caught up in the polls).
Right now he's certainly looking much much better than Boris for sure.
Anyone looks better than "Boris", except Corbyn. As a politically homeless person since the Conservative Party ditched being Conservative, I thought Starmer sounded impressive. A ruthless personal attack on Johnson shows he is not "boring" as the Johnson fanbois have tried to suggest. I am still concerned about the class obsessed, countryside and business hating lefties that are in the Labour Party, but if Starmer carries on this way I might lend him my vote next time round
Gosh, sounds like Starmer may already be penetrating the blue wall!
Starmer's speech has gone over really well with the pundits and the Labour mainstream, while the left are generally observing a polite silence. In normal circs I think it'd make a big impact. But currently I doubt if either party's pseudo-conference will change much. We may be locked into the current political stasis until the virus starts to fade from attention, as it did briefly in the summer (which is when Labour caught up in the polls).
Right now he's certainly looking much much better than Boris for sure.
Anyone looks better than "Boris", except Corbyn. As a politically homeless person since the Conservative Party ditched being Conservative, I thought Starmer sounded impressive. A ruthless personal attack on Johnson shows he is not "boring" as the Johnson fanbois have tried to suggest. I am still concerned about the class obsessed, countryside and business hating lefties that are in the Labour Party, but if Starmer carries on this way I might lend him my vote next time round
Only 15 is very good indeed for Boris. If that's the level of revolt when he's beset by crises on all sides and asking his troops to march through fire, then fantasies of his imminent demise are rather premature, to say the least
I am not sure your excitement is shared by those who fear for the heart and future of the Conservative Party.
The heart of the Conservative Party has been ripped out and it's future placed on a bonfire of vanity by the most unsuitable PM in history.
You would have said the same about Robert Peel no doubt.
Closure not just last orders at 10pm. That's a big difference, essentially last orders at 9:30-9:45 then.
I'm not persuaded this pub curfew will make much of a difference; sounds a bit pointless to me. If I normally go to the pub at 9.30 for a couple of pints, I'll just adjust my clock and go at 8.30 instead. My kids are already talking about just going out an hour or two earlier.
Starmer's speech has gone over really well with the pundits and the Labour mainstream, while the left are generally observing a polite silence. In normal circs I think it'd make a big impact. But currently I doubt if either party's pseudo-conference will change much. We may be locked into the current political stasis until the virus starts to fade from attention, as it did briefly in the summer (which is when Labour caught up in the polls).
Right now he's certainly looking much much better than Boris for sure.
Anyone looks better than "Boris", except Corbyn. As a politically homeless person since the Conservative Party ditched being Conservative, I thought Starmer sounded impressive. A ruthless personal attack on Johnson shows he is not "boring" as the Johnson fanbois have tried to suggest. I am still concerned about the class obsessed, countryside and business hating lefties that are in the Labour Party, but if Starmer carries on this way I might lend him my vote next time round
I'm in the same boat.
There is a long way to go and I doubt I would vote Labour but I would not rule it out
But then it is up to those families to form a support bubble and limit contact with the rest of us to ensure granny and grandpa don't die. As I said, there are too many people who believe in cakeism (ironic, I know) and want to have normal social lives but also be in regular contact with their parents and grandparents who are vulnerable and have a high chance of death of they catch the virus and a very high chance of severe ongoing problems if they don't die.
It just seems as though no one in the country is willing to have this conversation in a grown up way without calling everyone who thinks risk segmentation has a role to play a bunch of heartless Nazis or something like that.
And it's not really that difficult it's an either or question. You can socialise or see vulnerable people just don't do both...
What if you have a school age child or a risky job and vulnerable parents who need daily care?
Should people that work in a care home be banned from meeting anyone? They are badly paid enough already. Why would you continue to work there if you had to lock down with the residents for a long time (not just during a spike of a month or so)?
Risk segmentation sounds simple, but really, it isn't. It is impossible.
Boris sounds a bit more awake and clear today. Be interesting to see if he has run out of energy / focus by time of his address to the nation this evening.
So I can still book my Christmas and Easter trips and getaways....thinks most of the public..woohoo.
Which is why the message needs to be that either everyone starts behaving themselves better now, or a Christmas will indeed have to be cancelled.
Oh, and we need to start quarantining and testing all arrivals - in hotels, not in their own homes. People are arriving every day from Spain and India.
Boris sounds a bit more awake and clear today. Be interesting to see if he has run out of energy / focus by time of his address to the nation this evening.
It does speak volumes that we have this sort of running debate about the PM. If it were the star striker at the club you support you'd be calling for a quick sale. So ... ??
Closure not just last orders at 10pm. That's a big difference, essentially last orders at 9:30-9:45 then.
I'm not persuaded this pub curfew will make much of a difference; sounds a bit pointless to me. If I normally go to the pub at 9.30 for a couple of pints, I'll just adjust my clock and go at 8.30 instead. My kids are already talking about just going out an hour or two earlier.
I guess it might stop a few twentysomethings in Newcastle/Manchester/London etc getting wasted until 1am then snogging/shagging each other.
Starmer's speech has gone over really well with the pundits and the Labour mainstream, while the left are generally observing a polite silence. In normal circs I think it'd make a big impact. But currently I doubt if either party's pseudo-conference will change much. We may be locked into the current political stasis until the virus starts to fade from attention, as it did briefly in the summer (which is when Labour caught up in the polls).
Right now he's certainly looking much much better than Boris for sure.
Anyone looks better than "Boris", except Corbyn. As a politically homeless person since the Conservative Party ditched being Conservative, I thought Starmer sounded impressive. A ruthless personal attack on Johnson shows he is not "boring" as the Johnson fanbois have tried to suggest. I am still concerned about the class obsessed, countryside and business hating lefties that are in the Labour Party, but if Starmer carries on this way I might lend him my vote next time round
I'm in the same boat.
There is a long way to go and I doubt I would vote Labour but I would not rule it out
Bloody hell! Just PT and HYUFD to go then! Maybe even Bluestblue.......
Boris completely missing the point about Leicester and Bolton. The point was that local lockdowns have not worked. It is not something to be congratulated.
Boris sounds a bit more awake and clear today. Be interesting to see if he has run out of energy / focus by time of his address to the nation this evening.
It does speak volumes that we have this sort of running debate about the PM. If it were the star striker at the club you support you'd be calling for a quick sale. So ... ??
So you then remember that he just won the World Cup final 7-0 single-handedly and realize the debate is ludicrous
So I can still book my Christmas and Easter trips and getaways....thinks most of the public..woohoo.
Which is why the message needs to be that either everyone starts behaving themselves better now, or a Christmas will indeed have to be cancelled.
Oh, and we need to start quarantining and testing all arrivals - in hotels, not in their own homes. People are arriving every day from Spain and India.
As i said previously, i would have laid out a 6 month plan today. Make it clear now, ski holidays aren't happening. Any idea of New Year celebrations are cancelled. Christmas, you can have only your immediate family round, no you can't go from friend to friend to friends homes.
Boris completely missing the point about Leicester and Bolton. The point was that local lockdowns have not worked. It is not something to be congratulated.
Yes absolutely, these measures will make absolutely no difference. It's clear that home visits and isolation breakers are the issue. The former are tough to find but the latter is easy.
Closure not just last orders at 10pm. That's a big difference, essentially last orders at 9:30-9:45 then.
I'm not persuaded this pub curfew will make much of a difference; sounds a bit pointless to me. If I normally go to the pub at 9.30 for a couple of pints, I'll just adjust my clock and go at 8.30 instead. My kids are already talking about just going out an hour or two earlier.
I guess it might stop a few twentysomethings in Newcastle/Manchester/London etc getting wasted until 1am then snogging/shagging each other.
Its worth remembering that if R is currently about 1.2 then it won't take much change to get R down to about 0.9 which would put a halt completely to exponential growth and cause it to go back into decline.
Small changes can make a major difference. I'm reminded of the Dickens quote from David Copperfield. “Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen and six , result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery”
Labour should be thinking about the Tory's soft underbelly. When sun finally sets on this administration there will be rich pickings. Scotland and the Red Wall taught us there are no safe seats.
There are plenty of Tory seats where a fresh start and a new face is loooong overdue.
Anecdotally, I have been surprised by the reaction of lots of my friends' parents, most of whom are lifelong Tories.
Just one example, one of my friend's mum has voted Tory all her life, voted Leave, reads the Daily Mail.
Said to her daughter: "I quite like that Keir Starmer, I would think about voting for him."
He seems to have an appeal from the kind of Tory that likes a conventional, MOR bloke in a nice suit.
Yes my father and mother are both Tory Leave voters and have said they are impressed by Starmer and my father has reservations about Boris' competence though he quite likes Sunak. I doubt either would ever vote Labour though, my mother like me always votes Tory, however my father sometimes votes LD locally so might be persuaded nationally to vote LD too now Starmer not Corbyn is the alternative.
My Remain voting sister hates Boris and lives in Beckenham, she will likely vote Labour or LD or Green next time, she voted for May in 2017 but did not vote Tory in 2015 or 2019
Sisters often have the best qualities of their brothers without the bad stuff. This is also my experience. There's probably some research on it.
Starmer's speech has gone over really well with the pundits and the Labour mainstream, while the left are generally observing a polite silence. In normal circs I think it'd make a big impact. But currently I doubt if either party's pseudo-conference will change much. We may be locked into the current political stasis until the virus starts to fade from attention, as it did briefly in the summer (which is when Labour caught up in the polls).
Right now he's certainly looking much much better than Boris for sure.
Anyone looks better than "Boris", except Corbyn. As a politically homeless person since the Conservative Party ditched being Conservative, I thought Starmer sounded impressive. A ruthless personal attack on Johnson shows he is not "boring" as the Johnson fanbois have tried to suggest. I am still concerned about the class obsessed, countryside and business hating lefties that are in the Labour Party, but if Starmer carries on this way I might lend him my vote next time round
I'm in the same boat.
There is a long way to go and I doubt I would vote Labour but I would not rule it out
Bloody hell! Just PT and HYUFD to go then! Maybe even Bluestblue.......
Don’t get carried away, when it comes to the crunch 95% of them will vote Tory all they want is a safe Labour Party just in case the tories lose.
Starmer's speech has gone over really well with the pundits and the Labour mainstream, while the left are generally observing a polite silence. In normal circs I think it'd make a big impact. But currently I doubt if either party's pseudo-conference will change much. We may be locked into the current political stasis until the virus starts to fade from attention, as it did briefly in the summer (which is when Labour caught up in the polls).
Right now he's certainly looking much much better than Boris for sure.
Anyone looks better than "Boris", except Corbyn. As a politically homeless person since the Conservative Party ditched being Conservative, I thought Starmer sounded impressive. A ruthless personal attack on Johnson shows he is not "boring" as the Johnson fanbois have tried to suggest. I am still concerned about the class obsessed, countryside and business hating lefties that are in the Labour Party, but if Starmer carries on this way I might lend him my vote next time round
Gosh, sounds like Starmer may already be penetrating the blue wall!
So I can still book my Christmas and Easter trips and getaways....thinks most of the public..woohoo.
Which is why the message needs to be that either everyone starts behaving themselves better now, or a Christmas will indeed have to be cancelled.
Oh, and we need to start quarantining and testing all arrivals - in hotels, not in their own homes. People are arriving every day from Spain and India.
As i said previously, i would have laid out a 6 month plan today. Make it clear now, ski holidays aren't happening. Any idea of New Year celebrations are cancelled. Christmas, you can have only your immediate family round, no you can't go from friend to friend to friends homes.
"When it comes to handling coronavirus, were the political ‘bad guys’ right all along? For many, the epitome of incompetence would be Donald Trump. But by prioritising the economy, the US has got off relatively lightly Vince Cable"
"Sweden’s apparent success in getting on top of the infection and escaping the worst of economic damage (with an estimated fall of 4 per cent in GDP this year) has begun to restore its reputation after the initial surge in deaths. The lessons from Sweden are that common sense, consensus and self-discipline work better than convoluted, constantly changing, rules and regulations; that people respond better to being treated as adults than wayward children; that consistent, clear messaging is essential; and that schools and workplaces can and must be kept open."
Labour should be thinking about the Tory's soft underbelly. When sun finally sets on this administration there will be rich pickings. Scotland and the Red Wall taught us there are no safe seats.
There are plenty of Tory seats where a fresh start and a new face is loooong overdue.
Anecdotally, I have been surprised by the reaction of lots of my friends' parents, most of whom are lifelong Tories.
Just one example, one of my friend's mum has voted Tory all her life, voted Leave, reads the Daily Mail.
Said to her daughter: "I quite like that Keir Starmer, I would think about voting for him."
He seems to have an appeal from the kind of Tory that likes a conventional, MOR bloke in a nice suit.
Yes my father and mother are both Tory Leave voters and have said they are impressed by Starmer and my father has reservations about Boris' competence though he quite likes Sunak. I doubt either would ever vote Labour though, my mother like me always votes Tory, however my father sometimes votes LD locally so might be persuaded nationally to vote LD too now Starmer not Corbyn is the alternative.
My Remain voting sister hates Boris and lives in Beckenham, she will likely vote Labour or LD or Green next time, she voted for May in 2017 but did not vote Tory in 2015 or 2019
My parents live in Tunbridge Wells, 44th on the LD target list, my sister lives in Beckenham, 161st on the Labour target list, so if 2024 was to be a 1997 style landslide both seats would be marginal
Starmer's speech has gone over really well with the pundits and the Labour mainstream, while the left are generally observing a polite silence. In normal circs I think it'd make a big impact. But currently I doubt if either party's pseudo-conference will change much. We may be locked into the current political stasis until the virus starts to fade from attention, as it did briefly in the summer (which is when Labour caught up in the polls).
Right now he's certainly looking much much better than Boris for sure.
Anyone looks better than "Boris", except Corbyn. As a politically homeless person since the Conservative Party ditched being Conservative, I thought Starmer sounded impressive. A ruthless personal attack on Johnson shows he is not "boring" as the Johnson fanbois have tried to suggest. I am still concerned about the class obsessed, countryside and business hating lefties that are in the Labour Party, but if Starmer carries on this way I might lend him my vote next time round
I'm in the same boat.
There is a long way to go and I doubt I would vote Labour but I would not rule it out
Are you deliberately winding HYUFD up? He hasn't forgiven you for voting for Blair!
Boris completely missing the point about Leicester and Bolton. The point was that local lockdowns have not worked. It is not something to be congratulated.
Yes absolutely, these measures will make absolutely no difference. It's clear that home visits and isolation breakers are the issue. The former are tough to find but the latter is easy.
Not sure that they will make no difference but they are seeking to do just enough. Have they got that right? Time will tell.
Boris completely missing the point about Leicester and Bolton. The point was that local lockdowns have not worked. It is not something to be congratulated.
Yes absolutely, these measures will make absolutely no difference. It's clear that home visits and isolation breakers are the issue. The former are tough to find but the latter is easy.
Not sure that they will make no difference but they are seeking to do just enough. Have they got that right? Time will tell.
They won't have. This is not going to amount to anything.
Starmer's speech has gone over really well with the pundits and the Labour mainstream, while the left are generally observing a polite silence. In normal circs I think it'd make a big impact. But currently I doubt if either party's pseudo-conference will change much. We may be locked into the current political stasis until the virus starts to fade from attention, as it did briefly in the summer (which is when Labour caught up in the polls).
Right now he's certainly looking much much better than Boris for sure.
Anyone looks better than "Boris", except Corbyn. As a politically homeless person since the Conservative Party ditched being Conservative, I thought Starmer sounded impressive. A ruthless personal attack on Johnson shows he is not "boring" as the Johnson fanbois have tried to suggest. I am still concerned about the class obsessed, countryside and business hating lefties that are in the Labour Party, but if Starmer carries on this way I might lend him my vote next time round
I'm in the same boat.
There is a long way to go and I doubt I would vote Labour but I would not rule it out
Bloody hell! Just PT and HYUFD to go then! Maybe even Bluestblue.......
If the 3 of us did not vote Tory the Tory Party would basically be left with Boris, Patel, IDS and Rees Mogg
But then it is up to those families to form a support bubble and limit contact with the rest of us to ensure granny and grandpa don't die. As I said, there are too many people who believe in cakeism (ironic, I know) and want to have normal social lives but also be in regular contact with their parents and grandparents who are vulnerable and have a high chance of death of they catch the virus and a very high chance of severe ongoing problems if they don't die.
It just seems as though no one in the country is willing to have this conversation in a grown up way without calling everyone who thinks risk segmentation has a role to play a bunch of heartless Nazis or something like that.
And it's not really that difficult it's an either or question. You can socialise or see vulnerable people just don't do both...
What if you have a school age child or a risky job and vulnerable parents who need daily care?
Should people that work in a care home be banned from meeting anyone? They are badly paid enough already. Why would you continue to work there if you had to lock down with the residents for a long time (not just during a spike of a month or so)?
Risk segmentation sounds simple, but really, it isn't. It is impossible.
It does not sound, and is not, simple.
Nor is it impossible.
It's just that nowhere in the world has anyone implemented a workable strategy. I know you've linked to a one-page pdf which essentially says "shielding for the old and extra PPE for healthcare workers" but that doesn't answer all the questions and issues by a long chalk.
I'd love it if there were some way to do it, but society is intertwined through all demographics of age.
"b) Society is an open system. To cut a cohort of “vulnerable” people off from “non-vulnerable” or “less vulnerable” is likely to prove practically impossible, especially for disadvantaged groups (e.g. those living in cramped housing and multi-generational households). Many grandparents are looking after children sent home from school while parents are at work. ...
d) Despite claims to the contrary from some quarters, there are no examples of a segmentation-and-shielding policy having worked in any country.Notwithstanding our opposition to a policy of segmentation-and-shielding, we strongly support measures that will provide additional protection to those in care homes and other vulnerable groups. "
Starmer's speech has gone over really well with the pundits and the Labour mainstream, while the left are generally observing a polite silence. In normal circs I think it'd make a big impact. But currently I doubt if either party's pseudo-conference will change much. We may be locked into the current political stasis until the virus starts to fade from attention, as it did briefly in the summer (which is when Labour caught up in the polls).
Right now he's certainly looking much much better than Boris for sure.
Anyone looks better than "Boris", except Corbyn. As a politically homeless person since the Conservative Party ditched being Conservative, I thought Starmer sounded impressive. A ruthless personal attack on Johnson shows he is not "boring" as the Johnson fanbois have tried to suggest. I am still concerned about the class obsessed, countryside and business hating lefties that are in the Labour Party, but if Starmer carries on this way I might lend him my vote next time round
I'm in the same boat.
There is a long way to go and I doubt I would vote Labour but I would not rule it out
Are you deliberately winding HYUFD up? He hasn't forgiven you for voting for Blair!
So I can still book my Christmas and Easter trips and getaways....thinks most of the public..woohoo.
Which is why the message needs to be that either everyone starts behaving themselves better now, or a Christmas will indeed have to be cancelled.
Oh, and we need to start quarantining and testing all arrivals - in hotels, not in their own homes. People are arriving every day from Spain and India.
As i said previously, i would have laid out a 6 month plan today. Make it clear now, ski holidays aren't happening. Any idea of New Year celebrations are cancelled. Christmas, you can have only your immediate family round, no you can't go from friend to friend to friends homes.
He has said he expects today's restrictions to be in place for 6 months.
Starmer's speech has gone over really well with the pundits and the Labour mainstream, while the left are generally observing a polite silence. In normal circs I think it'd make a big impact. But currently I doubt if either party's pseudo-conference will change much. We may be locked into the current political stasis until the virus starts to fade from attention, as it did briefly in the summer (which is when Labour caught up in the polls).
Right now he's certainly looking much much better than Boris for sure.
Anyone looks better than "Boris", except Corbyn. As a politically homeless person since the Conservative Party ditched being Conservative, I thought Starmer sounded impressive. A ruthless personal attack on Johnson shows he is not "boring" as the Johnson fanbois have tried to suggest. I am still concerned about the class obsessed, countryside and business hating lefties that are in the Labour Party, but if Starmer carries on this way I might lend him my vote next time round
Gosh, sounds like Starmer may already be penetrating the blue wall!
He’s making the right noises with a very sharp distancing from the previous regime.
“It is no good looking at just case numbers any more. You have to look at what is happening in the medical wards and intensive care beds. That is a much better guide to this pandemic.”
So I can still book my Christmas and Easter trips and getaways....thinks most of the public..woohoo.
Which is why the message needs to be that either everyone starts behaving themselves better now, or a Christmas will indeed have to be cancelled.
Oh, and we need to start quarantining and testing all arrivals - in hotels, not in their own homes. People are arriving every day from Spain and India.
As i said previously, i would have laid out a 6 month plan today. Make it clear now, ski holidays aren't happening. Any idea of New Year celebrations are cancelled. Christmas, you can have only your immediate family round, no you can't go from friend to friend to friends homes.
He has said he expects today's restrictions to be in place for 6 months.
"the German practice of staying home if you are ill, so different from Anglo-Saxon workplace pressures to tough it out and go to work, thereby infecting others." [helped keep their 1st wave numbers down]
Closure not just last orders at 10pm. That's a big difference, essentially last orders at 9:30-9:45 then.
I'm not persuaded this pub curfew will make much of a difference; sounds a bit pointless to me. If I normally go to the pub at 9.30 for a couple of pints, I'll just adjust my clock and go at 8.30 instead. My kids are already talking about just going out an hour or two earlier.
The mistake I think people so often make on this sort of thing is to assume that, because they'd personally not reduce contact means it has no impact. The point of this sort of measure is to reduce the aggregate hours groups of people from different households spend together. You don't need everyone, or even most people to cut contact - you need an overall impact on the level of total face time. You just need a proportion of people for whom 8.30 isn't actually convenient, or who take it as a signal that doing it at all is riskier than they'd previously thought. Whether you personally are one of those people doesn't actually matter.
I have the same frustration with people's understanding of the fundamentals of economic supply and demand. People say "well, I wouldn't stop buying biscuits if the price went up 10 pence a pack". Okay, but you aren't the actually the centre of the universe - the relevant person in this situation is the marginal consumer - one of the handful out of every 100 who would reduce consumption.
Reading LadyG's posts about "Oh, can't we just get it over with, let other people die, I just want it to be back to normal" - I don't think they've thought about the arithmetic.
I agree with your point, but I don't think it's a matter of arithmetic for certain people. Those who are fundamentally selfish don't care how many die or suffer as long as they think this won't include them. And they are precisely the reason that The Swedish Model would not work for us...
--AS
I have thought about the arithmetic. I have thought about the arithmetic of an extended lockdown - quasi or severe - for six months. I have thought about the people who will die of undiagnosed cancers, the millions with intensified mental health problems, the huge uptick in suicides, the addicts and drunks who will relapse from despair, the centres of our cities hollowed out for good.
I have thought about all this and I am unpersuaded that a second lockdown will, on balance, be a benefit to the nation.
Starmer's speech has gone over really well with the pundits and the Labour mainstream, while the left are generally observing a polite silence. In normal circs I think it'd make a big impact. But currently I doubt if either party's pseudo-conference will change much. We may be locked into the current political stasis until the virus starts to fade from attention, as it did briefly in the summer (which is when Labour caught up in the polls).
Right now he's certainly looking much much better than Boris for sure.
Anyone looks better than "Boris", except Corbyn. As a politically homeless person since the Conservative Party ditched being Conservative, I thought Starmer sounded impressive. A ruthless personal attack on Johnson shows he is not "boring" as the Johnson fanbois have tried to suggest. I am still concerned about the class obsessed, countryside and business hating lefties that are in the Labour Party, but if Starmer carries on this way I might lend him my vote next time round
I'm in the same boat.
There is a long way to go and I doubt I would vote Labour but I would not rule it out
Bloody hell! Just PT and HYUFD to go then! Maybe even Bluestblue.......
If the 3 of us did not vote Tory the Tory Party would basically be left with Boris, Patel, IDS and Rees Mogg
Thought experiment: who of the above would be most likely to defect to Labour? I'd go with Rees-Mogg - as we saw with Quentin Davies all those years ago, it's the upper-middle-class types with aristocratic pretensions who tend to be the flakiest.
Starmer's speech has gone over really well with the pundits and the Labour mainstream, while the left are generally observing a polite silence. In normal circs I think it'd make a big impact. But currently I doubt if either party's pseudo-conference will change much. We may be locked into the current political stasis until the virus starts to fade from attention, as it did briefly in the summer (which is when Labour caught up in the polls).
Right now he's certainly looking much much better than Boris for sure.
Anyone looks better than "Boris", except Corbyn. As a politically homeless person since the Conservative Party ditched being Conservative, I thought Starmer sounded impressive. A ruthless personal attack on Johnson shows he is not "boring" as the Johnson fanbois have tried to suggest. I am still concerned about the class obsessed, countryside and business hating lefties that are in the Labour Party, but if Starmer carries on this way I might lend him my vote next time round
Gosh, sounds like Starmer may already be penetrating the blue wall!
BTW, how come Starmer was allowed to give a party speech from a public building (although it isn't actually open to the public yet)? Did the Labour party pay for the venue (like they would have to have done for a normal conference)? Or was this just the council giving favours?
The building in question is ridiculous, BTW. The facade of a listed building was 'enclosed' within a new glass structure to avoid demolishing it or having to actually refurbish the original (Girls' grammar school, long since closed).
Am I right in thinking now indoor team sports with more than 6 people are banned, but things like gym classes with more than 6 people are still ok (as long as inside, outside 7 people doing a yoga class is a no no)?
But then it is up to those families to form a support bubble and limit contact with the rest of us to ensure granny and grandpa don't die. As I said, there are too many people who believe in cakeism (ironic, I know) and want to have normal social lives but also be in regular contact with their parents and grandparents who are vulnerable and have a high chance of death of they catch the virus and a very high chance of severe ongoing problems if they don't die.
It just seems as though no one in the country is willing to have this conversation in a grown up way without calling everyone who thinks risk segmentation has a role to play a bunch of heartless Nazis or something like that.
And it's not really that difficult it's an either or question. You can socialise or see vulnerable people just don't do both...
What if you have a school age child or a risky job and vulnerable parents who need daily care?
Should people that work in a care home be banned from meeting anyone? They are badly paid enough already. Why would you continue to work there if you had to lock down with the residents for a long time (not just during a spike of a month or so)?
Risk segmentation sounds simple, but really, it isn't. It is impossible.
Absolutely. Humal life is so intertwined, it is impossible to have high risk totally isolated whereas low risk live life as normal. Parents over 60 with a teenagers at home is just one example that is totally unfeasible to "segment".
Football a big incoming issue now. Clubs now cancelling season ticket sales. Therefore no income. Many going bust surely very soon. Leaving a choice. One's local lower league club going under will be a huge blow to fans and businesses in small towns. Bail them out? Most non-fans see football = millionaires. Can't see that being popular if furlough etc is ended.
This is the kind of stuff we've needed for a while, a bit of flag waving
Turns me off a bit, I have to say. But my vote is safe (if not my membership) and it clearly is the case that the party under Corbyn was perceived as lacking in "proud to be British" sentiment and that this did cost votes and seats. It's important to counter this now and win a proportion of those voters back. So to this extent, I approve. "Go Keir. Wave that wi... flag."
But caution is required - because it's undeniable that xenophobic attitudes were a factor in taking some of these erstwhile Labour voters down the Brexit and UKIP-to-Tory path and Starmer should not imo be chasing this constituency. For 2 reasons. (i) Such attitudes are at odds with the core values of the party. (ii) It would backfire. The support picked up by pandering to xenophobic variety "patriotism" would be outweighed by the support lost in the party's new metropolitan base.
I don't think Starmer is pandering to anti-foreigner xenophobic patriotism but appealing to the middle of the road proud to be British patriotism.
Most of the party's new metropolitan base are bright enough to recognise that this is a route to power and won't be put off by it. It might even appeal to some.
I do hope and expect he will get things right. The risk I'm highlighting - of chasing Red Wall and losing Red Metro - is one he will have given far more thought to than I have. But I do fret about it. The shift to the left in 2015 turned me from a loyal Labour voter into a party member.
The answer to that will depend on whether he thinks the number of party members or the number of votes for his party at a general election is the more important statistic.
Oh the answer will be votes. No question. He will only take a direction if he is confident that the Red Wall gained will be bigger than the Red Metro lost. And of course in an ideal world - or even in this world if things go his way - he will gain both.
But how much Red Metro is there to actually lose at a GE? I’d say not much at all.
Why do you say that? Labour has become the party of the big cities and affluent uni towns. This is the new base - educated, urban, diverse, socially liberal - and it's bigger (now) than the old trad one that has drifted away on culture issues. There is a risk of overreaction to the loss of the Red Wall. That's my point. I'm sure Keir is aware of it. Certainly hope he is. Let's remember that a ton of votes are coming our way next time just purely based on integrity and competence. Johnson is being exposed as mendacious and utterly clueless. So, reap that harvest, by all means alter the mood music on "patriotism" so it doesn't turn people off unnecessarily, but do not make "Britain First" a key part of the offering, above all stay radical and socially liberal, do NOT lose people like me. There are loads of us. Ok, so we don't own a Union Jack or a St George, and we don't race whippets, but we vote.
How many seats will they lose at a GE, from those metropolitan and university towns? I suspect very few. If Starmer moves a little right from Corbyn you’re all voting for him and not the Tory, aren’t you?
The problem is that, to a large number of your metropolitan lefty friends, “socially liberal” means calling all white people racist, knocking down statues and saying that boys are girls. That goes down like a cup of cold sick in the Red Wall Seats, and will continue to go down like a cup of cold sick at the next election, unless Labour moves away from the far left.
They don’t need you to appeal to you to vote for them because you will anyway, they need me to vote for them if they want a majority.
It's the RISK I'm highlighting. The risk of him moving too far. There's this idea among some - mainly Tories tbf - that it is risk free for Starmer to move the party towards the cultural attitudes of Red Wall voters. It is not. He has to be very very careful. You caricature what Labour's new metropolitan voter base think because you have little understanding of it. But I do. I do, because I am one. And although my vote is safe as houses, I can assure you that for plenty of my ilk it isn't. There's no vote. There's Green. There's the LDs. Woo the Red Wall but do not chase it. That's perhaps the best way I can put it. I think he will. So far so good and I'll tell people if he goes imo seriously wrong. Consider me the canary in the coal mine.
These measures will achieve sod all and we'll have wasted yet more precious time. We need another lockdown.
It should be possible to reduce R below 1 without a lockdown, and we don't yet have the high level of case numbers where reducing R to 0.6 instead of 0.9 would make a huge difference in the number of deaths.
Comments
The problem is that, to a large number of your metropolitan lefty friends, “socially liberal” means calling all white people racist, knocking down statues and saying that boys are girls. That goes down like a cup of cold sick in the Red Wall Seats, and will continue to go down like a cup of cold sick at the next election, unless Labour moves away from the far left.
They don’t need you to appeal to you to vote for them because you will anyway, they need me to vote for them if they want a majority.
Anecdotally, I have been surprised by the reaction of lots of my friends' parents, most of whom are lifelong Tories.
Just one example, one of my friend's mum has voted Tory all her life, voted Leave, reads the Daily Mail.
Said to her daughter: "I quite like that Keir Starmer, I would think about voting for him."
He seems to have an appeal from the kind of Tory that likes a conventional, MOR bloke in a nice suit.
I don't know much about Starmer's laying his life down for his country credentials. Johnson from what I have read would sell us all down the river for personal enrichment ( not financial of course, but power related, or even for a crafty shag).
4,000 cases reported now is probably equivalent to 400-800 cases reported then.
If people take things a bit more seriously then there's no reason these measures won't be sufficient. That's a big "if" though.
My Remain voting sister hates Boris and lives in Beckenham, she will likely vote Labour or LD or Green next time, she voted for May in 2017 but did not vote Tory in 2015 or 2019
On a comparable basis the number of cases is far lower than in mid March but it will continue to increase sharply and deaths will follow unless action is taken. Although I doubt it will explode in the same way as before because there are already far more things being done to slow the spread, including WFH, face masks, bubbles at school, less use of public transport and better hand hygiene.
Should people that work in a care home be banned from meeting anyone? They are badly paid enough already. Why would you continue to work there if you had to lock down with the residents for a long time (not just during a spike of a month or so)?
Risk segmentation sounds simple, but really, it isn't. It is impossible.
(I’m assuming he wasn’t silly enough to go by car?)
https://twitter.com/PpollingNumbers/status/1308257350353145856
The hope must be that people will voluntarily reduce their contacts in response to the rhetoric, and they will be enough.
Rule of six for Christmas then.
Nor is it impossible.
Oh, and we need to start quarantining and testing all arrivals - in hotels, not in their own homes. People are arriving every day from Spain and India.
On the positive side they report change from previous poll.
So.....
Gold standard of American polling.
Is that good news or bad for @TheScreamingEagles
Small changes can make a major difference. I'm reminded of the Dickens quote from David Copperfield.
“Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen and six , result happiness.
Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery”
R 1.1 is misery, R 0.9 happiness.
For many, the epitome of incompetence would be Donald Trump. But by prioritising the economy, the US has got off relatively lightly
Vince Cable"
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/coronavirus-pandemic-economy-death-rates-donald-trump-us-brazil-sweden-b514103.html
Extract:
"Sweden’s apparent success in getting on top of the infection and escaping the worst of economic damage (with an estimated fall of 4 per cent in GDP this year) has begun to restore its reputation after the initial surge in deaths. The lessons from Sweden are that common sense, consensus and self-discipline work better than convoluted, constantly changing, rules and regulations; that people respond better to being treated as adults than wayward children; that consistent, clear messaging is essential; and that schools and workplaces can and must be kept open."
I know you've linked to a one-page pdf which essentially says "shielding for the old and extra PPE for healthcare workers" but that doesn't answer all the questions and issues by a long chalk.
I'd love it if there were some way to do it, but society is intertwined through all demographics of age.
As the open letter here: https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2020/09/21/covid-19-an-open-letter-to-the-uks-chief-medical-officers/ from twenty-odd professors and lecturers in public health and epidemiology says:
"b) Society is an open system. To cut a cohort of “vulnerable” people off from “non-vulnerable” or “less vulnerable” is likely to prove practically impossible, especially for disadvantaged groups (e.g. those living in cramped housing and multi-generational households). Many grandparents are looking after children sent home from school while parents are at work.
...
d) Despite claims to the contrary from some quarters, there are no examples of a segmentation-and-shielding policy having worked in any country.Notwithstanding our opposition to a policy of segmentation-and-shielding, we strongly support measures that will provide additional protection to those in care homes and other vulnerable groups. "
Their results are here: https://www.ajc.com/politics/ajc-poll-race-for-president-senate-contests-in-georgia-too-close-to-call/FCIZO2M5ZNH2XAQBRMAXJLFQVE/
And they show it as a tie.
(They also have proper cross-tabs if you scroll down.)
Germany's leading virologist.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2020/09/21/can-beat-covid-without-lockdowns-says-top-german-virologist/
Trump won Georgia by 5% in 2016
They could try and roll their own scheme, but would need to fund it themselves from existing budgets.
"the German practice of staying home if you are ill, so different from Anglo-Saxon workplace pressures to tough it out and go to work, thereby infecting others." [helped keep their 1st wave numbers down]
I really want to go because the couple are together because of me.
I suppose I can send my apologies and £500 worth of John Lewis vouchers?
But the whole event is going to last fewer than 90 minutes, with everyone wearing masks.
I have the same frustration with people's understanding of the fundamentals of economic supply and demand. People say "well, I wouldn't stop buying biscuits if the price went up 10 pence a pack". Okay, but you aren't the actually the centre of the universe - the relevant person in this situation is the marginal consumer - one of the handful out of every 100 who would reduce consumption.
Lockdown 2 will be announced sometime in October.
I have thought about all this and I am unpersuaded that a second lockdown will, on balance, be a benefit to the nation.
The building in question is ridiculous, BTW. The facade of a listed building was 'enclosed' within a new glass structure to avoid demolishing it or having to actually refurbish the original (Girls' grammar school, long since closed).
Parents over 60 with a teenagers at home is just one example that is totally unfeasible to "segment".
Many going bust surely very soon.
Leaving a choice. One's local lower league club going under will be a huge blow to fans and businesses in small towns.
Bail them out? Most non-fans see football = millionaires. Can't see that being popular if furlough etc is ended.