I don't know if there is data on this but the student infection outbreaks seem to involve a few of the crapper 'universities'.
According to the Guardian, Northumbria Law School ranks above Exeter, Birmingham, Warwick, Manchester, Newcastle, Cardiff, Nottingham, etc...
The Guardian rankings are nonsense. They don't include any measure of research output and use a very dubious value added system.
Is research output particularly relevant to students?
It is very relevant to postgraduate students. But anyway, the discussion was "crap or crapper" universities, so yes research output is relevant.
I’m a postgraduate student. Research output is not relevant to me.
Isn't that when it's most important?
Absolutely yes if you're aiming for a PhD in Science and/or maths.
But not if you want an actual job.
If you want one afterwards? My best mate at uni went on to do his PhD at Imperial and he walked into an R&D job at a big defence firm afterwards. Not sure he would have got the same opportunity had he stuck around at Cardiff.
Well nobody is denying that Imperial is a better university than Cardiff, especially when it comes to Engineering of some kind, I assume?
However doing a PhD in Law is not likely to fast-track you very far in getting a training contract at a large law firm, at least as far as I’m aware.
Likewise doing a PhD in History or English is not going to go far in helping you get a job.
Depends on the university, if you went to the finest university in the world then reading English at graduate level can get you a top top job, see for example Richard Burgon who read English Literature at St John's, and is likely to be a future Labour leader, if not future Prime Minister.
I don't know if there is data on this but the student infection outbreaks seem to involve a few of the crapper 'universities'.
According to the Guardian, Northumbria Law School ranks above Exeter, Birmingham, Warwick, Manchester, Newcastle, Cardiff, Nottingham, etc...
The Guardian rankings are nonsense. They don't include any measure of research output and use a very dubious value added system.
Is research output particularly relevant to students?
It is very relevant to postgraduate students. But anyway, the discussion was "crap or crapper" universities, so yes research output is relevant.
I’m a postgraduate student. Research output is not relevant to me.
Isn't that when it's most important?
Absolutely yes if you're aiming for a PhD in Science and/or maths.
But not if you want an actual job.
If you want one afterwards? My best mate at uni went on to do his PhD at Imperial and he walked into an R&D job at a big defence firm afterwards. Not sure he would have got the same opportunity had he stuck around at Cardiff.
Well nobody is denying that Imperial is a better university than Cardiff, especially when it comes to Engineering of some kind, I assume?
However doing a PhD in Law is not likely to fast-track you very far in getting a training contract at a large law firm, at least as far as I’m aware.
Likewise doing a PhD in History or English is not going to go far in helping you get a job.
Depends on the university, if you went to the finest university in the world then reading English at graduate level can get you a top top job, see for example Richard Burgon who read English Literature at St John's, and is likely to be a future Labour leader, if not future Prime Minister.
I did my undergraduate degree at nice Russell Group Newcastle University and was full of snobbery for the “ex-polys”. I am now doing a Master of Law degree at Northumbria and realise the snobbery was total rubbish. If anything the quality of teaching is better at the ex-poly than it was at the red brick.
I would suggest people check their prejudices.
You mean the poly students have to be spoon fed, while the Russell Group students are independent learners?
For the money I’m paying, I want to be spoon-fed liquid gold.
You are Crassus and I claim my £5.
Because I’m a pleb I had to do a Google to understand that reference.
When I become the country's first directly elected dictator I will close all the former polys change the history curriculum to ensure classical history is the centrepiece of the curriculum.
With Morris Dancer in charge of implementing the policy?
I want to improve the historical knowledge of the country, not damage it, Morris Dancer will be sent to the historical re-education camps.
I don't know if there is data on this but the student infection outbreaks seem to involve a few of the crapper 'universities'.
According to the Guardian, Northumbria Law School ranks above Exeter, Birmingham, Warwick, Manchester, Newcastle, Cardiff, Nottingham, etc...
The Guardian rankings are nonsense. They don't include any measure of research output and use a very dubious value added system.
Is research output particularly relevant to students?
It is very relevant to postgraduate students. But anyway, the discussion was "crap or crapper" universities, so yes research output is relevant.
I’m a postgraduate student. Research output is not relevant to me.
Isn't that when it's most important?
Absolutely yes if you're aiming for a PhD in Science and/or maths.
But not if you want an actual job.
If you want one afterwards? My best mate at uni went on to do his PhD at Imperial and he walked into an R&D job at a big defence firm afterwards. Not sure he would have got the same opportunity had he stuck around at Cardiff.
Well nobody is denying that Imperial is a better university than Cardiff, especially when it comes to Engineering of some kind, I assume?
However doing a PhD in Law is not likely to fast-track you very far in getting a training contract at a large law firm, at least as far as I’m aware.
Likewise doing a PhD in History or English is not going to go far in helping you get a job.
Depends on the university, if you went to the finest university in the world then reading English at graduate level can get you a top top job, see for example Richard Burgon who read English Literature at St John's, and is likely to be a future Labour leader, if not future Prime Minister.
I don't know if there is data on this but the student infection outbreaks seem to involve a few of the crapper 'universities'.
According to the Guardian, Northumbria Law School ranks above Exeter, Birmingham, Warwick, Manchester, Newcastle, Cardiff, Nottingham, etc...
The Guardian rankings are nonsense. They don't include any measure of research output and use a very dubious value added system.
Is research output particularly relevant to students?
It is very relevant to postgraduate students. But anyway, the discussion was "crap or crapper" universities, so yes research output is relevant.
I’m a postgraduate student. Research output is not relevant to me.
Isn't that when it's most important?
Absolutely yes if you're aiming for a PhD in Science and/or maths.
But not if you want an actual job.
If you want one afterwards? My best mate at uni went on to do his PhD at Imperial and he walked into an R&D job at a big defence firm afterwards. Not sure he would have got the same opportunity had he stuck around at Cardiff.
Well nobody is denying that Imperial is a better university than Cardiff, especially when it comes to Engineering of some kind, I assume?
However doing a PhD in Law is not likely to fast-track you very far in getting a training contract at a large law firm, at least as far as I’m aware.
Likewise doing a PhD in History or English is not going to go far in helping you get a job.
Depends on the university, if you went to the finest university in the world then reading English at graduate level can get you a top top job, see for example Richard Burgon who read English Literature at St John's, and is likely to be a future Labour leader, if not future Prime Minister.
I thought you couldn't do a DPhil (as they call them at proper universities) in English law because the fiction is that all the law already exists (it just gets expounded by the courts) so original research is impossible.
PhDs are absolutely not about the university anyway, they are about the individual supervisor and the examiners.
Johnson’s administration places no such premium on good governance. Why might that be? First, look to the top. All institutions ultimately reflect the personality and priorities of the person in charge, governments especially. Even the prime minister’s admirers don’t pretend that he’s a details man, across policy and process. One colleague says of Johnson’s earlier spell as the capital’s mayor: “He was basically chaotic, shagging his way around London, writing articles,” leaving the actual work to his staff. Recall last year’s revelation of a scribbled note referring to his predecessor as “girly swot Cameron”. Put aside the reflexive sexism and absorb a work ethic so lax it regards Notting Hill’s king of chillax as a relentless Stakhanovite.
So this government will keep messing up, of course it will. Covid has ripped the mask off the man who leads it and exposed its driving purpose. It has revealed both for what they are.
Gallowgate said in the last thread "Because I’m a pleb I had to do a Google to understand that reference."
Well, The great Richard Feynman, a Jewish boy from New York, was admonished by his first wife from her hospital bed with "What Do You Care What Other People Think?" It stayed with him for the rest of his life.
Gallowgate said in the last thread "Because I’m a pleb I had to do a Google to understand that reference."
Well, The great Richard Feynman, a Jewish boy from New York, was admonished by his first wife from her hospital bed with "What Do You Care What Other People Think?" It stayed with him for the rest of his life.
I don't know if there is data on this but the student infection outbreaks seem to involve a few of the crapper 'universities'.
According to the Guardian, Northumbria Law School ranks above Exeter, Birmingham, Warwick, Manchester, Newcastle, Cardiff, Nottingham, etc...
The Guardian rankings are nonsense. They don't include any measure of research output and use a very dubious value added system.
Is research output particularly relevant to students?
It is very relevant to postgraduate students. But anyway, the discussion was "crap or crapper" universities, so yes research output is relevant.
I’m a postgraduate student. Research output is not relevant to me.
Isn't that when it's most important?
Absolutely yes if you're aiming for a PhD in Science and/or maths.
But not if you want an actual job.
If you want one afterwards? My best mate at uni went on to do his PhD at Imperial and he walked into an R&D job at a big defence firm afterwards. Not sure he would have got the same opportunity had he stuck around at Cardiff.
Well nobody is denying that Imperial is a better university than Cardiff, especially when it comes to Engineering of some kind, I assume?
However doing a PhD in Law is not likely to fast-track you very far in getting a training contract at a large law firm, at least as far as I’m aware.
Likewise doing a PhD in History or English is not going to go far in helping you get a job.
Depends on the university, if you went to the finest university in the world then reading English at graduate level can get you a top top job, see for example Richard Burgon who read English Literature at St John's, and is likely to be a future Labour leader, if not future Prime Minister.
He went to the finest uni in the world? I thought he was at Cambridge.
Gallowgate said in the last thread "Because I’m a pleb I had to do a Google to understand that reference."
Well, The great Richard Feynman, a Jewish boy from New York, was admonished by his first wife from her hospital bed with "What Do You Care What Other People Think?" It stayed with him for the rest of his life.
Thats a great quote.
Feynman was a great mythologiser. His stories all follow the same pattern.
In a true Feynman story, everyone but Feynman emerges as a jerk.
A Feynman story should be treated with the same caution as a politician's story.
It is as I have been saying, if Trump had the remotest bit of message discipline he'd be in with a decent chance. But on every other topic apart from "the economy stupid" he is a loser and he can't help but talk about other topics.
I don't know if there is data on this but the student infection outbreaks seem to involve a few of the crapper 'universities'.
According to the Guardian, Northumbria Law School ranks above Exeter, Birmingham, Warwick, Manchester, Newcastle, Cardiff, Nottingham, etc...
The Guardian rankings are nonsense. They don't include any measure of research output and use a very dubious value added system.
Is research output particularly relevant to students?
It is very relevant to postgraduate students. But anyway, the discussion was "crap or crapper" universities, so yes research output is relevant.
I’m a postgraduate student. Research output is not relevant to me.
Isn't that when it's most important?
Absolutely yes if you're aiming for a PhD in Science and/or maths.
But not if you want an actual job.
If you want one afterwards? My best mate at uni went on to do his PhD at Imperial and he walked into an R&D job at a big defence firm afterwards. Not sure he would have got the same opportunity had he stuck around at Cardiff.
Well nobody is denying that Imperial is a better university than Cardiff, especially when it comes to Engineering of some kind, I assume?
However doing a PhD in Law is not likely to fast-track you very far in getting a training contract at a large law firm, at least as far as I’m aware.
Likewise doing a PhD in History or English is not going to go far in helping you get a job.
Physics actually, my wife has a masters from UCL which helped her get into corporate and government intelligence, again pretty sure one from London Met wouldn't have given her the same opportunities. Her master's is in a branch of economics which is extremely unscientific.
We’re discussing two different things though now. You’re talking about “reputation” whereas before we were talking about whether “research output” was relevant to most students.
If you are personally funding a taught masters (rather than research), you are going to want the best teaching possible for your money. You assume you are going to get that from a very well-regarded university like UCL, but when you get to the 10-20 ranked universities, I don’t think the reputation to teaching quality ratio is as good as most people seem to think.
Regardless, Northumbria University Law School is well regarded amongst North East law firms so that’s all that matters to me. It helps that they are the only university north of Leeds that offers the relevant course. Newcastle does not.
Gallowgate said in the last thread "Because I’m a pleb I had to do a Google to understand that reference."
Well, The great Richard Feynman, a Jewish boy from New York, was admonished by his first wife from her hospital bed with "What Do You Care What Other People Think?" It stayed with him for the rest of his life.
Thats a great quote.
Feynman was a great mythologiser. His stories all follow the same pattern.
In a true Feynman story, everyone but Feynman emerges as a jerk.
A Feynman story should be treated with the same caution as a politician's story.
Here's a Feynman story: We undergrads had him around to dinner at our "House". That was before he remarried. Chatting afterwards he requested three of us, just for the heck of it, to each clap fairly slowly, but randomly, while he counted each separately in binary. Don't ask why. But he managed it.
The one unnoticed advantage of Covid is that you can now get tables at the most exquisite London restaurants with barely 24 hours notice.
Silver linings, eh.
And (if you book) visit exhibitions without crowds (Artemesia at the National Gallery is superb), or hear exqusite concerts at the Wigmore Hall in spacious comfort.
I don't know if there is data on this but the student infection outbreaks seem to involve a few of the crapper 'universities'.
According to the Guardian, Northumbria Law School ranks above Exeter, Birmingham, Warwick, Manchester, Newcastle, Cardiff, Nottingham, etc...
The Guardian rankings are nonsense. They don't include any measure of research output and use a very dubious value added system.
Is research output particularly relevant to students?
It is very relevant to postgraduate students. But anyway, the discussion was "crap or crapper" universities, so yes research output is relevant.
I’m a postgraduate student. Research output is not relevant to me.
Isn't that when it's most important?
Absolutely yes if you're aiming for a PhD in Science and/or maths.
But not if you want an actual job.
If you want one afterwards? My best mate at uni went on to do his PhD at Imperial and he walked into an R&D job at a big defence firm afterwards. Not sure he would have got the same opportunity had he stuck around at Cardiff.
Well nobody is denying that Imperial is a better university than Cardiff, especially when it comes to Engineering of some kind, I assume?
However doing a PhD in Law is not likely to fast-track you very far in getting a training contract at a large law firm, at least as far as I’m aware.
Likewise doing a PhD in History or English is not going to go far in helping you get a job.
Physics actually, my wife has a masters from UCL which helped her get into corporate and government intelligence, again pretty sure one from London Met wouldn't have given her the same opportunities. Her master's is in a branch of economics which is extremely unscientific.
We’re discussing two different things though now. You’re talking about “reputation” whereas before we were talking about whether “research output” was relevant to most students.
If you are personally funding a taught masters (rather than research), you are going to want the best teaching possible for your money. You assume you are going to get that from a very well-regarded university like UCL, but when you get to the 10-20 ranked universities, I don’t think the reputation to teaching quality ratio is as good as most people seem to think.
Regardless, Northumbria University Law School is well regarded amongst North East law firms so that’s all that matters to me. It helps that they are the only university north of Leeds that offers the relevant course. Newcastle does not.
Too many in Britain are obsessed with reputation, rather than reality. Twas ever thus.
If those numbers are anywhere near the result, then - given the importance of the Black vote to the Democrats in states like Michigan and Pennsylvania, and the Hispanic vote in Arizona and Florida - Trump is likely to win the EC. You might even see places like NV being in play.
I can - with difficulty - see how Trump's performance might have appealed to a segment of Hispanic voters who like the Strong Man leader. Not seeing any way that performance appealed to any section of the Black population.
I will not read much into that poll until there are more post-debate polls. The only other recent poll I looked at had Biden increasing his lead, but that was an eve of debate poll, not post.
Biden's "You Ain't Black" comment was a real game changer for a fair few Black Americans, particularly the younger ones. It didn't get talked about much but, since then, I've noticed more Black pro-Trump social media sites popping up
(Note: Mrs Ed is a Black American. Has not voted Republican since 04. Voting for Trump this year).
Presumably not bothered by Trump refusing to condemn white supremacists...
I am sensing he is the new plato.
Ok, look I am quite happy to go back and sit in the shadows, and not comment. That's fine. But this is a betting website. There were plenty of people on here - and I think you were one of them - ramping up how we should all go on Biden after that debate because Trump was now toast. We now have the first poll after the debate that shows he has cut Biden's lead. For the sake of your bank balance alone, don't you think you should consider evidence that maybe goes against your views.
For someone who appears to proclaim himself such a liberal, you seem an awfully narrow minded individual.
Please keep commenting, and ignore the Lefty morons.
And AFTER the election too, one hopes.
Mr. Ed is a valuable resource to this site and provides insights from a pro-Trump perspective that is sadly lacking on here from anywhere else.
He is vociferously and personally attacked by some posters because of this.
I have zero respect for them. Quite frankly, I'd rather they were banned than Mr. Ed bullied off the site because he refuses to me yet another little Sir Echo.
If you want an echo chamber go and form a Facebook group or customise your own Twitter feed.
This is a betting site and I value opposing and conflicting views - *especially* when they go against the grain of what everyone else is saying.
Thank you @Casino_Royale, that is really appreciated. Kudos to you for standing up.
I too watched the debate and I thought it was outrageously entertaining, and far from a slam-dunk Biden win.
Trump was belligerent, nasty, snide, shouty, but he was also clever and hit home with some very sharp jabs, which made Biden look the second rate has-been that he is. And Biden was no saint, he was full of insults - "clown", "liar" etc, that didn't particularly work because they looked like the Washington elite sneering at the outside (however untrue that perception is)
I am not surprised the polls hint at Trump recovering ground. My reading was that Trump won a very bloody, hair-raising yet compelling debate (and a debate which made anything similar in Britain look infinitely tedious, even we ours are "well behaved").
For this reason I do not believe the Trump Covid Hoax stuff. He did relatively well in that debate. He would relish another.
Are the polls hinting at Trump recovering ground?
We had the IDB one with just a 3% lead for Biden, I'll give you that.
But we've also had Data for Progress (+10), USC (+8), IPSOS (+9) and Change Research (+13) all showing leads for Biden, all covering or partly covering the period since the debate. Plus a slew of state plls favourable to Biden.
Your party won't do anything to actually help young people as that would tank house prices, still COVID might do that anyway
You still don't get that the Tories are the party that tries to help the young get on the housing ladder do you?
The party have already done more to help the young get onto the housing ladder in the past decade than New Labour did in 13 years. Of course having had 13 years of Labour malfeasance to reverse and two major economic crises to tackle means the job isn't done yet, but its getting better or was pre-COVID.
Your party won't do anything to actually help young people as that would tank house prices, still COVID might do that anyway
The key is to consider whether doing so will actually help him, and his party. The answer is yes, in the long run, so I can believe he is sincere about wanting to do something to help in that area. But because of the inevitable difficulties and objections, I imagine he would be too weak or lacking in determination to follow through.
The one unnoticed advantage of Covid is that you can now get tables at the most exquisite London restaurants with barely 24 hours notice.
Silver linings, eh.
And (if you book) visit exhibitions without crowds (Artemesia at the National Gallery is superb), or hear exqusite concerts at the Wigmore Hall in spacious comfort.
The one unnoticed advantage of Covid is that you can now get tables at the most exquisite London restaurants with barely 24 hours notice.
Silver linings, eh.
Is this true?
Yes, absolutely. Go on Opentable. From the trendiest Shoreditch dinery to regularly booked-out stalwarts like the Ivy or Scotts, places that needed booking weeks ahead can now be booked tomorrow, and not at 3pm either
The one unnoticed advantage of Covid is that you can now get tables at the most exquisite London restaurants with barely 24 hours notice.
Silver linings, eh.
And (if you book) visit exhibitions without crowds (Artemesia at the National Gallery is superb), or hear exqusite concerts at the Wigmore Hall in spacious comfort.
L'enfer, c'est les autres. N'est ce pas?
Not exactly. It's just great to be able to stand and see the painting, or listen to Angela Hewitt's Bach, without distraction.
Your party won't do anything to actually help young people as that would tank house prices, still COVID might do that anyway
You still don't get that the Tories are the party that tries to help the young get on the housing ladder do you?
The party have already done more to help the young get onto the housing ladder in the past decade than New Labour did in 13 years. Of course having had 13 years of Labour malfeasance to reverse and two major economic crises to tackle means the job isn't done yet, but its getting better or was pre-COVID.
How many years do you think you can stretch this "it's all Labour's fault" line out for?
The one unnoticed advantage of Covid is that you can now get tables at the most exquisite London restaurants with barely 24 hours notice.
Silver linings, eh.
And (if you book) visit exhibitions without crowds (Artemesia at the National Gallery is superb), or hear exqusite concerts at the Wigmore Hall in spacious comfort.
L'enfer, c'est les autres. N'est ce pas?
Unless Richard in splendid isolation in Artemisia spent lots of money in the restaurant and the book shop, then the NG won't be able to afford to put on future exhibitions.
The crowds in the exhibition are needed to pay the money to finance the loans of artworks.
The biggest problem with the Guardian uni ranking approach is it is based in idea of value added. Thus, the lower your entry standards the more you get rewards for somebody getting the degree at the end.
You could argue that means the teaching must be better as it enabled students who came with lower grades to achieve the same as those at other unis who started from a better level of attainment. What it doesn't tell you is how good that degree actually is, because unlike A-Levels not everybody is sitting the same exam in the same small set of subjects at the end. And across wildly different subjects from theoretical to vocational, the difficulty of a degree is enormous.
And of course because of the doshola, no uni wants to fail anybody these days.
And finally, the Guardian algorithm for whatever reason appears to be extreme volatile from year to year e.g. Northumbria when from from 47 to 27 in a single year. While with the likes of the Times I believe it remains in the 50-60 range.
All that been said, there has definitely been an issue among some traditional unis failure to up their game, still resting on their reputation of being old. In the past 25 years, a number of newer unis such as Warwick, Exeter, York, Bath have moved right up to be consistently now in the top 10-15.
Your party won't do anything to actually help young people as that would tank house prices, still COVID might do that anyway
You still don't get that the Tories are the party that tries to help the young get on the housing ladder do you?
The party have already done more to help the young get onto the housing ladder in the past decade than New Labour did in 13 years. Of course having had 13 years of Labour malfeasance to reverse and two major economic crises to tackle means the job isn't done yet, but its getting better or was pre-COVID.
How many years do you think you can stretch this "it's all Labour's fault" line out for?
Good question. When will Labour stop banging on about Thatcher? Brown left office 21 years after her.
It's remarkable that a politician can on a whim change the voting arrangements in the middle of the actual vote. Particularly when he had championed the original arrangements
The one unnoticed advantage of Covid is that you can now get tables at the most exquisite London restaurants with barely 24 hours notice.
Silver linings, eh.
And (if you book) visit exhibitions without crowds (Artemesia at the National Gallery is superb), or hear exqusite concerts at the Wigmore Hall in spacious comfort.
L'enfer, c'est les autres. N'est ce pas?
Unless Richard in splendid isolation in Artemisia spent lots of money in the restaurant and the book shop, then the NG won't be able to afford to put on future exhibitions.
The crowds in the exhibition are needed to pay the money to finance the loans of artworks.
This is true, but isn't a reason not to enjoy it now. And you can help the restaurants survive afterwards.
If Kelly wins the Arizona Senate race, then - because it is a Special election - he will be seated immediately.
This means that, for the purposes of the lame duck session, the composition of the Senate is more likely to be 52-48 than 53-47.
This may be one of the reasons why the Republicans are keen to get the Supreme Court nomination sorted before the election.
Isn’t there another special election happening, albeit a likely GOP win? I forget which state though.
There's a Special Election in Georgia.
It's a Jungle Primary, though, which means that if the leading candidate gets less than 50% (a dead cert), then there's a run-off in January.
There are three serious candidates: Kelly Loeffler (the appointed incumbent), Doug Collins (his principle Republican challenger) and Raphael Warnock (the Democrat).
The polling currently has Warnock on just shy of 40%, with Collins and Loeffler in the mid-20s.
My gut is that if Collins faces Warnock, then it's a Republican hold. But if its Loeffler vs Warnock then it's going to be much closer.
The men in grey suits will be coming to have a word with Boris next year. If there is one thing the Tories are good at, it is removing crap leaders / leaders who have served their purpose.
If Kelly wins the Arizona Senate race, then - because it is a Special election - he will be seated immediately.
This means that, for the purposes of the lame duck session, the composition of the Senate is more likely to be 52-48 than 53-47.
This may be one of the reasons why the Republicans are keen to get the Supreme Court nomination sorted before the election.
There's also the Georgia special election. Theoretically a Dem candidate could get 50% in the first round and short circuit the Jungle Primary to take the seat.
Gallowgate said in the last thread "Because I’m a pleb I had to do a Google to understand that reference."
Well, The great Richard Feynman, a Jewish boy from New York, was admonished by his first wife from her hospital bed with "What Do You Care What Other People Think?" It stayed with him for the rest of his life.
Thats a great quote.
Feynman was a great mythologiser. His stories all follow the same pattern.
In a true Feynman story, everyone but Feynman emerges as a jerk.
A Feynman story should be treated with the same caution as a politician's story.
Here's a Feynman story: We undergrads had him around to dinner at our "House". That was before he remarried. Chatting afterwards he requested three of us, just for the heck of it, to each clap fairly slowly, but randomly, while he counted each separately in binary. Don't ask why. But he managed it.
That is a great Feynman Story.
Mine is not so good. I met him only once on a visit to CalTech, at a departmental party.
He ignored the faculty and spent all his time flirting with the secretaries. This was after his first serious cancer battle.
So, when I say met him, I mean I glimpsed him from a great distance.
Your party won't do anything to actually help young people as that would tank house prices, still COVID might do that anyway
You still don't get that the Tories are the party that tries to help the young get on the housing ladder do you?
The party have already done more to help the young get onto the housing ladder in the past decade than New Labour did in 13 years. Of course having had 13 years of Labour malfeasance to reverse and two major economic crises to tackle means the job isn't done yet, but its getting better or was pre-COVID.
How many years do you think you can stretch this "it's all Labour's fault" line out for?
Good question. When will Labour stop banging on about Thatcher? Brown left office 21 years after her.
Largely that stopped in 1997. You Tories need to start defending your own record now.
The men in grey suits will be coming to have a word with Boris next year. If there is one thing the Tories are good at, it is removing crap leaders / leaders who have served their purpose.
It took two years to get shot of the "dead woman walking".
Your party won't do anything to actually help young people as that would tank house prices, still COVID might do that anyway
You still don't get that the Tories are the party that tries to help the young get on the housing ladder do you?
The party have already done more to help the young get onto the housing ladder in the past decade than New Labour did in 13 years. Of course having had 13 years of Labour malfeasance to reverse and two major economic crises to tackle means the job isn't done yet, but its getting better or was pre-COVID.
How many years do you think you can stretch this "it's all Labour's fault" line out for?
Brown tried the reverse 13 years into office, albeit not successfully, so I would imagine a few more years yet. And given the majority, even if not successfully used it might see them through to another term.
It's remarkable that a politician can on a whim change the voting arrangements in the middle of the actual vote. Particularly when he had championed the original arrangements
How many "changes everything" have we had with Trump?
Nobody is talking about his taxes now....not that i thought Trump was going to win, but the big issue he has now is he can't do his rallies which in 2016 created such a large amount of coverage and often outside of the main national media.
Because of COVID restricting crowds and this time he hasn't found a lock her up / build the wall type slogan, I dont think they were building much momentum anyway, but this definitely stops any of it.
How many "changes everything" have we had with Trump?
It is something he has been a master at, with so many things to outrage his opponents (Democratic and Republican - or former Republican at any rate) that I feel like exhaustion induced apathy long since set in. Things that would have caused a stir years ago probably no longer even get commented on, and nothing he says or does, or happens to him in this case, seems like it can shake things around much.
The one unnoticed advantage of Covid is that you can now get tables at the most exquisite London restaurants with barely 24 hours notice.
Silver linings, eh.
Is this true?
Yes, absolutely. Go on Opentable. From the trendiest Shoreditch dinery to regularly booked-out stalwarts like the Ivy or Scotts, places that needed booking weeks ahead can now be booked tomorrow, and not at 3pm either
Very, very good to know. Thanks. I can see that I can book The Ivy tomorrow at 2100 or at any time next Friday or Saturday. That is indeed extraordinary. I could even reserve Sexy Fish at 2000 on a Friday next month, which is bonkers.
How many "changes everything" have we had with Trump?
Nobody is talking about his taxes now....not that i thought Trump was going to win, but the big issue he has now is he can't do his rallies which in 2016 created such a large amount of coverage and often outside of the main national media.
Because of COVID restricting crowds and this time he hasn't found a lock her up / build the wall type slogan, I dont think they were building much momentum anyway, but this definitely stops any of it.
From the evidence thus far, he can't even tweet. That, and pumping him full of magic serum does not augur well for a "mild" case.
The men in grey suits will be coming to have a word with Boris next year. If there is one thing the Tories are good at, it is removing crap leaders / leaders who have served their purpose.
It took two years to get shot of the "dead woman walking".
Indeed so, although all that proves is they can be crap at removing a leader, one who essentially had no control in parliament for quite some time given how tied in to Brexit everything was, and still pick the right moment to make a change and win big. By contrast Labour never managed it at all, and while Keir seems to be doing a pretty good job, so far from an election there's no telling yet whether they picked the right moment to make a move (waiting for an election to do the dirty work for them).
Your party won't do anything to actually help young people as that would tank house prices, still COVID might do that anyway
You still don't get that the Tories are the party that tries to help the young get on the housing ladder do you?
The party have already done more to help the young get onto the housing ladder in the past decade than New Labour did in 13 years. Of course having had 13 years of Labour malfeasance to reverse and two major economic crises to tackle means the job isn't done yet, but its getting better or was pre-COVID.
How many years do you think you can stretch this "it's all Labour's fault" line out for?
How about 20 years after Labour have stopped blaming things on Thatcher ?
Comments
Most likely: he recovers and argues for a delay/advantage that he doesn't get and then cries major foul at the result.
Not sure it's going to be pretty.
I want to improve the historical knowledge of the country, not damage it, Morris Dancer will be sent to the historical re-education camps.
PhDs are absolutely not about the university anyway, they are about the individual supervisor and the examiners.
https://twitter.com/AndrewKirell/status/1312121190597586944?s=19
So this government will keep messing up, of course it will. Covid has ripped the mask off the man who leads it and exposed its driving purpose. It has revealed both for what they are.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/oct/02/incompetence-brexit-johnson-cummings-pandemic
Well, The great Richard Feynman, a Jewish boy from New York, was admonished by his first wife from her hospital bed with "What Do You Care What Other People Think?" It stayed with him for the rest of his life.
It was, rather, too many twats make tweets.
Exhibit A - Donald Trump.
Silver linings, eh.
In a true Feynman story, everyone but Feynman emerges as a jerk.
A Feynman story should be treated with the same caution as a politician's story.
One of the biggest mistakes Doctors make with "special" patients is to not treat them the same as their other patients.
https://twitter.com/ForTheRuleOfLaw/status/1312102834456805377
https://twitter.com/DPMcBride/status/1312130010782736384
If you are personally funding a taught masters (rather than research), you are going to want the best teaching possible for your money. You assume you are going to get that from a very well-regarded university like UCL, but when you get to the 10-20 ranked universities, I don’t think the reputation to teaching quality ratio is as good as most people seem to think.
Regardless, Northumbria University Law School is well regarded amongst North East law firms so that’s all that matters to me. It helps that they are the only university north of Leeds that offers the relevant course. Newcastle does not.
We undergrads had him around to dinner at our "House". That was before he remarried. Chatting afterwards he requested three of us, just for the heck of it, to each clap fairly slowly, but randomly, while he counted each separately in binary. Don't ask why. But he managed it.
Aha, I will believe that when I see that BoJo.
Your party won't do anything to actually help young people as that would tank house prices, still COVID might do that anyway
He looks like he's wearing George III's wig.
We had the IDB one with just a 3% lead for Biden, I'll give you that.
But we've also had Data for Progress (+10), USC (+8), IPSOS (+9) and Change Research (+13) all showing leads for Biden, all covering or partly covering the period since the debate. Plus a slew of state plls favourable to Biden.
I think we need to wait and see.
Your thread this time yesterday before the news broke said that it was now 63% Biden, 36% Trump.
Today's thread says it is now 62% Biden, 35% Trump.
That doesn't look like a swing to Biden to me. That looks like a swing to A. N. Other.
Am I missing something?
If Kelly wins the Arizona Senate race, then - because it is a Special election - he will be seated immediately.
This means that, for the purposes of the lame duck session, the composition of the Senate is more likely to be 52-48 than 53-47.
This may be one of the reasons why the Republicans are keen to get the Supreme Court nomination sorted before the election.
The party have already done more to help the young get onto the housing ladder in the past decade than New Labour did in 13 years. Of course having had 13 years of Labour malfeasance to reverse and two major economic crises to tackle means the job isn't done yet, but its getting better or was pre-COVID.
I see the Republican PACs are pumping money into SC but also MI - I think James winning MI is going to be one of the surprises of the night.
N'est ce pas?
https://twitter.com/LarrySabato/status/1312042673726017536
The crowds in the exhibition are needed to pay the money to finance the loans of artworks.
You could argue that means the teaching must be better as it enabled students who came with lower grades to achieve the same as those at other unis who started from a better level of attainment. What it doesn't tell you is how good that degree actually is, because unlike A-Levels not everybody is sitting the same exam in the same small set of subjects at the end. And across wildly different subjects from theoretical to vocational, the difficulty of a degree is enormous.
And of course because of the doshola, no uni wants to fail anybody these days.
And finally, the Guardian algorithm for whatever reason appears to be extreme volatile from year to year e.g. Northumbria when from from 47 to 27 in a single year. While with the likes of the Times I believe it remains in the 50-60 range.
All that been said, there has definitely been an issue among some traditional unis failure to up their game, still resting on their reputation of being old. In the past 25 years, a number of newer unis such as Warwick, Exeter, York, Bath have moved right up to be consistently now in the top 10-15.
It's a Jungle Primary, though, which means that if the leading candidate gets less than 50% (a dead cert), then there's a run-off in January.
There are three serious candidates: Kelly Loeffler (the appointed incumbent), Doug Collins (his principle Republican challenger) and Raphael Warnock (the Democrat).
The polling currently has Warnock on just shy of 40%, with Collins and Loeffler in the mid-20s.
My gut is that if Collins faces Warnock, then it's a Republican hold. But if its Loeffler vs Warnock then it's going to be much closer.
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/09/provocative-results-boost-hopes-antibody-treatment-covid-19
If I were an obese septuagenarian recently diagnosed, I’d probably roll those dice.
It won't happen but it is a possibility.
Mine is not so good. I met him only once on a visit to CalTech, at a departmental party.
He ignored the faculty and spent all his time flirting with the secretaries. This was after his first serious cancer battle.
So, when I say met him, I mean I glimpsed him from a great distance.
I think we discussed this a few days ago.
Sadio Mane tests positive.
My guess is 2023.
Because of COVID restricting crowds and this time he hasn't found a lock her up / build the wall type slogan, I dont think they were building much momentum anyway, but this definitely stops any of it.
You are right.
Thanks for the tip.
At this point if Biden doesn't get it then I'm on board the covid poisoned Mic theory.
That, and pumping him full of magic serum does not augur well for a "mild" case.
He's the key player for this team.
footballersstudents who haven't had covid please report to the front desk so we can complete herd immunity.