More frustrating to me are the UK-centric threads by the regulars on here. Don't Alastair, Cyclefree, David Herdson etc. study US politics? We're reliant on Mike and Robert, who are excellent.
Sorry, not meaning to snipe but we're days away from the biggest betting event of the year, probably in the next four years. It also happens to be incredibly fascinating at Presidential, Senate, Congressional, Governor and issue level. There are some amazing battles taking place with stacks of polls. Any one of a score of Senate battles is worthy of a thread in its own right, and then some. It's also a result which will dramatically determine the UK's position.
Come on guys, please step up. Let's leave our myopia and focus on America for another week.
I thought you were supposed to be a writer?
All you do is whinge about other people's contributions, in between telling us they are too long for your attention span to actually read.
Is the first comment an invitation to me to write a thread?
Please try. You’ve been complaining about it incessantly, and I’d be genuinely interested to read what you come up with.
There's a staggering poll out on Trump's disapproval rating: -18. Just think about that for a moment. -18 with a little more than a week until main polling and with over 1/3rd of votes already cast. This is one of the reasons why I cannot see him winning.
More frustrating to me are the UK-centric threads by the regulars on here. Don't Alastair, Cyclefree, David Herdson etc. study US politics? We're reliant on Mike and Robert, who are excellent.
Sorry, not meaning to snipe but we're days away from the biggest betting event of the year, probably in the next four years. It also happens to be incredibly fascinating at Presidential, Senate, Congressional, Governor and issue level. There are some amazing battles taking place with stacks of polls. Any one of a score of Senate battles is worthy of a thread in its own right, and then some. It's also a result which will dramatically determine the UK's position.
Come on guys, please step up. Let's leave our myopia and focus on America for another week.
Speak for yourself, I personally don't give a toss for any senate battle and can only hope the Americans are not as thick as the English and vote in the nasty party again.
I don't think Mysticrose wants more discussion about it for any other reason than this site is called "politicalbetting.com" and there might be some fantastic opportunities out there to make money, if only the collective minds of PB.com would spend more time looking for them and sharing tips.
Whether there is actually sufficient knowledge of US politics on the site to achieve that (and overcome the partisan/slanted analyses) is another matter. When we have similar situations in the run up to UK elections there is usually enough genuine on the ground expertise to be able to largely disregard the one sided posters who may be pushing angles.
PB is better at US politics than UK politics IMHO, it's good to have people on the ground but I don't think they've ever been a great source of useful prediction fodder.
Don't worry. There will be at least one betting header a day in the final phase. I just wonder how long we will be betting on the outcome after November 3rd.
The current state of play on covid. Steroids, anticoagulation, lots of fluid replacement, CPAP and proning. Not much else seems to be adding anything at the moment.
Is it fair to say that this is a benefit of having a national system like the NHS ? We do seem to have been remarkably successful in producing useful hospital clinical trial results - both positive (dexamethasome) and negative (“the hydroxy”) - in a way that the far better funded, but more chaotic US system hasn’t.
Yes, the connected nature of UK ICU is really powerful for trials. The ICNARC data updated weekly too.
However incompetent the Tory govt has been on handling Corvid there is no reason to believe Labour would have handled it any better.Their shadow cabinet has hardly anyone who has any kind of executive CV.What Labour should do is try to recognise that and call for the govt to bring in recognisable successful figures from the worlds of business culture or sport into the govt. In the 2nd world war. Churchill brought in a highly regarded Labour figure from the unions Ernest Bevin to be minister of employment.It was a big success.
My cynicism tells me that a Labour government would be no better. Similar one law for you, none for me. Similar cronyism. Similar pissing money up against the wall. Probably more authoritarianism. Maybe not so much cronyism with the private sector but a similar effect due to incompetence dealing with it. No more likely to make the right decisions whatever they are. Contempt for the needs of business. More of a "government is right" attitude. These are diseases of the political left as well as the right. And don't forget the alternative was having a regime that many people found deeply unpalatable. Starmer is looking more like someone I might vote for if I decide the Tories need a kicking, but that will be a decision I make on the way to the polling station. Not now.
The specific problems that the UK have with dealing with the pandemic are greater than one set of incompetent Govt ministers, and encompass all areas of public administration and national life, going back decades.
Indeed. As my Dad used to say, we wrote the (West) German constitution for them, why can't we have it for ourselves? We need a revolution, not a Labour government
Love the way Tories claim that airport queues are not a problem because they’ve shut down the economy.
If you’ve arrived in Frankfurt on a A319 just after an A380 has arrived from China you know the value of the EU passport lane.
The economic shutdown has occurred across much of the world - to pretend it's a Tory thing helps to understand the cut through failure the header described. Why great swathes of the UK population would care if comfortably off jetsetters from China or any where else have to wait in a queue is beyond me. We'll have Polly Toynbee up next worried about getting back and forth from her Tuscany villa.
Tories may not have caused Corona, but they mishandled it and here they are again complacently saying it’s not a problem that business travel is restricted. You couldn’t make this stuff up.
They did some things right and some things wrong - much the same as everywhere else. The only people talkng at any length about this as a problem seem to be m/c business travellers like you. There are things people care about a lot in this world - saving a few minutes at an airport for a well heeled, expense account business traveller is not one of them.
I love the way you seem unconvinced that the Tories 'may' not have caused Covid. Such a concession - we feel your pain.
More Tory “fuck business” policy. You should care about business travellers. They tend to make investment decisions that create work that pay tax bills. Tories used to care about this before they went all ideological and nationalist.
To be fair, i think that's missing the point. Yes it will be economically damaging. But lots about Brexit is economically damaging. This is hardly a clincher for "Brexit is bad for business", that ship sailed long ago. The thrust of the argument here however, is that the UK Govt is suddenly panicking that UK holiday makers are suddenly going to discover they can't go through the e-gates, have to queue, and are going to get very angry about it, and change their minds about the whole business. Which they won't. Either they won't care. Or they will put it down to the EU being petty (which is the sort of thing which bolsters support for Brexit in the average Brexiteer mind - in fact even "eurosceptic" remainers)
Once tourism gets going again I really do think the mega delays will become a significant talking point. Remember that Brexit was supposed to make things better. "Blame the EU" won't wash for long - it will be pretty clear that EU/EEA/CH isn't us and than means join the mega queue. So the solution would be simple - "we need to be like the EEA/CH bit".
People won't want an Australian or Canadian deal. They'll want a Swiss deal...
However incompetent the Tory govt has been on handling Corvid there is no reason to believe Labour would have handled it any better.Their shadow cabinet has hardly anyone who has any kind of executive CV.What Labour should do is try to recognise that and call for the govt to bring in recognisable successful figures from the worlds of business culture or sport into the govt. In the 2nd world war. Churchill brought in a highly regarded Labour figure from the unions Ernest Bevin to be minister of employment.It was a big success.
My cynicism tells me that a Labour government would be no better. Similar one law for you, none for me. Similar cronyism. Similar pissing money up against the wall. Probably more authoritarianism. Maybe not so much cronyism with the private sector but a similar effect due to incompetence dealing with it. No more likely to make the right decisions whatever they are. Contempt for the needs of business. More of a "government is right" attitude. These are diseases of the political left as well as the right. And don't forget the alternative was having a regime that many people found deeply unpalatable. Starmer is looking more like someone I might vote for if I decide the Tories need a kicking, but that will be a decision I make on the way to the polling station. Not now.
The specific problems that the UK have with dealing with the pandemic are greater than one set of incompetent Govt ministers, and encompass all areas of public administration and national life, going back decades.
Indeed. As my Dad used to say, we wrote the (West) German constitution for them, why can't we have it for ourselves? We need a revolution, not a Labour government
Interesting thread header - I would say that Labour's caution is understandable. Starmer is not much less left-wing than Corbyn in reality but is bright enough to realise that the voters are in a different place. I think he is terrified to be explicit on Labour's programme. Some polling yesterday showed that even Labour voters continue to take a very hard line on immigration. That is just one example. Further, there remains a massive gulf between the media narrative and where people are. Yes the public has lost faith in Boris - but that is very different from accepting the sort of narrative on Europe, immigration , etc we see on twittter or on here. I'm not even convinced how many of those who are not that far above the school meals threshold go along with the endless demands for more and more in benefits for those who many of them perceive as feckless. Yes the chatterering middle classes in the metropolitan areas love it all - but I'm not sure they speak for Jo public that much who cling to the naive idea that parents should be feeding their own children.
There is much that you are correct on politically in that statement, the UK and England in particular is and always has been a long way away from Corbynism. But it is not just the poor who want endless benefits and govt handouts. The triple lock is the worst example of this, wanting an ever increasing share of the pie for the richest cohort in society at the expense of the working age population who get the ever declining share.
I have benefited personally from that ever since I retired - from all governments. The fact is pensioners vote in higher numbers than any other group - as they die out they are replaced by new ones with much the same mindset. The younger folk prefer twitter and other things to voting - otherwise there'd have been no Brexit. The solution is clear.
Of course I understand why the triple lock is popular with pensioners, and why they will probably even get their 10-20% bonus rise through next year. I am just pointing out the hypocrisy of the biggest non working bloc voting for an ever increasing share of the pie for themselves whilst moaning about the kids of feckless parents getting a sandwich.
As a conservative and a pensioner I have made it clear several times that the triple lock should go and I also said earlier this week I would have voted with Labour on free school meals
More frustrating to me are the UK-centric threads by the regulars on here. Don't Alastair, Cyclefree, David Herdson etc. study US politics? We're reliant on Mike and Robert, who are excellent.
Sorry, not meaning to snipe but we're days away from the biggest betting event of the year, probably in the next four years. It also happens to be incredibly fascinating at Presidential, Senate, Congressional, Governor and issue level. There are some amazing battles taking place with stacks of polls. Any one of a score of Senate battles is worthy of a thread in its own right, and then some. It's also a result which will dramatically determine the UK's position.
Come on guys, please step up. Let's leave our myopia and focus on America for another week.
Speak for yourself, I personally don't give a toss for any senate battle and can only hope the Americans are not as thick as the English and vote in the nasty party again.
I don't think Mysticrose wants more discussion about it for any other reason than this site is called "politicalbetting.com" and there might be some fantastic opportunities out there to make money, if only the collective minds of PB.com would spend more time looking for them and sharing tips.
Whether there is actually sufficient knowledge of US politics on the site to achieve that (and overcome the partisan/slanted analyses) is another matter. When we have similar situations in the run up to UK elections there is usually enough genuine on the ground expertise to be able to largely disregard the one sided posters who may be pushing angles.
PB is better at US politics than UK politics IMHO, it's good to have people on the ground but I don't think they've ever been a great source of useful prediction fodder.
On balance there are always more (obviously) people on here pushing slanted opinions on UK politics than US politics. But come election time we all usually know who the ones are that are able to offer genuine unbiased insight into what is happening on the ground. Doesn't mean they always get it right though. Sometimes you've just got to go with the broad picture and reject the "too clever" detailed stuff.
When looking at foreign politics you often get the impression that comment is "better" because fewer people have vested interests in the outcome. And are more likely to have a level of knowledge/expertise/insight above the norm. And the quality of analysis will be very high. Although America falls somewhere in the middle.
But Mysticrose is right - the interest is not so much in Trump/Biden. But the opportunities at lower levels - the Senate (or more so even more down ballot contests).
By the way, it also bears repeating (as Mike has done) that well over 1/3rd of votes have already been cast. So for those people the hypothetical opinion question is in fact virtually an exit poll.
As I mentioned, the markets are (still) out of kilter with the polls. I think that's based on normalcy bias. There are real opportunities here, not just in the Presidential but in the races down the ticket.
My wife has started writing ballards about sewing machines.
She's a Singer songwriter.
I don’t get it... 🤷♂️
It is a joke that relies on you knowing that Singer is a famous maker of sewing machines. I’m assuming here that your comment was not itself a joke that I didn’t get...
One from the Tim Vine school of comedy.
Somewhere Ydoethur is stirring, will be gutted to miss a pun fest.
He'll be heartened however to see that the Cornyvirus Pundemic is well into another wave
More frustrating to me are the UK-centric threads by the regulars on here. Don't Alastair, Cyclefree, David Herdson etc. study US politics? We're reliant on Mike and Robert, who are excellent.
Sorry, not meaning to snipe but we're days away from the biggest betting event of the year, probably in the next four years. It also happens to be incredibly fascinating at Presidential, Senate, Congressional, Governor and issue level. There are some amazing battles taking place with stacks of polls. Any one of a score of Senate battles is worthy of a thread in its own right, and then some. It's also a result which will dramatically determine the UK's position.
Come on guys, please step up. Let's leave our myopia and focus on America for another week.
I thought you were supposed to be a writer?
All you do is whinge about other people's contributions, in between telling us they are too long for your attention span to actually read.
Is the first comment an invitation to me to write a thread?
Re. the second, it's not my attention span. Some of the UK-centric threads are so full of wind there's just no point.
This is a betting site and we're days away from the biggest betting event between 2019 and 2024 (probably). Take a leaf out of Mike's book and let's have a swathe of betting opportunity threads in the immediate run up. There are still opportunities around especially as the markets are out of kilter with the polls.
It's not my job to invite you, but it is the logical resolution to your OP. You could show us what having a single point and making it well actually looks like.
My wife has started writing ballards about sewing machines.
She's a Singer songwriter.
I don’t get it... 🤷♂️
Singer (the Singer family?) was (is?) a massive company famous for making sewing machines.
Really big - almost like Hoover crossed over to become a regular noun and verb.
My mother used to refer to her food mixer as the Kenwood. Doubt that this is heard so much nowadays; Hoover has cut through into permanent vocab in a way that few manufacturers manage.
Love the way Tories claim that airport queues are not a problem because they’ve shut down the economy.
If you’ve arrived in Frankfurt on a A319 just after an A380 has arrived from China you know the value of the EU passport lane.
The economic shutdown has occurred across much of the world - to pretend it's a Tory thing helps to understand the cut through failure the header described. Why great swathes of the UK population would care if comfortably off jetsetters from China or any where else have to wait in a queue is beyond me. We'll have Polly Toynbee up next worried about getting back and forth from her Tuscany villa.
Tories may not have caused Corona, but they mishandled it and here they are again complacently saying it’s not a problem that business travel is restricted. You couldn’t make this stuff up.
They did some things right and some things wrong - much the same as everywhere else. The only people talkng at any length about this as a problem seem to be m/c business travellers like you. There are things people care about a lot in this world - saving a few minutes at an airport for a well heeled, expense account business traveller is not one of them.
I love the way you seem unconvinced that the Tories 'may' not have caused Covid. Such a concession - we feel your pain.
More Tory “fuck business” policy. You should care about business travellers. They tend to make investment decisions that create work that pay tax bills. Tories used to care about this before they went all ideological and nationalist.
To be fair, i think that's missing the point. Yes it will be economically damaging. But lots about Brexit is economically damaging. This is hardly a clincher for "Brexit is bad for business", that ship sailed long ago. The thrust of the argument here however, is that the UK Govt is suddenly panicking that UK holiday makers are suddenly going to discover they can't go through the e-gates, have to queue, and are going to get very angry about it, and change their minds about the whole business. Which they won't. Either they won't care. Or they will put it down to the EU being petty (which is the sort of thing which bolsters support for Brexit in the average Brexiteer mind - in fact even "eurosceptic" remainers)
Once tourism gets going again I really do think the mega delays will become a significant talking point. Remember that Brexit was supposed to make things better. "Blame the EU" won't wash for long - it will be pretty clear that EU/EEA/CH isn't us and than means join the mega queue. So the solution would be simple - "we need to be like the EEA/CH bit".
People won't want an Australian or Canadian deal. They'll want a Swiss deal...
You really think there will be "mega" delays? I rather doubt it to be honest. Not after a few weeks/months of "making a point". If people can't use e-gates (which as i say are hardly universally taken advantage of at the moment - even where they exist) then airports will employ additional staff to speed up progress. Countries/regions which rely on UK tourism as a major source of income, aren't going to want them hanging around in airports for hours not spending money.
By the way, it also bears repeating (as Mike has done) that well over 1/3rd of votes have already been cast. So for those people the hypothetical opinion question is in fact virtually an exit poll.
As I mentioned, the markets are (still) out of kilter with the polls. I think that's based on normalcy bias. There are real opportunities here, not just in the Presidential but in the races down the ticket.
More frustrating to me are the UK-centric threads by the regulars on here. Don't Alastair, Cyclefree, David Herdson etc. study US politics? We're reliant on Mike and Robert, who are excellent.
Sorry, not meaning to snipe but we're days away from the biggest betting event of the year, probably in the next four years. It also happens to be incredibly fascinating at Presidential, Senate, Congressional, Governor and issue level. There are some amazing battles taking place with stacks of polls. Any one of a score of Senate battles is worthy of a thread in its own right, and then some. It's also a result which will dramatically determine the UK's position.
Come on guys, please step up. Let's leave our myopia and focus on America for another week.
Speak for yourself, I personally don't give a toss for any senate battle and can only hope the Americans are not as thick as the English and vote in the nasty party again.
I don't think Mysticrose wants more discussion about it for any other reason than this site is called "politicalbetting.com" and there might be some fantastic opportunities out there to make money, if only the collective minds of PB.com would spend more time looking for them and sharing tips.
Whether there is actually sufficient knowledge of US politics on the site to achieve that (and overcome the partisan/slanted analyses) is another matter. When we have similar situations in the run up to UK elections there is usually enough genuine on the ground expertise to be able to largely disregard the one sided posters who may be pushing angles.
PB is better at US politics than UK politics IMHO, it's good to have people on the ground but I don't think they've ever been a great source of useful prediction fodder.
My 2019 GE profits were dented by me foolishly listening to an SCon ramper who did a good impression of knowing what they were talking about.
However incompetent the Tory govt has been on handling Corvid there is no reason to believe Labour would have handled it any better.Their shadow cabinet has hardly anyone who has any kind of executive CV.What Labour should do is try to recognise that and call for the govt to bring in recognisable successful figures from the worlds of business culture or sport into the govt. In the 2nd world war. Churchill brought in a highly regarded Labour figure from the unions Ernest Bevin to be minister of employment.It was a big success.
My cynicism tells me that a Labour government would be no better. Similar one law for you, none for me. Similar cronyism. Similar pissing money up against the wall. Probably more authoritarianism. Maybe not so much cronyism with the private sector but a similar effect due to incompetence dealing with it. No more likely to make the right decisions whatever they are. Contempt for the needs of business. More of a "government is right" attitude. These are diseases of the political left as well as the right. And don't forget the alternative was having a regime that many people found deeply unpalatable. Starmer is looking more like someone I might vote for if I decide the Tories need a kicking, but that will be a decision I make on the way to the polling station. Not now.
The specific problems that the UK have with dealing with the pandemic are greater than one set of incompetent Govt ministers, and encompass all areas of public administration and national life, going back decades.
Indeed. As my Dad used to say, we wrote the (West) German constitution for them, why can't we have it for ourselves? We need a revolution, not a Labour government
You are Jeremy Corbyn and I claim my £5.
I very much doubt our ideas about the future constitution of the United Kingdom would coincide. I have to admit I have given up on the idea of an English government, it would be almost as large and as dysfunctional as the British one, but the German model could allow both small and large federal regions to coexist, eg Cornwall and Yorkshire. In West Germany, Prussia was *deliberately* dismantled, although in the West it was relatively recently-occupied territories rather than the Prussia-Brandenburg heartlands.
More frustrating to me are the UK-centric threads by the regulars on here. Don't Alastair, Cyclefree, David Herdson etc. study US politics? We're reliant on Mike and Robert, who are excellent.
Sorry, not meaning to snipe but we're days away from the biggest betting event of the year, probably in the next four years. It also happens to be incredibly fascinating at Presidential, Senate, Congressional, Governor and issue level. There are some amazing battles taking place with stacks of polls. Any one of a score of Senate battles is worthy of a thread in its own right, and then some. It's also a result which will dramatically determine the UK's position.
Come on guys, please step up. Let's leave our myopia and focus on America for another week.
Speak for yourself, I personally don't give a toss for any senate battle and can only hope the Americans are not as thick as the English and vote in the nasty party again.
I don't think Mysticrose wants more discussion about it for any other reason than this site is called "politicalbetting.com" and there might be some fantastic opportunities out there to make money, if only the collective minds of PB.com would spend more time looking for them and sharing tips.
Whether there is actually sufficient knowledge of US politics on the site to achieve that (and overcome the partisan/slanted analyses) is another matter. When we have similar situations in the run up to UK elections there is usually enough genuine on the ground expertise to be able to largely disregard the one sided posters who may be pushing angles.
PB is better at US politics than UK politics IMHO, it's good to have people on the ground but I don't think they've ever been a great source of useful prediction fodder.
On balance there are always more (obviously) people on here pushing slanted opinions on UK politics than US politics. But come election time we all usually know who the ones are that are able to offer genuine unbiased insight into what is happening on the ground. Doesn't mean they always get it right though. Sometimes you've just got to go with the broad picture and reject the "too clever" detailed stuff.
When looking at foreign politics you often get the impression that comment is "better" because fewer people have vested interests in the outcome. And are more likely to have a level of knowledge/expertise/insight above the norm. And the quality of analysis will be very high. Although America falls somewhere in the middle.
But Mysticrose is right - the interest is not so much in Trump/Biden. But the opportunities at lower levels - the Senate (or more so even more down ballot contests).
I have had a bit of a browse, but not much obvious value.
I lumped on a significant Biden win some time ago, and am holding back my remaining stake money for the final weekend.
Worth noting that the votes are in down ballot too, not just POTUS.
By the way, it also bears repeating (as Mike has done) that well over 1/3rd of votes have already been cast. So for those people the hypothetical opinion question is in fact virtually an exit poll.
As I mentioned, the markets are (still) out of kilter with the polls. I think that's based on normalcy bias. There are real opportunities here, not just in the Presidential but in the races down the ticket.
Well over? Surely 20-30%?
Over 50 million votes have been cast.
At least 54 million and that is going to be an undercount due to varying state reporting standards.
Love the way Tories claim that airport queues are not a problem because they’ve shut down the economy.
If you’ve arrived in Frankfurt on a A319 just after an A380 has arrived from China you know the value of the EU passport lane.
The economic shutdown has occurred across much of the world - to pretend it's a Tory thing helps to understand the cut through failure the header described. Why great swathes of the UK population would care if comfortably off jetsetters from China or any where else have to wait in a queue is beyond me. We'll have Polly Toynbee up next worried about getting back and forth from her Tuscany villa.
Tories may not have caused Corona, but they mishandled it and here they are again complacently saying it’s not a problem that business travel is restricted. You couldn’t make this stuff up.
They did some things right and some things wrong - much the same as everywhere else. The only people talkng at any length about this as a problem seem to be m/c business travellers like you. There are things people care about a lot in this world - saving a few minutes at an airport for a well heeled, expense account business traveller is not one of them.
I love the way you seem unconvinced that the Tories 'may' not have caused Covid. Such a concession - we feel your pain.
More Tory “fuck business” policy. You should care about business travellers. They tend to make investment decisions that create work that pay tax bills. Tories used to care about this before they went all ideological and nationalist.
To be fair, i think that's missing the point. Yes it will be economically damaging. But lots about Brexit is economically damaging. This is hardly a clincher for "Brexit is bad for business", that ship sailed long ago. The thrust of the argument here however, is that the UK Govt is suddenly panicking that UK holiday makers are suddenly going to discover they can't go through the e-gates, have to queue, and are going to get very angry about it, and change their minds about the whole business. Which they won't. Either they won't care. Or they will put it down to the EU being petty (which is the sort of thing which bolsters support for Brexit in the average Brexiteer mind - in fact even "eurosceptic" remainers)
Once tourism gets going again I really do think the mega delays will become a significant talking point. Remember that Brexit was supposed to make things better. "Blame the EU" won't wash for long - it will be pretty clear that EU/EEA/CH isn't us and than means join the mega queue. So the solution would be simple - "we need to be like the EEA/CH bit".
People won't want an Australian or Canadian deal. They'll want a Swiss deal...
You really think there will be "mega" delays? I rather doubt it to be honest. Not after a few weeks/months of "making a point". If people can't use e-gates (which as i say are hardly universally taken advantage of at the moment - even where they exist) then airports will employ additional staff to speed up progress. Countries/regions which rely on UK tourism as a major source of income, aren't going to want them hanging around in airports for hours not spending money.
But we'll see.
You see the mega queues at UK airports for non EU/EEA/CH travellers? Do we employ additional staff? The queues in American airports for any foreigner? Do they employ additional staff? Queues and waiting are simply a normal part of air travel from which we have been insulated for a while. We can't use e-gates to enter the EU as we'll need to have our passports stamped. Just as Americans can't use our e-gates at Heathrow.
Airports will have the same challenges as ports like Dover. Any delay will create a backlog which devours space that doesn't exist. For the Channel we are hastily building vast lorry parks. For airports they won't have that luxury.
On the US - there have been a few stories around about how the FBI have warned that the Russians have managed to hack into and gain access to US electoral infrastructure. But little headline discussion of the implications of this. What are the implications?
Is it just that they have access to voter rolls etc, and can use it to engage in disinformation campaigns (which is bad enough). Or does it actually go as far as nightmare scenerios of disrupting election day itself, or even somehow changing the published results.
Or is this sort of stuff potentially happening but so sensitive that it hasn't been revealed (as that would necessitate revealing how it is being countered)?
Love the way Tories claim that airport queues are not a problem because they’ve shut down the economy.
If you’ve arrived in Frankfurt on a A319 just after an A380 has arrived from China you know the value of the EU passport lane.
The economic shutdown has occurred across much of the world - to pretend it's a Tory thing helps to understand the cut through failure the header described. Why great swathes of the UK population would care if comfortably off jetsetters from China or any where else have to wait in a queue is beyond me. We'll have Polly Toynbee up next worried about getting back and forth from her Tuscany villa.
Tories may not have caused Corona, but they mishandled it and here they are again complacently saying it’s not a problem that business travel is restricted. You couldn’t make this stuff up.
They did some things right and some things wrong - much the same as everywhere else. The only people talkng at any length about this as a problem seem to be m/c business travellers like you. There are things people care about a lot in this world - saving a few minutes at an airport for a well heeled, expense account business traveller is not one of them.
I love the way you seem unconvinced that the Tories 'may' not have caused Covid. Such a concession - we feel your pain.
More Tory “fuck business” policy. You should care about business travellers. They tend to make investment decisions that create work that pay tax bills. Tories used to care about this before they went all ideological and nationalist.
To be fair, i think that's missing the point. Yes it will be economically damaging. But lots about Brexit is economically damaging. This is hardly a clincher for "Brexit is bad for business", that ship sailed long ago. The thrust of the argument here however, is that the UK Govt is suddenly panicking that UK holiday makers are suddenly going to discover they can't go through the e-gates, have to queue, and are going to get very angry about it, and change their minds about the whole business. Which they won't. Either they won't care. Or they will put it down to the EU being petty (which is the sort of thing which bolsters support for Brexit in the average Brexiteer mind - in fact even "eurosceptic" remainers)
Once tourism gets going again I really do think the mega delays will become a significant talking point. Remember that Brexit was supposed to make things better. "Blame the EU" won't wash for long - it will be pretty clear that EU/EEA/CH isn't us and than means join the mega queue. So the solution would be simple - "we need to be like the EEA/CH bit".
People won't want an Australian or Canadian deal. They'll want a Swiss deal...
You really think there will be "mega" delays? I rather doubt it to be honest. Not after a few weeks/months of "making a point". If people can't use e-gates (which as i say are hardly universally taken advantage of at the moment - even where they exist) then airports will employ additional staff to speed up progress. Countries/regions which rely on UK tourism as a major source of income, aren't going to want them hanging around in airports for hours not spending money.
But we'll see.
You see the mega queues at UK airports for non EU/EEA/CH travellers? Do we employ additional staff? The queues in American airports for any foreigner? Do they employ additional staff? Queues and waiting are simply a normal part of air travel from which we have been insulated for a while. We can't use e-gates to enter the EU as we'll need to have our passports stamped. Just as Americans can't use our e-gates at Heathrow.
Airports will have the same challenges as ports like Dover. Any delay will create a backlog which devours space that doesn't exist. For the Channel we are hastily building vast lorry parks. For airports they won't have that luxury.
And just when are we to see international travel back to pre-covid levels to make any of this relevant
However incompetent the Tory govt has been on handling Corvid there is no reason to believe Labour would have handled it any better.Their shadow cabinet has hardly anyone who has any kind of executive CV.What Labour should do is try to recognise that and call for the govt to bring in recognisable successful figures from the worlds of business culture or sport into the govt. In the 2nd world war. Churchill brought in a highly regarded Labour figure from the unions Ernest Bevin to be minister of employment.It was a big success.
My cynicism tells me that a Labour government would be no better. Similar one law for you, none for me. Similar cronyism. Similar pissing money up against the wall. Probably more authoritarianism. Maybe not so much cronyism with the private sector but a similar effect due to incompetence dealing with it. No more likely to make the right decisions whatever they are. Contempt for the needs of business. More of a "government is right" attitude. These are diseases of the political left as well as the right. And don't forget the alternative was having a regime that many people found deeply unpalatable. Starmer is looking more like someone I might vote for if I decide the Tories need a kicking, but that will be a decision I make on the way to the polling station. Not now.
The specific problems that the UK have with dealing with the pandemic are greater than one set of incompetent Govt ministers, and encompass all areas of public administration and national life, going back decades.
Indeed. As my Dad used to say, we wrote the (West) German constitution for them, why can't we have it for ourselves? We need a revolution, not a Labour government
I was thinking this the other day...I'm not sure there's any potential candidate to be PM willing to talk about enacting necessary constitutional change. Politics has become short termist which has been massively to the deteriment of the country. Where's a Bevan character or - more controversially- a Thatcher type.
Still Brexit, I think, although that's as much a point of view as a policy act. Anyone who values decency, competence and the truth has abandoned the Conservative Party. We're at a 40% bedrock, who won't shift their views for any of those things.
'Britain has launched a series of covert attacks on Russian leaders and their interests, the former cabinet secretary has revealed.
Lord Sedwill said that clandestine operations had been mounted to punish President Putin and his senior allies and signalled that this included deploying Britain’s newly declared offensive cyber-capability.
The “series of discreet measures” were used to “impose a price greater than one they might have expected”, he said in an interview with Times Radio. It is the first time a senior British figure had confirmed such tactics.'
However incompetent the Tory govt has been on handling Corvid there is no reason to believe Labour would have handled it any better.Their shadow cabinet has hardly anyone who has any kind of executive CV.What Labour should do is try to recognise that and call for the govt to bring in recognisable successful figures from the worlds of business culture or sport into the govt. In the 2nd world war. Churchill brought in a highly regarded Labour figure from the unions Ernest Bevin to be minister of employment.It was a big success.
My cynicism tells me that a Labour government would be no better. Similar one law for you, none for me. Similar cronyism. Similar pissing money up against the wall. Probably more authoritarianism. Maybe not so much cronyism with the private sector but a similar effect due to incompetence dealing with it. No more likely to make the right decisions whatever they are. Contempt for the needs of business. More of a "government is right" attitude. These are diseases of the political left as well as the right. And don't forget the alternative was having a regime that many people found deeply unpalatable. Starmer is looking more like someone I might vote for if I decide the Tories need a kicking, but that will be a decision I make on the way to the polling station. Not now.
The specific problems that the UK have with dealing with the pandemic are greater than one set of incompetent Govt ministers, and encompass all areas of public administration and national life, going back decades.
Indeed. As my Dad used to say, we wrote the (West) German constitution for them, why can't we have it for ourselves? We need a revolution, not a Labour government
I was thinking this the other day...I'm not sure there's any potential candidate to be PM willing to talk about enacting necessary constitutional change. Politics has become short termist which has been massively to the deteriment of the country. Where's a Bevan character or - more controversially- a Thatcher type.
We haven't exactly had a good record in enacting "necessary" constitutional change over the last 23 years.
My wife has started writing ballards about sewing machines.
She's a Singer songwriter.
I don’t get it... 🤷♂️
Singer (the Singer family?) was (is?) a massive company famous for making sewing machines.
Really big - almost like Hoover crossed over to become a regular noun and verb.
My mother used to refer to her food mixer as the Kenwood. Doubt that this is heard so much nowadays; Hoover has cut through into permanent vocab in a way that few manufacturers manage.
On topic: There's much to commend in this article, but I don't agree with a fairly central theme that Labour should be fighting on Johnson's home turf. He is good at sweeping rhetoric, and absolutely fucking terrible at detail. For me, killing this Tory administration ought to be a matter of death by a thousand cuts. And a good QC knows how to use a scalpel as well as a club. This is not a strategy that would work in many circumstances. There needs to be time (and there is), there needs to a government that is making mistakes so the cuts don't look like pedantry (there is). Further, there is a compelling rationale for not blundering in and making themselves hostages to fortune so early on. The government might, you know, actually get some things right. And any sweeping attacks you make which are then proven wrong become ammo to be fired back at you at a later date.
Another important point is that since the pandemic struck, politics has largely moved out of the streets and back indoors. Thank goodness for that, too. It's been such a welcome break to not have gangs of idiots harassing MPs on the streets. Johnson has a foot in that old world, but Starmer feels clean. There's a real hope that the cold rain of coronavirus is waking the country up from the fevered rampage it's been on, and that someone who doesn't look at all like a populist will attract voters. When Theresa May tried to ride the populist wave in 2017, it was a stiff and awkward performance. I think that wave has broken, so there's absolutely no reason for Starmer to repeat May's mistake. I have never voted Labour, but I'm impressed with Starmer so far. He's not making any bad mistakes, which is a low bar but a necessary one. When the policy ideas start to flow, I'll be ready to listen to Labour in a way I haven't been for the whole of my adult life so far. If a polling company approached me today and asked whom I would vote for, it wouldn't be Labour. But I was never the kind of person who would just suddenly drop everything and say yeah, red for me next time. If I am at all representative of a body of people in this country, then other people will be the same, dropping their instinctive opposition to Labour and saying ok, in your own time, let's hear what you've got to say.
Interesting bit of 'cakeism' yesterday; the Government apparently, belatedly, realises that from Jan 1st travellers to Europe will have to go through the 'non-EU passports' channel, and that will take longer.
And when they experience that, people aren't going to like it. So it asked for the status quo to be maintained and the EU, understandably, said No.
In this context, now one can travel to the Canary Islands again, people are trying to do so, and, in the event that that situation will prevail over Christmas, many people are going to be coming back after New Year. Wonder if there are going to stories of hold-ups while returning.
This is a classic example of Remainers warning that something could happen because of Brexit, Brexiteers saying it wouldn't, and now Brexiteers moaning about how terrible it is. People will soon find out that a passport's colour is its least important characteristic.
It is sad though arriving at Rome Paris or Nice airport and watching all the stylish people drifting through the EU only barrier and realising you're no longer longer part of it. You're with the Brexiteers
Interesting bit of 'cakeism' yesterday; the Government apparently, belatedly, realises that from Jan 1st travellers to Europe will have to go through the 'non-EU passports' channel, and that will take longer.
And when they experience that, people aren't going to like it. So it asked for the status quo to be maintained and the EU, understandably, said No.
In this context, now one can travel to the Canary Islands again, people are trying to do so, and, in the event that that situation will prevail over Christmas, many people are going to be coming back after New Year. Wonder if there are going to stories of hold-ups while returning.
This is a classic example of Remainers warning that something could happen because of Brexit, Brexiteers saying it wouldn't, and now Brexiteers moaning about how terrible it is. People will soon find out that a passport's colour is its least important characteristic.
It is sad though arriving at Rome Paris or Nice airport and watching all the stylish people drifting through the EU only barrier and realising you're no longer longer part of it. You're with the Brexiteers
I feel like cutting through is like a dam bursting. It builds up for ages and then hits hard. I couldn't believe how long May remained in front despite having totally lost control.
Good article, but I don't think it's quite right. I'd argue the Government have had several mini Black Wednesday type events - there has been plenty for the opposition to get their teeth into.
The bigger problem is that the electorate at large (or at least the section that decides elections) isn't convinced that Labour shares their values.
I agree China's persecution of minorities is evil, but regrettably started long before coronavirus. Other than that, the charges are that they seek power and treasure on the international stage? Dastardly!
It is dastardly when you are a brutal authoritarian regime.
Yes, its not atypical behaviour for any nation, us included, to seek power and treasure, but not all places are the same. We'd rightly get more worried by North Korea rising in strength than Denmark.
The current state of play on covid. Steroids, anticoagulation, lots of fluid replacement, CPAP and proning. Not much else seems to be adding anything at the moment.
Is it fair to say that this is a benefit of having a national system like the NHS ? We do seem to have been remarkably successful in producing useful hospital clinical trial results - both positive (dexamethasome) and negative (“the hydroxy”) - in a way that the far better funded, but more chaotic US system hasn’t.
Yes, the connected nature of UK ICU is really powerful for trials. The ICNARC data updated weekly too.
For healthcare research in general, there are few better places than England with integrated data from all English hospitals. Other places have better data in depth, e.g. integration with primary care and/or social care - Scotland falls under the former, some of the Scandinavian countries and sections of Canada and Australia the latter - but England has the largest decent hospital dataset that I know of. There are very few other places I could do the research that I do.
The Atlantic endorses Joe Biden. Not a great surprise, indeed they call it "spectacularly obvious".
They are not overly flattering of the sitting President: "What we have learned since we published that editorial is that we understated our case. Donald Trump is the worst president this country has seen since Andrew Johnson, or perhaps James Buchanan, or perhaps ever. Trump has brought our country low; he has divided our people; he has pitted race against race; he has corrupted our democracy; he has shown contempt for American ideals; he has made cruelty a sacrament; he has provided comfort to propagators of hate; he has abandoned America’s allies; he has aligned himself with dictators; he has encouraged terrorism and mob violence; he has undermined the agencies and departments of government; he has despoiled the environment; he has opposed free speech; he has lied frenetically and evangelized for conspiracism; he has stolen children from their parents; he has made himself an advocate of a hostile foreign power; and he has failed to protect America from a ravaging virus. Trump is not responsible for all of the 220,000 COVID-19-related deaths in America. But through his avarice and ignorance and negligence and titanic incompetence, he has allowed tens of thousands of Americans to suffer and die, many alone, all needlessly. With each passing day, his presidency reaps more death."
It's hard to disagree. Biden is a flawed and limited candidate but jeez...enough.
Interesting bit of 'cakeism' yesterday; the Government apparently, belatedly, realises that from Jan 1st travellers to Europe will have to go through the 'non-EU passports' channel, and that will take longer.
And when they experience that, people aren't going to like it. So it asked for the status quo to be maintained and the EU, understandably, said No.
In this context, now one can travel to the Canary Islands again, people are trying to do so, and, in the event that that situation will prevail over Christmas, many people are going to be coming back after New Year. Wonder if there are going to stories of hold-ups while returning.
This is a classic example of Remainers warning that something could happen because of Brexit, Brexiteers saying it wouldn't, and now Brexiteers moaning about how terrible it is. People will soon find out that a passport's colour is its least important characteristic.
The EU have worked out that most Britons only really go to the EU on holiday and so this is the most effective way of sticking it to them and making them feel the consequences of Brexit.
There's absolutely no reason for it. We aren't doing it to EU visitors, nor Japanese, American or Australian/NZ visitors now. They don't do it to Iceland/Norway or Swiss visitors.
Benefit of the doubt is powerful, I agree. I think partly as critique needs to be focused to be effective. A general condemnation of performance or blame for all deaths risks people responding, as I've seen them do, by reflecting that the gov didn't cause a pandemic. Whereas targeted critiques of mistakes hit home better.
My wife has started writing ballards about sewing machines.
She's a Singer songwriter.
I don’t get it... 🤷♂️
Singer (the Singer family?) was (is?) a massive company famous for making sewing machines.
Really big - almost like Hoover crossed over to become a regular noun and verb.
My mother used to refer to her food mixer as the Kenwood. Doubt that this is heard so much nowadays; Hoover has cut through into permanent vocab in a way that few manufacturers manage.
Re Wales, as far I can see there is nothing in the regulations the Welsh government has brought in which mandates the covering up of certain types of products in supermarkets or forbidding their sale to those who are there to buy food etc or which prevents the online purchase of certain types of goods from Welsh retailers.
The key bit of the regulation is this:- “Requirement to stay at home 3.—(1)No person in Wales may, without a reasonable excuse, leave the place where they are living or remain away from that place. (2) A reasonable excuse includes the need to do the following— (a) obtain supplies from any business or service listed in Part 3 of Schedule 1 including— (i) food and medical supplies for those in the same household (including animals in the household) or for vulnerable persons; (ii) supplies for the essential upkeep, maintenance and functioning of the household, or the household of a vulnerable person; .....”
Two points: first, what you can buy includes these but is not limited to what is on this list. Second, what is necessary for the essential functioning of a household will depend on the nature of that household. A microwave may be necessary for one; a kettle for another etc. The issue is whether the person concerned has a “reasonable excuse” to leave the house. An online purchase is completely outside the scope of the regulations since it does not involve the person leaving the house at all.
Tiresome as it is to repeat this, we should not be bullied into not doing things by authorities claiming that they have powers which the law does not give them.
Interesting bit of 'cakeism' yesterday; the Government apparently, belatedly, realises that from Jan 1st travellers to Europe will have to go through the 'non-EU passports' channel, and that will take longer.
And when they experience that, people aren't going to like it. So it asked for the status quo to be maintained and the EU, understandably, said No.
In this context, now one can travel to the Canary Islands again, people are trying to do so, and, in the event that that situation will prevail over Christmas, many people are going to be coming back after New Year. Wonder if there are going to stories of hold-ups while returning.
This is a classic example of Remainers warning that something could happen because of Brexit, Brexiteers saying it wouldn't, and now Brexiteers moaning about how terrible it is. People will soon find out that a passport's colour is its least important characteristic.
The EU have worked out that most Britons only really go to the EU on holiday and so this is the most effective way of sticking it to them and making them feel the consequences of Brexit.
There's absolutely no reason for it. We aren't doing it to EU visitors, nor Japanese, American or Australian/NZ visitors now. They don't do it to Iceland/Norway or Swiss visitors.
A senior minister said ... "[Companies] are reporting that productivity is going down, they can't bring in new clients because it's not something you can really do over Zoom, and people aren't sparking off each other and having ideas because they're all stuck at home.
All fairly obvious despite the wfh cheerleading that was dominant here early in the year. On the flip side it does result in reduced costs and increased flexibility for both business and employee, so some productivity loss could be absorbed and it still be a better solution.
The trend for wfh is clearly here to stay, and will increase over time, but the office and office life is far from dead.
Good. The declarations that life had totally changed forever seemed a little precipitous.
On topic: There's much to commend in this article, but I don't agree with a fairly central theme that Labour should be fighting on Johnson's home turf. He is good at sweeping rhetoric, and absolutely fucking terrible at detail. For me, killing this Tory administration ought to be a matter of death by a thousand cuts. And a good QC knows how to use a scalpel as well as a club. This is not a strategy that would work in many circumstances. There needs to be time (and there is), there needs to a government that is making mistakes so the cuts don't look like pedantry (there is). Further, there is a compelling rationale for not blundering in and making themselves hostages to fortune so early on. The government might, you know, actually get some things right. And any sweeping attacks you make which are then proven wrong become ammo to be fired back at you at a later date.
Another important point is that since the pandemic struck, politics has largely moved out of the streets and back indoors. Thank goodness for that, too. It's been such a welcome break to not have gangs of idiots harassing MPs on the streets. Johnson has a foot in that old world, but Starmer feels clean. There's a real hope that the cold rain of coronavirus is waking the country up from the fevered rampage it's been on, and that someone who doesn't look at all like a populist will attract voters. When Theresa May tried to ride the populist wave in 2017, it was a stiff and awkward performance. I think that wave has broken, so there's absolutely no reason for Starmer to repeat May's mistake. I have never voted Labour, but I'm impressed with Starmer so far. He's not making any bad mistakes, which is a low bar but a necessary one. When the policy ideas start to flow, I'll be ready to listen to Labour in a way I haven't been for the whole of my adult life so far. If a polling company approached me today and asked whom I would vote for, it wouldn't be Labour. But I was never the kind of person who would just suddenly drop everything and say yeah, red for me next time. If I am at all representative of a body of people in this country, then other people will be the same, dropping their instinctive opposition to Labour and saying ok, in your own time, let's hear what you've got to say.
A thousand cuts is good but there has to be some theme to it. I don’t think Starmer should aim to be like Johnson. But he needs to be a little less cautious in his attacks or he needs to find someone else in his team to do this. A bit of contemptuous well-aimed fury would not go amiss now and again.
Very interesting header, thanks @Cyclefree. I think more should be made of the situation with Dodds. I believe there are mutterings within the party over her lack of impact. She's only been in post a few months but it's a cruel game politics. She has been promoted rapidly under Starmer and doesn't appear to have found her feet yet.
Generally in opposition, only the leader and the shadow chancellor make any kind of impact on the general public.
Love the way Tories claim that airport queues are not a problem because they’ve shut down the economy.
If you’ve arrived in Frankfurt on a A319 just after an A380 has arrived from China you know the value of the EU passport lane.
The economic shutdown has occurred across much of the world - to pretend it's a Tory thing helps to understand the cut through failure the header described.
A great example where critics with a valid point overshoot in their excitement and undermine themselves or even reinforce the government by mistake. And all from a tiny difference in tone or emphasis thst couldn't resist going one step too far.
Its likely why Keir tends to be cautious, even if he can overdo that caution.
On topic: There's much to commend in this article, but I don't agree with a fairly central theme that Labour should be fighting on Johnson's home turf. He is good at sweeping rhetoric, and absolutely fucking terrible at detail. For me, killing this Tory administration ought to be a matter of death by a thousand cuts. And a good QC knows how to use a scalpel as well as a club. This is not a strategy that would work in many circumstances. There needs to be time (and there is), there needs to a government that is making mistakes so the cuts don't look like pedantry (there is). Further, there is a compelling rationale for not blundering in and making themselves hostages to fortune so early on. The government might, you know, actually get some things right. And any sweeping attacks you make which are then proven wrong become ammo to be fired back at you at a later date.
Another important point is that since the pandemic struck, politics has largely moved out of the streets and back indoors. Thank goodness for that, too. It's been such a welcome break to not have gangs of idiots harassing MPs on the streets. Johnson has a foot in that old world, but Starmer feels clean. There's a real hope that the cold rain of coronavirus is waking the country up from the fevered rampage it's been on, and that someone who doesn't look at all like a populist will attract voters. When Theresa May tried to ride the populist wave in 2017, it was a stiff and awkward performance. I think that wave has broken, so there's absolutely no reason for Starmer to repeat May's mistake. I have never voted Labour, but I'm impressed with Starmer so far. He's not making any bad mistakes, which is a low bar but a necessary one. When the policy ideas start to flow, I'll be ready to listen to Labour in a way I haven't been for the whole of my adult life so far. If a polling company approached me today and asked whom I would vote for, it wouldn't be Labour. But I was never the kind of person who would just suddenly drop everything and say yeah, red for me next time. If I am at all representative of a body of people in this country, then other people will be the same, dropping their instinctive opposition to Labour and saying ok, in your own time, let's hear what you've got to say.
Personally - and it may surprise people to hear me say this - I think the skills even of top QC’s - don’t necessarily translate very well to politics. They have their place but can be a bit overrated. Lawyers - even good ones - aren’t necessarily great communicators outside their natural environment.
Non Labour voters don't normally go round with 'never kissed a socialist' shirts on but a good proportion of their potential voters won't vote for a party which retains its socialist membership and MPs and won't vote for a party which still has an anti Semitic element in it. This is the exact mirror of the non Tory voters who won't vote for a party with JR-M, Mark Francois or Steve Baker in it and believe (which I don't) that the Tories sympathise with racists and fascists.
The Blair/Brown years in which it seemed Labour had changed into a clearly centrist party ended with Iraq and the banking meltdown and was followed by a return to hard socialism.
So Labour still has an immense amount to prove. All references to to faults of others (all justified) are useless whataboutery unless translated into belief, votes, centrists joining and running the party, properly marginalising the grievance tendency, supporting success and opportunity, understanding white van man, comprehending that if Irish, Scots and Welsh nationalisms are acceptable political forces so is the English version (they will find that hard).
But above all the issue is calibre. Cyclefree refers to the old alliances of opposition leader and shadow chancellor. Shadow Chancellor Who?
On topic: There's much to commend in this article, but I don't agree with a fairly central theme that Labour should be fighting on Johnson's home turf. He is good at sweeping rhetoric, and absolutely fucking terrible at detail. For me, killing this Tory administration ought to be a matter of death by a thousand cuts. And a good QC knows how to use a scalpel as well as a club. This is not a strategy that would work in many circumstances. There needs to be time (and there is), there needs to a government that is making mistakes so the cuts don't look like pedantry (there is). Further, there is a compelling rationale for not blundering in and making themselves hostages to fortune so early on. The government might, you know, actually get some things right. And any sweeping attacks you make which are then proven wrong become ammo to be fired back at you at a later date.
Another important point is that since the pandemic struck, politics has largely moved out of the streets and back indoors. Thank goodness for that, too. It's been such a welcome break to not have gangs of idiots harassing MPs on the streets. Johnson has a foot in that old world, but Starmer feels clean. There's a real hope that the cold rain of coronavirus is waking the country up from the fevered rampage it's been on, and that someone who doesn't look at all like a populist will attract voters. When Theresa May tried to ride the populist wave in 2017, it was a stiff and awkward performance. I think that wave has broken, so there's absolutely no reason for Starmer to repeat May's mistake. I have never voted Labour, but I'm impressed with Starmer so far. He's not making any bad mistakes, which is a low bar but a necessary one. When the policy ideas start to flow, I'll be ready to listen to Labour in a way I haven't been for the whole of my adult life so far. If a polling company approached me today and asked whom I would vote for, it wouldn't be Labour. But I was never the kind of person who would just suddenly drop everything and say yeah, red for me next time. If I am at all representative of a body of people in this country, then other people will be the same, dropping their instinctive opposition to Labour and saying ok, in your own time, let's hear what you've got to say.
A thousand cuts is good but there has to be some theme to it. I don’t think Starmer should aim to be like Johnson. But he needs to be a little less cautious in his attacks or he needs to find someone else in his team to do this. A bit of contemptuous well-aimed fury would not go amiss now and again.
As several have noted, you make a good point about the importance of the shadow Chancellor partnership. An intelligent bruiser like Balls would be ideal.
However incompetent the Tory govt has been on handling Corvid there is no reason to believe Labour would have handled it any better.Their shadow cabinet has hardly anyone who has any kind of executive CV.What Labour should do is try to recognise that and call for the govt to bring in recognisable successful figures from the worlds of business culture or sport into the govt. In the 2nd world war. Churchill brought in a highly regarded Labour figure from the unions Ernest Bevin to be minister of employment.It was a big success.
My cynicism tells me that a Labour government would be no better. Similar one law for you, none for me. Similar cronyism. Similar pissing money up against the wall. Probably more authoritarianism. Maybe not so much cronyism with the private sector but a similar effect due to incompetence dealing with it. No more likely to make the right decisions whatever they are. Contempt for the needs of business. More of a "government is right" attitude. These are diseases of the political left as well as the right. And don't forget the alternative was having a regime that many people found deeply unpalatable. Starmer is looking more like someone I might vote for if I decide the Tories need a kicking, but that will be a decision I make on the way to the polling station. Not now.
The specific problems that the UK have with dealing with the pandemic are greater than one set of incompetent Govt ministers, and encompass all areas of public administration and national life, going back decades.
Indeed. As my Dad used to say, we wrote the (West) German constitution for them, why can't we have it for ourselves? We need a revolution, not a Labour government
I don't think constitutions necessarily solve all the systemic problems peopke think they will. Some soviet constitutions enshrined various freedoms not reflected in practice. And I doubt bureaucratic cultural problems would be much changed by such a thing.
Incremental change can achieve better results, and can actually be pretty radical in area by area if we have the will.
Interesting bit of 'cakeism' yesterday; the Government apparently, belatedly, realises that from Jan 1st travellers to Europe will have to go through the 'non-EU passports' channel, and that will take longer.
And when they experience that, people aren't going to like it. So it asked for the status quo to be maintained and the EU, understandably, said No.
In this context, now one can travel to the Canary Islands again, people are trying to do so, and, in the event that that situation will prevail over Christmas, many people are going to be coming back after New Year. Wonder if there are going to stories of hold-ups while returning.
This is a classic example of Remainers warning that something could happen because of Brexit, Brexiteers saying it wouldn't, and now Brexiteers moaning about how terrible it is. People will soon find out that a passport's colour is its least important characteristic.
The EU have worked out that most Britons only really go to the EU on holiday and so this is the most effective way of sticking it to them and making them feel the consequences of Brexit.
There's absolutely no reason for it. We aren't doing it to EU visitors, nor Japanese, American or Australian/NZ visitors now. They don't do it to Iceland/Norway or Swiss visitors.
It's pure spite. Nothing more. Nothing less.
Their system is limited to the EEA. There's nothing spiteful about continuing to enforce their existing rules, however much it offends your sense of entitlement.
Very interesting header, thanks @Cyclefree. I think more should be made of the situation with Dodds. I believe there are mutterings within the party over her lack of impact. She's only been in post a few months but it's a cruel game politics. She has been promoted rapidly under Starmer and doesn't appear to have found her feet yet.
Generally in opposition, only the leader and the shadow chancellor make any kind of impact on the general public.
It is very difficult to take a politician seriously when they appear to be having a bad hair day
Interesting bit of 'cakeism' yesterday; the Government apparently, belatedly, realises that from Jan 1st travellers to Europe will have to go through the 'non-EU passports' channel, and that will take longer.
And when they experience that, people aren't going to like it. So it asked for the status quo to be maintained and the EU, understandably, said No.
In this context, now one can travel to the Canary Islands again, people are trying to do so, and, in the event that that situation will prevail over Christmas, many people are going to be coming back after New Year. Wonder if there are going to stories of hold-ups while returning.
This is a classic example of Remainers warning that something could happen because of Brexit, Brexiteers saying it wouldn't, and now Brexiteers moaning about how terrible it is. People will soon find out that a passport's colour is its least important characteristic.
The EU have worked out that most Britons only really go to the EU on holiday and so this is the most effective way of sticking it to them and making them feel the consequences of Brexit.
There's absolutely no reason for it. We aren't doing it to EU visitors, nor Japanese, American or Australian/NZ visitors now. They don't do it to Iceland/Norway or Swiss visitors.
It's pure spite. Nothing more. Nothing less.
With respect, have you seen the non EEA/EU lines in our airports?!
Interesting bit of 'cakeism' yesterday; the Government apparently, belatedly, realises that from Jan 1st travellers to Europe will have to go through the 'non-EU passports' channel, and that will take longer.
And when they experience that, people aren't going to like it. So it asked for the status quo to be maintained and the EU, understandably, said No.
In this context, now one can travel to the Canary Islands again, people are trying to do so, and, in the event that that situation will prevail over Christmas, many people are going to be coming back after New Year. Wonder if there are going to stories of hold-ups while returning.
This is a classic example of Remainers warning that something could happen because of Brexit, Brexiteers saying it wouldn't, and now Brexiteers moaning about how terrible it is. People will soon find out that a passport's colour is its least important characteristic.
The EU have worked out that most Britons only really go to the EU on holiday and so this is the most effective way of sticking it to them and making them feel the consequences of Brexit.
There's absolutely no reason for it. We aren't doing it to EU visitors, nor Japanese, American or Australian/NZ visitors now. They don't do it to Iceland/Norway or Swiss visitors.
It's pure spite. Nothing more. Nothing less.
Its a negotiation. They know we want this part of the deal more than they do. They will want something for it. Not spite, just how countries negotiate with each other.
On topic: There's much to commend in this article, but I don't agree with a fairly central theme that Labour should be fighting on Johnson's home turf. He is good at sweeping rhetoric, and absolutely fucking terrible at detail. For me, killing this Tory administration ought to be a matter of death by a thousand cuts. And a good QC knows how to use a scalpel as well as a club. This is not a strategy that would work in many circumstances. There needs to be time (and there is), there needs to a government that is making mistakes so the cuts don't look like pedantry (there is). Further, there is a compelling rationale for not blundering in and making themselves hostages to fortune so early on. The government might, you know, actually get some things right. And any sweeping attacks you make which are then proven wrong become ammo to be fired back at you at a later date.
Another important point is that since the pandemic struck, politics has largely moved out of the streets and back indoors. Thank goodness for that, too. It's been such a welcome break to not have gangs of idiots harassing MPs on the streets. Johnson has a foot in that old world, but Starmer feels clean. There's a real hope that the cold rain of coronavirus is waking the country up from the fevered rampage it's been on, and that someone who doesn't look at all like a populist will attract voters. When Theresa May tried to ride the populist wave in 2017, it was a stiff and awkward performance. I think that wave has broken, so there's absolutely no reason for Starmer to repeat May's mistake. I have never voted Labour, but I'm impressed with Starmer so far. He's not making any bad mistakes, which is a low bar but a necessary one. When the policy ideas start to flow, I'll be ready to listen to Labour in a way I haven't been for the whole of my adult life so far. If a polling company approached me today and asked whom I would vote for, it wouldn't be Labour. But I was never the kind of person who would just suddenly drop everything and say yeah, red for me next time. If I am at all representative of a body of people in this country, then other people will be the same, dropping their instinctive opposition to Labour and saying ok, in your own time, let's hear what you've got to say.
Interesting post, would be helpful to see some polling figures not on voting intention, but on which parties people would consider voting for in the next GE, it is here I think Labour will have made significant progress so far.
It will obviously be a big job to convert those considers into voters by 2024 but most of that will be down to the Tories not Labour. If the Tories deliver and govern well or even adequately they are the natural party of power in the UK, Labour only get a chance when the Tories mess up.
Interesting bit of 'cakeism' yesterday; the Government apparently, belatedly, realises that from Jan 1st travellers to Europe will have to go through the 'non-EU passports' channel, and that will take longer.
And when they experience that, people aren't going to like it. So it asked for the status quo to be maintained and the EU, understandably, said No.
In this context, now one can travel to the Canary Islands again, people are trying to do so, and, in the event that that situation will prevail over Christmas, many people are going to be coming back after New Year. Wonder if there are going to stories of hold-ups while returning.
This is a classic example of Remainers warning that something could happen because of Brexit, Brexiteers saying it wouldn't, and now Brexiteers moaning about how terrible it is. People will soon find out that a passport's colour is its least important characteristic.
The EU have worked out that most Britons only really go to the EU on holiday and so this is the most effective way of sticking it to them and making them feel the consequences of Brexit.
There's absolutely no reason for it. We aren't doing it to EU visitors, nor Japanese, American or Australian/NZ visitors now. They don't do it to Iceland/Norway or Swiss visitors.
It's pure spite. Nothing more. Nothing less.
Brexit means Brexit.
Not an answer if it is not inevitable as a consequence but is a choice. It was a lazy defence of choices made in support of Brexit and its a lazy defence of choices made in opposition to Brexit, or choices made after it (by our government or others).
If its a choice to do it it is not an issue for me, and Brexit widened the range of choices to include it and that's important to note. But we cannot be reasonable and present something like an inevitable consequence if it is not.
Interesting bit of 'cakeism' yesterday; the Government apparently, belatedly, realises that from Jan 1st travellers to Europe will have to go through the 'non-EU passports' channel, and that will take longer.
And when they experience that, people aren't going to like it. So it asked for the status quo to be maintained and the EU, understandably, said No.
In this context, now one can travel to the Canary Islands again, people are trying to do so, and, in the event that that situation will prevail over Christmas, many people are going to be coming back after New Year. Wonder if there are going to stories of hold-ups while returning.
This is a classic example of Remainers warning that something could happen because of Brexit, Brexiteers saying it wouldn't, and now Brexiteers moaning about how terrible it is. People will soon find out that a passport's colour is its least important characteristic.
The EU have worked out that most Britons only really go to the EU on holiday and so this is the most effective way of sticking it to them and making them feel the consequences of Brexit.
There's absolutely no reason for it. We aren't doing it to EU visitors, nor Japanese, American or Australian/NZ visitors now. They don't do it to Iceland/Norway or Swiss visitors.
It's pure spite. Nothing more. Nothing less.
Must be an element of making a point in it. On the other hand, we are asking for a much less close economic and security arrangement than Iceland, Norway or Switzerland has with the EU so you can see their logic. It will be a massive ball-ache when I am travelling to the EU on business again, on the other hand the thought of all those leave voters looking at their blue passports while they queue at Spanish immigration will warm my heart. Sorry to be petty but as Leavers like to say, we voted out, get over it.
So you'll get shot if you try and cross the border?
A little less hyperbole.
Yes, I think the East/West Berlin comparison with Wales is slightly offensive.
I'd also note that many people thought Dominic Cummings should be locked up for ever for travelling up and down the country in violation of travel restrictions. Many of those same people now seem to take the view that the Welsh government imposing travel restrictions is tantamount to fascism.
Non Labour voters don't normally go round with 'never kissed a socialist' shirts on but a good proportion of their potential voters won't vote for a party which retains its socialist membership and MPs and won't vote for a party which still has an anti Semitic element in it. This is the exact mirror of the non Tory voters who won't vote for a party with JR-M, Mark Francois or Steve Baker in it and believe (which I don't) that the Tories sympathise with racists and fascists.
The Blair/Brown years in which it seemed Labour had changed into a clearly centrist party ended with Iraq and the banking meltdown and was followed by a return to hard socialism.
So Labour still has an immense amount to prove. All references to to faults of others (all justified) are useless whataboutery unless translated into belief, votes, centrists joining and running the party, properly marginalising the grievance tendency, supporting success and opportunity, understanding white van man, comprehending that if Irish, Scots and Welsh nationalisms are acceptable political forces so is the English version (they will find that hard).
But above all the issue is calibre. Cyclefree refers to the old alliances of opposition leader and shadow chancellor. Shadow Chancellor Who?
I'm particularly interested in the concept of "calibre" here. How precisely do normal people make judgements about the calibre of a politician?
On topic: There's much to commend in this article, but I don't agree with a fairly central theme that Labour should be fighting on Johnson's home turf. He is good at sweeping rhetoric, and absolutely fucking terrible at detail. For me, killing this Tory administration ought to be a matter of death by a thousand cuts. And a good QC knows how to use a scalpel as well as a club. This is not a strategy that would work in many circumstances. There needs to be time (and there is), there needs to a government that is making mistakes so the cuts don't look like pedantry (there is). Further, there is a compelling rationale for not blundering in and making themselves hostages to fortune so early on. The government might, you know, actually get some things right. And any sweeping attacks you make which are then proven wrong become ammo to be fired back at you at a later date.
Another important point is that since the pandemic struck, politics has largely moved out of the streets and back indoors. Thank goodness for that, too. It's been such a welcome break to not have gangs of idiots harassing MPs on the streets. Johnson has a foot in that old world, but Starmer feels clean. There's a real hope that the cold rain of coronavirus is waking the country up from the fevered rampage it's been on, and that someone who doesn't look at all like a populist will attract voters. When Theresa May tried to ride the populist wave in 2017, it was a stiff and awkward performance. I think that wave has broken, so there's absolutely no reason for Starmer to repeat May's mistake. I have never voted Labour, but I'm impressed with Starmer so far. He's not making any bad mistakes, which is a low bar but a necessary one. When the policy ideas start to flow, I'll be ready to listen to Labour in a way I haven't been for the whole of my adult life so far. If a polling company approached me today and asked whom I would vote for, it wouldn't be Labour. But I was never the kind of person who would just suddenly drop everything and say yeah, red for me next time. If I am at all representative of a body of people in this country, then other people will be the same, dropping their instinctive opposition to Labour and saying ok, in your own time, let's hear what you've got to say.
Personally - and it may surprise people to hear me say this - I think the skills even of top QC’s - don’t necessarily translate very well to politics. They have their place but can be a bit overrated. Lawyers - even good ones - aren’t necessarily great communicators outside their natural environment.
Though some are brilliant at it 😏.
Hi Cyclefree
You would know more about this than me, so I may be completely wrong. If so please tell me.
The job of a lawyer is to argue the facts and the law, generally based on information supplied by somebody else - a client, a solicitor, a junior counsel - to a small group of people face to face who have to pay attention. That is to say, know what they need to say and say it. Imagination is not needed or indeed helpful, as it might lead to them going off script.
Meanwhile, a politician needs to think up what to say, and then sell it to a very large disparate group of people who don’t have to listen if they don’t want to.
Would it therefore be fair to say that lawyers do not always have the qualities required to be leaders, rather than just advocates?
I appreciate many lawyers had vivid imaginations - Tony Blair’s fantasies about WMD spring to mind - but apart from him are Thatcher and Attlee the only barristers at law to be PM since 1922? Although again they were two very successful PMs.
Labour is still not taking a clear poll lead because our politics remains divided by Brexit.
Any gains Starmer has made since GE19 have come almost entirely from Remain voting LDs who hated Corbyn not from Leave voting Tories. Indeed the latest Yougov has a full 41% of 2019 LD voters now having defected to Starmer Labour.
Yet astonishingly more 2019 Tories have defected to Farage and the Brexit Party, 8%, over the tighter restrictions over Covid than the 6% who have gone to Labour.
64% of Leave voters are now voting Tory and 54% of Remain voters are now voting Labour
Re Wales, as far I can see there is nothing in the regulations the Welsh government has brought in which mandates the covering up of certain types of products in supermarkets or forbidding their sale to those who are there to buy food etc or which prevents the online purchase of certain types of goods from Welsh retailers.
The key bit of the regulation is this:- “Requirement to stay at home 3.—(1)No person in Wales may, without a reasonable excuse, leave the place where they are living or remain away from that place. (2) A reasonable excuse includes the need to do the following— (a) obtain supplies from any business or service listed in Part 3 of Schedule 1 including— (i) food and medical supplies for those in the same household (including animals in the household) or for vulnerable persons; (ii) supplies for the essential upkeep, maintenance and functioning of the household, or the household of a vulnerable person; .....”
Two points: first, what you can buy includes these but is not limited to what is on this list. Second, what is necessary for the essential functioning of a household will depend on the nature of that household. A microwave may be necessary for one; a kettle for another etc. The issue is whether the person concerned has a “reasonable excuse” to leave the house. An online purchase is completely outside the scope of the regulations since it does not involve the person leaving the house at all.
Tiresome as it is to repeat this, we should not be bullied into not doing things by authorities claiming that they have powers which the law does not give them.
Don't worry, I don't find it tiresome!
I'm a bit of a sucker for authority, I can be a bit forgiving of government and give it benefit of the doubt, but on this sort of issue even where id support a restriction im surprised at the lack of concern by politicians about whether they actually have the powers they seek to utilise or if they have legally authorised such powers for use by others.
I mean, if it kicks off that they are wrong it will undermine compliance other measures as people can genuinely claim confusion.
Very interesting header, thanks @Cyclefree. I think more should be made of the situation with Dodds. I believe there are mutterings within the party over her lack of impact. She's only been in post a few months but it's a cruel game politics. She has been promoted rapidly under Starmer and doesn't appear to have found her feet yet.
Generally in opposition, only the leader and the shadow chancellor make any kind of impact on the general public.
It is very difficult to take a politician seriously when they appear to be having a bad hair day
A senior minister said ... "[Companies] are reporting that productivity is going down, they can't bring in new clients because it's not something you can really do over Zoom, and people aren't sparking off each other and having ideas because they're all stuck at home.
All fairly obvious despite the wfh cheerleading that was dominant here early in the year. On the flip side it does result in reduced costs and increased flexibility for both business and employee, so some productivity loss could be absorbed and it still be a better solution.
The trend for wfh is clearly here to stay, and will increase over time, but the office and office life is far from dead.
It’s fairly obvious that we’ll be moving to a hybrid model when the virus is sufficiently down and out to permit it. WFH has its advantages and disadvantages Office work has its advantages and disadvantages. A 2/3 model (either way) cherrypicks the majority of the advantages and minimises the disadvantages.
If people want to see or understand why Labour have not "broken through" they need do no more than read @Cyclefree 's piece.
The inbuilt and unwarranted assumptions are just alien to the majority of this country. Remainer angst is redolent in every sentence. How could the people have been so stupid as to vote for Brexit and then, when the remainer Parliament lied and lied, kicked them out on their arses giving Boris an 80 strong majority? How deluded and stupid people are. How could anyone believe that anyone who thought Brexit was a good idea was right about anything, ever? Or competent? How can they not see this (gnashing of teeth).
The majority of us (as established by a referendum and an election) really don't see it that way. We see a government struggling with a pandemic that has caused chaos around the world, who is trying to negotiate with the EU with a significant chunk of its own country cheering the EU on, tweeting every contemptuous aside with glee. It pisses us off. And it makes it us overlook the many, many flaws of this government.
So you'll get shot if you try and cross the border?
A little less hyperbole.
Yes, I think the East/West Berlin comparison with Wales is slightly offensive.
I'd also note that many people thought Dominic Cummings should be locked up for ever for travelling up and down the country in violation of travel restrictions. Many of those same people now seem to take the view that the Welsh government imposing travel restrictions is tantamount to fascism.
He shouldn’t have been locked up. He should have been heavily fined, sacked from his job and barred from working in the public sector for multiple deliberate and admitted breaches of quarantine for ostensible reasons that were not merely specious but fatuous.
But the last two should apply anyway because he’s a bully, a liar, a failure, an incompetent and clearly thick as pigshit.
(In case anyone is uncertain, I don’t rate him at all.)
Edit - and although I bow to nobody in my contempt for Drakeford, you’re quite right that is a grotesque comparison. He’s an idiot but an honest and democratic idiot.
Interesting bit of 'cakeism' yesterday; the Government apparently, belatedly, realises that from Jan 1st travellers to Europe will have to go through the 'non-EU passports' channel, and that will take longer.
And when they experience that, people aren't going to like it. So it asked for the status quo to be maintained and the EU, understandably, said No.
In this context, now one can travel to the Canary Islands again, people are trying to do so, and, in the event that that situation will prevail over Christmas, many people are going to be coming back after New Year. Wonder if there are going to stories of hold-ups while returning.
This is a classic example of Remainers warning that something could happen because of Brexit, Brexiteers saying it wouldn't, and now Brexiteers moaning about how terrible it is. People will soon find out that a passport's colour is its least important characteristic.
The EU have worked out that most Britons only really go to the EU on holiday and so this is the most effective way of sticking it to them and making them feel the consequences of Brexit.
There's absolutely no reason for it. We aren't doing it to EU visitors, nor Japanese, American or Australian/NZ visitors now. They don't do it to Iceland/Norway or Swiss visitors.
It's pure spite. Nothing more. Nothing less.
Brexit means Brexit.
Yes, that will indeed be their cry - and those of the ultra-Remainers who are desperately hoping it changes something - but it's out of kilter with other European nations who are not in the EU, and will work against their interests by making it harder for visitors, tourists and business travellers. It also risks the UK reciprocating - which currently we are not planning on doing - and we are allowing citizens of Australia, Canada, Japan, New Zealand, US, Singapore and South Korea to all use biometric passports to pass through e-gates on arrival so it has nothing to do with Brexit at all. It's just a lose-lose.
I expect its simply a bit of willy-waving to put the UK off a No Deal and it will disappear in the full FTA.
Very interesting header, thanks @Cyclefree. I think more should be made of the situation with Dodds. I believe there are mutterings within the party over her lack of impact. She's only been in post a few months but it's a cruel game politics. She has been promoted rapidly under Starmer and doesn't appear to have found her feet yet.
Generally in opposition, only the leader and the shadow chancellor make any kind of impact on the general public.
Agreed. I think she may be better suited to the thinking/back room bit of the Shadow Treasury team rather than fronting it up. Starmer is a bit of a one-man band. He needs an effective ballsy Shadow Chancellor by his side and, for all her skills, I don’t think Dodds is the right choice.
Interesting bit of 'cakeism' yesterday; the Government apparently, belatedly, realises that from Jan 1st travellers to Europe will have to go through the 'non-EU passports' channel, and that will take longer.
And when they experience that, people aren't going to like it. So it asked for the status quo to be maintained and the EU, understandably, said No.
In this context, now one can travel to the Canary Islands again, people are trying to do so, and, in the event that that situation will prevail over Christmas, many people are going to be coming back after New Year. Wonder if there are going to stories of hold-ups while returning.
This is a classic example of Remainers warning that something could happen because of Brexit, Brexiteers saying it wouldn't, and now Brexiteers moaning about how terrible it is. People will soon find out that a passport's colour is its least important characteristic.
The EU have worked out that most Britons only really go to the EU on holiday and so this is the most effective way of sticking it to them and making them feel the consequences of Brexit.
There's absolutely no reason for it. We aren't doing it to EU visitors, nor Japanese, American or Australian/NZ visitors now. They don't do it to Iceland/Norway or Swiss visitors.
It's pure spite. Nothing more. Nothing less.
With respect, have you seen the non EEA/EU lines in our airports?!
Have you seen them for EU and UK as well?
We are not in Schengen. We've always had full border controls.
If you've gone in the last year or so you'll see it's now different for some non-EU countries too.
Re Wales, as far I can see there is nothing in the regulations the Welsh government has brought in which mandates the covering up of certain types of products in supermarkets or forbidding their sale to those who are there to buy food etc or which prevents the online purchase of certain types of goods from Welsh retailers.
The key bit of the regulation is this:- “Requirement to stay at home 3.—(1)No person in Wales may, without a reasonable excuse, leave the place where they are living or remain away from that place. (2) A reasonable excuse includes the need to do the following— (a) obtain supplies from any business or service listed in Part 3 of Schedule 1 including— (i) food and medical supplies for those in the same household (including animals in the household) or for vulnerable persons; (ii) supplies for the essential upkeep, maintenance and functioning of the household, or the household of a vulnerable person; .....”
Two points: first, what you can buy includes these but is not limited to what is on this list. Second, what is necessary for the essential functioning of a household will depend on the nature of that household. A microwave may be necessary for one; a kettle for another etc. The issue is whether the person concerned has a “reasonable excuse” to leave the house. An online purchase is completely outside the scope of the regulations since it does not involve the person leaving the house at all.
Tiresome as it is to repeat this, we should not be bullied into not doing things by authorities claiming that they have powers which the law does not give them.
Isn't all the relevant thus the provisions relating to which businesses can and can't be open in Chapters 3, 4 and 5. Although it's all completely impenetrable and i doubt anyone reading it can decipher it. It's about as close to legislative gobbledegook as you can get. It's ultimately not surprising that the shops in question have just decided that they've got no choice but to base their actions on Government guidance. Alhtough i am mystified as to where the suggested idea that Supermarkets can't sell certain items online has come from?
One of the things that's so scary about a lot of these statutory instrument driven pieces of legislation is that one of the usual roles of Courts when interpreting legislation is to determine what Parliament's intention was when approving the legislation. And one of the ways they do this is to look at the documentary written record of proceedings in parliament that led up to it. But in "statutory instrument" world they can't do this. The "intention" comes from ministers, but what is the "written record" of this? I guess all they've got is the "guidance" which accompanies it - but guidance which is constantly changing and refined in response to practical experience. And half the time public statements from ministers (from the PM downwards) often contradicts their own guidance because they don't understand it.
Very interesting header, thanks @Cyclefree. I think more should be made of the situation with Dodds. I believe there are mutterings within the party over her lack of impact. She's only been in post a few months but it's a cruel game politics. She has been promoted rapidly under Starmer and doesn't appear to have found her feet yet.
Generally in opposition, only the leader and the shadow chancellor make any kind of impact on the general public.
Agreed. I think she may be better suited to the thinking/back room bit of the Shadow Treasury team rather than fronting it up. Starmer is a bit of a one-man band. He needs an effective ballsy Shadow Chancellor by his side and, for all her skills, I don’t think Dodds is the right choice.
How soon can we get old Ballsy back? By-election in Leeds North East, perhaps?
Interesting bit of 'cakeism' yesterday; the Government apparently, belatedly, realises that from Jan 1st travellers to Europe will have to go through the 'non-EU passports' channel, and that will take longer.
And when they experience that, people aren't going to like it. So it asked for the status quo to be maintained and the EU, understandably, said No.
In this context, now one can travel to the Canary Islands again, people are trying to do so, and, in the event that that situation will prevail over Christmas, many people are going to be coming back after New Year. Wonder if there are going to stories of hold-ups while returning.
This is a classic example of Remainers warning that something could happen because of Brexit, Brexiteers saying it wouldn't, and now Brexiteers moaning about how terrible it is. People will soon find out that a passport's colour is its least important characteristic.
The EU have worked out that most Britons only really go to the EU on holiday and so this is the most effective way of sticking it to them and making them feel the consequences of Brexit.
There's absolutely no reason for it. We aren't doing it to EU visitors, nor Japanese, American or Australian/NZ visitors now. They don't do it to Iceland/Norway or Swiss visitors.
It's pure spite. Nothing more. Nothing less.
Its a negotiation. They know we want this part of the deal more than they do. They will want something for it. Not spite, just how countries negotiate with each other.
Yes, I think that's right. It's a negotiating stick.
Re Wales, as far I can see there is nothing in the regulations the Welsh government has brought in which mandates the covering up of certain types of products in supermarkets or forbidding their sale to those who are there to buy food etc or which prevents the online purchase of certain types of goods from Welsh retailers.
The key bit of the regulation is this:- “Requirement to stay at home 3.—(1)No person in Wales may, without a reasonable excuse, leave the place where they are living or remain away from that place. (2) A reasonable excuse includes the need to do the following— (a) obtain supplies from any business or service listed in Part 3 of Schedule 1 including— (i) food and medical supplies for those in the same household (including animals in the household) or for vulnerable persons; (ii) supplies for the essential upkeep, maintenance and functioning of the household, or the household of a vulnerable person; .....”
Two points: first, what you can buy includes these but is not limited to what is on this list. Second, what is necessary for the essential functioning of a household will depend on the nature of that household. A microwave may be necessary for one; a kettle for another etc. The issue is whether the person concerned has a “reasonable excuse” to leave the house. An online purchase is completely outside the scope of the regulations since it does not involve the person leaving the house at all.
Tiresome as it is to repeat this, we should not be bullied into not doing things by authorities claiming that they have powers which the law does not give them.
Yes, totally agree, but on the ground in Cardiff the birthday card sections ( for instance) are blocked off. The supermarkets won’t sell such dangerous non essential contraband to you because they’re scared of the Welsh Govt.
So unless someone takes them to court and wins we are where we are till at least Nov 9.
The main reason Labour have not cut through is that they don't look very much more competent. And health is devolved.
Sure, Johnson has not had a good pandemic ... but then nor have Drakeford or Sturgeon or most leaders of European countries.
It was not that long ago that Macron was the patron saint of pb.com. Macron has hardly covered himself in corona glory, yet he hasn't suffered much in the polls, despite a situation of very great gravity in the second wave. Pedro Sánchez in Spain must rival for Boris & Macron in the failure league, yet the Socialists are still in the lead in the polls in Spain.
In all these countries, the polls have not moved that much .... yet?
All these leaders are doing badly -- few people have really made the connection that their country could have done much better, perhaps as well as Germany or South Korea. Maybe they never will.
The stench of failure is pretty widely dispersed over Western Europe.
Re Wales, as far I can see there is nothing in the regulations the Welsh government has brought in which mandates the covering up of certain types of products in supermarkets or forbidding their sale to those who are there to buy food etc or which prevents the online purchase of certain types of goods from Welsh retailers.
The key bit of the regulation is this:- “Requirement to stay at home 3.—(1)No person in Wales may, without a reasonable excuse, leave the place where they are living or remain away from that place. (2) A reasonable excuse includes the need to do the following— (a) obtain supplies from any business or service listed in Part 3 of Schedule 1 including— (i) food and medical supplies for those in the same household (including animals in the household) or for vulnerable persons; (ii) supplies for the essential upkeep, maintenance and functioning of the household, or the household of a vulnerable person; .....”
Two points: first, what you can buy includes these but is not limited to what is on this list. Second, what is necessary for the essential functioning of a household will depend on the nature of that household. A microwave may be necessary for one; a kettle for another etc. The issue is whether the person concerned has a “reasonable excuse” to leave the house. An online purchase is completely outside the scope of the regulations since it does not involve the person leaving the house at all.
Tiresome as it is to repeat this, we should not be bullied into not doing things by authorities claiming that they have powers which the law does not give them.
Yes, totally agree, but on the ground in Cardiff the birthday card sections ( for instance) are blocked off. The supermarkets won’t sell such dangerous non essential contraband to you because they’re scared of the Welsh Govt.
So unless someone takes them to court and wins we are where we are till at least Nov 9.
Interesting bit of 'cakeism' yesterday; the Government apparently, belatedly, realises that from Jan 1st travellers to Europe will have to go through the 'non-EU passports' channel, and that will take longer.
And when they experience that, people aren't going to like it. So it asked for the status quo to be maintained and the EU, understandably, said No.
In this context, now one can travel to the Canary Islands again, people are trying to do so, and, in the event that that situation will prevail over Christmas, many people are going to be coming back after New Year. Wonder if there are going to stories of hold-ups while returning.
This is a classic example of Remainers warning that something could happen because of Brexit, Brexiteers saying it wouldn't, and now Brexiteers moaning about how terrible it is. People will soon find out that a passport's colour is its least important characteristic.
The EU have worked out that most Britons only really go to the EU on holiday and so this is the most effective way of sticking it to them and making them feel the consequences of Brexit.
There's absolutely no reason for it. We aren't doing it to EU visitors, nor Japanese, American or Australian/NZ visitors now. They don't do it to Iceland/Norway or Swiss visitors.
It's pure spite. Nothing more. Nothing less.
Their system is limited to the EEA. There's nothing spiteful about continuing to enforce their existing rules, however much it offends your sense of entitlement.
Utter nonsense. The system can easily be extended to cover other nations, as ours has been.
And Switzerland isn't in the EEA either - so you're wrong about that too.
For those wanting a more exciting US election race Biden’s comments about energy at the last debate have thrown a curveball into proceedings .
Although they might help him with progressives and younger voters he’s now on a damage limitation exercise in Pennsylvania and Texas in particular.
It could also hurt him in some other states . He’s lucky that so many have already voted but I think Pennsylvania is now more of a toss up , Texas which was a long shot is I think now definitely in the Trump column.
You don’t want to be doing a walkback exercise in the last week of the campaign .
Although polls show Americans by a clear margin understand the need to be moving to more renewables I think Biden’s gaffe was one of the few missteps of his campaign .
with another 7 months till the May elections (if they happen) I think Labour are probably right to sit tight and let BJ keep coiling his own rope....once the transition period ends ( 10 weeks) 2021 will probably be the time to turn the heat up.
If people want to see or understand why Labour have not "broken through" they need do no more than read @Cyclefree 's piece.
The inbuilt and unwarranted assumptions are just alien to the majority of this country. Remainer angst is redolent in every sentence. How could the people have been so stupid as to vote for Brexit and then, when the remainer Parliament lied and lied, kicked them out on their arses giving Boris an 80 strong majority? How deluded and stupid people are. How could anyone believe that anyone who thought Brexit was a good idea was right about anything, ever? Or competent? How can they not see this (gnashing of teeth).
The majority of us (as established by a referendum and an election) really don't see it that way. We see a government struggling with a pandemic that has caused chaos around the world, who is trying to negotiate with the EU with a significant chunk of its own country cheering the EU on, tweeting every contemptuous aside with glee. It pisses us off. And it makes it us overlook the many, many flaws of this government.
Just a thought.
"The majority of us (as established by a referendum and an election)" I'm not sure precisely what you're trying to say about the 2019 election, but I do hope you aren't confusing a majority of voters with a majority in parliament. I don't think just from the votes cast it's easy to find a clear majority one way or another.
Comments
https://assets.morningconsult.com/wp-uploads/2020/10/23190208/2010136_crosstabs_POLITICO_RVs_v1.pdf
Even if that exaggerates, IPSOS Mori has it at -13: https://e.infogram.com/7803c640-a1aa-406a-a7c4-bf9efee425d3?parent_url=https://www.mitchellrepublic.com/news/government-and-politics/6731229-Oct.-20-22-polling-shows-Biden-gains-in-most-areas&src=embed#async_embed
(Other polls have had him as low as -20+ in recent times so this doesn't seem like an outlier.)
Mike has often pointed to this as a key indicator. I agree.
Bet accordingly.
https://twitter.com/ICNARC/status/1319687062669451271?s=19
People won't want an Australian or Canadian deal. They'll want a Swiss deal...
When looking at foreign politics you often get the impression that comment is "better" because fewer people have vested interests in the outcome. And are more likely to have a level of knowledge/expertise/insight above the norm. And the quality of analysis will be very high. Although America falls somewhere in the middle.
But Mysticrose is right - the interest is not so much in Trump/Biden. But the opportunities at lower levels - the Senate (or more so even more down ballot contests).
As I mentioned, the markets are (still) out of kilter with the polls. I think that's based on normalcy bias. There are real opportunities here, not just in the Presidential but in the races down the ticket.
If you're not on Biden to take Florida I believe you really should be. Based on polling, many of whose respondents have already cast their votes.
If you step back from the minutiae of the election and ask "which demographics have moved away from President Trump, and which towards him?"
You'd say seniors were Biden's best shot. And Florida is full of them. And they blame the young 'ens for the lockdown.
But we'll see.
A little less hyperbole.
I lumped on a significant Biden win some time ago, and am holding back my remaining stake money for the final weekend.
Worth noting that the votes are in down ballot too, not just POTUS.
At least 54 million and that is going to be an undercount due to varying state reporting standards.
Airports will have the same challenges as ports like Dover. Any delay will create a backlog which devours space that doesn't exist. For the Channel we are hastily building vast lorry parks. For airports they won't have that luxury.
Is it just that they have access to voter rolls etc, and can use it to engage in disinformation campaigns (which is bad enough). Or does it actually go as far as nightmare scenerios of disrupting election day itself, or even somehow changing the published results.
Or is this sort of stuff potentially happening but so sensitive that it hasn't been revealed (as that would necessitate revealing how it is being countered)?
https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/terminology.png
Lord Sedwill said that clandestine operations had been mounted to punish President Putin and his senior allies and signalled that this included deploying Britain’s newly declared offensive cyber-capability.
The “series of discreet measures” were used to “impose a price greater than one they might have expected”, he said in an interview with Times Radio. It is the first time a senior British figure had confirmed such tactics.'
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/uk-targets-putin-allies-with-covert-attacks-hnl0nl27z
There's much to commend in this article, but I don't agree with a fairly central theme that Labour should be fighting on Johnson's home turf. He is good at sweeping rhetoric, and absolutely fucking terrible at detail. For me, killing this Tory administration ought to be a matter of death by a thousand cuts. And a good QC knows how to use a scalpel as well as a club.
This is not a strategy that would work in many circumstances. There needs to be time (and there is), there needs to a government that is making mistakes so the cuts don't look like pedantry (there is). Further, there is a compelling rationale for not blundering in and making themselves hostages to fortune so early on. The government might, you know, actually get some things right. And any sweeping attacks you make which are then proven wrong become ammo to be fired back at you at a later date.
Another important point is that since the pandemic struck, politics has largely moved out of the streets and back indoors. Thank goodness for that, too. It's been such a welcome break to not have gangs of idiots harassing MPs on the streets. Johnson has a foot in that old world, but Starmer feels clean. There's a real hope that the cold rain of coronavirus is waking the country up from the fevered rampage it's been on, and that someone who doesn't look at all like a populist will attract voters. When Theresa May tried to ride the populist wave in 2017, it was a stiff and awkward performance. I think that wave has broken, so there's absolutely no reason for Starmer to repeat May's mistake.
I have never voted Labour, but I'm impressed with Starmer so far. He's not making any bad mistakes, which is a low bar but a necessary one. When the policy ideas start to flow, I'll be ready to listen to Labour in a way I haven't been for the whole of my adult life so far. If a polling company approached me today and asked whom I would vote for, it wouldn't be Labour. But I was never the kind of person who would just suddenly drop everything and say yeah, red for me next time. If I am at all representative of a body of people in this country, then other people will be the same, dropping their instinctive opposition to Labour and saying ok, in your own time, let's hear what you've got to say.
Btw i'm amazed people are basing their opinions on polls when there is so much actual voting that is happening.
http://www.therepublic.com/2020/10/23/us-election-2020-senate-south-carolina-8/
The Republicans have recently matched his money, but not until he’d already established himself in the race.
The bigger problem is that the electorate at large (or at least the section that decides elections) isn't convinced that Labour shares their values.
Yes, its not atypical behaviour for any nation, us included, to seek power and treasure, but not all places are the same. We'd rightly get more worried by North Korea rising in strength than Denmark.
They are not overly flattering of the sitting President:
"What we have learned since we published that editorial is that we understated our case. Donald Trump is the worst president this country has seen since Andrew Johnson, or perhaps James Buchanan, or perhaps ever. Trump has brought our country low; he has divided our people; he has pitted race against race; he has corrupted our democracy; he has shown contempt for American ideals; he has made cruelty a sacrament; he has provided comfort to propagators of hate; he has abandoned America’s allies; he has aligned himself with dictators; he has encouraged terrorism and mob violence; he has undermined the agencies and departments of government; he has despoiled the environment; he has opposed free speech; he has lied frenetically and evangelized for conspiracism; he has stolen children from their parents; he has made himself an advocate of a hostile foreign power; and he has failed to protect America from a ravaging virus. Trump is not responsible for all of the 220,000 COVID-19-related deaths in America. But through his avarice and ignorance and negligence and titanic incompetence, he has allowed tens of thousands of Americans to suffer and die, many alone, all needlessly. With each passing day, his presidency reaps more death."
It's hard to disagree. Biden is a flawed and limited candidate but jeez...enough.
There's absolutely no reason for it. We aren't doing it to EU visitors, nor Japanese, American or Australian/NZ visitors now. They don't do it to Iceland/Norway or Swiss visitors.
It's pure spite. Nothing more. Nothing less.
The key bit of the regulation is this:-
“Requirement to stay at home
3.—(1)No person in Wales may, without a reasonable excuse, leave the place where they are living or remain away from that place.
(2) A reasonable excuse includes the need to do the following—
(a) obtain supplies from any business or service listed in Part 3 of Schedule 1 including—
(i) food and medical supplies for those in the same household (including animals in the household) or for vulnerable persons;
(ii) supplies for the essential upkeep, maintenance and functioning of the household, or the household of a vulnerable person; .....”
Two points: first, what you can buy includes these but is not limited to what is on this list. Second, what is necessary for the essential functioning of a household will depend on the nature of that household. A microwave may be necessary for one; a kettle for another etc. The issue is whether the person concerned has a “reasonable excuse” to leave the house. An online purchase is completely outside the scope of the regulations since it does not involve the person leaving the house at all.
Tiresome as it is to repeat this, we should not be bullied into not doing things by authorities claiming that they have powers which the law does not give them.
Generally in opposition, only the leader and the shadow chancellor make any kind of impact on the general public.
Its likely why Keir tends to be cautious, even if he can overdo that caution.
Though some are brilliant at it 😏.
The Blair/Brown years in which it seemed Labour had changed into a clearly centrist party ended with Iraq and the banking meltdown and was followed by a return to hard socialism.
So Labour still has an immense amount to prove. All references to to faults of others (all justified) are useless whataboutery unless translated into belief, votes, centrists joining and running the party, properly marginalising the grievance tendency, supporting success and opportunity, understanding white van man, comprehending that if Irish, Scots and Welsh nationalisms are acceptable political forces so is the English version (they will find that hard).
But above all the issue is calibre. Cyclefree refers to the old alliances of opposition leader and shadow chancellor. Shadow Chancellor Who?
Incremental change can achieve better results, and can actually be pretty radical in area by area if we have the will.
(Edited 'cos it sounded sexist)
It will obviously be a big job to convert those considers into voters by 2024 but most of that will be down to the Tories not Labour. If the Tories deliver and govern well or even adequately they are the natural party of power in the UK, Labour only get a chance when the Tories mess up.
If its a choice to do it it is not an issue for me, and Brexit widened the range of choices to include it and that's important to note. But we cannot be reasonable and present something like an inevitable consequence if it is not.
I'd also note that many people thought Dominic Cummings should be locked up for ever for travelling up and down the country in violation of travel restrictions. Many of those same people now seem to take the view that the Welsh government imposing travel restrictions is tantamount to fascism.
How precisely do normal people make judgements about the calibre of a politician?
You would know more about this than me, so I may be completely wrong. If so please tell me.
The job of a lawyer is to argue the facts and the law, generally based on information supplied by somebody else - a client, a solicitor, a junior counsel - to a small group of people face to face who have to pay attention. That is to say, know what they need to say and say it. Imagination is not needed or indeed helpful, as it might lead to them going off script.
Meanwhile, a politician needs to think up what to say, and then sell it to a very large disparate group of people who don’t have to listen if they don’t want to.
Would it therefore be fair to say that lawyers do not always have the qualities required to be leaders, rather than just advocates?
I appreciate many lawyers had vivid imaginations - Tony Blair’s fantasies about WMD spring to mind - but apart from him are Thatcher and Attlee the only barristers at law to be PM since 1922? Although again they were two very successful PMs.
Any gains Starmer has made since GE19 have come almost entirely from Remain voting LDs who hated Corbyn not from Leave voting Tories. Indeed the latest Yougov has a full 41% of 2019 LD voters now having defected to Starmer Labour.
Yet astonishingly more 2019 Tories have defected to Farage and the Brexit Party, 8%, over the tighter restrictions over Covid than the 6% who have gone to Labour.
64% of Leave voters are now voting Tory and 54% of Remain voters are now voting Labour
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/enclvxggp4/TheTimes_VI_Tracker_201014.pdf
I'm a bit of a sucker for authority, I can be a bit forgiving of government and give it benefit of the doubt, but on this sort of issue even where id support a restriction im surprised at the lack of concern by politicians about whether they actually have the powers they seek to utilise or if they have legally authorised such powers for use by others.
I mean, if it kicks off that they are wrong it will undermine compliance other measures as people can genuinely claim confusion.
WFH has its advantages and disadvantages
Office work has its advantages and disadvantages.
A 2/3 model (either way) cherrypicks the majority of the advantages and minimises the disadvantages.
The inbuilt and unwarranted assumptions are just alien to the majority of this country. Remainer angst is redolent in every sentence. How could the people have been so stupid as to vote for Brexit and then, when the remainer Parliament lied and lied, kicked them out on their arses giving Boris an 80 strong majority? How deluded and stupid people are. How could anyone believe that anyone who thought Brexit was a good idea was right about anything, ever? Or competent? How can they not see this (gnashing of teeth).
The majority of us (as established by a referendum and an election) really don't see it that way. We see a government struggling with a pandemic that has caused chaos around the world, who is trying to negotiate with the EU with a significant chunk of its own country cheering the EU on, tweeting every contemptuous aside with glee. It pisses us off. And it makes it us overlook the many, many flaws of this government.
Just a thought.
But the last two should apply anyway because he’s a bully, a liar, a failure, an incompetent and clearly thick as pigshit.
(In case anyone is uncertain, I don’t rate him at all.)
Edit - and although I bow to nobody in my contempt for Drakeford, you’re quite right that is a grotesque comparison. He’s an idiot but an honest and democratic idiot.
I expect its simply a bit of willy-waving to put the UK off a No Deal and it will disappear in the full FTA.
We are not in Schengen. We've always had full border controls.
If you've gone in the last year or so you'll see it's now different for some non-EU countries too.
One of the things that's so scary about a lot of these statutory instrument driven pieces of legislation is that one of the usual roles of Courts when interpreting legislation is to determine what Parliament's intention was when approving the legislation. And one of the ways they do this is to look at the documentary written record of proceedings in parliament that led up to it. But in "statutory instrument" world they can't do this. The "intention" comes from ministers, but what is the "written record" of this? I guess all they've got is the "guidance" which accompanies it - but guidance which is constantly changing and refined in response to practical experience. And half the time public statements from ministers (from the PM downwards) often contradicts their own guidance because they don't understand it.
So unless someone takes them to court and wins we are where we are till at least Nov 9.
And Jeff Bezos makes another few million.
The main reason Labour have not cut through is that they don't look very much more competent. And health is devolved.
Sure, Johnson has not had a good pandemic ... but then nor have Drakeford or Sturgeon or most leaders of European countries.
It was not that long ago that Macron was the patron saint of pb.com. Macron has hardly covered himself in corona glory, yet he hasn't suffered much in the polls, despite a situation of very great gravity in the second wave. Pedro Sánchez in Spain must rival for Boris & Macron in the failure league, yet the Socialists are still in the lead in the polls in Spain.
In all these countries, the polls have not moved that much .... yet?
All these leaders are doing badly -- few people have really made the connection that their country could have done much better, perhaps as well as Germany or South Korea. Maybe they never will.
The stench of failure is pretty widely dispersed over Western Europe.
And Switzerland isn't in the EEA either - so you're wrong about that too.
Although they might help him with progressives and younger voters he’s now on a damage limitation exercise in Pennsylvania and Texas in particular.
It could also hurt him in some other states . He’s lucky that so many have already voted but I think Pennsylvania is now more of a toss up , Texas which was a long shot is I think now definitely in the Trump column.
You don’t want to be doing a walkback exercise in the last week of the campaign .
Although polls show Americans by a clear margin understand the need to be moving to more renewables I think Biden’s gaffe was one of the few missteps of his campaign .
I'm not sure precisely what you're trying to say about the 2019 election, but I do hope you aren't confusing a majority of voters with a majority in parliament. I don't think just from the votes cast it's easy to find a clear majority one way or another.