What did Ms Whiplash have to say at the press conference? Anything interesting?
No, it was rubbish.
I thought the point of these was to focus on the vaccination numbers but they got the briefest hint of a mention. And then a bunch of journalists all lined up to ask the same whiny question as to whether the rules needed to be tightened and didn't really get an answer.
Angela Merkel has warned Germany will see ten times as many Covid cases by Easter if they 'don't manage to stop this British virus'.
Someone needs a better translator.
Merkel said
'In einer internen Sitzung der Unionsfraktion warnte sie vor dramatisch explodierenden Infektionszahlen durch das in Großbritannien mutierte Corona-Virus und ein vielfaches an Infektionszahlen in wenigen Wochen.'
Which translates as 'This variant that mutated in Great Britain.'
Least of her problems anyway, they've got the South African flavour
Yesterday I happened to see the last half hour of the new "All Creatures Great and Small" series on PBS. Am an old fan of the orginal.
Within a few minutes I was hooked. The casting is great, the scenery is great, the script and dialogue faithful to the (first) book and original TV show. But not just copy, a new take with some new twists.
No doubt helped that I immediately fell in love with the new Helen!
Am going to watch the whole of episode 1 via the web shortly.
AND will do my damnedest not to miss episode 2 which features the late, great Diana Rigg as Mrs Pumphrey.
I thought it would be America that would do private jabs first, but the UAE makes sense. I'm guessing India is dodgy doctors.
I fully expect to hear Turkey doing it. Already a hub for medical procedures, often with some questionable ethics. I imagine you will have to have the Russian vaccine though.
Yes, there are questions about why so many Republicans, like Mike Pence and Mitch McConnell, tolerated Trump’s behaviour for so long – and served alongside him. But perhaps we in Britain should be a little more understanding. After all, it was only a year ago that many sensible Labour politicians were campaigning to make Jeremy Corbyn our Prime Minister, sitting alongside him in his Shadow Cabinet.
smirk
That rhymes with berk.
can't imagine why the rhyming slang immediately comes to mind, m8
Yesterday I happened to see the last half hour of the new "All Creatures Great and Small" series on PBS. Am an old fan of the orginal.
Within a few minutes I was hooked. The casting is great, the scenery is great, the script and dialogue faithful to the (first) book and original TV show. But not just copy, a new take with some new twists.
No doubt helped that I immediately fell in love with the new Helen!
Yesterday I happened to see the last half hour of the new "All Creatures Great and Small" series on PBS. Am an old fan of the orginal.
Within a few minutes I was hooked. The casting is great, the scenery is great, the script and dialogue faithful to the (first) book and original TV show. But not just copy, a new take with some new twists.
No doubt helped that I immediately fell in love with the new Helen!
Best thing on Channel 5 (UK) in a long time.
A very low bar.
There was a tale/rumour that Ch5 only got the show because the BBC turned it down.
From what I heard the BBC only wanted a pilot while C5 offered a full season.
Yesterday I happened to see the last half hour of the new "All Creatures Great and Small" series on PBS. Am an old fan of the orginal.
Within a few minutes I was hooked. The casting is great, the scenery is great, the script and dialogue faithful to the (first) book and original TV show. But not just copy, a new take with some new twists.
No doubt helped that I immediately fell in love with the new Helen!
Am going to watch the whole of episode 1 via the web shortly.
AND will do my damnedest not to miss episode 2 which features the late, great Diana Rigg as Mrs Pumphrey.
My chance to name drop! My dad's sister's husband was the cousin of the real "Helen". Which meant, when a teenager, I not only knew the "state secret" of James Herriot's real name, but I got autographed copies of the paperbacks.
People are getting a little testy about the Corbyn comparison, not unreasonably to some extent - Trump does operate on a level not generally seen over here. And yet, and yet ... if you gave Corbyn the kind of political power and media reach Trump had, is it really that hard to imagine him imposing his loony left agenda on the country with an army of hundreds of thousands of, er, 'passionate' Momentumites cheering his every word at boisterous rallies? He's easy to laugh at now that Boris has annihilated him, but his defeat in the UK was just as essential as Trump's in the US.
The moral courage shown by Shadow Cabinet members like Starmer who supported him uncritically for years is unimpressive, to say the least.
Love things like this. Makes you wonder how few people you would need to have to get back to someone who met say Julius Caesar (as in two gets us to the Civil war, so 1865), did the Civil War chap meet an aged 90 year old, who when young had met an aged 90 year old etc... We'll never know of course, but fun to imagine.
My Great Grandmother died when I was 4. I do just about remember her. She always said that her grandfather had been a boot boy for the Duke of Wellington. No idea if it was true but the maths worked.
Wellington boot boy ? I think she was pulling your...
Oh I am sure she was. What always interested me afterwards was that the maths worked. Her Grandfather was born in 1834.
It just amazes me how close we are, by degrees of separation, to historical figures.
Wifey used to see an old lady when she was a child, whose father made the shoes for Queen Victoria at her wedding.....
My father knew Lloyd George, apparently.
Though presumably NOT so well as Francis Stevenson (aka Lady Lloyd-George)?
FYI, the American equivalent of "Lloyd George Knew My Father" is the "George Washington Bridge" song.
Lloyd George's nickname for his longtime mistress Frances Stevenson was ... err... Pussy. 😉
Just concentrate on the vaccine numbers. They are much more cheerful.
Did they announce a figure today?
Total vaccinated today is 2,431k, up 145k on yesterday. Which is considerably less than the 200k per day Hancock claimed at the weekend. So at that rate, assuming they are working 7 days, it will be 1,015k per week and we would get to about 6m by mid-Feb. But presumably the rate will increase....
Anecdotally there are clearly some practices using their vaccine and staff to do the originally promised second doses to some of the elderly. Which may reduce the number of new vaccinations being done
I am sure pb.com will be pleased to know the whining Baroness Bakewell has her second.
And she is now taking the Govt to court "on behalf of those waiting to have a second Pfizer Vaccine."
Of course, she is not using her own money, you can crowdfund her legal challenge -- should you feel so inclined.
A silly self-entitled women.
Bakewell watchers will know that the other thing she regular gets exercised about is any suggestion people living in huge mansions in North London should pay any more tax. She was apoplectic about the idea of a Mansion Tax.
I sometimes wonder why Baroness Bakewell of Stockport is in the Labour Party.
It's a variant of whataboutism - "X is bad, so Y (that I dislike for other reasons) is bad in the same way". You see it on the left too when Thatcher gets dragged into every conversation.
Happens with Boris a lot as well. Corbyn was, in my view, very unsuitable to be PM, but such parallels that can be made with him and Trump do not extend anywhere near that far, it's just unreasonable.
I suspect that Corbyn and his crowd would have handled the pandemic at least as well as the current mob, although they would have had to cope with a far less friendly press, so it would probably have felt worse.
Hmm, not so sure about that. Would Corbyn really have done all those vaccine deals with the evil multinational pharmaceutical companies?
I really don't know, Richard. It can only be a guess.
Boris's worst mistake was his failure to react quickly enough at the start of the outbreak. My guess is Corbyn would have done no worse and possibly quite a bit better. He would also, I think, have sacked anyone who made unauthorised trips to Barnard Castle.
Not sure about vaccine deals. I suspect he would have followed the science pretty closely but hard to say how that would have shaped into contracts with big pharma.
So less than 50% want to postpone the elections then.
Plus moving it from the Spring, by which time most of the most vulnerable to Covid will be vaccinated, to the autumn as we start flu season again is not a great idea.
You can also have early voting and postal voting too as the US did last year
I don't often agree with HYUFD but yeah, come on, we need to get these elections done to the original timetable. We can't simultaneously have governments talking about better things by the spring because of vaccination but also cancelling May elections. Unless they're really saying there's not a cat's chance in hell of anything being vaguely close to normal by May, in which case they ought to be saying that now.
Commit to it now and put out a big campaign to get everyone who is uncomfortable at the thought registered for a postal vote, and consider the possibility of maybe splitting in-person voting over two days or something.
If people can do their shopping at the supermarket, they can manage to vote at a polling station.
Manning them would be VERY difficult.
Not necessarily. A lot of volunteers are elderly and will have been vaccinated by May. Places with multiple stations per place just halve the number, and spread it over 2 days.
These are just spitballing ideas, there'll be more to it, but those I know in elections don't seem hugely worried about the logistics of preparing for May at present.
Those I know in elections are all talking about how long the delay will be....
Cabinet office will deny until an announcement is made. But I'd say chances of May elections are sub 5% at present.
Delaying the elections would require primary legislation.
I wonder if their Lordships might push back on delaying again the 2020 local elections?
Provision of the Public Health rules?
Bollocks
Get a postal vote mate
Postal votes won't help.
You'll still need to leave the house to apply for one and then send it out.
The big problem with holding the elections before enough people are vaccinated is having enough people at the polling stations and counts.
We had a General Election in December just over a year ago.
I don't see why we can't have locals in the autumn if vaccine rollout is due to be done by then.
Does Trump even like golf? Surely somebody who cheats as much as he does cannot have a genuine passion for it.
That's his worst sin of all. Cheating at golf is - not cricket.
Can you imagine how much our most golf loving dead Presidents - esp. Republicans Harding, Eisenhower, Reagan & W - would regard the vermin no only currently investing the White House, but also sullying "a good walk spoiled" (or visa versa).
Certainly helps explain why George W. Bush and Barack Obama NEVER liked the swine, even before he disgraced his country, violated his oath AND urged the violent overthrow of the duly-elected government of the United States.
Donald Trumpsky = Judge Smailes but without the redeeming comedic value
I always think of Goldfinger when it comes to cheating at golf. Trump would make a good Bond villain.
Surprised Trump hasn't bought Stoke Poges (where Goldfinger was filmed). The clubhouse is suitably OTT.
It's a variant of whataboutism - "X is bad, so Y (that I dislike for other reasons) is bad in the same way". You see it on the left too when Thatcher gets dragged into every conversation.
Happens with Boris a lot as well. Corbyn was, in my view, very unsuitable to be PM, but such parallels that can be made with him and Trump do not extend anywhere near that far, it's just unreasonable.
I suspect that Corbyn and his crowd would have handled the pandemic at least as well as the current mob, although they would have had to cope with a far less friendly press, so it would probably have felt worse.
Hmm, not so sure about that. Would Corbyn really have done all those vaccine deals with the evil multinational pharmaceutical companies?
I really don't know, Richard. It can only be a guess.
Boris's worst mistake was his failure to react quickly enough at the start of the outbreak. My guess is Corbyn would have done no worse and possibly quite a bit better. He would also, I think, have sacked anyone who made unauthorised trips to Barnard Castle.
Not sure about vaccine deals. I suspect he would have followed the science pretty closely but hard to say how that would have shaped into contracts with big pharma.
We would have been in the EU deal under Corbyn, Starmer would have made sure of it.
Just concentrate on the vaccine numbers. They are much more cheerful.
Did they announce a figure today?
Total vaccinated today is 2,431k, up 145k on yesterday. Which is considerably less than the 200k per day Hancock claimed at the weekend. So at that rate, assuming they are working 7 days, it will be 1,015k per week and we would get to about 6m by mid-Feb. But presumably the rate will increase....
Anecdotally there are clearly some practices using their vaccine and staff to do the originally promised second doses to some of the elderly. Which may reduce the number of new vaccinations being done
The stats are total of both first and second doses I guess, so the number of people vaccinated will be less than the total number of vaccinations delivered.
I think it was 145,076 first doses and 20,768 second doses, unless I'm misreading.
I rather think this is the key paragraph in that article - "There will always be cults, fanatics and demagogues; political parties are always vulnerable to capture. That’s why we need constitutions, written or unwritten. That’s why we should value established institutions and the rule of law. That’s why we must do everything to preserve our independent judiciaries and impartial civil services. In the taming of Trump, America has taught us all an invaluable lesson."
And that it is addressed at some of his former colleagues in Parliament here.
That, of course, is absolutely right. But it's not only supporters of far left and far right that need to remember it - very few governments entirely resist the temptation to have a pop at the judiciary, though they stop short of the blatantly political appointments that seem to be common practice in the US.
Isn't this a predictable response to "judicial activism"? Imagine a democratically elected government unable to implement its manifesto because a judge says No. Actually, don't imagine it, just watch it happen in the USA.
Yesterday I happened to see the last half hour of the new "All Creatures Great and Small" series on PBS. Am an old fan of the orginal.
Within a few minutes I was hooked. The casting is great, the scenery is great, the script and dialogue faithful to the (first) book and original TV show. But not just copy, a new take with some new twists.
No doubt helped that I immediately fell in love with the new Helen!
Am going to watch the whole of episode 1 via the web shortly.
AND will do my damnedest not to miss episode 2 which features the late, great Diana Rigg as Mrs Pumphrey.
My chance to name drop! My dad's sister's husband was the cousin of the real "Helen". Which meant, when a teenager, I not only knew the "state secret" of James Herriot's real name, but I got autographed copies of the paperbacks.
Just concentrate on the vaccine numbers. They are much more cheerful.
Did they announce a figure today?
Total vaccinated today is 2,431k, up 145k on yesterday. Which is considerably less than the 200k per day Hancock claimed at the weekend. So at that rate, assuming they are working 7 days, it will be 1,015k per week and we would get to about 6m by mid-Feb. But presumably the rate will increase....
It's a variant of whataboutism - "X is bad, so Y (that I dislike for other reasons) is bad in the same way". You see it on the left too when Thatcher gets dragged into every conversation.
Happens with Boris a lot as well. Corbyn was, in my view, very unsuitable to be PM, but such parallels that can be made with him and Trump do not extend anywhere near that far, it's just unreasonable.
I suspect that Corbyn and his crowd would have handled the pandemic at least as well as the current mob, although they would have had to cope with a far less friendly press, so it would probably have felt worse.
Hmm, not so sure about that. Would Corbyn really have done all those vaccine deals with the evil multinational pharmaceutical companies?
I really don't know, Richard. It can only be a guess.
Boris's worst mistake was his failure to react quickly enough at the start of the outbreak. My guess is Corbyn would have done no worse and possibly quite a bit better. He would also, I think, have sacked anyone who made unauthorised trips to Barnard Castle.
Not sure about vaccine deals. I suspect he would have followed the science pretty closely but hard to say how that would have shaped into contracts with big pharma.
Of course, Drakeford is a Corbynite.
He is not having a noticeably brilliant time now -- though he arguably handled the first wave better than Boris.
Another great poll for Boris. James O'Brien and his merry band of nutjobs won't be happy. I think if you'd said the Tories would be close to no change over 12 months on from the election they would have bitten your hand off.
So less than 50% want to postpone the elections then.
Plus moving it from the Spring, by which time most of the most vulnerable to Covid will be vaccinated, to the autumn as we start flu season again is not a great idea.
You can also have early voting and postal voting too as the US did last year
I don't often agree with HYUFD but yeah, come on, we need to get these elections done to the original timetable. We can't simultaneously have governments talking about better things by the spring because of vaccination but also cancelling May elections. Unless they're really saying there's not a cat's chance in hell of anything being vaguely close to normal by May, in which case they ought to be saying that now.
Commit to it now and put out a big campaign to get everyone who is uncomfortable at the thought registered for a postal vote, and consider the possibility of maybe splitting in-person voting over two days or something.
If people can do their shopping at the supermarket, they can manage to vote at a polling station.
Manning them would be VERY difficult.
Not necessarily. A lot of volunteers are elderly and will have been vaccinated by May. Places with multiple stations per place just halve the number, and spread it over 2 days.
These are just spitballing ideas, there'll be more to it, but those I know in elections don't seem hugely worried about the logistics of preparing for May at present.
Those I know in elections are all talking about how long the delay will be....
Cabinet office will deny until an announcement is made. But I'd say chances of May elections are sub 5% at present.
Delaying the elections would require primary legislation.
I wonder if their Lordships might push back on delaying again the 2020 local elections?
Provision of the Public Health rules?
Bollocks
Get a postal vote mate
Postal votes won't help.
You'll still need to leave the house to apply for one and then send it out.
The big problem with holding the elections before enough people are vaccinated is having enough people at the polling stations and counts.
We had a General Election in December just over a year ago.
I don't see why we can't have locals in the autumn if vaccine rollout is due to be done by then.
Because by that time some elected posts will have been waiting 18 months for the election. Which means in the case of our police commissioner we will have had an unelected appointed official doing the job for over 2 years.
Does Trump even like golf? Surely somebody who cheats as much as he does cannot have a genuine passion for it.
That's his worst sin of all. Cheating at golf is - not cricket.
Can you imagine how much our most golf loving dead Presidents - esp. Republicans Harding, Eisenhower, Reagan & W - would regard the vermin no only currently investing the White House, but also sullying "a good walk spoiled" (or visa versa).
Certainly helps explain why George W. Bush and Barack Obama NEVER liked the swine, even before he disgraced his country, violated his oath AND urged the violent overthrow of the duly-elected government of the United States.
Donald Trumpsky = Judge Smailes but without the redeeming comedic value
Goldfinger (another notorious golf cheat) without the snappy one liners. Though plenty of very odd jobs indeed in his cabinet.
It's a variant of whataboutism - "X is bad, so Y (that I dislike for other reasons) is bad in the same way". You see it on the left too when Thatcher gets dragged into every conversation.
Happens with Boris a lot as well. Corbyn was, in my view, very unsuitable to be PM, but such parallels that can be made with him and Trump do not extend anywhere near that far, it's just unreasonable.
I suspect that Corbyn and his crowd would have handled the pandemic at least as well as the current mob, although they would have had to cope with a far less friendly press, so it would probably have felt worse.
Hmm, not so sure about that. Would Corbyn really have done all those vaccine deals with the evil multinational pharmaceutical companies?
I really don't know, Richard. It can only be a guess.
Boris's worst mistake was his failure to react quickly enough at the start of the outbreak. My guess is Corbyn would have done no worse and possibly quite a bit better. He would also, I think, have sacked anyone who made unauthorised trips to Barnard Castle.
Not sure about vaccine deals. I suspect he would have followed the science pretty closely but hard to say how that would have shaped into contracts with big pharma.
Of course, Drakeford is a Corbynite.
He is not having a noticeably brilliant time now -- though he arguably handled the first wave better than Boris.
Lets not forget failure on testing worse than England during first wave...while Hancock got the man from Delmonte / Serco / private labs to get daily capacity from 20k to 100k in a month, Wales managed no more tests per day. Refusal to be involved, use English labs or extra capacity.
There were these ridiculous situations where they were sending tests from North Wales to South Wales, rather than just to Liverpool / Manchester way, because had to use a public lab in Wales.
So less than 50% want to postpone the elections then.
Plus moving it from the Spring, by which time most of the most vulnerable to Covid will be vaccinated, to the autumn as we start flu season again is not a great idea.
You can also have early voting and postal voting too as the US did last year
I don't often agree with HYUFD but yeah, come on, we need to get these elections done to the original timetable. We can't simultaneously have governments talking about better things by the spring because of vaccination but also cancelling May elections. Unless they're really saying there's not a cat's chance in hell of anything being vaguely close to normal by May, in which case they ought to be saying that now.
Commit to it now and put out a big campaign to get everyone who is uncomfortable at the thought registered for a postal vote, and consider the possibility of maybe splitting in-person voting over two days or something.
If people can do their shopping at the supermarket, they can manage to vote at a polling station.
Manning them would be VERY difficult.
Not necessarily. A lot of volunteers are elderly and will have been vaccinated by May. Places with multiple stations per place just halve the number, and spread it over 2 days.
These are just spitballing ideas, there'll be more to it, but those I know in elections don't seem hugely worried about the logistics of preparing for May at present.
Those I know in elections are all talking about how long the delay will be....
Cabinet office will deny until an announcement is made. But I'd say chances of May elections are sub 5% at present.
Delaying the elections would require primary legislation.
I wonder if their Lordships might push back on delaying again the 2020 local elections?
Provision of the Public Health rules?
Bollocks
Get a postal vote mate
Postal votes won't help.
You'll still need to leave the house to apply for one and then send it out.
The big problem with holding the elections before enough people are vaccinated is having enough people at the polling stations and counts.
People at the count is not a problem, preparations for those are well in hand. Fewer people counting, spread over several days, and better distancing with observers.
Also, do you need to leave the house to apply for a postal vote? The forms are downloadable, though I suppose note everyone can print them out. But could they not send the forms to people on request, or the government could provide funds to supply everyone with a postal vote automatically?
Polling stations is likely to be a bigger issue. My council sent out a questionnaire about availability a few weeks ago, but I don't know the response level they have had. I imagine fewer than willing to do the count, as polling station duty is an arse.
Re: the last Civil War (Union) widow, when we were in schoolkids my mother corresponded with a VERY old lady in Philippi, West Virginia. This was for a history project, because the woman has been a little girl at the time of the Battle of Philippi, June 3, 1861 which was just a skirmish but the first land battle and Union victory.
Anyway, she was Black, and in one passage of her letter to my sister, she talked about "the colored people" running away, or something like that, it was hard to read her writing and parts of her story were unclear to us.
Much later, realized that she was talking about the fear of Black people in the town (and in other areas occupied or invaded by Confederates during the , that the Confederates would seize them and haul them back to "old Virginny" and sell them into slavery.
Can still remember our family marveling at the fact that we were in touch with a living link to the Civil War. And we didn't know the half of it. Think of what she could have told us IF we'd had the sense to ask her.
Does Trump even like golf? Surely somebody who cheats as much as he does cannot have a genuine passion for it.
That's his worst sin of all. Cheating at golf is - not cricket.
Can you imagine how much our most golf loving dead Presidents - esp. Republicans Harding, Eisenhower, Reagan & W - would regard the vermin no only currently investing the White House, but also sullying "a good walk spoiled" (or visa versa).
Certainly helps explain why George W. Bush and Barack Obama NEVER liked the swine, even before he disgraced his country, violated his oath AND urged the violent overthrow of the duly-elected government of the United States.
Donald Trumpsky = Judge Smailes but without the redeeming comedic value
I seem to recall that chap who has written a book on Trump cheating at golf, in an interview linked on here, described how Clinton would cheat too, but a little and because he was bad at the game, while Trump is quite good but cheats blatantly anyway to pretend he's among the greatest every.
It's a variant of whataboutism - "X is bad, so Y (that I dislike for other reasons) is bad in the same way". You see it on the left too when Thatcher gets dragged into every conversation.
Happens with Boris a lot as well. Corbyn was, in my view, very unsuitable to be PM, but such parallels that can be made with him and Trump do not extend anywhere near that far, it's just unreasonable.
I suspect that Corbyn and his crowd would have handled the pandemic at least as well as the current mob, although they would have had to cope with a far less friendly press, so it would probably have felt worse.
Hmm, not so sure about that. Would Corbyn really have done all those vaccine deals with the evil multinational pharmaceutical companies?
I really don't know, Richard. It can only be a guess.
Boris's worst mistake was his failure to react quickly enough at the start of the outbreak. My guess is Corbyn would have done no worse and possibly quite a bit better. He would also, I think, have sacked anyone who made unauthorised trips to Barnard Castle.
Not sure about vaccine deals. I suspect he would have followed the science pretty closely but hard to say how that would have shaped into contracts with big pharma.
Of course, Drakeford is a Corbynite.
He is not having a noticeably brilliant time now -- though he arguably handled the first wave better than Boris.
Lets not forget failure on testing worse than England during first wave...while Hancock got the man from Delmonte / Serco / private labs to get capacity from 20k to 100k in a month, Wales managed no more tests per day. Refusal to be involved, use English labs or extra capacity.
There were these ridiculous situations where they were sending tests from North Wales to South Wales, rather than just to Liverpool / Manchester way.
The Lizard People have replaced Isabel Oakeshott with a robotic replica. This means that we already have her in prison *and* continue to make fun of her on the internets.
It's a variant of whataboutism - "X is bad, so Y (that I dislike for other reasons) is bad in the same way". You see it on the left too when Thatcher gets dragged into every conversation.
Happens with Boris a lot as well. Corbyn was, in my view, very unsuitable to be PM, but such parallels that can be made with him and Trump do not extend anywhere near that far, it's just unreasonable.
I suspect that Corbyn and his crowd would have handled the pandemic at least as well as the current mob, although they would have had to cope with a far less friendly press, so it would probably have felt worse.
Hmm, not so sure about that. Would Corbyn really have done all those vaccine deals with the evil multinational pharmaceutical companies?
I really don't know, Richard. It can only be a guess.
Boris's worst mistake was his failure to react quickly enough at the start of the outbreak. My guess is Corbyn would have done no worse and possibly quite a bit better. He would also, I think, have sacked anyone who made unauthorised trips to Barnard Castle.
Not sure about vaccine deals. I suspect he would have followed the science pretty closely but hard to say how that would have shaped into contracts with big pharma.
What makes you say that he would have sacked people? He was hardly prone to sacking people when it called for it - or even well past the point of calling for it.
His trusted lieutenant Shadow Chancellor literally called for the lynching of a female MP and that didn't get the blinking of an eye. Throughout the whole antisemitism mess he had to be dragged kicking and screaming to get rid of anyone who went well beyond the pale - anyone he could keep he did.
Had it been Seumas Milne that had gone to Barnard Castle then I don't think for one second Corbyn would have sacked him.
Re: the last Civil War (Union) widow, when we were in schoolkids my mother corresponded with a VERY old lady in Philippi, West Virginia. This was for a history project, because the woman has been a little girl at the time of the Battle of Philippi, June 3, 1861 which was just a skirmish but the first land battle and Union victory.
Anyway, she was Black, and in one passage of her letter to my sister, she talked about "the colored people" running away, or something like that, it was hard to read her writing and parts of her story were unclear to us.
Much later, realized that she was talking about the fear of Black people in the town (and in other areas occupied or invaded by Confederates during the , that the Confederates would seize them and haul them back to "old Virginny" and sell them into slavery.
Can still remember our family marveling at the fact that we were in touch with a living link to the Civil War. And we didn't know the half of it. Think of what she could have told us IF we'd had the sense to ask her.
At least she wasn't old enough to remember the first Battle of Philippi! She'd have been bloody ancient.
Just concentrate on the vaccine numbers. They are much more cheerful.
Did they announce a figure today?
Total vaccinated today is 2,431k, up 145k on yesterday. Which is considerably less than the 200k per day Hancock claimed at the weekend. So at that rate, assuming they are working 7 days, it will be 1,015k per week and we would get to about 6m by mid-Feb. But presumably the rate will increase....
It's a variant of whataboutism - "X is bad, so Y (that I dislike for other reasons) is bad in the same way". You see it on the left too when Thatcher gets dragged into every conversation.
Happens with Boris a lot as well. Corbyn was, in my view, very unsuitable to be PM, but such parallels that can be made with him and Trump do not extend anywhere near that far, it's just unreasonable.
I suspect that Corbyn and his crowd would have handled the pandemic at least as well as the current mob, although they would have had to cope with a far less friendly press, so it would probably have felt worse.
Hmm, not so sure about that. Would Corbyn really have done all those vaccine deals with the evil multinational pharmaceutical companies?
I really don't know, Richard. It can only be a guess.
Boris's worst mistake was his failure to react quickly enough at the start of the outbreak. My guess is Corbyn would have done no worse and possibly quite a bit better. He would also, I think, have sacked anyone who made unauthorised trips to Barnard Castle.
Not sure about vaccine deals. I suspect he would have followed the science pretty closely but hard to say how that would have shaped into contracts with big pharma.
Of course, Drakeford is a Corbynite.
He is not having a noticeably brilliant time now -- though he arguably handled the first wave better than Boris.
Lets not forget failure on testing worse than England during first wave...while Hancock got the man from Delmonte / Serco / private labs to get daily capacity from 20k to 100k in a month, Wales managed no more tests per day. Refusal to be involved, use English labs or extra capacity.
There were these ridiculous situations where they were sending tests from North Wales to South Wales, rather than just to Liverpool / Manchester way, because had to use a public lab in Wales.
Total silence on the vaccination of my 81 year old wife but why am I surprised
Yesterday I happened to see the last half hour of the new "All Creatures Great and Small" series on PBS. Am an old fan of the orginal.
Within a few minutes I was hooked. The casting is great, the scenery is great, the script and dialogue faithful to the (first) book and original TV show. But not just copy, a new take with some new twists.
No doubt helped that I immediately fell in love with the new Helen!
Am going to watch the whole of episode 1 via the web shortly.
AND will do my damnedest not to miss episode 2 which features the late, great Diana Rigg as Mrs Pumphrey.
My chance to name drop! My dad's sister's husband was the cousin of the real "Helen". Which meant, when a teenager, I not only knew the "state secret" of James Herriot's real name, but I got autographed copies of the paperbacks.
You shook the hand that shook the hand that had been portrayed as up a cow's rear end in Yorkshire in 1947?
She'll be like those Chinese figures who disappear for months then show up, desperately contrite for how they have let down the glorious country under the perfect leadership of the community party.
Another great poll for Boris. James O'Brien and his merry band of nutjobs won't be happy. I think if you'd said the Tories would be close to no change over 12 months on from the election they would have bitten your hand off.
Excellent poll. Whoever called Farage's new vehicle 'REFUK' must have a good sense of humour too.
Just concentrate on the vaccine numbers. They are much more cheerful.
Did they announce a figure today?
Total vaccinated today is 2,431k, up 145k on yesterday. Which is considerably less than the 200k per day Hancock claimed at the weekend. So at that rate, assuming they are working 7 days, it will be 1,015k per week and we would get to about 6m by mid-Feb. But presumably the rate will increase....
Another great poll for Boris. James O'Brien and his merry band of nutjobs won't be happy. I think if you'd said the Tories would be close to no change over 12 months on from the election they would have bitten your hand off.
Excellent poll. Whoever called Farage's new vehicle 'REFUK' must have a good sense of humour too.
Does Trump even like golf? Surely somebody who cheats as much as he does cannot have a genuine passion for it.
That's his worst sin of all. Cheating at golf is - not cricket.
Can you imagine how much our most golf loving dead Presidents - esp. Republicans Harding, Eisenhower, Reagan & W - would regard the vermin no only currently investing the White House, but also sullying "a good walk spoiled" (or visa versa).
Certainly helps explain why George W. Bush and Barack Obama NEVER liked the swine, even before he disgraced his country, violated his oath AND urged the violent overthrow of the duly-elected government of the United States.
Donald Trumpsky = Judge Smailes but without the redeeming comedic value
I seem to recall that chap who has written a book on Trump cheating at golf, in an interview linked on here, described how Clinton would cheat too, but a little and because he was bad at the game, while Trump is quite good but cheats blatantly anyway to pretend he's among the greatest every.
It my years of playing and acting in various offices I can identify many golfers who tried to get away with cheating, and in my days as handicap secretary I had great pleasure in disqualifying a fair number
It's a variant of whataboutism - "X is bad, so Y (that I dislike for other reasons) is bad in the same way". You see it on the left too when Thatcher gets dragged into every conversation.
Happens with Boris a lot as well. Corbyn was, in my view, very unsuitable to be PM, but such parallels that can be made with him and Trump do not extend anywhere near that far, it's just unreasonable.
I suspect that Corbyn and his crowd would have handled the pandemic at least as well as the current mob, although they would have had to cope with a far less friendly press, so it would probably have felt worse.
Hmm, not so sure about that. Would Corbyn really have done all those vaccine deals with the evil multinational pharmaceutical companies?
I really don't know, Richard. It can only be a guess.
Boris's worst mistake was his failure to react quickly enough at the start of the outbreak. My guess is Corbyn would have done no worse and possibly quite a bit better. He would also, I think, have sacked anyone who made unauthorised trips to Barnard Castle.
Not sure about vaccine deals. I suspect he would have followed the science pretty closely but hard to say how that would have shaped into contracts with big pharma.
Of course, Drakeford is a Corbynite.
He is not having a noticeably brilliant time now -- though he arguably handled the first wave better than Boris.
Lets not forget failure on testing worse than England during first wave...while Hancock got the man from Delmonte / Serco / private labs to get capacity from 20k to 100k in a month, Wales managed no more tests per day. Refusal to be involved, use English labs or extra capacity.
There were these ridiculous situations where they were sending tests from North Wales to South Wales, rather than just to Liverpool / Manchester way.
In my county a minor group set itself up calling itself Reform with grand ideals of standing in every electoral division in 2017, then onwards from there. Sadly, they only stood in one seat in the end.
Another great poll for Boris. James O'Brien and his merry band of nutjobs won't be happy. I think if you'd said the Tories would be close to no change over 12 months on from the election they would have bitten your hand off.
Yes, I think that is a good one, and very obviously what has happened. People think where there is smoke there is fire, so even though in court challenges Trump did not usually allege anything as much as he said in public, his catamites in Congress would then say 'Lots of people are worried about these allegations, we must look into it'.
So less than 50% want to postpone the elections then.
Plus moving it from the Spring, by which time most of the most vulnerable to Covid will be vaccinated, to the autumn as we start flu season again is not a great idea.
You can also have early voting and postal voting too as the US did last year
I don't often agree with HYUFD but yeah, come on, we need to get these elections done to the original timetable. We can't simultaneously have governments talking about better things by the spring because of vaccination but also cancelling May elections. Unless they're really saying there's not a cat's chance in hell of anything being vaguely close to normal by May, in which case they ought to be saying that now.
Commit to it now and put out a big campaign to get everyone who is uncomfortable at the thought registered for a postal vote, and consider the possibility of maybe splitting in-person voting over two days or something.
If people can do their shopping at the supermarket, they can manage to vote at a polling station.
Manning them would be VERY difficult.
Not necessarily. A lot of volunteers are elderly and will have been vaccinated by May. Places with multiple stations per place just halve the number, and spread it over 2 days.
These are just spitballing ideas, there'll be more to it, but those I know in elections don't seem hugely worried about the logistics of preparing for May at present.
Those I know in elections are all talking about how long the delay will be....
Cabinet office will deny until an announcement is made. But I'd say chances of May elections are sub 5% at present.
Delaying the elections would require primary legislation.
I wonder if their Lordships might push back on delaying again the 2020 local elections?
Provision of the Public Health rules?
Bollocks
Get a postal vote mate
Postal votes won't help.
You'll still need to leave the house to apply for one and then send it out.
The big problem with holding the elections before enough people are vaccinated is having enough people at the polling stations and counts.
We had a General Election in December just over a year ago.
I don't see why we can't have locals in the autumn if vaccine rollout is due to be done by then.
Because by that time some elected posts will have been waiting 18 months for the election. Which means in the case of our police commissioner we will have had an unelected appointed official doing the job for over 2 years.
And in World War II we went a decade between elections.
Four to Six months doesn't seem long to wait. Like WWII we don't necessarily need to wait until everything is completely eliminated, especially overseas, but until its safe in this country seems smart to do.
So less than 50% want to postpone the elections then.
Plus moving it from the Spring, by which time most of the most vulnerable to Covid will be vaccinated, to the autumn as we start flu season again is not a great idea.
You can also have early voting and postal voting too as the US did last year
I don't often agree with HYUFD but yeah, come on, we need to get these elections done to the original timetable. We can't simultaneously have governments talking about better things by the spring because of vaccination but also cancelling May elections. Unless they're really saying there's not a cat's chance in hell of anything being vaguely close to normal by May, in which case they ought to be saying that now.
Commit to it now and put out a big campaign to get everyone who is uncomfortable at the thought registered for a postal vote, and consider the possibility of maybe splitting in-person voting over two days or something.
If people can do their shopping at the supermarket, they can manage to vote at a polling station.
Manning them would be VERY difficult.
Not necessarily. A lot of volunteers are elderly and will have been vaccinated by May. Places with multiple stations per place just halve the number, and spread it over 2 days.
These are just spitballing ideas, there'll be more to it, but those I know in elections don't seem hugely worried about the logistics of preparing for May at present.
Those I know in elections are all talking about how long the delay will be....
Cabinet office will deny until an announcement is made. But I'd say chances of May elections are sub 5% at present.
Delaying the elections would require primary legislation.
I wonder if their Lordships might push back on delaying again the 2020 local elections?
Provision of the Public Health rules?
Bollocks
Get a postal vote mate
Postal votes won't help.
You'll still need to leave the house to apply for one and then send it out.
The big problem with holding the elections before enough people are vaccinated is having enough people at the polling stations and counts.
We had a General Election in December just over a year ago.
I don't see why we can't have locals in the autumn if vaccine rollout is due to be done by then.
Because by that time some elected posts will have been waiting 18 months for the election. Which means in the case of our police commissioner we will have had an unelected appointed official doing the job for over 2 years.
And in World War II we went a decade between elections.
Four to Six months doesn't seem long to wait. Like WWII we don't necessarily need to wait until everything is completely eliminated, especially overseas, but until its safe in this country seems smart to do.
It's not the end of the world if they don't happen, but people have been a bit too quick to jump to it as a suggestion and assuming challenges cannot reasonably be overcome.
So less than 50% want to postpone the elections then.
Plus moving it from the Spring, by which time most of the most vulnerable to Covid will be vaccinated, to the autumn as we start flu season again is not a great idea.
You can also have early voting and postal voting too as the US did last year
I don't often agree with HYUFD but yeah, come on, we need to get these elections done to the original timetable. We can't simultaneously have governments talking about better things by the spring because of vaccination but also cancelling May elections. Unless they're really saying there's not a cat's chance in hell of anything being vaguely close to normal by May, in which case they ought to be saying that now.
Commit to it now and put out a big campaign to get everyone who is uncomfortable at the thought registered for a postal vote, and consider the possibility of maybe splitting in-person voting over two days or something.
If people can do their shopping at the supermarket, they can manage to vote at a polling station.
Manning them would be VERY difficult.
Not necessarily. A lot of volunteers are elderly and will have been vaccinated by May. Places with multiple stations per place just halve the number, and spread it over 2 days.
These are just spitballing ideas, there'll be more to it, but those I know in elections don't seem hugely worried about the logistics of preparing for May at present.
Those I know in elections are all talking about how long the delay will be....
Cabinet office will deny until an announcement is made. But I'd say chances of May elections are sub 5% at present.
Delaying the elections would require primary legislation.
I wonder if their Lordships might push back on delaying again the 2020 local elections?
Provision of the Public Health rules?
Bollocks
Get a postal vote mate
Postal votes won't help.
You'll still need to leave the house to apply for one and then send it out.
The big problem with holding the elections before enough people are vaccinated is having enough people at the polling stations and counts.
We had a General Election in December just over a year ago.
I don't see why we can't have locals in the autumn if vaccine rollout is due to be done by then.
Because by that time some elected posts will have been waiting 18 months for the election. Which means in the case of our police commissioner we will have had an unelected appointed official doing the job for over 2 years.
And in World War II we went a decade between elections.
Four to Six months doesn't seem long to wait. Like WWII we don't necessarily need to wait until everything is completely eliminated, especially overseas, but until its safe in this country seems smart to do.
Also you can probably count the number of people that care their police commissioner is temporarily appointed rather than elected on a single hand.
Does Trump even like golf? Surely somebody who cheats as much as he does cannot have a genuine passion for it.
That's his worst sin of all. Cheating at golf is - not cricket.
Can you imagine how much our most golf loving dead Presidents - esp. Republicans Harding, Eisenhower, Reagan & W - would regard the vermin no only currently investing the White House, but also sullying "a good walk spoiled" (or visa versa).
Certainly helps explain why George W. Bush and Barack Obama NEVER liked the swine, even before he disgraced his country, violated his oath AND urged the violent overthrow of the duly-elected government of the United States.
Donald Trumpsky = Judge Smailes but without the redeeming comedic value
I seem to recall that chap who has written a book on Trump cheating at golf, in an interview linked on here, described how Clinton would cheat too, but a little and because he was bad at the game, while Trump is quite good but cheats blatantly anyway to pretend he's among the greatest every.
It my years of playing and acting in various offices I can identify many golfers who tried to get away with cheating, and in my days as handicap secretary I had great pleasure in disqualifying a fair number
What kind of cheating? "Protecting their handicap" (ie taking a dive if you aren't going to win) or worse?
I never understood that particular stupidity. Why would you pretend to be an even worse player than you actually were?
Re: the last Civil War (Union) widow, when we were in schoolkids my mother corresponded with a VERY old lady in Philippi, West Virginia. This was for a history project, because the woman has been a little girl at the time of the Battle of Philippi, June 3, 1861 which was just a skirmish but the first land battle and Union victory.
Anyway, she was Black, and in one passage of her letter to my sister, she talked about "the colored people" running away, or something like that, it was hard to read her writing and parts of her story were unclear to us.
Much later, realized that she was talking about the fear of Black people in the town (and in other areas occupied or invaded by Confederates during the , that the Confederates would seize them and haul them back to "old Virginny" and sell them into slavery.
Can still remember our family marveling at the fact that we were in touch with a living link to the Civil War. And we didn't know the half of it. Think of what she could have told us IF we'd had the sense to ask her.
At least she wasn't old enough to remember the first Battle of Philippi! She'd have been bloody ancient.
But no doubt some old lady in early 1st century AD could (and would) have let folks know, THAT wasn't the first one after all, as there had been a previous donnybrook back in HER younger days.
So less than 50% want to postpone the elections then.
Plus moving it from the Spring, by which time most of the most vulnerable to Covid will be vaccinated, to the autumn as we start flu season again is not a great idea.
You can also have early voting and postal voting too as the US did last year
I don't often agree with HYUFD but yeah, come on, we need to get these elections done to the original timetable. We can't simultaneously have governments talking about better things by the spring because of vaccination but also cancelling May elections. Unless they're really saying there's not a cat's chance in hell of anything being vaguely close to normal by May, in which case they ought to be saying that now.
Commit to it now and put out a big campaign to get everyone who is uncomfortable at the thought registered for a postal vote, and consider the possibility of maybe splitting in-person voting over two days or something.
If people can do their shopping at the supermarket, they can manage to vote at a polling station.
Manning them would be VERY difficult.
Not necessarily. A lot of volunteers are elderly and will have been vaccinated by May. Places with multiple stations per place just halve the number, and spread it over 2 days.
These are just spitballing ideas, there'll be more to it, but those I know in elections don't seem hugely worried about the logistics of preparing for May at present.
Those I know in elections are all talking about how long the delay will be....
Cabinet office will deny until an announcement is made. But I'd say chances of May elections are sub 5% at present.
Delaying the elections would require primary legislation.
I wonder if their Lordships might push back on delaying again the 2020 local elections?
Provision of the Public Health rules?
Bollocks
Get a postal vote mate
Postal votes won't help.
You'll still need to leave the house to apply for one and then send it out.
The big problem with holding the elections before enough people are vaccinated is having enough people at the polling stations and counts.
We had a General Election in December just over a year ago.
I don't see why we can't have locals in the autumn if vaccine rollout is due to be done by then.
Because by that time some elected posts will have been waiting 18 months for the election. Which means in the case of our police commissioner we will have had an unelected appointed official doing the job for over 2 years.
And in World War II we went a decade between elections.
Four to Six months doesn't seem long to wait. Like WWII we don't necessarily need to wait until everything is completely eliminated, especially overseas, but until its safe in this country seems smart to do.
We have enough time to organise an all-postal ballot election. No need for people to apply for a postal ballot. Just mail them all out, and hold the elections without repeating delays.
Does Trump even like golf? Surely somebody who cheats as much as he does cannot have a genuine passion for it.
That's his worst sin of all. Cheating at golf is - not cricket.
Can you imagine how much our most golf loving dead Presidents - esp. Republicans Harding, Eisenhower, Reagan & W - would regard the vermin no only currently investing the White House, but also sullying "a good walk spoiled" (or visa versa).
Certainly helps explain why George W. Bush and Barack Obama NEVER liked the swine, even before he disgraced his country, violated his oath AND urged the violent overthrow of the duly-elected government of the United States.
Donald Trumpsky = Judge Smailes but without the redeeming comedic value
I seem to recall that chap who has written a book on Trump cheating at golf, in an interview linked on here, described how Clinton would cheat too, but a little and because he was bad at the game, while Trump is quite good but cheats blatantly anyway to pretend he's among the greatest every.
It my years of playing and acting in various offices I can identify many golfers who tried to get away with cheating, and in my days as handicap secretary I had great pleasure in disqualifying a fair number
What kind of cheating? "Protecting their handicap" (ie taking a dive if you aren't going to win) or worse?
I never understood that particular stupidity. Why would you pretend to be even worse that you already were?
Various forms including deliberate incorrect scoring, rule breaking without declaration, playing a wrong ball etc
Of course some were innocent but we knew those who would try to get away with it
It's a variant of whataboutism - "X is bad, so Y (that I dislike for other reasons) is bad in the same way". You see it on the left too when Thatcher gets dragged into every conversation.
Happens with Boris a lot as well. Corbyn was, in my view, very unsuitable to be PM, but such parallels that can be made with him and Trump do not extend anywhere near that far, it's just unreasonable.
I suspect that Corbyn and his crowd would have handled the pandemic at least as well as the current mob, although they would have had to cope with a far less friendly press, so it would probably have felt worse.
Hmm, not so sure about that. Would Corbyn really have done all those vaccine deals with the evil multinational pharmaceutical companies?
I really don't know, Richard. It can only be a guess.
Boris's worst mistake was his failure to react quickly enough at the start of the outbreak. My guess is Corbyn would have done no worse and possibly quite a bit better. He would also, I think, have sacked anyone who made unauthorised trips to Barnard Castle.
Not sure about vaccine deals. I suspect he would have followed the science pretty closely but hard to say how that would have shaped into contracts with big pharma.
We would have been in the EU deal under Corbyn, Starmer would have made sure of it.
So less than 50% want to postpone the elections then.
Plus moving it from the Spring, by which time most of the most vulnerable to Covid will be vaccinated, to the autumn as we start flu season again is not a great idea.
You can also have early voting and postal voting too as the US did last year
I don't often agree with HYUFD but yeah, come on, we need to get these elections done to the original timetable. We can't simultaneously have governments talking about better things by the spring because of vaccination but also cancelling May elections. Unless they're really saying there's not a cat's chance in hell of anything being vaguely close to normal by May, in which case they ought to be saying that now.
Commit to it now and put out a big campaign to get everyone who is uncomfortable at the thought registered for a postal vote, and consider the possibility of maybe splitting in-person voting over two days or something.
If people can do their shopping at the supermarket, they can manage to vote at a polling station.
Manning them would be VERY difficult.
Not necessarily. A lot of volunteers are elderly and will have been vaccinated by May. Places with multiple stations per place just halve the number, and spread it over 2 days.
These are just spitballing ideas, there'll be more to it, but those I know in elections don't seem hugely worried about the logistics of preparing for May at present.
Those I know in elections are all talking about how long the delay will be....
Cabinet office will deny until an announcement is made. But I'd say chances of May elections are sub 5% at present.
Delaying the elections would require primary legislation.
I wonder if their Lordships might push back on delaying again the 2020 local elections?
Provision of the Public Health rules?
Bollocks
Get a postal vote mate
Postal votes won't help.
You'll still need to leave the house to apply for one and then send it out.
The big problem with holding the elections before enough people are vaccinated is having enough people at the polling stations and counts.
We had a General Election in December just over a year ago.
I don't see why we can't have locals in the autumn if vaccine rollout is due to be done by then.
Because by that time some elected posts will have been waiting 18 months for the election. Which means in the case of our police commissioner we will have had an unelected appointed official doing the job for over 2 years.
And in World War II we went a decade between elections.
Four to Six months doesn't seem long to wait. Like WWII we don't necessarily need to wait until everything is completely eliminated, especially overseas, but until its safe in this country seems smart to do.
We have enough time to organise an all-postal ballot election. No need for people to apply for a postal ballot. Just mail them all out, and hold the elections without repeating delays.
And campaigning?
Do people go canvassing during a stay at home order?
Do people deliver leaflets while some are still self-isolating?
Just because something can be done doesn't mean it should be done. Delay a few months and there can be a proper election with a proper campaign in the autumn. Do it now and its going to be a joke, even more than local elections normally are.
So less than 50% want to postpone the elections then.
Plus moving it from the Spring, by which time most of the most vulnerable to Covid will be vaccinated, to the autumn as we start flu season again is not a great idea.
You can also have early voting and postal voting too as the US did last year
I don't often agree with HYUFD but yeah, come on, we need to get these elections done to the original timetable. We can't simultaneously have governments talking about better things by the spring because of vaccination but also cancelling May elections. Unless they're really saying there's not a cat's chance in hell of anything being vaguely close to normal by May, in which case they ought to be saying that now.
Commit to it now and put out a big campaign to get everyone who is uncomfortable at the thought registered for a postal vote, and consider the possibility of maybe splitting in-person voting over two days or something.
If people can do their shopping at the supermarket, they can manage to vote at a polling station.
Manning them would be VERY difficult.
Not necessarily. A lot of volunteers are elderly and will have been vaccinated by May. Places with multiple stations per place just halve the number, and spread it over 2 days.
These are just spitballing ideas, there'll be more to it, but those I know in elections don't seem hugely worried about the logistics of preparing for May at present.
Those I know in elections are all talking about how long the delay will be....
Cabinet office will deny until an announcement is made. But I'd say chances of May elections are sub 5% at present.
Delaying the elections would require primary legislation.
I wonder if their Lordships might push back on delaying again the 2020 local elections?
Provision of the Public Health rules?
Bollocks
Get a postal vote mate
Postal votes won't help.
You'll still need to leave the house to apply for one and then send it out.
The big problem with holding the elections before enough people are vaccinated is having enough people at the polling stations and counts.
People at the count is not a problem, preparations for those are well in hand. Fewer people counting, spread over several days, and better distancing with observers.
Also, do you need to leave the house to apply for a postal vote? The forms are downloadable, though I suppose note everyone can print them out. But could they not send the forms to people on request, or the government could provide funds to supply everyone with a postal vote automatically?
Polling stations is likely to be a bigger issue. My council sent out a questionnaire about availability a few weeks ago, but I don't know the response level they have had. I imagine fewer than willing to do the count, as polling station duty is an arse.
How will they keep the ballots secure if they plan to count them over several days?
Has been a while since I applied for a postal ballot, but don't you need to send in a sample signature for the later verification process?
It's a variant of whataboutism - "X is bad, so Y (that I dislike for other reasons) is bad in the same way". You see it on the left too when Thatcher gets dragged into every conversation.
Happens with Boris a lot as well. Corbyn was, in my view, very unsuitable to be PM, but such parallels that can be made with him and Trump do not extend anywhere near that far, it's just unreasonable.
I suspect that Corbyn and his crowd would have handled the pandemic at least as well as the current mob, although they would have had to cope with a far less friendly press, so it would probably have felt worse.
Hmm, not so sure about that. Would Corbyn really have done all those vaccine deals with the evil multinational pharmaceutical companies?
I really don't know, Richard. It can only be a guess.
Boris's worst mistake was his failure to react quickly enough at the start of the outbreak. My guess is Corbyn would have done no worse and possibly quite a bit better. He would also, I think, have sacked anyone who made unauthorised trips to Barnard Castle.
Not sure about vaccine deals. I suspect he would have followed the science pretty closely but hard to say how that would have shaped into contracts with big pharma.
We would have been in the EU deal under Corbyn, Starmer would have made sure of it.
So less than 50% want to postpone the elections then.
Plus moving it from the Spring, by which time most of the most vulnerable to Covid will be vaccinated, to the autumn as we start flu season again is not a great idea.
You can also have early voting and postal voting too as the US did last year
I don't often agree with HYUFD but yeah, come on, we need to get these elections done to the original timetable. We can't simultaneously have governments talking about better things by the spring because of vaccination but also cancelling May elections. Unless they're really saying there's not a cat's chance in hell of anything being vaguely close to normal by May, in which case they ought to be saying that now.
Commit to it now and put out a big campaign to get everyone who is uncomfortable at the thought registered for a postal vote, and consider the possibility of maybe splitting in-person voting over two days or something.
If people can do their shopping at the supermarket, they can manage to vote at a polling station.
Manning them would be VERY difficult.
Not necessarily. A lot of volunteers are elderly and will have been vaccinated by May. Places with multiple stations per place just halve the number, and spread it over 2 days.
These are just spitballing ideas, there'll be more to it, but those I know in elections don't seem hugely worried about the logistics of preparing for May at present.
Those I know in elections are all talking about how long the delay will be....
Cabinet office will deny until an announcement is made. But I'd say chances of May elections are sub 5% at present.
Delaying the elections would require primary legislation.
I wonder if their Lordships might push back on delaying again the 2020 local elections?
Provision of the Public Health rules?
Bollocks
Get a postal vote mate
Postal votes won't help.
You'll still need to leave the house to apply for one and then send it out.
The big problem with holding the elections before enough people are vaccinated is having enough people at the polling stations and counts.
We had a General Election in December just over a year ago.
I don't see why we can't have locals in the autumn if vaccine rollout is due to be done by then.
Because by that time some elected posts will have been waiting 18 months for the election. Which means in the case of our police commissioner we will have had an unelected appointed official doing the job for over 2 years.
And in World War II we went a decade between elections.
Four to Six months doesn't seem long to wait. Like WWII we don't necessarily need to wait until everything is completely eliminated, especially overseas, but until its safe in this country seems smart to do.
We have enough time to organise an all-postal ballot election. No need for people to apply for a postal ballot. Just mail them all out, and hold the elections without repeating delays.
I have no strong views on May's elections but it is not unreasonable to expect they could be delayed to the Autumn, the word being 'could'
Does Trump even like golf? Surely somebody who cheats as much as he does cannot have a genuine passion for it.
That's his worst sin of all. Cheating at golf is - not cricket.
Can you imagine how much our most golf loving dead Presidents - esp. Republicans Harding, Eisenhower, Reagan & W - would regard the vermin no only currently investing the White House, but also sullying "a good walk spoiled" (or visa versa).
Certainly helps explain why George W. Bush and Barack Obama NEVER liked the swine, even before he disgraced his country, violated his oath AND urged the violent overthrow of the duly-elected government of the United States.
Donald Trumpsky = Judge Smailes but without the redeeming comedic value
I seem to recall that chap who has written a book on Trump cheating at golf, in an interview linked on here, described how Clinton would cheat too, but a little and because he was bad at the game, while Trump is quite good but cheats blatantly anyway to pretend he's among the greatest every.
It my years of playing and acting in various offices I can identify many golfers who tried to get away with cheating, and in my days as handicap secretary I had great pleasure in disqualifying a fair number
What kind of cheating? "Protecting their handicap" (ie taking a dive if you aren't going to win) or worse?
I never understood that particular stupidity. Why would you pretend to be even worse that you already were?
Various forms including deliberate incorrect scoring, rule breaking without declaration, playing a wrong ball etc
Of course some were innocent but we knew those who would try to get away with it
Yikes. When I played I always preferred matchplay. With none of this handicap nonsense. If my opponent was better, well, so be it. Try harder.
Does Trump even like golf? Surely somebody who cheats as much as he does cannot have a genuine passion for it.
That's his worst sin of all. Cheating at golf is - not cricket.
Can you imagine how much our most golf loving dead Presidents - esp. Republicans Harding, Eisenhower, Reagan & W - would regard the vermin no only currently investing the White House, but also sullying "a good walk spoiled" (or visa versa).
Certainly helps explain why George W. Bush and Barack Obama NEVER liked the swine, even before he disgraced his country, violated his oath AND urged the violent overthrow of the duly-elected government of the United States.
Donald Trumpsky = Judge Smailes but without the redeeming comedic value
I always think of Goldfinger when it comes to cheating at golf. Trump would make a good Bond villain.
Surprised Trump hasn't bought Stoke Poges (where Goldfinger was filmed). The clubhouse is suitably OTT.
But the guy still had to work his way up from being a German soldier riding a pony while being shelled by the Allies on D-Day.
Yes, there are questions about why so many Republicans, like Mike Pence and Mitch McConnell, tolerated Trump’s behaviour for so long – and served alongside him. But perhaps we in Britain should be a little more understanding. After all, it was only a year ago that many sensible Labour politicians were campaigning to make Jeremy Corbyn our Prime Minister, sitting alongside him in his Shadow Cabinet.
smirk
That rhymes with berk.
can't imagine why the rhyming slang immediately comes to mind, m8
Love things like this. Makes you wonder how few people you would need to have to get back to someone who met say Julius Caesar (as in two gets us to the Civil war, so 1865), did the Civil War chap meet an aged 90 year old, who when young had met an aged 90 year old etc... We'll never know of course, but fun to imagine.
My Great Grandmother died when I was 4. I do just about remember her. She always said that her grandfather had been a boot boy for the Duke of Wellington. No idea if it was true but the maths worked.
Wellington boot boy ? I think she was pulling your...
Oh I am sure she was. What always interested me afterwards was that the maths worked. Her Grandfather was born in 1834.
It just amazes me how close we are, by degrees of separation, to historical figures.
My grandfather was close to his first cousin, Edward Carson, who had been born during the Crimean War.
So less than 50% want to postpone the elections then.
Plus moving it from the Spring, by which time most of the most vulnerable to Covid will be vaccinated, to the autumn as we start flu season again is not a great idea.
You can also have early voting and postal voting too as the US did last year
I don't often agree with HYUFD but yeah, come on, we need to get these elections done to the original timetable. We can't simultaneously have governments talking about better things by the spring because of vaccination but also cancelling May elections. Unless they're really saying there's not a cat's chance in hell of anything being vaguely close to normal by May, in which case they ought to be saying that now.
Commit to it now and put out a big campaign to get everyone who is uncomfortable at the thought registered for a postal vote, and consider the possibility of maybe splitting in-person voting over two days or something.
If people can do their shopping at the supermarket, they can manage to vote at a polling station.
Manning them would be VERY difficult.
Not necessarily. A lot of volunteers are elderly and will have been vaccinated by May. Places with multiple stations per place just halve the number, and spread it over 2 days.
These are just spitballing ideas, there'll be more to it, but those I know in elections don't seem hugely worried about the logistics of preparing for May at present.
Those I know in elections are all talking about how long the delay will be....
Cabinet office will deny until an announcement is made. But I'd say chances of May elections are sub 5% at present.
Delaying the elections would require primary legislation.
I wonder if their Lordships might push back on delaying again the 2020 local elections?
Provision of the Public Health rules?
Bollocks
Get a postal vote mate
Postal votes won't help.
You'll still need to leave the house to apply for one and then send it out.
The big problem with holding the elections before enough people are vaccinated is having enough people at the polling stations and counts.
People at the count is not a problem, preparations for those are well in hand. Fewer people counting, spread over several days, and better distancing with observers.
Also, do you need to leave the house to apply for a postal vote? The forms are downloadable, though I suppose note everyone can print them out. But could they not send the forms to people on request, or the government could provide funds to supply everyone with a postal vote automatically?
Polling stations is likely to be a bigger issue. My council sent out a questionnaire about availability a few weeks ago, but I don't know the response level they have had. I imagine fewer than willing to do the count, as polling station duty is an arse.
How will they keep the ballots secure if they plan to count them over several days?
Has been a while since I applied for a postal ballot, but don't you need to send in a sample signature for the later verification process?
The former I don't know, but they've asked count staff to be available to verify friday, count principal authority on saturday, parishes sunday, pcc monday, so they must think they have a process in place.
On the latter I don't know either, the form requires a signature, but if they send the application forms out well ahead of elections instead of a vote? People can return those maybe.
It seems doable.
At the least by-elections have to be permitted again.
So less than 50% want to postpone the elections then.
Plus moving it from the Spring, by which time most of the most vulnerable to Covid will be vaccinated, to the autumn as we start flu season again is not a great idea.
You can also have early voting and postal voting too as the US did last year
I don't often agree with HYUFD but yeah, come on, we need to get these elections done to the original timetable. We can't simultaneously have governments talking about better things by the spring because of vaccination but also cancelling May elections. Unless they're really saying there's not a cat's chance in hell of anything being vaguely close to normal by May, in which case they ought to be saying that now.
Commit to it now and put out a big campaign to get everyone who is uncomfortable at the thought registered for a postal vote, and consider the possibility of maybe splitting in-person voting over two days or something.
If people can do their shopping at the supermarket, they can manage to vote at a polling station.
Manning them would be VERY difficult.
Not necessarily. A lot of volunteers are elderly and will have been vaccinated by May. Places with multiple stations per place just halve the number, and spread it over 2 days.
These are just spitballing ideas, there'll be more to it, but those I know in elections don't seem hugely worried about the logistics of preparing for May at present.
Those I know in elections are all talking about how long the delay will be....
Cabinet office will deny until an announcement is made. But I'd say chances of May elections are sub 5% at present.
Delaying the elections would require primary legislation.
I wonder if their Lordships might push back on delaying again the 2020 local elections?
Provision of the Public Health rules?
Bollocks
Get a postal vote mate
Postal votes won't help.
You'll still need to leave the house to apply for one and then send it out.
The big problem with holding the elections before enough people are vaccinated is having enough people at the polling stations and counts.
We had a General Election in December just over a year ago.
I don't see why we can't have locals in the autumn if vaccine rollout is due to be done by then.
Because by that time some elected posts will have been waiting 18 months for the election. Which means in the case of our police commissioner we will have had an unelected appointed official doing the job for over 2 years.
And in World War II we went a decade between elections.
Four to Six months doesn't seem long to wait. Like WWII we don't necessarily need to wait until everything is completely eliminated, especially overseas, but until its safe in this country seems smart to do.
We have enough time to organise an all-postal ballot election. No need for people to apply for a postal ballot. Just mail them all out, and hold the elections without repeating delays.
I have no strong views on May's elections but it is not unreasonable to expect they could be delayed to the Autumn, the word being 'could'
Does Trump even like golf? Surely somebody who cheats as much as he does cannot have a genuine passion for it.
That's his worst sin of all. Cheating at golf is - not cricket.
Can you imagine how much our most golf loving dead Presidents - esp. Republicans Harding, Eisenhower, Reagan & W - would regard the vermin no only currently investing the White House, but also sullying "a good walk spoiled" (or visa versa).
Certainly helps explain why George W. Bush and Barack Obama NEVER liked the swine, even before he disgraced his country, violated his oath AND urged the violent overthrow of the duly-elected government of the United States.
Donald Trumpsky = Judge Smailes but without the redeeming comedic value
I seem to recall that chap who has written a book on Trump cheating at golf, in an interview linked on here, described how Clinton would cheat too, but a little and because he was bad at the game, while Trump is quite good but cheats blatantly anyway to pretend he's among the greatest every.
It my years of playing and acting in various offices I can identify many golfers who tried to get away with cheating, and in my days as handicap secretary I had great pleasure in disqualifying a fair number
What kind of cheating? "Protecting their handicap" (ie taking a dive if you aren't going to win) or worse?
I never understood that particular stupidity. Why would you pretend to be even worse that you already were?
Various forms including deliberate incorrect scoring, rule breaking without declaration, playing a wrong ball etc
Of course some were innocent but we knew those who would try to get away with it
Yikes. When I played I always preferred matchplay. With none of this handicap nonsense. If my opponent was better, well, so be it. Try harder.
Stroke play was always recognised as the test of a golf and most of the major competitions are stroke play
However, match play is still very enjoyable but played much less
So less than 50% want to postpone the elections then.
Plus moving it from the Spring, by which time most of the most vulnerable to Covid will be vaccinated, to the autumn as we start flu season again is not a great idea.
You can also have early voting and postal voting too as the US did last year
I don't often agree with HYUFD but yeah, come on, we need to get these elections done to the original timetable. We can't simultaneously have governments talking about better things by the spring because of vaccination but also cancelling May elections. Unless they're really saying there's not a cat's chance in hell of anything being vaguely close to normal by May, in which case they ought to be saying that now.
Commit to it now and put out a big campaign to get everyone who is uncomfortable at the thought registered for a postal vote, and consider the possibility of maybe splitting in-person voting over two days or something.
If people can do their shopping at the supermarket, they can manage to vote at a polling station.
Manning them would be VERY difficult.
Not necessarily. A lot of volunteers are elderly and will have been vaccinated by May. Places with multiple stations per place just halve the number, and spread it over 2 days.
These are just spitballing ideas, there'll be more to it, but those I know in elections don't seem hugely worried about the logistics of preparing for May at present.
Those I know in elections are all talking about how long the delay will be....
Cabinet office will deny until an announcement is made. But I'd say chances of May elections are sub 5% at present.
Delaying the elections would require primary legislation.
I wonder if their Lordships might push back on delaying again the 2020 local elections?
Provision of the Public Health rules?
Bollocks
Get a postal vote mate
Postal votes won't help.
You'll still need to leave the house to apply for one and then send it out.
The big problem with holding the elections before enough people are vaccinated is having enough people at the polling stations and counts.
We had a General Election in December just over a year ago.
I don't see why we can't have locals in the autumn if vaccine rollout is due to be done by then.
Because by that time some elected posts will have been waiting 18 months for the election. Which means in the case of our police commissioner we will have had an unelected appointed official doing the job for over 2 years.
And in World War II we went a decade between elections.
Four to Six months doesn't seem long to wait. Like WWII we don't necessarily need to wait until everything is completely eliminated, especially overseas, but until its safe in this country seems smart to do.
We have enough time to organise an all-postal ballot election. No need for people to apply for a postal ballot. Just mail them all out, and hold the elections without repeating delays.
I have no strong views on May's elections but it is not unreasonable to expect they could be delayed to the Autumn, the word being 'could'
And I have a postal vote anyway
By the end of April all over 50s are due to have been vaccinated ie the most at risk groups.
By Autumn winter flu season will be back, if we are unlucky we could be seeing mutations of the virus again which the vaccines may be less effective against etc. It makes no sense to postpone the elections to the Autumn, though I agree they could be mainly postal.
So less than 50% want to postpone the elections then.
Plus moving it from the Spring, by which time most of the most vulnerable to Covid will be vaccinated, to the autumn as we start flu season again is not a great idea.
You can also have early voting and postal voting too as the US did last year
I don't often agree with HYUFD but yeah, come on, we need to get these elections done to the original timetable. We can't simultaneously have governments talking about better things by the spring because of vaccination but also cancelling May elections. Unless they're really saying there's not a cat's chance in hell of anything being vaguely close to normal by May, in which case they ought to be saying that now.
Commit to it now and put out a big campaign to get everyone who is uncomfortable at the thought registered for a postal vote, and consider the possibility of maybe splitting in-person voting over two days or something.
If people can do their shopping at the supermarket, they can manage to vote at a polling station.
Manning them would be VERY difficult.
Not necessarily. A lot of volunteers are elderly and will have been vaccinated by May. Places with multiple stations per place just halve the number, and spread it over 2 days.
These are just spitballing ideas, there'll be more to it, but those I know in elections don't seem hugely worried about the logistics of preparing for May at present.
Those I know in elections are all talking about how long the delay will be....
Cabinet office will deny until an announcement is made. But I'd say chances of May elections are sub 5% at present.
Delaying the elections would require primary legislation.
I wonder if their Lordships might push back on delaying again the 2020 local elections?
Provision of the Public Health rules?
Bollocks
Get a postal vote mate
Postal votes won't help.
You'll still need to leave the house to apply for one and then send it out.
The big problem with holding the elections before enough people are vaccinated is having enough people at the polling stations and counts.
We had a General Election in December just over a year ago.
I don't see why we can't have locals in the autumn if vaccine rollout is due to be done by then.
Because by that time some elected posts will have been waiting 18 months for the election. Which means in the case of our police commissioner we will have had an unelected appointed official doing the job for over 2 years.
And in World War II we went a decade between elections.
Four to Six months doesn't seem long to wait. Like WWII we don't necessarily need to wait until everything is completely eliminated, especially overseas, but until its safe in this country seems smart to do.
We have enough time to organise an all-postal ballot election. No need for people to apply for a postal ballot. Just mail them all out, and hold the elections without repeating delays.
And campaigning?
Do people go canvassing during a stay at home order?
Do people deliver leaflets while some are still self-isolating?
Just because something can be done doesn't mean it should be done. Delay a few months and there can be a proper election with a proper campaign in the autumn. Do it now and its going to be a joke, even more than local elections normally are.
You could increase the amount of freepost candidates would be entitled to. You could ask broadcasters to carry debates - I think the BBC still does local news programmes.
It's a variant of whataboutism - "X is bad, so Y (that I dislike for other reasons) is bad in the same way". You see it on the left too when Thatcher gets dragged into every conversation.
Happens with Boris a lot as well. Corbyn was, in my view, very unsuitable to be PM, but such parallels that can be made with him and Trump do not extend anywhere near that far, it's just unreasonable.
I suspect that Corbyn and his crowd would have handled the pandemic at least as well as the current mob, although they would have had to cope with a far less friendly press, so it would probably have felt worse.
Hmm, not so sure about that. Would Corbyn really have done all those vaccine deals with the evil multinational pharmaceutical companies?
I really don't know, Richard. It can only be a guess.
Boris's worst mistake was his failure to react quickly enough at the start of the outbreak. My guess is Corbyn would have done no worse and possibly quite a bit better. He would also, I think, have sacked anyone who made unauthorised trips to Barnard Castle.
Not sure about vaccine deals. I suspect he would have followed the science pretty closely but hard to say how that would have shaped into contracts with big pharma.
So less than 50% want to postpone the elections then.
Plus moving it from the Spring, by which time most of the most vulnerable to Covid will be vaccinated, to the autumn as we start flu season again is not a great idea.
You can also have early voting and postal voting too as the US did last year
I don't often agree with HYUFD but yeah, come on, we need to get these elections done to the original timetable. We can't simultaneously have governments talking about better things by the spring because of vaccination but also cancelling May elections. Unless they're really saying there's not a cat's chance in hell of anything being vaguely close to normal by May, in which case they ought to be saying that now.
Commit to it now and put out a big campaign to get everyone who is uncomfortable at the thought registered for a postal vote, and consider the possibility of maybe splitting in-person voting over two days or something.
If people can do their shopping at the supermarket, they can manage to vote at a polling station.
Manning them would be VERY difficult.
Not necessarily. A lot of volunteers are elderly and will have been vaccinated by May. Places with multiple stations per place just halve the number, and spread it over 2 days.
These are just spitballing ideas, there'll be more to it, but those I know in elections don't seem hugely worried about the logistics of preparing for May at present.
Those I know in elections are all talking about how long the delay will be....
Cabinet office will deny until an announcement is made. But I'd say chances of May elections are sub 5% at present.
Delaying the elections would require primary legislation.
I wonder if their Lordships might push back on delaying again the 2020 local elections?
Provision of the Public Health rules?
Bollocks
Get a postal vote mate
Postal votes won't help.
You'll still need to leave the house to apply for one and then send it out.
The big problem with holding the elections before enough people are vaccinated is having enough people at the polling stations and counts.
We had a General Election in December just over a year ago.
I don't see why we can't have locals in the autumn if vaccine rollout is due to be done by then.
Because by that time some elected posts will have been waiting 18 months for the election. Which means in the case of our police commissioner we will have had an unelected appointed official doing the job for over 2 years.
And in World War II we went a decade between elections.
Four to Six months doesn't seem long to wait. Like WWII we don't necessarily need to wait until everything is completely eliminated, especially overseas, but until its safe in this country seems smart to do.
We have enough time to organise an all-postal ballot election. No need for people to apply for a postal ballot. Just mail them all out, and hold the elections without repeating delays.
And campaigning?
Do people go canvassing during a stay at home order?
Do people deliver leaflets while some are still self-isolating?
Just because something can be done doesn't mean it should be done. Delay a few months and there can be a proper election with a proper campaign in the autumn. Do it now and its going to be a joke, even more than local elections normally are.
Postal election - every candidate gets a single leaflet all sent in a single envelope alongside the forms.
So less than 50% want to postpone the elections then.
Plus moving it from the Spring, by which time most of the most vulnerable to Covid will be vaccinated, to the autumn as we start flu season again is not a great idea.
You can also have early voting and postal voting too as the US did last year
I don't often agree with HYUFD but yeah, come on, we need to get these elections done to the original timetable. We can't simultaneously have governments talking about better things by the spring because of vaccination but also cancelling May elections. Unless they're really saying there's not a cat's chance in hell of anything being vaguely close to normal by May, in which case they ought to be saying that now.
Commit to it now and put out a big campaign to get everyone who is uncomfortable at the thought registered for a postal vote, and consider the possibility of maybe splitting in-person voting over two days or something.
If people can do their shopping at the supermarket, they can manage to vote at a polling station.
Manning them would be VERY difficult.
Not necessarily. A lot of volunteers are elderly and will have been vaccinated by May. Places with multiple stations per place just halve the number, and spread it over 2 days.
These are just spitballing ideas, there'll be more to it, but those I know in elections don't seem hugely worried about the logistics of preparing for May at present.
Those I know in elections are all talking about how long the delay will be....
Cabinet office will deny until an announcement is made. But I'd say chances of May elections are sub 5% at present.
Delaying the elections would require primary legislation.
I wonder if their Lordships might push back on delaying again the 2020 local elections?
Provision of the Public Health rules?
Bollocks
Get a postal vote mate
Postal votes won't help.
You'll still need to leave the house to apply for one and then send it out.
The big problem with holding the elections before enough people are vaccinated is having enough people at the polling stations and counts.
We had a General Election in December just over a year ago.
I don't see why we can't have locals in the autumn if vaccine rollout is due to be done by then.
Because by that time some elected posts will have been waiting 18 months for the election. Which means in the case of our police commissioner we will have had an unelected appointed official doing the job for over 2 years.
And in World War II we went a decade between elections.
Four to Six months doesn't seem long to wait. Like WWII we don't necessarily need to wait until everything is completely eliminated, especially overseas, but until its safe in this country seems smart to do.
We have enough time to organise an all-postal ballot election. No need for people to apply for a postal ballot. Just mail them all out, and hold the elections without repeating delays.
And campaigning?
Do people go canvassing during a stay at home order?
Do people deliver leaflets while some are still self-isolating?
Just because something can be done doesn't mean it should be done. Delay a few months and there can be a proper election with a proper campaign in the autumn. Do it now and its going to be a joke, even more than local elections normally are.
You could increase the amount of freepost candidates would be entitled to. You could ask broadcasters to carry debates - I think the BBC still does local news programmes.
There are options. Democracy is important.
I don't think there's enough time for every council election to have its own debate.
Remember this is two sets of elections being fought.
So less than 50% want to postpone the elections then.
Plus moving it from the Spring, by which time most of the most vulnerable to Covid will be vaccinated, to the autumn as we start flu season again is not a great idea.
You can also have early voting and postal voting too as the US did last year
I don't often agree with HYUFD but yeah, come on, we need to get these elections done to the original timetable. We can't simultaneously have governments talking about better things by the spring because of vaccination but also cancelling May elections. Unless they're really saying there's not a cat's chance in hell of anything being vaguely close to normal by May, in which case they ought to be saying that now.
Commit to it now and put out a big campaign to get everyone who is uncomfortable at the thought registered for a postal vote, and consider the possibility of maybe splitting in-person voting over two days or something.
If people can do their shopping at the supermarket, they can manage to vote at a polling station.
Manning them would be VERY difficult.
Not necessarily. A lot of volunteers are elderly and will have been vaccinated by May. Places with multiple stations per place just halve the number, and spread it over 2 days.
These are just spitballing ideas, there'll be more to it, but those I know in elections don't seem hugely worried about the logistics of preparing for May at present.
Those I know in elections are all talking about how long the delay will be....
Cabinet office will deny until an announcement is made. But I'd say chances of May elections are sub 5% at present.
Delaying the elections would require primary legislation.
I wonder if their Lordships might push back on delaying again the 2020 local elections?
Provision of the Public Health rules?
Bollocks
Get a postal vote mate
Postal votes won't help.
You'll still need to leave the house to apply for one and then send it out.
The big problem with holding the elections before enough people are vaccinated is having enough people at the polling stations and counts.
We had a General Election in December just over a year ago.
I don't see why we can't have locals in the autumn if vaccine rollout is due to be done by then.
Because by that time some elected posts will have been waiting 18 months for the election. Which means in the case of our police commissioner we will have had an unelected appointed official doing the job for over 2 years.
And in World War II we went a decade between elections.
Four to Six months doesn't seem long to wait. Like WWII we don't necessarily need to wait until everything is completely eliminated, especially overseas, but until its safe in this country seems smart to do.
We have enough time to organise an all-postal ballot election. No need for people to apply for a postal ballot. Just mail them all out, and hold the elections without repeating delays.
I have no strong views on May's elections but it is not unreasonable to expect they could be delayed to the Autumn, the word being 'could'
And I have a postal vote anyway
We delayed elections once already, last spring. That was fair enough, because we were caught by surprise, and everyone had more important things to do.
This time we had plenty of time to develop contingency plans. Elections are important, not a distraction to be swept aside. We should be making the effort to work out how best to hold them.
So less than 50% want to postpone the elections then.
Plus moving it from the Spring, by which time most of the most vulnerable to Covid will be vaccinated, to the autumn as we start flu season again is not a great idea.
You can also have early voting and postal voting too as the US did last year
I don't often agree with HYUFD but yeah, come on, we need to get these elections done to the original timetable. We can't simultaneously have governments talking about better things by the spring because of vaccination but also cancelling May elections. Unless they're really saying there's not a cat's chance in hell of anything being vaguely close to normal by May, in which case they ought to be saying that now.
Commit to it now and put out a big campaign to get everyone who is uncomfortable at the thought registered for a postal vote, and consider the possibility of maybe splitting in-person voting over two days or something.
If people can do their shopping at the supermarket, they can manage to vote at a polling station.
Manning them would be VERY difficult.
Not necessarily. A lot of volunteers are elderly and will have been vaccinated by May. Places with multiple stations per place just halve the number, and spread it over 2 days.
These are just spitballing ideas, there'll be more to it, but those I know in elections don't seem hugely worried about the logistics of preparing for May at present.
Those I know in elections are all talking about how long the delay will be....
Cabinet office will deny until an announcement is made. But I'd say chances of May elections are sub 5% at present.
Delaying the elections would require primary legislation.
I wonder if their Lordships might push back on delaying again the 2020 local elections?
Provision of the Public Health rules?
Bollocks
Get a postal vote mate
Postal votes won't help.
You'll still need to leave the house to apply for one and then send it out.
The big problem with holding the elections before enough people are vaccinated is having enough people at the polling stations and counts.
We had a General Election in December just over a year ago.
I don't see why we can't have locals in the autumn if vaccine rollout is due to be done by then.
Because by that time some elected posts will have been waiting 18 months for the election. Which means in the case of our police commissioner we will have had an unelected appointed official doing the job for over 2 years.
And in World War II we went a decade between elections.
Four to Six months doesn't seem long to wait. Like WWII we don't necessarily need to wait until everything is completely eliminated, especially overseas, but until its safe in this country seems smart to do.
We have enough time to organise an all-postal ballot election. No need for people to apply for a postal ballot. Just mail them all out, and hold the elections without repeating delays.
I have no strong views on May's elections but it is not unreasonable to expect they could be delayed to the Autumn, the word being 'could'
And I have a postal vote anyway
By the end of April all over 50s are due to have been vaccinated ie the most at risk groups.
By Autumn winter flu season will be back, if we are unlucky we could be seeing mutations of the virus again which the vaccines may be less effective against etc. It makes no sense to postpone, though I agree they could be mainly postal.
So less than 50% want to postpone the elections then.
Plus moving it from the Spring, by which time most of the most vulnerable to Covid will be vaccinated, to the autumn as we start flu season again is not a great idea.
You can also have early voting and postal voting too as the US did last year
I don't often agree with HYUFD but yeah, come on, we need to get these elections done to the original timetable. We can't simultaneously have governments talking about better things by the spring because of vaccination but also cancelling May elections. Unless they're really saying there's not a cat's chance in hell of anything being vaguely close to normal by May, in which case they ought to be saying that now.
Commit to it now and put out a big campaign to get everyone who is uncomfortable at the thought registered for a postal vote, and consider the possibility of maybe splitting in-person voting over two days or something.
If people can do their shopping at the supermarket, they can manage to vote at a polling station.
Manning them would be VERY difficult.
Not necessarily. A lot of volunteers are elderly and will have been vaccinated by May. Places with multiple stations per place just halve the number, and spread it over 2 days.
These are just spitballing ideas, there'll be more to it, but those I know in elections don't seem hugely worried about the logistics of preparing for May at present.
Those I know in elections are all talking about how long the delay will be....
Cabinet office will deny until an announcement is made. But I'd say chances of May elections are sub 5% at present.
Delaying the elections would require primary legislation.
I wonder if their Lordships might push back on delaying again the 2020 local elections?
Provision of the Public Health rules?
Bollocks
Get a postal vote mate
Postal votes won't help.
You'll still need to leave the house to apply for one and then send it out.
The big problem with holding the elections before enough people are vaccinated is having enough people at the polling stations and counts.
We had a General Election in December just over a year ago.
I don't see why we can't have locals in the autumn if vaccine rollout is due to be done by then.
Because by that time some elected posts will have been waiting 18 months for the election. Which means in the case of our police commissioner we will have had an unelected appointed official doing the job for over 2 years.
And in World War II we went a decade between elections.
Four to Six months doesn't seem long to wait. Like WWII we don't necessarily need to wait until everything is completely eliminated, especially overseas, but until its safe in this country seems smart to do.
We have enough time to organise an all-postal ballot election. No need for people to apply for a postal ballot. Just mail them all out, and hold the elections without repeating delays.
I have no strong views on May's elections but it is not unreasonable to expect they could be delayed to the Autumn, the word being 'could'
And I have a postal vote anyway
By the end of April all over 50s are due to have been vaccinated ie the most at risk groups.
By Autumn winter flu season will be back, if we are unlucky we could be seeing mutations of the virus again which the vaccines may be less effective against etc. It makes no sense to postpone, though I agree they could be mainly postal.
You are expressing your own personal hope, but it is not beyond possibility that a delay may be needed and as far as an Autumn flu season is concerned we always have our flu vaccines anyway and it did not stop GE 2019 in December
Another great poll for Boris. James O'Brien and his merry band of nutjobs won't be happy. I think if you'd said the Tories would be close to no change over 12 months on from the election they would have bitten your hand off.
Another post Brexit Deal poll showing some bounce for the Tories and like Deltapoll the bounce coming from the LDs not Labour
So less than 50% want to postpone the elections then.
Plus moving it from the Spring, by which time most of the most vulnerable to Covid will be vaccinated, to the autumn as we start flu season again is not a great idea.
You can also have early voting and postal voting too as the US did last year
I don't often agree with HYUFD but yeah, come on, we need to get these elections done to the original timetable. We can't simultaneously have governments talking about better things by the spring because of vaccination but also cancelling May elections. Unless they're really saying there's not a cat's chance in hell of anything being vaguely close to normal by May, in which case they ought to be saying that now.
Commit to it now and put out a big campaign to get everyone who is uncomfortable at the thought registered for a postal vote, and consider the possibility of maybe splitting in-person voting over two days or something.
If people can do their shopping at the supermarket, they can manage to vote at a polling station.
Manning them would be VERY difficult.
Not necessarily. A lot of volunteers are elderly and will have been vaccinated by May. Places with multiple stations per place just halve the number, and spread it over 2 days.
These are just spitballing ideas, there'll be more to it, but those I know in elections don't seem hugely worried about the logistics of preparing for May at present.
Those I know in elections are all talking about how long the delay will be....
Cabinet office will deny until an announcement is made. But I'd say chances of May elections are sub 5% at present.
Delaying the elections would require primary legislation.
I wonder if their Lordships might push back on delaying again the 2020 local elections?
Provision of the Public Health rules?
Bollocks
Get a postal vote mate
Postal votes won't help.
You'll still need to leave the house to apply for one and then send it out.
The big problem with holding the elections before enough people are vaccinated is having enough people at the polling stations and counts.
We had a General Election in December just over a year ago.
I don't see why we can't have locals in the autumn if vaccine rollout is due to be done by then.
Because by that time some elected posts will have been waiting 18 months for the election. Which means in the case of our police commissioner we will have had an unelected appointed official doing the job for over 2 years.
And in World War II we went a decade between elections.
Four to Six months doesn't seem long to wait. Like WWII we don't necessarily need to wait until everything is completely eliminated, especially overseas, but until its safe in this country seems smart to do.
We have enough time to organise an all-postal ballot election. No need for people to apply for a postal ballot. Just mail them all out, and hold the elections without repeating delays.
And campaigning?
Do people go canvassing during a stay at home order?
Do people deliver leaflets while some are still self-isolating?
Just because something can be done doesn't mean it should be done. Delay a few months and there can be a proper election with a proper campaign in the autumn. Do it now and its going to be a joke, even more than local elections normally are.
Postal election - every candidate gets a single leaflet all sent in a single envelope alongside the forms.
So no chance to speak to anyone? No chance to discuss ideas? No chance to do anything but a single leaflet then its over? Then that's it for years? Sounds absolutely awful.
I don't see how that's advantageous over waiting a couple of months and then doing it properly.
So less than 50% want to postpone the elections then.
Plus moving it from the Spring, by which time most of the most vulnerable to Covid will be vaccinated, to the autumn as we start flu season again is not a great idea.
You can also have early voting and postal voting too as the US did last year
I don't often agree with HYUFD but yeah, come on, we need to get these elections done to the original timetable. We can't simultaneously have governments talking about better things by the spring because of vaccination but also cancelling May elections. Unless they're really saying there's not a cat's chance in hell of anything being vaguely close to normal by May, in which case they ought to be saying that now.
Commit to it now and put out a big campaign to get everyone who is uncomfortable at the thought registered for a postal vote, and consider the possibility of maybe splitting in-person voting over two days or something.
If people can do their shopping at the supermarket, they can manage to vote at a polling station.
Manning them would be VERY difficult.
Not necessarily. A lot of volunteers are elderly and will have been vaccinated by May. Places with multiple stations per place just halve the number, and spread it over 2 days.
These are just spitballing ideas, there'll be more to it, but those I know in elections don't seem hugely worried about the logistics of preparing for May at present.
Those I know in elections are all talking about how long the delay will be....
Cabinet office will deny until an announcement is made. But I'd say chances of May elections are sub 5% at present.
Delaying the elections would require primary legislation.
I wonder if their Lordships might push back on delaying again the 2020 local elections?
Provision of the Public Health rules?
Bollocks
Get a postal vote mate
Postal votes won't help.
You'll still need to leave the house to apply for one and then send it out.
The big problem with holding the elections before enough people are vaccinated is having enough people at the polling stations and counts.
We had a General Election in December just over a year ago.
I don't see why we can't have locals in the autumn if vaccine rollout is due to be done by then.
Because by that time some elected posts will have been waiting 18 months for the election. Which means in the case of our police commissioner we will have had an unelected appointed official doing the job for over 2 years.
And in World War II we went a decade between elections.
Four to Six months doesn't seem long to wait. Like WWII we don't necessarily need to wait until everything is completely eliminated, especially overseas, but until its safe in this country seems smart to do.
We have enough time to organise an all-postal ballot election. No need for people to apply for a postal ballot. Just mail them all out, and hold the elections without repeating delays.
And campaigning?
Do people go canvassing during a stay at home order?
Do people deliver leaflets while some are still self-isolating?
Just because something can be done doesn't mean it should be done. Delay a few months and there can be a proper election with a proper campaign in the autumn. Do it now and its going to be a joke, even more than local elections normally are.
Postal election - every candidate gets a single leaflet all sent in a single envelope alongside the forms.
Quite. The 'proper campaigning' argument is a nonsense anyway, there's no set amount of campaigning that counts as 'proper'. Even with the parties quite often they'll be one leaflet, if that, especially with the paper candidates, and nothing else. Canvassing barely happens in many places as well.
Arguing it shouldn't be risked and can wait a few more months makes more sense that complaining about the campaigning. As well as the idea they cannot speak to people during their term and thus it'll be 'years'.
So less than 50% want to postpone the elections then.
Plus moving it from the Spring, by which time most of the most vulnerable to Covid will be vaccinated, to the autumn as we start flu season again is not a great idea.
You can also have early voting and postal voting too as the US did last year
I don't often agree with HYUFD but yeah, come on, we need to get these elections done to the original timetable. We can't simultaneously have governments talking about better things by the spring because of vaccination but also cancelling May elections. Unless they're really saying there's not a cat's chance in hell of anything being vaguely close to normal by May, in which case they ought to be saying that now.
Commit to it now and put out a big campaign to get everyone who is uncomfortable at the thought registered for a postal vote, and consider the possibility of maybe splitting in-person voting over two days or something.
So you plan to encourage canvassing between mid March and early May?
So less than 50% want to postpone the elections then.
Plus moving it from the Spring, by which time most of the most vulnerable to Covid will be vaccinated, to the autumn as we start flu season again is not a great idea.
You can also have early voting and postal voting too as the US did last year
I don't often agree with HYUFD but yeah, come on, we need to get these elections done to the original timetable. We can't simultaneously have governments talking about better things by the spring because of vaccination but also cancelling May elections. Unless they're really saying there's not a cat's chance in hell of anything being vaguely close to normal by May, in which case they ought to be saying that now.
Commit to it now and put out a big campaign to get everyone who is uncomfortable at the thought registered for a postal vote, and consider the possibility of maybe splitting in-person voting over two days or something.
If people can do their shopping at the supermarket, they can manage to vote at a polling station.
Manning them would be VERY difficult.
Not necessarily. A lot of volunteers are elderly and will have been vaccinated by May. Places with multiple stations per place just halve the number, and spread it over 2 days.
These are just spitballing ideas, there'll be more to it, but those I know in elections don't seem hugely worried about the logistics of preparing for May at present.
Those I know in elections are all talking about how long the delay will be....
Cabinet office will deny until an announcement is made. But I'd say chances of May elections are sub 5% at present.
Delaying the elections would require primary legislation.
I wonder if their Lordships might push back on delaying again the 2020 local elections?
Provision of the Public Health rules?
Bollocks
Get a postal vote mate
Postal votes won't help.
You'll still need to leave the house to apply for one and then send it out.
The big problem with holding the elections before enough people are vaccinated is having enough people at the polling stations and counts.
We had a General Election in December just over a year ago.
I don't see why we can't have locals in the autumn if vaccine rollout is due to be done by then.
Because by that time some elected posts will have been waiting 18 months for the election. Which means in the case of our police commissioner we will have had an unelected appointed official doing the job for over 2 years.
And in World War II we went a decade between elections.
Four to Six months doesn't seem long to wait. Like WWII we don't necessarily need to wait until everything is completely eliminated, especially overseas, but until its safe in this country seems smart to do.
We have enough time to organise an all-postal ballot election. No need for people to apply for a postal ballot. Just mail them all out, and hold the elections without repeating delays.
And campaigning?
Do people go canvassing during a stay at home order?
Do people deliver leaflets while some are still self-isolating?
Just because something can be done doesn't mean it should be done. Delay a few months and there can be a proper election with a proper campaign in the autumn. Do it now and its going to be a joke, even more than local elections normally are.
Postal election - every candidate gets a single leaflet all sent in a single envelope alongside the forms.
So no chance to speak to anyone? No chance to discuss ideas? No chance to do anything but a single leaflet then its over? Then that's it for years? Sounds absolutely awful.
I don't see how that's advantageous over waiting a couple of months and then doing it properly.
Oh you mean no chance to outright lie to your constituents (as my new MP did to my face).
Another great poll for Boris. James O'Brien and his merry band of nutjobs won't be happy. I think if you'd said the Tories would be close to no change over 12 months on from the election they would have bitten your hand off.
Another post Brexit Deal poll showing some bounce for the Tories and like Deltapoll the bounce coming from the LDs not Labour
Could just be MoE. Still, that being the case, certainly a distinct lead for the Tories.
So less than 50% want to postpone the elections then.
Plus moving it from the Spring, by which time most of the most vulnerable to Covid will be vaccinated, to the autumn as we start flu season again is not a great idea.
You can also have early voting and postal voting too as the US did last year
I don't often agree with HYUFD but yeah, come on, we need to get these elections done to the original timetable. We can't simultaneously have governments talking about better things by the spring because of vaccination but also cancelling May elections. Unless they're really saying there's not a cat's chance in hell of anything being vaguely close to normal by May, in which case they ought to be saying that now.
Commit to it now and put out a big campaign to get everyone who is uncomfortable at the thought registered for a postal vote, and consider the possibility of maybe splitting in-person voting over two days or something.
So you plan to encourage canvassing between mid March and early May?
That’s... brave
Yeah, what better way to wrap up the pandemic than a bunch of canvassers and campaigners giving the virus one last hurrah.
So less than 50% want to postpone the elections then.
Plus moving it from the Spring, by which time most of the most vulnerable to Covid will be vaccinated, to the autumn as we start flu season again is not a great idea.
You can also have early voting and postal voting too as the US did last year
I don't often agree with HYUFD but yeah, come on, we need to get these elections done to the original timetable. We can't simultaneously have governments talking about better things by the spring because of vaccination but also cancelling May elections. Unless they're really saying there's not a cat's chance in hell of anything being vaguely close to normal by May, in which case they ought to be saying that now.
Commit to it now and put out a big campaign to get everyone who is uncomfortable at the thought registered for a postal vote, and consider the possibility of maybe splitting in-person voting over two days or something.
If people can do their shopping at the supermarket, they can manage to vote at a polling station.
Manning them would be VERY difficult.
Not necessarily. A lot of volunteers are elderly and will have been vaccinated by May. Places with multiple stations per place just halve the number, and spread it over 2 days.
These are just spitballing ideas, there'll be more to it, but those I know in elections don't seem hugely worried about the logistics of preparing for May at present.
Those I know in elections are all talking about how long the delay will be....
Cabinet office will deny until an announcement is made. But I'd say chances of May elections are sub 5% at present.
Delaying the elections would require primary legislation.
I wonder if their Lordships might push back on delaying again the 2020 local elections?
Provision of the Public Health rules?
Bollocks
Get a postal vote mate
Postal votes won't help.
You'll still need to leave the house to apply for one and then send it out.
The big problem with holding the elections before enough people are vaccinated is having enough people at the polling stations and counts.
We had a General Election in December just over a year ago.
I don't see why we can't have locals in the autumn if vaccine rollout is due to be done by then.
Because by that time some elected posts will have been waiting 18 months for the election. Which means in the case of our police commissioner we will have had an unelected appointed official doing the job for over 2 years.
And in World War II we went a decade between elections.
Four to Six months doesn't seem long to wait. Like WWII we don't necessarily need to wait until everything is completely eliminated, especially overseas, but until its safe in this country seems smart to do.
We have enough time to organise an all-postal ballot election. No need for people to apply for a postal ballot. Just mail them all out, and hold the elections without repeating delays.
And campaigning?
Do people go canvassing during a stay at home order?
Do people deliver leaflets while some are still self-isolating?
Just because something can be done doesn't mean it should be done. Delay a few months and there can be a proper election with a proper campaign in the autumn. Do it now and its going to be a joke, even more than local elections normally are.
You could increase the amount of freepost candidates would be entitled to. You could ask broadcasters to carry debates - I think the BBC still does local news programmes.
There are options. Democracy is important.
I don't think there's enough time for every council election to have its own debate.
Remember this is two sets of elections being fought.
The BBC can broadcast a Manchester debate to Manchester people and a London debate to London people, as it does with the local news programmes. These are not insurmountable problems.
So less than 50% want to postpone the elections then.
Plus moving it from the Spring, by which time most of the most vulnerable to Covid will be vaccinated, to the autumn as we start flu season again is not a great idea.
You can also have early voting and postal voting too as the US did last year
I don't often agree with HYUFD but yeah, come on, we need to get these elections done to the original timetable. We can't simultaneously have governments talking about better things by the spring because of vaccination but also cancelling May elections. Unless they're really saying there's not a cat's chance in hell of anything being vaguely close to normal by May, in which case they ought to be saying that now.
Commit to it now and put out a big campaign to get everyone who is uncomfortable at the thought registered for a postal vote, and consider the possibility of maybe splitting in-person voting over two days or something.
If people can do their shopping at the supermarket, they can manage to vote at a polling station.
Manning them would be VERY difficult.
Not necessarily. A lot of volunteers are elderly and will have been vaccinated by May. Places with multiple stations per place just halve the number, and spread it over 2 days.
These are just spitballing ideas, there'll be more to it, but those I know in elections don't seem hugely worried about the logistics of preparing for May at present.
Those I know in elections are all talking about how long the delay will be....
Cabinet office will deny until an announcement is made. But I'd say chances of May elections are sub 5% at present.
Delaying the elections would require primary legislation.
I wonder if their Lordships might push back on delaying again the 2020 local elections?
Provision of the Public Health rules?
Bollocks
Get a postal vote mate
Postal votes won't help.
You'll still need to leave the house to apply for one and then send it out.
The big problem with holding the elections before enough people are vaccinated is having enough people at the polling stations and counts.
We had a General Election in December just over a year ago.
I don't see why we can't have locals in the autumn if vaccine rollout is due to be done by then.
Because by that time some elected posts will have been waiting 18 months for the election. Which means in the case of our police commissioner we will have had an unelected appointed official doing the job for over 2 years.
And in World War II we went a decade between elections.
Four to Six months doesn't seem long to wait. Like WWII we don't necessarily need to wait until everything is completely eliminated, especially overseas, but until its safe in this country seems smart to do.
We have enough time to organise an all-postal ballot election. No need for people to apply for a postal ballot. Just mail them all out, and hold the elections without repeating delays.
And campaigning?
Do people go canvassing during a stay at home order?
Do people deliver leaflets while some are still self-isolating?
Just because something can be done doesn't mean it should be done. Delay a few months and there can be a proper election with a proper campaign in the autumn. Do it now and its going to be a joke, even more than local elections normally are.
Postal election - every candidate gets a single leaflet all sent in a single envelope alongside the forms.
So no chance to speak to anyone? No chance to discuss ideas? No chance to do anything but a single leaflet then its over? Then that's it for years? Sounds absolutely awful.
I don't see how that's advantageous over waiting a couple of months and then doing it properly.
A friend of mine is standing as a council candidate. They've already started phone canvassing. You might have heard of telephones?
So less than 50% want to postpone the elections then.
Plus moving it from the Spring, by which time most of the most vulnerable to Covid will be vaccinated, to the autumn as we start flu season again is not a great idea.
You can also have early voting and postal voting too as the US did last year
I don't often agree with HYUFD but yeah, come on, we need to get these elections done to the original timetable. We can't simultaneously have governments talking about better things by the spring because of vaccination but also cancelling May elections. Unless they're really saying there's not a cat's chance in hell of anything being vaguely close to normal by May, in which case they ought to be saying that now.
Commit to it now and put out a big campaign to get everyone who is uncomfortable at the thought registered for a postal vote, and consider the possibility of maybe splitting in-person voting over two days or something.
If people can do their shopping at the supermarket, they can manage to vote at a polling station.
Manning them would be VERY difficult.
Not necessarily. A lot of volunteers are elderly and will have been vaccinated by May. Places with multiple stations per place just halve the number, and spread it over 2 days.
These are just spitballing ideas, there'll be more to it, but those I know in elections don't seem hugely worried about the logistics of preparing for May at present.
Those I know in elections are all talking about how long the delay will be....
Cabinet office will deny until an announcement is made. But I'd say chances of May elections are sub 5% at present.
Delaying the elections would require primary legislation.
I wonder if their Lordships might push back on delaying again the 2020 local elections?
Provision of the Public Health rules?
Bollocks
Get a postal vote mate
Postal votes won't help.
You'll still need to leave the house to apply for one and then send it out.
The big problem with holding the elections before enough people are vaccinated is having enough people at the polling stations and counts.
We had a General Election in December just over a year ago.
I don't see why we can't have locals in the autumn if vaccine rollout is due to be done by then.
Because by that time some elected posts will have been waiting 18 months for the election. Which means in the case of our police commissioner we will have had an unelected appointed official doing the job for over 2 years.
And in World War II we went a decade between elections.
Four to Six months doesn't seem long to wait. Like WWII we don't necessarily need to wait until everything is completely eliminated, especially overseas, but until its safe in this country seems smart to do.
We have enough time to organise an all-postal ballot election. No need for people to apply for a postal ballot. Just mail them all out, and hold the elections without repeating delays.
I have no strong views on May's elections but it is not unreasonable to expect they could be delayed to the Autumn, the word being 'could'
And I have a postal vote anyway
We delayed elections once already, last spring. That was fair enough, because we were caught by surprise, and everyone had more important things to do.
This time we had plenty of time to develop contingency plans. Elections are important, not a distraction to be swept aside. We should be making the effort to work out how best to hold them.
Precisely this. They are important, not trivial. Ok if an argument is to be made that it simply cannot be risked, but people are arguing on the grounds of it not mattering or of mild convenience. None of the staff I know are desperate for them to be delayed (though they won't mind if they are), so they seem confident they can do it properly.
Yes, I think that is a good one, and very obviously what has happened. People think where there is smoke there is fire, so even though in court challenges Trump did not usually allege anything as much as he said in public, his catamites in Congress would then say 'Lots of people are worried about these allegations, we must look into it'.
Gave that a like, principally for a good use of the excellent word, ‘catamite’.
So less than 50% want to postpone the elections then.
Plus moving it from the Spring, by which time most of the most vulnerable to Covid will be vaccinated, to the autumn as we start flu season again is not a great idea.
You can also have early voting and postal voting too as the US did last year
I don't often agree with HYUFD but yeah, come on, we need to get these elections done to the original timetable. We can't simultaneously have governments talking about better things by the spring because of vaccination but also cancelling May elections. Unless they're really saying there's not a cat's chance in hell of anything being vaguely close to normal by May, in which case they ought to be saying that now.
Commit to it now and put out a big campaign to get everyone who is uncomfortable at the thought registered for a postal vote, and consider the possibility of maybe splitting in-person voting over two days or something.
If people can do their shopping at the supermarket, they can manage to vote at a polling station.
Manning them would be VERY difficult.
Not necessarily. A lot of volunteers are elderly and will have been vaccinated by May. Places with multiple stations per place just halve the number, and spread it over 2 days.
These are just spitballing ideas, there'll be more to it, but those I know in elections don't seem hugely worried about the logistics of preparing for May at present.
Those I know in elections are all talking about how long the delay will be....
Cabinet office will deny until an announcement is made. But I'd say chances of May elections are sub 5% at present.
Delaying the elections would require primary legislation.
I wonder if their Lordships might push back on delaying again the 2020 local elections?
Provision of the Public Health rules?
Bollocks
Get a postal vote mate
Postal votes won't help.
You'll still need to leave the house to apply for one and then send it out.
The big problem with holding the elections before enough people are vaccinated is having enough people at the polling stations and counts.
We had a General Election in December just over a year ago.
I don't see why we can't have locals in the autumn if vaccine rollout is due to be done by then.
Because by that time some elected posts will have been waiting 18 months for the election. Which means in the case of our police commissioner we will have had an unelected appointed official doing the job for over 2 years.
And in World War II we went a decade between elections.
Four to Six months doesn't seem long to wait. Like WWII we don't necessarily need to wait until everything is completely eliminated, especially overseas, but until its safe in this country seems smart to do.
We have enough time to organise an all-postal ballot election. No need for people to apply for a postal ballot. Just mail them all out, and hold the elections without repeating delays.
I have no strong views on May's elections but it is not unreasonable to expect they could be delayed to the Autumn, the word being 'could'
And I have a postal vote anyway
We delayed elections once already, last spring. That was fair enough, because we were caught by surprise, and everyone had more important things to do.
This time we had plenty of time to develop contingency plans. Elections are important, not a distraction to be swept aside. We should be making the effort to work out how best to hold them.
Elections are important which is why they should be done properly, not cutting corners to make it a rubber stamp exercise.
If you eliminate all local campaigning for the local elections then what are you going to be left with? Is it just going to be national campaigning with Boris and Starmer etc - and then that's that? For the local elections?
When we could postpone by about 16-20 weeks and do the entire thing properly?
The BBC can broadcast a Manchester debate to Manchester people and a London debate to London people, as it does with the local news programmes. These are not insurmountable problems.
By my reckoning there's over 7,500 council seats up election this year in England alone, I'm not sure your plan will be able to cover every contest, because if you only allow some candidates airtime and not all then that's not permissible to ensure a fair contest.
Comments
I thought the point of these was to focus on the vaccination numbers but they got the briefest hint of a mention. And then a bunch of journalists all lined up to ask the same whiny question as to whether the rules needed to be tightened and didn't really get an answer.
And I hadn't noticed this before:
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/11/covid-biontech-ceo-says-vaccine-is-effective-against-new-strains.html
https://twitter.com/BNODesk/status/1349064246567514113
My dad's sister's husband was the cousin of the real "Helen".
Which meant, when a teenager, I not only knew the "state secret" of James Herriot's real name, but I got autographed copies of the paperbacks.
smirk.
Boris's worst mistake was his failure to react quickly enough at the start of the outbreak. My guess is Corbyn would have done no worse and possibly quite a bit better. He would also, I think, have sacked anyone who made unauthorised trips to Barnard Castle.
Not sure about vaccine deals. I suspect he would have followed the science pretty closely but hard to say how that would have shaped into contracts with big pharma.
I don't see why we can't have locals in the autumn if vaccine rollout is due to be done by then.
Surprised Trump hasn't bought Stoke Poges (where Goldfinger was filmed). The clubhouse is suitably OTT.
165,844 vaccinations (both 1st & 2nd) for the 11th compared with the data from the 10th
https://api.coronavirus.data.gov.uk/v1/data?page=1&filters=areaType=overview&structure={"date":"date","cumFirstDose":"cumPeopleVaccinatedFirstDoseByPublishDate","cumSecondDose":"cumPeopleVaccinatedSecondDoseByPublishDate"}
He is not having a noticeably brilliant time now -- though he arguably handled the first wave better than Boris.
https://twitter.com/DAaronovitch/status/1349057735384559618
Another great poll for Boris. James O'Brien and his merry band of nutjobs won't be happy. I think if you'd said the Tories would be close to no change over 12 months on from the election they would have bitten your hand off.
Though plenty of very odd jobs indeed in his cabinet.
There were these ridiculous situations where they were sending tests from North Wales to South Wales, rather than just to Liverpool / Manchester way, because had to use a public lab in Wales.
Also, do you need to leave the house to apply for a postal vote? The forms are downloadable, though I suppose note everyone can print them out. But could they not send the forms to people on request, or the government could provide funds to supply everyone with a postal vote automatically?
Polling stations is likely to be a bigger issue. My council sent out a questionnaire about availability a few weeks ago, but I don't know the response level they have had. I imagine fewer than willing to do the count, as polling station duty is an arse.
Anyway, she was Black, and in one passage of her letter to my sister, she talked about "the colored people" running away, or something like that, it was hard to read her writing and parts of her story were unclear to us.
Much later, realized that she was talking about the fear of Black people in the town (and in other areas occupied or invaded by Confederates during the , that the Confederates would seize them and haul them back to "old Virginny" and sell them into slavery.
Can still remember our family marveling at the fact that we were in touch with a living link to the Civil War. And we didn't know the half of it. Think of what she could have told us IF we'd had the sense to ask her.
I utterly reject their views
You reference to a satirical comment I made months ago is stale
I suspect if he screws up the vaccination program, then that will be noticed.
Perhaps not by Mr "Round the Clock Vaccinations", but certainly by families waiting for jabs for taid a nain.
His trusted lieutenant Shadow Chancellor literally called for the lynching of a female MP and that didn't get the blinking of an eye. Throughout the whole antisemitism mess he had to be dragged kicking and screaming to get rid of anyone who went well beyond the pale - anyone he could keep he did.
Had it been Seumas Milne that had gone to Barnard Castle then I don't think for one second Corbyn would have sacked him.
https://twitter.com/Patterico/status/1349051166621986818
Four to Six months doesn't seem long to wait. Like WWII we don't necessarily need to wait until everything is completely eliminated, especially overseas, but until its safe in this country seems smart to do.
I never understood that particular stupidity. Why would you pretend to be an even worse player than you actually were?
Of course some were innocent but we knew those who would try to get away with it
Do people go canvassing during a stay at home order?
Do people deliver leaflets while some are still self-isolating?
Just because something can be done doesn't mean it should be done. Delay a few months and there can be a proper election with a proper campaign in the autumn. Do it now and its going to be a joke, even more than local elections normally are.
Has been a while since I applied for a postal ballot, but don't you need to send in a sample signature for the later verification process?
And I have a postal vote anyway
On the latter I don't know either, the form requires a signature, but if they send the application forms out well ahead of elections instead of a vote? People can return those maybe.
It seems doable.
At the least by-elections have to be permitted again.
However, match play is still very enjoyable but played much less
By Autumn winter flu season will be back, if we are unlucky we could be seeing mutations of the virus again which the vaccines may be less effective against etc. It makes no sense to postpone the elections to the Autumn, though I agree they could be mainly postal.
There are options. Democracy is important.
Remember this is two sets of elections being fought.
This time we had plenty of time to develop contingency plans. Elections are important, not a distraction to be swept aside. We should be making the effort to work out how best to hold them.
I don't see how that's advantageous over waiting a couple of months and then doing it properly.
Arguing it shouldn't be risked and can wait a few more months makes more sense that complaining about the campaigning. As well as the idea they cannot speak to people during their term and thus it'll be 'years'.
And local elections are not a joke.
That’s... brave
If you eliminate all local campaigning for the local elections then what are you going to be left with? Is it just going to be national campaigning with Boris and Starmer etc - and then that's that? For the local elections?
When we could postpone by about 16-20 weeks and do the entire thing properly?