Except every one of you railing against promoting our being number one would be screaming "useless fuckers!!" if we were in the relegation zone.
We know you would.
And heaven help us if Scotland were more successful in getting its population vaccinated than England. That wouldn't be a contest where you'd be chanting "Scotland's number one, Scotland's number one." No sirreeeee.....
Triggered..
Lazy.
He's saying 'Triggered' a lot because he himself has been triggered over the fact this is a wholehearted British success story, and so he wants to draw others onto his own territory instead.
Scottish Nationalists know that if they were in the EU they'd (still) be waiting for a vaccine, rather than benefiting from the UK Government's foresightedness and superb pharmaceutical industry, hence the attacks.
He feels vulnerable.
Ooh, I love a bit of amateur psychology in the morning!
My amateur diagnosis is that having a pretty pishy go at someone in the third person via a third party shows you’re a bit of a fearty.
So are you triggered by him being triggered that your triggered by him being triggered by..... ?
I'd put money on his having been driven out there, dropped off for a cycle round, and then driven back. Why he didn't go somewhere nearer like Hyde Park, who can say. Whatever, it's what police across the country are trying to stop people doing, otherwise popular spots will become crowded (as and when it ever stops raining)
The Police have no right to be stopping people from doing legal activities.
If the Government had made this activity illegal it might be a story.
Morning all. Yep, most Leavers should be happy. It's harder for people and things to come here from Europe now. Brexit meant Brexit.
On an unrelated matter I made the effort to get to Morrisons early and gosh it paid dividends. The place was almost deserted - therefore easy to stay well away from other flesh & blood units who could be carrying the mutant variant.
The upshot is I was able to do my shopping for essentials - such as midget gems - in a calm, considered manner rather than feeling shit scared and hurtling around like a headless chicken and a blue arsed fly.
Teesside? Barnard Castle is on the banks of the Tees...
Moving the civil service there would be a delicious final twist of the knife for Cummings! They turned it into the punchline of a thousand gags - then "welcome to your new home....".
I'd put money on his having been driven out there, dropped off for a cycle round, and then driven back. Why he didn't go somewhere nearer like Hyde Park, who can say. Whatever, it's what police across the country are trying to stop people doing, otherwise popular spots will become crowded (as and when it ever stops raining)
The Police have no right to be stopping people from doing legal activities.
If the Government had made this activity illegal it might be a story.
But the police have treated it as if it was illegal.
Oh and made coffee by itself a substantial meal - given that coffee = a picnic
Teesside? Barnard Castle is on the banks of the Tees...
Rumour has it, it's Darlington or at Teesside airport.
Darlington has the advantage that it's close to posher places in North Yorkshire than say Boro and has excellent connection options (East Coast mainline, motorway and an airport).
I'd put money on his having been driven out there, dropped off for a cycle round, and then driven back. Why he didn't go somewhere nearer like Hyde Park, who can say. Whatever, it's what police across the country are trying to stop people doing, otherwise popular spots will become crowded (as and when it ever stops raining)
The Police have no right to be stopping people from doing legal activities.
If the Government had made this activity illegal it might be a story.
Quite right. The only way I would derive satisfaction from senior government ministers suffering at the hands of police whilst exercising their legal rights would be if the political messaging had been in such a state of confused flux that few people really knew what they were supposed to do or avoid doing.
Luckily for the country, that is far from the situation.
"Perry, who has appeared for the British government at the European Court of Human Rights, would bring a valuable perspective to the case, said Poon, who expected the trial to feature precedents from the European court and tribunals from other common law jurisdictions."
The 'valuable perspective' being that it helps Beijing make its repressive and authoritarian patriotic laws look like they're on a par with human rights law, and standard common law.
Perry is being used for propaganda purposes.
Either he's naïve, and his ego has got the better of him, or he's being made so much money he doesn't care.
Who do we think the holy 17 Republican Senators might be then?
I've seen two definites on here this morning, and three more probables.
The rest?
(PS. Success also depends on Pelosi and her acolytes making this all about America and her constitution, with precisely zero partisan attacks on the Reps and Democrat grandstanding - I'm not holding my breath on that.)
Much as it would be satisfying to see Trump impeached I'd prefer him to be free to stand in 2024.
It would cause a major headache for the GOP, the primaries will tear them apart. If he wins I think the Democrats will walk it and if he loses he will probably go on to stand as an independent and the Democrats will walk it.
The GOP really is stuck between a rock and a hard place and that's exactly where they deserve to be for not standing up to Trump till it was too late.
I'd put money on his having been driven out there, dropped off for a cycle round, and then driven back. Why he didn't go somewhere nearer like Hyde Park, who can say. Whatever, it's what police across the country are trying to stop people doing, otherwise popular spots will become crowded (as and when it ever stops raining)
The Police have no right to be stopping people from doing legal activities.
If the Government had made this activity illegal it might be a story.
Quite right. The only way I would derive satisfaction from senior government ministers suffering at the hands of police whilst exercising their legal rights would be if the political messaging had been in such a state of confused flux that few people really knew what they were supposed to do or avoid doing.
Luckily for the country, that is far from the situation.
Oh, and when I say "far from", I mean exactly seven miles away.
Morning all. Yep, most Leavers should be happy. It's harder for people and things to come here from Europe now. Brexit meant Brexit.
On an unrelated matter I made the effort to get to Morrisons early and gosh it paid dividends. The place was almost deserted - therefore easy to stay well away from other flesh & blood units who could be carrying the mutant variant.
The upshot is I was able to do my shopping for essentials - such as midget gems - in a calm, considered manner rather than feeling shit scared and hurtling around like a headless chicken and a blue arsed fly.
Except every one of you railing against promoting our being number one would be screaming "useless fuckers!!" if we were in the relegation zone.
We know you would.
And heaven help us if Scotland were more successful in getting its population vaccinated than England. That wouldn't be a contest where you'd be chanting "Scotland's number one, Scotland's number one." No sirreeeee.....
Triggered..
Lazy.
He's saying 'Triggered' a lot because he himself has been triggered over the fact this is a wholehearted British success story, and so he wants to draw others onto his own territory instead.
Scottish Nationalists know that if they were in the EU they'd (still) be waiting for a vaccine, rather than benefiting from the UK Government's foresightedness and superb pharmaceutical industry, hence the attacks.
He feels vulnerable.
Ooh, I love a bit of amateur psychology in the morning!
My amateur diagnosis is that having a pretty pishy go at someone in the third person via a third party shows you’re a bit of a fearty.
So are you triggered by him being triggered that your triggered by him being triggered by..... ?
"Telling us what is infectious and dangerous Friends and enemies, they find us contagerous I was looking back to see If you were sufficiently triggered to be looking back at me To see me, triggered, looking back at you"
Morning all. Yep, most Leavers should be happy. It's harder for people and things to come here from Europe now. Brexit meant Brexit.
On an unrelated matter I made the effort to get to Morrisons early and gosh it paid dividends. The place was almost deserted - therefore easy to stay well away from other flesh & blood units who could be carrying the mutant variant.
The upshot is I was able to do my shopping for essentials - such as midget gems - in a calm, considered manner rather than feeling shit scared and hurtling around like a headless chicken and a blue arsed fly.
"I was able to do my shopping for essentials - such as midget gems - in a calm, considered manner".
It is an honour to have Alan Bennett posting here.
Who do we think the holy 17 Republican Senators might be then?
I've seen two definites on here this morning, and three more probables.
The rest?
(PS. Success also depends on Pelosi and her acolytes making this all about America and her constitution, with precisely zero partisan attacks on the Reps and Democrat grandstanding - I'm not holding my breath on that.)
Much as it would be satisfying to see Trump impeached I'd prefer him to be free to stand in 2024.
It would cause a major headache for the GOP, the primaries will tear them apart. If he wins I think the Democrats will walk it and if he loses he will probably go on to stand as an independent and the Democrats will walk it.
The GOP really is stuck between a rock and a hard place and that's exactly where they deserve to be for not standing up to Trump till it was too late.
Yep - when you look at the future prospects it's actually better to cut Trump and his family permanently away otherwise the wound will just fester.
I'd put money on his having been driven out there, dropped off for a cycle round, and then driven back. Why he didn't go somewhere nearer like Hyde Park, who can say. Whatever, it's what police across the country are trying to stop people doing, otherwise popular spots will become crowded (as and when it ever stops raining)
The Police have no right to be stopping people from doing legal activities.
If the Government had made this activity illegal it might be a story.
But the police have treated it as if it was illegal.
Oh and made coffee by itself a substantial meal - given that coffee = a picnic
Did the Police start setting the law instead of Parliament?
Seems like a reason to criticise the Police for overstepping not for lawmakers for following the actual law.
The law no more says you can only exercise within walking distance of your house than it says you can only shop walking distance of your house.
The Wikipedia article is hilariously musty: "The Bullers were an old Cornish family, long seated at Morval in Cornwall until their removal to Downes." "By his wife he had issue an only child and daughter:"
Quite a lot of out of the way Wikipedia articles start as copy and pasta from Britannica 1911 edition.
Who do we think the holy 17 Republican Senators might be then?
I've seen two definites on here this morning, and three more probables.
The rest?
(PS. Success also depends on Pelosi and her acolytes making this all about America and her constitution, with precisely zero partisan attacks on the Reps and Democrat grandstanding - I'm not holding my breath on that.)
Much as it would be satisfying to see Trump impeached I'd prefer him to be free to stand in 2024.
It would cause a major headache for the GOP, the primaries will tear them apart. If he wins I think the Democrats will walk it and if he loses he will probably go on to stand as an independent and the Democrats will walk it.
The GOP really is stuck between a rock and a hard place and that's exactly where they deserve to be for not standing up to Trump till it was too late.
No, this goes beyond partisan advantage.
I've come round to impeachment in the last few days. The Rubicon has been crossed and I think it's better if both sides bilaterally impeach him.
I'd put money on his having been driven out there, dropped off for a cycle round, and then driven back. Why he didn't go somewhere nearer like Hyde Park, who can say. Whatever, it's what police across the country are trying to stop people doing, otherwise popular spots will become crowded (as and when it ever stops raining)
The Police have no right to be stopping people from doing legal activities.
If the Government had made this activity illegal it might be a story.
But the police have treated it as if it was illegal.
Oh and made coffee by itself a substantial meal - given that coffee = a picnic
The same police who sit in a nice warm cafe eating a full English day after day ... All I want is that those who set the rules, those that police the rules and those celebrities who pass opinion on others actually follow the bloody rules themselves.
I'd put money on his having been driven out there, dropped off for a cycle round, and then driven back. Why he didn't go somewhere nearer like Hyde Park, who can say. Whatever, it's what police across the country are trying to stop people doing, otherwise popular spots will become crowded (as and when it ever stops raining)
Surely it was a 21 minute cycle ride there for Muscles Johnson
It’s possible to wonder whether we’d now have the highest Covid-19 death rate of any major country if we hadn’t been led by ardent Brexiteers. I know we’re ahead on the vaccine front. But the vaccine won’t start to have any effect of the death rate for a good few weeks. And in the meantime our rate of Covid deaths will remain relatively the highest of comparable nations (save, possibly, Italy).
Who do we think the holy 17 Republican Senators might be then?
I've seen two definites on here this morning, and three more probables.
The rest?
(PS. Success also depends on Pelosi and her acolytes making this all about America and her constitution, with precisely zero partisan attacks on the Reps and Democrat grandstanding - I'm not holding my breath on that.)
Much as it would be satisfying to see Trump impeached I'd prefer him to be free to stand in 2024.
It would cause a major headache for the GOP, the primaries will tear them apart. If he wins I think the Democrats will walk it and if he loses he will probably go on to stand as an independent and the Democrats will walk it.
The GOP really is stuck between a rock and a hard place and that's exactly where they deserve to be for not standing up to Trump till it was too late.
CNN suggesting a self pardon and pardons for his sons are looking increasingly likely.
I'd put money on his having been driven out there, dropped off for a cycle round, and then driven back. Why he didn't go somewhere nearer like Hyde Park, who can say. Whatever, it's what police across the country are trying to stop people doing, otherwise popular spots will become crowded (as and when it ever stops raining)
The Police have no right to be stopping people from doing legal activities.
If the Government had made this activity illegal it might be a story.
But the police have treated it as if it was illegal.
Oh and made coffee by itself a substantial meal - given that coffee = a picnic
Did the Police start setting the law instead of Parliament?
Seems like a reason to criticise the Police for overstepping not for lawmakers for following the actual law.
The law no more says you can only exercise within walking distance of your house than it says you can only shop walking distance of your house.
The official guidance is that: You can continue to exercise alone, with one other person or with your household or support bubble. This should be limited to once per day, and you should not travel outside your local area. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/national-lockdown-stay-at-home
Who do we think the holy 17 Republican Senators might be then?
I've seen two definites on here this morning, and three more probables.
The rest?
(PS. Success also depends on Pelosi and her acolytes making this all about America and her constitution, with precisely zero partisan attacks on the Reps and Democrat grandstanding - I'm not holding my breath on that.)
I doubt we'll get 17 but will be pleasantly surprised.
I love the idea that if it fails it is Pelosi's fault.
Rather than work behind the scenes with Republican senators first, and line them up first before going public, she decided to initiate it herself at a mini press conference and threaten unilateral Democrat action unless the Republicans fell into line. She knows full well that it will start in the House almost automatically due to the Dems being in control and only a simply majority needed, but it's the Senate where it actually happens. And she needs the Republicans on side.
Of course I give some blame to Pelosi. I also blame numbskull Republican Senators too, but given she knows that she has (yet again) played the ultra-partisan game for which she's well-known rather than act skilfully and constructively to build an alliance in the greater interests of the republic and its constitution.
I simply don't buy that. The Republican Senate has enabled Trump for the last four years, and they needed publicly to be put on the spot over this. The signs were many of them would otherwise have sat on their hands.
Pretending a consensus which doesn't exist is just ridiculous - and in any event, once it reaches the Senate, it is completely out of Pelosi's hands.
That's not how politics works. You need to do the deal behind the scenes and present a united front on a subject such as this. If she'd tried and then failed, she could then go public - sure - but she's decided to proceed with an ultimatum. And the jurisdiction thing is a cop-out. She sits in the Capitol and is perfectly able to speak to both the majority and minority leaders in the Senate, as well as swing senators, and discuss the whole process.
She's as aggressive and partisan as many Republicans, and playing to her base just as they are.
Morning all. Yep, most Leavers should be happy. It's harder for people and things to come here from Europe now. Brexit meant Brexit.
On an unrelated matter I made the effort to get to Morrisons early and gosh it paid dividends. The place was almost deserted - therefore easy to stay well away from other flesh & blood units who could be carrying the mutant variant.
The upshot is I was able to do my shopping for essentials - such as midget gems - in a calm, considered manner rather than feeling shit scared and hurtling around like a headless chicken and a blue arsed fly.
Isn`t "midget gems" a niche porn site?
Own up all of you who actually tried to look it up
Teesside? Barnard Castle is on the banks of the Tees...
Rumour has it, it's Darlington or at Teesside airport.
Darlington has the advantage that it's close to posher places in North Yorkshire than say Boro and has excellent connection options (East Coast mainline, motorway and an airport).
Darlington's also on a direct route to London (first via the east coast mainline, later via hs2 part 2 east)
Why do you think I live there - also house prices are dirt cheap because the council actually and continually builds them - there is a mile of houses between where I live and the motorway that was fields when we moved here 20 years ago.
Annoyingly that does mean I haven't profited from the house price inflation elsewhere in the country.
Teesside? Barnard Castle is on the banks of the Tees...
I'm not convinced. New Labour created a lot of civil service jobs in the British regions. The problem was the weak private sector. And civil servants should think nationally, it ought not to matter where they are based. It's as if we have surrendered to provincialism because we are no longer capable of thinking on a UK wide basis.
Treasury north? What about Treasury Midlands? Treasury Cornwall? Treasury Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (admittedly they have a degree of devolution). Ed Miliband was much maligned but he at least tried to invoke the concept of one nation. Maybe he was actually quite good at seeing problems coming down the road.
I'd put money on his having been driven out there, dropped off for a cycle round, and then driven back. Why he didn't go somewhere nearer like Hyde Park, who can say. Whatever, it's what police across the country are trying to stop people doing, otherwise popular spots will become crowded (as and when it ever stops raining)
The Police have no right to be stopping people from doing legal activities.
If the Government had made this activity illegal it might be a story.
But the police have treated it as if it was illegal.
Oh and made coffee by itself a substantial meal - given that coffee = a picnic
The same police who sit in a nice warm cafe eating a full English day after day ... All I want is that those who set the rules, those that police the rules and those celebrities who pass opinion on others actually follow the bloody rules themselves.
Obviously that seems to much to ask for
Hmm the police will all be working together undistanced & with the public generally so are probably at a higher risk of catching covid so scientifically they're probably not doing any further harm breaking the rules by having a fry up together. Legally however...
Except every one of you railing against promoting our being number one would be screaming "useless fuckers!!" if we were in the relegation zone.
We know you would.
And heaven help us if Scotland were more successful in getting its population vaccinated than England. That wouldn't be a contest where you'd be chanting "Scotland's number one, Scotland's number one." No sirreeeee.....
Triggered..
Lazy.
He's saying 'Triggered' a lot because he himself has been triggered over the fact this is a wholehearted British success story, and so he wants to draw others onto his own territory instead.
Scottish Nationalists know that if they were in the EU they'd (still) be waiting for a vaccine, rather than benefiting from the UK Government's foresightedness and superb pharmaceutical industry, hence the attacks.
He feels vulnerable.
Ooh, I love a bit of amateur psychology in the morning!
My amateur diagnosis is that having a pretty pishy go at someone in the third person via a third party shows you’re a bit of a fearty.
Triggered..
PB: you come for the unique insights into the evolving political landscape in the UK and beyond. You stay for the passive aggressive feuding, world-class Whataboutery and numerous hissy fits and meltdowns.
I'd put money on his having been driven out there, dropped off for a cycle round, and then driven back. Why he didn't go somewhere nearer like Hyde Park, who can say. Whatever, it's what police across the country are trying to stop people doing, otherwise popular spots will become crowded (as and when it ever stops raining)
The Police have no right to be stopping people from doing legal activities.
If the Government had made this activity illegal it might be a story.
But the police have treated it as if it was illegal.
Oh and made coffee by itself a substantial meal - given that coffee = a picnic
Did the Police start setting the law instead of Parliament?
Seems like a reason to criticise the Police for overstepping not for lawmakers for following the actual law.
The law no more says you can only exercise within walking distance of your house than it says you can only shop walking distance of your house.
The official guidance is that: You can continue to exercise alone, with one other person or with your household or support bubble. This should be limited to once per day, and you should not travel outside your local area. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/national-lockdown-stay-at-home
He lives in London, he was exercising in a park in London. Local.
My most local part of town only has a Co-op, is that the only place I'm permitted to shop? If I want to go shopping in the Asda at the other side of town instead then am I in breach of the law? Since that's in a different Council.
The Wikipedia article is hilariously musty: "The Bullers were an old Cornish family, long seated at Morval in Cornwall until their removal to Downes." "By his wife he had issue an only child and daughter:"
Quite a lot of out of the way Wikipedia articles start as copy and pasta from Britannica 1911 edition.
I don't doubt it. But did people really speak like that in 1911? I have a sense that those sentences probably sounded mouldy even a hundred years ago.
Agree with Dan on this. In the end, only one GOP member of the House voted for the (milder) resolution requesting Pence to act. Republicans will generally do just enough to give themselves an "ultimately a good guy" ticket, while arguing that anything substantive would be distressingly divisive, time to move on, etc
It might change a few months down the line if Trump really pushes the "leader in exile" thing and starts demanding primary deselection for everyone except his loyalists. There would come a point when Republicans decide he needs to be squashed - but right now they reckon they can get away "Hey, he'll be gone this month, let's not aggravate things further". It's even arguable that they're right in terms of US political stability, not creating martyrs etc.
If he is impeached and found guilty he cannot run for president again. That`s the big plus - at least from many perspectives. Looking at it from the perspective of the Dem Party, however, it would be good for them if Trump did run again wouldn`t it?
Maybe, maybe not.
Trump has the diehard fans who will turnout to vote for him no matter what that Pence or Cruz or Haley would not have if they were the GOP nominee in 2024 instead of him, however they also have fewer voters who would turn out to vote against them than Trump would, except maybe Cruz.
Trump's a goner but a Dem dream scenario for 24 could be a 3rd party run from somebody endorsed by him. Such a person imo would have to have the surname Trump. I don't see it myself but it can't be ruled out.
But I'm not thinking that much about Trump any more. Not my focus. What I'm thinking about is Dominic Raab. How popular is he, would you say, with the Tory grassroots?
The Wikipedia article is hilariously musty: "The Bullers were an old Cornish family, long seated at Morval in Cornwall until their removal to Downes." "By his wife he had issue an only child and daughter:"
Quite a lot of out of the way Wikipedia articles start as copy and pasta from Britannica 1911 edition.
I don't doubt it. But did people really speak like that in 1911? I have a sense that those sentences probably sounded mouldy even a hundred years ago.
It’s possible to wonder whether we’d now have the highest Covid-19 death rate of any major country if we hadn’t been led by ardent Brexiteers. I know we’re ahead on the vaccine front. But the vaccine won’t start to have any effect of the death rate for a good few weeks. And in the meantime our rate of Covid deaths will remain relatively the highest of comparable nations (save, possibly, Italy).
Perhaps you can tell us what a different set of politicians would have done ?
Would they have been more willing to restrict international travel ?
Would they have made the UK less dependent upon imported PPE ?
Would they have stopped the NHS from sending patients back to care homes untested ?
Would they have reduced the levels of obese slobery ?
Would they have reduced the level of overcrowded or multi-generational housing ?
The answers to those seem to be No, No, No, No and No.
But they might have signed up to the EU's vaccine scheme, the EU's ventilator scheme and the EU's PPE scheme.
On the header, may we do an alternative version which is "Have Remain's prophecies on what would happen under Brexit actually occurred?"
How many 0/10's do you want?
Well, from a quick look at the controversial government leaflet urging a remain vote:
- If the UK voted to leave the EU, the resulting economic shock would put pressure on the value of the pound, which would risk higher prices of some household goods and damage living standards. -- £ did fall. Did we see much in the way of inflation?
- Millions of UK citizens travel to Europe each year. The EU has made this easier and cheaper. -- There has been much reduced travel following Brexit, some people may however claim other factors at play in this
- From next year, mobile phone roaming charges will be abolished across the EU, saving UK customers up to 38p per minute on calls. -- This may well not have happened had we been outwith the EU. So far no sign of roaming charge coming back though?
- EU membership also gives UK citizens travelling in other European countries the right to access free or cheaper public healthcare. -- EHIC is dead, long live the GHIC (but a bit sketchy on the details of that as yet and the costs to UK)
- Voting to leave the EU would create years of uncertainty and potential economic disruption. This would reduce investment and cost jobs. -- Years of uncertainty definitely true. Also, first year post-Brexit poor for jobs. Again, naysayers may suggest there are other reasons for that
- The Government judges it could result in 10 years or more of uncertainty -- Only 4.5 really, although still some uncertainty now on things
- A more limited trade deal with the EU would give the UK less access to the Single Market than we have now – including for services, which make up almost 80% of the UK economy. -- Current deal not that good for services, I think?
- Some argue that leaving the EU would give us more freedom to limit immigration. -- It clearly does. Remains to be seen how that freedom is used
- EU membership means you and your family have the right to live, work or study abroad in any of the 27 other member countries. -- Automatic rights lost, obviously.
Dear God, it really was an awful leaflet wasn't it? I don't think I read it at the time, otherwise I might have voted leave!
Except every one of you railing against promoting our being number one would be screaming "useless fuckers!!" if we were in the relegation zone.
We know you would.
And heaven help us if Scotland were more successful in getting its population vaccinated than England. That wouldn't be a contest where you'd be chanting "Scotland's number one, Scotland's number one." No sirreeeee.....
Triggered..
Lazy.
He's saying 'Triggered' a lot because he himself has been triggered over the fact this is a wholehearted British success story, and so he wants to draw others onto his own territory instead.
Scottish Nationalists know that if they were in the EU they'd (still) be waiting for a vaccine, rather than benefiting from the UK Government's foresightedness and superb pharmaceutical industry, hence the attacks.
He feels vulnerable.
Ooh, I love a bit of amateur psychology in the morning!
My amateur diagnosis is that having a pretty pishy go at someone in the third person via a third party shows you’re a bit of a fearty.
Triggered..
PB: you come for the unique insights into the evolving political landscape in the UK and beyond. You stay for the passive aggressive feuding, world-class Whataboutery and numerous hissy fits and meltdowns.
You forgot the top-notch puns....
Also advice on fashion in trainers. And being on the ground floor for pizza topping related extremism.
Agree with Dan on this. In the end, only one GOP member of the House voted for the (milder) resolution requesting Pence to act. Republicans will generally do just enough to give themselves an "ultimately a good guy" ticket, while arguing that anything substantive would be distressingly divisive, time to move on, etc
It might change a few months down the line if Trump really pushes the "leader in exile" thing and starts demanding primary deselection for everyone except his loyalists. There would come a point when Republicans decide he needs to be squashed - but right now they reckon they can get away "Hey, he'll be gone this month, let's not aggravate things further". It's even arguable that they're right in terms of US political stability, not creating martyrs etc.
If he is impeached and found guilty he cannot run for president again. That`s the big plus - at least from many perspectives. Looking at it from the perspective of the Dem Party, however, it would be good for them if Trump did run again wouldn`t it?
Maybe, maybe not.
Trump has the diehard fans who will turnout to vote for him no matter what that Pence or Cruz or Haley would not have if they were the GOP nominee in 2024 instead of him, however they also have fewer voters who would turn out to vote against them than Trump would, except maybe Cruz.
Trump's a goner but a Dem dream scenario for 24 could be a 3rd party run from somebody endorsed by him. Such a person imo would have to have the surname Trump. I don't see it myself but it can't be ruled out.
But I'm not thinking that much about Trump any more. Not my focus. What I'm thinking about is Dominic Raab. How popular is he, would you say, with the Tory grassroots?
That would be Don Jnr v Biden or Harris v Pence most likely.
The Tories won an election saying they would sign a deal which was clearly going to deliver this outcome. They then signed the deal. It seems a bit late to be moaning that they are getting what they voted for.
The more troublesome problem for the Tories is the sell out of the fishermen which is not going down well in the fishing areas. Fishermen have not only been given the catch they believe they were told they would get but they are also seeing stocks going to rot as the mountain of paperwork leaves their main market effectively closed to them.
That's the government's problem. They have delivered roughly the Vote Leave plan from 2016. Their problem is that at least some of the problems (foreseeable, foreseen, confidently denied) look like coming in as well.
In 1990, the Conservative government delivered on its manifesto commitment to introduce the Community Charge. That delivery did not work out to their advantage, even as it was reversed.
And if Johnson's Brexit turns out to be a temporary aberration, the long term costs will be bigger. Some of the lost business won't return, even if the UK did return to the EU...
The UK won't return to the EU, and by trying to inflate that particular mental dinghy, you're just making yourself feel worse.
I'd put money on his having been driven out there, dropped off for a cycle round, and then driven back. Why he didn't go somewhere nearer like Hyde Park, who can say. Whatever, it's what police across the country are trying to stop people doing, otherwise popular spots will become crowded (as and when it ever stops raining)
The Police have no right to be stopping people from doing legal activities.
If the Government had made this activity illegal it might be a story.
But the police have treated it as if it was illegal.
Oh and made coffee by itself a substantial meal - given that coffee = a picnic
The same police who sit in a nice warm cafe eating a full English day after day ... All I want is that those who set the rules, those that police the rules and those celebrities who pass opinion on others actually follow the bloody rules themselves.
Obviously that seems to much to ask for
Hmm the police will all be working together undistanced & with the public generally so are probably at a higher risk of catching covid so scientifically they're probably not doing any further harm breaking the rules by having a fry up together. Legally however...
If you want people to follow you have to lead - you do not lead by ignoring the rules if it suits you but still expect others to follow them.
Who do we think the holy 17 Republican Senators might be then?
I've seen two definites on here this morning, and three more probables.
The rest?
(PS. Success also depends on Pelosi and her acolytes making this all about America and her constitution, with precisely zero partisan attacks on the Reps and Democrat grandstanding - I'm not holding my breath on that.)
Much as it would be satisfying to see Trump impeached I'd prefer him to be free to stand in 2024.
It would cause a major headache for the GOP, the primaries will tear them apart. If he wins I think the Democrats will walk it and if he loses he will probably go on to stand as an independent and the Democrats will walk it.
The GOP really is stuck between a rock and a hard place and that's exactly where they deserve to be for not standing up to Trump till it was too late.
No, this goes beyond partisan advantage.
I've come round to impeachment in the last few days. The Rubicon has been crossed and I think it's better if both sides bilaterally impeach him.
Ideally 100-0.
That is not going to happen - half the GOP members of Congress still back him and therein lies their problem.
You would have thought by now that now that every GOP member could see that he should be impeached but last week well over half of GOP Congressman voted to try to overturn the presidential election result despite there being not a shred of evidence to support it.
Trump and his loony core have got the GOP by the balls and they are going to find it a hell of a job to shake them off. It's no less than they deserve.
Who do we think the holy 17 Republican Senators might be then?
I've seen two definites on here this morning, and three more probables.
The rest?
(PS. Success also depends on Pelosi and her acolytes making this all about America and her constitution, with precisely zero partisan attacks on the Reps and Democrat grandstanding - I'm not holding my breath on that.)
Much as it would be satisfying to see Trump impeached I'd prefer him to be free to stand in 2024.
It would cause a major headache for the GOP, the primaries will tear them apart. If he wins I think the Democrats will walk it and if he loses he will probably go on to stand as an independent and the Democrats will walk it.
The GOP really is stuck between a rock and a hard place and that's exactly where they deserve to be for not standing up to Trump till it was too late.
While I agree with your logic and while I prefer a Democrat led USA, I would prefer a sane GOP with Donald and his band in jail. I do not fear a GOP with people like Reagan, Bush, McCain, Romney in the higher echelons of it and it will ensure the Democrats remain a liberal party (liberal in the traditional definition) and not move to the left (which I don't think would happen anyway as that really isn't in the mentality of the US population).
Morning all. Yep, most Leavers should be happy. It's harder for people and things to come here from Europe now. Brexit meant Brexit.
On an unrelated matter I made the effort to get to Morrisons early and gosh it paid dividends. The place was almost deserted - therefore easy to stay well away from other flesh & blood units who could be carrying the mutant variant.
The upshot is I was able to do my shopping for essentials - such as midget gems - in a calm, considered manner rather than feeling shit scared and hurtling around like a headless chicken and a blue arsed fly.
Isn`t "midget gems" a niche porn site?
Places your mind goes. But, yes, I suppose it's bound to be. Not for me though. For me, in loco cigarettibus.
Who do we think the holy 17 Republican Senators might be then?
I've seen two definites on here this morning, and three more probables.
The rest?
(PS. Success also depends on Pelosi and her acolytes making this all about America and her constitution, with precisely zero partisan attacks on the Reps and Democrat grandstanding - I'm not holding my breath on that.)
I doubt we'll get 17 but will be pleasantly surprised.
I love the idea that if it fails it is Pelosi's fault.
Rather than work behind the scenes with Republican senators first, and line them up first before going public, she decided to initiate it herself at a mini press conference and threaten unilateral Democrat action unless the Republicans fell into line. She knows full well that it will start in the House almost automatically due to the Dems being in control and only a simply majority needed, but it's the Senate where it actually happens. And she needs the Republicans on side.
Of course I give some blame to Pelosi. I also blame numbskull Republican Senators too, but given she knows that she has (yet again) played the ultra-partisan game for which she's well-known rather than act skilfully and constructively to build an alliance in the greater interests of the republic and its constitution.
I simply don't buy that. The Republican Senate has enabled Trump for the last four years, and they needed publicly to be put on the spot over this. The signs were many of them would otherwise have sat on their hands.
Pretending a consensus which doesn't exist is just ridiculous - and in any event, once it reaches the Senate, it is completely out of Pelosi's hands.
That's not how politics works. You need to do the deal behind the scenes and present a united front on a subject such as this. If she'd tried and then failed, she could then go public - sure - but she's decided to proceed with an ultimatum. And the jurisdiction thing is a cop-out. She sits in the Capitol and is perfectly able to speak to both the majority and minority leaders in the Senate, as well as swing senators, and discuss the whole process.
She's as aggressive and partisan as many Republicans, and playing to her base just as they are.
It's a real problem the USA has.
Given how quickly not only Romney but Murkowski too have backed impeachment, with Sasse and others showing they're open to the idea ... And Cheney being in favour too ... And now even McConnell being open to it too ... I think more conversations have been had than you're giving it credit for.
Quite possibly having hundreds of politicians sheltering together in bipartisan fear of their own lives as a rampaging mob set upon them by the President is chanting about killing leaders of their own party was enough to get them to set aside partisanship.
Except every one of you railing against promoting our being number one would be screaming "useless fuckers!!" if we were in the relegation zone.
We know you would.
And heaven help us if Scotland were more successful in getting its population vaccinated than England. That wouldn't be a contest where you'd be chanting "Scotland's number one, Scotland's number one." No sirreeeee.....
Triggered..
Lazy.
He's saying 'Triggered' a lot because he himself has been triggered over the fact this is a wholehearted British success story, and so he wants to draw others onto his own territory instead.
Scottish Nationalists know that if they were in the EU they'd (still) be waiting for a vaccine, rather than benefiting from the UK Government's foresightedness and superb pharmaceutical industry, hence the attacks.
He feels vulnerable.
Ooh, I love a bit of amateur psychology in the morning!
My amateur diagnosis is that having a pretty pishy go at someone in the third person via a third party shows you’re a bit of a fearty.
So are you triggered by him being triggered that your triggered by him being triggered by..... ?
Thank you for your generous urge to enlighten and educate, but I’ve read the piece several times over the years.
I’d say Orwell’s many acute points are somewhat blunted by his inclination to distinguish between patriotism (a quality apparently of ordinary English people) and nationalism (a vice of the English intelligentsia); there seems to me a kind of sentimentality in that. Also Orwell’s reluctance to distinguish between England and Britain/the UK (not uncommon then or now) is uncharacteristically imprecise.
I'd put money on his having been driven out there, dropped off for a cycle round, and then driven back. Why he didn't go somewhere nearer like Hyde Park, who can say. Whatever, it's what police across the country are trying to stop people doing, otherwise popular spots will become crowded (as and when it ever stops raining)
The Police have no right to be stopping people from doing legal activities.
If the Government had made this activity illegal it might be a story.
But the police have treated it as if it was illegal.
Oh and made coffee by itself a substantial meal - given that coffee = a picnic
Did the Police start setting the law instead of Parliament?
Seems like a reason to criticise the Police for overstepping not for lawmakers for following the actual law.
The law no more says you can only exercise within walking distance of your house than it says you can only shop walking distance of your house.
The official guidance is that: You can continue to exercise alone, with one other person or with your household or support bubble. This should be limited to once per day, and you should not travel outside your local area. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/national-lockdown-stay-at-home
Guidance is not the law.
The police can only enforce the law. They can only fine you for breaches of the law.
Unless the law says that exercise is limited to once a day you are perfectly entitled to go out for two walks a day. And then go out to do your shopping.
The common-sense thing to do is to make sure that when you go out you limit as far as possible your interaction with other people since it is the interaction which spreads the virus not simply being outside.
So if that means driving away from crowded streets to a remoter area to exercise that is more sensible than walking up and down a street outside your home with other people doing the same.
Who do we think the holy 17 Republican Senators might be then?
I've seen two definites on here this morning, and three more probables.
The rest?
(PS. Success also depends on Pelosi and her acolytes making this all about America and her constitution, with precisely zero partisan attacks on the Reps and Democrat grandstanding - I'm not holding my breath on that.)
Much as it would be satisfying to see Trump impeached I'd prefer him to be free to stand in 2024.
It would cause a major headache for the GOP, the primaries will tear them apart. If he wins I think the Democrats will walk it and if he loses he will probably go on to stand as an independent and the Democrats will walk it.
The GOP really is stuck between a rock and a hard place and that's exactly where they deserve to be for not standing up to Trump till it was too late.
No, this goes beyond partisan advantage.
I've come round to impeachment in the last few days. The Rubicon has been crossed and I think it's better if both sides bilaterally impeach him.
Ideally 100-0.
It's interesting that you've come to that conclusion. From the standpoint of only a passing interest - after all they are a foreign country, and it's really none of my business how they treat their Presidents, it seems like a remarkably pointless idea.
Having been doing other things for a bit, I have had a quick scan back and seen the 'flag' posts. I'm not a Conservative, never have, never (as far as I can see) will, but credit where it's due, buying the vaccineS was a very good move indeed. Having the infrastructure, including the national database of just about everyone being registered with a GP, thanks to the NHS, helps a lot, too, in the rollout.
On the header, may we do an alternative version which is "Have Remain's prophecies on what would happen under Brexit actually occurred?"
How many 0/10's do you want?
For me that is the key issue - it's all very well saying Leavers lied, but in the end I voted remain as I was convinced that the risks weren't worth it, that and I didn't really want to associate myself with Farage and his queues at the border nonsense.
As usual I suppose the truth lies somewhere in the middle.
It’s possible to wonder whether we’d now have the highest Covid-19 death rate of any major country if we hadn’t been led by ardent Brexiteers. I know we’re ahead on the vaccine front. But the vaccine won’t start to have any effect of the death rate for a good few weeks. And in the meantime our rate of Covid deaths will remain relatively the highest of comparable nations (save, possibly, Italy).
Perhaps you can tell us what a different set of politicians would have done ?
Would they have been more willing to restrict international travel ?
Would they have made the UK less dependent upon imported PPE ?
Would they have stopped the NHS from sending patients back to care homes untested ?
Would they have reduced the levels of obese slobery ?
Would they have reduced the level of overcrowded or multi-generational housing ?
The answers to those seem to be No, No, No, No and No.
But they might have signed up to the EU's vaccine scheme, the EU's ventilator scheme and the EU's PPE scheme.
With negative consequences from each.
Just as an aside on the care home front - the NHS still seem to be doing that
They were going to send my father back to his care home to pass away but kept him in hospital so my brother could go in to say goodbye.
Ok - his care home now has its own outbreak, but this strikes me as stupid beyond words. (Whilst understanding the NHS needs bed space)
I'd put money on his having been driven out there, dropped off for a cycle round, and then driven back. Why he didn't go somewhere nearer like Hyde Park, who can say. Whatever, it's what police across the country are trying to stop people doing, otherwise popular spots will become crowded (as and when it ever stops raining)
The Police have no right to be stopping people from doing legal activities.
If the Government had made this activity illegal it might be a story.
But the police have treated it as if it was illegal.
Oh and made coffee by itself a substantial meal - given that coffee = a picnic
Did the Police start setting the law instead of Parliament?
Seems like a reason to criticise the Police for overstepping not for lawmakers for following the actual law.
The law no more says you can only exercise within walking distance of your house than it says you can only shop walking distance of your house.
The official guidance is that: You can continue to exercise alone, with one other person or with your household or support bubble. This should be limited to once per day, and you should not travel outside your local area. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/national-lockdown-stay-at-home
Guidance is not the law.
The police can only enforce the law. They can only fine you for breaches of the law.
Unless the law says that exercise is limited to once a day you are perfectly entitled to go out for two walks a day. And then go out to do your shopping.
The common-sense thing to do is to make sure that when you go out you limit as far as possible your interaction with other people since it is the interaction which spreads the virus not simply being outside.
So if that means driving away from crowded streets to a remoter area to exercise that is more sensible than walking up and down a street outside your home with other people doing the same.
Well said. I am baffled that people (the media, some posters here) cannot understand this pretty basic point.
Continual reference back to the Derbyshire overreach doesn't help. They've rescinded the fine for those poor women, and apologised.
I'd put money on his having been driven out there, dropped off for a cycle round, and then driven back. Why he didn't go somewhere nearer like Hyde Park, who can say. Whatever, it's what police across the country are trying to stop people doing, otherwise popular spots will become crowded (as and when it ever stops raining)
The Police have no right to be stopping people from doing legal activities.
If the Government had made this activity illegal it might be a story.
But the police have treated it as if it was illegal.
Oh and made coffee by itself a substantial meal - given that coffee = a picnic
Did the Police start setting the law instead of Parliament?
Seems like a reason to criticise the Police for overstepping not for lawmakers for following the actual law.
The law no more says you can only exercise within walking distance of your house than it says you can only shop walking distance of your house.
The official guidance is that: You can continue to exercise alone, with one other person or with your household or support bubble. This should be limited to once per day, and you should not travel outside your local area. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/national-lockdown-stay-at-home
He lives in London, he was exercising in a park in London. Local.
My most local part of town only has a Co-op, is that the only place I'm permitted to shop? If I want to go shopping in the Asda at the other side of town instead then am I in breach of the law? Since that's in a different Council.
Nowt wrong wi t'Co-op! As Mr Pioneers will, I'm sure, attest.
Who do we think the holy 17 Republican Senators might be then?
I've seen two definites on here this morning, and three more probables.
The rest?
(PS. Success also depends on Pelosi and her acolytes making this all about America and her constitution, with precisely zero partisan attacks on the Reps and Democrat grandstanding - I'm not holding my breath on that.)
Much as it would be satisfying to see Trump impeached I'd prefer him to be free to stand in 2024.
It would cause a major headache for the GOP, the primaries will tear them apart. If he wins I think the Democrats will walk it and if he loses he will probably go on to stand as an independent and the Democrats will walk it.
The GOP really is stuck between a rock and a hard place and that's exactly where they deserve to be for not standing up to Trump till it was too late.
CNN suggesting a self pardon and pardons for his sons are looking increasingly likely.
Whats to lose? It is close to inevitable and probably always has been for a transactional President on the look out for freebies. If its valid, great for him, if not at a minimum it keeps him out of jail for months whilst the lawyers debate it and there is no cost. Why wouldnt he? Shame? Please!
Agree with Dan on this. In the end, only one GOP member of the House voted for the (milder) resolution requesting Pence to act. Republicans will generally do just enough to give themselves an "ultimately a good guy" ticket, while arguing that anything substantive would be distressingly divisive, time to move on, etc
It might change a few months down the line if Trump really pushes the "leader in exile" thing and starts demanding primary deselection for everyone except his loyalists. There would come a point when Republicans decide he needs to be squashed - but right now they reckon they can get away "Hey, he'll be gone this month, let's not aggravate things further". It's even arguable that they're right in terms of US political stability, not creating martyrs etc.
If he is impeached and found guilty he cannot run for president again. That`s the big plus - at least from many perspectives. Looking at it from the perspective of the Dem Party, however, it would be good for them if Trump did run again wouldn`t it?
Maybe, maybe not.
Trump has the diehard fans who will turnout to vote for him no matter what that Pence or Cruz or Haley would not have if they were the GOP nominee in 2024 instead of him, however they also have fewer voters who would turn out to vote against them than Trump would, except maybe Cruz.
Trump's a goner but a Dem dream scenario for 24 could be a 3rd party run from somebody endorsed by him. Such a person imo would have to have the surname Trump. I don't see it myself but it can't be ruled out.
But I'm not thinking that much about Trump any more. Not my focus. What I'm thinking about is Dominic Raab. How popular is he, would you say, with the Tory grassroots?
I hear that the Dover Branch of the Conservative Party isn't aware that Dominic Raab has an important job in government.
The Tories won an election saying they would sign a deal which was clearly going to deliver this outcome. They then signed the deal. It seems a bit late to be moaning that they are getting what they voted for.
The more troublesome problem for the Tories is the sell out of the fishermen which is not going down well in the fishing areas. Fishermen have not only been given the catch they believe they were told they would get but they are also seeing stocks going to rot as the mountain of paperwork leaves their main market effectively closed to them.
That's the government's problem. They have delivered roughly the Vote Leave plan from 2016. Their problem is that at least some of the problems (foreseeable, foreseen, confidently denied) look like coming in as well.
In 1990, the Conservative government delivered on its manifesto commitment to introduce the Community Charge. That delivery did not work out to their advantage, even as it was reversed.
And if Johnson's Brexit turns out to be a temporary aberration, the long term costs will be bigger. Some of the lost business won't return, even if the UK did return to the EU...
The UK won't return to the EU, and by trying to inflate that particular mental dinghy, you're just making yourself feel worse.
I haven't said we will. I don't know what will happen next. Maybe this will turn out to be a roaring success.
But suppose it doesn't. What should the UK do then?
And why are some early Brexit supporters so determined to insist that this decision, uniquely amongst political decisions, is irreversible and never to be discussed again?
Who do we think the holy 17 Republican Senators might be then?
I've seen two definites on here this morning, and three more probables.
The rest?
(PS. Success also depends on Pelosi and her acolytes making this all about America and her constitution, with precisely zero partisan attacks on the Reps and Democrat grandstanding - I'm not holding my breath on that.)
Much as it would be satisfying to see Trump impeached I'd prefer him to be free to stand in 2024.
It would cause a major headache for the GOP, the primaries will tear them apart. If he wins I think the Democrats will walk it and if he loses he will probably go on to stand as an independent and the Democrats will walk it.
The GOP really is stuck between a rock and a hard place and that's exactly where they deserve to be for not standing up to Trump till it was too late.
No, this goes beyond partisan advantage.
I've come round to impeachment in the last few days. The Rubicon has been crossed and I think it's better if both sides bilaterally impeach him.
Ideally 100-0.
Damn it, it took me a paragraph to say what you said in your first 6 words.
If nothing is done about Trump (impeachment or otherwise) what is stop a democrat candidate in 2024 who loses the election to a Republican, claims fraud, launches all kinds of failed legal bids and then urge his supporters (BLM?) to march on Washington to make sure the congress doesn't endorse the Republican President elect?
And would Republicans expect any kind of consequences for this sort of behaviour or let it go on the basis of needing a 'healing' process to bring the country together? It's strange how people who apparently believe the other side are lower than vermin don't appear to be the slightest bit worried that the same tactics might one day be used against themselves.
I'd put money on his having been driven out there, dropped off for a cycle round, and then driven back. Why he didn't go somewhere nearer like Hyde Park, who can say. Whatever, it's what police across the country are trying to stop people doing, otherwise popular spots will become crowded (as and when it ever stops raining)
The Police have no right to be stopping people from doing legal activities.
If the Government had made this activity illegal it might be a story.
But the police have treated it as if it was illegal.
Oh and made coffee by itself a substantial meal - given that coffee = a picnic
Did the Police start setting the law instead of Parliament?
Seems like a reason to criticise the Police for overstepping not for lawmakers for following the actual law.
The law no more says you can only exercise within walking distance of your house than it says you can only shop walking distance of your house.
The official guidance is that: You can continue to exercise alone, with one other person or with your household or support bubble. This should be limited to once per day, and you should not travel outside your local area. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/national-lockdown-stay-at-home
He lives in London, he was exercising in a park in London. Local.
My most local part of town only has a Co-op, is that the only place I'm permitted to shop? If I want to go shopping in the Asda at the other side of town instead then am I in breach of the law? Since that's in a different Council.
Look at Downing Street on a map, and note the big green blotches within spitting distance. I cannot tell you how many Asda stores there are in London, if that is your preferred metric, because the "Find a store" link at the top of https://www.asda.com/ leads to "404 page not found".
It’s possible to wonder whether we’d now have the highest Covid-19 death rate of any major country if we hadn’t been led by ardent Brexiteers. I know we’re ahead on the vaccine front. But the vaccine won’t start to have any effect of the death rate for a good few weeks. And in the meantime our rate of Covid deaths will remain relatively the highest of comparable nations (save, possibly, Italy).
Perhaps you can tell us what a different set of politicians would have done ?
Would they have been more willing to restrict international travel ?
Would they have made the UK less dependent upon imported PPE ?
Would they have stopped the NHS from sending patients back to care homes untested ?
Would they have reduced the levels of obese slobery ?
Would they have reduced the level of overcrowded or multi-generational housing ?
The answers to those seem to be No, No, No, No and No.
But they might have signed up to the EU's vaccine scheme, the EU's ventilator scheme and the EU's PPE scheme.
With negative consequences from each.
Just as an aside on the care home front - the NHS still seem to be doing that
They were going to send my father back to his care home to pass away but kept him in hospital so my brother could go in to say goodbye.
Ok - his care home now has its own outbreak, but this strikes me as stupid beyond words. (Whilst understanding the NHS needs bed space)
It's a while since I used to be seconded to whatever the Care Home Inspectorate was called at the time. However, it was clear to me then that the sector was, generally speaking, slightly less well organised than the Wild West and the efforts of me and my fellow Deputy Sheriffs to try to bring in some order was fraught with a variety of problems which required much, much more than the occasional cursory glance from the politicians to resolve.
Who do we think the holy 17 Republican Senators might be then?
I've seen two definites on here this morning, and three more probables.
The rest?
(PS. Success also depends on Pelosi and her acolytes making this all about America and her constitution, with precisely zero partisan attacks on the Reps and Democrat grandstanding - I'm not holding my breath on that.)
Much as it would be satisfying to see Trump impeached I'd prefer him to be free to stand in 2024.
It would cause a major headache for the GOP, the primaries will tear them apart. If he wins I think the Democrats will walk it and if he loses he will probably go on to stand as an independent and the Democrats will walk it.
The GOP really is stuck between a rock and a hard place and that's exactly where they deserve to be for not standing up to Trump till it was too late.
No, this goes beyond partisan advantage.
I've come round to impeachment in the last few days. The Rubicon has been crossed and I think it's better if both sides bilaterally impeach him.
Ideally 100-0.
It's interesting that you've come to that conclusion. From the standpoint of only a passing interest - after all they are a foreign country, and it's really none of my business how they treat their Presidents, it seems like a remarkably pointless idea.
Reasons for punishing crimes -
- To inflict a cost on the guilty - To show the victims that society is protecting them - Preventing/making it more difficult for the guilty to repeat their crime. - Warning other potential malefactors that doing the same will have consequences.
I'd put money on his having been driven out there, dropped off for a cycle round, and then driven back. Why he didn't go somewhere nearer like Hyde Park, who can say. Whatever, it's what police across the country are trying to stop people doing, otherwise popular spots will become crowded (as and when it ever stops raining)
The Police have no right to be stopping people from doing legal activities.
If the Government had made this activity illegal it might be a story.
But the police have treated it as if it was illegal.
Oh and made coffee by itself a substantial meal - given that coffee = a picnic
Did the Police start setting the law instead of Parliament?
Seems like a reason to criticise the Police for overstepping not for lawmakers for following the actual law.
The law no more says you can only exercise within walking distance of your house than it says you can only shop walking distance of your house.
The official guidance is that: You can continue to exercise alone, with one other person or with your household or support bubble. This should be limited to once per day, and you should not travel outside your local area. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/national-lockdown-stay-at-home
Guidance is not the law.
The police can only enforce the law. They can only fine you for breaches of the law.
Unless the law says that exercise is limited to once a day you are perfectly entitled to go out for two walks a day. And then go out to do your shopping.
The common-sense thing to do is to make sure that when you go out you limit as far as possible your interaction with other people since it is the interaction which spreads the virus not simply being outside.
So if that means driving away from crowded streets to a remoter area to exercise that is more sensible than walking up and down a street outside your home with other people doing the same.
That's not quite true. Under the Coronavirus legislation you can be fined for refusing a direction from a police officer to go home, whether or not their reasons reflect the details of the restrictions. It's broadly drafted to make sure that the police are almost always going to be in the right if you refuse to go, when directed.
It’s possible to wonder whether we’d now have the highest Covid-19 death rate of any major country if we hadn’t been led by ardent Brexiteers. I know we’re ahead on the vaccine front. But the vaccine won’t start to have any effect of the death rate for a good few weeks. And in the meantime our rate of Covid deaths will remain relatively the highest of comparable nations (save, possibly, Italy).
This government deserves to be judged on the macro consequences of its many decisions. It's far too early for people to be crowing about an early lead in vaccinating because the consequences of what has happened so far will make marginal differences. To expand on that, imagine the UK stays 2% ahead of the EU average over the next few months. That is good news for the UK, but the effect on the spread and then recession of Covid-19 will be one factor among many. Other factors include legislation and adherence, non-regulated mask and hygiene behaviour, measures within healthcare settings, the current rates of infection, and more. The more vaccination, the more the R number is suppressed, but it's not the only game in town. Those extra vaccination WILL save lives, but failures and successes elsewhere will cost and save other lives.
It's too easy and understandable, if you're a supporter of this government, to become fixated on the success, to date, of the UK's vaccine program. But as nice as it is to have a good news story, the risk is that it overwhelms the message that we are still in danger.
The worst possible of worlds is if our early lead instils a sense of self-satisfied complacency, to the extent that people adopt riskier behaviours that cancel out the gains. As numerous people have pointed out, Czechia has found out recently that nemesis follows hubris. We'd be smart to keep our heads down and get on with it right now.
I'd put money on his having been driven out there, dropped off for a cycle round, and then driven back. Why he didn't go somewhere nearer like Hyde Park, who can say. Whatever, it's what police across the country are trying to stop people doing, otherwise popular spots will become crowded (as and when it ever stops raining)
The Police have no right to be stopping people from doing legal activities.
If the Government had made this activity illegal it might be a story.
But the police have treated it as if it was illegal.
Oh and made coffee by itself a substantial meal - given that coffee = a picnic
Did the Police start setting the law instead of Parliament?
Seems like a reason to criticise the Police for overstepping not for lawmakers for following the actual law.
The law no more says you can only exercise within walking distance of your house than it says you can only shop walking distance of your house.
The official guidance is that: You can continue to exercise alone, with one other person or with your household or support bubble. This should be limited to once per day, and you should not travel outside your local area. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/national-lockdown-stay-at-home
Guidance is not the law.
The police can only enforce the law. They can only fine you for breaches of the law.
Unless the law says that exercise is limited to once a day you are perfectly entitled to go out for two walks a day. And then go out to do your shopping.
The common-sense thing to do is to make sure that when you go out you limit as far as possible your interaction with other people since it is the interaction which spreads the virus not simply being outside.
So if that means driving away from crowded streets to a remoter area to exercise that is more sensible than walking up and down a street outside your home with other people doing the same.
You keep saying this about the police but back in the real world, police are dishing out fines for sitting down, drinking coffee, or travelling five (which is less than Boris's seven) miles for exercise. Admittedly these can be rescinded if the papers make a fuss.
That would be Don Jnr v Biden or Harris v Pence most likely.
And Don Jr would do as well as Perot did - which although would destroy Pence's chances wouldn't have an impact on the Republicans say taking the Senate and Congress.
It wouldn't be perfect but it's better than letting Trump slowly tear the party apart.
Teesside? Barnard Castle is on the banks of the Tees...
Rumour has it, it's Darlington or at Teesside airport.
Darlington has the advantage that it's close to posher places in North Yorkshire than say Boro and has excellent connection options (East Coast mainline, motorway and an airport).
I'm assuming it'll be Teesside Airport: 1. Infamously nationalised by Tory Mayor Ben Houchen 2. Lots of hot air about new flights and destinations 3. Neither the airport nor the airlines can actually make money (which is why the flights all stopped last time) 4. A business park on the south part of the site has been mooted a lot and kills lots of birds: * Puts 22k Treasury officials on Tory Teesside * Makes London - Teesside Airport flights viable * Airport makes a profit, flights come back, Tories cemented into place in Darlo / Stockton etc
I'd put money on his having been driven out there, dropped off for a cycle round, and then driven back. Why he didn't go somewhere nearer like Hyde Park, who can say. Whatever, it's what police across the country are trying to stop people doing, otherwise popular spots will become crowded (as and when it ever stops raining)
The Police have no right to be stopping people from doing legal activities.
If the Government had made this activity illegal it might be a story.
But the police have treated it as if it was illegal.
Oh and made coffee by itself a substantial meal - given that coffee = a picnic
Did the Police start setting the law instead of Parliament?
Seems like a reason to criticise the Police for overstepping not for lawmakers for following the actual law.
The law no more says you can only exercise within walking distance of your house than it says you can only shop walking distance of your house.
The official guidance is that: You can continue to exercise alone, with one other person or with your household or support bubble. This should be limited to once per day, and you should not travel outside your local area. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/national-lockdown-stay-at-home
Guidance is not the law.
The police can only enforce the law. They can only fine you for breaches of the law.
Unless the law says that exercise is limited to once a day you are perfectly entitled to go out for two walks a day. And then go out to do your shopping.
The common-sense thing to do is to make sure that when you go out you limit as far as possible your interaction with other people since it is the interaction which spreads the virus not simply being outside.
So if that means driving away from crowded streets to a remoter area to exercise that is more sensible than walking up and down a street outside your home with other people doing the same.
Well said. I am baffled that people (the media, some posters here) cannot understand this pretty basic point.
Continual reference back to the Derbyshire overreach doesn't help. They've rescinded the fine for those poor women, and apologised.
It is because the govt will never acknowledge this on TV. Ask a question did Derbyshire police overreach when it happened and it will be "Our police are doing a fantastic job in difficult circumstances and the police are right to tackle this with vigilance." instead of "On this occasion the police got it wrong, and we have asked them to review it, however the important point is our police are doing a fantastic job in difficult circumstances and the police are right to tackle this with vigilance."
Williamson clearly wanted to keep the schools open right to the end. Johnson wanted this too until he didn`t.
Williamson has been undermined by Johnson but as he is still in post cannot say this. Some mealy-mouthed waffle to follow I predict.
Yep. Pisspoor minister but not making the big calls. 75% of the shit heaped upon him should in truth be scraped up, shoveled into a large container, and emptied over the head of one "Boris" Johnson.
On the header, may we do an alternative version which is "Have Remain's prophecies on what would happen under Brexit actually occurred?"
How many 0/10's do you want?
Well, from a quick look at the controversial government leaflet urging a remain vote:
- If the UK voted to leave the EU, the resulting economic shock would put pressure on the value of the pound, which would risk higher prices of some household goods and damage living standards. -- £ did fall. Did we see much in the way of inflation?
- Millions of UK citizens travel to Europe each year. The EU has made this easier and cheaper. -- There has been much reduced travel following Brexit, some people may however claim other factors at play in this
- From next year, mobile phone roaming charges will be abolished across the EU, saving UK customers up to 38p per minute on calls. -- This may well not have happened had we been outwith the EU. So far no sign of roaming charge coming back though?
- EU membership also gives UK citizens travelling in other European countries the right to access free or cheaper public healthcare. -- EHIC is dead, long live the GHIC (but a bit sketchy on the details of that as yet and the costs to UK)
- Voting to leave the EU would create years of uncertainty and potential economic disruption. This would reduce investment and cost jobs. -- Years of uncertainty definitely true. Also, first year post-Brexit poor for jobs. Again, naysayers may suggest there are other reasons for that
- The Government judges it could result in 10 years or more of uncertainty -- Only 4.5 really, although still some uncertainty now on things
- A more limited trade deal with the EU would give the UK less access to the Single Market than we have now – including for services, which make up almost 80% of the UK economy. -- Current deal not that good for services, I think?
- Some argue that leaving the EU would give us more freedom to limit immigration. -- It clearly does. Remains to be seen how that freedom is used
- EU membership means you and your family have the right to live, work or study abroad in any of the 27 other member countries. -- Automatic rights lost, obviously.
Dear God, it really was an awful leaflet wasn't it? I don't think I read it at the time, otherwise I might have voted leave!
"- EU membership means you and your family have the right to live, work or study abroad in any of the 27 other member countries. -- Automatic rights lost, obviously."
That last one was the reason Leave won! Phrasing it that way didn't make people forget that it meant people from 27 other member countries had the right to live and work here, and most people in the UK didn't think that deal was good for them. They weren't tempted to go and live in Eastern Europe, didn't speak the language the way Eastern Europeans speak English and so on.
It is a shame because it might have made sense - cheaper housing, more land - a Brit upping sticks to live in Bulgaria, Poland or wherever might have a much better quality of life on paper, but it seems the British working class dont like to leave their roots so much. I actually, quarter jokingly, mentioned to my girlfriend that we would be better off if we bought a house in Eastern Europe and brought up our son there - I work from home, she could give up work - and she looked at me as if I were mad
The Tories won an election saying they would sign a deal which was clearly going to deliver this outcome. They then signed the deal. It seems a bit late to be moaning that they are getting what they voted for.
The more troublesome problem for the Tories is the sell out of the fishermen which is not going down well in the fishing areas. Fishermen have not only been given the catch they believe they were told they would get but they are also seeing stocks going to rot as the mountain of paperwork leaves their main market effectively closed to them.
That's the government's problem. They have delivered roughly the Vote Leave plan from 2016. Their problem is that at least some of the problems (foreseeable, foreseen, confidently denied) look like coming in as well.
In 1990, the Conservative government delivered on its manifesto commitment to introduce the Community Charge. That delivery did not work out to their advantage, even as it was reversed.
And if Johnson's Brexit turns out to be a temporary aberration, the long term costs will be bigger. Some of the lost business won't return, even if the UK did return to the EU...
The UK won't return to the EU, and by trying to inflate that particular mental dinghy, you're just making yourself feel worse.
I haven't said we will. I don't know what will happen next. Maybe this will turn out to be a roaring success.
But suppose it doesn't. What should the UK do then?
And why are some early Brexit supporters so determined to insist that this decision, uniquely amongst political decisions, is irreversible and never to be discussed again?
Its not irreversible.
But I think the odds of it being reversed is about as likely as Boris Johnson being a future winner of Strictly Come Dancing.
It isn't just a case of the UK coming around to the idea of going through this psychodrama again, that's unlikely enough but possible. You have to twin that with the notion that the EU would unanimously agree to let us back in.
I think there is a view now amongst many that quite frankly Degaulle was right, the UK (England in particular) was not a good fit for Europe.
The combined odds of the UK voting to rejoin Europe and the French in particular voting to let us back in have to be microscopic.
Agree with Dan on this. In the end, only one GOP member of the House voted for the (milder) resolution requesting Pence to act. Republicans will generally do just enough to give themselves an "ultimately a good guy" ticket, while arguing that anything substantive would be distressingly divisive, time to move on, etc
It might change a few months down the line if Trump really pushes the "leader in exile" thing and starts demanding primary deselection for everyone except his loyalists. There would come a point when Republicans decide he needs to be squashed - but right now they reckon they can get away "Hey, he'll be gone this month, let's not aggravate things further". It's even arguable that they're right in terms of US political stability, not creating martyrs etc.
If he is impeached and found guilty he cannot run for president again. That`s the big plus - at least from many perspectives. Looking at it from the perspective of the Dem Party, however, it would be good for them if Trump did run again wouldn`t it?
Maybe, maybe not.
Trump has the diehard fans who will turnout to vote for him no matter what that Pence or Cruz or Haley would not have if they were the GOP nominee in 2024 instead of him, however they also have fewer voters who would turn out to vote against them than Trump would, except maybe Cruz.
I'd put money on his having been driven out there, dropped off for a cycle round, and then driven back. Why he didn't go somewhere nearer like Hyde Park, who can say. Whatever, it's what police across the country are trying to stop people doing, otherwise popular spots will become crowded (as and when it ever stops raining)
The Police have no right to be stopping people from doing legal activities.
If the Government had made this activity illegal it might be a story.
But the police have treated it as if it was illegal.
Oh and made coffee by itself a substantial meal - given that coffee = a picnic
Did the Police start setting the law instead of Parliament?
Seems like a reason to criticise the Police for overstepping not for lawmakers for following the actual law.
The law no more says you can only exercise within walking distance of your house than it says you can only shop walking distance of your house.
The official guidance is that: You can continue to exercise alone, with one other person or with your household or support bubble. This should be limited to once per day, and you should not travel outside your local area. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/national-lockdown-stay-at-home
He lives in London, he was exercising in a park in London. Local.
My most local part of town only has a Co-op, is that the only place I'm permitted to shop? If I want to go shopping in the Asda at the other side of town instead then am I in breach of the law? Since that's in a different Council.
Look at Downing Street on a map, and note the big green blotches within spitting distance. I cannot tell you how many Asda stores there are in London, if that is your preferred metric, because the "Find a store" link at the top of https://www.asda.com/ leads to "404 page not found".
Within the same city doesn't cease to be local just because there are closer options.
Its not like he got on the M1 then the M6 in order to start riding a bike is it?
The Tories won an election saying they would sign a deal which was clearly going to deliver this outcome. They then signed the deal. It seems a bit late to be moaning that they are getting what they voted for.
The more troublesome problem for the Tories is the sell out of the fishermen which is not going down well in the fishing areas. Fishermen have not only been given the catch they believe they were told they would get but they are also seeing stocks going to rot as the mountain of paperwork leaves their main market effectively closed to them.
That's the government's problem. They have delivered roughly the Vote Leave plan from 2016. Their problem is that at least some of the problems (foreseeable, foreseen, confidently denied) look like coming in as well.
In 1990, the Conservative government delivered on its manifesto commitment to introduce the Community Charge. That delivery did not work out to their advantage, even as it was reversed.
And if Johnson's Brexit turns out to be a temporary aberration, the long term costs will be bigger. Some of the lost business won't return, even if the UK did return to the EU...
The UK won't return to the EU, and by trying to inflate that particular mental dinghy, you're just making yourself feel worse.
I haven't said we will. I don't know what will happen next. Maybe this will turn out to be a roaring success.
But suppose it doesn't. What should the UK do then?
And why are some early Brexit supporters so determined to insist that this decision, uniquely amongst political decisions, is irreversible and never to be discussed again?
We would end up in EEA or similar if Brexit is as damaging as many expect, not full membership. Or if its longer term, ideally the EU creates formal multiple tiered levels of membership and we could join at a looser level.
It’s possible to wonder whether we’d now have the highest Covid-19 death rate of any major country if we hadn’t been led by ardent Brexiteers. I know we’re ahead on the vaccine front. But the vaccine won’t start to have any effect of the death rate for a good few weeks. And in the meantime our rate of Covid deaths will remain relatively the highest of comparable nations (save, possibly, Italy).
Perhaps you can tell us what a different set of politicians would have done ?
Would they have been more willing to restrict international travel ?
Would they have made the UK less dependent upon imported PPE ?
Would they have stopped the NHS from sending patients back to care homes untested ?
Would they have reduced the levels of obese slobery ?
Would they have reduced the level of overcrowded or multi-generational housing ?
The answers to those seem to be No, No, No, No and No.
But they might have signed up to the EU's vaccine scheme, the EU's ventilator scheme and the EU's PPE scheme.
With negative consequences from each.
Just as an aside on the care home front - the NHS still seem to be doing that
They were going to send my father back to his care home to pass away but kept him in hospital so my brother could go in to say goodbye.
Ok - his care home now has its own outbreak, but this strikes me as stupid beyond words. (Whilst understanding the NHS needs bed space)
It's a while since I used to be seconded to whatever the Care Home Inspectorate was called at the time. However, it was clear to me then that the sector was, generally speaking, slightly less well organised than the Wild West and the efforts of me and my fellow Deputy Sheriffs to try to bring in some order was fraught with a variety of problems which required much, much more than the occasional cursory glance from the politicians to resolve.
So do you think the NHS seeking to send Covid infected patients back to care homes is a sensible policy?
Story in the Courier yesterday showed that Scotland had 2.99% of the population inoculated compared with 4.15% in England and 4.85% in NI. Only the perpetual laggards in Wales are doing worse at 2.73%. Gove pointed out that the Scottish government had been given 500k more doses of vaccine than it had used. Jennie Freeman (health minister) denied that but Sturgeon subsequently admitted that this number was "broadly accurate".
The rate of vaccination in Scotland still needs to significantly more than doubled if the somewhat modest targets are to be met. Last week Scotland managed to inoculate 7,143 a day. They will need to increase that by 11,756 to meet their targets.
I am not sure why this would be. It may be that the bigger focus on care homes slows things down a bit because it is not as fast as it would be running a conventional clinic. It may be that the Scottish NHS is just a bit more bureaucratic and has been slow to address the urgency (they never really kept up with England on testing either). What is crystal clear is that accelerating the roll out is absolutely critical to Scotland's recovery. Boris is right to be on the warpath with the English NHS as reported in the FT. Sturgeon needs to be doing likewise.
I am broadly in favour of comparison for rollout for the vaccine - however we should acknowledge the hindrances such as geography in Scotland and I assume high levels of self isolation of staff in Wales.
I am not in favour of comparative death rates without much more analysis and consideration. Were we better at keeping people alive with severe respiratory diseases before the crisis? If so this would have a big impact on excess deaths. How healthy were the rest of the cohort of susceptible people? This would be so diverse over a range of countries that it would need proper investigation and analysis. This is not to say that mistakes were not made around discharge from hospitals into care home for example.
I think if the discrepancy grows any larger than this it risks becoming a hot political potato for Sturgeon. Whilst the geography point is true this is reflected in higher NHS spending in Scotland meaning that there should be more capacity.
Hope springs eternal.
Any view on Gordon Brown’s new caper Our Scottish Future? Using Hugh ‘there will be no second wave, Scotland may not need a vaccine’ Pennington as a mouthpiece to attack the Scottish government over COVID doesn’t seem an optimal move.
Not impinged on my consciousness yet, sorry. No doubt it proves independence is inevitable, or something.
I'd put money on his having been driven out there, dropped off for a cycle round, and then driven back. Why he didn't go somewhere nearer like Hyde Park, who can say. Whatever, it's what police across the country are trying to stop people doing, otherwise popular spots will become crowded (as and when it ever stops raining)
The Police have no right to be stopping people from doing legal activities.
If the Government had made this activity illegal it might be a story.
But the police have treated it as if it was illegal.
Oh and made coffee by itself a substantial meal - given that coffee = a picnic
Did the Police start setting the law instead of Parliament?
Seems like a reason to criticise the Police for overstepping not for lawmakers for following the actual law.
The law no more says you can only exercise within walking distance of your house than it says you can only shop walking distance of your house.
The official guidance is that: You can continue to exercise alone, with one other person or with your household or support bubble. This should be limited to once per day, and you should not travel outside your local area. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/national-lockdown-stay-at-home
Guidance is not the law.
The police can only enforce the law. They can only fine you for breaches of the law.
Unless the law says that exercise is limited to once a day you are perfectly entitled to go out for two walks a day. And then go out to do your shopping.
The common-sense thing to do is to make sure that when you go out you limit as far as possible your interaction with other people since it is the interaction which spreads the virus not simply being outside.
So if that means driving away from crowded streets to a remoter area to exercise that is more sensible than walking up and down a street outside your home with other people doing the same.
Well said. I am baffled that people (the media, some posters here) cannot understand this pretty basic point.
Continual reference back to the Derbyshire overreach doesn't help. They've rescinded the fine for those poor women, and apologised.
It is because the govt will never acknowledge this on TV. Ask a question did Derbyshire police overreach when it happened and it will be "Our police are doing a fantastic job in difficult circumstances and the police are right to tackle this with vigilance." instead of "On this occasion the police got it wrong, and we have asked them to review it, however the important point is our police are doing a fantastic job in difficult circumstances and the police are right to tackle this with vigilance."
Haven't the Police already apologised, rescinded the fines and issued new guidance saying that it was inappropriate?
If someone acknowledges a mistake and says they won't do it again then is there a reason to keep kicking them when they're down. If they were insisting they were in the right and taking this matter to court then surely it would be more appropriate to intervene.
Teesside? Barnard Castle is on the banks of the Tees...
Rumour has it, it's Darlington or at Teesside airport.
Darlington has the advantage that it's close to posher places in North Yorkshire than say Boro and has excellent connection options (East Coast mainline, motorway and an airport).
I'm assuming it'll be Teesside Airport: 1. Infamously nationalised by Tory Mayor Ben Houchen 2. Lots of hot air about new flights and destinations 3. Neither the airport nor the airlines can actually make money (which is why the flights all stopped last time) 4. A business park on the south part of the site has been mooted a lot and kills lots of birds: * Puts 22k Treasury officials on Tory Teesside * Makes London - Teesside Airport flights viable * Airport makes a profit, flights come back, Tories cemented into place in Darlo / Stockton etc
I do think you are right - the issue is that the journey to and from the airport is a mare at anything approaching rush hour - although the northern bypass should fix some of those issues.
I should also emphasis I'm biased here - Teesside airport is brilliant for european flights - I used to be able to set off less than an hour before the Schiphol flight and get to most places in europe by Monday lunchtime.
Mr. Romford, for what it's worth, I think it's perfectly legitimate for people to want us to rejoin.
I think the electorate is sick of EU matters, certainly for the short term, however.
Fully agree. Starmer's line- Johnson's job is to make this plan work, and mainstream politicians job is to hold him to account in that framework- is about the right one. Rejoin ASAP has integrity if you don't think Johnson's plan can work, but it's not practical politics.
It's the "my monument will last forever" aspect that creeps me out. If the silver linings roll by as badly as they do in the Noel Coward song, what should we do in, say, a decade's time?
I'd put money on his having been driven out there, dropped off for a cycle round, and then driven back. Why he didn't go somewhere nearer like Hyde Park, who can say. Whatever, it's what police across the country are trying to stop people doing, otherwise popular spots will become crowded (as and when it ever stops raining)
The Police have no right to be stopping people from doing legal activities.
If the Government had made this activity illegal it might be a story.
But the police have treated it as if it was illegal.
Oh and made coffee by itself a substantial meal - given that coffee = a picnic
Did the Police start setting the law instead of Parliament?
Seems like a reason to criticise the Police for overstepping not for lawmakers for following the actual law.
The law no more says you can only exercise within walking distance of your house than it says you can only shop walking distance of your house.
The official guidance is that: You can continue to exercise alone, with one other person or with your household or support bubble. This should be limited to once per day, and you should not travel outside your local area. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/national-lockdown-stay-at-home
He lives in London, he was exercising in a park in London. Local.
My most local part of town only has a Co-op, is that the only place I'm permitted to shop? If I want to go shopping in the Asda at the other side of town instead then am I in breach of the law? Since that's in a different Council.
How long are you going to follow Johnson around with a fire extinguisher before you run out of energy?
Williamson clearly wanted to keep the schools open right to the end. Johnson wanted this too until he didn`t.
Williamson has been undermined by Johnson but as he is still in post cannot say this. Some mealy-mouthed waffle to follow I predict.
Yep. Pisspoor minister but not making the big calls. 75% of the shit heaped upon him should in truth be scraped up, shoveled into a large container, and emptied over the head of one "Boris" Johnson.
Listening to him is still very bad for my blood pressure.
Edit - Halfon just pointed out that Williamson is contradicting earlier evidence to the committee that schools were a marginal factor of transmission. Now he's claiming they were...and he's waffling in response.
I'd put money on his having been driven out there, dropped off for a cycle round, and then driven back. Why he didn't go somewhere nearer like Hyde Park, who can say. Whatever, it's what police across the country are trying to stop people doing, otherwise popular spots will become crowded (as and when it ever stops raining)
The Police have no right to be stopping people from doing legal activities.
If the Government had made this activity illegal it might be a story.
But the police have treated it as if it was illegal.
Oh and made coffee by itself a substantial meal - given that coffee = a picnic
Did the Police start setting the law instead of Parliament?
Seems like a reason to criticise the Police for overstepping not for lawmakers for following the actual law.
The law no more says you can only exercise within walking distance of your house than it says you can only shop walking distance of your house.
The official guidance is that: You can continue to exercise alone, with one other person or with your household or support bubble. This should be limited to once per day, and you should not travel outside your local area. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/national-lockdown-stay-at-home
He lives in London, he was exercising in a park in London. Local.
My most local part of town only has a Co-op, is that the only place I'm permitted to shop? If I want to go shopping in the Asda at the other side of town instead then am I in breach of the law? Since that's in a different Council.
How long are you going to follow Johnson around with a fire extinguisher before you run out of energy?
Probably not as long as you can go around with venom in your veins expressing hatred and contempt for your own compatriots.
The Tories won an election saying they would sign a deal which was clearly going to deliver this outcome. They then signed the deal. It seems a bit late to be moaning that they are getting what they voted for.
The more troublesome problem for the Tories is the sell out of the fishermen which is not going down well in the fishing areas. Fishermen have not only been given the catch they believe they were told they would get but they are also seeing stocks going to rot as the mountain of paperwork leaves their main market effectively closed to them.
That's the government's problem. They have delivered roughly the Vote Leave plan from 2016. Their problem is that at least some of the problems (foreseeable, foreseen, confidently denied) look like coming in as well.
In 1990, the Conservative government delivered on its manifesto commitment to introduce the Community Charge. That delivery did not work out to their advantage, even as it was reversed.
And if Johnson's Brexit turns out to be a temporary aberration, the long term costs will be bigger. Some of the lost business won't return, even if the UK did return to the EU...
The UK won't return to the EU, and by trying to inflate that particular mental dinghy, you're just making yourself feel worse.
I haven't said we will. I don't know what will happen next. Maybe this will turn out to be a roaring success.
But suppose it doesn't. What should the UK do then?
And why are some early Brexit supporters so determined to insist that this decision, uniquely amongst political decisions, is irreversible and never to be discussed again?
We would end up in EEA or similar if Brexit is as damaging as many expect, not full membership. Or if its longer term, ideally the EU creates formal multiple tiered levels of membership and we could join at a looser level.
It's not just the material aspects, it's the attitude of mind. I really, really don't the 'Fortress UK' attitude. So far as I can ascertain nearly all my ancestors have lived in these islands for many centuries, but I still see myself as a European, who wishes to travel freely around Europe. I don't wish the same formal 'reception' in France or Belgium as I get in Thailand or the US.
It’s possible to wonder whether we’d now have the highest Covid-19 death rate of any major country if we hadn’t been led by ardent Brexiteers. I know we’re ahead on the vaccine front. But the vaccine won’t start to have any effect of the death rate for a good few weeks. And in the meantime our rate of Covid deaths will remain relatively the highest of comparable nations (save, possibly, Italy).
As per my earlier comment I think death rates are a poor comparison point. I can think of large numbers of contributing factors across different countries that don't allow straight comparison including history of industries with negative impact on respiratory health, obesity levels, poverty levels, health specialisms in affected areas, geographical coverage of health provision, physical issues on estate of health care properties, relative power and relationship between primary health care and social care, historic death rate issues such as previous flu outbreaks and weather.
I am not saying that this will have a positive or negative impact on death rate information, but my hypothesis is that because we have a free at the point of use healthcare system this is generally better for those who are less well off and well educated, as generally barriers of reimbursement and form filling do not exist.
I'd put money on his having been driven out there, dropped off for a cycle round, and then driven back. Why he didn't go somewhere nearer like Hyde Park, who can say. Whatever, it's what police across the country are trying to stop people doing, otherwise popular spots will become crowded (as and when it ever stops raining)
The Police have no right to be stopping people from doing legal activities.
If the Government had made this activity illegal it might be a story.
But the police have treated it as if it was illegal.
Oh and made coffee by itself a substantial meal - given that coffee = a picnic
Did the Police start setting the law instead of Parliament?
Seems like a reason to criticise the Police for overstepping not for lawmakers for following the actual law.
The law no more says you can only exercise within walking distance of your house than it says you can only shop walking distance of your house.
The official guidance is that: You can continue to exercise alone, with one other person or with your household or support bubble. This should be limited to once per day, and you should not travel outside your local area. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/national-lockdown-stay-at-home
Guidance is not the law.
The police can only enforce the law. They can only fine you for breaches of the law.
Unless the law says that exercise is limited to once a day you are perfectly entitled to go out for two walks a day. And then go out to do your shopping.
The common-sense thing to do is to make sure that when you go out you limit as far as possible your interaction with other people since it is the interaction which spreads the virus not simply being outside.
So if that means driving away from crowded streets to a remoter area to exercise that is more sensible than walking up and down a street outside your home with other people doing the same.
Well said. I am baffled that people (the media, some posters here) cannot understand this pretty basic point.
Continual reference back to the Derbyshire overreach doesn't help. They've rescinded the fine for those poor women, and apologised.
It is because the govt will never acknowledge this on TV. Ask a question did Derbyshire police overreach when it happened and it will be "Our police are doing a fantastic job in difficult circumstances and the police are right to tackle this with vigilance." instead of "On this occasion the police got it wrong, and we have asked them to review it, however the important point is our police are doing a fantastic job in difficult circumstances and the police are right to tackle this with vigilance."
Haven't the Police already apologised, rescinded the fines and issued new guidance saying that it was inappropriate?
If someone acknowledges a mistake and says they won't do it again then is there a reason to keep kicking them when they're down. If they were insisting they were in the right and taking this matter to court then surely it would be more appropriate to intervene.
My comment was directed at the govt, specifically its communication, not the police.
Who do we think the holy 17 Republican Senators might be then?
I've seen two definites on here this morning, and three more probables.
The rest?
(PS. Success also depends on Pelosi and her acolytes making this all about America and her constitution, with precisely zero partisan attacks on the Reps and Democrat grandstanding - I'm not holding my breath on that.)
I doubt we'll get 17 but will be pleasantly surprised.
I love the idea that if it fails it is Pelosi's fault.
Rather than work behind the scenes with Republican senators first, and line them up first before going public, she decided to initiate it herself at a mini press conference and threaten unilateral Democrat action unless the Republicans fell into line. She knows full well that it will start in the House almost automatically due to the Dems being in control and only a simply majority needed, but it's the Senate where it actually happens. And she needs the Republicans on side.
Of course I give some blame to Pelosi. I also blame numbskull Republican Senators too, but given she knows that she has (yet again) played the ultra-partisan game for which she's well-known rather than act skilfully and constructively to build an alliance in the greater interests of the republic and its constitution.
You don't know what she has done behind the scenes. We do know the Nytimes have reported McConnell is pleased Dems have begun impeachment. Pelosi has shown herself capable of being bipartisan when it is unpopular to do so - for instance when she got her caucus to vote for Bush's bailout plan.
Good to see the gradual conversion of the People's Vote troops.
Was a time Remainers used to calculate how many Leavers would have died by now - and how they would just have to wait for s to die out before their rejoining was assured.
Teesside? Barnard Castle is on the banks of the Tees...
Rumour has it, it's Darlington or at Teesside airport.
Darlington has the advantage that it's close to posher places in North Yorkshire than say Boro and has excellent connection options (East Coast mainline, motorway and an airport).
I'm assuming it'll be Teesside Airport: 1. Infamously nationalised by Tory Mayor Ben Houchen 2. Lots of hot air about new flights and destinations 3. Neither the airport nor the airlines can actually make money (which is why the flights all stopped last time) 4. A business park on the south part of the site has been mooted a lot and kills lots of birds: * Puts 22k Treasury officials on Tory Teesside * Makes London - Teesside Airport flights viable * Airport makes a profit, flights come back, Tories cemented into place in Darlo / Stockton etc
I do think you are right - the issue is that the journey to and from the airport is a mare at anything approaching rush hour - although the northern bypass should fix some of those issues.
I should also emphasis I'm biased here - Teesside airport is brilliant for european flights - I used to be able to set off less than an hour before the Schiphol flight and get to most places in europe by Monday lunchtime.
The easy solution to the traffic issue is to add northern slips to the A1/A66(M) junction and dual the A66 southern bypass. Send all the traffic round the existing route.
Except every one of you railing against promoting our being number one would be screaming "useless fuckers!!" if we were in the relegation zone.
We know you would.
And heaven help us if Scotland were more successful in getting its population vaccinated than England. That wouldn't be a contest where you'd be chanting "Scotland's number one, Scotland's number one." No sirreeeee.....
Triggered..
Lazy.
He's saying 'Triggered' a lot because he himself has been triggered over the fact this is a wholehearted British success story, and so he wants to draw others onto his own territory instead.
Scottish Nationalists know that if they were in the EU they'd (still) be waiting for a vaccine, rather than benefiting from the UK Government's foresightedness and superb pharmaceutical industry, hence the attacks.
He feels vulnerable.
Ooh, I love a bit of amateur psychology in the morning!
My amateur diagnosis is that having a pretty pishy go at someone in the third person via a third party shows you’re a bit of a fearty.
So are you triggered by him being triggered that your triggered by him being triggered by..... ?
That's a very prescriptive definition of nationalism. And with all respect to Orwell, GK Chesterton's relevance to the 21st century is considerably slimmer than was Mr Chesterton.
It’s possible to wonder whether we’d now have the highest Covid-19 death rate of any major country if we hadn’t been led by ardent Brexiteers. I know we’re ahead on the vaccine front. But the vaccine won’t start to have any effect of the death rate for a good few weeks. And in the meantime our rate of Covid deaths will remain relatively the highest of comparable nations (save, possibly, Italy).
Perhaps you can tell us what a different set of politicians would have done ?
Would they have been more willing to restrict international travel ?
Would they have made the UK less dependent upon imported PPE ?
Would they have stopped the NHS from sending patients back to care homes untested ?
Would they have reduced the levels of obese slobery ?
Would they have reduced the level of overcrowded or multi-generational housing ?
The answers to those seem to be No, No, No, No and No.
But they might have signed up to the EU's vaccine scheme, the EU's ventilator scheme and the EU's PPE scheme.
With negative consequences from each.
Just as an aside on the care home front - the NHS still seem to be doing that
They were going to send my father back to his care home to pass away but kept him in hospital so my brother could go in to say goodbye.
Ok - his care home now has its own outbreak, but this strikes me as stupid beyond words. (Whilst understanding the NHS needs bed space)
It's a while since I used to be seconded to whatever the Care Home Inspectorate was called at the time. However, it was clear to me then that the sector was, generally speaking, slightly less well organised than the Wild West and the efforts of me and my fellow Deputy Sheriffs to try to bring in some order was fraught with a variety of problems which required much, much more than the occasional cursory glance from the politicians to resolve.
So do you think the NHS seeking to send Covid infected patients back to care homes is a sensible policy?
I don't see how you draw that conclusion form my comment, but, no, of course I don't. However, in my experience, although it's a bit old now, relationships between Care Homes and the NHS are by no means as good as they should be. For example, Care Homes automatically send residents to A&E after a fall...... as I have seen happen ...... shouldn't happen either. Qualified advice should be available to the home quickly. Just because as elderly person falls doesn't automatically mean they've damaged something.
I'd put money on his having been driven out there, dropped off for a cycle round, and then driven back. Why he didn't go somewhere nearer like Hyde Park, who can say. Whatever, it's what police across the country are trying to stop people doing, otherwise popular spots will become crowded (as and when it ever stops raining)
The Police have no right to be stopping people from doing legal activities.
If the Government had made this activity illegal it might be a story.
Quite right. The only way I would derive satisfaction from senior government ministers suffering at the hands of police whilst exercising their legal rights would be if the political messaging had been in such a state of confused flux that few people really knew what they were supposed to do or avoid doing.
Luckily for the country, that is far from the situation.
What do you mean by confused flux? Do you mean that police messaging has changed to reflect revised guidance? Do you mean that whilst economically keeping businesses open is prudent it makes it difficult for police to manage? Or have the Police been particularly inept in a way that I don't know about?
I'd put money on his having been driven out there, dropped off for a cycle round, and then driven back. Why he didn't go somewhere nearer like Hyde Park, who can say. Whatever, it's what police across the country are trying to stop people doing, otherwise popular spots will become crowded (as and when it ever stops raining)
The Police have no right to be stopping people from doing legal activities.
If the Government had made this activity illegal it might be a story.
Quite right. The only way I would derive satisfaction from senior government ministers suffering at the hands of police whilst exercising their legal rights would be if the political messaging had been in such a state of confused flux that few people really knew what they were supposed to do or avoid doing.
Luckily for the country, that is far from the situation.
What do you mean by confused flux? Do you mean that police messaging has changed to reflect revised guidance? Do you mean that whilst economically keeping businesses open is prudent it makes it difficult for police to manage? Or have the Police been particularly inept in a way that I don't know about?
Comments
I really wish everyone here would take an hour and read
https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwell/essays-and-other-works/notes-on-nationalism/
And I mean *everyone*
If the Government had made this activity illegal it might be a story.
On an unrelated matter I made the effort to get to Morrisons early and gosh it paid dividends. The place was almost deserted - therefore easy to stay well away from other flesh & blood units who could be carrying the mutant variant.
The upshot is I was able to do my shopping for essentials - such as midget gems - in a calm, considered manner rather than feeling shit scared and hurtling around like a headless chicken and a blue arsed fly.
Peak Dom.
Oh and made coffee by itself a substantial meal - given that coffee = a picnic
Darlington has the advantage that it's close to posher places in North Yorkshire than say Boro and has excellent connection options (East Coast mainline, motorway and an airport).
Luckily for the country, that is far from the situation.
The 'valuable perspective' being that it helps Beijing make its repressive and authoritarian patriotic laws look like they're on a par with human rights law, and standard common law.
Perry is being used for propaganda purposes.
Either he's naïve, and his ego has got the better of him, or he's being made so much money he doesn't care.
It would cause a major headache for the GOP, the primaries will tear them apart. If he wins I think the Democrats will walk it and if he loses he will probably go on to stand as an independent and the Democrats will walk it.
The GOP really is stuck between a rock and a hard place and that's exactly where they deserve to be for not standing up to Trump till it was too late.
Friends and enemies, they find us contagerous
I was looking back to see
If you were sufficiently triggered to be looking back at me
To see me, triggered, looking back at you"
It is an honour to have Alan Bennett posting here.
Seems like a reason to criticise the Police for overstepping not for lawmakers for following the actual law.
The law no more says you can only exercise within walking distance of your house than it says you can only shop walking distance of your house.
I've come round to impeachment in the last few days. The Rubicon has been crossed and I think it's better if both sides bilaterally impeach him.
Ideally 100-0.
Obviously that seems to much to ask for
I know we’re ahead on the vaccine front. But the vaccine won’t start to have any effect of the death rate for a good few weeks. And in the meantime our rate of Covid deaths will remain relatively the highest of comparable nations (save, possibly, Italy).
You can continue to exercise alone, with one other person or with your household or support bubble. This should be limited to once per day, and you should not travel outside your local area.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/national-lockdown-stay-at-home
She's as aggressive and partisan as many Republicans, and playing to her base just as they are.
It's a real problem the USA has.
Annoyingly that does mean I haven't profited from the house price inflation elsewhere in the country.
Treasury north? What about Treasury Midlands? Treasury Cornwall? Treasury Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (admittedly they have a degree of devolution). Ed Miliband was much maligned but he at least tried to invoke the concept of one nation. Maybe he was actually quite good at seeing problems coming down the road.
Legally however...
My most local part of town only has a Co-op, is that the only place I'm permitted to shop? If I want to go shopping in the Asda at the other side of town instead then am I in breach of the law? Since that's in a different Council.
But I'm not thinking that much about Trump any more. Not my focus. What I'm thinking about is Dominic Raab. How popular is he, would you say, with the Tory grassroots?
Would they have been more willing to restrict international travel ?
Would they have made the UK less dependent upon imported PPE ?
Would they have stopped the NHS from sending patients back to care homes untested ?
Would they have reduced the levels of obese slobery ?
Would they have reduced the level of overcrowded or multi-generational housing ?
The answers to those seem to be No, No, No, No and No.
But they might have signed up to the EU's vaccine scheme, the EU's ventilator scheme and the EU's PPE scheme.
With negative consequences from each.
- If the UK voted to leave the EU, the resulting economic shock would put pressure on the value of the pound, which would risk higher prices of some household goods and damage living standards.
-- £ did fall. Did we see much in the way of inflation?
- Millions of UK citizens travel to Europe each year. The EU has made this easier and cheaper.
-- There has been much reduced travel following Brexit, some people may however claim other factors at play in this
- From next year, mobile phone roaming charges will be abolished across the EU, saving UK customers up to 38p per minute on calls.
-- This may well not have happened had we been outwith the EU. So far no sign of roaming charge coming back though?
- EU membership also gives UK citizens travelling in other European countries the right to access free or cheaper public healthcare.
-- EHIC is dead, long live the GHIC (but a bit sketchy on the details of that as yet and the costs to UK)
- Voting to leave the EU would create years of uncertainty and potential economic disruption. This would reduce investment and cost jobs.
-- Years of uncertainty definitely true. Also, first year post-Brexit poor for jobs. Again, naysayers may suggest there are other reasons for that
- The Government judges it could result in 10 years or more of uncertainty
-- Only 4.5 really, although still some uncertainty now on things
- A more limited trade deal with the EU would give the UK less access to the Single Market than we have now –
including for services, which make up almost 80% of the UK economy.
-- Current deal not that good for services, I think?
- Some argue that leaving the EU would give us more freedom to limit immigration.
-- It clearly does. Remains to be seen how that freedom is used
- EU membership means you and your family have the right to live, work or study abroad in any of the 27 other member countries.
-- Automatic rights lost, obviously.
Dear God, it really was an awful leaflet wasn't it? I don't think I read it at the time, otherwise I might have voted leave!
Raab is OK but not as popular as Sunak
You would have thought by now that now that every GOP member could see that he should be impeached but last week well over half of GOP Congressman voted to try to overturn the presidential election result despite there being not a shred of evidence to support it.
Trump and his loony core have got the GOP by the balls and they are going to find it a hell of a job to shake them off. It's no less than they deserve.
Quite possibly having hundreds of politicians sheltering together in bipartisan fear of their own lives as a rampaging mob set upon them by the President is chanting about killing leaders of their own party was enough to get them to set aside partisanship.
I’d say Orwell’s many acute points are somewhat blunted by his inclination to distinguish between patriotism (a quality apparently of ordinary English people) and nationalism (a vice of the English intelligentsia); there seems to me a kind of sentimentality in that. Also Orwell’s reluctance to distinguish between England and Britain/the UK (not uncommon then or now) is uncharacteristically imprecise.
The police can only enforce the law. They can only fine you for breaches of the law.
Unless the law says that exercise is limited to once a day you are perfectly entitled to go out for two walks a day. And then go out to do your shopping.
The common-sense thing to do is to make sure that when you go out you limit as far as possible your interaction with other people since it is the interaction which spreads the virus not simply being outside.
So if that means driving away from crowded streets to a remoter area to exercise that is more sensible than walking up and down a street outside your home with other people doing the same.
As usual I suppose the truth lies somewhere in the middle.
They were going to send my father back to his care home to pass away but kept him in hospital so my brother could go in to say goodbye.
Ok - his care home now has its own outbreak, but this strikes me as stupid beyond words. (Whilst understanding the NHS needs bed space)
Continual reference back to the Derbyshire overreach doesn't help. They've rescinded the fine for those poor women, and apologised.
But suppose it doesn't. What should the UK do then?
And why are some early Brexit supporters so determined to insist that this decision, uniquely amongst political decisions, is irreversible and never to be discussed again?
I think the electorate is sick of EU matters, certainly for the short term, however.
And would Republicans expect any kind of consequences for this sort of behaviour or let it go on the basis of needing a 'healing' process to bring the country together? It's strange how people who apparently believe the other side are lower than vermin don't appear to be the slightest bit worried that the same tactics might one day be used against themselves.
- To inflict a cost on the guilty
- To show the victims that society is protecting them
- Preventing/making it more difficult for the guilty to repeat their crime.
- Warning other potential malefactors that doing the same will have consequences.
Consider impeachment in that light?
Good to see the gradual conversion of the People's Vote troops.
To expand on that, imagine the UK stays 2% ahead of the EU average over the next few months. That is good news for the UK, but the effect on the spread and then recession of Covid-19 will be one factor among many. Other factors include legislation and adherence, non-regulated mask and hygiene behaviour, measures within healthcare settings, the current rates of infection, and more. The more vaccination, the more the R number is suppressed, but it's not the only game in town. Those extra vaccination WILL save lives, but failures and successes elsewhere will cost and save other lives.
It's too easy and understandable, if you're a supporter of this government, to become fixated on the success, to date, of the UK's vaccine program. But as nice as it is to have a good news story, the risk is that it overwhelms the message that we are still in danger.
The worst possible of worlds is if our early lead instils a sense of self-satisfied complacency, to the extent that people adopt riskier behaviours that cancel out the gains.
As numerous people have pointed out, Czechia has found out recently that nemesis follows hubris. We'd be smart to keep our heads down and get on with it right now.
It wouldn't be perfect but it's better than letting Trump slowly tear the party apart.
1. Infamously nationalised by Tory Mayor Ben Houchen
2. Lots of hot air about new flights and destinations
3. Neither the airport nor the airlines can actually make money (which is why the flights all stopped last time)
4. A business park on the south part of the site has been mooted a lot and kills lots of birds:
* Puts 22k Treasury officials on Tory Teesside
* Makes London - Teesside Airport flights viable
* Airport makes a profit, flights come back, Tories cemented into place in Darlo / Stockton etc
-- Automatic rights lost, obviously."
That last one was the reason Leave won! Phrasing it that way didn't make people forget that it meant people from 27 other member countries had the right to live and work here, and most people in the UK didn't think that deal was good for them. They weren't tempted to go and live in Eastern Europe, didn't speak the language the way Eastern Europeans speak English and so on.
It is a shame because it might have made sense - cheaper housing, more land - a Brit upping sticks to live in Bulgaria, Poland or wherever might have a much better quality of life on paper, but it seems the British working class dont like to leave their roots so much. I actually, quarter jokingly, mentioned to my girlfriend that we would be better off if we bought a house in Eastern Europe and brought up our son there - I work from home, she could give up work - and she looked at me as if I were mad
But I think the odds of it being reversed is about as likely as Boris Johnson being a future winner of Strictly Come Dancing.
It isn't just a case of the UK coming around to the idea of going through this psychodrama again, that's unlikely enough but possible. You have to twin that with the notion that the EU would unanimously agree to let us back in.
I think there is a view now amongst many that quite frankly Degaulle was right, the UK (England in particular) was not a good fit for Europe.
The combined odds of the UK voting to rejoin Europe and the French in particular voting to let us back in have to be microscopic.
https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1349308619867742208?s=20
Its not like he got on the M1 then the M6 in order to start riding a bike is it?
If someone acknowledges a mistake and says they won't do it again then is there a reason to keep kicking them when they're down. If they were insisting they were in the right and taking this matter to court then surely it would be more appropriate to intervene.
I should also emphasis I'm biased here - Teesside airport is brilliant for european flights - I used to be able to set off less than an hour before the Schiphol flight and get to most places in europe by Monday lunchtime.
It's the "my monument will last forever" aspect that creeps me out. If the silver linings roll by as badly as they do in the Noel Coward song, what should we do in, say, a decade's time?
Edit - Halfon just pointed out that Williamson is contradicting earlier evidence to the committee that schools were a marginal factor of transmission. Now he's claiming they were...and he's waffling in response.
I am not saying that this will have a positive or negative impact on death rate information, but my hypothesis is that because we have a free at the point of use healthcare system this is generally better for those who are less well off and well educated, as generally barriers of reimbursement and form filling do not exist.
We do know the Nytimes have reported McConnell is pleased Dems have begun impeachment.
Pelosi has shown herself capable of being bipartisan when it is unpopular to do so - for instance when she got her caucus to vote for Bush's bailout plan.
Maybe we should mark that down as another 0/10?
And with all respect to Orwell, GK Chesterton's relevance to the 21st century is considerably slimmer than was Mr Chesterton.