Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Tonight’s big political bet – how many Senators will vote to impeach Trump? – politicalbetting.com

124»

Comments

  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    RobD said:

    justin124 said:

    RobD said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    I have just read David Herdson's excellent article on this May's elections. Much of it I do agree with - though I think it is stretching things a bit to view elections held less than 17 months beyond the previous GE as 'midterm', particularly in the context of normal party politics having been in abeyance since March 2020. The polls suggest that the Tories have recovered to roughly how things stood in early Autumn of last year - a steady lead but still well down on the stratospheric poll leads of March/April 2020. I must also point out that the Tories performed well in the County Council elections of April 1961 - and the Urban and City Council elections held a month later. A year later Macmillan's government had become unpopular and the Tories went on to lose in 1964.

    I think we'd all be disappointed if you didn't point out political parallels from a time before the Beatles released their first song... :wink:
    I was too young to remember those elections - but have studied them .We were marginally closer to 'midterm' in April/May 1961 than will be the case in early May this year. Your point is?
    That it's so far back in time it has absolutely zero bearing on what will happen now?
    But 'midterm' unpopularity was as obvious back then as it is today. In March 1962 the Tories lost Orpington to the Liberals - and a further three seats to Labour at by elections that year. Moreover , the Television Age had arrived by that time too.
    The fortunes of the governing party in each parliament are different. The fact you have to go back almost sixty years proves my point, doesn't it?
    History never repeats itself entirely. What makes direct comparisons with the early 1960s most difficult is the absence of by elections on anything like the same scale. As a result, we can now only look to the polls and Local Elections when they happen. A more recent useful example is perhaps the 1987 Parliament - by which time by elections had already become less frequent than a generation earlier - though still a fair bit more common than what we see today. The second half of 1988 saw the Tories still enjoying commanding poll leads - though this was not reflected in by elections at the Parliamentary and Local levels.
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    justin124 said:

    RobD said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    I have just read David Herdson's excellent article on this May's elections. Much of it I do agree with - though I think it is stretching things a bit to view elections held less than 17 months beyond the previous GE as 'midterm', particularly in the context of normal party politics having been in abeyance since March 2020. The polls suggest that the Tories have recovered to roughly how things stood in early Autumn of last year - a steady lead but still well down on the stratospheric poll leads of March/April 2020. I must also point out that the Tories performed well in the County Council elections of April 1961 - and the Urban and City Council elections held a month later. A year later Macmillan's government had become unpopular and the Tories went on to lose in 1964.

    I think we'd all be disappointed if you didn't point out political parallels from a time before the Beatles released their first song... :wink:
    I was too young to remember those elections - but have studied them .We were marginally closer to 'midterm' in April/May 1961 than will be the case in early May this year. Your point is?
    That it's so far back in time it has absolutely zero bearing on what will happen now?
    But 'midterm' unpopularity was as obvious back then as it is today. In March 1962 the Tories lost Orpington to the Liberals - and a further three seats to Labour at by elections that year. Moreover , the Television Age had arrived by that time too.
    Not just the Television Age, but smartphones had just arrived too. Now all right, maybe back then a smartphone meant a phone that had buttons instead of a spinning dial, but it's basically the same thing.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,933
    justin124 said:

    RobD said:

    justin124 said:

    RobD said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    I have just read David Herdson's excellent article on this May's elections. Much of it I do agree with - though I think it is stretching things a bit to view elections held less than 17 months beyond the previous GE as 'midterm', particularly in the context of normal party politics having been in abeyance since March 2020. The polls suggest that the Tories have recovered to roughly how things stood in early Autumn of last year - a steady lead but still well down on the stratospheric poll leads of March/April 2020. I must also point out that the Tories performed well in the County Council elections of April 1961 - and the Urban and City Council elections held a month later. A year later Macmillan's government had become unpopular and the Tories went on to lose in 1964.

    I think we'd all be disappointed if you didn't point out political parallels from a time before the Beatles released their first song... :wink:
    I was too young to remember those elections - but have studied them .We were marginally closer to 'midterm' in April/May 1961 than will be the case in early May this year. Your point is?
    That it's so far back in time it has absolutely zero bearing on what will happen now?
    But 'midterm' unpopularity was as obvious back then as it is today. In March 1962 the Tories lost Orpington to the Liberals - and a further three seats to Labour at by elections that year. Moreover , the Television Age had arrived by that time too.
    The fortunes of the governing party in each parliament are different. The fact you have to go back almost sixty years proves my point, doesn't it?
    History never repeats itself entirely. What makes direct comparisons with the early 1960s most difficult is the absence of by elections on anything like the same scale. As a result, we can now only look to the polls and Local Elections when they happen. A more recent useful example is perhaps the 1987 Parliament - by which time by elections had already become less frequent than a generation earlier - though still a fair bit more common than what we see today. The second half of 1988 saw the Tories still enjoying commanding poll leads - though this was not reflected in by elections at the Parliamentary and Local levels.
    How is 1988 a more recent example if it shows the opposite of what is going on now?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,204
    The GOP will work out in time that they've reached the wrong decision in the terms that matter most to them, electoral ones. I mean it might take them till 2026 but they'll get there, slowly, and the realisation will eventually dawn on the dimmest that they should have probably convicted Trump
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527

    justin124 said:

    RobD said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    I have just read David Herdson's excellent article on this May's elections. Much of it I do agree with - though I think it is stretching things a bit to view elections held less than 17 months beyond the previous GE as 'midterm', particularly in the context of normal party politics having been in abeyance since March 2020. The polls suggest that the Tories have recovered to roughly how things stood in early Autumn of last year - a steady lead but still well down on the stratospheric poll leads of March/April 2020. I must also point out that the Tories performed well in the County Council elections of April 1961 - and the Urban and City Council elections held a month later. A year later Macmillan's government had become unpopular and the Tories went on to lose in 1964.

    I think we'd all be disappointed if you didn't point out political parallels from a time before the Beatles released their first song... :wink:
    I was too young to remember those elections - but have studied them .We were marginally closer to 'midterm' in April/May 1961 than will be the case in early May this year. Your point is?
    That it's so far back in time it has absolutely zero bearing on what will happen now?
    But 'midterm' unpopularity was as obvious back then as it is today. In March 1962 the Tories lost Orpington to the Liberals - and a further three seats to Labour at by elections that year. Moreover , the Television Age had arrived by that time too.
    Not just the Television Age, but smartphones had just arrived too. Now all right, maybe back then a smartphone meant a phone that had buttons instead of a spinning dial, but it's basically the same thing.
    To this day I do not own a smartphone - though from memory phones with buttons did not appear until circa 1980.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,380

    Floater said:
    Yes, it's Opinium.

    They also asked: "Do you think a Labour government led by Keir Starmer would have done a better or worse job at slowing the spread of coronavirus?

    Better 31%
    Worse 20%

    However, as all the news is now dominated by the vaccine rollout, Johnson is at present able to get away with his wider failings on Covid by virtue of being seen to have succeeded with the vaccine.
    It's better to win the fourth lap than the first three. No-one remembers who was winning at the bell.
    What's striking in all these findings is the number who say dunno/much the same. It's what I'm also picking up in phone canvassing - most people see the pandemic as apolitical, and aren't inclined to change their votes over it. Johnson certainly benefits from the issue being the only game in town and always having something reportable to say about it (that, rather than a vaccine bonus, is what's helping the Tory vote), but I'll be surprised if it ends up being hugely beneficial to either side, even after the inquiry.
    I think you are right, however the economic fallout could well be a crucial factor by 2024.

    The 2008 US sub prime crash wasn't Gordon Brown's fault, however he paid for it at the subsequent election.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    RobD said:

    justin124 said:

    RobD said:

    justin124 said:

    RobD said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    I have just read David Herdson's excellent article on this May's elections. Much of it I do agree with - though I think it is stretching things a bit to view elections held less than 17 months beyond the previous GE as 'midterm', particularly in the context of normal party politics having been in abeyance since March 2020. The polls suggest that the Tories have recovered to roughly how things stood in early Autumn of last year - a steady lead but still well down on the stratospheric poll leads of March/April 2020. I must also point out that the Tories performed well in the County Council elections of April 1961 - and the Urban and City Council elections held a month later. A year later Macmillan's government had become unpopular and the Tories went on to lose in 1964.

    I think we'd all be disappointed if you didn't point out political parallels from a time before the Beatles released their first song... :wink:
    I was too young to remember those elections - but have studied them .We were marginally closer to 'midterm' in April/May 1961 than will be the case in early May this year. Your point is?
    That it's so far back in time it has absolutely zero bearing on what will happen now?
    But 'midterm' unpopularity was as obvious back then as it is today. In March 1962 the Tories lost Orpington to the Liberals - and a further three seats to Labour at by elections that year. Moreover , the Television Age had arrived by that time too.
    The fortunes of the governing party in each parliament are different. The fact you have to go back almost sixty years proves my point, doesn't it?
    History never repeats itself entirely. What makes direct comparisons with the early 1960s most difficult is the absence of by elections on anything like the same scale. As a result, we can now only look to the polls and Local Elections when they happen. A more recent useful example is perhaps the 1987 Parliament - by which time by elections had already become less frequent than a generation earlier - though still a fair bit more common than what we see today. The second half of 1988 saw the Tories still enjoying commanding poll leads - though this was not reflected in by elections at the Parliamentary and Local levels.
    How is 1988 a more recent example if it shows the opposite of what is going on now?
    In what sense was it the opposite? The Tories had a poll lead in late 1988 - though much bigger than what we see now.
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    RobD said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    I have just read David Herdson's excellent article on this May's elections. Much of it I do agree with - though I think it is stretching things a bit to view elections held less than 17 months beyond the previous GE as 'midterm', particularly in the context of normal party politics having been in abeyance since March 2020. The polls suggest that the Tories have recovered to roughly how things stood in early Autumn of last year - a steady lead but still well down on the stratospheric poll leads of March/April 2020. I must also point out that the Tories performed well in the County Council elections of April 1961 - and the Urban and City Council elections held a month later. A year later Macmillan's government had become unpopular and the Tories went on to lose in 1964.

    I think we'd all be disappointed if you didn't point out political parallels from a time before the Beatles released their first song... :wink:
    I was too young to remember those elections - but have studied them .We were marginally closer to 'midterm' in April/May 1961 than will be the case in early May this year. Your point is?
    That it's so far back in time it has absolutely zero bearing on what will happen now?
    But 'midterm' unpopularity was as obvious back then as it is today. In March 1962 the Tories lost Orpington to the Liberals - and a further three seats to Labour at by elections that year. Moreover , the Television Age had arrived by that time too.
    Not just the Television Age, but smartphones had just arrived too. Now all right, maybe back then a smartphone meant a phone that had buttons instead of a spinning dial, but it's basically the same thing.
    To this day I do not own a smartphone - though from memory phones with buttons did not appear until circa 1980.
    Actually the first push-button models appeared in 1960, though that was in the States.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,559
    edited February 2021

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    RobD said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    I have just read David Herdson's excellent article on this May's elections. Much of it I do agree with - though I think it is stretching things a bit to view elections held less than 17 months beyond the previous GE as 'midterm', particularly in the context of normal party politics having been in abeyance since March 2020. The polls suggest that the Tories have recovered to roughly how things stood in early Autumn of last year - a steady lead but still well down on the stratospheric poll leads of March/April 2020. I must also point out that the Tories performed well in the County Council elections of April 1961 - and the Urban and City Council elections held a month later. A year later Macmillan's government had become unpopular and the Tories went on to lose in 1964.

    I think we'd all be disappointed if you didn't point out political parallels from a time before the Beatles released their first song... :wink:
    I was too young to remember those elections - but have studied them .We were marginally closer to 'midterm' in April/May 1961 than will be the case in early May this year. Your point is?
    That it's so far back in time it has absolutely zero bearing on what will happen now?
    But 'midterm' unpopularity was as obvious back then as it is today. In March 1962 the Tories lost Orpington to the Liberals - and a further three seats to Labour at by elections that year. Moreover , the Television Age had arrived by that time too.
    Not just the Television Age, but smartphones had just arrived too. Now all right, maybe back then a smartphone meant a phone that had buttons instead of a spinning dial, but it's basically the same thing.
    To this day I do not own a smartphone - though from memory phones with buttons did not appear until circa 1980.
    Actually the first push-button models appeared in 1960, though that was in the States.
    Am old enough to remember when the Princess phone went on the market.

    Also sufficiently superannuated to recall friends of mine, out in the country, who were on a party line; each number had its own distinctive ring.

    PLUS when I lived in Louisiana in the 1970s, you could make a call on a pay phone (remember them?) for a nickle; was at least 10 cents elsewhere in USA.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,209
    Pulpstar said:

    The GOP will work out in time that they've reached the wrong decision in the terms that matter most to them, electoral ones. I mean it might take them till 2026 but they'll get there, slowly, and the realisation will eventually dawn on the dimmest that they should have probably convicted Trump

    The problem the Republican Party has is that they want Trump's supporters (because they can't win without them), but they don't want Trump (because they can't win with him).

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,209
    HYUFD said:
    I always think it's weird how we get to hear (almost constantly) about how there's no free speech. It's almost like there is free speech.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,933
    edited February 2021
    justin124 said:

    RobD said:

    justin124 said:

    RobD said:

    justin124 said:

    RobD said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    I have just read David Herdson's excellent article on this May's elections. Much of it I do agree with - though I think it is stretching things a bit to view elections held less than 17 months beyond the previous GE as 'midterm', particularly in the context of normal party politics having been in abeyance since March 2020. The polls suggest that the Tories have recovered to roughly how things stood in early Autumn of last year - a steady lead but still well down on the stratospheric poll leads of March/April 2020. I must also point out that the Tories performed well in the County Council elections of April 1961 - and the Urban and City Council elections held a month later. A year later Macmillan's government had become unpopular and the Tories went on to lose in 1964.

    I think we'd all be disappointed if you didn't point out political parallels from a time before the Beatles released their first song... :wink:
    I was too young to remember those elections - but have studied them .We were marginally closer to 'midterm' in April/May 1961 than will be the case in early May this year. Your point is?
    That it's so far back in time it has absolutely zero bearing on what will happen now?
    But 'midterm' unpopularity was as obvious back then as it is today. In March 1962 the Tories lost Orpington to the Liberals - and a further three seats to Labour at by elections that year. Moreover , the Television Age had arrived by that time too.
    The fortunes of the governing party in each parliament are different. The fact you have to go back almost sixty years proves my point, doesn't it?
    History never repeats itself entirely. What makes direct comparisons with the early 1960s most difficult is the absence of by elections on anything like the same scale. As a result, we can now only look to the polls and Local Elections when they happen. A more recent useful example is perhaps the 1987 Parliament - by which time by elections had already become less frequent than a generation earlier - though still a fair bit more common than what we see today. The second half of 1988 saw the Tories still enjoying commanding poll leads - though this was not reflected in by elections at the Parliamentary and Local levels.
    How is 1988 a more recent example if it shows the opposite of what is going on now?
    In what sense was it the opposite? The Tories had a poll lead in late 1988 - though much bigger than what we see now.
    So they are not enjoying commanding poll leads at the moment? I fail to see how 1988 is relevant to the current situation.
  • Politico.com - Inside Democrats' witness fiasco
    The impeachment managers in Donald Trump's trial spent Friday night and Saturday morning wrestling with the question themselves.

    https://www.politico.com/news/2021/02/13/senate-democrats-impeachment-witnesses-468992

    When Senate Democrats stepped onto the floor on Saturday morning, they had no idea the House impeachment managers were about to drop a political grenade in their laps.

    But after a brief schism that threatened to throw Donald Trump's trial into chaos, House and Senate Democrats quickly agreed to put the pin back in. House Democratic managers and the former president's lawyers ducked the issue of witnesses nearly as soon as it was raised, and Senate Democrats approved the turnaround.

    Instead of a weeks-long drama over trial witnesses that risked upending the Senate schedule, a widely known statement from one House Republican was entered into the record. Trump’s team declined to dispute it. And amazingly, both sides decided to move on. The Senate later voted 57-43 to acquit Trump, with seven Republicans joining all Democrats in favor of conviction.

    But that speedy resolution came after several hours of utter uncertainty. . . .
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,204
    Good to see
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9257823/Care-home-bosses-demand-staff-Covid-jabs-risk-losing-jobs-amid-fears-uptake.html?ito=push-notification&ci=77240&si=25474331
    The woman, who asked to remain anonymous, added: ‘They tried to make me feel guilty, telling me I could bring the virus into the home and people would die.’
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    RobD said:

    justin124 said:

    RobD said:

    justin124 said:

    RobD said:

    justin124 said:

    RobD said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    I have just read David Herdson's excellent article on this May's elections. Much of it I do agree with - though I think it is stretching things a bit to view elections held less than 17 months beyond the previous GE as 'midterm', particularly in the context of normal party politics having been in abeyance since March 2020. The polls suggest that the Tories have recovered to roughly how things stood in early Autumn of last year - a steady lead but still well down on the stratospheric poll leads of March/April 2020. I must also point out that the Tories performed well in the County Council elections of April 1961 - and the Urban and City Council elections held a month later. A year later Macmillan's government had become unpopular and the Tories went on to lose in 1964.

    I think we'd all be disappointed if you didn't point out political parallels from a time before the Beatles released their first song... :wink:
    I was too young to remember those elections - but have studied them .We were marginally closer to 'midterm' in April/May 1961 than will be the case in early May this year. Your point is?
    That it's so far back in time it has absolutely zero bearing on what will happen now?
    But 'midterm' unpopularity was as obvious back then as it is today. In March 1962 the Tories lost Orpington to the Liberals - and a further three seats to Labour at by elections that year. Moreover , the Television Age had arrived by that time too.
    The fortunes of the governing party in each parliament are different. The fact you have to go back almost sixty years proves my point, doesn't it?
    History never repeats itself entirely. What makes direct comparisons with the early 1960s most difficult is the absence of by elections on anything like the same scale. As a result, we can now only look to the polls and Local Elections when they happen. A more recent useful example is perhaps the 1987 Parliament - by which time by elections had already become less frequent than a generation earlier - though still a fair bit more common than what we see today. The second half of 1988 saw the Tories still enjoying commanding poll leads - though this was not reflected in by elections at the Parliamentary and Local levels.
    How is 1988 a more recent example if it shows the opposite of what is going on now?
    In what sense was it the opposite? The Tories had a poll lead in late 1988 - though much bigger than what we see now.
    So they are not enjoying commanding poll leads at the moment? I fail to see how 1988 is relevant to the current situation.
    The point is that the Tory poll leads of 1961 were not a leading indicator of elecoral success in 1964. Similarly the big Tory leads throughout 1988 were not reflected in a big Tory win in 1992 - and had Thatcher remained PM the Tories would likely have left office that year. On the same basis, today's modest Tory leads should not be seen as pointing to Johnson being re-elected in 2024. It is far too early to make such a judgement.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,933
    justin124 said:

    RobD said:

    justin124 said:

    RobD said:

    justin124 said:

    RobD said:

    justin124 said:

    RobD said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    I have just read David Herdson's excellent article on this May's elections. Much of it I do agree with - though I think it is stretching things a bit to view elections held less than 17 months beyond the previous GE as 'midterm', particularly in the context of normal party politics having been in abeyance since March 2020. The polls suggest that the Tories have recovered to roughly how things stood in early Autumn of last year - a steady lead but still well down on the stratospheric poll leads of March/April 2020. I must also point out that the Tories performed well in the County Council elections of April 1961 - and the Urban and City Council elections held a month later. A year later Macmillan's government had become unpopular and the Tories went on to lose in 1964.

    I think we'd all be disappointed if you didn't point out political parallels from a time before the Beatles released their first song... :wink:
    I was too young to remember those elections - but have studied them .We were marginally closer to 'midterm' in April/May 1961 than will be the case in early May this year. Your point is?
    That it's so far back in time it has absolutely zero bearing on what will happen now?
    But 'midterm' unpopularity was as obvious back then as it is today. In March 1962 the Tories lost Orpington to the Liberals - and a further three seats to Labour at by elections that year. Moreover , the Television Age had arrived by that time too.
    The fortunes of the governing party in each parliament are different. The fact you have to go back almost sixty years proves my point, doesn't it?
    History never repeats itself entirely. What makes direct comparisons with the early 1960s most difficult is the absence of by elections on anything like the same scale. As a result, we can now only look to the polls and Local Elections when they happen. A more recent useful example is perhaps the 1987 Parliament - by which time by elections had already become less frequent than a generation earlier - though still a fair bit more common than what we see today. The second half of 1988 saw the Tories still enjoying commanding poll leads - though this was not reflected in by elections at the Parliamentary and Local levels.
    How is 1988 a more recent example if it shows the opposite of what is going on now?
    In what sense was it the opposite? The Tories had a poll lead in late 1988 - though much bigger than what we see now.
    So they are not enjoying commanding poll leads at the moment? I fail to see how 1988 is relevant to the current situation.
    The point is that the Tory poll leads of 1961 were not a leading indicator of elecoral success in 1964. Similarly the big Tory leads throughout 1988 were not reflected in a big Tory win in 1992 - and had Thatcher remained PM the Tories would likely have left office that year. On the same basis, today's modest Tory leads should not be seen as pointing to Johnson being re-elected in 2024. It is far too early to make such a judgement.
    But the Tories don't have a commanding lead at the moment. So why are those two particular examples even relevant?
  • theProletheProle Posts: 1,206
    edited February 2021
    Mortimer said:

    Front pages full of stories of the unlocking....seems government have been busy briefing again

    Back in the boozer for Easter apparently. Picnics with anybody from March 8th..... just got to move the snow before putting the blanket down!

    Hmmmm... (a) I don't buy it; (b) if it does happen I hope to goodness it's not too soon - it'd be better to wait than to risk any further major reversals.
    1) Normality is just a few tens of millions of jabs away
    2) The only threat to Boris' position is from the backbenches. Who (rightly IMO) want to open up sooner than SAGE.
    The current ban on meeting others outside is shameful, disproportionate and counterproductive - whichever moron came up with it as a propoganda move to try to make people take lockdown seriously should be sacked, and then made to spend a year in solitary confinement. It's easily the single measure that's done me the most mental harm - I was coping reasonably well with the isolation when I could go on occasional walks with friends (who have kids, which means that the 1 + 1 option is useless), I'm really struggling with the isolation now (despite being in a engineering job where I'm in the workshop with others every day).

    It should never have been imposed, and won't be making any difference to the R number, so I really can't see why it couldn't be ditched now, never mind on the 8th March.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,086
    edited February 2021
    Pulpstar said:

    Good to see
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9257823/Care-home-bosses-demand-staff-Covid-jabs-risk-losing-jobs-amid-fears-uptake.html?ito=push-notification&ci=77240&si=25474331
    The woman, who asked to remain anonymous, added: ‘They tried to make me feel guilty, telling me I could bring the virus into the home and people would die.’

    "tried to make me feel guilty" = told the harsh reality of your irresponsible behaviour
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,477

    It would be typical of Boris if he built a tunnel from Scotland to Northern Ireland, and by the time it was finished, it linked two independent countries in the EU.

    "two independent countries in the EU"?

    No country in the EU is independent.
    Apart from being independent enough to decide whether they want to be in the EU or not.
    No doubt the basis of a referendum on accession - given the SNP are so keen on the will of the people... right?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,204

    Pulpstar said:

    Good to see
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9257823/Care-home-bosses-demand-staff-Covid-jabs-risk-losing-jobs-amid-fears-uptake.html?ito=push-notification&ci=77240&si=25474331
    The woman, who asked to remain anonymous, added: ‘They tried to make me feel guilty, telling me I could bring the virus into the home and people would die.’

    "tried to make me feel guilty" = told the harsh reality of your irresponsible behaviour
    Yes, older people have weaker immune systems, and by definition care homes are full of them. Even the best vaccine won't give maximum protection to a care home if the staff aren't vaxed up.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,477
    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:
    I always think it's weird how we get to hear (almost constantly) about how there's no free speech. It's almost like there is free speech.
    It's not actually weird in the slightest, unless you think curtailment of free speech results in literally no speech at all.
  • propagate the panda!! propitiate the peccary!!! penalize the pelican!!!
  • White House deputy press secretary TJ Ducklo has resigned, a day after being suspended without pay for allegedly threatening a female reporter.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-56058477
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,204
    How quickly will NZ get vaccines ? It's broadly got the first part of the Covid fight correct, you can't shut yourself off forever though - but you can till vaccines arrive.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,086
    edited February 2021
    Pulpstar said:

    How quickly will NZ get vaccines ? It's broadly got the first part of the Covid fight correct, you can't shut yourself off forever though - but you can till vaccines arrive.
    New Zealand’s first Covid-19 vaccines will arrive in the country ahead of schedule in a win for the government, which has been criticised for being too slow to procure them.

    In a surprise announcement on Friday, the prime minister, Jacinda Ardern, said hundreds of thousands of vials of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine would be arriving early, and vaccinations for border staff would begin next Saturday.

    But...Jacinda Ardern says vaccination of the wider population will begin in the second half of the year....and was expected to take six months to a year.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/feb/12/new-zealand-covid-vaccines-to-arrive-one-month-early-border-staff-to-be-inoculated-next-week
  • Apparently Duncan Bannatyne of Dragon's Den fame flew into the US yesterday and then proceeded to get himself a free jab today.

    Not sure that's a great look.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,588
    Interesting.

    "MP David Davis calls for Vitamin D therapy to be rolled out 'immediately' after study finds it can 'reduce Covid deaths by up to 60%' – despite scientists saying further research is needed
    Study evaluated effectiveness of calcifediol on patients at hospital in Barcelona
    Found those given doses of Vitamin D were 80 per cent less likely to require ICU"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9257521/Study-finds-Vitamin-D-reduces-Covid-deaths-60.html
  • Andy_JS said:

    Interesting.

    "MP David Davis calls for Vitamin D therapy to be rolled out 'immediately' after study finds it can 'reduce Covid deaths by up to 60%' – despite scientists saying further research is needed
    Study evaluated effectiveness of calcifediol on patients at hospital in Barcelona
    Found those given doses of Vitamin D were 80 per cent less likely to require ICU"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9257521/Study-finds-Vitamin-D-reduces-Covid-deaths-60.html

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYK9-zvJF_k
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,204
    edited February 2021

    Apparently Duncan Bannatyne of Dragon's Den fame flew into the US yesterday and then proceeded to get himself a free jab today.

    Not sure that's a great look.

    Criteria for a jab in the USA seems to be - are you white & are you minted.

    Although he could have had one here, he's 72 !
  • Pulpstar said:

    Apparently Duncan Bannatyne of Dragon's Den fame flew into the US yesterday and then proceeded to get himself a free jab today.

    Not sure that's a great look.

    Criteria for a jab in the USA seems to be - are you white & are you minted.
    Not quite as bad as Portugal, where it seems to be are you a friend of a politician or somebody on the vaccine roll out committee.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541
    I don’t think Zero Covid is a thing now TBH. In truth, given the connectedness of Wuhan, even with a more open and honest CCP, and the fact evidence is mounting it was spreading in China and Italy (at least) in the Autumn of 2019, I don’t think it ever was. We can squash the virus, turn it into a nuisance rather than a threat, but if NZ can’t keep this thing out completely then who can?

    https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-circulated-europe-china-before-wuhan-outbreak-2020-12?r=US&IR=T
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541

    Andy_JS said:

    Interesting.

    "MP David Davis calls for Vitamin D therapy to be rolled out 'immediately' after study finds it can 'reduce Covid deaths by up to 60%' – despite scientists saying further research is needed
    Study evaluated effectiveness of calcifediol on patients at hospital in Barcelona
    Found those given doses of Vitamin D were 80 per cent less likely to require ICU"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9257521/Study-finds-Vitamin-D-reduces-Covid-deaths-60.html

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYK9-zvJF_k
    Bodes well for the summer and more sunlight,
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541

    Pulpstar said:

    Good to see
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9257823/Care-home-bosses-demand-staff-Covid-jabs-risk-losing-jobs-amid-fears-uptake.html?ito=push-notification&ci=77240&si=25474331
    The woman, who asked to remain anonymous, added: ‘They tried to make me feel guilty, telling me I could bring the virus into the home and people would die.’

    "tried to make me feel guilty" = told the harsh reality of your irresponsible behaviour
    As an employment lawyer I have yet to see a convincing argument why employers shouldn’t have policies like this.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541
    The Worldometers Global 7 day average of cases drops below 400,000 for the first time since 20 October. It has dropped 47% in a month.



  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,588
    edited February 2021
    DougSeal said:

    I don’t think Zero Covid is a thing now TBH. In truth, given the connectedness of Wuhan, even with a more open and honest CCP, and the fact evidence is mounting it was spreading in China and Italy (at least) in the Autumn of 2019, I don’t think it ever was. We can squash the virus, turn it into a nuisance rather than a threat, but if NZ can’t keep this thing out completely then who can?

    https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-circulated-europe-china-before-wuhan-outbreak-2020-12?r=US&IR=T
    Zero Covid was always a mad idea, as Australia are finding out. Vaccinating the population on a regular basis is a more sensible option. Id be happy to have a jab every month if necessary, but we cant keep locking down every time one person somewhere gets it, which seems to be the approach in places like Victoria. Many people have their regular flu jab every year anyway, so you can just give another one to them at the same time.
  • FenmanFenman Posts: 1,047
    DougSeal said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Good to see
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9257823/Care-home-bosses-demand-staff-Covid-jabs-risk-losing-jobs-amid-fears-uptake.html?ito=push-notification&ci=77240&si=25474331
    The woman, who asked to remain anonymous, added: ‘They tried to make me feel guilty, telling me I could bring the virus into the home and people would die.’

    "tried to make me feel guilty" = told the harsh reality of your irresponsible behaviour
    As an employment lawyer I have yet to see a convincing argument why employers shouldn’t have policies like this.
    I think people with elderly relatives in homes should make it clear that they will take their relatives out unless they receive assurance that all staff are vaccinated.
  • Matchmaking for horny beavers in Plymouth

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-devon-55729648

    Cat missing for five years found in Derbyshire

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-derbyshire-56031051
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,204
    DougSeal said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Interesting.

    "MP David Davis calls for Vitamin D therapy to be rolled out 'immediately' after study finds it can 'reduce Covid deaths by up to 60%' – despite scientists saying further research is needed
    Study evaluated effectiveness of calcifediol on patients at hospital in Barcelona
    Found those given doses of Vitamin D were 80 per cent less likely to require ICU"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9257521/Study-finds-Vitamin-D-reduces-Covid-deaths-60.html

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYK9-zvJF_k
    Bodes well for the summer and more sunlight,
    Vitamin D ties in with a few things

    i) Winter northern hemisphere nations being worst hit.
    ii) Darker skinned individuals above the tropic of cancer being worst affected than lighter skinned individuals
    iii) Some places... Florida... for instance not having the sort of mortality you might expect compared to the atlantic seaboard.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,588
    England strike with the 8th ball of the day.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,599
    Immediate breakthrough for England and Ali, 301/7 as Patel gets stumped.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,599
    And another duck!
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,588
    And now with the 10th ball of the day. I remember getting out in precisely that manner in a school match once, for a golden duck. Looping full toss that you get a leading edge on, it balloons up in the air.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,599
    Pant’s on fire!
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,204
    Indian price immovable from 1.3ish ! I've laid them -£33/+£98.
    250 all out nailed on for England it is ^^;;
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868
    justin124 said:

    RobD said:

    justin124 said:

    RobD said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    I have just read David Herdson's excellent article on this May's elections. Much of it I do agree with - though I think it is stretching things a bit to view elections held less than 17 months beyond the previous GE as 'midterm', particularly in the context of normal party politics having been in abeyance since March 2020. The polls suggest that the Tories have recovered to roughly how things stood in early Autumn of last year - a steady lead but still well down on the stratospheric poll leads of March/April 2020. I must also point out that the Tories performed well in the County Council elections of April 1961 - and the Urban and City Council elections held a month later. A year later Macmillan's government had become unpopular and the Tories went on to lose in 1964.

    I think we'd all be disappointed if you didn't point out political parallels from a time before the Beatles released their first song... :wink:
    I was too young to remember those elections - but have studied them .We were marginally closer to 'midterm' in April/May 1961 than will be the case in early May this year. Your point is?
    That it's so far back in time it has absolutely zero bearing on what will happen now?
    But 'midterm' unpopularity was as obvious back then as it is today. In March 1962 the Tories lost Orpington to the Liberals - and a further three seats to Labour at by elections that year. Moreover , the Television Age had arrived by that time too.
    The fortunes of the governing party in each parliament are different. The fact you have to go back almost sixty years proves my point, doesn't it?
    History never repeats itself entirely. What makes direct comparisons with the early 1960s most difficult is the absence of by elections on anything like the same scale. As a result, we can now only look to the polls and Local Elections when they happen. A more recent useful example is perhaps the 1987 Parliament - by which time by elections had already become less frequent than a generation earlier - though still a fair bit more common than what we see today. The second half of 1988 saw the Tories still enjoying commanding poll leads - though this was not reflected in by elections at the Parliamentary and Local levels.
    Things were going well for Harold, with important victories in the north, and by the end of September 1066 was shaping up to be a very successful year...
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,204
    What a terrible dismissal for a No 11.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,588
    Well that was a stupid decision by Pant to take a single off the first ball of the over. All out 329.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,599
    Pant’s out of partners now! 329 all out, Pant stuck on 58 not out.
    Great start to the day with the ball from England, now to see how we get on with the bat.
    Lay the draw, this is likely to be a four day Test.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,204
    England have all day, they've got all of tommorow too. And the next day as well. No rush here !
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,588
    Sandpit said:

    Pant’s out of partners now! 329 all out, Pant stuck on 58 not out.
    Great start to the day with the ball from England, now to see how we get on with the bat.
    Lay the draw, this is likely to be a four day Test.

    yes the draw is 15/1, it should be about 50/1.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,599
    England’s turn for the row of ducks now, even though that was awfully close. Burns walking back...
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,204
    Ball clipping leg, commentators "crashing onto the wickets"
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,588
    edited February 2021
    Pulpstar said:

    Ball clipping leg, commentators "crashing onto the wickets"

    I thought Burns was unlucky with that decision. It would have been given not out more than 50% of the time IMO, and then umpires call would have saved him if the bowling team had reviewed it.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,599
    Not looking good for England now. 23/3.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,204
    329 looks massive.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,588
    edited February 2021
    To have a pitch on the first day that plays more like a third or fourth day strip is perhaps slightly questionable.
This discussion has been closed.