There is still some 3.3 available with BF to lay Sunak for next Tory leader.
I say this half in jest but also with some seriousness that, for those backing Sunak, it's worth bearing in mind that he is only 5'5" and always looks dwarfed when he stands next to almost all male counterparts (and some female ones). There are enough studies out there to show that height - at least for a man - seems to have some effect on how a leader is perceived. I suspect it might be more of an issue within the internal Conservative electorate for the leadership.
Yes, good point. We've come a fair way in ditching the old prejudices about who can be PM - e.g. the last but one was not an Old Etonian - but is the country ready for a midget?
That's racist. He's comfortably above average height for a man of Indian origin.
It's when @kinabalu does his thing of being impeccably progressive towards all minority/disadvantaged groups, right up until the moment when they stop supporting the Left
I'm calling bollocks on the height thing. Both Thatcher and HMQ are tiny.
Most of the public never see them in the flesh and those that do, whilst they might be surprised at their height, don't find it anything more than a curiosity.
It might be a problem for him if he was on the pull in a nightclub. But most politicians seeking the office of PM don't do that.
I'm calling bollocks on the height thing. Both Thatcher and HMQ are tiny.
Most of the public never see them in the flesh and those that do, whilst they might be surprised at their height, don't find it anything more than a curiosity.
It might be a problem for him if he was on the pull in a nightclub. But most politicians seeking the office of PM don't do that.
Depends - it gave Bercow [ remember him] quite the complex and we mustn't forget Napoleon
I think this is a key point: it's an issue if the subject concerned *thinks* it's an issue. Otherwise it isn't.
The best Rishi could do is just shrug it off and say it isn't a big deal to him, but he has to act like it to match - which includes getting photographed normally.
Not quite beaten in Wales - but getting damned close.
There was a doctor on BBC Wales yesterday who is expecting another big Welsh Covid wave in a few months, and the Welsh NHS will again be under strain.
Drakeford has really made a dog's breakfast of Covid hasn't he?
Did he/she say why? Vaccine suggests otherwise.
Dr Richard Pugh, Chairman of the Welsh Intensive Care group. It's on BBC Wales online.
Did he give reasons? Fine to make predictions, but I'd love to know his thinking
"When you look at critical care, the average age of people that come to critical care as a result of Covid is late-50s and these are people who are not going to be seeing the benefits of the vaccination programme that soon, so I am concerned about the potential of a third wave."
It's an odd thing to say because, at least in England, these people are now indeed being vaccinated. Is Pugh aware of the rapidity of the rollout?
Puzzling.
I think thats right. We may see a rise in cases with the schools and then a bit of rule of six outside, but should be suppressed by other factors. By the time we are really opening up I think the over 50's (and indeed the over 40's) will have been vaccinated at least once, so we shouldn't fear a large 4th wave. Unless its just defined by cases, not deaths, in which case the youths may indeed catch it.
Agreed – but as a side point this obsession with cases over deaths has to stop. I mean, who cares if you contact covid if it doesn't affect you? In what sense does that matter beyond some arbitrary statistic?
Totally agree with this, but it will take someone with balls/guts to face down the 'experts' in the media (Peston, I'm looking at you), who start to panic in three weeks when cases rises (schools back with lots of lateral flow tests - its inevitable).
It is absolutely inevitable that cases will rise when the children return. So the government needs to get in front of it to stop the sort of ludicrous panic and hysteria that is commonplace among the media, and fairly routine right here on PB.
There is still some 3.3 available with BF to lay Sunak for next Tory leader.
I say this half in jest but also with some seriousness that, for those backing Sunak, it's worth bearing in mind that he is only 5'5" and always looks dwarfed when he stands next to almost all male counterparts (and some female ones). There are enough studies out there to show that height - at least for a man - seems to have some effect on how a leader is perceived. I suspect it might be more of an issue within the internal Conservative electorate for the leadership.
Yes, good point. We've come a fair way in ditching the old prejudices about who can be PM - e.g. the last but one was not an Old Etonian - but is the country ready for a midget?
That's racist. He's comfortably above average height for a man of Indian origin.
Well he's five five, which is not actually that short.
Theory: Covid has rendered Brexit pointless, indeed self harming.
I voted to Leave (and it was a close call: I decided on the day) because I really did think we would move to a lower tax, more deregulated economy. Not Singapore-on-Thames, that was always a pipe-dream, but definitely something more nimble.
We are not getting that, because Covid. Instead, we are getting a high tax, low growth economy, essentially a European economy, but without the benefits of the European Single Market, Customs Union or Freedom of Movement. We will be a kind of particularly isolated France, minus the sunshine and vasty fields.
Meanwhile we have destabilised Northern Ireland, fuelled Scottish indy (maybe even Welsh indy), we have divided the nation bitterly and we face a decade of austerity. The future will be dominated by bitter quarrels with Brussels, from which we gain very little.
It is most unfortunate. Brexit could have worked. It might still work in 10-20 years. But in the short-medium term, Covid has turned Brexit into a nightmare. The worst case scenario
Thanks but it's a little bit late for this now.
What we're getting is the median (or maybe modal) view of the British electorate.
That is, decent spending on public services, responsible taxation, fiscal rectitude (but not austerity), immigration control, political independence, environmental stewardship, and popular regulation.
A deregulated low-tax model wouldn't garner much support, unless it delivered the goods in terms of high-growth and at little cost to everyday people in terms of public services.
FWIW, I think we will reform but it will be slowly and gently as our economy recalibrates. Not "big bang".
I think one way to shift public opinion in favour of lower taxes would be to abolish PAYE, so that people received their gross salaries each year, but then had to pay the government the taxes at the end of it. Having money, then having to give it back is always more noticeable than never having it in the first place.
Another way would be to have VAT not included in most marked prices so that it's extra when you pay it, like sales tax in the US.
Yes, that's true. But sales tax in US and Canada is really annoying because you're always surprised and come up short on the pocket change at the till.
But I am not sure the instinct amongst strong supporters of the SNP to man the barricades indicates a position of strength. It seems to me to indicate the opposite.
It's when @kinabalu does his thing of being impeccably progressive towards all minority/disadvantaged groups, right up until the moment when they stop supporting the Left
But I am not sure the instinct amongst strong supporters of the SNP to man the barricades indicates a position of strength. It seems to me to indicate the opposite.
They might also be anticipating a vote in any future leadership contest..?
Theory: Covid has rendered Brexit pointless, indeed self harming.
I voted to Leave (and it was a close call: I decided on the day) because I really did think we would move to a lower tax, more deregulated economy. Not Singapore-on-Thames, that was always a pipe-dream, but definitely something more nimble.
We are not getting that, because Covid. Instead, we are getting a high tax, low growth economy, essentially a European economy, but without the benefits of the European Single Market, Customs Union or Freedom of Movement. We will be a kind of particularly isolated France, minus the sunshine and vasty fields.
Meanwhile we have destabilised Northern Ireland, fuelled Scottish indy (maybe even Welsh indy), we have divided the nation bitterly and we face a decade of austerity. The future will be dominated by bitter quarrels with Brussels, from which we gain very little.
It is most unfortunate. Brexit could have worked. It might still work in 10-20 years. But in the short-medium term, Covid has turned Brexit into a nightmare. The worst case scenario
Thanks but it's a little bit late for this now.
What we're getting is the median (or maybe modal) view of the British electorate.
That is, decent spending on public services, responsible taxation, fiscal rectitude (but not austerity), immigration control, political independence, environmental stewardship, and popular regulation.
A deregulated low-tax model wouldn't garner much support, unless it delivered the goods in terms of high-growth and at little cost to everyday people in terms of public services.
FWIW, I think we will reform but it will be slowly and gently as our economy recalibrates. Not "big bang".
I think one way to shift public opinion in favour of lower taxes would be to abolish PAYE, so that people received their gross salaries each year, but then had to pay the government the taxes at the end of it. Having money, then having to give it back is always more noticeable than never having it in the first place.
Another way would be to have VAT not included in most marked prices so that it's extra when you pay it, like sales tax in the US.
Except in the US everyone gets their tax refunds like it's some government handout and not their own money!
Not quite beaten in Wales - but getting damned close.
There was a doctor on BBC Wales yesterday who is expecting another big Welsh Covid wave in a few months, and the Welsh NHS will again be under strain.
Drakeford has really made a dog's breakfast of Covid hasn't he?
Did he/she say why? Vaccine suggests otherwise.
Dr Richard Pugh, Chairman of the Welsh Intensive Care group. It's on BBC Wales online.
Did he give reasons? Fine to make predictions, but I'd love to know his thinking
"When you look at critical care, the average age of people that come to critical care as a result of Covid is late-50s and these are people who are not going to be seeing the benefits of the vaccination programme that soon, so I am concerned about the potential of a third wave."
It's an odd thing to say because, at least in England, these people are now indeed being vaccinated. Is Pugh aware of the rapidity of the rollout?
Puzzling.
I think thats right. We may see a rise in cases with the schools and then a bit of rule of six outside, but should be suppressed by other factors. By the time we are really opening up I think the over 50's (and indeed the over 40's) will have been vaccinated at least once, so we shouldn't fear a large 4th wave. Unless its just defined by cases, not deaths, in which case the youths may indeed catch it.
Agreed – but as a side point this obsession with cases over deaths has to stop. I mean, who cares if you contact covid if it doesn't affect you? In what sense does that matter beyond some arbitrary statistic?
Totally agree with this, but it will take someone with balls/guts to face down the 'experts' in the media (Peston, I'm looking at you), who start to panic in three weeks when cases rises (schools back with lots of lateral flow tests - its inevitable).
It is absolutely inevitable that cases will rise when the children return. So the government needs to get in front of it to stop the sort of ludicrous panic and hysteria that is commonplace among the media, and fairly routine right here on PB.
They will, but the measures being taken this time round seem better than last time. My (G6 & vaxxed) colleague is having her kids lateral flow tested twice a week so that should keep on top of it. Hopefully the vaccine rollout will continue eventual downward pressure on R/cases even if schools push it up a bit.
There is still some 3.3 available with BF to lay Sunak for next Tory leader.
I say this half in jest but also with some seriousness that, for those backing Sunak, it's worth bearing in mind that he is only 5'5" and always looks dwarfed when he stands next to almost all male counterparts (and some female ones). There are enough studies out there to show that height - at least for a man - seems to have some effect on how a leader is perceived. I suspect it might be more of an issue within the internal Conservative electorate for the leadership.
Yes, good point. We've come a fair way in ditching the old prejudices about who can be PM - e.g. the last but one was not an Old Etonian - but is the country ready for a midget?
Why, how very progressive of you!
Rishi has two immutable characteristics: (1) he fits handily into decorative niches around the house; (2) he'll squash the Opposition as flat as a pancake...
Disagree with (2). If he leads the Cons into the next GE there will be no landslide. The absolute best they can hope for is a tiny majority.
Maybe, but we'll see. He's bright, meticulous, quicker on his feet than most politicians, and ruthless: he just took decades of Conservative orthodoxy and shot it in the back of the head because he knows that despite what we Tories like to pretend, there's little love in this country for big business, and none at all for cutting their taxes while raising those of individuals and families. He's had it relatively easy so far, but his cross-party appeal is immense and he seems to be doing everything he can to cultivate it.
I can see why you Tories would hate Sunak - he is far too pragmatic and flexible when it comes to policy. Which for me is his key selling point to all those non-Tory voters you need to keep on board. It really helps that as well as a sound political head and being photogenic, he is clearly not twatty like so many politicians of all parties tend to be these days.
Shagger is an incompetent clown apparently being manipulated by the affair who has installed herself and her hideous wallpaper as the unelected Lady Protector. Bin him off, stick charming populist gets normal people Sunak in control, and he stands a chance to renew in place - a rare feat for any government.
But I am not sure the instinct amongst strong supporters of the SNP to man the barricades indicates a position of strength. It seems to me to indicate the opposite.
They might also be anticipating a vote in any future leadership contest..?
Yes, didn't think of that. Wonder if they are Nicolite true believers or Salmondite insurrectionists.
There is still some 3.3 available with BF to lay Sunak for next Tory leader.
I say this half in jest but also with some seriousness that, for those backing Sunak, it's worth bearing in mind that he is only 5'5" and always looks dwarfed when he stands next to almost all male counterparts (and some female ones). There are enough studies out there to show that height - at least for a man - seems to have some effect on how a leader is perceived. I suspect it might be more of an issue within the internal Conservative electorate for the leadership.
Yes, good point. We've come a fair way in ditching the old prejudices about who can be PM - e.g. the last but one was not an Old Etonian - but is the country ready for a midget?
That's racist. He's comfortably above average height for a man of Indian origin.
Well he's five five, which is not actually that short. It's more the overall dinkiness. But he is big on another metric - sex appeal to gay men.
He is undoubtedly short for a top-level politician in an Anglo country, certainly in recent times. But I was wondering (genuinely; I'm not just taking the piss) as to whether in your view, just as gravitas can sometimes be code for "has deep commanding voice" which is in turn code for "is male", "tall" could be similarly code for "is male AND Caucasian"?
I can't say I've ever detected that. But now you mention it - gosh what a minefield.
Um. Nope.
Obama had gravitas. Trump did not. Thatcher had gravitas. Trudeau does not (nitwit). Merkel has gravitas. Macron can at times. Boris does not. Sturgeon does usually, but not recently. Mother Theresa had it. So does Gisela Stuart. All different races, heights, backgrounds and genders.
Only in Guardianland is everything is about race and gender.
Not quite beaten in Wales - but getting damned close.
There was a doctor on BBC Wales yesterday who is expecting another big Welsh Covid wave in a few months, and the Welsh NHS will again be under strain.
Drakeford has really made a dog's breakfast of Covid hasn't he?
Did he/she say why? Vaccine suggests otherwise.
Dr Richard Pugh, Chairman of the Welsh Intensive Care group. It's on BBC Wales online.
Did he give reasons? Fine to make predictions, but I'd love to know his thinking
"When you look at critical care, the average age of people that come to critical care as a result of Covid is late-50s and these are people who are not going to be seeing the benefits of the vaccination programme that soon, so I am concerned about the potential of a third wave."
It's an odd thing to say because, at least in England, these people are now indeed being vaccinated. Is Pugh aware of the rapidity of the rollout?
Puzzling.
I think thats right. We may see a rise in cases with the schools and then a bit of rule of six outside, but should be suppressed by other factors. By the time we are really opening up I think the over 50's (and indeed the over 40's) will have been vaccinated at least once, so we shouldn't fear a large 4th wave. Unless its just defined by cases, not deaths, in which case the youths may indeed catch it.
Agreed – but as a side point this obsession with cases over deaths has to stop. I mean, who cares if you contact covid if it doesn't affect you? In what sense does that matter beyond some arbitrary statistic?
Totally agree with this, but it will take someone with balls/guts to face down the 'experts' in the media (Peston, I'm looking at you), who start to panic in three weeks when cases rises (schools back with lots of lateral flow tests - its inevitable).
It is absolutely inevitable that cases will rise when the children return. So the government needs to get in front of it to stop the sort of ludicrous panic and hysteria that is commonplace among the media, and fairly routine right here on PB.
Also - it's going to be about 3 weeks after 8 March before we see any increases in cases due to this ie the week leading up to Easter. Hopefully we will have seen significant further falls in deaths and hospitalisations as the effect of the reduction of the impact of COVID on people vaccinated in late January/February comes through.
It's when @kinabalu does his thing of being impeccably progressive towards all minority/disadvantaged groups, right up until the moment when they stop supporting the Left
FPT Just what I would expect from you , nasty snide Little Englander with a chip on his shoulder
malcolmg said:
Not sure who you mix with Burgessian, I am sure there are a good few low lifes that are anti - English but it is a very very small minority. Scotland as a whole is welcoming and especially to the English.
I can vouch for this. Been a Scottish resident now for 3 weeks here in central Buchan. Everyone has been lovely - we're by no means the only English family in the village and there's other nationalities too.
I've had anti English sentiment but only ever in Glasgow, everywhere else I've never had a problem. And to be totally fair, its only a couple of incidents. Like anywhere there are people with chips on shoulders.
There is still some 3.3 available with BF to lay Sunak for next Tory leader.
I say this half in jest but also with some seriousness that, for those backing Sunak, it's worth bearing in mind that he is only 5'5" and always looks dwarfed when he stands next to almost all male counterparts (and some female ones). There are enough studies out there to show that height - at least for a man - seems to have some effect on how a leader is perceived. I suspect it might be more of an issue within the internal Conservative electorate for the leadership.
Yes, good point. We've come a fair way in ditching the old prejudices about who can be PM - e.g. the last but one was not an Old Etonian - but is the country ready for a midget?
Why, how very progressive of you!
Rishi has two immutable characteristics: (1) he fits handily into decorative niches around the house; (2) he'll squash the Opposition as flat as a pancake...
Disagree with (2). If he leads the Cons into the next GE there will be no landslide. The absolute best they can hope for is a tiny majority.
Maybe, but we'll see. He's bright, meticulous, quicker on his feet than most politicians, and ruthless: he just took decades of Conservative orthodoxy and shot it in the back of the head because he knows that despite what we Tories like to pretend, there's little love in this country for big business, and none at all for cutting their taxes while raising those of individuals and families. He's had it relatively easy so far, but his cross-party appeal is immense and he seems to be doing everything he can to cultivate it.
I can see why you Tories would hate Sunak - he is far too pragmatic and flexible when it comes to policy. Which for me is his key selling point to all those non-Tory voters you need to keep on board. It really helps that as well as a sound political head and being photogenic, he is clearly not twatty like so many politicians of all parties tend to be these days.
Shagger is an incompetent clown apparently being manipulated by the affair who has installed herself and her hideous wallpaper as the unelected Lady Protector. Bin him off, stick charming populist gets normal people Sunak in control, and he stands a chance to renew in place - a rare feat for any government.
Boris, don't forget has already renewed the the government in place - as he wholly differentiated himself from TMay. To do it a third time is a big ask but we're all so personality driven right now Rishi might well be able to pull it off. Plus the public is used to it - oh that's the new lot. Even if it's only a new team from the old lot.
Poor old Lab if meaning a change means a change of Cons government personnel.
Verdict on the budget and EFO - We're all fucked, the numbers don't make any sense and the chancellor has hidden a lot of the pain with a CT rise that will literally never yield what he thinks it will because if it does then domestic companies all turn into takeover targets for multinationals who will offshore the profits and avoid the new rate of tax.
I fear that this is all going to come apart at the seams very badly in the run up to the election and Starmer might just become PM by default because of job losses due to business investment dropping off a cliff.
Budgets are largely theatre and often bear limited resemblance to what actually happens in practice. Yesterday will make little difference to the Tories prospects in 2024.
I do wonder just what the next election will be fought on. Labour seem to have dropped their radicalism and the Cons having done the one thing they were elected to do - Brexit - have become rather pointless. We hear much about the War on Woke but this is an essentially trivial matter and surely cannot bear the weight of being placed front and centre. The pandemic dwarfs everything right now but soon it will be over apart from the economic response and there's no great gap between the parties on that. Neither are going to prioritize repairing the public finances. So we could be looking at one of those "narcissism of small differences" elections where the driving force of the parties is purely to win power rather than what they plan to do with it. Who does this favour? Probably Labour but I really don't know. I do know it's less than inspiring.
If uninspiring politics will save us from damaging egotistical incompetent twats like Johnson, Corbyn and Rees-Mogg, (to name but a few) then I am all in favour of being uninspired.
There is that. Bland is not the worst thing in the world. But I like some ideological bite. For me, on election night, there should be a large section of the public feeling genuinely excited about the prospect of winning and just as genuinely nauseous at the thought of the other side winning. I just prefer that climate. I also think corruption and grift and the shallow obsession with ego and personalities is more likely when politics becomes more about being than doing.
I tend to agree with you, but didn't you feel 'genuinely excited' in 1997 when Blair won, despite his victory not containing much ideological bite? I certainly did: it was such a relief after waiting since 1979. Like you, I'd like Labour to be more radical, but any prospect of victory under a reasonably redistributive manifesto would suffice - better than more Tory years.
Oh gosh yes. 97 was cosmic. Naked in garden with brandy bottle type reaction. In fact strike that "type". It's why I can never properly join in the Blair hate. He gave me that...
Gave you what ???
- He gave me a good time, is what I'm trying to say. A night of real passion.
For a moment there I thought you were dropping a Curry-esque bombshell.
There is still some 3.3 available with BF to lay Sunak for next Tory leader.
I say this half in jest but also with some seriousness that, for those backing Sunak, it's worth bearing in mind that he is only 5'5" and always looks dwarfed when he stands next to almost all male counterparts (and some female ones). There are enough studies out there to show that height - at least for a man - seems to have some effect on how a leader is perceived. I suspect it might be more of an issue within the internal Conservative electorate for the leadership.
Yes, good point. We've come a fair way in ditching the old prejudices about who can be PM - e.g. the last but one was not an Old Etonian - but is the country ready for a midget?
Why, how very progressive of you!
Rishi has two immutable characteristics: (1) he fits handily into decorative niches around the house; (2) he'll squash the Opposition as flat as a pancake...
Disagree with (2). If he leads the Cons into the next GE there will be no landslide. The absolute best they can hope for is a tiny majority.
Maybe, but we'll see. He's bright, meticulous, quicker on his feet than most politicians, and ruthless: he just took decades of Conservative orthodoxy and shot it in the back of the head because he knows that despite what we Tories like to pretend, there's little love in this country for big business, and none at all for cutting their taxes while raising those of individuals and families. He's had it relatively easy so far, but his cross-party appeal is immense and he seems to be doing everything he can to cultivate it.
I can see why you Tories would hate Sunak - he is far too pragmatic and flexible when it comes to policy. Which for me is his key selling point to all those non-Tory voters you need to keep on board. It really helps that as well as a sound political head and being photogenic, he is clearly not twatty like so many politicians of all parties tend to be these days.
Shagger is an incompetent clown apparently being manipulated by the affair who has installed herself and her hideous wallpaper as the unelected Lady Protector. Bin him off, stick charming populist gets normal people Sunak in control, and he stands a chance to renew in place - a rare feat for any government.
I don't hate him at all - hence all the praise! On present trajectories, Boris looks good for one more victory, then he can hand the task of kicking Labour arse in the 2030s off to Rishi.
I'm calling bollocks on the height thing. Both Thatcher and HMQ are tiny.
Most of the public never see them in the flesh and those that do, whilst they might be surprised at their height, don't find it anything more than a curiosity.
It might be a problem for him if he was on the pull in a nightclub. But most politicians seeking the office of PM don't do that.
But if he ever became PM he would be constantly photographed meeting other world leaders who would be about twice the size.
Remember the photos of the Obamas meeting the Queen. It was jarring. On a visceral level it will affect Sunak's chances. It shouldn't but it will.
He is obviously sensitive about it hence the weirdly-angled photos
Thatcher was 5'5", and Reagan was 6'1", and they looked good together and had one of the most successful partnerships in history.
I don't doubt Rishi might look a bit short next to some other leaders too; I just don't think it will be a big deal provided he has the gravitas and character to be PM.
Not sure how he'd look in Maggie's heels though
I think he's 5' 7", so that's Maggie with heels.
He's tall enough - bear in mind most men are 5'10-5'11-ish, with only the tall ones > 6ft - and I don't think 4 inches is going to be a dealbreaker.
It might be if he was at Peter Dinklage or Warwick Davis levels, but he's not.
Winston Churchill was 5'6". He should have known that he'd never amount to anything to life.
In his era that was a reasonable, in fact, above average height. I seem to remember reading that the average height for a man in the late 1800s was 5'5''. Anyway, comparing Sunak to Churchill is just as ludicrous as comparing WSC to the Fat Clown. Sunak is more comparable to John Major, which is not necessarily a bad thing.
But Churchill was size 46, too, so he had a greater presence.
Not quite beaten in Wales - but getting damned close.
There was a doctor on BBC Wales yesterday who is expecting another big Welsh Covid wave in a few months, and the Welsh NHS will again be under strain.
Drakeford has really made a dog's breakfast of Covid hasn't he?
Did he/she say why? Vaccine suggests otherwise.
Dr Richard Pugh, Chairman of the Welsh Intensive Care group. It's on BBC Wales online.
Did he give reasons? Fine to make predictions, but I'd love to know his thinking
"When you look at critical care, the average age of people that come to critical care as a result of Covid is late-50s and these are people who are not going to be seeing the benefits of the vaccination programme that soon, so I am concerned about the potential of a third wave."
It's an odd thing to say because, at least in England, these people are now indeed being vaccinated. Is Pugh aware of the rapidity of the rollout?
Puzzling.
I think thats right. We may see a rise in cases with the schools and then a bit of rule of six outside, but should be suppressed by other factors. By the time we are really opening up I think the over 50's (and indeed the over 40's) will have been vaccinated at least once, so we shouldn't fear a large 4th wave. Unless its just defined by cases, not deaths, in which case the youths may indeed catch it.
Agreed – but as a side point this obsession with cases over deaths has to stop. I mean, who cares if you contact covid if it doesn't affect you? In what sense does that matter beyond some arbitrary statistic?
Totally agree with this, but it will take someone with balls/guts to face down the 'experts' in the media (Peston, I'm looking at you), who start to panic in three weeks when cases rises (schools back with lots of lateral flow tests - its inevitable).
It is absolutely inevitable that cases will rise when the children return. So the government needs to get in front of it to stop the sort of ludicrous panic and hysteria that is commonplace among the media, and fairly routine right here on PB.
They will, but the measures being taken this time round seem better than last time. My (G6 & vaxxed) colleague is having her kids lateral flow tested twice a week so that should keep on top of it. Hopefully the vaccine rollout will continue eventual downward pressure on R/cases even if schools push it up a bit.
The current lateral flow test positivity rate in secondary schools is 0.1%, vs a government estimate of the false positive rate of 0.31%, so quite hard to know what to make of it other than that there is barely any covid in school age kids.
Schools were open in November lockdown and cases still fell (to begin with) - can't see any particular cause for concern.
There is still some 3.3 available with BF to lay Sunak for next Tory leader.
I say this half in jest but also with some seriousness that, for those backing Sunak, it's worth bearing in mind that he is only 5'5" and always looks dwarfed when he stands next to almost all male counterparts (and some female ones). There are enough studies out there to show that height - at least for a man - seems to have some effect on how a leader is perceived. I suspect it might be more of an issue within the internal Conservative electorate for the leadership.
Yes, good point. We've come a fair way in ditching the old prejudices about who can be PM - e.g. the last but one was not an Old Etonian - but is the country ready for a midget?
Why, how very progressive of you!
Rishi has two immutable characteristics: (1) he fits handily into decorative niches around the house; (2) he'll squash the Opposition as flat as a pancake...
Disagree with (2). If he leads the Cons into the next GE there will be no landslide. The absolute best they can hope for is a tiny majority.
Maybe, but we'll see. He's bright, meticulous, quicker on his feet than most politicians, and ruthless: he just took decades of Conservative orthodoxy and shot it in the back of the head because he knows that despite what we Tories like to pretend, there's little love in this country for big business, and none at all for cutting their taxes while raising those of individuals and families. He's had it relatively easy so far, but his cross-party appeal is immense and he seems to be doing everything he can to cultivate it.
I can see why you Tories would hate Sunak - he is far too pragmatic and flexible when it comes to policy. Which for me is his key selling point to all those non-Tory voters you need to keep on board. It really helps that as well as a sound political head and being photogenic, he is clearly not twatty like so many politicians of all parties tend to be these days.
Shagger is an incompetent clown apparently being manipulated by the affair who has installed herself and her hideous wallpaper as the unelected Lady Protector. Bin him off, stick charming populist gets normal people Sunak in control, and he stands a chance to renew in place - a rare feat for any government.
That's strange. PB Brains Trust I get it. But First Minister vs some random doctor?
Who do you think has the better access to the bigger picture and advice?
PB Brains Trust, obv.
While this is clearly a joke, in fact there has been some very sound thinking and advice on this very forum. There are enough experts from a wide variety of disciplines to contribute. A bit like how parliament ought to be, but sadly isn't. If pb was in charge of the pandemic response, it would have been 'different', but also interesting...
But I am not sure the instinct amongst strong supporters of the SNP to man the barricades indicates a position of strength. It seems to me to indicate the opposite.
They might also be anticipating a vote in any future leadership contest..?
That was my immediate thought - what happened yesterday that meant joining a political party was an immediate decision..
Voting for Sturgeon's replacement would be just about the only valid reason for that sudden leap.
There is still some 3.3 available with BF to lay Sunak for next Tory leader.
I say this half in jest but also with some seriousness that, for those backing Sunak, it's worth bearing in mind that he is only 5'5" and always looks dwarfed when he stands next to almost all male counterparts (and some female ones). There are enough studies out there to show that height - at least for a man - seems to have some effect on how a leader is perceived. I suspect it might be more of an issue within the internal Conservative electorate for the leadership.
Yes, good point. We've come a fair way in ditching the old prejudices about who can be PM - e.g. the last but one was not an Old Etonian - but is the country ready for a midget?
That's racist. He's comfortably above average height for a man of Indian origin.
Well he's five five, which is not actually that short. It's more the overall dinkiness. But he is big on another metric - sex appeal to gay men.
He is undoubtedly short for a top-level politician in an Anglo country, certainly in recent times. But I was wondering (genuinely; I'm not just taking the piss) as to whether in your view, just as gravitas can sometimes be code for "has deep commanding voice" which is in turn code for "is male", "tall" could be similarly code for "is male AND Caucasian"?
I can't say I've ever detected that. But now you mention it - gosh what a minefield.
Um. Nope.
Obama had gravitas. Trump did not. Thatcher had gravitas. Trudeau does not (nitwit). Merkel has gravitas. Macron can at times. Boris does not. Sturgeon does usually, but not recently. Mother Theresa had it. So does Gisela Stuart. All different races, heights, backgrounds and genders.
Only in Guardianland is everything is about race and gender.
To an extent, you are right - we find what we are looking for. But I think you underestimated the reality and extent of subconscious bias across many parameters within society - not just race and gender.
More or less than the Scottish governments mishandling of the Salmond inquiry? Asking for a friend...
Unless he was claiming any form of discrimination or whictleblowing the maximum expore of the Government would be his notice period plus the statutory unfair dismissal cap in the year he left (£88,519 this year). So that would be my ballpark estimate.
I can see why you Tories would hate Sunak - he is far too pragmatic and flexible when it comes to policy.
The Tories are historically so good at getting and keeping power because they are pragmatic and flexible.
I don't know of real Tories that hate Sunak. They may disagree with his take on how to deal with the pandemic. But as with getting into it, getting out of the pandemic does not come with an instruction manual.
Theory: Covid has rendered Brexit pointless, indeed self harming.
I voted to Leave (and it was a close call: I decided on the day) because I really did think we would move to a lower tax, more deregulated economy. Not Singapore-on-Thames, that was always a pipe-dream, but definitely something more nimble.
We are not getting that, because Covid. Instead, we are getting a high tax, low growth economy, essentially a European economy, but without the benefits of the European Single Market, Customs Union or Freedom of Movement. We will be a kind of particularly isolated France, minus the sunshine and vasty fields.
Meanwhile we have destabilised Northern Ireland, fuelled Scottish indy (maybe even Welsh indy), we have divided the nation bitterly and we face a decade of austerity. The future will be dominated by bitter quarrels with Brussels, from which we gain very little.
It is most unfortunate. Brexit could have worked. It might still work in 10-20 years. But in the short-medium term, Covid has turned Brexit into a nightmare. The worst case scenario
For me, forgetting about Brexit good or bad, it's just been a monumental waste of time if we don't now do some serious things (other than border controls and trade deals) we couldn't have done as EU members. Like you, I sense we are not going to, regardless of who wins the next election.
Like, for example, vaccinate our population? (And yes I know we COULD have done that independently within the EU - but would we? Seriously?
To me, Brexit wasn't about leaving the EU as it was in 2016, it was about not being in the EU as it might be in 2025. There is a very strong chance that the EU in 2025 will be considerably more integrated than it was in 2016, in a way that would be very much to the UK's disadvantage. There is a fair chance that it will be an utter shitstorm driven by ongoing North-South Euro crises and East-West constitutional wrangles. I don't think we will change as much as we might like - any change is exhausting and eats up political capital. But I think Europe will change away from us, and we will be increasingly glad we are not part of it.
That's a respectable reason for voting Leave, yes. But I personally don't expect the EU to become a lot more integrated. I don't think they could take their publics with them on that even if - which I doubt - it was a serious practical aim rather than a "guiding spirit" perennial aspiration. Also, for me, you were overthinking it. That is just one possible future, and not an imminent one, but as against that you have the near certainty of making life more difficult in the here and now.
I'm calling bollocks on the height thing. Both Thatcher and HMQ are tiny.
Most of the public never see them in the flesh and those that do, whilst they might be surprised at their height, don't find it anything more than a curiosity.
It might be a problem for him if he was on the pull in a nightclub. But most politicians seeking the office of PM don't do that.
But if he ever became PM he would be constantly photographed meeting other world leaders who would be about twice the size.
Remember the photos of the Obamas meeting the Queen. It was jarring. On a visceral level it will affect Sunak's chances. It shouldn't but it will.
He is obviously sensitive about it hence the weirdly-angled photos
Thatcher was 5'5", and Reagan was 6'1", and they looked good together and had one of the most successful partnerships in history.
I don't doubt Rishi might look a bit short next to some other leaders too; I just don't think it will be a big deal provided he has the gravitas and character to be PM.
Not sure how he'd look in Maggie's heels though
I think he's 5' 7", so that's Maggie with heels.
He's tall enough - bear in mind most men are 5'10-5'11-ish, with only the tall ones > 6ft - and I don't think 4 inches is going to be a dealbreaker.
It might be if he was at Peter Dinklage or Warwick Davis levels, but he's not.
Winston Churchill was 5'6". He should have known that he'd never amount to anything to life.
To be fair, the average age of men has been rising for about 200 years, so that's not necessarily a killer point.
There is still some 3.3 available with BF to lay Sunak for next Tory leader.
I say this half in jest but also with some seriousness that, for those backing Sunak, it's worth bearing in mind that he is only 5'5" and always looks dwarfed when he stands next to almost all male counterparts (and some female ones). There are enough studies out there to show that height - at least for a man - seems to have some effect on how a leader is perceived. I suspect it might be more of an issue within the internal Conservative electorate for the leadership.
Yes, good point. We've come a fair way in ditching the old prejudices about who can be PM - e.g. the last but one was not an Old Etonian - but is the country ready for a midget?
Why, how very progressive of you!
Rishi has two immutable characteristics: (1) he fits handily into decorative niches around the house; (2) he'll squash the Opposition as flat as a pancake...
Disagree with (2). If he leads the Cons into the next GE there will be no landslide. The absolute best they can hope for is a tiny majority.
Maybe, but we'll see. He's bright, meticulous, quicker on his feet than most politicians, and ruthless: he just took decades of Conservative orthodoxy and shot it in the back of the head because he knows that despite what we Tories like to pretend, there's little love in this country for big business, and none at all for cutting their taxes while raising those of individuals and families. He's had it relatively easy so far, but his cross-party appeal is immense and he seems to be doing everything he can to cultivate it.
I can see why you Tories would hate Sunak - he is far too pragmatic and flexible when it comes to policy. Which for me is his key selling point to all those non-Tory voters you need to keep on board. It really helps that as well as a sound political head and being photogenic, he is clearly not twatty like so many politicians of all parties tend to be these days.
Shagger is an incompetent clown apparently being manipulated by the affair who has installed herself and her hideous wallpaper as the unelected Lady Protector. Bin him off, stick charming populist gets normal people Sunak in control, and he stands a chance to renew in place - a rare feat for any government.
This conservative strongly supports Rishi and will be very pleased to see him as PM one day
That's strange. PB Brains Trust I get it. But First Minister vs some random doctor?
Who do you think has the better access to the bigger picture and advice?
PB Brains Trust, obv.
While this is clearly a joke, in fact there has been some very sound thinking and advice on this very forum. There are enough experts from a wide variety of disciplines to contribute. A bit like how parliament ought to be, but sadly isn't. If pb was in charge of the pandemic response, it would have been 'different', but also interesting...
How `bout this for a PB.com cabinet:
Prime Minister: Stodge Chancellor of the Exchequer: Contrarian Foreign Secretary: DavidL Home Secretary: Black Rook Justice: Kinabalu Health: Gallowgate Work and pensions: Nabavi Education: Ydoethur Department for International Trade: PT Defence: HYUFD Secretary of State for Scotland: MalcyG Chief Whip: Topping
There is still some 3.3 available with BF to lay Sunak for next Tory leader.
I say this half in jest but also with some seriousness that, for those backing Sunak, it's worth bearing in mind that he is only 5'5" and always looks dwarfed when he stands next to almost all male counterparts (and some female ones). There are enough studies out there to show that height - at least for a man - seems to have some effect on how a leader is perceived. I suspect it might be more of an issue within the internal Conservative electorate for the leadership.
Yes, good point. We've come a fair way in ditching the old prejudices about who can be PM - e.g. the last but one was not an Old Etonian - but is the country ready for a midget?
That's racist. He's comfortably above average height for a man of Indian origin.
Well he's five five, which is not actually that short. It's more the overall dinkiness. But he is big on another metric - sex appeal to gay men.
He is undoubtedly short for a top-level politician in an Anglo country, certainly in recent times. But I was wondering (genuinely; I'm not just taking the piss) as to whether in your view, just as gravitas can sometimes be code for "has deep commanding voice" which is in turn code for "is male", "tall" could be similarly code for "is male AND Caucasian"?
I don't think so. Jackie Baillie, for example, could be said to have a degree of gravitas. Starmer, not so much.
There is still some 3.3 available with BF to lay Sunak for next Tory leader.
I say this half in jest but also with some seriousness that, for those backing Sunak, it's worth bearing in mind that he is only 5'5" and always looks dwarfed when he stands next to almost all male counterparts (and some female ones). There are enough studies out there to show that height - at least for a man - seems to have some effect on how a leader is perceived. I suspect it might be more of an issue within the internal Conservative electorate for the leadership.
Yes, good point. We've come a fair way in ditching the old prejudices about who can be PM - e.g. the last but one was not an Old Etonian - but is the country ready for a midget?
Why, how very progressive of you!
Rishi has two immutable characteristics: (1) he fits handily into decorative niches around the house; (2) he'll squash the Opposition as flat as a pancake...
Disagree with (2). If he leads the Cons into the next GE there will be no landslide. The absolute best they can hope for is a tiny majority.
Maybe, but we'll see. He's bright, meticulous, quicker on his feet than most politicians, and ruthless: he just took decades of Conservative orthodoxy and shot it in the back of the head because he knows that despite what we Tories like to pretend, there's little love in this country for big business, and none at all for cutting their taxes while raising those of individuals and families. He's had it relatively easy so far, but his cross-party appeal is immense and he seems to be doing everything he can to cultivate it.
I can see why you Tories would hate Sunak - he is far too pragmatic and flexible when it comes to policy. Which for me is his key selling point to all those non-Tory voters you need to keep on board. It really helps that as well as a sound political head and being photogenic, he is clearly not twatty like so many politicians of all parties tend to be these days.
Shagger is an incompetent clown apparently being manipulated by the affair who has installed herself and her hideous wallpaper as the unelected Lady Protector. Bin him off, stick charming populist gets normal people Sunak in control, and he stands a chance to renew in place - a rare feat for any government.
I don't hate him at all - hence all the praise! On present trajectories, Boris looks good for one more victory, then he can hand the task of kicking Labour arse in the 2030s off to Rishi.
What we have to ask ourselves is whether or not the next Labour PM has actually been born yet?
That's strange. PB Brains Trust I get it. But First Minister vs some random doctor?
Who do you think has the better access to the bigger picture and advice?
PB Brains Trust, obv.
While this is clearly a joke, in fact there has been some very sound thinking and advice on this very forum. There are enough experts from a wide variety of disciplines to contribute. A bit like how parliament ought to be, but sadly isn't. If pb was in charge of the pandemic response, it would have been 'different', but also interesting...
How `bout this for a PB.com cabinet:
Prime Minister: Stodge Chancellor of the Exchequer: Contrarian Foreign Secretary: DavidL Home Secretary: Black Rook Justice: Kinabalu Health: Gallowgate Work and pensions: Nabavi Education: Ydoethur Department for International Trade: PT Defence: HYUFD Secretary of State for Scotland: MalcyG Chief Whip: Topping
Can I have BEIS?
(And who is going to break it to Cyclefree she hasn't got a post? Hmmmmm - Leader of the House?)
Theory: Covid has rendered Brexit pointless, indeed self harming.
I voted to Leave (and it was a close call: I decided on the day) because I really did think we would move to a lower tax, more deregulated economy. Not Singapore-on-Thames, that was always a pipe-dream, but definitely something more nimble.
We are not getting that, because Covid. Instead, we are getting a high tax, low growth economy, essentially a European economy, but without the benefits of the European Single Market, Customs Union or Freedom of Movement. We will be a kind of particularly isolated France, minus the sunshine and vasty fields.
Meanwhile we have destabilised Northern Ireland, fuelled Scottish indy (maybe even Welsh indy), we have divided the nation bitterly and we face a decade of austerity. The future will be dominated by bitter quarrels with Brussels, from which we gain very little.
It is most unfortunate. Brexit could have worked. It might still work in 10-20 years. But in the short-medium term, Covid has turned Brexit into a nightmare. The worst case scenario
For me, forgetting about Brexit good or bad, it's just been a monumental waste of time if we don't now do some serious things (other than border controls and trade deals) we couldn't have done as EU members. Like you, I sense we are not going to, regardless of who wins the next election.
Like, for example, vaccinate our population? (And yes I know we COULD have done that independently within the EU - but would we? Seriously?
To me, Brexit wasn't about leaving the EU as it was in 2016, it was about not being in the EU as it might be in 2025. There is a very strong chance that the EU in 2025 will be considerably more integrated than it was in 2016, in a way that would be very much to the UK's disadvantage. There is a fair chance that it will be an utter shitstorm driven by ongoing North-South Euro crises and East-West constitutional wrangles. I don't think we will change as much as we might like - any change is exhausting and eats up political capital. But I think Europe will change away from us, and we will be increasingly glad we are not part of it.
That's a respectable reason for voting Leave, yes. But I personally don't expect the EU to become a lot more integrated. I don't think they could take their publics with them on that even if - which I doubt - it was a serious practical aim rather than a "guiding spirit" perennial aspiration. Also, for me, you were overthinking it. That is just one possible future, and not an imminent one, but as against that you have the near certainty of making life more difficult in the here and now.
I certainly was over-thinking it! I was overthinking it to death. Likelihood and benefits of best case scenario remain against likelihood and benefits of worst case scenario remain, against likelihood and benefits of best case scenario leave, against likelihood and benefits of worst case scenario leave, against all points along the line between. It was exhausting! But personally, I came to the unusual conclusion that leave was the low-risk option. It could work out well, it could work out badly. But neither extreme was likely. I thought the central estimate was slightly badly in the short term, slightly well in the long term. But while remain could have worked out well, badly was both a clear possibility and an utter disaster. I may be wrong, of course! We each had to make our own judgements. I hope I'm perceptive and well-informed enough that my judgements are worthwhile.
That's strange. PB Brains Trust I get it. But First Minister vs some random doctor?
Who do you think has the better access to the bigger picture and advice?
PB Brains Trust, obv.
While this is clearly a joke, in fact there has been some very sound thinking and advice on this very forum. There are enough experts from a wide variety of disciplines to contribute. A bit like how parliament ought to be, but sadly isn't. If pb was in charge of the pandemic response, it would have been 'different', but also interesting...
How `bout this for a PB.com cabinet:
Prime Minister: Stodge Chancellor of the Exchequer: Contrarian Foreign Secretary: DavidL Home Secretary: Black Rook Justice: Kinabalu Health: Gallowgate Work and pensions: Nabavi Education: Ydoethur Department for International Trade: PT Defence: HYUFD Secretary of State for Scotland: MalcyG Chief Whip: Topping
Theory: Covid has rendered Brexit pointless, indeed self harming.
I voted to Leave (and it was a close call: I decided on the day) because I really did think we would move to a lower tax, more deregulated economy. Not Singapore-on-Thames, that was always a pipe-dream, but definitely something more nimble.
We are not getting that, because Covid. Instead, we are getting a high tax, low growth economy, essentially a European economy, but without the benefits of the European Single Market, Customs Union or Freedom of Movement. We will be a kind of particularly isolated France, minus the sunshine and vasty fields.
Meanwhile we have destabilised Northern Ireland, fuelled Scottish indy (maybe even Welsh indy), we have divided the nation bitterly and we face a decade of austerity. The future will be dominated by bitter quarrels with Brussels, from which we gain very little.
It is most unfortunate. Brexit could have worked. It might still work in 10-20 years. But in the short-medium term, Covid has turned Brexit into a nightmare. The worst case scenario
For me, forgetting about Brexit good or bad, it's just been a monumental waste of time if we don't now do some serious things (other than border controls and trade deals) we couldn't have done as EU members. Like you, I sense we are not going to, regardless of who wins the next election.
Like, for example, vaccinate our population? (And yes I know we COULD have done that independently within the EU - but would we? Seriously?
To me, Brexit wasn't about leaving the EU as it was in 2016, it was about not being in the EU as it might be in 2025. There is a very strong chance that the EU in 2025 will be considerably more integrated than it was in 2016, in a way that would be very much to the UK's disadvantage. There is a fair chance that it will be an utter shitstorm driven by ongoing North-South Euro crises and East-West constitutional wrangles. I don't think we will change as much as we might like - any change is exhausting and eats up political capital. But I think Europe will change away from us, and we will be increasingly glad we are not part of it.
That's a respectable reason for voting Leave, yes. But I personally don't expect the EU to become a lot more integrated. I don't think they could take their publics with them on that even if - which I doubt - it was a serious practical aim rather than a "guiding spirit" perennial aspiration. Also, for me, you were overthinking it. That is just one possible future, and not an imminent one, but as against that you have the near certainty of making life more difficult in the here and now.
With Liz Truss agreeing with the US to remove whisky duty and the EU impounding vaccines going to Australia why would we want to be part of the EU
Theory: Covid has rendered Brexit pointless, indeed self harming.
I voted to Leave (and it was a close call: I decided on the day) because I really did think we would move to a lower tax, more deregulated economy. Not Singapore-on-Thames, that was always a pipe-dream, but definitely something more nimble.
We are not getting that, because Covid. Instead, we are getting a high tax, low growth economy, essentially a European economy, but without the benefits of the European Single Market, Customs Union or Freedom of Movement. We will be a kind of particularly isolated France, minus the sunshine and vasty fields.
Meanwhile we have destabilised Northern Ireland, fuelled Scottish indy (maybe even Welsh indy), we have divided the nation bitterly and we face a decade of austerity. The future will be dominated by bitter quarrels with Brussels, from which we gain very little.
It is most unfortunate. Brexit could have worked. It might still work in 10-20 years. But in the short-medium term, Covid has turned Brexit into a nightmare. The worst case scenario
There is still some 3.3 available with BF to lay Sunak for next Tory leader.
I say this half in jest but also with some seriousness that, for those backing Sunak, it's worth bearing in mind that he is only 5'5" and always looks dwarfed when he stands next to almost all male counterparts (and some female ones). There are enough studies out there to show that height - at least for a man - seems to have some effect on how a leader is perceived. I suspect it might be more of an issue within the internal Conservative electorate for the leadership.
Yes, good point. We've come a fair way in ditching the old prejudices about who can be PM - e.g. the last but one was not an Old Etonian - but is the country ready for a midget?
That's racist. He's comfortably above average height for a man of Indian origin.
Well he's five five, which is not actually that short. It's more the overall dinkiness. But he is big on another metric - sex appeal to gay men.
He is undoubtedly short for a top-level politician in an Anglo country, certainly in recent times. But I was wondering (genuinely; I'm not just taking the piss) as to whether in your view, just as gravitas can sometimes be code for "has deep commanding voice" which is in turn code for "is male", "tall" could be similarly code for "is male AND Caucasian"?
I can't say I've ever detected that. But now you mention it - gosh what a minefield.
Um. Nope.
Obama had gravitas. Trump did not. Thatcher had gravitas. Trudeau does not (nitwit). Merkel has gravitas. Macron can at times. Boris does not. Sturgeon does usually, but not recently. Mother Theresa had it. So does Gisela Stuart. All different races, heights, backgrounds and genders.
Only in Guardianland is everything is about race and gender.
To an extent, you are right - we find what we are looking for. But I think you underestimated the reality and extent of subconscious bias across many parameters within society - not just race and gender.
That's strange. PB Brains Trust I get it. But First Minister vs some random doctor?
Who do you think has the better access to the bigger picture and advice?
PB Brains Trust, obv.
While this is clearly a joke, in fact there has been some very sound thinking and advice on this very forum. There are enough experts from a wide variety of disciplines to contribute. A bit like how parliament ought to be, but sadly isn't. If pb was in charge of the pandemic response, it would have been 'different', but also interesting...
How `bout this for a PB.com cabinet:
Prime Minister: Stodge Chancellor of the Exchequer: Contrarian Foreign Secretary: DavidL Home Secretary: Black Rook Justice: Kinabalu Health: Gallowgate Work and pensions: Nabavi Education: Ydoethur Department for International Trade: PT Defence: HYUFD Secretary of State for Scotland: MalcyG Chief Whip: Topping
Some big beasts there. Missing Leon as minister of all the talents?
That's strange. PB Brains Trust I get it. But First Minister vs some random doctor?
Who do you think has the better access to the bigger picture and advice?
PB Brains Trust, obv.
While this is clearly a joke, in fact there has been some very sound thinking and advice on this very forum. There are enough experts from a wide variety of disciplines to contribute. A bit like how parliament ought to be, but sadly isn't. If pb was in charge of the pandemic response, it would have been 'different', but also interesting...
How `bout this for a PB.com cabinet:
Prime Minister: Stodge Chancellor of the Exchequer: Contrarian Foreign Secretary: DavidL Home Secretary: Black Rook Justice: Kinabalu Health: Gallowgate Work and pensions: Nabavi Education: Ydoethur Department for International Trade: PT Defence: HYUFD Secretary of State for Scotland: MalcyG Chief Whip: Topping
I was hoping at least for culture secretary, although my preference for 90s house music might not be universally popular.
I'm a bit bemused by this Rishi Sunak being short debate consuming PB. I had no idea he was short, and now I know he is, I really can't say I care.
He is totally in proportion, so without reference points he look 6 footish (to me). Layla Moran I always took to be tall (maybe that long neck), so I was stunned to see how short she is.
There is still some 3.3 available with BF to lay Sunak for next Tory leader.
I say this half in jest but also with some seriousness that, for those backing Sunak, it's worth bearing in mind that he is only 5'5" and always looks dwarfed when he stands next to almost all male counterparts (and some female ones). There are enough studies out there to show that height - at least for a man - seems to have some effect on how a leader is perceived. I suspect it might be more of an issue within the internal Conservative electorate for the leadership.
Yes, good point. We've come a fair way in ditching the old prejudices about who can be PM - e.g. the last but one was not an Old Etonian - but is the country ready for a midget?
That's racist. He's comfortably above average height for a man of Indian origin.
Well he's five five, which is not actually that short. It's more the overall dinkiness. But he is big on another metric - sex appeal to gay men.
He is undoubtedly short for a top-level politician in an Anglo country, certainly in recent times. But I was wondering (genuinely; I'm not just taking the piss) as to whether in your view, just as gravitas can sometimes be code for "has deep commanding voice" which is in turn code for "is male", "tall" could be similarly code for "is male AND Caucasian"?
I can't say I've ever detected that. But now you mention it - gosh what a minefield.
Um. Nope.
Obama had gravitas. Trump did not. Thatcher had gravitas. Trudeau does not (nitwit). Merkel has gravitas. Macron can at times. Boris does not. Sturgeon does usually, but not recently. Mother Theresa had it. So does Gisela Stuart. All different races, heights, backgrounds and genders.
Only in Guardianland is everything is about race and gender.
Endillion was being ultra woke, I agree, but race and gender are big factors and white men have the inside track. But this doesn't mean individual white men succeed purely because of being white and male. They still have to execute. Throw class in there too, though, and many do well regardless.
Another very low case number despite massive testing figure - positivity rate well below 1% on the day.
Testing about to become even massiver from next week when school children are tested (assuming this feeds into the figures?).
Yep, using lateral flow tests that the government estimate have a 0.31% false positive rate. So we may have to wait for them to stop testing to get cases meaningfully lower.
If there isn't a false positive floor to hit, we're on course for sub 1000 cases a day in England by the end of the month, current halving rate is under 11 days now
That's strange. PB Brains Trust I get it. But First Minister vs some random doctor?
Who do you think has the better access to the bigger picture and advice?
PB Brains Trust, obv.
While this is clearly a joke, in fact there has been some very sound thinking and advice on this very forum. There are enough experts from a wide variety of disciplines to contribute. A bit like how parliament ought to be, but sadly isn't. If pb was in charge of the pandemic response, it would have been 'different', but also interesting...
How `bout this for a PB.com cabinet:
Prime Minister: Stodge Chancellor of the Exchequer: Contrarian Foreign Secretary: DavidL Home Secretary: Black Rook Justice: Kinabalu Health: Gallowgate Work and pensions: Nabavi Education: Ydoethur Department for International Trade: PT Defence: HYUFD Secretary of State for Scotland: MalcyG Chief Whip: Topping
That would almost certainly see us embroiled in a war the Chancellor wouldn't be prepared to pay for. With the SoS for Scotland on the other side.
That's strange. PB Brains Trust I get it. But First Minister vs some random doctor?
Who do you think has the better access to the bigger picture and advice?
PB Brains Trust, obv.
While this is clearly a joke, in fact there has been some very sound thinking and advice on this very forum. There are enough experts from a wide variety of disciplines to contribute. A bit like how parliament ought to be, but sadly isn't. If pb was in charge of the pandemic response, it would have been 'different', but also interesting...
How `bout this for a PB.com cabinet:
Prime Minister: Stodge Chancellor of the Exchequer: Contrarian Foreign Secretary: DavidL Home Secretary: Black Rook Justice: Kinabalu Health: Gallowgate Work and pensions: Nabavi Education: Ydoethur Department for International Trade: PT Defence: HYUFD Secretary of State for Scotland: MalcyG Chief Whip: Topping
Can I have BEIS?
(And who is going to break it to Cyclefree she hasn't got a post? Hmmmmm - Leader of the House?)
Some of us could form a Shadow Cabinet-in-waiting for when it all goes pear-shaped.
Theory: Covid has rendered Brexit pointless, indeed self harming.
I voted to Leave (and it was a close call: I decided on the day) because I really did think we would move to a lower tax, more deregulated economy. Not Singapore-on-Thames, that was always a pipe-dream, but definitely something more nimble.
We are not getting that, because Covid. Instead, we are getting a high tax, low growth economy, essentially a European economy, but without the benefits of the European Single Market, Customs Union or Freedom of Movement. We will be a kind of particularly isolated France, minus the sunshine and vasty fields.
Meanwhile we have destabilised Northern Ireland, fuelled Scottish indy (maybe even Welsh indy), we have divided the nation bitterly and we face a decade of austerity. The future will be dominated by bitter quarrels with Brussels, from which we gain very little.
It is most unfortunate. Brexit could have worked. It might still work in 10-20 years. But in the short-medium term, Covid has turned Brexit into a nightmare. The worst case scenario
You *were* warned.
About Covid?! That WOULD be impressive. But it is not true
That's strange. PB Brains Trust I get it. But First Minister vs some random doctor?
Who do you think has the better access to the bigger picture and advice?
PB Brains Trust, obv.
While this is clearly a joke, in fact there has been some very sound thinking and advice on this very forum. There are enough experts from a wide variety of disciplines to contribute. A bit like how parliament ought to be, but sadly isn't. If pb was in charge of the pandemic response, it would have been 'different', but also interesting...
How `bout this for a PB.com cabinet:
Prime Minister: Stodge Chancellor of the Exchequer: Contrarian Foreign Secretary: DavidL Home Secretary: Black Rook Justice: Kinabalu Health: Gallowgate Work and pensions: Nabavi Education: Ydoethur Department for International Trade: PT Defence: HYUFD Secretary of State for Scotland: MalcyG Chief Whip: Topping
If you want Education sorting out, I’ll take the Ministry of Justice.
That's strange. PB Brains Trust I get it. But First Minister vs some random doctor?
Who do you think has the better access to the bigger picture and advice?
PB Brains Trust, obv.
While this is clearly a joke, in fact there has been some very sound thinking and advice on this very forum. There are enough experts from a wide variety of disciplines to contribute. A bit like how parliament ought to be, but sadly isn't. If pb was in charge of the pandemic response, it would have been 'different', but also interesting...
How `bout this for a PB.com cabinet:
Prime Minister: Stodge Chancellor of the Exchequer: Contrarian Foreign Secretary: DavidL Home Secretary: Black Rook Justice: Kinabalu Health: Gallowgate Work and pensions: Nabavi Education: Ydoethur Department for International Trade: PT Defence: HYUFD Secretary of State for Scotland: MalcyG Chief Whip: Topping
Some big beasts there. Missing Leon as minister of all the talents?
That's strange. PB Brains Trust I get it. But First Minister vs some random doctor?
Who do you think has the better access to the bigger picture and advice?
PB Brains Trust, obv.
While this is clearly a joke, in fact there has been some very sound thinking and advice on this very forum. There are enough experts from a wide variety of disciplines to contribute. A bit like how parliament ought to be, but sadly isn't. If pb was in charge of the pandemic response, it would have been 'different', but also interesting...
How `bout this for a PB.com cabinet:
Prime Minister: Stodge Chancellor of the Exchequer: Contrarian Foreign Secretary: DavidL Home Secretary: Black Rook Justice: Kinabalu Health: Gallowgate Work and pensions: Nabavi Education: Ydoethur Department for International Trade: PT Defence: HYUFD Secretary of State for Scotland: MalcyG Chief Whip: Topping
If you want Education sorting out, I’ll take the Ministry of Justice.
Yes, we can swap jobs. Then I can bring the hammer down on private schools.
SARS-CoV-2 mutations in MHC-I-restricted epitopes evade CD8+ T cell responses
https://immunology.sciencemag.org/content/6/57/eabg6461 ...we still lack a comprehensive understanding of the intrinsic capabilities of SARS-CoV-2 for immune evasion. Our study provides evidence that single nonsynonymous mutations in SARS-CoV-2 can subvert the immune response to CD8+ T cell epitopes. The majority of nonsynonymous mutations found in the validated CTL escapes had not reached fixation, i.e., were present at frequencies between 0.02 and 0.42 (Fig. 1B). This could be explained by the shorter duration of infection with SARS-CoV-2 compared to HIV or HCV. It may also reflect on the degree to which HLA polymorphism affects viral spreading within human populations. The impact of single anchor residue substitutions on the response of CD4+ T cells is still unclear....
...This study does not allow direct conclusions to be drawn concerning potential selection pressures which shape the mutational landscape of CD8+ T cell epitopes. This would invariably involve accounting for the HLA genotype of all individuals from whom SARS-CoV-2 genomes were sequenced. Moreover, how CTL escape mutations are maintained during transmission between individuals with differing HLA subtypes and how viruses carrying epitope mutations affect disease severity requires further investigation.
Many CTL epitopes for SARS-COV-2 have been described (39). Natural CTL responses against SARS-CoV-2 were associated with broad epitope recognition of on average 1.6 CD8+ T cell epitopes per antigen per HLA allele (23), which raises the question whether and how mutations in single epitopes affect virus control. This may be of particular importance for SARS-CoV-2 subunit vaccines, such as the RNA vaccines currently in use, which contain the S gene only and thus induce responses against a limited number of CD8 epitopes (44–46). In summary, our results highlight the capacity of SARS-CoV-2 to evade adaptive immune responses through sporadically emerging mutations in MHC-I epitopes...
#first post Please allow me to introduce myself... Been lurking on here since mid-2020 when I was reading all sorts of stuff anywhere and everywhere about US Presidential candidates, then the election itself. I'm not a betting man but I did find that betting sites like this plus ofc 538.com were good at giving background information; most of it interesting. [I did bet on Biden winning WH21 and turned a tiny stake of £100 into £141 :-) ] Me? Born and educated in Scotland; spent most of my working life in [in order] England, Germany, Belgium, Switzerland. Moved back to Edinburgh when semi-retirement beckoned. Staunchly pro-EU [both my kids live and work in Europe], fervently pro-independence for Scotland. So on both counts in a massive minority on here. My reading of the site here after about a year is that most contributors are in the main Tory-leaning, pro-Brexit, pro-Union, cricket-lovers. Way to stereotype, right? With the run-up to Holyrood '21 things will get more interesting / catty. Looking forward to it. Might even wager a small bet on the performance of the pro-Indy parties. ...pleased to meet you
Hello there. The tone of the board has imo changed recently. Not so much the relative numbers of different persuasions but more the volume and confidence levels. GE19 gave a big fillip to posters who are both Tory and Leavers and just as this was fading with the bleakness of the pandemic it was turbocharged again by the UK's vaccine success c.f. the hated Europe. The effect is that Tory Leave posters have become quite juiced up and leery - and prolific - and Tory Leave has thus become the dominant strain.
That's strange. PB Brains Trust I get it. But First Minister vs some random doctor?
Who do you think has the better access to the bigger picture and advice?
PB Brains Trust, obv.
While this is clearly a joke, in fact there has been some very sound thinking and advice on this very forum. There are enough experts from a wide variety of disciplines to contribute. A bit like how parliament ought to be, but sadly isn't. If pb was in charge of the pandemic response, it would have been 'different', but also interesting...
How `bout this for a PB.com cabinet:
Prime Minister: Stodge Chancellor of the Exchequer: Contrarian Foreign Secretary: DavidL Home Secretary: Black Rook Justice: Kinabalu Health: Gallowgate Work and pensions: Nabavi Education: Ydoethur Department for International Trade: PT Defence: HYUFD Secretary of State for Scotland: MalcyG Chief Whip: Topping
Can I have BEIS?
(And who is going to break it to Cyclefree she hasn't got a post? Hmmmmm - Leader of the House?)
Yes, you'd better sack me and give Cycle the Justice brief.
That's strange. PB Brains Trust I get it. But First Minister vs some random doctor?
Who do you think has the better access to the bigger picture and advice?
PB Brains Trust, obv.
While this is clearly a joke, in fact there has been some very sound thinking and advice on this very forum. There are enough experts from a wide variety of disciplines to contribute. A bit like how parliament ought to be, but sadly isn't. If pb was in charge of the pandemic response, it would have been 'different', but also interesting...
How `bout this for a PB.com cabinet:
Prime Minister: Stodge Chancellor of the Exchequer: Contrarian Foreign Secretary: DavidL Home Secretary: Black Rook Justice: Kinabalu Health: Gallowgate Work and pensions: Nabavi Education: Ydoethur Department for International Trade: PT Defence: HYUFD Secretary of State for Scotland: MalcyG Chief Whip: Topping
If you want Education sorting out, I’ll take the Ministry of Justice.
Yes, we can swap jobs. Then I can bring the hammer down on private schools.
Subject to cabinet collective responsibility - how`s that going to work out?
I'm a bit bemused by this Rishi Sunak being short debate consuming PB. I had no idea he was short, and now I know he is, I really can't say I care.
He is totally in proportion, so without reference points he look 6 footish (to me). Layla Moran I always took to be tall (maybe that long neck), so I was stunned to see how short she is.
But I am not sure the instinct amongst strong supporters of the SNP to man the barricades indicates a position of strength. It seems to me to indicate the opposite.
I'm guessing the line being prepared for May will be 'I am not sure the instinct amongst strong supporters of the SNP to vote in a majority SNP government indicates a position of strength'.
Homeopathic Unionism, the fewer members you have and votes you receive, the stronger the effect.
Theory: Covid has rendered Brexit pointless, indeed self harming.
I voted to Leave (and it was a close call: I decided on the day) because I really did think we would move to a lower tax, more deregulated economy. Not Singapore-on-Thames, that was always a pipe-dream, but definitely something more nimble.
We are not getting that, because Covid. Instead, we are getting a high tax, low growth economy, essentially a European economy, but without the benefits of the European Single Market, Customs Union or Freedom of Movement. We will be a kind of particularly isolated France, minus the sunshine and vasty fields.
Meanwhile we have destabilised Northern Ireland, fuelled Scottish indy (maybe even Welsh indy), we have divided the nation bitterly and we face a decade of austerity. The future will be dominated by bitter quarrels with Brussels, from which we gain very little.
It is most unfortunate. Brexit could have worked. It might still work in 10-20 years. But in the short-medium term, Covid has turned Brexit into a nightmare. The worst case scenario
For me, forgetting about Brexit good or bad, it's just been a monumental waste of time if we don't now do some serious things (other than border controls and trade deals) we couldn't have done as EU members. Like you, I sense we are not going to, regardless of who wins the next election.
Like, for example, vaccinate our population? (And yes I know we COULD have done that independently within the EU - but would we? Seriously?
To me, Brexit wasn't about leaving the EU as it was in 2016, it was about not being in the EU as it might be in 2025. There is a very strong chance that the EU in 2025 will be considerably more integrated than it was in 2016, in a way that would be very much to the UK's disadvantage. There is a fair chance that it will be an utter shitstorm driven by ongoing North-South Euro crises and East-West constitutional wrangles. I don't think we will change as much as we might like - any change is exhausting and eats up political capital. But I think Europe will change away from us, and we will be increasingly glad we are not part of it.
That's a respectable reason for voting Leave, yes. But I personally don't expect the EU to become a lot more integrated. I don't think they could take their publics with them on that even if - which I doubt - it was a serious practical aim rather than a "guiding spirit" perennial aspiration. Also, for me, you were overthinking it. That is just one possible future, and not an imminent one, but as against that you have the near certainty of making life more difficult in the here and now.
With Liz Truss agreeing with the US to remove whisky duty and the EU impounding vaccines going to Australia why would we want to be part of the EU
That's strange. PB Brains Trust I get it. But First Minister vs some random doctor?
Who do you think has the better access to the bigger picture and advice?
PB Brains Trust, obv.
While this is clearly a joke, in fact there has been some very sound thinking and advice on this very forum. There are enough experts from a wide variety of disciplines to contribute. A bit like how parliament ought to be, but sadly isn't. If pb was in charge of the pandemic response, it would have been 'different', but also interesting...
How `bout this for a PB.com cabinet:
Prime Minister: Stodge Chancellor of the Exchequer: Contrarian Foreign Secretary: DavidL Home Secretary: Black Rook Justice: Kinabalu Health: Gallowgate Work and pensions: Nabavi Education: Ydoethur Department for International Trade: PT Defence: HYUFD Secretary of State for Scotland: MalcyG Chief Whip: Topping
I was hoping at least for culture secretary, although my preference for 90s house music might not be universally popular.
I can only assume I've been left off as I'm non-resident but I want to be Ambassador to the EU as compensation.!
That's strange. PB Brains Trust I get it. But First Minister vs some random doctor?
Who do you think has the better access to the bigger picture and advice?
PB Brains Trust, obv.
While this is clearly a joke, in fact there has been some very sound thinking and advice on this very forum. There are enough experts from a wide variety of disciplines to contribute. A bit like how parliament ought to be, but sadly isn't. If pb was in charge of the pandemic response, it would have been 'different', but also interesting...
How `bout this for a PB.com cabinet:
Prime Minister: Stodge Chancellor of the Exchequer: Contrarian Foreign Secretary: DavidL Home Secretary: Black Rook Justice: Kinabalu Health: Gallowgate Work and pensions: Nabavi Education: Ydoethur Department for International Trade: PT Defence: HYUFD Secretary of State for Scotland: MalcyG Chief Whip: Topping
If you want Education sorting out, I’ll take the Ministry of Justice.
Yes, we can swap jobs. Then I can bring the hammer down on private schools.
Subject to cabinet collective responsibility - how`s that going to work out?
I'll have to convince all the big beasts. Unlikely, one has to say, looking at the names.
I'm a bit bemused by this Rishi Sunak being short debate consuming PB. I had no idea he was short, and now I know he is, I really can't say I care.
He is totally in proportion, so without reference points he look 6 footish (to me). Layla Moran I always took to be tall (maybe that long neck), so I was stunned to see how short she is.
FPT Just what I would expect from you , nasty snide Little Englander with a chip on his shoulder
malcolmg said:
Not sure who you mix with Burgessian, I am sure there are a good few low lifes that are anti - English but it is a very very small minority. Scotland as a whole is welcoming and especially to the English. PS: I would say anti Westminster sentiment is far more accurate.
Dougseal Give me a break. The last time my wife and I were in Scotland we both noticed the anti-English jibes that came about when she spoke with her American accent (typically "don't go to Edinburgh during the Festival, it's full of English" type of thing). Awful, awful place to visit if you are English.
Not sure how quoting the vaccination stats relates to my alleged status as a "Little Englander". Still, keep dreaming.
Did you even read my post including your own from previous thread, it being under the vaccination numbers was jsut a handy place to put it.
Comments
The best Rishi could do is just shrug it off and say it isn't a big deal to him, but he has to act like it to match - which includes getting photographed normally.
But I am not sure the instinct amongst strong supporters of the SNP to man the barricades indicates a position of strength. It seems to me to indicate the opposite.
Hopefully the vaccine rollout will continue eventual downward pressure on R/cases even if schools push it up a bit.
Shagger is an incompetent clown apparently being manipulated by the affair who has installed herself and her hideous wallpaper as the unelected Lady Protector. Bin him off, stick charming populist gets normal people Sunak in control, and he stands a chance to renew in place - a rare feat for any government.
Obama had gravitas. Trump did not. Thatcher had gravitas. Trudeau does not (nitwit). Merkel has gravitas. Macron can at times. Boris does not. Sturgeon does usually, but not recently. Mother Theresa had it. So does Gisela Stuart. All different races, heights, backgrounds and genders.
Only in Guardianland is everything is about race and gender.
Touchy subject.
Poor old Lab if meaning a change means a change of Cons government personnel.
And he could lay 300 bricks in a day. Allegedly.
Schools were open in November lockdown and cases still fell (to begin with) - can't see any particular cause for concern.
If pb was in charge of the pandemic response, it would have been 'different', but also interesting...
Voting for Sturgeon's replacement would be just about the only valid reason for that sudden leap.
Does not distinguish between vaccine passports for international movement, and certificates for domestic use within the country.
I don't know of real Tories that hate Sunak. They may disagree with his take on how to deal with the pandemic. But as with getting into it, getting out of the pandemic does not come with an instruction manual.
Mexico City Is Running Low On Oxygen, and Gangs Are Making a Profit
https://youtu.be/KNSi5v-BLNg
Is Sir Philip still furiously riding around on his Charger defending Lady Markle, or is it calm again?
Prime Minister: Stodge
Chancellor of the Exchequer: Contrarian
Foreign Secretary: DavidL
Home Secretary: Black Rook
Justice: Kinabalu
Health: Gallowgate
Work and pensions: Nabavi
Education: Ydoethur
Department for International Trade: PT
Defence: HYUFD
Secretary of State for Scotland: MalcyG
Chief Whip: Topping
Jackie Baillie, for example, could be said to have a degree of gravitas. Starmer, not so much.
And it's metaphorical weight, not height*.
*Which, one might argue, is defying gravitas...
(And who is going to break it to Cyclefree she hasn't got a post? Hmmmmm - Leader of the House?)
But personally, I came to the unusual conclusion that leave was the low-risk option. It could work out well, it could work out badly. But neither extreme was likely. I thought the central estimate was slightly badly in the short term, slightly well in the long term. But while remain could have worked out well, badly was both a clear possibility and an utter disaster.
I may be wrong, of course! We each had to make our own judgements. I hope I'm perceptive and well-informed enough that my judgements are worthwhile.
Mick McManus was only 5'6".
If there isn't a false positive floor to hit, we're on course for sub 1000 cases a day in England by the end of the month, current halving rate is under 11 days now
With the SoS for Scotland on the other side.
Covid is the crucial factor here
https://immunology.sciencemag.org/content/6/57/eabg6461
...we still lack a comprehensive understanding of the intrinsic capabilities of SARS-CoV-2 for immune evasion. Our study provides evidence that single nonsynonymous mutations in SARS-CoV-2 can subvert the immune response to CD8+ T cell epitopes. The majority of nonsynonymous mutations found in the validated CTL escapes had not reached fixation, i.e., were present at frequencies between 0.02 and 0.42 (Fig. 1B). This could be explained by the shorter duration of infection with SARS-CoV-2 compared to HIV or HCV. It may also reflect on the degree to which HLA polymorphism affects viral spreading within human populations. The impact of single anchor residue substitutions on the response of CD4+ T cells is still unclear....
...This study does not allow direct conclusions to be drawn concerning potential selection pressures which shape the mutational landscape of CD8+ T cell epitopes. This would invariably involve accounting for the HLA genotype of all individuals from whom SARS-CoV-2 genomes were sequenced. Moreover, how CTL escape mutations are maintained during transmission between individuals with differing HLA subtypes and how viruses carrying epitope mutations affect disease severity requires further investigation.
Many CTL epitopes for SARS-COV-2 have been described (39). Natural CTL responses against SARS-CoV-2 were associated with broad epitope recognition of on average 1.6 CD8+ T cell epitopes per antigen per HLA allele (23), which raises the question whether and how mutations in single epitopes affect virus control. This may be of particular importance for SARS-CoV-2 subunit vaccines, such as the RNA vaccines currently in use, which contain the S gene only and thus induce responses against a limited number of CD8 epitopes (44–46). In summary, our results highlight the capacity of SARS-CoV-2 to evade adaptive immune responses through sporadically emerging mutations in MHC-I epitopes...
"Massive Minority" will get nitpicked.
Unless you are very tall.
Homeopathic Unionism, the fewer members you have and votes you receive, the stronger the effect.
https://www.ft.com/content/bed655ac-9285-486a-b5ad-b015284798c8
https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/europe-blocks-250-000-astrazeneca-doses-bound-for-australia-20210305-p577z3.html
I doubt the Australians (or Astra Zeneca) are best pleased.