Howdy, Stranger!

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

What happened when I switched the CON and LAB GE2019 vote shares on the Electoral Calculus seat pred

123457»

Comments

  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 21,965
    The motto of the European Medicines Agency and various European Governments* seems to be "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"

    They seem to be trying their hardest to put folk off taking the AZ jab.

    How many more will die as a result?

    *Plus bloody Canada now.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,994
    On topic, I remember when headers like these were written for the Tories in 2004/2005.

    If Labour did that well they'd be picking up 15-20 seats in Scotland, and would have an overall majority of 20-30. The bigger OMG is that 44-45% of the vote looks a real stretch for them. It's relatively easy for them to get to 35-38% of the vote but the next 7-8% is very hard (yes, yes, I know GE2017 but that doesn't count).

    How do Labour assemble a coalition that broad that sticks?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,825

    The motto of the European Medicines Agency and various European Governments* seems to be "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"

    They seem to be trying their hardest to put folk off taking the AZ jab.

    How many more will die as a result?

    *Plus bloody Canada now.

    EMA are in the clear on this.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,825
    felix said:
    So the prevalence is actually *lower* amongst people that take the vaccines? Take a bow, various European governments.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 77,892
    Endillion said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Cookie said:

    Deaths announced by NHS England today: 31 (29 of which within the past couple of weeks, one of which 362 days old!). Compares with 69 this time last week.

    Hang on — aren't deaths supposed to be within the last 28 days?
    Within 28 days of a positive test. This death happened a year ago, with a positive test shortly before, but we are only finding out about it now, due to reporting delays. Presumably a record got "lost" somewhere in the system.
    Coroner's verdict required as to cause of death maybe
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,457
    edited March 2021
    Floater said:

    Lazy f##kers...

    Accountancy giant PriceWaterhouseCooper has joined a growing number of businesses waving goodbye to traditional working patterns since they were largely abandoned during the pandemic.

    Its workers can now work from home for a couple of days a week and start as early or as late as they want.

    And they'll be able to knock off early on Fridays this summer too

    ------

    In all seriousness, one of the only times I have had a "traditional" job, I worked for a firm who allowed basically total flexi-time and you didn't have to go into the office on Fridays. It was an awesome place to work, strangely they went busto though.

    Last summer we were all given friday afternoons off - much appreciated

    2 of my team already work very flexible patterns - causes us no problems at all
    Again in all seriousness, I don't think the company going bust had anything to do with the flexitime approach. I thought it was a great workplace and I think actually cut down on unnecessary meetings and when we did need them it focused minds on when to schedule them.

    Where as when I was in academia, far too many meeting about meetings about meetings, because most academics only have a limited number of contact hours per week, so the presumption is you are free most of the time for one.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513

    Nigelb said:

    .

    Nigelb said:

    Selebian said:

    Selebian said:

    Does anybody have any updates on the trials of that inhaler device that kills Covid whilst it's in its hibernation stage at the back of the throat? That looks extremely promising and could be a game changer.

    If you mean the Southampton team (only one I'm aware of) the initial trial reported last year. Here's the press release page:
    https://www.southampton.ac.uk/news/2020/11/interferon-trial-published.page

    The phase 3 trial is ongoing:
    https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/trial/2020-004743-83/GB
    https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/record/NCT04385095
    Seems that primary data collection should have been completed in February.

    Edit: They seem to be using NEWS as a secondary outcome, which makes me a bit queasy - NEWS has only been validated for imminent adverse outcomes (death, cardiac arrest, ICU within 24 hours). It's not a general purpose measure of health status, although it increasingly seems to be used as such.
    Thanks! No, I don't think I mean this one, it was one that a lady from Israel had invented: https://jewishnews.timesofisrael.com/israeli-behind-game-changing-covid-nasal-spray-says-its-99-9-effective/

    I see from the above that it's not an inhaler, it's a nasal spray, so sorry for the misleading info in the question.
    Interesting, I didn't know about that one.

    Ashford and St Peters NHS Trust have a page
    https://www.ashfordstpeters.nhs.uk/latest-news/2610-covid-busting-nasal-spray-begins-uk-trials
    which also mentions trials for already ill patients inhaling nitric oxide (different application of a similar thing).

    I do wonder about regular use of a nasal spray, as described and whether it's a great idea to - presumably - wipe out all sorts of things living in your nose. We know, for example, that antibiotics can play havoc with the balance of gut bacteria and that lactobacilli may have beneficial effects in nose and throat (not sure whether they'd be affected by the treatment).
    Yes, the regular use of antimicrobials which disrupt the bacteriome/virome balance is probably not a good thing at all.
    Science is only just starting to get to grips with the immense complexities of the gut ecosystem; ditto the nose etc.
    (FWIW, I have a family member who has suffered several years of serious chronic ill health after a couple of courses of broad spectrum antibiotics killed off gut bacteria, resulting in the sort of imbalance you refer to.
    Getting the condition even properly diagnosed took a year, as most medics don't yet have a clue about any of it.)
    I am not sure what point you're trying to make here. Antibiotics are of course hugely harmful to the gut microbiome, but they are still used extremely widely in medicine (far too widely) because the ends of destroying the problem are seen to justify the means. We also frequently use antimicrobial substances topically to treat all sorts of infections. Are you seriously saying we should use these for athlete's foot but not potentially to stop a case of Covid in its tracks - before the body is exposed to manifold other medical interventions that are considerably worse? Frankly I think this is sour grapes after you rubbished the idea of such treatments when I raised it, and I think it makes you look rather silly.
    I was responding to the comment ...I do wonder about regular use of a nasal spray, as described and whether it's a great idea to - presumably - wipe out all sorts of things living in your nose... as ought to have been clear to you.
    You may think what you like.
    I apologise for being touchy.
    No problem.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,169
    Floater said:
    Southern Europeans and Scandinavians don't seem to have such a big litter problem. I don't know what it is about the British and Dutch, if this image is representative of the Netherlands, which it may not be.
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,450
    Floater said:

    Lazy f##kers...

    Accountancy giant PriceWaterhouseCooper has joined a growing number of businesses waving goodbye to traditional working patterns since they were largely abandoned during the pandemic.

    Its workers can now work from home for a couple of days a week and start as early or as late as they want.

    And they'll be able to knock off early on Fridays this summer too

    ------

    In all seriousness, one of the only times I have had a "traditional" job, I worked for a firm who allowed basically total flexi-time and you didn't have to go into the office on Fridays. It was an awesome place to work, strangely they went busto though.

    Last summer we were all given friday afternoons off - much appreciated

    2 of my team already work very flexible patterns - causes us no problems at all
    I just don't believe it in the City though.

    They have deadlines to meet, expectations of clients and colleagues.

    In fact I find the whole business quite insidious, as the employer demands they work on, say, a Saturday, on the basis they can take Friday afternoons "off".
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    Floater said:


    Barry Sheerman MP
    @BarrySheerman
    Keir Starmer has made excellent progress in his first year as Labour leader. Steady as we go!

    Barry thought he had scheduled his tweet for tomorrow presumably

    Excellent progress seems a tad err optimistic
    From LAB being 25% behind to 4-5% seems like massive progress
    Those most vexed by Starmer on PB are posters that are unlikely ever to vote anything other than Conservative. If Starmer is so poor, aren't they better off keeping their counsel in the hope that he is not replaced by someone better?

    That said, a little opposing from the Leader of the Opposition might be nice, once in a while.
    I am critical of, rather than vexed by, him and have only ever voted Conservative once
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,231
    Cookie said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Good. At least someone was standing up against the needless clamour for ineffective and needless lockdowns.
    Why are the Government taking heat for not locking down again, but not for keeping the borders totally open? Resurgence in Covid didn't just come from nowhere. Reluctance avoid lockdowns is a totally understandable sentiment. Stubborn refusal to do anything about the importing of Covid, either before the first wave, before the second wave, and only reluctantly doing so during the second wave, is what they should be answering questions about.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,457
    edited March 2021
    I really wouldn't want to own a business operation that works on the presumption of a 9-5 / 5 day a week office routine e.g. all those businesses providing food for office workers....I don't think the old norm is coming back.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207

    Floater said:

    Lazy f##kers...

    Accountancy giant PriceWaterhouseCooper has joined a growing number of businesses waving goodbye to traditional working patterns since they were largely abandoned during the pandemic.

    Its workers can now work from home for a couple of days a week and start as early or as late as they want.

    And they'll be able to knock off early on Fridays this summer too

    ------

    In all seriousness, one of the only times I have had a "traditional" job, I worked for a firm who allowed basically total flexi-time and you didn't have to go into the office on Fridays. It was an awesome place to work, strangely they went busto though.

    Last summer we were all given friday afternoons off - much appreciated

    2 of my team already work very flexible patterns - causes us no problems at all
    I just don't believe it in the City though.

    They have deadlines to meet, expectations of clients and colleagues.

    In fact I find the whole business quite insidious, as the employer demands they work on, say, a Saturday, on the basis they can take Friday afternoons "off".
    Err - I work for a "City" firm and others do the same

    Obviously all deadlines have to be met and I can't remember the last time I worked at the weekend
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976

    Floater said:

    Lazy f##kers...

    Accountancy giant PriceWaterhouseCooper has joined a growing number of businesses waving goodbye to traditional working patterns since they were largely abandoned during the pandemic.

    Its workers can now work from home for a couple of days a week and start as early or as late as they want.

    And they'll be able to knock off early on Fridays this summer too

    ------

    In all seriousness, one of the only times I have had a "traditional" job, I worked for a firm who allowed basically total flexi-time and you didn't have to go into the office on Fridays. It was an awesome place to work, strangely they went busto though.

    Last summer we were all given friday afternoons off - much appreciated

    2 of my team already work very flexible patterns - causes us no problems at all
    I just don't believe it in the City though.

    They have deadlines to meet, expectations of clients and colleagues.

    In fact I find the whole business quite insidious, as the employer demands they work on, say, a Saturday, on the basis they can take Friday afternoons "off".
    Insurance brokers and underwriters are (or used to be, anyway - they've gotten into trouble over this in recent years) notorious for "working" late on Thursdays, going for long lunches on Fridays and not returning to their desks in the afternoons. I have heard similar tales from the banking industry, albeit mostly pre-dating the GFC.
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 3,055



    I was good at drawing curtains - nothing else. Still to this day cannot understand how people can draw or paint detailed pictures from imagination

    I had a bit of a revelation when I realised some people have a much clearer mind's eye than others (aphantasia).

    It always baffled me when artists or particularly sculptors said that the picture was already on the canvas, they just need to paint it (or find it in the block of marble). The only way I could conceive of an image is to draw it myself, literally or metaphorically.
    I never knew there was a word for it. Google tells me there is even "the aphantasia community".

    I was equally staggered when I discovered that some (lots of?) people can see things in their mind's eye.

    One always supposes vaguely that one's experience is normal until one discovers otherwise!
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 17,177

    Leeds Central, Leeds NW, Leeds W, Leeds NE, Leeds E - all have Labour MPs.

    Enough said.
    Ah - the youth of today, all they care about is the planet... Hypocritical Idiots
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207

    I really wouldn't want to own a business operation that works on the presumption of a 9-5 / 5 day a week office routine e.g. all those businesses providing food for office workers....I don't think the old norm is coming back.

    I have heard from 2 major London firms that they will be working flexibly post pandemic.

    Both of those have either not renewed leases or reconfigured and downsized office space to reflect that.

    My employer has surveyed the workforce but have already hinted that we can expect big changes - if we want them.

    I do not know of one respondent to that survey who asked to go back to 5 days in office - the most was 3
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,450
    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    Lazy f##kers...

    Accountancy giant PriceWaterhouseCooper has joined a growing number of businesses waving goodbye to traditional working patterns since they were largely abandoned during the pandemic.

    Its workers can now work from home for a couple of days a week and start as early or as late as they want.

    And they'll be able to knock off early on Fridays this summer too

    ------

    In all seriousness, one of the only times I have had a "traditional" job, I worked for a firm who allowed basically total flexi-time and you didn't have to go into the office on Fridays. It was an awesome place to work, strangely they went busto though.

    Last summer we were all given friday afternoons off - much appreciated

    2 of my team already work very flexible patterns - causes us no problems at all
    I just don't believe it in the City though.

    They have deadlines to meet, expectations of clients and colleagues.

    In fact I find the whole business quite insidious, as the employer demands they work on, say, a Saturday, on the basis they can take Friday afternoons "off".
    Err - I work for a "City" firm and others do the same

    Obviously all deadlines have to be met and I can't remember the last time I worked at the weekend
    I do hope you're right.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513
    kinabalu said:

    Wtf is a re-modelled African/Britain anyway?

    "There is a new story about the Caribbean experience which speaks to the slave period not only being about profit and suffering but how culturally African people transformed themselves into a re-modelled African/Britain."

    That is quite some sentence. I think it means slavery wasn't great but it opened up new vistas and opportunities for many.
    It's a bloody strange way of saying that Caribbean culture would not have existed without slavery.
    As you say, the way it's expressed suggests that whoever wrote might think plantation slavery wasn't so bad on balance....
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,147

    On topic, I remember when headers like these were written for the Tories in 2004/2005.

    If Labour did that well they'd be picking up 15-20 seats in Scotland, and would have an overall majority of 20-30. The bigger OMG is that 44-45% of the vote looks a real stretch for them. It's relatively easy for them to get to 35-38% of the vote but the next 7-8% is very hard (yes, yes, I know GE2017 but that doesn't count).

    How do Labour assemble a coalition that broad that sticks?

    It's the assembling game that's the killer - the focus on identity politics creates inevitable conflicts among the identities and leaves the lumpen masses outside the tent. Just look at today's reaction to the Race relations report - they cannot help themselves.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,080
    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    Wtf is a re-modelled African/Britain anyway?

    "There is a new story about the Caribbean experience which speaks to the slave period not only being about profit and suffering but how culturally African people transformed themselves into a re-modelled African/Britain."

    That is quite some sentence. I think it means slavery wasn't great but it opened up new vistas and opportunities for many.
    OK, dipping my toe in controversial waters here, but this is a genuine question - please don't splutter with indignation: but what would have been the counterfactual for the slaves transported to the West Indies? European slavers didn't capture them, they bought them. They already were slaves (as a result - I'm guessing? of small scale wars between African states). Would, as individuals, their futures have been any brighter being slaves in Africa?
    The size of the transatlantic slave trade was so vast that it massively increased demand for slaves, and therefore lead to an increase in conflict as ambitious people sought to satisfy that demand.

    A lot of people wouldn't have ended up as slaves at all.

    The death rate on the passage was also horrendous. So even for those who did become slaves in Africa their chances of survival were much better on the eastern side of the Atlantic.
  • I really wouldn't want to own a business operation that works on the presumption of a 9-5 / 5 day a week office routine e.g. all those businesses providing food for office workers....I don't think the old norm is coming back.

    My return to the office is the 5th of July.

    Between then and next March I will be in the office a maximum 2/3 days a week, the rest I can WFH.

    We're looking to see how next winter goes before a proper return to the office, but work is encouraging WFH as well as compressed working, which I did pre plague.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,147
    Andy_JS said:

    Floater said:
    Southern Europeans and Scandinavians don't seem to have such a big litter problem. I don't know what it is about the British and Dutch, if this image is representative of the Netherlands, which it may not be.
    The youth are too angstridden about climate change to pick up litter.........
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,314

    On topic, I remember when headers like these were written for the Tories in 2004/2005.

    If Labour did that well they'd be picking up 15-20 seats in Scotland, and would have an overall majority of 20-30. The bigger OMG is that 44-45% of the vote looks a real stretch for them. It's relatively easy for them to get to 35-38% of the vote but the next 7-8% is very hard (yes, yes, I know GE2017 but that doesn't count).

    How do Labour assemble a coalition that broad that sticks?

    A good, concise summary of the challenge. It's also cheered me up a bit when you put it like that. Yes, 7-8% is very hard, but it's not that much. The Tories may well lose 3-4% to Labour when things are less upbeat than now, leaving Labour with an extra 3-4% to win over. Nowt wrong with being optimistic.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,209

    Brom said:

    Younger folk (sub 25 years old I reckon) have a real issue with litter. I can just about understand leaving it behind at festivals when you've paid £300 and have designated litter collecters on a private field but to leave a public park looking like a shitheap is really poor form. Perhaps they don't care for Greta after all.
    Obviously not going to excuse littering but FFS can people on Twitter especially, not keep focusing on the negative (brrr no social distancing , littering ) and perhaps see it is also as evidence of people having a good time for once in this miserable covid-19 obsessed society we are in
    Bunch of two faced tossers whining about the environment and drop every conceivable piece of crap at their feet , even if next to a litter bin.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513

    The motto of the European Medicines Agency and various European Governments* seems to be "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"

    They seem to be trying their hardest to put folk off taking the AZ jab.

    How many more will die as a result?

    *Plus bloody Canada now.

    You are being unfair to the EMA.

    https://twitter.com/kakape/status/1377268296739913728
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,798
    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    Wtf is a re-modelled African/Britain anyway?

    "There is a new story about the Caribbean experience which speaks to the slave period not only being about profit and suffering but how culturally African people transformed themselves into a re-modelled African/Britain."

    That is quite some sentence. I think it means slavery wasn't great but it opened up new vistas and opportunities for many.
    OK, dipping my toe in controversial waters here, but this is a genuine question - please don't splutter with indignation: but what would have been the counterfactual for the slaves transported to the West Indies? European slavers didn't capture them, they bought them. They already were slaves (as a result - I'm guessing? of small scale wars between African states). Would, as individuals, their futures have been any brighter being slaves in Africa?
    As far as I can tell much of the taking of slaves and associated wars took place because the Atlantic slave trade existed, not as a primary activity from which European slavers helpfully took up the slack. The massive scale of it doesn't really indicate anything else.
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 3,055
    Floater said:
    It is sad, yes. However, I was bemused to read the suggestion that everyone would have taken their litter home if we hadn't voted for Brexit.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,209

    With just five weeks until the 2021 Scottish parliament election, and with the SNP committed to taking Scotland out of the UK and back into the EU, this paper reveals what EU membership would mean for Scotland and its relationship with the rest of the UK.

    It shows that Scotland rejoining the EU would reduce barriers to trade between Scotland and the EU but would inevitably mean the emergence of barriers to trade – and possibly even to the free movement of people – on the island of Great Britain. For the first time in more than three centuries, England and Scotland would find themselves on either side of a hard economic border.

    Joining the EU would mean Scotland joining the single market and customs union – and as a result the Anglo-Scottish border would become a new external customs and regulatory frontier for the EU. Even a looser model of integration with the EU, such as Scotland joining the European Economic Area (EEA), could not grant frictionless access to both the EU and the UK markets, so long as the UK–EU relationship continues to be governed by the UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement.


    https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publications/scottish-independence-eu-border

    Big improvement then , unfettered access to 27 countries versus minor irritation locally.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,994
    Andy_JS said:

    Floater said:
    Southern Europeans and Scandinavians don't seem to have such a big litter problem. I don't know what it is about the British and Dutch, if this image is representative of the Netherlands, which it may not be.
    It could be a generational thing across Western countries. Generation Me Me Me.

    Duty and personal responsibility not really being a thing.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,825
    malcolmg said:

    With just five weeks until the 2021 Scottish parliament election, and with the SNP committed to taking Scotland out of the UK and back into the EU, this paper reveals what EU membership would mean for Scotland and its relationship with the rest of the UK.

    It shows that Scotland rejoining the EU would reduce barriers to trade between Scotland and the EU but would inevitably mean the emergence of barriers to trade – and possibly even to the free movement of people – on the island of Great Britain. For the first time in more than three centuries, England and Scotland would find themselves on either side of a hard economic border.

    Joining the EU would mean Scotland joining the single market and customs union – and as a result the Anglo-Scottish border would become a new external customs and regulatory frontier for the EU. Even a looser model of integration with the EU, such as Scotland joining the European Economic Area (EEA), could not grant frictionless access to both the EU and the UK markets, so long as the UK–EU relationship continues to be governed by the UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement.


    https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publications/scottish-independence-eu-border

    Big improvement then , unfettered access to 27 countries versus minor irritation locally.
    What fraction of trade goes to that minor irritation?
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,283
    malcolmg said:

    With just five weeks until the 2021 Scottish parliament election, and with the SNP committed to taking Scotland out of the UK and back into the EU, this paper reveals what EU membership would mean for Scotland and its relationship with the rest of the UK.

    It shows that Scotland rejoining the EU would reduce barriers to trade between Scotland and the EU but would inevitably mean the emergence of barriers to trade – and possibly even to the free movement of people – on the island of Great Britain. For the first time in more than three centuries, England and Scotland would find themselves on either side of a hard economic border.

    Joining the EU would mean Scotland joining the single market and customs union – and as a result the Anglo-Scottish border would become a new external customs and regulatory frontier for the EU. Even a looser model of integration with the EU, such as Scotland joining the European Economic Area (EEA), could not grant frictionless access to both the EU and the UK markets, so long as the UK–EU relationship continues to be governed by the UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement.


    https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publications/scottish-independence-eu-border

    Big improvement then , unfettered access to 27 countries versus minor irritation locally.
    Well there we have it, if proof were needed, Scots Nats are even more stupid than the most stupid of Brexiteer
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,190

    Leon said:

    rkrkrk said:



    It's funny because my memory of Blair is he did the opposite.

    He was all about being modern not old fashioned, did loads for (then) woke issues like gay rights, hate crimes, set up equalities commission etc.

    He was pro inmigration

    But he SOLD it as patriotic firm government. Cool Britannia. Tough on crime, tough on the causes. Etc

    He then smuggled through a lot of ‘progressive’ stuff - some good, some bad - because he got the job done. Life seemed to improve. Government was stable. If he hadn’t invaded Iraq he might now be enjoying his seventh term in office

    I think that's right. The thing about social reform - gay marriage etc. - is that most people have a view (often surprisingly tolerant) but don't care as much as they do about bread-and-butter issues; the people who do care are mostly passionately in favour. So if you can persuade the majority that the bread and butter will be delivered, they'll take a bit of social stuff with a shrug. Blair didn't conceal the fact that he was going to liberalise gay rights etc., but he didn't go on about it as his central theme.

    Starmer believes that we need to establish a base of acceptance that Labour is sensible, patriotic and moderate. Only when he's gone on about that till we're all bored to tears with it can he get a hearing for the good stuff.

    I think the line that the party is full of Corbynites just awaiting their moment won't prove durable - certainly in reality the Corbynites have largely either said "Oh well, OK" (which is about where I am) or have gone completely passive or quit altogether. There will always be someone somewhere saying something off-message, but people don't pay much attention unless they've actually heard of them - "Councillor Bloggs from Little Snoring says he loves Stalin" doesn't really work..

    There's a new YouGov poll of Labour members out today. Lots of depressing stuff on anti-Semitism, sadly, but Starmer leads Corbyn by 61% to 29% on leader preference.

    Starmer is inoffensive enough to become Prime Minister. Now this isn't a ringing Blairesque endorsement by voters, but in the event they tire of the Conservatives he doesn't scare them like Corbyn did.

    At the moment Johnson is getting away with blue murder, in terms of corruption and lack of accountability issues.

    When the economy fails, Johnson will be held to account for Garden Bridges, water cannon, PPE contracts for chums, Dido Harding and Robert Jenrick saving the Government's favourite pornographer a £50 million tax bill.

    Now I will be accused of wishing economic catastrophe on Boris Johnson. I don't see how we avoid it, and those who can't see it coming should perhaps open the curtains and take a look outside.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,994

    On topic, I remember when headers like these were written for the Tories in 2004/2005.

    If Labour did that well they'd be picking up 15-20 seats in Scotland, and would have an overall majority of 20-30. The bigger OMG is that 44-45% of the vote looks a real stretch for them. It's relatively easy for them to get to 35-38% of the vote but the next 7-8% is very hard (yes, yes, I know GE2017 but that doesn't count).

    How do Labour assemble a coalition that broad that sticks?

    A good, concise summary of the challenge. It's also cheered me up a bit when you put it like that. Yes, 7-8% is very hard, but it's not that much. The Tories may well lose 3-4% to Labour when things are less upbeat than now, leaving Labour with an extra 3-4% to win over. Nowt wrong with being optimistic.
    I think @Leon got closest to the right strategy for Labour upthread.

    The thing is, Labour's membership is now so dominated by the Guardianista middle-classes that it will be very very hard for them to make that move. The resistance will be stratospheric.

    You'd need to be as tough as nails, with skin like tungsten, to push back against that sort of peer pressure.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,798
    edited March 2021



    I was good at drawing curtains - nothing else. Still to this day cannot understand how people can draw or paint detailed pictures from imagination

    I had a bit of a revelation when I realised some people have a much clearer mind's eye than others (aphantasia).

    It always baffled me when artists or particularly sculptors said that the picture was already on the canvas, they just need to paint it (or find it in the block of marble). The only way I could conceive of an image is to draw it myself, literally or metaphorically.
    I'd say the picture/sculpture being absolutely clear in the artist's mind's eye is rarer than one might think, even some well known masterpieces have large amounts of supporting sketches & versions. There are of course artists who know their subject so well that they probably didn't think too much while making a painting, eg Cezanne and his apples.

    Not specifically related, but not being much of a Dr Who fan I missed this first time round, it did bring a slight moistening to the eye. I really do believe van Gogh was a remarkable artist and human being.

    https://twitter.com/gothspiderbitch/status/1376865805531541505?s=20

  • AlistairMAlistairM Posts: 2,005
    edited March 2021


    Another good day of numbers.

    Cases down 2.5K on last week. Deaths more than halved from 98 to 43.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,585
    MattW said:

    AlistairM said:

    Apparently littering is connected to Brexit.

    https://twitter.com/acgrayling/status/1377189291361763335

    Seems quite a stretch given that the crowd causing it was very young in age and they clearly voted (if they were able to 5 years ago) in a majority to Remain.

    My theory is that youngsters are used to someone else doing things for them that they don't want. As a father of 3 I fall into this trap. I think anyone caught littering should be made to do a day's litter picking.

    Or....the first reply...the fault of self serving exceptionalism...

    https://twitter.com/SEZOWT/status/1377179459397111813?s=19
    Which is just the same as Milltown Park in Dublin. Silly old oaf.



    Is there any misfortune these people can't pin on Brexit?
    *treads on discarded lego* "Bloody Brexit!"
    *slugs decimating leeks* "This is all Boris Johsnon's fault"
    *small whirlwind in Clacton-on-Sea* "This sort of thing doesn't happen in Remain areas".
    etc.
  • PhilPhil Posts: 2,239

    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    Wtf is a re-modelled African/Britain anyway?

    "There is a new story about the Caribbean experience which speaks to the slave period not only being about profit and suffering but how culturally African people transformed themselves into a re-modelled African/Britain."

    That is quite some sentence. I think it means slavery wasn't great but it opened up new vistas and opportunities for many.
    OK, dipping my toe in controversial waters here, but this is a genuine question - please don't splutter with indignation: but what would have been the counterfactual for the slaves transported to the West Indies? European slavers didn't capture them, they bought them. They already were slaves (as a result - I'm guessing? of small scale wars between African states). Would, as individuals, their futures have been any brighter being slaves in Africa?
    As far as I can tell much of the taking of slaves and associated wars took place because the Atlantic slave trade existed, not as a primary activity from which European slavers helpfully took up the slack. The massive scale of it doesn't really indicate anything else.
    Yes, this is pretty much it: the Atlantic slave trade took an existing situation (the occasional taking of slaves by some African groups) and turbo charged it by creating a huge external demand for slaves, so those small kingdoms on the coast were acquiring able-bodied people from elsewhere, dragging them to the coast & selling them on.

    Without the triangular trade, the number of slaves taken in Africa would have been far, far smaller.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,994
    felix said:

    On topic, I remember when headers like these were written for the Tories in 2004/2005.

    If Labour did that well they'd be picking up 15-20 seats in Scotland, and would have an overall majority of 20-30. The bigger OMG is that 44-45% of the vote looks a real stretch for them. It's relatively easy for them to get to 35-38% of the vote but the next 7-8% is very hard (yes, yes, I know GE2017 but that doesn't count).

    How do Labour assemble a coalition that broad that sticks?

    It's the assembling game that's the killer - the focus on identity politics creates inevitable conflicts among the identities and leaves the lumpen masses outside the tent. Just look at today's reaction to the Race relations report - they cannot help themselves.
    Everyone is pretty fed up with identity politics, I think.

    A leader that got this, whilst also not making light of discrimination more broadly, would do well, I think.
  • maaarshmaaarsh Posts: 3,573
    Reasonable chance yesterday was the last day of 50 deaths being reported by the looks of it.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,314
    edited March 2021

    Andy_JS said:

    Floater said:
    Southern Europeans and Scandinavians don't seem to have such a big litter problem. I don't know what it is about the British and Dutch, if this image is representative of the Netherlands, which it may not be.
    It could be a generational thing across Western countries. Generation Me Me Me.

    Duty and personal responsibility not really being a thing.
    The idea that litter dropping is the sole preserve of the young is, er, rubbish. All the crap on roadside verges deposited from passing traffic is not, I suspect, the detritus of young eco-warriors.

    Triggering my inner Emily Thornberry, the worst litter dumpers I've witnessed are actually white-van men and similar, of various ages (St. George's flags optional).

    I also suspect the excess of litter yesterday is partly due to the closure of cafes, bars etc: everybody who went to the park had to take all their food and drink with them.

    Like others, though, I'm in favour of draconian punishments for litter bugs.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 41,947
    edited March 2021
    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    Wtf is a re-modelled African/Britain anyway?

    "There is a new story about the Caribbean experience which speaks to the slave period not only being about profit and suffering but how culturally African people transformed themselves into a re-modelled African/Britain."

    That is quite some sentence. I think it means slavery wasn't great but it opened up new vistas and opportunities for many.
    OK, dipping my toe in controversial waters here, but this is a genuine question - please don't splutter with indignation: but what would have been the counterfactual for the slaves transported to the West Indies? European slavers didn't capture them, they bought them. They already were slaves (as a result - I'm guessing? of small scale wars between African states). Would, as individuals, their futures have been any brighter being slaves in Africa?
    Hard to say what would have transpired with no colonial demand. A large proportion of those transported died on the trip - so no gain for them there.

    I'm honestly not sure what point is being made by the report here. Maybe just a "stop banging on about slavery, it helps nobody" type sentiment.

    I suspect it's a reaction to calls for the decolonization of the curriculum. This irritates "ordinary people" and the government knows it does. So with their usual acute ear for this sort of thing, they come up with vaguely upbeat and reassuring (to the unwary) platitudes such as this.

    I haven't read the report. It might have some good stuff in there, it probably has, but this bit looks a bit War on Woke.
  • NEW THREAD

  • PhilPhil Posts: 2,239
    edited March 2021
    (deleted)
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    edited March 2021
    Bhutan taking off:

    https://twitter.com/redouad/status/1377203970859536384?s=20

    All Oxford AstraZeneca
  • PhilPhil Posts: 2,239
    All true but, at the same time over the period that slavery was outlawed in this country, many Britons made their fortunes from the triangular trade or owned slaves themselves. Several port cities were built predominantly from the profits, along with numerous country piles.

    Yes, Britain is not the USA. At the same time, the idea that we have any kind of virtuous pure history on this issue is ludicrous.

  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Wonder if this will get highlighted:

    Besides, Venous thromboembolism is an important potential risk in the RMP of the recently approved COVID-19 Vaccine Janssen, another adenovirus vaccine, due to an imbalance in clinical trials.

    https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/prac-recommendation/signal-assessment-report-embolic-thrombotic-events-smq-covid-19-vaccine-chadox1-s-recombinant-covid_en.pdf
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,069
    Cookie said:

    felix said:

    felix said:

    algarkirk said:

    tlg86 said:

    Tory in 2010, not Tory in 2019 (* denotes Lib Dem seat, the rest are now Labour):

    Seat: majority 2010, deficit 2019

    Putney: 24.6%, -9.5%
    Enfield, Southgate: 17.2%, -9.4%
    Reading East: 15.2%, -10.6%
    Battersea: 12.3%, -9.5%
    Canterbury: 12.3%, -3.1%
    Ilford North: 11.5%, -10.4%
    Ealing Central and Acton: 7.9%, -24.3%
    Warwick and Leamington: 7.2%, -1.5%
    Richmond Park*: 6.9%, -11.9%
    Bristol North West: 6.5%, -10.2%
    Wirral West: 6.2%, -7%
    Croydon Central: 6%, -11%
    City of Chester: 5.5%, -11.3%
    St Albans*: 4.4%, -10.9%
    Enfield North: 3.8%, -14.4%
    Hove: 3.8%, -30.2%
    Brentford and Isleworth: 3.6%, -18%
    Brighton, Kemptown: 3.1%, -16.6%
    Bedford: 3%, -0.3%
    Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport: 2.6%, -8.9%
    Weaver Vale: 2.3%, -1.1%
    Lancaster and Fleetwood: 0.8%, -5.3%
    Cardiff North: 0.4%, -13.3%
    Oxford West and Abingdon*: 0.3%, -15.2%


    There are very few exceptions here to seats which are or combination of: Lots of HE/Academia; BAME; too posh to vote Tory+champagne socialists; super urban.

    I don't the issue of how Labour is going to win Chingford or Esher is very interesting. In the long run we need to know how they are going to win back Grimsby (Labour since 1935) and Burnley.

    There are (thank goodness) a lot more Mansfields than Putneys in the UK.

    What an absolutely bizarre comment. Have you ever visited Mansfield or Putney? Mansfield is horrible. Putney is absolutely lovely. Put that ludicrous hair-shirt back in the drawer.
    You are Emily Thornberry and I claim my St George's flag t-shirt.
    Have you ever visited either place? It's a completely ludicrous comparison. Sorry.
    You're never gonna get it are you? Sorry.
    You do realise that that I'm originally from that area? No, probably you don't...

    The patronising tone among PBers on these places makes me sick – they are not great places, most ambitious people leave them. The answer is not to lionise them, but to work out how to improve them.
    It's a tricky one.

    I'm from one of the south coast towns that looks and feels a lot more northern than it is. I've still got family there, and I'm very fond of them and the town. But there's lots of stuff that I've enjoyed doing in my life that I simply couldn't have done if I had stayed there.

    And the problem with the "somewhere" theory of life is that nobody has really worked out how to substantially improve the quality of smalltown-somewhere life without making it into a different place. More cosmopolitan. More like that there London. More civic pride and a less tatty public realm will help, but they're not a complete answer. Some of the things that will make towns attractive those prone to moving away will destroy the somewhere-ness that many people crave.

    I don't know what the answer to that one is, which is a shame, because it's important.
    Life in this small town (in reality, a large suburb) is pretty good right now.
    I'm working from home. So I spend most of my working week here - it's more of a community, less of a dormitory. The local shops are doing well because the workers-from-home are shopping in them. I walk down to the butchers (where I never shopped when I commuted, because I was at work in a big city while it was open) and see three people I know on my journey. I speak to my neighbours. There is space here, and time.
    We could do more to improve the urban realm. The place could be cleaner. But actually, some of the rebalancing is happening by itself. The primary advantage of the city was proximity to employment, which the small towns couldn't provide in anything like such abundance. With that advantage partially eroded, the small town has more to offer.
    Now, I do want to get back to the office. But in most future scenarios, I, along with most people, will be spending more time in my home town and less in the city where my work is. This can't help but be good for the small towns (and, regrettably, bad for the cities). And it will strengthen the often-claimed quality of a sense of community.
    Economically, the signs are surely good. And I'd hope that people who aren't spending 10 hours a week commuting will feel they have the time, energy and wish to do small battalion, community building stuff that modern Britain is frankly rubbish at.

    But.

    There's life-giving stuff; finding your tribe, banging nightlife or choral evensong, which only really works if you have a city-sized group of people together. And moving to a small town when you're middle-aged is delightful, but not the same as having been there for generations.
    We've got an opportunity to get this right, but the social issues might be tricky; think of all those ex-fishing villages in Cornwall.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,209
    RobD said:

    malcolmg said:

    With just five weeks until the 2021 Scottish parliament election, and with the SNP committed to taking Scotland out of the UK and back into the EU, this paper reveals what EU membership would mean for Scotland and its relationship with the rest of the UK.

    It shows that Scotland rejoining the EU would reduce barriers to trade between Scotland and the EU but would inevitably mean the emergence of barriers to trade – and possibly even to the free movement of people – on the island of Great Britain. For the first time in more than three centuries, England and Scotland would find themselves on either side of a hard economic border.

    Joining the EU would mean Scotland joining the single market and customs union – and as a result the Anglo-Scottish border would become a new external customs and regulatory frontier for the EU. Even a looser model of integration with the EU, such as Scotland joining the European Economic Area (EEA), could not grant frictionless access to both the EU and the UK markets, so long as the UK–EU relationship continues to be governed by the UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement.


    https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publications/scottish-independence-eu-border

    Big improvement then , unfettered access to 27 countries versus minor irritation locally.
    What fraction of trade goes to that minor irritation?
    Only a Tory would bring up that old chestnut, most of that trade is passing through to go to Europe, or should I say used to go to Europe, going to waste now.
    Maybe cast your eyes across the water , Ireland manages to trade with EU , why could Scotland not do same.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,209

    Andy_JS said:

    Floater said:
    Southern Europeans and Scandinavians don't seem to have such a big litter problem. I don't know what it is about the British and Dutch, if this image is representative of the Netherlands, which it may not be.
    It could be a generational thing across Western countries. Generation Me Me Me.

    Duty and personal responsibility not really being a thing.
    The idea that litter dropping is the sole preserve of the young is, er, rubbish. All the crap on roadside verges deposited from passing traffic is not, I suspect, the detritus of young eco-warriors.

    Triggering my inner Emily Thornberry, the worst litter dumpers I've witnessed are actually white-van men and similar, of various ages (St. George's flags optional).

    I also suspect the excess of litter yesterday is partly due to the closure of cafes, bars etc: everybody who went to the park had to take all their food and drink with them.

    Like others, though, I'm in favour of draconian punishments for litter bugs.
    I would vote to have all litter droppers flogged and pout in public stocks
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 41,947

    On topic, I remember when headers like these were written for the Tories in 2004/2005.

    If Labour did that well they'd be picking up 15-20 seats in Scotland, and would have an overall majority of 20-30. The bigger OMG is that 44-45% of the vote looks a real stretch for them. It's relatively easy for them to get to 35-38% of the vote but the next 7-8% is very hard (yes, yes, I know GE2017 but that doesn't count).

    How do Labour assemble a coalition that broad that sticks?

    A good, concise summary of the challenge. It's also cheered me up a bit when you put it like that. Yes, 7-8% is very hard, but it's not that much. The Tories may well lose 3-4% to Labour when things are less upbeat than now, leaving Labour with an extra 3-4% to win over. Nowt wrong with being optimistic.
    I think the gloom is overdone, in fact verging on the hysterical. A Lab outright majority next time is more or less out but there's a decent chance of doing well enough to put Starmer into number 10.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    Leon said:

    rkrkrk said:



    It's funny because my memory of Blair is he did the opposite.

    He was all about being modern not old fashioned, did loads for (then) woke issues like gay rights, hate crimes, set up equalities commission etc.

    He was pro inmigration

    But he SOLD it as patriotic firm government. Cool Britannia. Tough on crime, tough on the causes. Etc

    He then smuggled through a lot of ‘progressive’ stuff - some good, some bad - because he got the job done. Life seemed to improve. Government was stable. If he hadn’t invaded Iraq he might now be enjoying his seventh term in office

    I think that's right. The thing about social reform - gay marriage etc. - is that most people have a view (often surprisingly tolerant) but don't care as much as they do about bread-and-butter issues; the people who do care are mostly passionately in favour. So if you can persuade the majority that the bread and butter will be delivered, they'll take a bit of social stuff with a shrug. Blair didn't conceal the fact that he was going to liberalise gay rights etc., but he didn't go on about it as his central theme.

    Starmer believes that we need to establish a base of acceptance that Labour is sensible, patriotic and moderate. Only when he's gone on about that till we're all bored to tears with it can he get a hearing for the good stuff.

    I think the line that the party is full of Corbynites just awaiting their moment won't prove durable - certainly in reality the Corbynites have largely either said "Oh well, OK" (which is about where I am) or have gone completely passive or quit altogether. There will always be someone somewhere saying something off-message, but people don't pay much attention unless they've actually heard of them - "Councillor Bloggs from Little Snoring says he loves Stalin" doesn't really work..

    There's a new YouGov poll of Labour members out today. Lots of depressing stuff on anti-Semitism, sadly, but Starmer leads Corbyn by 61% to 29% on leader preference.

    Starmer is inoffensive enough to become Prime Minister. Now this isn't a ringing Blairesque endorsement by voters, but in the event they tire of the Conservatives he doesn't scare them like Corbyn did.

    At the moment Johnson is getting away with blue murder, in terms of corruption and lack of accountability issues.

    When the economy fails, Johnson will be held to account for Garden Bridges, water cannon, PPE contracts for chums, Dido Harding and Robert Jenrick saving the Government's favourite pornographer a £50 million tax bill.

    Now I will be accused of wishing economic catastrophe on Boris Johnson. I don't see how we avoid it, and those who can't see it coming should perhaps open the curtains and take a look outside.
    The last three leaders to win a majority (Blair, Cameron & Boris) all had the X factor. The last seven who failed or were booted out before they had the chance to (Hague, Howard, IDS, Brown, Miliband, Corbyn, May) all didn’t - Starmer fits into the latter group much more easily than the former in my eyes. I guess he doesn’t have to win a majority to be PM, but if he manages to get a hung parliament out of a GE vs Boris I will be amazed, will doff my cap and say I was wrong about him

    To put my money where my mouth is I’d like to offer 3/1 that Starmer will not be PM after the next GE to all PBers
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513
    malcolmg said:

    With just five weeks until the 2021 Scottish parliament election, and with the SNP committed to taking Scotland out of the UK and back into the EU, this paper reveals what EU membership would mean for Scotland and its relationship with the rest of the UK.

    It shows that Scotland rejoining the EU would reduce barriers to trade between Scotland and the EU but would inevitably mean the emergence of barriers to trade – and possibly even to the free movement of people – on the island of Great Britain. For the first time in more than three centuries, England and Scotland would find themselves on either side of a hard economic border.

    Joining the EU would mean Scotland joining the single market and customs union – and as a result the Anglo-Scottish border would become a new external customs and regulatory frontier for the EU. Even a looser model of integration with the EU, such as Scotland joining the European Economic Area (EEA), could not grant frictionless access to both the EU and the UK markets, so long as the UK–EU relationship continues to be governed by the UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement.


    https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publications/scottish-independence-eu-border

    Big improvement then , unfettered access to 27 countries versus minor irritation locally.
    From your previous posts, I thought we were a major irritation, malcolm ?

  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 41,947

    On topic, I remember when headers like these were written for the Tories in 2004/2005.

    If Labour did that well they'd be picking up 15-20 seats in Scotland, and would have an overall majority of 20-30. The bigger OMG is that 44-45% of the vote looks a real stretch for them. It's relatively easy for them to get to 35-38% of the vote but the next 7-8% is very hard (yes, yes, I know GE2017 but that doesn't count).

    How do Labour assemble a coalition that broad that sticks?

    A good, concise summary of the challenge. It's also cheered me up a bit when you put it like that. Yes, 7-8% is very hard, but it's not that much. The Tories may well lose 3-4% to Labour when things are less upbeat than now, leaving Labour with an extra 3-4% to win over. Nowt wrong with being optimistic.
    I think @Leon got closest to the right strategy for Labour upthread.

    The thing is, Labour's membership is now so dominated by the Guardianista middle-classes that it will be very very hard for them to make that move. The resistance will be stratospheric.

    You'd need to be as tough as nails, with skin like tungsten, to push back against that sort of peer pressure.
    Starmer has taken control of the party and has marginalized the elements you refer to. He is doing it his way and will be judged by the GE24 result. PM or out.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,548
    Meanwhile, on the lighter side of the news . . .

    Politico.com - Rep. Matt Gaetz denies relationship with minor
    The Florida Republican, 38, says he and his family are victims of an extortion scheme.

    Rep. Matt Gaetz on Tuesday denied allegations against him about a relationship with an underage teenager, after a report said the Justice Department was investigating the matter.

    “It is verifiably false that I’ve traveled with a 17 year old woman,” the Florida Republican told POLITICO in a text message. “These are lines rooted in extortion, coordinated by a former DOJ official.”

    In the evening, Gaetz, 38, took to Twitter and Fox News to defend himself against a report about an investigation into an alleged sexual relationship with a minor whom he might have traveled across state lines with.


    In a series of tweets, Gaetz said he and his family were the victims of an extortion scheme. The congressmember provided POLITICO with a series of documents that he said supported his allegation of extortion, but none could be immediately verified.

    “Over the past several weeks my family and I have been victims of an organized criminal extortion involving a former DOJ official seeking $25 million while threatening to smear my name,” he said on Twitter.

    His family has been cooperating with federal authorities, he said, adding that his father had been “wearing a wire at the FBI’s direction to catch these criminals.” He said a Tuesday report by The New York Times was an attempt to “thwart that investigation,” and demanded that the Justice Department release those recordings to clear his name.

    In an interview with Tucker Carlson on Fox News, Gaetz said that the 17-year-old “doesn’t exist” and that his father was supposed to pay a $4.5 million down payment to the former Justice Department official — whom he named on the show — on Wednesday to make the allegations “go away.”

    But as Gaetz explained the complex extortion plot, which he said included nonexistent pictures of him with child prostitutes, even Carlson seemed to be confused, especially over the sex trafficking charge that the congressman flatly denied.

    “Again, for the fifth time, I don’t really understand this story very well,” Carlson said.

    “That was one of the weirdest interviews I have ever conducted,” the Fox host said when his show came back from commercial break. “Don’t quite understand it but we will bring you more when we find out,” he added . . .

    Axios had reported on Tuesday that Gaetz was considering early retirement from Congress to take a job at Newsmax, the conservative TV network. Gaetz told The Times that he was not planning to resign his House seat.

    https://www.politico.com/news/2021/03/30/gaetz-being-investigated-for-alleged-sexual-relations-with-minor-nyt-says-478631

    Wonder IF your own beloved Prince Andrew is buddies with THIS foul peckerhead? Sure sounds like they have similar interests.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,209
    Nigelb said:

    malcolmg said:

    With just five weeks until the 2021 Scottish parliament election, and with the SNP committed to taking Scotland out of the UK and back into the EU, this paper reveals what EU membership would mean for Scotland and its relationship with the rest of the UK.

    It shows that Scotland rejoining the EU would reduce barriers to trade between Scotland and the EU but would inevitably mean the emergence of barriers to trade – and possibly even to the free movement of people – on the island of Great Britain. For the first time in more than three centuries, England and Scotland would find themselves on either side of a hard economic border.

    Joining the EU would mean Scotland joining the single market and customs union – and as a result the Anglo-Scottish border would become a new external customs and regulatory frontier for the EU. Even a looser model of integration with the EU, such as Scotland joining the European Economic Area (EEA), could not grant frictionless access to both the EU and the UK markets, so long as the UK–EU relationship continues to be governed by the UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement.


    https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publications/scottish-independence-eu-border

    Big improvement then , unfettered access to 27 countries versus minor irritation locally.
    From your previous posts, I thought we were a major irritation, malcolm ?

    @nigelb Only the hoorays running the show Nigel, people are fine.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513

    Wonder if this will get highlighted:

    Besides, Venous thromboembolism is an important potential risk in the RMP of the recently approved COVID-19 Vaccine Janssen, another adenovirus vaccine, due to an imbalance in clinical trials.

    https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/prac-recommendation/signal-assessment-report-embolic-thrombotic-events-smq-covid-19-vaccine-chadox1-s-recombinant-covid_en.pdf

    It does seem to be a thing, given that the mRNA vaccines have seen far fewer (or no) case reports of this particular condition - though they have reported more cases of immune thrombocytopenia.

    In both cases, though, the incidences are so rare that's it's very hard to disentangle them for what you might expect in an unvaccinated population.
    And there's also the point that you're more likely to find a rare condition if you're actively looking for it.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 41,947
    isam said:

    Leon said:

    rkrkrk said:



    It's funny because my memory of Blair is he did the opposite.

    He was all about being modern not old fashioned, did loads for (then) woke issues like gay rights, hate crimes, set up equalities commission etc.

    He was pro inmigration

    But he SOLD it as patriotic firm government. Cool Britannia. Tough on crime, tough on the causes. Etc

    He then smuggled through a lot of ‘progressive’ stuff - some good, some bad - because he got the job done. Life seemed to improve. Government was stable. If he hadn’t invaded Iraq he might now be enjoying his seventh term in office

    I think that's right. The thing about social reform - gay marriage etc. - is that most people have a view (often surprisingly tolerant) but don't care as much as they do about bread-and-butter issues; the people who do care are mostly passionately in favour. So if you can persuade the majority that the bread and butter will be delivered, they'll take a bit of social stuff with a shrug. Blair didn't conceal the fact that he was going to liberalise gay rights etc., but he didn't go on about it as his central theme.

    Starmer believes that we need to establish a base of acceptance that Labour is sensible, patriotic and moderate. Only when he's gone on about that till we're all bored to tears with it can he get a hearing for the good stuff.

    I think the line that the party is full of Corbynites just awaiting their moment won't prove durable - certainly in reality the Corbynites have largely either said "Oh well, OK" (which is about where I am) or have gone completely passive or quit altogether. There will always be someone somewhere saying something off-message, but people don't pay much attention unless they've actually heard of them - "Councillor Bloggs from Little Snoring says he loves Stalin" doesn't really work..

    There's a new YouGov poll of Labour members out today. Lots of depressing stuff on anti-Semitism, sadly, but Starmer leads Corbyn by 61% to 29% on leader preference.

    Starmer is inoffensive enough to become Prime Minister. Now this isn't a ringing Blairesque endorsement by voters, but in the event they tire of the Conservatives he doesn't scare them like Corbyn did.

    At the moment Johnson is getting away with blue murder, in terms of corruption and lack of accountability issues.

    When the economy fails, Johnson will be held to account for Garden Bridges, water cannon, PPE contracts for chums, Dido Harding and Robert Jenrick saving the Government's favourite pornographer a £50 million tax bill.

    Now I will be accused of wishing economic catastrophe on Boris Johnson. I don't see how we avoid it, and those who can't see it coming should perhaps open the curtains and take a look outside.
    The last three leaders to win a majority (Blair, Cameron & Boris) all had the X factor. The last seven who failed or were booted out before they had the chance to (Hague, Howard, IDS, Brown, Miliband, Corbyn, May) all didn’t - Starmer fits into the latter group much more easily than the former in my eyes. I guess he doesn’t have to win a majority to be PM, but if he manages to get a hung parliament out of a GE vs Boris I will be amazed, will doff my cap and say I was wrong about him

    To put my money where my mouth is I’d like to offer 3/1 that Starmer will not be PM after the next GE to all PBers
    £100.
  • FenmanFenman Posts: 1,047
    Phil said:

    All true but, at the same time over the period that slavery was outlawed in this country, many Britons made their fortunes from the triangular trade or owned slaves themselves. Several port cities were built predominantly from the profits, along with numerous country piles.

    Yes, Britain is not the USA. At the same time, the idea that we have any kind of virtuous pure history on this issue is ludicrous.

    Actually, slavery in England was abolished by the Synod of Westminster in 1102.
  • FenmanFenman Posts: 1,047

    Bhutan taking off:

    https://twitter.com/redouad/status/1377203970859536384?s=20

    All Oxford AstraZeneca

    Both of them?
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,080
    maaarsh said:

    Reasonable chance yesterday was the last day of 50 deaths being reported by the looks of it.

    I think there might be a reporting effect due to Easter that will see one relatively big reporting day in the week afterwards.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,210

    Meanwhile, on the lighter side of the news . . .

    Politico.com - Rep. Matt Gaetz denies relationship with minor
    The Florida Republican, 38, says he and his family are victims of an extortion scheme.

    Rep. Matt Gaetz on Tuesday denied allegations against him about a relationship with an underage teenager, after a report said the Justice Department was investigating the matter.

    “It is verifiably false that I’ve traveled with a 17 year old woman,” the Florida Republican told POLITICO in a text message. “These are lines rooted in extortion, coordinated by a former DOJ official.”

    In the evening, Gaetz, 38, took to Twitter and Fox News to defend himself against a report about an investigation into an alleged sexual relationship with a minor whom he might have traveled across state lines with.


    In a series of tweets, Gaetz said he and his family were the victims of an extortion scheme. The congressmember provided POLITICO with a series of documents that he said supported his allegation of extortion, but none could be immediately verified.

    “Over the past several weeks my family and I have been victims of an organized criminal extortion involving a former DOJ official seeking $25 million while threatening to smear my name,” he said on Twitter.

    His family has been cooperating with federal authorities, he said, adding that his father had been “wearing a wire at the FBI’s direction to catch these criminals.” He said a Tuesday report by The New York Times was an attempt to “thwart that investigation,” and demanded that the Justice Department release those recordings to clear his name.

    In an interview with Tucker Carlson on Fox News, Gaetz said that the 17-year-old “doesn’t exist” and that his father was supposed to pay a $4.5 million down payment to the former Justice Department official — whom he named on the show — on Wednesday to make the allegations “go away.”

    But as Gaetz explained the complex extortion plot, which he said included nonexistent pictures of him with child prostitutes, even Carlson seemed to be confused, especially over the sex trafficking charge that the congressman flatly denied.

    “Again, for the fifth time, I don’t really understand this story very well,” Carlson said.

    “That was one of the weirdest interviews I have ever conducted,” the Fox host said when his show came back from commercial break. “Don’t quite understand it but we will bring you more when we find out,” he added . . .

    Axios had reported on Tuesday that Gaetz was considering early retirement from Congress to take a job at Newsmax, the conservative TV network. Gaetz told The Times that he was not planning to resign his House seat.

    https://www.politico.com/news/2021/03/30/gaetz-being-investigated-for-alleged-sexual-relations-with-minor-nyt-says-478631

    Wonder IF your own beloved Prince Andrew is buddies with THIS foul peckerhead? Sure sounds like they have similar interests.

    The difference is that in the UK, having sex with a 17 year old is an entirely legal activity (unless she is a prostitute, or you are a teacher and she is your student)
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Phil said:

    All true but, at the same time over the period that slavery was outlawed in this country, many Britons made their fortunes from the triangular trade or owned slaves themselves. Several port cities were built predominantly from the profits, along with numerous country piles.

    Yes, Britain is not the USA. At the same time, the idea that we have any kind of virtuous pure history on this issue is ludicrous.

    Well, quite. Who got the vast majority of the US slaves to the US in the first place?
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    Charles said:

    Excellent threat. Real food for thought.

    Mike do you know how Scotland feeds into this? Have Labour ever won an outright majority off only seats south of the border?

    Another way to ask that is that if Labour continue to flounder in Scotland is their route to an overall majority impossible?

    (I know some will say that they can form a coalition with the SNP but we all know what the price of that would be.)

    Blair did, I believe
    As did Wilson and Attlee.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    ydoethur said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Charles said:

    Excellent threat. Real food for thought.

    Mike do you know how Scotland feeds into this? Have Labour ever won an outright majority off only seats south of the border?

    Another way to ask that is that if Labour continue to flounder in Scotland is their route to an overall majority impossible?

    (I know some will say that they can form a coalition with the SNP but we all know what the price of that would be.)

    Blair did, I believe
    I don't think so, Charles.

    Labour Party seats won in Scotland during General Elections:

    1997: 56
    2001: 56
    2005: 41 (boundary changes meant Blair lost 5 seats not 15)

    Gordon Brown took over and in:

    2010 Labour also won 41 seats in Scotland

    In 2015 Labour won 1 seat in Scotland, losing 40 of their MPs under Metropolitan Miliband.

    In 2017, Corbynism took them up to 7 seats in Scotland, losing all of those gains in 2019 when Labour again returned to 1 seat.

    I fail to see how Labour can possibly win a majority unless they win back their Scottish base.
    Hang on... Thinking about that, that means the LibDems have 4x the number of Scottish MPs the Labour Party does.
    Surely you realised that before? First time the Liberals outpolled Labour in Scotland since (I think) December 1910.

    Remember also Labour will lose a lot of seats in Wales on these boundary changes. Possibly as many as eight.
    Not in votes . Labour was well ahead of the LDs in vote share there.
This discussion has been closed.