I'm not sure Sturgeon will hold it. She knows that a botched wildcat referendum is a probable and potential disaster. It will be boycotted by unionists, ignored by Westminster, and then what? Her party looks inept and clueless and the idea of a THIRD referendum recedes further into the distance
If Salmond holds the balance of power, however, he might be able to force her. But the polls show Alba is cratering
She gets her mandate, demands a referendum, is refused, and thus gets a wonderful new grievance to exploit. Much better than actually holding a referendum.
One of France's top colleges - the Ecole Nationale d'Administration - will be shut down, French President Emmanuel Macron is expected to announce, under plans to boost social mobility.
To be replaced by a new "public administration school”.
French media reported that a new school would aim to attract a more socially diverse range of students, who would follow a course more in touch with modern life that included subjects such as laîcité – France’s version of secularism – poverty, ecology and sciences.
Honestly, the man’s such an empty suit. First out-Islamaphobing Le Pen, now trying to out-woke BLM. What would be wrong with ordering the ENA to change its admission policies, as we have with the OFA?
He doesn’t deserve another term and I hope somebody emerges to thwart both him and Le Pen.
I'm not sure Sturgeon will hold it. She knows that a botched wildcat referendum is a probable and potential disaster. It will be boycotted by unionists, ignored by Westminster, and then what? Her party looks inept and clueless and the idea of a THIRD referendum recedes further into the distance
If Salmond holds the balance of power, however, he might be able to force her. But the polls show Alba is cratering
She gets her mandate, demands a referendum, is refused, and thus gets a wonderful new grievance to exploit. Much better than actually holding a referendum.
Quite. However she does have a problem with malcolmg militants in her own party, not just Alba. The hardcore will demand a vote. And if she refuses there is a serious risk the SNP splits wide open, rather than just splintering, as now
I'm not sure Sturgeon will hold it. She knows that a botched wildcat referendum is a probable and potential disaster. It will be boycotted by unionists, ignored by Westminster, and then what? Her party looks inept and clueless and the idea of a THIRD referendum recedes further into the distance
If Salmond holds the balance of power, however, he might be able to force her. But the polls show Alba is cratering
She gets her mandate, demands a referendum, is refused, and thus gets a wonderful new grievance to exploit. Much better than actually holding a referendum.
Quite. However she does have a problem with malcolmg militants in her own party, not just Alba. The hardcore will demand a vote. And if she refuses there is a serious risk the SNP splits wide open, rather than just splintering, as now
This, of course, must be Boris' strategic aim
If she gets a Holyrood majority then Sturgeon will hold an independence vote, Boris will ignore it.
Salmond will then demand she declares UDI which Sturgeon has said she will not do, that is when the split will come in the Nationalist ranks
If there are any Surrey fans on there, I feel your pain.
(No, not really, but I’m trying to be nice.)
Thanks. Clearly our batsmen are suffering from Englanditis... hopefully the youngsters that haven't yet been got at can get us up to 250+ or so...
Ooof. It just got worse for you, didn’t it?
I think Smith was surprised Josh Shaw bowled a straight one, tbh. I know I am...
Sigh... I'm not going to comment any more. Although clearly Vince is trying to remind the selectors he exists in some style.
I actually spent half an hour or so this morning drawing up my predictions for this year’s championship, in which I tipped Surrey for second in group two ahead of Hampshire (and indeed, good dark horses for the championship). This was because of the depth and quality of their batting.
I added the caveat, ‘unless James Vince has a big season.’
So I’m afraid, as Atkinson joins the procession, it’s all my fault...
I'm not sure Sturgeon will hold it. She knows that a botched wildcat referendum is a probable and potential disaster. It will be boycotted by unionists, ignored by Westminster, and then what? Her party looks inept and clueless and the idea of a THIRD referendum recedes further into the distance
If Salmond holds the balance of power, however, he might be able to force her. But the polls show Alba is cratering
She gets her mandate, demands a referendum, is refused, and thus gets a wonderful new grievance to exploit. Much better than actually holding a referendum.
Quite. However she does have a problem with malcolmg militants in her own party, not just Alba. The hardcore will demand a vote. And if she refuses there is a serious risk the SNP splits wide open, rather than just splintering, as now
This, of course, must be Boris' strategic aim
Since when has Johnson had a strategy beyond his own self-aggrandisement?
The EU will just wait out the Johnson project at this point I think. They'll deal with whomever comes after on the basis that they almost certainly won't be a conceited shit surrendered by a coterie of brainfucked ball garglers.
Not quite the terminology I would use, but you are spot-on. Quite apart from anything else, Boris has rubbished and reneged on both agreements he's signed, within weeks of signing and hailing them as triumphs, so they'd have to be out of their minds to want to deal with him any further if they can avoid it.
Whereas the EU has proved to be totally trustworthy ... oh
So ok - I do now get your comment earlier about Labour choosing a miscalculating Remainer as leader.
But they had to, I think. It's a strongly Remain party. Pretending otherwise wouldn't wash.
Strategy is to leave the issue behind now. Good chance of working.
This gives a good indication as to why case numbers are now in free fall. Combined with those who have already had Covid there are many people who have immunity. As soon as they get the doses to get through the 30 to 49s then the risk ought to be tiny and it will be very hard for the virus to spread.
I think it's safe to say Phase I is complete.
No - there's still a fair bit to do in the 50-60s groups. I don't think that 90%+ is unattainable there.
How many more still to go to get to 90%?
Those figures are 4 days out of date already. Any who weren't vaccinated already 4 days ago ought to have been offered a vaccine by now.
See below for whose left
The first column is using the 94% achieved for the 75-79 group as the goal, the second column uses 90% as a goal
to 94% to 90% Under 50 18,640,314 17,441,494 50-54 564,069 376,769 55-59 395,395 214,440 60-64 233,415 79,908 65-69 108,029 N/A 70-74 29,842 N/A 75-79 0 N/A 80+ 16,238 N/A
Something wrong with your maths surely?
How can to 90% have positive numbers for 55-59 and 60-65 when they're at 94% and 97% respectively already? Surely we just need the 3% of 50-54?
How can 55-59, 60-64, 65-69 and 70-74 have positive numbers to 94% when they're already at 94%, 97%, 94% and 97% respectively already? Surely we just need the 7% of 50-54?
I'm not sure Sturgeon will hold it. She knows that a botched wildcat referendum is a probable and potential disaster. It will be boycotted by unionists, ignored by Westminster, and then what? Her party looks inept and clueless and the idea of a THIRD referendum recedes further into the distance
If Salmond holds the balance of power, however, he might be able to force her. But the polls show Alba is cratering
She gets her mandate, demands a referendum, is refused, and thus gets a wonderful new grievance to exploit. Much better than actually holding a referendum.
Quite. However she does have a problem with malcolmg militants in her own party, not just Alba. The hardcore will demand a vote. And if she refuses there is a serious risk the SNP splits wide open, rather than just splintering, as now
This, of course, must be Boris' strategic aim
Strategic from the team that toyed with sending Prince Edward to live up an Edinburgh close? Of course!
If there are any Surrey fans on there, I feel your pain.
(No, not really, but I’m trying to be nice.)
Incidentally, for the amusement of @justin124 and @Pagan2 I have just had a visit from a census collector. He asked if I had completed my census and when I said, rather startled, that I had, weeks ago, he sighed in exasperation and said that of 40 people he’d spoken to today, 38 had said the same and he was getting fed up with the system’s problems.
Nice man, he called Gavin Williamson a ‘fucking prick,’ so he obviously is very bright.
Unprompted? Or did you offer him a multiple choice in which FP was the most complimentary option? Such fine distinctions matter when a reputation is as fragile as Williamson's.
I'd like to think the government are killing two birds with one stone here: chasing up on old census forms, and confirming to each voter, individually and in person, that Gavin Williamson is a fucking prick.
Few politicians can unify like Williamson can around that statement.
I'm not sure Sturgeon will hold it. She knows that a botched wildcat referendum is a probable and potential disaster. It will be boycotted by unionists, ignored by Westminster, and then what? Her party looks inept and clueless and the idea of a THIRD referendum recedes further into the distance
If Salmond holds the balance of power, however, he might be able to force her. But the polls show Alba is cratering
She gets her mandate, demands a referendum, is refused, and thus gets a wonderful new grievance to exploit. Much better than actually holding a referendum.
It's not better than holding and WINNING a (legal) referendum.
Xosé Lluís Fernández @XLlFS Sanidade desconvoca a 1.400 gallegos que iban a ser vacunados hoy con AstraZeneca Translated from Spanish by Sanidade recalls 1,400 Galicians who were going to be vaccinated today with AstraZeneca
This is the problem, a quite chaotic situation in Spain, now. Millions of young Spaniards have had one dose of AZ. What happens now? They are considering: giving them a second dose of something else, only giving one dose, trying to persuade people to have the 2nd AZ shot anyway. Or they might start the vax programme all over again
This gives a good indication as to why case numbers are now in free fall. Combined with those who have already had Covid there are many people who have immunity. As soon as they get the doses to get through the 30 to 49s then the risk ought to be tiny and it will be very hard for the virus to spread.
I think it's safe to say Phase I is complete.
No - there's still a fair bit to do in the 50-60s groups. I don't think that 90%+ is unattainable there.
How many more still to go to get to 90%?
Those figures are 4 days out of date already. Any who weren't vaccinated already 4 days ago ought to have been offered a vaccine by now.
See below for whose left
The first column is using the 94% achieved for the 75-79 group as the goal, the second column uses 90% as a goal
to 94% to 90% Under 50 18,640,314 17,441,494 50-54 564,069 376,769 55-59 395,395 214,440 60-64 233,415 79,908 65-69 108,029 N/A 70-74 29,842 N/A 75-79 0 N/A 80+ 16,238 N/A
Something wrong with your maths surely?
How can to 90% have positive numbers for 55-59 and 60-65 when they're at 94% and 97% respectively already? Surely we just need the 3% of 50-54?
How can 55-59, 60-64, 65-69 and 70-74 have positive numbers to 94% when they're already at 94%, 97%, 94% and 97% respectively already? Surely we just need the 7% of 50-54?
They aren't at 90%
I'm using NIMIS for population numbers, which takes ONS 2019 and projects forward. This is quite accurate - 29 year olds become 30 year olds rather regularly.....
If there are any Surrey fans on there, I feel your pain.
(No, not really, but I’m trying to be nice.)
Thanks. Clearly our batsmen are suffering from Englanditis... hopefully the youngsters that haven't yet been got at can get us up to 250+ or so...
Ooof. It just got worse for you, didn’t it?
I think Smith was surprised Josh Shaw bowled a straight one, tbh. I know I am...
Sigh... I'm not going to comment any more. Although clearly Vince is trying to remind the selectors he exists in some style.
I actually spent half an hour or so this morning drawing up my predictions for this year’s championship, in which I tipped Surrey for second in group two ahead of Hampshire (and indeed, good dark horses for the championship). This was because of the depth and quality of their batting.
I added the caveat, ‘unless James Vince has a big season.’
So I’m afraid, as Atkinson joins the procession, it’s all my fault...
The one comfort I can offer you is that the last time Gloucestershire faced Jamie Overton he had a slightly stronger batting lineup all out for about three.
Edit - although now I check, it was actually Craig took the wickets. But it was Jamie who terrified the batsmen into playing dumb shots against his brother.
I'm not sure Sturgeon will hold it. She knows that a botched wildcat referendum is a probable and potential disaster. It will be boycotted by unionists, ignored by Westminster, and then what? Her party looks inept and clueless and the idea of a THIRD referendum recedes further into the distance
If Salmond holds the balance of power, however, he might be able to force her. But the polls show Alba is cratering
She gets her mandate, demands a referendum, is refused, and thus gets a wonderful new grievance to exploit. Much better than actually holding a referendum.
It's not better than holding and WINNING a (legal) referendum.
Winning the referendum would be great, and would make her loved by many. Actually having to implement independence on the other hand....? It’s the ultimate hospital pass. Brexit on steroids, without being able to fall back on being a large economy yourself.
This gives a good indication as to why case numbers are now in free fall. Combined with those who have already had Covid there are many people who have immunity. As soon as they get the doses to get through the 30 to 49s then the risk ought to be tiny and it will be very hard for the virus to spread.
I think it's safe to say Phase I is complete.
No - there's still a fair bit to do in the 50-60s groups. I don't think that 90%+ is unattainable there.
How many more still to go to get to 90%?
Those figures are 4 days out of date already. Any who weren't vaccinated already 4 days ago ought to have been offered a vaccine by now.
See below for whose left
The first column is using the 94% achieved for the 75-79 group as the goal, the second column uses 90% as a goal
to 94% to 90% Under 50 18,640,314 17,441,494 50-54 564,069 376,769 55-59 395,395 214,440 60-64 233,415 79,908 65-69 108,029 N/A 70-74 29,842 N/A 75-79 0 N/A 80+ 16,238 N/A
Something wrong with your maths surely?
How can to 90% have positive numbers for 55-59 and 60-65 when they're at 94% and 97% respectively already? Surely we just need the 3% of 50-54?
How can 55-59, 60-64, 65-69 and 70-74 have positive numbers to 94% when they're already at 94%, 97%, 94% and 97% respectively already? Surely we just need the 7% of 50-54?
They aren't at 90%
I'm using NIMIS for population numbers, which takes ONS 2019 and projects forward. This is quite accurate - 29 year olds become 30 year olds rather regularly.....
Yes 29 year olds become 30 year olds etc, but also people die so . . . using these percentages here if there's 3% left to get to 90% of 50-54 year olds then how much is that?
I'm not sure Sturgeon will hold it. She knows that a botched wildcat referendum is a probable and potential disaster. It will be boycotted by unionists, ignored by Westminster, and then what? Her party looks inept and clueless and the idea of a THIRD referendum recedes further into the distance
If Salmond holds the balance of power, however, he might be able to force her. But the polls show Alba is cratering
She gets her mandate, demands a referendum, is refused, and thus gets a wonderful new grievance to exploit. Much better than actually holding a referendum.
Quite. However she does have a problem with malcolmg militants in her own party, not just Alba. The hardcore will demand a vote. And if she refuses there is a serious risk the SNP splits wide open, rather than just splintering, as now
This, of course, must be Boris' strategic aim
Since when has Johnson had a strategy beyond his own self-aggrandisement?
For a man who apparently has no strategic sense, according to all his opponents, Boris does seem to wallop those opponents rather often, with a winning strategy. Odd.
I'm not sure Sturgeon will hold it. She knows that a botched wildcat referendum is a probable and potential disaster. It will be boycotted by unionists, ignored by Westminster, and then what? Her party looks inept and clueless and the idea of a THIRD referendum recedes further into the distance
If Salmond holds the balance of power, however, he might be able to force her. But the polls show Alba is cratering
She gets her mandate, demands a referendum, is refused, and thus gets a wonderful new grievance to exploit. Much better than actually holding a referendum.
The people of Scotland being told that their opinion doesn't matter, that what they vote for they can't have. All this does is strengthens the Yes vote when the referendum inevitably happens.
The whole point about democracy is a mandate. If the people want something and some other people say "ha ha ha you can't have it" then it only delays the inevitable.
I'm not sure Sturgeon will hold it. She knows that a botched wildcat referendum is a probable and potential disaster. It will be boycotted by unionists, ignored by Westminster, and then what? Her party looks inept and clueless and the idea of a THIRD referendum recedes further into the distance
If Salmond holds the balance of power, however, he might be able to force her. But the polls show Alba is cratering
She gets her mandate, demands a referendum, is refused, and thus gets a wonderful new grievance to exploit. Much better than actually holding a referendum.
The people of Scotland being told that their opinion doesn't matter, that what they vote for they can't have. All this does is strengthens the Yes vote when the referendum inevitably happens.
The whole point about democracy is a mandate. If the people want something and some other people say "ha ha ha you can't have it" then it only delays the inevitable.
The EU will just wait out the Johnson project at this point I think. They'll deal with whomever comes after on the basis that they almost certainly won't be a conceited shit surrendered by a coterie of brainfucked ball garglers.
Not quite the terminology I would use, but you are spot-on. Quite apart from anything else, Boris has rubbished and reneged on both agreements he's signed, within weeks of signing and hailing them as triumphs, so they'd have to be out of their minds to want to deal with him any further if they can avoid it.
Whereas the EU has proved to be totally trustworthy ... oh
So ok - I do now get your comment earlier about Labour choosing a miscalculating Remainer as leader.
But they had to, I think. It's a strongly Remain party. Pretending otherwise wouldn't wash.
Strategy is to leave the issue behind now. Good chance of working.
At the time, many of us hated Mrs May's deal. It was awful. Had we had the luxury of crystal ball gazing so we were able to see Johnson, Cummings, and Frost crash the country with their deal, I daresay we would have taken Mrs May's deal.
The EU will just wait out the Johnson project at this point I think. They'll deal with whomever comes after on the basis that they almost certainly won't be a conceited shit surrendered by a coterie of brainfucked ball garglers.
Not quite the terminology I would use, but you are spot-on. Quite apart from anything else, Boris has rubbished and reneged on both agreements he's signed, within weeks of signing and hailing them as triumphs, so they'd have to be out of their minds to want to deal with him any further if they can avoid it.
Whereas the EU has proved to be totally trustworthy ... oh
So ok - I do now get your comment earlier about Labour choosing a miscalculating Remainer as leader.
But they had to, I think. It's a strongly Remain party. Pretending otherwise wouldn't wash.
Strategy is to leave the issue behind now. Good chance of working.
At the time, many of us hated Mrs May's deal. It was awful. Had we had the luxury of crystal ball gazing so we were able to see Johnson, Cummings, and Frost crash the country with their deal, I daresay we would have taken Mrs May's deal.
Yeah, well, some of us pointed this out at the time...
This gives a good indication as to why case numbers are now in free fall. Combined with those who have already had Covid there are many people who have immunity. As soon as they get the doses to get through the 30 to 49s then the risk ought to be tiny and it will be very hard for the virus to spread.
I think it's safe to say Phase I is complete.
No - there's still a fair bit to do in the 50-60s groups. I don't think that 90%+ is unattainable there.
How many more still to go to get to 90%?
Those figures are 4 days out of date already. Any who weren't vaccinated already 4 days ago ought to have been offered a vaccine by now.
See below for whose left
The first column is using the 94% achieved for the 75-79 group as the goal, the second column uses 90% as a goal
to 94% to 90% Under 50 18,640,314 17,441,494 50-54 564,069 376,769 55-59 395,395 214,440 60-64 233,415 79,908 65-69 108,029 N/A 70-74 29,842 N/A 75-79 0 N/A 80+ 16,238 N/A
Something wrong with your maths surely?
How can to 90% have positive numbers for 55-59 and 60-65 when they're at 94% and 97% respectively already? Surely we just need the 3% of 50-54?
How can 55-59, 60-64, 65-69 and 70-74 have positive numbers to 94% when they're already at 94%, 97%, 94% and 97% respectively already? Surely we just need the 7% of 50-54?
They aren't at 90%
I'm using NIMS for population numbers, which takes ONS 2019 and projects forward. This is quite accurate - 29 year olds become 30 year olds rather regularly.....
Well that doesn't match these percentages. [tweet]1380149681322397699[/tweet]
Yes 29 year olds become 30 year olds etc, but also people die so . . . using these percentages here if there's 3% left to get to 90% of 50-54 year olds then how much is that?
Those numbers are using ONS 2019, from the look of them, raw.
NIMS is an official estimate of the population - they start with the latest data ONS 2019, then using birth and death data construct an estimate for population. They then cross check with other data sources, I believe. You can find this data on
I'm not sure Sturgeon will hold it. She knows that a botched wildcat referendum is a probable and potential disaster. It will be boycotted by unionists, ignored by Westminster, and then what? Her party looks inept and clueless and the idea of a THIRD referendum recedes further into the distance
If Salmond holds the balance of power, however, he might be able to force her. But the polls show Alba is cratering
She gets her mandate, demands a referendum, is refused, and thus gets a wonderful new grievance to exploit. Much better than actually holding a referendum.
Quite. However she does have a problem with malcolmg militants in her own party, not just Alba. The hardcore will demand a vote. And if she refuses there is a serious risk the SNP splits wide open, rather than just splintering, as now
This, of course, must be Boris' strategic aim
Since when has Johnson had a strategy beyond his own self-aggrandisement?
For a man who apparently has no strategic sense, according to all his opponents, Boris does seem to wallop those opponents rather often, with a winning strategy. Odd.
Winning elections & plebiscites and governing successfully are two different things.
I'm not sure Sturgeon will hold it. She knows that a botched wildcat referendum is a probable and potential disaster. It will be boycotted by unionists, ignored by Westminster, and then what? Her party looks inept and clueless and the idea of a THIRD referendum recedes further into the distance
If Salmond holds the balance of power, however, he might be able to force her. But the polls show Alba is cratering
She gets her mandate, demands a referendum, is refused, and thus gets a wonderful new grievance to exploit. Much better than actually holding a referendum.
It's not better than holding and WINNING a (legal) referendum.
Winning the referendum would be great, and would make her loved by many. Actually having to implement independence on the other hand....? It’s the ultimate hospital pass. Brexit on steroids, without being able to fall back on being a large economy yourself.
Sure. But OTOH realizing the goal of her political life and going down in the history books as the architect of an independent Scotland. I will take a lot of persuading that she has given up on this and just wants a comfortable life as FM. I'd need to see some compelling evidence for it. As yet I've seen little or none.
I'm not sure Sturgeon will hold it. She knows that a botched wildcat referendum is a probable and potential disaster. It will be boycotted by unionists, ignored by Westminster, and then what? Her party looks inept and clueless and the idea of a THIRD referendum recedes further into the distance
If Salmond holds the balance of power, however, he might be able to force her. But the polls show Alba is cratering
She gets her mandate, demands a referendum, is refused, and thus gets a wonderful new grievance to exploit. Much better than actually holding a referendum.
Quite. However she does have a problem with malcolmg militants in her own party, not just Alba. The hardcore will demand a vote. And if she refuses there is a serious risk the SNP splits wide open, rather than just splintering, as now
This, of course, must be Boris' strategic aim
Since when has Johnson had a strategy beyond his own self-aggrandisement?
For a man who apparently has no strategic sense, according to all his opponents, Boris does seem to wallop those opponents rather often, with a winning strategy. Odd.
Boris is the consummate politician - very ruthless, driven and shrewd. But his greatest trick is that he looks to be the complete opposite.
He also became infamous for taking the yellowish penile discharge from a man he believed to be infected with gonorrhea and rubbing it into cuts he had created on his own penis.
What could lead a man to do this, other than boredom and access to said fluids, you ask? Hunter was convinced that gonorrhea and syphilis were two forms of the same disease.
At the time, both diseases were known as "the pox", despite different and distinct symptoms. Some were beginning to believe – correctly – that the two forms of pox were actually different diseases.
Hunter, however, thought that the difference in symptoms was a result of differences in the tissues infected. What's more, he was so confident he was willing to bet his own penis that he was correct.
I'm not sure Sturgeon will hold it. She knows that a botched wildcat referendum is a probable and potential disaster. It will be boycotted by unionists, ignored by Westminster, and then what? Her party looks inept and clueless and the idea of a THIRD referendum recedes further into the distance
If Salmond holds the balance of power, however, he might be able to force her. But the polls show Alba is cratering
She gets her mandate, demands a referendum, is refused, and thus gets a wonderful new grievance to exploit. Much better than actually holding a referendum.
The people of Scotland being told that their opinion doesn't matter, that what they vote for they can't have. All this does is strengthens the Yes vote when the referendum inevitably happens.
The whole point about democracy is a mandate. If the people want something and some other people say "ha ha ha you can't have it" then it only delays the inevitable.
Delaying disaster in the hope that something turns up to disrupt it is what politicians do. In many cases, it's quite rational, even if it often isn't successful.
Of course, a really wily PM might be able to finesse it with sweet talk and convincing-sounding obfuscation. Boris probably isn't up to that, though.
Xosé Lluís Fernández @XLlFS Sanidade desconvoca a 1.400 gallegos que iban a ser vacunados hoy con AstraZeneca Translated from Spanish by Sanidade recalls 1,400 Galicians who were going to be vaccinated today with AstraZeneca
This is the problem, a quite chaotic situation in Spain, now. Millions of young Spaniards have had one dose of AZ. What happens now? They are considering: giving them a second dose of something else, only giving one dose, trying to persuade people to have the 2nd AZ shot anyway. Or they might start the vax programme all over again
I'm not sure Sturgeon will hold it. She knows that a botched wildcat referendum is a probable and potential disaster. It will be boycotted by unionists, ignored by Westminster, and then what? Her party looks inept and clueless and the idea of a THIRD referendum recedes further into the distance
If Salmond holds the balance of power, however, he might be able to force her. But the polls show Alba is cratering
She gets her mandate, demands a referendum, is refused, and thus gets a wonderful new grievance to exploit. Much better than actually holding a referendum.
Quite. However she does have a problem with malcolmg militants in her own party, not just Alba. The hardcore will demand a vote. And if she refuses there is a serious risk the SNP splits wide open, rather than just splintering, as now
This, of course, must be Boris' strategic aim
Since when has Johnson had a strategy beyond his own self-aggrandisement?
For a man who apparently has no strategic sense, according to all his opponents, Boris does seem to wallop those opponents rather often, with a winning strategy. Odd.
Winning elections and plebiscites and governing successfully are two different things.
In what way is he governing unsuccessfully?
Brexit was always going to be painful, a global plague is not a cakewalk.
He's made some terrible decisions, esp early in Covid, but he's also made some great decisions - eg the vaccine task force. His party is outpolling the opposition, after a decade in power, and he is more popular than the opposition leader.
At a time of intense chaos he is doing OK. It is too early to decide whether he is "successful" or not
Boris-haters, usually Remainers, are foolishly blinded by their hatred.
I'm not sure Sturgeon will hold it. She knows that a botched wildcat referendum is a probable and potential disaster. It will be boycotted by unionists, ignored by Westminster, and then what? Her party looks inept and clueless and the idea of a THIRD referendum recedes further into the distance
If Salmond holds the balance of power, however, he might be able to force her. But the polls show Alba is cratering
She gets her mandate, demands a referendum, is refused, and thus gets a wonderful new grievance to exploit. Much better than actually holding a referendum.
It's not better than holding and WINNING a (legal) referendum.
Not sure about that. Winning with a tiny majority ain't great.
I'm not sure Sturgeon will hold it. She knows that a botched wildcat referendum is a probable and potential disaster. It will be boycotted by unionists, ignored by Westminster, and then what? Her party looks inept and clueless and the idea of a THIRD referendum recedes further into the distance
If Salmond holds the balance of power, however, he might be able to force her. But the polls show Alba is cratering
She gets her mandate, demands a referendum, is refused, and thus gets a wonderful new grievance to exploit. Much better than actually holding a referendum.
The people of Scotland being told that their opinion doesn't matter, that what they vote for they can't have. All this does is strengthens the Yes vote when the referendum inevitably happens.
The whole point about democracy is a mandate. If the people want something and some other people say "ha ha ha you can't have it" then it only delays the inevitable.
It doesn't, 2014 was a once in a generation vote. Scots voted 55% to stay in the UK. End of.
Holding a vote now before that generation is up means the SNP can and will demand a third referendum even if No narrowly wins.
Spain's government refused Catalonia's nationalist government an independence referendum in 2017 and ignored its UDI declaration, 4 years later Catalonia remains part of Spain
I'm not sure Sturgeon will hold it. She knows that a botched wildcat referendum is a probable and potential disaster. It will be boycotted by unionists, ignored by Westminster, and then what? Her party looks inept and clueless and the idea of a THIRD referendum recedes further into the distance
If Salmond holds the balance of power, however, he might be able to force her. But the polls show Alba is cratering
She gets her mandate, demands a referendum, is refused, and thus gets a wonderful new grievance to exploit. Much better than actually holding a referendum.
Quite. However she does have a problem with malcolmg militants in her own party, not just Alba. The hardcore will demand a vote. And if she refuses there is a serious risk the SNP splits wide open, rather than just splintering, as now
This, of course, must be Boris' strategic aim
Since when has Johnson had a strategy beyond his own self-aggrandisement?
For a man who apparently has no strategic sense, according to all his opponents, Boris does seem to wallop those opponents rather often, with a winning strategy. Odd.
This is what drives them all mad. Scott's being pasting non-stop today like a demented painter/decorator orgasming over the demos in NI. Yesterday he creamed hiself over the thought of Boris being blamed for AZT. I'ts both amusing and appalling to watch at the same time.
Xosé Lluís Fernández @XLlFS Sanidade desconvoca a 1.400 gallegos que iban a ser vacunados hoy con AstraZeneca Translated from Spanish by Sanidade recalls 1,400 Galicians who were going to be vaccinated today with AstraZeneca
This is the problem, a quite chaotic situation in Spain, now. Millions of young Spaniards have had one dose of AZ. What happens now? They are considering: giving them a second dose of something else, only giving one dose, trying to persuade people to have the 2nd AZ shot anyway. Or they might start the vax programme all over again
It's getting messier by the hour - real doubts they can deliver the promised 70% vaccinated by the end of August.
The EU and UK have talked and bickered themselves into a crazy position: prolonging a deadly plague because 1 in a million people croak after a vaccine jab. It is not rational
The EU will just wait out the Johnson project at this point I think. They'll deal with whomever comes after on the basis that they almost certainly won't be a conceited shit surrendered by a coterie of brainfucked ball garglers.
Not quite the terminology I would use, but you are spot-on. Quite apart from anything else, Boris has rubbished and reneged on both agreements he's signed, within weeks of signing and hailing them as triumphs, so they'd have to be out of their minds to want to deal with him any further if they can avoid it.
Whereas the EU has proved to be totally trustworthy ... oh
So ok - I do now get your comment earlier about Labour choosing a miscalculating Remainer as leader.
But they had to, I think. It's a strongly Remain party. Pretending otherwise wouldn't wash.
Strategy is to leave the issue behind now. Good chance of working.
At the time, many of us hated Mrs May's deal. It was awful. Had we had the luxury of crystal ball gazing so we were able to see Johnson, Cummings, and Frost crash the country with their deal, I daresay we would have taken Mrs May's deal.
I think you are to be commended for your honesty. I voted Remain but accepted the result fairly promptly. It has harmed me financially but fortunately we get so much sun here it really does help.
I'm not sure Sturgeon will hold it. She knows that a botched wildcat referendum is a probable and potential disaster. It will be boycotted by unionists, ignored by Westminster, and then what? Her party looks inept and clueless and the idea of a THIRD referendum recedes further into the distance
If Salmond holds the balance of power, however, he might be able to force her. But the polls show Alba is cratering
She gets her mandate, demands a referendum, is refused, and thus gets a wonderful new grievance to exploit. Much better than actually holding a referendum.
Quite. However she does have a problem with malcolmg militants in her own party, not just Alba. The hardcore will demand a vote. And if she refuses there is a serious risk the SNP splits wide open, rather than just splintering, as now
This, of course, must be Boris' strategic aim
Since when has Johnson had a strategy beyond his own self-aggrandisement?
For a man who apparently has no strategic sense, according to all his opponents, Boris does seem to wallop those opponents rather often, with a winning strategy. Odd.
Winning elections & plebiscites and governing successfully are two different things.
The EU will just wait out the Johnson project at this point I think. They'll deal with whomever comes after on the basis that they almost certainly won't be a conceited shit surrendered by a coterie of brainfucked ball garglers.
Not quite the terminology I would use, but you are spot-on. Quite apart from anything else, Boris has rubbished and reneged on both agreements he's signed, within weeks of signing and hailing them as triumphs, so they'd have to be out of their minds to want to deal with him any further if they can avoid it.
Whereas the EU has proved to be totally trustworthy ... oh
So ok - I do now get your comment earlier about Labour choosing a miscalculating Remainer as leader.
But they had to, I think. It's a strongly Remain party. Pretending otherwise wouldn't wash.
Strategy is to leave the issue behind now. Good chance of working.
At the time, many of us hated Mrs May's deal. It was awful. Had we had the luxury of crystal ball gazing so we were able to see Johnson, Cummings, and Frost crash the country with their deal, I daresay we would have taken Mrs May's deal.
Yeah, well, some of us pointed this out at the time...
I'm not sure Sturgeon will hold it. She knows that a botched wildcat referendum is a probable and potential disaster. It will be boycotted by unionists, ignored by Westminster, and then what? Her party looks inept and clueless and the idea of a THIRD referendum recedes further into the distance
If Salmond holds the balance of power, however, he might be able to force her. But the polls show Alba is cratering
She gets her mandate, demands a referendum, is refused, and thus gets a wonderful new grievance to exploit. Much better than actually holding a referendum.
Quite. However she does have a problem with malcolmg militants in her own party, not just Alba. The hardcore will demand a vote. And if she refuses there is a serious risk the SNP splits wide open, rather than just splintering, as now
This, of course, must be Boris' strategic aim
Since when has Johnson had a strategy beyond his own self-aggrandisement?
For a man who apparently has no strategic sense, according to all his opponents, Boris does seem to wallop those opponents rather often, with a winning strategy. Odd.
Winning elections & plebiscites and governing successfully are two different things.
Yes, I've often heard that - usually from people who are crap at winning elections and plebiscites.
I'm not sure Sturgeon will hold it. She knows that a botched wildcat referendum is a probable and potential disaster. It will be boycotted by unionists, ignored by Westminster, and then what? Her party looks inept and clueless and the idea of a THIRD referendum recedes further into the distance
If Salmond holds the balance of power, however, he might be able to force her. But the polls show Alba is cratering
She gets her mandate, demands a referendum, is refused, and thus gets a wonderful new grievance to exploit. Much better than actually holding a referendum.
The people of Scotland being told that their opinion doesn't matter, that what they vote for they can't have. All this does is strengthens the Yes vote when the referendum inevitably happens.
The whole point about democracy is a mandate. If the people want something and some other people say "ha ha ha you can't have it" then it only delays the inevitable.
And yet, it hasn't done that in Catalunya
Hasn't it?
The 2019 elections in Catalonia saw the separatists increase their number of MPs, not decrease them.
I'm not sure Sturgeon will hold it. She knows that a botched wildcat referendum is a probable and potential disaster. It will be boycotted by unionists, ignored by Westminster, and then what? Her party looks inept and clueless and the idea of a THIRD referendum recedes further into the distance
If Salmond holds the balance of power, however, he might be able to force her. But the polls show Alba is cratering
She gets her mandate, demands a referendum, is refused, and thus gets a wonderful new grievance to exploit. Much better than actually holding a referendum.
Quite. However she does have a problem with malcolmg militants in her own party, not just Alba. The hardcore will demand a vote. And if she refuses there is a serious risk the SNP splits wide open, rather than just splintering, as now
This, of course, must be Boris' strategic aim
Since when has Johnson had a strategy beyond his own self-aggrandisement?
For a man who apparently has no strategic sense, according to all his opponents, Boris does seem to wallop those opponents rather often, with a winning strategy. Odd.
Winning elections & plebiscites and governing successfully are two different things.
You require the first to get a go at the second.
But having achieved the first there is no guarantee you will achieve the second.
"RECALLING that Northern Ireland is part of the customs territory of the United Kingdom
The Withdrawal Agreement, as ratified by the EU, the RoI, the UK and as hosted on the EU's own website says it explicitly. Northern Ireland is part of the customs territory of the United Kingdom, there are no ifs or buts about that, that is international law. Checkmate.
What am I wrong on precisely you pillock? Checkmate?!! I doubt you would win against a five year old in a game of draughts! Actually you would probably find "snap" a little perplexing
You were wrong in falsely claiming that NI was part of the EU's customs territory not the UK's. It is explicitly recognised as the other way around, NI is part of the UK's territory.
The NI Protocol was quite clever. If there's no societal difficulties likely to persist from the Protocol then who cares, life goes on.
If there are societal difficulties likely to persist then the Protocol Article 16 gives the UK (and the EU) unilateral rights to do whatever it considers necessary to resolve those difficulties.
So either way we have no issue. If there's no difficulties there's no problem. If there are difficulties (and everyone agrees there are) we invoke Article 16 and move on.
That's why it was clever negotiations.
Much from you about this today. Energizer bunny.
In fact I get your position completely, but let’s take the lipstick off the pig. The EU’s biggest red line in Brexit was to protect the integrity of their single market. Since all sides – absolutely everyone - agreed there mustn’t under any circumstances be a border in Ireland it meant a border in the Irish Sea. That solemn undertaking was expressed in the Protocol. Letter and spirit.
You are saying we should renege on this. We should now refuse to implement the Irish Sea border and present them with a ‘devil and deep blue sea’ choice – put up a border in Ireland after all or accept a violation of the integrity of the single market. Which, I repeat, was their biggest red line, perhaps their one and only genuine red line.
“Tough,” you might say. Or “Cool, we win!” We protect the UK single market and if they put a border across Ireland and it causes trouble that’s “on them” (to use the rather chippy phrase that the more bumptious Leavers seem to like). Also “on them” if they choose to live with a hole in their single market. Ditto if they take us to court and get embroiled in that for years. All on them.
And you’re right in a sense. It is on them. It’s on them for assuming that the UK government was negotiating the Brexit deal in good faith. For assuming that Boris Johnson and Michael Gove were not a political incarnation of Delboy and Rodney.
But now they know better, and so does the rest of the world. It’s a “win” at the price of looking like a rogue nation that has chosen to defect from normal good practice in international affairs and instead conduct itself according to the grubby character of the individual who just happens to be our PM at this moment.
Yay.
Ad that is the absolute heart of the problem.
The EU's "greatest priority" was "the integrity of the Single Market".
It should have been Peace in Ireland.
Just as it should have been for the UK government. To be fair to Theresa May, it was for her. Sadly, it was less of an issue for her successor.
Yes. She made a deal that was so weak that the nasty Brexiteers wouldn't vote for it, and which respected the delicacy of the Irish border problem. Would it really have been so bad for Remain MP's, elected on a pledge to respect the referendum result, to have swallowed their pride and voted for it, rather than gamble on getting, then winning, a second referendum, the ridiculous "People's Vote"?
Then along came Boris, and that was that. Huge Con Maj instead of weak deal with the DUP, and Boris's Brexit instead of Theresa's compromise
The Remain MPs didn't gamble on *getting* a second referendum. They seemed to hope that one would be *given* to them. Perhaps a watery tart would start standing out referendums, down at the lake?
If they had *tried* to get a second referendum, with those vote things in Parliament, now that would have been a different matter.
Funny to recall the serious faces of Remain MPs as they continually voted down every single option, whilst saying they respected the Leave vote!
I'll be eternally grateful for those useful idiots in giving us exactly what we wanted.
Have any of them admitted their strategy was a calamitous mistake yet? That they should have just accepted the public’s vote and made the best of it? The memoirs maybe
Straw in the wind, my mother wasn't due to have her 2nd jab for a few weeks, got asked if she wanted to be jabbed with AZN tomorrow. Of course she said yes.
I'm not sure Sturgeon will hold it. She knows that a botched wildcat referendum is a probable and potential disaster. It will be boycotted by unionists, ignored by Westminster, and then what? Her party looks inept and clueless and the idea of a THIRD referendum recedes further into the distance
If Salmond holds the balance of power, however, he might be able to force her. But the polls show Alba is cratering
She gets her mandate, demands a referendum, is refused, and thus gets a wonderful new grievance to exploit. Much better than actually holding a referendum.
Quite. However she does have a problem with malcolmg militants in her own party, not just Alba. The hardcore will demand a vote. And if she refuses there is a serious risk the SNP splits wide open, rather than just splintering, as now
This, of course, must be Boris' strategic aim
Since when has Johnson had a strategy beyond his own self-aggrandisement?
For a man who apparently has no strategic sense, according to all his opponents, Boris does seem to wallop those opponents rather often, with a winning strategy. Odd.
He played the People v Parliament tune brilliantly. Set up the perfect GE for him and the Cons. Thing of beauty. But if the national interest or the party interest or any interest ever differs from his - bye bye those interests and people. Boris First, Boris Only. Many politicians are a bit like that but this guy is something else. He's very special.
One of the UK’s biggest trade unions faces claims it failed to properly investigate allegations of antisemitism in a speech by a senior official, Jewish News can reveal.
A former senior official within the GMB union is alleged to have made a speech to colleagues at a function openly dismissing claims of antisemitism in the Labour Party and saying “rich bastard Jews” were responsible for the continued prominence of the issue.
I'm not sure Sturgeon will hold it. She knows that a botched wildcat referendum is a probable and potential disaster. It will be boycotted by unionists, ignored by Westminster, and then what? Her party looks inept and clueless and the idea of a THIRD referendum recedes further into the distance
If Salmond holds the balance of power, however, he might be able to force her. But the polls show Alba is cratering
She gets her mandate, demands a referendum, is refused, and thus gets a wonderful new grievance to exploit. Much better than actually holding a referendum.
Quite. However she does have a problem with malcolmg militants in her own party, not just Alba. The hardcore will demand a vote. And if she refuses there is a serious risk the SNP splits wide open, rather than just splintering, as now
This, of course, must be Boris' strategic aim
Since when has Johnson had a strategy beyond his own self-aggrandisement?
For a man who apparently has no strategic sense, according to all his opponents, Boris does seem to wallop those opponents rather often, with a winning strategy. Odd.
Winning elections and plebiscites and governing successfully are two different things.
In what way is he governing unsuccessfully?
Brexit was always going to be painful, a global plague is not a cakewalk.
He's made some terrible decisions, esp early in Covid, but he's also made some great decisions - eg the vaccine task force. His party is outpolling the opposition, after a decade in power, and he is more popular than the opposition leader.
At a time of intense chaos he is doing OK. It is too early to decide whether he is "successful" or not
Boris-haters, usually Remainers, are foolishly blinded by their hatred.
I don't hate Johnson.
You see the Emperor's new clothes. I just see an overweight bare-assed clown.
One of the UK’s biggest trade unions faces claims it failed to properly investigate allegations of antisemitism in a speech by a senior official, Jewish News can reveal.
A former senior official within the GMB union is alleged to have made a speech to colleagues at a function openly dismissing claims of antisemitism in the Labour Party and saying “rich bastard Jews” were responsible for the continued prominence of the issue.
Stats still looking very good. I'm expecting some daily case numbers under 2K in the next week.
Hospital admission figures are particularly encouraging. Last six Thursdays are: 757, 532, 426, 354, 274, 220.
Not sure what the stats say on this but if a new hospitalisation has, say, a 5% chance of death then we are looking at around 10 per day from 200 ish admissions.
One of the UK’s biggest trade unions faces claims it failed to properly investigate allegations of antisemitism in a speech by a senior official, Jewish News can reveal.
A former senior official within the GMB union is alleged to have made a speech to colleagues at a function openly dismissing claims of antisemitism in the Labour Party and saying “rich bastard Jews” were responsible for the continued prominence of the issue.
I put the below chart together to demonstrate the vaccine impact. This shows the % fall from the individual peaks for cases, hospital admissions and deaths by the number of days past the peak (7 day rolling averages). What this shows is cases and deaths fell in close alignment until about 30 days after the peak. Since then deaths have fallen further than cases - the yellow highlight is this vaccine impact.
Admissions doesn't seem to be aligned because from the peak the numbers initially only fell a little before accelerating. Even given that though admissions have now fallen below the line for cases.
I'm not sure Sturgeon will hold it. She knows that a botched wildcat referendum is a probable and potential disaster. It will be boycotted by unionists, ignored by Westminster, and then what? Her party looks inept and clueless and the idea of a THIRD referendum recedes further into the distance
If Salmond holds the balance of power, however, he might be able to force her. But the polls show Alba is cratering
She gets her mandate, demands a referendum, is refused, and thus gets a wonderful new grievance to exploit. Much better than actually holding a referendum.
Quite. However she does have a problem with malcolmg militants in her own party, not just Alba. The hardcore will demand a vote. And if she refuses there is a serious risk the SNP splits wide open, rather than just splintering, as now
This, of course, must be Boris' strategic aim
Since when has Johnson had a strategy beyond his own self-aggrandisement?
For a man who apparently has no strategic sense, according to all his opponents, Boris does seem to wallop those opponents rather often, with a winning strategy. Odd.
Winning elections & plebiscites and governing successfully are two different things.
Yes, I've often heard that - usually from people who are crap at winning elections and plebiscites.
It was from a piece from Thatcher I read a while back, was one of the reasons she wasn't keen on plebiscites.
I'm not sure Sturgeon will hold it. She knows that a botched wildcat referendum is a probable and potential disaster. It will be boycotted by unionists, ignored by Westminster, and then what? Her party looks inept and clueless and the idea of a THIRD referendum recedes further into the distance
If Salmond holds the balance of power, however, he might be able to force her. But the polls show Alba is cratering
She gets her mandate, demands a referendum, is refused, and thus gets a wonderful new grievance to exploit. Much better than actually holding a referendum.
Quite. However she does have a problem with malcolmg militants in her own party, not just Alba. The hardcore will demand a vote. And if she refuses there is a serious risk the SNP splits wide open, rather than just splintering, as now
This, of course, must be Boris' strategic aim
Since when has Johnson had a strategy beyond his own self-aggrandisement?
For a man who apparently has no strategic sense, according to all his opponents, Boris does seem to wallop those opponents rather often, with a winning strategy. Odd.
Winning elections & plebiscites and governing successfully are two different things.
Yes, I've often heard that - usually from people who are crap at winning elections and plebiscites.
I'm not sure Sturgeon will hold it. She knows that a botched wildcat referendum is a probable and potential disaster. It will be boycotted by unionists, ignored by Westminster, and then what? Her party looks inept and clueless and the idea of a THIRD referendum recedes further into the distance
If Salmond holds the balance of power, however, he might be able to force her. But the polls show Alba is cratering
She gets her mandate, demands a referendum, is refused, and thus gets a wonderful new grievance to exploit. Much better than actually holding a referendum.
It's not better than holding and WINNING a (legal) referendum.
Not sure about that. Winning with a tiny majority ain't great.
Scotland after a narrow YES win might be an appalling place. 20-30% of Scots would feel that their identity has been stripped away. Many more would feel aggrieved and distressed by the turmoil. Entire chunks of the country would be in a rebellious mood. The Borders?
Meanwhile the awful economic consequences of indy would rapidly unfold, the country would likely default, the currency and banking system would be a mess, EU membership would be 10-20 years away (if ever). Hideous negotiations would have to begin, splitting the UK in an acrimonious divorce.
It would be Brexit times a million. I can foresee civil strife, in the worst case scenario. Scotland has a history of sectarian bitterness, edging towards violence. England and rUK would be pulled into the vortex of chaos.
This, indeed, is one reason why Boris is entirely justified in denying a vote: for the political and economic wellbeing of the whole UK, including Scotland.
Referendums on huge constitutional issues are horribly destabilising. They must, for that reason, remain extremely rare. Once in a generation - 15-20 years - is about right
The EU will just wait out the Johnson project at this point I think. They'll deal with whomever comes after on the basis that they almost certainly won't be a conceited shit surrendered by a coterie of brainfucked ball garglers.
Not quite the terminology I would use, but you are spot-on. Quite apart from anything else, Boris has rubbished and reneged on both agreements he's signed, within weeks of signing and hailing them as triumphs, so they'd have to be out of their minds to want to deal with him any further if they can avoid it.
Whereas the EU has proved to be totally trustworthy ... oh
So ok - I do now get your comment earlier about Labour choosing a miscalculating Remainer as leader.
But they had to, I think. It's a strongly Remain party. Pretending otherwise wouldn't wash.
Strategy is to leave the issue behind now. Good chance of working.
At the time, many of us hated Mrs May's deal. It was awful. Had we had the luxury of crystal ball gazing so we were able to see Johnson, Cummings, and Frost crash the country with their deal, I daresay we would have taken Mrs May's deal.
Yeah, well, some of us pointed this out at the time...
I put the below chart together to demonstrate the vaccine impact. This shows the % fall from the individual peaks for cases, hospital admissions and deaths by the number of days past the peak (7 day rolling averages). What this shows is cases and deaths fell in close alignment until about 30 days after the peak. Since then deaths have fallen further than cases - the yellow highlight is this vaccine impact.
Admissions doesn't seem to be aligned because from the peak the numbers initially only fell a little before accelerating. Even given that though admissions have now fallen below the line for cases.
Whilst this shows some of the vaccine impact - surely the vaccine impact is actually larger than this - and possibly by quite a lot - as in an alternate world with no vaccine effect the cases wouldn't have fallen as far as fast either.
I'm quite a fan of the politicsforall twitter handle (and it's rare for me to praise anything on twitter except Hugo Gye) but sometimes I think that account was created by someone cunning at Tory HQ to rebalance the left wing news slant on Twitter. No chance was it created by some mysterious teenager as suggested. Election Maps is run by a teenager and you can tell.
I know the point about the NI situation is very relevant and Boris's decisions have certainly been a big part of how things develop there, but people have to get over that damn referendum bus.
Of all the things to want to keep in peoples' minds, that there was a bus with a slogan on it is what we are choosing? It's really bizarre, because recalling the things said without going on about or highlighting the bus also works (Edit: and yes I know it is relevant in this particular example of a picture of a bus on fire, but this is a general point, as people bring up the bus all the time).
What exactly do the people burning the bus want by way of policy change? If there is nothing rational that they would like instead of the current situation it is hard to link it with the simplicities of a campaign 5 years ago.
One of the UK’s biggest trade unions faces claims it failed to properly investigate allegations of antisemitism in a speech by a senior official, Jewish News can reveal.
A former senior official within the GMB union is alleged to have made a speech to colleagues at a function openly dismissing claims of antisemitism in the Labour Party and saying “rich bastard Jews” were responsible for the continued prominence of the issue.
The EU will just wait out the Johnson project at this point I think. They'll deal with whomever comes after on the basis that they almost certainly won't be a conceited shit surrendered by a coterie of brainfucked ball garglers.
Not quite the terminology I would use, but you are spot-on. Quite apart from anything else, Boris has rubbished and reneged on both agreements he's signed, within weeks of signing and hailing them as triumphs, so they'd have to be out of their minds to want to deal with him any further if they can avoid it.
Whereas the EU has proved to be totally trustworthy ... oh
So ok - I do now get your comment earlier about Labour choosing a miscalculating Remainer as leader.
But they had to, I think. It's a strongly Remain party. Pretending otherwise wouldn't wash.
Strategy is to leave the issue behind now. Good chance of working.
At the time, many of us hated Mrs May's deal. It was awful. Had we had the luxury of crystal ball gazing so we were able to see Johnson, Cummings, and Frost crash the country with their deal, I daresay we would have taken Mrs May's deal.
Yeah, well, some of us pointed this out at the time...
Indeed you did, as did Alastair Meeks.
But neither of them were LABOUR remainers.
True. It was so far up the thread that I'd forgotten the Labour part of the argument.
My commendation to the two former-Conservative Remainers nonetheless stands.
The EU will just wait out the Johnson project at this point I think. They'll deal with whomever comes after on the basis that they almost certainly won't be a conceited shit surrendered by a coterie of brainfucked ball garglers.
Not quite the terminology I would use, but you are spot-on. Quite apart from anything else, Boris has rubbished and reneged on both agreements he's signed, within weeks of signing and hailing them as triumphs, so they'd have to be out of their minds to want to deal with him any further if they can avoid it.
Whereas the EU has proved to be totally trustworthy ... oh
So ok - I do now get your comment earlier about Labour choosing a miscalculating Remainer as leader.
But they had to, I think. It's a strongly Remain party. Pretending otherwise wouldn't wash.
Strategy is to leave the issue behind now. Good chance of working.
At the time, many of us hated Mrs May's deal. It was awful. Had we had the luxury of crystal ball gazing so we were able to see Johnson, Cummings, and Frost crash the country with their deal, I daresay we would have taken Mrs May's deal.
Yeah, well, some of us pointed this out at the time...
Indeed you did, as did Alastair Meeks.
But neither of them were LABOUR remainers.
Indeed. Labour Remainers put defeating Theresa May as more important than having a softer deal with Europe than what we got.
I know the point about the NI situation is very relevant and Boris's decisions have certainly been a big part of how things develop there, but people have to get over that damn referendum bus.
Of all the things to want to keep in peoples' minds, that there was a bus with a slogan on it is what we are choosing? It's really bizarre, because recalling the things said without going on about or highlighting the bus also works (Edit: and yes I know it is relevant in this particular example of a picture of a bus on fire, but this is a general point, as people bring up the bus all the time).
What exactly do the people burning the bus want by way of policy change?
I know the point about the NI situation is very relevant and Boris's decisions have certainly been a big part of how things develop there, but people have to get over that damn referendum bus.
Of all the things to want to keep in peoples' minds, that there was a bus with a slogan on it is what we are choosing? It's really bizarre, because recalling the things said without going on about or highlighting the bus also works (Edit: and yes I know it is relevant in this particular example of a picture of a bus on fire, but this is a general point, as people bring up the bus all the time).
What exactly do the people burning the bus want by way of policy change? If there is nothing rational that they would like instead of the current situation it is hard to link it with the simplicities of a campaign 5 years ago.
I'm generally of the view that people who burn buses (or anything else) are likely to be too stupid to even know what they want. I'm pretty impressed that they can operate a box of matches to be honest.
I know the point about the NI situation is very relevant and Boris's decisions have certainly been a big part of how things develop there, but people have to get over that damn referendum bus.
Of all the things to want to keep in peoples' minds, that there was a bus with a slogan on it is what we are choosing? It's really bizarre, because recalling the things said without going on about or highlighting the bus also works (Edit: and yes I know it is relevant in this particular example of a picture of a bus on fire, but this is a general point, as people bring up the bus all the time).
What exactly do the people burning the bus want by way of policy change? If there is nothing rational that they would like instead of the current situation it is hard to link it with the simplicities of a campaign 5 years ago.
I'm generally of the view that people who burn buses (or anything else) are likely to be too stupid to even know what they want. I'm pretty impressed that they can operate a box of matches to be honest.
I'm of the opinion they want to see things burn and are thinking beyond that.
I know the point about the NI situation is very relevant and Boris's decisions have certainly been a big part of how things develop there, but people have to get over that damn referendum bus.
Of all the things to want to keep in peoples' minds, that there was a bus with a slogan on it is what we are choosing? It's really bizarre, because recalling the things said without going on about or highlighting the bus also works (Edit: and yes I know it is relevant in this particular example of a picture of a bus on fire, but this is a general point, as people bring up the bus all the time).
What exactly do the people burning the bus want by way of policy change? If there is nothing rational that they would like instead of the current situation it is hard to link it with the simplicities of a campaign 5 years ago.
I'm generally of the view that people who burn buses (or anything else) are likely to be too stupid to even know what they want. I'm pretty impressed that they can operate a box of matches to be honest.
I think you will find there is normally a much older scarier looking gentleman wandering around in the background that might just be assisting the knuckle draggers with such things as how to strike matches correctly.
In the case of the bus burning incident, such an individual is caught on camera. Obviously he is only observing.
I know the point about the NI situation is very relevant and Boris's decisions have certainly been a big part of how things develop there, but people have to get over that damn referendum bus.
Of all the things to want to keep in peoples' minds, that there was a bus with a slogan on it is what we are choosing? It's really bizarre, because recalling the things said without going on about or highlighting the bus also works (Edit: and yes I know it is relevant in this particular example of a picture of a bus on fire, but this is a general point, as people bring up the bus all the time).
What exactly do the people burning the bus want by way of policy change? If there is nothing rational that they would like instead of the current situation it is hard to link it with the simplicities of a campaign 5 years ago.
I'm generally of the view that people who burn buses (or anything else) are likely to be too stupid to even know what they want. I'm pretty impressed that they can operate a box of matches to be honest.
The EU will just wait out the Johnson project at this point I think. They'll deal with whomever comes after on the basis that they almost certainly won't be a conceited shit surrendered by a coterie of brainfucked ball garglers.
Not quite the terminology I would use, but you are spot-on. Quite apart from anything else, Boris has rubbished and reneged on both agreements he's signed, within weeks of signing and hailing them as triumphs, so they'd have to be out of their minds to want to deal with him any further if they can avoid it.
Whereas the EU has proved to be totally trustworthy ... oh
So ok - I do now get your comment earlier about Labour choosing a miscalculating Remainer as leader.
But they had to, I think. It's a strongly Remain party. Pretending otherwise wouldn't wash.
Strategy is to leave the issue behind now. Good chance of working.
At the time, many of us hated Mrs May's deal. It was awful. Had we had the luxury of crystal ball gazing so we were able to see Johnson, Cummings, and Frost crash the country with their deal, I daresay we would have taken Mrs May's deal.
Yeah, well, some of us pointed this out at the time...
Indeed you did, as did Alastair Meeks.
But neither of them were LABOUR remainers.
Indeed. Labour Remainers put defeating Theresa May as more important than having a softer deal with Europe than what we got.
Thanks. 👍
I'm not sure that is true. I think some of us were just foolhardy enough to hold out for the second referendum.
I'm not sure Sturgeon will hold it. She knows that a botched wildcat referendum is a probable and potential disaster. It will be boycotted by unionists, ignored by Westminster, and then what? Her party looks inept and clueless and the idea of a THIRD referendum recedes further into the distance
If Salmond holds the balance of power, however, he might be able to force her. But the polls show Alba is cratering
She gets her mandate, demands a referendum, is refused, and thus gets a wonderful new grievance to exploit. Much better than actually holding a referendum.
Quite. However she does have a problem with malcolmg militants in her own party, not just Alba. The hardcore will demand a vote. And if she refuses there is a serious risk the SNP splits wide open, rather than just splintering, as now
This, of course, must be Boris' strategic aim
Since when has Johnson had a strategy beyond his own self-aggrandisement?
For a man who apparently has no strategic sense, according to all his opponents, Boris does seem to wallop those opponents rather often, with a winning strategy. Odd.
Defeating Corbyn was a slam dunk. Hiding in a fridge and refusing to be interviewed by anyone credible and his propensity to lie are all I grant you winning strategies but they aren't especially honourable. I am reminded of the famous Newsnight interview of Michael Howard. He refused to answer the question repeatedly which pretty well destroyed him. He could easily have lied and would probably have got away with it, but he didn't. Ignoring all the recent stuff I suggest you watch the session where Boris was in front of the Treasury Select Committee and just making stuff up. Andrew Tyrie's (Conservative chair of the committee) response summed it up: 'All very interesting, Boris. Except none of it is really true, is it?'.
I grant you Boris is nothing like Trump and I expect my politicians to evade and avoid, but I draw the line at outright lying and Boris has done this many times.
I know the point about the NI situation is very relevant and Boris's decisions have certainly been a big part of how things develop there, but people have to get over that damn referendum bus.
Of all the things to want to keep in peoples' minds, that there was a bus with a slogan on it is what we are choosing? It's really bizarre, because recalling the things said without going on about or highlighting the bus also works (Edit: and yes I know it is relevant in this particular example of a picture of a bus on fire, but this is a general point, as people bring up the bus all the time).
What exactly do the people burning the bus want by way of policy change?
I'm not sure Sturgeon will hold it. She knows that a botched wildcat referendum is a probable and potential disaster. It will be boycotted by unionists, ignored by Westminster, and then what? Her party looks inept and clueless and the idea of a THIRD referendum recedes further into the distance
If Salmond holds the balance of power, however, he might be able to force her. But the polls show Alba is cratering
She gets her mandate, demands a referendum, is refused, and thus gets a wonderful new grievance to exploit. Much better than actually holding a referendum.
Quite. However she does have a problem with malcolmg militants in her own party, not just Alba. The hardcore will demand a vote. And if she refuses there is a serious risk the SNP splits wide open, rather than just splintering, as now
This, of course, must be Boris' strategic aim
Since when has Johnson had a strategy beyond his own self-aggrandisement?
For a man who apparently has no strategic sense, according to all his opponents, Boris does seem to wallop those opponents rather often, with a winning strategy. Odd.
Winning elections and plebiscites and governing successfully are two different things.
In what way is he governing unsuccessfully?
Brexit was always going to be painful, a global plague is not a cakewalk.
He's made some terrible decisions, esp early in Covid, but he's also made some great decisions - eg the vaccine task force. His party is outpolling the opposition, after a decade in power, and he is more popular than the opposition leader.
At a time of intense chaos he is doing OK. It is too early to decide whether he is "successful" or not
Boris-haters, usually Remainers, are foolishly blinded by their hatred.
Well he said this awesome Brexit Withdrawal deal was brilliant and oven ready, within a few months he realised he screwed up and tried to pass the Internal Markets Bill.
He said EU trade deal was brilliant and within weeks he's trying to undo that mistake, as the violence in Northern Ireland shows, because you may have missed him past comments about putting a border in the Irish sea.
Those terrible decisions regarding early Covid-19 I've often said I could give him a pass on those given the circumstances, but he repeatedly made those mistakes later on, have a look at this chart, and see where most of the deaths took place, not early in Covid-19 but much later on.
The EU will just wait out the Johnson project at this point I think. They'll deal with whomever comes after on the basis that they almost certainly won't be a conceited shit surrendered by a coterie of brainfucked ball garglers.
Not quite the terminology I would use, but you are spot-on. Quite apart from anything else, Boris has rubbished and reneged on both agreements he's signed, within weeks of signing and hailing them as triumphs, so they'd have to be out of their minds to want to deal with him any further if they can avoid it.
Whereas the EU has proved to be totally trustworthy ... oh
So ok - I do now get your comment earlier about Labour choosing a miscalculating Remainer as leader.
But they had to, I think. It's a strongly Remain party. Pretending otherwise wouldn't wash.
Strategy is to leave the issue behind now. Good chance of working.
At the time, many of us hated Mrs May's deal. It was awful. Had we had the luxury of crystal ball gazing so we were able to see Johnson, Cummings, and Frost crash the country with their deal, I daresay we would have taken Mrs May's deal.
Yeah, well, some of us pointed this out at the time...
Indeed you did, as did Alastair Meeks.
But neither of them were LABOUR remainers.
Indeed. Labour Remainers put defeating Theresa May as more important than having a softer deal with Europe than what we got.
Thanks. 👍
I'm not sure that is true. I think some of us were just foolhardy enough to hold out for the second referendum.
At the very least once Parliament failed to find any alternatives on the indicative votes, continuing to vote to reject the deal was an interesting decision.
I'm not sure Sturgeon will hold it. She knows that a botched wildcat referendum is a probable and potential disaster. It will be boycotted by unionists, ignored by Westminster, and then what? Her party looks inept and clueless and the idea of a THIRD referendum recedes further into the distance
If Salmond holds the balance of power, however, he might be able to force her. But the polls show Alba is cratering
She gets her mandate, demands a referendum, is refused, and thus gets a wonderful new grievance to exploit. Much better than actually holding a referendum.
It's not better than holding and WINNING a (legal) referendum.
Winning the referendum would be great, and would make her loved by many. Actually having to implement independence on the other hand....? It’s the ultimate hospital pass. Brexit on steroids, without being able to fall back on being a large economy yourself.
Sure. But OTOH realizing the goal of her political life and going down in the history books as the architect of an independent Scotland. I will take a lot of persuading that she has given up on this and just wants a comfortable life as FM. I'd need to see some compelling evidence for it. As yet I've seen little or none.
Yeah that’s fair. It’s just, if it were me, I think I’d want to manufacture a way to win the thing and then sod off. That way you can even be “king across the water” and criticise the flavour of independence that occurs.
I know the point about the NI situation is very relevant and Boris's decisions have certainly been a big part of how things develop there, but people have to get over that damn referendum bus.
Of all the things to want to keep in peoples' minds, that there was a bus with a slogan on it is what we are choosing? It's really bizarre, because recalling the things said without going on about or highlighting the bus also works (Edit: and yes I know it is relevant in this particular example of a picture of a bus on fire, but this is a general point, as people bring up the bus all the time).
What exactly do the people burning the bus want by way of policy change? If there is nothing rational that they would like instead of the current situation it is hard to link it with the simplicities of a campaign 5 years ago.
I'm generally of the view that people who burn buses (or anything else) are likely to be too stupid to even know what they want. I'm pretty impressed that they can operate a box of matches to be honest.
Poll tax riots?
Equally stupid.
@topping, @FrancisUrquhart - I'm sure that there are people manipulating these daft, malleable elements. They're idiots too though. Admittedly more dangerous idiots.
I know the point about the NI situation is very relevant and Boris's decisions have certainly been a big part of how things develop there, but people have to get over that damn referendum bus.
Of all the things to want to keep in peoples' minds, that there was a bus with a slogan on it is what we are choosing? It's really bizarre, because recalling the things said without going on about or highlighting the bus also works (Edit: and yes I know it is relevant in this particular example of a picture of a bus on fire, but this is a general point, as people bring up the bus all the time).
What exactly do the people burning the bus want by way of policy change?
'The Scottish Tory leader said people should “look at their individual constituency and vote for the strongest candidate” capable of defeating the SNP, even if that was not a Tory.
The Tory leader stressed that it was crucial for pro-Union supporters to back his party with their regional list votes, arguing this could prevent an SNP majority.'
The EU will just wait out the Johnson project at this point I think. They'll deal with whomever comes after on the basis that they almost certainly won't be a conceited shit surrendered by a coterie of brainfucked ball garglers.
Not quite the terminology I would use, but you are spot-on. Quite apart from anything else, Boris has rubbished and reneged on both agreements he's signed, within weeks of signing and hailing them as triumphs, so they'd have to be out of their minds to want to deal with him any further if they can avoid it.
Whereas the EU has proved to be totally trustworthy ... oh
So ok - I do now get your comment earlier about Labour choosing a miscalculating Remainer as leader.
But they had to, I think. It's a strongly Remain party. Pretending otherwise wouldn't wash.
Strategy is to leave the issue behind now. Good chance of working.
At the time, many of us hated Mrs May's deal. It was awful. Had we had the luxury of crystal ball gazing so we were able to see Johnson, Cummings, and Frost crash the country with their deal, I daresay we would have taken Mrs May's deal.
Yeah, well, some of us pointed this out at the time...
Indeed you did, as did Alastair Meeks.
But neither of them were LABOUR remainers.
Indeed. Labour Remainers put defeating Theresa May as more important than having a softer deal with Europe than what we got.
Thanks. 👍
I'm not sure that is true. I think some of us were just foolhardy enough to hold out for the second referendum.
At the very least once Parliament failed to find any alternatives on the indicative votes, continuing to vote to reject the deal was an interesting decision.
I'm glad they did. Not sure others should be.
We kind of agree. I think Mrs May putting exactly the same deal down time and again without a hint of compromise, puts her back in the frame for some of the blame too. It wasn't entirely my fault.
I know the point about the NI situation is very relevant and Boris's decisions have certainly been a big part of how things develop there, but people have to get over that damn referendum bus.
Of all the things to want to keep in peoples' minds, that there was a bus with a slogan on it is what we are choosing? It's really bizarre, because recalling the things said without going on about or highlighting the bus also works (Edit: and yes I know it is relevant in this particular example of a picture of a bus on fire, but this is a general point, as people bring up the bus all the time).
What exactly do the people burning the bus want by way of policy change? If there is nothing rational that they would like instead of the current situation it is hard to link it with the simplicities of a campaign 5 years ago.
I'm generally of the view that people who burn buses (or anything else) are likely to be too stupid to even know what they want. I'm pretty impressed that they can operate a box of matches to be honest.
Poll tax riots?
Equally stupid.
@topping, @FrancisUrquhart - I'm sure that there are people manipulating these daft, malleable elements. They're idiots too though. Admittedly more dangerous idiots.
I'm not sure Sturgeon will hold it. She knows that a botched wildcat referendum is a probable and potential disaster. It will be boycotted by unionists, ignored by Westminster, and then what? Her party looks inept and clueless and the idea of a THIRD referendum recedes further into the distance
If Salmond holds the balance of power, however, he might be able to force her. But the polls show Alba is cratering
She gets her mandate, demands a referendum, is refused, and thus gets a wonderful new grievance to exploit. Much better than actually holding a referendum.
It's not better than holding and WINNING a (legal) referendum.
Winning the referendum would be great, and would make her loved by many. Actually having to implement independence on the other hand....? It’s the ultimate hospital pass. Brexit on steroids, without being able to fall back on being a large economy yourself.
Sure. But OTOH realizing the goal of her political life and going down in the history books as the architect of an independent Scotland. I will take a lot of persuading that she has given up on this and just wants a comfortable life as FM. I'd need to see some compelling evidence for it. As yet I've seen little or none.
Yeah that’s fair. It’s just, if it were me, I think I’d want to manufacture a way to win the thing and then sod off. That way you can even be “king across the water” and criticise the flavour of independence that occurs.
I am certain that is what any Sindyref winning leader would do: very quickly resign, having "achieved a lifetime's ambition and freed a country from the Anglo-Hunnish jackboot" blah blah blah
Get out while the going's good. Then you can blame the inevitable, horrific chaos and pain on your successor. As you suggest
The EU will just wait out the Johnson project at this point I think. They'll deal with whomever comes after on the basis that they almost certainly won't be a conceited shit surrendered by a coterie of brainfucked ball garglers.
Not quite the terminology I would use, but you are spot-on. Quite apart from anything else, Boris has rubbished and reneged on both agreements he's signed, within weeks of signing and hailing them as triumphs, so they'd have to be out of their minds to want to deal with him any further if they can avoid it.
Whereas the EU has proved to be totally trustworthy ... oh
So ok - I do now get your comment earlier about Labour choosing a miscalculating Remainer as leader.
But they had to, I think. It's a strongly Remain party. Pretending otherwise wouldn't wash.
Strategy is to leave the issue behind now. Good chance of working.
At the time, many of us hated Mrs May's deal. It was awful. Had we had the luxury of crystal ball gazing so we were able to see Johnson, Cummings, and Frost crash the country with their deal, I daresay we would have taken Mrs May's deal.
Yeah, well, some of us pointed this out at the time...
Indeed you did, as did Alastair Meeks.
But neither of them were LABOUR remainers.
Indeed. Labour Remainers put defeating Theresa May as more important than having a softer deal with Europe than what we got.
Thanks. 👍
I'm not sure that is true. I think some of us were just foolhardy enough to hold out for the second referendum.
At the very least once Parliament failed to find any alternatives on the indicative votes, continuing to vote to reject the deal was an interesting decision.
I'm glad they did. Not sure others should be.
We kind of agree. I think Mrs May putting exactly the same deal down time and again without a hint of compromise, puts her back in the frame for some of the blame too.
To be fair to her, May was not in any state to negotiate a new deal. It was a case of either back her deal, or replace her and get a new one negotiated by her successor.
She wasn't backed so the latter happened. It was kind of inevitable.
I know the point about the NI situation is very relevant and Boris's decisions have certainly been a big part of how things develop there, but people have to get over that damn referendum bus.
Of all the things to want to keep in peoples' minds, that there was a bus with a slogan on it is what we are choosing? It's really bizarre, because recalling the things said without going on about or highlighting the bus also works (Edit: and yes I know it is relevant in this particular example of a picture of a bus on fire, but this is a general point, as people bring up the bus all the time).
What exactly do the people burning the bus want by way of policy change? If there is nothing rational that they would like instead of the current situation it is hard to link it with the simplicities of a campaign 5 years ago.
I'm generally of the view that people who burn buses (or anything else) are likely to be too stupid to even know what they want. I'm pretty impressed that they can operate a box of matches to be honest.
Poll tax riots?
Equally stupid.
@topping, @FrancisUrquhart - I'm sure that there are people manipulating these daft, malleable elements. They're idiots too though. Admittedly more dangerous idiots.
IIRC large elements of republican/loyalist terrorist groups switched their focus towards being full-time drug dealers following the GFA, the East/West routes have been disrupted, while North/South flows unimpeded. Bit of civil strife resulting in customs changes would suit them well.
'The Scottish Tory leader said people should “look at their individual constituency and vote for the strongest candidate” capable of defeating the SNP, even if that was not a Tory.
The Tory leader stressed that it was crucial for pro-Union supporters to back his party with their regional list votes, arguing this could prevent an SNP majority.'
Isn’t any Scottish opposition party campaigning on how dreadful the SNP is in Government? “Before we talk about independence let’s teach our kids to read” feels like a vote winner to me.
I'm not sure Sturgeon will hold it. She knows that a botched wildcat referendum is a probable and potential disaster. It will be boycotted by unionists, ignored by Westminster, and then what? Her party looks inept and clueless and the idea of a THIRD referendum recedes further into the distance
If Salmond holds the balance of power, however, he might be able to force her. But the polls show Alba is cratering
She gets her mandate, demands a referendum, is refused, and thus gets a wonderful new grievance to exploit. Much better than actually holding a referendum.
Quite. However she does have a problem with malcolmg militants in her own party, not just Alba. The hardcore will demand a vote. And if she refuses there is a serious risk the SNP splits wide open, rather than just splintering, as now
This, of course, must be Boris' strategic aim
Since when has Johnson had a strategy beyond his own self-aggrandisement?
For a man who apparently has no strategic sense, according to all his opponents, Boris does seem to wallop those opponents rather often, with a winning strategy. Odd.
Winning elections and plebiscites and governing successfully are two different things.
In what way is he governing unsuccessfully?
Brexit was always going to be painful, a global plague is not a cakewalk.
He's made some terrible decisions, esp early in Covid, but he's also made some great decisions - eg the vaccine task force. His party is outpolling the opposition, after a decade in power, and he is more popular than the opposition leader.
At a time of intense chaos he is doing OK. It is too early to decide whether he is "successful" or not
Boris-haters, usually Remainers, are foolishly blinded by their hatred.
Well he said this awesome Brexit Withdrawal deal was brilliant and oven ready, within a few months he realised he screwed up and tried to pass the Internal Markets Bill.
He said EU trade deal was brilliant and within weeks he's trying to undo that mistake, as the violence in Northern Ireland shows, because you may have missed him past comments about putting a border in the Irish sea.
Those terrible decisions regarding early Covid-19 I've often said I could give him a pass on those given the circumstances, but he repeatedly made those mistakes later on, have a look at this chart, and see where most of the deaths took place, not early in Covid-19 but much later on.
Brexit and Covid are so enormous and sui generis we won't be able to judge whether he handled them "successfully" for several years, maybe many years, possibly never
I know the point about the NI situation is very relevant and Boris's decisions have certainly been a big part of how things develop there, but people have to get over that damn referendum bus.
Of all the things to want to keep in peoples' minds, that there was a bus with a slogan on it is what we are choosing? It's really bizarre, because recalling the things said without going on about or highlighting the bus also works (Edit: and yes I know it is relevant in this particular example of a picture of a bus on fire, but this is a general point, as people bring up the bus all the time).
What exactly do the people burning the bus want by way of policy change? If there is nothing rational that they would like instead of the current situation it is hard to link it with the simplicities of a campaign 5 years ago.
I'm generally of the view that people who burn buses (or anything else) are likely to be too stupid to even know what they want. I'm pretty impressed that they can operate a box of matches to be honest.
Poll tax riots?
Equally stupid.
@topping, @FrancisUrquhart - I'm sure that there are people manipulating these daft, malleable elements. They're idiots too though. Admittedly more dangerous idiots.
IIRC large elements of republican/loyalist terrorist groups switched their focus towards being full-time drug dealers following the GFA, the East/West routes have been disrupted, while North/South flows unimpeded. Bit of civil strife resulting in customs changes would suit them well.
I read on the twitter machine that part of the increased "tensions" over the past few weeks is down to the plod having really increased the kicking doors down over the drug dealing operations of these types of people.
I'm not sure Sturgeon will hold it. She knows that a botched wildcat referendum is a probable and potential disaster. It will be boycotted by unionists, ignored by Westminster, and then what? Her party looks inept and clueless and the idea of a THIRD referendum recedes further into the distance
If Salmond holds the balance of power, however, he might be able to force her. But the polls show Alba is cratering
She gets her mandate, demands a referendum, is refused, and thus gets a wonderful new grievance to exploit. Much better than actually holding a referendum.
Quite. However she does have a problem with malcolmg militants in her own party, not just Alba. The hardcore will demand a vote. And if she refuses there is a serious risk the SNP splits wide open, rather than just splintering, as now
This, of course, must be Boris' strategic aim
Since when has Johnson had a strategy beyond his own self-aggrandisement?
For a man who apparently has no strategic sense, according to all his opponents, Boris does seem to wallop those opponents rather often, with a winning strategy. Odd.
Winning elections & plebiscites and governing successfully are two different things.
You require the first to get a go at the second.
But having achieved the first there is no guarantee you will achieve the second.
Nothing is ever guaranteed but the first gets you in the game - the second leaves you eating cold chips in Plymouth.
The EU will just wait out the Johnson project at this point I think. They'll deal with whomever comes after on the basis that they almost certainly won't be a conceited shit surrendered by a coterie of brainfucked ball garglers.
Not quite the terminology I would use, but you are spot-on. Quite apart from anything else, Boris has rubbished and reneged on both agreements he's signed, within weeks of signing and hailing them as triumphs, so they'd have to be out of their minds to want to deal with him any further if they can avoid it.
Whereas the EU has proved to be totally trustworthy ... oh
So ok - I do now get your comment earlier about Labour choosing a miscalculating Remainer as leader.
But they had to, I think. It's a strongly Remain party. Pretending otherwise wouldn't wash.
Strategy is to leave the issue behind now. Good chance of working.
At the time, many of us hated Mrs May's deal. It was awful. Had we had the luxury of crystal ball gazing so we were able to see Johnson, Cummings, and Frost crash the country with their deal, I daresay we would have taken Mrs May's deal.
Yeah, well, some of us pointed this out at the time...
Indeed you did, as did Alastair Meeks.
But neither of them were LABOUR remainers.
Indeed. Labour Remainers put defeating Theresa May as more important than having a softer deal with Europe than what we got.
Thanks. 👍
I'm not sure that is true. I think some of us were just foolhardy enough to hold out for the second referendum.
Yes the most committed of Remainers with moderate politics - of which I recall you being one - genuinely went for the dream of Ref2 and Remain. A miscalculation but they should feel no shame. It was a noble enough cause.
I'm quite a fan of the politicsforall twitter handle (and it's rare for me to praise anything on twitter except Hugo Gye) but sometimes I think that account was created by someone cunning at Tory HQ to rebalance the left wing news slant on Twitter. No chance was it created by some mysterious teenager as suggested. Election Maps is run by a teenager and you can tell.
It has a very clear centre-right bias for me. Quite remarkable how it grew so quickly, and gained so much legitimacy out of nowhere...
There is a lot of good news on the BBC website Covid-wise. Add that to Matty H this morning and I can't see how the roadmap will be delayed. Nor brought forward, but there were real concerns yesterday over the former.
Comments
This, of course, must be Boris' strategic aim
https://twitter.com/MacaesBruno/status/1380151766487031823
Salmond will then demand she declares UDI which Sturgeon has said she will not do, that is when the split will come in the Nationalist ranks
I added the caveat, ‘unless James Vince has a big season.’
So I’m afraid, as Atkinson joins the procession, it’s all my fault...
But they had to, I think. It's a strongly Remain party. Pretending otherwise wouldn't wash.
Strategy is to leave the issue behind now. Good chance of working.
How can to 90% have positive numbers for 55-59 and 60-65 when they're at 94% and 97% respectively already? Surely we just need the 3% of 50-54?
How can 55-59, 60-64, 65-69 and 70-74 have positive numbers to 94% when they're already at 94%, 97%, 94% and 97% respectively already? Surely we just need the 7% of 50-54?
@XLlFS
Sanidade desconvoca a 1.400 gallegos que iban a ser vacunados hoy con AstraZeneca
Translated from Spanish by
Sanidade recalls 1,400 Galicians who were going to be vaccinated today with AstraZeneca
This is the problem, a quite chaotic situation in Spain, now. Millions of young Spaniards have had one dose of AZ. What happens now? They are considering: giving them a second dose of something else, only giving one dose, trying to persuade people to have the 2nd AZ shot anyway. Or they might start the vax programme all over again
https://twitter.com/XLlFS/status/1380169118800883718?s=20
I'm using NIMIS for population numbers, which takes ONS 2019 and projects forward. This is quite accurate - 29 year olds become 30 year olds rather regularly.....
This gives the percentages vaccinated as
Under 50 25.08%
50-54 81.02%
55-59 84.71%
60-64 87.68%
65-69 90.73%
70-74 93.43%
75-79 94.46%
80+ 93.90%
https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/bob-willis-trophy-2020-1227582/somerset-vs-gloucestershire-central-group-1227612/live-cricket-score
Edit - although now I check, it was actually Craig took the wickets. But it was Jamie who terrified the batsmen into playing dumb shots against his brother.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/5N4x1rxtrXRdrBXctshRVtl/blackbirding-scotlands-dark-place-in-the-history-of-the-pacific
https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1380149681322397699
Yes 29 year olds become 30 year olds etc, but also people die so . . . using these percentages here if there's 3% left to get to 90% of 50-54 year olds then how much is that?
The whole point about democracy is a mandate. If the people want something and some other people say "ha ha ha you can't have it" then it only delays the inevitable.
NIMS is an official estimate of the population - they start with the latest data ONS 2019, then using birth and death data construct an estimate for population. They then cross check with other data sources, I believe. You can find this data on
https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2021/04/COVID-19-weekly-announced-vaccinations-8-April-2021.xlsx
It's nearly the last tab.
It is noticeable that using the NIMS numbers, nearly all of the 100%+ comedy vanishes.
This is what I used above to get the numbers remaining.
Using raw ONS 2019 doesn't make sense for this.
https://twitter.com/JimMFelton/status/1380173350723596288
Includes this
He also became infamous for taking the yellowish penile discharge from a man he believed to be infected with gonorrhea and rubbing it into cuts he had created on his own penis.
What could lead a man to do this, other than boredom and access to said fluids, you ask? Hunter was convinced that gonorrhea and syphilis were two forms of the same disease.
At the time, both diseases were known as "the pox", despite different and distinct symptoms. Some were beginning to believe – correctly – that the two forms of pox were actually different diseases.
Hunter, however, thought that the difference in symptoms was a result of differences in the tissues infected. What's more, he was so confident he was willing to bet his own penis that he was correct.
Of course, a really wily PM might be able to finesse it with sweet talk and convincing-sounding obfuscation. Boris probably isn't up to that, though.
Brexit was always going to be painful, a global plague is not a cakewalk.
He's made some terrible decisions, esp early in Covid, but he's also made some great decisions - eg the vaccine task force. His party is outpolling the opposition, after a decade in power, and he is more popular than the opposition leader.
At a time of intense chaos he is doing OK. It is too early to decide whether he is "successful" or not
Boris-haters, usually Remainers, are foolishly blinded by their hatred.
Stats still looking very good. I'm expecting some daily case numbers under 2K in the next week.
Holding a vote now before that generation is up means the SNP can and will demand a third referendum even if No narrowly wins.
Spain's government refused Catalonia's nationalist government an independence referendum in 2017 and ignored its UDI declaration, 4 years later Catalonia remains part of Spain
The 2019 elections in Catalonia saw the separatists increase their number of MPs, not decrease them.
https://twitter.com/Number10cat/status/1380173985569193987?s=20
Straw in the wind, my mother wasn't due to have her 2nd jab for a few weeks, got asked if she wanted to be jabbed with AZN tomorrow. Of course she said yes.
A former senior official within the GMB union is alleged to have made a speech to colleagues at a function openly dismissing claims of antisemitism in the Labour Party and saying “rich bastard Jews” were responsible for the continued prominence of the issue.
https://jewishnews.timesofisrael.com/exclusive-gmb-union-rocked-by-rich-b-jews-speech-claims/
You see the Emperor's new clothes. I just see an overweight bare-assed clown.
Not sure what the stats say on this but if a new hospitalisation has, say, a 5% chance of death then we are looking at around 10 per day from 200 ish admissions.
It’s like Chris Williamson blaming the allegations of antisemitism against him on an international conspiracy run from Israel.
Admissions doesn't seem to be aligned because from the peak the numbers initially only fell a little before accelerating. Even given that though admissions have now fallen below the line for cases.
Meanwhile the awful economic consequences of indy would rapidly unfold, the country would likely default, the currency and banking system would be a mess, EU membership would be 10-20 years away (if ever). Hideous negotiations would have to begin, splitting the UK in an acrimonious divorce.
It would be Brexit times a million. I can foresee civil strife, in the worst case scenario. Scotland has a history of sectarian bitterness, edging towards violence. England and rUK would be pulled into the vortex of chaos.
This, indeed, is one reason why Boris is entirely justified in denying a vote: for the political and economic wellbeing of the whole UK, including Scotland.
Referendums on huge constitutional issues are horribly destabilising. They must, for that reason, remain extremely rare. Once in a generation - 15-20 years - is about right
No chance was it created by some mysterious teenager as suggested. Election Maps is run by a teenager and you can tell.
They often get to answer abusive calls from the antisemitic cranks, very nasty, that leaves them upset.
Curiously it got worse and more regular since Corbyn became Labour leader, pure coincidence I know.
My commendation to the two former-Conservative Remainers nonetheless stands.
Thanks. 👍
In the case of the bus burning incident, such an individual is caught on camera. Obviously he is only observing.
I think GB news would be delighted if 2.4% of potential viewers tuned in!
"Have you heard of GB News?" with the same responses is a huge achievement.
I grant you Boris is nothing like Trump and I expect my politicians to evade and avoid, but I draw the line at outright lying and Boris has done this many times.
https://twitter.com/paulhutcheon/status/1380179747104251908?s=20
He said EU trade deal was brilliant and within weeks he's trying to undo that mistake, as the violence in Northern Ireland shows, because you may have missed him past comments about putting a border in the Irish sea.
Those terrible decisions regarding early Covid-19 I've often said I could give him a pass on those given the circumstances, but he repeatedly made those mistakes later on, have a look at this chart, and see where most of the deaths took place, not early in Covid-19 but much later on.
https://twitter.com/ian_a_jones/status/1376889738167193604
I'm glad they did. Not sure others should be.
@topping, @FrancisUrquhart - I'm sure that there are people manipulating these daft, malleable elements. They're idiots too though. Admittedly more dangerous idiots.
Mind you not in the league of the idiot in @TheScreamingEagles post below.
The Tory leader stressed that it was crucial for pro-Union supporters to back his party with their regional list votes, arguing this could prevent an SNP majority.'
Get out while the going's good. Then you can blame the inevitable, horrific chaos and pain on your successor. As you suggest
She wasn't backed so the latter happened. It was kind of inevitable.