Categories
Apart from one poll Salmond’s Alba party looks doomed – politicalbetting.com
Apart from one poll Salmond’s Alba party looks doomed – politicalbetting.com
Thanks to David Cowling for the latest tables.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
If Unionists win a majority then that of course removes the chance of Sturgeon even trying for an indyref2 anyway
The humiliation of THAT would be profound, for him
https://www.politico.eu/coronavirus-in-europe/
Perched between unionists who hate him, and the SNP who will despise him for being a splitter, for 4 years. Without any backup.
He would be so offended and angry he would goad Sturgeon even more
https://twitter.com/dhothersall/status/1380147757013422088?s=20
1) Why would the UN get involved and what powers and enforcement action does it have?
and
2) So why hasn't the UN enforced this principle for Catalonia?
https://www.thenational.scot/news/19039315.snp-can-use-principle-self-determination-override-indyref2-veto/
and they've looked at using the The International Court of Justice as well.
https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/snp-could-use-international-law-push-indyref2-says-former-un-adviser-3112114
Sure to be a massive bidding war between RT and GB News for the rights.
(a) Yes wins, Boris Johnson then goes down in history as the Prime Minister who lost the Union and probably has to resign
(b) No wins, Scotland's nationalist voters get even more pissed off and the SNP continues to win Scottish elections ad infinitum - in which case, what was the point?
(b) No wins, the wind goes right out of the SNP's sails, and Scottish voters decide to vote for parties that might actually sit in a UK Government. Result: the bulk of them go back to Labour, and it becomes substantially easier for Labour to win a General Election
The incentive for the current Government to concede a referendum, regardless of how large a majority can be found for it at Holyrood, is therefore exactly nil.
https://twitter.com/Lairdscott01/status/1354098345732689938
https://twitter.com/SaorAlba59/status/1354053645017501697
R=1.2 ish.
Will be doing this correction until you drop it. Let's see who blinks first.
A Permanent member can be kicked out of the UN, like China [Taiwan as permanent member] was. But short of that how do they override a veto?
Plenty of military conflicts stated off small anded up pretty big.
Jeez. That's terrible.
It would need a 2/3 majority which is unlikely anyway and even if it was what would they do? Send in a UN peacekeeping force to Glasgow? As that worked so well in Bosnia and Rwanda
In general avoiding anyone with an Alba logo in their profile is a pretty solid move.
I suspect Putin still loves the Scottish Nasty Party though, so I am sure independence will still get plenty of airtime from Vlad's mouthpiece. Funny how despots and fascists tend to have a mutual attraction with the Scottish nationalist cause. Birds of a feather and all that I guess.
I know people in the North East and Leicestershire have been in lockdown for even longer than that.
a lawyer told me I have a case
good luck with that
It was even used against us once.
There’s an esoteric maneuver to get around a threatened veto: invoking the obscure U.N. Resolution 377, also known as the “Uniting for Peace” Resolution. In early 1950, the United States pushed through the resolution as a means of circumventing possible Soviet vetoes. The measure states that, in the event that the Security Council cannot maintain international peace, a matter can be taken up by the General Assembly. This procedure has been used 10 times so far, most notably in 1956 to help resolve the Suez Canal crisis. Britain and France, which were occupying parts of the canal at the time, vetoed Security Council resolutions calling for their withdrawal. The United States called for an emergency “Uniting for Peace” session of the General Assembly, which passed a withdrawal resolution. (A simple majority vote is required.) Britain and France pulled out shortly after.
Yet these non-Security Council resolutions are more symbolic pressure tactics than anything else. The council still maintains responsibility for enforcement, so naysayers among the permanent members can likely prevent the actual dispatching of troops. Nor, as history has shown, will all nations buckle like Britain and France did in 1956. In 1980, the General Assembly convened in a “Uniting for Peace” session and passed a resolution demanding the Soviet Union’s withdrawal from Afghanistan. The Soviets merely shrugged.
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2003/03/can-you-bypass-a-u-n-security-council-veto.html
I love educating PBers, especially when it comes to history.
The UNSC can send troops, that's completely different.
The 128k figure is for deaths within 28 days of a positive test.
The 150k is deaths with Covid-19 listed as a cause on the death certificate.
Edit - IIRC it is top of the government's Covid-19 dashboard.
Assuming it goes ahead as planned, I'm counting May 17th as the end of lockdown, even if the restrictions won't all be gone and I'm pessimistic about exactly how many months (or years) we may end up being lumbered with some of them. Twenty-one weeks, much of them stretching through what is, after all, the most depressing time of the year even under normal circumstances. I doubt that countries in Europe which have fallen back into lockdown more recently will have to put up with anything as bad as that.
So seems like just a case of 'I'll pick the higher number other people aren't using because the worst case scenario suits my argument".
But I doubt it.
@HYUFD ?
Whitty, Vallance, and JVT have often used the higher figure to contextualise things.
Yeah right.
Someone still got the strops after the Liverpool result lol.
.
https://graphics.suntimes.com/homicides/
https://www.murdermap.co.uk/statistics/london-murders-2021-latest-total/
Compare, if you will, to Russia, where the official Covid death toll is about 100k but the excess death count for the pandemic period is closer to half-a-million (which, on a per capita basis, would be about twice as bad as the United States.)
It's why you've also heard more than once at the UK Government pressers that, in the long run, the best relative international measure of deaths in the pandemic is liable to come from the excess death statistics. They're the numbers least likely to be corrupted.
where this oft quoted "150,000 dead" figure comes from. Given our rather liberal reporting of covid deaths sits around the 126k mark are they privy to some statistics I'm not, are they predicting the future or do they just round up all numbers to the nearest 50,000?
The reality is when you were spouting your rubbish theories, it was in fact the government's own figures which they publish and highlight every day.
https://twitter.com/RachLoxton/status/1380169402302263300?s=20
I have a few foreign friends and colleagues and they marvel at the concept that the ONS and statistics authority have the power, which they often use, to publicly criticise and reprimand ministers, including the PM, for using misleading stats.
It would be an alien concept in their home countries.
What stood out for me is that Mark Oaten is now apparently a lobbyist on behalf of the International Fur Trade federation:
https://lobbying-register.uk/individual/?i=132967&search=Mark Oaten
Is this the vaccine Germany is procuring lots of?
Classic.
Though Jim Sillars is the only prominent proponent I know of outside the EU/outside the UK, which IMO is the only intellectually coherent form of Sindy.