We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
What he said was 100% correct.
Don't forget that most people are unvaccinated still. That percentage is being driven down but if it were just the vaccines then the virus would never have been suppressed.
The lockdown suppressed the virus while the vaccines were rolled out. The vaccines will help keep it suppressed while the lockdown is removed.
They are kind of screwed as a group if, even at such a time, they are relying on the Queen to be the one who is being sensible and making the rest be sensible as well. Charles has been in training his whole life, and Will is, in proper fashion, boringly sensible, but will they be able to keep a lid on the rest of them without her matriarchal authority?
I doubt the average voter could care less whether the males in the royal family wear military uniforms on Saturday or not.
In any case it is Charles and William who are next in line to the throne after the Queen, not Andrew and Harry neither of whom even perform royal duties anymore
I think you've missed my point, which was that the family members are reportedly squabbling over petty issues to the point it apparently still requires the Queen herself, no doubt hit harder than anyone by the death of her husband, to personally intervene to sort it out.
It's not about whether the public care what they wear, or what the line of succession is. It's about whether those not in the direct line damage the institution through their general behaviour, and if they can be managed without the Queen there to manage them.
It's the right decision but it really does beggar belief that The Queen has to deal with this shit on top of grieving for losing the love of her life.
The Queen is Head of State and head of the royal family so obviously she still decides on what they are allowed to do, when she dies Charles will take those roles and decide as will William when Charles dies.
It is as simple as that
It's not as simple as that, as the point was whether the troublemakers will listen to Will and Charles as they do to the Queen. The signs are not promising.
6 months sounds excessive, although the general reasoning is sound in the scenario where vaccination capacity is constrained.
If you look at our weekly survey on antibody prevalence 12-14 weeks is probably about right. It's a shame the European countries were too pig headed to admit brexit Britain was right and decided to try and undermine our strategy rather than copy it. Doing a u-turn now will just dent overall confidence given that the people have been brainwashed into thinking the UK took loads of risks with the first dose preference strategy.
As much as the EU/Macron succeeded in trashing the AZ reputation in the eyes of the French, I don’t think the attempts at shitting on the UK’s one dose strategy as risky ever really convinced people here - the UK is just seen as having handled it’s programme well like Israel. I’ve never had any comments from people criticising the UK and vaccines, compared to last spring when people were incredulous about the UK’s herd immunity approach in the early days of the pandemic.
That is interesting to note and quite positive, though it makes the attempts to paint it as riskier than it was more inexplicable rather than simply shitty. I never really understood why attack the strategy like that, rather than just go for an abundance of caution line if not following suit. A bit like when the data wranglers were focusing on second doses, when simple maths would indicate that would backfire in a month.
It doesn't matter whether they do or not, Charles for instance would decide.
It was Charles who removed Andrew from royal duties for example, not the Queen
You've been very impressive with the missing the point on this one, well done. You seem incapable of noticing that 'X deciding' something does not mean that person Y will play along quietly, rather than, say, publicly embarrass the family with interviews, stories or poor behaviour, because they don't listen to what X decides.
Yes it does, the sovereign heads the royal family (and to some extent the next in line if the sovereign is very old, with Charles now increasingly leading the royal family).
It was the Queen who removed Andrew from royal duties under pressure from Charles, Andrew did not get a say.
Whether they then do interviews or whatsover or go to the press is irrelevant, they are no longer working members of the royal family, just the same as anyone else who has been sacked if they do an interview no longer represents that organisation
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
What he said was 100% correct.
Don't forget that most people are unvaccinated still. That percentage is being driven down but if it were just the vaccines then the virus would never have been suppressed.
The lockdown suppressed the virus while the vaccines were rolled out. The vaccines will help keep it suppressed while the lockdown is removed.
It really isn't brain surgery.
It was the presentation.
(And actually the science shows that he wasn't 100% correct – see Professor Tim Spector's analysis this morning)
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Great analysis..... I note that 8 out of the 10 top seats are Red Wall former Labour seats - fascinating election battle in 2023/4 awaits - IMO so much indirectly hinges on Scotland's events this Summer.
Bury North and Bury South are not really Red Wall seats in that they have often been Tory held - indeed even on the basis of the 2019 result it could be said that both are shifting to Labour on the basis that the Tories had bigger majorities there in 1992 when their national lead was just 7.6%. The same would be true of High Peak and Gedling.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Boris' intervention was utterly moronic. It made people think "why bother getting vaccinated then?" – just absolutely insane presentation.
If anyone is stupid enough to think that then they're really, really thick and spectacularly missed the point. 🤦♂️
The point is that in the future lockdown won't be there. So if you're safe now while unvaccinated then you're safe because of the lockdown - but in the future the lockdown will be gone so you need your jab. You can't rely upon lockdown once its gone to do the work for you.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Badly phrased expectation management.
Awfully phrased something or other, mishandled and bungled. He needs to engage brain before opening mouth. He is a liability.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Badly phrased expectation management.
Awfully phrased something or other, mishandled and bungled. He needs to engage brain before opening mouth. He is a liability.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
They are kind of screwed as a group if, even at such a time, they are relying on the Queen to be the one who is being sensible and making the rest be sensible as well. Charles has been in training his whole life, and Will is, in proper fashion, boringly sensible, but will they be able to keep a lid on the rest of them without her matriarchal authority?
I doubt the average voter could care less whether the males in the royal family wear military uniforms on Saturday or not.
In any case it is Charles and William who are next in line to the throne after the Queen, not Andrew and Harry neither of whom even perform royal duties anymore
I think you've missed my point, which was that the family members are reportedly squabbling over petty issues to the point it apparently still requires the Queen herself, no doubt hit harder than anyone by the death of her husband, to personally intervene to sort it out.
It's not about whether the public care what they wear, or what the line of succession is. It's about whether those not in the direct line damage the institution through their general behaviour, and if they can be managed without the Queen there to manage them.
It's the right decision but it really does beggar belief that The Queen has to deal with this shit on top of grieving for losing the love of her life.
The Queen is Head of State and head of the royal family so obviously she still decides on what they are allowed to do, when she dies Charles will take those roles and decide as will William when Charles dies.
It is as simple as that
It's not as simple as that, as the point was whether the troublemakers will listen to Will and Charles as they do to the Queen. The signs are not promising.
6 months sounds excessive, although the general reasoning is sound in the scenario where vaccination capacity is constrained.
If you look at our weekly survey on antibody prevalence 12-14 weeks is probably about right. It's a shame the European countries were too pig headed to admit brexit Britain was right and decided to try and undermine our strategy rather than copy it. Doing a u-turn now will just dent overall confidence given that the people have been brainwashed into thinking the UK took loads of risks with the first dose preference strategy.
As much as the EU/Macron succeeded in trashing the AZ reputation in the eyes of the French, I don’t think the attempts at shitting on the UK’s one dose strategy as risky ever really convinced people here - the UK is just seen as having handled it’s programme well like Israel. I’ve never had any comments from people criticising the UK and vaccines, compared to last spring when people were incredulous about the UK’s herd immunity approach in the early days of the pandemic.
That is interesting to note and quite positive, though it makes the attempts to paint it as riskier than it was more inexplicable rather than simply shitty. I never really understood why attack the strategy like that, rather than just go for an abundance of caution line if not following suit. A bit like when the data wranglers were focusing on second doses, when simple maths would indicate that would backfire in a month.
The question it makes me ask is about the capacity limit of the French infra, but that would require teh Medics to be taking non-medical things into account - which I don' believe they would.
I suspect the French medical authorities think that Mons Macaron is as much a nutjob as we do.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Boris' intervention was utterly moronic. It made people think "why bother getting vaccinated then?" – just absolutely insane presentation.
If anyone is stupid enough to think that then they're really, really thick and spectacularly missed the point. 🤦♂️
The point is that in the future lockdown won't be there. So if you're safe now while unvaccinated then you're safe because of the lockdown - but in the future the lockdown will be gone so you need your jab. You can't rely upon lockdown once its gone to do the work for you.
Again Philip, I agree with you. But the way he presented it was absolutely lousy. He is an effing idiot at times with the way he phrases things: it's a fragile situation, spare us his blundering around.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Badly phrased expectation management.
Awfully phrased something or other, mishandled and bungled. He needs to engage brain before opening mouth. He is a liability.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Boris' intervention was utterly moronic. It made people think "why bother getting vaccinated then?" – just absolutely insane presentation.
As we have the highest rates of vaccine acceptance in Europe have you any evidence this has dropped as a result of these comments
Have you seen the vaccination refusal rate among ethnic minorities? We are not helping ourselves crack those cohorts with this stupid messaging.
You think telling ethnic minorities that in the past the lockdown drove down cases, but in the future they'll rise as there's no lockdown, unless they go out and get vaccinated - will drive down vaccination rates? Why?
You've spectacularly missed the point. The point is the lockdown is going so you NEED a vaccine instead. Whereas in recent months the unvaccinated have been protected by the lockdown, they won't be going forwards.
Surge testing in Smethwick. Uncontrolled Covid immigration resulting in rivers of infection.
Typical hyperbole from you.
Hysterical, attention-seeking nonsense.
With respect you may be right but do you have a source for your rejection and is there surge testing in Smethwick
There is surge testing in Smethwick yes, but we could well do without the gleeful "uncontrolled Covid immigration resulting in rivers of infection" hysteria.
Sadly such lines are typical from this poster.
Given that the location was *Smethwick* it was obviously (well to me anyway) a parody of Enoch's anti-immigration speech and 'rivers of blood'. Personally I thought it was mildy amusing and in keeping with the occasional pun but each to their own.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Boris' intervention was utterly moronic. It made people think "why bother getting vaccinated then?" – just absolutely insane presentation.
Ah yes - the "We must bullshit to make people do the right thing" theory.
It almost never works.
No. Wrong. Not bullshit – explain the true situation is clear balanced terms. Not blundering around with stupid poorly phrased messaging that can and will be misinterpreted. It's clear to me that PBers know f-all about PR and message discipline.
Great analysis..... I note that 8 out of the 10 top seats are Red Wall former Labour seats - fascinating election battle in 2023/4 awaits - IMO so much indirectly hinges on Scotland's events this Summer.
Bury North and Bury South are not really Red Wall seats in that they have often been Tory held - indeed even on the basis of the 2019 result it could be said that both are shifting to Labour on the basis that the Tories had bigger majorities there in 1992 when their national lead was just 7.6%. The same would be true of High Peak and Gedling.
Yes, I made this point earlier. Ditto Bolton North East. Bury South has a large middle class segment and is the sort of metropolitan seat which has broadly swung from Con to Lab over the last 30 years. It swung away from Labour in 2019 due to a number of factors, not least the large Jewish population in the seat. It will be interesting to see if that effect stays in a post-Corbyn world. We once had a frequent poster on the site from Bury South, Stuart Penketh - I wonder what happened to him?
Interesting though that four of Labour's top ten targets are coterminous (Bolton NE, Bury North, Bury South, Heywood and Middleton).
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Badly phrased expectation management.
Awfully phrased something or other, mishandled and bungled. He needs to engage brain before opening mouth. He is a liability.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Boris' intervention was utterly moronic. It made people think "why bother getting vaccinated then?" – just absolutely insane presentation.
As we have the highest rates of vaccine acceptance in Europe have you any evidence this has dropped as a result of these comments
Have you seen the vaccination refusal rate among ethnic minorities? We are not helping ourselves crack those cohorts with this stupid messaging.
You think telling ethnic minorities that in the past the lockdown drove down cases, but in the future they'll rise as there's no lockdown, unless they go out and get vaccinated - will drive down vaccination rates? Why?
You've spectacularly missed the point. The point is the lockdown is going so you NEED a vaccine instead. Whereas in recent months the unvaccinated have been protected by the lockdown, they won't be going forwards.
Yes, that is the point, but that the way Boris presented it makes it extremely likely to be misinterpreted. I'm surprised you can't see this.
Surge testing in Smethwick. Uncontrolled Covid immigration resulting in rivers of infection.
Typical hyperbole from you.
Hysterical, attention-seeking nonsense.
With respect you may be right but do you have a source for your rejection and is there surge testing in Smethwick
There is surge testing in Smethwick yes, but we could well do without the gleeful "uncontrolled Covid immigration resulting in rivers of infection" hysteria.
Sadly such lines are typical from this poster.
Given that the location was *Smethwick* it was obviously (well to me anyway) a parody of Enoch's anti-immigration speech and 'rivers of blood'. Personally I thought it was mildy amusing and in keeping with the occasional pun but each to their own.
If you want a Covid positive neighbour, vote Remain!
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Typical hyperbole from you.
Hysterical, attention-seeking nonsense.
A wise person once said that
FFS, get a brain of your own. Drop the partisan fanboy stuff. Please.
I doubt that Starmer's 'Tory sleaze' redux (is Mandelson advising him?) will go anywhere. The transplant from the 1990s doesn't fit the world of the 2020s.
Why do you think lining your pockets with taxpayers money is ok in the 2020s?
Because the expected standards for conduct in public life are massively lower.
Latterly I've been struck by how many officials of all stripes in the UK are amenable to bit of fragrant grease - as the Chinese say.
That's interesting.
Can you give us a list of say 20 examples you have encountered personally in the UK in the last 3 years?
I am 59 and I cannot recall a single incident in my adult life where any official has ever indicated to me that some "fragrant grease" might aid the process along. Of course I don't live in Liverpool but it is just not a feature of public life in Britain in my experience. I have of course had to deal with officious and pedantic idiots who seemed to be creating problems for irrational reasons. Maybe I was just missing the signposts?
Our "corruption" seems to me to be at a different level. It is the appointment of like minded people to public bodies and publicly funded organisations, grants to those bodies who become beholden to and cheerleaders for those in charge, in more recent times contracts offered to chums without due diligence or competitive tendering, that sort of thing. We are a long way from perfect but just plain bribes or "thank you's"? Just never seen it.
Yesterday I had a call from someone in a Local Authority regarding our tender for some major works. He wanted to have a meeting about it outside Starbucks over a coffee.. This is an example of the signpost you are talking about.
This type of thing has been happening for decades and will always continue to happen. I could give hundreds of examples of where we do work on peoples houses for nothing, provide holidays, golf memberships etc etc as well as the good old brown envelope.
There's quite a few 'brown envelope' estates round here, and they stick out a mile. Planning constraints conveniently forgotten. Some people did go to jail but not necessarily over that.
It seems one party states are the worst for this kind of thing, and it probably doesn't matter which party.
In our case it was a similar make up to Liverpool.
This kind of thing is not that common. Those areas where people can be influenced are known by developers. But this is not normal in local government.
There are too many people who would have to be involved to get away with it, it's just implausible as it would both be too risky to attempt and cost too much to be worth it. That's why it is so shocking when genuinely corrupt councils are revealed. DavidL's scenarios are much more plausible.
Not that it stops people very casually suggesting rampant brown envelope corruption of Members and officials as if it is the mmost natural thing in the world. Even on this thread we've a cast iron comment about how many are so amenable, then watered down when pressed about it to how there may not be any 'signposts' or thoughts about asking for a bribe until offered.
That is, going from 'many are amenable' to 'even if they don't ask for one, just assume they would take one'.
I've been on both sides of public sector procurement for the last ten years and have seen literally nothing dodgy, ever.
That is my experience. I've spent the last 30 years doing consultancy for public sector clients. So I have bid for literally hundreds of pieces of work and have also run procurements for public sector clients in Central and local government. In every case there are multiple people involved in the selection process, so it would be hard to sway a decision without a good reason. Having said which, one of the procurement leads on one project was subsequently prosecuted for taking a bribe from a supplier, so there are clearly checks as well. Perhaps construction is dodger than IT?
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Badly phrased expectation management.
Awfully phrased something or other, mishandled and bungled. He needs to engage brain before opening mouth. He is a liability.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Boris' intervention was utterly moronic. It made people think "why bother getting vaccinated then?" – just absolutely insane presentation.
As we have the highest rates of vaccine acceptance in Europe have you any evidence this has dropped as a result of these comments
Have you seen the vaccination refusal rate among ethnic minorities? We are not helping ourselves crack those cohorts with this stupid messaging.
You think telling ethnic minorities that in the past the lockdown drove down cases, but in the future they'll rise as there's no lockdown, unless they go out and get vaccinated - will drive down vaccination rates? Why?
You've spectacularly missed the point. The point is the lockdown is going so you NEED a vaccine instead. Whereas in recent months the unvaccinated have been protected by the lockdown, they won't be going forwards.
Yes, that is the point, but that the way Boris presented it makes it extremely likely to be misinterpreted. I'm surprised you can't see this.
I watched what he said live on the News. The way he presented it was crystal clear and reasonable. He made the point eloquently and expanded on it. It was the same point he, Whitty and Vallance have been saying for months now since they said there can't be a Zero Covid strategy and why.
The way others misrepresented it - and the way you were off half-cocked and driven yourself into a frenzy based on headlines others wrote - is the problem here. You're willing there to be problems where non-exist.
'We have won the war, America has lost', say Taliban...
It's a similar picture across much of Afghanistan: the government controls the cities and bigger towns, but the Taliban are encircling them, with a presence in large parts of the countryside...
The government pays the salaries of staff, but the Taliban are in charge. It's a hybrid system in place across the country...
We're really not going to have our geopolitical troubles to seek over the next few years are we?
Reading this article is profoundly depressing in 2021. Civil war in Afghanistan or simply a Taliban take-over? Either way, whatever you think of the US as a global police force, without the US military there a giant backward step for ordinary Afghans seems inevitable. It looks like we are back to square one.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Typical hyperbole from you.
Hysterical, attention-seeking nonsense.
A wise person once said that
FFS, get a brain of your own. Drop the partisan fanboy stuff. Please.
I do have one of my own, thank you very much, and as a result I don't need to outsource my thinking to the Spectator. I'm just not a hysteric. Nothing bad is going to happen because Boris dared to defy Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Badly phrased expectation management.
Awfully phrased something or other, mishandled and bungled. He needs to engage brain before opening mouth. He is a liability.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Boris' intervention was utterly moronic. It made people think "why bother getting vaccinated then?" – just absolutely insane presentation.
As we have the highest rates of vaccine acceptance in Europe have you any evidence this has dropped as a result of these comments
Have you seen the vaccination refusal rate among ethnic minorities? We are not helping ourselves crack those cohorts with this stupid messaging.
You think telling ethnic minorities that in the past the lockdown drove down cases, but in the future they'll rise as there's no lockdown, unless they go out and get vaccinated - will drive down vaccination rates? Why?
You've spectacularly missed the point. The point is the lockdown is going so you NEED a vaccine instead. Whereas in recent months the unvaccinated have been protected by the lockdown, they won't be going forwards.
Yes, that is the point, but that the way Boris presented it makes it extremely likely to be misinterpreted. I'm surprised you can't see this.
I watched what he said live on the News. The way he presented it was crystal clear and reasonable. He made the point eloquently and expanded on it. It was the same point he, Whitty and Vallance have been saying for months now since they said there can't be a Zero Covid strategy and why.
The way others misrepresented it - and the way you were off half-cocked and driven yourself into a frenzy based on headlines others wrote - is the problem here. You're willing there to be problems where non-exist.
Not so. I want the problems to disappear, a goal hindered by a PM who doesn't think before he speaks.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Badly phrased expectation management.
Awfully phrased something or other, mishandled and bungled. He needs to engage brain before opening mouth. He is a liability.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Boris' intervention was utterly moronic. It made people think "why bother getting vaccinated then?" – just absolutely insane presentation.
As we have the highest rates of vaccine acceptance in Europe have you any evidence this has dropped as a result of these comments
Have you seen the vaccination refusal rate among ethnic minorities? We are not helping ourselves crack those cohorts with this stupid messaging.
You think telling ethnic minorities that in the past the lockdown drove down cases, but in the future they'll rise as there's no lockdown, unless they go out and get vaccinated - will drive down vaccination rates? Why?
You've spectacularly missed the point. The point is the lockdown is going so you NEED a vaccine instead. Whereas in recent months the unvaccinated have been protected by the lockdown, they won't be going forwards.
Yes, that is the point, but that the way Boris presented it makes it extremely likely to be misinterpreted. I'm surprised you can't see this.
I watched what he said live on the News. The way he presented it was crystal clear and reasonable. He made the point eloquently and expanded on it. It was the same point he, Whitty and Vallance have been saying for months now since they said there can't be a Zero Covid strategy and why.
The way others misrepresented it - and the way you were off half-cocked and driven yourself into a frenzy based on headlines others wrote - is the problem here. You're willing there to be problems where non-exist.
Not so. I want the problems to disappear, a goal hindered by a PM who doesn't think before he speaks.
The problems will disappear if people realise that the lockdown has been protecting them and so they need to get vaccinated now as lockdown is removed. Just like he said.
The problems won't disappear by doing as you want and sticking your head in the sand thinking lockdown did nothing and removing it changes nothing.
'We have won the war, America has lost', say Taliban...
It's a similar picture across much of Afghanistan: the government controls the cities and bigger towns, but the Taliban are encircling them, with a presence in large parts of the countryside...
The government pays the salaries of staff, but the Taliban are in charge. It's a hybrid system in place across the country...
We're really not going to have our geopolitical troubles to seek over the next few years are we?
Reading this article is profoundly depressing in 2021. Civil war in Afghanistan or simply a Taliban take-over? Either way, whatever you think of the US as a global police force, without the US military there a giant backward step for ordinary Afghans seems inevitable. It looks like we are back to square one.
Trump would have withdrawn troops even earlier in May he said if he was re elected.
However we did not invade Afghanistan to remove the Taliban, that is a myth. The Taliban had controlled the government of Afghanistan since 1996.
The invasion only occurred in 2001 after 9/11 to kill Bin Laden and remove Al Qaeda from the country, aims which have now been achieved.
The Taliban will have to have some role in the government again to secure it
I doubt that Starmer's 'Tory sleaze' redux (is Mandelson advising him?) will go anywhere. The transplant from the 1990s doesn't fit the world of the 2020s.
Why do you think lining your pockets with taxpayers money is ok in the 2020s?
Because the expected standards for conduct in public life are massively lower.
Latterly I've been struck by how many officials of all stripes in the UK are amenable to bit of fragrant grease - as the Chinese say.
That's interesting.
Can you give us a list of say 20 examples you have encountered personally in the UK in the last 3 years?
I am 59 and I cannot recall a single incident in my adult life where any official has ever indicated to me that some "fragrant grease" might aid the process along. Of course I don't live in Liverpool but it is just not a feature of public life in Britain in my experience. I have of course had to deal with officious and pedantic idiots who seemed to be creating problems for irrational reasons. Maybe I was just missing the signposts?
Our "corruption" seems to me to be at a different level. It is the appointment of like minded people to public bodies and publicly funded organisations, grants to those bodies who become beholden to and cheerleaders for those in charge, in more recent times contracts offered to chums without due diligence or competitive tendering, that sort of thing. We are a long way from perfect but just plain bribes or "thank you's"? Just never seen it.
Yesterday I had a call from someone in a Local Authority regarding our tender for some major works. He wanted to have a meeting about it outside Starbucks over a coffee.. This is an example of the signpost you are talking about.
This type of thing has been happening for decades and will always continue to happen. I could give hundreds of examples of where we do work on peoples houses for nothing, provide holidays, golf memberships etc etc as well as the good old brown envelope.
There's quite a few 'brown envelope' estates round here, and they stick out a mile. Planning constraints conveniently forgotten. Some people did go to jail but not necessarily over that.
It seems one party states are the worst for this kind of thing, and it probably doesn't matter which party.
In our case it was a similar make up to Liverpool.
This kind of thing is not that common. Those areas where people can be influenced are known by developers. But this is not normal in local government.
There are too many people who would have to be involved to get away with it, it's just implausible as it would both be too risky to attempt and cost too much to be worth it. That's why it is so shocking when genuinely corrupt councils are revealed. DavidL's scenarios are much more plausible.
Not that it stops people very casually suggesting rampant brown envelope corruption of Members and officials as if it is the mmost natural thing in the world. Even on this thread we've a cast iron comment about how many are so amenable, then watered down when pressed about it to how there may not be any 'signposts' or thoughts about asking for a bribe until offered.
That is, going from 'many are amenable' to 'even if they don't ask for one, just assume they would take one'.
I've been on both sides of public sector procurement for the last ten years and have seen literally nothing dodgy, ever.
That is my experience. I've spent the last 30 years doing consultancy for public sector clients. So I have bid for literally hundreds of pieces of work and have also run procurements for public sector clients in Central and local government. In every case there are multiple people involved in the selection process, so it would be hard to sway a decision without a good reason. Having said which, one of the procurement leads on one project was subsequently prosecuted for taking a bribe from a supplier, so there are clearly checks as well. Perhaps construction is dodger than IT?
I suspect construction is a lot easier to bribe than IT. You could for instance get home improvements done on the cheap or free in ways that an IT consultancy can't provide home software...
Great analysis..... I note that 8 out of the 10 top seats are Red Wall former Labour seats - fascinating election battle in 2023/4 awaits - IMO so much indirectly hinges on Scotland's events this Summer.
Bury North and Bury South are not really Red Wall seats in that they have often been Tory held - indeed even on the basis of the 2019 result it could be said that both are shifting to Labour on the basis that the Tories had bigger majorities there in 1992 when their national lead was just 7.6%. The same would be true of High Peak and Gedling.
Indeed. Bury South is a bellwether. Voting for the winning Party in every GE since it was created in 1983. Except for 2017 when it went Labour despite no campaign there. That it is in the top 10 targets after such a heavy defeat is a sign it is drifting red. In contrast to next door Bolton.
'We have won the war, America has lost', say Taliban...
It's a similar picture across much of Afghanistan: the government controls the cities and bigger towns, but the Taliban are encircling them, with a presence in large parts of the countryside...
The government pays the salaries of staff, but the Taliban are in charge. It's a hybrid system in place across the country...
We're really not going to have our geopolitical troubles to seek over the next few years are we?
Reading this article is profoundly depressing in 2021. Civil war in Afghanistan or simply a Taliban take-over? Either way, whatever you think of the US as a global police force, without the US military there a giant backward step for ordinary Afghans seems inevitable. It looks like we are back to square one.
They forgot the list of the Three Classic Blunders
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Typical hyperbole from you.
Hysterical, attention-seeking nonsense.
A wise person once said that
FFS, get a brain of your own. Drop the partisan fanboy stuff. Please.
I do have one of my own, thank you very much, and as a result I don't need to outsource my thinking to the Spectator. I'm just not a hysteric. Nothing bad is going to happen because Boris dared to defy Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown.
Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown
Idiotic post, I'm doing no such thing. I'm criticising Boris' moronic presentation – read my posts.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Badly phrased expectation management.
Awfully phrased something or other, mishandled and bungled. He needs to engage brain before opening mouth. He is a liability.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Boris' intervention was utterly moronic. It made people think "why bother getting vaccinated then?" – just absolutely insane presentation.
As we have the highest rates of vaccine acceptance in Europe have you any evidence this has dropped as a result of these comments
Have you seen the vaccination refusal rate among ethnic minorities? We are not helping ourselves crack those cohorts with this stupid messaging.
You think telling ethnic minorities that in the past the lockdown drove down cases, but in the future they'll rise as there's no lockdown, unless they go out and get vaccinated - will drive down vaccination rates? Why?
You've spectacularly missed the point. The point is the lockdown is going so you NEED a vaccine instead. Whereas in recent months the unvaccinated have been protected by the lockdown, they won't be going forwards.
Yes, that is the point, but that the way Boris presented it makes it extremely likely to be misinterpreted. I'm surprised you can't see this.
I watched what he said live on the News. The way he presented it was crystal clear and reasonable. He made the point eloquently and expanded on it. It was the same point he, Whitty and Vallance have been saying for months now since they said there can't be a Zero Covid strategy and why.
The way others misrepresented it - and the way you were off half-cocked and driven yourself into a frenzy based on headlines others wrote - is the problem here. You're willing there to be problems where non-exist.
Not so. I want the problems to disappear, a goal hindered by a PM who doesn't think before he speaks.
The problems will disappear if people realise that the lockdown has been protecting them and so they need to get vaccinated now as lockdown is removed. Just like he said.
The problems won't disappear by doing as you want and sticking your head in the sand thinking lockdown did nothing and removing it changes nothing.
Who is doing this?
It's about the messaging – Boris' comments were always going to be misinterpreted by the media.
The secret to PR is to shape your message so the press are unable to twist your words.
Anyway, who do I have to bribe to get my second Pfizer dose? That's the important question for today.
Despite getting an invite to book my second dose, every time I log in it says no appointments are available. Meanwhile my ex-GP texts me every day reminding me to book my second dose. I wish I could. The 12 weeks is almost up.
Nightmare .....
Ty and change your location, you may need to drive to somewhere further away to get it as the provisioning system has probably allocated you a dose in London.
I live in the Lake District. I cannot get a slot here because the GP cannot get me onto the booking system. I cannot change the location. I have spent ages on the phone to both my old practice and my new one and the NHS helpline. It is Kafkaesque.
Have you tried the website directly? I just typed in my NHS number and post code
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Badly phrased expectation management.
Awfully phrased something or other, mishandled and bungled. He needs to engage brain before opening mouth. He is a liability.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Boris' intervention was utterly moronic. It made people think "why bother getting vaccinated then?" – just absolutely insane presentation.
As we have the highest rates of vaccine acceptance in Europe have you any evidence this has dropped as a result of these comments
Have you seen the vaccination refusal rate among ethnic minorities? We are not helping ourselves crack those cohorts with this stupid messaging.
You think telling ethnic minorities that in the past the lockdown drove down cases, but in the future they'll rise as there's no lockdown, unless they go out and get vaccinated - will drive down vaccination rates? Why?
You've spectacularly missed the point. The point is the lockdown is going so you NEED a vaccine instead. Whereas in recent months the unvaccinated have been protected by the lockdown, they won't be going forwards.
Yes, that is the point, but that the way Boris presented it makes it extremely likely to be misinterpreted. I'm surprised you can't see this.
I watched what he said live on the News. The way he presented it was crystal clear and reasonable. He made the point eloquently and expanded on it. It was the same point he, Whitty and Vallance have been saying for months now since they said there can't be a Zero Covid strategy and why.
The way others misrepresented it - and the way you were off half-cocked and driven yourself into a frenzy based on headlines others wrote - is the problem here. You're willing there to be problems where non-exist.
Not so. I want the problems to disappear, a goal hindered by a PM who doesn't think before he speaks.
The problems will disappear if people realise that the lockdown has been protecting them and so they need to get vaccinated now as lockdown is removed. Just like he said.
The problems won't disappear by doing as you want and sticking your head in the sand thinking lockdown did nothing and removing it changes nothing.
Who is doing this?
It's about the messaging – Boris' comments were always going to be misinterpreted by the media.
The secret to PR is to shape your message so the press are unable to twist your words.
He failed, badly.
Impossible, people have an agenda and will always twist things to suit their own agenda.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Badly phrased expectation management.
Awfully phrased something or other, mishandled and bungled. He needs to engage brain before opening mouth. He is a liability.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Boris' intervention was utterly moronic. It made people think "why bother getting vaccinated then?" – just absolutely insane presentation.
As we have the highest rates of vaccine acceptance in Europe have you any evidence this has dropped as a result of these comments
Have you seen the vaccination refusal rate among ethnic minorities? We are not helping ourselves crack those cohorts with this stupid messaging.
You think telling ethnic minorities that in the past the lockdown drove down cases, but in the future they'll rise as there's no lockdown, unless they go out and get vaccinated - will drive down vaccination rates? Why?
You've spectacularly missed the point. The point is the lockdown is going so you NEED a vaccine instead. Whereas in recent months the unvaccinated have been protected by the lockdown, they won't be going forwards.
Yes, that is the point, but that the way Boris presented it makes it extremely likely to be misinterpreted. I'm surprised you can't see this.
I watched what he said live on the News. The way he presented it was crystal clear and reasonable. He made the point eloquently and expanded on it. It was the same point he, Whitty and Vallance have been saying for months now since they said there can't be a Zero Covid strategy and why.
The way others misrepresented it - and the way you were off half-cocked and driven yourself into a frenzy based on headlines others wrote - is the problem here. You're willing there to be problems where non-exist.
Not so. I want the problems to disappear, a goal hindered by a PM who doesn't think before he speaks.
The problems will disappear if people realise that the lockdown has been protecting them and so they need to get vaccinated now as lockdown is removed. Just like he said.
The problems won't disappear by doing as you want and sticking your head in the sand thinking lockdown did nothing and removing it changes nothing.
Who is doing this?
It's about the messaging – Boris' comments were always going to be misinterpreted by the media.
The secret to PR is to shape your message so the press are unable to twist your words.
He failed, badly.
Impossible, people have an agenda and will always twist things to suit their own agenda.
What he said was correct, your hysteria is not.
Wrong.
Dead wrong.
He gifted the press an absolute open goal with the way he phrased his comments – he should know better.
'We have won the war, America has lost', say Taliban...
It's a similar picture across much of Afghanistan: the government controls the cities and bigger towns, but the Taliban are encircling them, with a presence in large parts of the countryside...
The government pays the salaries of staff, but the Taliban are in charge. It's a hybrid system in place across the country...
We're really not going to have our geopolitical troubles to seek over the next few years are we?
Reading this article is profoundly depressing in 2021. Civil war in Afghanistan or simply a Taliban take-over? Either way, whatever you think of the US as a global police force, without the US military there a giant backward step for ordinary Afghans seems inevitable. It looks like we are back to square one.
Unlike a good number of the locals, America survived the Fall of Saigon and it'll survive the Fall of Kabul. And there’s no guarantee that the Islamists will continue to look West - at some point they’ve got to notice China and the Uighurs - which, sickeningly, may be in our interest.
Every year or so my mother has popped down to the GP surgery to have her ears syringed to remove excess earwax... she rang this week to see if it was OK to visit the nurse, only to be told that it couldn’t be done and to try Boots or Specsavers... I checked online... sure enough, clearing earwax no longer a service that GPS must provide... so it’s £55 to Boots, thank you very much... it’s not a big thing, but cuts to services like these do seem penny-pinching...
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Badly phrased expectation management.
Awfully phrased something or other, mishandled and bungled. He needs to engage brain before opening mouth. He is a liability.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Boris' intervention was utterly moronic. It made people think "why bother getting vaccinated then?" – just absolutely insane presentation.
As we have the highest rates of vaccine acceptance in Europe have you any evidence this has dropped as a result of these comments
Have you seen the vaccination refusal rate among ethnic minorities? We are not helping ourselves crack those cohorts with this stupid messaging.
You think telling ethnic minorities that in the past the lockdown drove down cases, but in the future they'll rise as there's no lockdown, unless they go out and get vaccinated - will drive down vaccination rates? Why?
You've spectacularly missed the point. The point is the lockdown is going so you NEED a vaccine instead. Whereas in recent months the unvaccinated have been protected by the lockdown, they won't be going forwards.
Yes, that is the point, but that the way Boris presented it makes it extremely likely to be misinterpreted. I'm surprised you can't see this.
I watched what he said live on the News. The way he presented it was crystal clear and reasonable. He made the point eloquently and expanded on it. It was the same point he, Whitty and Vallance have been saying for months now since they said there can't be a Zero Covid strategy and why.
The way others misrepresented it - and the way you were off half-cocked and driven yourself into a frenzy based on headlines others wrote - is the problem here. You're willing there to be problems where non-exist.
Not so. I want the problems to disappear, a goal hindered by a PM who doesn't think before he speaks.
The problems will disappear if people realise that the lockdown has been protecting them and so they need to get vaccinated now as lockdown is removed. Just like he said.
The problems won't disappear by doing as you want and sticking your head in the sand thinking lockdown did nothing and removing it changes nothing.
Who is doing this?
It's about the messaging – Boris' comments were always going to be misinterpreted by the media.
The secret to PR is to shape your message so the press are unable to twist your words.
He failed, badly.
Impossible, people have an agenda and will always twist things to suit their own agenda.
What he said was correct, your hysteria is not.
Wrong.
Dead wrong.
He gifted the press an absolute open goal with the way he phrased his comments – he should know better.
His comments were the truth, the unambiguous truth, which needed to be said.
Anyway, who do I have to bribe to get my second Pfizer dose? That's the important question for today.
Despite getting an invite to book my second dose, every time I log in it says no appointments are available. Meanwhile my ex-GP texts me every day reminding me to book my second dose. I wish I could. The 12 weeks is almost up.
Nightmare .....
Ty and change your location, you may need to drive to somewhere further away to get it as the provisioning system has probably allocated you a dose in London.
I live in the Lake District. I cannot get a slot here because the GP cannot get me onto the booking system. I cannot change the location. I have spent ages on the phone to both my old practice and my new one and the NHS helpline. It is Kafkaesque.
If you got your first dose from a GP, they are supposed to arrange the second dose themselves, and you are blocked from the national NHs booking system. My mother was in the same position and she had to wait for a GP slot, and was done last week. At 89 I am sure she’s higher up the queue than you.
They have done. They have given me the link to the system which books and which I used last time to book my first dose. It checks my date of birth and then sends me to the site to book.
Then I get a screen saying: No Appointments Available and telling me to check the link every day and that I will be able to book the moment slots become available.
My brother was done yesterday and according to what he heard the next slots will be on 21st and 24th April. So am keeping my fingers crossed. But I it is a 5 hour drive down to London.
Quite why it was my ex-GP who organised my first dose despite me having already moved practice is unclear. It does not give me a lot of confidence in the system.
I would call your GP and tell him that you are just going to turn up tomorrow for your jab. Then just go down there and refuse to leave until they jab you.
My GP doesn't have any jabs. The GP in London doesn't have any jabs either. They are doing it at another location at a larger practice in Belsize Lane. If I haven't been able to book by the 21st I will get onto them.
It''s the feeling that I'm going to slip between the cracks and be forgotten that is worrying me .....
Do what we did. Book it at your old doctor, drive down and get it done.
Surge testing in Smethwick. Uncontrolled Covid immigration resulting in rivers of infection.
Typical hyperbole from you.
Hysterical, attention-seeking nonsense.
With respect you may be right but do you have a source for your rejection and is there surge testing in Smethwick
There is surge testing in Smethwick yes, but we could well do without the gleeful "uncontrolled Covid immigration resulting in rivers of infection" hysteria.
Sadly such lines are typical from this poster.
FFS - he was clearly making a joke referencing Enoch Powell's 'rivers of blood' speech!
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Badly phrased expectation management.
Awfully phrased something or other, mishandled and bungled. He needs to engage brain before opening mouth. He is a liability.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Boris' intervention was utterly moronic. It made people think "why bother getting vaccinated then?" – just absolutely insane presentation.
As we have the highest rates of vaccine acceptance in Europe have you any evidence this has dropped as a result of these comments
Have you seen the vaccination refusal rate among ethnic minorities? We are not helping ourselves crack those cohorts with this stupid messaging.
You think telling ethnic minorities that in the past the lockdown drove down cases, but in the future they'll rise as there's no lockdown, unless they go out and get vaccinated - will drive down vaccination rates? Why?
You've spectacularly missed the point. The point is the lockdown is going so you NEED a vaccine instead. Whereas in recent months the unvaccinated have been protected by the lockdown, they won't be going forwards.
Yes, that is the point, but that the way Boris presented it makes it extremely likely to be misinterpreted. I'm surprised you can't see this.
I watched what he said live on the News. The way he presented it was crystal clear and reasonable. He made the point eloquently and expanded on it. It was the same point he, Whitty and Vallance have been saying for months now since they said there can't be a Zero Covid strategy and why.
The way others misrepresented it - and the way you were off half-cocked and driven yourself into a frenzy based on headlines others wrote - is the problem here. You're willing there to be problems where non-exist.
I have to say I have some sympathy with Anabobazina here. For reasons best known to themselves (maybe as simple as bad news sells newspapers) the media seems to want to pick up a negative thread from pretty much any government utterance on its COVID strategy. So, from a messaging perspective, don't give the media any help in coming up with a negative spin on things.
He should have said:
* The lockdown as done its job in getting infections, hospitalizations and deaths down to negligible levels while we ramped up the vaccine roll-out - well done everyone, great national effort and sacrifice, eternally grateful, etc, etc * The vaccine roll out is a great success (leading the world, global Britain, etc) and is doing its job in protecting those vaccinated ... so we need to continue with that apace so no more lockdowns are necessary * Our strategy is working so well that we are announcing an accelerated easing of restrictions - we're bringing the May 17th deadline forward to April 30th ... happy bank holiday weekend everyone
Unless of course what the nudge team wanted was to throw cold water on the benefits of the vaccine roll out and keep the option of future lockdowns on the table ... in which case, job done.
'We have won the war, America has lost', say Taliban...
It's a similar picture across much of Afghanistan: the government controls the cities and bigger towns, but the Taliban are encircling them, with a presence in large parts of the countryside...
The government pays the salaries of staff, but the Taliban are in charge. It's a hybrid system in place across the country...
We're really not going to have our geopolitical troubles to seek over the next few years are we?
Reading this article is profoundly depressing in 2021. Civil war in Afghanistan or simply a Taliban take-over? Either way, whatever you think of the US as a global police force, without the US military there a giant backward step for ordinary Afghans seems inevitable. It looks like we are back to square one.
Unlike a good number of the locals, America survived the Fall of Saigon and it'll survive the Fall of Kabul. And there’s no guarantee that the Islamists will continue to look West - at some point they’ve got to notice China and the Uighurs - which, sickeningly, may be in our interest.
Vietnam was a defeat however as the aim there was to keep South Vietnam free from Communist North Vietnam, so the fall of Saigon represented that defeat.
Even if Kabul fell that would not be a defeat though as the aim of the US invasion in 2001 was not primarily to remove the Taliban, the objectives were to kill Bin Laden and remove Al Qaeda from the country which have been achieved.
Though personally I think a role can be found for the Taliban to control parts of the country while the Afghan government (which let us not forget is elected by the majority of Afghans) keeps control of Kabul and its environs
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Badly phrased expectation management.
Awfully phrased something or other, mishandled and bungled. He needs to engage brain before opening mouth. He is a liability.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Boris' intervention was utterly moronic. It made people think "why bother getting vaccinated then?" – just absolutely insane presentation.
As we have the highest rates of vaccine acceptance in Europe have you any evidence this has dropped as a result of these comments
Have you seen the vaccination refusal rate among ethnic minorities? We are not helping ourselves crack those cohorts with this stupid messaging.
You think telling ethnic minorities that in the past the lockdown drove down cases, but in the future they'll rise as there's no lockdown, unless they go out and get vaccinated - will drive down vaccination rates? Why?
You've spectacularly missed the point. The point is the lockdown is going so you NEED a vaccine instead. Whereas in recent months the unvaccinated have been protected by the lockdown, they won't be going forwards.
Yes, that is the point, but that the way Boris presented it makes it extremely likely to be misinterpreted. I'm surprised you can't see this.
I watched what he said live on the News. The way he presented it was crystal clear and reasonable. He made the point eloquently and expanded on it. It was the same point he, Whitty and Vallance have been saying for months now since they said there can't be a Zero Covid strategy and why.
The way others misrepresented it - and the way you were off half-cocked and driven yourself into a frenzy based on headlines others wrote - is the problem here. You're willing there to be problems where non-exist.
I have to say I have some sympathy with Anabobazina here. For reasons best known to themselves (maybe as simple as bad news sells newspapers) the media seems to want to pick up a negative thread from pretty much any government utterance on its COVID strategy. So, from a messaging perspective, don't give the media any help in coming up with a negative spin on things.
He should have said:
* The lockdown as done its job in getting infections, hospitalizations and deaths down to negligible levels while we ramped up the vaccine roll-out - well done everyone, great national effort and sacrifice, eternally grateful, etc, etc * The vaccine roll out is a great success (leading the world, global Britain, etc) and is doing its job in protecting those vaccinated ... so we need to continue with that apace so no more lockdowns are necessary * Our strategy is working so well that we are announcing an accelerated easing of restrictions - we're bringing the May 17th deadline forward to April 30th ... happy bank holiday weekend everyone
Unless of course what the nudge team wanted was to throw cold water on the benefits of the vaccine roll out and keep the option of future lockdowns on the table ... in which case, job done.
That's pretty much exactly what he said though - while preparing people for the fact there will be more cases (which there will be) but people won't get sick or die from those because of the vaccine. Same as has been government strategy since Zero Covid was wisely rejected.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Typical hyperbole from you.
Hysterical, attention-seeking nonsense.
A wise person once said that
FFS, get a brain of your own. Drop the partisan fanboy stuff. Please.
I do have one of my own, thank you very much, and as a result I don't need to outsource my thinking to the Spectator. I'm just not a hysteric. Nothing bad is going to happen because Boris dared to defy Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown.
Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown
Idiotic post, I'm doing no such thing. I'm criticising Boris' moronic presentation – read my posts.
I do read your posts, and I understand what they actually mean. You're so obsessed with our never entering lockdown ever again that you think just mentioning the subject in public makes it more likely to happen; but it doesn't. We locked down because we had to, and if we ever have to again, we'll do so in the future. I hope it doesn't happen just as much as you do, but them's the facts.
People have quoted Boris' words to you, which say that the public have to learn to accept more cases as we unlock; the posters on here who have the most epidemiological knowledge pointed out at the time that there was nothing wrong with the statement, not least because we're still some distance from full herd immunity; but you still think disaster is coming because the PM acknowledged scientific facts in a balanced way. I'm not trying to be harsh, but surely you can see that your perspective isn't entirely rational.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Badly phrased expectation management.
Awfully phrased something or other, mishandled and bungled. He needs to engage brain before opening mouth. He is a liability.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Boris' intervention was utterly moronic. It made people think "why bother getting vaccinated then?" – just absolutely insane presentation.
As we have the highest rates of vaccine acceptance in Europe have you any evidence this has dropped as a result of these comments
Have you seen the vaccination refusal rate among ethnic minorities? We are not helping ourselves crack those cohorts with this stupid messaging.
You think telling ethnic minorities that in the past the lockdown drove down cases, but in the future they'll rise as there's no lockdown, unless they go out and get vaccinated - will drive down vaccination rates? Why?
You've spectacularly missed the point. The point is the lockdown is going so you NEED a vaccine instead. Whereas in recent months the unvaccinated have been protected by the lockdown, they won't be going forwards.
Yes, that is the point, but that the way Boris presented it makes it extremely likely to be misinterpreted. I'm surprised you can't see this.
I watched what he said live on the News. The way he presented it was crystal clear and reasonable. He made the point eloquently and expanded on it. It was the same point he, Whitty and Vallance have been saying for months now since they said there can't be a Zero Covid strategy and why.
The way others misrepresented it - and the way you were off half-cocked and driven yourself into a frenzy based on headlines others wrote - is the problem here. You're willing there to be problems where non-exist.
Not so. I want the problems to disappear, a goal hindered by a PM who doesn't think before he speaks.
The problems will disappear if people realise that the lockdown has been protecting them and so they need to get vaccinated now as lockdown is removed. Just like he said.
The problems won't disappear by doing as you want and sticking your head in the sand thinking lockdown did nothing and removing it changes nothing.
Who is doing this?
It's about the messaging – Boris' comments were always going to be misinterpreted by the media.
The secret to PR is to shape your message so the press are unable to twist your words.
He failed, badly.
Impossible, people have an agenda and will always twist things to suit their own agenda.
What he said was correct, your hysteria is not.
Wrong.
Dead wrong.
He gifted the press an absolute open goal with the way he phrased his comments – he should know better.
His comments were the truth, the unambiguous truth, which needed to be said.
How would you have rephrased it?
"Most of the early reduction in cases was due to lockdown, as we now open up, the vaccines will do more of that work. Get your jab."
I doubt that Starmer's 'Tory sleaze' redux (is Mandelson advising him?) will go anywhere. The transplant from the 1990s doesn't fit the world of the 2020s.
Why do you think lining your pockets with taxpayers money is ok in the 2020s?
Because the expected standards for conduct in public life are massively lower.
Latterly I've been struck by how many officials of all stripes in the UK are amenable to bit of fragrant grease - as the Chinese say.
That's interesting.
Can you give us a list of say 20 examples you have encountered personally in the UK in the last 3 years?
I am 59 and I cannot recall a single incident in my adult life where any official has ever indicated to me that some "fragrant grease" might aid the process along. Of course I don't live in Liverpool but it is just not a feature of public life in Britain in my experience. I have of course had to deal with officious and pedantic idiots who seemed to be creating problems for irrational reasons. Maybe I was just missing the signposts?
Our "corruption" seems to me to be at a different level. It is the appointment of like minded people to public bodies and publicly funded organisations, grants to those bodies who become beholden to and cheerleaders for those in charge, in more recent times contracts offered to chums without due diligence or competitive tendering, that sort of thing. We are a long way from perfect but just plain bribes or "thank you's"? Just never seen it.
Yesterday I had a call from someone in a Local Authority regarding our tender for some major works. He wanted to have a meeting about it outside Starbucks over a coffee.. This is an example of the signpost you are talking about.
This type of thing has been happening for decades and will always continue to happen. I could give hundreds of examples of where we do work on peoples houses for nothing, provide holidays, golf memberships etc etc as well as the good old brown envelope.
There's quite a few 'brown envelope' estates round here, and they stick out a mile. Planning constraints conveniently forgotten. Some people did go to jail but not necessarily over that.
It seems one party states are the worst for this kind of thing, and it probably doesn't matter which party.
In our case it was a similar make up to Liverpool.
This kind of thing is not that common. Those areas where people can be influenced are known by developers. But this is not normal in local government.
There are too many people who would have to be involved to get away with it, it's just implausible as it would both be too risky to attempt and cost too much to be worth it. That's why it is so shocking when genuinely corrupt councils are revealed. DavidL's scenarios are much more plausible.
Not that it stops people very casually suggesting rampant brown envelope corruption of Members and officials as if it is the mmost natural thing in the world. Even on this thread we've a cast iron comment about how many are so amenable, then watered down when pressed about it to how there may not be any 'signposts' or thoughts about asking for a bribe until offered.
That is, going from 'many are amenable' to 'even if they don't ask for one, just assume they would take one'.
I've been on both sides of public sector procurement for the last ten years and have seen literally nothing dodgy, ever.
As said, too easy to throw accusations... That's why im always a bit hesitant to go all in when i hear some supposed scandal. There might be breaches of conduct that are questionable re Nolan principles, but corruption and bribery are criminal matters and it wont be for the prime minister to set up an enquiry or be in anyway involved it would be the police.
Anyway, who do I have to bribe to get my second Pfizer dose? That's the important question for today.
Despite getting an invite to book my second dose, every time I log in it says no appointments are available. Meanwhile my ex-GP texts me every day reminding me to book my second dose. I wish I could. The 12 weeks is almost up.
Nightmare .....
Ty and change your location, you may need to drive to somewhere further away to get it as the provisioning system has probably allocated you a dose in London.
I live in the Lake District. I cannot get a slot here because the GP cannot get me onto the booking system. I cannot change the location. I have spent ages on the phone to both my old practice and my new one and the NHS helpline. It is Kafkaesque.
Have you tried the website directly? I just typed in my NHS number and post code
It does not recognise me if I put in my postcode. If I put in my NHS number it says that I am not eligible and need to go back to my GP - or my ex-GP.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Typical hyperbole from you.
Hysterical, attention-seeking nonsense.
A wise person once said that
FFS, get a brain of your own. Drop the partisan fanboy stuff. Please.
I do have one of my own, thank you very much, and as a result I don't need to outsource my thinking to the Spectator. I'm just not a hysteric. Nothing bad is going to happen because Boris dared to defy Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown.
Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown
Idiotic post, I'm doing no such thing. I'm criticising Boris' moronic presentation – read my posts.
I do read your posts, and I understand what they actually mean. You're so obsessed with our never entering lockdown ever again that you think just mentioning the subject in public makes it more likely to happen; but it doesn't. We locked down because we had to, and if we ever have to again, we'll do so in the future. I hope it doesn't happen just as much as you do, but them's the facts.
People have quoted Boris' words to you, which say that the public have to learn to accept more cases as we unlock; the posters on here who have the most epidemiological knowledge pointed out at the time that there was nothing wrong with the statement, not least because we're still some distance from full herd immunity; but you still think disaster is coming because the PM acknowledged scientific facts in a balanced way. I'm not trying to be harsh, but surely you can see that your perspective isn't entirely rational.
Wrong.
His presentation of it was terrible – I'm not talking about 'epidemiological knowledge', I am talking about messaging.
You clearly know nothing about PR, is my conclusion.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Badly phrased expectation management.
Awfully phrased something or other, mishandled and bungled. He needs to engage brain before opening mouth. He is a liability.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Boris' intervention was utterly moronic. It made people think "why bother getting vaccinated then?" – just absolutely insane presentation.
As we have the highest rates of vaccine acceptance in Europe have you any evidence this has dropped as a result of these comments
Have you seen the vaccination refusal rate among ethnic minorities? We are not helping ourselves crack those cohorts with this stupid messaging.
You think telling ethnic minorities that in the past the lockdown drove down cases, but in the future they'll rise as there's no lockdown, unless they go out and get vaccinated - will drive down vaccination rates? Why?
You've spectacularly missed the point. The point is the lockdown is going so you NEED a vaccine instead. Whereas in recent months the unvaccinated have been protected by the lockdown, they won't be going forwards.
Yes, that is the point, but that the way Boris presented it makes it extremely likely to be misinterpreted. I'm surprised you can't see this.
I watched what he said live on the News. The way he presented it was crystal clear and reasonable. He made the point eloquently and expanded on it. It was the same point he, Whitty and Vallance have been saying for months now since they said there can't be a Zero Covid strategy and why.
The way others misrepresented it - and the way you were off half-cocked and driven yourself into a frenzy based on headlines others wrote - is the problem here. You're willing there to be problems where non-exist.
Not so. I want the problems to disappear, a goal hindered by a PM who doesn't think before he speaks.
The problems will disappear if people realise that the lockdown has been protecting them and so they need to get vaccinated now as lockdown is removed. Just like he said.
The problems won't disappear by doing as you want and sticking your head in the sand thinking lockdown did nothing and removing it changes nothing.
Who is doing this?
It's about the messaging – Boris' comments were always going to be misinterpreted by the media.
The secret to PR is to shape your message so the press are unable to twist your words.
He failed, badly.
Impossible, people have an agenda and will always twist things to suit their own agenda.
What he said was correct, your hysteria is not.
Wrong.
Dead wrong.
He gifted the press an absolute open goal with the way he phrased his comments – he should know better.
His comments were the truth, the unambiguous truth, which needed to be said.
How would you have rephrased it?
"Most of the early reduction in cases was due to lockdown, as we now open up, the vaccines will do more of that work. Get your jab."
'We have won the war, America has lost', say Taliban...
It's a similar picture across much of Afghanistan: the government controls the cities and bigger towns, but the Taliban are encircling them, with a presence in large parts of the countryside...
The government pays the salaries of staff, but the Taliban are in charge. It's a hybrid system in place across the country...
We're really not going to have our geopolitical troubles to seek over the next few years are we?
Reading this article is profoundly depressing in 2021. Civil war in Afghanistan or simply a Taliban take-over? Either way, whatever you think of the US as a global police force, without the US military there a giant backward step for ordinary Afghans seems inevitable. It looks like we are back to square one.
Unlike a good number of the locals, America survived the Fall of Saigon and it'll survive the Fall of Kabul. And there’s no guarantee that the Islamists will continue to look West - at some point they’ve got to notice China and the Uighurs - which, sickeningly, may be in our interest.
The Islamists don't give two hoots about the Uighurs. When their plight was raised at the UN, most Islamic countries - all those who get upset at cartoons and books disrespectful of Islam in the West - sided with China.
Remember that so-called ummah, used as justification for Muslims getting upset at what is done to their co-religionists ..... some might think that it's just a crock of shit.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Typical hyperbole from you.
Hysterical, attention-seeking nonsense.
A wise person once said that
FFS, get a brain of your own. Drop the partisan fanboy stuff. Please.
I do have one of my own, thank you very much, and as a result I don't need to outsource my thinking to the Spectator. I'm just not a hysteric. Nothing bad is going to happen because Boris dared to defy Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown.
Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown
Idiotic post, I'm doing no such thing. I'm criticising Boris' moronic presentation – read my posts.
I do read your posts, and I understand what they actually mean. You're so obsessed with our never entering lockdown ever again that you think just mentioning the subject in public makes it more likely to happen; but it doesn't. We locked down because we had to, and if we ever have to again, we'll do so in the future. I hope it doesn't happen just as much as you do, but them's the facts.
People have quoted Boris' words to you, which say that the public have to learn to accept more cases as we unlock; the posters on here who have the most epidemiological knowledge pointed out at the time that there was nothing wrong with the statement, not least because we're still some distance from full herd immunity; but you still think disaster is coming because the PM acknowledged scientific facts in a balanced way. I'm not trying to be harsh, but surely you can see that your perspective isn't entirely rational.
Wrong.
His presentation of it was terrible – I'm not talking about 'epidemiological knowledge', I am talking about messaging.
You clearly know nothing about PR, is my conclusion.
To be precise, your conclusion is that Boris knows nothing about PR, which is provably untrue.
'We have won the war, America has lost', say Taliban...
It's a similar picture across much of Afghanistan: the government controls the cities and bigger towns, but the Taliban are encircling them, with a presence in large parts of the countryside...
The government pays the salaries of staff, but the Taliban are in charge. It's a hybrid system in place across the country...
We're really not going to have our geopolitical troubles to seek over the next few years are we?
Reading this article is profoundly depressing in 2021. Civil war in Afghanistan or simply a Taliban take-over? Either way, whatever you think of the US as a global police force, without the US military there a giant backward step for ordinary Afghans seems inevitable. It looks like we are back to square one.
Unlike a good number of the locals, America survived the Fall of Saigon and it'll survive the Fall of Kabul. And there’s no guarantee that the Islamists will continue to look West - at some point they’ve got to notice China and the Uighurs - which, sickeningly, may be in our interest.
Vietnam was a defeat however as the aim there was to keep South Vietnam free from Communist North Vietnam, so the fall of Saigon represented that defeat.
Even if Kabul fell that would not be a defeat though as the aim of the US invasion in 2001 was not primarily to remove the Taliban, the objectives were to kill Bin Laden and remove Al Qaeda from the country which have been achieved.
Though personally I think a role can be found for the Taliban to control parts of the country while the Afghan government (which let us not forget is elected by the majority of Afghans) keeps control of Kabul and its environs
Al-Qaeda were a completely spent force in Afghanistan after the Battle of Shahi-Kot in 2002. After that they withdrew to the FATA in Pakistan. If eliminating AQ was the victory condition why were the US still there 19 years later?
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Badly phrased expectation management.
Awfully phrased something or other, mishandled and bungled. He needs to engage brain before opening mouth. He is a liability.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Boris' intervention was utterly moronic. It made people think "why bother getting vaccinated then?" – just absolutely insane presentation.
As we have the highest rates of vaccine acceptance in Europe have you any evidence this has dropped as a result of these comments
Have you seen the vaccination refusal rate among ethnic minorities? We are not helping ourselves crack those cohorts with this stupid messaging.
You think telling ethnic minorities that in the past the lockdown drove down cases, but in the future they'll rise as there's no lockdown, unless they go out and get vaccinated - will drive down vaccination rates? Why?
You've spectacularly missed the point. The point is the lockdown is going so you NEED a vaccine instead. Whereas in recent months the unvaccinated have been protected by the lockdown, they won't be going forwards.
Yes, that is the point, but that the way Boris presented it makes it extremely likely to be misinterpreted. I'm surprised you can't see this.
I watched what he said live on the News. The way he presented it was crystal clear and reasonable. He made the point eloquently and expanded on it. It was the same point he, Whitty and Vallance have been saying for months now since they said there can't be a Zero Covid strategy and why.
The way others misrepresented it - and the way you were off half-cocked and driven yourself into a frenzy based on headlines others wrote - is the problem here. You're willing there to be problems where non-exist.
Not so. I want the problems to disappear, a goal hindered by a PM who doesn't think before he speaks.
The problems will disappear if people realise that the lockdown has been protecting them and so they need to get vaccinated now as lockdown is removed. Just like he said.
The problems won't disappear by doing as you want and sticking your head in the sand thinking lockdown did nothing and removing it changes nothing.
Who is doing this?
It's about the messaging – Boris' comments were always going to be misinterpreted by the media.
The secret to PR is to shape your message so the press are unable to twist your words.
He failed, badly.
Impossible, people have an agenda and will always twist things to suit their own agenda.
What he said was correct, your hysteria is not.
Wrong.
Dead wrong.
He gifted the press an absolute open goal with the way he phrased his comments – he should know better.
His comments were the truth, the unambiguous truth, which needed to be said.
How would you have rephrased it?
"Most of the early reduction in cases was due to lockdown, as we now open up, the vaccines will do more of that work. Get your jab."
He said that.
He didn't, and when he alluded to it, he had already prefaced it with this:
"But it is very, very important for everybody to understand that the reduction in these numbers - in hospitalisations and in deaths and infections - has not been achieved by the vaccination programme."
That is also not entirely true, as some of the reduction IS due to the vaccines.
When you say those words, you really ought to know what the press will do with it.
I have to say I have some sympathy with Anabobazina here. For reasons best known to themselves (maybe as simple as bad news sells newspapers) the media seems to want to pick up a negative thread from pretty much any government utterance on its COVID strategy. So, from a messaging perspective, don't give the media any help in coming up with a negative spin on things.
He should have said:
* The lockdown as done its job in getting infections, hospitalizations and deaths down to negligible levels while we ramped up the vaccine roll-out - well done everyone, great national effort and sacrifice, eternally grateful, etc, etc * The vaccine roll out is a great success (leading the world, global Britain, etc) and is doing its job in protecting those vaccinated ... so we need to continue with that apace so no more lockdowns are necessary * Our strategy is working so well that we are announcing an accelerated easing of restrictions - we're bringing the May 17th deadline forward to April 30th ... happy bank holiday weekend everyone
Unless of course what the nudge team wanted was to throw cold water on the benefits of the vaccine roll out and keep the option of future lockdowns on the table ... in which case, job done.
The issue is that the timelines are in place so you can gauge the impact of the previous set of changes before the next set kick off.
Which is why everything is set on a Monday 4+ weeks apart because you need 3 weeks to see what the impact was.
And yes that does mean that things are going slower than a lot of people want but that is sadly unavoidable
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Badly phrased expectation management.
Awfully phrased something or other, mishandled and bungled. He needs to engage brain before opening mouth. He is a liability.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Boris' intervention was utterly moronic. It made people think "why bother getting vaccinated then?" – just absolutely insane presentation.
As we have the highest rates of vaccine acceptance in Europe have you any evidence this has dropped as a result of these comments
Have you seen the vaccination refusal rate among ethnic minorities? We are not helping ourselves crack those cohorts with this stupid messaging.
You think telling ethnic minorities that in the past the lockdown drove down cases, but in the future they'll rise as there's no lockdown, unless they go out and get vaccinated - will drive down vaccination rates? Why?
You've spectacularly missed the point. The point is the lockdown is going so you NEED a vaccine instead. Whereas in recent months the unvaccinated have been protected by the lockdown, they won't be going forwards.
Yes, that is the point, but that the way Boris presented it makes it extremely likely to be misinterpreted. I'm surprised you can't see this.
I watched what he said live on the News. The way he presented it was crystal clear and reasonable. He made the point eloquently and expanded on it. It was the same point he, Whitty and Vallance have been saying for months now since they said there can't be a Zero Covid strategy and why.
The way others misrepresented it - and the way you were off half-cocked and driven yourself into a frenzy based on headlines others wrote - is the problem here. You're willing there to be problems where non-exist.
I have to say I have some sympathy with Anabobazina here. For reasons best known to themselves (maybe as simple as bad news sells newspapers) the media seems to want to pick up a negative thread from pretty much any government utterance on its COVID strategy. So, from a messaging perspective, don't give the media any help in coming up with a negative spin on things.
He should have said:
* The lockdown as done its job in getting infections, hospitalizations and deaths down to negligible levels while we ramped up the vaccine roll-out - well done everyone, great national effort and sacrifice, eternally grateful, etc, etc * The vaccine roll out is a great success (leading the world, global Britain, etc) and is doing its job in protecting those vaccinated ... so we need to continue with that apace so no more lockdowns are necessary * Our strategy is working so well that we are announcing an accelerated easing of restrictions - we're bringing the May 17th deadline forward to April 30th ... happy bank holiday weekend everyone
Unless of course what the nudge team wanted was to throw cold water on the benefits of the vaccine roll out and keep the option of future lockdowns on the table ... in which case, job done.
That's pretty much exactly what he said though - while preparing people for the fact there will be more cases (which there will be) but people won't get sick or die from those because of the vaccine. Same as has been government strategy since Zero Covid was wisely rejected.
Maybe so Philip, but that's not the message that most people will have heard, albeit though the distorting filter of the media. The government has been nowhere near explicit enough nor unequivocal enough in setting out its objectives for a COVID end state. I don't think the way the government is acting or communicating suggests that it has rejected zero-COVID - quite the reverse.
We are still being bombarded with ludicrously terrifying radio ads that make it sound like the end of the world is nigh. It needs to change its communications strategy now to facilitate a return to normality.
'We have won the war, America has lost', say Taliban...
It's a similar picture across much of Afghanistan: the government controls the cities and bigger towns, but the Taliban are encircling them, with a presence in large parts of the countryside...
The government pays the salaries of staff, but the Taliban are in charge. It's a hybrid system in place across the country...
We're really not going to have our geopolitical troubles to seek over the next few years are we?
Reading this article is profoundly depressing in 2021. Civil war in Afghanistan or simply a Taliban take-over? Either way, whatever you think of the US as a global police force, without the US military there a giant backward step for ordinary Afghans seems inevitable. It looks like we are back to square one.
Unlike a good number of the locals, America survived the Fall of Saigon and it'll survive the Fall of Kabul. And there’s no guarantee that the Islamists will continue to look West - at some point they’ve got to notice China and the Uighurs - which, sickeningly, may be in our interest.
The Islamists don't give two hoots about the Uighurs. When their plight was raised at the UN, most Islamic countries - all those who get upset at cartoons and books disrespectful of Islam in the West - sided with China.
Remember that so-called ummah, used as justification for Muslims getting upset at what is done to their co-religionists ..... some might think that it's just a crock of shit.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Typical hyperbole from you.
Hysterical, attention-seeking nonsense.
A wise person once said that
FFS, get a brain of your own. Drop the partisan fanboy stuff. Please.
I do have one of my own, thank you very much, and as a result I don't need to outsource my thinking to the Spectator. I'm just not a hysteric. Nothing bad is going to happen because Boris dared to defy Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown.
Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown
Idiotic post, I'm doing no such thing. I'm criticising Boris' moronic presentation – read my posts.
I do read your posts, and I understand what they actually mean. You're so obsessed with our never entering lockdown ever again that you think just mentioning the subject in public makes it more likely to happen; but it doesn't. We locked down because we had to, and if we ever have to again, we'll do so in the future. I hope it doesn't happen just as much as you do, but them's the facts.
People have quoted Boris' words to you, which say that the public have to learn to accept more cases as we unlock; the posters on here who have the most epidemiological knowledge pointed out at the time that there was nothing wrong with the statement, not least because we're still some distance from full herd immunity; but you still think disaster is coming because the PM acknowledged scientific facts in a balanced way. I'm not trying to be harsh, but surely you can see that your perspective isn't entirely rational.
Wrong.
His presentation of it was terrible – I'm not talking about 'epidemiological knowledge', I am talking about messaging.
You clearly know nothing about PR, is my conclusion.
To be precise, your conclusion is that Boris knows nothing about PR, which is provably untrue.
He might know about it, but he cocks it up too frequently by failing to engage brain before opening mouth.
"But it is very, very important for everybody to understand that the reduction in these numbers - in hospitalisations and in deaths and infections - has NOT been achieved by the vaccination programme."
Sadly, this needless, moronic presentation has set the tone for the whole week.
"Wimbledon, Carshalton, Cheltenham, Winchester and Cheadle – all of which look very vulnerable and where Davey’s party has been working very hard."
a) It's Davey, the guy who was standing way behind Starmer when charisma was being doled out.
b) You think the Tories haven't been working those seats hard?
c) Rejoin is a very different thing to sell to Remain that gave them the bounce in those seats in 2019. Especially when Rejoin will come with a whole bunch of things we will have give up. Like membership of trade organisations that actually want us.
d) Four more years of incumbency.
The love of the EU and the antipathy towards Boris is far, far different on pb.com than that amongst the wider electorate.
Incumbency always helps but there's plenty of evidence that it peaks after the first re-election. Eventually floating voters start to move from "You've done quite well, let's give you another shot" to "You were pretty good but it's time for a change." Other things being equal, of course.
An important unknown is whether any kind of Lab/LD/Green understanding is reached. All it would take would be quietly shelving the Lab/LD rule that parties need to stand in every seat. Local parties will do the rest ("We give the GE a miss, you give us a clear run in 4 council seats"). As Sean F often observes, voters don't necessarily follow suit, but around 50-60% of them do, judging by multi-member wards where parties aren't putting up full slates (I'm a beneficiary of that)..
Didnt LDs and Green do that in 2019? ended in tears I think...........
That’s overstating things - that it didn’t deliver much benefit is different from ending in tears. There’s no evidence that it did any harm.
Yes - two small parties helping each other doesn't produce many seats, and may not be worth the irritation to rival activists. But unlike the Greens (except in a tiny handful of seats), the LDs have a number of seats that they could easily win with no Labour candidate, and potential Labour gains with that sort of nudge are all over the place.
It needs a constituency-based quid pro quo in council seats, though. Constituency parties are not up for standing down to benefit somewhere else - perhaps they should be, but they're not. However, a small party offered a chance at say 4 council seats vs 0 will be very tempted.
A Tory weakness is that there are no parties in sight which they could do that sort of deal with.
In terms of deals I don't think there will be anything formal but in almost all of the 92 seats where the LDs are challenger LAB isn't competitive. Same goes for the LDs in all other seats.
It is in Starmer's interest for the Tories to lose as many seats as possible because his best hope of getting to Number 10 is as lead party in a minority government. He needs the LDs, Greens and PC to do well where LAB cannot win.
Not true of seats such as Wimbledon, Finchley and Cities of London & Westminster. Wimbledon was Labour held 1997 - 2005 and the party performed strongly there in 2017. As such , it will be a three way contest next time. Special - and likely one off - factors weakened Labour in Finchley and Cities of London & Westminster last time. Carshalton might also be interesting, in that until the 1980s it was Tory Labour contest with Labour very competitive at both 1974 elections. For many years there the LDs have benefitted from Labour tactical voting, but having now lost the seat such voters may return to Labour. Portsmouth South comes to mind!
'We have won the war, America has lost', say Taliban...
It's a similar picture across much of Afghanistan: the government controls the cities and bigger towns, but the Taliban are encircling them, with a presence in large parts of the countryside...
The government pays the salaries of staff, but the Taliban are in charge. It's a hybrid system in place across the country...
We're really not going to have our geopolitical troubles to seek over the next few years are we?
Reading this article is profoundly depressing in 2021. Civil war in Afghanistan or simply a Taliban take-over? Either way, whatever you think of the US as a global police force, without the US military there a giant backward step for ordinary Afghans seems inevitable. It looks like we are back to square one.
Unlike a good number of the locals, America survived the Fall of Saigon and it'll survive the Fall of Kabul. And there’s no guarantee that the Islamists will continue to look West - at some point they’ve got to notice China and the Uighurs - which, sickeningly, may be in our interest.
Vietnam was a defeat however as the aim there was to keep South Vietnam free from Communist North Vietnam, so the fall of Saigon represented that defeat.
Even if Kabul fell that would not be a defeat though as the aim of the US invasion in 2001 was not primarily to remove the Taliban, the objectives were to kill Bin Laden and remove Al Qaeda from the country which have been achieved.
Though personally I think a role can be found for the Taliban to control parts of the country while the Afghan government (which let us not forget is elected by the majority of Afghans) keeps control of Kabul and its environs
Al-Qaeda were a completely spent force in Afghanistan after the Battle of Shahi-Kot in 2002. After that they withdrew to the FATA in Pakistan. If eliminating AQ was the victory condition why were the US still there 19 years later?
Bin Laden was only killed in 2011.
They then continued the military presence to train up Afghan forces to maintain security but that was not the original aim of the invasion which was to remove Al Qaeda from the country.
The main symbolism of Kabul falling to the Taliban would be to be disastrous imagery for the Biden-Harris administration as the Iranian hostages disaster was for the Carter administration, leading to Reagan's 1980 win.
Ford was also beaten in 1976 by Carter after the fall of Saigon on his watch
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Typical hyperbole from you.
Hysterical, attention-seeking nonsense.
A wise person once said that
FFS, get a brain of your own. Drop the partisan fanboy stuff. Please.
I do have one of my own, thank you very much, and as a result I don't need to outsource my thinking to the Spectator. I'm just not a hysteric. Nothing bad is going to happen because Boris dared to defy Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown.
Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown
Idiotic post, I'm doing no such thing. I'm criticising Boris' moronic presentation – read my posts.
I do read your posts, and I understand what they actually mean. You're so obsessed with our never entering lockdown ever again that you think just mentioning the subject in public makes it more likely to happen; but it doesn't. We locked down because we had to, and if we ever have to again, we'll do so in the future. I hope it doesn't happen just as much as you do, but them's the facts.
People have quoted Boris' words to you, which say that the public have to learn to accept more cases as we unlock; the posters on here who have the most epidemiological knowledge pointed out at the time that there was nothing wrong with the statement, not least because we're still some distance from full herd immunity; but you still think disaster is coming because the PM acknowledged scientific facts in a balanced way. I'm not trying to be harsh, but surely you can see that your perspective isn't entirely rational.
Wrong.
His presentation of it was terrible – I'm not talking about 'epidemiological knowledge', I am talking about messaging.
You clearly know nothing about PR, is my conclusion.
To be precise, your conclusion is that Boris knows nothing about PR, which is provably untrue.
He might know about it, but he cocks it up too frequently by failing to engage brain before opening mouth.
"But it is very, very important for everybody to understand that the reduction in these numbers - in hospitalisations and in deaths and infections - has NOT been achieved by the vaccination programme."
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Typical hyperbole from you.
Hysterical, attention-seeking nonsense.
A wise person once said that
FFS, get a brain of your own. Drop the partisan fanboy stuff. Please.
I do have one of my own, thank you very much, and as a result I don't need to outsource my thinking to the Spectator. I'm just not a hysteric. Nothing bad is going to happen because Boris dared to defy Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown.
Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown
Idiotic post, I'm doing no such thing. I'm criticising Boris' moronic presentation – read my posts.
I do read your posts, and I understand what they actually mean. You're so obsessed with our never entering lockdown ever again that you think just mentioning the subject in public makes it more likely to happen; but it doesn't. We locked down because we had to, and if we ever have to again, we'll do so in the future. I hope it doesn't happen just as much as you do, but them's the facts.
People have quoted Boris' words to you, which say that the public have to learn to accept more cases as we unlock; the posters on here who have the most epidemiological knowledge pointed out at the time that there was nothing wrong with the statement, not least because we're still some distance from full herd immunity; but you still think disaster is coming because the PM acknowledged scientific facts in a balanced way. I'm not trying to be harsh, but surely you can see that your perspective isn't entirely rational.
Wrong.
His presentation of it was terrible – I'm not talking about 'epidemiological knowledge', I am talking about messaging.
You clearly know nothing about PR, is my conclusion.
To be precise, your conclusion is that Boris knows nothing about PR, which is provably untrue.
Boris, do not talk about yourself in the 3rd person...
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Typical hyperbole from you.
Hysterical, attention-seeking nonsense.
A wise person once said that
FFS, get a brain of your own. Drop the partisan fanboy stuff. Please.
I do have one of my own, thank you very much, and as a result I don't need to outsource my thinking to the Spectator. I'm just not a hysteric. Nothing bad is going to happen because Boris dared to defy Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown.
Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown
Idiotic post, I'm doing no such thing. I'm criticising Boris' moronic presentation – read my posts.
I do read your posts, and I understand what they actually mean. You're so obsessed with our never entering lockdown ever again that you think just mentioning the subject in public makes it more likely to happen; but it doesn't. We locked down because we had to, and if we ever have to again, we'll do so in the future. I hope it doesn't happen just as much as you do, but them's the facts.
People have quoted Boris' words to you, which say that the public have to learn to accept more cases as we unlock; the posters on here who have the most epidemiological knowledge pointed out at the time that there was nothing wrong with the statement, not least because we're still some distance from full herd immunity; but you still think disaster is coming because the PM acknowledged scientific facts in a balanced way. I'm not trying to be harsh, but surely you can see that your perspective isn't entirely rational.
Wrong.
His presentation of it was terrible – I'm not talking about 'epidemiological knowledge', I am talking about messaging.
You clearly know nothing about PR, is my conclusion.
To be precise, your conclusion is that Boris knows nothing about PR, which is provably untrue.
He might know about it, but he cocks it up too frequently by failing to engage brain before opening mouth.
"But it is very, very important for everybody to understand that the reduction in these numbers - in hospitalisations and in deaths and infections - has NOT been achieved by the vaccination programme."
Which is 100% correct, yes.
Ridiculous.
Boris happily ignores "correct" things when it suits to send a better message on a regular basis.
Good news everyone. I’ve been offered, and have accepted, a role as a paralegal at a fairly prestigious commercial law firm in the North of England in their engineering and construction team.
The salary is pants but it’s a great opportunity and the team seems lovely — I hope it pays off.
Very late to the thread but so pleased to be greeted by this news. I'm delighted for you, @Gallowgate, and wish you all the very best.
And when I added my Like that brought the total to 39. Never seen so many before.
Very rough rule of thumb: 0.1%-0.2% CFR is the point where that happens. The cases by age and sex do distribute enough for us to wet-finger a guesstimate that 0.1-0.2% of those testing positive should die, on average, within a month of any random event by all causes. So that's 5-10 deaths per day; we're currently running at just under 30. Getting there, but not quite there yet. (We can cross check after the fact by comparing the deaths-within-60-days metric and seeing if that runs at very close to double the deaths-within-28-days metric from 32 days earlier; if it does, that provides further evidence to support that the deaths-from-covid are statistically close to zero by then.
Good reasoning. That would mean that we're possibly already at the point where the effect is beginning to distort the figures.
The virus is transposing to younger members of the population though and with cases still decreasing won't the "background" fatalities also decrease ?
Very good point, so I took a look this lunchtime. From the recent five-year-average up until 2019 (and 2019 was very close to that average), we would expect a randomly selected member of the population to die during a randomly selected 28 day window of time about 0.07% of the time. Due to the slight age skew on cases, I rounded that up to "between 0.1% and 0.2%" as a baseline, but, as you say, this is massively dependent on who is getting cases, age-wise.
So, we can compare Malmesbury's excellent CFR graphs to the background fatality rate in a random 28 day window for members of that age group (taken from the ONS stats for 2019 in England and Wales).
From top to bottom lines on the graph
Age 85+ (blue line): base rate of 1.12% (currently c. 10%) Age 75-84 (orange line): base rate of 0.33% (currently c. 7%) Age 65-74 (grey line): base rate of 0.11% (currently c. 2%) Age 45-64 (yellow line): base rate of 0.03% Age 15-44 (light blue): base rate of 0.005% Age 0-14 (green line): base rate of 0.0025%
So we're maybe not quite as close as I'd thought we were to the base rate.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Typical hyperbole from you.
Hysterical, attention-seeking nonsense.
A wise person once said that
FFS, get a brain of your own. Drop the partisan fanboy stuff. Please.
I do have one of my own, thank you very much, and as a result I don't need to outsource my thinking to the Spectator. I'm just not a hysteric. Nothing bad is going to happen because Boris dared to defy Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown.
Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown
Idiotic post, I'm doing no such thing. I'm criticising Boris' moronic presentation – read my posts.
I do read your posts, and I understand what they actually mean. You're so obsessed with our never entering lockdown ever again that you think just mentioning the subject in public makes it more likely to happen; but it doesn't. We locked down because we had to, and if we ever have to again, we'll do so in the future. I hope it doesn't happen just as much as you do, but them's the facts.
People have quoted Boris' words to you, which say that the public have to learn to accept more cases as we unlock; the posters on here who have the most epidemiological knowledge pointed out at the time that there was nothing wrong with the statement, not least because we're still some distance from full herd immunity; but you still think disaster is coming because the PM acknowledged scientific facts in a balanced way. I'm not trying to be harsh, but surely you can see that your perspective isn't entirely rational.
Wrong.
His presentation of it was terrible – I'm not talking about 'epidemiological knowledge', I am talking about messaging.
You clearly know nothing about PR, is my conclusion.
To be precise, your conclusion is that Boris knows nothing about PR, which is provably untrue.
He might know about it, but he cocks it up too frequently by failing to engage brain before opening mouth.
"But it is very, very important for everybody to understand that the reduction in these numbers - in hospitalisations and in deaths and infections - has NOT been achieved by the vaccination programme."
Which is 100% correct, yes.
Ridiculous.
Boris happily ignores "correct" things when it suits to send a better message on a regular basis.
So his critics like to claim, typically because they don't like what he has to say - which is a different thing entirely.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Typical hyperbole from you.
Hysterical, attention-seeking nonsense.
A wise person once said that
FFS, get a brain of your own. Drop the partisan fanboy stuff. Please.
I do have one of my own, thank you very much, and as a result I don't need to outsource my thinking to the Spectator. I'm just not a hysteric. Nothing bad is going to happen because Boris dared to defy Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown.
Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown
Idiotic post, I'm doing no such thing. I'm criticising Boris' moronic presentation – read my posts.
I do read your posts, and I understand what they actually mean. You're so obsessed with our never entering lockdown ever again that you think just mentioning the subject in public makes it more likely to happen; but it doesn't. We locked down because we had to, and if we ever have to again, we'll do so in the future. I hope it doesn't happen just as much as you do, but them's the facts.
People have quoted Boris' words to you, which say that the public have to learn to accept more cases as we unlock; the posters on here who have the most epidemiological knowledge pointed out at the time that there was nothing wrong with the statement, not least because we're still some distance from full herd immunity; but you still think disaster is coming because the PM acknowledged scientific facts in a balanced way. I'm not trying to be harsh, but surely you can see that your perspective isn't entirely rational.
Wrong.
His presentation of it was terrible – I'm not talking about 'epidemiological knowledge', I am talking about messaging.
You clearly know nothing about PR, is my conclusion.
To be precise, your conclusion is that Boris knows nothing about PR, which is provably untrue.
He might know about it, but he cocks it up too frequently by failing to engage brain before opening mouth.
"But it is very, very important for everybody to understand that the reduction in these numbers - in hospitalisations and in deaths and infections - has NOT been achieved by the vaccination programme."
Which is 100% correct, yes.
WRONG.
Some of the reduction IS due to the vaccines, a non-trivial portion of it in fact.
So actually, it's crap messaging and it's inaccurate.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Typical hyperbole from you.
Hysterical, attention-seeking nonsense.
A wise person once said that
FFS, get a brain of your own. Drop the partisan fanboy stuff. Please.
I do have one of my own, thank you very much, and as a result I don't need to outsource my thinking to the Spectator. I'm just not a hysteric. Nothing bad is going to happen because Boris dared to defy Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown.
Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown
Idiotic post, I'm doing no such thing. I'm criticising Boris' moronic presentation – read my posts.
I do read your posts, and I understand what they actually mean. You're so obsessed with our never entering lockdown ever again that you think just mentioning the subject in public makes it more likely to happen; but it doesn't. We locked down because we had to, and if we ever have to again, we'll do so in the future. I hope it doesn't happen just as much as you do, but them's the facts.
People have quoted Boris' words to you, which say that the public have to learn to accept more cases as we unlock; the posters on here who have the most epidemiological knowledge pointed out at the time that there was nothing wrong with the statement, not least because we're still some distance from full herd immunity; but you still think disaster is coming because the PM acknowledged scientific facts in a balanced way. I'm not trying to be harsh, but surely you can see that your perspective isn't entirely rational.
Wrong.
His presentation of it was terrible – I'm not talking about 'epidemiological knowledge', I am talking about messaging.
You clearly know nothing about PR, is my conclusion.
To be precise, your conclusion is that Boris knows nothing about PR, which is provably untrue.
He might know about it, but he cocks it up too frequently by failing to engage brain before opening mouth.
"But it is very, very important for everybody to understand that the reduction in these numbers - in hospitalisations and in deaths and infections - has NOT been achieved by the vaccination programme."
Which is 100% correct, yes.
Ridiculous.
Boris happily ignores "correct" things when it suits to send a better message on a regular basis.
So his critics like to claim, typically because they don't like what he has to say - which is a different thing entirely.
No border in the Irish Sea, if anyone asks you to fill in a form you should rip it up.
I will probably vote for them, to be honest. Keep Labour on their toes.
I have a choice between Tory, Labour, former UKIPs pretending to be Independent, former LibDems pretending to be independent (although my local candidate was never a LibDem), another load of independents who as far as I can tell may actually be independent although my local candidate actually is a former LibDem, and an anti-lockdown candidate from the Freedom Alliance, although who he is allied with isn’t immediately apparent. Surprisingly no Green Party, who came second last time.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Typical hyperbole from you.
Hysterical, attention-seeking nonsense.
A wise person once said that
FFS, get a brain of your own. Drop the partisan fanboy stuff. Please.
I do have one of my own, thank you very much, and as a result I don't need to outsource my thinking to the Spectator. I'm just not a hysteric. Nothing bad is going to happen because Boris dared to defy Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown.
Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown
Idiotic post, I'm doing no such thing. I'm criticising Boris' moronic presentation – read my posts.
I do read your posts, and I understand what they actually mean. You're so obsessed with our never entering lockdown ever again that you think just mentioning the subject in public makes it more likely to happen; but it doesn't. We locked down because we had to, and if we ever have to again, we'll do so in the future. I hope it doesn't happen just as much as you do, but them's the facts.
People have quoted Boris' words to you, which say that the public have to learn to accept more cases as we unlock; the posters on here who have the most epidemiological knowledge pointed out at the time that there was nothing wrong with the statement, not least because we're still some distance from full herd immunity; but you still think disaster is coming because the PM acknowledged scientific facts in a balanced way. I'm not trying to be harsh, but surely you can see that your perspective isn't entirely rational.
Wrong.
His presentation of it was terrible – I'm not talking about 'epidemiological knowledge', I am talking about messaging.
You clearly know nothing about PR, is my conclusion.
To be precise, your conclusion is that Boris knows nothing about PR, which is provably untrue.
He might know about it, but he cocks it up too frequently by failing to engage brain before opening mouth.
"But it is very, very important for everybody to understand that the reduction in these numbers - in hospitalisations and in deaths and infections - has NOT been achieved by the vaccination programme."
Which is 100% correct, yes.
It's not correct, a large proportion of our gains in hospitalisations and deaths have been due to our vaccine programme. We're running at a much lower rate that expected in vaccinated groups when compared to lockdown 1.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Typical hyperbole from you.
Hysterical, attention-seeking nonsense.
A wise person once said that
FFS, get a brain of your own. Drop the partisan fanboy stuff. Please.
I do have one of my own, thank you very much, and as a result I don't need to outsource my thinking to the Spectator. I'm just not a hysteric. Nothing bad is going to happen because Boris dared to defy Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown.
Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown
Idiotic post, I'm doing no such thing. I'm criticising Boris' moronic presentation – read my posts.
I do read your posts, and I understand what they actually mean. You're so obsessed with our never entering lockdown ever again that you think just mentioning the subject in public makes it more likely to happen; but it doesn't. We locked down because we had to, and if we ever have to again, we'll do so in the future. I hope it doesn't happen just as much as you do, but them's the facts.
People have quoted Boris' words to you, which say that the public have to learn to accept more cases as we unlock; the posters on here who have the most epidemiological knowledge pointed out at the time that there was nothing wrong with the statement, not least because we're still some distance from full herd immunity; but you still think disaster is coming because the PM acknowledged scientific facts in a balanced way. I'm not trying to be harsh, but surely you can see that your perspective isn't entirely rational.
Wrong.
His presentation of it was terrible – I'm not talking about 'epidemiological knowledge', I am talking about messaging.
You clearly know nothing about PR, is my conclusion.
To be precise, your conclusion is that Boris knows nothing about PR, which is provably untrue.
He might know about it, but he cocks it up too frequently by failing to engage brain before opening mouth.
"But it is very, very important for everybody to understand that the reduction in these numbers - in hospitalisations and in deaths and infections - has NOT been achieved by the vaccination programme."
Which is 100% correct, yes.
WRONG.
Some of the reduction IS due to the vaccines, a non-trivial portion of it in fact.
So actually, it's crap messaging and it's inaccurate.
Machiavelli always said that fear was the way to keep the proles under control.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Typical hyperbole from you.
Hysterical, attention-seeking nonsense.
A wise person once said that
FFS, get a brain of your own. Drop the partisan fanboy stuff. Please.
I do have one of my own, thank you very much, and as a result I don't need to outsource my thinking to the Spectator. I'm just not a hysteric. Nothing bad is going to happen because Boris dared to defy Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown.
Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown
Idiotic post, I'm doing no such thing. I'm criticising Boris' moronic presentation – read my posts.
I do read your posts, and I understand what they actually mean. You're so obsessed with our never entering lockdown ever again that you think just mentioning the subject in public makes it more likely to happen; but it doesn't. We locked down because we had to, and if we ever have to again, we'll do so in the future. I hope it doesn't happen just as much as you do, but them's the facts.
People have quoted Boris' words to you, which say that the public have to learn to accept more cases as we unlock; the posters on here who have the most epidemiological knowledge pointed out at the time that there was nothing wrong with the statement, not least because we're still some distance from full herd immunity; but you still think disaster is coming because the PM acknowledged scientific facts in a balanced way. I'm not trying to be harsh, but surely you can see that your perspective isn't entirely rational.
Wrong.
His presentation of it was terrible – I'm not talking about 'epidemiological knowledge', I am talking about messaging.
You clearly know nothing about PR, is my conclusion.
To be precise, your conclusion is that Boris knows nothing about PR, which is provably untrue.
He might know about it, but he cocks it up too frequently by failing to engage brain before opening mouth.
"But it is very, very important for everybody to understand that the reduction in these numbers - in hospitalisations and in deaths and infections - has NOT been achieved by the vaccination programme."
Which is 100% correct, yes.
WRONG.
Some of the reduction IS due to the vaccines, a non-trivial portion of it in fact.
So actually, it's crap messaging and it's inaccurate.
He said some was. 🤦♂️
You took that out of his remarks. You editing what he said to exclude that doesn't mean he didn't say it.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Boris' intervention was utterly moronic. It made people think "why bother getting vaccinated then?" – just absolutely insane presentation.
It was ill-considered, as he should well know exactly what message will be amplified out of that. Simply going with the message: "We still need to get to a certain level of vaccination before vaccines alone can carry the load."
And following up with "As most of the fall came before the vaccination programme was widespread, it's obvious that the lockdown did that. We need to keep the vaccinations going at pace so we can get to a position where the restrictions are less and less needed, and the immunity from vaccination can shoulder more and more of the load. Like balancing accelerator and clutch while changing gear."
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Typical hyperbole from you.
Hysterical, attention-seeking nonsense.
A wise person once said that
FFS, get a brain of your own. Drop the partisan fanboy stuff. Please.
I do have one of my own, thank you very much, and as a result I don't need to outsource my thinking to the Spectator. I'm just not a hysteric. Nothing bad is going to happen because Boris dared to defy Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown.
Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown
Idiotic post, I'm doing no such thing. I'm criticising Boris' moronic presentation – read my posts.
I do read your posts, and I understand what they actually mean. You're so obsessed with our never entering lockdown ever again that you think just mentioning the subject in public makes it more likely to happen; but it doesn't. We locked down because we had to, and if we ever have to again, we'll do so in the future. I hope it doesn't happen just as much as you do, but them's the facts.
People have quoted Boris' words to you, which say that the public have to learn to accept more cases as we unlock; the posters on here who have the most epidemiological knowledge pointed out at the time that there was nothing wrong with the statement, not least because we're still some distance from full herd immunity; but you still think disaster is coming because the PM acknowledged scientific facts in a balanced way. I'm not trying to be harsh, but surely you can see that your perspective isn't entirely rational.
Wrong.
His presentation of it was terrible – I'm not talking about 'epidemiological knowledge', I am talking about messaging.
You clearly know nothing about PR, is my conclusion.
To be precise, your conclusion is that Boris knows nothing about PR, which is provably untrue.
He might know about it, but he cocks it up too frequently by failing to engage brain before opening mouth.
"But it is very, very important for everybody to understand that the reduction in these numbers - in hospitalisations and in deaths and infections - has NOT been achieved by the vaccination programme."
Which is 100% correct, yes.
Ridiculous.
Boris happily ignores "correct" things when it suits to send a better message on a regular basis.
So his critics like to claim, typically because they don't like what he has to say - which is a different thing entirely.
No border in the Irish Sea, if anyone asks you to fill in a form you should rip it up.
Said to Northern Irish businessmen about sending stuff to GB, yes.
Out of curiosity how much paperwork do businesses in NI need to fill in to send stuff to GB? How accurate or inaccurate were his remarks?
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Typical hyperbole from you.
Hysterical, attention-seeking nonsense.
A wise person once said that
FFS, get a brain of your own. Drop the partisan fanboy stuff. Please.
I do have one of my own, thank you very much, and as a result I don't need to outsource my thinking to the Spectator. I'm just not a hysteric. Nothing bad is going to happen because Boris dared to defy Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown.
Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown
Idiotic post, I'm doing no such thing. I'm criticising Boris' moronic presentation – read my posts.
I do read your posts, and I understand what they actually mean. You're so obsessed with our never entering lockdown ever again that you think just mentioning the subject in public makes it more likely to happen; but it doesn't. We locked down because we had to, and if we ever have to again, we'll do so in the future. I hope it doesn't happen just as much as you do, but them's the facts.
People have quoted Boris' words to you, which say that the public have to learn to accept more cases as we unlock; the posters on here who have the most epidemiological knowledge pointed out at the time that there was nothing wrong with the statement, not least because we're still some distance from full herd immunity; but you still think disaster is coming because the PM acknowledged scientific facts in a balanced way. I'm not trying to be harsh, but surely you can see that your perspective isn't entirely rational.
Wrong.
His presentation of it was terrible – I'm not talking about 'epidemiological knowledge', I am talking about messaging.
You clearly know nothing about PR, is my conclusion.
To be precise, your conclusion is that Boris knows nothing about PR, which is provably untrue.
He might know about it, but he cocks it up too frequently by failing to engage brain before opening mouth.
"But it is very, very important for everybody to understand that the reduction in these numbers - in hospitalisations and in deaths and infections - has NOT been achieved by the vaccination programme."
Which is 100% correct, yes.
WRONG.
Some of the reduction IS due to the vaccines, a non-trivial portion of it in fact.
So actually, it's crap messaging and it's inaccurate.
He said some was. 🤦♂️
You took that out of his remarks. You editing what he said to exclude that doesn't mean he didn't say it.
All he needed to say was “alone” at the end of that sentence. Pretty poor that he didn’t.
We seem to be back to the lockdown fanatics actively seeking bad news. Not helped by the moronic intervention by Boris earlier in the week – probably the most stupid thing he has said since this shitshow began.
Typical hyperbole from you.
Hysterical, attention-seeking nonsense.
A wise person once said that
FFS, get a brain of your own. Drop the partisan fanboy stuff. Please.
I do have one of my own, thank you very much, and as a result I don't need to outsource my thinking to the Spectator. I'm just not a hysteric. Nothing bad is going to happen because Boris dared to defy Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown.
Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown
Idiotic post, I'm doing no such thing. I'm criticising Boris' moronic presentation – read my posts.
I do read your posts, and I understand what they actually mean. You're so obsessed with our never entering lockdown ever again that you think just mentioning the subject in public makes it more likely to happen; but it doesn't. We locked down because we had to, and if we ever have to again, we'll do so in the future. I hope it doesn't happen just as much as you do, but them's the facts.
People have quoted Boris' words to you, which say that the public have to learn to accept more cases as we unlock; the posters on here who have the most epidemiological knowledge pointed out at the time that there was nothing wrong with the statement, not least because we're still some distance from full herd immunity; but you still think disaster is coming because the PM acknowledged scientific facts in a balanced way. I'm not trying to be harsh, but surely you can see that your perspective isn't entirely rational.
Wrong.
His presentation of it was terrible – I'm not talking about 'epidemiological knowledge', I am talking about messaging.
You clearly know nothing about PR, is my conclusion.
To be precise, your conclusion is that Boris knows nothing about PR, which is provably untrue.
He might know about it, but he cocks it up too frequently by failing to engage brain before opening mouth.
"But it is very, very important for everybody to understand that the reduction in these numbers - in hospitalisations and in deaths and infections - has NOT been achieved by the vaccination programme."
Which is 100% correct, yes.
WRONG.
Some of the reduction IS due to the vaccines, a non-trivial portion of it in fact.
So actually, it's crap messaging and it's inaccurate.
Since a lot of Europe is in lockdown still and struggling to turn the tide against the new variants, the vaccine must be having a significant effect, the only other explanation for the divergence between UK and EU being that we had the second wave earlier (true) and began to run out of uninfected people at risk (unlikely to be true).
Comments
Boris' intervention was utterly moronic. It made people think "why bother getting vaccinated then?" – just absolutely insane presentation.
Don't forget that most people are unvaccinated still. That percentage is being driven down but if it were just the vaccines then the virus would never have been suppressed.
The lockdown suppressed the virus while the vaccines were rolled out. The vaccines will help keep it suppressed while the lockdown is removed.
It really isn't brain surgery.
It was the Queen who removed Andrew from royal duties under pressure from Charles, Andrew did not get a say.
Whether they then do interviews or whatsover or go to the press is irrelevant, they are no longer working members of the royal family, just the same as anyone else who has been sacked if they do an interview no longer represents that organisation
(And actually the science shows that he wasn't 100% correct – see Professor Tim Spector's analysis this morning)
The point is that in the future lockdown won't be there. So if you're safe now while unvaccinated then you're safe because of the lockdown - but in the future the lockdown will be gone so you need your jab. You can't rely upon lockdown once its gone to do the work for you.
Awfully phrased something or other, mishandled and bungled. He needs to engage brain before opening mouth. He is a liability.
It almost never works.
Awfully phrased something or other, mishandled and bungled. He needs to engage brain before opening mouth. He is a liability. Have you seen the vaccination refusal rate among ethnic minorities? We are not helping ourselves crack those cohorts with this stupid messaging.
Hysterical, attention-seeking nonsense.
A wise person once said that
I suspect the French medical authorities think that Mons Macaron is as much a nutjob as we do.
Surprising if true
Angela Merkel to get AZ jab on Friday
https://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article230399919/AstraZeneca-Bundeskanzlerin-Merkel-laesst-sich-am-Freitag-impfen.html
You've spectacularly missed the point. The point is the lockdown is going so you NEED a vaccine instead. Whereas in recent months the unvaccinated have been protected by the lockdown, they won't be going forwards.
https://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article230399919/AstraZeneca-Bundeskanzlerin-Merkel-laesst-sich-am-Freitag-impfen.html
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1LsQ2qFoKjNvBRWtrCG9KBQJcy8TBy35qAypG8_0jN0o/edit#gid=1548184403
Bury South has a large middle class segment and is the sort of metropolitan seat which has broadly swung from Con to Lab over the last 30 years. It swung away from Labour in 2019 due to a number of factors, not least the large Jewish population in the seat. It will be interesting to see if that effect stays in a post-Corbyn world.
We once had a frequent poster on the site from Bury South, Stuart Penketh - I wonder what happened to him?
Interesting though that four of Labour's top ten targets are coterminous (Bolton NE, Bury North, Bury South, Heywood and Middleton).
Hmmm...doesn’t really rhyme, does it?
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-is-boris-talking-down-britain-s-vaccine-success-again-
Having said which, one of the procurement leads on one project was subsequently prosecuted for taking a bribe from a supplier, so there are clearly checks as well.
Perhaps construction is dodger than IT?
The way others misrepresented it - and the way you were off half-cocked and driven yourself into a frenzy based on headlines others wrote - is the problem here. You're willing there to be problems where non-exist.
Reading this article is profoundly depressing in 2021. Civil war in Afghanistan or simply a Taliban take-over? Either way, whatever you think of the US as a global police force, without the US military there a giant backward step for ordinary Afghans seems inevitable. It looks like we are back to square one.
The problems won't disappear by doing as you want and sticking your head in the sand thinking lockdown did nothing and removing it changes nothing.
However we did not invade Afghanistan to remove the Taliban, that is a myth. The Taliban had controlled the government of Afghanistan since 1996.
The invasion only occurred in 2001 after 9/11 to kill Bin Laden and remove Al Qaeda from the country, aims which have now been achieved.
The Taliban will have to have some role in the government again to secure it
Except for 2017 when it went Labour despite no campaign there.
That it is in the top 10 targets after such a heavy defeat is a sign it is drifting red. In contrast to next door Bolton.
Only a majority Tory government will continue to block a legal indyref2 for a generation
Anabobazina's personal fatwah against ever acknowledging the efficacy of lockdown
Idiotic post, I'm doing no such thing. I'm criticising Boris' moronic presentation – read my posts.
It's about the messaging – Boris' comments were always going to be misinterpreted by the media.
The secret to PR is to shape your message so the press are unable to twist your words.
He failed, badly.
What he said was correct, your hysteria is not.
Dead wrong.
He gifted the press an absolute open goal with the way he phrased his comments – he should know better.
https://www.newsweek.com/covid-19-deniers-event-leaves-host-dead-12-infected-1583553
How would you have rephrased it?
He should have said:
* The lockdown as done its job in getting infections, hospitalizations and deaths down to negligible levels while we ramped up the vaccine roll-out - well done everyone, great national effort and sacrifice, eternally grateful, etc, etc
* The vaccine roll out is a great success (leading the world, global Britain, etc) and is doing its job in protecting those vaccinated ... so we need to continue with that apace so no more lockdowns are necessary
* Our strategy is working so well that we are announcing an accelerated easing of restrictions - we're bringing the May 17th deadline forward to April 30th ... happy bank holiday weekend everyone
Unless of course what the nudge team wanted was to throw cold water on the benefits of the vaccine roll out and keep the option of future lockdowns on the table ... in which case, job done.
Even if Kabul fell that would not be a defeat though as the aim of the US invasion in 2001 was not primarily to remove the Taliban, the objectives were to kill Bin Laden and remove Al Qaeda from the country which have been achieved.
Though personally I think a role can be found for the Taliban to control parts of the country while the Afghan government (which let us not forget is elected by the majority of Afghans) keeps control of Kabul and its environs
People have quoted Boris' words to you, which say that the public have to learn to accept more cases as we unlock; the posters on here who have the most epidemiological knowledge pointed out at the time that there was nothing wrong with the statement, not least because we're still some distance from full herd immunity; but you still think disaster is coming because the PM acknowledged scientific facts in a balanced way. I'm not trying to be harsh, but surely you can see that your perspective isn't entirely rational.
A Labour government in 2024 means closer alignment to the EU and maybe even EUref2 as well as indyref2 in Scotland
As I said, Kafka-esque......
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-56724875
His presentation of it was terrible – I'm not talking about 'epidemiological knowledge', I am talking about messaging.
You clearly know nothing about PR, is my conclusion.
I will probably vote for them, to be honest. Keep Labour on their toes.
Remember that so-called ummah, used as justification for Muslims getting upset at what is done to their co-religionists ..... some might think that it's just a crock of shit.
No Union Jack bandages.
"But it is very, very important for everybody to understand that the reduction in these numbers - in hospitalisations and in deaths and infections - has not been achieved by the vaccination programme."
That is also not entirely true, as some of the reduction IS due to the vaccines.
When you say those words, you really ought to know what the press will do with it.
Very badly handled.
Which is why everything is set on a Monday 4+ weeks apart because you need 3 weeks to see what the impact was.
And yes that does mean that things are going slower than a lot of people want but that is sadly unavoidable
We are still being bombarded with ludicrously terrifying radio ads that make it sound like the end of the world is nigh. It needs to change its communications strategy now to facilitate a return to normality.
"But it is very, very important for everybody to understand that the reduction in these numbers - in hospitalisations and in deaths and infections - has NOT been achieved by the vaccination programme."
Sadly, this needless, moronic presentation has set the tone for the whole week.
Carshalton might also be interesting, in that until the 1980s it was Tory Labour contest with Labour very competitive at both 1974 elections. For many years there the LDs have benefitted from Labour tactical voting, but having now lost the seat such voters may return to Labour. Portsmouth South comes to mind!
They then continued the military presence to train up Afghan forces to maintain security but that was not the original aim of the invasion which was to remove Al Qaeda from the country.
The main symbolism of Kabul falling to the Taliban would be to be disastrous imagery for the Biden-Harris administration as the Iranian hostages disaster was for the Carter administration, leading to Reagan's 1980 win.
Ford was also beaten in 1976 by Carter after the fall of Saigon on his watch
Boris happily ignores "correct" things when it suits to send a better message on a regular basis.
And when I added my Like that brought the total to 39. Never seen so many before.
Good afternoon, everybody.
From the recent five-year-average up until 2019 (and 2019 was very close to that average), we would expect a randomly selected member of the population to die during a randomly selected 28 day window of time about 0.07% of the time.
Due to the slight age skew on cases, I rounded that up to "between 0.1% and 0.2%" as a baseline, but, as you say, this is massively dependent on who is getting cases, age-wise.
So, we can compare Malmesbury's excellent CFR graphs to the background fatality rate in a random 28 day window for members of that age group (taken from the ONS stats for 2019 in England and Wales).
From top to bottom lines on the graph
Age 85+ (blue line): base rate of 1.12% (currently c. 10%)
Age 75-84 (orange line): base rate of 0.33% (currently c. 7%)
Age 65-74 (grey line): base rate of 0.11% (currently c. 2%)
Age 45-64 (yellow line): base rate of 0.03%
Age 15-44 (light blue): base rate of 0.005%
Age 0-14 (green line): base rate of 0.0025%
So we're maybe not quite as close as I'd thought we were to the base rate.
I'm very much looking forward to getting stuck in.
Some of the reduction IS due to the vaccines, a non-trivial portion of it in fact.
So actually, it's crap messaging and it's inaccurate.
You took that out of his remarks. You editing what he said to exclude that doesn't mean he didn't say it.
And following up with "As most of the fall came before the vaccination programme was widespread, it's obvious that the lockdown did that. We need to keep the vaccinations going at pace so we can get to a position where the restrictions are less and less needed, and the immunity from vaccination can shoulder more and more of the load. Like balancing accelerator and clutch while changing gear."
Simple, straightforward, and hard to misconstrue.
Out of curiosity how much paperwork do businesses in NI need to fill in to send stuff to GB? How accurate or inaccurate were his remarks?