I was up very early this morning (5.30am) to take my son in law into hospital in Wrexham for his complete knee replacement operation later today on coming home I listened to the radio
I was aware of the dreadful headlines for Boris from todays papers, and not least from the Mail which has suddenly become the doyen of the left and EU supporters, and expected Boris to be hung our to dry
However, the reporting was more balanced than I expected, indeed fairly critical of Labour who have been using sleaze for some time with no cut through yet in the polls. That is not to say Boris received a free pass, but the alleged comments were put more inbalance and Nicky Campbell in fairness did say the were receiving texts acciusing him that he was leading the left in the attacks on Boris.
On returning home Sky were fairly similar, but I believe Kate McCann of Sky was spot on when she said we only have just over a week to see the results of the nationwide ballot and whether it cuts through
I would suggest if after all this Boris does OK and wins Harlepool ( which I do not expect) then Starmer is going to come under huge pressure
The last few days has made next week's election fair more relevant,,and important for both Boris and Starmer, while previously I had exoectec that only Starmer would be under pressure
I'm not sure what relevance the polling has to this, other than for betting purposes.
Just because the public on the whole doesn't care about something doesn't mean it is right or ok. Standards do matter for the integrity of the office itself.
I fully understand your sentiment but in real politics winning is the bench mark and Boris has been excellent at that, rightly or wrongly
And thank you for your kind comments about my son in law
Yes, hope he's ok.
Thank you
It is a big operation but he has no choice due to legacy damage from his days playing hockey and team sports
I was up very early this morning (5.30am) to take my son in law into hospital in Wrexham for his complete knee replacement operation later today, and on driving home I listened to the radio
I was aware of the dreadful headlines for Boris from todays papers, and not least from the Mail which has suddenly become the doyen of the left and EU supporters, and expected Boris to be hung out to dry
However, the reporting was more balanced than I expected, indeed fairly critical of Labour who have been using sleaze for some time with no cut through yet in the polls. That is not to say Boris received a free pass, but the alleged comments were put more in balance and Nicky Campbell, in fairness, did say they were receiving texts accusing him of leading the left in the attacks on Boris.
On returning home, Sky were fairly similar, but I believe Kate McCann of Sky was spot on when she said we only have just over a week to see the results of the nationwide ballot and whether it cuts through
I would suggest if after all this Boris does OK and wins Harlepool ( which I do not expect) then Starmer is going to come under huge pressure
The last few days has made next week's election fair more relevant, and important for both Boris and Starmer, while previously I had expected that only Starmer would be under pressure
Big G, I'm afraid you're sadly mistaken if you think that the Mail is "the doyen of the left and EU supporters". As a member of both, I can reassure you that the left hate the Mail with a vengeance. You can be confident in the Mail's support for the Tories at the next GE, whenever that is. The Mail remains a scurrilous, unpleasant, right-wing rag.
You do know the current editor is pro remain unlike Dacre
I was up very early this morning (5.30am) to take my son in law into hospital in Wrexham for his complete knee replacement operation later today, and on driving home I listened to the radio
I was aware of the dreadful headlines for Boris from todays papers, and not least from the Mail which has suddenly become the doyen of the left and EU supporters, and expected Boris to be hung out to dry
However, the reporting was more balanced than I expected, indeed fairly critical of Labour who have been using sleaze for some time with no cut through yet in the polls. That is not to say Boris received a free pass, but the alleged comments were put more in balance and Nicky Campbell, in fairness, did say they were receiving texts accusing him of leading the left in the attacks on Boris.
On returning home, Sky were fairly similar, but I believe Kate McCann of Sky was spot on when she said we only have just over a week to see the results of the nationwide ballot and whether it cuts through
I would suggest if after all this Boris does OK and wins Harlepool ( which I do not expect) then Starmer is going to come under huge pressure
The last few days has made next week's election fair more relevant, and important for both Boris and Starmer, while previously I had expected that only Starmer would be under pressure
Big G, I'm afraid you're sadly mistaken if you think that the Mail is "the doyen of the left and EU supporters". As a member of both, I can reassure you that the left hate the Mail with a vengeance. You can be confident in the Mail's support for the Tories at the next GE, whenever that is. The Mail remains a scurrilous, unpleasant, right-wing rag.
You do know the current editor is pro remain unlike Dacre
Pro Remain? We've left, surely?
Yes but some want to rejoin the single market and have a closer relationship
I think we forget here, where we mostly think the government cocked up massively by having the Christmas relaxation rather than bringing in another lockdown in December, that not everyone shares that view. I know plety of people in the south who were - and still are, after all that has happened - royally pissed off that "Boris cancelled Christmas". As bad as January was, they still don't personally know anyone who died and it's all a bit abstract for them. Not everyone thinks the government was too slow and some would agree with "letting the bodies pile up" (as long as they're other people's bodies) to "save Christmas".
I know the national polling suggests the public favours all and every restriction on freedom, but what matters is two things: - How much is that true of Johnson supporters? By definition, they're mostly pro-Brexit and damn the consequences - taking actions to prevent harm may not be in their psyche. Labour/Lib-Dem/SNP supporters frothing at the mouth over 'Boris the Butcher' has little relevance to Johnson's electoral prospects. - How much do people actually care whether the restrictions are in law? If you plan to not visit relatives, then you're unlikely to be against a ban on visiting relatives. But do you actually care if there is no ban?
OK, I'm not a fan of our current PM. Not by any means. Dragged through Traitors Gate in chains is too good for him!
But mid summer last year I knew of one person who had, perhaps, died of Covid, and one who had had it and recovered.
Now I know several in the 'died within one month of test, but also had something else' category, and at least one who died who was otherwise well. I also know of a couple of sufferers from Long Covid, as well as several, including relations, who have had it.
And a couple of weeks ago we were able, at last, to exchange Christmas presents with an adult granddaughter, presents which could not be safely posted.
And when I Zoom, or chat about it in the pub, with friends, we're all in similar positions. And that's by no means only with friends of our political persuasion.
I was up very early this morning (5.30am) to take my son in law into hospital in Wrexham for his complete knee replacement operation later today, and on driving home I listened to the radio
I was aware of the dreadful headlines for Boris from todays papers, and not least from the Mail which has suddenly become the doyen of the left and EU supporters, and expected Boris to be hung out to dry
However, the reporting was more balanced than I expected, indeed fairly critical of Labour who have been using sleaze for some time with no cut through yet in the polls. That is not to say Boris received a free pass, but the alleged comments were put more in balance and Nicky Campbell, in fairness, did say they were receiving texts accusing him of leading the left in the attacks on Boris.
On returning home, Sky were fairly similar, but I believe Kate McCann of Sky was spot on when she said we only have just over a week to see the results of the nationwide ballot and whether it cuts through
I would suggest if after all this Boris does OK and wins Harlepool ( which I do not expect) then Starmer is going to come under huge pressure
The last few days has made next week's election fair more relevant, and important for both Boris and Starmer, while previously I had expected that only Starmer would be under pressure
Big G, I'm afraid you're sadly mistaken if you think that the Mail is "the doyen of the left and EU supporters". As a member of both, I can reassure you that the left hate the Mail with a vengeance. You can be confident in the Mail's support for the Tories at the next GE, whenever that is. The Mail remains a scurrilous, unpleasant, right-wing rag.
You do know the current editor is pro remain unlike Dacre
Hold on a sec.
If you look at the content of the Daily Mail, it's hardly a pro-Remain paper. It's not a gung-ho as the Express, but it's backing Brexit and seeking to narrate and make a success of it.
Isn't it possible that the Mail's anger is nothing to do with Brexit and everything to do with the awfulness of the Prime Minister as a person? It's not as if any plausible successor is going to soften Boris's Brexit in any meaningful way.
Admittedly, "Brexit is still in peril and we must be loyal to Comrade Napoleon Mr Johnson because we don't want Farmer Jones von der Leyen back" is a handy narrative to keep people on board. One that will work right up to the moment it doesn't.
Personally, I don't think either the "bodies" comment nor the soft furnishings will cut through all that much to the public. They are stories the Conservatives could do without in an election campaign, but aren't gamechangers.
"Bodies" won't cut through that much because there is a general mood of optimism regarding Covid so the comment has much less force than if bodies were currently piling up as they did in the early part of the year. Enough Conservatives also have a "Boris will be Boris" mentality when he says something that other politicians would be punished for, much as Republicans had a "Trump will be Trump" view. Had it emerged in January, probably a different story. But it didn't.
The furnishings won't because the taxpayer isn't seen to be paying, and it feels a bit bogged down in who needs to declare what on which form. It ought to cut through as people don't do favours for nothing, and it was a blatant attempt to solicit personal favours without even applying the disinfectant of publicity let alone just avoiding the whole damned thing and making do with a John Lewis sofa. It would quite obviously be a resigning matter for a chairman of a Council planning committee, but Johnson will get away with it. That's a bit galling to those of us for whom corruption matters, but it's reality.
The story of what is effectively another Oxford success. (And like everything else which has worked during the pandemic, had its genesis a decade or more back.)
How the UK found the first effective Covid-19 treatment — and saved a million lives The United Kingdom is not a pandemic success story. But its massive Covid-19 trials program is. https://www.vox.com/22397833/dexamethasone-coronavirus-uk-recovery-trial ...The road to the Recovery Trial started in the 1980s, when a group of Oxford scholars was dissatisfied with the lack of treatments for heart attacks. They imagined a trial that could test different interventions — a massive trial, perhaps as many as 10,000 to 15,000 patients. For such a big trial to work, it had to be simple: Nurses and doctors would need to be able to try out the treatments the researchers were testing as part of their normal care routine....
A friend's elderly mother has just been admitted to hospital in Jakarta with COVID - I asked if they were giving her dexamethasone - "yes, it's standard procedure now".
I was up very early this morning (5.30am) to take my son in law into hospital in Wrexham for his complete knee replacement operation later today, and on driving home I listened to the radio
I was aware of the dreadful headlines for Boris from todays papers, and not least from the Mail which has suddenly become the doyen of the left and EU supporters, and expected Boris to be hung out to dry
However, the reporting was more balanced than I expected, indeed fairly critical of Labour who have been using sleaze for some time with no cut through yet in the polls. That is not to say Boris received a free pass, but the alleged comments were put more in balance and Nicky Campbell, in fairness, did say they were receiving texts accusing him of leading the left in the attacks on Boris.
On returning home, Sky were fairly similar, but I believe Kate McCann of Sky was spot on when she said we only have just over a week to see the results of the nationwide ballot and whether it cuts through
I would suggest if after all this Boris does OK and wins Harlepool ( which I do not expect) then Starmer is going to come under huge pressure
The last few days has made next week's election fair more relevant, and important for both Boris and Starmer, while previously I had expected that only Starmer would be under pressure
Big G, I'm afraid you're sadly mistaken if you think that the Mail is "the doyen of the left and EU supporters". As a member of both, I can reassure you that the left hate the Mail with a vengeance. You can be confident in the Mail's support for the Tories at the next GE, whenever that is. The Mail remains a scurrilous, unpleasant, right-wing rag.
You do know the current editor is pro remain unlike Dacre
Pro Remain? We've left, surely?
That's true, but the Remain/Leave divide still exists, simply now between those thinking we should have remained and those thinking we should have left.
Some people seem to have been able to bridge the gap to change sides - Truss has done a very good job, while our own RochdalePioneers has swapped the other direction with the added zeal of the convert. But many haven't reconciled to the result yet including eg Scott and the Mail's new Editor.
Its irrelevant whether Johnson went on to bring in further lockdowns . The defense from some is he did the right thing anyway which completely misses the point . The issue is he viewed more bodies piling up as a price worth paying if he kept the economy open.
There are of course always a range of factors when politicians have to make these difficult decisions , balancing the risk to life v damage to the economy . However it’s the callous nature of the comments and the dismissive tone of the people who could die that is the real problem for no 10 .
What evidence do you have that he said these remarks?
Multiple sources and a recording due in next couple of days.
How long does it take to hand over a recording? If it existed it would have been delivered by now
I think we forget here, where we mostly think the government cocked up massively by having the Christmas relaxation rather than bringing in another lockdown in December, that not everyone shares that view. I know plety of people in the south who were - and still are, after all that has happened - royally pissed off that "Boris cancelled Christmas". As bad as January was, they still don't personally know anyone who died and it's all a bit abstract for them. Not everyone thinks the government was too slow and some would agree with "letting the bodies pile up" (as long as they're other people's bodies) to "save Christmas".
I know the national polling suggests the public favours all and every restriction on freedom, but what matters is two things: - How much is that true of Johnson supporters? By definition, they're mostly pro-Brexit and damn the consequences - taking actions to prevent harm may not be in their psyche. Labour/Lib-Dem/SNP supporters frothing at the mouth over 'Boris the Butcher' has little relevance to Johnson's electoral prospects. - How much do people actually care whether the restrictions are in law? If you plan to not visit relatives, then you're unlikely to be against a ban on visiting relatives. But do you actually care if there is no ban?
The extent to which Leave/Remain (or even left/right, or any other axis) matches pro/anti lockdown is a little unclear. Based purely on the people who post angry things on facebook, I can see no correlation whatsoever. You'd have thought there might be a correlation-by-proxy to young/old, but even here I can't see any obvious correlation between views.
That's a fair point and it was clumsily put by me. Maybe there's no equivalence, I don't know why I brought Brexit into it other than my deep rooted mout-frothing remoaner DNA I do still think people who like Johnson are less likely to be horrified by this, unless they personally knew people who died in January. The calm, rational, cost-benefit thing to do was to lock down in December. If you like calm, rational, cost-benefit then you're a bit more Starmer than Johnson already, this might make you dislike Johnson more, but you weren't going to vote for him anyway. So maybe little effect on the polls and if little effect on the polls then little/no effect on the security of Johnson's position.
Anecdotal stories from India hospitals that Remdesivir isn't helping much against their local variant.
Disappointing.
More than disappointing, worrying.....its no magic bullet, but it has saved loads of lives.
Remember that lots of these pieces of anecdotal ‘evidence’ have proved unworthy of the billing since COVID began. Most in fact. So I’d suggest waiting for proper evidence before jumping to any conclusions.
Yes, I remember the panic about reinfection in Brazil after that one unreviewed study which then turned out to be a load of rubbish.
See also: the Kentish variant is more lethal; covid victims are getting younger... neither turned out to be true IIRC...
The payment for Carrie’s wallpaper was effectively money laundering.
No, it really wasn’t. Money laundering has 3 distinct elements, the only one of which I can remember is “layering”.
And layering your wallpaper is a definite no no.
Might I suggest some remedial training? I have it ready to be rolled out ........ with humour, wit and insight. And how often can you say that about Compliance training?
I am concerned that BoJo is a walking liability, as previously feared. If anything I am pleased that for the period of March 20 to March 2021, we seemed to have avoided that.
I was up very early this morning (5.30am) to take my son in law into hospital in Wrexham for his complete knee replacement operation later today, and on driving home I listened to the radio
I was aware of the dreadful headlines for Boris from todays papers, and not least from the Mail which has suddenly become the doyen of the left and EU supporters, and expected Boris to be hung out to dry
However, the reporting was more balanced than I expected, indeed fairly critical of Labour who have been using sleaze for some time with no cut through yet in the polls. That is not to say Boris received a free pass, but the alleged comments were put more in balance and Nicky Campbell, in fairness, did say they were receiving texts accusing him of leading the left in the attacks on Boris.
On returning home, Sky were fairly similar, but I believe Kate McCann of Sky was spot on when she said we only have just over a week to see the results of the nationwide ballot and whether it cuts through
I would suggest if after all this Boris does OK and wins Harlepool ( which I do not expect) then Starmer is going to come under huge pressure
The last few days has made next week's election fair more relevant, and important for both Boris and Starmer, while previously I had expected that only Starmer would be under pressure
Big G, I'm afraid you're sadly mistaken if you think that the Mail is "the doyen of the left and EU supporters". As a member of both, I can reassure you that the left hate the Mail with a vengeance. You can be confident in the Mail's support for the Tories at the next GE, whenever that is. The Mail remains a scurrilous, unpleasant, right-wing rag.
You do know the current editor is pro remain unlike Dacre
Pro Remain? We've left, surely?
I'd like to take the opportunity to back up Northen Al in asserting that the Mail is not the doyen of the left! Not unless the Grauniad typos have got bad to the extent of 'Guardian' being written as 'the Mail'.
Much more palatable to remain voting/soft Brexiter Tories post-Dacre though, I'd have thought.
Its irrelevant whether Johnson went on to bring in further lockdowns . The defense from some is he did the right thing anyway which completely misses the point . The issue is he viewed more bodies piling up as a price worth paying if he kept the economy open.
There are of course always a range of factors when politicians have to make these difficult decisions , balancing the risk to life v damage to the economy . However it’s the callous nature of the comments and the dismissive tone of the people who could die that is the real problem for no 10 .
What evidence do you have that he said these remarks?
Multiple sources and a recording due in next couple of days.
How long does it take to hand over a recording? If it existed it would have been delivered by now
Much more effective to produce it after the PM vehemently denied saying it I would have thought.
I was up very early this morning (5.30am) to take my son in law into hospital in Wrexham for his complete knee replacement operation later today, and on driving home I listened to the radio
I was aware of the dreadful headlines for Boris from todays papers, and not least from the Mail which has suddenly become the doyen of the left and EU supporters, and expected Boris to be hung out to dry
However, the reporting was more balanced than I expected, indeed fairly critical of Labour who have been using sleaze for some time with no cut through yet in the polls. That is not to say Boris received a free pass, but the alleged comments were put more in balance and Nicky Campbell, in fairness, did say they were receiving texts accusing him of leading the left in the attacks on Boris.
On returning home, Sky were fairly similar, but I believe Kate McCann of Sky was spot on when she said we only have just over a week to see the results of the nationwide ballot and whether it cuts through
I would suggest if after all this Boris does OK and wins Harlepool ( which I do not expect) then Starmer is going to come under huge pressure
The last few days has made next week's election fair more relevant, and important for both Boris and Starmer, while previously I had expected that only Starmer would be under pressure
Big G, I'm afraid you're sadly mistaken if you think that the Mail is "the doyen of the left and EU supporters". As a member of both, I can reassure you that the left hate the Mail with a vengeance. You can be confident in the Mail's support for the Tories at the next GE, whenever that is. The Mail remains a scurrilous, unpleasant, right-wing rag.
You do know the current editor is pro remain unlike Dacre
Hold on a sec.
If you look at the content of the Daily Mail, it's hardly a pro-Remain paper. It's not a gung-ho as the Express, but it's backing Brexit and seeking to narrate and make a success of it.
Isn't it possible that the Mail's anger is nothing to do with Brexit and everything to do with the awfulness of the Prime Minister as a person? It's not as if any plausible successor is going to soften Boris's Brexit in any meaningful way.
Admittedly, "Brexit is still in peril and we must be loyal to Comrade Napoleon Mr Johnson because we don't want Farmer Jones von der Leyen back" is a handy narrative to keep people on board. One that will work right up to the moment it doesn't.
I have no doubt it is personal v Boris but there are shades of brexit as we all know
We receive the actual paper on line every day as my wife does the puzzles but I rarely read it
As far as UVDL is concerned she has been a spectacular failure for the EU, its peoples, and made the case for Brexit better than anyone since Farage
I was up very early this morning (5.30am) to take my son in law into hospital in Wrexham for his complete knee replacement operation later today, and on driving home I listened to the radio
I was aware of the dreadful headlines for Boris from todays papers, and not least from the Mail which has suddenly become the doyen of the left and EU supporters, and expected Boris to be hung out to dry
However, the reporting was more balanced than I expected, indeed fairly critical of Labour who have been using sleaze for some time with no cut through yet in the polls. That is not to say Boris received a free pass, but the alleged comments were put more in balance and Nicky Campbell, in fairness, did say they were receiving texts accusing him of leading the left in the attacks on Boris.
On returning home, Sky were fairly similar, but I believe Kate McCann of Sky was spot on when she said we only have just over a week to see the results of the nationwide ballot and whether it cuts through
I would suggest if after all this Boris does OK and wins Harlepool ( which I do not expect) then Starmer is going to come under huge pressure
The last few days has made next week's election fair more relevant, and important for both Boris and Starmer, while previously I had expected that only Starmer would be under pressure
Big G, I'm afraid you're sadly mistaken if you think that the Mail is "the doyen of the left and EU supporters". As a member of both, I can reassure you that the left hate the Mail with a vengeance. You can be confident in the Mail's support for the Tories at the next GE, whenever that is. The Mail remains a scurrilous, unpleasant, right-wing rag.
You do know the current editor is pro remain unlike Dacre
Hold on a sec.
If you look at the content of the Daily Mail, it's hardly a pro-Remain paper. It's not a gung-ho as the Express, but it's backing Brexit and seeking to narrate and make a success of it.
Isn't it possible that the Mail's anger is nothing to do with Brexit and everything to do with the awfulness of the Prime Minister as a person? It's not as if any plausible successor is going to soften Boris's Brexit in any meaningful way.
Admittedly, "Brexit is still in peril and we must be loyal to Comrade Napoleon Mr Johnson because we don't want Farmer Jones von der Leyen back" is a handy narrative to keep people on board. One that will work right up to the moment it doesn't.
If this is your idea of "backing Brexit" you and I have very different ideas on what backing Brexit means.
Its irrelevant whether Johnson went on to bring in further lockdowns . The defense from some is he did the right thing anyway which completely misses the point . The issue is he viewed more bodies piling up as a price worth paying if he kept the economy open.
There are of course always a range of factors when politicians have to make these difficult decisions , balancing the risk to life v damage to the economy . However it’s the callous nature of the comments and the dismissive tone of the people who could die that is the real problem for no 10 .
What evidence do you have that he said these remarks?
Multiple sources and a recording due in next couple of days.
How long does it take to hand over a recording? If it existed it would have been delivered by now
If people are covertly recording the PM at No 10 would they not have broken the Offical Secrets Act?
I'm still not seeing where the corruption is in taking a loan from his own party.
It wasn't a loan, until it became public knowledge.
My take is
(a) the taxpayer (his landlord) (ie me) didn't pay for it. That is good.
(b) who gives a flying f*** what Boris says in private? We already know he likes flowery language.
I reckon that's how the average Tory-inclined voter will think, too.
Unfortunately it's hiding lots of more real stuff, like cronyism, conflict of interest, etc.
And I thought Dominic Cummings was a contemptible little man, none of what he says is to be believed. Suddenly he is He Who Talks Truth To Power. Laughable.
And there we have it. What amazes me in particular is the confected outrage that a PM having to make life-and-death decisions in the middle on the greatest domestic crisis in 100 years might possibly have vented his emotions in his private office, which is now causing some histrionic types to faint like Victorian aunts exposed to a bare table leg.
Its irrelevant whether Johnson went on to bring in further lockdowns . The defense from some is he did the right thing anyway which completely misses the point . The issue is he viewed more bodies piling up as a price worth paying if he kept the economy open.
There are of course always a range of factors when politicians have to make these difficult decisions , balancing the risk to life v damage to the economy . However it’s the callous nature of the comments and the dismissive tone of the people who could die that is the real problem for no 10 .
What evidence do you have that he said these remarks?
Multiple sources and a recording due in next couple of days.
How long does it take to hand over a recording? If it existed it would have been delivered by now
Drip, drip, drip - wait to the story to nearly end and re-ignite it?
Anecdotal stories from India hospitals that Remdesivir isn't helping much against their local variant.
Disappointing.
More than disappointing, worrying.....its no magic bullet, but it has saved loads of lives.
Remember that lots of these pieces of anecdotal ‘evidence’ have proved unworthy of the billing since COVID began. Most in fact. So I’d suggest waiting for proper evidence before jumping to any conclusions.
Yes, I remember the panic about reinfection in Brazil after that one unreviewed study which then turned out to be a load of rubbish.
See also: the Kentish variant is more lethal; covid victims are getting younger... neither turned out to be true IIRC...
Kent variant being more lethal turned out to be true. That's why the death toll was higher here, more people getting a more lethal variant. The Case Fatality Rate went up, until vaccines took it back down.
I was up very early this morning (5.30am) to take my son in law into hospital in Wrexham for his complete knee replacement operation later today, and on driving home I listened to the radio
I was aware of the dreadful headlines for Boris from todays papers, and not least from the Mail which has suddenly become the doyen of the left and EU supporters, and expected Boris to be hung out to dry
However, the reporting was more balanced than I expected, indeed fairly critical of Labour who have been using sleaze for some time with no cut through yet in the polls. That is not to say Boris received a free pass, but the alleged comments were put more in balance and Nicky Campbell, in fairness, did say they were receiving texts accusing him of leading the left in the attacks on Boris.
On returning home, Sky were fairly similar, but I believe Kate McCann of Sky was spot on when she said we only have just over a week to see the results of the nationwide ballot and whether it cuts through
I would suggest if after all this Boris does OK and wins Harlepool ( which I do not expect) then Starmer is going to come under huge pressure
The last few days has made next week's election fair more relevant, and important for both Boris and Starmer, while previously I had expected that only Starmer would be under pressure
Big G, I'm afraid you're sadly mistaken if you think that the Mail is "the doyen of the left and EU supporters". As a member of both, I can reassure you that the left hate the Mail with a vengeance. You can be confident in the Mail's support for the Tories at the next GE, whenever that is. The Mail remains a scurrilous, unpleasant, right-wing rag.
You do know the current editor is pro remain unlike Dacre
Pro Remain? We've left, surely?
That's true, but the Remain/Leave divide still exists, simply now between those thinking we should have remained and those thinking we should have left.
Some people seem to have been able to bridge the gap to change sides - Truss has done a very good job, while our own RochdalePioneers has swapped the other direction with the added zeal of the convert. But many haven't reconciled to the result yet including eg Scott and the Mail's new Editor.
Most people seem to have moved on from it, in my view.
Current battles are fulcruming around civil liberties, gender/race, "culture", and climate change.
What achieves “cut through” and enters the public consciousness, and which stories remain confined to the Westminster bubble, is part of the art and alchemy of politics. Having an eye for the difference between what gets voters excited and what makes people in Westminster excitable is key to successful political communications.
Personally I still don't think the the decor/furnishings stuff is going anywhere. Boris can brazen that out.
The "pile bodies high" remark is much more damaging and will cut through with the public though. That's absolutely terrible for Boris if proven to be true.
It's pretty bad even if it's not proven to be true. We've already seen that politically its treated as absolute fact already, and is prominent enough to enter public consciousness.
Likewise, did Boris really say 'F*ck business'? I realised yesterday I have no idea, so perhaps it is certain, but even if it isnt it didn't stop me assuming it was, since it seemed like what he'd say.
Its irrelevant whether Johnson went on to bring in further lockdowns . The defense from some is he did the right thing anyway which completely misses the point . The issue is he viewed more bodies piling up as a price worth paying if he kept the economy open.
There are of course always a range of factors when politicians have to make these difficult decisions , balancing the risk to life v damage to the economy . However it’s the callous nature of the comments and the dismissive tone of the people who could die that is the real problem for no 10 .
What evidence do you have that he said these remarks?
Multiple sources and a recording due in next couple of days.
How long does it take to hand over a recording? If it existed it would have been delivered by now
Much more effective to produce it after the PM vehemently denied saying it I would have thought.
Exactly. Why produce it now? Knowledge that it exists has already flushed out two witnesses willing to testify under oath. There's a whole nest of rats to be flushed out...
Anecdotal stories from India hospitals that Remdesivir isn't helping much against their local variant.
Disappointing.
More than disappointing, worrying.....its no magic bullet, but it has saved loads of lives.
Remember that lots of these pieces of anecdotal ‘evidence’ have proved unworthy of the billing since COVID began. Most in fact. So I’d suggest waiting for proper evidence before jumping to any conclusions.
Yes, I remember the panic about reinfection in Brazil after that one unreviewed study which then turned out to be a load of rubbish.
See also: the Kentish variant is more lethal; covid victims are getting younger... neither turned out to be true IIRC...
Kent variant being more lethal turned out to be true. That's why the death toll was higher here, more people getting a more lethal variant. The Case Fatality Rate went up, until vaccines took it back down.
It is hard to keep up but I thought the most recent evidence was that it was not in fact more lethal, just more transmissible.
I'm still not seeing where the corruption is in taking a loan from his own party.
It wasn't a loan, until it became public knowledge.
My take is
(a) the taxpayer (his landlord) (ie me) didn't pay for it. That is good.
(b) who gives a flying f*** what Boris says in private? We already know he likes flowery language.
I reckon that's how the average Tory-inclined voter will think, too.
Unfortunately it's hiding lots of more real stuff, like cronyism, conflict of interest, etc.
And I thought Dominic Cummings was a contemptible little man, none of what he says is to be believed. Suddenly he is He Who Talks Truth To Power. Laughable.
And there we have it. What amazes me in particular is the confected outrage that a PM having to make life-and-death decisions in the middle on the greatest domestic crisis in 100 years might possibly have vented his emotions in his private office, which is now causing some histrionic types to faint like Victorian aunts exposed to a bare table leg.
Well said, between this and wallpaper it has to be the most boring "scandal" in decades.
Quite frankly if the PM was against the idea of lockdowns unless absolutely necessary - good - that's not a bad thing. The hysteria from zero Covidiots over the past year has gotten so ridiculous now.
Anecdotal stories from India hospitals that Remdesivir isn't helping much against their local variant.
Disappointing.
More than disappointing, worrying.....its no magic bullet, but it has saved loads of lives.
Remember that lots of these pieces of anecdotal ‘evidence’ have proved unworthy of the billing since COVID began. Most in fact. So I’d suggest waiting for proper evidence before jumping to any conclusions.
Yes, I remember the panic about reinfection in Brazil after that one unreviewed study which then turned out to be a load of rubbish.
See also: the Kentish variant is more lethal; covid victims are getting younger... neither turned out to be true IIRC...
Kent variant being more lethal turned out to be true. That's why the death toll was higher here, more people getting a more lethal variant. The Case Fatality Rate went up, until vaccines took it back down.
It is hard to keep up but I thought the most recent evidence was that it was not in fact more lethal, just more transmissible.
If it was only more transmissible the CFR wouldn't have gone up surely?
Indeed my understanding is the CFR has been tracking down all pandemic because people have gotten better medicines (dexamethasone) and other treatments (proning). But whereever B117 has hit the CFR has gone back up again. More transmissible and more deadly is an unpleasant combination.
I'm still not seeing where the corruption is in taking a loan from his own party.
It wasn't a loan, until it became public knowledge.
My take is
(a) the taxpayer (his landlord) (ie me) didn't pay for it. That is good.
(b) who gives a flying f*** what Boris says in private? We already know he likes flowery language.
I reckon that's how the average Tory-inclined voter will think, too.
Unfortunately it's hiding lots of more real stuff, like cronyism, conflict of interest, etc.
And I thought Dominic Cummings was a contemptible little man, none of what he says is to be believed. Suddenly he is He Who Talks Truth To Power. Laughable.
And there we have it. What amazes me in particular is the confected outrage that a PM having to make life-and-death decisions in the middle on the greatest domestic crisis in 100 years might possibly have vented his emotions in his private office, which is now causing some histrionic types to faint like Victorian aunts exposed to a bare table leg.
The "emotion" he was venting was that he didn't want the political hit of a further lockdown, regardless of how many dead grannies it involved. That's a genuinely deeply unpleasant "emotion" that speaks appallingly about Johnson as a human being. It's not just a matter of flowery language - the opinion it expresses is foul.
I've said that I don't think it will cut through with the wider public. But it isn't histrionics to personally find it all very unpleasant.
I'm still not seeing where the corruption is in taking a loan from his own party.
It wasn't a loan, until it became public knowledge.
My take is
(a) the taxpayer (his landlord) (ie me) didn't pay for it. That is good.
(b) who gives a flying f*** what Boris says in private? We already know he likes flowery language.
I reckon that's how the average Tory-inclined voter will think, too.
Unfortunately it's hiding lots of more real stuff, like cronyism, conflict of interest, etc.
And I thought Dominic Cummings was a contemptible little man, none of what he says is to be believed. Suddenly he is He Who Talks Truth To Power. Laughable.
And there we have it. What amazes me in particular is the confected outrage that a PM having to make life-and-death decisions in the middle on the greatest domestic crisis in 100 years might possibly have vented his emotions in his private office, which is now causing some histrionic types to faint like Victorian aunts exposed to a bare table leg.
The "emotion" he was venting was that he didn't want the political hit of a further lockdown, regardless of how many dead grannies it involved. That's a genuinely deeply unpleasant "emotion" that speaks appallingly about Johnson as a human being. It's not just a matter of flowery language - the opinion it expresses is foul.
I've said that I don't think it will cut through with the wider public. But it isn't histrionics to personally find it all very unpleasant.
You’re making quite a jump there. Lockdowns cause deaths, it’s just that SkyNews don’t have a daily tracker on their screen for it.
Its irrelevant whether Johnson went on to bring in further lockdowns . The defense from some is he did the right thing anyway which completely misses the point . The issue is he viewed more bodies piling up as a price worth paying if he kept the economy open.
There are of course always a range of factors when politicians have to make these difficult decisions , balancing the risk to life v damage to the economy . However it’s the callous nature of the comments and the dismissive tone of the people who could die that is the real problem for no 10 .
What evidence do you have that he said these remarks?
Multiple sources and a recording due in next couple of days.
How long does it take to hand over a recording? If it existed it would have been delivered by now
Much more effective to produce it after the PM vehemently denied saying it I would have thought.
Exactly. Why produce it now? Knowledge that it exists has already flushed out two witnesses willing to testify under oath. There's a whole nest of rats to be flushed out...
Or its produced two disgruntled people willing to say to Peston they're prepared to, but unwilling to actually come forward and say anything. Or perhaps they are but Peston knows their identity will discredit them?
The ONS have just suggests that deaths involving covid 19 among people all age groups 50 and above has fallen by at least 95%
Now that is what matters to us all
If only that was the case, some of the interviews on Breakfast TV talking about the PMs bedding were ludicrous compared to the reports that followed from India.
We are so lucky in the UK to have the Vaccine programme we do.
I'm still not seeing where the corruption is in taking a loan from his own party.
It wasn't a loan, until it became public knowledge.
My take is
(a) the taxpayer (his landlord) (ie me) didn't pay for it. That is good.
(b) who gives a flying f*** what Boris says in private? We already know he likes flowery language.
I reckon that's how the average Tory-inclined voter will think, too.
Unfortunately it's hiding lots of more real stuff, like cronyism, conflict of interest, etc.
And I thought Dominic Cummings was a contemptible little man, none of what he says is to be believed. Suddenly he is He Who Talks Truth To Power. Laughable.
And there we have it. What amazes me in particular is the confected outrage that a PM having to make life-and-death decisions in the middle on the greatest domestic crisis in 100 years might possibly have vented his emotions in his private office, which is now causing some histrionic types to faint like Victorian aunts exposed to a bare table leg.
The "emotion" he was venting was that he didn't want the political hit of a further lockdown, regardless of how many dead grannies it involved. That's a genuinely deeply unpleasant "emotion" that speaks appallingly about Johnson as a human being. It's not just a matter of flowery language - the opinion it expresses is foul.
I've said that I don't think it will cut through with the wider public. But it isn't histrionics to personally find it all very unpleasant.
Oh cut the crap!
Not wanting to strip people's civil liberties, imprison them in their homes, shutter their businesses, send people out of work etc is not remotely unpleasant.
People who are such extreme zero covidiots that they think the choice is "dead granny" or "shut everything down, there are no consequences for doing so" are deeply unpleasant and foul.
I'm still not seeing where the corruption is in taking a loan from his own party.
It wasn't a loan, until it became public knowledge.
My take is
(a) the taxpayer (his landlord) (ie me) didn't pay for it. That is good.
(b) who gives a flying f*** what Boris says in private? We already know he likes flowery language.
I reckon that's how the average Tory-inclined voter will think, too.
Unfortunately it's hiding lots of more real stuff, like cronyism, conflict of interest, etc.
And I thought Dominic Cummings was a contemptible little man, none of what he says is to be believed. Suddenly he is He Who Talks Truth To Power. Laughable.
And there we have it. What amazes me in particular is the confected outrage that a PM having to make life-and-death decisions in the middle on the greatest domestic crisis in 100 years might possibly have vented his emotions in his private office, which is now causing some histrionic types to faint like Victorian aunts exposed to a bare table leg.
The "emotion" he was venting was that he didn't want the political hit of a further lockdown, regardless of how many dead grannies it involved. That's a genuinely deeply unpleasant "emotion" that speaks appallingly about Johnson as a human being. It's not just a matter of flowery language - the opinion it expresses is foul.
I've said that I don't think it will cut through with the wider public. But it isn't histrionics to personally find it all very unpleasant.
Really? Were you there? You seem to know a lot of detail and background from anonymous sources.....
I was up very early this morning (5.30am) to take my son in law into hospital in Wrexham for his complete knee replacement operation later today, and on driving home I listened to the radio
I was aware of the dreadful headlines for Boris from todays papers, and not least from the Mail which has suddenly become the doyen of the left and EU supporters, and expected Boris to be hung out to dry
However, the reporting was more balanced than I expected, indeed fairly critical of Labour who have been using sleaze for some time with no cut through yet in the polls. That is not to say Boris received a free pass, but the alleged comments were put more in balance and Nicky Campbell, in fairness, did say they were receiving texts accusing him of leading the left in the attacks on Boris.
On returning home, Sky were fairly similar, but I believe Kate McCann of Sky was spot on when she said we only have just over a week to see the results of the nationwide ballot and whether it cuts through
I would suggest if after all this Boris does OK and wins Harlepool ( which I do not expect) then Starmer is going to come under huge pressure
The last few days has made next week's election fair more relevant, and important for both Boris and Starmer, while previously I had expected that only Starmer would be under pressure
Big G, I'm afraid you're sadly mistaken if you think that the Mail is "the doyen of the left and EU supporters". As a member of both, I can reassure you that the left hate the Mail with a vengeance. You can be confident in the Mail's support for the Tories at the next GE, whenever that is. The Mail remains a scurrilous, unpleasant, right-wing rag.
You do know the current editor is pro remain unlike Dacre
Hold on a sec.
If you look at the content of the Daily Mail, it's hardly a pro-Remain paper. It's not a gung-ho as the Express, but it's backing Brexit and seeking to narrate and make a success of it.
Isn't it possible that the Mail's anger is nothing to do with Brexit and everything to do with the awfulness of the Prime Minister as a person? It's not as if any plausible successor is going to soften Boris's Brexit in any meaningful way.
Admittedly, "Brexit is still in peril and we must be loyal to Comrade Napoleon Mr Johnson because we don't want Farmer Jones von der Leyen back" is a handy narrative to keep people on board. One that will work right up to the moment it doesn't.
If this is your idea of "backing Brexit" you and I have very different ideas on what backing Brexit means.
Oh Phillip, dear sweet pirate that you are, you do come out with some silly stuff sometimes.
One. It's perfectly possible for a newspaper hack to write a column expressing what their proprietor wants, not what they personally believe. And most proprietors have at least half an eye on commercial realities as well as megaphoning their own views. And the commercial reality of 2016 was that we were in a 52:48 world, so unless you want to pander to a niche, you cover as many bases as you can. Times went remain, Sunday Times went leave. Mail went leave, Mail on Sunday went remain. Pretty commercially rational, really.
Two. We're post 2016, post 2019. We've left. That changes the political dynamics. Is there any evidence that the Mail's editor is currently seeking to sabotage or soften Brexit?
I was up very early this morning (5.30am) to take my son in law into hospital in Wrexham for his complete knee replacement operation later today, and on driving home I listened to the radio
I was aware of the dreadful headlines for Boris from todays papers, and not least from the Mail which has suddenly become the doyen of the left and EU supporters, and expected Boris to be hung out to dry
However, the reporting was more balanced than I expected, indeed fairly critical of Labour who have been using sleaze for some time with no cut through yet in the polls. That is not to say Boris received a free pass, but the alleged comments were put more in balance and Nicky Campbell, in fairness, did say they were receiving texts accusing him of leading the left in the attacks on Boris.
On returning home, Sky were fairly similar, but I believe Kate McCann of Sky was spot on when she said we only have just over a week to see the results of the nationwide ballot and whether it cuts through
I would suggest if after all this Boris does OK and wins Harlepool ( which I do not expect) then Starmer is going to come under huge pressure
The last few days has made next week's election fair more relevant, and important for both Boris and Starmer, while previously I had expected that only Starmer would be under pressure
Big G, I'm afraid you're sadly mistaken if you think that the Mail is "the doyen of the left and EU supporters". As a member of both, I can reassure you that the left hate the Mail with a vengeance. You can be confident in the Mail's support for the Tories at the next GE, whenever that is. The Mail remains a scurrilous, unpleasant, right-wing rag.
You do know the current editor is pro remain unlike Dacre
Hold on a sec.
If you look at the content of the Daily Mail, it's hardly a pro-Remain paper. It's not a gung-ho as the Express, but it's backing Brexit and seeking to narrate and make a success of it.
Isn't it possible that the Mail's anger is nothing to do with Brexit and everything to do with the awfulness of the Prime Minister as a person? It's not as if any plausible successor is going to soften Boris's Brexit in any meaningful way.
Admittedly, "Brexit is still in peril and we must be loyal to Comrade Napoleon Mr Johnson because we don't want Farmer Jones von der Leyen back" is a handy narrative to keep people on board. One that will work right up to the moment it doesn't.
If this is your idea of "backing Brexit" you and I have very different ideas on what backing Brexit means.
The MoS which took the opposite view to the Mail on Brexit I believe?
Two sources who claim Boris Johnson did say he would rather have ‘bodies pile high in their thousands’ than implement a third lockdown are prepared to speak publicly.
That Johnson is a liar will not be news to anyone. The only attack that will work is convincing the thicko Johnson lovers-well represented on here-that it matters
I happen to be able to see the wood for the trees, as can SO. No one cares enough to get their blood pressure raised about these trivialities, apart from a tiny number of partisan political obsessives. The voters are too busy down the pub, playing golf, keeping their businesses afloat, making up for lost time with family etc... and they are the ones that have life right.
Family being the key word. The PM chose to kill members of lots of people's families to generate "Boris Saves Christmas" headlines. Now that the proof comes out, expect the anger to turn into rage.
When you say "chose to kill" you alienate anyone who is not already convinced that Johnson is evil incarnate. There will be rage - among people who already agree that he is evil incarnate.
It was deliberate and it was done twice.
First - the policy to ship Covid patients into care homes from hospital with no testing allowed. Reports at the time of fraught care home staff arguing with ambulance crews that they wouldn't take the residents back, denials that it was policy until it was proven. Result - 20,000 dead in care homes in a short period Second - the denial of the need to lock down through the winter. The declaration of the absurd 5 day period where Covid wouldn't get us. The Boris Saves Christmas headlines. Result? 68k cases a day in January. We haven't had the proof yet, but Cummings and now two other people have come forward to prove it.
Watch the Daily Mail. Their coverage at the moment is there to whip up a frenzy. Next they move into heart-rendering stories of people who lost their closest loved-ones as a direct result of this policy. We already had it on radio phone-ins yesterday, and the popular tabloids will be plastered with it.
I've been saying for months that this policy will sink him and that the Mail would go crazy over it. And here they are.
The Daily Heil exists to whip up hate.
But its impact is rather trivial and its typically laughed at by most normal people.
Its a shame you've succombed to its lure.
Putting things in context
The UK is fretting about some wallpaper meanwhile
The head of the EU believes her priority is who gets to sit on a sofa first rather than the 1000s of her citizens dying each day
The french army is making noises about why it might be better if it ran the country instead of the fop president
The UK is "fretting" about the probity of its PM. This is allowed, I think, despite this being a big old complex world with lots of bad stuff going on.
LOL show me a UK PM whose probity wasnt questionable. Likewise a LOTO
Ok. So you don't care about this stuff and never will.
"Man of the World" Alanbrooke. He knows how this dirty old world ticks. Seen it all, done it all.
I was up very early this morning (5.30am) to take my son in law into hospital in Wrexham for his complete knee replacement operation later today, and on driving home I listened to the radio
I was aware of the dreadful headlines for Boris from todays papers, and not least from the Mail which has suddenly become the doyen of the left and EU supporters, and expected Boris to be hung out to dry
However, the reporting was more balanced than I expected, indeed fairly critical of Labour who have been using sleaze for some time with no cut through yet in the polls. That is not to say Boris received a free pass, but the alleged comments were put more in balance and Nicky Campbell, in fairness, did say they were receiving texts accusing him of leading the left in the attacks on Boris.
On returning home, Sky were fairly similar, but I believe Kate McCann of Sky was spot on when she said we only have just over a week to see the results of the nationwide ballot and whether it cuts through
I would suggest if after all this Boris does OK and wins Harlepool ( which I do not expect) then Starmer is going to come under huge pressure
The last few days has made next week's election fair more relevant, and important for both Boris and Starmer, while previously I had expected that only Starmer would be under pressure
Big G, I'm afraid you're sadly mistaken if you think that the Mail is "the doyen of the left and EU supporters". As a member of both, I can reassure you that the left hate the Mail with a vengeance. You can be confident in the Mail's support for the Tories at the next GE, whenever that is. The Mail remains a scurrilous, unpleasant, right-wing rag.
You do know the current editor is pro remain unlike Dacre
Hold on a sec.
If you look at the content of the Daily Mail, it's hardly a pro-Remain paper. It's not a gung-ho as the Express, but it's backing Brexit and seeking to narrate and make a success of it.
Isn't it possible that the Mail's anger is nothing to do with Brexit and everything to do with the awfulness of the Prime Minister as a person? It's not as if any plausible successor is going to soften Boris's Brexit in any meaningful way.
Admittedly, "Brexit is still in peril and we must be loyal to Comrade Napoleon Mr Johnson because we don't want Farmer Jones von der Leyen back" is a handy narrative to keep people on board. One that will work right up to the moment it doesn't.
If this is your idea of "backing Brexit" you and I have very different ideas on what backing Brexit means.
The MoS which took the opposite view to the Mail on Brexit I believe?
The MoS whose then Editor is now the new Editor of the Mail.
And the Editorial line of the Mail changed when the new Editor came in.
There appears to be both a "nothing to see here, move along" defence from PB Tories and pessimists on the left saying "it won't cut through".
It will, and here's why. The capstone was, is, and remains the government policy to let people die en masse to save Christmas / get positive headlines. There is no longer any doubt that Liar said it - both the promised recording and now people willing to testify under oath points to it happening. What will do him isn't that he said it, but that he has been caught lying about saying it.
He could have survived this. "There is a delicate balance to strike between being ultra-cautious and killing the economy. Whilst I regret the colourful language said in the middle of the most harrowing of meetings in the midst of a national emergency, I don't regret being the person making the decisions - I almost died of Covid remember." He'd have been OK.
Instead we have total denial. Never said it, didn't happen, of course it didn't happen would be an outrage to say such an awful thing". Then its proven he did say it. But his own definition then its the worst thing that could have been said.
The rest of the scandals - and he should resign like Mandelson over the undeclared house loan - will then suddenly gain weight whereas by themselves they would have been ineffective.
Not that this is manna from heaven for Labour. All this does is removes Liar and the cabal of idiots from government and replaces them with Sunak/Truss. Labour and IDStarmer won't get a look in.
@Philip_Thompson, for example, after a quiet day yesterday getting his story together for today, has come back all guns blazing. I paraphrase, but "Boris saved the lives of the nation with his clarion call on vaccinations", a fair point, and indeed all the other nonsense for Johnson is just froth.
On the news last night LauraK. took us into Mrs May's dour beige Downing Street flat, proof if it were needed that a tasteful makeover was desperately required, irrespective of who paid. But back to the saved lives element of the story. Isn't Johnson's popularity all about his Churchillian patriotism, leading the nation from the front to defeat the pandemic? Indeed it is, and should his callous, angry quip be true, it might cause him a problem. And if it does, will Mr and Mrs Sunak, just have to live with Carrie's god-awful wallpaper?
Or - radical idea - they can buy some new wallpaper or cans of paint like the rest of the world do.
Call me boring if you want but I don't see what's wrong with a can of Magnolia from B&Q. Good enough for me.
What others do on their walls - to be honest I couldn't care less, so long as I'm not expected to pay for it.
I'm sorry but £60k to redecorate a small flat is a racket. Its twatty wallpaper sold at ludicrous prices to effete snobs. Someone posted the Harry and Paul "I saw you coming" sketch the other day and its literally that.
There's no need to use wallpaper, paint is a fraction of the cost and just as good in my opinion.
But other people have other priorities. I'm a coffee snob, I love the stuff but won't drink instant, I hate it. A coffee isn't a decent coffee without a proper crema. But other people will look at it and think there's nothing wrong with instant, in the same way as I see nothing wrong with paint. 🤷♂️
Everyone has stuff they want to spend their money on. So long as they're not spending mine I don't care.
Unfortunately for any owner of a listed building they will have to follow the design guidance from relevant authorities, a must for a PM, or face their wrath if discovered. I once visited the rear of a property in Worcester taking design advice from local authority officer ahead of submission for planning. The location at rear was only accessible through the building, and after the meeting the officer asked if he could take some extra photos of neighbouring properties, as there were significant numbers of UPVC windows installed to rear elevations. He must have had a field day sending the enforcement letters.
As I commented earlier Douglas Ross is poor and Anas Sarwar is the rising star for Labour
And as I also said, I hope Labour do take SNP votes and do well in Scotland as it improves the union
I am far more concerned to retain the union and if that means voting Labour then In would do it
Fair enough, Labour also have a chance of taking Edinburgh Central on this poll too from the Conservatives and beating Angus Robertson in the process too.
With just over a week until polling day Sturgeon now faces May 2017 style humiliation if the Panelbase poll is correct, from polling showing an SNP landslide just a few months ago to now facing the prospect of the SNP actually losing seats and failing to get a majority at all
I'm still not seeing where the corruption is in taking a loan from his own party.
It wasn't a loan, until it became public knowledge.
My take is
(a) the taxpayer (his landlord) (ie me) didn't pay for it. That is good.
(b) who gives a flying f*** what Boris says in private? We already know he likes flowery language.
I reckon that's how the average Tory-inclined voter will think, too.
Unfortunately it's hiding lots of more real stuff, like cronyism, conflict of interest, etc.
And I thought Dominic Cummings was a contemptible little man, none of what he says is to be believed. Suddenly he is He Who Talks Truth To Power. Laughable.
And there we have it. What amazes me in particular is the confected outrage that a PM having to make life-and-death decisions in the middle on the greatest domestic crisis in 100 years might possibly have vented his emotions in his private office, which is now causing some histrionic types to faint like Victorian aunts exposed to a bare table leg.
And yet, if it's a nothing, why lie about it? Had he fessed up on Sunday, the story really would have been dead by now, for the reasons you suggest.
It's as if Cummings knew that Johnson would take the dishonest route, and that would get him into even more trouble. Sociopathic, but smart.
I was up very early this morning (5.30am) to take my son in law into hospital in Wrexham for his complete knee replacement operation later today, and on driving home I listened to the radio
I was aware of the dreadful headlines for Boris from todays papers, and not least from the Mail which has suddenly become the doyen of the left and EU supporters, and expected Boris to be hung out to dry
However, the reporting was more balanced than I expected, indeed fairly critical of Labour who have been using sleaze for some time with no cut through yet in the polls. That is not to say Boris received a free pass, but the alleged comments were put more in balance and Nicky Campbell, in fairness, did say they were receiving texts accusing him of leading the left in the attacks on Boris.
On returning home, Sky were fairly similar, but I believe Kate McCann of Sky was spot on when she said we only have just over a week to see the results of the nationwide ballot and whether it cuts through
I would suggest if after all this Boris does OK and wins Harlepool ( which I do not expect) then Starmer is going to come under huge pressure
The last few days has made next week's election fair more relevant, and important for both Boris and Starmer, while previously I had expected that only Starmer would be under pressure
Big G, I'm afraid you're sadly mistaken if you think that the Mail is "the doyen of the left and EU supporters". As a member of both, I can reassure you that the left hate the Mail with a vengeance. You can be confident in the Mail's support for the Tories at the next GE, whenever that is. The Mail remains a scurrilous, unpleasant, right-wing rag.
You do know the current editor is pro remain unlike Dacre
Hold on a sec.
If you look at the content of the Daily Mail, it's hardly a pro-Remain paper. It's not a gung-ho as the Express, but it's backing Brexit and seeking to narrate and make a success of it.
Isn't it possible that the Mail's anger is nothing to do with Brexit and everything to do with the awfulness of the Prime Minister as a person? It's not as if any plausible successor is going to soften Boris's Brexit in any meaningful way.
Admittedly, "Brexit is still in peril and we must be loyal to Comrade Napoleon Mr Johnson because we don't want Farmer Jones von der Leyen back" is a handy narrative to keep people on board. One that will work right up to the moment it doesn't.
If this is your idea of "backing Brexit" you and I have very different ideas on what backing Brexit means.
The MoS which took the opposite view to the Mail on Brexit I believe?
Actually It did and it was so ridiculous
Daily Mail - pro brexit
Mail on Sunday - pro remain
The difference Dacre pro brexit editor of the Daily Mail
Geordie Greig editor of the Mail on Sunday pro remain
The payment for Carrie’s wallpaper was effectively money laundering.
The statement that “the payment for Carrie’s wallpaper was effectively money laundering” is effectively libellous.
It’s true though.
Money from donors has been paid to benefit Boris and Carrie, via a deliberately obfuscatory Conservative Party transaction.
I suggest you go and research what the criminal act of money laundering is all about.
A deliberately obfuscatory way to avoid it looking as if Boris is taking money directly from donors.
(But which he has now been forced to pay back).
I wonder if he has paid tax on what was effectively a loan.
Oh good, you have dropped the libellous accusation of the serious criminal offence of money laundering.
No I haven’t. It’s effectively a form of money laundering, albeit a legal one. The intent was to obscure the source of funds.
Deary me.
“Effectively a form of rape but a legal one”. “Effectively a form of murder but a legal one”. Etc...
Both rape (in a conjugal context) and murder (the act of killing someone, maybe in wartime) have been legal in the past and the latter may still be.
Come down from your fake moral high ground.
Nonetheless you are wrong in describing this as money laundering. Only if the money for the refurbishment came from the proceeds of crime could its use be described as money laundering.
There may well be other concerns: eg payment in expectation of reward / failure to comply with electoral rules on donations etc. But these do not per se make what has happened money-laundering.
It's actually kind of the opposite to money laundering. They've taken clean money and turned it into dirty money. Dirty money being a good description of cash donated under the counter to Boris Johnson to buy influence.
How do we know it wasn't? Just asking!
Ah well good question. I was giving the benefit of the doubt on that one. But I think if it was it'd be going the traditional route - into weird looking "catering" establishments in quiet, affluent parts of London. Sorts pf places that you hardly ever see anybody in and yet turnover a very decent whack.
Hopefully the vaccine pushing further down to everyone in their 40s soon will put more pressure on the reproductive rate; probably counterbalanced by May 17th opening. Our rollout strategy was correct, get the deaths down first but I think the counterpoint is that it is backloaded in terms of those who were always going to spread the virus the most.
Its irrelevant whether Johnson went on to bring in further lockdowns . The defense from some is he did the right thing anyway which completely misses the point . The issue is he viewed more bodies piling up as a price worth paying if he kept the economy open.
There are of course always a range of factors when politicians have to make these difficult decisions , balancing the risk to life v damage to the economy . However it’s the callous nature of the comments and the dismissive tone of the people who could die that is the real problem for no 10 .
What evidence do you have that he said these remarks?
Multiple sources and a recording due in next couple of days.
How long does it take to hand over a recording? If it existed it would have been delivered by now
Much more effective to produce it after the PM vehemently denied saying it I would have thought.
Exactly. Why produce it now? Knowledge that it exists has already flushed out two witnesses willing to testify under oath. There's a whole nest of rats to be flushed out...
And at the end of the day this new Star Chamber will have proved ... what? That the PM might have said something in anger in his private office that didn't change policy in the slightest because the decision had already been made? This supposedly high crime is really just another arx e cloaca * for Boris' detractors to toss themselves off over until he mysteriously rises in the polls again and they retire in state of perplexity, if not apoplexy...
*A mountain out of a molehill; more literally, a citadel out of shit.
Hopefully the vaccine pushing further down to everyone in their 40s soon will put more pressure ont he reproductive rate; probably counterbalanced by May 17th opening.
Between vaccines and naturally acquired immunity we're probably already at the herd immunity point.
Its irrelevant whether Johnson went on to bring in further lockdowns . The defense from some is he did the right thing anyway which completely misses the point . The issue is he viewed more bodies piling up as a price worth paying if he kept the economy open.
There are of course always a range of factors when politicians have to make these difficult decisions , balancing the risk to life v damage to the economy . However it’s the callous nature of the comments and the dismissive tone of the people who could die that is the real problem for no 10 .
What evidence do you have that he said these remarks?
Multiple sources and a recording due in next couple of days.
How long does it take to hand over a recording? If it existed it would have been delivered by now
Much more effective to produce it after the PM vehemently denied saying it I would have thought.
Exactly. Why produce it now? Knowledge that it exists has already flushed out two witnesses willing to testify under oath. There's a whole nest of rats to be flushed out...
Or its produced two disgruntled people willing to say to Peston they're prepared to, but unwilling to actually come forward and say anything. Or perhaps they are but Peston knows their identity will discredit them?
Cummings and Cain perhaps?
Perhaps! That's half the fun. That the people coming forward are disgruntled is beyond question. The real question is why Boris is Ben Swain levels of dumb in not knowing that if you piss about with people like big bad Dom you get burned.
I was up very early this morning (5.30am) to take my son in law into hospital in Wrexham for his complete knee replacement operation later today, and on driving home I listened to the radio
I was aware of the dreadful headlines for Boris from todays papers, and not least from the Mail which has suddenly become the doyen of the left and EU supporters, and expected Boris to be hung out to dry
However, the reporting was more balanced than I expected, indeed fairly critical of Labour who have been using sleaze for some time with no cut through yet in the polls. That is not to say Boris received a free pass, but the alleged comments were put more in balance and Nicky Campbell, in fairness, did say they were receiving texts accusing him of leading the left in the attacks on Boris.
On returning home, Sky were fairly similar, but I believe Kate McCann of Sky was spot on when she said we only have just over a week to see the results of the nationwide ballot and whether it cuts through
I would suggest if after all this Boris does OK and wins Harlepool ( which I do not expect) then Starmer is going to come under huge pressure
The last few days has made next week's election fair more relevant, and important for both Boris and Starmer, while previously I had expected that only Starmer would be under pressure
Big G, I'm afraid you're sadly mistaken if you think that the Mail is "the doyen of the left and EU supporters". As a member of both, I can reassure you that the left hate the Mail with a vengeance. You can be confident in the Mail's support for the Tories at the next GE, whenever that is. The Mail remains a scurrilous, unpleasant, right-wing rag.
You do know the current editor is pro remain unlike Dacre
Hold on a sec.
If you look at the content of the Daily Mail, it's hardly a pro-Remain paper. It's not a gung-ho as the Express, but it's backing Brexit and seeking to narrate and make a success of it.
Isn't it possible that the Mail's anger is nothing to do with Brexit and everything to do with the awfulness of the Prime Minister as a person? It's not as if any plausible successor is going to soften Boris's Brexit in any meaningful way.
Admittedly, "Brexit is still in peril and we must be loyal to Comrade Napoleon Mr Johnson because we don't want Farmer Jones von der Leyen back" is a handy narrative to keep people on board. One that will work right up to the moment it doesn't.
If this is your idea of "backing Brexit" you and I have very different ideas on what backing Brexit means.
The MoS which took the opposite view to the Mail on Brexit I believe?
Actually It did and it was so ridiculous
Daily Mail - pro brexit
Mail on Sunday - pro remain
The difference Dacre pro brexit editor of the Daily Mail
Geordie Greig editor of the Mail on Sunday pro remain
Geordie Greig now edits both
Thereby lies your answer
If the Mail is not careful it risks a big defection of readers to the Express, Mail readers are even more pro Brexit than Boris is
As I commented earlier Douglas Ross is poor and Anas Sarwar is the rising star for Labour
And as I also said, I hope Labour do take SNP votes and do well in Scotland as it improves the union
I am far more concerned to retain the union and if that means voting Labour then In would do it
Fair enough, Labour also have a chance of taking Edinburgh Central on this poll too from the Conservatives and beating Angus Robertson in the process too.
With just over a week until polling day Sturgeon now faces May 2017 style humiliation if the Panelbase poll is correct, from polling showing an SNP landslide just a few months ago to now facing the prospect of the SNP actually losing seats and failing to get a majority at all
We are sometimes in disagreement but we do share the common belief that the union is valuable to all of is living in the UK
And I hope that Sarwar further grows his support reducing the SNPs influence
Its irrelevant whether Johnson went on to bring in further lockdowns . The defense from some is he did the right thing anyway which completely misses the point . The issue is he viewed more bodies piling up as a price worth paying if he kept the economy open.
There are of course always a range of factors when politicians have to make these difficult decisions , balancing the risk to life v damage to the economy . However it’s the callous nature of the comments and the dismissive tone of the people who could die that is the real problem for no 10 .
What evidence do you have that he said these remarks?
Multiple sources and a recording due in next couple of days.
How long does it take to hand over a recording? If it existed it would have been delivered by now
Much more effective to produce it after the PM vehemently denied saying it I would have thought.
Exactly. Why produce it now? Knowledge that it exists has already flushed out two witnesses willing to testify under oath. There's a whole nest of rats to be flushed out...
And at the end of the day this new Star Chamber will have proved ... what? That the PM might have said something in anger in his private office that didn't change policy in the slightest because the decision had already been made? This supposedly high crime is really just another arx e cloaca * for Boris' detractors to toss themselves off over until he mysteriously rises in the polls again and they retire in state of perplexity, if not apoplexy...
*A mountain out of a molehill; more literally, a citadel out of shit.
When the real news going on in the world includes people building funeral pyres in India because they're so overwhelmed, while in the UK we're virtually Covid-free and planning on unlocking permanently - to be banging on about private conversations allegedly had months ago is petty meaningless crap.
There's real news going on. The problem is the real news doesn't suit those with an agenda to push. The real news is that things are going well here and awfully elsewhere and we should be discussing how can we move on from saving lives in this country to saving lives overseas in India and whereever else is struggling not this ridiculous petty shit.
On Boris, none of the current stories will bring him down, obviously. Not the redecoration. Nor the intemperate remarks. Nor the cronyism/mates' contracts. Nor the failure to replace Alex Allan. Nor the failure to update the Register of Members' Interests. Nor the failure to sack Patel for breaching the Ministerial Code. Nor the loss of lives to Covid. Nor the money wasted on track and trace. Nor Greensill and Cameron. I could go on. Individually, each of these does not have cut through. But collectively, they might, as a narrative of sleaze and cronyism is building.
I agree with those who argue that despite the Tories being more or less in power for 11 years, the Boris government really is brand new. And it's been in power less than 18 months. It usually takes a lot longer than that for sleaze allegations to take hold. In this respect, this government is performing more swiftly than any predecessor I can think of. I'm beginning to wonder if Boris will survive as long as I'd previously assumed. Government/ministerial/civil service self-discipline seems to be severely lacking, and the level of leaks and smears so early in Boris's reign does not augur well for a prolonged Johnson premiership. Hope I'm right (though I'll probably change my mind next week).
Apart from "Boris" instead of "Johnson" - c'mon! - a super post from you here, Al.
Way I see it, he'll be around for a while yet, but the frightful notion of "PM for a decade or more" is receding. Great, because I was starting to give that some credence and it was making me feel a bit ill.
I'm still not seeing where the corruption is in taking a loan from his own party.
It wasn't a loan, until it became public knowledge.
My take is
(a) the taxpayer (his landlord) (ie me) didn't pay for it. That is good.
(b) who gives a flying f*** what Boris says in private? We already know he likes flowery language.
I reckon that's how the average Tory-inclined voter will think, too.
Unfortunately it's hiding lots of more real stuff, like cronyism, conflict of interest, etc.
And I thought Dominic Cummings was a contemptible little man, none of what he says is to be believed. Suddenly he is He Who Talks Truth To Power. Laughable.
And there we have it. What amazes me in particular is the confected outrage that a PM having to make life-and-death decisions in the middle on the greatest domestic crisis in 100 years might possibly have vented his emotions in his private office, which is now causing some histrionic types to faint like Victorian aunts exposed to a bare table leg.
I'm almost sympathetic to your view; I don't have a big problem with colourful expression, and it's what we expect from Boris. But if you're right, why on earth doesn't he just admit to his colourful turn of phrase and ask folk to accept that his intentions are good? (Which makes me think of:
I'm just a soul whose intentions are good Oh Lord, please don't let me be misunderstood).
The problem is his lying/denying, not his turn of phrase.
On Boris, none of the current stories will bring him down, obviously. Not the redecoration. Nor the intemperate remarks. Nor the cronyism/mates' contracts. Nor the failure to replace Alex Allan. Nor the failure to update the Register of Members' Interests. Nor the failure to sack Patel for breaching the Ministerial Code. Nor the loss of lives to Covid. Nor the money wasted on track and trace. Nor Greensill and Cameron. I could go on. Individually, each of these does not have cut through. But collectively, they might, as a narrative of sleaze and cronyism is building.
I agree with those who argue that despite the Tories being more or less in power for 11 years, the Boris government really is brand new. And it's been in power less than 18 months. It usually takes a lot longer than that for sleaze allegations to take hold. In this respect, this government is performing more swiftly than any predecessor I can think of. I'm beginning to wonder if Boris will survive as long as I'd previously assumed. Government/ministerial/civil service self-discipline seems to be severely lacking, and the level of leaks and smears so early in Boris's reign does not augur well for a prolonged Johnson premiership. Hope I'm right (though I'll probably change my mind next week).
Apart from "Boris" instead of "Johnson" - c'mon! - a super post from you here, Al.
Way I see it, he'll be around for a while yet, but the frightful notion of "PM for a decade or more" is receding. Great, because I was starting to give that some credence and it was making me feel a bit ill.
Far more likely he'll be in office around a decade than out of it this year. 2024 and then either 2028 or 2029 before handing over is probably around a 50/50 shot at the minute.
Its irrelevant whether Johnson went on to bring in further lockdowns . The defense from some is he did the right thing anyway which completely misses the point . The issue is he viewed more bodies piling up as a price worth paying if he kept the economy open.
There are of course always a range of factors when politicians have to make these difficult decisions , balancing the risk to life v damage to the economy . However it’s the callous nature of the comments and the dismissive tone of the people who could die that is the real problem for no 10 .
What evidence do you have that he said these remarks?
Multiple sources and a recording due in next couple of days.
How long does it take to hand over a recording? If it existed it would have been delivered by now
Much more effective to produce it after the PM vehemently denied saying it I would have thought.
Exactly. Why produce it now? Knowledge that it exists has already flushed out two witnesses willing to testify under oath. There's a whole nest of rats to be flushed out...
And at the end of the day this new Star Chamber will have proved ... what? That the PM might have said something in anger in his private office that didn't change policy in the slightest because the decision had already been made? This supposedly high crime is really just another arx e cloaca * for Boris' detractors to toss themselves off over until he mysteriously rises in the polls again and they retire in state of perplexity, if not apoplexy...
*A mountain out of a molehill; more literally, a citadel out of shit.
Same question for you O Bluest of Blue.
What about if some squaddie had been zapped by the Taliban in Afghan and Boris was overheard, or it was leaked that he had said so what it's only one soldier's death vs the overall campaign?
Its irrelevant whether Johnson went on to bring in further lockdowns . The defense from some is he did the right thing anyway which completely misses the point . The issue is he viewed more bodies piling up as a price worth paying if he kept the economy open.
There are of course always a range of factors when politicians have to make these difficult decisions , balancing the risk to life v damage to the economy . However it’s the callous nature of the comments and the dismissive tone of the people who could die that is the real problem for no 10 .
What evidence do you have that he said these remarks?
Multiple sources and a recording due in next couple of days.
How long does it take to hand over a recording? If it existed it would have been delivered by now
Much more effective to produce it after the PM vehemently denied saying it I would have thought.
Exactly. Why produce it now? Knowledge that it exists has already flushed out two witnesses willing to testify under oath. There's a whole nest of rats to be flushed out...
And at the end of the day this new Star Chamber will have proved ... what? That the PM might have said something in anger in his private office that didn't change policy in the slightest because the decision had already been made? This supposedly high crime is really just another arx e cloaca * for Boris' detractors to toss themselves off over until he mysteriously rises in the polls again and they retire in state of perplexity, if not apoplexy...
*A mountain out of a molehill; more literally, a citadel out of shit.
This is a risible defence and once again misses the point ! It’s irrelevant whether he went onto bring the lockdowns in . If you don’t think the comments were callous in nature and showed zero regard for the people who might have died then you clearly are a fully paid up member of the Bozo Cult !
What achieves “cut through” and enters the public consciousness, and which stories remain confined to the Westminster bubble, is part of the art and alchemy of politics. Having an eye for the difference between what gets voters excited and what makes people in Westminster excitable is key to successful political communications.
Personally I still don't think the the decor/furnishings stuff is going anywhere. Boris can brazen that out.
The "pile bodies high" remark is much more damaging and will cut through with the public though. That's absolutely terrible for Boris if proven to be true.
I'll say what I said weeks ago about current 'scandals'. Saying something behind closed doors when we don't know the context, or seeking alternative ways to pay for a refurb. These don't seem overly scandalous to me. People were jailed after MPs expenses and cash for questions.
Whilst they will role up the usual suspects on here who would find a way to criticise Boris if he came round to there house and brought them s present (Nurses deserve presents more than me, hasn't he got anything better to do!), I can't see the cut through in the general population in the way duck houses on moats, or Barnard castle have.
I was up very early this morning (5.30am) to take my son in law into hospital in Wrexham for his complete knee replacement operation later today, and on driving home I listened to the radio
I was aware of the dreadful headlines for Boris from todays papers, and not least from the Mail which has suddenly become the doyen of the left and EU supporters, and expected Boris to be hung out to dry
However, the reporting was more balanced than I expected, indeed fairly critical of Labour who have been using sleaze for some time with no cut through yet in the polls. That is not to say Boris received a free pass, but the alleged comments were put more in balance and Nicky Campbell, in fairness, did say they were receiving texts accusing him of leading the left in the attacks on Boris.
On returning home, Sky were fairly similar, but I believe Kate McCann of Sky was spot on when she said we only have just over a week to see the results of the nationwide ballot and whether it cuts through
I would suggest if after all this Boris does OK and wins Harlepool ( which I do not expect) then Starmer is going to come under huge pressure
The last few days has made next week's election fair more relevant, and important for both Boris and Starmer, while previously I had expected that only Starmer would be under pressure
Big G, I'm afraid you're sadly mistaken if you think that the Mail is "the doyen of the left and EU supporters". As a member of both, I can reassure you that the left hate the Mail with a vengeance. You can be confident in the Mail's support for the Tories at the next GE, whenever that is. The Mail remains a scurrilous, unpleasant, right-wing rag.
You do know the current editor is pro remain unlike Dacre
Hold on a sec.
If you look at the content of the Daily Mail, it's hardly a pro-Remain paper. It's not a gung-ho as the Express, but it's backing Brexit and seeking to narrate and make a success of it.
Isn't it possible that the Mail's anger is nothing to do with Brexit and everything to do with the awfulness of the Prime Minister as a person? It's not as if any plausible successor is going to soften Boris's Brexit in any meaningful way.
Admittedly, "Brexit is still in peril and we must be loyal to Comrade Napoleon Mr Johnson because we don't want Farmer Jones von der Leyen back" is a handy narrative to keep people on board. One that will work right up to the moment it doesn't.
If this is your idea of "backing Brexit" you and I have very different ideas on what backing Brexit means.
The MoS which took the opposite view to the Mail on Brexit I believe?
Actually It did and it was so ridiculous
Daily Mail - pro brexit
Mail on Sunday - pro remain
The difference Dacre pro brexit editor of the Daily Mail
Geordie Greig editor of the Mail on Sunday pro remain
Geordie Greig now edits both
Thereby lies your answer
If the Mail is not careful it risks a big defection of readers to the Express, Mail readers are even more pro Brexit than Boris is
Ted Verity now edits the MOS. So the Daily Mail & MOS flipped positions when Dacre retired. Geordie Greig is the ultimate liberal Cameronite with no love lost over Boris & Brexit. The Express remains fervently supportive of the PM.
I was up very early this morning (5.30am) to take my son in law into hospital in Wrexham for his complete knee replacement operation later today, and on driving home I listened to the radio
I was aware of the dreadful headlines for Boris from todays papers, and not least from the Mail which has suddenly become the doyen of the left and EU supporters, and expected Boris to be hung out to dry
However, the reporting was more balanced than I expected, indeed fairly critical of Labour who have been using sleaze for some time with no cut through yet in the polls. That is not to say Boris received a free pass, but the alleged comments were put more in balance and Nicky Campbell, in fairness, did say they were receiving texts accusing him of leading the left in the attacks on Boris.
On returning home, Sky were fairly similar, but I believe Kate McCann of Sky was spot on when she said we only have just over a week to see the results of the nationwide ballot and whether it cuts through
I would suggest if after all this Boris does OK and wins Harlepool ( which I do not expect) then Starmer is going to come under huge pressure
The last few days has made next week's election fair more relevant, and important for both Boris and Starmer, while previously I had expected that only Starmer would be under pressure
Big G, I'm afraid you're sadly mistaken if you think that the Mail is "the doyen of the left and EU supporters". As a member of both, I can reassure you that the left hate the Mail with a vengeance. You can be confident in the Mail's support for the Tories at the next GE, whenever that is. The Mail remains a scurrilous, unpleasant, right-wing rag.
You do know the current editor is pro remain unlike Dacre
Hold on a sec.
If you look at the content of the Daily Mail, it's hardly a pro-Remain paper. It's not a gung-ho as the Express, but it's backing Brexit and seeking to narrate and make a success of it.
Isn't it possible that the Mail's anger is nothing to do with Brexit and everything to do with the awfulness of the Prime Minister as a person? It's not as if any plausible successor is going to soften Boris's Brexit in any meaningful way.
Admittedly, "Brexit is still in peril and we must be loyal to Comrade Napoleon Mr Johnson because we don't want Farmer Jones von der Leyen back" is a handy narrative to keep people on board. One that will work right up to the moment it doesn't.
If this is your idea of "backing Brexit" you and I have very different ideas on what backing Brexit means.
The MoS which took the opposite view to the Mail on Brexit I believe?
Actually It did and it was so ridiculous
Daily Mail - pro brexit
Mail on Sunday - pro remain
The difference Dacre pro brexit editor of the Daily Mail
Geordie Greig editor of the Mail on Sunday pro remain
Geordie Greig now edits both
Thereby lies your answer
If the Mail is not careful it risks a big defection of readers to the Express, Mail readers are even more pro Brexit than Boris is
It would have lost me long before now, but my dear wife of nearly 60 years loves the puzzle sections and she is far more important than Geordie Greig
And I would not have the Daily Express under any circumstances
Indeed, little would change as I obtain my news online including the Guardian, through PB which is the market leader, and other news media including the BBC and Sky
If I was the Opposition, I would be in a dilemma whether to portray Johnson as the Grim Reaper or as a cheerful undertaker.
Normally, Johnson would be finished by this. The only way it could get worse is if it is found that the Government signed contracts with a gravedigging firm associated with a Tory cabinet member without a tendering process.
The idea Keir Starmer is going to resign if Labour loses Hartlepool is for the birds, he's in for as long as he wants the job.
Unless he loses a General Election surely that will challenge things?
Even though the Labour Party do have a history of allowing losers to lose again, like Kinnock and Corbyn.
Keir will be there until the GE, which will probably be in 2024. Then he loses the GE. But he does better than LAB did in 2019.
So the problem for LAB is who can replace him. Nandy? Rayner?
In many ways Starmer is like Kinnock, following Corbyn who was like Foot. It will be interesting then to see if Starmer does indeed stay to lose 2029 as well as 2024.
Starmer might stay after losing only if the party does well enough to get a hung parliament with a very unstable Tory minority government - in which case he'll be looking for a 2nd bite GE soon after to complete the job and become PM.
Other than that, after the next GE, it's PM Starmer or it's 'See you later' Starmer.
Two sources who claim Boris Johnson did say he would rather have ‘bodies pile high in their thousands’ than implement a third lockdown are prepared to speak publicly.
That Johnson is a liar will not be news to anyone. The only attack that will work is convincing the thicko Johnson lovers-well represented on here-that it matters
I happen to be able to see the wood for the trees, as can SO. No one cares enough to get their blood pressure raised about these trivialities, apart from a tiny number of partisan political obsessives. The voters are too busy down the pub, playing golf, keeping their businesses afloat, making up for lost time with family etc... and they are the ones that have life right.
Family being the key word. The PM chose to kill members of lots of people's families to generate "Boris Saves Christmas" headlines. Now that the proof comes out, expect the anger to turn into rage.
When you say "chose to kill" you alienate anyone who is not already convinced that Johnson is evil incarnate. There will be rage - among people who already agree that he is evil incarnate.
It was deliberate and it was done twice.
First - the policy to ship Covid patients into care homes from hospital with no testing allowed. Reports at the time of fraught care home staff arguing with ambulance crews that they wouldn't take the residents back, denials that it was policy until it was proven. Result - 20,000 dead in care homes in a short period Second - the denial of the need to lock down through the winter. The declaration of the absurd 5 day period where Covid wouldn't get us. The Boris Saves Christmas headlines. Result? 68k cases a day in January. We haven't had the proof yet, but Cummings and now two other people have come forward to prove it.
Watch the Daily Mail. Their coverage at the moment is there to whip up a frenzy. Next they move into heart-rendering stories of people who lost their closest loved-ones as a direct result of this policy. We already had it on radio phone-ins yesterday, and the popular tabloids will be plastered with it.
I've been saying for months that this policy will sink him and that the Mail would go crazy over it. And here they are.
The Daily Heil exists to whip up hate.
But its impact is rather trivial and its typically laughed at by most normal people.
Its a shame you've succombed to its lure.
Putting things in context
The UK is fretting about some wallpaper meanwhile
The head of the EU believes her priority is who gets to sit on a sofa first rather than the 1000s of her citizens dying each day
The french army is making noises about why it might be better if it ran the country instead of the fop president
The UK is "fretting" about the probity of its PM. This is allowed, I think, despite this being a big old complex world with lots of bad stuff going on.
LOL show me a UK PM whose probity wasnt questionable. Likewise a LOTO
Ok. So you don't care about this stuff and never will.
"Man of the World" Alanbrooke. He knows how this dirty old world ticks. Seen it all, done it all.
LOL indeed.
Im just older than you and have seen it all before.
To expect perfect politicians is just plain naive, they come as a package faults and all and we judge them on how well they run the country not on who they shag or how dodgy their mates are.
The idea Keir Starmer is going to resign if Labour loses Hartlepool is for the birds, he's in for as long as he wants the job.
Unless he loses a General Election surely that will challenge things?
Even though the Labour Party do have a history of allowing losers to lose again, like Kinnock and Corbyn.
Keir will be there until the GE, which will probably be in 2024. Then he loses the GE. But he does better than LAB did in 2019.
So the problem for LAB is who can replace him. Nandy? Rayner?
In many ways Starmer is like Kinnock, following Corbyn who was like Foot. It will be interesting then to see if Starmer does indeed stay to lose 2029 as well as 2024.
Starmer might stay after losing only if the party does well enough to get a hung parliament with a very unstable Tory minority government - in which case he'll be looking for a 2nd bite GE soon after to complete the job and become PM.
Other than that, after the next GE, it's PM Starmer or it's 'See you later' Starmer.
So if Boris wins 2029 who do you think it's most likely he's defeating?
On Boris, none of the current stories will bring him down, obviously. Not the redecoration. Nor the intemperate remarks. Nor the cronyism/mates' contracts. Nor the failure to replace Alex Allan. Nor the failure to update the Register of Members' Interests. Nor the failure to sack Patel for breaching the Ministerial Code. Nor the loss of lives to Covid. Nor the money wasted on track and trace. Nor Greensill and Cameron. I could go on. Individually, each of these does not have cut through. But collectively, they might, as a narrative of sleaze and cronyism is building.
I agree with those who argue that despite the Tories being more or less in power for 11 years, the Boris government really is brand new. And it's been in power less than 18 months. It usually takes a lot longer than that for sleaze allegations to take hold. In this respect, this government is performing more swiftly than any predecessor I can think of. I'm beginning to wonder if Boris will survive as long as I'd previously assumed. Government/ministerial/civil service self-discipline seems to be severely lacking, and the level of leaks and smears so early in Boris's reign does not augur well for a prolonged Johnson premiership. Hope I'm right (though I'll probably change my mind next week).
Apart from "Boris" instead of "Johnson" - c'mon! - a super post from you here, Al.
Way I see it, he'll be around for a while yet, but the frightful notion of "PM for a decade or more" is receding. Great, because I was starting to give that some credence and it was making me feel a bit ill.
Thanks. Always best to lull the enemy into a false sense of security - hence 'Boris'. I know you don't like it, but I reckon on balance it's best to fake familiarity in the battle for hearts and minds. It would be different if he had a more interesting surname like Fortescue or something.
The idea Keir Starmer is going to resign if Labour loses Hartlepool is for the birds, he's in for as long as he wants the job.
Unless he loses a General Election surely that will challenge things?
Even though the Labour Party do have a history of allowing losers to lose again, like Kinnock and Corbyn.
Keir will be there until the GE, which will probably be in 2024. Then he loses the GE. But he does better than LAB did in 2019.
So the problem for LAB is who can replace him. Nandy? Rayner?
In many ways Starmer is like Kinnock, following Corbyn who was like Foot. It will be interesting then to see if Starmer does indeed stay to lose 2029 as well as 2024.
Starmer might stay after losing only if the party does well enough to get a hung parliament with a very unstable Tory minority government - in which case he'll be looking for a 2nd bite GE soon after to complete the job and become PM.
Other than that, after the next GE, it's PM Starmer or it's 'See you later' Starmer.
He won't be the next PM. Of the current Labour bigwigs I think Burnham would have the best chance to beat a tired and washed up (Which is that he may well be) Boris in 2028/9.
I think we forget here, where we mostly think the government cocked up massively by having the Christmas relaxation rather than bringing in another lockdown in December, that not everyone shares that view. I know plety of people in the south who were - and still are, after all that has happened - royally pissed off that "Boris cancelled Christmas". As bad as January was, they still don't personally know anyone who died and it's all a bit abstract for them. Not everyone thinks the government was too slow and some would agree with "letting the bodies pile up" (as long as they're other people's bodies) to "save Christmas".
I know the national polling suggests the public favours all and every restriction on freedom, but what matters is two things: - How much is that true of Johnson supporters? By definition, they're mostly pro-Brexit and damn the consequences - taking actions to prevent harm may not be in their psyche. Labour/Lib-Dem/SNP supporters frothing at the mouth over 'Boris the Butcher' has little relevance to Johnson's electoral prospects. - How much do people actually care whether the restrictions are in law? If you plan to not visit relatives, then you're unlikely to be against a ban on visiting relatives. But do you actually care if there is no ban?
OK, I'm not a fan of our current PM. Not by any means. Dragged through Traitors Gate in chains is too good for him!
But mid summer last year I knew of one person who had, perhaps, died of Covid, and one who had had it and recovered.
Now I know several in the 'died within one month of test, but also had something else' category, and at least one who died who was otherwise well. I also know of a couple of sufferers from Long Covid, as well as several, including relations, who have had it.
And a couple of weeks ago we were able, at last, to exchange Christmas presents with an adult granddaughter, presents which could not be safely posted.
And when I Zoom, or chat about it in the pub, with friends, we're all in similar positions. And that's by no means only with friends of our political persuasion.
How do you find, locally, opinons are splitting between not locking down being a big mistake and "cancelling Christmas" having been a bad thing?
Up here, it never got all that bad, but my remainery metropolitan liberal elite circle of friends, colleagues and family-in-law pretty much all think not locking down earlier was a big mistake (and many called it at the time, too). My family and friends in Essex are far more split, mostly along generational lines - my parents are still pissed off about Christmas being cancelled, while friends from my generation generally think it there should have been more restrictions earlier (but the latter were never going to be Johnson voters anyway).
The idea Keir Starmer is going to resign if Labour loses Hartlepool is for the birds, he's in for as long as he wants the job.
Yep. I agree. Just the one caveat - if in a year from now the polls are still showing us miles underwater and him not cutting through, then I think he might come under real pressure.
But Hartlepool will not be a trigger. Indeed if we win there it will provide a boost.
What will hurt the PM is if he did tip the wink to Man United. Can't see how that is provable, but this is the thing. With him, almost anything is believable because he has no ideology, blurts out florid phrases and has casual mendacity as his default setting. So it doesn't have to be true to ring true.
10,000 cases, 300 deaths per day and Italy are reopening, even for me that seems a tad hasty.
From the article, it seems to be mostly outside, where viruses spead much less. And there's only a certain amount people will put up with, especially in an Italian summer.
Talking about zoom - does anyone still do social zooms?
I find them the most depressing thing going.
Not for myself but my girls do "Rainbows" meetings over Zoom. Though not many who were attending Rainbows in person chose to do the Zoom, it's good for them and they have different activities each week.
Its irrelevant whether Johnson went on to bring in further lockdowns . The defense from some is he did the right thing anyway which completely misses the point . The issue is he viewed more bodies piling up as a price worth paying if he kept the economy open.
There are of course always a range of factors when politicians have to make these difficult decisions , balancing the risk to life v damage to the economy . However it’s the callous nature of the comments and the dismissive tone of the people who could die that is the real problem for no 10 .
What evidence do you have that he said these remarks?
Multiple sources and a recording due in next couple of days.
How long does it take to hand over a recording? If it existed it would have been delivered by now
Jon Culshaw has a busy schedule and isn't available for a couple of days
If Starmer loses Hartlepool and has a bad election I'd be surprised if there aren't rumblings of a leadership challenge. Why should the left of the party sit back and accept electoral defeat in 2024? Owen Smith has made the argument on behalf of the Labour left (though I dont expect they have anyone who can beat Starmer).
The idea Keir Starmer is going to resign if Labour loses Hartlepool is for the birds, he's in for as long as he wants the job.
Unless he loses a General Election surely that will challenge things?
Even though the Labour Party do have a history of allowing losers to lose again, like Kinnock and Corbyn.
Keir will be there until the GE, which will probably be in 2024. Then he loses the GE. But he does better than LAB did in 2019.
So the problem for LAB is who can replace him. Nandy? Rayner?
In many ways Starmer is like Kinnock, following Corbyn who was like Foot. It will be interesting then to see if Starmer does indeed stay to lose 2029 as well as 2024.
Kinnock actually gained 20 seats in 1987 and 42 seats in 1992.
It is also possible Starmer could be Wilson, who got in in 1964 with a UK Labour majority of 4 despite Home winning a Tory majority in England or he could be a Labour Cameron who gained enough seats to force a hung parliament and a deal with the LDs even if he failed to win a majority.
2024 will be after 14 years of Tory rule, much as 1964 was after 14 years of Tory rule and 2010 after 13 years of Labour rule.
Indeed on yesterday's Mori it would be back to 2017 with the Tories losing their majority and again reliant on the DUP
Talking about zoom - does anyone still do social zooms?
I find them the most depressing thing going.
Not for myself but my girls do "Rainbows" meetings over Zoom. Though not many who were attending Rainbows in person chose to do the Zoom, it's good for them and they have different activities each week.
Sounds great - I would put that in the maintaining social development category for children which imo is vital.
I'm talking about you and your mates sitting with a glass of wine or beer in front of a screen chatting.
I was up very early this morning (5.30am) to take my son in law into hospital in Wrexham for his complete knee replacement operation later today on coming home I listened to the radio
I was aware of the dreadful headlines for Boris from todays papers, and not least from the Mail which has suddenly become the doyen of the left and EU supporters, and expected Boris to be hung our to dry
However, the reporting was more balanced than I expected, indeed fairly critical of Labour who have been using sleaze for some time with no cut through yet in the polls. That is not to say Boris received a free pass, but the alleged comments were put more inbalance and Nicky Campbell in fairness did say the were receiving texts acciusing him that he was leading the left in the attacks on Boris.
On returning home Sky were fairly similar, but I believe Kate McCann of Sky was spot on when she said we only have just over a week to see the results of the nationwide ballot and whether it cuts through
I would suggest if after all this Boris does OK and wins Harlepool ( which I do not expect) then Starmer is going to come under huge pressure
The last few days has made next week's election fair more relevant,,and important for both Boris and Starmer, while previously I had exoectec that only Starmer would be under pressure
I'm not sure what relevance the polling has to this, other than for betting purposes.
Just because the public on the whole doesn't care about something doesn't mean it is right or ok. Standards do matter for the integrity of the office itself.
I fully understand your sentiment but in real politics winning is the bench mark and Boris has been excellent at that, rightly or wrongly
And thank you for your kind comments about my son in law
Yes, hope he's ok.
Thank you
It is a big operation but he has no choice due to legacy damage from his days playing hockey and team sports
Interesting thought. 60+ years ago I smashed an ankle..... put my foot in a two-foot deep hole while running and of course all my weight went down on it. 6 months later I was back playing hockey, did so for another season, then worked standing up for another 20+ years. It has now come back to bite me. Very uncomfortable.
If Starmer loses Hartlepool and has a bad election I'd be surprised if there aren't rumblings of a leadership challenge. Why should the left of the party sit back and accept electoral defeat in 2024? Owen Smith has made the argument on behalf of the Labour left (though I dont expect they have anyone who can beat Starmer).
On yesterday's Mori Labour will gain a lot of county council seats from the Tories next week and win London by a landslide and comfortably hold Wales even if they lose Hartlepool (which has special circumstances due to the high BXP vote in 2019).
On today's Panelbase in Scotland Labour will also overtake the Conservatives for second at Holyrood and prevent the SNP getting a majority
Comments
It is a big operation but he has no choice due to legacy damage from his days playing hockey and team sports
Interesting dynamic if the SNP no longer have full hold on the narrative in the next parliament..
But mid summer last year I knew of one person who had, perhaps, died of Covid, and one who had had it and recovered.
Now I know several in the 'died within one month of test, but also had something else' category, and at least one who died who was otherwise well. I also know of a couple of sufferers from Long Covid, as well as several, including relations, who have had it.
And a couple of weeks ago we were able, at last, to exchange Christmas presents with an adult granddaughter, presents which could not be safely posted.
And when I Zoom, or chat about it in the pub, with friends, we're all in similar positions. And that's by no means only with friends of our political persuasion.
If you look at the content of the Daily Mail, it's hardly a pro-Remain paper. It's not a gung-ho as the Express, but it's backing Brexit and seeking to narrate and make a success of it.
Isn't it possible that the Mail's anger is nothing to do with Brexit and everything to do with the awfulness of the Prime Minister as a person? It's not as if any plausible successor is going to soften Boris's Brexit in any meaningful way.
Admittedly, "Brexit is still in peril and we must be loyal to Comrade Napoleon Mr Johnson because we don't want Farmer Jones von der Leyen back" is a handy narrative to keep people on board. One that will work right up to the moment it doesn't.
"Bodies" won't cut through that much because there is a general mood of optimism regarding Covid so the comment has much less force than if bodies were currently piling up as they did in the early part of the year. Enough Conservatives also have a "Boris will be Boris" mentality when he says something that other politicians would be punished for, much as Republicans had a "Trump will be Trump" view. Had it emerged in January, probably a different story. But it didn't.
The furnishings won't because the taxpayer isn't seen to be paying, and it feels a bit bogged down in who needs to declare what on which form. It ought to cut through as people don't do favours for nothing, and it was a blatant attempt to solicit personal favours without even applying the disinfectant of publicity let alone just avoiding the whole damned thing and making do with a John Lewis sofa. It would quite obviously be a resigning matter for a chairman of a Council planning committee, but Johnson will get away with it. That's a bit galling to those of us for whom corruption matters, but it's reality.
Some people seem to have been able to bridge the gap to change sides - Truss has done a very good job, while our own RochdalePioneers has swapped the other direction with the added zeal of the convert. But many haven't reconciled to the result yet including eg Scott and the Mail's new Editor.
It feels like it's all for show?
As I commented earlier Douglas Ross is poor and Anas Sarwar is the rising star for Labour
And as I also said, I hope Labour do take SNP votes and do well in Scotland as it improves the union
I am far more concerned to retain the union and if that means voting Labour then In would do it
I am concerned that BoJo is a walking liability, as previously feared. If anything I am pleased that for the period of March 20 to March 2021, we seemed to have avoided that.
Much more palatable to remain voting/soft Brexiter Tories post-Dacre though, I'd have thought.
We receive the actual paper on line every day as my wife does the puzzles but I rarely read it
As far as UVDL is concerned she has been a spectacular failure for the EU, its peoples, and made the case for Brexit better than anyone since Farage
Orperhaps there is something coming in PMQs?
Current battles are fulcruming around civil liberties, gender/race, "culture", and climate change.
The ONS have just suggests that deaths involving covid 19 among people all age groups 50 and above has fallen by at least 95%
Now that is what matters to us all
Likewise, did Boris really say 'F*ck business'? I realised yesterday I have no idea, so perhaps it is certain, but even if it isnt it didn't stop me assuming it was, since it seemed like what he'd say.
Quite frankly if the PM was against the idea of lockdowns unless absolutely necessary - good - that's not a bad thing. The hysteria from zero Covidiots over the past year has gotten so ridiculous now.
Indeed my understanding is the CFR has been tracking down all pandemic because people have gotten better medicines (dexamethasone) and other treatments (proning). But whereever B117 has hit the CFR has gone back up again. More transmissible and more deadly is an unpleasant combination.
I've said that I don't think it will cut through with the wider public. But it isn't histrionics to personally find it all very unpleasant.
Cummings and Cain perhaps?
We are so lucky in the UK to have the Vaccine programme we do.
Not wanting to strip people's civil liberties, imprison them in their homes, shutter their businesses, send people out of work etc is not remotely unpleasant.
People who are such extreme zero covidiots that they think the choice is "dead granny" or "shut everything down, there are no consequences for doing so" are deeply unpleasant and foul.
https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1386980847593705472
One. It's perfectly possible for a newspaper hack to write a column expressing what their proprietor wants, not what they personally believe. And most proprietors have at least half an eye on commercial realities as well as megaphoning their own views. And the commercial reality of 2016 was that we were in a 52:48 world, so unless you want to pander to a niche, you cover as many bases as you can. Times went remain, Sunday Times went leave. Mail went leave, Mail on Sunday went remain. Pretty commercially rational, really.
Two. We're post 2016, post 2019. We've left. That changes the political dynamics. Is there any evidence that the Mail's editor is currently seeking to sabotage or soften Brexit?
Or is it just "oldthinkers unbellyfeel Brexit?"
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/04/27/european-parliament-brands-brexit-historic-mistake-vote-ratify/
"Man of the World" Alanbrooke. He knows how this dirty old world ticks. Seen it all, done it all.
LOL indeed.
And the Editorial line of the Mail changed when the new Editor came in.
Funny that.
With just over a week until polling day Sturgeon now faces May 2017 style humiliation if the Panelbase poll is correct, from polling showing an SNP landslide just a few months ago to now facing the prospect of the SNP actually losing seats and failing to get a majority at all
It's as if Cummings knew that Johnson would take the dishonest route, and that would get him into even more trouble. Sociopathic, but smart.
my thoughts on this remind me of the Winter of Discontent where rubbish piled up in the streets and bodies went unburied.
Only in this case, Johnson has brought to mind the image of bodies piled up in the streets and him not caring.
Daily Mail - pro brexit
Mail on Sunday - pro remain
The difference Dacre pro brexit editor of the Daily Mail
Geordie Greig editor of the Mail on Sunday pro remain
Geordie Greig now edits both
Thereby lies your answer
Our rollout strategy was correct, get the deaths down first but I think the counterpoint is that it is backloaded in terms of those who were always going to spread the virus the most.
*A mountain out of a molehill; more literally, a citadel out of shit.
And I hope that Sarwar further grows his support reducing the SNPs influence
There's real news going on. The problem is the real news doesn't suit those with an agenda to push. The real news is that things are going well here and awfully elsewhere and we should be discussing how can we move on from saving lives in this country to saving lives overseas in India and whereever else is struggling not this ridiculous petty shit.
There sure does seem to be an awful lot of coverage of this given that so many on here have told us there is nothing whatsoever to the story.
Way I see it, he'll be around for a while yet, but the frightful notion of "PM for a decade or more" is receding. Great, because I was starting to give that some credence and it was making me feel a bit ill.
I'm just a soul whose intentions are good
Oh Lord, please don't let me be misunderstood).
The problem is his lying/denying, not his turn of phrase.
What about if some squaddie had been zapped by the Taliban in Afghan and Boris was overheard, or it was leaked that he had said so what it's only one soldier's death vs the overall campaign?
Whilst they will role up the usual suspects on here who would find a way to criticise Boris if he came round to there house and brought them s present (Nurses deserve presents more than me, hasn't he got anything better to do!), I can't see the cut through in the general population in the way duck houses on moats, or Barnard castle have.
And I would not have the Daily Express under any circumstances
Indeed, little would change as I obtain my news online including the Guardian, through PB which is the market leader, and other news media including the BBC and Sky
Normally, Johnson would be finished by this. The only way it could get worse is if it is found that the Government signed contracts with a gravedigging firm associated with a Tory cabinet member without a tendering process.
Other than that, after the next GE, it's PM Starmer or it's 'See you later' Starmer.
To expect perfect politicians is just plain naive, they come as a package faults and all and we judge them on how well they run the country not on who they shag or how dodgy their mates are.
10,000 cases, 300 deaths per day and Italy are reopening, even for me that seems a tad hasty.
Up here, it never got all that bad, but my remainery metropolitan liberal elite circle of friends, colleagues and family-in-law pretty much all think not locking down earlier was a big mistake (and many called it at the time, too). My family and friends in Essex are far more split, mostly along generational lines - my parents are still pissed off about Christmas being cancelled, while friends from my generation generally think it there should have been more restrictions earlier (but the latter were never going to be Johnson voters anyway).
But Hartlepool will not be a trigger. Indeed if we win there it will provide a boost.
I find them the most depressing thing going.
Can't see how that is provable, but this is the thing.
With him, almost anything is believable because he has no ideology, blurts out florid phrases and has casual mendacity as his default setting.
So it doesn't have to be true to ring true.
There is a ticking time bomb coming. This is not going to be a nice decade.
It is also possible Starmer could be Wilson, who got in in 1964 with a UK Labour majority of 4 despite Home winning a Tory majority in England or he could be a Labour Cameron who gained enough seats to force a hung parliament and a deal with the LDs even if he failed to win a majority.
2024 will be after 14 years of Tory rule, much as 1964 was after 14 years of Tory rule and 2010 after 13 years of Labour rule.
Indeed on yesterday's Mori it would be back to 2017 with the Tories losing their majority and again reliant on the DUP
This must hit the SNP’s constituency seats. Is there a calculator anywhere?
I'm talking about you and your mates sitting with a glass of wine or beer in front of a screen chatting.
It has now come back to bite me. Very uncomfortable.
But we have an expert (on the former) on here, apparently, so I could ask about it I suppose.
On today's Panelbase in Scotland Labour will also overtake the Conservatives for second at Holyrood and prevent the SNP getting a majority