Apropos of nothing, I’m just having a moan, after my first jab yesterday, AZ, I’ve felt like crap all day today. Light-headed, fuzzy brained, niggling headache. Been absolutely useless all day. My parents, in their 60s, both had AZ and they were fine apart from a bit of a sore arm so I thought I’d fly through it. But not so. Hopefully I’ll feel better tomorrow.
That was me yesterday too. Touch wood, woken up feeling more like myself today.
I would regard some malaise as a good thing, in that an immune response has been triggered.
Looking over the more up to date data on the vaccine failures, this caught my eye:
"There have been community studies in the U.K. and Israel demonstrating vaccines are effective in preventing hospitalization. What is notable about vaccinated patients who are admitted to the hospital is that their outcomes are the same as non-vaccinated counterparts.
In order to be in the hospital, patients have to meet a “threshold of sickness” that is the same “if they are vaccinated or non-vaccinated,” said Annemarie Doherty, critical care consultant and a co-author of the study. “They look as sick as non-vaccinated patients. We’re only comparing patients that are sick enough to come into hospital, and then there is no difference in how well they do,” she said."
"526 of the hospitalized patients had developed their symptoms more than three weeks after being vaccinated, meaning they would be expected to have had immunity to SARS-CoV-2 infection. A total of 113 those patients died."
This would be just over 1% of hospital admissions, over the period. Obviously the %vaccinated over the period changed, so hard to know the denominator.
There were only 140 admissions post second vaccine, though because of the timelines, very few would have had the second dose within the study period.
So either the vaccine works, or it doesn’t, and mostly it does. But if it doesn’t, there is no consolation prize.
The consolation prize is if everyone else is vaccinated you are far less likely to catch it.
Yes, that seems true.
The data on vaccine failures is a bit complicated, as the covid prevalence was dropping as the vaccine rate was rising, so knowing what the denominator is is problematic. Nearly all the deaths were in Tier 2 patients, so 80+.
Also, from the figures you quoted, less than one per cent of those hospitalised had gone more than three weeks after their first vaccine shot. And the immune response with the AZN vaccine appears still to be building after three weeks.
2 weeks post completion of course, seems to mean post second dose, but difficult to specify a 1/100 000 risk without specifying a time period covered, and knowing the background risk.
I am very pro-vaccine, but understanding the risk of breakthrough infection is fairly key to the normalisation schedule.
Tim Spector reckons your chance of catching COVID in the UK after one vaccine shot is 1/100,000 per 24 hour period. And 1/150,000 after two shots. Of course this is partly a result of the low prevalence in the UK. Would be good to see this compasred with other everyday risks, like crossing the road.
In layman's terms...you've got more chance of being run over by an orange Robin Reliant
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
Or because he's not as stupid as HYUFD as to think its possible to deny a democratic mandate, making Scots slaves unable to determine their own future at the ballot box.
The vote on Thursday will likely be roughly 50% for the Nationalist parties (SNP and Alba and Green) and 50% for the Unionist parties (Labour and Conservative and LD), hardly an overwhelming mandate and the Nationalist parties will fall well short of the 2/3 majority of Holyrood seats they would need for there to really be a major demand for an immediate indyref2. Plus on a poll last week most Scottish Greens now oppose independence anyway so the Greens cannot really be counted as pro independence either, only the SNP and Alba can. An SNP and Green majority would not count. https://archive.ph/eg2lt
Unlike Neville Chamberlain Nationalist appeasers such as yourself, Boris will do a Churchill and defy them and rightly so
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
Yes, give in to the Nationalists now before a generation has elapsed since 2014 and even if No narrowly win an indyref2 the hardliners in the Nationalists would force Sturgeon to push for indyref3 soon after
I don't think so. Losing again would set nationalism back a very long way. It might also finish off Sturgeon which would weaken the Nationalists considerably. They have no one else even vaguely competent.
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
I was chatting to someone who worked on the last Indyref and he's convinced that Gove is pulling the strings on this and will game the referendum a bit.
Such as allowing Scots in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland a vote in Indyref2, that sort of stuff.
The huge downside in all of this is the Prime Minister, I've mentioned on here that Yes tried to portray the 2014 as a battle of good v. evil but whilst the majority of Scots didn't agree with the politics of David Cameron they didn't see him as some malignant force, just a nice family man they disagreed with.
Now it is possible the majority of Scots do see Boris Johnson as some malignant force.
Boris has a higher approval rating in Scotland now than Alex Salmond who led the Yes campaign in 2014, Starmer has a higher approval rating in Scotland now than Cameron did in 2014
What is the relevance of this statement?
You seem to have listed some facts but not an argument.
I see the winner of the Tamil Nadu state elections is called Stalin - apparently named thus in honour of the Russian leader before the Cold War started after WW2. Like Germans called Adolf by enthusiastic 1940s parents, he must have had embarassing moments, though he is apparently grew up to be a mild-mannered regionalist social democrat. i think I'd have changed my name in his shoes, but perhaps voters there aren't that bothered.
Incidentally, I reently changed computers, and before getting my new one used to finding politicalbetting.com, it persistently offered me what looks like a spam site, telling me I've won something or other. Do the moderators know about it?
In Beirut I worked with a gaffer (chief electrician) who was introduced to me as 'Hitler'. I laughed politely. (It isn't uncommon for the macho jobs on crew to have nicknames like 'Horse' and 'Chunky'). But I was the only one laughing.
It was his actual name and his brother was called Rommel! It was explained to me that in the Middle East it was common for their heroes to be our villains
In reply to Nick Palmer
The has been a persistent problem as the site seems to have been hacked. If you login via vanilla there is no issue.
There was a gym instructor at a gym I used called Stalin. Really nice chap, too.
A good morning everyone! We were going to go to the seaside, but it's clouding over a bit now.
I can’t read that story because I’m not a subscriber. But remember all legal restrictions will go on 21 June according to the government’s own roadmap. Whether some venues keep glass screens, who knows?
Disturbing story briefed in the times. Suggests theatre and cinema goers will be forced to wear masks throughout screenings and performances. Distancing to be gone, but punters to wear masks when moving around. Sports venues may be capped to avoid pinch points. If things go as I expect with the vaccination rollout, cases will continue to fall, and hospitalisation and death will be minimal, yet I’ll still need to wear a mask to watch a film? Bye bye cinemas.
Who is briefing this? I think much of it is rampant speculation and kite flying trying to hold the public’s feet to the fire for the final weeks of lockdown. People have noticed that hardly anyone is now suffering from covid 19 in the UK.
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
I was chatting to someone who worked on the last Indyref and he's convinced that Gove is pulling the strings on this and will game the referendum a bit.
Such as allowing Scots in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland a vote in Indyref2, that sort of stuff.
The huge downside in all of this is the Prime Minister, I've mentioned on here that Yes tried to portray the 2014 as a battle of good v. evil but whilst the majority of Scots didn't agree with the politics of David Cameron they didn't see him as some malignant force, just a nice family man they disagreed with.
Now it is possible the majority of Scots do see Boris Johnson as some malignant force.
Yes.
Which is why (amongst multiple other reasons), Boris has to go.
Harris: When he wasn’t “chillaxing”, Cameron tried to cover his lack of substance with a performative gravitas that sometimes verged on camp. Johnson, by contrast, seizes every opportunity to reduce politics to the absurd, and thereby makes the vacuum beneath him even more glaring. Without convictions or consistency you get a government based on serial lurching, from U-turn to U-turn and crisis to crisis, which sooner or later has massive consequences.
Moreover, because that dominance symbolises a very English mixture of nostalgia, deference and recklessness, it is part of the reason why the UK is now pulling apart; indeed, the fact that Johnson has been so hare-brained about arrangements in Northern Ireland is a vivid case study in the perils of entrusting matters of the utmost fragility to people whose basic unseriousness is not just toxic, but extremely dangerous.
Part of the English disease is our readiness to ascribe our national disasters to questions of personal character. But the vanities of posh men and their habit of dragging us into catastrophe have much deeper roots. They centre on an ancient system that trains a narrow caste of people to run our affairs, but also ensures they have almost none of the attributes actually required. If this country is to belatedly move into the 21st century, this is what we will finally have to confront: a great tower of failings that, to use a very topical word, are truly institutional.
That seems like a lot of words to say this is all about class. But are other places really hugely varied in their leadership?
I think that the point is that the cult of the Public schoolboy gentleman amateur still dominates English life. Certainly other countries have ruling cliques, but the English one eschews intellectual study and preparation. It seems an unshakeable fixation in the land.
So we have two recent Etonian Prime Ministers playing their games with our lives. Cameron then Johnson, entitled amateurism first as tragedy, then as farce.
Sounds like bollocks to me. Or, gasp, English exceptionalism.
Unless I am to believe that when people in other countries complain about their ruling cliques they are doing so on the basis they are too well prepared, intelligent and competent, how dare they. Which is the unavoidable implication of suggesting our clique, uniquely, eschews study and preparation.
It also seems like a way of blaming people for who they are choosing whilst still making that choice the fault of the person chosen.
Best description of this for me was in Chariots of Fire where Abrahams' college masters were accusing his professionalism of being a little too plebeian.
Yes, the idea of a gentleman amateur who pursues an interest purely out of love for the task, and is a natural leader is an idea that rose in the days of Empire via public school sports. Waterloo being won on the playing fields of Eton, and similar bollocks.
The disdain of professionalism has died in sport, but still a strong feature of English political life.
Harris: When he wasn’t “chillaxing”, Cameron tried to cover his lack of substance with a performative gravitas that sometimes verged on camp. Johnson, by contrast, seizes every opportunity to reduce politics to the absurd, and thereby makes the vacuum beneath him even more glaring. Without convictions or consistency you get a government based on serial lurching, from U-turn to U-turn and crisis to crisis, which sooner or later has massive consequences.
Moreover, because that dominance symbolises a very English mixture of nostalgia, deference and recklessness, it is part of the reason why the UK is now pulling apart; indeed, the fact that Johnson has been so hare-brained about arrangements in Northern Ireland is a vivid case study in the perils of entrusting matters of the utmost fragility to people whose basic unseriousness is not just toxic, but extremely dangerous.
Part of the English disease is our readiness to ascribe our national disasters to questions of personal character. But the vanities of posh men and their habit of dragging us into catastrophe have much deeper roots. They centre on an ancient system that trains a narrow caste of people to run our affairs, but also ensures they have almost none of the attributes actually required. If this country is to belatedly move into the 21st century, this is what we will finally have to confront: a great tower of failings that, to use a very topical word, are truly institutional.
That seems like a lot of words to say this is all about class. But are other places really hugely varied in their leadership?
I think that the point is that the cult of the Public schoolboy gentleman amateur still dominates English life. Certainly other countries have ruling cliques, but the English one eschews intellectual study and preparation. It seems an unshakeable fixation in the land.
So we have two recent Etonian Prime Ministers playing their games with our lives. Cameron then Johnson, entitled amateurism first as tragedy, then as farce.
Sounds like bollocks to me. Or, gasp, English exceptionalism.
Unless I am to believe that when people in other countries complain about their ruling cliques they are doing so on the basis they are too well prepared, intelligent and competent, how dare they. Which is the unavoidable implication of suggesting our clique, uniquely, eschews study and preparation.
It also seems like a way of blaming people for who they are choosing whilst still making that choice the fault of the person chosen.
It’s a particularly English ailment, though, to create a ruling clique whose defining feature is insouciance.
CNN: Despite the United Kingdom's successful Covid-19 vaccine rollout and an end to lockdown in sight, the British Prime Minister finds himself engulfed in scandals less than a week before crucial elections take place.
One place this could hurt Johnson a lot is Scotland. The Prime Minister already knows that there is little chance of Scottish voters electing anything than a parliamentary majority in favor of independence. As the leader of the Brexit campaign in 2016 and self-appointed defender of the Union, it's hard to think of a greater humiliation for Johnson to endure than see Scotland leaving the UK and going back into the EU.
Even members of his own government privately worry that the actions of Johnson, the Unionist who sought to unite the nation post-Brexit, could kick off a chain of events that leads to Scotland finally cutting loose from the United Kingdom.
This CNN article describes Johnson as a Unionist, but I wouldn’t use that term of him.
There’s very little evidence he gives a toss about the Union, save the impact on his own reputation.
He has turned the UK into Greater England.
Under @HYUFD it will be England and the occupied territories.
It isn't just HYUFD. That story that Liar will take the Scottish Government to the Supreme Court to impose His will over the people of Scotland. It doesn't matter how you choose to vote north of the wall you will always be treated as second class supplicants., able to do whatever you want only with the permission of England.
I can’t read that story because I’m not a subscriber. But remember all legal restrictions will go on 21 June according to the government’s own roadmap. Whether some venues keep glass screens, who knows?
Disturbing story briefed in the times. Suggests theatre and cinema goers will be forced to wear masks throughout screenings and performances. Distancing to be gone, but punters to wear masks when moving around. Sports venues may be capped to avoid pinch points. If things go as I expect with the vaccination rollout, cases will continue to fall, and hospitalisation and death will be minimal, yet I’ll still need to wear a mask to watch a film? Bye bye cinemas.
Who is briefing this? I think much of it is rampant speculation and kite flying trying to hold the public’s feet to the fire for the final weeks of lockdown. People have noticed that hardly anyone is now suffering from covid 19 in the UK.
Don’t know, but I know how briefing works. Someone from government is placing these stories.
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
I was chatting to someone who worked on the last Indyref and he's convinced that Gove is pulling the strings on this and will game the referendum a bit.
Such as allowing Scots in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland a vote in Indyref2, that sort of stuff.
The huge downside in all of this is the Prime Minister, I've mentioned on here that Yes tried to portray the 2014 as a battle of good v. evil but whilst the majority of Scots didn't agree with the politics of David Cameron they didn't see him as some malignant force, just a nice family man they disagreed with.
Now it is possible the majority of Scots do see Boris Johnson as some malignant force.
Boris has a higher approval rating in Scotland now than Alex Salmond who led the Yes campaign in 2014, Starmer has a higher approval rating in Scotland now than Cameron did in 2014
What is the relevance of this statement?
You seem to have listed some facts but not an argument.
@HYUFD thinks the numbers speak for themselves and mostly he is right
I can’t read that story because I’m not a subscriber. But remember all legal restrictions will go on 21 June according to the government’s own roadmap. Whether some venues keep glass screens, who knows?
Disturbing story briefed in the times. Suggests theatre and cinema goers will be forced to wear masks throughout screenings and performances. Distancing to be gone, but punters to wear masks when moving around. Sports venues may be capped to avoid pinch points. If things go as I expect with the vaccination rollout, cases will continue to fall, and hospitalisation and death will be minimal, yet I’ll still need to wear a mask to watch a film? Bye bye cinemas.
Who is briefing this? I think much of it is rampant speculation and kite flying trying to hold the public’s feet to the fire for the final weeks of lockdown. People have noticed that hardly anyone is now suffering from covid 19 in the UK.
Indeed, I wouldn't believe anything at this stage until its officially denied announced.
The reality is they're trying to keep the pressure up to ensure people get vaccinated, but its probably unnecessary. We're probably already at herd immunity rates now and vaccinations are still going great guns and will do for another couple of months yet.
I see the winner of the Tamil Nadu state elections is called Stalin - apparently named thus in honour of the Russian leader before the Cold War started after WW2. Like Germans called Adolf by enthusiastic 1940s parents, he must have had embarassing moments, though he is apparently grew up to be a mild-mannered regionalist social democrat. i think I'd have changed my name in his shoes, but perhaps voters there aren't that bothered.
Incidentally, I reently changed computers, and before getting my new one used to finding politicalbetting.com, it persistently offered me what looks like a spam site, telling me I've won something or other. Do the moderators know about it?
In Beirut I worked with a gaffer (chief electrician) who was introduced to me as 'Hitler'. I laughed politely. (It isn't uncommon for the macho jobs on crew to have nicknames like 'Horse' and 'Chunky'). But I was the only one laughing.
It was his actual name and his brother was called Rommel! It was explained to me that in the Middle East it was common for their heroes to be our villains
In reply to Nick Palmer
The has been a persistent problem as the site seems to have been hacked. If you login via vanilla there is no issue.
There was a gym instructor at a gym I used called Stalin. Really nice chap, too.
A good morning everyone! We were going to go to the seaside, but it's clouding over a bit now.
Who would dare disobey a personal trainer called Stalin?
On topic I note the voteshares in the 2017 county council elections were 38% Tory, 27% Labour and 18% LD based on the BBC results screenshot in OGH's thread header.
So given even the latest Survation voteshares at the weekend of Tories 39%, Labour 38% and LD 9% the Tories would actually be up 1% still on their 2017 county council voteshare (helped by squeezing UKIP who got 4.6% in England in the 2017 locals), Labour would be up by 11%, a big jump and the LDs would actually be down 9% on what they got last time.
On that basis then you would expect Labour to gain a large number of Tory county council seats on Thursday based on a 5% swing from the Tories to Labour, though the Tories would still be narrowly ahead overall. There would also be a 10% swing from LD to Labour so you would expect Labour to gain a number of LD county council seats as well and a 5% swing from LD to Tory, so you would expect the Tories to gain some LD county council seats (though LD opposition to new development in the Home Counties etc might reduce that swing in the South of England at least).
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
Yes, give in to the Nationalists now before a generation has elapsed since 2014 and even if No narrowly win an indyref2 the hardliners in the Nationalists would force Sturgeon to push for indyref3 soon after
I don't think so. Losing again would set nationalism back a very long way. It might also finish off Sturgeon which would weaken the Nationalists considerably. They have no one else even vaguely competent.
Oh it would.
Only if No won 60%+ in an indyref2 would it set nationalism back significantly.
A result of something like No 51% and Yes 49% which would be most likely would be seen by Nationalist hardliners as progress from the 45% they got in 2014 and they would move onto pushing for indyref3 straight away given the weakness of the UK government in granting indyref2 before a generation had elapsed since indyref1.
Sturgeon would likely be replaced by an even harder line nationalist, she would be the SNP's Arlene Foster or Theresa May
Apropos of nothing, I’m just having a moan, after my first jab yesterday, AZ, I’ve felt like crap all day today. Light-headed, fuzzy brained, niggling headache. Been absolutely useless all day. My parents, in their 60s, both had AZ and they were fine apart from a bit of a sore arm so I thought I’d fly through it. But not so. Hopefully I’ll feel better tomorrow.
That was me yesterday too. Touch wood, woken up feeling more like myself today.
I would regard some malaise as a good thing, in that an immune response has been triggered.
Looking over the more up to date data on the vaccine failures, this caught my eye:
"There have been community studies in the U.K. and Israel demonstrating vaccines are effective in preventing hospitalization. What is notable about vaccinated patients who are admitted to the hospital is that their outcomes are the same as non-vaccinated counterparts.
In order to be in the hospital, patients have to meet a “threshold of sickness” that is the same “if they are vaccinated or non-vaccinated,” said Annemarie Doherty, critical care consultant and a co-author of the study. “They look as sick as non-vaccinated patients. We’re only comparing patients that are sick enough to come into hospital, and then there is no difference in how well they do,” she said."
"526 of the hospitalized patients had developed their symptoms more than three weeks after being vaccinated, meaning they would be expected to have had immunity to SARS-CoV-2 infection. A total of 113 those patients died."
This would be just over 1% of hospital admissions, over the period. Obviously the %vaccinated over the period changed, so hard to know the denominator.
There were only 140 admissions post second vaccine, though because of the timelines, very few would have had the second dose within the study period.
So either the vaccine works, or it doesn’t, and mostly it does. But if it doesn’t, there is no consolation prize.
The consolation prize is if everyone else is vaccinated you are far less likely to catch it.
Yes, that seems true.
The data on vaccine failures is a bit complicated, as the covid prevalence was dropping as the vaccine rate was rising, so knowing what the denominator is is problematic. Nearly all the deaths were in Tier 2 patients, so 80+.
Also, from the figures you quoted, less than one per cent of those hospitalised had gone more than three weeks after their first vaccine shot. And the immune response with the AZN vaccine appears still to be building after three weeks.
2 weeks post completion of course, seems to mean post second dose, but difficult to specify a 1/100 000 risk without specifying a time period covered, and knowing the background risk.
I am very pro-vaccine, but understanding the risk of breakthrough infection is fairly key to the normalisation schedule.
Tim Spector reckons your chance of catching COVID in the UK after one vaccine shot is 1/100,000 per 24 hour period. And 1/150,000 after two shots. Of course this is partly a result of the low prevalence in the UK. Would be good to see this compasred with other everyday risks, like crossing the road.
In layman's terms...you've got more chance of being run over by an orange Robin Reliant
Not really.
The risk of death from crossing the road, from any type of vehicle, is estimated at around one in 300 million.
Even if you made the statistics more comparable by adjusting the 300 million to a 24 hour rate by dividing by the average number of daily road crossings of 3.9 per person (=one in 77 million) and made the COVID risk into a fatality risk at the current UK CFR of 2.9% (= one in 3.4 to one in 5.2 million), there is still a big difference.
I don't have stats on the prevalence of orange Reliants.
I can’t read that story because I’m not a subscriber. But remember all legal restrictions will go on 21 June according to the government’s own roadmap. Whether some venues keep glass screens, who knows?
Disturbing story briefed in the times. Suggests theatre and cinema goers will be forced to wear masks throughout screenings and performances. Distancing to be gone, but punters to wear masks when moving around. Sports venues may be capped to avoid pinch points. If things go as I expect with the vaccination rollout, cases will continue to fall, and hospitalisation and death will be minimal, yet I’ll still need to wear a mask to watch a film? Bye bye cinemas.
Harris: When he wasn’t “chillaxing”, Cameron tried to cover his lack of substance with a performative gravitas that sometimes verged on camp. Johnson, by contrast, seizes every opportunity to reduce politics to the absurd, and thereby makes the vacuum beneath him even more glaring. Without convictions or consistency you get a government based on serial lurching, from U-turn to U-turn and crisis to crisis, which sooner or later has massive consequences.
Moreover, because that dominance symbolises a very English mixture of nostalgia, deference and recklessness, it is part of the reason why the UK is now pulling apart; indeed, the fact that Johnson has been so hare-brained about arrangements in Northern Ireland is a vivid case study in the perils of entrusting matters of the utmost fragility to people whose basic unseriousness is not just toxic, but extremely dangerous.
Part of the English disease is our readiness to ascribe our national disasters to questions of personal character. But the vanities of posh men and their habit of dragging us into catastrophe have much deeper roots. They centre on an ancient system that trains a narrow caste of people to run our affairs, but also ensures they have almost none of the attributes actually required. If this country is to belatedly move into the 21st century, this is what we will finally have to confront: a great tower of failings that, to use a very topical word, are truly institutional.
That seems like a lot of words to say this is all about class. But are other places really hugely varied in their leadership?
I think that the point is that the cult of the Public schoolboy gentleman amateur still dominates English life. Certainly other countries have ruling cliques, but the English one eschews intellectual study and preparation. It seems an unshakeable fixation in the land.
So we have two recent Etonian Prime Ministers playing their games with our lives. Cameron then Johnson, entitled amateurism first as tragedy, then as farce.
Sounds like bollocks to me. Or, gasp, English exceptionalism.
Unless I am to believe that when people in other countries complain about their ruling cliques they are doing so on the basis they are too well prepared, intelligent and competent, how dare they. Which is the unavoidable implication of suggesting our clique, uniquely, eschews study and preparation.
It also seems like a way of blaming people for who they are choosing whilst still making that choice the fault of the person chosen.
Best description of this for me was in Chariots of Fire where Abrahams' college masters were accusing his professionalism of being a little too plebeian.
Yes, the idea of a gentleman amateur who pursues an interest purely out of love for the task, and is a natural leader is an idea that rose in the days of Empire via public school sports. Waterloo being won on the playing fields of Eton, and similar bollocks.
The disdain of professionalism has died in sport, but still a strong feature of English political life.
I don't see how this squares with the simultaneous criticism that our political leaders are now too professionalised, lots of former Spads and union officials an lawyers going into safe seats, never having real jobs outside politics. If anything our leaders are criticised for not being political amateurs, which might square with your theory except that it is saying they are not prepared for the business of politics, when the other criticism is that that is all they are prepared for.
I can’t read that story because I’m not a subscriber. But remember all legal restrictions will go on 21 June according to the government’s own roadmap. Whether some venues keep glass screens, who knows?
Disturbing story briefed in the times. Suggests theatre and cinema goers will be forced to wear masks throughout screenings and performances. Distancing to be gone, but punters to wear masks when moving around. Sports venues may be capped to avoid pinch points. If things go as I expect with the vaccination rollout, cases will continue to fall, and hospitalisation and death will be minimal, yet I’ll still need to wear a mask to watch a film? Bye bye cinemas.
Who is briefing this? I think much of it is rampant speculation and kite flying trying to hold the public’s feet to the fire for the final weeks of lockdown. People have noticed that hardly anyone is now suffering from covid 19 in the UK.
As I think I've commented before, wearing a mask with behind the ear hearing aids and glasses is complicated. Especially when one tries to take it off. A sort of cats cradle of wires and straps develops..
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
Yes, give in to the Nationalists now before a generation has elapsed since 2014 and even if No narrowly win an indyref2 the hardliners in the Nationalists would force Sturgeon to push for indyref3 soon after
I don't think so. Losing again would set nationalism back a very long way. It might also finish off Sturgeon which would weaken the Nationalists considerably. They have no one else even vaguely competent.
Oh it would.
Only if No won 60%+ in an indyref2 would it set nationalism back significantly.
A result of something like No 51% and Yes 49% which would be most likely would be seen by Nationalist hardliners as progress from the 45% they got in 2014 and they would move onto pushing for indyref3 straight away given the weakness of the UK government in granting indyref2 before a generation had elapsed since indyref1.
Sturgeon would likely be replaced by an even harder line nationalist, she would be the SNP's Arlene Foster or Theresa May
For someone who likes mentioning Quebec a lot you seem to forget the result of the second plebiscite there.
Harris: When he wasn’t “chillaxing”, Cameron tried to cover his lack of substance with a performative gravitas that sometimes verged on camp. Johnson, by contrast, seizes every opportunity to reduce politics to the absurd, and thereby makes the vacuum beneath him even more glaring. Without convictions or consistency you get a government based on serial lurching, from U-turn to U-turn and crisis to crisis, which sooner or later has massive consequences.
Moreover, because that dominance symbolises a very English mixture of nostalgia, deference and recklessness, it is part of the reason why the UK is now pulling apart; indeed, the fact that Johnson has been so hare-brained about arrangements in Northern Ireland is a vivid case study in the perils of entrusting matters of the utmost fragility to people whose basic unseriousness is not just toxic, but extremely dangerous.
Part of the English disease is our readiness to ascribe our national disasters to questions of personal character. But the vanities of posh men and their habit of dragging us into catastrophe have much deeper roots. They centre on an ancient system that trains a narrow caste of people to run our affairs, but also ensures they have almost none of the attributes actually required. If this country is to belatedly move into the 21st century, this is what we will finally have to confront: a great tower of failings that, to use a very topical word, are truly institutional.
That seems like a lot of words to say this is all about class. But are other places really hugely varied in their leadership?
I think that the point is that the cult of the Public schoolboy gentleman amateur still dominates English life. Certainly other countries have ruling cliques, but the English one eschews intellectual study and preparation. It seems an unshakeable fixation in the land.
So we have two recent Etonian Prime Ministers playing their games with our lives. Cameron then Johnson, entitled amateurism first as tragedy, then as farce.
Sounds like bollocks to me. Or, gasp, English exceptionalism.
Unless I am to believe that when people in other countries complain about their ruling cliques they are doing so on the basis they are too well prepared, intelligent and competent, how dare they. Which is the unavoidable implication of suggesting our clique, uniquely, eschews study and preparation.
It also seems like a way of blaming people for who they are choosing whilst still making that choice the fault of the person chosen.
It’s a particularly English ailment, though, to create a ruling clique whose defining feature is insouciance.
Is it? Boris has that, but a lack of seriousness from him is striking because it is uncommon. Part of his brand is being distinct from most of the clique, for better or worse depending on your stance.
I can’t read that story because I’m not a subscriber. But remember all legal restrictions will go on 21 June according to the government’s own roadmap. Whether some venues keep glass screens, who knows?
Disturbing story briefed in the times. Suggests theatre and cinema goers will be forced to wear masks throughout screenings and performances. Distancing to be gone, but punters to wear masks when moving around. Sports venues may be capped to avoid pinch points. If things go as I expect with the vaccination rollout, cases will continue to fall, and hospitalisation and death will be minimal, yet I’ll still need to wear a mask to watch a film? Bye bye cinemas.
Outdoor cinemas is the future
In California maybe. Rainy old U.K., not so much...
Apropos of nothing, I’m just having a moan, after my first jab yesterday, AZ, I’ve felt like crap all day today. Light-headed, fuzzy brained, niggling headache. Been absolutely useless all day. My parents, in their 60s, both had AZ and they were fine apart from a bit of a sore arm so I thought I’d fly through it. But not so. Hopefully I’ll feel better tomorrow.
That was me yesterday too. Touch wood, woken up feeling more like myself today.
I would regard some malaise as a good thing, in that an immune response has been triggered.
Looking over the more up to date data on the vaccine failures, this caught my eye:
"There have been community studies in the U.K. and Israel demonstrating vaccines are effective in preventing hospitalization. What is notable about vaccinated patients who are admitted to the hospital is that their outcomes are the same as non-vaccinated counterparts.
In order to be in the hospital, patients have to meet a “threshold of sickness” that is the same “if they are vaccinated or non-vaccinated,” said Annemarie Doherty, critical care consultant and a co-author of the study. “They look as sick as non-vaccinated patients. We’re only comparing patients that are sick enough to come into hospital, and then there is no difference in how well they do,” she said."
"526 of the hospitalized patients had developed their symptoms more than three weeks after being vaccinated, meaning they would be expected to have had immunity to SARS-CoV-2 infection. A total of 113 those patients died."
This would be just over 1% of hospital admissions, over the period. Obviously the %vaccinated over the period changed, so hard to know the denominator.
There were only 140 admissions post second vaccine, though because of the timelines, very few would have had the second dose within the study period.
So either the vaccine works, or it doesn’t, and mostly it does. But if it doesn’t, there is no consolation prize.
The consolation prize is if everyone else is vaccinated you are far less likely to catch it.
Yes, that seems true.
The data on vaccine failures is a bit complicated, as the covid prevalence was dropping as the vaccine rate was rising, so knowing what the denominator is is problematic. Nearly all the deaths were in Tier 2 patients, so 80+.
Also, from the figures you quoted, less than one per cent of those hospitalised had gone more than three weeks after their first vaccine shot. And the immune response with the AZN vaccine appears still to be building after three weeks.
2 weeks post completion of course, seems to mean post second dose, but difficult to specify a 1/100 000 risk without specifying a time period covered, and knowing the background risk.
I am very pro-vaccine, but understanding the risk of breakthrough infection is fairly key to the normalisation schedule.
Tim Spector reckons your chance of catching COVID in the UK after one vaccine shot is 1/100,000 per 24 hour period. And 1/150,000 after two shots. Of course this is partly a result of the low prevalence in the UK. Would be good to see this compasred with other everyday risks, like crossing the road.
If my maths is right that is a 1 in 411 chance of catching covid in a year, so pretty unlikely to happen in a lifetime. For the pessimists it also implies 170k people catching covid in the UK in a year.
All not particularly relevant though unfortunately as heavily dependent on prevalence rate and current restrictions, which will be eased in a couple of weeks.
CNN: Despite the United Kingdom's successful Covid-19 vaccine rollout and an end to lockdown in sight, the British Prime Minister finds himself engulfed in scandals less than a week before crucial elections take place.
One place this could hurt Johnson a lot is Scotland. The Prime Minister already knows that there is little chance of Scottish voters electing anything than a parliamentary majority in favor of independence. As the leader of the Brexit campaign in 2016 and self-appointed defender of the Union, it's hard to think of a greater humiliation for Johnson to endure than see Scotland leaving the UK and going back into the EU.
Even members of his own government privately worry that the actions of Johnson, the Unionist who sought to unite the nation post-Brexit, could kick off a chain of events that leads to Scotland finally cutting loose from the United Kingdom.
This CNN article describes Johnson as a Unionist, but I wouldn’t use that term of him.
There’s very little evidence he gives a toss about the Union, save the impact on his own reputation.
He has turned the UK into Greater England.
Under @HYUFD it will be England and the occupied territories.
No, that would require the abolition of Holyrood and the Senedd and Stormont and the imposition of direct rule from Westminster too and also the removal of all Scottish and Welsh and Northern Irish MPs from the House of Commons
It is already direct rule from Westminster. Can't speak about Wales too much, but North of the Wall and over the water in Westeros, people can vote for whomever and whatever they want and you "unionists" will simply say "you have no power, we are in charge".
Ultimately you and your Liar are literally destroying the UK - it will collapse and pretty quickly. A democracy that is not a democracy is not a democracy - it is an empire. Scotland will vote in a majority of MSPs on a mandate of independence. If you say "don't care, we're keeping you" then the democratic mandate you are hamfistedly trying to defend is literally over.
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
It would also be a tremendous distraction from the constant series of pickles in which he finds himself.
Revealed that a Russian oligarch funded a no 10 cheese sommelier? Sorry, busy crushing rebellious Scots. Jennifer Arcuri releases dick pics? Sorry, busy putting Sturge in her place. Etc.
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
I reckon he’ll put a tight window on it - latter half of this year? Now or never?
I think 6 months is the recognised minimum time for a referendum, and there has to be a lot of wrangling over who gets to vote, exact question etc. 2022 is the earliest possibility.
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
I was chatting to someone who worked on the last Indyref and he's convinced that Gove is pulling the strings on this and will game the referendum a bit.
Such as allowing Scots in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland a vote in Indyref2, that sort of stuff.
The huge downside in all of this is the Prime Minister, I've mentioned on here that Yes tried to portray the 2014 as a battle of good v. evil but whilst the majority of Scots didn't agree with the politics of David Cameron they didn't see him as some malignant force, just a nice family man they disagreed with.
Now it is possible the majority of Scots do see Boris Johnson as some malignant force.
Or they just might see him as the man who has saved the lives of thousands of Scots by rolling out a truly amazing vaccine program and the jobs of tens of thousands of Scots with furlough money, grants and QE beyond the aspirations of an independent Scotland. The answers to what has the Union done for me are stronger right now than they have been in decades and I think Boris (and Gove) are very well aware of that and want to take advantage.
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
I was chatting to someone who worked on the last Indyref and he's convinced that Gove is pulling the strings on this and will game the referendum a bit.
Such as allowing Scots in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland a vote in Indyref2, that sort of stuff.
The huge downside in all of this is the Prime Minister, I've mentioned on here that Yes tried to portray the 2014 as a battle of good v. evil but whilst the majority of Scots didn't agree with the politics of David Cameron they didn't see him as some malignant force, just a nice family man they disagreed with.
Now it is possible the majority of Scots do see Boris Johnson as some malignant force.
Or they just might see him as the man who has saved the lives of thousands of Scots by rolling out a truly amazing vaccine program and the jobs of tens of thousands of Scots with furlough money, grants and QE beyond the aspirations of an independent Scotland. The answers to what has the Union done for me are stronger right now than they have been in decades and I think Boris (and Gove) are very well aware of that and want to take advantage.
Do you really want Gove and Johnson front and centre of an Indyref2 campaign?
Gove the living embodiment of the scorpion in the story of The Scorpion and the frog and Boris Johnson who might be facing legal and tax problems relating to his finances.
You know things like pile the bodies high stuff will be there.
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
I was chatting to someone who worked on the last Indyref and he's convinced that Gove is pulling the strings on this and will game the referendum a bit.
Such as allowing Scots in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland a vote in Indyref2, that sort of stuff.
The huge downside in all of this is the Prime Minister, I've mentioned on here that Yes tried to portray the 2014 as a battle of good v. evil but whilst the majority of Scots didn't agree with the politics of David Cameron they didn't see him as some malignant force, just a nice family man they disagreed with.
Now it is possible the majority of Scots do see Boris Johnson as some malignant force.
The hubris of the Tories - as witnessed by the remaining fanbois on here - is that Johnson fans genuinely believe Him to be immaculate. They won't see the danger of so much of the country seeing the lying corrupt fool as a "malignant force" because look how many MPs he has!
Brexit England thats not near the coast think he's marvellous. Outside this group? Not marvellous.
On topic I note the voteshares in the 2017 county council elections were 38% Tory, 27% Labour and 18% LD based on the BBC results screenshot in OGH's thread header.
So given even the latest Survation voteshares at the weekend of Tories 39%, Labour 38% and LD 9% the Tories would actually be up 1% still on their 2017 county council voteshare (helped by squeezing UKIP who got 4.6% in England in the 2017 locals), Labour would be up by 11%, a big jump and the LDs would actually be down 9% on what they got last time.
On that basis then you would expect Labour to gain a large number of Tory county council seats on Thursday based on a 5% swing from the Tories to Labour, though the Tories would still be narrowly ahead overall. There would also be a 10% swing from LD to Labour so you would expect Labour to gain a number of LD county council seats as well and a 5% swing from LD to Tory, so you would expect the Tories to gain some LD county council seats (though LD opposition to new development in the Home Counties etc might reduce that swing in the South of England at least).
The Tories are not 1% up on 2017!
You are comparing apples and oranges. You can't compare local election results to opinion poll results, since the local election results always boost various 'pothole parties' like Residents Association, Liberal Democrats, Independents etc that people don't back at General Elections.
If you want to compare apples with apples you need to compare opinion polls now with opinion polls in 2017. At the time of the local elections in 2017 the Liberal Democrats were averaging about 9-10% not 18% so the Lib Dems are about flat on where they were then based on the polls, not lost half their share.
At the time of the 2017 local elections the Tories were about 46%, so 39% is massively down not up on last time. 🤦♂️
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
I was chatting to someone who worked on the last Indyref and he's convinced that Gove is pulling the strings on this and will game the referendum a bit.
Such as allowing Scots in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland a vote in Indyref2, that sort of stuff.
The huge downside in all of this is the Prime Minister, I've mentioned on here that Yes tried to portray the 2014 as a battle of good v. evil but whilst the majority of Scots didn't agree with the politics of David Cameron they didn't see him as some malignant force, just a nice family man they disagreed with.
Now it is possible the majority of Scots do see Boris Johnson as some malignant force.
Boris has a higher approval rating in Scotland now than Alex Salmond who led the Yes campaign in 2014, Starmer has a higher approval rating in Scotland now than Cameron did in 2014
Do you ever think what you write
You do have your strengths, but you leave a lot of us aghast at your attitude to Scotland and now sugggesting that as Boris has a higher rating than Salmond than in some way that is an electoral advantages
Apropos of nothing, I’m just having a moan, after my first jab yesterday, AZ, I’ve felt like crap all day today. Light-headed, fuzzy brained, niggling headache. Been absolutely useless all day. My parents, in their 60s, both had AZ and they were fine apart from a bit of a sore arm so I thought I’d fly through it. But not so. Hopefully I’ll feel better tomorrow.
That was me yesterday too. Touch wood, woken up feeling more like myself today.
I would regard some malaise as a good thing, in that an immune response has been triggered.
Looking over the more up to date data on the vaccine failures, this caught my eye:
"There have been community studies in the U.K. and Israel demonstrating vaccines are effective in preventing hospitalization. What is notable about vaccinated patients who are admitted to the hospital is that their outcomes are the same as non-vaccinated counterparts.
In order to be in the hospital, patients have to meet a “threshold of sickness” that is the same “if they are vaccinated or non-vaccinated,” said Annemarie Doherty, critical care consultant and a co-author of the study. “They look as sick as non-vaccinated patients. We’re only comparing patients that are sick enough to come into hospital, and then there is no difference in how well they do,” she said."
"526 of the hospitalized patients had developed their symptoms more than three weeks after being vaccinated, meaning they would be expected to have had immunity to SARS-CoV-2 infection. A total of 113 those patients died."
This would be just over 1% of hospital admissions, over the period. Obviously the %vaccinated over the period changed, so hard to know the denominator.
There were only 140 admissions post second vaccine, though because of the timelines, very few would have had the second dose within the study period.
So either the vaccine works, or it doesn’t, and mostly it does. But if it doesn’t, there is no consolation prize.
The consolation prize is if everyone else is vaccinated you are far less likely to catch it.
Yes, that seems true.
The data on vaccine failures is a bit complicated, as the covid prevalence was dropping as the vaccine rate was rising, so knowing what the denominator is is problematic. Nearly all the deaths were in Tier 2 patients, so 80+.
Also, from the figures you quoted, less than one per cent of those hospitalised had gone more than three weeks after their first vaccine shot. And the immune response with the AZN vaccine appears still to be building after three weeks.
2 weeks post completion of course, seems to mean post second dose, but difficult to specify a 1/100 000 risk without specifying a time period covered, and knowing the background risk.
I am very pro-vaccine, but understanding the risk of breakthrough infection is fairly key to the normalisation schedule.
Tim Spector reckons your chance of catching COVID in the UK after one vaccine shot is 1/100,000 per 24 hour period. And 1/150,000 after two shots. Of course this is partly a result of the low prevalence in the UK. Would be good to see this compasred with other everyday risks, like crossing the road.
If my maths is right that is a 1 in 411 chance of catching covid in a year, so pretty unlikely to happen in a lifetime. For the pessimists it also implies 170k people catching covid in the UK in a year.
All not particularly relevant though unfortunately as heavily dependent on prevalence rate and current restrictions, which will be eased in a couple of weeks.
The prevalence rate is key, so I think covid will become a disease caught overseas, and have local foci in antivax communities.
Harris: When he wasn’t “chillaxing”, Cameron tried to cover his lack of substance with a performative gravitas that sometimes verged on camp. Johnson, by contrast, seizes every opportunity to reduce politics to the absurd, and thereby makes the vacuum beneath him even more glaring. Without convictions or consistency you get a government based on serial lurching, from U-turn to U-turn and crisis to crisis, which sooner or later has massive consequences.
Moreover, because that dominance symbolises a very English mixture of nostalgia, deference and recklessness, it is part of the reason why the UK is now pulling apart; indeed, the fact that Johnson has been so hare-brained about arrangements in Northern Ireland is a vivid case study in the perils of entrusting matters of the utmost fragility to people whose basic unseriousness is not just toxic, but extremely dangerous.
Part of the English disease is our readiness to ascribe our national disasters to questions of personal character. But the vanities of posh men and their habit of dragging us into catastrophe have much deeper roots. They centre on an ancient system that trains a narrow caste of people to run our affairs, but also ensures they have almost none of the attributes actually required. If this country is to belatedly move into the 21st century, this is what we will finally have to confront: a great tower of failings that, to use a very topical word, are truly institutional.
That seems like a lot of words to say this is all about class. But are other places really hugely varied in their leadership?
I think that the point is that the cult of the Public schoolboy gentleman amateur still dominates English life. Certainly other countries have ruling cliques, but the English one eschews intellectual study and preparation. It seems an unshakeable fixation in the land.
So we have two recent Etonian Prime Ministers playing their games with our lives. Cameron then Johnson, entitled amateurism first as tragedy, then as farce.
Sounds like bollocks to me. Or, gasp, English exceptionalism.
Unless I am to believe that when people in other countries complain about their ruling cliques they are doing so on the basis they are too well prepared, intelligent and competent, how dare they. Which is the unavoidable implication of suggesting our clique, uniquely, eschews study and preparation.
It also seems like a way of blaming people for who they are choosing whilst still making that choice the fault of the person chosen.
It’s a particularly English ailment, though, to create a ruling clique whose defining feature is insouciance.
Is it? Boris has that, but a lack of seriousness from him is striking because it is uncommon. Part of his brand is being distinct from most of the clique, for better or worse depending on your stance.
Insouciance doesn't have to have a lack of seriousness, it can be born of arrogance and a slightly distorted sense of "duty". Boris is unusual in that he doesn't take politics, life or himself entirely seriously. It may partly be an affectation but it is one of his more redeeming features. In contrast SKS takes himself way too seriously.
I actually think Boris has it right to refuse another referendum right now.
A Scottish Indy referendum would affect ALL citizens of the U.K. It follows that it’s not a decision for the Scots alone.
Once in a generation is fair; with a generation being 20 or even 25 years.
I know there is a school of thought which says denying Scots in this matter would further inflame pro-independence sentiment. If so, so be it. Otherwise we are in a constitutional free-for-all.
I can’t read that story because I’m not a subscriber. But remember all legal restrictions will go on 21 June according to the government’s own roadmap. Whether some venues keep glass screens, who knows?
Disturbing story briefed in the times. Suggests theatre and cinema goers will be forced to wear masks throughout screenings and performances. Distancing to be gone, but punters to wear masks when moving around. Sports venues may be capped to avoid pinch points. If things go as I expect with the vaccination rollout, cases will continue to fall, and hospitalisation and death will be minimal, yet I’ll still need to wear a mask to watch a film? Bye bye cinemas.
Who is briefing this? I think much of it is rampant speculation and kite flying trying to hold the public’s feet to the fire for the final weeks of lockdown. People have noticed that hardly anyone is now suffering from covid 19 in the UK.
Don’t know, but I know how briefing works. Someone from government is placing these stories.
What's happened is that the clown treating politics as a game has backfired and the government's communication discipline, such as it was, is breaking down.
The clown thought stoking the Greensill story was a great chance to knock the reputation of his lifetime rival, and surely a lot of the current negative briefing is now coming from Cammo's allies and friends.
The clown thought trying to pin the leak on Cummo was a great chance to get Carrie's friend off the hook.
Between Cammo and Cummo, the clown has proved himself outstanding at making unnecessary enemies.
Just actually had a look at Lord Ashcroft's data tables for his poll that @HYUFD loves so much as it "shows that Green voters are against Independence" and I cannot actually stop laughing.
That is based on looking at the response of Green Constituency voters! If you look at the breakdown by Green vote on the List Green voters are, unsurprisingly, overwhelmingly in favour of independence.
In case anyone doesn't understand what is going on, the Greens are only standing in 10 out of the 72 constituencies.
I can’t read that story because I’m not a subscriber. But remember all legal restrictions will go on 21 June according to the government’s own roadmap. Whether some venues keep glass screens, who knows?
Disturbing story briefed in the times. Suggests theatre and cinema goers will be forced to wear masks throughout screenings and performances. Distancing to be gone, but punters to wear masks when moving around. Sports venues may be capped to avoid pinch points. If things go as I expect with the vaccination rollout, cases will continue to fall, and hospitalisation and death will be minimal, yet I’ll still need to wear a mask to watch a film? Bye bye cinemas.
Outdoor cinemas is the future
By the time it is sufficiently dark, it tends to be insufficiently warm
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
I was chatting to someone who worked on the last Indyref and he's convinced that Gove is pulling the strings on this and will game the referendum a bit.
Such as allowing Scots in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland a vote in Indyref2, that sort of stuff.
The huge downside in all of this is the Prime Minister, I've mentioned on here that Yes tried to portray the 2014 as a battle of good v. evil but whilst the majority of Scots didn't agree with the politics of David Cameron they didn't see him as some malignant force, just a nice family man they disagreed with.
Now it is possible the majority of Scots do see Boris Johnson as some malignant force.
Or they just might see him as the man who has saved the lives of thousands of Scots by rolling out a truly amazing vaccine program and the jobs of tens of thousands of Scots with furlough money, grants and QE beyond the aspirations of an independent Scotland. The answers to what has the Union done for me are stronger right now than they have been in decades and I think Boris (and Gove) are very well aware of that and want to take advantage.
So why isn't it having an affect already?
It possibly could be. See the recent decline in Yes share.
Just actually had a look at Lord Ashcroft's data tables for his poll that @HYUFD loves so much as it "shows that Green voters are against Independence" and I cannot actually stop laughing.
That is based on looking at the response of Green Constituency voters! If you look at the breakdown by Green vote on the List Green voters are, unsurprisingly, overwhelmingly in favour of independence.
In case anyone doesn't understand what is going on, the Greens are only standing in 10 out of the 72 constituencies.
Oh, posting misleading polling information is a no no on PB.
On topic I note the voteshares in the 2017 county council elections were 38% Tory, 27% Labour and 18% LD based on the BBC results screenshot in OGH's thread header.
So given even the latest Survation voteshares at the weekend of Tories 39%, Labour 38% and LD 9% the Tories would actually be up 1% still on their 2017 county council voteshare (helped by squeezing UKIP who got 4.6% in England in the 2017 locals), Labour would be up by 11%, a big jump and the LDs would actually be down 9% on what they got last time.
On that basis then you would expect Labour to gain a large number of Tory county council seats on Thursday based on a 5% swing from the Tories to Labour, though the Tories would still be narrowly ahead overall. There would also be a 10% swing from LD to Labour so you would expect Labour to gain a number of LD county council seats as well and a 5% swing from LD to Tory, so you would expect the Tories to gain some LD county council seats (though LD opposition to new development in the Home Counties etc might reduce that swing in the South of England at least).
The Tories are not 1% up on 2017!
You are comparing apples and oranges. You can't compare local election results to opinion poll results, since the local election results always boost various 'pothole parties' like Residents Association, Liberal Democrats, Independents etc that people don't back at General Elections.
If you want to compare apples with apples you need to compare opinion polls now with opinion polls in 2017. At the time of the local elections in 2017 the Liberal Democrats were averaging about 9-10% not 18% so the Lib Dems are about flat on where they were then based on the polls, not lost half their share.
At the time of the 2017 local elections the Tories were about 46%, so 39% is massively down not up on last time. 🤦♂️
In which case you would also expect the LDs to gain some Tory county council seats on Thursday as well as Labour gaining large numbers of Tory county council seats if the weekend Survation and Opinium polls are correct (though there was still a 4.6% UKIP vote in 2017 for the Tories to squeeze which will not be there now).
It also remains the case the Tories will likely have a better chance of holding their marginal county council seats over the LDs on Thursday than they will over Labour, given there would be a significantly bigger swing from Tories to Labour than to the LDs even if only looking at national opinion polls rather than the actual local election voteshares from 2017
Harris: When he wasn’t “chillaxing”, Cameron tried to cover his lack of substance with a performative gravitas that sometimes verged on camp. Johnson, by contrast, seizes every opportunity to reduce politics to the absurd, and thereby makes the vacuum beneath him even more glaring. Without convictions or consistency you get a government based on serial lurching, from U-turn to U-turn and crisis to crisis, which sooner or later has massive consequences.
Moreover, because that dominance symbolises a very English mixture of nostalgia, deference and recklessness, it is part of the reason why the UK is now pulling apart; indeed, the fact that Johnson has been so hare-brained about arrangements in Northern Ireland is a vivid case study in the perils of entrusting matters of the utmost fragility to people whose basic unseriousness is not just toxic, but extremely dangerous.
Part of the English disease is our readiness to ascribe our national disasters to questions of personal character. But the vanities of posh men and their habit of dragging us into catastrophe have much deeper roots. They centre on an ancient system that trains a narrow caste of people to run our affairs, but also ensures they have almost none of the attributes actually required. If this country is to belatedly move into the 21st century, this is what we will finally have to confront: a great tower of failings that, to use a very topical word, are truly institutional.
That seems like a lot of words to say this is all about class. But are other places really hugely varied in their leadership?
I think that the point is that the cult of the Public schoolboy gentleman amateur still dominates English life. Certainly other countries have ruling cliques, but the English one eschews intellectual study and preparation. It seems an unshakeable fixation in the land.
So we have two recent Etonian Prime Ministers playing their games with our lives. Cameron then Johnson, entitled amateurism first as tragedy, then as farce.
Sounds like bollocks to me. Or, gasp, English exceptionalism.
Unless I am to believe that when people in other countries complain about their ruling cliques they are doing so on the basis they are too well prepared, intelligent and competent, how dare they. Which is the unavoidable implication of suggesting our clique, uniquely, eschews study and preparation.
It also seems like a way of blaming people for who they are choosing whilst still making that choice the fault of the person chosen.
It’s a particularly English ailment, though, to create a ruling clique whose defining feature is insouciance.
Is it? Boris has that, but a lack of seriousness from him is striking because it is uncommon. Part of his brand is being distinct from most of the clique, for better or worse depending on your stance.
Insouciance doesn't have to have a lack of seriousness, it can be born of arrogance and a slightly distorted sense of "duty". Boris is unusual in that he doesn't take politics, life or himself entirely seriously. It may partly be an affectation but it is one of his more redeeming features. In contrast SKS takes himself way too seriously.
But as you've just said, Boris is unusual. He isn't emblematic of some common trend in British politics. Indeed, the fear that he will become emblematic of it is one thing that worries people.
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
I was chatting to someone who worked on the last Indyref and he's convinced that Gove is pulling the strings on this and will game the referendum a bit.
Such as allowing Scots in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland a vote in Indyref2, that sort of stuff.
The huge downside in all of this is the Prime Minister, I've mentioned on here that Yes tried to portray the 2014 as a battle of good v. evil but whilst the majority of Scots didn't agree with the politics of David Cameron they didn't see him as some malignant force, just a nice family man they disagreed with.
Now it is possible the majority of Scots do see Boris Johnson as some malignant force.
The hubris of the Tories - as witnessed by the remaining fanbois on here - is that Johnson fans genuinely believe Him to be immaculate. They won't see the danger of so much of the country seeing the lying corrupt fool as a "malignant force" because look how many MPs he has!
Brexit England thats not near the coast think he's marvellous. Outside this group? Not marvellous.
“A bare-faced liar promoted to our highest office”
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
I was chatting to someone who worked on the last Indyref and he's convinced that Gove is pulling the strings on this and will game the referendum a bit.
Such as allowing Scots in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland a vote in Indyref2, that sort of stuff.
The huge downside in all of this is the Prime Minister, I've mentioned on here that Yes tried to portray the 2014 as a battle of good v. evil but whilst the majority of Scots didn't agree with the politics of David Cameron they didn't see him as some malignant force, just a nice family man they disagreed with.
Now it is possible the majority of Scots do see Boris Johnson as some malignant force.
Or they just might see him as the man who has saved the lives of thousands of Scots by rolling out a truly amazing vaccine program and the jobs of tens of thousands of Scots with furlough money, grants and QE beyond the aspirations of an independent Scotland. The answers to what has the Union done for me are stronger right now than they have been in decades and I think Boris (and Gove) are very well aware of that and want to take advantage.
So why isn't it having an affect already?
It is. Independence is significantly down on the lead it had most of last year, polling indicates that an Independent Scotland would have suffered more deaths and would not have been able to respond to the pandemic as well. These points need to be hammered home though and so far Mr Ross is doing a pretty poor job of that.
On topic I note the voteshares in the 2017 county council elections were 38% Tory, 27% Labour and 18% LD based on the BBC results screenshot in OGH's thread header.
So given even the latest Survation voteshares at the weekend of Tories 39%, Labour 38% and LD 9% the Tories would actually be up 1% still on their 2017 county council voteshare (helped by squeezing UKIP who got 4.6% in England in the 2017 locals), Labour would be up by 11%, a big jump and the LDs would actually be down 9% on what they got last time.
On that basis then you would expect Labour to gain a large number of Tory county council seats on Thursday based on a 5% swing from the Tories to Labour, though the Tories would still be narrowly ahead overall. There would also be a 10% swing from LD to Labour so you would expect Labour to gain a number of LD county council seats as well and a 5% swing from LD to Tory, so you would expect the Tories to gain some LD county council seats (though LD opposition to new development in the Home Counties etc might reduce that swing in the South of England at least).
The Tories are not 1% up on 2017!
You are comparing apples and oranges. You can't compare local election results to opinion poll results, since the local election results always boost various 'pothole parties' like Residents Association, Liberal Democrats, Independents etc that people don't back at General Elections.
If you want to compare apples with apples you need to compare opinion polls now with opinion polls in 2017. At the time of the local elections in 2017 the Liberal Democrats were averaging about 9-10% not 18% so the Lib Dems are about flat on where they were then based on the polls, not lost half their share.
At the time of the 2017 local elections the Tories were about 46%, so 39% is massively down not up on last time. 🤦♂️
In which case you would also expect the LDs to gain some Tory county council seats on Thursday as well as Labour gaining large numbers of Tory county council seats if the weekend Survation and Opinium polls are correct (though there was still a 4.6% UKIP vote in 2017 for the Tories to squeeze which will not be there now).
It also remains the case the Tories will likely have a better chance of holding their marginal county council seats over the LDs on Thursday than they will over Labour, given there would be a significantly bigger swing to Labour than to the LDs even if only looking at national opinion polls rather than the actual local election voteshares from 2017
Or they just might see him as the man who has saved the lives of thousands of Scots by rolling out a truly amazing vaccine program and the jobs of tens of thousands of Scots with furlough money, grants and QE beyond the aspirations of an independent Scotland. The answers to what has the Union done for me are stronger right now than they have been in decades and I think Boris (and Gove) are very well aware of that and want to take advantage.
That approach doesn't work with a character as divisive as Johnson. He could give me the keys to a 930 Flachbau and I would spit in his face.
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
I was chatting to someone who worked on the last Indyref and he's convinced that Gove is pulling the strings on this and will game the referendum a bit.
Such as allowing Scots in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland a vote in Indyref2, that sort of stuff.
The huge downside in all of this is the Prime Minister, I've mentioned on here that Yes tried to portray the 2014 as a battle of good v. evil but whilst the majority of Scots didn't agree with the politics of David Cameron they didn't see him as some malignant force, just a nice family man they disagreed with.
Now it is possible the majority of Scots do see Boris Johnson as some malignant force.
Or they just might see him as the man who has saved the lives of thousands of Scots by rolling out a truly amazing vaccine program and the jobs of tens of thousands of Scots with furlough money, grants and QE beyond the aspirations of an independent Scotland. The answers to what has the Union done for me are stronger right now than they have been in decades and I think Boris (and Gove) are very well aware of that and want to take advantage.
I respect those arguments. The problem is that so many people remember all of the other disastrous decisions made by Johnson during the pandemic and the much better decisions made by Sturgeon. And Johnson refusing to answer questions and Sturgeon doing so every day.
Then we have the Big Picture. England - "we have you vaccines and furlough, what are you complaining about?" Scotland - "I am a prisoner, you let me vote but refuse to accept what I vote for" England - "bloody jocks, shut up and do what we tell you"
Or they just might see him as the man who has saved the lives of thousands of Scots by rolling out a truly amazing vaccine program and the jobs of tens of thousands of Scots with furlough money, grants and QE beyond the aspirations of an independent Scotland. The answers to what has the Union done for me are stronger right now than they have been in decades and I think Boris (and Gove) are very well aware of that and want to take advantage.
That approach doesn't work with a character as divisive as Johnson. He could give me the keys to a 930 Flachbau and I would spit in his face.
You would be right to, as he would be handing you the keys after having mown down an old lady doing 100 in a 20 zone.
On topic I note the voteshares in the 2017 county council elections were 38% Tory, 27% Labour and 18% LD based on the BBC results screenshot in OGH's thread header.
So given even the latest Survation voteshares at the weekend of Tories 39%, Labour 38% and LD 9% the Tories would actually be up 1% still on their 2017 county council voteshare (helped by squeezing UKIP who got 4.6% in England in the 2017 locals), Labour would be up by 11%, a big jump and the LDs would actually be down 9% on what they got last time.
On that basis then you would expect Labour to gain a large number of Tory county council seats on Thursday based on a 5% swing from the Tories to Labour, though the Tories would still be narrowly ahead overall. There would also be a 10% swing from LD to Labour so you would expect Labour to gain a number of LD county council seats as well and a 5% swing from LD to Tory, so you would expect the Tories to gain some LD county council seats (though LD opposition to new development in the Home Counties etc might reduce that swing in the South of England at least).
The Tories are not 1% up on 2017!
You are comparing apples and oranges. You can't compare local election results to opinion poll results, since the local election results always boost various 'pothole parties' like Residents Association, Liberal Democrats, Independents etc that people don't back at General Elections.
If you want to compare apples with apples you need to compare opinion polls now with opinion polls in 2017. At the time of the local elections in 2017 the Liberal Democrats were averaging about 9-10% not 18% so the Lib Dems are about flat on where they were then based on the polls, not lost half their share.
At the time of the 2017 local elections the Tories were about 46%, so 39% is massively down not up on last time. 🤦♂️
In which case you would also expect the LDs to gain some Tory county council seats on Thursday as well as Labour gaining large numbers of Tory county council seats if the weekend Survation and Opinium polls are correct (though there was still a 4.6% UKIP vote in 2017 for the Tories to squeeze which will not be there now).
It also remains the case the Tories will likely have a better chance of holding their marginal county council seats over the LDs on Thursday than they will over Labour, given there would be a significantly bigger swing to Labour than to the LDs even if only looking at national opinion polls rather than the actual local election voteshares from 2017
TBH I'd expect many Kippers to go back to being non-voters. Especially at local/County level.
Or they just might see him as the man who has saved the lives of thousands of Scots by rolling out a truly amazing vaccine program and the jobs of tens of thousands of Scots with furlough money, grants and QE beyond the aspirations of an independent Scotland. The answers to what has the Union done for me are stronger right now than they have been in decades and I think Boris (and Gove) are very well aware of that and want to take advantage.
That approach doesn't work with a character as divisive as Johnson. He could give me the keys to a 930 Flachbau and I would spit in his face.
Especially if you had paid for it, but he claimed that he was giving it to you out of the goodness of his heart, the glorious Union, etc.
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
Boris to allow Indyref2 must be an option, but he holds the cards on timing (they can't both want one at the same time, as they both only want one they will win) and he holds the strategy in his hands - like let's have a referendum when we have agreed the main heads of what an independence deal will actually say and do. Such an option is dynamite. NS can't refuse it and can't accept it (IMHO). I feel there are multiple opportunities to make life difficult for Sturgeon; and any majority for independence is wafer thin at the moment.
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
I was chatting to someone who worked on the last Indyref and he's convinced that Gove is pulling the strings on this and will game the referendum a bit.
Such as allowing Scots in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland a vote in Indyref2, that sort of stuff.
The huge downside in all of this is the Prime Minister, I've mentioned on here that Yes tried to portray the 2014 as a battle of good v. evil but whilst the majority of Scots didn't agree with the politics of David Cameron they didn't see him as some malignant force, just a nice family man they disagreed with.
Now it is possible the majority of Scots do see Boris Johnson as some malignant force.
Or they just might see him as the man who has saved the lives of thousands of Scots by rolling out a truly amazing vaccine program and the jobs of tens of thousands of Scots with furlough money, grants and QE beyond the aspirations of an independent Scotland. The answers to what has the Union done for me are stronger right now than they have been in decades and I think Boris (and Gove) are very well aware of that and want to take advantage.
Do you really want Gove and Johnson front and centre of an Indyref2 campaign?
Gove the living embodiment of the scorpion in the story of The Scorpion and the frog and Boris Johnson who might be facing legal and tax problems relating to his finances.
You know things like pile the bodies high stuff will be there.
The short answer is yes. It is a mixed package but they are excellent campaigners as the Brexit campaign showed very clearly. Cameron and Osborne really kept out of 2014 too much not wanting to overshadow or undermine Darling. The UK government should be much more vigorous in support of the Union than it was in 2014. Especially now.
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
I was chatting to someone who worked on the last Indyref and he's convinced that Gove is pulling the strings on this and will game the referendum a bit.
Such as allowing Scots in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland a vote in Indyref2, that sort of stuff.
The huge downside in all of this is the Prime Minister, I've mentioned on here that Yes tried to portray the 2014 as a battle of good v. evil but whilst the majority of Scots didn't agree with the politics of David Cameron they didn't see him as some malignant force, just a nice family man they disagreed with.
Now it is possible the majority of Scots do see Boris Johnson as some malignant force.
Or they just might see him as the man who has saved the lives of thousands of Scots by rolling out a truly amazing vaccine program and the jobs of tens of thousands of Scots with furlough money, grants and QE beyond the aspirations of an independent Scotland. The answers to what has the Union done for me are stronger right now than they have been in decades and I think Boris (and Gove) are very well aware of that and want to take advantage.
Do you really want Gove and Johnson front and centre of an Indyref2 campaign?
Gove the living embodiment of the scorpion in the story of The Scorpion and the frog and Boris Johnson who might be facing legal and tax problems relating to his finances.
You know things like pile the bodies high stuff will be there.
I don't think Johnson could resist. Like Trump, the only bits he enjoys about politics are the adoring crowds while campaigning, the groupies and the trappings of power. He is bored by the day job. Johnson is incapable of resisting that heffalump trap.
Like @DavidL I think a further defeat would be the last referendum in a long time, and the SNP would go into feuding decline, as it did post 1978. Obviously a successful indyvote would open a whole new can of worms, but like Brexit would be unstoppable, even though similarly nearly evenly split.
Surely the obvious UK government line is that 50% of a 50% turnout does not demonstrate an overwhelming desire in Scotland for another independence referendum.
......and the reply is that 40% of a 70% turnout doesn't demonstrate a desire for a Boris Johnson led government.
No equivalence really. We have to have a government after all. Independence is a very major constitutional change. I can't believe the number of people siding with the SNP just because it will annoy Boris.
I also want someone to ask Sturgeon WHEN she would hold a referendum if it was granted.
I thought the final episode was excellent. The programme always surprises and it did here. Along with most people I was expecting pyrotechnics and a reveal outlandish enough to beat the hype, eg H turns out to be Home Secretary Priti Patel.
I’m glad they resisted this in favour of something credible. The banality of evil etc. I also found the downbeat, almost wistful vibe at the end exactly matched my mood as this great series came to an end.
Or did it? Because this was another thing that was skilful here. It was wrapped up sufficiently to be the last one – it worked on that level – but at the same time it sketched a platform for future development if the writers and cast are up for it.
Just actually had a look at Lord Ashcroft's data tables for his poll that @HYUFD loves so much as it "shows that Green voters are against Independence" and I cannot actually stop laughing.
That is based on looking at the response of Green Constituency voters! If you look at the breakdown by Green vote on the List Green voters are, unsurprisingly, overwhelmingly in favour of independence.
In case anyone doesn't understand what is going on, the Greens are only standing in 10 out of the 72 constituencies.
I gave up when HYUFD ignored my question on if that was the case why is a referendum part of the Green Party manifesto?
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
I was chatting to someone who worked on the last Indyref and he's convinced that Gove is pulling the strings on this and will game the referendum a bit.
Such as allowing Scots in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland a vote in Indyref2, that sort of stuff.
The huge downside in all of this is the Prime Minister, I've mentioned on here that Yes tried to portray the 2014 as a battle of good v. evil but whilst the majority of Scots didn't agree with the politics of David Cameron they didn't see him as some malignant force, just a nice family man they disagreed with.
Now it is possible the majority of Scots do see Boris Johnson as some malignant force.
Or they just might see him as the man who has saved the lives of thousands of Scots by rolling out a truly amazing vaccine program and the jobs of tens of thousands of Scots with furlough money, grants and QE beyond the aspirations of an independent Scotland. The answers to what has the Union done for me are stronger right now than they have been in decades and I think Boris (and Gove) are very well aware of that and want to take advantage.
Do you really want Gove and Johnson front and centre of an Indyref2 campaign?
Gove the living embodiment of the scorpion in the story of The Scorpion and the frog and Boris Johnson who might be facing legal and tax problems relating to his finances.
You know things like pile the bodies high stuff will be there.
They're also two of the three most unpopular politicians in Scotland that I recall from recent polling.
On topic I note the voteshares in the 2017 county council elections were 38% Tory, 27% Labour and 18% LD based on the BBC results screenshot in OGH's thread header.
So given even the latest Survation voteshares at the weekend of Tories 39%, Labour 38% and LD 9% the Tories would actually be up 1% still on their 2017 county council voteshare (helped by squeezing UKIP who got 4.6% in England in the 2017 locals), Labour would be up by 11%, a big jump and the LDs would actually be down 9% on what they got last time.
On that basis then you would expect Labour to gain a large number of Tory county council seats on Thursday based on a 5% swing from the Tories to Labour, though the Tories would still be narrowly ahead overall. There would also be a 10% swing from LD to Labour so you would expect Labour to gain a number of LD county council seats as well and a 5% swing from LD to Tory, so you would expect the Tories to gain some LD county council seats (though LD opposition to new development in the Home Counties etc might reduce that swing in the South of England at least).
The Tories are not 1% up on 2017!
You are comparing apples and oranges. You can't compare local election results to opinion poll results, since the local election results always boost various 'pothole parties' like Residents Association, Liberal Democrats, Independents etc that people don't back at General Elections.
If you want to compare apples with apples you need to compare opinion polls now with opinion polls in 2017. At the time of the local elections in 2017 the Liberal Democrats were averaging about 9-10% not 18% so the Lib Dems are about flat on where they were then based on the polls, not lost half their share.
At the time of the 2017 local elections the Tories were about 46%, so 39% is massively down not up on last time. 🤦♂️
Also, it's the paper LibDem candidates who are losing most of the votes - the proportion of voters who will go for a LibDem just because the option is on the ballot has dropped from 10% to 5% or less. Those LibDems with active campaigns and credible pitches based on their incumbency or position on the council haven't tended to do so badly, since the initial post-coalition wipeout.
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
Yes, give in to the Nationalists now before a generation has elapsed since 2014 and even if No narrowly win an indyref2 the hardliners in the Nationalists would force Sturgeon to push for indyref3 soon after
I don't think so. Losing again would set nationalism back a very long way. It might also finish off Sturgeon which would weaken the Nationalists considerably. They have no one else even vaguely competent.
Oh it would.
Only if No won 60%+ in an indyref2 would it set nationalism back significantly.
A result of something like No 51% and Yes 49% which would be most likely would be seen by Nationalist hardliners as progress from the 45% they got in 2014 and they would move onto pushing for indyref3 straight away given the weakness of the UK government in granting indyref2 before a generation had elapsed since indyref1.
Sturgeon would likely be replaced by an even harder line nationalist, she would be the SNP's Arlene Foster or Theresa May
For someone who likes mentioning Quebec a lot you seem to forget the result of the second plebiscite there.
The second plebiscite in Quebec was held in 1995, a full 15 years after the first in 1980 ie a genuine generation
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
I was chatting to someone who worked on the last Indyref and he's convinced that Gove is pulling the strings on this and will game the referendum a bit.
Such as allowing Scots in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland a vote in Indyref2, that sort of stuff.
The huge downside in all of this is the Prime Minister, I've mentioned on here that Yes tried to portray the 2014 as a battle of good v. evil but whilst the majority of Scots didn't agree with the politics of David Cameron they didn't see him as some malignant force, just a nice family man they disagreed with.
Now it is possible the majority of Scots do see Boris Johnson as some malignant force.
Or they just might see him as the man who has saved the lives of thousands of Scots by rolling out a truly amazing vaccine program and the jobs of tens of thousands of Scots with furlough money, grants and QE beyond the aspirations of an independent Scotland. The answers to what has the Union done for me are stronger right now than they have been in decades and I think Boris (and Gove) are very well aware of that and want to take advantage.
Do you really want Gove and Johnson front and centre of an Indyref2 campaign?
Gove the living embodiment of the scorpion in the story of The Scorpion and the frog and Boris Johnson who might be facing legal and tax problems relating to his finances.
You know things like pile the bodies high stuff will be there.
The short answer is yes. It is a mixed package but they are excellent campaigners as the Brexit campaign showed very clearly. Cameron and Osborne really kept out of 2014 too much not wanting to overshadow or undermine Darling. The UK government should be much more vigorous in support of the Union than it was in 2014. Especially now.
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
Yes, give in to the Nationalists now before a generation has elapsed since 2014 and even if No narrowly win an indyref2 the hardliners in the Nationalists would force Sturgeon to push for indyref3 soon after
I don't think so. Losing again would set nationalism back a very long way. It might also finish off Sturgeon which would weaken the Nationalists considerably. They have no one else even vaguely competent.
Oh it would.
Only if No won 60%+ in an indyref2 would it set nationalism back significantly.
A result of something like No 51% and Yes 49% which would be most likely would be seen by Nationalist hardliners as progress from the 45% they got in 2014 and they would move onto pushing for indyref3 straight away given the weakness of the UK government in granting indyref2 before a generation had elapsed since indyref1.
Sturgeon would likely be replaced by an even harder line nationalist, she would be the SNP's Arlene Foster or Theresa May
For someone who likes mentioning Quebec a lot you seem to forget the result of the second plebiscite there.
The second plebiscite in Quebec was held in 1995, a full 15 years after the first in 1980 ie a genuine generation
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
I was chatting to someone who worked on the last Indyref and he's convinced that Gove is pulling the strings on this and will game the referendum a bit.
Such as allowing Scots in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland a vote in Indyref2, that sort of stuff.
The huge downside in all of this is the Prime Minister, I've mentioned on here that Yes tried to portray the 2014 as a battle of good v. evil but whilst the majority of Scots didn't agree with the politics of David Cameron they didn't see him as some malignant force, just a nice family man they disagreed with.
Now it is possible the majority of Scots do see Boris Johnson as some malignant force.
Or they just might see him as the man who has saved the lives of thousands of Scots by rolling out a truly amazing vaccine program and the jobs of tens of thousands of Scots with furlough money, grants and QE beyond the aspirations of an independent Scotland. The answers to what has the Union done for me are stronger right now than they have been in decades and I think Boris (and Gove) are very well aware of that and want to take advantage.
Do you really want Gove and Johnson front and centre of an Indyref2 campaign?
Gove the living embodiment of the scorpion in the story of The Scorpion and the frog and Boris Johnson who might be facing legal and tax problems relating to his finances.
You know things like pile the bodies high stuff will be there.
Who else is going to run the Better Together 2 campaign.
It's not something any sane Labour leader would do as you don't want to give SNP (but former labour) voters a reason to never vote Labour again.
So the Tory party will need to front the campaign and that is going to be a problem unless Boris decides on a very early retirement
Just done a quick vaccine count calculation - by the end of May we'll reach 81-83% of adults with one dose and 50% of adults with two doses, that's with no increase in vaccine supply. Assuming the MHRA ever get around to approving Novavax that 81-83% becomes more like 87-89% leaving just 7-8% needing first doses (around one week of supply in June). By the time we hit June 21st everyone who wants a vaccine will have had a first dose and by the end of July every single person will have had both doses except a few unlucky people who get AZ in the next two to three weeks.
Surely those who get AZ in the next few weeks could have their 2nd dose early (though not really early versus the original plan) once there are no more first doses to give?
There are clinical reasons to delay the second AZ dose to 12 weeks. Someone who gets AZ at the end of May will need to wait until the middle of August for their second dose. However, it does seem like the MHRA are about to remove that option by limiting AZ for under 40s as well, I assume we will get Novavax approved around the same time which only needs a minimum 3 week gap for 96% efficacy.
Other countries are not using a 12 week gap for AZ. I entirely support the UK's decision to do so, but I think the primary driver was the laudible desire to get as many 1st doses given as quickly as possible*.
Hancock briefed him on it as an idea his department had come up with and he was considering. He asked Blair’s opinion.
Blair then ran and brief the media about his wonderful idea.
Hancock was so pissed off that he ceased all briefing of Blair
It was extraordinary poor behaviour by a former PM
I was teasing.
I am rather surprised Hancock spoke to Blair about the idea though. I would not have expected any contact at all between any member of the current cabinet and Blair.
All former PMs are entitled to briefing on Privy Counsellor terms & are expected to offer their advice
Interesting, and on the whole positive.
Wonder IF they could have a seance to brief and consult Sir Robert Walpole, Pitt Elder & Younger, Disraeli, Gladstone, Lloyd George, Churchill, Atlee, Macmillan, Wilson, Thatcher?
Please don’t tell @moonshine about that technology. It’s supposed to be secret
Or they just might see him as the man who has saved the lives of thousands of Scots by rolling out a truly amazing vaccine program and the jobs of tens of thousands of Scots with furlough money, grants and QE beyond the aspirations of an independent Scotland. The answers to what has the Union done for me are stronger right now than they have been in decades and I think Boris (and Gove) are very well aware of that and want to take advantage.
That approach doesn't work with a character as divisive as Johnson. He could give me the keys to a 930 Flachbau and I would spit in his face.
You would be right to, as he would be handing you the keys after having mown down an old lady doing 100 in a 20 zone.
With his watery eyes and palsied grip Johnson lacks the steely composure of a true 'ton up' 'merchant. Let alone the 'Double Castle' (140mph) or semi legendary 'Double Ton' (200mph).
Just actually had a look at Lord Ashcroft's data tables for his poll that @HYUFD loves so much as it "shows that Green voters are against Independence" and I cannot actually stop laughing.
That is based on looking at the response of Green Constituency voters! If you look at the breakdown by Green vote on the List Green voters are, unsurprisingly, overwhelmingly in favour of independence.
In case anyone doesn't understand what is going on, the Greens are only standing in 10 out of the 72 constituencies.
'Of those likely to vote SNP with their first vote, the vast majority (84%) were in favour of independence. By contrast, those likely to vote for the Scottish Conservatives were overwhelmingly against Scotland becoming an independent country, with 95% anti-independence. Among Scottish Labour, and Scottish Liberal Democrats supporters 75% and 79% respectively opposed separation from the UK. The picture was more mixed for Scottish Greens supporters with 43% pro-independence and 46% against.' https://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Lord-Ashcroft-Polls-Scottish-Political-Research-April-2021.pdf (p19)
You cannot exclude Green voters on the constituency vote from what Green Party voters think on an independence referendum just as you dislike the result, indeed they are the most genuine Green voters in Scotland ie voting Green on the constituency and list votes.
Given the SNP will likely get less than 50% on the constituency vote that is clearly no mandate for indyref2 (they will get far less on the list vote but even there the SNP and Greens and Alba combined will likely not get much more than 50% and probably less on the list vote as well)
In all this talk of indyref2, on the assumption Boris agrees to it, then surely it must be upto the HoC voting it through, and the HOC largely consists of anti indyref2 MPs
Can someone confirm or otherwise the actual process of granting a sec 30 order as that would be most helpful
Harris: When he wasn’t “chillaxing”, Cameron tried to cover his lack of substance with a performative gravitas that sometimes verged on camp. Johnson, by contrast, seizes every opportunity to reduce politics to the absurd, and thereby makes the vacuum beneath him even more glaring. Without convictions or consistency you get a government based on serial lurching, from U-turn to U-turn and crisis to crisis, which sooner or later has massive consequences.
Moreover, because that dominance symbolises a very English mixture of nostalgia, deference and recklessness, it is part of the reason why the UK is now pulling apart; indeed, the fact that Johnson has been so hare-brained about arrangements in Northern Ireland is a vivid case study in the perils of entrusting matters of the utmost fragility to people whose basic unseriousness is not just toxic, but extremely dangerous.
Part of the English disease is our readiness to ascribe our national disasters to questions of personal character. But the vanities of posh men and their habit of dragging us into catastrophe have much deeper roots. They centre on an ancient system that trains a narrow caste of people to run our affairs, but also ensures they have almost none of the attributes actually required. If this country is to belatedly move into the 21st century, this is what we will finally have to confront: a great tower of failings that, to use a very topical word, are truly institutional.
That seems like a lot of words to say this is all about class. But are other places really hugely varied in their leadership?
I think that the point is that the cult of the Public schoolboy gentleman amateur still dominates English life. Certainly other countries have ruling cliques, but the English one eschews intellectual study and preparation. It seems an unshakeable fixation in the land.
So we have two recent Etonian Prime Ministers playing their games with our lives. Cameron then Johnson, entitled amateurism first as tragedy, then as farce.
Sounds like bollocks to me. Or, gasp, English exceptionalism.
Unless I am to believe that when people in other countries complain about their ruling cliques they are doing so on the basis they are too well prepared, intelligent and competent, how dare they. Which is the unavoidable implication of suggesting our clique, uniquely, eschews study and preparation.
It also seems like a way of blaming people for who they are choosing whilst still making that choice the fault of the person chosen.
It’s a particularly English ailment, though, to create a ruling clique whose defining feature is insouciance.
Is it? Boris has that, but a lack of seriousness from him is striking because it is uncommon. Part of his brand is being distinct from most of the clique, for better or worse depending on your stance.
Insouciance doesn't have to have a lack of seriousness, it can be born of arrogance and a slightly distorted sense of "duty". Boris is unusual in that he doesn't take politics, life or himself entirely seriously. It may partly be an affectation but it is one of his more redeeming features. In contrast SKS takes himself way too seriously.
Yes, Cameron has a different style of insouciance, with the chillaxing etc. First as tragedy, then as farce.
Surely the obvious UK government line is that 50% of a 50% turnout does not demonstrate an overwhelming desire in Scotland for another independence referendum.
......and the reply is that 40% of a 70% turnout doesn't demonstrate a desire for a Boris Johnson led government.
Works for me!!
I'm sure you had no issues with 35% of 61% in 2005, though. In fact I'm sure it was a "feature" of our system.
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
I was chatting to someone who worked on the last Indyref and he's convinced that Gove is pulling the strings on this and will game the referendum a bit.
Such as allowing Scots in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland a vote in Indyref2, that sort of stuff.
The huge downside in all of this is the Prime Minister, I've mentioned on here that Yes tried to portray the 2014 as a battle of good v. evil but whilst the majority of Scots didn't agree with the politics of David Cameron they didn't see him as some malignant force, just a nice family man they disagreed with.
Now it is possible the majority of Scots do see Boris Johnson as some malignant force.
Or they just might see him as the man who has saved the lives of thousands of Scots by rolling out a truly amazing vaccine program and the jobs of tens of thousands of Scots with furlough money, grants and QE beyond the aspirations of an independent Scotland. The answers to what has the Union done for me are stronger right now than they have been in decades and I think Boris (and Gove) are very well aware of that and want to take advantage.
I respect those arguments. The problem is that so many people remember all of the other disastrous decisions made by Johnson during the pandemic and the much better decisions made by Sturgeon. And Johnson refusing to answer questions and Sturgeon doing so every day.
Then we have the Big Picture. England - "we have you vaccines and furlough, what are you complaining about?" Scotland - "I am a prisoner, you let me vote but refuse to accept what I vote for" England - "bloody jocks, shut up and do what we tell you"
I don't think Sturgeon made better decisions. We are still much more locked down than England despite a vanishingly low level of infection. She has consistently overdone lockdown with a casual indifference to its economic cost just to be different and show how much she "cares". Our disaster on residential homes was at least as bad as that in England, arguably worse, the education of our children has been handled even more badly than by Williamson, a truly astounding achievement and our vaccine roll out has been slower and more bureaucratic.
I also don't understand your second point. We will, sadly, have yet another SNP administration looking to pick arguments, focused on short term freebies, indifferent to Scotland's actual needs unless they are relevant to the great god independence, and all too often not even then because they are too thick to see it.
In all this talk of indyref2, on the assumption Boris agrees to it, then surely it must be upto the HoC voting it through, and the HOC largely consists of anti indyref2 MPs
Can someone confirm or otherwise the actual process of granting a sec 30 order as that would be most helpful
Morning, BigG! THis might be worth a look. The Sec30 for indyref1 was laid before Pmt. But remember it also has to clear the Scottish Parliament, under the Sewell convention and indeed precedent - and trying to ignore that would be itself highly problematical for obvious reasons.
Just actually had a look at Lord Ashcroft's data tables for his poll that @HYUFD loves so much as it "shows that Green voters are against Independence" and I cannot actually stop laughing.
That is based on looking at the response of Green Constituency voters! If you look at the breakdown by Green vote on the List Green voters are, unsurprisingly, overwhelmingly in favour of independence.
In case anyone doesn't understand what is going on, the Greens are only standing in 10 out of the 72 constituencies.
There is also the minor point that the Scottish Greens are openly in favour of independence. If you vote for the Scottish Greens you are voting for their manifesto which is for independence.
So of course HYUFD says Green voters don't back independence. The poor simpletons don't know what they are voting for. Which is why it is So Important not to give them any say at all over their own status. They're such children - let the grown ups in England take care of them.
I can’t read that story because I’m not a subscriber. But remember all legal restrictions will go on 21 June according to the government’s own roadmap. Whether some venues keep glass screens, who knows?
Disturbing story briefed in the times. Suggests theatre and cinema goers will be forced to wear masks throughout screenings and performances. Distancing to be gone, but punters to wear masks when moving around. Sports venues may be capped to avoid pinch points. If things go as I expect with the vaccination rollout, cases will continue to fall, and hospitalisation and death will be minimal, yet I’ll still need to wear a mask to watch a film? Bye bye cinemas.
Who is briefing this? I think much of it is rampant speculation and kite flying trying to hold the public’s feet to the fire for the final weeks of lockdown. People have noticed that hardly anyone is now suffering from covid 19 in the UK.
They're preparing the ground for keeping masks and as "low cost" interventions over the long term. The public health chumps don't want to let their tools go.
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
I was chatting to someone who worked on the last Indyref and he's convinced that Gove is pulling the strings on this and will game the referendum a bit.
Such as allowing Scots in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland a vote in Indyref2, that sort of stuff.
The huge downside in all of this is the Prime Minister, I've mentioned on here that Yes tried to portray the 2014 as a battle of good v. evil but whilst the majority of Scots didn't agree with the politics of David Cameron they didn't see him as some malignant force, just a nice family man they disagreed with.
Now it is possible the majority of Scots do see Boris Johnson as some malignant force.
Or they just might see him as the man who has saved the lives of thousands of Scots by rolling out a truly amazing vaccine program and the jobs of tens of thousands of Scots with furlough money, grants and QE beyond the aspirations of an independent Scotland. The answers to what has the Union done for me are stronger right now than they have been in decades and I think Boris (and Gove) are very well aware of that and want to take advantage.
I respect those arguments. The problem is that so many people remember all of the other disastrous decisions made by Johnson during the pandemic and the much better decisions made by Sturgeon. And Johnson refusing to answer questions and Sturgeon doing so every day.
Then we have the Big Picture. England - "we have you vaccines and furlough, what are you complaining about?" Scotland - "I am a prisoner, you let me vote but refuse to accept what I vote for" England - "bloody jocks, shut up and do what we tell you"
I don't think Sturgeon made better decisions. We are still much more locked down than England despite a vanishingly low level of infection. She has consistently overdone lockdown with a casual indifference to its economic cost just to be different and show how much she "cares". Our disaster on residential homes was at least as bad as that in England, arguably worse, the education of our children has been handled even more badly than by Williamson, a truly astounding achievement and our vaccine roll out has been slower and more bureaucratic.
I also don't understand your second point. We will, sadly, have yet another SNP administration looking to pick arguments, focused on short term freebies, indifferent to Scotland's actual needs unless they are relevant to the great god independence, and all too often not even then because they are too thick to see it.
Markedly different death rates in the later stages of the pandemic. That counts for a lot.
"Limits on international leisure travel should continue even after 17 May, a cross-party group of MPs has warned.
The All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on coronavirus has told the government to "discourage all international leisure travel" to protect the UK from COVID-19 variants. The group said that airport arrival halls are a "breeding ground for infection" and the importation of variants could lead to "further lockdowns and inevitably further loss of life".
Lib Dem MP Layla Moran, who chairs the APPG, said: "It is staggering that the government is even contemplating encouraging overseas holidays when airports are already struggling to keep the virus and new variants at bay. "Urgent measures are needed to better detect fake COVID test certificates, reduce overcrowding in arrival halls and separate those arriving from red and amber list countries. "The country's biosecurity cannot rely on border staff spotting a spelling error.""
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
I was chatting to someone who worked on the last Indyref and he's convinced that Gove is pulling the strings on this and will game the referendum a bit.
Such as allowing Scots in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland a vote in Indyref2, that sort of stuff.
The huge downside in all of this is the Prime Minister, I've mentioned on here that Yes tried to portray the 2014 as a battle of good v. evil but whilst the majority of Scots didn't agree with the politics of David Cameron they didn't see him as some malignant force, just a nice family man they disagreed with.
Now it is possible the majority of Scots do see Boris Johnson as some malignant force.
Or they just might see him as the man who has saved the lives of thousands of Scots by rolling out a truly amazing vaccine program and the jobs of tens of thousands of Scots with furlough money, grants and QE beyond the aspirations of an independent Scotland. The answers to what has the Union done for me are stronger right now than they have been in decades and I think Boris (and Gove) are very well aware of that and want to take advantage.
Do you really want Gove and Johnson front and centre of an Indyref2 campaign?
Gove the living embodiment of the scorpion in the story of The Scorpion and the frog and Boris Johnson who might be facing legal and tax problems relating to his finances.
You know things like pile the bodies high stuff will be there.
I don't think Johnson could resist. Like Trump, the only bits he enjoys about politics are the adoring crowds while campaigning, the groupies and the trappings of power. He is bored by the day job. Johnson is incapable of resisting that heffalump trap.
Like @DavidL I think a further defeat would be the last referendum in a long time, and the SNP would go into feuding decline, as it did post 1978. Obviously a successful indyvote would open a whole new can of worms, but like Brexit would be unstoppable, even though similarly nearly evenly split.
Im arriving at the point where it's clear that Referendum 2 is going to be inevitable.
The question is how do you get the awkward questions into public conversation in a way that doesn't allow everyone to vote for their unicorn independence
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
I was chatting to someone who worked on the last Indyref and he's convinced that Gove is pulling the strings on this and will game the referendum a bit.
Such as allowing Scots in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland a vote in Indyref2, that sort of stuff.
The huge downside in all of this is the Prime Minister, I've mentioned on here that Yes tried to portray the 2014 as a battle of good v. evil but whilst the majority of Scots didn't agree with the politics of David Cameron they didn't see him as some malignant force, just a nice family man they disagreed with.
Now it is possible the majority of Scots do see Boris Johnson as some malignant force.
Or they just might see him as the man who has saved the lives of thousands of Scots by rolling out a truly amazing vaccine program and the jobs of tens of thousands of Scots with furlough money, grants and QE beyond the aspirations of an independent Scotland. The answers to what has the Union done for me are stronger right now than they have been in decades and I think Boris (and Gove) are very well aware of that and want to take advantage.
Do you really want Gove and Johnson front and centre of an Indyref2 campaign?
Gove the living embodiment of the scorpion in the story of The Scorpion and the frog and Boris Johnson who might be facing legal and tax problems relating to his finances.
You know things like pile the bodies high stuff will be there.
Who else is going to run the Better Together 2 campaign.
It's not something any sane Labour leader would do as you don't want to give SNP (but former labour) voters a reason to never vote Labour again.
So the Tory party will need to front the campaign and that is going to be a problem unless Boris decides on a very early retirement
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
I was chatting to someone who worked on the last Indyref and he's convinced that Gove is pulling the strings on this and will game the referendum a bit.
Such as allowing Scots in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland a vote in Indyref2, that sort of stuff.
The huge downside in all of this is the Prime Minister, I've mentioned on here that Yes tried to portray the 2014 as a battle of good v. evil but whilst the majority of Scots didn't agree with the politics of David Cameron they didn't see him as some malignant force, just a nice family man they disagreed with.
Now it is possible the majority of Scots do see Boris Johnson as some malignant force.
Or they just might see him as the man who has saved the lives of thousands of Scots by rolling out a truly amazing vaccine program and the jobs of tens of thousands of Scots with furlough money, grants and QE beyond the aspirations of an independent Scotland. The answers to what has the Union done for me are stronger right now than they have been in decades and I think Boris (and Gove) are very well aware of that and want to take advantage.
So why isn't it having an affect already?
It is. Independence is significantly down on the lead it had most of last year, polling indicates that an Independent Scotland would have suffered more deaths and would not have been able to respond to the pandemic as well. These points need to be hammered home though and so far Mr Ross is doing a pretty poor job of that.
A simple question - how does "polling" influence how a non-UK country deals with the pandemic? Regardless of policy - and Sturgeon has been less stupid and gung-ho than Mr let the bodies pile high - people saying "I don't think an independent Scotland would have done as well" is not the same as an independent Scotland doing well or badly.
Just actually had a look at Lord Ashcroft's data tables for his poll that @HYUFD loves so much as it "shows that Green voters are against Independence" and I cannot actually stop laughing.
That is based on looking at the response of Green Constituency voters! If you look at the breakdown by Green vote on the List Green voters are, unsurprisingly, overwhelmingly in favour of independence.
In case anyone doesn't understand what is going on, the Greens are only standing in 10 out of the 72 constituencies.
There is also the minor point that the Scottish Greens are openly in favour of independence. If you vote for the Scottish Greens you are voting for their manifesto which is for independence.
So of course HYUFD says Green voters don't back independence. The poor simpletons don't know what they are voting for. Which is why it is So Important not to give them any say at all over their own status. They're such children - let the grown ups in England take care of them.
People vote for parties for different reasons. It is certainly true that someone voting for the Tories, for example, probably doesn't support everything the Tories propose to do. Indeed, they probably do not know everything the Tories propose to do.
But imperfect as they are if a party stands under a manifesto and wins seats under it it is reasonable for that party to treat their supporters as having endorsed that manifesto to some degree. Particularly when it is such a major policy.
Just done a quick vaccine count calculation - by the end of May we'll reach 81-83% of adults with one dose and 50% of adults with two doses, that's with no increase in vaccine supply. Assuming the MHRA ever get around to approving Novavax that 81-83% becomes more like 87-89% leaving just 7-8% needing first doses (around one week of supply in June). By the time we hit June 21st everyone who wants a vaccine will have had a first dose and by the end of July every single person will have had both doses except a few unlucky people who get AZ in the next two to three weeks.
Surely those who get AZ in the next few weeks could have their 2nd dose early (though not really early versus the original plan) once there are no more first doses to give?
There are clinical reasons to delay the second AZ dose to 12 weeks. Someone who gets AZ at the end of May will need to wait until the middle of August for their second dose. However, it does seem like the MHRA are about to remove that option by limiting AZ for under 40s as well, I assume we will get Novavax approved around the same time which only needs a minimum 3 week gap for 96% efficacy.
Other countries are not using a 12 week gap for AZ. I entirely support the UK's decision to do so, but I think the primary driver was the laudible desire to get as many 1st doses given as quickly as possible*.
I can’t read that story because I’m not a subscriber. But remember all legal restrictions will go on 21 June according to the government’s own roadmap. Whether some venues keep glass screens, who knows?
Disturbing story briefed in the times. Suggests theatre and cinema goers will be forced to wear masks throughout screenings and performances. Distancing to be gone, but punters to wear masks when moving around. Sports venues may be capped to avoid pinch points. If things go as I expect with the vaccination rollout, cases will continue to fall, and hospitalisation and death will be minimal, yet I’ll still need to wear a mask to watch a film? Bye bye cinemas.
Who is briefing this? I think much of it is rampant speculation and kite flying trying to hold the public’s feet to the fire for the final weeks of lockdown. People have noticed that hardly anyone is now suffering from covid 19 in the UK.
They're preparing the ground for keeping masks and as "low cost" interventions over the long term. The public health chumps don't want to let their tools go.
It was absolutely predictable that this would happen when the masks were introduced last year to stop a second wave. They were a total failure at that, but, like all failed government interventions, killing them is impossible because so many people are now interested in keeping them.
Harris: When he wasn’t “chillaxing”, Cameron tried to cover his lack of substance with a performative gravitas that sometimes verged on camp. Johnson, by contrast, seizes every opportunity to reduce politics to the absurd, and thereby makes the vacuum beneath him even more glaring. Without convictions or consistency you get a government based on serial lurching, from U-turn to U-turn and crisis to crisis, which sooner or later has massive consequences.
Moreover, because that dominance symbolises a very English mixture of nostalgia, deference and recklessness, it is part of the reason why the UK is now pulling apart; indeed, the fact that Johnson has been so hare-brained about arrangements in Northern Ireland is a vivid case study in the perils of entrusting matters of the utmost fragility to people whose basic unseriousness is not just toxic, but extremely dangerous.
Part of the English disease is our readiness to ascribe our national disasters to questions of personal character. But the vanities of posh men and their habit of dragging us into catastrophe have much deeper roots. They centre on an ancient system that trains a narrow caste of people to run our affairs, but also ensures they have almost none of the attributes actually required. If this country is to belatedly move into the 21st century, this is what we will finally have to confront: a great tower of failings that, to use a very topical word, are truly institutional.
That seems like a lot of words to say this is all about class. But are other places really hugely varied in their leadership?
I think that the point is that the cult of the Public schoolboy gentleman amateur still dominates English life. Certainly other countries have ruling cliques, but the English one eschews intellectual study and preparation. It seems an unshakeable fixation in the land.
So we have two recent Etonian Prime Ministers playing their games with our lives. Cameron then Johnson, entitled amateurism first as tragedy, then as farce.
Sounds like bollocks to me. Or, gasp, English exceptionalism.
Unless I am to believe that when people in other countries complain about their ruling cliques they are doing so on the basis they are too well prepared, intelligent and competent, how dare they. Which is the unavoidable implication of suggesting our clique, uniquely, eschews study and preparation.
It also seems like a way of blaming people for who they are choosing whilst still making that choice the fault of the person chosen.
It’s a particularly English ailment, though, to create a ruling clique whose defining feature is insouciance.
Is it? Boris has that, but a lack of seriousness from him is striking because it is uncommon. Part of his brand is being distinct from most of the clique, for better or worse depending on your stance.
Insouciance doesn't have to have a lack of seriousness, it can be born of arrogance and a slightly distorted sense of "duty". Boris is unusual in that he doesn't take politics, life or himself entirely seriously. It may partly be an affectation but it is one of his more redeeming features. In contrast SKS takes himself way too seriously.
But as you've just said, Boris is unusual. He isn't emblematic of some common trend in British politics. Indeed, the fear that he will become emblematic of it is one thing that worries people.
So the premise still fails.
I really cannot see politicians not taking themselves seriously catching on. To want to be PM or even a minister you need to be vain, arrogant and genuinely believe that you are the answer to the questions being asked. It will be a while before another Boris comes along.
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
I was chatting to someone who worked on the last Indyref and he's convinced that Gove is pulling the strings on this and will game the referendum a bit.
Such as allowing Scots in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland a vote in Indyref2, that sort of stuff.
The huge downside in all of this is the Prime Minister, I've mentioned on here that Yes tried to portray the 2014 as a battle of good v. evil but whilst the majority of Scots didn't agree with the politics of David Cameron they didn't see him as some malignant force, just a nice family man they disagreed with.
Now it is possible the majority of Scots do see Boris Johnson as some malignant force.
Or they just might see him as the man who has saved the lives of thousands of Scots by rolling out a truly amazing vaccine program and the jobs of tens of thousands of Scots with furlough money, grants and QE beyond the aspirations of an independent Scotland. The answers to what has the Union done for me are stronger right now than they have been in decades and I think Boris (and Gove) are very well aware of that and want to take advantage.
Do you really want Gove and Johnson front and centre of an Indyref2 campaign?
Gove the living embodiment of the scorpion in the story of The Scorpion and the frog and Boris Johnson who might be facing legal and tax problems relating to his finances.
You know things like pile the bodies high stuff will be there.
They're also two of the three most unpopular politicians in Scotland that I recall from recent polling.
Thinking of the third of the three most unpopular pols in Scotland begs the question of the role Salmond/Alba would play when a referendum takes place. It would immediately whip away their stated current raison d’être. I guess AS would end up as a type figure appealing to the gamier end of Indy voters but shunned by other groups.
Just done a quick vaccine count calculation - by the end of May we'll reach 81-83% of adults with one dose and 50% of adults with two doses, that's with no increase in vaccine supply. Assuming the MHRA ever get around to approving Novavax that 81-83% becomes more like 87-89% leaving just 7-8% needing first doses (around one week of supply in June). By the time we hit June 21st everyone who wants a vaccine will have had a first dose and by the end of July every single person will have had both doses except a few unlucky people who get AZ in the next two to three weeks.
Surely those who get AZ in the next few weeks could have their 2nd dose early (though not really early versus the original plan) once there are no more first doses to give?
There are clinical reasons to delay the second AZ dose to 12 weeks. Someone who gets AZ at the end of May will need to wait until the middle of August for their second dose. However, it does seem like the MHRA are about to remove that option by limiting AZ for under 40s as well, I assume we will get Novavax approved around the same time which only needs a minimum 3 week gap for 96% efficacy.
Other countries are not using a 12 week gap for AZ. I entirely support the UK's decision to do so, but I think the primary driver was the laudible desire to get as many 1st doses given as quickly as possible*.
Hancock briefed him on it as an idea his department had come up with and he was considering. He asked Blair’s opinion.
Blair then ran and brief the media about his wonderful idea.
Hancock was so pissed off that he ceased all briefing of Blair
It was extraordinary poor behaviour by a former PM
I'm not sure about that. According to my new guru Alan Duncan there is no one on the Tory benches more duplicitous than Hancock. He said explicitly you can't believe a word he says. He will do anything for advancement. Tony Blair by contrast is a politician of great skill and distinction. The fact Hancock is prepared to concern himself with glory hunting in the middle of the pandemic rather bears out Duncan's judgement. Blair wouldn't need to bother.
Of course. He has so much glory from the Second Iraq War that he doesn’t need any more
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
I was chatting to someone who worked on the last Indyref and he's convinced that Gove is pulling the strings on this and will game the referendum a bit.
Such as allowing Scots in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland a vote in Indyref2, that sort of stuff.
The huge downside in all of this is the Prime Minister, I've mentioned on here that Yes tried to portray the 2014 as a battle of good v. evil but whilst the majority of Scots didn't agree with the politics of David Cameron they didn't see him as some malignant force, just a nice family man they disagreed with.
Now it is possible the majority of Scots do see Boris Johnson as some malignant force.
Or they just might see him as the man who has saved the lives of thousands of Scots by rolling out a truly amazing vaccine program and the jobs of tens of thousands of Scots with furlough money, grants and QE beyond the aspirations of an independent Scotland. The answers to what has the Union done for me are stronger right now than they have been in decades and I think Boris (and Gove) are very well aware of that and want to take advantage.
Do you really want Gove and Johnson front and centre of an Indyref2 campaign?
Gove the living embodiment of the scorpion in the story of The Scorpion and the frog and Boris Johnson who might be facing legal and tax problems relating to his finances.
You know things like pile the bodies high stuff will be there.
The short answer is yes. It is a mixed package but they are excellent campaigners as the Brexit campaign showed very clearly. Cameron and Osborne really kept out of 2014 too much not wanting to overshadow or undermine Darling. The UK government should be much more vigorous in support of the Union than it was in 2014. Especially now.
But they LOST the Brexit campaign in Scotland. North of the wall people voted to stay in the EU by a large margin. You want the people who lost the referendum in Scotland to lead the referendum campaign for No?
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
I was chatting to someone who worked on the last Indyref and he's convinced that Gove is pulling the strings on this and will game the referendum a bit.
Such as allowing Scots in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland a vote in Indyref2, that sort of stuff.
The huge downside in all of this is the Prime Minister, I've mentioned on here that Yes tried to portray the 2014 as a battle of good v. evil but whilst the majority of Scots didn't agree with the politics of David Cameron they didn't see him as some malignant force, just a nice family man they disagreed with.
Now it is possible the majority of Scots do see Boris Johnson as some malignant force.
Or they just might see him as the man who has saved the lives of thousands of Scots by rolling out a truly amazing vaccine program and the jobs of tens of thousands of Scots with furlough money, grants and QE beyond the aspirations of an independent Scotland. The answers to what has the Union done for me are stronger right now than they have been in decades and I think Boris (and Gove) are very well aware of that and want to take advantage.
Do you really want Gove and Johnson front and centre of an Indyref2 campaign?
Gove the living embodiment of the scorpion in the story of The Scorpion and the frog and Boris Johnson who might be facing legal and tax problems relating to his finances.
You know things like pile the bodies high stuff will be there.
I don't think Johnson could resist. Like Trump, the only bits he enjoys about politics are the adoring crowds while campaigning, the groupies and the trappings of power. He is bored by the day job. Johnson is incapable of resisting that heffalump trap.
Like @DavidL I think a further defeat would be the last referendum in a long time, and the SNP would go into feuding decline, as it did post 1978. Obviously a successful indyvote would open a whole new can of worms, but like Brexit would be unstoppable, even though similarly nearly evenly split.
Im arriving at the point where it's clear that Referendum 2 is going to be inevitable.
The question is how do you get the awkward questions into public conversation in a way that doesn't allow everyone to vote for their unicorn independence
There will never be a legal indyref2 allowed while we Tories are in power as the UK government, so of course it is not inevitable. As Union matters are reserved to the UK government under the Scotland Act 1998 there is nothing the Nationalists can do to change the status of the Union while we Tories remain in power.
Certainly we will not allow one for a genuine generation ie from about 2030 on not just 7 years after the first in 2014
Just actually had a look at Lord Ashcroft's data tables for his poll that @HYUFD loves so much as it "shows that Green voters are against Independence" and I cannot actually stop laughing.
That is based on looking at the response of Green Constituency voters! If you look at the breakdown by Green vote on the List Green voters are, unsurprisingly, overwhelmingly in favour of independence.
In case anyone doesn't understand what is going on, the Greens are only standing in 10 out of the 72 constituencies.
'Of those likely to vote SNP with their first vote, the vast majority (84%) were in favour of independence. By contrast, those likely to vote for the Scottish Conservatives were overwhelmingly against Scotland becoming an independent country, with 95% anti-independence. Among Scottish Labour, and Scottish Liberal Democrats supporters 75% and 79% respectively opposed separation from the UK. The picture was more mixed for Scottish Greens supporters with 43% pro-independence and 46% against.' https://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Lord-Ashcroft-Polls-Scottish-Political-Research-April-2021.pdf (p19)
You cannot exclude Green voters on the constituency vote from what Green Party voters think on an independence referendum just as you dislike the result, indeed they are the most genuine Green voters in Scotland ie voting Green on the constituency and list votes.
Given the SNP will likely get less than 50% on the constituency vote that is clearly no mandate for indyref2 (they will get far less on the list vote but even there the SNP and Greens and Alba combined will likely not get much more than 50% and probably less on the list vote as well)
Yet you are at other times so keen at quoting (selected chunks of) the Tory manifesto at us?
Harris: When he wasn’t “chillaxing”, Cameron tried to cover his lack of substance with a performative gravitas that sometimes verged on camp. Johnson, by contrast, seizes every opportunity to reduce politics to the absurd, and thereby makes the vacuum beneath him even more glaring. Without convictions or consistency you get a government based on serial lurching, from U-turn to U-turn and crisis to crisis, which sooner or later has massive consequences.
Moreover, because that dominance symbolises a very English mixture of nostalgia, deference and recklessness, it is part of the reason why the UK is now pulling apart; indeed, the fact that Johnson has been so hare-brained about arrangements in Northern Ireland is a vivid case study in the perils of entrusting matters of the utmost fragility to people whose basic unseriousness is not just toxic, but extremely dangerous.
Part of the English disease is our readiness to ascribe our national disasters to questions of personal character. But the vanities of posh men and their habit of dragging us into catastrophe have much deeper roots. They centre on an ancient system that trains a narrow caste of people to run our affairs, but also ensures they have almost none of the attributes actually required. If this country is to belatedly move into the 21st century, this is what we will finally have to confront: a great tower of failings that, to use a very topical word, are truly institutional.
That seems like a lot of words to say this is all about class. But are other places really hugely varied in their leadership?
I think that the point is that the cult of the Public schoolboy gentleman amateur still dominates English life. Certainly other countries have ruling cliques, but the English one eschews intellectual study and preparation. It seems an unshakeable fixation in the land.
So we have two recent Etonian Prime Ministers playing their games with our lives. Cameron then Johnson, entitled amateurism first as tragedy, then as farce.
Sounds like bollocks to me. Or, gasp, English exceptionalism.
Unless I am to believe that when people in other countries complain about their ruling cliques they are doing so on the basis they are too well prepared, intelligent and competent, how dare they. Which is the unavoidable implication of suggesting our clique, uniquely, eschews study and preparation.
It also seems like a way of blaming people for who they are choosing whilst still making that choice the fault of the person chosen.
It’s a particularly English ailment, though, to create a ruling clique whose defining feature is insouciance.
Is it? Boris has that, but a lack of seriousness from him is striking because it is uncommon. Part of his brand is being distinct from most of the clique, for better or worse depending on your stance.
Insouciance doesn't have to have a lack of seriousness, it can be born of arrogance and a slightly distorted sense of "duty". Boris is unusual in that he doesn't take politics, life or himself entirely seriously. It may partly be an affectation but it is one of his more redeeming features. In contrast SKS takes himself way too seriously.
My reading of Johnson is that he takes nothing seriously, nothing at all, bar one thing - himself.
Just done a quick vaccine count calculation - by the end of May we'll reach 81-83% of adults with one dose and 50% of adults with two doses, that's with no increase in vaccine supply. Assuming the MHRA ever get around to approving Novavax that 81-83% becomes more like 87-89% leaving just 7-8% needing first doses (around one week of supply in June). By the time we hit June 21st everyone who wants a vaccine will have had a first dose and by the end of July every single person will have had both doses except a few unlucky people who get AZ in the next two to three weeks.
Surely those who get AZ in the next few weeks could have their 2nd dose early (though not really early versus the original plan) once there are no more first doses to give?
There are clinical reasons to delay the second AZ dose to 12 weeks. Someone who gets AZ at the end of May will need to wait until the middle of August for their second dose. However, it does seem like the MHRA are about to remove that option by limiting AZ for under 40s as well, I assume we will get Novavax approved around the same time which only needs a minimum 3 week gap for 96% efficacy.
Other countries are not using a 12 week gap for AZ. I entirely support the UK's decision to do so, but I think the primary driver was the laudible desire to get as many 1st doses given as quickly as possible*.
Hancock briefed him on it as an idea his department had come up with and he was considering. He asked Blair’s opinion.
Blair then ran and brief the media about his wonderful idea.
Hancock was so pissed off that he ceased all briefing of Blair
It was extraordinary poor behaviour by a former PM
I'm not sure about that. According to my new guru Alan Duncan there is no one on the Tory benches more duplicitous than Hancock. He said explicitly you can't believe a word he says. He will do anything for advancement. Tony Blair by contrast is a politician of great skill and distinction. The fact Hancock is prepared to concern himself with glory hunting in the middle of the pandemic rather bears out Duncan's judgement. Blair wouldn't need to bother.
Even by @Charles's account, Hancock briefed Blair on a range of options being considered, and Blair advocated one of them.
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
I was chatting to someone who worked on the last Indyref and he's convinced that Gove is pulling the strings on this and will game the referendum a bit.
Such as allowing Scots in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland a vote in Indyref2, that sort of stuff.
The huge downside in all of this is the Prime Minister, I've mentioned on here that Yes tried to portray the 2014 as a battle of good v. evil but whilst the majority of Scots didn't agree with the politics of David Cameron they didn't see him as some malignant force, just a nice family man they disagreed with.
Now it is possible the majority of Scots do see Boris Johnson as some malignant force.
Or they just might see him as the man who has saved the lives of thousands of Scots by rolling out a truly amazing vaccine program and the jobs of tens of thousands of Scots with furlough money, grants and QE beyond the aspirations of an independent Scotland. The answers to what has the Union done for me are stronger right now than they have been in decades and I think Boris (and Gove) are very well aware of that and want to take advantage.
Do you really want Gove and Johnson front and centre of an Indyref2 campaign?
Gove the living embodiment of the scorpion in the story of The Scorpion and the frog and Boris Johnson who might be facing legal and tax problems relating to his finances.
You know things like pile the bodies high stuff will be there.
I don't think Johnson could resist. Like Trump, the only bits he enjoys about politics are the adoring crowds while campaigning, the groupies and the trappings of power. He is bored by the day job. Johnson is incapable of resisting that heffalump trap.
Like @DavidL I think a further defeat would be the last referendum in a long time, and the SNP would go into feuding decline, as it did post 1978. Obviously a successful indyvote would open a whole new can of worms, but like Brexit would be unstoppable, even though similarly nearly evenly split.
Im arriving at the point where it's clear that Referendum 2 is going to be inevitable.
The question is how do you get the awkward questions into public conversation in a way that doesn't allow everyone to vote for their unicorn independence
There will never be a legal indyref2 allowed while we Tories are in power as the UK government, so of course it is not inevitable.
Certainly we will not allow one for a genuine generation ie from about 2030 on not just 7 years after the first in 2014
16 year old mothers is at least an improvement on your 15 year old primaparas this morning.
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
I was chatting to someone who worked on the last Indyref and he's convinced that Gove is pulling the strings on this and will game the referendum a bit.
Such as allowing Scots in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland a vote in Indyref2, that sort of stuff.
The huge downside in all of this is the Prime Minister, I've mentioned on here that Yes tried to portray the 2014 as a battle of good v. evil but whilst the majority of Scots didn't agree with the politics of David Cameron they didn't see him as some malignant force, just a nice family man they disagreed with.
Now it is possible the majority of Scots do see Boris Johnson as some malignant force.
Or they just might see him as the man who has saved the lives of thousands of Scots by rolling out a truly amazing vaccine program and the jobs of tens of thousands of Scots with furlough money, grants and QE beyond the aspirations of an independent Scotland. The answers to what has the Union done for me are stronger right now than they have been in decades and I think Boris (and Gove) are very well aware of that and want to take advantage.
Do you really want Gove and Johnson front and centre of an Indyref2 campaign?
Gove the living embodiment of the scorpion in the story of The Scorpion and the frog and Boris Johnson who might be facing legal and tax problems relating to his finances.
You know things like pile the bodies high stuff will be there.
The short answer is yes. It is a mixed package but they are excellent campaigners as the Brexit campaign showed very clearly. Cameron and Osborne really kept out of 2014 too much not wanting to overshadow or undermine Darling. The UK government should be much more vigorous in support of the Union than it was in 2014. Especially now.
Remind me how Scots voted in the EU referendum.
I’m sure I remember Gove at one point saying that he expected Scotland to vote leave, which means that he’s either a clueless idiot about Scotland or a lying barsteward.
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
I was chatting to someone who worked on the last Indyref and he's convinced that Gove is pulling the strings on this and will game the referendum a bit.
Such as allowing Scots in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland a vote in Indyref2, that sort of stuff.
The huge downside in all of this is the Prime Minister, I've mentioned on here that Yes tried to portray the 2014 as a battle of good v. evil but whilst the majority of Scots didn't agree with the politics of David Cameron they didn't see him as some malignant force, just a nice family man they disagreed with.
Now it is possible the majority of Scots do see Boris Johnson as some malignant force.
Or they just might see him as the man who has saved the lives of thousands of Scots by rolling out a truly amazing vaccine program and the jobs of tens of thousands of Scots with furlough money, grants and QE beyond the aspirations of an independent Scotland. The answers to what has the Union done for me are stronger right now than they have been in decades and I think Boris (and Gove) are very well aware of that and want to take advantage.
Do you really want Gove and Johnson front and centre of an Indyref2 campaign?
Gove the living embodiment of the scorpion in the story of The Scorpion and the frog and Boris Johnson who might be facing legal and tax problems relating to his finances.
You know things like pile the bodies high stuff will be there.
I don't think Johnson could resist. Like Trump, the only bits he enjoys about politics are the adoring crowds while campaigning, the groupies and the trappings of power. He is bored by the day job. Johnson is incapable of resisting that heffalump trap.
Like @DavidL I think a further defeat would be the last referendum in a long time, and the SNP would go into feuding decline, as it did post 1978. Obviously a successful indyvote would open a whole new can of worms, but like Brexit would be unstoppable, even though similarly nearly evenly split.
Im arriving at the point where it's clear that Referendum 2 is going to be inevitable.
The question is how do you get the awkward questions into public conversation in a way that doesn't allow everyone to vote for their unicorn independence
Stick to the facts, take away the emotion. Focus on Issues like currency, economic prosperity, future pension liabilities and the real downsides to Indy. Offer a vision that is not just more of the same. Learn from the failings of the inept remain campaign in the brexit referendum.
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
I was chatting to someone who worked on the last Indyref and he's convinced that Gove is pulling the strings on this and will game the referendum a bit.
Such as allowing Scots in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland a vote in Indyref2, that sort of stuff.
The huge downside in all of this is the Prime Minister, I've mentioned on here that Yes tried to portray the 2014 as a battle of good v. evil but whilst the majority of Scots didn't agree with the politics of David Cameron they didn't see him as some malignant force, just a nice family man they disagreed with.
Now it is possible the majority of Scots do see Boris Johnson as some malignant force.
Or they just might see him as the man who has saved the lives of thousands of Scots by rolling out a truly amazing vaccine program and the jobs of tens of thousands of Scots with furlough money, grants and QE beyond the aspirations of an independent Scotland. The answers to what has the Union done for me are stronger right now than they have been in decades and I think Boris (and Gove) are very well aware of that and want to take advantage.
So why isn't it having an affect already?
It is. Independence is significantly down on the lead it had most of last year, polling indicates that an Independent Scotland would have suffered more deaths and would not have been able to respond to the pandemic as well. These points need to be hammered home though and so far Mr Ross is doing a pretty poor job of that.
A simple question - how does "polling" influence how a non-UK country deals with the pandemic? Regardless of policy - and Sturgeon has been less stupid and gung-ho than Mr let the bodies pile high - people saying "I don't think an independent Scotland would have done as well" is not the same as an independent Scotland doing well or badly.
Do I really need to explain this? What we are measuring is how people are likely to vote when asked about independence. If they think (correctly) that an independent Scotland will be buffeted much more by the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune than the UK that may well give them pause on the hold on to nurse principle.
Peoples' perception is what is relevant, the reality will always be unknown.
Just actually had a look at Lord Ashcroft's data tables for his poll that @HYUFD loves so much as it "shows that Green voters are against Independence" and I cannot actually stop laughing.
That is based on looking at the response of Green Constituency voters! If you look at the breakdown by Green vote on the List Green voters are, unsurprisingly, overwhelmingly in favour of independence.
In case anyone doesn't understand what is going on, the Greens are only standing in 10 out of the 72 constituencies.
I gave up when HYUFD ignored my question on if that was the case why is a referendum part of the Green Party manifesto?
In all this talk of indyref2, on the assumption Boris agrees to it, then surely it must be upto the HoC voting it through, and the HOC largely consists of anti indyref2 MPs
Can someone confirm or otherwise the actual process of granting a sec 30 order as that would be most helpful
Morning, BigG! THis might be worth a look. The Sec30 for indyref1 was laid before Pmt. But remember it also has to clear the Scottish Parliament, under the Sewell convention and indeed precedent - and trying to ignore that would be itself highly problematical for obvious reasons.
Just actually had a look at Lord Ashcroft's data tables for his poll that @HYUFD loves so much as it "shows that Green voters are against Independence" and I cannot actually stop laughing.
That is based on looking at the response of Green Constituency voters! If you look at the breakdown by Green vote on the List Green voters are, unsurprisingly, overwhelmingly in favour of independence.
In case anyone doesn't understand what is going on, the Greens are only standing in 10 out of the 72 constituencies.
'Of those likely to vote SNP with their first vote, the vast majority (84%) were in favour of independence. By contrast, those likely to vote for the Scottish Conservatives were overwhelmingly against Scotland becoming an independent country, with 95% anti-independence. Among Scottish Labour, and Scottish Liberal Democrats supporters 75% and 79% respectively opposed separation from the UK. The picture was more mixed for Scottish Greens supporters with 43% pro-independence and 46% against.' https://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Lord-Ashcroft-Polls-Scottish-Political-Research-April-2021.pdf (p19)
You cannot exclude Green voters on the constituency vote from what Green Party voters think on an independence referendum just as you dislike the result, indeed they are the most genuine Green voters in Scotland ie voting Green on the constituency and list votes.
Given the SNP will likely get less than 50% on the constituency vote that is clearly no mandate for indyref2 (they will get far less on the list vote but even there the SNP and Greens and Alba combined will likely not get much more than 50% and probably less on the list vote as well)
Yet you are at other times so keen at quoting (selected chunks of) the Tory manifesto at us?
On the same logic, he'd consider much of the parliamentary activity of recent Conservative governments illegitimate because the votes depended also on other parties such as the DUP.
I don't know Scott, its almost as if he is gearing up to fight Indyref2 already. This is going to be an anxious week.
I am more and more convinced he is going to allow Indyref2 solely because he thinks he can win it.
That has crossed my mind more than once. The problem is that Nicola will play for a repeat of the Neverendum of 2012-2014 and the damage done to an already damaged Scottish economy will be immense.
I was chatting to someone who worked on the last Indyref and he's convinced that Gove is pulling the strings on this and will game the referendum a bit.
Such as allowing Scots in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland a vote in Indyref2, that sort of stuff.
The huge downside in all of this is the Prime Minister, I've mentioned on here that Yes tried to portray the 2014 as a battle of good v. evil but whilst the majority of Scots didn't agree with the politics of David Cameron they didn't see him as some malignant force, just a nice family man they disagreed with.
Now it is possible the majority of Scots do see Boris Johnson as some malignant force.
Or they just might see him as the man who has saved the lives of thousands of Scots by rolling out a truly amazing vaccine program and the jobs of tens of thousands of Scots with furlough money, grants and QE beyond the aspirations of an independent Scotland. The answers to what has the Union done for me are stronger right now than they have been in decades and I think Boris (and Gove) are very well aware of that and want to take advantage.
I respect those arguments. The problem is that so many people remember all of the other disastrous decisions made by Johnson during the pandemic and the much better decisions made by Sturgeon. And Johnson refusing to answer questions and Sturgeon doing so every day.
Then we have the Big Picture. England - "we have you vaccines and furlough, what are you complaining about?" Scotland - "I am a prisoner, you let me vote but refuse to accept what I vote for" England - "bloody jocks, shut up and do what we tell you"
Except if a second independence referendum is happening, then that "Big Picture" remains something of HYUFD's fervered imagination and not something that actually happened.
In all this talk of indyref2, on the assumption Boris agrees to it, then surely it must be upto the HoC voting it through, and the HOC largely consists of anti indyref2 MPs
Can someone confirm or otherwise the actual process of granting a sec 30 order as that would be most helpful
Morning, BigG! THis might be worth a look. The Sec30 for indyref1 was laid before Pmt. But remember it also has to clear the Scottish Parliament, under the Sewell convention and indeed precedent - and trying to ignore that would be itself highly problematical for obvious reasons.
Thank you for that and it does look quite complex.
However, unless I am wrong the ultimate agreement to hold for indyref 2 rests with Westminster so I assume Westminster would have to vote it through
I must admit though I have no constitutional expertise
Pleasure to help. I'll be interested to see if they can find an Act which both parliaments would vote through (bearing in mind the Tories of HYUFD's persuasion, etc.)
Harris: When he wasn’t “chillaxing”, Cameron tried to cover his lack of substance with a performative gravitas that sometimes verged on camp. Johnson, by contrast, seizes every opportunity to reduce politics to the absurd, and thereby makes the vacuum beneath him even more glaring. Without convictions or consistency you get a government based on serial lurching, from U-turn to U-turn and crisis to crisis, which sooner or later has massive consequences.
Moreover, because that dominance symbolises a very English mixture of nostalgia, deference and recklessness, it is part of the reason why the UK is now pulling apart; indeed, the fact that Johnson has been so hare-brained about arrangements in Northern Ireland is a vivid case study in the perils of entrusting matters of the utmost fragility to people whose basic unseriousness is not just toxic, but extremely dangerous.
Part of the English disease is our readiness to ascribe our national disasters to questions of personal character. But the vanities of posh men and their habit of dragging us into catastrophe have much deeper roots. They centre on an ancient system that trains a narrow caste of people to run our affairs, but also ensures they have almost none of the attributes actually required. If this country is to belatedly move into the 21st century, this is what we will finally have to confront: a great tower of failings that, to use a very topical word, are truly institutional.
That seems like a lot of words to say this is all about class. But are other places really hugely varied in their leadership?
I think that the point is that the cult of the Public schoolboy gentleman amateur still dominates English life. Certainly other countries have ruling cliques, but the English one eschews intellectual study and preparation. It seems an unshakeable fixation in the land.
So we have two recent Etonian Prime Ministers playing their games with our lives. Cameron then Johnson, entitled amateurism first as tragedy, then as farce.
Sounds like bollocks to me. Or, gasp, English exceptionalism.
Unless I am to believe that when people in other countries complain about their ruling cliques they are doing so on the basis they are too well prepared, intelligent and competent, how dare they. Which is the unavoidable implication of suggesting our clique, uniquely, eschews study and preparation.
It also seems like a way of blaming people for who they are choosing whilst still making that choice the fault of the person chosen.
It’s a particularly English ailment, though, to create a ruling clique whose defining feature is insouciance.
Is it? Boris has that, but a lack of seriousness from him is striking because it is uncommon. Part of his brand is being distinct from most of the clique, for better or worse depending on your stance.
Insouciance doesn't have to have a lack of seriousness, it can be born of arrogance and a slightly distorted sense of "duty". Boris is unusual in that he doesn't take politics, life or himself entirely seriously. It may partly be an affectation but it is one of his more redeeming features. In contrast SKS takes himself way too seriously.
But as you've just said, Boris is unusual. He isn't emblematic of some common trend in British politics. Indeed, the fear that he will become emblematic of it is one thing that worries people.
So the premise still fails.
I really cannot see politicians not taking themselves seriously catching on. To want to be PM or even a minister you need to be vain, arrogant and genuinely believe that you are the answer to the questions being asked. It will be a while before another Boris comes along.
Question is, how much is "Boris doesn't take himself seriously" just a carefully manicured act by someone who takes himself very seriously indeed?
Comments
https://archive.ph/eg2lt
Unlike Neville Chamberlain Nationalist appeasers such as yourself, Boris will do a Churchill and defy them and rightly so
You seem to have listed some facts but not an argument.
A good morning everyone! We were going to go to the seaside, but it's clouding over a bit now.
Which is why (amongst multiple other reasons), Boris has to go.
He is a threat to the Union.
The disdain of professionalism has died in sport, but still a strong feature of English political life.
The reality is they're trying to keep the pressure up to ensure people get vaccinated, but its probably unnecessary. We're probably already at herd immunity rates now and vaccinations are still going great guns and will do for another couple of months yet.
Only if No won 60%+ in an indyref2 would it set nationalism back significantly.
A result of something like No 51% and Yes 49% which would be most likely would be seen by Nationalist hardliners as progress from the 45% they got in 2014 and they would move onto pushing for indyref3 straight away given the weakness of the UK government in granting indyref2 before a generation had elapsed since indyref1.
Sturgeon would likely be replaced by an even harder line nationalist, she would be the SNP's Arlene Foster or Theresa May
The risk of death from crossing the road, from any type of vehicle, is estimated at around one in 300 million.
Even if you made the statistics more comparable by adjusting the 300 million to a 24 hour rate by dividing by the average number of daily road crossings of 3.9 per person (=one in 77 million) and made the COVID risk into a fatality risk at the current UK CFR of 2.9% (= one in 3.4 to one in 5.2 million), there is still a big difference.
I don't have stats on the prevalence of orange Reliants.
Scottish election: Outright SNP victory 'nothing short of a nightmare' for Boris Johnson http://news.sky.com/story/scottish-election-outright-snp-victory-nothing-short-of-a-nightmare-for-boris-johnson-12293709
All not particularly relevant though unfortunately as heavily dependent on prevalence rate and current restrictions, which will be eased in a couple of weeks.
Ultimately you and your Liar are literally destroying the UK - it will collapse and pretty quickly. A democracy that is not a democracy is not a democracy - it is an empire. Scotland will vote in a majority of MSPs on a mandate of independence. If you say "don't care, we're keeping you" then the democratic mandate you are hamfistedly trying to defend is literally over.
Revealed that a Russian oligarch funded a no 10 cheese sommelier? Sorry, busy crushing rebellious Scots.
Jennifer Arcuri releases dick pics? Sorry, busy putting Sturge in her place.
Etc.
Gove the living embodiment of the scorpion in the story of The Scorpion and the frog and Boris Johnson who might be facing legal and tax problems relating to his finances.
You know things like pile the bodies high stuff will be there.
Brexit England thats not near the coast think he's marvellous. Outside this group? Not marvellous.
You are comparing apples and oranges. You can't compare local election results to opinion poll results, since the local election results always boost various 'pothole parties' like Residents Association, Liberal Democrats, Independents etc that people don't back at General Elections.
If you want to compare apples with apples you need to compare opinion polls now with opinion polls in 2017. At the time of the local elections in 2017 the Liberal Democrats were averaging about 9-10% not 18% so the Lib Dems are about flat on where they were then based on the polls, not lost half their share.
At the time of the 2017 local elections the Tories were about 46%, so 39% is massively down not up on last time. 🤦♂️
You do have your strengths, but you leave a lot of us aghast at your attitude to Scotland and now sugggesting that as Boris has a higher rating than Salmond than in some way that is an electoral advantages
A Scottish Indy referendum would affect ALL citizens of the U.K. It follows that it’s not a decision for the Scots alone.
Once in a generation is fair; with a generation being 20 or even 25 years.
I know there is a school of thought which says denying Scots in this matter would further inflame pro-independence sentiment. If so, so be it. Otherwise we are in a constitutional free-for-all.
The clown thought stoking the Greensill story was a great chance to knock the reputation of his lifetime rival, and surely a lot of the current negative briefing is now coming from Cammo's allies and friends.
The clown thought trying to pin the leak on Cummo was a great chance to get Carrie's friend off the hook.
Between Cammo and Cummo, the clown has proved himself outstanding at making unnecessary enemies.
Just actually had a look at Lord Ashcroft's data tables for his poll that @HYUFD loves so much as it "shows that Green voters are against Independence" and I cannot actually stop laughing.
That is based on looking at the response of Green Constituency voters! If you look at the breakdown by Green vote on the List Green voters are, unsurprisingly, overwhelmingly in favour of independence.
In case anyone doesn't understand what is going on, the Greens are only standing in 10 out of the 72 constituencies.
It also remains the case the Tories will likely have a better chance of holding their marginal county council seats over the LDs on Thursday than they will over Labour, given there would be a significantly bigger swing from Tories to Labour than to the LDs even if only looking at national opinion polls rather than the actual local election voteshares from 2017
So the premise still fails.
Then we have the Big Picture.
England - "we have you vaccines and furlough, what are you complaining about?"
Scotland - "I am a prisoner, you let me vote but refuse to accept what I vote for"
England - "bloody jocks, shut up and do what we tell you"
Like @DavidL I think a further defeat would be the last referendum in a long time, and the SNP would go into feuding decline, as it did post 1978. Obviously a successful indyvote would open a whole new can of worms, but like Brexit would be unstoppable, even though similarly nearly evenly split.
I also want someone to ask Sturgeon WHEN she would hold a referendum if it was granted.
I’m glad they resisted this in favour of something credible. The banality of evil etc. I also found the downbeat, almost wistful vibe at the end exactly matched my mood as this great series came to an end.
Or did it? Because this was another thing that was skilful here. It was wrapped up sufficiently to be the last one – it worked on that level – but at the same time it sketched a platform for future development if the writers and cast are up for it.
It's not something any sane Labour leader would do as you don't want to give SNP (but former labour) voters a reason to never vote Labour again.
So the Tory party will need to front the campaign and that is going to be a problem unless Boris decides on a very early retirement
Among Scottish Labour, and Scottish Liberal Democrats supporters 75% and 79% respectively opposed separation from the UK.
The picture was more mixed for Scottish Greens supporters with 43% pro-independence and 46% against.'
https://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Lord-Ashcroft-Polls-Scottish-Political-Research-April-2021.pdf (p19)
You cannot exclude Green voters on the constituency vote from what Green Party voters think on an independence referendum just as you dislike the result, indeed they are the most genuine Green voters in Scotland ie voting Green on the constituency and list votes.
Given the SNP will likely get less than 50% on the constituency vote that is clearly no mandate for indyref2 (they will get far less on the list vote but even there the SNP and Greens and Alba combined will likely not get much more than 50% and probably less on the list vote as well)
Can someone confirm or otherwise the actual process of granting a sec 30 order as that would be most helpful
I also don't understand your second point. We will, sadly, have yet another SNP administration looking to pick arguments, focused on short term freebies, indifferent to Scotland's actual needs unless they are relevant to the great god independence, and all too often not even then because they are too thick to see it.
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/whats-the-process-for-a-second-independence-referendum-in-scotland/
So of course HYUFD says Green voters don't back independence. The poor simpletons don't know what they are voting for. Which is why it is So Important not to give them any say at all over their own status. They're such children - let the grown ups in England take care of them.
The question is how do you get the awkward questions into public conversation in a way that doesn't allow everyone to vote for their unicorn independence
But imperfect as they are if a party stands under a manifesto and wins seats under it it is reasonable for that party to treat their supporters as having endorsed that manifesto to some degree. Particularly when it is such a major policy.
Certainly we will not allow one for a genuine generation ie from about 2030 on not just 7 years after the first in 2014
Peoples' perception is what is relevant, the reality will always be unknown.
However, unless I am wrong the ultimate agreement to hold indyref 2 rests with Westminster so I assume Westminster would have to vote it through
I must admit though I have no constitutional expertise