Assuming the polls are true - and labour is losing significant votes in Hartlepool, doing pretty badly in the West Midlands, but ~level pegging overall, WHERE are they piling up votes?
I don’t get it.
Has anyone dug into the subsamples?
Possibly places where they already weigh the labour vote like london
And yet Khan is down. My money's on the Home Counties.
I agree. Starmer’s picking up votes in blue-remainia, isn’t he?
Labour could put in a surprisingly good performance in Chesham & Amersham.
I actually doubt your last point and wrt the Home counties not sure they would win much in a GE here - potential to make the Tory vote even more efficient.
Well indeed. Analogous to Tyne and Wear. Massive swings to the Tories all this century has left 12 out of 12 Labour seats much more efficiently won.
I do think my home town seat of Sunderland central could go blue for the first time since 1963!
I'm not convinced. Sunderland Central is a university seat after all and is being gentrified, albeit slowly (believe it or not). It also contains the more middle class metropolitan liberal elite parts of Sunderland.
Plus Sunderland/Tyne and Wear generally hasn't exactly been given a ton of Tory red meat to chew on like Teesside.
The council elections on Thursday should be informative.
Gentrified??? Metropolitan liberal elite???
You'll have to let me know where to find the artisan bakers and organic cyclist cafes in Sunderland city centre...
Here we go again. Government announces great news that prisoners (sorry, residents) can be allowed outside the home without having to quarantine on return to the home.
Firstly, that implies that residents have up to now been able to leave the home albeit with quarantine on return. This is not true. (Plus, as an aside, residents are basically in quarantine in a care home anyway aren't they?)
Secondly, the wonderful new guidance is now out in writing and it states that only the two current nominated visitors are to be allowed to take the resident away for a trip out thus meaning that for many families, such as ours, who have nominated two infirm and elderly family members as nominated visitors (as the younger relatives (like me) are best suited to see relative outdoors) are in effect excluded because the nominated visitors we chose are too frail to push my mum in her wheelchair. So no trips out for mum then.
I've asked the care home to switch one of the nominated visitors to me instead and they have refused because "the government says this is not allowed".
Cases now dropping like a stone WoW, deaths almost down to zero. Yet here we are sitting in the cold drinking beer while the nice warm pubs are still closed off.
The scientists have made doom porn modelling an art form. I'm still waiting for those idiots who said we'd have a third wave worse than the second wave to retract their idiot model. Their agenda is laughably transparent and it's time for them to be forced into printing retractions.
Even the Modeller of Doom admits this is nearly over.
Dan Bloom @danbloom1 NEW: Prof Neil Ferguson says we now "don’t see any prospect of the NHS being overwhelmed, with the one caveat around variants", in a third wave this summer/autumn
It wasn't Ferguson who was banging on about a "third wave with more hospitalisations than the second" but it's a start. All of these scientists and their dodgy models need to have a very bright light shone on them
Well, we've had this debate before, but the groups that contributed provided different modelled sceanrios based on different assumptions of vaccine efficacy in protection and protection against onwards transmission. You seem to only focus on the most pessimistic; the modelled scenarios included things that were far, far away from 'doom'.
Now, you'll say the pessimistic assumptions were too pessimistic (I agree) and that even the most optimistic were too pessimistic (I agree again) but the models will have been put togther with the well established facts available at the time. Still too pessimistic, quite possibly, but anything beyond that is too specultive and potentially irrepsonsible - "based on flimsy evidence, we confidently say there's no chance of further problems", that is misleading the politicians making the decisions.
I was involved in a report for the NHS last year looking at a (non-infectious) condition and predicting future numbers for service planning. There seem to be some changes in incidence, but the big driver of changes in prevalence (which has increased over 50% in a decade) is increased survival times. We modelled a range of scenarios based on different impacts from new treatments extending survival further. But we also modelled a scenario in which there is no increase in incidence or survival, but changes only based on population growth and changing demographics. That showed a 10% predicted increase in the next ten years. Now, that final prediction of 10% is complete nonsense. The assumptions are demonstably false. But the commissioners found it useful as it was the one thing we could say with certainty: in ten years time you'll need, at an absolute and unrealistic minimum, a 10% increase in care capacity. The money will be allocated now, training given and the service built up. Further increases will depend on future developments in treatment and survival. But that 10% estimate, complete nonsense as it is, is useful. Without it, we'd have a range of possibilities with great uncertainties (impacts of treatments not yet even conceived) and not be able to give a hard limit on numbers at either end.
The SAGE models do the same. The worst cases are nonsense - we can say that now and could pretty much say that when they were published. But it told the policy makers and civil servants useful things. Absolute worst is similar to January. The NHS coped in January in the middle of winter. So that nonsense forecase said we would cope in any third wave. We didn't need to build Nightingale hospitals or panic buy ventilators. Importantly, we could unlock as planned and not crash the NHS, if the politicians were able to take a (very) low risk of a wave rivalling January. The roadmap did not change, so I guess we can conclude that they could (and I'm pretty sure the scientists will ithave made it clear to them what the more likely scenarios were).
I don't agree that the unrealistically pessimistic (frankly knowingly incorrect) models provided any service. It just handed the government, civil servants and public health types exactly what they needed to justify their ridiculously slow unlockdown plan and to prepare the ground for continuing measures after June 21st. These models went well beyond "reasonable" worst case scenario planning. They assumed significantly worse vaccine efficacy than we had already observed, even against variants and an effective freeze in the number of people who would have partial of full immunity. These are simply incorrect data inputs intended to get a specifically desired outcome. They did it on purpose and now they need to be forced to retract their paper.
From a professional standards point of view if I'd released a model where I'd knowingly input incorrect data points and then consequently been proven wrong then I'd have to make a shit ton of apologies to VP level management for being such a massive fuckwit in the first place.
That's where you and I disagree, you want no accountability for these scientists who knowingly produce garbage data to fit some political agenda. I think we should have some. If that means fewer scientists producing politically driven garbage models then all the better.
Given the tiny number of deaths now it must be quite possible that some if not all of these so-called Coronavirus deaths are naturally occurring deaths of people who by pure coincidence tested positive within last 28 days?
That wasn't true all pandemic, though its certainly been a factor which is why the real death toll is tens of thousands fewer than the 'official' one. But it must surely be a real factor now?
Yes but on the other hand many will have died of Covid outside of 28 days which will not be in figures. I've kind of accepted that one balances the other.
Only 4 today - on a murder Tuesday. (Unless bank holiday moves that back to Wednesday?)
Yes, Wednesday is the new Tuesday. For this week, anyway.
Explain the logic of Labour losing in the groups most opposed to racism (young and minorities)
If the centrists and right wing fairly tale about Corbyn being racist and Starmer being anti racist were true the opposite would happen.
Starmer seems most popular (comparatively to Corbyn) among groups most in favour of racism (older white people) the same groups were Corbyn is least popular.
I know this might be hard to hear but is it possible it is you that is wrong rather than the children Mr Skinner?
The better starting point is not to be racist because its wrong. Too many of your fellow Corbynite activists - and Corbyn himself - cannot pass this test due to being usually passive but sometimes active anti-semites.
Once you've got this "believing in something cos its right" thing down, the next barrier is not ramming your standards down other people's throats. You may be right and the other person wrong, but sneering / shouting won't change their view in your direction. Quite the opposite in fact.
Finally, don't be a screaming hypocrite. Diane Abbott was on the receiving end of some horrendous racist abuse. She was also on the end of a lot of abuse because she is a shit politician that was willfully miscategorised as racist. At the same time Luciana Berger was also on the end of some horrendous racist abuse - with much of it coming from Labour members who then insisted it wasn't racist.
Diane Abbott is an interesting one to compare with Israel.
If you're attacking Abbott/Israel alone then that seems to be racism.
If you're attacking Abbott along with Rebecca Wrong Daily, Laura Pillock, the Jezziah and the rest of them - then that's not racist.
Wrong-Daily is white. Pillock is white. Berger is BAME. Abbott is BAME. My point was that in large parts of Labour there is a hierarchy of racism where as Baddiel puts it so neatly: Jews Don't Count.
The party promoted Anas Sarwar as the first BAME leader of a political party. Scottish Labour isn't a political party, but Sarwar isn't even the first BAME Labour leader - Ed Milliband doesn't count apparently.
Because to recognise millibrand as bame they wouldn't be able to claim that even for him as Disraeli would be the first Bame leader of a political party and incidentally prime minister
Exactly. I stopped with Ed M and didn't mention Howard or the others because they weren't Labour.
This is the Labour Party. Who claims to be anti-racist. And who still has a massive bind spot when it comes to anti-semitism.
I would say "still" is unfair, given that the start of the problem can be dated precisely to September 2015.
Anyway, using hatred of Starmer by Corbynista fanboys as a crude proxy for whether he's addressing the issue, ten minutes of scanning this forum today has made me quite optimistic.
Weird given people kept going back before that time (whether they were looking for left wing or centrist anti semitism)
I guess all the anti semitism people used as a weapon against Corbyn (or centrists) that appeared before that date was part of Corbyn's evil racist plan were he went back in time and planted racist comments that seem as if they existed before Corbyn won the leadership but clever older white men with large bank accounts saw through this...
Young people and minorities haven't got this kind of magic perception which is why they can't see that Corbyn is secretly a time travelling racist.
Please don't tar young people with your brush, most are sane and a great number of them also saw through corbyn and didnt vote for him 71% in fact
Without young people Corbyn was buried, the old voted against him the young voted for him.
Vast numbers of people as always didn't vote but there is a reason Labour did better among the young.
Corbyn is the first political leader the younger generation has had.
First?
What about Ed Miliband? Nick Clegg? Tony Blair?
Every "younger generation" has always had a leader or leaders politically. The only way to define Corbyn as the first is simply by wiping out any that come before him, in which case Starmer or A N Other could be a first next time.
I've never understood why I'm supposed to think someone is greater because they had more of the young vote, as though its morally worth more.
I criticise the grey vote bribes we get and the age polarisation of recent times is a worry, but we overdo the 'please think of the children(and young people)' stuff - same reason people love youthful campaigners.
I'll never understand people criticising something without reading it, what is the point?
I was on about younger people being less racist and them being the ones who voted for Corbyn (in relatively greater numbers)
Was it really too difficult for you to go back and read the context in which is was used?
Or are my posts just useful staging posts for you to have a self righteous whine without actually reading them?
In future please read the context in which I am saying something or don't talk about my posts. Nothing worse than someone being self righteous when they don't even know what they are talking about.
You need to calm the f*ck down, take your own advice and read what I wrote.
Your post and the one which followed it led me to reflect on a tangential point of my own. It was not a criticism of you or your post and did not say as much.
Why should not one person's thoughts serve as staging for another, separate point by another? I welcomed the discussion and it led me to think about something related but different.
So f*ck you. Amazing how you just personified the very point you wanted to criticise about self righteousness.
Not everything is about you. Nor do you own a discussion or a reply to a post which was not even yours. Just because it was in a thread with yours didn't make it a criticism of you.
So vain.
Oh, and TheJezziah, that's a criticism of you btw. Since you just invented one in your imagination to whinge about clearly you need help to identify an actual criticism of you.
I would respectfully suggest you take some of your own advice and calm down. There's no need for this.
I didn't know there had been a vacancy for site policeman, David?
Oh no - not a PCC election here on PB. How do I spoil my ballot?
Does anyone still think pcc elections are a good idea?
Cameron’s idea was to slash the police budget, then blame the pcc’s for the inevitable consequences. Now Boris is fixing the problem Dave created, they’re surplus to requirements.
Unnecessary and expensive elections for a role that shouldn’t be partisan, IMO.
Assuming the polls are true - and labour is losing significant votes in Hartlepool, doing pretty badly in the West Midlands, but ~level pegging overall, WHERE are they piling up votes?
I don’t get it.
Has anyone dug into the subsamples?
I don't think the Tories have a single voter left around my way. So that's part of it. Hopefully just a small part, though, since such a swap would be electorally inefficient for Labour.
Are there really seats where the Tory vote is zero? Even in seats like East Ham they manage ~15%.
No, not yet. I think we can have a crack at it round here though. Can you imagine if we pulled it off at the next GE? Talk about your badge of honour! - and a great boost for house prices as people in more "diverse" areas hear about it and want a piece.
Tories get 10% of the vote in Labour's safest seat (Walton) and Labour get 13% in the Tory's safest (S Holland). Nowhere near extinction time yet.
True. But there's 3 years to go till the GE and with the contempt that this government has for educated, left/liberal metropolitans I think "Zero Tory" is a feasible stretch goal for London NW3.
The contempt is nowhere near as high as it needs to be. The swamp needs to be drained, but it seems highly unlikely .
An odd way to talk about large numbers of perfectly unexceptional citizens of this country. I'll do you a favour and assume lurid banter.
Given the tiny number of deaths now it must be quite possible that some if not all of these so-called Coronavirus deaths are naturally occurring deaths of people who by pure coincidence tested positive within last 28 days?
That wasn't true all pandemic, though its certainly been a factor which is why the real death toll is tens of thousands fewer than the 'official' one. But it must surely be a real factor now?
Yes but on the other hand many will have died of Covid outside of 28 days which will not be in figures. I've kind of accepted that one balances the other.
Only 4 today - on a murder Tuesday. (Unless bank holiday moves that back to Wednesday?)
Yes, Wednesday is the new Tuesday. For this week, anyway.
17 last Tuesday so if single figures tomorrow then result.
Assuming the polls are true - and labour is losing significant votes in Hartlepool, doing pretty badly in the West Midlands, but ~level pegging overall, WHERE are they piling up votes?
I don’t get it.
Has anyone dug into the subsamples?
Possibly places where they already weigh the labour vote like london
And yet Khan is down. My money's on the Home Counties.
I agree. Starmer’s picking up votes in blue-remainia, isn’t he?
Labour could put in a surprisingly good performance in Chesham & Amersham.
I actually doubt your last point and wrt the Home counties not sure they would win much in a GE here - potential to make the Tory vote even more efficient.
Well indeed. Analogous to Tyne and Wear. Massive swings to the Tories all this century has left 12 out of 12 Labour seats much more efficiently won.
I do think my home town seat of Sunderland central could go blue for the first time since 1963!
I'm not convinced. Sunderland Central is a university seat after all and is being gentrified, albeit slowly (believe it or not). It also contains the more middle class metropolitan liberal elite parts of Sunderland.
Plus Sunderland/Tyne and Wear generally hasn't exactly been given a ton of Tory red meat to chew on like Teesside.
The council elections on Thursday should be informative.
Gentrified??? Metropolitan liberal elite???
You'll have to let me know where to find the artisan bakers and organic cyclist cafes in Sunderland city centre...
"Metropolitan liberal elite" is relative, of course.
There is of course not many artisan bakers or organic cyclist cafes in Newcastle City Centre either.
Given the tiny number of deaths now it must be quite possible that some if not all of these so-called Coronavirus deaths are naturally occurring deaths of people who by pure coincidence tested positive within last 28 days?
That wasn't true all pandemic, though its certainly been a factor which is why the real death toll is tens of thousands fewer than the 'official' one. But it must surely be a real factor now?
Yes but on the other hand many will have died of Covid outside of 28 days which will not be in figures. I've kind of accepted that one balances the other.
Only 4 today - on a murder Tuesday. (Unless bank holiday moves that back to Wednesday?)
I'd be wary of weekend/BH reporting on this occasion. And awaits the media misunderstanding tomorrow...
Assuming the polls are true - and labour is losing significant votes in Hartlepool, doing pretty badly in the West Midlands, but ~level pegging overall, WHERE are they piling up votes?
I don’t get it.
Has anyone dug into the subsamples?
I don't think the Tories have a single voter left around my way. So that's part of it. Hopefully just a small part, though, since such a swap would be electorally inefficient for Labour.
Are there really seats where the Tory vote is zero? Even in seats like East Ham they manage ~15%.
No, not yet. I think we can have a crack at it round here though. Can you imagine if we pulled it off at the next GE? Talk about your badge of honour! - and a great boost for house prices as people in more "diverse" areas hear about it and want a piece.
Tories get 10% of the vote in Labour's safest seat (Walton) and Labour get 13% in the Tory's safest (S Holland). Nowhere near extinction time yet.
True. But there's 3 years to go till the GE and with the contempt that this government has for educated, left/liberal metropolitans I think "Zero Tory" is a feasible stretch goal for London NW3.
I think the bantz of being the only Tory in NW3 would be too strong to resist so you'll get a few thousand votes on that basis alone.
A few years back the Tory candidate in Trimdon ward got zero votes. These days they probably weigh the Tory vote.
Here we go again. Government announces great news that prisoners (sorry, residents) can be allowed outside the home without having to quarantine on return to the home.
Firstly, that implies that residents have up to now been able to leave the home albeit with quarantine on return. This is not true. (Plus, as an aside, residents are basically in quarantine in a care home anyway aren't they?)
Secondly, the wonderful new guidance is now out in writing and it states that only the two current nominated visitors are to be allowed to take the resident away for a trip out thus meaning that for many families, such as ours, who have nominated two infirm and elderly family members as nominated visitors (as the younger relatives (like me) are best suited to see relative outdoors) are in effect excluded because the nominated visitors we chose are too frail to push my mum in her wheelchair. So no trips out for mum then.
I've asked the care home to switch one of the nominated visitors to me instead and they have refused because "the government says this is not allowed".
Words fail me.
Care home news has been a persistent area of poor communication and decisions generally, it seems.
Assuming the polls are true - and labour is losing significant votes in Hartlepool, doing pretty badly in the West Midlands, but ~level pegging overall, WHERE are they piling up votes?
I don’t get it.
Has anyone dug into the subsamples?
Possibly places where they already weigh the labour vote like london
And yet Khan is down. My money's on the Home Counties.
I agree. Starmer’s picking up votes in blue-remainia, isn’t he?
Labour could put in a surprisingly good performance in Chesham & Amersham.
I actually doubt your last point and wrt the Home counties not sure they would win much in a GE here - potential to make the Tory vote even more efficient.
Well indeed. Analogous to Tyne and Wear. Massive swings to the Tories all this century has left 12 out of 12 Labour seats much more efficiently won.
I do think my home town seat of Sunderland central could go blue for the first time since 1963!
I'm not convinced. Sunderland Central is a university seat after all and is being gentrified, albeit slowly (believe it or not). It also contains the more middle class metropolitan liberal elite parts of Sunderland.
Plus Sunderland/Tyne and Wear generally hasn't exactly been given a ton of Tory red meat to chew on like Teesside.
The council elections on Thursday should be informative.
Gentrified??? Metropolitan liberal elite???
You'll have to let me know where to find the artisan bakers and organic cyclist cafes in Sunderland city centre...
"Metropolitan liberal elite" is relative, of course.
It's a state of mind, not geography.
Same with being a man of the people (gender and/or actualy connection with 'the people' not required)
Here we go again. Government announces great news that prisoners (sorry, residents) can be allowed outside the home without having to quarantine on return to the home.
Firstly, that implies that residents have up to now been able to leave the home albeit with quarantine on return. This is not true. (Plus, as an aside, residents are basically in quarantine in a care home anyway aren't they?)
Secondly, the wonderful new guidance is now out in writing and it states that only the two current nominated visitors are to be allowed to take the resident away for a trip out thus meaning that for many families, such as ours, who have nominated two infirm and elderly family members as nominated visitors (as the younger relatives (like me) are best suited to see relative outdoors) are in effect excluded because the nominated visitors we chose are too frail to push my mum in her wheelchair. So no trips out for mum then.
I've asked the care home to switch one of the nominated visitors to me instead and they have refused because "the government says this is not allowed".
Words fail me.
Care home news has been a persistent area of poor communication and decisions generally, it seems.
I also think that those that run the care homes are shit scared of being blamed/sued when a patient dies, and someone wants to make an issue. Far easier to just lock them up as tight as possible and be intransigent than take the risk.
Assuming the polls are true - and labour is losing significant votes in Hartlepool, doing pretty badly in the West Midlands, but ~level pegging overall, WHERE are they piling up votes?
I don’t get it.
Has anyone dug into the subsamples?
Possibly places where they already weigh the labour vote like london
And yet Khan is down. My money's on the Home Counties.
I agree. Starmer’s picking up votes in blue-remainia, isn’t he?
Labour could put in a surprisingly good performance in Chesham & Amersham.
I actually doubt your last point and wrt the Home counties not sure they would win much in a GE here - potential to make the Tory vote even more efficient.
Well indeed. Analogous to Tyne and Wear. Massive swings to the Tories all this century has left 12 out of 12 Labour seats much more efficiently won.
I do think my home town seat of Sunderland central could go blue for the first time since 1963!
I'm not convinced. Sunderland Central is a university seat after all and is being gentrified, albeit slowly (believe it or not). It also contains the more middle class metropolitan liberal elite parts of Sunderland.
Plus Sunderland/Tyne and Wear generally hasn't exactly been given a ton of Tory red meat to chew on like Teesside.
The council elections on Thursday should be informative.
Gentrified??? Metropolitan liberal elite???
You'll have to let me know where to find the artisan bakers and organic cyclist cafes in Sunderland city centre...
"Metropolitan liberal elite" is relative, of course.
There is of course not many artisan bakers or organic cyclist cafes in Newcastle City Centre either.
Vegan strip clubs?
If vegans REALLY want the world to get with the program, they should consider this option?
Damn sight more appealing than your average vegan cafe!
Assuming the polls are true - and labour is losing significant votes in Hartlepool, doing pretty badly in the West Midlands, but ~level pegging overall, WHERE are they piling up votes?
I don’t get it.
Has anyone dug into the subsamples?
Possibly places where they already weigh the labour vote like london
And yet Khan is down. My money's on the Home Counties.
I agree. Starmer’s picking up votes in blue-remainia, isn’t he?
Labour could put in a surprisingly good performance in Chesham & Amersham.
I actually doubt your last point and wrt the Home counties not sure they would win much in a GE here - potential to make the Tory vote even more efficient.
Well indeed. Analogous to Tyne and Wear. Massive swings to the Tories all this century has left 12 out of 12 Labour seats much more efficiently won.
I do think my home town seat of Sunderland central could go blue for the first time since 1963!
I'm not convinced. Sunderland Central is a university seat after all and is being gentrified, albeit slowly (believe it or not). It also contains the more middle class metropolitan liberal elite parts of Sunderland.
Plus Sunderland/Tyne and Wear generally hasn't exactly been given a ton of Tory red meat to chew on like Teesside.
The council elections on Thursday should be informative.
Gentrified??? Metropolitan liberal elite???
You'll have to let me know where to find the artisan bakers and organic cyclist cafes in Sunderland city centre...
"Metropolitan liberal elite" is relative, of course.
It's a state of mind, not geography.
Same with being a man of the people (gender and/or actualy connection with 'the people' not required)
Some of us are metropolitan liberal elite and a man of the people.
Here we go again. Government announces great news that prisoners (sorry, residents) can be allowed outside the home without having to quarantine on return to the home.
Firstly, that implies that residents have up to now been able to leave the home albeit with quarantine on return. This is not true. (Plus, as an aside, residents are basically in quarantine in a care home anyway aren't they?)
Secondly, the wonderful new guidance is now out in writing and it states that only the two current nominated visitors are to be allowed to take the resident away for a trip out thus meaning that for many families, such as ours, who have nominated two infirm and elderly family members as nominated visitors (as the younger relatives (like me) are best suited to see relative outdoors) are in effect excluded because the nominated visitors we chose are too frail to push my mum in her wheelchair. So no trips out for mum then.
I've asked the care home to switch one of the nominated visitors to me instead and they have refused because "the government says this is not allowed".
"It is important that the named visitors remain the same people as far as possible. This is important in reducing the risk of transmission, by limiting the number of different people coming into the care home from the community. However, we recognise that there will be situations in which a named visitor cannot continue to visit (for example because of illness). We advise care homes and families to take a pragmatic approach, with the aim of minimising change wherever possible."
Assuming the polls are true - and labour is losing significant votes in Hartlepool, doing pretty badly in the West Midlands, but ~level pegging overall, WHERE are they piling up votes?
I don’t get it.
Has anyone dug into the subsamples?
Possibly places where they already weigh the labour vote like london
And yet Khan is down. My money's on the Home Counties.
I agree. Starmer’s picking up votes in blue-remainia, isn’t he?
Labour could put in a surprisingly good performance in Chesham & Amersham.
I actually doubt your last point and wrt the Home counties not sure they would win much in a GE here - potential to make the Tory vote even more efficient.
Well indeed. Analogous to Tyne and Wear. Massive swings to the Tories all this century has left 12 out of 12 Labour seats much more efficiently won.
I do think my home town seat of Sunderland central could go blue for the first time since 1963!
I'm not convinced. Sunderland Central is a university seat after all and is being gentrified, albeit slowly (believe it or not). It also contains the more middle class metropolitan liberal elite parts of Sunderland.
Plus Sunderland/Tyne and Wear generally hasn't exactly been given a ton of Tory red meat to chew on like Teesside.
The council elections on Thursday should be informative.
Gentrified??? Metropolitan liberal elite???
You'll have to let me know where to find the artisan bakers and organic cyclist cafes in Sunderland city centre...
"Metropolitan liberal elite" is relative, of course.
There is of course not many artisan bakers or organic cyclist cafes in Newcastle City Centre either.
Vegan strip clubs?
If vegans REALLY want the world to get with the program, they should consider this option?
Damn sight more appealing than your average vegan cafe!
I think you just want to go to a den of debauchery, the vegan part of your proposal is simply a figleaf.
Here we go again. Government announces great news that prisoners (sorry, residents) can be allowed outside the home without having to quarantine on return to the home.
Firstly, that implies that residents have up to now been able to leave the home albeit with quarantine on return. This is not true. (Plus, as an aside, residents are basically in quarantine in a care home anyway aren't they?)
Secondly, the wonderful new guidance is now out in writing and it states that only the two current nominated visitors are to be allowed to take the resident away for a trip out thus meaning that for many families, such as ours, who have nominated two infirm and elderly family members as nominated visitors (as the younger relatives (like me) are best suited to see relative outdoors) are in effect excluded because the nominated visitors we chose are too frail to push my mum in her wheelchair. So no trips out for mum then.
I've asked the care home to switch one of the nominated visitors to me instead and they have refused because "the government says this is not allowed".
Words fail me.
Care home news has been a persistent area of poor communication and decisions generally, it seems.
I also think that those that run the care homes are shit scared of being blamed/sued when a patient dies, and someone wants to make an issue. Far easier to just lock them up as tight as possible and be intransigent than take the risk.
I would go one stage further than that - they don't want covid in their homes as it takes time to find replacement residents.
Assuming the polls are true - and labour is losing significant votes in Hartlepool, doing pretty badly in the West Midlands, but ~level pegging overall, WHERE are they piling up votes?
I don’t get it.
Has anyone dug into the subsamples?
Possibly places where they already weigh the labour vote like london
And yet Khan is down. My money's on the Home Counties.
I agree. Starmer’s picking up votes in blue-remainia, isn’t he?
Labour could put in a surprisingly good performance in Chesham & Amersham.
I actually doubt your last point and wrt the Home counties not sure they would win much in a GE here - potential to make the Tory vote even more efficient.
Well indeed. Analogous to Tyne and Wear. Massive swings to the Tories all this century has left 12 out of 12 Labour seats much more efficiently won.
I do think my home town seat of Sunderland central could go blue for the first time since 1963!
I'm not convinced. Sunderland Central is a university seat after all and is being gentrified, albeit slowly (believe it or not). It also contains the more middle class metropolitan liberal elite parts of Sunderland.
Plus Sunderland/Tyne and Wear generally hasn't exactly been given a ton of Tory red meat to chew on like Teesside.
The council elections on Thursday should be informative.
Gentrified??? Metropolitan liberal elite???
You'll have to let me know where to find the artisan bakers and organic cyclist cafes in Sunderland city centre...
"Metropolitan liberal elite" is relative, of course.
It's a state of mind, not geography.
Same with being a man of the people (gender and/or actualy connection with 'the people' not required)
Some of us are metropolitan liberal elite and a man of the people.
Alex Salmond is at the centre of a row about transgender rights over a remark he is reported to have made to the respected broadcaster Jim Spence.
Writing in his latest column for The Courier, Mr Spence claimed the former first minister complained to him the SNP had been “captured by around a hundred loony tune transgender warriors”.
Assuming the polls are true - and labour is losing significant votes in Hartlepool, doing pretty badly in the West Midlands, but ~level pegging overall, WHERE are they piling up votes?
I don’t get it.
Has anyone dug into the subsamples?
Possibly places where they already weigh the labour vote like london
And yet Khan is down. My money's on the Home Counties.
I agree. Starmer’s picking up votes in blue-remainia, isn’t he?
Labour could put in a surprisingly good performance in Chesham & Amersham.
I actually doubt your last point and wrt the Home counties not sure they would win much in a GE here - potential to make the Tory vote even more efficient.
Well indeed. Analogous to Tyne and Wear. Massive swings to the Tories all this century has left 12 out of 12 Labour seats much more efficiently won.
I do think my home town seat of Sunderland central could go blue for the first time since 1963!
I'm not convinced. Sunderland Central is a university seat after all and is being gentrified, albeit slowly (believe it or not). It also contains the more middle class metropolitan liberal elite parts of Sunderland.
Plus Sunderland/Tyne and Wear generally hasn't exactly been given a ton of Tory red meat to chew on like Teesside.
The council elections on Thursday should be informative.
Gentrified??? Metropolitan liberal elite???
You'll have to let me know where to find the artisan bakers and organic cyclist cafes in Sunderland city centre...
"Metropolitan liberal elite" is relative, of course.
It's a state of mind, not geography.
Same with being a man of the people (gender and/or actualy connection with 'the people' not required)
Some of us are metropolitan liberal elite and a man of the people.
The Speccie points out that Starmer might have to fight another nightmare seat after Thursday. Tracy Brabin will apparently step down as Batley and Spen MP if she triumphs in the West Yorkshire Mayoralty, according to the Speccie.
The 154m Census number is based on those that definitively reported having voted, you forget the 36m that didn't respond.
As the Census bureau notes.
The estimates presented in this table package may differ from those based on administrative data or exit polls due to factors such as survey nonresponse, vote misreporting and methodological issues related to question wording and survey administration.
.... I know you and almost everybody on here would not like to face up to the fact that more than 70% of republican voters still don't think Biden got enough legit votes to win. But its true, they don't. And stuff like this is used to keep that notion going.
On the contrary, we're quite happy to discuss it. However, we would like you to face up to the fact that (1) registered Republicans constitute only a third of the electorate, so you're only talking about one in five voters, and (2) the main reason they persist in that belief is that their leaders persist in lying about the election.
Caveat - "Republican voters" are WAY more than "registered Republicans" for several reasons, for example states such as my own beloved WA that do NOT have party registration.
The Republican voters Contrarian is referring to, are folks who voted for Republican President & nominee Trumpsky. Of which 70% equates to approx. one in three voters.
Assuming the polls are true - and labour is losing significant votes in Hartlepool, doing pretty badly in the West Midlands, but ~level pegging overall, WHERE are they piling up votes?
I don’t get it.
Has anyone dug into the subsamples?
I don't think the Tories have a single voter left around my way. So that's part of it. Hopefully just a small part, though, since such a swap would be electorally inefficient for Labour.
Are there really seats where the Tory vote is zero? Even in seats like East Ham they manage ~15%.
No, not yet. I think we can have a crack at it round here though. Can you imagine if we pulled it off at the next GE? Talk about your badge of honour! - and a great boost for house prices as people in more "diverse" areas hear about it and want a piece.
Tories get 10% of the vote in Labour's safest seat (Walton) and Labour get 13% in the Tory's safest (S Holland). Nowhere near extinction time yet.
True. But there's 3 years to go till the GE and with the contempt that this government has for educated, left/liberal metropolitans I think "Zero Tory" is a feasible stretch goal for London NW3.
I think the bantz of being the only Tory in NW3 would be too strong to resist so you'll get a few thousand votes on that basis alone.
A few years back the Tory candidate in Trimdon ward got zero votes. These days they probably weigh the Tory vote.
I remember that. The candidate only got on the ballot, because a local Labour bloke took pity on the kid the Tories sent there to gather sigs for the petition, and helped him find enough to qualify (including his own) with proviso that none of the signers were gonna vote for the Great Blue Hope.
Cases now dropping like a stone WoW, deaths almost down to zero. Yet here we are sitting in the cold drinking beer while the nice warm pubs are still closed off.
The scientists have made doom porn modelling an art form. I'm still waiting for those idiots who said we'd have a third wave worse than the second wave to retract their idiot model. Their agenda is laughably transparent and it's time for them to be forced into printing retractions.
Deaths are now only a whisker over 10/day on average. Yet I wouldn't expect the government to accelerate the timetable – they seem wedded to 17 May.
Here we go again. Government announces great news that prisoners (sorry, residents) can be allowed outside the home without having to quarantine on return to the home.
Firstly, that implies that residents have up to now been able to leave the home albeit with quarantine on return. This is not true. (Plus, as an aside, residents are basically in quarantine in a care home anyway aren't they?)
Secondly, the wonderful new guidance is now out in writing and it states that only the two current nominated visitors are to be allowed to take the resident away for a trip out thus meaning that for many families, such as ours, who have nominated two infirm and elderly family members as nominated visitors (as the younger relatives (like me) are best suited to see relative outdoors) are in effect excluded because the nominated visitors we chose are too frail to push my mum in her wheelchair. So no trips out for mum then.
I've asked the care home to switch one of the nominated visitors to me instead and they have refused because "the government says this is not allowed".
Words fail me.
Care home news has been a persistent area of poor communication and decisions generally, it seems.
I also think that those that run the care homes are shit scared of being blamed/sued when a patient dies, and someone wants to make an issue. Far easier to just lock them up as tight as possible and be intransigent than take the risk.
I would go one stage further than that - they don't want covid in their homes as it takes time to find replacement residents.
Cases now dropping like a stone WoW, deaths almost down to zero. Yet here we are sitting in the cold drinking beer while the nice warm pubs are still closed off.
The scientists have made doom porn modelling an art form. I'm still waiting for those idiots who said we'd have a third wave worse than the second wave to retract their idiot model. Their agenda is laughably transparent and it's time for them to be forced into printing retractions.
I don't see much reason for the May 17th changes to be brought forward but there is little reason to not bring the June changes forward.
Ironically the weather is pronged for a warm up on... 17 May. Would be darkly funny to see the pubs open their doors only to see multiple requests from punters to sit outside.
Assuming the polls are true - and labour is losing significant votes in Hartlepool, doing pretty badly in the West Midlands, but ~level pegging overall, WHERE are they piling up votes?
I don’t get it.
Has anyone dug into the subsamples?
Possibly places where they already weigh the labour vote like london
And yet Khan is down. My money's on the Home Counties.
I agree. Starmer’s picking up votes in blue-remainia, isn’t he?
Labour could put in a surprisingly good performance in Chesham & Amersham.
I actually doubt your last point and wrt the Home counties not sure they would win much in a GE here - potential to make the Tory vote even more efficient.
Well indeed. Analogous to Tyne and Wear. Massive swings to the Tories all this century has left 12 out of 12 Labour seats much more efficiently won.
I do think my home town seat of Sunderland central could go blue for the first time since 1963!
I'm not convinced. Sunderland Central is a university seat after all and is being gentrified, albeit slowly (believe it or not). It also contains the more middle class metropolitan liberal elite parts of Sunderland.
Plus Sunderland/Tyne and Wear generally hasn't exactly been given a ton of Tory red meat to chew on like Teesside.
The council elections on Thursday should be informative.
Gentrified??? Metropolitan liberal elite???
You'll have to let me know where to find the artisan bakers and organic cyclist cafes in Sunderland city centre...
"Metropolitan liberal elite" is relative, of course.
It's a state of mind, not geography.
Same with being a man of the people (gender and/or actualy connection with 'the people' not required)
Some of us are metropolitan liberal elite and a man of the people.
No doubt. Who?
Me.
Well I was recently upgraded to upper class by some friends (they were doing a quiz and it asked them how many upper class people they knew, for this you didn't need a title for to be upper class.)
Assuming the polls are true - and labour is losing significant votes in Hartlepool, doing pretty badly in the West Midlands, but ~level pegging overall, WHERE are they piling up votes?
I don’t get it.
Has anyone dug into the subsamples?
Possibly places where they already weigh the labour vote like london
And yet Khan is down. My money's on the Home Counties.
I agree. Starmer’s picking up votes in blue-remainia, isn’t he?
Labour could put in a surprisingly good performance in Chesham & Amersham.
I actually doubt your last point and wrt the Home counties not sure they would win much in a GE here - potential to make the Tory vote even more efficient.
Well indeed. Analogous to Tyne and Wear. Massive swings to the Tories all this century has left 12 out of 12 Labour seats much more efficiently won.
I do think my home town seat of Sunderland central could go blue for the first time since 1963!
I'm not convinced. Sunderland Central is a university seat after all and is being gentrified, albeit slowly (believe it or not). It also contains the more middle class metropolitan liberal elite parts of Sunderland.
Plus Sunderland/Tyne and Wear generally hasn't exactly been given a ton of Tory red meat to chew on like Teesside.
The council elections on Thursday should be informative.
I have lived in Pennywell, was like a series of scenes off Shameless.
I think most of it's gone now. I think Gallowgate may be wrong - the university influence is not as strong - there are a kot of thrifty homeowners there these days. As he says the locals might give a clue but wallpaper gate has come at the wrong time.
Explain the logic of Labour losing in the groups most opposed to racism (young and minorities)
If the centrists and right wing fairly tale about Corbyn being racist and Starmer being anti racist were true the opposite would happen.
Starmer seems most popular (comparatively to Corbyn) among groups most in favour of racism (older white people) the same groups were Corbyn is least popular.
I know this might be hard to hear but is it possible it is you that is wrong rather than the children Mr Skinner?
The better starting point is not to be racist because its wrong. Too many of your fellow Corbynite activists - and Corbyn himself - cannot pass this test due to being usually passive but sometimes active anti-semites.
Once you've got this "believing in something cos its right" thing down, the next barrier is not ramming your standards down other people's throats. You may be right and the other person wrong, but sneering / shouting won't change their view in your direction. Quite the opposite in fact.
Finally, don't be a screaming hypocrite. Diane Abbott was on the receiving end of some horrendous racist abuse. She was also on the end of a lot of abuse because she is a shit politician that was willfully miscategorised as racist. At the same time Luciana Berger was also on the end of some horrendous racist abuse - with much of it coming from Labour members who then insisted it wasn't racist.
Diane Abbott is an interesting one to compare with Israel.
If you're attacking Abbott/Israel alone then that seems to be racism.
If you're attacking Abbott along with Rebecca Wrong Daily, Laura Pillock, the Jezziah and the rest of them - then that's not racist.
Wrong-Daily is white. Pillock is white. Berger is BAME. Abbott is BAME. My point was that in large parts of Labour there is a hierarchy of racism where as Baddiel puts it so neatly: Jews Don't Count.
The party promoted Anas Sarwar as the first BAME leader of a political party. Scottish Labour isn't a political party, but Sarwar isn't even the first BAME Labour leader - Ed Milliband doesn't count apparently.
Because to recognise millibrand as bame they wouldn't be able to claim that even for him as Disraeli would be the first Bame leader of a political party and incidentally prime minister
Exactly. I stopped with Ed M and didn't mention Howard or the others because they weren't Labour.
This is the Labour Party. Who claims to be anti-racist. And who still has a massive bind spot when it comes to anti-semitism.
I would say "still" is unfair, given that the start of the problem can be dated precisely to September 2015.
Anyway, using hatred of Starmer by Corbynista fanboys as a crude proxy for whether he's addressing the issue, ten minutes of scanning this forum today has made me quite optimistic.
Weird given people kept going back before that time (whether they were looking for left wing or centrist anti semitism)
I guess all the anti semitism people used as a weapon against Corbyn (or centrists) that appeared before that date was part of Corbyn's evil racist plan were he went back in time and planted racist comments that seem as if they existed before Corbyn won the leadership but clever older white men with large bank accounts saw through this...
Young people and minorities haven't got this kind of magic perception which is why they can't see that Corbyn is secretly a time travelling racist.
Please don't tar young people with your brush, most are sane and a great number of them also saw through corbyn and didnt vote for him 71% in fact
Without young people Corbyn was buried, the old voted against him the young voted for him.
Vast numbers of people as always didn't vote but there is a reason Labour did better among the young.
Corbyn is the first political leader the younger generation has had.
First?
What about Ed Miliband? Nick Clegg? Tony Blair?
Every "younger generation" has always had a leader or leaders politically. The only way to define Corbyn as the first is simply by wiping out any that come before him, in which case Starmer or A N Other could be a first next time.
I've never understood why I'm supposed to think someone is greater because they had more of the young vote, as though its morally worth more.
I criticise the grey vote bribes we get and the age polarisation of recent times is a worry, but we overdo the 'please think of the children(and young people)' stuff - same reason people love youthful campaigners.
I'll never understand people criticising something without reading it, what is the point?
I was on about younger people being less racist and them being the ones who voted for Corbyn (in relatively greater numbers)
Was it really too difficult for you to go back and read the context in which is was used?
Or are my posts just useful staging posts for you to have a self righteous whine without actually reading them?
In future please read the context in which I am saying something or don't talk about my posts. Nothing worse than someone being self righteous when they don't even know what they are talking about.
You need to calm the f*ck down, take your own advice and read what I wrote.
Your post and the one which followed it led me to reflect on a tangential point of my own. It was not a criticism of you or your post and did not say as much.
Why should not one person's thoughts serve as staging for another, separate point by another? I welcomed the discussion and it led me to think about something related but different.
So f*ck you. Amazing how you just personified the very point you wanted to criticise about self righteousness.
Not everything is about you. Nor do you own a discussion or a reply to a post which was not even yours. Just because it was in a thread with yours didn't make it a criticism of you.
So vain.
Oh, and TheJezziah, that's a criticism of you btw. Since you just invented one in your imagination to whinge about clearly you need help to identify an actual criticism of you.
I would respectfully suggest you take some of your own advice and calm down. There's no need for this.
I didn't know there had been a vacancy for site policeman, David?
Oh no - not a PCC election here on PB. How do I spoil my ballot?
Here we go again. Government announces great news that prisoners (sorry, residents) can be allowed outside the home without having to quarantine on return to the home.
Firstly, that implies that residents have up to now been able to leave the home albeit with quarantine on return. This is not true. (Plus, as an aside, residents are basically in quarantine in a care home anyway aren't they?)
Secondly, the wonderful new guidance is now out in writing and it states that only the two current nominated visitors are to be allowed to take the resident away for a trip out thus meaning that for many families, such as ours, who have nominated two infirm and elderly family members as nominated visitors (as the younger relatives (like me) are best suited to see relative outdoors) are in effect excluded because the nominated visitors we chose are too frail to push my mum in her wheelchair. So no trips out for mum then.
I've asked the care home to switch one of the nominated visitors to me instead and they have refused because "the government says this is not allowed".
"It is important that the named visitors remain the same people as far as possible. This is important in reducing the risk of transmission, by limiting the number of different people coming into the care home from the community. However, we recognise that there will be situations in which a named visitor cannot continue to visit (for example because of illness). We advise care homes and families to take a pragmatic approach, with the aim of minimising change wherever possible."
Yes, I quoted that very passage to the care home manager this afternoon and got nowhere. Because both of the named visitors are not ill they cannot be replaced, she said.
Assuming the polls are true - and labour is losing significant votes in Hartlepool, doing pretty badly in the West Midlands, but ~level pegging overall, WHERE are they piling up votes?
I don’t get it.
Has anyone dug into the subsamples?
Possibly places where they already weigh the labour vote like london
And yet Khan is down. My money's on the Home Counties.
I agree. Starmer’s picking up votes in blue-remainia, isn’t he?
Labour could put in a surprisingly good performance in Chesham & Amersham.
I actually doubt your last point and wrt the Home counties not sure they would win much in a GE here - potential to make the Tory vote even more efficient.
Well indeed. Analogous to Tyne and Wear. Massive swings to the Tories all this century has left 12 out of 12 Labour seats much more efficiently won.
I do think my home town seat of Sunderland central could go blue for the first time since 1963!
I'm not convinced. Sunderland Central is a university seat after all and is being gentrified, albeit slowly (believe it or not). It also contains the more middle class metropolitan liberal elite parts of Sunderland.
Plus Sunderland/Tyne and Wear generally hasn't exactly been given a ton of Tory red meat to chew on like Teesside.
The council elections on Thursday should be informative.
Gentrified??? Metropolitan liberal elite???
You'll have to let me know where to find the artisan bakers and organic cyclist cafes in Sunderland city centre...
Cases now dropping like a stone WoW, deaths almost down to zero. Yet here we are sitting in the cold drinking beer while the nice warm pubs are still closed off.
The scientists have made doom porn modelling an art form. I'm still waiting for those idiots who said we'd have a third wave worse than the second wave to retract their idiot model. Their agenda is laughably transparent and it's time for them to be forced into printing retractions.
Even the Modeller of Doom admits this is nearly over.
Dan Bloom @danbloom1 NEW: Prof Neil Ferguson says we now "don’t see any prospect of the NHS being overwhelmed, with the one caveat around variants", in a third wave this summer/autumn
I thought Neil Ferguson had avoided the doom porn and for most of this year was saying once vaccination is complete we're pretty much done in the UK and would just have to live with flu-level outbreaks.
Got a lot of respect for Neil Ferguson. His ‘500,000 deaths’ quote - which received much derision on here - turned out to be bang on: as a reasonable worst case scenario for UK Covid with no mitigation
He then got death threats for a year. Now he’s willing to dial down the doom
The Boffin' Boffin? – is this the very same Professor Ferguson who filled the airwaves preaching to his subjects only to then sneak out to get his end away with a blonde lady?
Assuming the polls are true - and labour is losing significant votes in Hartlepool, doing pretty badly in the West Midlands, but ~level pegging overall, WHERE are they piling up votes?
I don’t get it.
Has anyone dug into the subsamples?
Possibly places where they already weigh the labour vote like london
And yet Khan is down. My money's on the Home Counties.
I agree. Starmer’s picking up votes in blue-remainia, isn’t he?
Labour could put in a surprisingly good performance in Chesham & Amersham.
I actually doubt your last point and wrt the Home counties not sure they would win much in a GE here - potential to make the Tory vote even more efficient.
Well indeed. Analogous to Tyne and Wear. Massive swings to the Tories all this century has left 12 out of 12 Labour seats much more efficiently won.
I do think my home town seat of Sunderland central could go blue for the first time since 1963!
I'm not convinced. Sunderland Central is a university seat after all and is being gentrified, albeit slowly (believe it or not). It also contains the more middle class metropolitan liberal elite parts of Sunderland.
Plus Sunderland/Tyne and Wear generally hasn't exactly been given a ton of Tory red meat to chew on like Teesside.
The council elections on Thursday should be informative.
I have lived in Pennywell, was like a series of scenes off Shameless.
I think most of it's gone now. I think Gallowgate may be wrong - the university influence is not as strong - there are a kot of thrifty homeowners there these days. As he says the locals might give a clue but wallpaper gate has come at the wrong time.
There was no metro, just a notorious 'psychopath' as the cyclepath was known as, rape and robbery was not uncommon.
Alex Salmond is at the centre of a row about transgender rights over a remark he is reported to have made to the respected broadcaster Jim Spence.
Writing in his latest column for The Courier, Mr Spence claimed the former first minister complained to him the SNP had been “captured by around a hundred loony tune transgender warriors”.
Explain the logic of Labour losing in the groups most opposed to racism (young and minorities)
If the centrists and right wing fairly tale about Corbyn being racist and Starmer being anti racist were true the opposite would happen.
Starmer seems most popular (comparatively to Corbyn) among groups most in favour of racism (older white people) the same groups were Corbyn is least popular.
I know this might be hard to hear but is it possible it is you that is wrong rather than the children Mr Skinner?
The better starting point is not to be racist because its wrong. Too many of your fellow Corbynite activists - and Corbyn himself - cannot pass this test due to being usually passive but sometimes active anti-semites.
Once you've got this "believing in something cos its right" thing down, the next barrier is not ramming your standards down other people's throats. You may be right and the other person wrong, but sneering / shouting won't change their view in your direction. Quite the opposite in fact.
Finally, don't be a screaming hypocrite. Diane Abbott was on the receiving end of some horrendous racist abuse. She was also on the end of a lot of abuse because she is a shit politician that was willfully miscategorised as racist. At the same time Luciana Berger was also on the end of some horrendous racist abuse - with much of it coming from Labour members who then insisted it wasn't racist.
Diane Abbott is an interesting one to compare with Israel.
If you're attacking Abbott/Israel alone then that seems to be racism.
If you're attacking Abbott along with Rebecca Wrong Daily, Laura Pillock, the Jezziah and the rest of them - then that's not racist.
Wrong-Daily is white. Pillock is white. Berger is BAME. Abbott is BAME. My point was that in large parts of Labour there is a hierarchy of racism where as Baddiel puts it so neatly: Jews Don't Count.
The party promoted Anas Sarwar as the first BAME leader of a political party. Scottish Labour isn't a political party, but Sarwar isn't even the first BAME Labour leader - Ed Milliband doesn't count apparently.
Because to recognise millibrand as bame they wouldn't be able to claim that even for him as Disraeli would be the first Bame leader of a political party and incidentally prime minister
Exactly. I stopped with Ed M and didn't mention Howard or the others because they weren't Labour.
This is the Labour Party. Who claims to be anti-racist. And who still has a massive bind spot when it comes to anti-semitism.
I would say "still" is unfair, given that the start of the problem can be dated precisely to September 2015.
Anyway, using hatred of Starmer by Corbynista fanboys as a crude proxy for whether he's addressing the issue, ten minutes of scanning this forum today has made me quite optimistic.
Weird given people kept going back before that time (whether they were looking for left wing or centrist anti semitism)
I guess all the anti semitism people used as a weapon against Corbyn (or centrists) that appeared before that date was part of Corbyn's evil racist plan were he went back in time and planted racist comments that seem as if they existed before Corbyn won the leadership but clever older white men with large bank accounts saw through this...
Young people and minorities haven't got this kind of magic perception which is why they can't see that Corbyn is secretly a time travelling racist.
Please don't tar young people with your brush, most are sane and a great number of them also saw through corbyn and didnt vote for him 71% in fact
Without young people Corbyn was buried, the old voted against him the young voted for him.
Vast numbers of people as always didn't vote but there is a reason Labour did better among the young.
Corbyn is the first political leader the younger generation has had.
First?
What about Ed Miliband? Nick Clegg? Tony Blair?
Every "younger generation" has always had a leader or leaders politically. The only way to define Corbyn as the first is simply by wiping out any that come before him, in which case Starmer or A N Other could be a first next time.
I've never understood why I'm supposed to think someone is greater because they had more of the young vote, as though its morally worth more.
I criticise the grey vote bribes we get and the age polarisation of recent times is a worry, but we overdo the 'please think of the children(and young people)' stuff - same reason people love youthful campaigners.
I'll never understand people criticising something without reading it, what is the point?
I was on about younger people being less racist and them being the ones who voted for Corbyn (in relatively greater numbers)
Was it really too difficult for you to go back and read the context in which is was used?
Or are my posts just useful staging posts for you to have a self righteous whine without actually reading them?
In future please read the context in which I am saying something or don't talk about my posts. Nothing worse than someone being self righteous when they don't even know what they are talking about.
You need to calm the f*ck down, take your own advice and read what I wrote.
Your post and the one which followed it led me to reflect on a tangential point of my own. It was not a criticism of you or your post and did not say as much.
Why should not one person's thoughts serve as staging for another, separate point by another? I welcomed the discussion and it led me to think about something related but different.
So f*ck you. Amazing how you just personified the very point you wanted to criticise about self righteousness.
Not everything is about you. Nor do you own a discussion or a reply to a post which was not even yours. Just because it was in a thread with yours didn't make it a criticism of you.
So vain.
Oh, and TheJezziah, that's a criticism of you btw. Since you just invented one in your imagination to whinge about clearly you need help to identify an actual criticism of you.
I would respectfully suggest you take some of your own advice and calm down. There's no need for this.
I didn't know there had been a vacancy for site policeman, David?
Oh no - not a PCC election here on PB. How do I spoil my ballot?
If we took the pro rata turnout for those elections then it would only be @Leon's fingernail voting.
Given the tiny number of deaths now it must be quite possible that some if not all of these so-called Coronavirus deaths are naturally occurring deaths of people who by pure coincidence tested positive within last 28 days?
That wasn't true all pandemic, though its certainly been a factor which is why the real death toll is tens of thousands fewer than the 'official' one. But it must surely be a real factor now?
Yes but on the other hand many will have died of Covid outside of 28 days which will not be in figures. I've kind of accepted that one balances the other.
Only 4 today - on a murder Tuesday. (Unless bank holiday moves that back to Wednesday?)
Yes, Wednesday is the new Tuesday. For this week, anyway.
Agreed. We can't use today as a rule of thumb as we would a normal Tuesday. That said, 4 is a low number even accounting for bank holiday effect. Let's see what the rest of the week brings.
Explain the logic of Labour losing in the groups most opposed to racism (young and minorities)
If the centrists and right wing fairly tale about Corbyn being racist and Starmer being anti racist were true the opposite would happen.
Starmer seems most popular (comparatively to Corbyn) among groups most in favour of racism (older white people) the same groups were Corbyn is least popular.
I know this might be hard to hear but is it possible it is you that is wrong rather than the children Mr Skinner?
The better starting point is not to be racist because its wrong. Too many of your fellow Corbynite activists - and Corbyn himself - cannot pass this test due to being usually passive but sometimes active anti-semites.
Once you've got this "believing in something cos its right" thing down, the next barrier is not ramming your standards down other people's throats. You may be right and the other person wrong, but sneering / shouting won't change their view in your direction. Quite the opposite in fact.
Finally, don't be a screaming hypocrite. Diane Abbott was on the receiving end of some horrendous racist abuse. She was also on the end of a lot of abuse because she is a shit politician that was willfully miscategorised as racist. At the same time Luciana Berger was also on the end of some horrendous racist abuse - with much of it coming from Labour members who then insisted it wasn't racist.
Diane Abbott is an interesting one to compare with Israel.
If you're attacking Abbott/Israel alone then that seems to be racism.
If you're attacking Abbott along with Rebecca Wrong Daily, Laura Pillock, the Jezziah and the rest of them - then that's not racist.
Wrong-Daily is white. Pillock is white. Berger is BAME. Abbott is BAME. My point was that in large parts of Labour there is a hierarchy of racism where as Baddiel puts it so neatly: Jews Don't Count.
The party promoted Anas Sarwar as the first BAME leader of a political party. Scottish Labour isn't a political party, but Sarwar isn't even the first BAME Labour leader - Ed Milliband doesn't count apparently.
Because to recognise millibrand as bame they wouldn't be able to claim that even for him as Disraeli would be the first Bame leader of a political party and incidentally prime minister
Exactly. I stopped with Ed M and didn't mention Howard or the others because they weren't Labour.
This is the Labour Party. Who claims to be anti-racist. And who still has a massive bind spot when it comes to anti-semitism.
I would say "still" is unfair, given that the start of the problem can be dated precisely to September 2015.
Anyway, using hatred of Starmer by Corbynista fanboys as a crude proxy for whether he's addressing the issue, ten minutes of scanning this forum today has made me quite optimistic.
Weird given people kept going back before that time (whether they were looking for left wing or centrist anti semitism)
I guess all the anti semitism people used as a weapon against Corbyn (or centrists) that appeared before that date was part of Corbyn's evil racist plan were he went back in time and planted racist comments that seem as if they existed before Corbyn won the leadership but clever older white men with large bank accounts saw through this...
Young people and minorities haven't got this kind of magic perception which is why they can't see that Corbyn is secretly a time travelling racist.
Please don't tar young people with your brush, most are sane and a great number of them also saw through corbyn and didnt vote for him 71% in fact
Without young people Corbyn was buried, the old voted against him the young voted for him.
Vast numbers of people as always didn't vote but there is a reason Labour did better among the young.
Corbyn is the first political leader the younger generation has had.
First?
What about Ed Miliband? Nick Clegg? Tony Blair?
Every "younger generation" has always had a leader or leaders politically. The only way to define Corbyn as the first is simply by wiping out any that come before him, in which case Starmer or A N Other could be a first next time.
I've never understood why I'm supposed to think someone is greater because they had more of the young vote, as though its morally worth more.
I criticise the grey vote bribes we get and the age polarisation of recent times is a worry, but we overdo the 'please think of the children(and young people)' stuff - same reason people love youthful campaigners.
I'll never understand people criticising something without reading it, what is the point?
I was on about younger people being less racist and them being the ones who voted for Corbyn (in relatively greater numbers)
Was it really too difficult for you to go back and read the context in which is was used?
Or are my posts just useful staging posts for you to have a self righteous whine without actually reading them?
In future please read the context in which I am saying something or don't talk about my posts. Nothing worse than someone being self righteous when they don't even know what they are talking about.
You need to calm the f*ck down, take your own advice and read what I wrote.
Your post and the one which followed it led me to reflect on a tangential point of my own. It was not a criticism of you or your post and did not say as much.
Why should not one person's thoughts serve as staging for another, separate point by another? I welcomed the discussion and it led me to think about something related but different.
So f*ck you. Amazing how you just personified the very point you wanted to criticise about self righteousness.
Not everything is about you. Nor do you own a discussion or a reply to a post which was not even yours. Just because it was in a thread with yours didn't make it a criticism of you.
So vain.
Oh, and TheJezziah, that's a criticism of you btw. Since you just invented one in your imagination to whinge about clearly you need help to identify an actual criticism of you.
I would respectfully suggest you take some of your own advice and calm down. There's no need for this.
I didn't know there had been a vacancy for site policeman, David?
Oh no - not a PCC election here on PB. How do I spoil my ballot?
Does anyone still think pcc elections are a good idea?
Cameron’s idea was to slash the police budget, then blame the pcc’s for the inevitable consequences. Now Boris is fixing the problem Dave created, they’re surplus to requirements.
Unnecessary and expensive elections for a role that shouldn’t be partisan, IMO.
Our PCC claims that their role and office cost are less than the old police authority.
Assuming the polls are true - and labour is losing significant votes in Hartlepool, doing pretty badly in the West Midlands, but ~level pegging overall, WHERE are they piling up votes?
I don’t get it.
Has anyone dug into the subsamples?
Possibly places where they already weigh the labour vote like london
And yet Khan is down. My money's on the Home Counties.
I agree. Starmer’s picking up votes in blue-remainia, isn’t he?
Labour could put in a surprisingly good performance in Chesham & Amersham.
I actually doubt your last point and wrt the Home counties not sure they would win much in a GE here - potential to make the Tory vote even more efficient.
Well indeed. Analogous to Tyne and Wear. Massive swings to the Tories all this century has left 12 out of 12 Labour seats much more efficiently won.
I do think my home town seat of Sunderland central could go blue for the first time since 1963!
I'm not convinced. Sunderland Central is a university seat after all and is being gentrified, albeit slowly (believe it or not). It also contains the more middle class metropolitan liberal elite parts of Sunderland.
Plus Sunderland/Tyne and Wear generally hasn't exactly been given a ton of Tory red meat to chew on like Teesside.
The council elections on Thursday should be informative.
I have lived in Pennywell, was like a series of scenes off Shameless.
I think most of it's gone now. I think Gallowgate may be wrong - the university influence is not as strong - there are a kot of thrifty homeowners there these days. As he says the locals might give a clue but wallpaper gate has come at the wrong time.
The University's influence is no where near as strong as in cities with multiple universities, but it is still a factor. Look at Teesside. Middlesborough stands alone as the last Labour holdout. One possible factor is the university.
Explain the logic of Labour losing in the groups most opposed to racism (young and minorities)
If the centrists and right wing fairly tale about Corbyn being racist and Starmer being anti racist were true the opposite would happen.
Starmer seems most popular (comparatively to Corbyn) among groups most in favour of racism (older white people) the same groups were Corbyn is least popular.
I know this might be hard to hear but is it possible it is you that is wrong rather than the children Mr Skinner?
The better starting point is not to be racist because its wrong. Too many of your fellow Corbynite activists - and Corbyn himself - cannot pass this test due to being usually passive but sometimes active anti-semites.
Once you've got this "believing in something cos its right" thing down, the next barrier is not ramming your standards down other people's throats. You may be right and the other person wrong, but sneering / shouting won't change their view in your direction. Quite the opposite in fact.
Finally, don't be a screaming hypocrite. Diane Abbott was on the receiving end of some horrendous racist abuse. She was also on the end of a lot of abuse because she is a shit politician that was willfully miscategorised as racist. At the same time Luciana Berger was also on the end of some horrendous racist abuse - with much of it coming from Labour members who then insisted it wasn't racist.
Diane Abbott is an interesting one to compare with Israel.
If you're attacking Abbott/Israel alone then that seems to be racism.
If you're attacking Abbott along with Rebecca Wrong Daily, Laura Pillock, the Jezziah and the rest of them - then that's not racist.
Wrong-Daily is white. Pillock is white. Berger is BAME. Abbott is BAME. My point was that in large parts of Labour there is a hierarchy of racism where as Baddiel puts it so neatly: Jews Don't Count.
The party promoted Anas Sarwar as the first BAME leader of a political party. Scottish Labour isn't a political party, but Sarwar isn't even the first BAME Labour leader - Ed Milliband doesn't count apparently.
Because to recognise millibrand as bame they wouldn't be able to claim that even for him as Disraeli would be the first Bame leader of a political party and incidentally prime minister
Exactly. I stopped with Ed M and didn't mention Howard or the others because they weren't Labour.
This is the Labour Party. Who claims to be anti-racist. And who still has a massive bind spot when it comes to anti-semitism.
I would say "still" is unfair, given that the start of the problem can be dated precisely to September 2015.
Anyway, using hatred of Starmer by Corbynista fanboys as a crude proxy for whether he's addressing the issue, ten minutes of scanning this forum today has made me quite optimistic.
Weird given people kept going back before that time (whether they were looking for left wing or centrist anti semitism)
I guess all the anti semitism people used as a weapon against Corbyn (or centrists) that appeared before that date was part of Corbyn's evil racist plan were he went back in time and planted racist comments that seem as if they existed before Corbyn won the leadership but clever older white men with large bank accounts saw through this...
Young people and minorities haven't got this kind of magic perception which is why they can't see that Corbyn is secretly a time travelling racist.
Please don't tar young people with your brush, most are sane and a great number of them also saw through corbyn and didnt vote for him 71% in fact
Without young people Corbyn was buried, the old voted against him the young voted for him.
Vast numbers of people as always didn't vote but there is a reason Labour did better among the young.
Corbyn is the first political leader the younger generation has had.
First?
What about Ed Miliband? Nick Clegg? Tony Blair?
Every "younger generation" has always had a leader or leaders politically. The only way to define Corbyn as the first is simply by wiping out any that come before him, in which case Starmer or A N Other could be a first next time.
I've never understood why I'm supposed to think someone is greater because they had more of the young vote, as though its morally worth more.
I criticise the grey vote bribes we get and the age polarisation of recent times is a worry, but we overdo the 'please think of the children(and young people)' stuff - same reason people love youthful campaigners.
I'll never understand people criticising something without reading it, what is the point?
I was on about younger people being less racist and them being the ones who voted for Corbyn (in relatively greater numbers)
Was it really too difficult for you to go back and read the context in which is was used?
Or are my posts just useful staging posts for you to have a self righteous whine without actually reading them?
In future please read the context in which I am saying something or don't talk about my posts. Nothing worse than someone being self righteous when they don't even know what they are talking about.
You need to calm the f*ck down, take your own advice and read what I wrote.
Your post and the one which followed it led me to reflect on a tangential point of my own. It was not a criticism of you or your post and did not say as much.
Why should not one person's thoughts serve as staging for another, separate point by another? I welcomed the discussion and it led me to think about something related but different.
So f*ck you. Amazing how you just personified the very point you wanted to criticise about self righteousness.
Not everything is about you. Nor do you own a discussion or a reply to a post which was not even yours. Just because it was in a thread with yours didn't make it a criticism of you.
So vain.
Oh, and TheJezziah, that's a criticism of you btw. Since you just invented one in your imagination to whinge about clearly you need help to identify an actual criticism of you.
I would respectfully suggest you take some of your own advice and calm down. There's no need for this.
I didn't know there had been a vacancy for site policeman, David?
Oh no - not a PCC election here on PB. How do I spoil my ballot?
Does anyone still think pcc elections are a good idea?
Cameron’s idea was to slash the police budget, then blame the pcc’s for the inevitable consequences. Now Boris is fixing the problem Dave created, they’re surplus to requirements.
Unnecessary and expensive elections for a role that shouldn’t be partisan, IMO.
Our PCC claims that their role and office cost are less than the old police authority.
"Contract out the cleaning staff, job done. To the pub?"
Here we go again. Government announces great news that prisoners (sorry, residents) can be allowed outside the home without having to quarantine on return to the home.
Firstly, that implies that residents have up to now been able to leave the home albeit with quarantine on return. This is not true. (Plus, as an aside, residents are basically in quarantine in a care home anyway aren't they?)
Secondly, the wonderful new guidance is now out in writing and it states that only the two current nominated visitors are to be allowed to take the resident away for a trip out thus meaning that for many families, such as ours, who have nominated two infirm and elderly family members as nominated visitors (as the younger relatives (like me) are best suited to see relative outdoors) are in effect excluded because the nominated visitors we chose are too frail to push my mum in her wheelchair. So no trips out for mum then.
I've asked the care home to switch one of the nominated visitors to me instead and they have refused because "the government says this is not allowed".
"It is important that the named visitors remain the same people as far as possible. This is important in reducing the risk of transmission, by limiting the number of different people coming into the care home from the community. However, we recognise that there will be situations in which a named visitor cannot continue to visit (for example because of illness). We advise care homes and families to take a pragmatic approach, with the aim of minimising change wherever possible."
Yes, I quoted that very passage to the care home manager this afternoon and got nowhere. Because both of the named visitors are not ill they cannot be replaced, she said.
That really is wilful incompetence. If there is any escalation procedure beyond the manager someone will hopefully see sense.
Assuming the polls are true - and labour is losing significant votes in Hartlepool, doing pretty badly in the West Midlands, but ~level pegging overall, WHERE are they piling up votes?
I don’t get it.
Has anyone dug into the subsamples?
Possibly places where they already weigh the labour vote like london
And yet Khan is down. My money's on the Home Counties.
I agree. Starmer’s picking up votes in blue-remainia, isn’t he?
Labour could put in a surprisingly good performance in Chesham & Amersham.
I actually doubt your last point and wrt the Home counties not sure they would win much in a GE here - potential to make the Tory vote even more efficient.
Well indeed. Analogous to Tyne and Wear. Massive swings to the Tories all this century has left 12 out of 12 Labour seats much more efficiently won.
I do think my home town seat of Sunderland central could go blue for the first time since 1963!
I'm not convinced. Sunderland Central is a university seat after all and is being gentrified, albeit slowly (believe it or not). It also contains the more middle class metropolitan liberal elite parts of Sunderland.
Plus Sunderland/Tyne and Wear generally hasn't exactly been given a ton of Tory red meat to chew on like Teesside.
The council elections on Thursday should be informative.
Gentrified??? Metropolitan liberal elite???
You'll have to let me know where to find the artisan bakers and organic cyclist cafes in Sunderland city centre...
"Metropolitan liberal elite" is relative, of course.
It's a state of mind, not geography.
Same with being a man of the people (gender and/or actualy connection with 'the people' not required)
Some of us are metropolitan liberal elite and a man of the people.
No doubt. Who?
Me.
Well I was recently upgraded to upper class by some friends (they were doing a quiz and it asked them how many upper class people they knew, for this you didn't need a title for to be upper class.)
Regrettably, standards continuing to slide to hell in a heck of a hurry . . .
Assuming the polls are true - and labour is losing significant votes in Hartlepool, doing pretty badly in the West Midlands, but ~level pegging overall, WHERE are they piling up votes?
I don’t get it.
Has anyone dug into the subsamples?
Possibly places where they already weigh the labour vote like london
And yet Khan is down. My money's on the Home Counties.
I agree. Starmer’s picking up votes in blue-remainia, isn’t he?
Labour could put in a surprisingly good performance in Chesham & Amersham.
I actually doubt your last point and wrt the Home counties not sure they would win much in a GE here - potential to make the Tory vote even more efficient.
Well indeed. Analogous to Tyne and Wear. Massive swings to the Tories all this century has left 12 out of 12 Labour seats much more efficiently won.
I do think my home town seat of Sunderland central could go blue for the first time since 1963!
I'm not convinced. Sunderland Central is a university seat after all and is being gentrified, albeit slowly (believe it or not). It also contains the more middle class metropolitan liberal elite parts of Sunderland.
Plus Sunderland/Tyne and Wear generally hasn't exactly been given a ton of Tory red meat to chew on like Teesside.
The council elections on Thursday should be informative.
I have lived in Pennywell, was like a series of scenes off Shameless.
I think most of it's gone now. I think Gallowgate may be wrong - the university influence is not as strong - there are a kot of thrifty homeowners there these days. As he says the locals might give a clue but wallpaper gate has come at the wrong time.
The University's influence is no where near as strong as in cities with multiple universities, but it is still a factor. Look at Teesside. Middlesborough stands alone as the last Labour holdout. One possible factor is the university.
This is true - Brighton and Bristol also have two, and are notably tolerant and open-minded places.
Assuming the polls are true - and labour is losing significant votes in Hartlepool, doing pretty badly in the West Midlands, but ~level pegging overall, WHERE are they piling up votes?
I don’t get it.
Has anyone dug into the subsamples?
Possibly places where they already weigh the labour vote like london
And yet Khan is down. My money's on the Home Counties.
I agree. Starmer’s picking up votes in blue-remainia, isn’t he?
Labour could put in a surprisingly good performance in Chesham & Amersham.
I actually doubt your last point and wrt the Home counties not sure they would win much in a GE here - potential to make the Tory vote even more efficient.
Well indeed. Analogous to Tyne and Wear. Massive swings to the Tories all this century has left 12 out of 12 Labour seats much more efficiently won.
I do think my home town seat of Sunderland central could go blue for the first time since 1963!
I'm not convinced. Sunderland Central is a university seat after all and is being gentrified, albeit slowly (believe it or not). It also contains the more middle class metropolitan liberal elite parts of Sunderland.
Plus Sunderland/Tyne and Wear generally hasn't exactly been given a ton of Tory red meat to chew on like Teesside.
The council elections on Thursday should be informative.
I have lived in Pennywell, was like a series of scenes off Shameless.
I think most of it's gone now. I think Gallowgate may be wrong - the university influence is not as strong - there are a kot of thrifty homeowners there these days. As he says the locals might give a clue but wallpaper gate has come at the wrong time.
The University's influence is no where near as strong as in cities with multiple universities, but it is still a factor. Look at Teesside. Middlesborough stands alone as the last Labour holdout. One possible factor is the university.
This is true - Brighton and Bristol also have two, and are notably tolerant and open-minded places.
...the latter are particularly tolerant of their local Police force....
Cases now dropping like a stone WoW, deaths almost down to zero. Yet here we are sitting in the cold drinking beer while the nice warm pubs are still closed off.
The scientists have made doom porn modelling an art form. I'm still waiting for those idiots who said we'd have a third wave worse than the second wave to retract their idiot model. Their agenda is laughably transparent and it's time for them to be forced into printing retractions.
Even the Modeller of Doom admits this is nearly over.
Dan Bloom @danbloom1 NEW: Prof Neil Ferguson says we now "don’t see any prospect of the NHS being overwhelmed, with the one caveat around variants", in a third wave this summer/autumn
I thought Neil Ferguson had avoided the doom porn and for most of this year was saying once vaccination is complete we're pretty much done in the UK and would just have to live with flu-level outbreaks.
Got a lot of respect for Neil Ferguson. His ‘500,000 deaths’ quote - which received much derision on here - turned out to be bang on: as a reasonable worst case scenario for UK Covid with no mitigation
He then got death threats for a year. Now he’s willing to dial down the doom
The Boffin' Boffin? – is this the very same Professor Ferguson who filled the airwaves preaching to his subjects only to then sneak out to get his end away with a blonde lady?
The British Jimmy Swaggart? Is he also a very talented pianist (gospel & honky-tonk)?
Assuming the polls are true - and labour is losing significant votes in Hartlepool, doing pretty badly in the West Midlands, but ~level pegging overall, WHERE are they piling up votes?
I don’t get it.
Has anyone dug into the subsamples?
Possibly places where they already weigh the labour vote like london
And yet Khan is down. My money's on the Home Counties.
I agree. Starmer’s picking up votes in blue-remainia, isn’t he?
Labour could put in a surprisingly good performance in Chesham & Amersham.
I actually doubt your last point and wrt the Home counties not sure they would win much in a GE here - potential to make the Tory vote even more efficient.
Well indeed. Analogous to Tyne and Wear. Massive swings to the Tories all this century has left 12 out of 12 Labour seats much more efficiently won.
I do think my home town seat of Sunderland central could go blue for the first time since 1963!
I'm not convinced. Sunderland Central is a university seat after all and is being gentrified, albeit slowly (believe it or not). It also contains the more middle class metropolitan liberal elite parts of Sunderland.
Plus Sunderland/Tyne and Wear generally hasn't exactly been given a ton of Tory red meat to chew on like Teesside.
The council elections on Thursday should be informative.
I have lived in Pennywell, was like a series of scenes off Shameless.
I think most of it's gone now. I think Gallowgate may be wrong - the university influence is not as strong - there are a kot of thrifty homeowners there these days. As he says the locals might give a clue but wallpaper gate has come at the wrong time.
The University's influence is no where near as strong as in cities with multiple universities, but it is still a factor. Look at Teesside. Middlesborough stands alone as the last Labour holdout. One possible factor is the university.
This is true - Brighton and Bristol also have two, and are notably tolerant and open-minded places.
...the latter are particularly tolerant of their local Police force....
..the new Bill being a slightly different and national issue, ofcourse..
Here we go again. Government announces great news that prisoners (sorry, residents) can be allowed outside the home without having to quarantine on return to the home.
Firstly, that implies that residents have up to now been able to leave the home albeit with quarantine on return. This is not true. (Plus, as an aside, residents are basically in quarantine in a care home anyway aren't they?)
Secondly, the wonderful new guidance is now out in writing and it states that only the two current nominated visitors are to be allowed to take the resident away for a trip out thus meaning that for many families, such as ours, who have nominated two infirm and elderly family members as nominated visitors (as the younger relatives (like me) are best suited to see relative outdoors) are in effect excluded because the nominated visitors we chose are too frail to push my mum in her wheelchair. So no trips out for mum then.
I've asked the care home to switch one of the nominated visitors to me instead and they have refused because "the government says this is not allowed".
"It is important that the named visitors remain the same people as far as possible. This is important in reducing the risk of transmission, by limiting the number of different people coming into the care home from the community. However, we recognise that there will be situations in which a named visitor cannot continue to visit (for example because of illness). We advise care homes and families to take a pragmatic approach, with the aim of minimising change wherever possible."
Yes, I quoted that very passage to the care home manager this afternoon and got nowhere. Because both of the named visitors are not ill they cannot be replaced, she said.
That really is wilful incompetence. If there is any escalation procedure beyond the manager someone will hopefully see sense.
I've asked that she reconsiders and get back to me in a few days. Beyond this I cannot see what else I can do. Basically the care homes (and thousands of others across the country no doubt) are charging £1000 + + per week to keep old folk hostage. They burble on about their business indemnity assurance. The quality of life of the resident is not paramount it seems.
The problem, to be fair, is that the government makes out that it is doing this that and the other to improve things but this is disingenuous - they have kicked the issue to the individual care homes, who are left interpreting guidelines as they see fit. And they have the power to do this with no-one to appeal to. They take the most cautious interpretation of the government guidelines that it is possible to take - every time.
I wrote a letter to Helen Whateley months ago about the way care home residents are being treated and didn't even get the courtesy of a reply.
Assuming the polls are true - and labour is losing significant votes in Hartlepool, doing pretty badly in the West Midlands, but ~level pegging overall, WHERE are they piling up votes?
I don’t get it.
Has anyone dug into the subsamples?
Possibly places where they already weigh the labour vote like london
And yet Khan is down. My money's on the Home Counties.
I agree. Starmer’s picking up votes in blue-remainia, isn’t he?
Labour could put in a surprisingly good performance in Chesham & Amersham.
I actually doubt your last point and wrt the Home counties not sure they would win much in a GE here - potential to make the Tory vote even more efficient.
Well indeed. Analogous to Tyne and Wear. Massive swings to the Tories all this century has left 12 out of 12 Labour seats much more efficiently won.
I do think my home town seat of Sunderland central could go blue for the first time since 1963!
I'm not convinced. Sunderland Central is a university seat after all and is being gentrified, albeit slowly (believe it or not). It also contains the more middle class metropolitan liberal elite parts of Sunderland.
Plus Sunderland/Tyne and Wear generally hasn't exactly been given a ton of Tory red meat to chew on like Teesside.
The council elections on Thursday should be informative.
I have lived in Pennywell, was like a series of scenes off Shameless.
I think most of it's gone now. I think Gallowgate may be wrong - the university influence is not as strong - there are a kot of thrifty homeowners there these days. As he says the locals might give a clue but wallpaper gate has come at the wrong time.
The University's influence is no where near as strong as in cities with multiple universities, but it is still a factor. Look at Teesside. Middlesborough stands alone as the last Labour holdout. One possible factor is the university.
This is true - Brighton and Bristol also have two, and are notably tolerant and open-minded places.
...the latter are particularly tolerant of their local Police force....
And people who have the temerity to need an emergency ambulance while they are wanting to save the world. Those people stamping on a statue that was pulled down showed the kind of beast these people will unleash if they ever get the upper hand. They'll be little tolerance for those that wont fall in line.
Assuming the polls are true - and labour is losing significant votes in Hartlepool, doing pretty badly in the West Midlands, but ~level pegging overall, WHERE are they piling up votes?
I don’t get it.
Has anyone dug into the subsamples?
Possibly places where they already weigh the labour vote like london
And yet Khan is down. My money's on the Home Counties.
I agree. Starmer’s picking up votes in blue-remainia, isn’t he?
Labour could put in a surprisingly good performance in Chesham & Amersham.
I actually doubt your last point and wrt the Home counties not sure they would win much in a GE here - potential to make the Tory vote even more efficient.
Well indeed. Analogous to Tyne and Wear. Massive swings to the Tories all this century has left 12 out of 12 Labour seats much more efficiently won.
I do think my home town seat of Sunderland central could go blue for the first time since 1963!
I'm not convinced. Sunderland Central is a university seat after all and is being gentrified, albeit slowly (believe it or not). It also contains the more middle class metropolitan liberal elite parts of Sunderland.
Plus Sunderland/Tyne and Wear generally hasn't exactly been given a ton of Tory red meat to chew on like Teesside.
The council elections on Thursday should be informative.
Gentrified??? Metropolitan liberal elite???
You'll have to let me know where to find the artisan bakers and organic cyclist cafes in Sunderland city centre...
"Metropolitan liberal elite" is relative, of course.
There is of course not many artisan bakers or organic cyclist cafes in Newcastle City Centre either.
Vegan strip clubs?
If vegans REALLY want the world to get with the program, they should consider this option?
Damn sight more appealing than your average vegan cafe!
I think you just want to go to a den of debauchery, the vegan part of your proposal is simply a figleaf.
Are figleafs vegan? I'm guessing they are!
There's an actual vegan strip club in Portland, Oregon (unless Trumpsky' agents provocateurs trashed it) though have never been able to figure out, are the customers vegan, or the strippers, or both?
Sounds like a job for the PB dynamic duo of Leon & TSE.
If that Scottish poll is right it's a landslide for nationalist parties and we're getting a second IndyRef. The only question is how and when.
God save us.
They have to win the thing first..
As long as BJ is there, what worries me is that it shouldn't be too difficult.
Part of me agrees. But the underlying supplementary polling recently has given me some reason to think it would be a no vote.
There was a fascinating focus group today for the times, with people giving SNP their vote because they “liked Sturgeon”, but recoiled in horror at the thought that it may bring about another referendum
(Which also begs the question - what on earth have they missed for the last 14 years)
If that Scottish poll is right it's a landslide for nationalist parties and we're getting a second IndyRef. The only question is how and when.
God save us.
They have to win the thing first..
As long as BJ is there, what worries me is that it shouldn't be too difficult.
Part of me agrees. But the underlying supplementary polling recently has given me some reason to think it would be a no vote.
There was a fascinating focus group today for the times, with people giving SNP their vote because they “liked Sturgeon”, but recoiled in horror at the thought that it may bring about another referendum
(Which also begs the question - what on earth have they missed for the last 14 years)
This from Sky today explains that that a quick indyref2 is not so popular
Labour set for huge election defeat in Hartlepool, internal polling suggests
Exclusive: Party’s own figures show only 40% of previous supporters pledge to back its candidate this time
Fewer than half of recent Labour voters in Hartlepool say they will back the party in Thursday’s crucial byelection, according to internal data based on the canvassing of more than 10,000 people, leading activists to fear an historic Conservative victory.
Labour insiders said that polling from its ground campaign in the town showed that only about 40% of the party’s previous supporters had pledged to vote for its candidate, Paul Williams.
Such an outcome would deal a significant blow to Keir Starmer’s leadership and a decisive Conservative win in a north-east England seat that has elected a Labour MP at every parliamentary election since 1964.
Labour sources said they were in “huge trouble” in Hartlepool and also in danger of losing control of Sunderland and Durham councils for the first time in half a century. Voters across England, Scotland and Wales will go to the polls on what has been dubbed “Super Thursday”, in the biggest set of local elections since 1973.
If that Scottish poll is right it's a landslide for nationalist parties and we're getting a second IndyRef. The only question is how and when.
God save us.
I'd hate to see Scotland go.
Make them see the reality of not being subsidised by the rest of the UK FIRST
There was an article in the Speccy about this - a poll was done on the extent to which Scots agree with various statement. Long and short of it, Scots don't believe they are being subsidised by the rest of us.
I have a vague nostalgia for the Britain of my youth, when you could comfortably think of the Highlands of Scotland as just the top end of your country, rather than an entirely foreign country ruled by a hostile power who would be rather happy to see the border closed, who are trying to rewrite history with England as the villains and who give every impression of being keen to ally with anyone as long as it would be against the English. Is Scotland as a whole still welcoming to English people, I wonder? Oh well. Those days are gone, and I don't think they can be brought back.
It's going to be a bloody nuisance redesigning the flag though.
If that Scottish poll is right it's a landslide for nationalist parties and we're getting a second IndyRef. The only question is how and when.
God save us.
They have to win the thing first..
As long as BJ is there, what worries me is that it shouldn't be too difficult.
Part of me agrees. But the underlying supplementary polling recently has given me some reason to think it would be a no vote.
There was a fascinating focus group today for the times, with people giving SNP their vote because they “liked Sturgeon”, but recoiled in horror at the thought that it may bring about another referendum
(Which also begs the question - what on earth have they missed for the last 14 years)
This from Sky today explains that that a quick indyref2 is not so popular
I think Sturgeon will be under pressure to go for 2022, whilst the economy recovers. There’s too large a part of her party that wants the Indy vote regardless of context..
Labour set for huge election defeat in Hartlepool, internal polling suggests
Exclusive: Party’s own figures show only 40% of previous supporters pledge to back its candidate this time
Fewer than half of recent Labour voters in Hartlepool say they will back the party in Thursday’s crucial byelection, according to internal data based on the canvassing of more than 10,000 people, leading activists to fear an historic Conservative victory.
Labour insiders said that polling from its ground campaign in the town showed that only about 40% of the party’s previous supporters had pledged to vote for its candidate, Paul Williams.
Such an outcome would deal a significant blow to Keir Starmer’s leadership and a decisive Conservative win in a north-east England seat that has elected a Labour MP at every parliamentary election since 1964.
Labour sources said they were in “huge trouble” in Hartlepool and also in danger of losing control of Sunderland and Durham councils for the first time in half a century. Voters across England, Scotland and Wales will go to the polls on what has been dubbed “Super Thursday”, in the biggest set of local elections since 1973.
Labour set for huge election defeat in Hartlepool, internal polling suggests
Exclusive: Party’s own figures show only 40% of previous supporters pledge to back its candidate this time
Fewer than half of recent Labour voters in Hartlepool say they will back the party in Thursday’s crucial byelection, according to internal data based on the canvassing of more than 10,000 people, leading activists to fear an historic Conservative victory.
Labour insiders said that polling from its ground campaign in the town showed that only about 40% of the party’s previous supporters had pledged to vote for its candidate, Paul Williams.
Such an outcome would deal a significant blow to Keir Starmer’s leadership and a decisive Conservative win in a north-east England seat that has elected a Labour MP at every parliamentary election since 1964.
Labour sources said they were in “huge trouble” in Hartlepool and also in danger of losing control of Sunderland and Durham councils for the first time in half a century. Voters across England, Scotland and Wales will go to the polls on what has been dubbed “Super Thursday”, in the biggest set of local elections since 1973.
Labour set for huge election defeat in Hartlepool, internal polling suggests
Exclusive: Party’s own figures show only 40% of previous supporters pledge to back its candidate this time
Fewer than half of recent Labour voters in Hartlepool say they will back the party in Thursday’s crucial byelection, according to internal data based on the canvassing of more than 10,000 people, leading activists to fear an historic Conservative victory.
Labour insiders said that polling from its ground campaign in the town showed that only about 40% of the party’s previous supporters had pledged to vote for its candidate, Paul Williams.
Such an outcome would deal a significant blow to Keir Starmer’s leadership and a decisive Conservative win in a north-east England seat that has elected a Labour MP at every parliamentary election since 1964.
Labour sources said they were in “huge trouble” in Hartlepool and also in danger of losing control of Sunderland and Durham councils for the first time in half a century. Voters across England, Scotland and Wales will go to the polls on what has been dubbed “Super Thursday”, in the biggest set of local elections since 1973.
The nightmare is coming true for Labour, as warned by the Guardian, et al. The SNP are already the Scottish party, the Tories are becoming the party of England
So the scores on the doors for SKS are likely to be:
Overall council seats, a bit of a wash, not much change either way. Hartlepool a loss. London a clear win, probably not on the first count. Scotland small progress Wales small retreat, not nearly as bad as it looked a month ago West Midlands Mayor, a bit of a thumping. Teeside Mayor probably a loss. Greater Manchester Mayor, a clear win.
It's not a great scorecard, is it? More of a C- than a C+ I would say.
If there's no Scotland progress I would be saying more a solid D. IDS was dumped for a much much better performance than this.
I had thought that Sarwar just might deliver second place behind the SNP. That is not what the polling is showing now though.
Labour set for huge election defeat in Hartlepool, internal polling suggests
Exclusive: Party’s own figures show only 40% of previous supporters pledge to back its candidate this time
Fewer than half of recent Labour voters in Hartlepool say they will back the party in Thursday’s crucial byelection, according to internal data based on the canvassing of more than 10,000 people, leading activists to fear an historic Conservative victory.
Labour insiders said that polling from its ground campaign in the town showed that only about 40% of the party’s previous supporters had pledged to vote for its candidate, Paul Williams.
Such an outcome would deal a significant blow to Keir Starmer’s leadership and a decisive Conservative win in a north-east England seat that has elected a Labour MP at every parliamentary election since 1964.
Labour sources said they were in “huge trouble” in Hartlepool and also in danger of losing control of Sunderland and Durham councils for the first time in half a century. Voters across England, Scotland and Wales will go to the polls on what has been dubbed “Super Thursday”, in the biggest set of local elections since 1973.
I can’t reconcile this with the recent national polling (unless they are piling the votes up elsewhere)
IIRC there has been speculation they are piling up votes in Southern and coastal seats, some formerly quite strongly Tory.
This is interesting, because parts of the Tories old "Blue Wall" may also be teetering and looking weaker, at the same time as Labour has its troubles.
If that Scottish poll is right it's a landslide for nationalist parties and we're getting a second IndyRef. The only question is how and when.
God save us.
I'd hate to see Scotland go.
Make them see the reality of not being subsidised by the rest of the UK FIRST
There was an article in the Speccy about this - a poll was done on the extent to which Scots agree with various statement. Long and short of it, Scots don't believe they are being subsidised by the rest of us.
I have a vague nostalgia for the Britain of my youth, when you could comfortably think of the Highlands of Scotland as just the top end of your country, rather than an entirely foreign country ruled by a hostile power who would be rather happy to see the border closed, who are trying to rewrite history with England as the villains and who give every impression of being keen to ally with anyone as long as it would be against the English. Is Scotland as a whole still welcoming to English people, I wonder? Oh well. Those days are gone, and I don't think they can be brought back.
It's going to be a bloody nuisance redesigning the flag though.
What Scotch poll are we talking about? Most recent I can find doesn't look that good for indy
Labour set for huge election defeat in Hartlepool, internal polling suggests
Exclusive: Party’s own figures show only 40% of previous supporters pledge to back its candidate this time
Fewer than half of recent Labour voters in Hartlepool say they will back the party in Thursday’s crucial byelection, according to internal data based on the canvassing of more than 10,000 people, leading activists to fear an historic Conservative victory.
Labour insiders said that polling from its ground campaign in the town showed that only about 40% of the party’s previous supporters had pledged to vote for its candidate, Paul Williams.
Such an outcome would deal a significant blow to Keir Starmer’s leadership and a decisive Conservative win in a north-east England seat that has elected a Labour MP at every parliamentary election since 1964.
Labour sources said they were in “huge trouble” in Hartlepool and also in danger of losing control of Sunderland and Durham councils for the first time in half a century. Voters across England, Scotland and Wales will go to the polls on what has been dubbed “Super Thursday”, in the biggest set of local elections since 1973.
Anything approaching the polling should be the end of Starmer. You really can't lose your safest seats to an 'unpopular' and 'sleazy' government in such a substantial manner. There's probably only a handful of Labour MPs that could feel remotely 'safe' if the polling is borne out.
(I don't really think it'll be quite so bad for Labour, and I think Starmer will somehow battle on.)
If that Scottish poll is right it's a landslide for nationalist parties and we're getting a second IndyRef. The only question is how and when.
God save us.
They have to win the thing first..
As long as BJ is there, what worries me is that it shouldn't be too difficult.
Part of me agrees. But the underlying supplementary polling recently has given me some reason to think it would be a no vote.
There was a fascinating focus group today for the times, with people giving SNP their vote because they “liked Sturgeon”, but recoiled in horror at the thought that it may bring about another referendum
(Which also begs the question - what on earth have they missed for the last 14 years)
This from Sky today explains that that a quick indyref2 is not so popular
I think Sturgeon will be under pressure to go for 2022, whilst the economy recovers. There’s too large a part of her party that wants the Indy vote regardless of context..
She is a 'canny' politician and with this poll at 50/50 and yesterday's with no leading 53/47 I expect her to use covid recovery as a reason to delay, hoping the figures move towards independence which they are not at present
Furthermore, there are lots of hurdles for her to go through and not just Boris, but Westminster itself
And I have to say I do believe covid and Brexit has made it very winnable for the union whenever it happens, if it does
If that Scottish poll is right it's a landslide for nationalist parties and we're getting a second IndyRef. The only question is how and when.
God save us.
I'd hate to see Scotland go.
Make them see the reality of not being subsidised by the rest of the UK FIRST
There was an article in the Speccy about this - a poll was done on the extent to which Scots agree with various statement. Long and short of it, Scots don't believe they are being subsidised by the rest of us.
I have a vague nostalgia for the Britain of my youth, when you could comfortably think of the Highlands of Scotland as just the top end of your country, rather than an entirely foreign country ruled by a hostile power who would be rather happy to see the border closed, who are trying to rewrite history with England as the villains and who give every impression of being keen to ally with anyone as long as it would be against the English. Is Scotland as a whole still welcoming to English people, I wonder? Oh well. Those days are gone, and I don't think they can be brought back.
It's going to be a bloody nuisance redesigning the flag though.
The Speccie points out that Starmer might have to fight another nightmare seat after Thursday. Tracy Brabin will apparently step down as Batley and Spen MP if she triumphs in the West Yorkshire Mayoralty, according to the Speccie.
The 154m Census number is based on those that definitively reported having voted, you forget the 36m that didn't respond.
As the Census bureau notes.
The estimates presented in this table package may differ from those based on administrative data or exit polls due to factors such as survey nonresponse, vote misreporting and methodological issues related to question wording and survey administration.
So much for the immense betting implications then.
With respect I did not make any claims about the veracity of the document, merely that the apparent discrepancy is being used by figures on the right to keep the 'stolen' election narrative going.
I know you and almost everybody on here would not like to face up to the fact that more than 70% of republican voters still don't think Biden got enough legit votes to win. But its true, they don't. And stuff like this is used to keep that notion going.
Stuff like people not understanding the figure is an estimate?
If that Scottish poll is right it's a landslide for nationalist parties and we're getting a second IndyRef. The only question is how and when.
God save us.
I'd hate to see Scotland go.
Make them see the reality of not being subsidised by the rest of the UK FIRST
There was an article in the Speccy about this - a poll was done on the extent to which Scots agree with various statement. Long and short of it, Scots don't believe they are being subsidised by the rest of us.
I have a vague nostalgia for the Britain of my youth, when you could comfortably think of the Highlands of Scotland as just the top end of your country, rather than an entirely foreign country ruled by a hostile power who would be rather happy to see the border closed, who are trying to rewrite history with England as the villains and who give every impression of being keen to ally with anyone as long as it would be against the English. Is Scotland as a whole still welcoming to English people, I wonder? Oh well. Those days are gone, and I don't think they can be brought back.
It's going to be a bloody nuisance redesigning the flag though.
Flag will be kept. Blue to represent the sea
Yes. Keep. Best flag in the world. Brilliant branding
Labour set for huge election defeat in Hartlepool, internal polling suggests
Exclusive: Party’s own figures show only 40% of previous supporters pledge to back its candidate this time
Fewer than half of recent Labour voters in Hartlepool say they will back the party in Thursday’s crucial byelection, according to internal data based on the canvassing of more than 10,000 people, leading activists to fear an historic Conservative victory.
Labour insiders said that polling from its ground campaign in the town showed that only about 40% of the party’s previous supporters had pledged to vote for its candidate, Paul Williams.
Such an outcome would deal a significant blow to Keir Starmer’s leadership and a decisive Conservative win in a north-east England seat that has elected a Labour MP at every parliamentary election since 1964.
Labour sources said they were in “huge trouble” in Hartlepool and also in danger of losing control of Sunderland and Durham councils for the first time in half a century. Voters across England, Scotland and Wales will go to the polls on what has been dubbed “Super Thursday”, in the biggest set of local elections since 1973.
Anything approaching the polling should be the end of Starmer. You really can't lose your safest seats to an 'unpopular' and 'sleazy' government in such a substantial manner. There's probably only a handful of Labour MPs that could feel remotely 'safe' if the polling is borne out.
(I don't really think it'll be quite so bad for Labour, and I think Starmer will somehow battle on.)
It's a while since any NE seat was amongst Labour's safest.
If that Scottish poll is right it's a landslide for nationalist parties and we're getting a second IndyRef. The only question is how and when.
God save us.
I'd hate to see Scotland go.
Make them see the reality of not being subsidised by the rest of the UK FIRST
There was an article in the Speccy about this - a poll was done on the extent to which Scots agree with various statement. Long and short of it, Scots don't believe they are being subsidised by the rest of us.
I have a vague nostalgia for the Britain of my youth, when you could comfortably think of the Highlands of Scotland as just the top end of your country, rather than an entirely foreign country ruled by a hostile power who would be rather happy to see the border closed, who are trying to rewrite history with England as the villains and who give every impression of being keen to ally with anyone as long as it would be against the English. Is Scotland as a whole still welcoming to English people, I wonder? Oh well. Those days are gone, and I don't think they can be brought back.
It's going to be a bloody nuisance redesigning the flag though.
I was in Scotland a couple of years ago and found it remarkably welcoming - even in little out-of-the-way pubs where you'd ordinarily expect to be silently glowered at by the locals as you shuffle to the bar.
If that Scottish poll is right it's a landslide for nationalist parties and we're getting a second IndyRef. The only question is how and when.
God save us.
I'd hate to see Scotland go.
Make them see the reality of not being subsidised by the rest of the UK FIRST
There was an article in the Speccy about this - a poll was done on the extent to which Scots agree with various statement. Long and short of it, Scots don't believe they are being subsidised by the rest of us.
I have a vague nostalgia for the Britain of my youth, when you could comfortably think of the Highlands of Scotland as just the top end of your country, rather than an entirely foreign country ruled by a hostile power who would be rather happy to see the border closed, who are trying to rewrite history with England as the villains and who give every impression of being keen to ally with anyone as long as it would be against the English. Is Scotland as a whole still welcoming to English people, I wonder? Oh well. Those days are gone, and I don't think they can be brought back.
It's going to be a bloody nuisance redesigning the flag though.
What Scotch poll are we talking about? Most recent I can find doesn't look that good for indy
Cases now dropping like a stone WoW, deaths almost down to zero. Yet here we are sitting in the cold drinking beer while the nice warm pubs are still closed off.
The scientists have made doom porn modelling an art form. I'm still waiting for those idiots who said we'd have a third wave worse than the second wave to retract their idiot model. Their agenda is laughably transparent and it's time for them to be forced into printing retractions.
Even the Modeller of Doom admits this is nearly over.
Dan Bloom @danbloom1 NEW: Prof Neil Ferguson says we now "don’t see any prospect of the NHS being overwhelmed, with the one caveat around variants", in a third wave this summer/autumn
I thought Neil Ferguson had avoided the doom porn and for most of this year was saying once vaccination is complete we're pretty much done in the UK and would just have to live with flu-level outbreaks.
Got a lot of respect for Neil Ferguson. His ‘500,000 deaths’ quote - which received much derision on here - turned out to be bang on: as a reasonable worst case scenario for UK Covid with no mitigation
He then got death threats for a year. Now he’s willing to dial down the doom
For sure. We should save our derision for the moron who went touting around a prediction of two million dead Brits.
If that Scottish poll is right it's a landslide for nationalist parties and we're getting a second IndyRef. The only question is how and when.
God save us.
They have to win the thing first..
As long as BJ is there, what worries me is that it shouldn't be too difficult.
Part of me agrees. But the underlying supplementary polling recently has given me some reason to think it would be a no vote.
There was a fascinating focus group today for the times, with people giving SNP their vote because they “liked Sturgeon”, but recoiled in horror at the thought that it may bring about another referendum
(Which also begs the question - what on earth have they missed for the last 14 years)
This from Sky today explains that that a quick indyref2 is not so popular
I think Sturgeon will be under pressure to go for 2022, whilst the economy recovers. There’s too large a part of her party that wants the Indy vote regardless of context..
She is a 'canny' politician and with this poll at 50/50 and yesterday's with no leading 53/47 I expect her to use covid recovery as a reason to delay, hoping the figures move towards independence which they are not at present
Furthermore, there are lots of hurdles for her to go through and not just Boris, but Westminster itself
And I have to say I do believe covid and Brexit has made it very winnable for the union whenever it happens, if it does
Yes - I think so. We’re in a holding pattern for the foreseeable.
I also thought it was interesting - in the context of Scottish identify rising - is that English identity is on the rise (particularly in Hartlepool). Tony Blair is convinced devolution prevented breakup earlier, but I think it’s eroded a UK sense of identity and turbo charged others..
It may be Leon is right and that the tories are remoulding themselves into the party of England (which tbh is what I think Brexiters wanted all along)
Here we go again. Government announces great news that prisoners (sorry, residents) can be allowed outside the home without having to quarantine on return to the home.
Firstly, that implies that residents have up to now been able to leave the home albeit with quarantine on return. This is not true. (Plus, as an aside, residents are basically in quarantine in a care home anyway aren't they?)
Secondly, the wonderful new guidance is now out in writing and it states that only the two current nominated visitors are to be allowed to take the resident away for a trip out thus meaning that for many families, such as ours, who have nominated two infirm and elderly family members as nominated visitors (as the younger relatives (like me) are best suited to see relative outdoors) are in effect excluded because the nominated visitors we chose are too frail to push my mum in her wheelchair. So no trips out for mum then.
I've asked the care home to switch one of the nominated visitors to me instead and they have refused because "the government says this is not allowed".
"It is important that the named visitors remain the same people as far as possible. This is important in reducing the risk of transmission, by limiting the number of different people coming into the care home from the community. However, we recognise that there will be situations in which a named visitor cannot continue to visit (for example because of illness). We advise care homes and families to take a pragmatic approach, with the aim of minimising change wherever possible."
Yes, I quoted that very passage to the care home manager this afternoon and got nowhere. Because both of the named visitors are not ill they cannot be replaced, she said.
Just tell them one of them is no longer able to travel , feel it is far too much for them and stressing them out and making them ill. Get GP to write a letter. Bloody jobsworths.
If that Scottish poll is right it's a landslide for nationalist parties and we're getting a second IndyRef. The only question is how and when.
God save us.
They have to win the thing first..
As long as BJ is there, what worries me is that it shouldn't be too difficult.
Part of me agrees. But the underlying supplementary polling recently has given me some reason to think it would be a no vote.
There was a fascinating focus group today for the times, with people giving SNP their vote because they “liked Sturgeon”, but recoiled in horror at the thought that it may bring about another referendum
(Which also begs the question - what on earth have they missed for the last 14 years)
This from Sky today explains that that a quick indyref2 is not so popular
I think Sturgeon will be under pressure to go for 2022, whilst the economy recovers. There’s too large a part of her party that wants the Indy vote regardless of context..
She is a 'canny' politician and with this poll at 50/50 and yesterday's with no leading 53/47 I expect her to use covid recovery as a reason to delay, hoping the figures move towards independence which they are not at present
Furthermore, there are lots of hurdles for her to go through and not just Boris, but Westminster itself
And I have to say I do believe covid and Brexit has made it very winnable for the union whenever it happens, if it does
Boris will say No, but in the end there will be Sindyref2, as there was a 2nd Quebec vote. Latter half of this decade, nearer 2030, methinks (respecting the ‘generation’ argument but acknowledging Scottish democracy)
In the meantime Unionists need to get some proper arguments above and beyond Fear, and Boris needs to Establish a Constitutional Convention so Scots - and Brits - know who is voting for exactly what, why, and when
Given the tiny number of deaths now it must be quite possible that some if not all of these so-called Coronavirus deaths are naturally occurring deaths of people who by pure coincidence tested positive within last 28 days?
That wasn't true all pandemic, though its certainly been a factor which is why the real death toll is tens of thousands fewer than the 'official' one. But it must surely be a real factor now?
From the 6th of July to the 18th of August Scotland had 1 death on the 28 day measure.
So we are still a few weeks away from that level in the UK.
Labour set for huge election defeat in Hartlepool, internal polling suggests
Exclusive: Party’s own figures show only 40% of previous supporters pledge to back its candidate this time
Fewer than half of recent Labour voters in Hartlepool say they will back the party in Thursday’s crucial byelection, according to internal data based on the canvassing of more than 10,000 people, leading activists to fear an historic Conservative victory.
Labour insiders said that polling from its ground campaign in the town showed that only about 40% of the party’s previous supporters had pledged to vote for its candidate, Paul Williams.
Such an outcome would deal a significant blow to Keir Starmer’s leadership and a decisive Conservative win in a north-east England seat that has elected a Labour MP at every parliamentary election since 1964.
Labour sources said they were in “huge trouble” in Hartlepool and also in danger of losing control of Sunderland and Durham councils for the first time in half a century. Voters across England, Scotland and Wales will go to the polls on what has been dubbed “Super Thursday”, in the biggest set of local elections since 1973.
Anything approaching the polling should be the end of Starmer. You really can't lose your safest seats to an 'unpopular' and 'sleazy' government in such a substantial manner. There's probably only a handful of Labour MPs that could feel remotely 'safe' if the polling is borne out.
(I don't really think it'll be quite so bad for Labour, and I think Starmer will somehow battle on.)
It's a while since any NE seat was amongst Labour's safest.
Sure, but in the 90s this seat was 60% Labour.
Mandelson found himself a very safe seat.
To lose this by (what appears to be) a significant margin when in opposition will be a howler.
Assuming the polls are true - and labour is losing significant votes in Hartlepool, doing pretty badly in the West Midlands, but ~level pegging overall, WHERE are they piling up votes?
I don’t get it.
Has anyone dug into the subsamples?
Possibly places where they already weigh the labour vote like london
And yet Khan is down. My money's on the Home Counties.
I agree. Starmer’s picking up votes in blue-remainia, isn’t he?
Labour could put in a surprisingly good performance in Chesham & Amersham.
I actually doubt your last point and wrt the Home counties not sure they would win much in a GE here - potential to make the Tory vote even more efficient.
Well indeed. Analogous to Tyne and Wear. Massive swings to the Tories all this century has left 12 out of 12 Labour seats much more efficiently won.
I do think my home town seat of Sunderland central could go blue for the first time since 1963!
I'm not convinced. Sunderland Central is a university seat after all and is being gentrified, albeit slowly (believe it or not). It also contains the more middle class metropolitan liberal elite parts of Sunderland.
Plus Sunderland/Tyne and Wear generally hasn't exactly been given a ton of Tory red meat to chew on like Teesside.
The council elections on Thursday should be informative.
Gentrified??? Metropolitan liberal elite???
You'll have to let me know where to find the artisan bakers and organic cyclist cafes in Sunderland city centre...
"Metropolitan liberal elite" is relative, of course.
It's a state of mind, not geography.
Same with being a man of the people (gender and/or actualy connection with 'the people' not required)
Some of us are metropolitan liberal elite and a man of the people.
No doubt. Who?
Me.
Well I was recently upgraded to upper class by some friends (they were doing a quiz and it asked them how many upper class people they knew, for this you didn't need a title for to be upper class.)
The test is whether you’d see a home of John Lewis decor and furnishings as a nightmare?
Comments
You'll have to let me know where to find the artisan bakers and organic cyclist cafes in Sunderland city centre...
CONSTITUENCY
SNP 52% (+3 from 16-20 April)
Con 20% (-1)
Lab 19% (-2)
LD 6% (nc)
Green 2% (+1)
REGIONAL LIST
SNP 38% (-1)
Con 22% (nc)
Lab 16% (-1)
Green 13% (+3)
LD 5% (nc)
Alba 3% (+1)
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/05/04/scottish-voting-intention-snp-52-con-20-lab-19-2-4?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=website_article&utm_campaign=final_call_Scotland_VI_May_2021 https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1389615995074011139/photo/1
Here we go again. Government announces great news that prisoners (sorry, residents) can be allowed outside the home without having to quarantine on return to the home.
Firstly, that implies that residents have up to now been able to leave the home albeit with quarantine on return. This is not true. (Plus, as an aside, residents are basically in quarantine in a care home anyway aren't they?)
Secondly, the wonderful new guidance is now out in writing and it states that only the two current nominated visitors are to be allowed to take the resident away for a trip out thus meaning that for many families, such as ours, who have nominated two infirm and elderly family members as nominated visitors (as the younger relatives (like me) are best suited to see relative outdoors) are in effect excluded because the nominated visitors we chose are too frail to push my mum in her wheelchair. So no trips out for mum then.
I've asked the care home to switch one of the nominated visitors to me instead and they have refused because "the government says this is not allowed".
Words fail me.
From a professional standards point of view if I'd released a model where I'd knowingly input incorrect data points and then consequently been proven wrong then I'd have to make a shit ton of apologies to VP level management for being such a massive fuckwit in the first place.
That's where you and I disagree, you want no accountability for these scientists who knowingly produce garbage data to fit some political agenda. I think we should have some. If that means fewer scientists producing politically driven garbage models then all the better.
Cameron’s idea was to slash the police budget, then blame the pcc’s for the inevitable consequences. Now Boris is fixing the problem Dave created, they’re surplus to requirements.
Unnecessary and expensive elections for a role that shouldn’t be partisan, IMO.
There is of course not many artisan bakers or organic cyclist cafes in Newcastle City Centre either.
Another 4 pointer
Any idea what that equates to in terms of seats?
Westminster Voting Intention:
CON: 40% (-2)
LAB 36% (+1)
LDM: 8% (=)
GRN: 4% (+1)
SNP: 4% (-1)
Via
@SavantaComRes
, 30 Apr - 2 May.
Changes w/ 23-25 Apr.
Same with being a man of the people (gender and/or actualy connection with 'the people' not required)
If vegans REALLY want the world to get with the program, they should consider this option?
Damn sight more appealing than your average vegan cafe!
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/visiting-care-homes-during-coronavirus/update-on-policies-for-visiting-arrangements-in-care-homes
"It is important that the named visitors remain the same people as far as possible. This is important in reducing the risk of transmission, by limiting the number of different people coming into the care home from the community. However, we recognise that there will be situations in which a named visitor cannot continue to visit (for example because of illness). We advise care homes and families to take a pragmatic approach, with the aim of minimising change wherever possible."
Writing in his latest column for The Courier, Mr Spence claimed the former first minister complained to him the SNP had been “captured by around a hundred loony tune transgender warriors”.
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/politics/scottish-politics/2191135/exclusive-alex-salmond-embroiled-in-transgender-remark-row/?utm_source=twitter
Savanta ComRes - lead down from 7 to 4
Opinium - lead down from 11 to 5
Redfield - lead down from 10 to 2
Survation - lead down from 6 to 1
https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2021-04/topline_write_up_reuters_ipsos_trump_coattails_poll_-_april_02_2021.pdf
That year, anyway.
SNP - 68 (seats)
Tory - 26
Lab - 17
Green - 13
LD - 5
SNP majority of 6, Indy majority of 32 (i.e. 81 seats for the SNP + Greens).
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/swingometer/scottish-parliament?election=2016s&cSNP=52&cLAB=19&cCON=20&cLD=6&rSNP=38&rCON=22&rLAB=16&rGRN=13&rLD=5&rUKIP=1&rAFU=1&rALBA=3&rRefUK=1#Scotland
Well I was recently upgraded to upper class by some friends (they were doing a quiz and it asked them how many upper class people they knew, for this you didn't need a title for to be upper class.)
What would Queen Mary say? Or Benny Hill?
The problem, to be fair, is that the government makes out that it is doing this that and the other to improve things but this is disingenuous - they have kicked the issue to the individual care homes, who are left interpreting guidelines as they see fit. And they have the power to do this with no-one to appeal to. They take the most cautious interpretation of the government guidelines that it is possible to take - every time.
I wrote a letter to Helen Whateley months ago about the way care home residents are being treated and didn't even get the courtesy of a reply.
God save us.
There's an actual vegan strip club in Portland, Oregon (unless Trumpsky' agents provocateurs trashed it) though have never been able to figure out, are the customers vegan, or the strippers, or both?
Sounds like a job for the PB dynamic duo of Leon & TSE.
Staunch Unionist Boris Johnson will save the Union, he'll be front and centre of indyref2.
Professionally speaking being in charge of the firm's Scottish Independence planning is a headache I could do without.
Although it will make me feel less guilty about being on PB during work hours.
There was a fascinating focus group today for the times, with people giving SNP their vote because they “liked Sturgeon”, but recoiled in horror at the thought that it may bring about another referendum
(Which also begs the question - what on earth have they missed for the last 14 years)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmQ9108NZT4
Starts by discussing Hartlepool. Not watched the rest yet. Half an hour long.
http://news.sky.com/story/elections-2021-scottish-voters-less-enthusiastic-about-independence-referendum-in-next-5-years-sky-news-poll-12296485
Labour set for huge election defeat in Hartlepool, internal polling suggests
Exclusive: Party’s own figures show only 40% of previous supporters pledge to back its candidate this time
Fewer than half of recent Labour voters in Hartlepool say they will back the party in Thursday’s crucial byelection, according to internal data based on the canvassing of more than 10,000 people, leading activists to fear an historic Conservative victory.
Labour insiders said that polling from its ground campaign in the town showed that only about 40% of the party’s previous supporters had pledged to vote for its candidate, Paul Williams.
Such an outcome would deal a significant blow to Keir Starmer’s leadership and a decisive Conservative win in a north-east England seat that has elected a Labour MP at every parliamentary election since 1964.
Labour sources said they were in “huge trouble” in Hartlepool and also in danger of losing control of Sunderland and Durham councils for the first time in half a century. Voters across England, Scotland and Wales will go to the polls on what has been dubbed “Super Thursday”, in the biggest set of local elections since 1973.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/may/04/internal-polling-suggests-labour-heading-for-defeat-in-hartlepool-byelection?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
I have a vague nostalgia for the Britain of my youth, when you could comfortably think of the Highlands of Scotland as just the top end of your country, rather than an entirely foreign country ruled by a hostile power who would be rather happy to see the border closed, who are trying to rewrite history with England as the villains and who give every impression of being keen to ally with anyone as long as it would be against the English. Is Scotland as a whole still welcoming to English people, I wonder? Oh well. Those days are gone, and I don't think they can be brought back.
It's going to be a bloody nuisance redesigning the flag though.
I think Sturgeon will be under pressure to go for 2022, whilst the economy recovers. There’s too large a part of her party that wants the Indy vote regardless of context..
This is interesting, because parts of the Tories old "Blue Wall" may also be teetering and looking weaker, at the same time as Labour has its troubles.
https://news.sky.com/story/elections-2021-scottish-voters-less-enthusiastic-about-independence-referendum-in-next-5-years-sky-news-poll-12296485
(I don't really think it'll be quite so bad for Labour, and I think Starmer will somehow battle on.)
Furthermore, there are lots of hurdles for her to go through and not just Boris, but Westminster itself
And I have to say I do believe covid and Brexit has made it very winnable for the union whenever it happens, if it does
I also thought it was interesting - in the context of Scottish identify rising - is that English identity is on the rise (particularly in Hartlepool). Tony Blair is convinced devolution prevented breakup earlier, but I think it’s eroded a UK sense of identity and turbo charged others..
It may be Leon is right and that the tories are remoulding themselves into the party of England (which tbh is what I think Brexiters wanted all along)
In the meantime Unionists need to get some proper arguments above and beyond Fear, and Boris needs to Establish a Constitutional Convention so Scots - and Brits - know who is voting for exactly what, why, and when
Projecting YouGov 2 - 4 May into seats (changes vs 16 - 20 Apr / vs 2016):
SNP ~ 70 (+2 / +7)
Conservative ~ 25 (-2 / -6)
Labour ~ 18 (-1 / -6)
Green ~ 12 (+1 / +6)
Lib Dem ~ 4 (nc / -1)
Caveats: http://ballotbox.scot/projections
So we are still a few weeks away from that level in the UK.
Mandelson found himself a very safe seat.
To lose this by (what appears to be) a significant margin when in opposition will be a howler.