Oh dear.. is everything's going to be about Boris being an unashamed liar.. its getting very boring and I suspect the electorate are not interested. Boris must be the teflon dead cat that those who dislike him can thrash away at to little or no effect.
Oh dear, another obsequious post from one of the Government's apologists and predictably "liked" by the usual PB Johnsonphile automatons! Ever wondered about being independent of thought? Ever imagined that it might be possible that the government you voted for might have got things wrong? No, of course not. My party right or wrong. The Führerprinzip is a philosophy alive and well among Johnson's faithful and unthinking followers.
I doubt there's anyone on here that thinks mistakes haven't been made and the government got everything right.
Given the was like a once in a century calamity, the biggest disaster since WWII the question really not whether mistakes were made but it's whether the mistakes that have been made were understandable or unreasonable. Would anyone else have done any better?
What would a Corbyn minority government with Lib-Dem, SNP and Green support have done? Personally I doubt Labour would have done much different to the Conservative government.
I will say that with something like this Theresa May might have done quite well. I think her instinct would probably have been to lockdown harder and earlier... But then again who knows how she'd have handled it...
I think you missed my point, because I think there are a couple of posters on here who are desperate to defend the government, and would continue to do so even if Boris Johnson was filmed eating babies. I have no idea whether Labour would have handled it better, but under Corbyn I suggest it would have been equally bad. The fundamental is that Johnson is good at winning elections, but is a very very poor executive. He displays no expertise in this area and demonstrates disorganisation and incompetence.
But, but, BBQ, babies, Tory, I am not sure that I am getting your point.
Me neither if you don't agree with Mr Foremain's view of how we should think or more to the point post on here, you are automatically a Boris apologist.
The thing that amuses me most is that it doesn't matter a monkeys what the left scream on here, the reality is that their party is deeply split with no proseect of power for at least one election and probably two.
When you have feck all to say about your party because the leadership is so awful, the policy seems to be attack people and insult them ... Its very timesque really.
Vaccine penetration in the 40s is topping out at a disappointing level. Using ONS data, barely any movement week on week for the 45-49s at 82.6% vs 80.7% the week prior. Meanwhile for 40-44s, 82.3% vs 77.1%. During which time 1.1m first doses were given to the under 40s.
If these silly bastards lead to a winter lockdown I will not be held accountable for my actions.
Why would healthy people not really affected by covid put their bodies on the line when vaccination does not lead to freedom?
I am not sure you have got the hang of this polling mullarkey.
If responses are taken a day or two before an event, it is unlikely that the responses will be in relation to the event...unless the respondent is psychic...or from the future.
Love it when people dont' realise they are being trolled.
I would have to be even dafter than I look if I made the assumption that any post by @Floater wasn't all about trolling his/her opponents. I suspect however, the post in question, was made having earnestly analysed the polling data, but not the dates, and thus he/she reached their spurious conclusion.
Crappy covid numbers again. Tiny, tiny numbers in absolute terms (statistical zeros) but won’t help stave off the bed wetting. Need to unlock lots of vaccines in the fortysomethings who are slow on the uptake.
Ah the outlier corrected - that would be the one that had Labour just the one behind. I guess it's been published to send the anti-boristas into another paroxysmal raging against the machine. BFb.
Jesus. People aren't saying he is electorally unsuccessful, they are saying he is an unprincipled shit. When you hear the tedious expression "worst prime minister since Lord North" do you think the reference is to Lord N's performance in the polls? Are you any different from, or more interesting than, a football supporter whose team is temporarily outperforming other teams?
Oh I get it - you're playing the 'morality' card to excuse your lack of answer. Try just considering for a nano second maybe you're wrong and the public have it right. I know it's hard but just ease up on the entitlement syndrome. Footie fans are a laugh a minute - the brain dead are all on twitter calling people fanbois.
I am not sure what question I am meant to lack an answer to, but approaching important questions from the point of view of morality is what adults are meant to do; it isn't "playing a card."
It absolutely is.
When politicians start to talk about "morality" run for the hills.
Yes. I am not a politician.
Neither was Jerry Falwell Sr.
I don't trust anyone who bangs on about "morality" in the context of politics. Keep your morals to yourself.
And I don't trust or like anyone who produces this embarrassingly adolescent realpolitik schtick. Integrity is crucial to public life and if you genuinely don't agree, I am very comfortable with the assumption that you are a shit in private too. I wouldn't enter into a bet with you.
Vaccine penetration in the 40s is topping out at a disappointing level. Using ONS data, barely any movement week on week for the 45-49s at 82.6% vs 80.7% the week prior. Meanwhile for 40-44s, 82.3% vs 77.1%. During which time 1.1m first doses were given to the under 40s.
If these silly bastards lead to a winter lockdown I will not be held accountable for my actions.
Why would healthy people not really affected by covid put their bodies on the line when vaccination does not lead to freedom?
Getting a vaccine is about getting your body out of the line.
You're mammothly more at risk from Covid than a vaccine, if you're fucking stupid enough to think that getting a "vaccine is putting your body on the line" then there's no such thing as "not really affected by covid" is there?
Opinium just started field data for a poll with the results out on Saturday evening which should give us a better idea if there has been any change post Cummings, most of the Survation data was before his testimony was completed https://twitter.com/chriscurtis94/status/1397932510370226176?s=20
Vaccine penetration in the 40s is topping out at a disappointing level. Using ONS data, barely any movement week on week for the 45-49s at 82.6% vs 80.7% the week prior. Meanwhile for 40-44s, 82.3% vs 77.1%. During which time 1.1m first doses were given to the under 40s.
If these silly bastards lead to a winter lockdown I will not be held accountable for my actions.
80-90 is less antivaxxers, more the lazy bunch
I know the ONS pop numbers are flawed but in London it’s in the 70 percents for that age range.
That's pretty decent for London considering how many Londoners are now elsewhere in the country, or in a foreign country.
Vaccine penetration in the 40s is topping out at a disappointing level. Using ONS data, barely any movement week on week for the 45-49s at 82.6% vs 80.7% the week prior. Meanwhile for 40-44s, 82.3% vs 77.1%. During which time 1.1m first doses were given to the under 40s.
If these silly bastards lead to a winter lockdown I will not be held accountable for my actions.
Why would healthy people not really affected by covid put their bodies on the line when vaccination does not lead to freedom?
Getting a vaccine is about getting your body out of the line.
You're mammothly more at risk from Covid than a vaccine, if you're fucking stupid enough to think that getting a "vaccine is putting your body on the line" then there's no such thing as "not really affected by covid" is there?
I'll keep my liberties and take my chances with covid, thanks buddy.
I am not sure you have got the hang of this polling mullarkey.
If responses are taken a day or two before an event, it is unlikely that the responses will be in relation to the event...unless the respondent is psychic...or from the future.
I only poll people from the future, as their responses are more likely to be useful from a betting perspective.
But the future that is certain. It is the past that keeps changing. Surely that is what we need to monitor.
I am not sure you have got the hang of this polling mullarkey.
If responses are taken a day or two before an event, it is unlikely that the responses will be in relation to the event...unless the respondent is psychic...or from the future.
I only poll people from the future, as their responses are more likely to be useful from a betting perspective.
I was very impressed by your assertion prior to 10pm on December 12, 2019 that the Conservative majority would be circa 80. At the time I was very, very impressed at your analysis and subsequent prediction. Now it seems, I've tumbled your game!
Vaccine penetration in the 40s is topping out at a disappointing level. Using ONS data, barely any movement week on week for the 45-49s at 82.6% vs 80.7% the week prior. Meanwhile for 40-44s, 82.3% vs 77.1%. During which time 1.1m first doses were given to the under 40s.
If these silly bastards lead to a winter lockdown I will not be held accountable for my actions.
Why would healthy people not really affected by covid put their bodies on the line when vaccination does not lead to freedom?
Getting a vaccine is about getting your body out of the line.
You're mammothly more at risk from Covid than a vaccine, if you're fucking stupid enough to think that getting a "vaccine is putting your body on the line" then there's no such thing as "not really affected by covid" is there?
I'll keep my liberties and take my chances with covid, thanks buddy.
You spend every waking moment moaning about your liberties being taken away.
Ah the outlier corrected - that would be the one that had Labour just the one behind. I guess it's been published to send the anti-boristas into another paroxysmal raging against the machine. BFb.
Jesus. People aren't saying he is electorally unsuccessful, they are saying he is an unprincipled shit. When you hear the tedious expression "worst prime minister since Lord North" do you think the reference is to Lord N's performance in the polls? Are you any different from, or more interesting than, a football supporter whose team is temporarily outperforming other teams?
Oh I get it - you're playing the 'morality' card to excuse your lack of answer. Try just considering for a nano second maybe you're wrong and the public have it right. I know it's hard but just ease up on the entitlement syndrome. Footie fans are a laugh a minute - the brain dead are all on twitter calling people fanbois.
I am not sure what question I am meant to lack an answer to, but approaching important questions from the point of view of morality is what adults are meant to do; it isn't "playing a card."
It absolutely is.
When politicians start to talk about "morality" run for the hills.
Yes. I am not a politician.
Neither was Jerry Falwell Sr.
I don't trust anyone who bangs on about "morality" in the context of politics. Keep your morals to yourself.
And I don't trust or like anyone who produces this embarrassingly adolescent realpolitik schtick. Integrity is crucial to public life and if you genuinely don't agree, I am very comfortable with the assumption that you are a shit in private too. I wouldn't enter into a bet with you.
Realpolitik is not adolescent it is how the world has operated for hundreds of years. If not forever.
I agree that integrity is important, but if you want to talk about integrity then speak about integrity, not "morality".
People's morals vary, which is why morality should have nothing to do with politics. Do you think a man laying with another man is moral or immoral? Do you think a teenager aborting an unwanted pregnancy is moral or immoral? Do you think any of this should be decided by Parliament or by people? Morality is not a codeword for whatever you want it to mean and it is not consistent from person to person, people have different morals from one another and quite rightly too.
Vaccine penetration in the 40s is topping out at a disappointing level. Using ONS data, barely any movement week on week for the 45-49s at 82.6% vs 80.7% the week prior. Meanwhile for 40-44s, 82.3% vs 77.1%. During which time 1.1m first doses were given to the under 40s.
If these silly bastards lead to a winter lockdown I will not be held accountable for my actions.
Why would healthy people not really affected by covid put their bodies on the line when vaccination does not lead to freedom?
Because it is not putting your body on the line and even healthy people can suffer and occasionally die from Covid.
Moreover they can pass it on to others who are more at risk.
Moreover since you keep moaning about lockdowns, it is those refusing to have the vaccine who are risking a necessary return to lockdown if the numbers rise again.
Crappy covid numbers again. Tiny, tiny numbers in absolute terms (statistical zeros) but won’t help stave off the bed wetting. Need to unlock lots of vaccines in the fortysomethings who are slow on the uptake.
I know 40-something who have been poleaxed for two days by the jab.
These stories go around and maybe 40-something would prefer to take their chances. Such as they are.
Vaccine penetration in the 40s is topping out at a disappointing level. Using ONS data, barely any movement week on week for the 45-49s at 82.6% vs 80.7% the week prior. Meanwhile for 40-44s, 82.3% vs 77.1%. During which time 1.1m first doses were given to the under 40s.
If these silly bastards lead to a winter lockdown I will not be held accountable for my actions.
Why would healthy people not really affected by covid put their bodies on the line when vaccination does not lead to freedom?
Getting a vaccine is about getting your body out of the line.
You're mammothly more at risk from Covid than a vaccine, if you're fucking stupid enough to think that getting a "vaccine is putting your body on the line" then there's no such thing as "not really affected by covid" is there?
I'll keep my liberties and take my chances with covid, thanks buddy.
Let's hope you don't get it and give it to your family.
I am not sure you have got the hang of this polling mullarkey.
If responses are taken a day or two before an event, it is unlikely that the responses will be in relation to the event...unless the respondent is psychic...or from the future.
I only poll people from the future, as their responses are more likely to be useful from a betting perspective.
Or poll aliens. They have all that advanced technology we don't understand that doesn't have to obey our laws of physics.
Vaccine penetration in the 40s is topping out at a disappointing level. Using ONS data, barely any movement week on week for the 45-49s at 82.6% vs 80.7% the week prior. Meanwhile for 40-44s, 82.3% vs 77.1%. During which time 1.1m first doses were given to the under 40s.
If these silly bastards lead to a winter lockdown I will not be held accountable for my actions.
Why would healthy people not really affected by covid put their bodies on the line when vaccination does not lead to freedom?
Getting a vaccine is about getting your body out of the line.
You're mammothly more at risk from Covid than a vaccine, if you're fucking stupid enough to think that getting a "vaccine is putting your body on the line" then there's no such thing as "not really affected by covid" is there?
I'll keep my liberties and take my chances with covid, thanks buddy.
I'll keep my liberties and take my vaccines, thanks buddy.
I am not sure you have got the hang of this polling mullarkey.
If responses are taken a day or two before an event, it is unlikely that the responses will be in relation to the event...unless the respondent is psychic...or from the future.
I only poll people from the future, as their responses are more likely to be useful from a betting perspective.
But the future that is certain. It is the past that keeps changing. Surely that is what we need to monitor.
Polling on past events is probably not a bad guide. The disappearance of people who owned up to voting Lib Dem in 2010 was the strongest indicator of their performance in 2015.
Vaccine penetration in the 40s is topping out at a disappointing level. Using ONS data, barely any movement week on week for the 45-49s at 82.6% vs 80.7% the week prior. Meanwhile for 40-44s, 82.3% vs 77.1%. During which time 1.1m first doses were given to the under 40s.
If these silly bastards lead to a winter lockdown I will not be held accountable for my actions.
Why would healthy people not really affected by covid put their bodies on the line when vaccination does not lead to freedom?
Getting a vaccine is about getting your body out of the line.
You're mammothly more at risk from Covid than a vaccine, if you're fucking stupid enough to think that getting a "vaccine is putting your body on the line" then there's no such thing as "not really affected by covid" is there?
I'll keep my liberties and take my chances with covid, thanks buddy.
Let's hope you don't get it and give it to your family.
Let's hope another eight months in lockdown doesn't devastate the mental health of your family.
Crappy covid numbers again. Tiny, tiny numbers in absolute terms (statistical zeros) but won’t help stave off the bed wetting. Need to unlock lots of vaccines in the fortysomethings who are slow on the uptake.
I know 40-something who have been poleaxed for two days by the jab.
These stories go around and maybe 40-something would prefer to take their chances. Such as they are.
This fortysomething was. It’s called taking one for the team. You prefer to freeroll, thus making further lockdowns more likely.
I am not sure you have got the hang of this polling mullarkey.
If responses are taken a day or two before an event, it is unlikely that the responses will be in relation to the event...unless the respondent is psychic...or from the future.
I only poll people from the future, as their responses are more likely to be useful from a betting perspective.
I was very impressed by your assertion prior to 10pm on December 12, 2019 that the Conservative majority would be circa 80. At the time I was very, very impressed at your analysis and subsequent prediction. Now it seems, I've tumbled your game!
Hey: in the last three elections I've gotten the LDs almost exactly right (sub 10, 12-14, 12-14), and I got the Conservative majority spot on this time around.
I did, however, get 2017 wrong. I thought the Conservatives would do better than they did (and Labour worse).
Vaccine penetration in the 40s is topping out at a disappointing level. Using ONS data, barely any movement week on week for the 45-49s at 82.6% vs 80.7% the week prior. Meanwhile for 40-44s, 82.3% vs 77.1%. During which time 1.1m first doses were given to the under 40s.
If these silly bastards lead to a winter lockdown I will not be held accountable for my actions.
Why would healthy people not really affected by covid put their bodies on the line when vaccination does not lead to freedom?
Not getting vaxxed is 'putting your body on the line' unless you're planning on living like a hermit crab your whole life
I am not sure you have got the hang of this polling mullarkey.
If responses are taken a day or two before an event, it is unlikely that the responses will be in relation to the event...unless the respondent is psychic...or from the future.
I only poll people from the future, as their responses are more likely to be useful from a betting perspective.
Or poll aliens. They have all that advanced technology we don't understand that doesn't have to obey our laws of physics.
And this informs them on important matters like who paid for the wallpaper in No 10 how, exactly? I understand that this is apparently key.
Ah the outlier corrected - that would be the one that had Labour just the one behind. I guess it's been published to send the anti-boristas into another paroxysmal raging against the machine. BFb.
Jesus. People aren't saying he is electorally unsuccessful, they are saying he is an unprincipled shit. When you hear the tedious expression "worst prime minister since Lord North" do you think the reference is to Lord N's performance in the polls? Are you any different from, or more interesting than, a football supporter whose team is temporarily outperforming other teams?
Oh I get it - you're playing the 'morality' card to excuse your lack of answer. Try just considering for a nano second maybe you're wrong and the public have it right. I know it's hard but just ease up on the entitlement syndrome. Footie fans are a laugh a minute - the brain dead are all on twitter calling people fanbois.
I am not sure what question I am meant to lack an answer to, but approaching important questions from the point of view of morality is what adults are meant to do; it isn't "playing a card."
It absolutely is.
When politicians start to talk about "morality" run for the hills.
Yes. I am not a politician.
Neither was Jerry Falwell Sr.
I don't trust anyone who bangs on about "morality" in the context of politics. Keep your morals to yourself.
And I don't trust or like anyone who produces this embarrassingly adolescent realpolitik schtick. Integrity is crucial to public life and if you genuinely don't agree, I am very comfortable with the assumption that you are a shit in private too. I wouldn't enter into a bet with you.
Realpolitik is not adolescent it is how the world has operated for hundreds of years. If not forever.
I agree that integrity is important, but if you want to talk about integrity then speak about integrity, not "morality".
People's morals vary, which is why morality should have nothing to do with politics. Do you think a man laying with another man is moral or immoral? Do you think a teenager aborting an unwanted pregnancy is moral or immoral? Do you think any of this should be decided by Parliament or by people? Morality is not a codeword for whatever you want it to mean and it is not consistent from person to person, people have different morals from one another and quite rightly too.
You don't know what "morality" means. It subsumes integrity and has virtually nothing to do with "a man laying (!) with another man," except in the minds of the half educated.
Crappy covid numbers again. Tiny, tiny numbers in absolute terms (statistical zeros) but won’t help stave off the bed wetting. Need to unlock lots of vaccines in the fortysomethings who are slow on the uptake.
I know 40-something who have been poleaxed for two days by the jab.
These stories go around and maybe 40-something would prefer to take their chances. Such as they are.
Are you aware of how irrational and superstitious this position is? It makes no sense to be afraid of exposing your immune system to a vaccine while being relaxed about exposing it to covid. If you're willing to 'take your chances', then you should at least have some awareness of your odds.
I am not sure you have got the hang of this polling mullarkey.
If responses are taken a day or two before an event, it is unlikely that the responses will be in relation to the event...unless the respondent is psychic...or from the future.
Love it when people dont' realise they are being trolled.
I would have to be even dafter than I look if I made the assumption that any post by @Floater wasn't all about trolling his/her opponents. I suspect however, the post in question, was made having earnestly analysed the polling data, but not the dates, and thus he/she reached their spurious conclusion.
I think the previous poll that had CON/LAB 39/38 was even more spurious than Floaters spurious conclusion TBH
The thing that did tickle me the most about yesterday's appearance was this WhatsApp message I received from people who used to work for the Tory party.
Dominic Cummings: Boris Johnson is totally unsuitable to be Prime Minister.
Greg Clark: What's your evidence for that?
Dominic Cummings: Well he employed for me for starters.
In fairness as Foxy suggested yesterday Boris does now have the Trump problem (though nowhere near as severely) of needing to trash his former employee who he praised to all and sundry (and used up lots of political capital to defend, including losing a chancellor over him).
A blow out always looked inevitable between them. If Cummings is to be believed it's amazing it wasnt sooner. So why the heck did Boris not fire him earlier when lots demanded it? Hed cause less damage now if so.
This was inevitable the day Boris Johnson appointed him.
I know several people who have worked in close proximity and pretty much they all think he's the biggest [moderated] in the world, even those who agree with him.
As the old saying goes there's not an apple cart Cummings has seen that he doesn't want to overturn.
He might spot a problem but he tells the people that we've done their entire lives is wrong and worthless and now he wants them to what he tells them, even the face of all the evidence that he is wrong.
Remember in 2010 Michael Gove was made Education Secretary and had a lot of good will in the sector for the changes he wanted to enact but Cummings upset them all and Sir Lynton Crosby persuaded David Cameron to demote Gove in 2014 because Gove's ratings were so poor that it would cost Dave a majority in 2015.
For somebody with a galaxy sized brain Cummings is very poor at people skills and de-escalating things.
Remember you and I have paid out many times for Cummings being a [moderated].
What kind of shit calls armed officers on a defenceless woman? One with issues is my guess.
""police officer stationed at the door of No 10 Downing Street escorted a woman from the front door to exit gates as she did not have a security pass at the time".
About a million miles from "calls armed officers on a defenceless woman"
You complain about Cummings and then post outright lies and you are even too dumb to realise people will check them.
Richard, I know people who saw the incident, there's a reason why the government paid her an out of court settlement.
FYI - The police officers outside Number 10 are armed, they aren't lawn jockeys.
She was paid an out of court settlement because she was unfairly dismissed not because she was escorted to the gate.
Oh and one of my cousins IS one of the protection officers at Downing Street (and other locations)
Even after the settlement she says she was escorted by armed officers, now if that didn't happen the government and their legal team would have insisted in the settlement she shouldn't repeated the allegations, that they didn't speaks volumes.
Of course they were armed. What is a lie is your claim that Cummings "calls armed officers on a defenceless woman"
So I thought I would settle this and just phoned my cousin. Not specifically about this of course as he wasn't involved but about the general policy. Guess what. Every single person without a security pass who enters or leaves the building is escorted in and out. No one is allowed to just wander around without an escort for blindingly obvious reasons.
It is exactly the same as if you are sacked from a company and are escorted off the premises by the security guards. It is a normal part of life and you trying to make it anything more than that just shows how much you are scraping the barrel.
How many security guards at companies in the UK are armed?
Still pursuing this stupid fatuous smear. Just shows how bereft of any real arguments you are.
Of course you are well known for dishonesty in your arguments so it is no surprise.
I see you haven't answered my question. I think we know who the bereft one is in this discussion, and it isn't me.
I note the chap you're defending admitted dishonesty yesterday.
Ah the outlier corrected - that would be the one that had Labour just the one behind. I guess it's been published to send the anti-boristas into another paroxysmal raging against the machine. BFb.
Jesus. People aren't saying he is electorally unsuccessful, they are saying he is an unprincipled shit. When you hear the tedious expression "worst prime minister since Lord North" do you think the reference is to Lord N's performance in the polls? Are you any different from, or more interesting than, a football supporter whose team is temporarily outperforming other teams?
Oh I get it - you're playing the 'morality' card to excuse your lack of answer. Try just considering for a nano second maybe you're wrong and the public have it right. I know it's hard but just ease up on the entitlement syndrome. Footie fans are a laugh a minute - the brain dead are all on twitter calling people fanbois.
I am not sure what question I am meant to lack an answer to, but approaching important questions from the point of view of morality is what adults are meant to do; it isn't "playing a card."
It absolutely is.
When politicians start to talk about "morality" run for the hills.
Yes. I am not a politician.
Neither was Jerry Falwell Sr.
I don't trust anyone who bangs on about "morality" in the context of politics. Keep your morals to yourself.
And I don't trust or like anyone who produces this embarrassingly adolescent realpolitik schtick. Integrity is crucial to public life and if you genuinely don't agree, I am very comfortable with the assumption that you are a shit in private too. I wouldn't enter into a bet with you.
Realpolitik is not adolescent it is how the world has operated for hundreds of years. If not forever.
I agree that integrity is important, but if you want to talk about integrity then speak about integrity, not "morality".
People's morals vary, which is why morality should have nothing to do with politics. Do you think a man laying with another man is moral or immoral? Do you think a teenager aborting an unwanted pregnancy is moral or immoral? Do you think any of this should be decided by Parliament or by people? Morality is not a codeword for whatever you want it to mean and it is not consistent from person to person, people have different morals from one another and quite rightly too.
You don't know what "morality" means. It subsumes integrity and has virtually nothing to do with "a man laying (!) with another man," except in the minds of the half educated.
That's the problem though, you ask 10 different people what moral issues bother them you can get 10 different answers - and the half educated get a vote even if I disagree with them. Hence you get stupid things like the Moral Majority campaign etc
If you want to talk about integrity then say integrity but "morality" is a vague and uncertain phrase that can mean whatever the speaker wants it to mean, while wrapped up in a cloak of self-righteousness.
Crappy covid numbers again. Tiny, tiny numbers in absolute terms (statistical zeros) but won’t help stave off the bed wetting. Need to unlock lots of vaccines in the fortysomethings who are slow on the uptake.
I know 40-something who have been poleaxed for two days by the jab.
These stories go around and maybe 40-something would prefer to take their chances. Such as they are.
This fortysomething was. It’s called taking one fir the team. You prefer to freeroll, thus making further lockdowns more likely.
Utter garbage, utter bullshit.
Governments decree lockdowns you stupid booby, I have been for freedom all along.
Do you really think this would end with 100% of the population being vaccinated twice ? there is always another threat, another disease, another variant, another reason to keep you penned in.
The only way to get out of this is to stop playing the game. Stop playing by their rules. As long as you do, you weill never get out.
I am not sure you have got the hang of this polling mullarkey.
If responses are taken a day or two before an event, it is unlikely that the responses will be in relation to the event...unless the respondent is psychic...or from the future.
I only poll people from the future, as their responses are more likely to be useful from a betting perspective.
I was very impressed by your assertion prior to 10pm on December 12, 2019 that the Conservative majority would be circa 80. At the time I was very, very impressed at your analysis and subsequent prediction. Now it seems, I've tumbled your game!
Hey: in the last three elections I've gotten the LDs almost exactly right (sub 10, 12-14, 12-14), and I got the Conservative majority spot on this time around.
I did, however, get 2017 wrong. I thought the Conservatives would do better than they did (and Labour worse).
1992. That was a good one to call the Tory majority within 2.....
I am not sure you have got the hang of this polling mullarkey.
If responses are taken a day or two before an event, it is unlikely that the responses will be in relation to the event...unless the respondent is psychic...or from the future.
I only poll people from the future, as their responses are more likely to be useful from a betting perspective.
I was very impressed by your assertion prior to 10pm on December 12, 2019 that the Conservative majority would be circa 80. At the time I was very, very impressed at your analysis and subsequent prediction. Now it seems, I've tumbled your game!
Hey: in the last three elections I've gotten the LDs almost exactly right (sub 10, 12-14, 12-14), and I got the Conservative majority spot on this time around.
I did, however, get 2017 wrong. I thought the Conservatives would do better than they did (and Labour worse).
Opinium just started field data for a poll with the results out on Saturday evening which should give us a better idea if there has been any change post Cummings, most of the Survation data was before his testimony was completed https://twitter.com/chriscurtis94/status/1397932510370226176?s=20
I am not sure you have got the hang of this polling mullarkey.
If responses are taken a day or two before an event, it is unlikely that the responses will be in relation to the event...unless the respondent is psychic...or from the future.
I only poll people from the future, as their responses are more likely to be useful from a betting perspective.
But the future that is certain. It is the past that keeps changing. Surely that is what we need to monitor.
Polling on past events is probably not a bad guide. The disappearance of people who owned up to voting Lib Dem in 2010 was the strongest indicator of their performance in 2015.
My God: you might be onto something. The LibDem performance in 2015 was the consequence of Cameron "disappearing" LibDem voters.
Vaccine penetration in the 40s is topping out at a disappointing level. Using ONS data, barely any movement week on week for the 45-49s at 82.6% vs 80.7% the week prior. Meanwhile for 40-44s, 82.3% vs 77.1%. During which time 1.1m first doses were given to the under 40s.
If these silly bastards lead to a winter lockdown I will not be held accountable for my actions.
That's why vaccine passports might become necessary, as we might need to give a nudge, or even a shove, to some of the dafter chunks of the populace.
Bring back penal colonies for those who don’t get vaccinated and move them to places like Rockall, The Pitcairn Islands, and Middlesbrough and then nuke the Smoggies.
Crappy covid numbers again. Tiny, tiny numbers in absolute terms (statistical zeros) but won’t help stave off the bed wetting. Need to unlock lots of vaccines in the fortysomethings who are slow on the uptake.
I know 40-something who have been poleaxed for two days by the jab.
These stories go around and maybe 40-something would prefer to take their chances. Such as they are.
I know 30-somethings who have been poleaxed for two weeks by the virus.
I'd rather take my chances with the vaccine. But then I'm not a thick as pigshit antivaxxer.
Vaccine penetration in the 40s is topping out at a disappointing level. Using ONS data, barely any movement week on week for the 45-49s at 82.6% vs 80.7% the week prior. Meanwhile for 40-44s, 82.3% vs 77.1%. During which time 1.1m first doses were given to the under 40s.
If these silly bastards lead to a winter lockdown I will not be held accountable for my actions.
Why would healthy people not really affected by covid put their bodies on the line when vaccination does not lead to freedom?
Not getting vaxxed is 'putting your body on the line' unless you're planning on living like a hermit crab your whole life
In return for freedom I would take that risk every day of the week. But you take your walled-in safety if you want chum.
Get used to it. Because it is going to last a long, long time.
I am not sure you have got the hang of this polling mullarkey.
If responses are taken a day or two before an event, it is unlikely that the responses will be in relation to the event...unless the respondent is psychic...or from the future.
I only poll people from the future, as their responses are more likely to be useful from a betting perspective.
But the future that is certain. It is the past that keeps changing. Surely that is what we need to monitor.
Polling on past events is probably not a bad guide. The disappearance of people who owned up to voting Lib Dem in 2010 was the strongest indicator of their performance in 2015.
My God: you might be onto something. The LibDem performance in 2015 was the consequence of Cameron "disappearing" LibDem voters.
We need an immediate investigation.
Immediate investigation? Shall we start it next Spring?
I am not sure you have got the hang of this polling mullarkey.
If responses are taken a day or two before an event, it is unlikely that the responses will be in relation to the event...unless the respondent is psychic...or from the future.
I only poll people from the future, as their responses are more likely to be useful from a betting perspective.
But the future that is certain. It is the past that keeps changing. Surely that is what we need to monitor.
Polling on past events is probably not a bad guide. The disappearance of people who owned up to voting Lib Dem in 2010 was the strongest indicator of their performance in 2015.
My God: you might be onto something. The LibDem performance in 2015 was the consequence of Cameron "disappearing" LibDem voters.
We need an immediate investigation.
Ben Page said it was the biggest false recall he can, ahem, recall in all his years of polling.
I am not sure you have got the hang of this polling mullarkey.
If responses are taken a day or two before an event, it is unlikely that the responses will be in relation to the event...unless the respondent is psychic...or from the future.
I only poll people from the future, as their responses are more likely to be useful from a betting perspective.
I was very impressed by your assertion prior to 10pm on December 12, 2019 that the Conservative majority would be circa 80. At the time I was very, very impressed at your analysis and subsequent prediction. Now it seems, I've tumbled your game!
Hey: in the last three elections I've gotten the LDs almost exactly right (sub 10, 12-14, 12-14), and I got the Conservative majority spot on this time around.
I did, however, get 2017 wrong. I thought the Conservatives would do better than they did (and Labour worse).
1992. That was a good one to call the Tory majority within 2.....
All I remember about 1992 is the Bedfordshire North campaign
I am not sure you have got the hang of this polling mullarkey.
If responses are taken a day or two before an event, it is unlikely that the responses will be in relation to the event...unless the respondent is psychic...or from the future.
I only poll people from the future, as their responses are more likely to be useful from a betting perspective.
I was very impressed by your assertion prior to 10pm on December 12, 2019 that the Conservative majority would be circa 80. At the time I was very, very impressed at your analysis and subsequent prediction. Now it seems, I've tumbled your game!
Hey: in the last three elections I've gotten the LDs almost exactly right (sub 10, 12-14, 12-14), and I got the Conservative majority spot on this time around.
I did, however, get 2017 wrong. I thought the Conservatives would do better than they did (and Labour worse).
Let down by polling respondents from the future?
I think a lot of people from the future had just seen the Corbyn Glastonbury performance and were embarrassed of their 2017 vote. throwing the numbers off somewhat.
I am not sure you have got the hang of this polling mullarkey.
If responses are taken a day or two before an event, it is unlikely that the responses will be in relation to the event...unless the respondent is psychic...or from the future.
I only poll people from the future, as their responses are more likely to be useful from a betting perspective.
I was very impressed by your assertion prior to 10pm on December 12, 2019 that the Conservative majority would be circa 80. At the time I was very, very impressed at your analysis and subsequent prediction. Now it seems, I've tumbled your game!
Hey: in the last three elections I've gotten the LDs almost exactly right (sub 10, 12-14, 12-14), and I got the Conservative majority spot on this time around.
I did, however, get 2017 wrong. I thought the Conservatives would do better than they did (and Labour worse).
1992. That was a good one to call the Tory majority within 2.....
All I remember about 1992 is the Bedfordshire North campaign
I am not sure you have got the hang of this polling mullarkey.
If responses are taken a day or two before an event, it is unlikely that the responses will be in relation to the event...unless the respondent is psychic...or from the future.
I only poll people from the future, as their responses are more likely to be useful from a betting perspective.
I was very impressed by your assertion prior to 10pm on December 12, 2019 that the Conservative majority would be circa 80. At the time I was very, very impressed at your analysis and subsequent prediction. Now it seems, I've tumbled your game!
Hey: in the last three elections I've gotten the LDs almost exactly right (sub 10, 12-14, 12-14), and I got the Conservative majority spot on this time around.
I did, however, get 2017 wrong. I thought the Conservatives would do better than they did (and Labour worse).
1992. That was a good one to call the Tory majority within 2.....
All I remember about 1992 is the Bedfordshire North campaign
If only Labour and Green voters had tactically voted for the Lib Dem candidate, then LD Gain.
The Lib Dems should have upped their bar chart game in that election.
Crappy covid numbers again. Tiny, tiny numbers in absolute terms (statistical zeros) but won’t help stave off the bed wetting. Need to unlock lots of vaccines in the fortysomethings who are slow on the uptake.
I know 40-something who have been poleaxed for two days by the jab.
These stories go around and maybe 40-something would prefer to take their chances. Such as they are.
I know 30-somethings who have been poleaxed for two weeks by the virus.
I'd rather take my chances with the vaccine. But then I'm not a thick as pigshit antivaxxer.
Vaccine penetration in the 40s is topping out at a disappointing level. Using ONS data, barely any movement week on week for the 45-49s at 82.6% vs 80.7% the week prior. Meanwhile for 40-44s, 82.3% vs 77.1%. During which time 1.1m first doses were given to the under 40s.
If these silly bastards lead to a winter lockdown I will not be held accountable for my actions.
Why would healthy people not really affected by covid put their bodies on the line when vaccination does not lead to freedom?
Not getting vaxxed is 'putting your body on the line' unless you're planning on living like a hermit crab your whole life
In return for freedom I would take that risk every day of the week. But you take your walled-in safety if you want chum.
Get used to it. Because it is going to last a long, long time.
I am not sure you have got the hang of this polling mullarkey.
If responses are taken a day or two before an event, it is unlikely that the responses will be in relation to the event...unless the respondent is psychic...or from the future.
To be fair, the headline quotes were all over the internet, and on the overnight front pages, so those who answer opinion polls would probably have been influenced to some extent.
I suspect you are clutching at straws here, unless opinion poll respondents behave like I do with my tax returns and submit them on the evening of January 31st. Most I would hazard, do not.
I thought they were asked over the period 25-26 May. ie yesterday and the day before, when the Cummings bombshells were all over the media
Vaccine penetration in the 40s is topping out at a disappointing level. Using ONS data, barely any movement week on week for the 45-49s at 82.6% vs 80.7% the week prior. Meanwhile for 40-44s, 82.3% vs 77.1%. During which time 1.1m first doses were given to the under 40s.
If these silly bastards lead to a winter lockdown I will not be held accountable for my actions.
Why would healthy people not really affected by covid put their bodies on the line when vaccination does not lead to freedom?
Not getting vaxxed is 'putting your body on the line' unless you're planning on living like a hermit crab your whole life
In return for freedom I would take that risk every day of the week. But you take your walled-in safety if you want chum.
Get used to it. Because it is going to last a long, long time.
I think a lot of people from the future had just seen the Corbyn Glastonbury performance and were embarrassed of their 2017 vote. throwing the numbers off somewhat.
I think people from the future saw another Glastonbury performance and were so horrified they sabotaged the live stream last weekend
Crappy covid numbers again. Tiny, tiny numbers in absolute terms (statistical zeros) but won’t help stave off the bed wetting. Need to unlock lots of vaccines in the fortysomethings who are slow on the uptake.
I know 40-something who have been poleaxed for two days by the jab.
These stories go around and maybe 40-something would prefer to take their chances. Such as they are.
This fortysomething was. It’s called taking one fir the team. You prefer to freeroll, thus making further lockdowns more likely.
Utter garbage, utter bullshit.
Governments decree lockdowns you stupid booby, I have been for freedom all along.
Do you really think this would end with 100% of the population being vaccinated twice ? there is always another threat, another disease, another variant, another reason to keep you penned in.
The only way to get out of this is to stop playing the game. Stop playing by their rules. As long as you do, you weill never get out.
(ignoring the fact you undermine any argument you make by refusing the vax… I’ll engage with your argument…)
Can you explain to me HOW I stage such a revolt? There is no way that I can see that I can attend my cousin’s wedding (she has postponed twice already) if the government wets the bed and delays 21 June.
There is NO WAY I can stage the rebellion you are calling for. None.
Crappy covid numbers again. Tiny, tiny numbers in absolute terms (statistical zeros) but won’t help stave off the bed wetting. Need to unlock lots of vaccines in the fortysomethings who are slow on the uptake.
I know 40-something who have been poleaxed for two days by the jab.
These stories go around and maybe 40-something would prefer to take their chances. Such as they are.
This fortysomething was. It’s called taking one fir the team. You prefer to freeroll, thus making further lockdowns more likely.
Utter garbage, utter bullshit.
Governments decree lockdowns you stupid booby, I have been for freedom all along.
Do you really think this would end with 100% of the population being vaccinated twice ? there is always another threat, another disease, another variant, another reason to keep you penned in.
The only way to get out of this is to stop playing the game. Stop playing by their rules. As long as you do, you weill never get out.
There’s only two ways through as far as I see it. Option 1) you reach herd immunity and the pandemic ends. Option 2) you keep some combination of internal and border restrictions more or less indefinitely.
Option 2) sucks.
Within option 1), you can either reach herd immunity by acquired infection or by vaccination. Given the vaccine is now here, it’s much quicker (and safer) to reach herd immunity using the vaccine rather than state sponsored spin the bottle tournaments.
Your position is a puzzle to me and I say that as someone who would rather we locked down far less in 2020 and early 2021 than we have.
Oh dear.. is everything's going to be about Boris being an unashamed liar.. its getting very boring and I suspect the electorate are not interested. Boris must be the teflon dead cat that those who dislike him can thrash away at to little or no effect.
Oh dear, another obsequious post from one of the Government's apologists and predictably "liked" by the usual PB Johnsonphile automatons! Ever wondered about being independent of thought? Ever imagined that it might be possible that the government you voted for might have got things wrong? No, of course not. My party right or wrong. The Führerprinzip is a philosophy alive and well among Johnson's faithful and unthinking followers.
He is, however, right that the electorate isn’t, right now at least, remotely interested. I am just back from dog training class and all of the others spent the entire break slagging off Cummings; there wasn’t the slightest interest in whether any of the allegations had any truth in them, at all.
Surge testing when there's a localised outbreak will give a slightly distorted impression so I don't think there's any reason to panic.
It may be local but patients admitted up 20% in the last 7 days is not good.
In England we’ve had 28 days in a row of fewer than 100 hospitalisations which IS good.
Sure, these increases are from a very low base and the percentages exaggerate as a result. But it is disappointing.
Bolton well past its mini-peak for positive tests now and declining steadily. Hospitalisations tend to lag positives by a week or so so we are probably close to the peak for hospitalisations at Royal Bolton now.
Now, there is not one 'wave', there are hundreds of localised mini-waves; we are likely to see dozens of mini-Boltons; though there's reason to hope they won't be anything like of the same scale. They won't all be at the same time though. I'm optimistic that hospitalisations will remain just over 100 per day for a while yet as vaccinations race reopening.
I am not sure you have got the hang of this polling mullarkey.
If responses are taken a day or two before an event, it is unlikely that the responses will be in relation to the event...unless the respondent is psychic...or from the future.
To be fair, the headline quotes were all over the internet, and on the overnight front pages, so those who answer opinion polls would probably have been influenced to some extent.
I suspect you are clutching at straws here, unless opinion poll respondents behave like I do with my tax returns and submit them on the evening of January 31st. Most I would hazard, do not.
I thought they were asked over the period 25-26 May. ie yesterday and the day before, when the Cummings bombshells were all over the media
Most of the survey took place before Cumming's testimony and 50% before any of it had been given, wait until Saturday for Opinium which started polling today to see if there has been any impact
I think a lot of people from the future had just seen the Corbyn Glastonbury performance and were embarrassed of their 2017 vote. throwing the numbers off somewhat.
I think people from the future saw another Glastonbury performance and were so horrified they sabotaged the live stream last weekend
Oh dear.. is everything's going to be about Boris being an unashamed liar.. its getting very boring and I suspect the electorate are not interested. Boris must be the teflon dead cat that those who dislike him can thrash away at to little or no effect.
Oh dear, another obsequious post from one of the Government's apologists and predictably "liked" by the usual PB Johnsonphile automatons! Ever wondered about being independent of thought? Ever imagined that it might be possible that the government you voted for might have got things wrong? No, of course not. My party right or wrong. The Führerprinzip is a philosophy alive and well among Johnson's faithful and unthinking followers.
He is, however, right that the electorate isn’t, right now at least, remotely interested. I am just back from dog training class and all of the others spent the entire break slagging off Cummings; there wasn’t the slightest interest in whether any of the allegations had any truth in them, at all.
Crappy covid numbers again. Tiny, tiny numbers in absolute terms (statistical zeros) but won’t help stave off the bed wetting. Need to unlock lots of vaccines in the fortysomethings who are slow on the uptake.
I know 40-something who have been poleaxed for two days by the jab.
These stories go around and maybe 40-something would prefer to take their chances. Such as they are.
I know 30-somethings who have been poleaxed for two weeks by the virus.
I'd rather take my chances with the vaccine. But then I'm not a thick as pigshit antivaxxer.
I thought vaccines were our way out Philip.
But they aren't.
They are.
Lockdowns are being lifted because and only because of people taking the vaccine.
If we all refused the jab then lockdowns would be getting continued.
I am not sure you have got the hang of this polling mullarkey.
If responses are taken a day or two before an event, it is unlikely that the responses will be in relation to the event...unless the respondent is psychic...or from the future.
To be fair, the headline quotes were all over the internet, and on the overnight front pages, so those who answer opinion polls would probably have been influenced to some extent.
I suspect you are clutching at straws here, unless opinion poll respondents behave like I do with my tax returns and submit them on the evening of January 31st. Most I would hazard, do not.
I thought they were asked over the period 25-26 May. ie yesterday and the day before, when the Cummings bombshells were all over the media
Most of the survey took place before Cumming's testimony and 50% before any of it had been given, wait until Saturday for Opinium which started polling today to see if there has been any impact
Oh dear.. is everything's going to be about Boris being an unashamed liar.. its getting very boring and I suspect the electorate are not interested. Boris must be the teflon dead cat that those who dislike him can thrash away at to little or no effect.
Oh dear, another obsequious post from one of the Government's apologists and predictably "liked" by the usual PB Johnsonphile automatons! Ever wondered about being independent of thought? Ever imagined that it might be possible that the government you voted for might have got things wrong? No, of course not. My party right or wrong. The Führerprinzip is a philosophy alive and well among Johnson's faithful and unthinking followers.
He is, however, right that the electorate isn’t, right now at least, remotely interested. I am just back from dog training class and all of the others spent the entire break slagging off Cummings; there wasn’t the slightest interest in whether any of the allegations had any truth in them, at all.
There's a perception amongst its opponents that this Government is ideological and very right-wing.
In fact, the reason it's polling so well is that it's positioned itself slap-bang in the centre of where public opinion is across the country at large.
That's not the same as the chatterati, but it doesn't make it untrue.
I am not sure you have got the hang of this polling mullarkey.
If responses are taken a day or two before an event, it is unlikely that the responses will be in relation to the event...unless the respondent is psychic...or from the future.
To be fair, the headline quotes were all over the internet, and on the overnight front pages, so those who answer opinion polls would probably have been influenced to some extent.
I suspect you are clutching at straws here, unless opinion poll respondents behave like I do with my tax returns and submit them on the evening of January 31st. Most I would hazard, do not.
I thought they were asked over the period 25-26 May. ie yesterday and the day before, when the Cummings bombshells were all over the media
Most of the survey took place before Cumming's testimony and 50% before any of it had been given, wait until Saturday for Opinium which started polling today to see if there has been any impact
The impact will be negligible IMO
Whilst SKS is LOTO Boris et al have a free pass
No alternative Labour leader would make any difference, except maybe Burnham who has said he will not stand for Parliament again until the next general election at the earliest anyway when he could be a contender if Starmer has led Labour to another defeat.
Otherwise the next general election will be decided about how well the government has managed the economy and general situation post pandemic and post Brexit
Oh dear.. is everything's going to be about Boris being an unashamed liar.. its getting very boring and I suspect the electorate are not interested. Boris must be the teflon dead cat that those who dislike him can thrash away at to little or no effect.
Oh dear, another obsequious post from one of the Government's apologists and predictably "liked" by the usual PB Johnsonphile automatons! Ever wondered about being independent of thought? Ever imagined that it might be possible that the government you voted for might have got things wrong? No, of course not. My party right or wrong. The Führerprinzip is a philosophy alive and well among Johnson's faithful and unthinking followers.
He is, however, right that the electorate isn’t, right now at least, remotely interested. I am just back from dog training class and all of the others spent the entire break slagging off Cummings; there wasn’t the slightest interest in whether any of the allegations had any truth in them, at all.
I am not sure you have got the hang of this polling mullarkey.
If responses are taken a day or two before an event, it is unlikely that the responses will be in relation to the event...unless the respondent is psychic...or from the future.
To be fair, the headline quotes were all over the internet, and on the overnight front pages, so those who answer opinion polls would probably have been influenced to some extent.
I suspect you are clutching at straws here, unless opinion poll respondents behave like I do with my tax returns and submit them on the evening of January 31st. Most I would hazard, do not.
I thought they were asked over the period 25-26 May. ie yesterday and the day before, when the Cummings bombshells were all over the media
If it follows the usual form of pollsters, the poll opened around 9am on Tuesday, and they got about 75-80%% of respondents by around 5pm on Tuesday, then the final 25% were collated by around 12pm tomorrow.
The last 25%-30% of respondents are usually the hardest to get, particularly if they haven't hit their demographic targets.
So Guido's comment that this was a day of testimony poll is highly misleading.
Surge testing when there's a localised outbreak will give a slightly distorted impression so I don't think there's any reason to panic.
It may be local but patients admitted up 20% in the last 7 days is not good.
In England we’ve had 28 days in a row of fewer than 100 hospitalisations which IS good.
Sure, these increases are from a very low base and the percentages exaggerate as a result. But it is disappointing.
One thing to note - yes an increase in admissions, but the total in hospital is not rising. Signs of patients going in being less sick than before? I think so.
Crappy covid numbers again. Tiny, tiny numbers in absolute terms (statistical zeros) but won’t help stave off the bed wetting. Need to unlock lots of vaccines in the fortysomethings who are slow on the uptake.
I know 40-something who have been poleaxed for two days by the jab.
These stories go around and maybe 40-something would prefer to take their chances. Such as they are.
This fortysomething was. It’s called taking one fir the team. You prefer to freeroll, thus making further lockdowns more likely.
Utter garbage, utter bullshit.
Governments decree lockdowns you stupid booby, I have been for freedom all along.
Do you really think this would end with 100% of the population being vaccinated twice ? there is always another threat, another disease, another variant, another reason to keep you penned in.
The only way to get out of this is to stop playing the game. Stop playing by their rules. As long as you do, you weill never get out.
There’s only two ways through as far as I see it. Option 1) you reach herd immunity and the pandemic ends. Option 2) you keep some combination of internal and border restrictions more or less indefinitely.
Option 2) sucks.
Within option 1), you can either reach herd immunity by acquired infection or by vaccination. Given the vaccine is now here, it’s much quicker (and safer) to reach herd immunity using the vaccine rather than state sponsored spin the bottle tournaments.
Your position is a puzzle to me and I say that as someone who would rather we locked down far less in 2020 and early 2021 than we have.
Yes, me too. I'm highly sceptical of lockdowns but also highly enthusiastic about vaccinations.
On which subject, this particular 40-something was also totally fine after jab #1. I don't know anyone who's felt worse than 'a bit grotty for a day or so'.
EDIT: And how, exactly, are we supposed to 'stop playing the game, stop playing by their rules'? Granted, we could vote in a different government. But that doesn't appear to be an immediate option.
Crappy covid numbers again. Tiny, tiny numbers in absolute terms (statistical zeros) but won’t help stave off the bed wetting. Need to unlock lots of vaccines in the fortysomethings who are slow on the uptake.
I know 40-something who have been poleaxed for two days by the jab.
These stories go around and maybe 40-something would prefer to take their chances. Such as they are.
I know 30-somethings who have been poleaxed for two weeks by the virus.
I'd rather take my chances with the vaccine. But then I'm not a thick as pigshit antivaxxer.
I think a lot of people from the future had just seen the Corbyn Glastonbury performance and were embarrassed of their 2017 vote. throwing the numbers off somewhat.
I think people from the future saw another Glastonbury performance and were so horrified they sabotaged the live stream last weekend
Only one thing came out of that.
You don't mess with Eurovision.
My God: you've got it. Make Radiohead the British Eurovision entry.
There's a perception amongst its opponents that this Government is ideological and very right-wing.
In fact, the reason it's polling so well is that it's positioned itself slap-bang in the centre of where public opinion is across the country at large.
That's not the same as the chatterati, but it doesn't make it untrue.
Bluekip/Blue Labour are what it’s been called, which is economically leftish and culturally rightish - the option that wasn’t really on the table for the last 20 odd years
Surge testing when there's a localised outbreak will give a slightly distorted impression so I don't think there's any reason to panic.
It may be local but patients admitted up 20% in the last 7 days is not good.
In England we’ve had 28 days in a row of fewer than 100 hospitalisations which IS good.
Sure, these increases are from a very low base and the percentages exaggerate as a result. But it is disappointing.
90% of hospitalisations in Bolton are not fully vaccinated. I suspect the same is true elsewhere.
Keep calm and carry on jabbing.
We don't know, but the 4 or 5 in Bolton hospital who have been double jabbed may well have been 2nd dosed only recently, or may be frail, or have other issues. Much we don't know.
There's a perception amongst its opponents that this Government is ideological and very right-wing.
In fact, the reason it's polling so well is that it's positioned itself slap-bang in the centre of where public opinion is across the country at large.
That's not the same as the chatterati, but it doesn't make it untrue.
Well said.
The likes of TIGgers etc love to call themselves "centrists" when they're not remotely in the centre. Boris is ruthlessly centrist right now.
Oh dear.. is everything's going to be about Boris being an unashamed liar.. its getting very boring and I suspect the electorate are not interested. Boris must be the teflon dead cat that those who dislike him can thrash away at to little or no effect.
Oh dear, another obsequious post from one of the Government's apologists and predictably "liked" by the usual PB Johnsonphile automatons! Ever wondered about being independent of thought? Ever imagined that it might be possible that the government you voted for might have got things wrong? No, of course not. My party right or wrong. The Führerprinzip is a philosophy alive and well among Johnson's faithful and unthinking followers.
He is, however, right that the electorate isn’t, right now at least, remotely interested. I am just back from dog training class and all of the others spent the entire break slagging off Cummings; there wasn’t the slightest interest in whether any of the allegations had any truth in them, at all.
Surge testing when there's a localised outbreak will give a slightly distorted impression so I don't think there's any reason to panic.
It may be local but patients admitted up 20% in the last 7 days is not good.
In England we’ve had 28 days in a row of fewer than 100 hospitalisations which IS good.
Sure, these increases are from a very low base and the percentages exaggerate as a result. But it is disappointing.
One thing to note - yes an increase in admissions, but the total in hospital is not rising. Signs of patients going in being less sick than before? I think so.
Either that or they are leaving via the back door, and thankfully there is no sign of an increase in those numbers.
I am not sure you have got the hang of this polling mullarkey.
If responses are taken a day or two before an event, it is unlikely that the responses will be in relation to the event...unless the respondent is psychic...or from the future.
To be fair, the headline quotes were all over the internet, and on the overnight front pages, so those who answer opinion polls would probably have been influenced to some extent.
I suspect you are clutching at straws here, unless opinion poll respondents behave like I do with my tax returns and submit them on the evening of January 31st. Most I would hazard, do not.
I thought they were asked over the period 25-26 May. ie yesterday and the day before, when the Cummings bombshells were all over the media
Most of the survey took place before Cumming's testimony and 50% before any of it had been given, wait until Saturday for Opinium which started polling today to see if there has been any impact
There's a perception amongst its opponents that this Government is ideological and very right-wing.
In fact, the reason it's polling so well is that it's positioned itself slap-bang in the centre of where public opinion is across the country at large.
That's not the same as the chatterati, but it doesn't make it untrue.
It is rightwing to wealthy urban Remainers and graduates, it is dead centre for the working class and lower middle class voters who decide elections.
Oh dear.. is everything's going to be about Boris being an unashamed liar.. its getting very boring and I suspect the electorate are not interested. Boris must be the teflon dead cat that those who dislike him can thrash away at to little or no effect.
Oh dear, another obsequious post from one of the Government's apologists and predictably "liked" by the usual PB Johnsonphile automatons! Ever wondered about being independent of thought? Ever imagined that it might be possible that the government you voted for might have got things wrong? No, of course not. My party right or wrong. The Führerprinzip is a philosophy alive and well among Johnson's faithful and unthinking followers.
He is, however, right that the electorate isn’t, right now at least, remotely interested. I am just back from dog training class and all of the others spent the entire break slagging off Cummings; there wasn’t the slightest interest in whether any of the allegations had any truth in them, at all.
There's a perception amongst its opponents that this Government is ideological and very right-wing.
In fact, the reason it's polling so well is that it's positioned itself slap-bang in the centre of where public opinion is across the country at large.
That's not the same as the chatterati, but it doesn't make it untrue.
Excellent post. Very true.
It’s the most leftwing Tory government since the 1970s, and possibly before.
I keep repeating this to my chattering class friends!
Crappy covid numbers again. Tiny, tiny numbers in absolute terms (statistical zeros) but won’t help stave off the bed wetting. Need to unlock lots of vaccines in the fortysomethings who are slow on the uptake.
I know 40-something who have been poleaxed for two days by the jab.
These stories go around and maybe 40-something would prefer to take their chances. Such as they are.
I know 30-somethings who have been poleaxed for two weeks by the virus.
I'd rather take my chances with the vaccine. But then I'm not a thick as pigshit antivaxxer.
I thought vaccines were our way out Philip.
But they aren't.
You are in complete denial of the facts aren't you? Or just deliberately trying to wind people up. The vaccines absolutely are the way out, as is happening in Israel and United States. Our government, caught out in the autumn, is being very cautious now, but we are still on track. If you have so little civic responsibility that you won't have a freely available and safe vaccine to help society then you are a hopeless case.
Comments
The thing that amuses me most is that it doesn't matter a monkeys what the left scream on here, the reality is that their party is deeply split with no proseect of power for at least one election and probably two.
When you have feck all to say about your party because the leadership is so awful, the policy seems to be attack people and insult them ... Its very timesque really.
You're mammothly more at risk from Covid than a vaccine, if you're fucking stupid enough to think that getting a "vaccine is putting your body on the line" then there's no such thing as "not really affected by covid" is there?
Another desperate 8 months of this.
https://www.politico.eu/coronavirus-in-europe/
https://twitter.com/chriscurtis94/status/1397932510370226176?s=20
27th Change
Under 40 29% 5%
40-44 69% 4%
45-49 77% 2%
50-54 84% 0%
55-59 87% 0%
60-64 89% 0%
65-69 92% 0%
70-74 94% 0%
75-79 95% 0%
80+ 95% 0%
I agree that integrity is important, but if you want to talk about integrity then speak about integrity, not "morality".
People's morals vary, which is why morality should have nothing to do with politics. Do you think a man laying with another man is moral or immoral? Do you think a teenager aborting an unwanted pregnancy is moral or immoral? Do you think any of this should be decided by Parliament or by people? Morality is not a codeword for whatever you want it to mean and it is not consistent from person to person, people have different morals from one another and quite rightly too.
Moreover they can pass it on to others who are more at risk.
Moreover since you keep moaning about lockdowns, it is those refusing to have the vaccine who are risking a necessary return to lockdown if the numbers rise again.
These stories go around and maybe 40-something would prefer to take their chances. Such as they are.
I did, however, get 2017 wrong. I thought the Conservatives would do better than they did (and Labour worse).
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1397923771864862722?s=20
Floater does take Guido as gospel mind.
Pfizer has really hit it out the park as far as vaccine manufacturing goes. They now look like they'll make 3 billion doses this year.
I note the chap you're defending admitted dishonesty yesterday.
If you want to talk about integrity then say integrity but "morality" is a vague and uncertain phrase that can mean whatever the speaker wants it to mean, while wrapped up in a cloak of self-righteousness.
Governments decree lockdowns you stupid booby, I have been for freedom all along.
Do you really think this would end with 100% of the population being vaccinated twice ? there is always another threat, another disease, another variant, another reason to keep you penned in.
The only way to get out of this is to stop playing the game. Stop playing by their rules. As long as you do, you weill never get out.
60% of Tory voters though think Hancock should stay in post, while 64% of Labour voters think he should resign.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2021/05/27/56a76/3
Keep calm and carry on jabbing.
(Sorry!)
We need an immediate investigation.
I'd rather take my chances with the vaccine. But then I'm not a thick as pigshit antivaxxer.
Get used to it. Because it is going to last a long, long time.
Wasn't paying any attention to politics.
The Lib Dems should have upped their bar chart game in that election.
But they aren't.
But I'd admire his stubbornness
Can you explain to me HOW I stage such a revolt? There is no way that I can see that I can attend my cousin’s wedding (she has postponed twice already) if the government wets the bed and delays 21 June.
There is NO WAY I can stage the rebellion you are calling for. None.
Option 2) sucks.
Within option 1), you can either reach herd immunity by acquired infection or by vaccination. Given the vaccine is now here, it’s much quicker (and safer) to reach herd immunity using the vaccine rather than state sponsored spin the bottle tournaments.
Your position is a puzzle to me and I say that as someone who would rather we locked down far less in 2020 and early 2021 than we have.
Now, there is not one 'wave', there are hundreds of localised mini-waves; we are likely to see dozens of mini-Boltons; though there's reason to hope they won't be anything like of the same scale. They won't all be at the same time though. I'm optimistic that hospitalisations will remain just over 100 per day for a while yet as vaccinations race reopening.
Another desperate 8 months of this.
Perhaps you should take the vaccine then you dimwitted etc.
You don't mess with Eurovision.
Lockdowns are being lifted because and only because of people taking the vaccine.
If we all refused the jab then lockdowns would be getting continued.
Whilst SKS is LOTO Boris et al have a free pass
He says that the government needs to see whether this is now translating into increased hospitalisations
Cases remain focused in the hotspot areas
https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1397946575968739335
In fact, the reason it's polling so well is that it's positioned itself slap-bang in the centre of where public opinion is across the country at large.
That's not the same as the chatterati, but it doesn't make it untrue.
Otherwise the next general election will be decided about how well the government has managed the economy and general situation post pandemic and post Brexit
The last 25%-30% of respondents are usually the hardest to get, particularly if they haven't hit their demographic targets.
So Guido's comment that this was a day of testimony poll is highly misleading.
On which subject, this particular 40-something was also totally fine after jab #1. I don't know anyone who's felt worse than 'a bit grotty for a day or so'.
EDIT: And how, exactly, are we supposed to 'stop playing the game, stop playing by their rules'? Granted, we could vote in a different government. But that doesn't appear to be an immediate option.
I have two A levels in maths, maths and further maths, both As, when A levels were hard.
The likes of TIGgers etc love to call themselves "centrists" when they're not remotely in the centre. Boris is ruthlessly centrist right now.
The school changed exam boards the next year as most people had failed.
It’s the most leftwing Tory government since the 1970s, and possibly before.
I keep repeating this to my chattering class friends!