Categories
After two by-election flops the Tories should blame their own complacency – politicalbetting.com
After two by-election flops the Tories should blame their own complacency – politicalbetting.com
In the past two and a bit weeks the mood of Labour and Lib Dem parties has soared following the Chesham and Batley by-elections. For in both seats the Tories were widely believed to be next to near certainties and this was driving the media narrative and the betting. Betfair had the blue team as a 75%+ chance to take Batley and a 95% one in Chesham.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Best thing you can do? Switch off the news. Stop reading about covid. Don't cheer NHS staff. Get back to normal life.
Hancock's affair is the best thing to have happened to the UK this year.
Great piece.
Paywall but you can get 3 months for £1 (and then cancel).
I'm not sure how much football success* would carry through, especially over years, and we know that Johnson has often been a 'lucky general' but the trend now is clearly away from the Conservatives. It's slight for sure, but a trend nonetheless.
As we come away from covid and life returns more and more to normality other issues that are gnawing away in the background will come to the fore. Johnson is all blague and bluster and piss poor on detail. It's going to be a bumpy few years for Johnson.
* The 1966 World Cup success is often said to have boosted Harold Wilson. But four years later he lost the election anyway.
I expect such comments are to be frowned upon these days but I have female friends who regularly drool over male Cabinet members and score them accordingly.
It's the way of the world.
Liar will try - if he is forced - to claim they always follow the science as he reimposes the "never again" restrictions as the blaze of "Good Old Boris" headlines are replaced by Covid gloom that he created.
I hope the "doom mongers" are wrong. Then again if they are wrong we should have ignored them from the start and none of this would have happened. So be very clear about what we are about to embark on - a public health experiment in the PM's quest to be loved.
I suspect that the answer is yes.
However i’ve never heard anyone try to argue that Wilson lost in 1970 “despite World Cup success in 1966”. The argument usually made is that he lost in part because of England’s loss to West Germany in the 1970 quarter final.
“Good infection and outbreak control measures are still important at local level. However, mass testing and daily testing should be stopped, as testing of asymptomatic people is causing unnecessary harms with no evidence that it contributes to reducing transmission.”
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jul/04/uk-scientists-caution-that-lifting-of-covid-rules-is-like-building-variant-factories
The scientists are split on this, and many of those lining up to denounce the easing of restrictions are in the camp that wants to keep them forever. Do you want rules and regulations to suppress respiratory illnesses forever? Masks and social distancing forever? I suspect not, it's just that taking the opportunity to bash the Government out of intense dislike of it is too good to resist.
Much of the criticism of reopening also constitutes the infamous goalpost shifting to which we have become so used. As the effectiveness of the vaccinations forces those who are clinging to rules and nannying and endless cyclical lockdowns to retreat, they do so from one prepared redoubt to another. Since people aren't dying in huge numbers we now hear clucking about Long Covid in children and new variants. If the JCVI eventually opts to jab children to try to reach herd immunity, then the next whine will be that restrictions are needed to combat the NHS Winter Crisis.
When - and it will be a case of "when," not "if" - Covid decays to background levels at or below the prevalence of flu, then the drumbeat will pick up for a Zero Covid strategy to crush the virus and protect the remaining vulnerable. And even if we were to eliminate community transmission (which does not seem to be a realistic aim,) the argument would be that rules were needed forever to stamp on further waves caused by reimportation of the disease, including the dreaded new variants which could keep on coming for years.
In short, from a purely disease-focussed, precautionary point of view, there will probably never be a good time to bin the Covid rules, and there are no shortage of people - often people with an ideological bent towards keeping them - who will be willing to pop up and say so. But, unless you really do want to build a biosecurity state in which the population exists to service the needs of the NHS and not the other way around, then they have to go some time. So, if not now, when?
I am simply pointing out that if let her rip goes badly wrong as half the scientists are warning, Liar will be reinstating restrictions and saying "we always follow the science". They tried that bullshit once before, they will try it again. As they will blaming people for doing what they the ministers strongly encouraged people to do.
Part of me says 'fuck the biosecurity state', but then another part of me expects the virus to just re-emerge in a more aggressive way in a few months time, necessitating another lockdown. However, for me the decisive argument if favour of what Javid is pursuing is that it would be extremely harmful to get used to a situation where these rules are permanently in place; however convenient it would be for the people that advocate for them. They should be regarded as exceptional curtailments on freedom and liberty that are only justified by an extreme public health emergency. Right now, such a justification does not exist, not even vaguely.
2. We don't know whether the Liberal Democrats will gain any longer-term momentum from their by-election win
3. We don't know if Labour will be able to hold together its existing voter coalition, and expand it by winning back old supporters or capturing sizeable numbers of new ones from the Tories
4. We're all clueless as to the extent of the economic fallout that we'll ultimately see as the country gradually gets back to normal, and to what degree this will be blamed on Covid itself or on the Government and its handling thereof
These are, of course, very uncertain times, but there are a couple of things that we do know. Firstly, the Tories' voter coalition is currently much larger than Labour's, more efficiently distributed, and that the forthcoming boundary changes are liable to help rather than hinder them. Secondly, that the combined Opposition is going to have to take a notional total, under revised boundaries, of about four dozen seats from the Government to be able to vote it out and install a Labour minority or a rainbow coalition, and that nearly all of these will necessarily have to come from England and Wales. This will require a lot of rebuilding of the Red Wall, and/or a lot of knocking down of the Blue Wall.
Now, clearly all of this is possible, but if you're going to back the Government to fall then you have to possess a reasonable degree of confidence that enough existing Tory voters can be persuaded to stay at home or switch in order for this to happen - and, at this stage, it's just as plausible to advance the opposite theory: the Tories over-run the remaining Labour marginals off the back of socially conservative switchers, the number of Southern metropolitans moving in the other direction isn't great enough to overturn many Tory majorities, and the Government therefore wins bigger next time than it did the last.
I think we're going to need to get a lot closer to the next election before even attempting to guess its outcome.
Not the zero-covid Indy SAGE extremist "science", but the actual science recommended by the Chief Medical Officer and Chief Scientific Officer and others who've been saying since February the time will come when we break the link between cases and deaths, where we need to open up even if it means more cases. That time is now.
Plus the mistake of trying too hard to be "cautious and irreversible" is that it means you remain locked down for far longer than necessary. If you lift lockdown in a 'risk' and it turns out fine you've gained, if it doesn't you're only back to where you were before so nothing is lost.
In this case “half the scientists”, is in fact two “Indy Sage” “behavioural scientists” sounding off as ever outside their area of supposed professional expertise, in a Guardian article in which 4 “scientists”/“experts” are quoted.
But it has really shown up the limitations and hideousness of journalists and journalism. Very few journalists and journals have had a 'good' Covid war: many have been absolutely appalling. I'd argue the Economist has been quite good, but the BBC has had a shocker - and they've been angels compared to most of the print media.
It's a shame when randos on the Internet - such as Dr John Campbell, or some on here - provide a much better discussion of what is going on that organisations with many orders of magnitude more funding.
Personally I am quite concerned by the Delta wave, though clearly vaccinations are having a big impact on admissions and deaths, or at least yet.
I think that most restrictions should go though probably not in Health and Social care. It is daft to restrict weddings while allowing tens of thousands at football etc
"Wimbledon 2021: British wildcard Emma Raducanu headlines Court One on day seven"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/57712820
Wimbledon order of play on day seven.. etc
It tells me that full crowds will be allowed in from Tuesday, but doesn't tell me what "Day Of Wimbledon" that is!
As an NHS pensioner, I wonder if I'll get one!
Nice touch by your Trust, by the way!
With some prominent exceptions that should be highlighted (eg John Burn-Murdoch and most of the FT output, and Tom Whipple, and Hugo Gye).
But pretty much the entire output of the Telegraph and Mail was such repeated and arrant bollocks.
And, God - JHB and Allison Pearson! Not to mention the execrable Toby Young - who’s STILL crusading and has spent months pushing antivax lines (doubtless because a big chunk of his readership are now antivaxxers, so if he wants to keep making money from his Lockdown
DenialistsSceptics site, well, that’s what gets the dosh).They’ve been even more energetic and consistently spewing their line than even iSAGE - God knows, they’ve had more output.
I know you are keen to bash Boris (it seems to have been much more virulent since you moved to Scotland, so May be you are trying to fit in). But you should be careful about who you cite so approvingly
Otherwise people may just think you’re a crackpot
The political balances are different this time, but the PM has a lot of form for pre-briefing lower levels of restrictions and then slamming the brakes on at the last minute.
What is interesting is that no actual major scientists are saying anything of the kind. All we have are the standard "iSAGE because I have a PhD in something" types. Note that they are sounding weaker and less... virulent than usual.
What is also interesting is that there are no flag flying of the "senior scientist briefs the Guardian" type. Which strongly suggests that the NHS/Government scientist groups are backing the decisions.
This government faces difficult decisions and serious problems on a whole range of fronts. I remain a bit nervous that Javid is showing the same gung ho, slightly simplistic tendencies that he did during his brief and somewhat undistinguished time in the Treasury. I remain to be convinced that he was a good appointment.
Steve Reichner is on a sub committee of the formal SAGE. And he spent yesterday morning railing against the health Secretary (with health in sarcastic speech marks) for his irresponsibility. He’s a behavioural scientist, with no grounding in infectious disease. He’s always been fond of tweeting his support for the Labour Party.
It’s no wonder the public get confused when you get “experts” (see I can use them too) who are unable to disentangle their personal politics from their professional public image.
"Roll up! roll up! Pick your scientist here! All views on offer! Choose the one that best fits your own! All highly qualified! Roll up! Roll up! Special offers on media-experienced narcissists! We've got physicists, biologists, chemists, geologists... all willing to opine outside their speciality! Roll up! Roll up!"
(Salesman):
"Ah, hello sir!"
(Customer):
"Ah, yes. I'd like someone to opine that Covid means the extinction of all mankind."
(Salesman twitches his moustache as he leads the customer to a foul, dark cage)
"Ah sir, I have the very one. This gentleman here is a theoretical physicist; he's been on BBC, ITV and Sky, writes regularly for The Guardian and the Mail."
(Customer examines the scientist's hooves and teeth)
"Wasn't this one on Sky just last week, saying that Covid was all a fiction and we should get back to normal immediately?"
(Salesman):
"Ah yes, sir. All my scientists are quantum-trained: capable of holding three thousand views consecutively. They all collapse down to one view once they know that you want it to be."
Can’t wait for the medal to arrive.
I also notice she seems to be enjoying herself in her public outings.
To answer my own question, apparently the export season is just starting, and lamb prices are falling, but slightly better than last year:
https://ahdb.org.uk/news/sharp-drop-in-british-lamb-prices
What weight does such a symbol carry in today's culture?
And what does it mean if politicised? Imo inevitably. I wonder if the Unions will start using a line such as "Thank-you nicely, but where's the payrise", TUs being intensely materialistic in practice?".
The best analogue I think I can come up with is Malta's GC.
Just reflecting.
Tend to agree on the Tory complacency in these campaigns.
Will anyone wake up?
The warm public reception to the ERP has demonstrated the central role such events play in our lives. The ERP has allowed over 20,000 spectators to walk through Wembley’s turnstiles for the FA Cup Final and over 13,000 people to attend dance and music events over a Bank Holiday weekend in Liverpool – the return of such events, with comprehensive pre-event testing, at a scale not seen anywhere since the beginning of the pandemic. Over the course of 17 days in Sheffield, we brought full capacity audiences back into an event for the first time to watch the World Snooker Championship. At the BRITs we saw the return of an international music awards ceremony, with an audience, including key workers, participating in an evening celebrating the best of British talent. The joy of the over 58,000 people who attended the pilots and the positive response to these events, showed just how much the country has missed such occasions.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/events-research-programme-phase-i-findings/events-research-programme-phase-i-findings
“Coffee please,” said my wife, before being handed some cremated gerbil in boiling water.
“Coffee too, please” I said.
“One drink per bed,” the orderly snarled, then trundled to the next room.
How do you raise your scientists - free range, or confined in small common rooms with piles of out of date TES?
'Scuse me whilst I go and update my business cards to add GC to my many post nominals.
The Tory campaign .......
What about the Labour campaign for starters?
My late brother-in-law had a Nobel prize (awarded to UN blue berets in 1988) on the same basis.
All must have prizes.
C&A fits a long tradition of LD byelections in Tory seats.
In B&S the Tories polled better (34.4%) than in 2010 and 2015.
So possibly less to see here than people think.
Perhaps it’s a winding up order masquerading as an award?
Menu here:
https://www.sfh-tr.nhs.uk/media/3617/steamplicity-1.pdf
But massive strides over a couple of decades.
And there's a heartkiller menu in one of the staff facilities, which is OK but for some reason gets quite overpriced at lunchtime compared to breakfast.
A PB problem is that people remember things from 30 years ago when they were under 30 :-) .
F1: some very good days for Red Bull of late.
Last year, Verstappen had one DNF and finished 33s off the lead at the other race at that circuit. At Hungary in 2020 he was 8s off the lead.
That may not bode well for Mercedes, but we shall see. Hamilton's floor damage does make pace comparison a little more difficult.