'This really matters, because around the world we face rising enemies with the Taliban's level of self-regard. The Russians have a nationalist spirit untroubled by futile, divisive culture wars. The Chinese firmly believe they are the Middle Kingdom, destined to rule the world as they did before. Islamists everywhere think Allah is on their side and we are doomed materialists, and the fall of Kabul will only encourage them.
What can we do? We need to find the muscle memory of western greatness. For all the flaws of the West, no civilisation on earth has delivered, to its citizens, so much freedom, so much prosperity, so much human happiness. Until we rediscover this true faith in ourselves, we will flee in fear before those with a cruder yet stronger creed, like the terrified citizens of Phnom Penh and Kabul.'
That looks like a rehash of something I read here on PB.
I think Mr Thomas is plagiarising our very own Leon!
Leon should sue!
It reminiscent of Superman: you never saw him and Clark Kent together.
Homophobia is and always was wrong. Just as racism is and always was wrong.
Saying it was a symptom of the time is irrelevant, it's either right or it is wrong. End of story.
Just as in a few decades time this culture war nonsense about trans people will be much the same.
Women, know your place. A man has spoken.
I know it is a common trope on here. But is there any evidence women are more opposed to trans rights than men?
The opposite. But the bigger split is age. Which seems to be a theme in modern politics, although maybe it's always been the case and is just more recognized and discussed now.
Why is Biden still around 3.4 on Betfair Ex for the nomination ?
While I'm not massively tempted to short huge amounts this far from the election, I'm surprised his odds have not lengthened rather more. And I wouldn't dream of backing at these odds.
Can anyone understand the mindset of not wanting a vaccine which has been tested on multiple millions of other humans but instead want to take an anti-worming treatment for horses? Next thing they'll be saying not to eat salads but dog food instead.
Trying my hand at writing the 1st sentence of a tabloid feature:
President Joe Biden, age 78, married to Jill Biden, age 70 and female and owner of Major, a German shepherd aged 3, must bear full responsibility for Donald Trump's negotiations with the Taliban and the hasty retreat and suicide bombings at Kabul airport.
Probably should have this is a sub story to add a bit of interest.
Taliban incels?
Sexual frustration, the unavailability of marriage to poor men in some Islamic societies, and Islamic terrorism have been linked - at least in some academic circles - for at least a decade.
Alienated dysfunctional young men looking for love in all the wrong places are common in most terrorist groups, I'd imagine
Homophobia is and always was wrong. Just as racism is and always was wrong.
Saying it was a symptom of the time is irrelevant, it's either right or it is wrong. End of story.
Just as in a few decades time this culture war nonsense about trans people will be much the same.
Women, know your place. A man has spoken.
I know it is a common trope on here. But is there any evidence women are more opposed to trans rights than men?
The opposite. But the bigger split is age. Which seems to be a theme in modern politics, although maybe it's always been the case and is just more recognized and discussed now.
Interestingly. If Trudeau is re-elected it will be on the votes of the over 55's. If the Tories win it will be on the lead in the 905 (Toronto Metro Area). So the trends seen here aren't worldwide.
Around one in 70 people in private households in England had Covid-19 in the week to August 20, up from one in 80 in the previous week, according to the latest estimates from the Office for National Statistics. One in 70 is the equivalent of about 756,900 people.
Can anyone advise what we need to divide 756,900 by to get an indication of daily infection rates?
Can anyone understand the mindset of not wanting a vaccine which has been tested on multiple millions of other humans but instead want to take an anti-worming treatment for horses? Next thing they'll be saying not to eat salads but dog food instead.
I can't understand the mindset of risking Covid, which mucks with your cellular processes in a dozen different nasty ways, rather than take a well tested and characterised vaccine which basically does one, strictly limited thing.
Perhaps the effect of too much high fructose corn syrup.
Homophobia is and always was wrong. Just as racism is and always was wrong.
Saying it was a symptom of the time is irrelevant, it's either right or it is wrong. End of story.
Just as in a few decades time this culture war nonsense about trans people will be much the same.
Women, know your place. A man has spoken.
I know it is a common trope on here. But is there any evidence women are more opposed to trans rights than men?
The opposite. But the bigger split is age. Which seems to be a theme in modern politics, although maybe it's always been the case and is just more recognized and discussed now.
Interestingly. If Trudeau is re-elected it will be on the votes of the over 55's. If the Tories win it will be on the lead in the 905 (Toronto Metro Area). So the trends seen here aren't worldwide.
Yes but the Tories don't do well with young voters under 30 either, it is the NDP and Greens who do best with the youngest voters.
The Toronto Metro and suburban Area may be the swing area but it is still rural Alberta which is the Tories stronghold
Homophobia is and always was wrong. Just as racism is and always was wrong.
Saying it was a symptom of the time is irrelevant, it's either right or it is wrong. End of story.
Just as in a few decades time this culture war nonsense about trans people will be much the same.
Women, know your place. A man has spoken.
I know it is a common trope on here. But is there any evidence women are more opposed to trans rights than men?
The opposite. But the bigger split is age. Which seems to be a theme in modern politics, although maybe it's always been the case and is just more recognized and discussed now.
I have been wondering about this. I don't feel this is my battle, but I remember all the ardent feminists my age and older as students in the late 80s fighting hard for women-only safe spaces and can see why they take the position they do. I then asked my teenage daughters and they have no problem at all with a trans woman being treated as a woman in all circumstances. When I pointed out there was nothing stopping a man from putting on a dress and pretending to be a woman, they just looked at me as if I was bonkers and said. "why would anyone do that?"
'This really matters, because around the world we face rising enemies with the Taliban's level of self-regard. The Russians have a nationalist spirit untroubled by futile, divisive culture wars. The Chinese firmly believe they are the Middle Kingdom, destined to rule the world as they did before. Islamists everywhere think Allah is on their side and we are doomed materialists, and the fall of Kabul will only encourage them.
What can we do? We need to find the muscle memory of western greatness. For all the flaws of the West, no civilisation on earth has delivered, to its citizens, so much freedom, so much prosperity, so much human happiness. Until we rediscover this true faith in ourselves, we will flee in fear before those with a cruder yet stronger creed, like the terrified citizens of Phnom Penh and Kabul.'
Well that's a piece of cake then. We just need to locate the muscle memory of our greatness. Who wants to go first?
Do you want these children to get these vaccines for their protection, or yours?
Because for them, the chances of dying of covid are less than being struck by lightning.
These children might just want to get the vaccine to ensue that older members of their family don't catch it from them and die?
How can that happen? older members of their family have been doubled jabbed, and will soon be jabbed again. They are protected.
I find your lack of faith in the vaccines disconcerting to be honest.
We are entering a period where the effectiveness of the double jab is waning somewhat. Nobody is forcing kids to get the jab. But if they want to do their bit, to make sure they don't bring the virus to granny before she gets her booster, then I salute them.
You?
I would prefer a 12-year old child lived its life free of having to make such a terrible grown up decision. I never had to and I don't see why anybody at that age should. I also think anybody expecting a child to make that decision at that age has completely lost their moral compass.
Granny can be content with her vaccines and avoid seeing her grandchild if she wants. We've done quite enough for granny recently, I think. More than enough.
What if the child wants to see its grandparents?
Then the child being a child it would be the the parents and grandparents (being fucking adults) who can make the decision for them.
What if the child wants to drive a Vauxhall Senator at 135mph on the A303?
Edit: I of course have done the latter but only had the mind, not the body or legal status of a child.
You seem to have fucking missed the point entirely.
'This really matters, because around the world we face rising enemies with the Taliban's level of self-regard. The Russians have a nationalist spirit untroubled by futile, divisive culture wars. The Chinese firmly believe they are the Middle Kingdom, destined to rule the world as they did before. Islamists everywhere think Allah is on their side and we are doomed materialists, and the fall of Kabul will only encourage them.
What can we do? We need to find the muscle memory of western greatness. For all the flaws of the West, no civilisation on earth has delivered, to its citizens, so much freedom, so much prosperity, so much human happiness. Until we rediscover this true faith in ourselves, we will flee in fear before those with a cruder yet stronger creed, like the terrified citizens of Phnom Penh and Kabul.'
Well that's a piece of cake then. We just need to locate the muscle memory of our greatness. Who wants to go first?
Do you want these children to get these vaccines for their protection, or yours?
Because for them, the chances of dying of covid are less than being struck by lightning.
These children might just want to get the vaccine to ensue that older members of their family don't catch it from them and die?
How can that happen? older members of their family have been doubled jabbed, and will soon be jabbed again. They are protected.
I find your lack of faith in the vaccines disconcerting to be honest.
We are entering a period where the effectiveness of the double jab is waning somewhat. Nobody is forcing kids to get the jab. But if they want to do their bit, to make sure they don't bring the virus to granny before she gets her booster, then I salute them.
You?
I would prefer a 12-year old child lived its life free of having to make such a terrible grown up decision. I never had to and I don't see why anybody at that age should. I also think anybody expecting a child to make that decision at that age has completely lost their moral compass.
Granny can be content with her vaccines and avoid seeing her grandchild if she wants. We've done quite enough for granny recently, I think. More than enough.
What if the child wants to see its grandparents?
Then the child being a child it would be the the parents and grandparents (being fucking adults) who can make the decision for them.
What if the child wants to drive a Vauxhall Senator at 135mph on the A303?
Edit: I of course have done the latter but only had the mind, not the body or legal status of a child.
You seem to have fucking missed the point entirely.
"Nicht mal einen Kaffeeplausch auf kommunaler Ebene dürfe es für Unionsvertreter mit AfD-Politikern geben, sagte Söder"
"Union politicians shouldn't even drink a coffee at local level with AfD politicians"
If the SPD and Greens went into government with the Linke they would have no choice but to deal with the AfD.
Otherwise given the Union and FDP simply do not have the numbers for a majority, the Union would almost never be able to return to power again with a right of centre majority and only with the SDP when Union-AfD-FDP has more seats than SPD-Green-Linke
“The Home Office has blamed a ‘technical glitch’ after callers to an emergency Afghanistan helpline were redirected to a washing machine repair company in Coventry.”
I was supposedly dealing with a washing machine repair company in Coventry last week. Is it possible I was actually put through to the Home Office team on Afghanistan?
To be fair they did come round on Monday and fix my dishwasher, so I think we can rule out the Home Office on the grounds of efficiency.
Got to maintain that cover.
Overall i think no.. unless you are really unlucky. Its more cost effective to take a hit if it happens. These days a repair could cost more than the appliance!
Do you want these children to get these vaccines for their protection, or yours?
Because for them, the chances of dying of covid are less than being struck by lightning.
These children might just want to get the vaccine to ensue that older members of their family don't catch it from them and die?
How can that happen? older members of their family have been doubled jabbed, and will soon be jabbed again. They are protected.
I find your lack of faith in the vaccines disconcerting to be honest.
You seem to have a rather binary view of vaccine efficacy. Either 100% or 0% - they either protect everyone perfectly or they do not and thus if you do not believe they protect everyone perfectly, you don't believe in the vaccines.
Is this really the case?
In reality, all vaccines - by training up your immune system - provide a measurable increase in your ability to fight off a virus. From any symptoms at all (Ve versus symptomatic infection), from severe illness (Ve against severe illness) and death (Ve against death).
If Ve against death is about 95% (which is what it seems to be), then the risk of death to an average 75-year-old drops from about 5% to about 0.25%.
Which means that one in four hundred 75-year-olds would still die. It may well be that you're willing to deliberately take a one-in-four-hundred risk of unintentionally causing a 75-year-old relatives death (and, of course, if you have four such relatives, it's up to a one-in-a-hundred chance that you'd cause one of them to die in what is, to be fair, a very unpleasant and frightening way); others may not like that chance. Because, after all, out of every thousand such youngsters, ten would end up living with having seen their relative die in just such a way.
And yes, the vaccines work, which is why it's ten rather than two hundred of the thousand youngsters. Ten is a much smaller number than two hundred and thus is a considerably better outcome. Not having your relatives die in such an unpleasant avoidable way is better still.
Can anyone understand the mindset of not wanting a vaccine which has been tested on multiple millions of other humans but instead want to take an anti-worming treatment for horses? Next thing they'll be saying not to eat salads but dog food instead.
It is also used on sheep.
Which, given the cry of many antivaxxers ("Don't be sheep, people!") is beyond irony.
Do you want these children to get these vaccines for their protection, or yours?
Because for them, the chances of dying of covid are less than being struck by lightning.
These children might just want to get the vaccine to ensue that older members of their family don't catch it from them and die?
How can that happen? older members of their family have been doubled jabbed, and will soon be jabbed again. They are protected.
I find your lack of faith in the vaccines disconcerting to be honest.
You seem to have a rather binary view of vaccine efficacy. Either 100% or 0% - they either protect everyone perfectly or they do not and thus if you do not believe they protect everyone perfectly, you don't believe in the vaccines.
Is this really the case?
In reality, all vaccines - by training up your immune system - provide a measurable increase in your ability to fight off a virus. From any symptoms at all (Ve versus symptomatic infection), from severe illness (Ve against severe illness) and death (Ve against death).
If Ve against death is about 95% (which is what it seems to be), then the risk of death to an average 75-year-old drops from about 5% to about 0.25%.
Which means that one in four hundred 75-year-olds would still die. It may well be that you're willing to deliberately take a one-in-four-hundred risk of unintentionally causing a 75-year-old relatives death (and, of course, if you have four such relatives, it's up to a one-in-a-hundred chance that you'd cause one of them to die in what is, to be fair, a very unpleasant and frightening way); others may not like that chance. Because, after all, out of every thousand such youngsters, ten would end up living with having seen their relative die in just such a way.
And yes, the vaccines work, which is why it's ten rather than two hundred of the thousand youngsters. Ten is a much smaller number than two hundred and thus is a considerably better outcome. Not having your relatives die in such an unpleasant avoidable way is better still.
The worst polls for the Tories have them as the largest party, but probably no majority, the best polls for them see them with an 80 seat majority.
Mid term, with lots of bad headlines in the papers, but with a leader that is more well liked and charismatic than the LotO I can't see how any reasoned analysis can see past a Con maj as by far the most likely outcome
"Nicht mal einen Kaffeeplausch auf kommunaler Ebene dürfe es für Unionsvertreter mit AfD-Politikern geben, sagte Söder"
"Union politicians shouldn't even drink a coffee at local level with AfD politicians"
If the SPD and Greens went into government with the Linke they would have no choice but to deal with the AfD.
Otherwise given the Union and FDP simply do not have the numbers for a majority, the Union would almost never be able to return to power again with a right of centre majority and only with the SDP when Union-AfD-FDP has more seats than SPD-Green-Linke
What a load of rubbish. CDU/CSU plus FDP didn't get a majority the last 2 elections and yet CDU/CSU still miraculously remained in power.
If SPD-Greens-Left form the next government, and if they no longer have a majority after the following election CDU/CSU still potentially have 3 coalition partners with which to form a government. AfD isn't one of them.
You still haven't answered what you were on about when you said 'the AfD supported the FDP in Berlin". You posted a link to an article about Thüringen. Now either you think Berlin is in Thüringen or you didn't read beyond the headline (which mentioned Berlin). Though, if your opinions about German politics are based entirely on misunderstanding headlines in US media it does explain a lot.
Do you want these children to get these vaccines for their protection, or yours?
Because for them, the chances of dying of covid are less than being struck by lightning.
These children might just want to get the vaccine to ensue that older members of their family don't catch it from them and die?
How can that happen? older members of their family have been doubled jabbed, and will soon be jabbed again. They are protected.
I find your lack of faith in the vaccines disconcerting to be honest.
You seem to have a rather binary view of vaccine efficacy. Either 100% or 0% - they either protect everyone perfectly or they do not and thus if you do not believe they protect everyone perfectly, you don't believe in the vaccines.
Is this really the case?
In reality, all vaccines - by training up your immune system - provide a measurable increase in your ability to fight off a virus. From any symptoms at all (Ve versus symptomatic infection), from severe illness (Ve against severe illness) and death (Ve against death).
If Ve against death is about 95% (which is what it seems to be), then the risk of death to an average 75-year-old drops from about 5% to about 0.25%.
Which means that one in four hundred 75-year-olds would still die. It may well be that you're willing to deliberately take a one-in-four-hundred risk of unintentionally causing a 75-year-old relatives death (and, of course, if you have four such relatives, it's up to a one-in-a-hundred chance that you'd cause one of them to die in what is, to be fair, a very unpleasant and frightening way); others may not like that chance. Because, after all, out of every thousand such youngsters, ten would end up living with having seen their relative die in just such a way.
And yes, the vaccines work, which is why it's ten rather than two hundred of the thousand youngsters. Ten is a much smaller number than two hundred and thus is a considerably better outcome. Not having your relatives die in such an unpleasant avoidable way is better still.
Your numbers assume that vaccines for 12-year olds are 100% safe, which of course they are not. Yes complications are pretty rare at almost all ages, but the difference is that in 12-year olds problems with covid itself are also very rare.
Also we do not know if there are any problems with spike proteins further down the track, because we simply haven't been further down the track.
Anybody who presents a choice like this to a 12-year to have completely and utterly lost their moral compass. I wasn't presented with such a decision when I was twelve and neither were you. Why should twelve year olds have to make that choice now? After already having had their educations wrecked to save granny?
Your analysis here strikes me as similar to the numbers you used to justify lock down, which all along were completely one-sided, and never took into account any of the destructive effects of that most egregious and disastrous of policies.
"Nicht mal einen Kaffeeplausch auf kommunaler Ebene dürfe es für Unionsvertreter mit AfD-Politikern geben, sagte Söder"
"Union politicians shouldn't even drink a coffee at local level with AfD politicians"
If the SPD and Greens went into government with the Linke they would have no choice but to deal with the AfD.
Otherwise given the Union and FDP simply do not have the numbers for a majority, the Union would almost never be able to return to power again with a right of centre majority and only with the SDP when Union-AfD-FDP has more seats than SPD-Green-Linke
What a load of rubbish. CDU/CSU plus FDP didn't get a majority the last 2 elections and yet CDU/CSU still miraculously remained in power.
If SPD-Greens-Left form the next government, and if they no longer have a majority after the following election CDU/CSU still potentially have 3 coalition partners with which to form a government. AfD isn't one of them.
You still haven't answered what you were on about when you said 'the AfD supported the FDP in Berlin". You posted a link to an article about Thüringen. Now either you think Berlin is in Thüringen or you didn't read beyond the headline (which mentioned Berlin). Though, if your opinions about German politics are based entirely on misunderstanding headlines in US media it does explain a lot.
Only because the SDP refused to do a deal with the Linke in 2005 and 2013 which with the Greens would have had a majority.
The CDU/CSU and AfD and FDP would have had a majority in 2017 but Merkel refused to deal with the AfD. Given it is unlikely the CDU/CSU and FDP will ever have a majority again as they did in 2009, or at least for the foreseaable future then if the SPD do form a government with the Linke and Greens there will never be a rightwing majority again without the AfD being added to the CDU/CSU and FDP.
Yet there could be leftwing majority governments if the SPD will deal with the Stalinist Linke as well as the Greens, shifting Germany irreversably left. The only potential governments being a centrist SPD-CDU/CSU grand coalition or a leftwing SPD-Green-Linke coalition
In such circumstances there would also be growing calls for independence in the more conservative Bavaria where the CSU will still win comfortably next month
Comments
So it could split the Union
Learn summat every day on here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2021_Canadian_federal_election#Campaign_period
Wor Lass: "We're running low on toilet rolls"
Me (after going to check) "We've got 17!"
I think we had close to 100 at one point, so I suppose in relative terms she's right.
While I'm not massively tempted to short huge amounts this far from the election, I'm surprised his odds have not lengthened rather more. And I wouldn't dream of backing at these odds.
Any views on this ?
So the trends seen here aren't worldwide.
7?
10?
14?
Perhaps the effect of too much high fructose corn syrup.
The Toronto Metro and suburban Area may be the swing area but it is still rural Alberta which is the Tories stronghold
Seeing as you are such a big fan of Söder, maybe HE can help convince you that CDU/CSU aren't going to do a deal with the AfD:
https://www.welt.de/newsticker/news2/article195803333/AfD-Soeder-will-nicht-mal-Kaffeeplausch-mit-AfD-Politikern.html
"Nicht mal einen Kaffeeplausch auf kommunaler Ebene dürfe es für Unionsvertreter mit AfD-Politikern geben, sagte Söder"
"Union politicians shouldn't even drink a coffee at local level with AfD politicians"
Otherwise given the Union and FDP simply do not have the numbers for a majority, the Union would almost never be able to return to power again with a right of centre majority and only with the SDP when Union-AfD-FDP has more seats than SPD-Green-Linke
Is this really the case?
In reality, all vaccines - by training up your immune system - provide a measurable increase in your ability to fight off a virus. From any symptoms at all (Ve versus symptomatic infection), from severe illness (Ve against severe illness) and death (Ve against death).
If Ve against death is about 95% (which is what it seems to be), then the risk of death to an average 75-year-old drops from about 5% to about 0.25%.
Which means that one in four hundred 75-year-olds would still die.
It may well be that you're willing to deliberately take a one-in-four-hundred risk of unintentionally causing a 75-year-old relatives death (and, of course, if you have four such relatives, it's up to a one-in-a-hundred chance that you'd cause one of them to die in what is, to be fair, a very unpleasant and frightening way); others may not like that chance. Because, after all, out of every thousand such youngsters, ten would end up living with having seen their relative die in just such a way.
And yes, the vaccines work, which is why it's ten rather than two hundred of the thousand youngsters. Ten is a much smaller number than two hundred and thus is a considerably better outcome. Not having your relatives die in such an unpleasant avoidable way is better still.
Which, given the cry of many antivaxxers ("Don't be sheep, people!") is beyond irony.
Mid term, with lots of bad headlines in the papers, but with a leader that is more well liked and charismatic than the LotO I can't see how any reasoned analysis can see past a Con maj as by far the most likely outcome
CDU/CSU plus FDP didn't get a majority the last 2 elections and yet CDU/CSU still miraculously remained in power.
If SPD-Greens-Left form the next government, and if they no longer have a majority after the following election CDU/CSU still potentially have 3 coalition partners with which to form a government. AfD isn't one of them.
You still haven't answered what you were on about when you said 'the AfD supported the FDP in Berlin". You posted a link to an article about Thüringen. Now either you think Berlin is in Thüringen or you didn't read beyond the headline (which mentioned Berlin). Though, if your opinions about German politics are based entirely on misunderstanding headlines in US media it does explain a lot.
Also we do not know if there are any problems with spike proteins further down the track, because we simply haven't been further down the track.
Anybody who presents a choice like this to a 12-year to have completely and utterly lost their moral compass. I wasn't presented with such a decision when I was twelve and neither were you. Why should twelve year olds have to make that choice now? After already having had their educations wrecked to save granny?
Your analysis here strikes me as similar to the numbers you used to justify lock down, which all along were completely one-sided, and never took into account any of the destructive effects of that most egregious and disastrous of policies.
The CDU/CSU and AfD and FDP would have had a majority in 2017 but Merkel refused to deal with the AfD. Given it is unlikely the CDU/CSU and FDP will ever have a majority again as they did in 2009, or at least for the foreseaable future then if the SPD do form a government with the Linke and Greens there will never be a rightwing majority again without the AfD being added to the CDU/CSU and FDP.
Yet there could be leftwing majority governments if the SPD will deal with the Stalinist Linke as well as the Greens, shifting Germany irreversably left. The only potential governments being a centrist SPD-CDU/CSU grand coalition or a leftwing SPD-Green-Linke coalition
In such circumstances there would also be growing calls for independence in the more conservative Bavaria where the CSU will still win comfortably next month