Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

That YouGov LAB lead poll is increasingly looking like an outlier – politicalbetting.com

12346

Comments

  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,725
    Sources from todays TULO meeting say that Starmer claimed he was trying to find a consensus, but wouldn’t actually address any of the issues. He was instead "bollocked"

    WEAK WEAK WEAK
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 4,793
    edited September 2021

    Burn...



    Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico
    You know. I've got to be honest. I'm starting to have my doubts as to how accurate that 7,000 hospitalisations per day forecast is going to prove.


    Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp

    ...infuriating when news stories focus on worst (v unlikely) scenario and then blame spim when it doesn't happen. Often ignoring that things are still quite bad even if they weren't worse



    Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico

    SPI-M said its R=1.5 and R=1.1 cases encompassed the "likely" envelope - ie covered the central 55-70% most likely scenarios. That means they said there was a 15-22.5% probability the number wld be *higher* than 7k/day.

    I've read through the paper repeatedly (did so when it came out and pulled my hair out at the headlines) and I can't see this 15-22.5% probability mentioned.

    "Four of these same models have further been used to explore the potential impact of a range of scenarios following changes in transmission. These scenarios assume changes in behaviour result in R values of 1.1, 1.5, or 2.0 on 6th September (In each of these scenarios, R drops over time after 6th September as vaccination and infection reduce the number of people who remain susceptible), and are run for a further eight weeks. These scenarios are shown in Figure 1 (R=1.1 – green; 1.5 – blue; 2.0 – red) for England’s hospital admissions.




    SPI-M-O deems the scenario where R = 2.0 (red) to be an extreme trajectory for the epidemic over the next few weeks; it is a possible outcome, but highly unlikely. A scenario of this scale might be more likely were waning immunity to play a greater role (see paragraph 17 above) or if a new variant of concern were to emerge. In contrast, a scenario of R = 1.1 (green) is much more possible through a range of many different situations. This range of R values, however, is not dissimilar to those seen for cases in Scotland in recent weeks.

    The two scenarios of R = 1.1 and R = 1.5 attempt to provide an envelope which contains the likely epidemic trajectory over the next couple of months. Even in the R =1.1 scenario, a large number of COVID-19 hospital admissions (up to around 2,000 a day) in England for a potentially protracted period of time is projected. Due to the uncertainties already discussed, it is not possible to project more accurately or further into the future. If combined with other winter pressures or seasonal effects; this could lead to a difficult few months for the health and care sector."


    Personally, at the time, I viewed the statement that "a scenario of R = 1.1 (green) is much more possible through a range of many different situations" to be pointing pretty strongly at "look at the green one"
    Which, at September 21st, had 900-1400 with a central value of 1000 projected.

    Describing it as "a 7000 hospitalisations per day forecast" is unworthy of anyone trying to analyse what was actually projected or said. Rhetoric rather than reason.

    EDIT: In addition, calling it "A 7,000 hospitalisations per day forecast" when the paper states:

    "The projections represent what the trajectory might be if the epidemic continued to follow the trends seen in the latest available data up to 6th September. They are neither forecasts nor predictions and cannot fully reflect recent changes in transmission that have not yet filtered through into surveillance data"
    ... is just being an arse.
    (Note that the bolding was actually in the paper itself when released)
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    ...

    Far from his best, sorry to say.
    A "What have you done with the real Matt?" moment.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408

    Just not cricket....

    Ryder Cup: Bryson DeChambeau hits 'huge' 417-yard drive - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/av/golf/58686340

    I was just watching that - was more impressed by this almost vertical hit

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/av/golf/58684764
  • Taz said:

    ping said:



    Lol

    I reckon there are still people who have those bog rolls and mega bags of pasta from 18 months ago!
    Why do peeps always panic buy pasta? I know it keeps for years, but so does rice. And what exactly are they going to eat with the pasta when it all goes 'The Road'? Rat?
    I’ve still got the dried lentils I bought ahead of the first brexit date.
    My panic buy food of choice is porridge. I reckon you could live for weeks on a few decent sized bags of porridge oats.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    ping said:



    Lol

    I reckon there are still people who have those bog rolls and mega bags of pasta from 18 months ago!
    Why do peeps always panic buy pasta? I know it keeps for years, but so does rice. And what exactly are they going to eat with the pasta when it all goes 'The Road'? Rat?
    They've also panic purchased chargrilled aubergine, capers and olives right?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited September 2021

    I live next door to a petrol station.I’m hearing quite a lot of tooting horns at the moment.

    The only surprise is that Peston didn’t cause this run on the fuel.
    Shell/BP announce a few stations may have a supply problem, the press and media jump on it, and hey Preston we have panic buying

    There is no shortage of fuel and to be fair the media are trying to row back but they panicked the country in the first place
    If we think back to the stupid scenes at start of lockdown MKI, apparently there really wasn't actually that much of an uptick, about 10% increase, which caught the retailers out, but then the media megaphone amplifies the issue.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 14,884
    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    MaxPB said:

    What beats me is that in about five days the petrol stations will still have petrol and people will still think they did the right thing by panic buying.

    What beats me is that in a year's time, 99.999% of the houses in the country will not have burned down, been struck by lightning or otherwise ceased to exist, and the householders will still think they did the right thing by paying for house insurance.
    We don’t tend to run out of insurance if we all try and buy at the same time though...
    Christ all fucking mighty. You make a point so crashingly obvious you fear you are insulting PB's collective intelligence by making it, and this happens.
    Tell you what, we can all stop posting and leave the floor to you. It’s a fecking discussion. Don’t like my posts, ignore them. I won’t care.
    OK, let me spell it out. The analogy is: the difference between me filling up my car next Tuesday when I would normally expect to, vs filling it up today when I am driving past a petrol station anyway and the tank is half full, represents a tiny investment in extra effort, which is equivalent to the relatively tiny cost of an insurance premium, and protects me against the relatively tiny possibility that in 5 days time there will still be a fuel shortage. Except the investment is much less and the danger much greater than in the house insurance analogy. A value bet in other words.

    Clear now?
    No one out there thinks ‘they’ are panicking. They are all being rational, like yourself. You are insuring yourself against the problem you are helping to create. But anyone rushing out before they need is doing exactly that, just as in March 2020.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408

    Taz said:

    ping said:



    Lol

    I reckon there are still people who have those bog rolls and mega bags of pasta from 18 months ago!
    Why do peeps always panic buy pasta? I know it keeps for years, but so does rice. And what exactly are they going to eat with the pasta when it all goes 'The Road'? Rat?
    I’ve still got the dried lentils I bought ahead of the first brexit date.
    My panic buy food of choice is porridge. I reckon you could live for weeks on a few decent sized bags of porridge oats.
    If you call that living.
  • Angela punters - this is your moment...


  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408

    Angela punters - this is your moment...


    I didn't even recognise her.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,739
    GUARDIAN: Ministers to agree visas for foreign lorry drivers in Brexit U-turn #TomorrowsPapersToday https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1441510227438755841/photo/1
  • kle4 said:

    Taz said:

    ping said:



    Lol

    I reckon there are still people who have those bog rolls and mega bags of pasta from 18 months ago!
    Why do peeps always panic buy pasta? I know it keeps for years, but so does rice. And what exactly are they going to eat with the pasta when it all goes 'The Road'? Rat?
    I’ve still got the dried lentils I bought ahead of the first brexit date.
    My panic buy food of choice is porridge. I reckon you could live for weeks on a few decent sized bags of porridge oats.
    If you call that living.
    Well, I was thinking more of the just surviving side of living rather than the @seanT @leon lunch by the Parthian with two bottles of ouzo type of living.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    Omnium said:

    eek said:

    F**king useless nonentity. Bring on a leadership challenge

    Michael Savage
    @michaelsavage
    More than one union leader has “gone for” Starmer at a key meeting tonight. Sounds pretty brutal. Row over party rules now clearly threatening to overshadow a conference he himself has talked up as key to his leadership.

    And replace him with who exactly?
    Quite.

    Starmer isn't great as a leader, although he has some really good traits that will help him.

    Labour will split sooner or later, and to be fair to the left it really is the moderates that are betraying the cause. However the cause is some daft c19 manifesto written by a layabout.

    What Starmer needs to do is get the split done with - off goes Corbyn, off goes McDonald, and then I think it stops. No sensible Labour politician will throw themselves over the cliff. Maybe Abbot, Dawn whatever, Long-Bailey, and Burgeon.

    PS. whatever=Butler.
    Ken Loach....on Starmer, Jezza and "proper Labour".

    https://youtu.be/PVP6PlX_UUA
    Let me guess "proper Labour" are antisemites like him?
    careful, I like reading your posts and I don't want you booted
    Why would I get booted for asking if the antisemite Ken Loach who was "against the witch-hunt" until he got expelled out of the Labour Party like other antisemites prefers other antisemites like himself? 🤔

    Antisemites like Loach have a tendency to stick together.
    Because even if you feel ready to defend yourself against defamation claims, the site owners mightn't want to join you in your defence. The burden of proof for getting booted for potentially defamatory comments is necessarily lower than for a defamation claim.
    Nah, a jew hater is a jew hater, slice it how you like.

    You can quote me on that. I'm not afraid, the site has a single use throwaway email address for me, and a spoofed IP address filtered through a VPN.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 14,884

    Burn...



    Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico
    You know. I've got to be honest. I'm starting to have my doubts as to how accurate that 7,000 hospitalisations per day forecast is going to prove.


    Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp

    ...infuriating when news stories focus on worst (v unlikely) scenario and then blame spim when it doesn't happen. Often ignoring that things are still quite bad even if they weren't worse



    Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico

    SPI-M said its R=1.5 and R=1.1 cases encompassed the "likely" envelope - ie covered the central 55-70% most likely scenarios. That means they said there was a 15-22.5% probability the number wld be *higher* than 7k/day.

    I've read through the paper repeatedly (did so when it came out and pulled my hair out at the headlines) and I can't see this 15-22.5% probability mentioned.

    "Four of these same models have further been used to explore the potential impact of a range of scenarios following changes in transmission. These scenarios assume changes in behaviour result in R values of 1.1, 1.5, or 2.0 on 6th September (In each of these scenarios, R drops over time after 6th September as vaccination and infection reduce the number of people who remain susceptible), and are run for a further eight weeks. These scenarios are shown in Figure 1 (R=1.1 – green; 1.5 – blue; 2.0 – red) for England’s hospital admissions.




    SPI-M-O deems the scenario where R = 2.0 (red) to be an extreme trajectory for the epidemic over the next few weeks; it is a possible outcome, but highly unlikely. A scenario of this scale might be more likely were waning immunity to play a greater role (see paragraph 17 above) or if a new variant of concern were to emerge. In contrast, a scenario of R = 1.1 (green) is much more possible through a range of many different situations. This range of R values, however, is not dissimilar to those seen for cases in Scotland in recent weeks.

    The two scenarios of R = 1.1 and R = 1.5 attempt to provide an envelope which contains the likely epidemic trajectory over the next couple of months. Even in the R =1.1 scenario, a large number of COVID-19 hospital admissions (up to around 2,000 a day) in England for a potentially protracted period of time is projected. Due to the uncertainties already discussed, it is not possible to project more accurately or further into the future. If combined with other winter pressures or seasonal effects; this could lead to a difficult few months for the health and care sector."


    Personally, at the time, I viewed the statement that "a scenario of R = 1.1 (green) is much more possible through a range of many different situations" to be pointing pretty strongly at "look at the green one"
    Which, at September 21st, had 900-1400 with a central value of 1000 projected.

    Describing it as "a 7000 hospitalisations per day forecast" is unworthy of anyone trying to analyse what was actually projected or said. Rhetoric rather than reason.

    EDIT: In addition, calling it "A 7,000 hospitalisations per day forecast" when the paper states:

    "The projections represent what the trajectory might be if the epidemic continued to follow the trends seen in the latest available data up to 6th September. They are neither forecasts nor predictions and cannot fully reflect recent changes in transmission that have not yet filtered through into surveillance data"
    ... is just being an arse.
    (Note that the bolding was actually in the paper itself when released)
    Blue scenario was r=1.5 and goes to 7000 per day.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,739
    it’s the splash tonight across Fleet St https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1441509347314520067/photo/1
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,149
    kle4 said:

    Taz said:

    ping said:



    Lol

    I reckon there are still people who have those bog rolls and mega bags of pasta from 18 months ago!
    Why do peeps always panic buy pasta? I know it keeps for years, but so does rice. And what exactly are they going to eat with the pasta when it all goes 'The Road'? Rat?
    I’ve still got the dried lentils I bought ahead of the first brexit date.
    My panic buy food of choice is porridge. I reckon you could live for weeks on a few decent sized bags of porridge oats.
    If you call that living.
    Oh, it's not a bad diet at all. Though I like to vary it with oatcakes (good with home made marmalade).
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408

    kle4 said:

    Taz said:

    ping said:



    Lol

    I reckon there are still people who have those bog rolls and mega bags of pasta from 18 months ago!
    Why do peeps always panic buy pasta? I know it keeps for years, but so does rice. And what exactly are they going to eat with the pasta when it all goes 'The Road'? Rat?
    I’ve still got the dried lentils I bought ahead of the first brexit date.
    My panic buy food of choice is porridge. I reckon you could live for weeks on a few decent sized bags of porridge oats.
    If you call that living.
    Well, I was thinking more of the just surviving side of living rather than the @seanT @leon lunch by the Parthian with two bottles of ouzo type of living.
    I was just kidding, I love porridge.
  • HYUFD said:

    McLeish close to picking out that last splinter in his arse from the Scottish Indy fence he's been sitting on for years. Fear not though Yoons, he may yet be tempted back and his indy support would be conditional on the Union being unable to reform itself. Whadda ya think lads, what are the chance sthe the Union will reform itself?



    https://twitter.com/paulhutcheon/status/1441414202996842502?s=20

    Why on earth should Tories care less what a former Labour FM thinks of the Union? As long as there is a Tory government at Westminster indyref2 will be refused.

    The only way there will ever be an indyref2 allowed is if there is a UK Labour government, in which case McLeish would probably back the Union again anyway and Starmer's No + devomax offer in such a scenario
    Can you tell me the precise moment you gave up on the 'no second referendum for a generation' guff, and what caused it?
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,725

    Angela punters - this is your moment...


    Been saying all week its Rayner vs Streeting

    Very soon SKS will only ever deliver one Leaders speech at Conference IMO
  • Just not cricket....

    Ryder Cup: Bryson DeChambeau hits 'huge' 417-yard drive - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/av/golf/58686340

    That is absurd
  • Scott_xP said:

    Breaking:

    EG Group, which has 389 petrol stations, is imposing a £30 limit on fuel because of ‘unprecedented customer demand’

    It says this will give ensure ‘all our customers have a fair chance to refuel

    It asks customers to treat staff with respect during challenging times

    https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1441483020398043137

    Yeah but BigG has an anecdote repeated at least 3 times involving Asda and a tanker that clearly proves there is no problem
    There was no problem, then idiots decided to spark a panic when there was no reason to do so - and Lemmings joined in the panic.
    I agree. I suspect there was a little bit of supply issue due to covid etc. I'm sure tanker drivers aren't running off to ferry cabbages around. Perhaps it was the management at the distribution centres overplaying their hands. Sadly it has sparked off a bit of a panic.
    I do however think it is fair to say that there is a longer term problem with our supply chain. According to the drivers themselves the problem is not even primarily about money although of course they would like more. It is about conditions. The cry all across Europe is that the drivers are desperate for safe basic facilities where they can park up to sleep, get cleaned up and have a coffee. If the Government really wanted to do something to alleviate this issue in the longer term they could do some infrastructure spending and build some dedicated services for Lorry Drivers which are fit for the 20th century let alone the 21st.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 10,775

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    MaxPB said:

    What beats me is that in about five days the petrol stations will still have petrol and people will still think they did the right thing by panic buying.

    What beats me is that in a year's time, 99.999% of the houses in the country will not have burned down, been struck by lightning or otherwise ceased to exist, and the householders will still think they did the right thing by paying for house insurance.
    We don’t tend to run out of insurance if we all try and buy at the same time though...
    Christ all fucking mighty. You make a point so crashingly obvious you fear you are insulting PB's collective intelligence by making it, and this happens.
    Tell you what, we can all stop posting and leave the floor to you. It’s a fecking discussion. Don’t like my posts, ignore them. I won’t care.
    OK, let me spell it out. The analogy is: the difference between me filling up my car next Tuesday when I would normally expect to, vs filling it up today when I am driving past a petrol station anyway and the tank is half full, represents a tiny investment in extra effort, which is equivalent to the relatively tiny cost of an insurance premium, and protects me against the relatively tiny possibility that in 5 days time there will still be a fuel shortage. Except the investment is much less and the danger much greater than in the house insurance analogy. A value bet in other words.

    Clear now?
    No one out there thinks ‘they’ are panicking. They are all being rational, like yourself. You are insuring yourself against the problem you are helping to create. But anyone rushing out before they need is doing exactly that, just as in March 2020.
    If you think you need fuel in 2 days and you think you won't be able to get it then, but you can get it now, then you get it now.
    There is a feedback loop between individual decisions and herd decisions, which everybody intuitively understands.
    The strangest thing is those people repeatedly trying to say "there's no problem", thus repeatedly drawing attention to the "problem". What's the likeliest effect that'll have?
  • isamisam Posts: 40,731

    kle4 said:

    Taz said:

    ping said:



    Lol

    I reckon there are still people who have those bog rolls and mega bags of pasta from 18 months ago!
    Why do peeps always panic buy pasta? I know it keeps for years, but so does rice. And what exactly are they going to eat with the pasta when it all goes 'The Road'? Rat?
    I’ve still got the dried lentils I bought ahead of the first brexit date.
    My panic buy food of choice is porridge. I reckon you could live for weeks on a few decent sized bags of porridge oats.
    If you call that living.
    Well, I was thinking more of the just surviving side of living rather than the @seanT @leon lunch by the Parthian with two bottles of ouzo type of living.
    I had Vivera Steak tonight - plant based steak. It was ok, a bit like a processed grillsteak you’d get out of the freezer, but a weird thing was they have tiny amounts of fake blood coming out if it. Not much but enough to make me think it a bit odd. If you’ve made the choice to eat fake meat, surely you don’t want reminding of the feeling of blood dripping from it?!
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    This crowd is a bit uncouth
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 10,775
    IshmaelZ said:

    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    Omnium said:

    eek said:

    F**king useless nonentity. Bring on a leadership challenge

    Michael Savage
    @michaelsavage
    More than one union leader has “gone for” Starmer at a key meeting tonight. Sounds pretty brutal. Row over party rules now clearly threatening to overshadow a conference he himself has talked up as key to his leadership.

    And replace him with who exactly?
    Quite.

    Starmer isn't great as a leader, although he has some really good traits that will help him.

    Labour will split sooner or later, and to be fair to the left it really is the moderates that are betraying the cause. However the cause is some daft c19 manifesto written by a layabout.

    What Starmer needs to do is get the split done with - off goes Corbyn, off goes McDonald, and then I think it stops. No sensible Labour politician will throw themselves over the cliff. Maybe Abbot, Dawn whatever, Long-Bailey, and Burgeon.

    PS. whatever=Butler.
    Ken Loach....on Starmer, Jezza and "proper Labour".

    https://youtu.be/PVP6PlX_UUA
    Let me guess "proper Labour" are antisemites like him?
    careful, I like reading your posts and I don't want you booted
    Why would I get booted for asking if the antisemite Ken Loach who was "against the witch-hunt" until he got expelled out of the Labour Party like other antisemites prefers other antisemites like himself? 🤔

    Antisemites like Loach have a tendency to stick together.
    Because even if you feel ready to defend yourself against defamation claims, the site owners mightn't want to join you in your defence. The burden of proof for getting booted for potentially defamatory comments is necessarily lower than for a defamation claim.
    Nah, a jew hater is a jew hater, slice it how you like.

    You can quote me on that. I'm not afraid, the site has a single use throwaway email address for me, and a spoofed IP address filtered through a VPN.
    So you're safe. The site isn't. That was my only point.
  • WEAK WEAK WEAK

    You talking about the Prime Minister?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,149
    isam said:

    kle4 said:

    Taz said:

    ping said:



    Lol

    I reckon there are still people who have those bog rolls and mega bags of pasta from 18 months ago!
    Why do peeps always panic buy pasta? I know it keeps for years, but so does rice. And what exactly are they going to eat with the pasta when it all goes 'The Road'? Rat?
    I’ve still got the dried lentils I bought ahead of the first brexit date.
    My panic buy food of choice is porridge. I reckon you could live for weeks on a few decent sized bags of porridge oats.
    If you call that living.
    Well, I was thinking more of the just surviving side of living rather than the @seanT @leon lunch by the Parthian with two bottles of ouzo type of living.
    I had Vivera Steak tonight - plant based steak. It was ok, a bit like a processed grillsteak you’d get out of the freezer, but a weird thing was they have tiny amounts of fake blood coming out if it. Not much but enough to make me think it a bit odd. If you’ve made the choice to eat fake meat, surely you don’t want reminding of the feeling of blood dripping from it?!
    How odd. We just slung a tin of tofu into the stir fried veg lastd night.

    Made up for it with some mature mutton stewed with shallots and carrots tonight. I do wonder how much longer this will be available with the sort of headcases we see on PB urging that we hand back total control by importing even more of our food because it is a good thing that UK farmers go bust.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,588
    .
    Thank goodness there isn't an energy, fuel and food supply crisis for Momentum types to worry about.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 14,884
    Farooq said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    MaxPB said:

    What beats me is that in about five days the petrol stations will still have petrol and people will still think they did the right thing by panic buying.

    What beats me is that in a year's time, 99.999% of the houses in the country will not have burned down, been struck by lightning or otherwise ceased to exist, and the householders will still think they did the right thing by paying for house insurance.
    We don’t tend to run out of insurance if we all try and buy at the same time though...
    Christ all fucking mighty. You make a point so crashingly obvious you fear you are insulting PB's collective intelligence by making it, and this happens.
    Tell you what, we can all stop posting and leave the floor to you. It’s a fecking discussion. Don’t like my posts, ignore them. I won’t care.
    OK, let me spell it out. The analogy is: the difference between me filling up my car next Tuesday when I would normally expect to, vs filling it up today when I am driving past a petrol station anyway and the tank is half full, represents a tiny investment in extra effort, which is equivalent to the relatively tiny cost of an insurance premium, and protects me against the relatively tiny possibility that in 5 days time there will still be a fuel shortage. Except the investment is much less and the danger much greater than in the house insurance analogy. A value bet in other words.

    Clear now?
    No one out there thinks ‘they’ are panicking. They are all being rational, like yourself. You are insuring yourself against the problem you are helping to create. But anyone rushing out before they need is doing exactly that, just as in March 2020.
    If you think you need fuel in 2 days and you think you won't be able to get it then, but you can get it now, then you get it now.
    There is a feedback loop between individual decisions and herd decisions, which everybody intuitively understands.
    The strangest thing is those people repeatedly trying to say "there's no problem", thus repeatedly drawing attention to the "problem". What's the likeliest effect that'll have?
    This is an entirely confected run on fuel. I think it was 5 or 6 BP garages out of thousands U.K. wide had an issue yesterday. Suddenly the media has created a panic buying situation. I wouldn’t argue for d notices, as someone did, but there isn’t a shortage of fuel.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,725
    I reckon if the electoral college got through Streeting vs Rayner would be something like

    PLP 22% Streeting 11.3% Rayner
    Unions 14%/19.3%
    CLPs 14%/19.3%

    So basically a tie

    Under OMOV Easy win Rayner circa 60/40
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,149

    Scott_xP said:

    Breaking:

    EG Group, which has 389 petrol stations, is imposing a £30 limit on fuel because of ‘unprecedented customer demand’

    It says this will give ensure ‘all our customers have a fair chance to refuel

    It asks customers to treat staff with respect during challenging times

    https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1441483020398043137

    Yeah but BigG has an anecdote repeated at least 3 times involving Asda and a tanker that clearly proves there is no problem
    There was no problem, then idiots decided to spark a panic when there was no reason to do so - and Lemmings joined in the panic.
    I agree. I suspect there was a little bit of supply issue due to covid etc. I'm sure tanker drivers aren't running off to ferry cabbages around. Perhaps it was the management at the distribution centres overplaying their hands. Sadly it has sparked off a bit of a panic.
    I do however think it is fair to say that there is a longer term problem with our supply chain. According to the drivers themselves the problem is not even primarily about money although of course they would like more. It is about conditions. The cry all across Europe is that the drivers are desperate for safe basic facilities where they can park up to sleep, get cleaned up and have a coffee. If the Government really wanted to do something to alleviate this issue in the longer term they could do some infrastructure spending and build some dedicated services for Lorry Drivers which are fit for the 20th century let alone the 21st.
    I am surprised it isn't a serious H&S issue already. It's not as if the drivers aren't employees, is it? With IR35 torn up.
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 4,793

    Burn...



    Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico
    You know. I've got to be honest. I'm starting to have my doubts as to how accurate that 7,000 hospitalisations per day forecast is going to prove.


    Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp

    ...infuriating when news stories focus on worst (v unlikely) scenario and then blame spim when it doesn't happen. Often ignoring that things are still quite bad even if they weren't worse



    Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico

    SPI-M said its R=1.5 and R=1.1 cases encompassed the "likely" envelope - ie covered the central 55-70% most likely scenarios. That means they said there was a 15-22.5% probability the number wld be *higher* than 7k/day.

    I've read through the paper repeatedly (did so when it came out and pulled my hair out at the headlines) and I can't see this 15-22.5% probability mentioned.

    "Four of these same models have further been used to explore the potential impact of a range of scenarios following changes in transmission. These scenarios assume changes in behaviour result in R values of 1.1, 1.5, or 2.0 on 6th September (In each of these scenarios, R drops over time after 6th September as vaccination and infection reduce the number of people who remain susceptible), and are run for a further eight weeks. These scenarios are shown in Figure 1 (R=1.1 – green; 1.5 – blue; 2.0 – red) for England’s hospital admissions.




    SPI-M-O deems the scenario where R = 2.0 (red) to be an extreme trajectory for the epidemic over the next few weeks; it is a possible outcome, but highly unlikely. A scenario of this scale might be more likely were waning immunity to play a greater role (see paragraph 17 above) or if a new variant of concern were to emerge. In contrast, a scenario of R = 1.1 (green) is much more possible through a range of many different situations. This range of R values, however, is not dissimilar to those seen for cases in Scotland in recent weeks.

    The two scenarios of R = 1.1 and R = 1.5 attempt to provide an envelope which contains the likely epidemic trajectory over the next couple of months. Even in the R =1.1 scenario, a large number of COVID-19 hospital admissions (up to around 2,000 a day) in England for a potentially protracted period of time is projected. Due to the uncertainties already discussed, it is not possible to project more accurately or further into the future. If combined with other winter pressures or seasonal effects; this could lead to a difficult few months for the health and care sector."


    Personally, at the time, I viewed the statement that "a scenario of R = 1.1 (green) is much more possible through a range of many different situations" to be pointing pretty strongly at "look at the green one"
    Which, at September 21st, had 900-1400 with a central value of 1000 projected.

    Describing it as "a 7000 hospitalisations per day forecast" is unworthy of anyone trying to analyse what was actually projected or said. Rhetoric rather than reason.

    EDIT: In addition, calling it "A 7,000 hospitalisations per day forecast" when the paper states:

    "The projections represent what the trajectory might be if the epidemic continued to follow the trends seen in the latest available data up to 6th September. They are neither forecasts nor predictions and cannot fully reflect recent changes in transmission that have not yet filtered through into surveillance data"
    ... is just being an arse.
    (Note that the bolding was actually in the paper itself when released)
    Blue scenario was r=1.5 and goes to 7000 per day.
    Yes, it does.
    The green scenario was much more possible, though. As it said.
    And they were explicitly not forecasts but projections of what would happen if the current trends were followed.


  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    kle4 said:

    Angela punters - this is your moment...


    I didn't even recognise her.
    I'm by no means a left leaning person but I'd tick her box any time, if you get my drift.
  • Angela punters - this is your moment...


    Been saying all week its Rayner vs Streeting

    Very soon SKS will only ever deliver one Leaders speech at Conference IMO
    Streeting? Seriously?



  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,149

    Farooq said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    MaxPB said:

    What beats me is that in about five days the petrol stations will still have petrol and people will still think they did the right thing by panic buying.

    What beats me is that in a year's time, 99.999% of the houses in the country will not have burned down, been struck by lightning or otherwise ceased to exist, and the householders will still think they did the right thing by paying for house insurance.
    We don’t tend to run out of insurance if we all try and buy at the same time though...
    Christ all fucking mighty. You make a point so crashingly obvious you fear you are insulting PB's collective intelligence by making it, and this happens.
    Tell you what, we can all stop posting and leave the floor to you. It’s a fecking discussion. Don’t like my posts, ignore them. I won’t care.
    OK, let me spell it out. The analogy is: the difference between me filling up my car next Tuesday when I would normally expect to, vs filling it up today when I am driving past a petrol station anyway and the tank is half full, represents a tiny investment in extra effort, which is equivalent to the relatively tiny cost of an insurance premium, and protects me against the relatively tiny possibility that in 5 days time there will still be a fuel shortage. Except the investment is much less and the danger much greater than in the house insurance analogy. A value bet in other words.

    Clear now?
    No one out there thinks ‘they’ are panicking. They are all being rational, like yourself. You are insuring yourself against the problem you are helping to create. But anyone rushing out before they need is doing exactly that, just as in March 2020.
    If you think you need fuel in 2 days and you think you won't be able to get it then, but you can get it now, then you get it now.
    There is a feedback loop between individual decisions and herd decisions, which everybody intuitively understands.
    The strangest thing is those people repeatedly trying to say "there's no problem", thus repeatedly drawing attention to the "problem". What's the likeliest effect that'll have?
    This is an entirely confected run on fuel. I think it was 5 or 6 BP garages out of thousands U.K. wide had an issue yesterday. Suddenly the media has created a panic buying situation. I wouldn’t argue for d notices, as someone did, but there isn’t a shortage of fuel.
    BP were saying 5 or 6 closed - but 100 out of 1200 without at least one fuel. And that was first thing this morning.
  • TazTaz Posts: 10,704
    Farooq said:

    The Sun is anti Labour and anti Union. Seems fairly rational to not want, from their point of view, a Trojan horse within the walls?
    Labour won with the sun onboard. Something that may not have escaped SKS. The print media,may be in decline but the MSM is still influential.
  • kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Taz said:

    ping said:



    Lol

    I reckon there are still people who have those bog rolls and mega bags of pasta from 18 months ago!
    Why do peeps always panic buy pasta? I know it keeps for years, but so does rice. And what exactly are they going to eat with the pasta when it all goes 'The Road'? Rat?
    I’ve still got the dried lentils I bought ahead of the first brexit date.
    My panic buy food of choice is porridge. I reckon you could live for weeks on a few decent sized bags of porridge oats.
    If you call that living.
    Well, I was thinking more of the just surviving side of living rather than the @seanT @leon lunch by the Parthian with two bottles of ouzo type of living.
    I was just kidding, I love porridge.
    No better way to start the day. Maple syrup on mine. Lightly drizzled.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 14,884

    Burn...



    Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico
    You know. I've got to be honest. I'm starting to have my doubts as to how accurate that 7,000 hospitalisations per day forecast is going to prove.


    Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp

    ...infuriating when news stories focus on worst (v unlikely) scenario and then blame spim when it doesn't happen. Often ignoring that things are still quite bad even if they weren't worse



    Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico

    SPI-M said its R=1.5 and R=1.1 cases encompassed the "likely" envelope - ie covered the central 55-70% most likely scenarios. That means they said there was a 15-22.5% probability the number wld be *higher* than 7k/day.

    I've read through the paper repeatedly (did so when it came out and pulled my hair out at the headlines) and I can't see this 15-22.5% probability mentioned.

    "Four of these same models have further been used to explore the potential impact of a range of scenarios following changes in transmission. These scenarios assume changes in behaviour result in R values of 1.1, 1.5, or 2.0 on 6th September (In each of these scenarios, R drops over time after 6th September as vaccination and infection reduce the number of people who remain susceptible), and are run for a further eight weeks. These scenarios are shown in Figure 1 (R=1.1 – green; 1.5 – blue; 2.0 – red) for England’s hospital admissions.




    SPI-M-O deems the scenario where R = 2.0 (red) to be an extreme trajectory for the epidemic over the next few weeks; it is a possible outcome, but highly unlikely. A scenario of this scale might be more likely were waning immunity to play a greater role (see paragraph 17 above) or if a new variant of concern were to emerge. In contrast, a scenario of R = 1.1 (green) is much more possible through a range of many different situations. This range of R values, however, is not dissimilar to those seen for cases in Scotland in recent weeks.

    The two scenarios of R = 1.1 and R = 1.5 attempt to provide an envelope which contains the likely epidemic trajectory over the next couple of months. Even in the R =1.1 scenario, a large number of COVID-19 hospital admissions (up to around 2,000 a day) in England for a potentially protracted period of time is projected. Due to the uncertainties already discussed, it is not possible to project more accurately or further into the future. If combined with other winter pressures or seasonal effects; this could lead to a difficult few months for the health and care sector."


    Personally, at the time, I viewed the statement that "a scenario of R = 1.1 (green) is much more possible through a range of many different situations" to be pointing pretty strongly at "look at the green one"
    Which, at September 21st, had 900-1400 with a central value of 1000 projected.

    Describing it as "a 7000 hospitalisations per day forecast" is unworthy of anyone trying to analyse what was actually projected or said. Rhetoric rather than reason.

    EDIT: In addition, calling it "A 7,000 hospitalisations per day forecast" when the paper states:

    "The projections represent what the trajectory might be if the epidemic continued to follow the trends seen in the latest available data up to 6th September. They are neither forecasts nor predictions and cannot fully reflect recent changes in transmission that have not yet filtered through into surveillance data"
    ... is just being an arse.
    (Note that the bolding was actually in the paper itself when released)
    Blue scenario was r=1.5 and goes to 7000 per day.
    Yes, it does.
    The green scenario was much more possible, though. As it said.
    And they were explicitly not forecasts but projections of what would happen if the current trends were followed.


    I understand that, but I really do question the whole nexus of spi-m and the media. They must realise that it will be interpreted that way. You almost suspect they are trying to manipulate people into taking more care.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    edited September 2021

    I reckon if the electoral college got through Streeting vs Rayner would be something like

    PLP 22% Streeting 11.3% Rayner
    Unions 14%/19.3%
    CLPs 14%/19.3%

    So basically a tie

    Under OMOV Easy win Rayner circa 60/40

    Well that would give us Tories another majority at the next general election then guaranteed, thanks.

    Boris may well get that decade in No 10 yet
  • Farooq said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    MaxPB said:

    What beats me is that in about five days the petrol stations will still have petrol and people will still think they did the right thing by panic buying.

    What beats me is that in a year's time, 99.999% of the houses in the country will not have burned down, been struck by lightning or otherwise ceased to exist, and the householders will still think they did the right thing by paying for house insurance.
    We don’t tend to run out of insurance if we all try and buy at the same time though...
    Christ all fucking mighty. You make a point so crashingly obvious you fear you are insulting PB's collective intelligence by making it, and this happens.
    Tell you what, we can all stop posting and leave the floor to you. It’s a fecking discussion. Don’t like my posts, ignore them. I won’t care.
    OK, let me spell it out. The analogy is: the difference between me filling up my car next Tuesday when I would normally expect to, vs filling it up today when I am driving past a petrol station anyway and the tank is half full, represents a tiny investment in extra effort, which is equivalent to the relatively tiny cost of an insurance premium, and protects me against the relatively tiny possibility that in 5 days time there will still be a fuel shortage. Except the investment is much less and the danger much greater than in the house insurance analogy. A value bet in other words.

    Clear now?
    No one out there thinks ‘they’ are panicking. They are all being rational, like yourself. You are insuring yourself against the problem you are helping to create. But anyone rushing out before they need is doing exactly that, just as in March 2020.
    If you think you need fuel in 2 days and you think you won't be able to get it then, but you can get it now, then you get it now.
    There is a feedback loop between individual decisions and herd decisions, which everybody intuitively understands.
    The strangest thing is those people repeatedly trying to say "there's no problem", thus repeatedly drawing attention to the "problem". What's the likeliest effect that'll have?
    This is an entirely confected run on fuel. I think it was 5 or 6 BP garages out of thousands U.K. wide had an issue yesterday. Suddenly the media has created a panic buying situation. I wouldn’t argue for d notices, as someone did, but there isn’t a shortage of fuel.
    The media combined with bosses with an agenda to push to avoid paying more have created a panic.

    And the PM is folding like a cheap suit.

    "WEAK WEAK WEAK"
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 14,884
    Carnyx said:

    Farooq said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    MaxPB said:

    What beats me is that in about five days the petrol stations will still have petrol and people will still think they did the right thing by panic buying.

    What beats me is that in a year's time, 99.999% of the houses in the country will not have burned down, been struck by lightning or otherwise ceased to exist, and the householders will still think they did the right thing by paying for house insurance.
    We don’t tend to run out of insurance if we all try and buy at the same time though...
    Christ all fucking mighty. You make a point so crashingly obvious you fear you are insulting PB's collective intelligence by making it, and this happens.
    Tell you what, we can all stop posting and leave the floor to you. It’s a fecking discussion. Don’t like my posts, ignore them. I won’t care.
    OK, let me spell it out. The analogy is: the difference between me filling up my car next Tuesday when I would normally expect to, vs filling it up today when I am driving past a petrol station anyway and the tank is half full, represents a tiny investment in extra effort, which is equivalent to the relatively tiny cost of an insurance premium, and protects me against the relatively tiny possibility that in 5 days time there will still be a fuel shortage. Except the investment is much less and the danger much greater than in the house insurance analogy. A value bet in other words.

    Clear now?
    No one out there thinks ‘they’ are panicking. They are all being rational, like yourself. You are insuring yourself against the problem you are helping to create. But anyone rushing out before they need is doing exactly that, just as in March 2020.
    If you think you need fuel in 2 days and you think you won't be able to get it then, but you can get it now, then you get it now.
    There is a feedback loop between individual decisions and herd decisions, which everybody intuitively understands.
    The strangest thing is those people repeatedly trying to say "there's no problem", thus repeatedly drawing attention to the "problem". What's the likeliest effect that'll have?
    This is an entirely confected run on fuel. I think it was 5 or 6 BP garages out of thousands U.K. wide had an issue yesterday. Suddenly the media has created a panic buying situation. I wouldn’t argue for d notices, as someone did, but there isn’t a shortage of fuel.
    BP were saying 5 or 6 closed - but 100 out of 1200 without at least one fuel. And that was first thing this morning.
    Honestly though, you always encounter some pumps without. That’s happened for years.
  • TazTaz Posts: 10,704
    Carnyx said:

    Farooq said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    MaxPB said:

    What beats me is that in about five days the petrol stations will still have petrol and people will still think they did the right thing by panic buying.

    What beats me is that in a year's time, 99.999% of the houses in the country will not have burned down, been struck by lightning or otherwise ceased to exist, and the householders will still think they did the right thing by paying for house insurance.
    We don’t tend to run out of insurance if we all try and buy at the same time though...
    Christ all fucking mighty. You make a point so crashingly obvious you fear you are insulting PB's collective intelligence by making it, and this happens.
    Tell you what, we can all stop posting and leave the floor to you. It’s a fecking discussion. Don’t like my posts, ignore them. I won’t care.
    OK, let me spell it out. The analogy is: the difference between me filling up my car next Tuesday when I would normally expect to, vs filling it up today when I am driving past a petrol station anyway and the tank is half full, represents a tiny investment in extra effort, which is equivalent to the relatively tiny cost of an insurance premium, and protects me against the relatively tiny possibility that in 5 days time there will still be a fuel shortage. Except the investment is much less and the danger much greater than in the house insurance analogy. A value bet in other words.

    Clear now?
    No one out there thinks ‘they’ are panicking. They are all being rational, like yourself. You are insuring yourself against the problem you are helping to create. But anyone rushing out before they need is doing exactly that, just as in March 2020.
    If you think you need fuel in 2 days and you think you won't be able to get it then, but you can get it now, then you get it now.
    There is a feedback loop between individual decisions and herd decisions, which everybody intuitively understands.
    The strangest thing is those people repeatedly trying to say "there's no problem", thus repeatedly drawing attention to the "problem". What's the likeliest effect that'll have?
    This is an entirely confected run on fuel. I think it was 5 or 6 BP garages out of thousands U.K. wide had an issue yesterday. Suddenly the media has created a panic buying situation. I wouldn’t argue for d notices, as someone did, but there isn’t a shortage of fuel.
    BP were saying 5 or 6 closed - but 100 out of 1200 without at least one fuel. And that was first thing this morning.
    Be interesting to,know what it would be usually. They won’t run at full capacity all the time I’d imagine.
  • IshmaelZ said:

    kle4 said:

    Angela punters - this is your moment...


    I didn't even recognise her.
    I'm by no means a left leaning person but I'd tick her box any time, if you get my drift.
    Cornered that MILF>GILF transition market sector.
  • Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    Taz said:

    ping said:



    Lol

    I reckon there are still people who have those bog rolls and mega bags of pasta from 18 months ago!
    Why do peeps always panic buy pasta? I know it keeps for years, but so does rice. And what exactly are they going to eat with the pasta when it all goes 'The Road'? Rat?
    I’ve still got the dried lentils I bought ahead of the first brexit date.
    My panic buy food of choice is porridge. I reckon you could live for weeks on a few decent sized bags of porridge oats.
    If you call that living.
    Oh, it's not a bad diet at all. Though I like to vary it with oatcakes (good with home made marmalade).
    Oh, oatcakes with marmalade. I've never tried that and I love a good oatcake. Thanks.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,739
    And here it is. Folks can make up their own mind.
    GB News is just a disaster. I came close to a breakdown:
    ANDREW NEIL | Daily Mail Online
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10026417/GB-News-just-disaster-came-close-breakdown-ANDREW-NEIL.html
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 10,775

    Farooq said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    MaxPB said:

    What beats me is that in about five days the petrol stations will still have petrol and people will still think they did the right thing by panic buying.

    What beats me is that in a year's time, 99.999% of the houses in the country will not have burned down, been struck by lightning or otherwise ceased to exist, and the householders will still think they did the right thing by paying for house insurance.
    We don’t tend to run out of insurance if we all try and buy at the same time though...
    Christ all fucking mighty. You make a point so crashingly obvious you fear you are insulting PB's collective intelligence by making it, and this happens.
    Tell you what, we can all stop posting and leave the floor to you. It’s a fecking discussion. Don’t like my posts, ignore them. I won’t care.
    OK, let me spell it out. The analogy is: the difference between me filling up my car next Tuesday when I would normally expect to, vs filling it up today when I am driving past a petrol station anyway and the tank is half full, represents a tiny investment in extra effort, which is equivalent to the relatively tiny cost of an insurance premium, and protects me against the relatively tiny possibility that in 5 days time there will still be a fuel shortage. Except the investment is much less and the danger much greater than in the house insurance analogy. A value bet in other words.

    Clear now?
    No one out there thinks ‘they’ are panicking. They are all being rational, like yourself. You are insuring yourself against the problem you are helping to create. But anyone rushing out before they need is doing exactly that, just as in March 2020.
    If you think you need fuel in 2 days and you think you won't be able to get it then, but you can get it now, then you get it now.
    There is a feedback loop between individual decisions and herd decisions, which everybody intuitively understands.
    The strangest thing is those people repeatedly trying to say "there's no problem", thus repeatedly drawing attention to the "problem". What's the likeliest effect that'll have?
    This is an entirely confected run on fuel. I think it was 5 or 6 BP garages out of thousands U.K. wide had an issue yesterday. Suddenly the media has created a panic buying situation. I wouldn’t argue for d notices, as someone did, but there isn’t a shortage of fuel.
    That D-notices stuff was like a shard of fucking gold. "There is no problem, and to prove it we should jump straight to the most draconian response we can." Honestly, I nearly went out to fill up then and there.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,725

    .

    Thank goodness there isn't an energy, fuel and food supply crisis for Momentum types to worry about.
    Well exactly

    Could ask same about the timing / focus by SKS on factional shit,
  • TazTaz Posts: 10,704

    Farooq said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    MaxPB said:

    What beats me is that in about five days the petrol stations will still have petrol and people will still think they did the right thing by panic buying.

    What beats me is that in a year's time, 99.999% of the houses in the country will not have burned down, been struck by lightning or otherwise ceased to exist, and the householders will still think they did the right thing by paying for house insurance.
    We don’t tend to run out of insurance if we all try and buy at the same time though...
    Christ all fucking mighty. You make a point so crashingly obvious you fear you are insulting PB's collective intelligence by making it, and this happens.
    Tell you what, we can all stop posting and leave the floor to you. It’s a fecking discussion. Don’t like my posts, ignore them. I won’t care.
    OK, let me spell it out. The analogy is: the difference between me filling up my car next Tuesday when I would normally expect to, vs filling it up today when I am driving past a petrol station anyway and the tank is half full, represents a tiny investment in extra effort, which is equivalent to the relatively tiny cost of an insurance premium, and protects me against the relatively tiny possibility that in 5 days time there will still be a fuel shortage. Except the investment is much less and the danger much greater than in the house insurance analogy. A value bet in other words.

    Clear now?
    No one out there thinks ‘they’ are panicking. They are all being rational, like yourself. You are insuring yourself against the problem you are helping to create. But anyone rushing out before they need is doing exactly that, just as in March 2020.
    If you think you need fuel in 2 days and you think you won't be able to get it then, but you can get it now, then you get it now.
    There is a feedback loop between individual decisions and herd decisions, which everybody intuitively understands.
    The strangest thing is those people repeatedly trying to say "there's no problem", thus repeatedly drawing attention to the "problem". What's the likeliest effect that'll have?
    This is an entirely confected run on fuel. I think it was 5 or 6 BP garages out of thousands U.K. wide had an issue yesterday. Suddenly the media has created a panic buying situation. I wouldn’t argue for d notices, as someone did, but there isn’t a shortage of fuel.
    The media combined with bosses with an agenda to push to avoid paying more have created a panic.

    And the PM is folding like a cheap suit.

    "WEAK WEAK WEAK"
    I said this before. The govt have been stitched up by a media wanting a story to,fill columns and drive clicks and the bosses and haulage companies wanting labour. The govt have been stitched up and fell for it.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    edited September 2021

    HYUFD said:

    McLeish close to picking out that last splinter in his arse from the Scottish Indy fence he's been sitting on for years. Fear not though Yoons, he may yet be tempted back and his indy support would be conditional on the Union being unable to reform itself. Whadda ya think lads, what are the chance sthe the Union will reform itself?



    https://twitter.com/paulhutcheon/status/1441414202996842502?s=20

    Why on earth should Tories care less what a former Labour FM thinks of the Union? As long as there is a Tory government at Westminster indyref2 will be refused.

    The only way there will ever be an indyref2 allowed is if there is a UK Labour government, in which case McLeish would probably back the Union again anyway and Starmer's No + devomax offer in such a scenario
    Can you tell me the precise moment you gave up on the 'no second referendum for a generation' guff, and what caused it?
    Boris has correctly said no Tory government would allow indyref2 for a genuine generation ie 40 years, if you think we will be in power for 40 years fine with me

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/wait-40-years-for-another-scottish-independence-vote-says-boris-johnson-kwb7njq99
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 8,480
    edited September 2021
    Hmm.

    In 2018, and earlier on in 2019, the Lib Dems always seemed to benefit when there were notable Brexit troubles - perhaps perceived as the default pro-European party.

    Labour are tying themselves in knots, and not having a particularly good week - although that may change to some extent next week - I wonder if the Lib Dems could get a similar uplift to two or three years ago ?
  • Local news tonight: Motorists are being urged not to panic buy.

  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    Burn...



    Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico
    You know. I've got to be honest. I'm starting to have my doubts as to how accurate that 7,000 hospitalisations per day forecast is going to prove.


    Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp

    ...infuriating when news stories focus on worst (v unlikely) scenario and then blame spim when it doesn't happen. Often ignoring that things are still quite bad even if they weren't worse



    Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico

    SPI-M said its R=1.5 and R=1.1 cases encompassed the "likely" envelope - ie covered the central 55-70% most likely scenarios. That means they said there was a 15-22.5% probability the number wld be *higher* than 7k/day.

    I've read through the paper repeatedly (did so when it came out and pulled my hair out at the headlines) and I can't see this 15-22.5% probability mentioned.

    "Four of these same models have further been used to explore the potential impact of a range of scenarios following changes in transmission. These scenarios assume changes in behaviour result in R values of 1.1, 1.5, or 2.0 on 6th September (In each of these scenarios, R drops over time after 6th September as vaccination and infection reduce the number of people who remain susceptible), and are run for a further eight weeks. These scenarios are shown in Figure 1 (R=1.1 – green; 1.5 – blue; 2.0 – red) for England’s hospital admissions.




    SPI-M-O deems the scenario where R = 2.0 (red) to be an extreme trajectory for the epidemic over the next few weeks; it is a possible outcome, but highly unlikely. A scenario of this scale might be more likely were waning immunity to play a greater role (see paragraph 17 above) or if a new variant of concern were to emerge. In contrast, a scenario of R = 1.1 (green) is much more possible through a range of many different situations. This range of R values, however, is not dissimilar to those seen for cases in Scotland in recent weeks.

    The two scenarios of R = 1.1 and R = 1.5 attempt to provide an envelope which contains the likely epidemic trajectory over the next couple of months. Even in the R =1.1 scenario, a large number of COVID-19 hospital admissions (up to around 2,000 a day) in England for a potentially protracted period of time is projected. Due to the uncertainties already discussed, it is not possible to project more accurately or further into the future. If combined with other winter pressures or seasonal effects; this could lead to a difficult few months for the health and care sector."


    Personally, at the time, I viewed the statement that "a scenario of R = 1.1 (green) is much more possible through a range of many different situations" to be pointing pretty strongly at "look at the green one"
    Which, at September 21st, had 900-1400 with a central value of 1000 projected.

    Describing it as "a 7000 hospitalisations per day forecast" is unworthy of anyone trying to analyse what was actually projected or said. Rhetoric rather than reason.

    EDIT: In addition, calling it "A 7,000 hospitalisations per day forecast" when the paper states:

    "The projections represent what the trajectory might be if the epidemic continued to follow the trends seen in the latest available data up to 6th September. They are neither forecasts nor predictions and cannot fully reflect recent changes in transmission that have not yet filtered through into surveillance data"
    ... is just being an arse.
    (Note that the bolding was actually in the paper itself when released)
    Blue scenario was r=1.5 and goes to 7000 per day.
    Yes, it does.
    The green scenario was much more possible, though. As it said.
    And they were explicitly not forecasts but projections of what would happen if the current trends were followed.


    And the "current trends" are effectively 2 week out of date
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 14,884
    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    MaxPB said:

    What beats me is that in about five days the petrol stations will still have petrol and people will still think they did the right thing by panic buying.

    What beats me is that in a year's time, 99.999% of the houses in the country will not have burned down, been struck by lightning or otherwise ceased to exist, and the householders will still think they did the right thing by paying for house insurance.
    We don’t tend to run out of insurance if we all try and buy at the same time though...
    Christ all fucking mighty. You make a point so crashingly obvious you fear you are insulting PB's collective intelligence by making it, and this happens.
    Tell you what, we can all stop posting and leave the floor to you. It’s a fecking discussion. Don’t like my posts, ignore them. I won’t care.
    OK, let me spell it out. The analogy is: the difference between me filling up my car next Tuesday when I would normally expect to, vs filling it up today when I am driving past a petrol station anyway and the tank is half full, represents a tiny investment in extra effort, which is equivalent to the relatively tiny cost of an insurance premium, and protects me against the relatively tiny possibility that in 5 days time there will still be a fuel shortage. Except the investment is much less and the danger much greater than in the house insurance analogy. A value bet in other words.

    Clear now?
    No one out there thinks ‘they’ are panicking. They are all being rational, like yourself. You are insuring yourself against the problem you are helping to create. But anyone rushing out before they need is doing exactly that, just as in March 2020.
    If you think you need fuel in 2 days and you think you won't be able to get it then, but you can get it now, then you get it now.
    There is a feedback loop between individual decisions and herd decisions, which everybody intuitively understands.
    The strangest thing is those people repeatedly trying to say "there's no problem", thus repeatedly drawing attention to the "problem". What's the likeliest effect that'll have?
    This is an entirely confected run on fuel. I think it was 5 or 6 BP garages out of thousands U.K. wide had an issue yesterday. Suddenly the media has created a panic buying situation. I wouldn’t argue for d notices, as someone did, but there isn’t a shortage of fuel.
    That D-notices stuff was like a shard of fucking gold. "There is no problem, and to prove it we should jump straight to the most draconian response we can." Honestly, I nearly went out to fill up then and there.
    There is a tenuous link to Covid stats reporting. Every day that the number of new Covid deaths is reported is another that cancer deaths isn’t. Covid is not the biggest cause of death in the U.K. currently. It wouldn’t hurt to tone down the reporting. With respect to fuel, how often have petrol stations been out of (some or all) fuel in the past? Not reported.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,739
    HYUFD said:

    Boris has correctly said no Tory government would allow indyref2 for a genuine generation

    BoZo says a lot of shit that turns out not to be true
  • Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    MaxPB said:

    What beats me is that in about five days the petrol stations will still have petrol and people will still think they did the right thing by panic buying.

    What beats me is that in a year's time, 99.999% of the houses in the country will not have burned down, been struck by lightning or otherwise ceased to exist, and the householders will still think they did the right thing by paying for house insurance.
    We don’t tend to run out of insurance if we all try and buy at the same time though...
    Christ all fucking mighty. You make a point so crashingly obvious you fear you are insulting PB's collective intelligence by making it, and this happens.
    Tell you what, we can all stop posting and leave the floor to you. It’s a fecking discussion. Don’t like my posts, ignore them. I won’t care.
    OK, let me spell it out. The analogy is: the difference between me filling up my car next Tuesday when I would normally expect to, vs filling it up today when I am driving past a petrol station anyway and the tank is half full, represents a tiny investment in extra effort, which is equivalent to the relatively tiny cost of an insurance premium, and protects me against the relatively tiny possibility that in 5 days time there will still be a fuel shortage. Except the investment is much less and the danger much greater than in the house insurance analogy. A value bet in other words.

    Clear now?
    No one out there thinks ‘they’ are panicking. They are all being rational, like yourself. You are insuring yourself against the problem you are helping to create. But anyone rushing out before they need is doing exactly that, just as in March 2020.
    If you think you need fuel in 2 days and you think you won't be able to get it then, but you can get it now, then you get it now.
    There is a feedback loop between individual decisions and herd decisions, which everybody intuitively understands.
    The strangest thing is those people repeatedly trying to say "there's no problem", thus repeatedly drawing attention to the "problem". What's the likeliest effect that'll have?
    This is an entirely confected run on fuel. I think it was 5 or 6 BP garages out of thousands U.K. wide had an issue yesterday. Suddenly the media has created a panic buying situation. I wouldn’t argue for d notices, as someone did, but there isn’t a shortage of fuel.
    That D-notices stuff was like a shard of fucking gold. "There is no problem, and to prove it we should jump straight to the most draconian response we can." Honestly, I nearly went out to fill up then and there.
    To be fair we also had the gem of an opinion that "paying more isn't a solution we should ban any company from paying more" earlier today too.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,725
    Great thats all Labour needs now an intervention from Jezza

    Corbyn – Starmer is ignoring country’s needs to attack members and unions
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    Can see this ending 7-1 by the end of today
  • Farooq said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    MaxPB said:

    What beats me is that in about five days the petrol stations will still have petrol and people will still think they did the right thing by panic buying.

    What beats me is that in a year's time, 99.999% of the houses in the country will not have burned down, been struck by lightning or otherwise ceased to exist, and the householders will still think they did the right thing by paying for house insurance.
    We don’t tend to run out of insurance if we all try and buy at the same time though...
    Christ all fucking mighty. You make a point so crashingly obvious you fear you are insulting PB's collective intelligence by making it, and this happens.
    Tell you what, we can all stop posting and leave the floor to you. It’s a fecking discussion. Don’t like my posts, ignore them. I won’t care.
    OK, let me spell it out. The analogy is: the difference between me filling up my car next Tuesday when I would normally expect to, vs filling it up today when I am driving past a petrol station anyway and the tank is half full, represents a tiny investment in extra effort, which is equivalent to the relatively tiny cost of an insurance premium, and protects me against the relatively tiny possibility that in 5 days time there will still be a fuel shortage. Except the investment is much less and the danger much greater than in the house insurance analogy. A value bet in other words.

    Clear now?
    No one out there thinks ‘they’ are panicking. They are all being rational, like yourself. You are insuring yourself against the problem you are helping to create. But anyone rushing out before they need is doing exactly that, just as in March 2020.
    If you think you need fuel in 2 days and you think you won't be able to get it then, but you can get it now, then you get it now.
    There is a feedback loop between individual decisions and herd decisions, which everybody intuitively understands.
    The strangest thing is those people repeatedly trying to say "there's no problem", thus repeatedly drawing attention to the "problem". What's the likeliest effect that'll have?
    This is an entirely confected run on fuel. I think it was 5 or 6 BP garages out of thousands U.K. wide had an issue yesterday. Suddenly the media has created a panic buying situation. I wouldn’t argue for d notices, as someone did, but there isn’t a shortage of fuel.
    The media combined with bosses with an agenda to push to avoid paying more have created a panic.

    And the PM is folding like a cheap suit.

    "WEAK WEAK WEAK"
    The Guardian seems to have the most responsible front page confirming Boris decision to grant visas to foreign workers (note not just EU)

    In other media the figure of 5,000 is mentioned and to be honest it is the right thing to do, and highlights the new visa quota scheme that we could not have done while in the EU
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 10,775
    Taz said:

    Farooq said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    MaxPB said:

    What beats me is that in about five days the petrol stations will still have petrol and people will still think they did the right thing by panic buying.

    What beats me is that in a year's time, 99.999% of the houses in the country will not have burned down, been struck by lightning or otherwise ceased to exist, and the householders will still think they did the right thing by paying for house insurance.
    We don’t tend to run out of insurance if we all try and buy at the same time though...
    Christ all fucking mighty. You make a point so crashingly obvious you fear you are insulting PB's collective intelligence by making it, and this happens.
    Tell you what, we can all stop posting and leave the floor to you. It’s a fecking discussion. Don’t like my posts, ignore them. I won’t care.
    OK, let me spell it out. The analogy is: the difference between me filling up my car next Tuesday when I would normally expect to, vs filling it up today when I am driving past a petrol station anyway and the tank is half full, represents a tiny investment in extra effort, which is equivalent to the relatively tiny cost of an insurance premium, and protects me against the relatively tiny possibility that in 5 days time there will still be a fuel shortage. Except the investment is much less and the danger much greater than in the house insurance analogy. A value bet in other words.

    Clear now?
    No one out there thinks ‘they’ are panicking. They are all being rational, like yourself. You are insuring yourself against the problem you are helping to create. But anyone rushing out before they need is doing exactly that, just as in March 2020.
    If you think you need fuel in 2 days and you think you won't be able to get it then, but you can get it now, then you get it now.
    There is a feedback loop between individual decisions and herd decisions, which everybody intuitively understands.
    The strangest thing is those people repeatedly trying to say "there's no problem", thus repeatedly drawing attention to the "problem". What's the likeliest effect that'll have?
    This is an entirely confected run on fuel. I think it was 5 or 6 BP garages out of thousands U.K. wide had an issue yesterday. Suddenly the media has created a panic buying situation. I wouldn’t argue for d notices, as someone did, but there isn’t a shortage of fuel.
    The media combined with bosses with an agenda to push to avoid paying more have created a panic.

    And the PM is folding like a cheap suit.

    "WEAK WEAK WEAK"
    I said this before. The govt have been stitched up by a media wanting a story to,fill columns and drive clicks and the bosses and haulage companies wanting labour. The govt have been stitched up and fell for it.
    People using attention-seeking bastardry to get their way? Wherever did they get the idea?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    McLeish close to picking out that last splinter in his arse from the Scottish Indy fence he's been sitting on for years. Fear not though Yoons, he may yet be tempted back and his indy support would be conditional on the Union being unable to reform itself. Whadda ya think lads, what are the chance sthe the Union will reform itself?



    https://twitter.com/paulhutcheon/status/1441414202996842502?s=20

    Why on earth should Tories care less what a former Labour FM thinks of the Union? As long as there is a Tory government at Westminster indyref2 will be refused.

    The only way there will ever be an indyref2 allowed is if there is a UK Labour government, in which case McLeish would probably back the Union again anyway and Starmer's No + devomax offer in such a scenario
    Can you tell me the precise moment you gave up on the 'no second referendum for a generation' guff, and what caused it?
    Boris has correctly said no Tory government would allow indyref2 for a genuine generation ie 40 years, if you think we will be in power for 40 years fine with me

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/wait-40-years-for-another-scottish-independence-vote-says-boris-johnson-kwb7njq99
    40 years is a bit longer than a generation, think it shd be more like 30 years tbh
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Farooq said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    Omnium said:

    eek said:

    F**king useless nonentity. Bring on a leadership challenge

    Michael Savage
    @michaelsavage
    More than one union leader has “gone for” Starmer at a key meeting tonight. Sounds pretty brutal. Row over party rules now clearly threatening to overshadow a conference he himself has talked up as key to his leadership.

    And replace him with who exactly?
    Quite.

    Starmer isn't great as a leader, although he has some really good traits that will help him.

    Labour will split sooner or later, and to be fair to the left it really is the moderates that are betraying the cause. However the cause is some daft c19 manifesto written by a layabout.

    What Starmer needs to do is get the split done with - off goes Corbyn, off goes McDonald, and then I think it stops. No sensible Labour politician will throw themselves over the cliff. Maybe Abbot, Dawn whatever, Long-Bailey, and Burgeon.

    PS. whatever=Butler.
    Ken Loach....on Starmer, Jezza and "proper Labour".

    https://youtu.be/PVP6PlX_UUA
    Let me guess "proper Labour" are antisemites like him?
    careful, I like reading your posts and I don't want you booted
    Why would I get booted for asking if the antisemite Ken Loach who was "against the witch-hunt" until he got expelled out of the Labour Party like other antisemites prefers other antisemites like himself? 🤔

    Antisemites like Loach have a tendency to stick together.
    Because even if you feel ready to defend yourself against defamation claims, the site owners mightn't want to join you in your defence. The burden of proof for getting booted for potentially defamatory comments is necessarily lower than for a defamation claim.
    Nah, a jew hater is a jew hater, slice it how you like.

    You can quote me on that. I'm not afraid, the site has a single use throwaway email address for me, and a spoofed IP address filtered through a VPN.
    So you're safe. The site isn't. That was my only point.
    I was kidding, the site knows exactly who I am. But honestly, if you can't call a known associate of Jeremy Corbyn an antisemite, who can you call what?
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,725
    @DAILYMIRROR - Soft Left MP who backs KS: “This is an unmitigated disaster. When we’re supposed to be reconnecting with working people, we’re having a punch-up with ourselves.
    “What I want to know is: is Keir a leader or is he doing the dirty work of the person who wants to be next leader?”
  • Great thats all Labour needs now an intervention from Jezza

    Corbyn – Starmer is ignoring country’s needs to attack members and unions

    Which country does he mean? I'm assuming Palestine based on his past record.
  • Scott_xP said:

    HYUFD said:

    Boris has correctly said no Tory government would allow indyref2 for a genuine generation

    BoZo says a lot of shit that turns out not to be true
    He really knows how to get to you though
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,149
    Taz said:

    Carnyx said:

    Farooq said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    MaxPB said:

    What beats me is that in about five days the petrol stations will still have petrol and people will still think they did the right thing by panic buying.

    What beats me is that in a year's time, 99.999% of the houses in the country will not have burned down, been struck by lightning or otherwise ceased to exist, and the householders will still think they did the right thing by paying for house insurance.
    We don’t tend to run out of insurance if we all try and buy at the same time though...
    Christ all fucking mighty. You make a point so crashingly obvious you fear you are insulting PB's collective intelligence by making it, and this happens.
    Tell you what, we can all stop posting and leave the floor to you. It’s a fecking discussion. Don’t like my posts, ignore them. I won’t care.
    OK, let me spell it out. The analogy is: the difference between me filling up my car next Tuesday when I would normally expect to, vs filling it up today when I am driving past a petrol station anyway and the tank is half full, represents a tiny investment in extra effort, which is equivalent to the relatively tiny cost of an insurance premium, and protects me against the relatively tiny possibility that in 5 days time there will still be a fuel shortage. Except the investment is much less and the danger much greater than in the house insurance analogy. A value bet in other words.

    Clear now?
    No one out there thinks ‘they’ are panicking. They are all being rational, like yourself. You are insuring yourself against the problem you are helping to create. But anyone rushing out before they need is doing exactly that, just as in March 2020.
    If you think you need fuel in 2 days and you think you won't be able to get it then, but you can get it now, then you get it now.
    There is a feedback loop between individual decisions and herd decisions, which everybody intuitively understands.
    The strangest thing is those people repeatedly trying to say "there's no problem", thus repeatedly drawing attention to the "problem". What's the likeliest effect that'll have?
    This is an entirely confected run on fuel. I think it was 5 or 6 BP garages out of thousands U.K. wide had an issue yesterday. Suddenly the media has created a panic buying situation. I wouldn’t argue for d notices, as someone did, but there isn’t a shortage of fuel.
    BP were saying 5 or 6 closed - but 100 out of 1200 without at least one fuel. And that was first thing this morning.
    Be interesting to,know what it would be usually. They won’t run at full capacity all the time I’d imagine.
    Mind, it's a bit shitty if your local petrol retailer can't provide unleaded or whatever you need for your wheels.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,004
    edited September 2021

    Great thats all Labour needs now an intervention from Jezza

    Corbyn – Starmer is ignoring country’s needs to attack members and unions

    Has he publicly intervened tonight

    I did hear McDonnell rattling a few a cages earlier
  • TazTaz Posts: 10,704
    Farooq said:

    Taz said:

    Farooq said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    MaxPB said:

    What beats me is that in about five days the petrol stations will still have petrol and people will still think they did the right thing by panic buying.

    What beats me is that in a year's time, 99.999% of the houses in the country will not have burned down, been struck by lightning or otherwise ceased to exist, and the householders will still think they did the right thing by paying for house insurance.
    We don’t tend to run out of insurance if we all try and buy at the same time though...
    Christ all fucking mighty. You make a point so crashingly obvious you fear you are insulting PB's collective intelligence by making it, and this happens.
    Tell you what, we can all stop posting and leave the floor to you. It’s a fecking discussion. Don’t like my posts, ignore them. I won’t care.
    OK, let me spell it out. The analogy is: the difference between me filling up my car next Tuesday when I would normally expect to, vs filling it up today when I am driving past a petrol station anyway and the tank is half full, represents a tiny investment in extra effort, which is equivalent to the relatively tiny cost of an insurance premium, and protects me against the relatively tiny possibility that in 5 days time there will still be a fuel shortage. Except the investment is much less and the danger much greater than in the house insurance analogy. A value bet in other words.

    Clear now?
    No one out there thinks ‘they’ are panicking. They are all being rational, like yourself. You are insuring yourself against the problem you are helping to create. But anyone rushing out before they need is doing exactly that, just as in March 2020.
    If you think you need fuel in 2 days and you think you won't be able to get it then, but you can get it now, then you get it now.
    There is a feedback loop between individual decisions and herd decisions, which everybody intuitively understands.
    The strangest thing is those people repeatedly trying to say "there's no problem", thus repeatedly drawing attention to the "problem". What's the likeliest effect that'll have?
    This is an entirely confected run on fuel. I think it was 5 or 6 BP garages out of thousands U.K. wide had an issue yesterday. Suddenly the media has created a panic buying situation. I wouldn’t argue for d notices, as someone did, but there isn’t a shortage of fuel.
    The media combined with bosses with an agenda to push to avoid paying more have created a panic.

    And the PM is folding like a cheap suit.

    "WEAK WEAK WEAK"
    I said this before. The govt have been stitched up by a media wanting a story to,fill columns and drive clicks and the bosses and haulage companies wanting labour. The govt have been stitched up and fell for it.
    People using attention-seeking bastardry to get their way? Wherever did they get the idea?
    This govt has the unique ability to fold late in the day after stating they won’t. As they did on school meals. Of,course the tactic is as old as god but the govt response is usually inept.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,725
    John McDonnell MP
    @johnmcdonnellMP
    ·
    11h
    Reports coming in of several constituency delegates to conference receiving last minute notices from Labour HQ threatening disciplinary action & barring them attending Labour Party conference. It’s opening up the party bureaucracy to accusations of vote fixing. Beyond farce.
  • Pulpstar said:

    Can see this ending 7-1 by the end of today

    US beating the EU again !!
  • TazTaz Posts: 10,704
    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    McLeish close to picking out that last splinter in his arse from the Scottish Indy fence he's been sitting on for years. Fear not though Yoons, he may yet be tempted back and his indy support would be conditional on the Union being unable to reform itself. Whadda ya think lads, what are the chance sthe the Union will reform itself?



    https://twitter.com/paulhutcheon/status/1441414202996842502?s=20

    Why on earth should Tories care less what a former Labour FM thinks of the Union? As long as there is a Tory government at Westminster indyref2 will be refused.

    The only way there will ever be an indyref2 allowed is if there is a UK Labour government, in which case McLeish would probably back the Union again anyway and Starmer's No + devomax offer in such a scenario
    Can you tell me the precise moment you gave up on the 'no second referendum for a generation' guff, and what caused it?
    Boris has correctly said no Tory government would allow indyref2 for a genuine generation ie 40 years, if you think we will be in power for 40 years fine with me

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/wait-40-years-for-another-scottish-independence-vote-says-boris-johnson-kwb7njq99
    40 years is a bit longer than a generation, think it shd be more like 30 years tbh
    There are 32 year old grandmothers in these parts.
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    McLeish close to picking out that last splinter in his arse from the Scottish Indy fence he's been sitting on for years. Fear not though Yoons, he may yet be tempted back and his indy support would be conditional on the Union being unable to reform itself. Whadda ya think lads, what are the chance sthe the Union will reform itself?



    https://twitter.com/paulhutcheon/status/1441414202996842502?s=20

    Why on earth should Tories care less what a former Labour FM thinks of the Union? As long as there is a Tory government at Westminster indyref2 will be refused.

    The only way there will ever be an indyref2 allowed is if there is a UK Labour government, in which case McLeish would probably back the Union again anyway and Starmer's No + devomax offer in such a scenario
    Can you tell me the precise moment you gave up on the 'no second referendum for a generation' guff, and what caused it?
    Boris has correctly said no Tory government would allow indyref2 for a genuine generation ie 40 years, if you think we will be in power for 40 years fine with me

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/wait-40-years-for-another-scottish-independence-vote-says-boris-johnson-kwb7njq99
    But recently you’ve been saying the Tories will ‘never’ allow another Indy ref. Is this some new exciting meaning of the word ‘never’ that I don’t know about?

    In any case since Rayner is being discussed I believe she was a granny at 39, which indicates generation is a somewhat eeeeelastic term.
  • Scott_xP said:

    HYUFD said:

    Boris has correctly said no Tory government would allow indyref2 for a genuine generation

    BoZo says a lot of shit that turns out not to be true
    He really knows how to get to you though
    Scott and HYUFD are two sides of the same coin.

    It doesn't matter what Boris does you can guarantee that Scott will attack it and call for the opposite, and HYUFD will back it.

    Then if Boris u turns and does what Scott was calling for yesterday, then HYUFD will back it and Scott will attack it.

    No consistency in opinions or logic other than that Boris is bad/good respectively.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    McLeish close to picking out that last splinter in his arse from the Scottish Indy fence he's been sitting on for years. Fear not though Yoons, he may yet be tempted back and his indy support would be conditional on the Union being unable to reform itself. Whadda ya think lads, what are the chance sthe the Union will reform itself?



    https://twitter.com/paulhutcheon/status/1441414202996842502?s=20

    Why on earth should Tories care less what a former Labour FM thinks of the Union? As long as there is a Tory government at Westminster indyref2 will be refused.

    The only way there will ever be an indyref2 allowed is if there is a UK Labour government, in which case McLeish would probably back the Union again anyway and Starmer's No + devomax offer in such a scenario
    Can you tell me the precise moment you gave up on the 'no second referendum for a generation' guff, and what caused it?
    Boris has correctly said no Tory government would allow indyref2 for a genuine generation ie 40 years, if you think we will be in power for 40 years fine with me

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/wait-40-years-for-another-scottish-independence-vote-says-boris-johnson-kwb7njq99
    Have you any idea how much that kind of post irritates the fuck out of your potential voters? It would certainly tip me over the edge if I hadn't been tipped already, and I've voted tory in every ge but one since 1979. Just so you know.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,725

    Great thats all Labour needs now an intervention from Jezza

    Corbyn – Starmer is ignoring country’s needs to attack members and unions

    Has he publicly intervened tonight

    I did hear McDonnell rattling a few a cages early
    Open warfare glad i'm out
  • IshmaelZ said:

    Farooq said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    Omnium said:

    eek said:

    F**king useless nonentity. Bring on a leadership challenge

    Michael Savage
    @michaelsavage
    More than one union leader has “gone for” Starmer at a key meeting tonight. Sounds pretty brutal. Row over party rules now clearly threatening to overshadow a conference he himself has talked up as key to his leadership.

    And replace him with who exactly?
    Quite.

    Starmer isn't great as a leader, although he has some really good traits that will help him.

    Labour will split sooner or later, and to be fair to the left it really is the moderates that are betraying the cause. However the cause is some daft c19 manifesto written by a layabout.

    What Starmer needs to do is get the split done with - off goes Corbyn, off goes McDonald, and then I think it stops. No sensible Labour politician will throw themselves over the cliff. Maybe Abbot, Dawn whatever, Long-Bailey, and Burgeon.

    PS. whatever=Butler.
    Ken Loach....on Starmer, Jezza and "proper Labour".

    https://youtu.be/PVP6PlX_UUA
    Let me guess "proper Labour" are antisemites like him?
    careful, I like reading your posts and I don't want you booted
    Why would I get booted for asking if the antisemite Ken Loach who was "against the witch-hunt" until he got expelled out of the Labour Party like other antisemites prefers other antisemites like himself? 🤔

    Antisemites like Loach have a tendency to stick together.
    Because even if you feel ready to defend yourself against defamation claims, the site owners mightn't want to join you in your defence. The burden of proof for getting booted for potentially defamatory comments is necessarily lower than for a defamation claim.
    Nah, a jew hater is a jew hater, slice it how you like.

    You can quote me on that. I'm not afraid, the site has a single use throwaway email address for me, and a spoofed IP address filtered through a VPN.
    So you're safe. The site isn't. That was my only point.
    I was kidding, the site knows exactly who I am. But honestly, if you can't call a known associate of Jeremy Corbyn an antisemite, who can you call what?
    It is a matter for the moderators to police the site, not individual posters
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    IshmaelZ said:

    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    Omnium said:

    eek said:

    F**king useless nonentity. Bring on a leadership challenge

    Michael Savage
    @michaelsavage
    More than one union leader has “gone for” Starmer at a key meeting tonight. Sounds pretty brutal. Row over party rules now clearly threatening to overshadow a conference he himself has talked up as key to his leadership.

    And replace him with who exactly?
    Quite.

    Starmer isn't great as a leader, although he has some really good traits that will help him.

    Labour will split sooner or later, and to be fair to the left it really is the moderates that are betraying the cause. However the cause is some daft c19 manifesto written by a layabout.

    What Starmer needs to do is get the split done with - off goes Corbyn, off goes McDonald, and then I think it stops. No sensible Labour politician will throw themselves over the cliff. Maybe Abbot, Dawn whatever, Long-Bailey, and Burgeon.

    PS. whatever=Butler.
    Ken Loach....on Starmer, Jezza and "proper Labour".

    https://youtu.be/PVP6PlX_UUA
    Let me guess "proper Labour" are antisemites like him?
    careful, I like reading your posts and I don't want you booted
    Why would I get booted for asking if the antisemite Ken Loach who was "against the witch-hunt" until he got expelled out of the Labour Party like other antisemites prefers other antisemites like himself? 🤔

    Antisemites like Loach have a tendency to stick together.
    Because even if you feel ready to defend yourself against defamation claims, the site owners mightn't want to join you in your defence. The burden of proof for getting booted for potentially defamatory comments is necessarily lower than for a defamation claim.
    Nah, a jew hater is a jew hater, slice it how you like.

    You can quote me on that. I'm not afraid, the site has a single use throwaway email address for me, and a spoofed IP address filtered through a VPN.
    @PBModerator ~ Genuine question Is this allowed ?
  • @DAILYMIRROR - Soft Left MP who backs KS: “This is an unmitigated disaster. When we’re supposed to be reconnecting with working people, we’re having a punch-up with ourselves.
    “What I want to know is: is Keir a leader or is he doing the dirty work of the person who wants to be next leader?”

    Did they ask Kinnock that question? History tells us that he was the latter but at the time he was trying to be leader and next PM as well.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,725
    Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar is v unimpressed with Keir Starmer's conference plan to change leadership rules:

    “I don’t think it should be our focus. It is certainly not my focus. I’m going to conference to talk about the issues I care about."
  • kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Taz said:

    ping said:



    Lol

    I reckon there are still people who have those bog rolls and mega bags of pasta from 18 months ago!
    Why do peeps always panic buy pasta? I know it keeps for years, but so does rice. And what exactly are they going to eat with the pasta when it all goes 'The Road'? Rat?
    I’ve still got the dried lentils I bought ahead of the first brexit date.
    My panic buy food of choice is porridge. I reckon you could live for weeks on a few decent sized bags of porridge oats.
    If you call that living.
    Well, I was thinking more of the just surviving side of living rather than the @seanT @leon lunch by the Parthian with two bottles of ouzo type of living.
    I was just kidding, I love porridge.
    No better way to start the day. Maple syrup on mine. Lightly drizzled.
    I prefer honey on my porridge.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    edited September 2021
    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    McLeish close to picking out that last splinter in his arse from the Scottish Indy fence he's been sitting on for years. Fear not though Yoons, he may yet be tempted back and his indy support would be conditional on the Union being unable to reform itself. Whadda ya think lads, what are the chance sthe the Union will reform itself?



    https://twitter.com/paulhutcheon/status/1441414202996842502?s=20

    Why on earth should Tories care less what a former Labour FM thinks of the Union? As long as there is a Tory government at Westminster indyref2 will be refused.

    The only way there will ever be an indyref2 allowed is if there is a UK Labour government, in which case McLeish would probably back the Union again anyway and Starmer's No + devomax offer in such a scenario
    Can you tell me the precise moment you gave up on the 'no second referendum for a generation' guff, and what caused it?
    Boris has correctly said no Tory government would allow indyref2 for a genuine generation ie 40 years, if you think we will be in power for 40 years fine with me

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/wait-40-years-for-another-scottish-independence-vote-says-boris-johnson-kwb7njq99
    Have you any idea how much that kind of post irritates the fuck out of your potential voters? It would certainly tip me over the edge if I hadn't been tipped already, and I've voted tory in every ge but one since 1979. Just so you know.
    I could not care less, if we do not refuse indyref2 then there is no point us being in power anyway.

    If Labour wants to allow an indyref2 that is up to them. Note too you have not voted Tory in every ge since 1979 either
  • Pulpstar said:

    Can see this ending 7-1 by the end of today

    US beating the EU again !!
    British players a bit of a weak link?
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 10,775

    IshmaelZ said:

    Farooq said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    Omnium said:

    eek said:

    F**king useless nonentity. Bring on a leadership challenge

    Michael Savage
    @michaelsavage
    More than one union leader has “gone for” Starmer at a key meeting tonight. Sounds pretty brutal. Row over party rules now clearly threatening to overshadow a conference he himself has talked up as key to his leadership.

    And replace him with who exactly?
    Quite.

    Starmer isn't great as a leader, although he has some really good traits that will help him.

    Labour will split sooner or later, and to be fair to the left it really is the moderates that are betraying the cause. However the cause is some daft c19 manifesto written by a layabout.

    What Starmer needs to do is get the split done with - off goes Corbyn, off goes McDonald, and then I think it stops. No sensible Labour politician will throw themselves over the cliff. Maybe Abbot, Dawn whatever, Long-Bailey, and Burgeon.

    PS. whatever=Butler.
    Ken Loach....on Starmer, Jezza and "proper Labour".

    https://youtu.be/PVP6PlX_UUA
    Let me guess "proper Labour" are antisemites like him?
    careful, I like reading your posts and I don't want you booted
    Why would I get booted for asking if the antisemite Ken Loach who was "against the witch-hunt" until he got expelled out of the Labour Party like other antisemites prefers other antisemites like himself? 🤔

    Antisemites like Loach have a tendency to stick together.
    Because even if you feel ready to defend yourself against defamation claims, the site owners mightn't want to join you in your defence. The burden of proof for getting booted for potentially defamatory comments is necessarily lower than for a defamation claim.
    Nah, a jew hater is a jew hater, slice it how you like.

    You can quote me on that. I'm not afraid, the site has a single use throwaway email address for me, and a spoofed IP address filtered through a VPN.
    So you're safe. The site isn't. That was my only point.
    I was kidding, the site knows exactly who I am. But honestly, if you can't call a known associate of Jeremy Corbyn an antisemite, who can you call what?
    It is a matter for the moderators to police the site, not individual posters
    I'm not doing that. I'm trying to ensure one of the more interesting contributors doesn't get kicked. I would be sad not to read what Philip's got to say.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,149
    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    McLeish close to picking out that last splinter in his arse from the Scottish Indy fence he's been sitting on for years. Fear not though Yoons, he may yet be tempted back and his indy support would be conditional on the Union being unable to reform itself. Whadda ya think lads, what are the chance sthe the Union will reform itself?



    https://twitter.com/paulhutcheon/status/1441414202996842502?s=20

    Why on earth should Tories care less what a former Labour FM thinks of the Union? As long as there is a Tory government at Westminster indyref2 will be refused.

    The only way there will ever be an indyref2 allowed is if there is a UK Labour government, in which case McLeish would probably back the Union again anyway and Starmer's No + devomax offer in such a scenario
    Can you tell me the precise moment you gave up on the 'no second referendum for a generation' guff, and what caused it?
    Boris has correctly said no Tory government would allow indyref2 for a genuine generation ie 40 years, if you think we will be in power for 40 years fine with me

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/wait-40-years-for-another-scottish-independence-vote-says-boris-johnson-kwb7njq99
    Have you any idea how much that kind of post irritates the fuck out of your potential voters? It would certainly tip me over the edge if I hadn't been tipped already, and I've voted tory in every ge but one since 1979. Just so you know.
    "your potential voters".

    Not many Scots in Epping.
  • Great thats all Labour needs now an intervention from Jezza

    Corbyn – Starmer is ignoring country’s needs to attack members and unions

    Has he publicly intervened tonight

    I did hear McDonnell rattling a few a cages earlier
    Either way, being criticised by Jez and John is probably quite handy for the Labour leadership.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,149
    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    McLeish close to picking out that last splinter in his arse from the Scottish Indy fence he's been sitting on for years. Fear not though Yoons, he may yet be tempted back and his indy support would be conditional on the Union being unable to reform itself. Whadda ya think lads, what are the chance sthe the Union will reform itself?



    https://twitter.com/paulhutcheon/status/1441414202996842502?s=20

    Why on earth should Tories care less what a former Labour FM thinks of the Union? As long as there is a Tory government at Westminster indyref2 will be refused.

    The only way there will ever be an indyref2 allowed is if there is a UK Labour government, in which case McLeish would probably back the Union again anyway and Starmer's No + devomax offer in such a scenario
    Can you tell me the precise moment you gave up on the 'no second referendum for a generation' guff, and what caused it?
    Boris has correctly said no Tory government would allow indyref2 for a genuine generation ie 40 years, if you think we will be in power for 40 years fine with me

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/wait-40-years-for-another-scottish-independence-vote-says-boris-johnson-kwb7njq99
    Have you any idea how much that kind of post irritates the fuck out of your potential voters? It would certainly tip me over the edge if I hadn't been tipped already, and I've voted tory in every ge but one since 1979. Just so you know.
    I could not care less, if we do not refuse indyref2 then there is no point us being in power anyway.

    If Labour wants to allow an indyref2 that is up to them. Note too you have not voted Tory in every ge since 1979 either
    That's another Tory sent to the outer darkness for impurity of the personal juices or whatever.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    Taz said:
    For the Tories
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,725
    Wes Streeting IMO


    Rachel Wearmouth
    @REWearmouth
    A moderate Labour MP broadly supportive of Starmer: “I am gutted. Some of us didn’t think Keir had the mettle to deliver the changes needed. He needs to step up and deliver or will condemn Labour to more years of opposition.”
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 8,480
    edited September 2021

    Great thats all Labour needs now an intervention from Jezza

    Corbyn – Starmer is ignoring country’s needs to attack members and unions

    Has he publicly intervened tonight

    I did hear McDonnell rattling a few a cages earlier
    Either way, being criticised by Jez and John is probably quite handy for the Labour leadership.
    I don't think any of this is helping Labour, to be honest. Starmer simply lost about two or three points in the polls to the Greens when he first suspended Corbyn, and now he seems to have lost another two or three. Likewise I don't think Corbyn and McDonnell are helping much themselves, either.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,165
    Outside our local...


  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    Carnyx said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    McLeish close to picking out that last splinter in his arse from the Scottish Indy fence he's been sitting on for years. Fear not though Yoons, he may yet be tempted back and his indy support would be conditional on the Union being unable to reform itself. Whadda ya think lads, what are the chance sthe the Union will reform itself?



    https://twitter.com/paulhutcheon/status/1441414202996842502?s=20

    Why on earth should Tories care less what a former Labour FM thinks of the Union? As long as there is a Tory government at Westminster indyref2 will be refused.

    The only way there will ever be an indyref2 allowed is if there is a UK Labour government, in which case McLeish would probably back the Union again anyway and Starmer's No + devomax offer in such a scenario
    Can you tell me the precise moment you gave up on the 'no second referendum for a generation' guff, and what caused it?
    Boris has correctly said no Tory government would allow indyref2 for a genuine generation ie 40 years, if you think we will be in power for 40 years fine with me

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/wait-40-years-for-another-scottish-independence-vote-says-boris-johnson-kwb7njq99
    Have you any idea how much that kind of post irritates the fuck out of your potential voters? It would certainly tip me over the edge if I hadn't been tipped already, and I've voted tory in every ge but one since 1979. Just so you know.
    "your potential voters".

    Not many Scots in Epping.
    Actually our MP, the great Dame Eleanor Laing, is a Scot born and raised
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 10,775
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    McLeish close to picking out that last splinter in his arse from the Scottish Indy fence he's been sitting on for years. Fear not though Yoons, he may yet be tempted back and his indy support would be conditional on the Union being unable to reform itself. Whadda ya think lads, what are the chance sthe the Union will reform itself?



    https://twitter.com/paulhutcheon/status/1441414202996842502?s=20

    Why on earth should Tories care less what a former Labour FM thinks of the Union? As long as there is a Tory government at Westminster indyref2 will be refused.

    The only way there will ever be an indyref2 allowed is if there is a UK Labour government, in which case McLeish would probably back the Union again anyway and Starmer's No + devomax offer in such a scenario
    Can you tell me the precise moment you gave up on the 'no second referendum for a generation' guff, and what caused it?
    Boris has correctly said no Tory government would allow indyref2 for a genuine generation ie 40 years, if you think we will be in power for 40 years fine with me

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/wait-40-years-for-another-scottish-independence-vote-says-boris-johnson-kwb7njq99
    Have you any idea how much that kind of post irritates the fuck out of your potential voters? It would certainly tip me over the edge if I hadn't been tipped already, and I've voted tory in every ge but one since 1979. Just so you know.
    I could not care less, if we do not refuse indyref2 then there is no point us being in power anyway.

    If Labour wants to allow an indyref2 that is up to them. Note too you have not voted Tory in every ge since 1979 either
    That's another Tory sent to the outer darkness for impurity of the personal juices or whatever.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1KvgtEnABY
  • pingping Posts: 3,724
    edited September 2021
    Scott_xP said:

    And here it is. Folks can make up their own mind.
    GB News is just a disaster. I came close to a breakdown:
    ANDREW NEIL | Daily Mail Online
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10026417/GB-News-just-disaster-came-close-breakdown-ANDREW-NEIL.html

    “Another suggestion was that we should put secret cameras in classrooms to show how Left-wing the teachers were.”

    Seriously shitty “journalism” from GB news.
  • IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    McLeish close to picking out that last splinter in his arse from the Scottish Indy fence he's been sitting on for years. Fear not though Yoons, he may yet be tempted back and his indy support would be conditional on the Union being unable to reform itself. Whadda ya think lads, what are the chance sthe the Union will reform itself?



    https://twitter.com/paulhutcheon/status/1441414202996842502?s=20

    Why on earth should Tories care less what a former Labour FM thinks of the Union? As long as there is a Tory government at Westminster indyref2 will be refused.

    The only way there will ever be an indyref2 allowed is if there is a UK Labour government, in which case McLeish would probably back the Union again anyway and Starmer's No + devomax offer in such a scenario
    Can you tell me the precise moment you gave up on the 'no second referendum for a generation' guff, and what caused it?
    Boris has correctly said no Tory government would allow indyref2 for a genuine generation ie 40 years, if you think we will be in power for 40 years fine with me

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/wait-40-years-for-another-scottish-independence-vote-says-boris-johnson-kwb7njq99
    Have you any idea how much that kind of post irritates the fuck out of your potential voters? It would certainly tip me over the edge if I hadn't been tipped already, and I've voted tory in every ge but one since 1979. Just so you know.
    I have rejected @HYUFD utter nonsense on indyref2 for as long as I can remember

    He is an embarrassment, talks about Scotland as an enemy, and yet seems to think he speaks for those of us who value the union, are connected directly with immediate family in Scotland, and know that someday indyref2 may happen , indeed may be beneficial for the union to happen, and I just ask that he is considered as a one off with unbending views

    The other day he was lecturing me on politics in Wales when I actually live here, have children and grandchildren here and use Wales NHS and education and have been involved for over 50 years in Welsh politics

    Indeed I nearly became the youngest councilor in Wales but had to let that go to become, at the time, the youngest golf club captain in Wales
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,961
    HYUFD said:

    Taz said:
    For the Tories
    Even better than Angela Eagles and Bob Ainsworth......
  • IshmaelZ said:

    Farooq said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    Omnium said:

    eek said:

    F**king useless nonentity. Bring on a leadership challenge

    Michael Savage
    @michaelsavage
    More than one union leader has “gone for” Starmer at a key meeting tonight. Sounds pretty brutal. Row over party rules now clearly threatening to overshadow a conference he himself has talked up as key to his leadership.

    And replace him with who exactly?
    Quite.

    Starmer isn't great as a leader, although he has some really good traits that will help him.

    Labour will split sooner or later, and to be fair to the left it really is the moderates that are betraying the cause. However the cause is some daft c19 manifesto written by a layabout.

    What Starmer needs to do is get the split done with - off goes Corbyn, off goes McDonald, and then I think it stops. No sensible Labour politician will throw themselves over the cliff. Maybe Abbot, Dawn whatever, Long-Bailey, and Burgeon.

    PS. whatever=Butler.
    Ken Loach....on Starmer, Jezza and "proper Labour".

    https://youtu.be/PVP6PlX_UUA
    Let me guess "proper Labour" are antisemites like him?
    careful, I like reading your posts and I don't want you booted
    Why would I get booted for asking if the antisemite Ken Loach who was "against the witch-hunt" until he got expelled out of the Labour Party like other antisemites prefers other antisemites like himself? 🤔

    Antisemites like Loach have a tendency to stick together.
    Because even if you feel ready to defend yourself against defamation claims, the site owners mightn't want to join you in your defence. The burden of proof for getting booted for potentially defamatory comments is necessarily lower than for a defamation claim.
    Nah, a jew hater is a jew hater, slice it how you like.

    You can quote me on that. I'm not afraid, the site has a single use throwaway email address for me, and a spoofed IP address filtered through a VPN.
    So you're safe. The site isn't. That was my only point.
    I was kidding, the site knows exactly who I am. But honestly, if you can't call a known associate of Jeremy Corbyn an antisemite, who can you call what?
    It is a matter for the moderators to police the site, not individual posters
    And considering the moderator was posting and didn't intervene, some people want to call the "moderation" card prematurely in order to shut down the debate.

    Saying you can't call Loach an antisemite is like saying you can't call Trump a racist. Or orange. Or bad.

    The truth is an absolute defence.
  • Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    Taz said:

    ping said:



    Lol

    I reckon there are still people who have those bog rolls and mega bags of pasta from 18 months ago!
    Why do peeps always panic buy pasta? I know it keeps for years, but so does rice. And what exactly are they going to eat with the pasta when it all goes 'The Road'? Rat?
    I’ve still got the dried lentils I bought ahead of the first brexit date.
    My panic buy food of choice is porridge. I reckon you could live for weeks on a few decent sized bags of porridge oats.
    If you call that living.
    Oh, it's not a bad diet at all. Though I like to vary it with oatcakes (good with home made marmalade).
    Oh, oatcakes with marmalade. I've never tried that and I love a good oatcake. Thanks.
    You can also use oatcakes as mini pizza bases, providing you have some tinned fruit in your emergency food stockpile to use as topping.

    (This suggestion brought to you by the person who also suggested using Chorley Cakes as pizza bases.)
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,243
    edited September 2021

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    McLeish close to picking out that last splinter in his arse from the Scottish Indy fence he's been sitting on for years. Fear not though Yoons, he may yet be tempted back and his indy support would be conditional on the Union being unable to reform itself. Whadda ya think lads, what are the chance sthe the Union will reform itself?



    https://twitter.com/paulhutcheon/status/1441414202996842502?s=20

    Why on earth should Tories care less what a former Labour FM thinks of the Union? As long as there is a Tory government at Westminster indyref2 will be refused.

    The only way there will ever be an indyref2 allowed is if there is a UK Labour government, in which case McLeish would probably back the Union again anyway and Starmer's No + devomax offer in such a scenario
    Can you tell me the precise moment you gave up on the 'no second referendum for a generation' guff, and what caused it?
    Boris has correctly said no Tory government would allow indyref2 for a genuine generation ie 40 years, if you think we will be in power for 40 years fine with me

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/wait-40-years-for-another-scottish-independence-vote-says-boris-johnson-kwb7njq99
    Have you any idea how much that kind of post irritates the fuck out of your potential voters? It would certainly tip me over the edge if I hadn't been tipped already, and I've voted tory in every ge but one since 1979. Just so you know.
    I have rejected @HYUFD utter nonsense on indyref2 for as long as I can remember

    He is an embarrassment, talks about Scotland as an enemy, and yet seems to think he speaks for those of us who value the union, are connected directly with immediate family in Scotland, and know that someday indyref2 may happen , indeed may be beneficial for the union to happen, and I just ask that he is considered as a one off with unbending views

    The other day he was lecturing me on politics in Wales when I actually live here, have children and grandchildren here and use Wales NHS and education and have been involved for over 50 years in Welsh politics

    Indeed I nearly became the youngest councilor in Wales but had to let that go to become, at the time, the youngest golf club captain in Wales
    Wow, so you've been an old fogey for a VERY long time!

    EDIT - almost as long as I've been an old fool . . .
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,961

    Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar is v unimpressed with Keir Starmer's conference plan to change leadership rules:

    “I don’t think it should be our focus. It is certainly not my focus. I’m going to conference to talk about the issues I care about."

    Bit bold not to give a shiny shit about the rules that delivered up Corbyn as Labour leader!
This discussion has been closed.