Would it not be more exact to say that the evidence against him was not strong enough to guarantee a conviction?
I think that's correct - he appears to me to be saying that any investigation that ends in acquittal should never have taken place. He comes across as a right little twerp to be honest.
I don't think Carole could ever admit she was wrong.
Mr. Meeks, if the EU wants a deal then all it need do is revert to the position it held for years, namely that Canada's on offer, up until the point the UK agreed to it.
It's one-eyed to pretend the UK's been the only ropey party (in places it has been dubious) whereas the EU is somehow reasonable, honest, and true.
The UK can do a "Canada" with the EU, ie 1500 pages of bespoke agreement, every page haggled over by the various stakeholders over the course of six years. You would also need to do something about Northern Ireland, which doesn't feature in the Canada setup. The UK doesn't even want Canada.
This isn't realistic.
Canada for GB would be fine, the Withdrawal Agreement already covers Northern Ireland
Plus three years for ratification. So we will be looking at provisional implementation in 2029. If it happens at all. What will we be doing in the meantime?
WTO terms, though as we are already much closer aligned to the EU than Canada was it should not take that long to negotiate and implement
Is it okay to think that Starmer might genuinely be a very good LOTO and the best one since Blair?
What made Blair so effective was that he opposed surgically, but also that he could compellingly spell out an alternative. I am very confident Starmer can do the first, much less convinced he can do the latter. But given what Labour has offered for the last decade, I’m happy to take that. I suspect it’s not enough to win a majority, though.
For all that I can criticise Johnson he proved during the election campaign that he could win support for a vision of the future. Optimistically you might say we have two halves of a good political leader.
The hope, from Johnson's days as Mayor of London, was that he would have competent details people serving under him, as with his cycling commissioner. Thus far the evidence on that is not good.
In time we will come to see if Johnson won that election, or Corbyn lost it.
I maintain the view that Johnson isn't popular, he was just less unpopular than his opponent (albeit, a lot).
If tgat was the case May would have won in 2017 over Corbyn.
Boris is popular and charismatic, the most electorally successful Tory leader since Thatcher in terms of size of majority as well as having twice won the Mayoralty of London and led the winning Leave campaign.
Boris also has an appeal to blue collar, working class voters no Tory leader has had since Thatcher too. In fact even more so in the North and Midlands
Boris certainly has charisma but he still only got just over 1% more of the vote than May 2 years earlier.
His success in the "red wall" seats was as much down to Corbyn being anathema to regular Labour voters in those areas as it was to love of Boris.
Charisma is an asset but if there proves to be little substance behind it can soon look vacuous. By 2024 Boris is going to need a bit more than a breezy optimistic personna.
The LDs were up 4% on 2017 in 2019, Labour down 8%.
Boris won more than enough working class Labour Leave voters to make up for middle class Remainers lost to the LDs (with Labour losing a few to the Brexit Party too).
Working class Leave voters will still prefer Boris to Starmer, where Starmer might appeal is middle class Remain voters who hated Corbyn
I think you are making a lot of assumptions about working class leave voters there. There is a good chance many of those depressed towns will look even worse by 2024 not better. Nobody really knows how they are going to react to that politically and many may just stay at home and say f**k the lot of you.
Most of those Tory leave seat gains were won with small majorities. I can easily see most of them going back the other way. They are no where near in the bag for the Tories at future elections.
Mr. Mark, yeah, heard that from one person already.
Mr. Jonathan, it coincidentally hit Wuhan incredibly hard before anybody else noticed it existed, and the Chinese covered it up, but it started somewhere else?
Mr. Meeks, if the EU wants a deal then all it need do is revert to the position it held for years, namely that Canada's on offer, up until the point the UK agreed to it.
It's one-eyed to pretend the UK's been the only ropey party (in places it has been dubious) whereas the EU is somehow reasonable, honest, and true.
The UK can do a "Canada" with the EU, ie 1500 pages of bespoke agreement, every page haggled over by the various stakeholders over the course of six years. You would also need to do something about Northern Ireland, which doesn't feature in the Canada setup. The UK doesn't even want Canada.
This isn't realistic.
Canada for GB would be fine, the Withdrawal Agreement already covers Northern Ireland
Plus three years for ratification. So we will be looking at provisional implementation in 2029. If it happens at all. What will we be doing in the meantime?
WTO terms, though as we are already much closer aligned to the EU than Canada was it should not take that long to negotiate and implement
What matters is the destination, not the starting point. If the UK commits to dynamically aligning with the EU indefinitely, it won't take long. Otherwise it will.
And an extra few million get satisfied that they had it "back then" - so are at no risk to themselves or anybody else by acting like a twat in not social distancing....
Articles like this mean we need that antibody test all the more.
If it started in October, maybe it didn’t start in China.
Your Order of August the First is in the post from Beijing....
Don’t be daft. But it’s food for thought. The January Wuhan outbreak is what ties it to China. If it was cropping up around the world before that then it is at least possible it started elsewhere.
I don’t buy it, but it’s an interesting question.
It is now admitted to be in Wuhan by at least November. Clearly earlier - the CIA was preparing its report on WTF is happening in Wuhan by then. So maybe weeks before that. With a large proportion showing no symptoms, it is not at all beyond the bounds of possibility that people were on planes all over the place before anyone was aware there was any issue. And the US and UK for students and Italy for its "Made in Italy" badge factories for the Chinese markets would make sense as early hotspots.
The question arises - even though nobody was looking, how did significant numbers of cases outside China not get picked up?
Mr. Meeks, if the EU wants a deal then all it need do is revert to the position it held for years, namely that Canada's on offer, up until the point the UK agreed to it.
It's one-eyed to pretend the UK's been the only ropey party (in places it has been dubious) whereas the EU is somehow reasonable, honest, and true.
The UK can do a "Canada" with the EU, ie 1500 pages of bespoke agreement, every page haggled over by the various stakeholders over the course of six years. You would also need to do something about Northern Ireland, which doesn't feature in the Canada setup. The UK doesn't even want Canada.
This isn't realistic.
Canada for GB would be fine, the Withdrawal Agreement already covers Northern Ireland
Plus three years for ratification. So we will be looking at provisional implementation in 2029. If it happens at all. What will we be doing in the meantime?
WTO terms, though as we are already much closer aligned to the EU than Canada was it should not take that long to negotiate and implement
What matters is the destination, not the starting point. If the UK commits to dynamically aligning with the EU indefinitely, it won't take long. Otherwise it will.
"If the UK commits to dynamically aligning with the EU indefinitely"
Is it okay to think that Starmer might genuinely be a very good LOTO and the best one since Blair?
What made Blair so effective was that he opposed surgically, but also that he could compellingly spell out an alternative. I am very confident Starmer can do the first, much less convinced he can do the latter. But given what Labour has offered for the last decade, I’m happy to take that. I suspect it’s not enough to win a majority, though.
He’s more a younger Smith than Blair. That’s no bad thing given the state of the world and the party. Success will come from the team he forms around him.
Is it okay to think that Starmer might genuinely be a very good LOTO and the best one since Blair?
What made Blair so effective was that he opposed surgically, but also that he could compellingly spell out an alternative. I am very confident Starmer can do the first, much less convinced he can do the latter. But given what Labour has offered for the last decade, I’m happy to take that. I suspect it’s not enough to win a majority, though.
He’s more a younger Smith than Blair. That’s no bad thing given the state of the world and the party. Success will come from the team he forms around him.
Starmer is actually two years older than John Smith at the time of his death in 1994.
Toby Young believes that his free speech is being infringed if he can't express his views without others also acting on their consequent view of him. Of course he believes he's being oppressed if he can't do as he pleases and hang the consequences.
I am angrier at Young's article in the telegraph today than I think I have been at any article in many years. It is a long time since I openly swore whilst reading an article. Young needs to grow up and stop thinking every Government act is one step away from fascism.
He has just managed to insult everyone of those men and women who died fighting to protect his right to whine and whinge.
Swedish top egg-head doubling down on their approach. Basically well we now building a level of community immunity, ~20% have had it, other Nordic countries more like 1-2%. And long term only widespread community immunity will keep spread down to manageable levels, as no vaccine for a long time. Care homes is where the big mistake was made.
Not sold on idea of contact tracing, doesn't think it is really workable, due to the nature of Coronarvius versus say measles.
Doesn't recommend masks, as masks science not good. Better to just have a policy of if you ill a bit sick, stay home. Where as if you tell people to use masks, they more likely to go out anyway.
Mr. Meeks, if the EU wants a deal then all it need do is revert to the position it held for years, namely that Canada's on offer, up until the point the UK agreed to it.
It's one-eyed to pretend the UK's been the only ropey party (in places it has been dubious) whereas the EU is somehow reasonable, honest, and true.
The UK can do a "Canada" with the EU, ie 1500 pages of bespoke agreement, every page haggled over by the various stakeholders over the course of six years. You would also need to do something about Northern Ireland, which doesn't feature in the Canada setup. The UK doesn't even want Canada.
This isn't realistic.
Canada for GB would be fine, the Withdrawal Agreement already covers Northern Ireland
Plus three years for ratification. So we will be looking at provisional implementation in 2029. If it happens at all. What will we be doing in the meantime?
WTO terms, though as we are already much closer aligned to the EU than Canada was it should not take that long to negotiate and implement
What matters is the destination, not the starting point. If the UK commits to dynamically aligning with the EU indefinitely, it won't take long. Otherwise it will.
"If the UK commits to dynamically aligning with the EU indefinitely"
It isn't going to. Select a new start point.
The UK won't accept it now, agreed. I think there is a very high chance of there being no effective deal agreed by end 2020 and no transition period either. It won't be the end of the matter however and the UK is likely to be in a major crisis at that point centred on Northern Ireland. In the medium term I think it pretty likely the UK will in practice accept dynamic alignment just to put an end to the whole thing. The unspoken deal is that we won't attempt to rejoin the EU but we will do what they say anyway. Any thinking person would see that as the worst of both worlds, but there we go.
The Tories are currently on 365 seats, Labour 202, Lib Dems 11.
On a 5.5% swing in 2024, Labour would make 61 gains, 56 of which would be Tory seats, putting the Tories on 309. Labour would be on 263.
5 of the 61 gains are SNP seats, so likely Labour won't take those. But really that's net negative for Labour since the SNP would presumably support them.
If the SNP therefore hold around 40 seats, that is Labour + SNP = 303. Lib Dems hold 11 say and that's 314.
Green MP is one more.
SDLP is two more.
So that's Labour alliance thingy on 317, Tories + DUP on 316.
Imagine how buggered a Parliament that would be!
Why would the DUP support the Tories now that Corbyn has ceased to be Labour leader?
The Tories are currently on 365 seats, Labour 202, Lib Dems 11.
On a 5.5% swing in 2024, Labour would make 61 gains, 56 of which would be Tory seats, putting the Tories on 309. Labour would be on 263.
5 of the 61 gains are SNP seats, so likely Labour won't take those. But really that's net negative for Labour since the SNP would presumably support them.
If the SNP therefore hold around 40 seats, that is Labour + SNP = 303. Lib Dems hold 11 say and that's 314.
Green MP is one more.
SDLP is two more.
So that's Labour alliance thingy on 317, Tories + DUP on 316.
Imagine how buggered a Parliament that would be!
Why would the DUP support the Tories now that Corbyn has ceased to be Labour leader?
And an extra few million get satisfied that they had it "back then" - so are at no risk to themselves or anybody else by acting like a twat in not social distancing....
Articles like this mean we need that antibody test all the more.
If it started in October, maybe it didn’t start in China.
Your Order of August the First is in the post from Beijing....
Don’t be daft. But it’s food for thought. The January Wuhan outbreak is what ties it to China. If it was cropping up around the world before that then it is at least possible it started elsewhere.
I don’t buy it, but it’s an interesting question.
It is now admitted to be in Wuhan by at least November. Clearly earlier - the CIA was preparing its report on WTF is happening in Wuhan by then. So maybe weeks before that. With a large proportion showing no symptoms, it is not at all beyond the bounds of possibility that people were on planes all over the place before anyone was aware there was any issue. And the US and UK for students and Italy for its "Made in Italy" badge factories for the Chinese markets would make sense as early hotspots.
The question arises - even though nobody was looking, how did significant numbers of cases outside China not get picked up?
Not really. The Taiwanese knew it was in Wuhan in late December and told the WHO that it was displaying human to human transmission. They acted on their own information.
The Tories are currently on 365 seats, Labour 202, Lib Dems 11.
On a 5.5% swing in 2024, Labour would make 61 gains, 56 of which would be Tory seats, putting the Tories on 309. Labour would be on 263.
5 of the 61 gains are SNP seats, so likely Labour won't take those. But really that's net negative for Labour since the SNP would presumably support them.
If the SNP therefore hold around 40 seats, that is Labour + SNP = 303. Lib Dems hold 11 say and that's 314.
Green MP is one more.
SDLP is two more.
So that's Labour alliance thingy on 317, Tories + DUP on 316.
Imagine how buggered a Parliament that would be!
Why would the DUP support the Tories now that Corbyn has ceased to be Labour leader?
Because they are a right-wing party.
But the Conservative and Unionist Party put a border down the Irish Sea.
The DUP will never forgive or forget that betrayal.
Swedish egghead - Very little evidence that children spread it easily to adults. In Nordic countries, in schools spread has been teacher to teacher, not pupils to teachers.
The Tories are currently on 365 seats, Labour 202, Lib Dems 11.
On a 5.5% swing in 2024, Labour would make 61 gains, 56 of which would be Tory seats, putting the Tories on 309. Labour would be on 263.
5 of the 61 gains are SNP seats, so likely Labour won't take those. But really that's net negative for Labour since the SNP would presumably support them.
If the SNP therefore hold around 40 seats, that is Labour + SNP = 303. Lib Dems hold 11 say and that's 314.
Green MP is one more.
SDLP is two more.
So that's Labour alliance thingy on 317, Tories + DUP on 316.
Imagine how buggered a Parliament that would be!
Why would the DUP support the Tories now that Corbyn has ceased to be Labour leader?
Because they are a right-wing party.
But the Conservative and Unionist Party put a border down the Irish Sea.
The DUP will never forgive or forget that betrayal.
The Tories are currently on 365 seats, Labour 202, Lib Dems 11.
On a 5.5% swing in 2024, Labour would make 61 gains, 56 of which would be Tory seats, putting the Tories on 309. Labour would be on 263.
5 of the 61 gains are SNP seats, so likely Labour won't take those. But really that's net negative for Labour since the SNP would presumably support them.
If the SNP therefore hold around 40 seats, that is Labour + SNP = 303. Lib Dems hold 11 say and that's 314.
Green MP is one more.
SDLP is two more.
So that's Labour alliance thingy on 317, Tories + DUP on 316.
Imagine how buggered a Parliament that would be!
Why would the DUP support the Tories now that Corbyn has ceased to be Labour leader?
Because they are a right-wing party.
But the Conservative and Unionist Party put a border down the Irish Sea.
The DUP will never forgive or forget that betrayal.
Besides Labour would presumably offer them a few £Billion.
Somewhat sobering prog The Briefing Room on R4 this am mainly about the economic fallout of Corona. A US economist or historian was talking about how various US cities and states reacted differently to the Spanish Influenza. SF had a very strong belt and braces policy initially but lifted too early and was smashed by a third wave of the flu.
FFS, there's a third wave now?!
Yep. For spanish flu. iirc there were three waves, before it burnt out, the second was the most brutal.
Somemone here in Spain has predicted 2 further waves and no real recovery before 2022
Swedish egghead - ours is a workable long term strategy. Lockdown isn't feasible. Working vaccine for so far in the future, need a sustainable strategy to be maintained over the course of years.
The Tories are currently on 365 seats, Labour 202, Lib Dems 11.
On a 5.5% swing in 2024, Labour would make 61 gains, 56 of which would be Tory seats, putting the Tories on 309. Labour would be on 263.
5 of the 61 gains are SNP seats, so likely Labour won't take those. But really that's net negative for Labour since the SNP would presumably support them.
If the SNP therefore hold around 40 seats, that is Labour + SNP = 303. Lib Dems hold 11 say and that's 314.
Green MP is one more.
SDLP is two more.
So that's Labour alliance thingy on 317, Tories + DUP on 316.
Imagine how buggered a Parliament that would be!
Why would the DUP support the Tories now that Corbyn has ceased to be Labour leader?
Because they are a right-wing party.
But the Conservative and Unionist Party put a border down the Irish Sea.
The DUP will never forgive or forget that betrayal.
Did Boris intend betraying the DUP over the Irish Sea border or did he just not understand the complexities of his own so-called oven-ready deal? That has never been clear.
One similarity between Starmer path to power and Smith/Blair’s In he 90s is that the Lib Dem’s are starting fro an anaemic position and some recovery there is useful to chip away soft Tory votes in places Labour cannot reach. The LDs need to find a decent leader who can work with Labour and create a bit of anti Tory momentum.
The key difference is Scotland. Unless Starmer can find a way to attack the flabby soft blue underbelly in the south (which is entirely possible) he has to fight two fronts.
Or just give up on Scotland and let the SNP stop the Tories?
He doesn't need to get Sturgeon in the cabinet, just dare her to vote down a Labour budget and explain to her country why she let the Tories back in.
Literally giving up on Scotland and supporting independence might be a good strategy to win over England.
I'm not advocating supporting Independence, my point is that trying to actively try to win seats in Scotland seems like a waste of resources. They can repeat publicly the views they are pro-Unionism, etc. I just think whether they lose in Scotland or not is really irrelevant at this point.
Starmer is much more likely to recover seats lost to the SNP - beyond the gains made in 2017.If Labour hits 40% across GB , I cannot see them failing to get circa 30% in Scotland.
The Tories are currently on 365 seats, Labour 202, Lib Dems 11.
On a 5.5% swing in 2024, Labour would make 61 gains, 56 of which would be Tory seats, putting the Tories on 309. Labour would be on 263.
5 of the 61 gains are SNP seats, so likely Labour won't take those. But really that's net negative for Labour since the SNP would presumably support them.
If the SNP therefore hold around 40 seats, that is Labour + SNP = 303. Lib Dems hold 11 say and that's 314.
Green MP is one more.
SDLP is two more.
So that's Labour alliance thingy on 317, Tories + DUP on 316.
Imagine how buggered a Parliament that would be!
Why would the DUP support the Tories now that Corbyn has ceased to be Labour leader?
Because they are a right-wing party.
The Ulster Unionists were more natural Tory allies. On economic policy, the DUP is far from being right-wing.
The Tories are currently on 365 seats, Labour 202, Lib Dems 11.
On a 5.5% swing in 2024, Labour would make 61 gains, 56 of which would be Tory seats, putting the Tories on 309. Labour would be on 263.
5 of the 61 gains are SNP seats, so likely Labour won't take those. But really that's net negative for Labour since the SNP would presumably support them.
If the SNP therefore hold around 40 seats, that is Labour + SNP = 303. Lib Dems hold 11 say and that's 314.
Green MP is one more.
SDLP is two more.
So that's Labour alliance thingy on 317, Tories + DUP on 316.
Imagine how buggered a Parliament that would be!
Why would the DUP support the Tories now that Corbyn has ceased to be Labour leader?
Because they are a right-wing party.
But the Conservative and Unionist Party put a border down the Irish Sea.
The DUP will never forgive or forget that betrayal.
signed up member are you ?
Of the DUP? No, unless they start standing candidates in Great Britain.
I think they’d do really well in parts of Scotland.
I might join the Orange Order, I’m coming to the conclusion to that orange really is my colour, fashion wise.
Swedish top egg-head doubling down on their approach. Basically well we now building a level of community immunity, ~20% have had it, other Nordic countries more like 1-2%. And long term only widespread community immunity will keep spread down to manageable levels, as no vaccine for a long time. Care homes is where the big mistake was made.
Not sold on idea of contact tracing, doesn't think it is really workable, due to the nature of Coronarvius versus say measles.
Doesn't recommend masks, as masks science not good. Better to just have a policy of if you ill a bit sick, stay home. Where as if you tell people to use masks, they more likely to go out anyway.
At 9 minits 20 seconds in he quotes 25% of the population as now immune, I has thought that was the finger for Stockholm only, but maybe its nationally.
The Tories are currently on 365 seats, Labour 202, Lib Dems 11.
On a 5.5% swing in 2024, Labour would make 61 gains, 56 of which would be Tory seats, putting the Tories on 309. Labour would be on 263.
5 of the 61 gains are SNP seats, so likely Labour won't take those. But really that's net negative for Labour since the SNP would presumably support them.
If the SNP therefore hold around 40 seats, that is Labour + SNP = 303. Lib Dems hold 11 say and that's 314.
Green MP is one more.
SDLP is two more.
So that's Labour alliance thingy on 317, Tories + DUP on 316.
Imagine how buggered a Parliament that would be!
Why would the DUP support the Tories now that Corbyn has ceased to be Labour leader?
Because they are a right-wing party.
But the Conservative and Unionist Party put a border down the Irish Sea.
The DUP will never forgive or forget that betrayal.
Did Boris intend betraying the DUP over the Irish Sea border or did he just not understand the complexities of his own so-called oven-ready deal? That has never been clear.
He betrayed them like he regularly betrayed his wife.
I mean he even went to a DUP conference and said no Brit PM could ever countenance putting a border down the Irish Sea.
And an extra few million get satisfied that they had it "back then" - so are at no risk to themselves or anybody else by acting like a twat in not social distancing....
Articles like this mean we need that antibody test all the more.
If it started in October, maybe it didn’t start in China.
Perhaps it started in a Greggs or a Weatherspoons.
The Tories are currently on 365 seats, Labour 202, Lib Dems 11.
On a 5.5% swing in 2024, Labour would make 61 gains, 56 of which would be Tory seats, putting the Tories on 309. Labour would be on 263.
5 of the 61 gains are SNP seats, so likely Labour won't take those. But really that's net negative for Labour since the SNP would presumably support them.
If the SNP therefore hold around 40 seats, that is Labour + SNP = 303. Lib Dems hold 11 say and that's 314.
Green MP is one more.
SDLP is two more.
So that's Labour alliance thingy on 317, Tories + DUP on 316.
Imagine how buggered a Parliament that would be!
Why would the DUP support the Tories now that Corbyn has ceased to be Labour leader?
Because they are a right-wing party.
But the Conservative and Unionist Party put a border down the Irish Sea.
The DUP will never forgive or forget that betrayal.
signed up member are you ?
Of the DUP? No, unless they start standing candidates in Great Britain.
I think they’d do really well in parts of Scotland.
I might join the Orange Order, I’m coming to the conclusion to that orange really is my colour, fashion wise.
Already do, sort of - [edit: OK, exaggerating a bit, but it's related]
The Tories are currently on 365 seats, Labour 202, Lib Dems 11.
On a 5.5% swing in 2024, Labour would make 61 gains, 56 of which would be Tory seats, putting the Tories on 309. Labour would be on 263.
5 of the 61 gains are SNP seats, so likely Labour won't take those. But really that's net negative for Labour since the SNP would presumably support them.
If the SNP therefore hold around 40 seats, that is Labour + SNP = 303. Lib Dems hold 11 say and that's 314.
Green MP is one more.
SDLP is two more.
So that's Labour alliance thingy on 317, Tories + DUP on 316.
Imagine how buggered a Parliament that would be!
Why would the DUP support the Tories now that Corbyn has ceased to be Labour leader?
Because they are a right-wing party.
The Ulster Unionists were more natural Tory allies. On economic policy, the DUP is far from being right-wing.
And an extra few million get satisfied that they had it "back then" - so are at no risk to themselves or anybody else by acting like a twat in not social distancing....
Articles like this mean we need that antibody test all the more.
If it started in October, maybe it didn’t start in China.
Perhaps it started in a Greggs or a Weatherspoons.
It was when a vegan sausage roll came into contact with a steak bake.
The Tories are currently on 365 seats, Labour 202, Lib Dems 11.
On a 5.5% swing in 2024, Labour would make 61 gains, 56 of which would be Tory seats, putting the Tories on 309. Labour would be on 263.
5 of the 61 gains are SNP seats, so likely Labour won't take those. But really that's net negative for Labour since the SNP would presumably support them.
If the SNP therefore hold around 40 seats, that is Labour + SNP = 303. Lib Dems hold 11 say and that's 314.
Green MP is one more.
SDLP is two more.
So that's Labour alliance thingy on 317, Tories + DUP on 316.
Imagine how buggered a Parliament that would be!
Why would the DUP support the Tories now that Corbyn has ceased to be Labour leader?
Because they are a right-wing party.
But the Conservative and Unionist Party put a border down the Irish Sea.
The DUP will never forgive or forget that betrayal.
I agree, the LDs, the SNP, Plaid, the SDLP, the Greens, the Alliance and even now the DUP would all prefer a Starmer led Government and the whole UK back in the single market than a Boris led Government with GB on WTO terms and a border in the Irish Sea (though Boris will try and avoid checks in GB on goods from NI).
If Boris wants to stay PM he will need to win another Tory majority at the next general election
Swedish egghead - ours is a workable long term strategy. Lockdown isn't feasible. Working vaccine for so far in the future, need a sustainable strategy to be maintained over the course of years.
IF they are right, I really fear for our media class. They will have a mental breakdown in trying to come to terms with the horrible reality of the situation.
And an extra few million get satisfied that they had it "back then" - so are at no risk to themselves or anybody else by acting like a twat in not social distancing....
Articles like this mean we need that antibody test all the more.
If it started in October, maybe it didn’t start in China.
Perhaps it started in a Greggs or a Weatherspoons.
It was when a vegan sausage roll came into contact with a steak bake.
We all know it started when someone was eating a Hawaiian pizza whilst watching Die Hard in the run up to Christmas.
Mr. Meeks, if the EU wants a deal then all it need do is revert to the position it held for years, namely that Canada's on offer, up until the point the UK agreed to it.
It's one-eyed to pretend the UK's been the only ropey party (in places it has been dubious) whereas the EU is somehow reasonable, honest, and true.
The UK can do a "Canada" with the EU, ie 1500 pages of bespoke agreement, every page haggled over by the various stakeholders over the course of six years. You would also need to do something about Northern Ireland, which doesn't feature in the Canada setup. The UK doesn't even want Canada.
This isn't realistic.
Canada for GB would be fine, the Withdrawal Agreement already covers Northern Ireland
Plus three years for ratification. So we will be looking at provisional implementation in 2029. If it happens at all. What will we be doing in the meantime?
WTO terms, though as we are already much closer aligned to the EU than Canada was it should not take that long to negotiate and implement
You don’t go Frictionless to WTO to FTA. That would be ludicrous. You go Frictionless to FTA. And it takes as long as it takes.
And an extra few million get satisfied that they had it "back then" - so are at no risk to themselves or anybody else by acting like a twat in not social distancing....
Articles like this mean we need that antibody test all the more.
If it started in October, maybe it didn’t start in China.
Perhaps it started in a Greggs or a Weatherspoons.
That would explain why Greggs and Wetherspoons are still shut. You could be on to something.
And an extra few million get satisfied that they had it "back then" - so are at no risk to themselves or anybody else by acting like a twat in not social distancing....
Articles like this mean we need that antibody test all the more.
If it started in October, maybe it didn’t start in China.
Perhaps it started in a Greggs or a Weatherspoons.
It was when a vegan sausage roll came into contact with a steak bake.
Mr. Meeks, if the EU wants a deal then all it need do is revert to the position it held for years, namely that Canada's on offer, up until the point the UK agreed to it.
It's one-eyed to pretend the UK's been the only ropey party (in places it has been dubious) whereas the EU is somehow reasonable, honest, and true.
The UK can do a "Canada" with the EU, ie 1500 pages of bespoke agreement, every page haggled over by the various stakeholders over the course of six years. You would also need to do something about Northern Ireland, which doesn't feature in the Canada setup. The UK doesn't even want Canada.
This isn't realistic.
Canada for GB would be fine, the Withdrawal Agreement already covers Northern Ireland
Plus three years for ratification. So we will be looking at provisional implementation in 2029. If it happens at all. What will we be doing in the meantime?
WTO terms, though as we are already much closer aligned to the EU than Canada was it should not take that long to negotiate and implement
You don’t go Frictionless to WTO to FTA. That would be ludicrous. You go Frictionless to FTA. And it takes as long as it takes.
In that case the EU will just string along the transition period indefinitely with ultimately an EEA in all but name FTA, if we truly want a Canada style FTA we have to be prepared to go to WTO and Boris is
Mr. Meeks, if the EU wants a deal then all it need do is revert to the position it held for years, namely that Canada's on offer, up until the point the UK agreed to it.
It's one-eyed to pretend the UK's been the only ropey party (in places it has been dubious) whereas the EU is somehow reasonable, honest, and true.
The UK can do a "Canada" with the EU, ie 1500 pages of bespoke agreement, every page haggled over by the various stakeholders over the course of six years. You would also need to do something about Northern Ireland, which doesn't feature in the Canada setup. The UK doesn't even want Canada.
This isn't realistic.
Canada for GB would be fine, the Withdrawal Agreement already covers Northern Ireland
Plus three years for ratification. So we will be looking at provisional implementation in 2029. If it happens at all. What will we be doing in the meantime?
WTO terms, though as we are already much closer aligned to the EU than Canada was it should not take that long to negotiate and implement
You don’t go Frictionless to WTO to FTA. That would be ludicrous. You go Frictionless to FTA. And it takes as long as it takes.
Given they got to the same point with different approaches (I'd argue they aren't actually all that different in practice) perhaps suggests that outcomes depend on the circumstances of a particular country? Madness, I know.
I mean if I can still enjoy listening to The Smiths despite knowing Morrissey is a cock end...
I think I do draw the line at wishing people dead.
Normally I do as well but the episode Beer of Blackadder II really is one I loved and then became really relevant to me when one of my mother's friend slapped me around the face and called me a wicked child* when she learned I wasn't going to have an arranged marriage and was fornicating outside the faith. Ever since I've always called her Lady Whiteadder.
*Well she didn't call me wicked child, she called me a dahla and a haramzaada which are really strong words in Punjabi.
Swedish egghead - ours is a workable long term strategy. Lockdown isn't feasible. Working vaccine for so far in the future, need a sustainable strategy to be maintained over the course of years.
IF they are right, I really fear for our media class. They will have a mental breakdown in trying to come to terms with the horrible reality of the situation.
If they are right it would unfortunately still not have been a course we could have followed. They have had death rates probably 5 times of what they would have had with lockdown and there is no way that the Government would have survived 150,000+ deaths. We would simply have ended up in lockdown much later but with many more dead.
I really really hope the Swedes are right that this was the best way for their country. But it needs a small population and the willingness to have significant 'necessary' deaths to make it work as an experiment.
"The word stochastic in English was originally used as an adjective with the definition "pertaining to conjecturing" , and stemming from a Greek word meaning "to aim at a mark, guess", and the Oxford English Dictionary gives the year 1662 as its earliest occurrence"
Somewhat sobering prog The Briefing Room on R4 this am mainly about the economic fallout of Corona. A US economist or historian was talking about how various US cities and states reacted differently to the Spanish Influenza. SF had a very strong belt and braces policy initially but lifted too early and was smashed by a third wave of the flu.
FFS, there's a third wave now?!
Yep. For spanish flu. iirc there were three waves, before it burnt out, the second was the most brutal.
stochastic "ADJECTIVE technical Having a random probability distribution or pattern that may be analysed statistically but may not be predicted precisely."
And an extra few million get satisfied that they had it "back then" - so are at no risk to themselves or anybody else by acting like a twat in not social distancing....
Articles like this mean we need that antibody test all the more.
If it started in October, maybe it didn’t start in China.
Perhaps it started in a Greggs or a Weatherspoons.
It was when a vegan sausage roll came into contact with a steak bake.
Only a teensy bit more meat in the steak bake.
Greggs vegan sausage roll is a thing of beauty, and better than the actual sausage sausage roll. That was the verdict of colleagues when it was trialled round here.
stochastic "ADJECTIVE technical Having a random probability distribution or pattern that may be analysed statistically but may not be predicted precisely."
I suppose like tossing a coin? You can't predict each one precisely, but you can measure the probability distribution. Seems like they are trying to say that using this word somehow discredits this entire field of statistics?
"The word stochastic in English was originally used as an adjective with the definition "pertaining to conjecturing" , and stemming from a Greek word meaning "to aim at a mark, guess", and the Oxford English Dictionary gives the year 1662 as its earliest occurrence"
Stochasticgate is reminiscent of idiots creaming themselves over the phrase "mathematical trick" in the UEA climate emails.
Doesn't it have a rather specific meaning in terms of statistics?
Yes - one of the latest things on social media is a criticism of the Imperial College modelling by someone who presents herself as an expert in "coding" but who apparently doesn't have much of a clue about mathematical modelling. To the extent that if she understands the concept of Monte Carlo modelling she doesn't show any sign of it.
Of course this has been eagerly seized on by the crazies who say the lockdown has all been for nothing. As if it wasn't possible to estimate on the back of an envelope how many people were likely to die from a disease with an infection fatality rate of 0.5-1% and a basic reproduction number of 2-3, to which there is no known immunity in the population, if it were allowed to propagate unhindered.
At 9 minits 20 seconds in he quotes 25% of the population as now immune, I has thought that was the finger for Stockholm only, but maybe its nationally.
Swedish egghead - ours is a workable long term strategy. Lockdown isn't feasible. Working vaccine for so far in the future, need a sustainable strategy to be maintained over the course of years.
IF they are right, I really fear for our media class. They will have a mental breakdown in trying to come to terms with the horrible reality of the situation.
It's an awful balancing act. Everyone is going to get this sooner or later, all we can do is reach herd immunity in such a way that minimises deaths without crippling the economy.
At the moment we have gone with lockdown, which is a lowest-possible-deaths at the cost of total economic meltdown. But it won't work. Not just because it will destroy the economy, but also because lockdown cannot be maintained indefinitely. People are already breaking the rules, meeting up, etc.
Indefinite lockdown is not an option. That means herd immunity is still the only game in town. The only question is how we get there and how many lives will be lost.
An initial lockdown to build NHS capacity and prepare e.g. ramp up PPE production, hand sanitiser etc, was a good idea. But now lockdown has become a can kicking exercise. Nobody wants to face up to the truth. "Some of you will die" is not a vote winner. But it is the only option.
Given they got to the same point with different approaches (I'd argue they aren't actually all that different in practice) perhaps suggests that outcomes depend on the circumstances of a particular country? Madness, I know.
Is it okay to think that Starmer might genuinely be a very good LOTO and the best one since Blair?
What made Blair so effective was that he opposed surgically, but also that he could compellingly spell out an alternative. I am very confident Starmer can do the first, much less convinced he can do the latter. But given what Labour has offered for the last decade, I’m happy to take that. I suspect it’s not enough to win a majority, though.
By 1997 Major's government was universally detested and Major himself derided as a joke. That quite possibly might be the view of Johnson and his government by 2024. I can't envision Covid-19 and its aftershock playing well for incumbent governments across the globe.
Starmer looks and sounds the part which may be all it needs. Johnson did not offer a vision save for 'get Brexit done'. Remember Jeremy had an alternative, it was just an alternative vision no one else shared.
It can't be understated also how in 2024, the Government won't be able to play the "new and fresh" card again. 13 years of Government will be eating into them, people will be ready for a change, IMHO.
If that change isn't perceived as bats**t crazy like last time its a real risk yes.
Also, it is often forgotten, but Starmer gaining a majority is almost inconceivable without some kind of revival in Scotland.
The real constitutionally-impossible situation that is quite plausible is Tories win England but a Lab minority backed by the SNP takes Westminster, though any time SNP abstains means the Tories have a majority.
Given the SNP won't vote on England-only matters it means Labour would be incapable of properly governing England . . . and it will be in the SNP's interests to ensure Westminster is gummed up.
Plus the SNP will demand an independence referendum but them winning it would hand England back to the Tories who had won in England.
If the red wall can fall, so can the soft blue underbelly.
It can, but that doesn't change an iota of what I wrote.
Its quite plausible the result ends up with a Tory majority in England, but Lab minority government with SNP support in Westminster, in which case governing England will be nigh on impossible.
Which is why IMHO, Labour would be best to try and ensure a Lib Dem revival.
Indeed, Esher and Walton and Wokingham and Cities of London and Westminster are now more likely to be lost by the Tories to the LDs than Great Grimsby or Bishop Auckland or Harlow are to be lost to Labour.
Blair never won the former unlike the latter yet the latter have bigger Tory majorities now than the former
In reality , I suspect that is unlikely. Voters who swung massively against Labour in Grimsby and Bishop Auckland over a two and a half year period might swing back in 2024 on a similar scale post-Corbyn with Brexit no longer being an issue to many.Labour is also likely to regain second place in seats such as Cities of London & Westminster and Finchley.
Doesn't it have a rather specific meaning in terms of statistics?
Yes - one of the latest things on social media is a criticism of the Imperial College modelling by someone who presents herself as an expert in "coding" but who apparently doesn't have much of a clue about mathematical modelling. To the extent that if she understands the concept of Monte Carlo modelling she doesn't show any sign of it.
Of course this has been eagerly seized on by the crazies who say the lockdown has all been for nothing. As if it wasn't possible to estimate on the back of an envelope how many people were likely to die from a disease with an infection fatality rate of 0.5-1% and a basic reproduction number of 2-3, to which there is no known immunity in the population.
Monte carlo should be a pretty basic concept for someone critiquing mathematical models.
All of that is undoubtedly good news, the investigation needs to look into why Lord Deighton wasn't appointed in March so that these initiatives would be ready for the beginning of April rather than in April for May.
On topic: This thread segues very well with Southams Starmer thread and the BTL discussion of Isam of wondering what c the centre left actually stands for.
They could do worse than start with this Herdson thread and a few similar he has done in the past. So much of today's politics, despite Thatcher, is still predicated on now largely unspoken assumptions from the post-war era. Their unspokenness has weakened them.
Simply starting by renewing, restating and arguing for such basic things from the ground up would be a fantastic first step.
And an extra few million get satisfied that they had it "back then" - so are at no risk to themselves or anybody else by acting like a twat in not social distancing....
Articles like this mean we need that antibody test all the more.
If it started in October, maybe it didn’t start in China.
Perhaps it started in a Greggs or a Weatherspoons.
It was when a vegan sausage roll came into contact with a steak bake.
Swedish egghead - ours is a workable long term strategy. Lockdown isn't feasible. Working vaccine for so far in the future, need a sustainable strategy to be maintained over the course of years.
IF they are right, I really fear for our media class. They will have a mental breakdown in trying to come to terms with the horrible reality of the situation.
If they are right it would unfortunately still not have been a course we could have followed. They have had death rates probably 5 times of what they would have had with lockdown and there is no way that the Government would have survived 150,000+ deaths. We would simply have ended up in lockdown much later but with many more dead.
I really really hope the Swedes are right that this was the best way for their country. But it needs a small population and the willingness to have significant 'necessary' deaths to make it work as an experiment.
And a culture that isn't social. Swedish culture lends itself to social distancing a lot more easily than ours.
He really is so dense that he can quote a dictionary definition of a scientific term without noticing that the definition he's quoting is labelled "now rare or obsolete" and dated to the 17th century.
Perhaps if he'd looked up the dictionary definitions of "rare" and "obsolete" it would have helped.
Is it okay to think that Starmer might genuinely be a very good LOTO and the best one since Blair?
What made Blair so effective was that he opposed surgically, but also that he could compellingly spell out an alternative. I am very confident Starmer can do the first, much less convinced he can do the latter. But given what Labour has offered for the last decade, I’m happy to take that. I suspect it’s not enough to win a majority, though.
By 1997 Major's government was universally detested and Major himself derided as a joke. That quite possibly might be the view of Johnson and his government by 2024. I can't envision Covid-19 and its aftershock playing well for incumbent governments across the globe.
Starmer looks and sounds the part which may be all it needs. Johnson did not offer a vision save for 'get Brexit done'. Remember Jeremy had an alternative, it was just an alternative vision no one else shared.
It can't be understated also how in 2024, the Government won't be able to play the "new and fresh" card again. 13 years of Government will be eating into them, people will be ready for a change, IMHO.
If that change isn't perceived as bats**t crazy like last time its a real risk yes.
Also, it is often forgotten, but Starmer gaining a majority is almost inconceivable without some kind of revival in Scotland.
The real constitutionally-impossible situation that is quite plausible is Tories win England but a Lab minority backed by the SNP takes Westminster, though any time SNP abstains means the Tories have a majority.
Given the SNP won't vote on England-only matters it means Labour would be incapable of properly governing England . . . and it will be in the SNP's interests to ensure Westminster is gummed up.
Plus the SNP will demand an independence referendum but them winning it would hand England back to the Tories who had won in England.
If the red wall can fall, so can the soft blue underbelly.
It can, but that doesn't change an iota of what I wrote.
Its quite plausible the result ends up with a Tory majority in England, but Lab minority government with SNP support in Westminster, in which case governing England will be nigh on impossible.
Which is why IMHO, Labour would be best to try and ensure a Lib Dem revival.
Indeed, Esher and Walton and Wokingham and Cities of London and Westminster are now more likely to be lost by the Tories to the LDs than Great Grimsby or Bishop Auckland or Harlow are to be lost to Labour.
Blair never won the former unlike the latter yet the latter have bigger Tory majorities now than the former
In reality , I suspect that is unlikely. Voters who swung massively against Labour in Grimsby and Bishop Auckland over a two and a half year period might swing back in 2024 on a similar scale post-Corbyn with Brexit no longer being an issue to many.Labour is also likely to regain second place in seats such as Cities of London & Westminster and Finchley.
Stochastic has a specific technical meaning in physical science/numerical methods.
Witless probably is the mot juste, you are right. I don't mind hacks not knowing what stochastic means but it really ought to have been obvious this was a technical or jargon word. Shades of Bernard and Sir Humphrey trying to explain meta-dioxin by parsing meta as a Latin or Greek term rather than a chemical one.
“Right you've convinced me. Later this week I shall lose my thirty pound land virginity. I remain to be convinced it will have a lasting positive effect on my mental health.”
I would be delighted to advise on what you need to buy! Could I not be taken on such visits as a buyer - like those art buyers poncey rich people have? I will wear my mask - made on my sewing machine last night and very fetching - you tell me the budget and I will blow it. It will do wonders for your garden and my mental health! 😀
Stay away from the tat though. Agapanthus, peonies, dahlias, crocosmias, geums and foxgloves will be starting to come through. One tip: never buy plants that are in full flower because the flowering will not last long once you are home, unless you are good at deadheading or it is a plant which will repeat flower. Buy plants with plenty of buds so you - rather than the garden centre - get the full benefit.
And check the roots. Many plants will likely be pot bound with the roots would tightly round and round. Ideally, you don’t want these as they take a bit longer to get established in the ground unless you pull the roots a bit to allow them to spread.
Have fun!
By the by, one shrub that has done very well this year is the dwarf lilac. Heavenly scent too. Well worth anybody considering it to fill a space.
What a wonderful view ... is it from your garden and where would that be pray? In general terms obviously.
It is a gorgeous view, south Devon, looking out towards the coast west of Dartmouth. We can glimpse the sea - was more than that, but a plantation of conifers on the horizon has pretty much done for the view.
You have to go upstairs for the view, Peter.....guest bedroom. Dwarf lilac in the foreground. Sadly, CV-19 means no guests getting the benefit:
Thanks for the further superb view from your home MM ... I think I can well understand why you seldom manage to find the time to attend NFFC's games!
"The word stochastic in English was originally used as an adjective with the definition "pertaining to conjecturing" , and stemming from a Greek word meaning "to aim at a mark, guess", and the Oxford English Dictionary gives the year 1662 as its earliest occurrence"
Stochasticgate is reminiscent of idiots creaming themselves over the phrase "mathematical trick" in the UEA climate emails.
No, that was deliberately misleading. It is perfectly possible to believe in and be concerned about climate change, while also recognising that some of its proponents are, in your own word, idiots. You are not obliged to defend the indefensible.
The Tories are currently on 365 seats, Labour 202, Lib Dems 11.
On a 5.5% swing in 2024, Labour would make 61 gains, 56 of which would be Tory seats, putting the Tories on 309. Labour would be on 263.
5 of the 61 gains are SNP seats, so likely Labour won't take those. But really that's net negative for Labour since the SNP would presumably support them.
If the SNP therefore hold around 40 seats, that is Labour + SNP = 303. Lib Dems hold 11 say and that's 314.
Green MP is one more.
SDLP is two more.
So that's Labour alliance thingy on 317, Tories + DUP on 316.
Imagine how buggered a Parliament that would be!
Why would the DUP support the Tories now that Corbyn has ceased to be Labour leader?
Because they are a right-wing party.
But the Conservative and Unionist Party put a border down the Irish Sea.
The DUP will never forgive or forget that betrayal.
signed up member are you ?
Of the DUP? No, unless they start standing candidates in Great Britain.
I think they’d do really well in parts of Scotland.
I might join the Orange Order, I’m coming to the conclusion to that orange really is my colour, fashion wise.
Swedish egghead - ours is a workable long term strategy. Lockdown isn't feasible. Working vaccine for so far in the future, need a sustainable strategy to be maintained over the course of years.
IF they are right, I really fear for our media class. They will have a mental breakdown in trying to come to terms with the horrible reality of the situation.
If they are right it would unfortunately still not have been a course we could have followed. They have had death rates probably 5 times of what they would have had with lockdown and there is no way that the Government would have survived 150,000+ deaths. We would simply have ended up in lockdown much later but with many more dead.
I really really hope the Swedes are right that this was the best way for their country. But it needs a small population and the willingness to have significant 'necessary' deaths to make it work as an experiment.
Comments
Most of those Tory leave seat gains were won with small majorities. I can easily see most of them going back the other way. They are no where near in the bag for the Tories at future elections.
Mr. Jonathan, it coincidentally hit Wuhan incredibly hard before anybody else noticed it existed, and the Chinese covered it up, but it started somewhere else?
Je suis not convinced.
Europe winning here!
https://twitter.com/gordonguthrie/status/1259081611729084416?s=20
The question arises - even though nobody was looking, how did significant numbers of cases outside China not get picked up?
https://twitter.com/cyclefree2/status/1259083009220907008?s=21
I may have to work on the marketing though .......
It isn't going to. Select a new start point.
It's going to make identity parades fun...
He has just managed to insult everyone of those men and women who died fighting to protect his right to whine and whinge.
Not sold on idea of contact tracing, doesn't think it is really workable, due to the nature of Coronarvius versus say measles.
Doesn't recommend masks, as masks science not good. Better to just have a policy of if you ill a bit sick, stay home. Where as if you tell people to use masks, they more likely to go out anyway.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8J9CvgB1AE
The DUP will never forgive or forget that betrayal.
I think they’d do really well in parts of Scotland.
I might join the Orange Order, I’m coming to the conclusion to that orange really is my colour, fashion wise.
https://twitter.com/HuffPostUK/status/1259074232874602497?s=20
I mean he even went to a DUP conference and said no Brit PM could ever countenance putting a border down the Irish Sea.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/millions-more-items-of-ppe-for-frontline-staff-from-new-business-partnerships
Still she’ll always be Lady Whiteadder to me.
I mean if I can still enjoy listening to The Smiths despite knowing Morrissey is a cock end...
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15270068.orange-order-elected-to-councils-as-labour-and-tory-members/
Which is interesting in view of this ...
If Boris wants to stay PM he will need to win another Tory majority at the next general election
Fewer cases/deaths means less urgency for PPE.
https://twitter.com/ClarkeMicah/status/1258679760902934528
https://twitter.com/ambkcsingh/status/1259013289238880257
*Well she didn't call me wicked child, she called me a dahla and a haramzaada which are really strong words in Punjabi.
Nej, it's mine!
I really really hope the Swedes are right that this was the best way for their country. But it needs a small population and the willingness to have significant 'necessary' deaths to make it work as an experiment.
https://lockdownsceptics.org/how-convincing-is-imperial-colleges-covid-19-model/
But the author says 'educated guess'.
wiki says:
"The word stochastic in English was originally used as an adjective with the definition "pertaining to conjecturing" , and stemming from a Greek word meaning "to aim at a mark, guess", and the Oxford English Dictionary gives the year 1662 as its earliest occurrence"
stochastic
"ADJECTIVE
technical
Having a random probability distribution or pattern that may be analysed statistically but may not be predicted precisely."
Of course this has been eagerly seized on by the crazies who say the lockdown has all been for nothing. As if it wasn't possible to estimate on the back of an envelope how many people were likely to die from a disease with an infection fatality rate of 0.5-1% and a basic reproduction number of 2-3, to which there is no known immunity in the population, if it were allowed to propagate unhindered.
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2020/04/28/coronavirus-covid-19-sweden-anders-tegnell-herd-immunity/3031536001/
New York City found pretty much an identical figure via antibody tests, although the rest of the state was at ~4%.
At the moment we have gone with lockdown, which is a lowest-possible-deaths at the cost of total economic meltdown. But it won't work. Not just because it will destroy the economy, but also because lockdown cannot be maintained indefinitely. People are already breaking the rules, meeting up, etc.
Indefinite lockdown is not an option. That means herd immunity is still the only game in town. The only question is how we get there and how many lives will be lost.
An initial lockdown to build NHS capacity and prepare e.g. ramp up PPE production, hand sanitiser etc, was a good idea. But now lockdown has become a can kicking exercise. Nobody wants to face up to the truth. "Some of you will die" is not a vote winner. But it is the only option.
https://twitter.com/GidMK/status/1259020210419318784
Stochastic has a specific technical meaning in physical science/numerical methods.
This thread segues very well with Southams Starmer thread and the BTL discussion of Isam of wondering what c the centre left actually stands for.
They could do worse than start with this Herdson thread and a few similar he has done in the past. So much of today's politics, despite Thatcher, is still predicated on now largely unspoken assumptions from the post-war era. Their unspokenness has weakened them.
Simply starting by renewing, restating and arguing for such basic things from the ground up would be a fantastic first step.
Perhaps if he'd looked up the dictionary definitions of "rare" and "obsolete" it would have helped.
What will happen if someone introduces the concept of Monte Carlo simulations to him?
*Mansfield waves....*
2017 Con majority - 1,057
2019 Con majority - 16,306
https://www.businessinsider.com/google-employees-cannot-expense-food-and-other-perks-2020-5
IIRC there were 60 'Remain Alliance' seats, though that may have been on the same other planet as Jo Swinson being PM.