The new Lib Dem leader would surely be wise to get behind Starmer.
What!?
How do you figure that? You do realise the Lib Dems are not a subordinate branch of the Labour Party. Why doesn't Starmer just get behind Johnson? Why doesn't Carlaw just get behind Sturgeon? That's what you've just proposed.
The Lib Dems will have to get behind the Tories or Labour, as that is their realistic chance of being in Government. We know that happens when they proclaim they can govern alone or have their leader as PM.
Since they hate Johnson and hate Brexit, I would assume they'll go for the less hated option which is clearly Labour. Seems logical to me.
Labour needs a strong LD performance to soak up Tory seats in the South West and South Coast. Conversely the LDs need a Labour leader that would not look out of place in 10 Downing Street.
The two parties need to be distinctly separate for the above to work.
Scotland, for Labour is ancient history and assuming Johnson is still PM at the next election, the Tories will be harder to shift from the Brexit voting areas in the Midlands and the North of England. I have them consolidating these seats and perhaps adding more along with the M4 corridor in Wales. Johnson is electoral catnip in these areas which means Labour are even more reliant on 50 seats from the LDs.
More or Less worth a listen again. Comparison with Germany very interesting, but ran the testing story again. The deception here really is disgraceful.
They picked the 15/5 when 136,000 tests were done but they are not only including posted tests but also non diagnosed tests carried out by Uni and Research Labs (30,000) so useful for other reasons but not tests to determine if people have or don't have Covid. Also 2nd tests are not generally because the previous test needs verifying, but because say the test was dropped on the floor or the testee vomited on the first test. Also a spit and nasal test is counted as two.
Total people tested = 43,000 out of a quoted figure of 136,000
It really is an appalling deception.
I have never heard 'More or Less' get so annoyed in its fact checking.
Again not news.
On the very day the 100,000 test target was announced, they announced five strands of testing including diagnostic and yes non-diagnostic testing etc - someone from the media asked what was meant by the 100,000 and Hancock replied that it was "all tests from all strands".
So that some are non-diagnostic is not news. It was what was said would be counted literally on day one.
A dropped test counts as 2 tests? You are defending the indefensible
Not the dropped test no, that's ridiculous to log that, but the non-diagnostic is what I referred to.
Who's dropping tests though and why are they logging them? I'd doubt that's a high proportion, at least I'd hope not.
It appears that the 2nd tests are because of failures to take the test in the first place largely not because they are going back to retest, but because of vomiting on the test, dropping the test, etc because of the difficulty in taking the test. Also a throat and nasal test is counted as 2 tests! I don't know why some tests are single swabs and some are 2 swabs, but it is still 1 test in my book if the test consists of 2 swabs (nose and throat). The lab might do 2 tests but it is 1 person tested. The number of 2 tests on that day was 26,000 for all reasons.
I disagree, a swab test and a nasal test is 2 tests. It literally is 2 tests - one person, 2 tests.
Would you consider a swab test and a blood test to be just one test?
I said the lab will do 2 tests but only 1 person has been tested and the Govt has been misrepresenting this quite blatantly to massage figures and pointlessly so.
Most people don't look at the data, they look at the headline figure. It is interesting that professional statisticians and their professional bodies have been backing up the misrepresentation claims quite loudly.
People will refer to the fact that they have gone to the Doctors for a test, when that will consist of several blood samples, urine sample, swab, etc.
The only purpose of making it a plural is for stock or knowing the number of tests the labs carry out. As far as the individual is concerned they have been for a test.
Just the same as when you go for an xray. You will never have 1.
Yes multiple xrays, number of examinations/test = 1
Plus what about all the other stuff that took 136K to 43K.
You think the population by and large understands that 30K weren't used to see if specific individuals had Covid or not, regardless of what was put in the small print of the announcement.
There's no misrepesentation. The headline data the government sets out includes the number of people tested. They have that in the headline chart they send out.
If the media aren't reporting that well blame the media. The data is there and clear. Numbers of tests and number of people are reported simultaneously.
That is clearly nonsense as statisticians will tell you. The Royal Statistical Society President has written to the Government expressing its concerns quite forcefully about the Govt presentation of the data. And the data is not all there. More or Less has been asking the Govt for some of the figures for sometime which the Govt claims not to have. One for instance was the returns of postal tests. There was concern for sometime that these were being counted twice in the figure (eg when going out and coming back). The Govt couldn't initially confirm that they weren't. They have now, but still can't give the figure.
This has sod all to do with the media. I am listening to what is said by the minister. It is far from transparent. Most of the data supplied on More or Less for that day was not announced by the minister.
The Lib Dems will have to get behind the Tories or Labour, as that is their realistic chance of being in Government. We know that happens when they proclaim they can govern alone or have their leader as PM.
Since they hate Johnson and hate Brexit, I would assume they'll go for the less hated option which is clearly Labour. Seems logical to me.
What makes you think that the LibDems want to be in government? They've tried that, and they found the entire experience to be thoroughly miserable. They are won't want to repeat the experience for many years, if ever.
Indeed.
Their two parliaments in coalition with SLab has also put the SLDs off power. In the unlikely event that Carlaw or Leonard get within a whisker of Bute House, you can pretty much guarantee that Rennie will let them down at the last minute.
Maybe. You may or may not agree with the UK's new trade arrangements, but they stem from decidedly conservative principles. Cleverness right now isn't that important. Political bottle is.
Look at Rishi Sunak. I think yesterday it actually dawned on him he might go down in history as the man who broke Britain. Anybody with an ounce of courage would have resigned weeks ago.
You've been posting some interesting stuff there. I'm particularly interested to discover that there is a second person on the world (second after Liz Truss herself) who thinks that she has achieved anything at all.
Also, no matter how much partisans such as @Philip_Thompson and @HYUFD want it to be, politics is not, and should not, be like supporting a football team.
It’s about achieving aims, not about “your team” winning for the sake of it.
This may be news to someone as used to losing elections as yourself but the way party politicians get their aims implemented is to either win the election or for minor parties to raise awareness for their aims so that a major party does it.
If your aim is a Labour Party government then why would you be leading the Liberal Democrats? If you're leading the Liberal Democrats it should be because your aims differ from the Labour Party's aims. In which case you need to set out what your party stands for and seek to convince people to vote for that.
If you don't stand for anything then why stand as a separate party?
I’ve never stood in an election and thus I’ve never lost an election. Nice try though.
The person I voted for in GE 2019 was elected though, so there’s that.
Boris still comfortably leads Starmer on preferred PM still.
Net approval ratings are not enough on their own either eg in 1979 Thatcher's Tories unlike Starmer's Labour led on voting intention as well as Thatcher leading on net approval even when she trailed Callaghan as preferred PM
Starmer has halved Johnson's lead in a month - and this is the easy part for the Tories politically. The next bit, when the furlough ends and a no deal is approaching, will be a lot more challenging.
.These regular complaints about tweets are almost as irritating as the tweets themselves.
And as for complaints about complaints about the tweets?
Ipsos custodes...
I'm not complaining; just pointing out the futility of it.
Do not ruin my meme. I wanted to complain about you complaining about the complaints... and then wait and see who would take it to the next level.
Can i complain about those who complain that i complain too much about Hancocks non existent protective ring at the outset? Or will that just precipitate more complaints about those who are complaining about those complaining about my complaining?
More or Less worth a listen again. Comparison with Germany very interesting, but ran the testing story again. The deception here really is disgraceful.
They picked the 15/5 when 136,000 tests were done but they are not only including posted tests but also non diagnosed tests carried out by Uni and Research Labs (30,000) so useful for other reasons but not tests to determine if people have or don't have Covid. Also 2nd tests are not generally because the previous test needs verifying, but because say the test was dropped on the floor or the testee vomited on the first test. Also a spit and nasal test is counted as two.
Total people tested = 43,000 out of a quoted figure of 136,000
It really is an appalling deception.
I have never heard 'More or Less' get so annoyed in its fact checking.
Again not news.
On the very day the 100,000 test target was announced, they announced five strands of testing including diagnostic and yes non-diagnostic testing etc - someone from the media asked what was meant by the 100,000 and Hancock replied that it was "all tests from all strands".
So that some are non-diagnostic is not news. It was what was said would be counted literally on day one.
A dropped test counts as 2 tests? You are defending the indefensible
Not the dropped test no, that's ridiculous to log that, but the non-diagnostic is what I referred to.
Who's dropping tests though and why are they logging them? I'd doubt that's a high proportion, at least I'd hope not.
It appears that the 2nd tests are because of failures to take the test in the first place largely not because they are going back to retest, but because of vomiting on the test, dropping the test, etc because of the difficulty in taking the test. Also a throat and nasal test is counted as 2 tests! I don't know why some tests are single swabs and some are 2 swabs, but it is still 1 test in my book if the test consists of 2 swabs (nose and throat). The lab might do 2 tests but it is 1 person tested. The number of 2 tests on that day was 26,000 for all reasons.
I disagree, a swab test and a nasal test is 2 tests. It literally is 2 tests - one person, 2 tests.
Would you consider a swab test and a blood test to be just one test?
I said the lab will do 2 tests but only 1 person has been tested and the Govt has been misrepresenting this quite blatantly to massage figures and pointlessly so.
Most people don't look at the data, they look at the headline figure. It is interesting that professional statisticians and their professional bodies have been backing up the misrepresentation claims quite loudly.
People will refer to the fact that they have gone to the Doctors for a test, when that will consist of several blood samples, urine sample, swab, etc.
The only purpose of making it a plural is for stock or knowing the number of tests the labs carry out. As far as the individual is concerned they have been for a test.
Just the same as when you go for an xray. You will never have 1.
Yes multiple xrays, number of examinations/test = 1
Plus what about all the other stuff that took 136K to 43K.
You think the population by and large understands that 30K weren't used to see if specific individuals had Covid or not, regardless of what was put in the small print of the announcement.
There's no misrepesentation. The headline data the government sets out includes the number of people tested. They have that in the headline chart they send out.
If the media aren't reporting that well blame the media. The data is there and clear. Numbers of tests and number of people are reported simultaneously.
That is clearly nonsense as statisticians will tell you. The Royal Statistical Society President has written to the Government expressing its concerns quite forcefully about the Govt presentation of the data. And the data is not all there. More or Less has been asking the Govt for some of the figures for sometime which the Govt claims not to have. One for instance was the returns of postal tests. There was concern for sometime that these were being counted twice in the figure (eg when going out and coming back). The Govt couldn't initially confirm that they weren't. They have now, but still can't give the figure.
This has sod all to do with the media. I am listening to what is said by the minister. It is far from transparent. Most of the data supplied on More or Less for that day was not announced by the minister.
That's a different matter. That's an issue with how you count the number of tests, not the number of people. You were complaining about people being tested twice being reported as two in the headline figures but they're reported as one person in the headline figures.
They certainly forget the hundreds (thousands?) of predictions they've made about Scottish politics and the demise of the SNP. More self aware types might be ashamed to trot out the same turgid guff time after time, but these chaps are made of sterner stuff.
This time next year, you'll be Indy, eh lads?
Oh wait...
I've never made that prediction.
While we're on that subject of looking into the future, let's take a little trip to the past.
'Scott_P Posts: 21,367 June 25
JackW said:
4. Next PM. It's May for me, anyone but Boris.
5. Corbyn should go too. A total tool. About as effective as a leader and potential PM as a fart in a hurricane.
6.Lastly and this will shock many but Scotland should now opt for independence. There I said it. The will of the Scottish people on the EU, a matter of the most crucial significance for the future, was clear. Hopefully it will be an amicable uncoupling. I would vote for YES in SINDY2, if still around.
SINDY2 should take place within 18 months and a YES vote take effect on the date of BREXIT two years after Article 50 is enabled or before 2020 whichever is sooner.
Maybe. You may or may not agree with the UK's new trade arrangements, but they stem from decidedly conservative principles. Cleverness right now isn't that important. Political bottle is.
Look at Rishi Sunak. I think yesterday it actually dawned on him he might go down in history as the man who broke Britain. Anybody with an ounce of courage would have resigned weeks ago.
You've been posting some interesting stuff there. I'm particularly interested to discover that there is a second person on the world (second after Liz Truss herself) who thinks that she has achieved anything at all.
Swedish schools (for under 16s) have been open throughout. It is a non-issue.
The problem with closing things is not the initial closure, but the much more difficult re-opening. It is a bit like the classic equity market problem: yes, of course it is fantastic to sell at or near the top, but you also need to buy at or near the bottom. In other words, you need to get it right *twice*, which is bloody hard, which is why most intelligent folks just shrug their shoulders and stay in.
The mental health repercussions of disrupted education and social life for the young, in combination with mass unemployment, could well outweigh the benefits of lockdown. We’ll have a better idea of that when we have the perspective of hindsight.
Very much agree with this, the country has basically gone insane, aided and abetted by politicians.
The evidence for outdoor transmission is limited, the evidence for child to adult transmission is limited and yet we're still not allowed to interact socially outdoors and schools are still closed.
Someone in government needs to step up and explain all of this to the public in a clear and concise manner, laying out the scientific arguments in favour. In an age when we need a political colossus we have a bunch of pygmys all too scared of their own shadows to make decisions.
I know I bang on about my poor mother in a care home - sorry - but I talked to the care home manager yesterday (again). I pressed her on why I can`t see my mother - why is the care home refusing my request for them to load mum in a wheelchair, wheel her outside into the car park and allow us to see her 2 metres away. We can`t allow that, the manager said, the government says no and care home`s are politically hot topic at the moment.
No recognition of the mental health of the residents at all.
It's an area I have nil experience of (thankfully) but this does seem OTT.
FWIW, there is a care home I pass regularly on my corona constitutionals and they are allowing visits on that 'outside and 2m' basis. I see it going on as I walk by.
Putting aside the potentially slightly misleading headline. Even just 40-50 new cases a day on london is a lot lower than i imagined was the situation & this is with more people back to work etc.
The new Lib Dem leader would surely be wise to get behind Starmer.
What!?
How do you figure that? You do realise the Lib Dems are not a subordinate branch of the Labour Party. Why doesn't Starmer just get behind Johnson? Why doesn't Carlaw just get behind Sturgeon? That's what you've just proposed.
The fact Tories are so rattled by the idea of the Lib Dems getting behind Starmer says it all really.
I'm not rattled I'm confused!
Why doesn't the Ole Gunnar Solskjaer just get behind Manchester City?
Why doesn't whoever Arsenal's manager is now just get behind Chelsea?
Why doesn't Biden just get behind Trump?
snip
OI!!
Arsenal's manager is...er...no he's gone...er...no give up. Dammit
Good interview with Arsenal's last manager here. I feel he was very unfairly scapegoated
For me, the rot started when we lost Ashley Cole to Chelsea for an extra £5,000/week, plus the over-30 rule was infuriating when you had the likes of Viera, Pires, Freddie, and Thierry getting the ball from Jens and scoring in 40 seconds.
Cole of course went on to become arguably the best left back on the planet.
I am an Arsene fan but appreciate he needed refreshing and I saw some shocking decisions of his (of which one, switching Iwobi, who was playing down the left flank and getting past everyone, to playing in the centre and not getting a touch for the rest of the game, was particularly notable).
I don't think many, including perhaps the players, took Arsenal seriously after he left. They needed an old and safe pair of hands to guide them through the inevitable rough patch. The comment that Arteta should have gone to Everton, and Ancelotti to Arsenal was absolutely spot on.
Also, no matter how much partisans such as @Philip_Thompson and @HYUFD want it to be, politics is not, and should not, be like supporting a football team.
It’s about achieving aims, not about “your team” winning for the sake of it.
Says Labour partisan Gallowgate
Good one. I’ve been a Labour party member for the best part of 5 months. Prior to that I was a member of the Lib Dems.
I’m as far from being a “Labour partisan” as can be.
If lockdown is lifted, “social distancing” has to stop. Basic, sensible hygiene measures: yes. But the idea that you can have venues and activities where social closeness is integral to the very nature of what is going on at the same time as “social distancing” is contradictory nonsense.
Why? It's not a binary on/off switch.
The shape of what's coming, internationally, is, I think, becoming clear. In economic terms, we are going to see neither a 'V' nor a 'U' nor an 'L' shaped recession. Instead, the profile going to be something like an 'L' initially but with the bottom glyph gradually turning upwards in a slow, incremental recovery. It will probably take some years before economies are back to pre-Covid-19 levels, even if a vaccine becomes widely available some time next year..
On a sector level, we are going to see a very mixed picture. Factories will largely re-open, provided they are making things which are still in demand. Offices will partially return to semi-normal with social distancing and other precautions in place, but with many or most workers still working from home. Retail - or the bit of it which survives - is going to run at reduced capacity, with social distancing precautions in place for quite a while. Schools will reopen tentatively. Universities, hotels, restaurants, pubs, theatres, concert halls, airlines, civil aviation manufacturing are completely stuffed. Non-Covid healthcare will stutter back into life but at reduced capacity.
If social distancing is maintained as a policy then all forms of social closeness and intimacy and the activities by which humans express and show and enjoy this will effectively be banned or impossible. This is pretty much every form of human activity save for that work which can be done from home or while tooled up in protective gear
This is not an economic issue fundamentally but about how we want to live.
Pretending that lockdown can be lifted and these activities can continue “with social distancing measures” in place is a big fat lie.
A life, a society where can there be no social closeness is unbearable, to me anyway. And a huge overreaction. Societies have lived with contagious and deadly diseases before without closing down everything in sight for months or years on end.
Ultimately it will come down to each individual taking on as much risk as they are comfortable with. That is the only way forward if we don't develop a vaccine.
The problem will come if restaurants, cinemas, pubs, coffee shops discover that there aren't enough people willing to take the risk to make their businesses viable. A lot will go bust but the innovative and good quality ones will survive.
For example, I can't wait to go out for meals again but which restaurants we use will very much be determined on how well they appear to be dealing with the issue. A number of restaurants we go to for lunch in our small city have two floors but only generally open up the ground floor for lunch. Now if one of them is enterprising enough to open up the upper floor with well-spaced tables for the over 70s / vulnerable I'll be there every day!
Also, no matter how much partisans such as @Philip_Thompson and @HYUFD want it to be, politics is not, and should not, be like supporting a football team.
It’s about achieving aims, not about “your team” winning for the sake of it.
My politics have clearly evolved over 25 years. But I reached an acute crisis point last year when the Corbyn disaster changed my party beyond recognition. So I quit. And as it continued I hitched a ride with the party with the closest fit to my politics - the LibDems.
It wasn't a good fit, it felt increasingly like I was going through the motions, so when Starmer won and my friends asked me to "return home" to Labour I had to give it a go. Labour still has a lot of problems inherited from the Corbyn disaster. But I have belief that we can resolve them.
Why did you go Labour to LibDem to Labour I've been asked. Because the political map changed underneath me I replied...
The Lib Dems will have to get behind the Tories or Labour, as that is their realistic chance of being in Government. We know that happens when they proclaim they can govern alone or have their leader as PM.
Since they hate Johnson and hate Brexit, I would assume they'll go for the less hated option which is clearly Labour. Seems logical to me.
What makes you think that the LibDems want to be in government? They've tried that, and they found the entire experience to be thoroughly miserable. They are won't want to repeat the experience for many years, if ever.
Possibly , however the Lib dems won their most seats under Blair. So I guess they would hope SkS does well, with lots of conservative switchers, feeling safe to vote Lib Dem.
Serology for SARS-CoV-2: Apprehensions, opportunities, and the path forward https://immunology.sciencemag.org/content/5/47/eabc6347 ...Making data-driven decisions on how to fight the COVID-19 pandemic without completely shutting down economies will require better tools to understand the extent of transmission. The current crisis presents an opportunity to rethink how health systems generate and use surveillance data, and how to harness the power of serological tests and seroepidemiology. The world’s health systems are rushing to develop and implement testing for clinical use, evaluations of social policy, and quantification of population-level risk, which has brought into sharp focus the challenges facing surveillance programs throughout the world. There is an urgent need to monitor variations in disease transmission across populations and geographies in near real-time. Rapid detection of active cases and contact tracing – using direct tests for presence of the virus (acute phase diagnosis) – is the cornerstone of containment strategies. For later phases of pandemic control – when the key questions involve when, where, and how to lift confinement measures, and relax social distancing constraints – serological testing to measure antibody responses to the virus becomes paramount to refine understanding of transmission intensity and population susceptibility.
Antibody tests to detect exposure to SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for COVID-19, are rapidly becoming available (a list is maintained by FIND at https://www.finddx.org/covid-19/pipeline/), with the majority configured for detection of IgG antibodies to the Spike (S) protein of the virus, though other isotypes and antigens are being explored...
... The performance of different test platforms is likely to vary considerably; for instance, point of care lateral flow assays are likely to be fraught with more problems of sensitivity/specificity than ELISA formats, however their low cost and ease of use will facilitate more rapid scale-up and widespread adoption.
Despite enormous and ongoing efforts to study immune responses to COVID-19 in different clinical settings, to date there is insufficient data and poor understanding of the magnitude and duration of antibody responses (IgM, IgG, and IgA) following asymptomatic, mild, and severe infections. We do not yet understand how antibody responses vary across diverse populations with different genetic backgrounds, comorbidities, or infection histories. In this article, we discuss the use case for individual- versus population-level serological testing, with a focus on IgG testing applications. We emphasize the dangers of using current serologic tests for individual-level risk assessments, but highlight the potential power of deploying population-level serological testing (i.e., serosurveillance or seroepidemiology) – even with assays of moderate sensitivity/specificity....
"There is an urgent need to monitor variations in disease transmission across populations and geographies in near real-time."
This a great quote from the study. People oddly think that how the virus has affected a country is all down to whether the Government is any good or not when papably it is not, they may be able to tinker round the edges but this virus will do what it likes. In some countries it has been a huge problem and others have been left alone. As I said earlier how can anyone explain the way this virus has treated Iran and Iraq so differently.
.These regular complaints about tweets are almost as irritating as the tweets themselves.
And as for complaints about complaints about the tweets?
Ipsos custodes...
I'm not complaining; just pointing out the futility of it.
Do not ruin my meme. I wanted to complain about you complaining about the complaints... and then wait and see who would take it to the next level.
Can i complain about those who complain that i complain too much about Hancocks non existent protective ring at the outset? Or will that just precipitate more complaints about those who are complaining about those complaining about my complaining?
Boris still comfortably leads Starmer on preferred PM still.
Net approval ratings are not enough on their own either eg in 1979 Thatcher's Tories unlike Starmer's Labour led on voting intention as well as Thatcher leading on net approval even when she trailed Callaghan as preferred PM
Starmer has halved Johnson's lead in a month - and this is the easy part for the Tories politically. The next bit, when the furlough ends and a no deal is approaching, will be a lot more challenging.
Swedish schools (for under 16s) have been open throughout. It is a non-issue.
The problem with closing things is not the initial closure, but the much more difficult re-opening. It is a bit like the classic equity market problem: yes, of course it is fantastic to sell at or near the top, but you also need to buy at or near the bottom. In other words, you need to get it right *twice*, which is bloody hard, which is why most intelligent folks just shrug their shoulders and stay in.
The mental health repercussions of disrupted education and social life for the young, in combination with mass unemployment, could well outweigh the benefits of lockdown. We’ll have a better idea of that when we have the perspective of hindsight.
Very much agree with this, the country has basically gone insane, aided and abetted by politicians.
...
We need to get the death toll down to a trickle and the problems people talking about here largely disappear of their own accord. The governments are getting those numbers down but it's taking longer than it should because of previous and current mistakes. The only way of getting numbers down to a trickle right now is through continued social distancing. There aren't any shortcuts.
That's not true. People under 40 without any health conditions can essentially lead a normal life as long as they limit their contact to that group. Kids also don't give it to adults so schools should be back as long as teachers maintain social distancing measures between themselves and other staff.
There is a huge mental health toll on younger generations that isn't being addressed, kids aren't seeing their friends, teenagers aren't seeing their girlfriends and boyfriends, young adults aren't dating or seeing their friends, loads are sitting at home unemployed or furloughed in misery when it is not clear that they need to be.
It doesn't matter how ageist it looks to let everyone under 40 without health conditions get on with life as normal but that is what needs to happen. The government are too worried about how things will look.
How on earth do you partition the society into those over 40 anfd those under 40? That would also bring a huge toll on younger genertaions. There are a huge number of parents over 40 with children who are not old enough to look after themselves, even before you start to think of the jobs done by over 40s that people under 40 depend on.
So you'd rather have the nation shut down for everyone indefinitely instead of making a few tough decisions for people over 40? Don't forget their kids will still be going to school and seeing their friends everyday.
How about we squash the virus so that it is either eliminated altogether (like New Zealand) or down at containable levels? That way then everyone can get back to normalish while taking sensible precautions and using track, trace and isolation for those who do get the virus or get exposed and quarantining at the borders to stop it reentering the nation.
Why does there have to be a generational divide?
I think you're on the right side of history here - but if it doesn't work, and the prospect of a treatment or a vaccine remains distant, there will have to be some tough decisions made.
I am not a Unionist.. I have no opinion one way or another, The times wasn't very kind about the sainted Nicola and her handling of Scottish matters. Sooner or later questions will be asked.. and they are starting to be asked.
There seems to be a contradiction here: The outcomes in Scotland versus England seem broadly similar, yet the same people who claim that Boris will have to resign in disgrace for his handling of the epidemic, say Sturgeon has been made stronger.
This does not make sense.
Without commenting either way on the Scottish government’s performance, I note that could easily be reconciled by noting that the lamentable failings in the initial decision-making at a UK-wide level were the responsibility of Boris Johnson.
Health is devolved. The lockdown decisions are devolved. What isn't devolved is external borders, and there, I agree the UK government has fallen short.
Sturgeon had "advanced warning" of the consequences of a super spreader event after the NIKE conference in Edinburgh (as did PHE which were in the loop) - which no doubt will feature prominently in the Inquiry.
One thing she is doing is being "mother of the nation" fronting all the press conferences (which she does well) something Boris conspicuously hasn't (and when he did, didn't do as well).
Faint praise is still praise. And coming from a rampant cyberbritnat like Carlotta it sounds like a megaphone.
Nicola 7 - Boris 0
I don't think anyone has denied that Nicola is a talented politician - I've said it many times.
As have I.
I do note Mr Dickson studiously avoids commenting on a report (very) critical of the SNP government.
Maybe. You may or may not agree with the UK's new trade arrangements, but they stem from decidedly conservative principles. Cleverness right now isn't that important. Political bottle is.
Look at Rishi Sunak. I think yesterday it actually dawned on him he might go down in history as the man who broke Britain. Anybody with an ounce of courage would have resigned weeks ago.
You've been posting some interesting stuff there. I'm particularly interested to discover that there is a second person on the world (second after Liz Truss herself) who thinks that she has achieved anything at all.
Liz Truss' roles are to act as Twitter troll, which she is actually quite good at, and to keep the flag flying for a Global Brexit Britain. Reality is overwhelming her on the second point.
Boris still comfortably leads Starmer on preferred PM still.
Net approval ratings are not enough on their own either eg in 1979 Thatcher's Tories unlike Starmer's Labour led on voting intention as well as Thatcher leading on net approval even when she trailed Callaghan as preferred PM
Starmer has halved Johnson's lead in a month - and this is the easy part for the Tories politically. The next bit, when the furlough ends and a no deal is approaching, will be a lot more challenging.
How do you think Starmer is doing with WWC?
Anecdotally not amazingly, but better than Corbyn.
I wonder if the government would secretly be quite happy if a substantial number of parents keep their children away from schools as they re-open? Unfortunately it might well be the wrong parents, though.
Also, no matter how much partisans such as @Philip_Thompson and @HYUFD want it to be, politics is not, and should not, be like supporting a football team.
It’s about achieving aims, not about “your team” winning for the sake of it.
My politics have clearly evolved over 25 years. But I reached an acute crisis point last year when the Corbyn disaster changed my party beyond recognition. So I quit. And as it continued I hitched a ride with the party with the closest fit to my politics - the LibDems.
It wasn't a good fit, it felt increasingly like I was going through the motions, so when Starmer won and my friends asked me to "return home" to Labour I had to give it a go. Labour still has a lot of problems inherited from the Corbyn disaster. But I have belief that we can resolve them.
Why did you go Labour to LibDem to Labour I've been asked. Because the political map changed underneath me I replied...
When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do?
Starmer is doing well in Scotland thus far: he’s in a +5 to +10 range, which is approximately where Ruth Davidson used to poll before she got the boot.
Starmer is certainly miles ahead of Richard Leonard, and galaxies ahead of Boris Johnson, Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn ratings.
The problem is he is well behind Sturgeon.
The missing man is Jackson Carlaw, who theoretically is the main Unionist candidate to be Next FM. In reality he is nothing of the sort.
At the risk of sounding like a cybernat, this is good news for the SNP. The more split the opposition, the better for them.
Not if Starmer wins back those former Labour voters who switched to the SNP in 2015. I expect him to have some success on that front.
Boris still comfortably leads Starmer on preferred PM still.
Net approval ratings are not enough on their own either eg in 1979 Thatcher's Tories unlike Starmer's Labour led on voting intention as well as Thatcher leading on net approval even when she trailed Callaghan as preferred PM
Starmer has halved Johnson's lead in a month - and this is the easy part for the Tories politically. The next bit, when the furlough ends and a no deal is approaching, will be a lot more challenging.
Not sure this is the easy bit for the Government - they are taking increasing flak for their handling of the virus and another day brings another issue such as schools reopening. That leaves Starmer free to attack the Government on topics that are easy for him to exploit without having to offer solutions. The problem for him I suspect is if / when politics get back to normal and we start discussing the trade deals we will sign and what is happening with the extension. At that point, he is going to have to explain what Labour will do, which is likely to p1ss off a lot of the ex-Labour voters who moved to the Tories.
Also, no matter how much partisans such as @Philip_Thompson and @HYUFD want it to be, politics is not, and should not, be like supporting a football team.
It’s about achieving aims, not about “your team” winning for the sake of it.
Says Labour partisan Gallowgate
Good one. I’ve been a Labour party member for the best part of 5 months. Prior to that I was a member of the Lib Dems.
I’m as far from being a “Labour partisan” as can be.
So you are just an anti Tory partisan, thanks for confirming
On schools: it's the logistics. I've got a friend who works in one and they're desperately trying to work out how to make it work.
They wish to maintain social distancing as much as practicable. After all, even if kids don't die of this as much (albeit there are, I am reliably informed, children with asthma or diabetes or even other issues that can make them specifically vulnerable), it has been found that the vast majority of them live in households that contain adults.
Some of these adults will be vulnerable. Risk categories include asthma, diabetes, hypertension, age, vitamin D deficiency, and being male. If just 10% of households contain vulnerable adults, then any randomly chosen group of 7 children will have a better than fifty-fifty chance that a vulnerable adult is in close daily contact with at least one of them.
We have found some indications that children might not carry the disease to infect others. Unfortunately, this hasn't been confirmed in any remotely reliable way. It's also difficult to see how you could catch it from touching a parcel (confirmed) but not from touching a child's skin or clothes. After all, they are indeed mobile surfaces that interact with others.
So - social distancing. Maximum of 10 children per class to have any chance of this. Most schools don't have anywhere near enough classrooms to cope with even a half of their normal capacity while maintaining social distancing. Children to stay in that single bubble and not mingle. They have to go to the loo at specified times to be escorted and controlled in their group. Sectioned-off areas of the playground. No sharing anything. No playing games in close contact. No hugging friends. So many restrictions that the teachers may not have the opportunity to, you know, teach anything.
Children have been looking on a return to school and their friends as a source of hope. They traipse in, and cannot come close to their friends, have to stay in their "bubble" (even if their best friends are in another one", are in the wrong classroom with weird restrictions, probably with the wrong teacher, who's wearing mask and gloves.
Yeah, this will work well, won't it?
I have been thinking all of the above, thanks for expressing so eloquently.
If lockdown is lifted, “social distancing” has to stop. Basic, sensible hygiene measures: yes. But the idea that you can have venues and activities where social closeness is integral to the very nature of what is going on at the same time as “social distancing” is contradictory nonsense.
Yes I'd say so. Offices and so on can do that, but it's just not viable for many activities and venues if safe to open.
Boris still comfortably leads Starmer on preferred PM still.
Net approval ratings are not enough on their own either eg in 1979 Thatcher's Tories unlike Starmer's Labour led on voting intention as well as Thatcher leading on net approval even when she trailed Callaghan as preferred PM
That post sounds like you are trying to convince yourself that the dynamic is not changing at the moment.
Also, no matter how much partisans such as @Philip_Thompson and @HYUFD want it to be, politics is not, and should not, be like supporting a football team.
It’s about achieving aims, not about “your team” winning for the sake of it.
This may be news to someone as used to losing elections as yourself but the way party politicians get their aims implemented is to either win the election or for minor parties to raise awareness for their aims so that a major party does it.
If your aim is a Labour Party government then why would you be leading the Liberal Democrats? If you're leading the Liberal Democrats it should be because your aims differ from the Labour Party's aims. In which case you need to set out what your party stands for and seek to convince people to vote for that.
If you don't stand for anything then why stand as a separate party?
I’ve never stood in an election and thus I’ve never lost an election. Nice try though.
The person I voted for in GE 2019 was elected though, so there’s that.
Are you telling me hand on heart that on the night of GE2019/morning after you weren't disappointed with the result and didn't think you'd lost?
This 'could be seen as a difficult time' for Starmer as you say, but Boris is being tested in the areas he is absolutely weakest on: coping with decline, loss of liberty, message to play everything safe etc in a context where competent and boring delivery, communicated with accuracy and simplicity is really the only thing needed. To be LOTO when you can do the simple and boring accuracy (only simple if you know your stuff - ask any lawyer) and don't have to deliver is a lot easier than many contexts for taking over as LOTO.
In the long run Boris will be fortunate and brave if can overcome this one. At the moment the communication skills of government is much worse than I would have expected.
The government Comms have been terrible because the only thing they are good at is lying and the current situation requires them to be truthful. Nobody believes a word they say now, even when they are telling the truth.
That is why England is a failing state. She has passed a point of no return.
It does rather feel like it. The thing I found genuinely terrifying was the sight of Johnson leading his Cabinet in the chant of the lie about the hospitals. It was like something from a death cult, or a theocratic junta. Could you imagine Thatcher doing it? Or indeed any of Johnson's predecessors? I thought, this is how great nations die.
Which lie was that, please? Not being critical at all - simplyh interested.
"We are building forty new hospitals" (they are upgrading six hospitals).
I wonder if the government would secretly be quite happy if a substantial number of parents keep their children away from schools as they re-open? Unfortunately it might well be the wrong parents, though.
I think they are counting on it. Just as they counted on not everyone returning to the workplace immediately, when that was lifted.
Also, no matter how much partisans such as @Philip_Thompson and @HYUFD want it to be, politics is not, and should not, be like supporting a football team.
It’s about achieving aims, not about “your team” winning for the sake of it.
Says Labour partisan Gallowgate
Good one. I’ve been a Labour party member for the best part of 5 months. Prior to that I was a member of the Lib Dems.
I’m as far from being a “Labour partisan” as can be.
So you are just an anti Tory partisan, thanks for confirming
Not necessarily, I would consider voting Tory under certain circumstances. However the only Tory governments in my adult life has been Cameron’s austerity binge, and now May and Johnson’s Brexit bonanza, so it’s not exactly compelling.
Starmer is doing as well as a LoTO could do, I think
I disagree. He would be doing much better if he had a half-decent team behind him. He lacks heavy-hitters.
If you look back to Blair’s shadow cabinet during the Major years, he had several quality big-hitters, plus a decent corps of junior supporters. Poor Starmer has almost no back-up.
He needs some time to build up that team (or build themselves up).
This 'could be seen as a difficult time' for Starmer as you say, but Boris is being tested in the areas he is absolutely weakest on: coping with decline, loss of liberty, message to play everything safe etc in a context where competent and boring delivery, communicated with accuracy and simplicity is really the only thing needed. To be LOTO when you can do the simple and boring accuracy (only simple if you know your stuff - ask any lawyer) and don't have to deliver is a lot easier than many contexts for taking over as LOTO.
In the long run Boris will be fortunate and brave if can overcome this one. At the moment the communication skills of government is much worse than I would have expected.
The government Comms have been terrible because the only thing they are good at is lying and the current situation requires them to be truthful. Nobody believes a word they say now, even when they are telling the truth.
That is why England is a failing state. She has passed a point of no return.
It does rather feel like it. The thing I found genuinely terrifying was the sight of Johnson leading his Cabinet in the chant of the lie about the hospitals. It was like something from a death cult, or a theocratic junta. Could you imagine Thatcher doing it? Or indeed any of Johnson's predecessors? I thought, this is how great nations die.
There is only one route open now: England needs to start telling the truth, not least to herself. The facts are ugly, but they must be presented and fully digested. The Conservatives are incapable of this, so the long, slow decline of once great England will continue, until a more noble group of leaders can wrestle power from the charlatans.
Remember that to voters, it doesn’t matter if their “party” does well. What matters is whether policies they want get implemented.
I would like that to be true, but then you look at how the attitude of Republican voters has changed in respect to Russia, and perhaps the policies are less important to many voters than the feeling of superiority gained from getting one over the other side?
Boris still comfortably leads Starmer on preferred PM still.
Net approval ratings are not enough on their own either eg in 1979 Thatcher's Tories unlike Starmer's Labour led on voting intention as well as Thatcher leading on net approval even when she trailed Callaghan as preferred PM
Starmer has halved Johnson's lead in a month - and this is the easy part for the Tories politically. The next bit, when the furlough ends and a no deal is approaching, will be a lot more challenging.
Not sure this is the easy bit for the Government - they are taking increasing flak for their handling of the virus and another day brings another issue such as schools reopening. That leaves Starmer free to attack the Government on topics that are easy for him to exploit without having to offer solutions. The problem for him I suspect is if / when politics get back to normal and we start discussing the trade deals we will sign and what is happening with the extension. At that point, he is going to have to explain what Labour will do, which is likely to p1ss off a lot of the ex-Labour voters who moved to the Tories.
If the economy tanks to the extent that it looks like it will, circumstances will do all the heavy lifting for Starmer.
Also, no matter how much partisans such as @Philip_Thompson and @HYUFD want it to be, politics is not, and should not, be like supporting a football team.
It’s about achieving aims, not about “your team” winning for the sake of it.
This may be news to someone as used to losing elections as yourself but the way party politicians get their aims implemented is to either win the election or for minor parties to raise awareness for their aims so that a major party does it.
If your aim is a Labour Party government then why would you be leading the Liberal Democrats? If you're leading the Liberal Democrats it should be because your aims differ from the Labour Party's aims. In which case you need to set out what your party stands for and seek to convince people to vote for that.
If you don't stand for anything then why stand as a separate party?
I’ve never stood in an election and thus I’ve never lost an election. Nice try though.
The person I voted for in GE 2019 was elected though, so there’s that.
Are you telling me hand on heart that on the night of GE2019/morning after you weren't disappointed with the result and didn't think you'd lost?
Oh how the roles have reversed, and it’s me who’s being anal and pedantic and it’s you who’s trying to appeal to the “real world”.
I wonder if the government would secretly be quite happy if a substantial number of parents keep their children away from schools as they re-open? Unfortunately it might well be the wrong parents, though.
That is undoubtedly the plan. The problem is the schools will stop supporting the same level of home learning for the kids who don't return.
Could one of the mods have a gentle word with ScottP - last night there was a veritable flood of single tweet posts from him, and today it looks like more of the same. It would be great if he could be encouraged to offer a few words with each retweet to explain how he feels this particular Tweet is pertinent or adds to the debate here. Unlike Twitter, we can't 'unfollow' a user, so treating the comment threads here like Twitter doesn't really work.
Could one of the mods ban one of my opponents, because I dislike messages which counter my own world view.
There, sorted that for you.
Its another irregular verb -
I repost valuable information You are off topic He is a spammer
Actually the proposal that if you're posting a Tweet you write some of your own words to say why its relevant is not an unreasonable one.
Share Tweets as often as you like then, with your own thoughts. Not just copy and pasting other people's thoughts.
Just skip Scott's post if they bother you, there are a couple of posters I never look at. It's not difficult, a minor irritant , no more.
It' s no coincidence that there is 100% correlation between those wanting to curtail his posts and those who don't like the message!
Also, no matter how much partisans such as @Philip_Thompson and @HYUFD want it to be, politics is not, and should not, be like supporting a football team.
It’s about achieving aims, not about “your team” winning for the sake of it.
Says Labour partisan Gallowgate
Good one. I’ve been a Labour party member for the best part of 5 months. Prior to that I was a member of the Lib Dems.
I’m as far from being a “Labour partisan” as can be.
So you are just an anti Tory partisan, thanks for confirming
Not necessarily, I would consider voting Tory under certain circumstances. However the only Tory governments in my adult life has been Cameron’s austerity binge, and now May and Johnson’s Brexit bonanza, so it’s not exactly compelling.
Please state when you last voted Tory then?
If you did not even vote Tory in 2015 or 2019 when the Tories won an overall majority, you are just an anti Tory partisan
Also, no matter how much partisans such as @Philip_Thompson and @HYUFD want it to be, politics is not, and should not, be like supporting a football team.
It’s about achieving aims, not about “your team” winning for the sake of it.
Says Labour partisan Gallowgate
Good one. I’ve been a Labour party member for the best part of 5 months. Prior to that I was a member of the Lib Dems.
I’m as far from being a “Labour partisan” as can be.
Boris still comfortably leads Starmer on preferred PM still.
Net approval ratings are not enough on their own either eg in 1979 Thatcher's Tories unlike Starmer's Labour led on voting intention as well as Thatcher leading on net approval even when she trailed Callaghan as preferred PM
Starmer has halved Johnson's lead in a month - and this is the easy part for the Tories politically. The next bit, when the furlough ends and a no deal is approaching, will be a lot more challenging.
Not sure this is the easy bit for the Government - they are taking increasing flak for their handling of the virus and another day brings another issue such as schools reopening. That leaves Starmer free to attack the Government on topics that are easy for him to exploit without having to offer solutions. The problem for him I suspect is if / when politics get back to normal and we start discussing the trade deals we will sign and what is happening with the extension. At that point, he is going to have to explain what Labour will do, which is likely to p1ss off a lot of the ex-Labour voters who moved to the Tories.
The government is taking flak, but there is broad support for both the lockdown and the various economic measures that have been taken. Navigating the end of both of these is going to be a whole lot tougher than what has happened up to now.
Also, no matter how much partisans such as @Philip_Thompson and @HYUFD want it to be, politics is not, and should not, be like supporting a football team.
It’s about achieving aims, not about “your team” winning for the sake of it.
Says Labour partisan Gallowgate
Good one. I’ve been a Labour party member for the best part of 5 months. Prior to that I was a member of the Lib Dems.
I’m as far from being a “Labour partisan” as can be.
Patel isn;t clever, but she has that priceless ability to ignore the shrieks of the commentariat and the left in pursuing her goals. She resisted almost every attempt to water down her immigration bill, even in respect of potentially dangerous NHS workers.
That is not an admirable quality. It just means she rammed through a piece of legislation that will either unravel quickly or have more holes in it than Emmental cheese. If a bill cannot survive intense scrutiny in its passage, it does not deserve to make it on to the statute books.
Having a tin ear is a great quality if you are a despot or dictator, less so in normal politics.
Theres certainly a range. Being determined and committed can be a strength so you arent constantly vacilating in an indecisive manner as a result of every little detail.
But it's not a strength to make a virtue of having a closed mind. Its perfectly possible to hold strong views without pre determining matters, of being able to listen and potentially change course even if you dont often.
Could one of the mods have a gentle word with ScottP - last night there was a veritable flood of single tweet posts from him, and today it looks like more of the same. It would be great if he could be encouraged to offer a few words with each retweet to explain how he feels this particular Tweet is pertinent or adds to the debate here. Unlike Twitter, we can't 'unfollow' a user, so treating the comment threads here like Twitter doesn't really work.
Could one of the mods ban one of my opponents, because I dislike messages which counter my own world view.
There, sorted that for you.
Its another irregular verb -
I repost valuable information You are off topic He is a spammer
Actually the proposal that if you're posting a Tweet you write some of your own words to say why its relevant is not an unreasonable one.
Share Tweets as often as you like then, with your own thoughts. Not just copy and pasting other people's thoughts.
Just skip Scott's post if they bother you, there are a couple of posters I never look at. It's not difficult, a minor irritant , no more.
It' s no coincidence that there is 100% correlation between those wanting to curtail his posts and those who don't like the message!
They don't bother me, I wasn't the one complaining.
I wonder if the government would secretly be quite happy if a substantial number of parents keep their children away from schools as they re-open? Unfortunately it might well be the wrong parents, though.
That is undoubtedly the plan. The problem is the schools will stop supporting the same level of home learning for the kids who don't return.
I wonder if the government would secretly be quite happy if a substantial number of parents keep their children away from schools as they re-open? Unfortunately it might well be the wrong parents, though.
That is undoubtedly the plan. The problem is the schools will stop supporting the same level of home learning for the kids who don't return.
True - that would be impossible, given that it's currently a full time job for a lot of teachers.
Also, no matter how much partisans such as @Philip_Thompson and @HYUFD want it to be, politics is not, and should not, be like supporting a football team.
It’s about achieving aims, not about “your team” winning for the sake of it.
Says Labour partisan Gallowgate
Good one. I’ve been a Labour party member for the best part of 5 months. Prior to that I was a member of the Lib Dems.
I’m as far from being a “Labour partisan” as can be.
So you are just an anti Tory partisan, thanks for confirming
Not necessarily, I would consider voting Tory under certain circumstances. However the only Tory governments in my adult life has been Cameron’s austerity binge, and now May and Johnson’s Brexit bonanza, so it’s not exactly compelling.
Please state when you last voted Tory then?
Never, and I just explained why. That doesn’t mean I wont in the future.
You on the other hand would never vote Labour, as you constantly belittle @Big_G_NorthWales for doing during the Blair years, as the Tory party is “your team”.
This 'could be seen as a difficult time' for Starmer as you say, but Boris is being tested in the areas he is absolutely weakest on: coping with decline, loss of liberty, message to play everything safe etc in a context where competent and boring delivery, communicated with accuracy and simplicity is really the only thing needed. To be LOTO when you can do the simple and boring accuracy (only simple if you know your stuff - ask any lawyer) and don't have to deliver is a lot easier than many contexts for taking over as LOTO.
In the long run Boris will be fortunate and brave if can overcome this one. At the moment the communication skills of government is much worse than I would have expected.
The government Comms have been terrible because the only thing they are good at is lying and the current situation requires them to be truthful. Nobody believes a word they say now, even when they are telling the truth.
That is why England is a failing state. She has passed a point of no return.
It does rather feel like it. The thing I found genuinely terrifying was the sight of Johnson leading his Cabinet in the chant of the lie about the hospitals. It was like something from a death cult, or a theocratic junta. Could you imagine Thatcher doing it? Or indeed any of Johnson's predecessors? I thought, this is how great nations die.
Which lie was that, please? Not being critical at all - simplyh interested.
"We are building forty new hospitals" (they are upgrading six hospitals).
Thanks!
And also there is the difference between adapting a pre-existing building and building it from the earth up (their claim of doing as well as the Chinese emergency hospital)
Boris still comfortably leads Starmer on preferred PM still.
Net approval ratings are not enough on their own either eg in 1979 Thatcher's Tories unlike Starmer's Labour led on voting intention as well as Thatcher leading on net approval even when she trailed Callaghan as preferred PM
Starmer has halved Johnson's lead in a month - and this is the easy part for the Tories politically. The next bit, when the furlough ends and a no deal is approaching, will be a lot more challenging.
How do you think Starmer is doing with WWC?
Judging by the approval ratings, much better than Corbyn. Though the bar is exceptionally low. The damage done to Labour over recent years has been so severe that it is going to take a long time to undo. The first step in the process is to get a hearing. Starmer is creating the space for that to happen. But, as I say, that is only the start. What he says also has to resonate. On that the jury remains very much out.
One thing i would ask / suggest, when people quote a post with a tweet in it, take out the http at the front of the link so that the tweet doesn't display in the reply. It is very annoying when somebody is posting a load of tweets, which causes a flood of replies and end up with a screen of tweets repeated over and over again.
I wonder if the government would secretly be quite happy if a substantial number of parents keep their children away from schools as they re-open? Unfortunately it might well be the wrong parents, though.
'Wrong parents'? Would indiscriminate shaggers with sprogs scattered all over the joint be included in this category
Italy looks far worse on that graph. Our line is already nearly back to the trend line so our percentage will go down, their line hasn't gone down at all yet so their percentage is still going up.
This 'could be seen as a difficult time' for Starmer as you say, but Boris is being tested in the areas he is absolutely weakest on: coping with decline, loss of liberty, message to play everything safe etc in a context where competent and boring delivery, communicated with accuracy and simplicity is really the only thing needed. To be LOTO when you can do the simple and boring accuracy (only simple if you know your stuff - ask any lawyer) and don't have to deliver is a lot easier than many contexts for taking over as LOTO.
In the long run Boris will be fortunate and brave if can overcome this one. At the moment the communication skills of government is much worse than I would have expected.
The government Comms have been terrible because the only thing they are good at is lying and the current situation requires them to be truthful. Nobody believes a word they say now, even when they are telling the truth.
That is why England is a failing state. She has passed a point of no return.
It does rather feel like it. The thing I found genuinely terrifying was the sight of Johnson leading his Cabinet in the chant of the lie about the hospitals. It was like something from a death cult, or a theocratic junta. Could you imagine Thatcher doing it? Or indeed any of Johnson's predecessors? I thought, this is how great nations die.
There is only one route open now: England needs to start telling the truth, not least to herself. The facts are ugly, but they must be presented and fully digested. The Conservatives are incapable of this, so the long, slow decline of once great England will continue, until a more noble group of leaders can wrestle power from the charlatans.
How's the SNP doing on "telling the truth"?
Care Homes.....Nike......
One thing for sure, the Scots offiical figures for covid deaths (weekly, NAS) match the excess deaths per week very well, much better than the English ONS ones do; the latter's cod aths figure seems markedly lower than the known deaths excess. I have pointed this out several times but I've not seen an explanation for this (or a demonstration that I am looking at the wrong things).
Probably my favourite form of betting and the only one I seem to be successful at regularly.
The loss of jobs will be huge. Hundreds of low paid, part time staff at the stadium and then the connected trainers and food and drink supplier will be massively hit.
Suspect it will be turned into a housing estate. This will be the end of the housing crisis. Offices converted, places like this built on and yet I can't see the population size increasing as the number of migrants will drop dramatically.
He has shed a fair amount of weight due to the virus. Less fat, which is probably good, but some of the previous muscle tone might have been lost too, which is not so good.
The new Lib Dem leader would surely be wise to get behind Starmer.
What!?
How do you figure that? You do realise the Lib Dems are not a subordinate branch of the Labour Party. Why doesn't Starmer just get behind Johnson? Why doesn't Carlaw just get behind Sturgeon? That's what you've just proposed.
The fact Tories are so rattled by the idea of the Lib Dems getting behind Starmer says it all really.
I'm not rattled I'm confused!
Why doesn't the Ole Gunnar Solskjaer just get behind Manchester City?
Why doesn't whoever Arsenal's manager is now just get behind Chelsea?
Why doesn't Biden just get behind Trump?
snip
OI!!
Arsenal's manager is...er...no he's gone...er...no give up. Dammit
Good interview with Arsenal's last manager here. I feel he was very unfairly scapegoated
For me, the rot started when we lost Ashley Cole to Chelsea for an extra £5,000/week, plus the over-30 rule was infuriating when you had the likes of Viera, Pires, Freddie, and Thierry getting the ball from Jens and scoring in 40 seconds.
Cole of course went on to become arguably the best left back on the planet.
I am an Arsene fan but appreciate he needed refreshing and I saw some shocking decisions of his (of which one, switching Iwobi, who was playing down the left flank and getting past everyone, to playing in the centre and not getting a touch for the rest of the game, was particularly notable).
I don't think many, including perhaps the players, took Arsenal seriously after he left. They needed an old and safe pair of hands to guide them through the inevitable rough patch. The comment that Arteta should have gone to Everton, and Ancelotti to Arsenal was absolutely spot on.
As an Arsenal fan I have seen us win the league in the last minute, possibly the happiest day of my life, 2-0 away at the team of the decade, four other league titles including two doubles and an invincible season, countless FA Cups, a Champions League final and lots of beautiful football. We have been spoilt rotten, and if we never won anything again while I was alive I couldnt complain.
So I am happy we chose an ex player with love for the club, (and who Arsene chose as captain) over someone safe who has been around the block. If it succeeds then great - if not, oh well. I almost had an anxiety attack when I read we might aget Mourinho last Autumn; that would have been the ultimate betrayal of everything AW built. Emery was an outsider and I didn't want him appointed, but I feel he was unfairly mocked and was sad to see him go.
He has lost a fair amount of weight due to the virus. Less fat, which is probably good, but some of the previous muscle tone might have been lost too, which is not so good.
I need a doctor to confirm but I thought the body had a nasty habit of attacking muscle before fat when ill.
Putting aside the potentially slightly misleading headline. Even just 40-50 new cases a day on london is a lot lower than i imagined was the situation & this is with more people back to work etc.
He has lost a fair amount of weight due to the virus. Less fat, which is probably good, but some of the previous muscle tone might have been lost too, which is not so good.
I need a doctor to confirm but I thought the body had a nasty habit of attacking muscle before fat when ill.
Did you have a close look before posting? Because the period being reported for each country varies considerably. As a result it's quite misleading at first glance.
Probably my favourite form of betting and the only one I seem to be successful at regularly.
The loss of jobs will be huge. Hundreds of low paid, part time staff at the stadium and then the connected trainers and food and drink supplier will be massively hit.
Suspect it will be turned into a housing estate. This will be the end of the housing crisis. Offices converted, places like this built on and yet I can't see the population size increasing as the number of migrants will drop dramatically.
It's an entire industry based on animal abuse so fuck it.
Also, no matter how much partisans such as @Philip_Thompson and @HYUFD want it to be, politics is not, and should not, be like supporting a football team.
It’s about achieving aims, not about “your team” winning for the sake of it.
Says Labour partisan Gallowgate
Good one. I’ve been a Labour party member for the best part of 5 months. Prior to that I was a member of the Lib Dems.
I’m as far from being a “Labour partisan” as can be.
So you are just an anti Tory partisan, thanks for confirming
Not necessarily, I would consider voting Tory under certain circumstances. However the only Tory governments in my adult life has been Cameron’s austerity binge, and now May and Johnson’s Brexit bonanza, so it’s not exactly compelling.
Please state when you last voted Tory then?
Never, and I just explained why. That doesn’t mean I wont in the future.
You on the other hand would never vote Labour, as you constantly belittle @Big_G_NorthWales for doing during the Blair years, as the Tory party is “your team”.
You would never vote Tory, you are clearly an ideological leftwinger so stop pretending otherwise.
I have never pretended to be anything but on the right
He has lost a fair amount of weight due to the virus. Less fat, which is probably good, but some of the previous muscle tone might have been lost too, which is not so good.
I need a doctor to confirm but I thought the body had a nasty habit of attacking muscle before fat when ill.
However, that guy was intubated for 4.5 weeks. I doubt most would even be standing 10 days after having the tube out given such an extreme amount of time in ICU.
Boris still comfortably leads Starmer on preferred PM still.
Net approval ratings are not enough on their own either eg in 1979 Thatcher's Tories unlike Starmer's Labour led on voting intention as well as Thatcher leading on net approval even when she trailed Callaghan as preferred PM
Starmer has halved Johnson's lead in a month - and this is the easy part for the Tories politically. The next bit, when the furlough ends and a no deal is approaching, will be a lot more challenging.
How do you think Starmer is doing with WWC?
Judging by the approval ratings, much better than Corbyn. Though the bar is exceptionally low. The damage done to Labour over recent years has been so severe that it is going to take a long time to undo. The first step in the process is to get a hearing. Starmer is creating the space for that to happen. But, as I say, that is only the start. What he says also has to resonate. On that the jury remains very much out.
Strange that Corbyn in his worst GE got so many more votes than Brown and Miliband yet is spoke of as if he did much worse, and that the Labour malaise started with him
Probably my favourite form of betting and the only one I seem to be successful at regularly.
The loss of jobs will be huge. Hundreds of low paid, part time staff at the stadium and then the connected trainers and food and drink supplier will be massively hit.
Suspect it will be turned into a housing estate. This will be the end of the housing crisis. Offices converted, places like this built on and yet I can't see the population size increasing as the number of migrants will drop dramatically.
Trap 1 when it is not the fav but has 'good early toe' has worked well for me in the past. Shoots out, reaches the opening bend first, steers the others out wide, couple of them slip, gets a lead that is big enough to last home. Walk to window and collect.
He has lost a fair amount of weight due to the virus. Less fat, which is probably good, but some of the previous muscle tone might have been lost too, which is not so good.
I need a doctor to confirm but I thought the body had a nasty habit of attacking muscle before fat when ill.
However, that guy was intubated for 4.5 weeks. I doubt most would even be standing 10 days after having the tube out given such an extreme amount of time in ICU.
Even so, that is a massive amount of muscle that has gone away.
Boris still comfortably leads Starmer on preferred PM still.
Net approval ratings are not enough on their own either eg in 1979 Thatcher's Tories unlike Starmer's Labour led on voting intention as well as Thatcher leading on net approval even when she trailed Callaghan as preferred PM
Starmer has halved Johnson's lead in a month - and this is the easy part for the Tories politically. The next bit, when the furlough ends and a no deal is approaching, will be a lot more challenging.
How do you think Starmer is doing with WWC?
Boris leads Starmer 39% to 32% as preferred PM with middle class ABC1 voters but Boris is preferred to Starmer as PM by a wider 40% to 21% margin with working class C2DE voters
Comments
https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1263052473591377920?s=20
Still tbc if Nigel rammed the hapless refugees with his Schnellboot.
The two parties need to be distinctly separate for the above to work.
Scotland, for Labour is ancient history and assuming Johnson is still PM at the next election, the Tories will be harder to shift
from the Brexit voting areas in the Midlands and the North of England. I have them consolidating these seats and perhaps adding more along with the M4 corridor in Wales. Johnson is electoral catnip in these areas which means Labour are even more reliant on 50 seats from the LDs.
This has sod all to do with the media. I am listening to what is said by the minister. It is far from transparent. Most of the data supplied on More or Less for that day was not announced by the minister.
Their two parliaments in coalition with SLab has also put the SLDs off power. In the unlikely event that Carlaw or Leonard get within a whisker of Bute House, you can pretty much guarantee that Rennie will let them down at the last minute.
They’ve lost their nerve.
The person I voted for in GE 2019 was elected though, so there’s that.
Thanks in advance
FWIW, there is a care home I pass regularly on my corona constitutionals and they are allowing visits on that 'outside and 2m' basis. I see it going on as I walk by.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11664513/london-reports-coronavirus-cases-lockdown/
Cole of course went on to become arguably the best left back on the planet.
I am an Arsene fan but appreciate he needed refreshing and I saw some shocking decisions of his (of which one, switching Iwobi, who was playing down the left flank and getting past everyone, to playing in the centre and not getting a touch for the rest of the game, was particularly notable).
I don't think many, including perhaps the players, took Arsenal seriously after he left. They needed an old and safe pair of hands to guide them through the inevitable rough patch. The comment that Arteta should have gone to Everton, and Ancelotti to Arsenal was absolutely spot on.
The problem will come if restaurants, cinemas, pubs, coffee shops discover that there aren't enough people willing to take the risk to make their businesses viable. A lot will go bust but the innovative and good quality ones will survive.
For example, I can't wait to go out for meals again but which restaurants we use will very much be determined on how well they appear to be dealing with the issue. A number of restaurants we go to for lunch in our small city have two floors but only generally open up the ground floor for lunch. Now if one of them is enterprising enough to open up the upper floor with well-spaced tables for the over 70s / vulnerable I'll be there every day!
It wasn't a good fit, it felt increasingly like I was going through the motions, so when Starmer won and my friends asked me to "return home" to Labour I had to give it a go. Labour still has a lot of problems inherited from the Corbyn disaster. But I have belief that we can resolve them.
Why did you go Labour to LibDem to Labour I've been asked. Because the political map changed underneath me I replied...
So I guess they would hope SkS does well, with lots of conservative switchers, feeling safe to vote Lib Dem.
"There is an urgent need to monitor variations in disease transmission across populations and geographies in near real-time."
This a great quote from the study. People oddly think that how the virus has affected a country is all down to whether the Government is any good or not when papably it is not, they may be able to tinker round the edges but this virus will do what it likes. In some countries it has been a huge problem and others have been left alone. As I said earlier how can anyone explain the way this virus has treated Iran and Iraq so differently.
I do note Mr Dickson studiously avoids commenting on a report (very) critical of the SNP government.
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/education/2020/05/reopening-schools-question-logistics-not-risks-teachers
I wonder if the government would secretly be quite happy if a substantial number of parents keep their children away from schools as they re-open? Unfortunately it might well be the wrong parents, though.
Not back till after schools are supposed to reopen
Just looking at the recess dates, Boris doesn't have to get through many more PMQs between now and middle of October.
Care Homes.....Nike......
Funny that.
It' s no coincidence that there is 100% correlation between those wanting to curtail his posts and those who don't like the message!
If you did not even vote Tory in 2015 or 2019 when the Tories won an overall majority, you are just an anti Tory partisan
But it's not a strength to make a virtue of having a closed mind. Its perfectly possible to hold strong views without pre determining matters, of being able to listen and potentially change course even if you dont often.
You on the other hand would never vote Labour, as you constantly belittle @Big_G_NorthWales for doing during the Blair years, as the Tory party is “your team”.
And also there is the difference between adapting a pre-existing building and building it from the earth up (their claim of doing as well as the Chinese emergency hospital)
Does anyone need me to explain this Tweet?
I wonder if that is an after effect of him having Covid 19 or whether the overall death toll and likely toll of excess deaths is also contributing?
https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/local-news/shock-peterborough-greyhound-stadium-announces-18278292
Probably my favourite form of betting and the only one I seem to be successful at regularly.
The loss of jobs will be huge. Hundreds of low paid, part time staff at the stadium and then the connected trainers and food and drink supplier will be massively hit.
Suspect it will be turned into a housing estate. This will be the end of the housing crisis. Offices converted, places like this built on and yet I can't see the population size increasing as the number of migrants will drop dramatically.
So I am happy we chose an ex player with love for the club, (and who Arsene chose as captain) over someone safe who has been around the block. If it succeeds then great - if not, oh well. I almost had an anxiety attack when I read we might aget Mourinho last Autumn; that would have been the ultimate betrayal of everything AW built. Emery was an outsider and I didn't want him appointed, but I feel he was unfairly mocked and was sad to see him go.
He looks as if he is still under the weather
He needs to either take some leave or step up to the plate
There's 1.5 million people working in care. You expect them all to be tested overnight?
I have never pretended to be anything but on the right
This is a Tweet about PMQs
Boris accuses SKS of ignoring his previous answer which in fairness he did.
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1263045754500849664?s=20
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1263045751891951616?s=20
Starmer next question: "Will we have track and trace operational by 1 June?"
Oops, going ahead with the prescripted questions like Corbyn did.