politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Strange Rebirth of Liberal Unionism
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Strange Rebirth of Liberal Unionism
Wikipedia has a history of the Liberal Unionist Party:. The most well-known Liberal Unionist arguably was Joseph Chamberlain, father of Neville, and for 19 days leader of the Opposition in 1906 after Balfour lost his seat in Manchester as part of the disastrous Conservative election defeat.
0
Comments
-
First like City on goal difference.0
-
Always nice to get a bit of historical perspective and detail, though you can understand why things get simplified in our memories. I think my mind was blown when I discovered there used to be a Democratic-Republican Party in the USA.0
-
Go fourth0
-
I see that Darren Grimes was a LibDem activist and worked for Norman Lamb.0
-
Sixth, like the number of times Liverpool have been champions of Europe.1
-
Well said Stodge and I hope you're right. Great thread.0
-
Or indeed Michael Heseltine who stood as a Liberal Unionist in his early days and arguable carried the torch through to current day.
Attributing any sort of principles or ideology to the great self regarding pudding in Downing Street is however stretching credibility too far,1 -
That is a good one. It also amuses me that the Grand Old Party in the USA is the newer of the two parties.kle4 said:Always nice to get a bit of historical perspective and detail, though you can understand why things get simplified in our memories. I think my mind was blown when I discovered there used to be a Democratic-Republican Party in the USA.
0 -
Excellent article. Thanks Stodge.
Johnson may be a Liberal Unionist. But is his party?
0 -
I believe Heseltine stood as a National Liberal.IanB2 said:Or indeed Michael Heseltine who stood as a Liberal Unionist in his early days and arguable carried the torch through to current day.
Attributing any sort of principles or ideology to the great self regarding pudding in Downing Street is however stretching credibility too far,1 -
They're quite right. Why would relations with a third country matter more than those other issues? It's not a direct comparison but I sure as shit hope Boris's main priority for the coming years isn't relations with the EU.CorrectHorseBattery said:1 -
Sounds cool to me! Good thread0
-
"Rule of law in the EU" is shorthand for obeying the German constitutional court over the ECB I suspect.CorrectHorseBattery said:2 -
An interesting read Stodge! Question - if Johnson is a Liberal Unionist why is he doing so much to wreck the Union?0
-
Great thread Stodge.0
-
Winston Churchill a "Liberal Unionist"? Would have been a surprise to him AND Clemmie.
Liberal Unionists started off a Liberals who split with their former party due over Home Rule as proposed by Liberal leader Wm E. Gladstone (who began his own political odyssey as a Tory). Joe Chamberlain was indeed a radical Liberal, but he was opposed to Home Rule (even though he acted as a go-between for Gladstone & Charles Stewart Parnell, leader of the Irish (Home Rule) Party.
Liberal Unionist cooperated closely with Conservatives, and ended up merging into the Conservative and Unionist Party (hence the name).
Young Winston first ran for Parliament as a Conservative (not Liberal Unionist) candidate. Then after he was elected (on 2nd attempt) he crossed the aisle an joined the (non-unionist) Liberals, over issue of Free Trade (Joe C was a protectionist) and also because it was clearly path to power.
Churchill was a supporter of Home Rule for Ireland, but NOT independence; thus he was heavily involved in the Black & Tan War until he help negotiate the Anglo-Irish Treaty.
When the Liberals self-destructed during & after WWI, Churchill ended up (after a brief transition) re-joining the Conservative Party - one reason why True Blue Tories never really trusted him until AFTER WW2.1 -
Churchill abandoned the Unionists in 1904 over Chamberlains Tarrif Reform policy - and only returned to their ranks twenty years later , having left the Liberals over Asquith's decision to support Ramsay Macdonald's first Labour Government.1
-
Indeed. What will or has become of those brought up on 40 years of radical free market ideology? Have they gone away? Only temporarily surely.rottenborough said:Excellent article. Thanks Stodge.
Johnson may be a Liberal Unionist. But is his party?0 -
I used to think that GOP stood for God's Own Party.Philip_Thompson said:
That is a good one. It also amuses me that the Grand Old Party in the USA is the newer of the two parties.kle4 said:Always nice to get a bit of historical perspective and detail, though you can understand why things get simplified in our memories. I think my mind was blown when I discovered there used to be a Democratic-Republican Party in the USA.
1 -
No, but that's a point about consistency, and that his particular brand being using his first name - it has nothing whatsoever to do with the preposterous and frankly insulting view of the public that it denotes endearment,which was my objection.kinabalu said:
Is there any other politician who you routinely refer to by their first name as a matter of course and with no irony?kle4 said:
No matter how many times people tell me its use demonstrates some form of endearment it never stops sounding like a pile of nonsense to me. I think it is really demeaning to suggest that it does in fact. Here, I'll give you an example of why it's nonsense - Boris is an arse, who has been sacked for lying multiple times. Oh heaven forfend, such endearment has been shown by that statement. There's no real implication from using Boris, that's something people are inferring.kinabalu said:
+1dfte said:Mike, I like it that you called him Johnson here, not Boris. Keep it that way - it's inconsistent to use a self-chosen first name for one politician which implies some form of endearment which is not universally felt!
Yes. I strongly prefer Johnson. I wish more would use it. Not just here on PB but generally. Use of his 1st name (unless in irony) is inappropriate and borderline cringeful.
His brand is being known as Boris. Fine if people don't want to use it for that reason, or because they want to be consistent or more formal. But I've used both Boris and Johnson and Boris Johnson, and I don't accept this ludicrousness that if people generally refer to him as Boris they should not because it is somehow cuddly or friendly.
You want to argue for consistency or formaility politicians should, as nearly all do, go by their first name (although frankly Sir Keir is not doing too badly in that respect)? Fine. But to get het up about it being endearing or cringy? Screw that, it's saying the public are idiotic monkeys swayed by using what isn't even his actual first name, despite very easy examples of criticising and insulting him whilst still using Boris.
Criticising it on that basis is judging people and presuming what their views of him are based on absolutely nothing.0 -
An interesting one will be the deficit and debt levels. If Tory party MPs follow the Republican model they will only care about them when the Labour (Dems) are in office.dixiedean said:
Indeed. What will or has become of those brought up on 40 years of radical free market ideology? Have they gone away? Only temporarily surely.rottenborough said:Excellent article. Thanks Stodge.
Johnson may be a Liberal Unionist. But is his party?2 -
1
-
Most of those wins are not in the modern football era, the European Cup was a very different competition prior to the Champions League came into being. In fact if the format had still been the same Liverpool wouldn't even have been eligible to play in it for the last 30 years.TheScreamingEagles said:Sixth, like the number of times Liverpool have been champions of Europe.
You now finally have your first PL title, 28 years after the competition began, well done. but let's not get carried away, the problems will start when Klopp moves on so I wouldn't overdo the gloating just yet, I'd wait till you are closing in on United's 13 titles.0 -
'The modern Conservative Party stands foursquare behind the Union but recognises that Union has to evolve to the demands of the 21st Century – it has come to support a degree of devolution to Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland.'
It hasn't really. The Conservative recognises the fact of devolution but if it could press a button that cancelled it without any political, electoral or legal consequences it would. This inclination is even more firmly embedded in their Scotch cousins.0 -
I haven't seen the actual question from the survey, but I don't think that's a fair assessment. I think it was rather about the developments in Hungary and Poland et al.rottenborough said:
"Rule of law in the EU" is shorthand for obeying the German constitutional court over the ECB I suspect.CorrectHorseBattery said:1 -
Oh god, you're one of those bellends who thinks football began in 1992.OllyT said:
Most of those wins are not in the modern football era, the European Cup was a very different competition prior to the Champions League came into being. In fact if the format had still been the same Liverpool wouldn't even have been eligible to play in it for the last 30 years.TheScreamingEagles said:Sixth, like the number of times Liverpool have been champions of Europe.
You now finally have your first PL title, 28 years after the competition began, well done. but let's not get carried away, the problems will start when Klopp moves on so I wouldn't overdo the gloating just yet, I'd wait till you are closing in on United's 13 titles.
To be honest our problems when Klopp moves on will pale into comparison when the despotic regime in Abu Dhab/UAEi falls/oil prices consistently collapses and you get dumped like an ex with the clap and back to the third level of English football if you're lucky.1 -
Because just wrecking the liberal side of the offering wouldn’t be balanced.RochdalePioneers said:An interesting read Stodge! Question - if Johnson is a Liberal Unionist why is he doing so much to wreck the Union?
0 -
Credit where it is due, Klopp's Liverpool is a phenomenally good team. Man City are very brittle. They look convincing when ahead, but when behind fold like a cheap suit.OllyT said:
Most of those wins are not in the modern football era, the European Cup was a very different competition prior to the Champions League came into being. In fact if the format had still been the same Liverpool wouldn't even have been eligible to play in it for the last 30 years.TheScreamingEagles said:Sixth, like the number of times Liverpool have been champions of Europe.
You now finally have your first PL title, 28 years after the competition began, well done. but let's not get carried away, the problems will start when Klopp moves on so I wouldn't overdo the gloating just yet, I'd wait till you are closing in on United's 13 titles.0 -
We're now in a counting war. Counting how many tens of thousands of new Rona cases there are in America each day. And counting how many thousands of retail and hospitality jobs have been lost in the UK each day. Scary times...0
-
You know the answer to that one. There's nobody in government pushing it, even now. I can accept "don't wear masks" as a bit of a white lie in March, when there were huge shortages of everything protective.LadyG said:WHY are we SO shit at MASKS
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1278803791425482752?s=20
It's hard to escape the impression that the government really, really can't be bothered with Covid any more. And perhaps- like Trump- masks would be a too-visible sign of their failure to properly squash the virus.0 -
IIRC there was NOT a "Democratic-Republican" Party by name, though think there was a faction that used that moniker briefly.kle4 said:Always nice to get a bit of historical perspective and detail, though you can understand why things get simplified in our memories. I think my mind was blown when I discovered there used to be a Democratic-Republican Party in the USA.
Rather, the party of Thomas Jefferson, etc. was called by it's leaders, followers & opponents the Republican Party. But to eliminate confusion with the later Republican Party (circa 1856-date) historians used Democratic-Republican for the older party.
After the demise of the Federalist Party, the dominant old Republican Party factionalized, eventually leading to creation of two new groupings:
>> the Democratic Party, whose initial standard-bearer was Andrew Jackson (aka The Democracy) so called because it supported greater democratization and universal White manhood suffrage.
>> the Whig Party, named in honor of the British Whigs as opposed to British Tories (post-Glorious Revolution, pre-American Revolution). In contrast to Democrats, Whigs supported nationalism as opposed to state's rights, and distrusted democracy (especially as polluted by turbulent Irish immigrants).
The Whig Party fell apart in 1850s (like British Liberal Party did in early 20th century) over issue of slavery. It's demise resulted in the creation of two new parties: American Party (Know Nothings) focused on threat of immigration (sound familiar?) and Republican Party dedicated to stopping the expansion of slavery. After a brief tug-of-war, the Know Nothings also fell apart (due to guess what - slavery!) and most ended up with the Republicans Party.
The Democrats also had their splits, but retained their existence during and after the Civil War, mostly in the shadow of the Republican Party until 1932 and the advent of the New Deal.0 -
I know that in Austria, France and some other countries when they made masks compulsory in some situations they had people handing them out at metro stations and shops. "Here is a mask, now put it on."LadyG said:WHY are we SO shit at MASKS
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1278803791425482752?s=20
Is the British government giving out millions of masks?0 -
Big changes in data reporting - https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/ is now Pillar 1 & 2
Daily number of lab-confirmed UK cases - 576 - big drop
Daily number of COVID-19 associated UK deaths - 89 - another big drop
All data from the last 3-5 days subject to further revision> last 5 days included for completeness
England case data - Pillar 1 & 2
0 -
Football didn't begin in 1992.OllyT said:
Most of those wins are not in the modern football era, the European Cup was a very different competition prior to the Champions League came into being. In fact if the format had still been the same Liverpool wouldn't even have been eligible to play in it for the last 30 years.TheScreamingEagles said:Sixth, like the number of times Liverpool have been champions of Europe.
You now finally have your first PL title, 28 years after the competition began, well done. but let's not get carried away, the problems will start when Klopp moves on so I wouldn't overdo the gloating just yet, I'd wait till you are closing in on United's 13 titles.
Hopefully we can win the league next season and the year after to reclaim our perch of the most league titles by any squad, as well as already being the most successful club in England by major trophies.1 -
"Finland's air force drops swastika emblem after century in use
The use of the symbol predated its association with Nazism but caused 'misunderstandings'"
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/07/02/finlands-air-force-drops-swastika-emblem-century-use/0 -
Excellent header Stodge. Many thanks
I am not sure if I agree with it entirely - I would need to consider it a lot more and see some of the other arguments back and forth - but it is great to read a thread header that educates me on an aspect of political history.1 -
The GOP had the benefit of one of America's greatest cartoonists, Thomas Nast, who made the elephant the Republican symbol and IIRC coined the term "Grand Old Party"; he also specialized in anti-Irish cartoons that would have made a Punch editor blush.SandyRentool said:
I used to think that GOP stood for God's Own Party.Philip_Thompson said:
That is a good one. It also amuses me that the Grand Old Party in the USA is the newer of the two parties.kle4 said:Always nice to get a bit of historical perspective and detail, though you can understand why things get simplified in our memories. I think my mind was blown when I discovered there used to be a Democratic-Republican Party in the USA.
Democratic symbol is today a donkey - a working animal in old-school USA, noot a circus attraction. However, during 1800s main Dem symbol with a cock (very belligerent rooster NOT what some of yez perverts are thinking!) Indeed, in some states the official Democratic symbol is still the fighting chicken; as in the old advice "scratch the rooster" meaning in this case, vote the straight-Democratic ticket.
Whig symbol; was the raccoon - one reason by former Whit Congressman Davy Crockett was wearing (at least part of the time) a coon-skin cap at the Alamo.0 -
England down to Low Level Authority - Pillar 1 & 2
3 -
I didn't say it denotes endearment. What it denotes is familiarity. Which is false. Also very odd for a politician as your answer indicates.kle4 said:
No, but that's a point about consistency, and that his particular brand being using his first name - it has nothing whatsoever to do with the preposterous and frankly insulting view of the public that it denotes endearment,which was my objection.kinabalu said:
Is there any other politician who you routinely refer to by their first name as a matter of course and with no irony?kle4 said:
No matter how many times people tell me its use demonstrates some form of endearment it never stops sounding like a pile of nonsense to me. I think it is really demeaning to suggest that it does in fact. Here, I'll give you an example of why it's nonsense - Boris is an arse, who has been sacked for lying multiple times. Oh heaven forfend, such endearment has been shown by that statement. There's no real implication from using Boris, that's something people are inferring.kinabalu said:
+1dfte said:Mike, I like it that you called him Johnson here, not Boris. Keep it that way - it's inconsistent to use a self-chosen first name for one politician which implies some form of endearment which is not universally felt!
Yes. I strongly prefer Johnson. I wish more would use it. Not just here on PB but generally. Use of his 1st name (unless in irony) is inappropriate and borderline cringeful.
His brand is being known as Boris. Fine if people don't want to use it for that reason, or because they want to be consistent or more formal. But I've used both Boris and Johnson and Boris Johnson, and I don't accept this ludicrousness that if people generally refer to him as Boris they should not because it is somehow cuddly or friendly.
You want to argue for consistency or formaility politicians should, as nearly all do, go by their first name (although frankly Sir Keir is not doing too badly in that respect)? Fine. But to get het up about it being endearing or cringy? Screw that, it's saying the public are idiotic monkeys swayed by using what isn't even his actual first name, despite very easy examples of criticising and insulting him whilst still using Boris.
Criticising it on that basis is judging people and presuming what their views of him are based on absolutely nothing.
He benefits big time from the phony sense of intimacy which the "Boris" handle imbues. There is no question of that. Don't kid yourself it makes no difference.
It's then up to you whether to collaborate in this or not. But unless you are a strong supporter of him or this government I would suggest that it makes sense not to.0 -
I don't think football began in 1992 at all it's just that fans of other clubs don't keep banging on about what happened over 30 years ago as though it was last week.TheScreamingEagles said:
Oh god, you're one of those bellends who thinks football began in 1992.OllyT said:
Most of those wins are not in the modern football era, the European Cup was a very different competition prior to the Champions League came into being. In fact if the format had still been the same Liverpool wouldn't even have been eligible to play in it for the last 30 years.TheScreamingEagles said:Sixth, like the number of times Liverpool have been champions of Europe.
You now finally have your first PL title, 28 years after the competition began, well done. but let's not get carried away, the problems will start when Klopp moves on so I wouldn't overdo the gloating just yet, I'd wait till you are closing in on United's 13 titles.
To be honest our problems when Klopp moves on will pale into comparison when the despotic regime in Abu Dhab/UAEi falls/oil prices consistently collapses and you get dumped like an ex with the clap and back to the third level of English football if you're lucky.
Most fans discussing the sport tab about the PL and CL era. Obviously Liverpool fans don't because up to now they have been spectacularly unsuccessful in the modern era. It's understandable, all you had up to Klopp's arrival was your history.
We'll talk about what happens after our owners sell up when it happens. It's been being predicted since the day they took over.
0 -
And a link to the spreadsheet I generated...
England Case Data Pillars 1 & 2 -
https://drive.google.com/file/d/14EbynHa3HVgBaPNCdl663_ZxeuvIeiNh/view?usp=sharing0 -
"Boris Johnson, an admirer and biographer of Churchill"
BoJo's "biography" is just a hair above a coloring-book version. There's no there there. Bought my copy 2nd-hand at deep discount, and still paid too much.0 -
NOW the situation is crystal clear!Malmesbury said:England down to Low Level Authority - Pillar 1 & 2
0 -
But what happened thirty years ago is what happened last week.OllyT said:
I don't think football began in 1992 at all it's just that fans of other clubs don't keep banging on about what happened over 30 years ago as though it was last week.TheScreamingEagles said:
Oh god, you're one of those bellends who thinks football began in 1992.OllyT said:
Most of those wins are not in the modern football era, the European Cup was a very different competition prior to the Champions League came into being. In fact if the format had still been the same Liverpool wouldn't even have been eligible to play in it for the last 30 years.TheScreamingEagles said:Sixth, like the number of times Liverpool have been champions of Europe.
You now finally have your first PL title, 28 years after the competition began, well done. but let's not get carried away, the problems will start when Klopp moves on so I wouldn't overdo the gloating just yet, I'd wait till you are closing in on United's 13 titles.
To be honest our problems when Klopp moves on will pale into comparison when the despotic regime in Abu Dhab/UAEi falls/oil prices consistently collapses and you get dumped like an ex with the clap and back to the third level of English football if you're lucky.
Most fans discussing the sport tab about the PL and CL era. Obviously Liverpool fans don't because up to now they have been spectacularly unsuccessful in the modern era. It's understandable, all you had up to Klopp's arrival was your history.
We'll talk about what happens after our owners sell up when it happens. It's been being predicted since the day they took over.2 -
Though no spike in Leicester deaths. 7 were added this week, but the most recent of these was on 24/6. Inpatients down again today too, to 70.Malmesbury said:England down to Low Level Authority - Pillar 1 & 2
0 -
I love this plot.Malmesbury said:England down to Low Level Authority - Pillar 1 & 2
0 -
With a Tory parliamentary party now more strongly represented in the Midlands than it has been for decades, if we do end up on WTO terms and tariffs with most of the world but free trade agreements with the Anglosphere then we can say the era of Joseph Chamberlain has returned0
-
"great self regarding pudding in Downing Street" -IanB2 said:Or indeed Michael Heseltine who stood as a Liberal Unionist in his early days and arguable carried the torch through to current day.
Attributing any sort of principles or ideology to the great self regarding pudding in Downing Street is however stretching credibility too far,
Quite like that one Ian. Yes. Has a nice ring of gentle exasperation to it.0 -
I've said before hopefully now we're catching cases in the community sooner because of track and trace rather than catching only the sickest in the hospital. So the decrease in cases in reality is probably even more stark than the decrease in confirmed cases.Foxy said:
Though no spike in Leicester deaths. 7 were added this week, but the most recent of these was on 24/6. Inpatients down again today too, to 70.Malmesbury said:England down to Low Level Authority - Pillar 1 & 2
0 -
-
195 points in the previous 2 season would tend to negate that argument.Foxy said:
Credit where it is due, Klopp's Liverpool is a phenomenally good team. Man City are very brittle. They look convincing when ahead, but when behind fold like a cheap suit.OllyT said:
Most of those wins are not in the modern football era, the European Cup was a very different competition prior to the Champions League came into being. In fact if the format had still been the same Liverpool wouldn't even have been eligible to play in it for the last 30 years.TheScreamingEagles said:Sixth, like the number of times Liverpool have been champions of Europe.
You now finally have your first PL title, 28 years after the competition began, well done. but let's not get carried away, the problems will start when Klopp moves on so I wouldn't overdo the gloating just yet, I'd wait till you are closing in on United's 13 titles.0 -
It's odd how Keir changing opinions is weak yet when the Tories do constant u-turns it's a sign of strength. PB Tories never change.0
-
Ed Davey is going to win the Lib Dem leadership now that he has got the support of Daisy Cooper.
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2020/07/what-does-daisy-coopers-endorsement-ed-davey-mean-liberal-democrat-leadership0 -
Wasn't Ken Livingstone usually referred to as Ken in his mayoral days? Just Ken to those who were indifferent to him, and Red Ken both to those who loathed him and those who loved him.kinabalu said:
I didn't say it denotes endearment. What it denotes is familiarity. Which is false. Also very odd for a politician as your answer indicates.kle4 said:
No, but that's a point about consistency, and that his particular brand being using his first name - it has nothing whatsoever to do with the preposterous and frankly insulting view of the public that it denotes endearment,which was my objection.kinabalu said:
Is there any other politician who you routinely refer to by their first name as a matter of course and with no irony?kle4 said:
No matter how many times people tell me its use demonstrates some form of endearment it never stops sounding like a pile of nonsense to me. I think it is really demeaning to suggest that it does in fact. Here, I'll give you an example of why it's nonsense - Boris is an arse, who has been sacked for lying multiple times. Oh heaven forfend, such endearment has been shown by that statement. There's no real implication from using Boris, that's something people are inferring.kinabalu said:
+1dfte said:Mike, I like it that you called him Johnson here, not Boris. Keep it that way - it's inconsistent to use a self-chosen first name for one politician which implies some form of endearment which is not universally felt!
Yes. I strongly prefer Johnson. I wish more would use it. Not just here on PB but generally. Use of his 1st name (unless in irony) is inappropriate and borderline cringeful.
His brand is being known as Boris. Fine if people don't want to use it for that reason, or because they want to be consistent or more formal. But I've used both Boris and Johnson and Boris Johnson, and I don't accept this ludicrousness that if people generally refer to him as Boris they should not because it is somehow cuddly or friendly.
You want to argue for consistency or formaility politicians should, as nearly all do, go by their first name (although frankly Sir Keir is not doing too badly in that respect)? Fine. But to get het up about it being endearing or cringy? Screw that, it's saying the public are idiotic monkeys swayed by using what isn't even his actual first name, despite very easy examples of criticising and insulting him whilst still using Boris.
Criticising it on that basis is judging people and presuming what their views of him are based on absolutely nothing.
He benefits big time from the phony sense of intimacy which the "Boris" handle imbues. There is no question of that. Don't kid yourself it makes no difference.
It's then up to you whether to collaborate in this or not. But unless you are a strong supporter of him or this government I would suggest that it makes sense not to.0 -
Track and Trace is not the reason for the increase in testing in Leics. Indeed it is rather a flop. To quote yesterday's PHE report:Philip_Thompson said:
I've said before hopefully now we're catching cases in the community sooner because of track and trace rather than catching only the sickest in the hospital. So the decrease in cases in reality is probably even more stark than the decrease in confirmed cases.Foxy said:
Though no spike in Leicester deaths. 7 were added this week, but the most recent of these was on 24/6. Inpatients down again today too, to 70.Malmesbury said:England down to Low Level Authority - Pillar 1 & 2
1.5 Backward contact tracing
A current study on the utility of backward contact tracing is being piloted across England. Leicester city residents have been included in the pilot. Against an intended sample of 50 cases, only 11 cases in the city had successfully completed the study until 24 June 2020. Preliminary analysis of the 11 cases did not identify any events with multiple households attending. Most of the cases did not report leaving home, other than for visiting supermarkets
0 -
Re posts yesterday afternoon re Parliamentary Constituencies Bill:
Chloe Smith obviously realised she had made a mistake when answering John Spellar's question and she set out the correct position at the very beginning of the afternoon session yesterday:
"I wanted to clarify a point that was raised by the right hon. Member for Warley...…………."
https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2020-06-30/debates/421b1932-ccc1-4b40-a166-18556820ab45/ParliamentaryConstituenciesBill(EighthSitting)0 -
I don't think any PB Tory has said a Tory u-turn is a sign of strength?CorrectHorseBattery said:It's odd how Keir changing opinions is weak yet when the Tories do constant u-turns it's a sign of strength. PB Tories never change.
1 -
PB Tories klaxon for CHB!!0
-
Yes - saw that about the lack of spike in deaths.Foxy said:
Though no spike in Leicester deaths. 7 were added this week, but the most recent of these was on 24/6. Inpatients down again today too, to 70.Malmesbury said:England down to Low Level Authority - Pillar 1 & 2
What is interesting is how the epidemic is falling off a cliff in much of the country vs the outbreaks. In many places it is gone - in others, halving in a week.1 -
And the crowd goes wild!BannedinnParis said:PB Tories klaxon for CHB!!
0 -
If there are so many radical exciting plans to transform Britain why don't we know about them already? Isn't the usual procedure to put them in the manifesto so people know what they're voting for? And if they weren't in the manifesto, how can anyone claim the government has a mandate to implement them?0
-
The words ‘heart’ and ‘vision’ were a little jarring, too.IanB2 said:Or indeed Michael Heseltine who stood as a Liberal Unionist in his early days and arguable carried the torch through to current day.
Attributing any sort of principles or ideology to the great self regarding pudding in Downing Street is however stretching credibility too far,
But an interesting article nonetheless.0 -
2/3 of our catchment is the county of Leics rather than the city. The number of cases in the county has halved, but the rise in cases in the city means a fairly flat overall position for June.Malmesbury said:
Yes - saw that about the lack of spike in deaths.Foxy said:
Though no spike in Leicester deaths. 7 were added this week, but the most recent of these was on 24/6. Inpatients down again today too, to 70.Malmesbury said:England down to Low Level Authority - Pillar 1 & 2
What is interesting is how the epidemic is falling off a cliff in much of the country vs the outbreaks. In many places it is gone - in others, halving in a week.0 -
A free cookie for every mention of PB Tories, yum yum0
-
Bunch of idiots. It’s perhaps the single most simple and cost effective intervention.Stuartinromford said:
You know the answer to that one. There's nobody in government pushing it, even now. I can accept "don't wear masks" as a bit of a white lie in March, when there were huge shortages of everything protective.LadyG said:WHY are we SO shit at MASKS
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1278803791425482752?s=20
It's hard to escape the impression that the government really, really can't be bothered with Covid any more. And perhaps- like Trump- masks would be a too-visible sign of their failure to properly squash the virus.0 -
Yours truly has posted some critical commentary to Stodge. Do need to add, that, historical critique aside, believe the basic point re: Boris Johnson is certainly valid. And the entire article, warts and all, is positively thought provoking. Thanks!1
-
Shouldn't that be "biscuit"? Or is there some perverted, sinister meaning of "cookie" in common Brit-speak that a sheltered one such as meself shudders to contemplate???CorrectHorseBattery said:A free cookie for every mention of PB Tories, yum yum
1 -
Yougov has Trump back ahead with Independents 38% to 36% for Biden, 87% of Republicans are sticking with Trump, 86% of Democrats backing Biden.HYUFD said:
9% of voters are still undecided, 4% voting for Other candidates0 -
Backward tracing is surely a different thing again to track and trace?Foxy said:
Track and Trace is not the reason for the increase in testing in Leics. Indeed it is rather a flop. To quote yesterday's PHE report:Philip_Thompson said:
I've said before hopefully now we're catching cases in the community sooner because of track and trace rather than catching only the sickest in the hospital. So the decrease in cases in reality is probably even more stark than the decrease in confirmed cases.Foxy said:
Though no spike in Leicester deaths. 7 were added this week, but the most recent of these was on 24/6. Inpatients down again today too, to 70.Malmesbury said:England down to Low Level Authority - Pillar 1 & 2
1.5 Backward contact tracing
A current study on the utility of backward contact tracing is being piloted across England. Leicester city residents have been included in the pilot. Against an intended sample of 50 cases, only 11 cases in the city had successfully completed the study until 24 June 2020. Preliminary analysis of the 11 cases did not identify any events with multiple households attending. Most of the cases did not report leaving home, other than for visiting supermarkets
Ie track and trace is saying "Bob has the virus, Bob has been in touch with these 8 people, get them tested" - whereas I would imagine that backwards tracing is "Bob has the virus, who did he get it from and did anyone else get it from the same event?"
Nationally we seem to be catching a far, far higher proportion of cases in the community than we are in the hospital. So either the disease is suddenly much less deadly (unlikely) or we're getting better as a country at tracking who's got it.0 -
-
Foxy said "are" - present tense.OllyT said:
195 points in the previous 2 season would tend to negate that argument.Foxy said:
Credit where it is due, Klopp's Liverpool is a phenomenally good team. Man City are very brittle. They look convincing when ahead, but when behind fold like a cheap suit.OllyT said:
Most of those wins are not in the modern football era, the European Cup was a very different competition prior to the Champions League came into being. In fact if the format had still been the same Liverpool wouldn't even have been eligible to play in it for the last 30 years.TheScreamingEagles said:Sixth, like the number of times Liverpool have been champions of Europe.
You now finally have your first PL title, 28 years after the competition began, well done. but let's not get carried away, the problems will start when Klopp moves on so I wouldn't overdo the gloating just yet, I'd wait till you are closing in on United's 13 titles.
You had different defenders in the past 2 seasons than you've got this season. Not replacing Kompany in the summer does look like it was a tremendous mistake.0 -
They should be more specific, because there's also the big row about Poland's constitutional changes that mean it is no longer abiding with European law. (And which disadvantage Germans in particular.)rottenborough said:
"Rule of law in the EU" is shorthand for obeying the German constitutional court over the ECB I suspect.CorrectHorseBattery said:0 -
Well, yes and no. Until the last few days, Tier 2 tests were recorded centrally, not seen by local Public Health.Philip_Thompson said:
Backward tracing is surely a different thing again to track and trace?Foxy said:
Track and Trace is not the reason for the increase in testing in Leics. Indeed it is rather a flop. To quote yesterday's PHE report:Philip_Thompson said:
I've said before hopefully now we're catching cases in the community sooner because of track and trace rather than catching only the sickest in the hospital. So the decrease in cases in reality is probably even more stark than the decrease in confirmed cases.Foxy said:
Though no spike in Leicester deaths. 7 were added this week, but the most recent of these was on 24/6. Inpatients down again today too, to 70.Malmesbury said:England down to Low Level Authority - Pillar 1 & 2
1.5 Backward contact tracing
A current study on the utility of backward contact tracing is being piloted across England. Leicester city residents have been included in the pilot. Against an intended sample of 50 cases, only 11 cases in the city had successfully completed the study until 24 June 2020. Preliminary analysis of the 11 cases did not identify any events with multiple households attending. Most of the cases did not report leaving home, other than for visiting supermarkets
Ie track and trace is saying "Bob has the virus, Bob has been in touch with these 8 people, get them tested" - whereas I would imagine that backwards tracing is "Bob has the virus, who did he get it from and did anyone else get it from the same event?"
Nationally we seem to be catching a far, far higher proportion of cases in the community than we are in the hospital. So either the disease is suddenly much less deadly (unlikely) or we're getting better as a country at tracking who's got it.
Incidentally the number of tested persons is available at last too.
https://twitter.com/justinmadders/status/1278806189980123136?s=090 -
Wasn't the promise 100k tests a day? Not surprising though, as won't people in hospitals will be checked regularly?Foxy said:
Well, yes and no. Until the last few days, Tier 2 tests were recorded centrally, not seen by local Public Health.Philip_Thompson said:
Backward tracing is surely a different thing again to track and trace?Foxy said:
Track and Trace is not the reason for the increase in testing in Leics. Indeed it is rather a flop. To quote yesterday's PHE report:Philip_Thompson said:
I've said before hopefully now we're catching cases in the community sooner because of track and trace rather than catching only the sickest in the hospital. So the decrease in cases in reality is probably even more stark than the decrease in confirmed cases.Foxy said:
Though no spike in Leicester deaths. 7 were added this week, but the most recent of these was on 24/6. Inpatients down again today too, to 70.Malmesbury said:England down to Low Level Authority - Pillar 1 & 2
1.5 Backward contact tracing
A current study on the utility of backward contact tracing is being piloted across England. Leicester city residents have been included in the pilot. Against an intended sample of 50 cases, only 11 cases in the city had successfully completed the study until 24 June 2020. Preliminary analysis of the 11 cases did not identify any events with multiple households attending. Most of the cases did not report leaving home, other than for visiting supermarkets
Ie track and trace is saying "Bob has the virus, Bob has been in touch with these 8 people, get them tested" - whereas I would imagine that backwards tracing is "Bob has the virus, who did he get it from and did anyone else get it from the same event?"
Nationally we seem to be catching a far, far higher proportion of cases in the community than we are in the hospital. So either the disease is suddenly much less deadly (unlikely) or we're getting better as a country at tracking who's got it.
Incidentally the number of tested persons is available at last too.
https://twitter.com/justinmadders/status/1278806189980123136?s=090 -
Yes - that's what backward track and trace is. Try and find the source.Philip_Thompson said:
Backward tracing is surely a different thing again to track and trace?Foxy said:
Track and Trace is not the reason for the increase in testing in Leics. Indeed it is rather a flop. To quote yesterday's PHE report:Philip_Thompson said:
I've said before hopefully now we're catching cases in the community sooner because of track and trace rather than catching only the sickest in the hospital. So the decrease in cases in reality is probably even more stark than the decrease in confirmed cases.Foxy said:
Though no spike in Leicester deaths. 7 were added this week, but the most recent of these was on 24/6. Inpatients down again today too, to 70.Malmesbury said:England down to Low Level Authority - Pillar 1 & 2
1.5 Backward contact tracing
A current study on the utility of backward contact tracing is being piloted across England. Leicester city residents have been included in the pilot. Against an intended sample of 50 cases, only 11 cases in the city had successfully completed the study until 24 June 2020. Preliminary analysis of the 11 cases did not identify any events with multiple households attending. Most of the cases did not report leaving home, other than for visiting supermarkets
Ie track and trace is saying "Bob has the virus, Bob has been in touch with these 8 people, get them tested" - whereas I would imagine that backwards tracing is "Bob has the virus, who did he get it from and did anyone else get it from the same event?"
Nationally we seem to be catching a far, far higher proportion of cases in the community than we are in the hospital. So either the disease is suddenly much less deadly (unlikely) or we're getting better as a country at tracking who's got it.0 -
For those who missed it, the title of Stodge's essay echoes the title of the famous book "The Strange Death of Liberal England" (1935) by George Dangerfield1
-
Fair enough if was only talking about this season. That being said we still have a best goal difference in the league as things stands. Winning 3 on the trot was always going to be a big ask.Philip_Thompson said:
Foxy said "are" - present tense.OllyT said:
195 points in the previous 2 season would tend to negate that argument.Foxy said:
Credit where it is due, Klopp's Liverpool is a phenomenally good team. Man City are very brittle. They look convincing when ahead, but when behind fold like a cheap suit.OllyT said:
Most of those wins are not in the modern football era, the European Cup was a very different competition prior to the Champions League came into being. In fact if the format had still been the same Liverpool wouldn't even have been eligible to play in it for the last 30 years.TheScreamingEagles said:Sixth, like the number of times Liverpool have been champions of Europe.
You now finally have your first PL title, 28 years after the competition began, well done. but let's not get carried away, the problems will start when Klopp moves on so I wouldn't overdo the gloating just yet, I'd wait till you are closing in on United's 13 titles.
You had different defenders in the past 2 seasons than you've got this season. Not replacing Kompany in the summer does look like it was a tremendous mistake.
Anyway onwards and upwards to next season, although we do still have 2 trophies to go for in the remainder of this one.
0 -
Well my Dad found out he doesn't have Covid-19 today, and he doesnt seem to have cancer anymore either, so my anger at his biopsy being delayed more than three months, while the Nightingale Hospital stood empty, has subsided10
-
You didn't, but the comment dfte made did, and that prompted this discussion.kinabalu said:
I didn't say it denotes endearment. What it denotes is familiarity. Which is false. Also very odd for a politician as your answer indicates.kle4 said:
No, but that's a point about consistency, and that his particular brand being using his first name - it has nothing whatsoever to do with the preposterous and frankly insulting view of the public that it denotes endearment,which was my objection.kinabalu said:
Is there any other politician who you routinely refer to by their first name as a matter of course and with no irony?kle4 said:
No matter how many times people tell me its use demonstrates some form of endearment it never stops sounding like a pile of nonsense to me. I think it is really demeaning to suggest that it does in fact. Here, I'll give you an example of why it's nonsense - Boris is an arse, who has been sacked for lying multiple times. Oh heaven forfend, such endearment has been shown by that statement. There's no real implication from using Boris, that's something people are inferring.kinabalu said:
+1dfte said:Mike, I like it that you called him Johnson here, not Boris. Keep it that way - it's inconsistent to use a self-chosen first name for one politician which implies some form of endearment which is not universally felt!
Yes. I strongly prefer Johnson. I wish more would use it. Not just here on PB but generally. Use of his 1st name (unless in irony) is inappropriate and borderline cringeful.
His brand is being known as Boris. Fine if people don't want to use it for that reason, or because they want to be consistent or more formal. But I've used both Boris and Johnson and Boris Johnson, and I don't accept this ludicrousness that if people generally refer to him as Boris they should not because it is somehow cuddly or friendly.
You want to argue for consistency or formaility politicians should, as nearly all do, go by their first name (although frankly Sir Keir is not doing too badly in that respect)? Fine. But to get het up about it being endearing or cringy? Screw that, it's saying the public are idiotic monkeys swayed by using what isn't even his actual first name, despite very easy examples of criticising and insulting him whilst still using Boris.
Criticising it on that basis is judging people and presuming what their views of him are based on absolutely nothing.
He benefits big time from the phony sense of intimacy which the "Boris" handle imbues. There is no question of that. Don't kid yourself it makes no difference.
It's then up to you whether to collaborate in this or not. But unless you are a strong supporter of him or this government I would suggest that it makes sense not to.
I think your description of it as collaboration and suggestion it is only for those who are strong supporters of him is insulting and beneath you. It's pathetic to suggest people are so stupid that any sense of 'familiarity' is akin to collaboration. Up yours, I thought you better than that.
I seriously cannot grasp the mental process that thinks people are 'collaborating' in some kind of intimacy by calling him what people call him. That you maintain that position even though its used by people who are not strong supporters of his instantly makes your point utter garbage, yet people persist in it even as their own words show what garbage it is.0 -
I was referring to the rest of the *country*, not the county. :-)Foxy said:
2/3 of our catchment is the county of Leics rather than the city. The number of cases in the county has halved, but the rise in cases in the city means a fairly flat overall position for June.Malmesbury said:
Yes - saw that about the lack of spike in deaths.Foxy said:
Though no spike in Leicester deaths. 7 were added this week, but the most recent of these was on 24/6. Inpatients down again today too, to 70.Malmesbury said:England down to Low Level Authority - Pillar 1 & 2
What is interesting is how the epidemic is falling off a cliff in much of the country vs the outbreaks. In many places it is gone - in others, halving in a week.0 -
Good news for your Dad! Glad it is in remission.isam said:Well my Dad found out he doesn't have Covid-19 today, and he doesnt seem to have cancer anymore either, so my anger at his biopsy being delayed more than three months, while the Nightingale Hospital stood empty, has subsided
1 -
Not the most encouraging of polls for Biden with 4 months to go.HYUFD said:1 -
SO how do you think Trumpsky feels?Andy_JS said:
Not the most encouraging of polls for Biden with 4 months to go.HYUFD said:
You think the news will improve for him, based on a) COVID-19 trend; b) ecomomic trend; and c) his disinclination to throw away the shovel and stop digging the hole he's in deeper?0 -
One Texan to anotherNigelb said:
Who is that masked man? Is it the Lone Ranger?
No, it's just our Antifi Governor!0 -
-
-
It's also a poll that has Biden lagging only 2 points behind with the over 65s. and...SeaShantyIrish2 said:
SO how do you think Trumpsky feels?Andy_JS said:
Not the most encouraging of polls for Biden with 4 months to go.HYUFD said:
You think the news will improve for him, based on a) COVID-19 trend; b) ecomomic trend; and c) his disinclination to throw away the shovel and stop digging the hole he's in deeper?
Trump getting 30% of the Hispanic vote.
Neither of which I believe.1 -
Speaking of polls, this from July 2 NYT:SeaShantyIrish2 said:
SO how do you think Trumpsky feels?Andy_JS said:
Not the most encouraging of polls for Biden with 4 months to go.HYUFD said:
You think the news will improve for him, based on a) COVID-19 trend; b) ecomomic trend; and c) his disinclination to throw away the shovel and stop digging the hole he's in deeper?
In addition to public surveys showing him losing decisively to Joseph R. Biden Jr. in a number of battleground states, private Republican polls in recent weeks show the president struggling even in conservative states, leading Mr. Biden by less than five points in Montana and trailing him in Georgia and even Kansas, according to G.O.P. officials who have seen the data."
“People are making judgments about the president’s performance there and how he’s handling it,” said John Thune of South Dakota, the second-ranking Senate Republican, making no attempt to sugarcoat what he acknowledged has become a referendum on Mr. Trump’s performance. “Sometimes you get dealt a hand and you got to play it.”
0 -
SeaShantyIrish2 said:
SO how do you think Trumpsky feels?Andy_JS said:
Not the most encouraging of polls for Biden with 4 months to go.HYUFD said:
You think the news will improve for him, based on a) COVID-19 trend; b) ecomomic trend; and c) his disinclination to throw away the shovel and stop digging the hole he's in deeper?0 -
I think it will be the closest election since 2000, Pennsylvania and Florida will decide it and the result may not be conclusive for days if not weeks.Anabobazina said:1 -
It's going to be close IMO. Pennsylvania could decide it.SeaShantyIrish2 said:
SO how do you think Trumpsky feels?Andy_JS said:
Not the most encouraging of polls for Biden with 4 months to go.HYUFD said:
You think the news will improve for him, based on a) COVID-19 trend; b) ecomomic trend; and c) his disinclination to throw away the shovel and stop digging the hole he's in deeper?1 -
Kevin_McCandless said:
It's also a poll that has Biden lagging only 2 points behind with the over 65s. and...SeaShantyIrish2 said:
SO how do you think Trumpsky feels?Andy_JS said:
Not the most encouraging of polls for Biden with 4 months to go.HYUFD said:
You think the news will improve for him, based on a) COVID-19 trend; b) ecomomic trend; and c) his disinclination to throw away the shovel and stop digging the hole he's in deeper?
Trump getting 30% of the Hispanic vote.
Agree Hispanic % for Trumpsky looks high (he got 28% of Hispanics vote in '16)
But his showing among geezers is in line with other polling - after all, they are the group most directly affected by Trumpsky's "leadership" on COVID-190 -
I thought you said you were from Seattle?SeaShantyIrish2 said:
One Texan to anotherNigelb said:
Who is that masked man? Is it the Lone Ranger?
No, it's just our Antifi Governor!0 -
There was a lot in the manifesto, including investment in public services and infrastructure. I genuinely believe many Conservative MPs and even some pb Tories did not read the 2019 manifesto. In essence, Boris ran on Labour's almost-successful 2017 platform and against Cameron and May's (and Thatcher's) Conservatism.OnlyLivingBoy said:If there are so many radical exciting plans to transform Britain why don't we know about them already? Isn't the usual procedure to put them in the manifesto so people know what they're voting for? And if they weren't in the manifesto, how can anyone claim the government has a mandate to implement them?
0 -
Personally don't think its gonna be close enough in 2020 for one state - even a big one - to make the difference by itself.Andy_JS said:
It's going to be close IMO. Pennsylvania could decide it.SeaShantyIrish2 said:
SO how do you think Trumpsky feels?Andy_JS said:
Not the most encouraging of polls for Biden with 4 months to go.HYUFD said:
You think the news will improve for him, based on a) COVID-19 trend; b) ecomomic trend; and c) his disinclination to throw away the shovel and stop digging the hole he's in deeper?
As a native of the Keystone State (my grandfather used to give me toy Penzoil trucks to play with) yours truly maintains a strong interest in PA politics.
Trump's victory in 2016 was due to ancestoral rust-belt & rural-backwater Democrats in Western PA swinging hard his way - a pattern repeated from Maine to Washington State.
In 2018, GOP tightened its hold in many areas captured by Trumpsky. But these gains were more than offset by Republican loses in Eastern PA, esp the Philadelphia suburbs.
Looking to 2020, story in July 2 NYT says that local GOP leader state (for publication anyway) they are confident the President can erase current -10% PA deficit versus Biden, thanks to
> GOP advantage in new voter registrations;
> a return to in-person organizing versus Biden virtual campaigning;
> a range of issues: energy (fracking), economic reopening & police defunding
To me, the best argument is the first. However, also think that Trumpsky may have achieved his max already in Western PA outside of Pittsburgh (which is in much better economically than rest of region) whereas Dems are still gaining votes Philly & Pittburgh burbs. But registration numbers are indeed important.
As for in-person organizing, think that Tulsa shows that might be problematic for some time. And while virtual campaigning is not my cup of tea, the Democrats are currently working it for all were worth. Delayed & late primaries help this cause, as does the massive increase in absentee voting.
Issues are a toss-up. Fracking is a plus for Reps in rust belt & rural areas, way less so in cities & suburbs. And don't think Trumpsky is getting the better end of the economy vs health debate as premise that public health heresy makes good economic policy ain't looking so hot right now. And defunding police is a bad sound bite, but it seems that even conservative voters have been part of the BLM sea change over here since George Floyd was killed.0 -
Trump did same thing in 2016 re: infrastructure and NAFTA - ran on traditional DEMOCRATIC issues. Which yours truly thinks was what put him over the top, along with Hillary's incredible political incompetence.DecrepiterJohnL said:
There was a lot in the manifesto, including investment in public services and infrastructure. I genuinely believe many Conservative MPs and even some pb Tories did not read the 2019 manifesto. In essence, Boris ran on Labour's almost-successful 2017 platform and against Cameron and May's (and Thatcher's) Conservatism.OnlyLivingBoy said:If there are so many radical exciting plans to transform Britain why don't we know about them already? Isn't the usual procedure to put them in the manifesto so people know what they're voting for? And if they weren't in the manifesto, how can anyone claim the government has a mandate to implement them?
Problem for BoJo & Trumpsky here is the same - Republicans elected to Congress and Tories elected to Parliament by and large do NOT want massive public investment in infrastructure, for both ideological and business reasons.
As for foreign trade, interesting that Trump's interest in replacing NAFTA and Johnson's in Brexit are broadly similar, designed (at least rhetorically but also at least somewhat genuinely) to get America/Britain a better deal versus China & etc/Europe. And stick it to the fuqing foreigners. Which fellow followers cheer, and business types go along with by focusing on the fine print.0 -
Indeed - but the Lone Ranger was a Texas Ranger. Not a Seattle Mariner!alterego said:
I thought you said you were from Seattle?SeaShantyIrish2 said:
One Texan to anotherNigelb said:
Who is that masked man? Is it the Lone Ranger?
No, it's just our Antifi Governor!0
This discussion has been closed.