politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Strange Rebirth of Liberal Unionism

algarkirk said:

Andy_JS said:

ElectoralCalculus's latest polling average is showing a swing of 4% from LD to Lab since the general election. Whether that's because the LDs are waiting for their new leader to be announced is an interesting question.

It must be nice to be the party whose only function is, by how their votes affects the other parties' results, to decide which of the other parties forms the government that completely ignores them. It is remarkable that anyone would want to spend their lives campaigning for this great purpose.

Not a fan of the LDs?

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/AyoCaesar/status/1278957882378248192

What are the thoughts on Ash's tweet here? Anti-Semitic?

It does seem like a legitimate question (I've wondered myself what kosher salt was all about, surely there is no pork or shellfish in regular salt). Perhaps just googling it might have been sufficient. But then I am not a Twitter person.

MaxPB said:

Another question, does this mean the government's R calculation has been incorrect all this time as well and it's actually a lot lower?

It also means our death rate is up to 15% (!!) of those known to have the disease. Has anyone heard anything of the antibody tests that were supposed to give us a better idea of how many had actually had it.

algarkirk said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

rottenborough said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1278954269505437697

What about dismantling capitalism?

I agree with the concept of "black lives matter", I don't agree with the organisation "Black Lives Matter" or "Black Lives Matter UK". That's what I think Keir was getting at.

+1.

BLM with capitals is one more attempt to monopolise virtue, and attach it to a wider agenda. A next stage is to somehow demonise those who don't join in.

I think SKS may have made mistake with the knee business - his version of the Bullington photo. Lots of the people whose votes he needs think kneeling is only for the divine and the anointed, mostly HM the Queen in our case.

Or your wife (or vice versa 😄)

MaxPB said:

So at a stroke we have 30k fewer cases. I wonder how much damage has been done to the UK because of this unnecessary double counting. If we'd been reporting these accurate figures for the last month would the UK still be seen as a leper colony like Leicester?

Details?

rottenborough said:

For a start, a showman(person) will have to be brought in to handle the briefings.

Ian Watkins.

Charles said:

MaxPB said:

So at a stroke we have 30k fewer cases. I wonder how much damage has been done to the UK because of this unnecessary double counting. If we'd been reporting these accurate figures for the last month would the UK still be seen as a leper colony like Leicester?

Details?

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/

At the top of the page.

MaxPB said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

MaxPB said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

rottenborough said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1278954269505437697

What about dismantling capitalism?

I agree with the concept of "black lives matter", I don't agree with the organisation "Black Lives Matter" or "Black Lives Matter UK". That's what I think Keir was getting at.

Present but not involved

Well not really, your argument is ridiculous.

Do you agree with everything the Tories do? No, of course not - in your world though, it's black and white.

Of course black lives matter, I am very comfortable with that concept. I don't like what the organisation is doing.

Which is all fine, but he should have thought about all of this before bending the knee. It was a cheap, ill thought out gesture designed to get headlines. Starmer is supposed to be the thinking man's Labour leader, on this evidence he's not living up to that.

I think that's a little unfair. Kneeling was a mistake but a minor and so far isolated one. And it was a mistake in good company as EPL players continue to demonstrate.

nichomar said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

As for Whats-Her-Name Maxwell, here in US the Court TV cable channel is ALL over her case. Reporting that she appeared at initial hearing this via zoom proceedings in orange prison jump suit; fashion note "she didn't look disheveled but she sure didn't look put together".

Bail hearing scheduled for Monday, feds will oppose granting her bail on grounds (pretty ample I'd say) that she's a flight risk. Speculation (pretty obvious I'd say) that she may cut some kind of deal with the feds. Attorneys for victims say her arrest is very good news, because she's got all the ledgers, black books and other key documentation that will put some big fish right into DOJ's net.

His Foul Highness Prince Andrew is toast. Won't be long before some courtier is advising him to put his head in an oven - gas or electric - and push the button.

OR maybe take a slow boat to Pitcairn Island - show up wearing a mask & claiming to be Fletcher Christian's 14th cousin 13 times removed.

The romantic in me is rooting for Option A.

If Maxwell is a flight risk, why hadn't she flown? WTF was she still doing in America? As for Prince Andrew, even if innocent (and allowing for some fudging on different ages of majority) the question remains, what is he for?

Not truely up to speed on details of Maxwell, but seems that she's been hiding - perhaps she was planning to sneak out of the US for a safer long-term hiding place, but the pandemic shut down the borders? Anyway, she's got multiple pass-ports, money stashed god-knows-where - a flight risk? Hell yes!

His Foul Highness was up to his syphilitic gonads before this based on what was already known. With the inside dirt & details La Maxwell can & will provide, he's going to be at the deeeeeeeeep end of a very deep and slimy pool.

Almost certainly will be subpoenaed - whether or not he can be served (in legal sense that is) - to testify; quite possible he will be indicted for multiple, serious felonies.

She will mysteriously get covid and die four weeks later.

Somebody made a market on her health prospects over the next 12 months on the Omen prediction market on the Ethereum blockchain. However if you were to bet on this the arbitration system that would ultimately settle it would almost definitely rule that this was an "invalid question" because it looks too much like an elaborate nerd-technology-based assassination attempt.

ydoethur said:

Charles said:

Good article @stodge although I would take issue with describing Joe Chamberlain as a Liberal Unionist.

He certainly made common cause with them, but was at heart a Radical and Imperial Preferencer as you note. That’s a very different strain within the Tory Party (if you recall, my thread was Ultras, Liberal Unionists and Radicals) even though they had common branding for a while. The Liberal Unionists were originally grouped around the Cavendish family, but more recent examples are people like Carson, Mayhew, Hurd, Ancram, etc. They had disappeared under Blair and Cameron, quiescent given the dominance of the metropolitan interest.

In my view the current government is a slightly odd mix of Liberal Unionist and Radical. I like their instincts but just wish they had the ability and focus to deliver on them!

Given he spent a huge amount of time scheming against Hartington/Devonshire for control of the Liberal Unionist Party, which he finally won as a side-effect of his Tariff Reform Campaign in 1903, he would have disagreed with you.

Sure, he was an entryist who was subsequently expelled

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/AyoCaesar/status/1278957882378248192

What are the thoughts on Ash's tweet here? Anti-Semitic?

Nope. I have wondered this myself.

OnlyLivingBoy said:

rottenborough said:

Lord Tebbit:

"The peer also told The Telegraph’s Chopper’s Politics podcast that the PM also risks becoming “a spokesman for Dominic Cummings” after the ousting of Cabinet secretary Sir Mark Sedwill."

(Guardian blog)

"I agree with Norman Tebbit" are not words I thought I would ever utter.

Happens to us all.

OldKingCole said:

IanB2 said:

Shapps now saying "over 50" countries will be on the quarantine-exempt traffic light list to be announced later. Yesterday government was briefing "about 75".

Gather we can go to Thailand, but the Thais won't let us in!

There’s lots of differences between borders being open in theory and in practice across the world. Many countries are still asking for testing, quarantine, health insurance (can you even get that anywhere?) downloading apps etc. Added to the processes at airports, going anywhere is going to be a bureaucratic and expensive process for a while yet.

NerysHughes said:

MaxPB said:

So at a stroke we have 30k fewer cases. I wonder how much damage has been done to the UK because of this unnecessary double counting. If we'd been reporting these accurate figures for the last month would the UK still be seen as a leper colony like Leicester?

The key stat for me has always been the number of people admitted to hospital as I have always been unsure of the accuracy of the Covid test. For information there is now not a single Covid patient in any of Hampshire hospitals. So thats a County with a population of 2.1 million with no Covid inpatients.

Fantastic news! Does that mean we can all follow Boris' earlier advice and spend our way out of recession, down the pub? I have read that as a government invitation to get absolutely s***faced on Saturday, I suspect I am not alone.

Charles said:

ydoethur said:

Charles said:

Good article @stodge although I would take issue with describing Joe Chamberlain as a Liberal Unionist.

He certainly made common cause with them, but was at heart a Radical and Imperial Preferencer as you note. That’s a very different strain within the Tory Party (if you recall, my thread was Ultras, Liberal Unionists and Radicals) even though they had common branding for a while. The Liberal Unionists were originally grouped around the Cavendish family, but more recent examples are people like Carson, Mayhew, Hurd, Ancram, etc. They had disappeared under Blair and Cameron, quiescent given the dominance of the metropolitan interest.

In my view the current government is a slightly odd mix of Liberal Unionist and Radical. I like their instincts but just wish they had the ability and focus to deliver on them!

Given he spent a huge amount of time scheming against Hartington/Devonshire for control of the Liberal Unionist Party, which he finally won as a side-effect of his Tariff Reform Campaign in 1903, he would have disagreed with you.

Sure, he was an entryist who was subsequently expelled

Huh? He was (admittedly nominally for the previous six years) Leader of the Party when it dissolved in 1912!

eek said:

Charles said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/AyoCaesar/status/1278957882378248192

What are the thoughts on Ash's tweet here? Anti-Semitic?

Objectionable and nasty, I think. But not anti-Semitic.

I think “Harley. Quinn” had it right to refer to her as a “Jew-baiting wretch”

I would actually go for anti-Semitic as it was Jew-baiting and designed to cause a particular re-action.

I’m not sure just baiting gets the classification of anti-Semitic.

The implication, I suppose, was that “kosher” is a gimmick (“just to make it inclusive”). Nasty, definitely, and close to the line, but not sure it goes beyond.

As part of a pattern of behaviour, though, you’d draw some fairly serious conclusions about her

Slackbladder said:

Charles said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/AyoCaesar/status/1278957882378248192

What are the thoughts on Ash's tweet here? Anti-Semitic?

Objectionable and nasty, I think. But not anti-Semitic.

I think “Harley. Quinn” had it right to refer to her as a “Jew-baiting wretch”

On one way it's a fair question, but on the other hand, it's singling out a Jewish practice to question.

As stated, would she be so open questioning 'halal'?

By itself its not, but if part of a pattern of behavior?

That’s pretty much my view as well

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/theousherwood/status/1278965302647312384

Your poppy fascists are at it again, have a word CHB.

DavidL said:

MaxPB said:

Another question, does this mean the government's R calculation has been incorrect all this time as well and it's actually a lot lower?

It also means our death rate is up to 15% (!!) of those known to have the disease. Has anyone heard anything of the antibody tests that were supposed to give us a better idea of how many had actually had it.

Yes, it shows 13% in London, 3% in the SW on the latest figures that I have seen.

I know of a couple of people who were virus antigen positive, but have come up antibody negative, and more than a couple of weeks later. Test inaccuracy? Or do some people not produce antibodies?

ydoethur said:

Charles said:

ydoethur said:

Charles said:

Good article @stodge although I would take issue with describing Joe Chamberlain as a Liberal Unionist.

He certainly made common cause with them, but was at heart a Radical and Imperial Preferencer as you note. That’s a very different strain within the Tory Party (if you recall, my thread was Ultras, Liberal Unionists and Radicals) even though they had common branding for a while. The Liberal Unionists were originally grouped around the Cavendish family, but more recent examples are people like Carson, Mayhew, Hurd, Ancram, etc. They had disappeared under Blair and Cameron, quiescent given the dominance of the metropolitan interest.

In my view the current government is a slightly odd mix of Liberal Unionist and Radical. I like their instincts but just wish they had the ability and focus to deliver on them!

Given he spent a huge amount of time scheming against Hartington/Devonshire for control of the Liberal Unionist Party, which he finally won as a side-effect of his Tariff Reform Campaign in 1903, he would have disagreed with you.

Sure, he was an entryist who was subsequently expelled

Huh? He was (admittedly nominally for the previous six years) Leader of the Party when it dissolved in 1912!

I’m differentiating between the substance and the label. It was a marriage of convenience

LostPassword said:

Charles said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Andy_JS said:

BBC radio news at midnight tonight said: “…after racist comments by David Starkey”. They didn’t even bother to say “alleged racist comments”.

Allegedly, not alleged. It is (at best) the racist nature of the recorded comments that might be in doubt, not their existence given they are on video, so "allegedly racist" rather than "alleged ... comments". I doubt we'll see yet another Starkey television series on the Tudors.

A linguistic question

Starkey said “so many damn blacks survived”. It certainly indicates he has some pretty antediluvian views. But is the actual *comment* racist?

If not then aren’t you attacking someone for what they believe?

The other contexts when you might say, "why are there still so many damn < something >" are, I think, where the something is negative - so many damn slugs, so many damn midges, so many damn racists, etc.

So the implication from common usage of the word in the sentence is that the continued existence of black people despite slavery is a negative thing - clearly racist.

Yes, clearly racist.

Current local areas with highest infection rates:

Leicester 62.5 per 100,000
Bradford 19.5
Oadby 19.3
Rochdale 19.1
Rotherham 17.0
Kirklees 16.4

Data is to 03/07/20 so will likely increase as more comes in.

https://verify-it-c19data.co.uk/ords/verify02/r/covid-19/metrics-interactive-report?session=15883296378688

kle4 said:

kinabalu said:

kle4 said:

kinabalu said:

kle4 said:

kinabalu said:

dfte 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!

+1

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.

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.

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.

Is there any other politician who you routinely refer to by their first name as a matter of course and with no irony?

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.

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.

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.

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.

You didn't, but the comment dfte made did, and that prompted this discussion.

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.

Encore et redux -

1. The "Boris" brand creates false intimacy and he benefits big time from this.

2. By adopting it people reinforce the brand and the false intimacy from which he benefits.

3. Thus if you are not a supporter you should consider whether you should be playing along.

Thinking cap please.

And less of the "utter garbage".

The fact that people do not follow my recommendation in (3) does not make it a bad recommendation. It just means people are not following it. But they should.

IanB2 said:

algarkirk said:

Andy_JS said:

ElectoralCalculus's latest polling average is showing a swing of 4% from LD to Lab since the general election. Whether that's because the LDs are waiting for their new leader to be announced is an interesting question.

It must be nice to be the party whose only function is, by how their votes affects the other parties' results, to decide which of the other parties forms the government that completely ignores them. It is remarkable that anyone would want to spend their lives campaigning for this great purpose.

'tis the way our crooked system works. Other than campaigning to change the system, what else are you supposed to do if you look at Tory and Labour and find them equally abhorrent and incompetent?

Either campaign for another party and convince others to do the same ... Or join one of those two and try and change it from within.

There's nothing magical about Tories and Labour that mean they need to be two main parties. Only reason they are is because most people want to vote for one or the other.

RochdalePioneers said:

Johnson on LBC. Caller - "I work in theatres. We can't reopen and you're cutting off financial support. You won't let us go to work and won't support us what will you do". Waffle blah fill. Nick Ferrari throwing an ever growing list of absurdities in the guidance at Shagger, leading to Ferrari getting ever more exasperated and the waffle from Shagger getting sillier

It'll still be catnip to the usual suspects on this board.

Charles said:

eek said:

Charles said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/AyoCaesar/status/1278957882378248192

What are the thoughts on Ash's tweet here? Anti-Semitic?

Objectionable and nasty, I think. But not anti-Semitic.

I think “Harley. Quinn” had it right to refer to her as a “Jew-baiting wretch”

I would actually go for anti-Semitic as it was Jew-baiting and designed to cause a particular re-action.

I’m not sure just baiting gets the classification of anti-Semitic.

The implication, I suppose, was that “kosher” is a gimmick (“just to make it inclusive”). Nasty, definitely, and close to the line, but not sure it goes beyond.

As part of a pattern of behaviour, though, you’d draw some fairly serious conclusions about her

The thing is it's not something you should be asking on twitter - it's 10 seconds on google to find out it's natural (large crystal) salt rather than table salt (which is smaller crystals with iodine and other things often added). As for why the term "kosher" is used - as with a lot of things it's thanks to American English. The initial market was Jews as everyone else was happy with the cheaper stuff.

And yes I did Google that as it appears all the time in Bon-appetit videos (which we don't currently watch due to the children refusing to watch because of Conde Nast's pay equality issues).

So I would still be going for anti-Semitic as the other plausible reason is too thick to understand that the tweet shouldn't have been a tweet and was always going to be a problem regardless.

TOPPING said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/AyoCaesar/status/1278957882378248192

What are the thoughts on Ash's tweet here? Anti-Semitic?

It does seem like a legitimate question (I've wondered myself what kosher salt was all about, surely there is no pork or shellfish in regular salt). Perhaps just googling it might have been sufficient. But then I am not a Twitter person.

I happened to look at my shower gel this morning. It said "vegan" on the bottle.

Good news, it should also be both Kosher and Halal then too.

eek said:

Charles said:

eek said:

Charles said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/AyoCaesar/status/1278957882378248192

What are the thoughts on Ash's tweet here? Anti-Semitic?

Objectionable and nasty, I think. But not anti-Semitic.

I think “Harley. Quinn” had it right to refer to her as a “Jew-baiting wretch”

I would actually go for anti-Semitic as it was Jew-baiting and designed to cause a particular re-action.

I’m not sure just baiting gets the classification of anti-Semitic.

The implication, I suppose, was that “kosher” is a gimmick (“just to make it inclusive”). Nasty, definitely, and close to the line, but not sure it goes beyond.

As part of a pattern of behaviour, though, you’d draw some fairly serious conclusions about her

The thing is it's not something you should be asking on twitter - it's 10 seconds on google to find out it's natural (large crystal) salt rather than table salt (which is smaller crystals with iodine and other things often added). As for why the term "kosher" is used - as with a lot of things it's thanks to American English. The initial market was Jews as everyone else was happy with the cheaper stuff.

And yes I did Google that as it appears all the time in Bon-appetit videos (which we don't currently watch due to the children refusing to watch because of Conde Nast's pay equality issues).

So I would still be going for anti-Semitic as the other plausible reason is too thick to understand that the tweet shouldn't have been a tweet and was always going to be a problem regardless.

Given it is Ash Sarkar, whose immediate reaction to the exit poll last year was to say 'the red wave is coming,' I don't think we should rule out option 2.

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/johnestevens/status/1278967608423911425

He hasn't a clue about ANY of the details. ANY. Which is why "whack-a-mole" is so preposterous - you can literally picture the man standing by the machine shocked by the moles popping out and with a "cripes!" trying to hit them in shock that they are there.

The point about the whack-a-mole game is that they don't stop coming. You can't have a strategy to defeat the moles by whacking them on the head - you need to switch the machine off. Which he is unwilling to do.

Luckyguy1983 said:

eek said:

Charles said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/AyoCaesar/status/1278957882378248192

What are the thoughts on Ash's tweet here? Anti-Semitic?

Objectionable and nasty, I think. But not anti-Semitic.

I think “Harley. Quinn” had it right to refer to her as a “Jew-baiting wretch”

I would actually go for anti-Semitic as it was Jew-baiting and designed to cause a particular re-action.

Really? I agree with the poster who said she could have Googled, but Twitter is like speaking to these people. Did anyone give her an answer?

I looked. Apparently kosher salt just means unprocessed grainy salt; it is called kosher salt not because of any inherent properties, but because it's used to draw blood out of meat in the koshering process. So Maldon is kosher.

CorrectHorseBattery said:

This is one of the big problems for the UK and something the Government had control over. It's now too late.

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1278803791425482752

Why is it too late ?
Ensuring an adequate supply of masks and ensuring that people wear them could still be done - and really ought to be.

Philip_Thompson said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/1278961555732860928

Whinge whinge whinge. Why do people still Tweet this guy?

Some people just want things to moan about. I welcome pub re-opening.

Foxy said:

DavidL said:

MaxPB said:

Another question, does this mean the government's R calculation has been incorrect all this time as well and it's actually a lot lower?

It also means our death rate is up to 15% (!!) of those known to have the disease. Has anyone heard anything of the antibody tests that were supposed to give us a better idea of how many had actually had it.

Yes, it shows 13% in London, 3% in the SW on the latest figures that I have seen.

I know of a couple of people who were virus antigen positive, but have come up antibody negative, and more than a couple of weeks later. Test inaccuracy? Or do some people not produce antibodies?

13% isn't bad and must reduce the risk of a second wave somewhat. I fear much of the country is probably closer to the SW though. Have you seen any figures for Scotland?

Arrivals to the UK from countries including France, Spain, Italy, Germany and New Zealand will no longer need to quarantine from 10th July

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-53273048

Foxy said:

TOPPING said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/AyoCaesar/status/1278957882378248192

What are the thoughts on Ash's tweet here? Anti-Semitic?

It does seem like a legitimate question (I've wondered myself what kosher salt was all about, surely there is no pork or shellfish in regular salt). Perhaps just googling it might have been sufficient. But then I am not a Twitter person.

I happened to look at my shower gel this morning. It said "vegan" on the bottle.

Good news, it should also be both Kosher and Halal then too.

That's a point, isn't it? If we all ate hummus all the time, there wouldn't be any issues with kosher, halal, etc.

Admittedly we might all die of boredom from the repetitive diet or become like @Dura_Ace but nothing is perfect.

ydoethur said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/AyoCaesar/status/1278957882378248192

What are the thoughts on Ash's tweet here? Anti-Semitic?

On its own, I don't think you can say it's anti-Semitic. It is I think a misunderstanding that 'kosher salt' is the US term for a pure salt without additives: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosher_salt. In this country it would be 'kitchen salt.'

I don't know enough about her to say whether or not she has ever made disparaging remarks about the Jews, so I can't comment on if it's part of a pattern.

However, given the Corbynite issues with anti-Semitism, it's very unwise for her to have tweeted it, because it can certainly be interpreted that way. When there are grounds for suspicion, it is important that all actions are beyond it.

In ordinary and non racist north London gentile slang 'kosher' just means 'genuine' or 'real'. Usually in the form of a question about an offer or a deal: Is it kosher?

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/Kate_M_Proctor/status/1278968742035230720

If he wanted to do some top trolling, he should have said Papa flew there to get an eye test.

MaxPB said:

kamski said:

MaxPB said:

NerysHughes said:

MaxPB said:

So at a stroke we have 30k fewer cases. I wonder how much damage has been done to the UK because of this unnecessary double counting. If we'd been reporting these accurate figures for the last month would the UK still be seen as a leper colony like Leicester?

The key stat for me has always been the number of people admitted to hospital as I have always been unsure of the accuracy of the Covid test. For information there is now not a single Covid patient in any of Hampshire hospitals. So thats a County with a population of !.4 million with no Covid inpatients.

Which is fine, but the government's warning levels and quarantine/lockdown decisions have been made based on this old data. Now it turns out there are 30k fewer cases. How much earlier could we have opened up if we had known there were just a few hundred new cases per day at this point?

I don't know, but the UK death rate from Covid is still at the rate Germany's was 2 months ago, which is when the lockdown started being eased here. If you compare to European neighbours I guess the UK is still easing lockdown relatively early so I'm not sure if the double-counting hadn't happened that lockdown measures would have been eased any earlier in the UK.

Incidentally, if you compare the numbers of new cases 2-3 weeks ago, with the numbers of deaths the last days, the mortality rate in the UK still appears to be much higher than in Germany.

From the government data we don't actually know that. The daily release includes deaths that happened weeks or months ago. The only accurate by date data we have is the English hospitals and that is now at around 30-40 per day.

Ah yes that's a good point.

Might make an interesting lead article to discuss:

https://www.thearticle.com/a-new-index-puts-labour-ahead-of-the-tories

Slackbladder said:

LostPassword said:

Charles said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Andy_JS said:

BBC radio news at midnight tonight said: “…after racist comments by David Starkey”. They didn’t even bother to say “alleged racist comments”.

Allegedly, not alleged. It is (at best) the racist nature of the recorded comments that might be in doubt, not their existence given they are on video, so "allegedly racist" rather than "alleged ... comments". I doubt we'll see yet another Starkey television series on the Tudors.

A linguistic question

Starkey said “so many damn blacks survived”. It certainly indicates he has some pretty antediluvian views. But is the actual *comment* racist?

If not then aren’t you attacking someone for what they believe?

The other contexts when you might say, "why are there still so many damn < something >" are, I think, where the something is negative - so many damn slugs, so many damn midges, so many damn racists, etc.

So the implication from common usage of the word in the sentence is that the continued existence of black people despite slavery is a negative thing - clearly racist.

Yes, clearly racist.

Clearly racist and on camera. No need to use the word alleged or allegedly.

If he hadn't used the word damn it would be a different matter.

HYUFD said:

algarkirk said:

One major fly in the ointment of Liberal Unionism as described here is Northern Ireland. As long as none of the major parties organise and stand for election in NI it is obvious that its status is different. There is lots of support for British Unionism but not truly UK unionism.

The Tories have stood before but never got very far as most of the Unionist vote already votes DUP or UUP, indeed the Tories stood with the latter in 2010.

Labour is effectively already represented in Northern Ireland too by its sister party the SDLP as are the LDs by their sister party the Alliance Party

You describe my problem well.

https://twitter.com/robpowellnews/status/1278970259152736256

CorrectHorseBattery said:

SDLP would likely be involved in a Labour Government in future.

Both of them?

https://twitter.com/estwebber/status/1278970942035619840

https://twitter.com/seanjonesqc/status/1278971156742246402