I do think BMI is severely shortist. If I were only a couple of inches taller I would be ok.
Because BMI uses the square of your height, not the cube, it is actually the other way round.
I speak as someone who has not had a good lockdown from the mass point of view and I was several inches too short for my weight even at the start.
Not sure I get that. I went to the NHS BMI calculator. If I was 6'1 instead of 5'11 I would be a healthy weight, albeit at the top end. As it it I should be losing 9llb.
If you were the same shape but taller then your mass would increase by the same proportion as your volume. Your volume depends on the cube of your height, not the square. If, on the other hand, you could stretch out your height without changing your mass then you would inevitably be thinner.
60% of confectionary sales (were) are at the point of sale, that’s why there is always a fight to get best placement. This is because they are impulse purchases. Whilst banning the practice may be good for weight loss it could cost an awful lot of jobs.
Sounds to me like the FOBT argument all over again.
As a paternalistic Tory, I'd rather the health of the nation improves than a few jobs are saved.
The seats in question are mainly the "Red Wall" gained by the Conservatives in December 2019. In the Opinium sample of 2019 Con gain seats only, the respondents voted 65% to Leave and 35% to Remain. Leavers as a whole still give Johnson a net +31% approval rating, Remainers give Johnson a net -42% approval rating. So it's no surprise that Johnson should still have a +8.5% net approval rating in such seats.
What is more striking is that even in such Leave-dominated seats, Starmer has a +11% net approval rating, still better than that of Johnson. I think he is getting credit for taking on and defeating the derided Corbyn.
Labour can win most of these seats back in 2024, so long as Brexit fades as an issue that defines how people vote, Starmer can show that Labour has become a very different party to that under Corbyn's leadership and the public tires of the Conservatives under Johnson endlessly failing to deliver on their promises.
On swing, Boris got 4.6%. The common theme of big swings is facing a duffer like Brown, Major or Corbyn. Boris, much as people like to hate him, isn't in that category.
On topic: aren't voters in the 2019 Tory gains more invested in "Boris" than the Tory party? So perhaps it's not surprising: given structural antipathy to the Tories in many of these areas, it was only seats where Johnson himself was particularly popular that the Tory candidate won. In traditional Tory seats, by contrast, "Boris" was likely less important as a selling point. A corollary of this is that replacing Johnson mid-term in an effort to bolster Tory support may have the opposite effect in some of these seats. I have a gut feeling that Sunak may be less popular in these seats than in the traditional Tory home counties, but it'd be interesting to see polling on that. There's also the Brexit factor at work, although I imagine that will fade as an issue over time, especially if it turns out to be a bit shit, as seems likely.
Indeed, according to Redfield 2019 Tory voters prefer Boris to Starmer by more than they prefer Sunak to Starmer, only 2019 LD voters prefer Sunak to Starmer by more than they prefer Boris to Starmer and the latter are very posh London and Home Counties centred
I do think BMI is severely shortist. If I were only a couple of inches taller I would be ok.
Because BMI uses the square of your height, not the cube, it is actually the other way round.
I speak as someone who has not had a good lockdown from the mass point of view and I was several inches too short for my weight even at the start.
Not sure I get that. I went to the NHS BMI calculator. If I was 6'1 instead of 5'11 I would be a healthy weight, albeit at the top end. As it it I should be losing 9llb.
If you were the same shape but taller then your mass would increase by the same proportion as your volume. Your volume depends on the cube of your height, not the square. If, on the other hand, you could stretch out your height without changing your mass then you would inevitably be thinner.
Isn't the issue that we aren't all the same shape?
So someone with short legs and a big belly . . . and someone with long legs and a big belly . . . may have very different BMIs even if they both have eg the same waist measurements?
Indeed! Though I do think that kind of piece is something he is good at. It's when his flaws actually help him as he doesnt come across as too lecturing and his admissions seem genuine.
Loved the "and if you go for a run first thing then everything in the rest of your day is going to be better than that."
On topic: aren't voters in the 2019 Tory gains more invested in "Boris" than the Tory party? So perhaps it's not surprising: given structural antipathy to the Tories in many of these areas, it was only seats where Johnson himself was particularly popular that the Tory candidate won. In traditional Tory seats, by contrast, "Boris" was likely less important as a selling point. A corollary of this is that replacing Johnson mid-term in an effort to bolster Tory support may have the opposite effect in some of these seats. I have a gut feeling that Sunak may be less popular in these seats than in the traditional Tory home counties, but it'd be interesting to see polling on that. There's also the Brexit factor at work, although I imagine that will fade as an issue over time, especially if it turns out to be a bit shit, as seems likely.
Indeed, according to Redfield 2019 Tory voters prefer Boris to Starmer by more than they prefer Sunak to Starmer, only 2019 LD voters prefer Sunak to Starmer by more than they prefer Boris to Starmer and the latter are very posh London and Home Counties centred
One very likely explanation for this is the similar psychological response to a change in buying behaviour, a kind of confirmation bias that is the opposite to buyers remorse. In other words, I have changed who I buy from, away from my traditional brand, and I need to keep telling myself it was the right decision, because part of me tells me it was not. "I DID make the right decision! I DID" The person will look for those reasons why they should convince themselves it was the correct decision. Clever brands will keep marketing to such folk to keep them on board. In political terms Tony Blair was the most recent to achieve this, and before him Margaret Thatcher.
As I have said many times before, Johnson is no Tony Blair, and he is definitely no Margaret Thatcher. This effect will doubtless melt away long before another GE.
On swing, Boris got 4.6%. The common theme of big swings is facing a duffer like Brown, Major or Corbyn. Boris, much as people like to hate him, isn't in that category
..... yet.
And if you're right and Johnson's big swing was mainly the result of him facing a duffer, it follows that things can be expected to go into reverse once the duffer's been removed from the scene.
This looks like confirmation bias in action. Those that took a chance voting for BoZo don't want to admit they made a mistake, yet.
Liked your link to the Miliband manifesto on the previous thread. Confirmed my idea that he is a pretty good policy wonk but not a great executive/front man. If I was SKS I would be trying pretty hard to get him back into the shadow cabinet. He needs some fresh thinking and it would be another demonstration that Corbyn era was a sad aberration.
Perhaps the idea that it's more important to have a charismatic front man than somebody who actually understands how the world works as PM is part of our problem. I do sometimes wonder whether evolutionary processes have left us congenitally unable to pick good leaders. The kind of leadership qualities that would help a neolithic tribe to survive and prosper (aggression, physical presence and charisma) are maybe not those that help deliver good leadership in large complex capitalist societies. I mean, look at how the taller candidate usually wins the US presidential election - that does suggest voters are basically picking somebody to lead a raiding or hunting party on the African savannah thirty thousand years ago.
I think that successful leaders have a range of skills including the abilities to inspire, set out clear messages and to persuade. May, for example, lacked these skills despite being diligent, clever and generally right (immigration being a bit of a black mark). And she was a disaster as leader, a total disaster.
Boris has these skills in spades. Whether he has a sufficient grip of the detail to choose the right direction is the more problematic bit.
There is much to be said for a front man who has the confidence to surround him or herself with brighter people but that is quite rare. Arguably early Maggie. Certainly Reagan.
"There is much to be said for a front man who has the confidence to surround him or herself with brighter people but that is quite rare. Arguably early Maggie. Certainly Reagan."
Trump too. Though I suspect you might consider that 'proving the rule'.
5% swing wipes out the Tory majority and creates a mess of a Parliament.
5% is a big swing though, that implies a result of 39 Con/38 Lab. One would expect that the Tory majority would be gone.
5% swing isn't impossible though, depends where the country is in 2024.
Nothing is impossible, however, 5% is a big swing. 2010 was a 5.1% swing, for example and that was the limit of what was seen as achievable. Only Blair, Thatcher and Cameron have achieved that level of swing since WW2. Starmer is not Blair or Thatcher, he may yet be Cameron, though. They also faced pretty insipid opponents. Boris, for all his faults, is a good campaigner and has a way of connecting with people that a lot of politicians can only dream of.
The more I see of Starmer the less impressive he becomes. He's presentable but seems like a blank sheet of paper, nothing he has said or done has challenged that yet.
He comes across to me more as a civil servant. Very smooth. I could picture him as a senior mandarin being non-committal at a select committee. The question is what sort of campaigner is he? Can he quicken the pulse?
On swing, Boris got 4.6%. The common theme of big swings is facing a duffer like Brown, Major or Corbyn. Boris, much as people like to hate him, isn't in that category.
John Major had much stronger leadership skills than Johnson. Brown was of similar standard to Johnson, though Brown did at least have the important skill of hard application. Johnson is a lazy git, and it will catch up with him. Johnson had more leadership capability than Corbyn, but then so does the average ruminant.
Twitter is full of left-wing authoritarians. Who could have guessed they would have turned out like this 10 or 20 year ago? At that time the right was more likely to be authoritarian.
Perhaps. Or he's giving them what they voted for so they are feeling good.
That's the question.
Did they vote for more expensive holidays, for example?
More expensive holidays haven't arrived yet. The question was why first time Tory voters are the most supportive of Shagger. Next year - if we crash out of transition - expect "thats not the Brexit I voted for" to be repeated a lot.
On swing, Boris got 4.6%. The common theme of big swings is facing a duffer like Brown, Major or Corbyn. Boris, much as people like to hate him, isn't in that category.
John Major had much stronger leadership skills than Johnson. Brown was of similar standard to Johnson, though Brown did at least have the important skill of hard application. Johnson is a lazy git, and it will catch up with him. Johnson had more leadership capability than Corbyn, but then so does the average ruminant.
You see what you want to see, ultimately it's going to be for the people to decide, but I'm pretty certain that Boris isn't in the same category as the three mentioned, @isam had a header on this based on personality ratings, well worth a read if you haven't had a chance.
Sooner they bring it in for all internationals, the better.
Agreed. Would it be too much to hope that they would also have a word with umpires about their interpretation of the 'bad light' regulations?
As a cricket lover, I reckon the number one priority for the ICC should be improving over rates. It's ridiculous that in international cricket 12-13 overs an hour is the norm, and they can't even reach 90 overs in a day. Fiddling with the field after every ball is the main reason. In Bradman's day, I believe 20 overs an hour was the norm. I'd suggest penalties for not reaching a minimum of 15 overs an hour.
This looks like confirmation bias in action. Those that took a chance voting for BoZo don't want to admit they made a mistake, yet.
They haven't made a mistake - he delivered. We have left the EU.
It's almost as if you have forgotten how pissed off people were at the attempts to thwart that.
We left the EU by the effluxion of time, having missed the Boris do-or-die date. Still, I suppose in the final analysis that will be the government's greatest achievement.
Given the number of different attempts to stop us leaving by continuously delaying that date then yes I would suggest that was quite an achievement.
On topic: aren't voters in the 2019 Tory gains more invested in "Boris" than the Tory party? So perhaps it's not surprising: given structural antipathy to the Tories in many of these areas, it was only seats where Johnson himself was particularly popular that the Tory candidate won. In traditional Tory seats, by contrast, "Boris" was likely less important as a selling point. A corollary of this is that replacing Johnson mid-term in an effort to bolster Tory support may have the opposite effect in some of these seats. I have a gut feeling that Sunak may be less popular in these seats than in the traditional Tory home counties, but it'd be interesting to see polling on that. There's also the Brexit factor at work, although I imagine that will fade as an issue over time, especially if it turns out to be a bit shit, as seems likely.
Indeed, according to Redfield 2019 Tory voters prefer Boris to Starmer by more than they prefer Sunak to Starmer, only 2019 LD voters prefer Sunak to Starmer by more than they prefer Boris to Starmer and the latter are very posh London and Home Counties centred
One very likely explanation for this is the similar psychological response to a change in buying behaviour, a kind of confirmation bias that is the opposite to buyers remorse. In other words, I have changed who I buy from, away from my traditional brand, and I need to keep telling myself it was the right decision, because part of me tells me it was not. "I DID make the right decision! I DID" The person will look for those reasons why they should convince themselves it was the correct decision. Clever brands will keep marketing to such folk to keep them on board. In political terms Tony Blair was the most recent to achieve this, and before him Margaret Thatcher.
As I have said many times before, Johnson is no Tony Blair, and he is definitely no Margaret Thatcher. This effect will doubtless melt away long before another GE.
That explanation doesn't explain why they "bought from him" in the first place.
There's no swing in these number. The logical thought surely is that the voters in these seats like him . . . because they like him . . . and that's why they voted for him in the first place. Not that they voted for him then decided they like him, because they voted for him.
This looks like confirmation bias in action. Those that took a chance voting for BoZo don't want to admit they made a mistake, yet.
Yes, and most important of all we haven't yet hit the end of the Brexit transition period, so the contradictions and chaotic implementation of the government's approach aren't yet showing up much.
On the fewer v less debate: when you write something it is so that you can communicate your ideas as well as possible (unless you are a lawyer). “Eight items or less” conveys the same idea as “Eight items or fewer” and in one fewer character, so why the argument? Well for a significant fraction of your readership the first version will cause them to wince a little. They are now thinking about your grammar, not your ideas. This is not helpful.
Over time English evolves as it is used, and the distinction will become less (and here fewer is certainly wrong) important. Incidentally that is why quoting uses from the ninth century doesn’t really help here; it’s how people use it now that is important. But while there are still those of us around who will wince then you are more likely to get a sympathetic hearing by avoiding that construction.
I think that was the point the video I linked to previously, was making.
Many of the things we say now were wrong a few hundred years ago (or more) but as you say language adapts and changes.
I don't know if it's a generational thing but I certainly don't wince when I see "less" instead of fewer and I don't know anyone else who does either.
Do you think the OED will ever state:
"LOSE" - alt "LOOSE"...?
It might. There was a recent report that people are losing the ability to spell as they rely on software handling it for them. Combine that trend with the descriptive (as opposed to prescriptive) approach to language, and yes, loose/lose will be in the OED.
“Should of” for “should have” (from the sound of “should’ve”) is one I think I am fighting a losing battle with. I’m conscious that I’m one of the few on here that can do anything at all about this by flagging up these points in my pupils’ work. Some would end up with more written by me than they did if I went for everything they got wrong. Not just pupils either. We have a school policy of getting someone else to check our reports before they are sent out and I’ve had a few discussions about what I think are basic bits of grammar with some of my younger colleagues.
That. of course, comes down to the steady loss of knowledge of how to use the apostrophe - 'should of' being a homonym for 'should've'. Such linguistic innovations are, regrettably or not, inevitable. Though there is a degree of entertainment to be had from attempting to halt the inexorable march of evolution.
*Bangs head on desk*
Just write 'tell me why this is wrong' in your marking. Get them to do the work. They're more likely to remember it that way anyway.
Twitter is full of left-wing authoritarians. Who could have guessed they would have turned out like this 10 or 20 year ago? At that time the right was more likely to be authoritarian.
Was it?
SWP types have always been authoritarian. Blair's government had very authoritarian streaks - 90 day detention without trial.
Indeed! Though I do think that kind of piece is something he is good at. It's when his flaws actually help him as he doesnt come across as too lecturing and his admissions seem genuine.
Loved the "and if you go for a run first thing then everything in the rest of your day is going to be better than that."
It works as while some people apparently love jogging and he could have said it was fun and you'll love it if you try, a lot of people find it an almighty chore so it probably relates to more people to say so.
On the fewer v less debate: when you write something it is so that you can communicate your ideas as well as possible (unless you are a lawyer). “Eight items or less” conveys the same idea as “Eight items or fewer” and in one fewer character, so why the argument? Well for a significant fraction of your readership the first version will cause them to wince a little. They are now thinking about your grammar, not your ideas. This is not helpful.
Over time English evolves as it is used, and the distinction will become less (and here fewer is certainly wrong) important. Incidentally that is why quoting uses from the ninth century doesn’t really help here; it’s how people use it now that is important. But while there are still those of us around who will wince then you are more likely to get a sympathetic hearing by avoiding that construction.
I think that was the point the video I linked to previously, was making.
Many of the things we say now were wrong a few hundred years ago (or more) but as you say language adapts and changes.
I don't know if it's a generational thing but I certainly don't wince when I see "less" instead of fewer and I don't know anyone else who does either.
Do you think the OED will ever state:
"LOSE" - alt "LOOSE"...?
It might. There was a recent report that people are losing the ability to spell as they rely on software handling it for them. Combine that trend with the descriptive (as opposed to prescriptive) approach to language, and yes, loose/lose will be in the OED.
“Should of” for “should have” (from the sound of “should’ve”) is one I think I am fighting a losing battle with. I’m conscious that I’m one of the few on here that can do anything at all about this by flagging up these points in my pupils’ work. Some would end up with more written by me than they did if I went for everything they got wrong. Not just pupils either. We have a school policy of getting someone else to check our reports before they are sent out and I’ve had a few discussions about what I think are basic bits of grammar with some of my younger colleagues.
That. of course, comes down to the steady loss of knowledge of how to use the apostrophe - 'should of' being a homonym for 'should've'. Such linguistic innovations are, regrettably or not, inevitable. Though there is a degree of entertainment to be had from attempting to halt the inexorable march of evolution.
*Bangs head on desk*
Just write 'tell me why this is wrong' in your marking. Get them to do the work. They're more likely to remember it that way anyway.
I think you missed the point of what @Nigelb posted and my response...
Edit - also, that takes longer to write than just correcting it.
This looks like confirmation bias in action. Those that took a chance voting for BoZo don't want to admit they made a mistake, yet.
Yes, and most important of all we haven't yet hit the end of the Brexit transition period, so the contradictions and chaotic implementation of the government's approach aren't yet showing up much.
Maybe they are already priced in.
I think there will be a direct (and negative) correlation between GBPUSD and the hardness of Brexit.
At the moment, Johnson, being a *** useless twat, people think we will have a super-soft Brexit as evidenced by the cave on NI.
Indeed! Though I do think that kind of piece is something he is good at. It's when his flaws actually help him as he doesnt come across as too lecturing and his admissions seem genuine.
Loved the "and if you go for a run first thing then everything in the rest of your day is going to be better than that."
It works as while some people apparently love jogging and he could have said it was fun and you'll love it if you try, a lot of people find it an almighty chore so it probably relates to more people to say so.
He's right for once. A run first thing always makes my day better.
Credit where it's due, I didn't expect this govt to do anything much on obesity.
I criticized them for not pushing people to lose weight a month or two back, so am very pleasantly surprised to see Boris making the link between protecting the NHS and staying healthier.
They're even doing some restrictions on advertising, must admit I'm stunned they're willing to annoy big business like that.
Credit where it's due, I didn't expect this govt to do anything much on obesity.
I criticized them for not pushing people to lose weight a month or two back, so am very pleasantly surprised to see Boris making the link between protecting the NHS and staying healthier.
They're even doing some restrictions on advertising, must admit I'm stunned they're willing to annoy big business like that.
Credit where it's due, I didn't expect this govt to do anything much on obesity.
I criticized them for not pushing people to lose weight a month or two back, so am very pleasantly surprised to see Boris making the link between protecting the NHS and staying healthier.
They're even doing some restrictions on advertising, must admit I'm stunned they're willing to annoy big business like that.
It is good that that very basic link is being made.
We're far away from the conversation on health we need to be having, but it's a start.
I do think BMI is severely shortist. If I were only a couple of inches taller I would be ok.
Because BMI uses the square of your height, not the cube, it is actually the other way round.
I speak as someone who has not had a good lockdown from the mass point of view and I was several inches too short for my weight even at the start.
Not sure I get that. I went to the NHS BMI calculator. If I was 6'1 instead of 5'11 I would be a healthy weight, albeit at the top end. As it it I should be losing 9llb.
There's a cycling kit supply company called "Fat Lad at the Back".
"Won't leave you looking like a badly packed sausage"
Credit where it's due, I didn't expect this govt to do anything much on obesity.
I criticized them for not pushing people to lose weight a month or two back, so am very pleasantly surprised to see Boris making the link between protecting the NHS and staying healthier.
They're even doing some restrictions on advertising, must admit I'm stunned they're willing to annoy big business like that.
Yes, though I'm not sure sin taxes that treat everyone as if they have an issue is the way forwards. I used to have the occasional McDonald's breakfast on the way to the office when the London Wall branch existed, I haven't got a problem with my weight and neither did the majority of people also getting breakfast.
I think promotion of a healthier lifestyle including exercise, healthier home cooked food and making cooking a mandatory GCSE and making them learn useful things, not how to make fun stuff like cakes.
Credit where it's due, I didn't expect this govt to do anything much on obesity.
I criticized them for not pushing people to lose weight a month or two back, so am very pleasantly surprised to see Boris making the link between protecting the NHS and staying healthier.
They're even doing some restrictions on advertising, must admit I'm stunned they're willing to annoy big business like that.
I don't smoke, don't like smoking, but at a time when the world is coming to recognise prohibition has failed and is legalising drugs to be thinking of outlawing tobacco? Madness.
Indeed! Though I do think that kind of piece is something he is good at. It's when his flaws actually help him as he doesnt come across as too lecturing and his admissions seem genuine.
Loved the "and if you go for a run first thing then everything in the rest of your day is going to be better than that."
It works as while some people apparently love jogging and he could have said it was fun and you'll love it if you try, a lot of people find it an almighty chore so it probably relates to more people to say so.
He's right for once. A run first thing always makes my day better.
I wish that was true for me as well, I even have Hampstead Heath on my doorstep! I'm a stationary bike kind of person, alternate between 40 mins on different programmes with the bike and we've set up a small home gym in the tiny spare room, it's just about big enough to fit a bench and squat bar. It's been our lockdown saviour!
Credit where it's due, I didn't expect this govt to do anything much on obesity.
I criticized them for not pushing people to lose weight a month or two back, so am very pleasantly surprised to see Boris making the link between protecting the NHS and staying healthier.
They're even doing some restrictions on advertising, must admit I'm stunned they're willing to annoy big business like that.
I don't smoke, don't like smoking, but at a time when the world is coming to recognise prohibition has failed and is legalising drugs to be thinking of outlawing tobacco? Madness.
I used to joke that tobacco companies would prepare for the banning of tobacco and the legalisation of weed, by buying expertise from the drug cartels in exchange for tobacco growing knowledge.
Now I wonder where the knowledge exchange is taking place.
Yes, though I'm not sure sin taxes that treat everyone as if they have an issue is the way forwards. I used to have the occasional McDonald's breakfast on the way to the office when the London Wall branch existed, I haven't got a problem with my weight and neither did the majority of people also getting breakfast.
Fujitsu, as a legacy of their manufacturing days, has subsidised canteens in the offices. A full fry-up to start the day at your desk for about £5
I think promotion of a healthier lifestyle including exercise, healthier home cooked food and making cooking a mandatory GCSE and making them learn useful things, not how to make fun stuff like cakes.
On topic: aren't voters in the 2019 Tory gains more invested in "Boris" than the Tory party? So perhaps it's not surprising: given structural antipathy to the Tories in many of these areas, it was only seats where Johnson himself was particularly popular that the Tory candidate won. In traditional Tory seats, by contrast, "Boris" was likely less important as a selling point. A corollary of this is that replacing Johnson mid-term in an effort to bolster Tory support may have the opposite effect in some of these seats. I have a gut feeling that Sunak may be less popular in these seats than in the traditional Tory home counties, but it'd be interesting to see polling on that. There's also the Brexit factor at work, although I imagine that will fade as an issue over time, especially if it turns out to be a bit shit, as seems likely.
Indeed, according to Redfield 2019 Tory voters prefer Boris to Starmer by more than they prefer Sunak to Starmer, only 2019 LD voters prefer Sunak to Starmer by more than they prefer Boris to Starmer and the latter are very posh London and Home Counties centred
One very likely explanation for this is the similar psychological response to a change in buying behaviour, a kind of confirmation bias that is the opposite to buyers remorse. In other words, I have changed who I buy from, away from my traditional brand, and I need to keep telling myself it was the right decision, because part of me tells me it was not. "I DID make the right decision! I DID" The person will look for those reasons why they should convince themselves it was the correct decision. Clever brands will keep marketing to such folk to keep them on board. In political terms Tony Blair was the most recent to achieve this, and before him Margaret Thatcher.
As I have said many times before, Johnson is no Tony Blair, and he is definitely no Margaret Thatcher. This effect will doubtless melt away long before another GE.
That explanation doesn't explain why they "bought from him" in the first place.
There's no swing in these number. The logical thought surely is that the voters in these seats like him . . . because they like him . . . and that's why they voted for him in the first place. Not that they voted for him then decided they like him, because they voted for him.
Nope, they voted for him because they distinctly disliked the other guy. They are subsequently giving him the benefit of the doubt because they (unlike you, and to a lesser extent me) are not that interested in politics, and wish to justify their decision. Quite easy to understand really.
Credit where it's due, I didn't expect this govt to do anything much on obesity.
I criticized them for not pushing people to lose weight a month or two back, so am very pleasantly surprised to see Boris making the link between protecting the NHS and staying healthier.
They're even doing some restrictions on advertising, must admit I'm stunned they're willing to annoy big business like that.
I don't smoke, don't like smoking, but at a time when the world is coming to recognise prohibition has failed and is legalising drugs to be thinking of outlawing tobacco? Madness.
It makes perfect sense for this government to think of banning smoking.
As I have said several times, if they had a 5pm news conference with the CMO and DCMO at lecterns alongside Boris and the subject was smoking (or driving, or mountain climbing, or motorsports, or three day eventing) you can guess what the medical advice would be.
On topic: aren't voters in the 2019 Tory gains more invested in "Boris" than the Tory party? So perhaps it's not surprising: given structural antipathy to the Tories in many of these areas, it was only seats where Johnson himself was particularly popular that the Tory candidate won. In traditional Tory seats, by contrast, "Boris" was likely less important as a selling point. A corollary of this is that replacing Johnson mid-term in an effort to bolster Tory support may have the opposite effect in some of these seats. I have a gut feeling that Sunak may be less popular in these seats than in the traditional Tory home counties, but it'd be interesting to see polling on that. There's also the Brexit factor at work, although I imagine that will fade as an issue over time, especially if it turns out to be a bit shit, as seems likely.
Indeed, according to Redfield 2019 Tory voters prefer Boris to Starmer by more than they prefer Sunak to Starmer, only 2019 LD voters prefer Sunak to Starmer by more than they prefer Boris to Starmer and the latter are very posh London and Home Counties centred
One very likely explanation for this is the similar psychological response to a change in buying behaviour, a kind of confirmation bias that is the opposite to buyers remorse. In other words, I have changed who I buy from, away from my traditional brand, and I need to keep telling myself it was the right decision, because part of me tells me it was not. "I DID make the right decision! I DID" The person will look for those reasons why they should convince themselves it was the correct decision. Clever brands will keep marketing to such folk to keep them on board. In political terms Tony Blair was the most recent to achieve this, and before him Margaret Thatcher.
As I have said many times before, Johnson is no Tony Blair, and he is definitely no Margaret Thatcher. This effect will doubtless melt away long before another GE.
That explanation doesn't explain why they "bought from him" in the first place.
There's no swing in these number. The logical thought surely is that the voters in these seats like him . . . because they like him . . . and that's why they voted for him in the first place. Not that they voted for him then decided they like him, because they voted for him.
Nope, they voted for him because they distinctly disliked the other guy. They are subsequently giving him the benefit of the doubt because they (unlike you, and to a lesser extent me) are not that interested in politics, and wish to justify their decision. Quite easy to understand really.
Nope, dislike for the other guy existed but they also liked Boris.
If your theory was correct there should have been a major swing in Boris's own approval ratings if you compare now with immediately prior to the election . . . that hasn't happened.
If you live long enough what was absolutely normal as a child comes around.
We used to travel to Italy regularly as a child on sleeper trains. Initially from Victoria and then Calais, changing at Paris going to Rome and then the last change there for the train to Naples. I have so many happy memories of these train journeys: the peculiar smell of trains (especially the combination of steam and sea as we arrived at Calais for the ferry), everything about Wagons-Lits, eating dinner, peering out at night to see the station names, hearing the announcements and waking up to the smell of a new country and watching how the light changed and the gradual differences in houses, stations, countryside etc. Plus the people. Wonderful.
Then when my family were younger we’d take the car across and go to Brussels or Paris and do something similar: put the car on the train and travel with it to Nice or Livorno, avoiding the dreary drive through France. Belgium closed its service a few years ago.
The last time I did it was in 2016 with my daughter when we went to Nice from Paris. The service was awful: rude, uncaring staff, shabby trains, trains delayed etc. It had the air of a service that was being deliberately run down to turn away customers and justify its closure. And that happened in 2017.
And now it is being revived. Plus ca change, eh?
I love train travel across Europe. There should be much much more of it. Far nicer than planes. Greener too. And it has the possibility of fun adventure, in a way which flights really don’t have.
Then when my family were younger we’d take the car across and go to Brussels or Paris and do something similar: put the car on the train and travel with it to Nice or Livorno, avoiding the dreary drive through France. Belgium closed its service a few years ago.
It was at one time possible to put your car on a train from London to Edinburgh (and elsewhere)
One enterprising individual set up an Overnight Bag service, where he would collect parcels at one end, drive the van on the train, and someone else would deliver them at the other end.
It was brilliant. Then when it ended you could still use Red Star parcels to get something to London the same day. Now you would need to pay someone to take is as hand baggage.
If you live long enough what was absolutely normal as a child comes around.
We used to travel to Italy regularly as a child on sleeper trains. Initially from Victoria and then Calais, changing at Paris going to Rome and then the last change there for the train to Naples. I have so many happy memories of these train journeys: the peculiar smell of trains (especially the combination of steam and sea as we arrived at Calais for the ferry), everything about Wagons-Lits, eating dinner, peering out at night to see the station names, hearing the announcements and waking up to the smell of a new country and watching how the light changed and the gradual differences in houses, stations, countryside etc. Plus the people. Wonderful.
Then when my family were younger we’d take the car across and go to Brussels or Paris and do something similar: put the car on the train and travel with it to Nice or Livorno, avoiding the dreary drive through France. Belgium closed its service a few years ago.
The last time I did it was in 2016 with my daughter when we went to Nice from Paris. The service was awful: rude, uncaring staff, shabby trains, trains delayed etc. It had the air of a service that was being deliberately run down to turn away customers and justify its closure. And that happened in 2017.
And now it is being revived. Plus ca change, eh?
I love train travel across Europe. There should be much much more of it. Far nicer than planes. Greener too. And it has the possibility of fun adventure, in a way which flights really don’t have.
I was OVERJOYED to see this article. Wagons Lit journey across Europe is on my bucket list.
On swing, Boris got 4.6%. The common theme of big swings is facing a duffer like Brown, Major or Corbyn. Boris, much as people like to hate him, isn't in that category.
John Major had much stronger leadership skills than Johnson. Brown was of similar standard to Johnson, though Brown did at least have the important skill of hard application. Johnson is a lazy git, and it will catch up with him. Johnson had more leadership capability than Corbyn, but then so does the average ruminant.
You see what you want to see, ultimately it's going to be for the people to decide, but I'm pretty certain that Boris isn't in the same category as the three mentioned, @isam had a header on this based on personality ratings, well worth a read if you haven't had a chance.
No, sorry, I agree there is always an element of that with any of us, but my main objection to Johnson has always been that he does not have what it takes to be a PM. I held that opinion long before he famously decided which Brexit article would most help him achieve his career ambition. He is a value vacuum; a man who was a hopeless Foreign Secretary and he is, and will continue to be, a hopeless PM. There is a fundamental difference between being able to win an election, whether against weak opposition or not, and the ability to lead a government.
Then when my family were younger we’d take the car across and go to Brussels or Paris and do something similar: put the car on the train and travel with it to Nice or Livorno, avoiding the dreary drive through France. Belgium closed its service a few years ago.
It was at one time possible to put your cat on a train from London to Edinburgh (and elsewhere)
One enterprising individual set up an Overnight Bag service, where he would collect parcels at one end, drive the van on the train, and someone else would deliver them at the other end.
It was brilliant. Then when it ended you could still use Red Star parcels to get something to London the same day. Now you would need to pay someone to take is as hand baggage.
Someone just told be the wrongful trading laws were suspended in March, is that true?
The insolvency industry is surely going to have a field day with all the reborn companies after this....?
Partly true - the bit about directors being personally liable if the company continued trading whilst insolvent was suspended. This was very sensible, because otherwise a lot of companies would have had to be closed down, to be on the safe side of the law.
If you live long enough what was absolutely normal as a child comes around.
We used to travel to Italy regularly as a child on sleeper trains. Initially from Victoria and then Calais, changing at Paris going to Rome and then the last change there for the train to Naples. I have so many happy memories of these train journeys: the peculiar smell of trains (especially the combination of steam and sea as we arrived at Calais for the ferry), everything about Wagons-Lits, eating dinner, peering out at night to see the station names, hearing the announcements and waking up to the smell of a new country and watching how the light changed and the gradual differences in houses, stations, countryside etc. Plus the people. Wonderful.
Then when my family were younger we’d take the car across and go to Brussels or Paris and do something similar: put the car on the train and travel with it to Nice or Livorno, avoiding the dreary drive through France. Belgium closed its service a few years ago.
The last time I did it was in 2016 with my daughter when we went to Nice from Paris. The service was awful: rude, uncaring staff, shabby trains, trains delayed etc. It had the air of a service that was being deliberately run down to turn away customers and justify its closure. And that happened in 2017.
And now it is being revived. Plus ca change, eh?
I love train travel across Europe. There should be much much more of it. Far nicer than planes. Greener too. And it has the possibility of fun adventure, in a way which flights really don’t have.
I was OVERJOYED to see this article. Wagons Lit journey across Europe is on my bucket list.
All this rather depressing talk of BMIs and the like reminds me that I really need to go for my daily exercise.
Laters...
Gym this morning. First time since March. In some ways it was the same, but in others very different. Same equipment of course, but the one-way systems were a bit of a nuisance.
On swing, Boris got 4.6%. The common theme of big swings is facing a duffer like Brown, Major or Corbyn. Boris, much as people like to hate him, isn't in that category.
John Major had much stronger leadership skills than Johnson. Brown was of similar standard to Johnson, though Brown did at least have the important skill of hard application. Johnson is a lazy git, and it will catch up with him. Johnson had more leadership capability than Corbyn, but then so does the average ruminant.
You see what you want to see, ultimately it's going to be for the people to decide, but I'm pretty certain that Boris isn't in the same category as the three mentioned, @isam had a header on this based on personality ratings, well worth a read if you haven't had a chance.
No, sorry, I agree there is always an element of that with any of us, but my main objection to Johnson has always been that he does not have what it takes to be a PM. I held that opinion long before he famously decided which Brexit article would most help him achieve his career ambition. He is a value vacuum; a man who was a hopeless Foreign Secretary and he is, and will continue to be, a hopeless PM. There is a fundamental difference between being able to win an election, whether against weak opposition or not, and the ability to lead a government.
What are the qualities that you think are required to make a good PM?
Then when my family were younger we’d take the car across and go to Brussels or Paris and do something similar: put the car on the train and travel with it to Nice or Livorno, avoiding the dreary drive through France. Belgium closed its service a few years ago.
It was at one time possible to put your cat on a train from London to Edinburgh (and elsewhere)
One enterprising individual set up an Overnight Bag service, where he would collect parcels at one end, drive the van on the train, and someone else would deliver them at the other end.
It was brilliant. Then when it ended you could still use Red Star parcels to get something to London the same day. Now you would need to pay someone to take is as hand baggage.
Red Star was also brilliant
When I was a student Personal Luggage in Advance was vey useful. Let my wife and I down (well, maybe not) on our honeymoon when we arrived at the hotel with the clothes we stood up in and our bags arrived the next day.
In the 1960s my family was due to have a holiday in the Netherlands but the weather was foul so after crossing the Channel, we had a last minute change of plan. We set off for Paris and put the car on the overnight train to Nice. It was our first time in the South of France and my father just drove along the coast until we found somewhere we fancied (Cavaliare). It was the first of several holidays there. The South of France in the 60s was bliss.
In the 1960s my family was due to have a holiday in the Netherlands but the weather was foul so after crossing the Channel, we had a last minute change of plan. We set off for Paris and put the car on the overnight train to Nice. It was our first time in the South of France and my father just drove along the coast until we found somewhere we fancied (Cavaliare). It was the first of several holidays there. The South of France in the 60s was bliss.
The drive from Nice to Livorno is one of the great car journeys of Europe: Mediterranean on your right, mountains on your left and Italy’s autostrade are your oysters. Plus the food at service stations is really rather good.
Then when my family were younger we’d take the car across and go to Brussels or Paris and do something similar: put the car on the train and travel with it to Nice or Livorno, avoiding the dreary drive through France. Belgium closed its service a few years ago.
It was at one time possible to put your cat on a train from London to Edinburgh (and elsewhere)
One enterprising individual set up an Overnight Bag service, where he would collect parcels at one end, drive the van on the train, and someone else would deliver them at the other end.
It was brilliant. Then when it ended you could still use Red Star parcels to get something to London the same day. Now you would need to pay someone to take is as hand baggage.
Red Star was also brilliant
When I was a student Personal Luggage in Advance was vey useful. Let my wife and I down (well, maybe not) on our honeymoon when we arrived at the hotel with the clothes we stood up in and our bags arrived the next day.
The John Lennon Airport has a motto from ‘Imagine’ - ‘above us only sky.’
It was acidly suggested the baggage handlers should take their motto from the same song - ‘imagine no possessions.’
LOL Actually, the subjects were volunteers who'd very recently had contact with someone infected with Covid (picked up by contact tracing) and given hydroxychloroquine (or a placebo) as prophylaxis.
Then when my family were younger we’d take the car across and go to Brussels or Paris and do something similar: put the car on the train and travel with it to Nice or Livorno, avoiding the dreary drive through France. Belgium closed its service a few years ago.
It was at one time possible to put your cat on a train from London to Edinburgh (and elsewhere)
One enterprising individual set up an Overnight Bag service, where he would collect parcels at one end, drive the van on the train, and someone else would deliver them at the other end.
It was brilliant. Then when it ended you could still use Red Star parcels to get something to London the same day. Now you would need to pay someone to take is as hand baggage.
Red Star was also brilliant
When I was a student Personal Luggage in Advance was vey useful. Let my wife and I down (well, maybe not) on our honeymoon when we arrived at the hotel with the clothes we stood up in and our bags arrived the next day.
That was a huge boon if you had to travel a long way and had no car. The system was still operating in the late 1970s (I think I used it last in summer 1978 as a student) but I'm not sure when BR stopped doing it.
When I was a child in the early 2000s, we used to drive from Birmingham to the south of France, sometimes by Ferry, sometimes by Chunnel. Could usually get from Birmingham to 3/4 through France in one day. How much did the car train cost compared to the cost of fuel?
On swing, Boris got 4.6%. The common theme of big swings is facing a duffer like Brown, Major or Corbyn. Boris, much as people like to hate him, isn't in that category.
John Major had much stronger leadership skills than Johnson. Brown was of similar standard to Johnson, though Brown did at least have the important skill of hard application. Johnson is a lazy git, and it will catch up with him. Johnson had more leadership capability than Corbyn, but then so does the average ruminant.
You see what you want to see, ultimately it's going to be for the people to decide, but I'm pretty certain that Boris isn't in the same category as the three mentioned, @isam had a header on this based on personality ratings, well worth a read if you haven't had a chance.
No, sorry, I agree there is always an element of that with any of us, but my main objection to Johnson has always been that he does not have what it takes to be a PM. I held that opinion long before he famously decided which Brexit article would most help him achieve his career ambition. He is a value vacuum; a man who was a hopeless Foreign Secretary and he is, and will continue to be, a hopeless PM. There is a fundamental difference between being able to win an election, whether against weak opposition or not, and the ability to lead a government.
What are the qualities that you think are required to make a good PM?
Good judgement is the key. Far more important than energy or intelligence.
Johnson does not have that, and never has had.
He is a poor judge of character, a poor judge of policy and a poor judge of ethics.
At the same time, he is undoubtedly possessed of a remarkable emotional intelligence.
In the 1960s my family was due to have a holiday in the Netherlands but the weather was foul so after crossing the Channel, we had a last minute change of plan. We set off for Paris and put the car on the overnight train to Nice. It was our first time in the South of France and my father just drove along the coast until we found somewhere we fancied (Cavaliare). It was the first of several holidays there. The South of France in the 60s was bliss.
The drive from Nice to Livorno is one of the great car journeys of Europe: Mediterranean on your right, mountains on your left and Italy’s autostrade are your oysters. Plus the food at service stations is really rather good.
I've just checked and it was Cavaliere,not Cavaliare.
Credit where it's due, I didn't expect this govt to do anything much on obesity.
I criticized them for not pushing people to lose weight a month or two back, so am very pleasantly surprised to see Boris making the link between protecting the NHS and staying healthier.
They're even doing some restrictions on advertising, must admit I'm stunned they're willing to annoy big business like that.
I don't smoke, don't like smoking, but at a time when the world is coming to recognise prohibition has failed and is legalising drugs to be thinking of outlawing tobacco? Madness.
You can't make cigarettes in a bathtub, and tobacco smoking is a mere 400 year blip in the history of mankind whereas we have been at the booze so long we are genetically adapted to it (and anyway currently prohibition works pretty bloody well in many parts of the world). So not a very good parallel. I would prefer smoking to be taxed and ridiculed out of existence rather than legislated, but it has to, and will, go.
I do think BMI is severely shortist. If I were only a couple of inches taller I would be ok.
Because BMI uses the square of your height, not the cube, it is actually the other way round.
I speak as someone who has not had a good lockdown from the mass point of view and I was several inches too short for my weight even at the start.
Not sure I get that. I went to the NHS BMI calculator. If I was 6'1 instead of 5'11 I would be a healthy weight, albeit at the top end. As it it I should be losing 9llb.
If you were the same shape but taller then your mass would increase by the same proportion as your volume. Your volume depends on the cube of your height, not the square. If, on the other hand, you could stretch out your height without changing your mass then you would inevitably be thinner.
I do think BMI is severely shortist. If I were only a couple of inches taller I would be ok.
Because BMI uses the square of your height, not the cube, it is actually the other way round.
I speak as someone who has not had a good lockdown from the mass point of view and I was several inches too short for my weight even at the start.
Not sure I get that. I went to the NHS BMI calculator. If I was 6'1 instead of 5'11 I would be a healthy weight, albeit at the top end. As it it I should be losing 9llb.
If you were the same shape but taller then your mass would increase by the same proportion as your volume. Your volume depends on the cube of your height, not the square. If, on the other hand, you could stretch out your height without changing your mass then you would inevitably be thinner.
That was the advice during lockdown, it is not the advice now.
The high street needs to recover and the government wants to encourage shoppers to shop in person again in high street shops while wearing facemasks and respecting social distancing and a tax on goods online or deliveries would be a good way to do that and fair as online retailers do not have to pay business rates unlike high street shops and also made vastly increased profits during lockdown unlike virtually every other business, most of which made a loss or broke even at best.
Credit where it's due, I didn't expect this govt to do anything much on obesity.
I criticized them for not pushing people to lose weight a month or two back, so am very pleasantly surprised to see Boris making the link between protecting the NHS and staying healthier.
They're even doing some restrictions on advertising, must admit I'm stunned they're willing to annoy big business like that.
On swing, Boris got 4.6%. The common theme of big swings is facing a duffer like Brown, Major or Corbyn. Boris, much as people like to hate him, isn't in that category.
John Major had much stronger leadership skills than Johnson. Brown was of similar standard to Johnson, though Brown did at least have the important skill of hard application. Johnson is a lazy git, and it will catch up with him. Johnson had more leadership capability than Corbyn, but then so does the average ruminant.
You see what you want to see, ultimately it's going to be for the people to decide, but I'm pretty certain that Boris isn't in the same category as the three mentioned, @isam had a header on this based on personality ratings, well worth a read if you haven't had a chance.
No, sorry, I agree there is always an element of that with any of us, but my main objection to Johnson has always been that he does not have what it takes to be a PM. I held that opinion long before he famously decided which Brexit article would most help him achieve his career ambition. He is a value vacuum; a man who was a hopeless Foreign Secretary and he is, and will continue to be, a hopeless PM. There is a fundamental difference between being able to win an election, whether against weak opposition or not, and the ability to lead a government.
What are the qualities that you think are required to make a good PM?
Good judgement is the key. Far more important than energy or intelligence.
Johnson does not have that, and never has had.
He is a poor judge of character, a poor judge of policy and a poor judge of ethics.
At the same time, he is undoubtedly possessed of a remarkable emotional intelligence.
Good judgement is the key to being an effective PM, high emotional intelligence is often the key to getting elected to the office in the first place
The consultation and the implementation of such a policy will take months, by which time you'd hope we'd be in a better position. Even so, "essentials" such as food shopping/DIY/childrens' clothing could be exempted as with VAT at present. I agree in principle that online companies get too much of an easy ride on tax and we should be tapping into this.
On swing, Boris got 4.6%. The common theme of big swings is facing a duffer like Brown, Major or Corbyn. Boris, much as people like to hate him, isn't in that category.
John Major had much stronger leadership skills than Johnson. Brown was of similar standard to Johnson, though Brown did at least have the important skill of hard application. Johnson is a lazy git, and it will catch up with him. Johnson had more leadership capability than Corbyn, but then so does the average ruminant.
You see what you want to see, ultimately it's going to be for the people to decide, but I'm pretty certain that Boris isn't in the same category as the three mentioned, @isam had a header on this based on personality ratings, well worth a read if you haven't had a chance.
No, sorry, I agree there is always an element of that with any of us, but my main objection to Johnson has always been that he does not have what it takes to be a PM. I held that opinion long before he famously decided which Brexit article would most help him achieve his career ambition. He is a value vacuum; a man who was a hopeless Foreign Secretary and he is, and will continue to be, a hopeless PM. There is a fundamental difference between being able to win an election, whether against weak opposition or not, and the ability to lead a government.
What are the qualities that you think are required to make a good PM?
Good judgement is the key. Far more important than energy or intelligence.
Johnson does not have that, and never has had.
He is a poor judge of character, a poor judge of policy and a poor judge of ethics.
At the same time, he is undoubtedly possessed of a remarkable emotional intelligence.
Good judgement is the key to being an effective PM, high emotional intelligence is often the key to getting elected to the office in the first place
I see you are doing a Priti Patel by conspicuously failing to contradict, and thereby implicitly agreeing with @ydoethur about the fact that Johnson has dreadful judgement.
A lot of places will probably end up with very different totals to now. Being second or third or whatever in deaths likely means little but we can broadly see who has had a bad outcome.
If you live long enough what was absolutely normal as a child comes around.
We used to travel to Italy regularly as a child on sleeper trains. Initially from Victoria and then Calais, changing at Paris going to Rome and then the last change there for the train to Naples. I have so many happy memories of these train journeys: the peculiar smell of trains (especially the combination of steam and sea as we arrived at Calais for the ferry), everything about Wagons-Lits, eating dinner, peering out at night to see the station names, hearing the announcements and waking up to the smell of a new country and watching how the light changed and the gradual differences in houses, stations, countryside etc. Plus the people. Wonderful.
Then when my family were younger we’d take the car across and go to Brussels or Paris and do something similar: put the car on the train and travel with it to Nice or Livorno, avoiding the dreary drive through France. Belgium closed its service a few years ago.
The last time I did it was in 2016 with my daughter when we went to Nice from Paris. The service was awful: rude, uncaring staff, shabby trains, trains delayed etc. It had the air of a service that was being deliberately run down to turn away customers and justify its closure. And that happened in 2017.
And now it is being revived. Plus ca change, eh?
I love train travel across Europe. There should be much much more of it. Far nicer than planes. Greener too. And it has the possibility of fun adventure, in a way which flights really don’t have.
In 2016 we extended our 2 weeks in Spain with a long weekend in Paris. Train Alicante - Barcelona - La Tour de Carol and then one of the few Intercites de Nuit services to Paris. Which was cancelled and replaced by an EMU as far as Tolouse Matabieu where we eventually boarded the sleeper which came in from one of its other legs at about half midnight. Which was very late for my kids...
Credit where it's due, I didn't expect this govt to do anything much on obesity.
I criticized them for not pushing people to lose weight a month or two back, so am very pleasantly surprised to see Boris making the link between protecting the NHS and staying healthier.
They're even doing some restrictions on advertising, must admit I'm stunned they're willing to annoy big business like that.
The consultation and the implementation of such a policy will take months, by which time you'd hope we'd be in a better position. Even so, "essentials" such as food shopping/DIY/childrens' clothing could be exempted as with VAT at present. I agree in principle that online companies get too much of an easy ride on tax and we should be tapping into this.
As noted elsewhere, the problem is Amazon.
If Amazon paid "their fare share of tax" the problem would be solved. It wouldn't be necessary to penalise UK businesses that happen to sell "mail order"
On topic: aren't voters in the 2019 Tory gains more invested in "Boris" than the Tory party? So perhaps it's not surprising: given structural antipathy to the Tories in many of these areas, it was only seats where Johnson himself was particularly popular that the Tory candidate won. In traditional Tory seats, by contrast, "Boris" was likely less important as a selling point. A corollary of this is that replacing Johnson mid-term in an effort to bolster Tory support may have the opposite effect in some of these seats. I have a gut feeling that Sunak may be less popular in these seats than in the traditional Tory home counties, but it'd be interesting to see polling on that. There's also the Brexit factor at work, although I imagine that will fade as an issue over time, especially if it turns out to be a bit shit, as seems likely.
Indeed, according to Redfield 2019 Tory voters prefer Boris to Starmer by more than they prefer Sunak to Starmer, only 2019 LD voters prefer Sunak to Starmer by more than they prefer Boris to Starmer and the latter are very posh London and Home Counties centred
One very likely explanation for this is the similar psychological response to a change in buying behaviour, a kind of confirmation bias that is the opposite to buyers remorse. In other words, I have changed who I buy from, away from my traditional brand, and I need to keep telling myself it was the right decision, because part of me tells me it was not. "I DID make the right decision! I DID" The person will look for those reasons why they should convince themselves it was the correct decision. Clever brands will keep marketing to such folk to keep them on board. In political terms Tony Blair was the most recent to achieve this, and before him Margaret Thatcher.
As I have said many times before, Johnson is no Tony Blair, and he is definitely no Margaret Thatcher. This effect will doubtless melt away long before another GE.
That explanation doesn't explain why they "bought from him" in the first place.
There's no swing in these number. The logical thought surely is that the voters in these seats like him . . . because they like him . . . and that's why they voted for him in the first place. Not that they voted for him then decided they like him, because they voted for him.
You and Nigel are both right. They voted for Johnson because they like him and they say they still like him. The latter could be for one of two reasons. (i) It's too early to have realized the mistake. (ii) They have realized their mistake but are not yet ready to admit it. All the Red Wallers are probably in one or the other camp. We can postulate that a (iii) category - realized the mistake AND saying so - is virtually empty right now. It must be otherwise it would be showing up in the data.
The key question here - which we can't answer - is what is the split between (i) and (ii). Heavily (i) means good news for the Cons. Their strategy is predicated on the Red Wall still being in a (i) state by the time of the next election - because if these voters have not clocked their mistake by then the chances are they will repeat it. But if (as I hope) there are lots in (ii), Labour are set fair. Why? Because from (ii) it's only a matter of time before they take the decisive step to (iii) - which will duly show up in the polls and more importantly at the ballot box.
Credit where it's due, I didn't expect this govt to do anything much on obesity.
I criticized them for not pushing people to lose weight a month or two back, so am very pleasantly surprised to see Boris making the link between protecting the NHS and staying healthier.
They're even doing some restrictions on advertising, must admit I'm stunned they're willing to annoy big business like that.
All this rather depressing talk of BMIs and the like reminds me that I really need to go for my daily exercise.
Laters...
Gym this morning. First time since March. In some ways it was the same, but in others very different. Same equipment of course, but the one-way systems were a bit of a nuisance.
Mrs RP went swimming this morning. Said it was bliss. Its wet and windy here so will go to the gym later and report back
If you live long enough what was absolutely normal as a child comes around.
We used to travel to Italy regularly as a child on sleeper trains. Initially from Victoria and then Calais, changing at Paris going to Rome and then the last change there for the train to Naples. I have so many happy memories of these train journeys: the peculiar smell of trains (especially the combination of steam and sea as we arrived at Calais for the ferry), everything about Wagons-Lits, eating dinner, peering out at night to see the station names, hearing the announcements and waking up to the smell of a new country and watching how the light changed and the gradual differences in houses, stations, countryside etc. Plus the people. Wonderful.
Then when my family were younger we’d take the car across and go to Brussels or Paris and do something similar: put the car on the train and travel with it to Nice or Livorno, avoiding the dreary drive through France. Belgium closed its service a few years ago.
The last time I did it was in 2016 with my daughter when we went to Nice from Paris. The service was awful: rude, uncaring staff, shabby trains, trains delayed etc. It had the air of a service that was being deliberately run down to turn away customers and justify its closure. And that happened in 2017.
And now it is being revived. Plus ca change, eh?
I love train travel across Europe. There should be much much more of it. Far nicer than planes. Greener too. And it has the possibility of fun adventure, in a way which flights really don’t have.
I can't see all of that Times piece, but of course it's worth remembering that there was a plan to run sleepers through the tunnel. Some class 92 locos and coaching stock were procured, but the plug was pulled as low cost airlines took off (excuse the pun).
So you don’t think airlines should have to pay for the CO2 they produce?
Where did you get that from?
For the average punter, taking a holiday in Europe will be more expensive after we have left that it was when we were members.
Is that what they voted for?
They voted for protectionism in the labour market. Incredible that it took a Tory govt to provide it, whilst Labour supporters fought tooth and nail to stop it.
LOL Actually, the subjects were volunteers who'd very recently had contact with someone infected with Covid (picked up by contact tracing) and given hydroxychloroquine (or a placebo) as prophylaxis.
The way it was written implied that it was a challenge trial which seemed extremely irresponsible given the previous results of other trials!
The consultation and the implementation of such a policy will take months, by which time you'd hope we'd be in a better position. Even so, "essentials" such as food shopping/DIY/childrens' clothing could be exempted as with VAT at present. I agree in principle that online companies get too much of an easy ride on tax and we should be tapping into this.
As noted elsewhere, the problem is Amazon.
If Amazon paid "their fare share of tax" the problem would be solved. It wouldn't be necessary to penalise UK businesses that happen to sell "mail order"
It is when you have companies like Boohoo and ASOS undercutting high street chains significantly because they don't pay business rates or have rent to pay landlords. Nearly all larger businesses can move online and survive, but that would involve sacrificing footfall that many independent businesses in the same city centres as the bigger chains rely on to survive.
We need to find the right balance between giving people the convenience of online shopping where necessary/desirable, but also encouraging people (when it is completely safe of course) to go and spend in their local economy.
Credit where it's due, I didn't expect this govt to do anything much on obesity.
I criticized them for not pushing people to lose weight a month or two back, so am very pleasantly surprised to see Boris making the link between protecting the NHS and staying healthier.
They're even doing some restrictions on advertising, must admit I'm stunned they're willing to annoy big business like that.
Credit where it's due, I didn't expect this govt to do anything much on obesity.
I criticized them for not pushing people to lose weight a month or two back, so am very pleasantly surprised to see Boris making the link between protecting the NHS and staying healthier.
They're even doing some restrictions on advertising, must admit I'm stunned they're willing to annoy big business like that.
Are they still promoting the "Eat Out to Help Out" campaign?
I am not by nature an anti-government free market kind of person, but even I can see the absurdity of the government spending money to both encourage and discourage people from eating at McDonalds.
So you don’t think airlines should have to pay for the CO2 they produce?
Where did you get that from?
For the average punter, taking a holiday in Europe will be more expensive after we have left that it was when we were members.
Is that what they voted for?
They voted for protectionism in the labour market. Incredible that it took a Tory govt to provide it, whilst Labour supporters fought tooth and nail to stop it.
How things change
Exactly. So if their pay and conditions do not improve as a result, they’re gonna be miffed. They didn’t vote for protectionism “just because”. They want a positive benefit.
That’s going to be tricky in 98% british born Blyth Valley, for example, where Brexit is going to make diddly squat difference to the labour market.
Comments
If, on the other hand, you could stretch out your height without changing your mass then you would inevitably be thinner.
As a paternalistic Tory, I'd rather the health of the nation improves than a few jobs are saved.
What is more striking is that even in such Leave-dominated seats, Starmer has a +11% net approval rating, still better than that of Johnson. I think he is getting credit for taking on and defeating the derided Corbyn.
Labour can win most of these seats back in 2024, so long as Brexit fades as an issue that defines how people vote, Starmer can show that Labour has become a very different party to that under Corbyn's leadership and the public tires of the Conservatives under Johnson endlessly failing to deliver on their promises.
Laters...
https://redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/latest-gb-voting-intention-22-july/
So someone with short legs and a big belly . . . and someone with long legs and a big belly . . . may have very different BMIs even if they both have eg the same waist measurements?
Problem is I'm also a late riser. Tough.
As I have said many times before, Johnson is no Tony Blair, and he is definitely no Margaret Thatcher. This effect will doubtless melt away long before another GE.
And if you're right and Johnson's big swing was mainly the result of him facing a duffer, it follows that things can be expected to go into reverse once the duffer's been removed from the scene.
Trump too. Though I suspect you might consider that 'proving the rule'.
There's no swing in these number. The logical thought surely is that the voters in these seats like him . . . because they like him . . . and that's why they voted for him in the first place. Not that they voted for him then decided they like him, because they voted for him.
SWP types have always been authoritarian.
Blair's government had very authoritarian streaks - 90 day detention without trial.
Edit - also, that takes longer to write than just correcting it.
At the moment, Johnson, being a *** useless twat, people think we will have a super-soft Brexit as evidenced by the cave on NI.
I criticized them for not pushing people to lose weight a month or two back, so am very pleasantly surprised to see Boris making the link between protecting the NHS and staying healthier.
They're even doing some restrictions on advertising, must admit I'm stunned they're willing to annoy big business like that.
We're far away from the conversation on health we need to be having, but it's a start.
"Won't leave you looking like a badly packed sausage"
https://fatladattheback.com/collections/mens
I think promotion of a healthier lifestyle including exercise, healthier home cooked food and making cooking a mandatory GCSE and making them learn useful things, not how to make fun stuff like cakes.
Harwood embarrassing himself again
I don't smoke, don't like smoking, but at a time when the world is coming to recognise prohibition has failed and is legalising drugs to be thinking of outlawing tobacco? Madness.
Now I wonder where the knowledge exchange is taking place.
As I have said several times, if they had a 5pm news conference with the CMO and DCMO at lecterns alongside Boris and the subject was smoking (or driving, or mountain climbing, or motorsports, or three day eventing) you can guess what the medical advice would be.
If your theory was correct there should have been a major swing in Boris's own approval ratings if you compare now with immediately prior to the election . . . that hasn't happened.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/world/frances-love-affair-with-speed-derailed-as-macron-signals-sleepers-return-92mcgptpq
If you live long enough what was absolutely normal as a child comes around.
We used to travel to Italy regularly as a child on sleeper trains. Initially from Victoria and then Calais, changing at Paris going to Rome and then the last change there for the train to Naples. I have so many happy memories of these train journeys: the peculiar smell of trains (especially the combination of steam and sea as we arrived at Calais for the ferry), everything about Wagons-Lits, eating dinner, peering out at night to see the station names, hearing the announcements and waking up to the smell of a new country and watching how the light changed and the gradual differences in houses, stations, countryside etc. Plus the people. Wonderful.
Then when my family were younger we’d take the car across and go to Brussels or Paris and do something similar: put the car on the train and travel with it to Nice or Livorno, avoiding the dreary drive through France. Belgium closed its service a few years ago.
The last time I did it was in 2016 with my daughter when we went to Nice from Paris. The service was awful: rude, uncaring staff, shabby trains, trains delayed etc. It had the air of a service that was being deliberately run down to turn away customers and justify its closure. And that happened in 2017.
And now it is being revived. Plus ca change, eh?
I love train travel across Europe. There should be much much more of it. Far nicer than planes. Greener too. And it has the possibility of fun adventure, in a way which flights really don’t have.
The insolvency industry is surely going to have a field day with all the reborn companies after this....?
One enterprising individual set up an Overnight Bag service, where he would collect parcels at one end, drive the van on the train, and someone else would deliver them at the other end.
It was brilliant. Then when it ended you could still use Red Star parcels to get something to London the same day. Now you would need to pay someone to take is as hand baggage.
EDIT:just spotted the typo...
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/corporate-insolvency-and-governance-bill-2020-factsheets/suspension-of-wrongful-trading-liability
It was acidly suggested the baggage handlers should take their motto from the same song - ‘imagine no possessions.’
Actually, the subjects were volunteers who'd very recently had contact with someone infected with Covid (picked up by contact tracing) and given hydroxychloroquine (or a placebo) as prophylaxis.
Johnson does not have that, and never has had.
He is a poor judge of character, a poor judge of policy and a poor judge of ethics.
At the same time, he is undoubtedly possessed of a remarkable emotional intelligence.
What cunning plan has the Government come up with now?
https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1287711552397869064
The high street needs to recover and the government wants to encourage shoppers to shop in person again in high street shops while wearing facemasks and respecting social distancing and a tax on goods online or deliveries would be a good way to do that and fair as online retailers do not have to pay business rates unlike high street shops and also made vastly increased profits during lockdown unlike virtually every other business, most of which made a loss or broke even at best.
If Amazon paid "their fare share of tax" the problem would be solved. It wouldn't be necessary to penalise UK businesses that happen to sell "mail order"
The key question here - which we can't answer - is what is the split between (i) and (ii). Heavily (i) means good news for the Cons. Their strategy is predicated on the Red Wall still being in a (i) state by the time of the next election - because if these voters have not clocked their mistake by then the chances are they will repeat it. But if (as I hope) there are lots in (ii), Labour are set fair. Why? Because from (ii) it's only a matter of time before they take the decisive step to (iii) - which will duly show up in the polls and more importantly at the ballot box.
Under the VAT directive the only sales tax permissible is VAT and we are limited to the two substantive rates, plus zero-rating.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nightstar_(train)
How things change
We need to find the right balance between giving people the convenience of online shopping where necessary/desirable, but also encouraging people (when it is completely safe of course) to go and spend in their local economy.
That’s going to be tricky in 98% british born Blyth Valley, for example, where Brexit is going to make diddly squat difference to the labour market.