To the story we can add the parties we were promised (or threatened with) that never got done. Alan Sked - the very original founder of UKIp who parted company with his baby long ago - was briefly in the news again a few years ago through some new party he was intending to launch. Arron Banks during the Brexit parliamentary saga was apparently going to pour his money into a new party. And Farage at various times has threatened us with new political entities.
Once you start with a new party it clearly becomes a habit.
First they ignore you, then laugh at you, then they fight you.. then you win.
We've gone from "win" (2016) back to ignoring and laughing, which is where we were in the late 90s/ early 00s, but we shouldn't forget what's happened next.
If you want to keep laughing (or ignoring) the populist right then centrist parties need to address the issues that mobilise voters around them or they'll be doomed to relive the same experiences all over again - or worse. Just shouting more loudly that they're wrong and you don't agree won't do it.
The reason I keep saying centrists are like the Bourbons is that I don't see much evidence they've learn anything or forgotten anything from the last five years. So I'm not overly hopeful although I pray there is at least some cognitive diversity and intelligence out there.
It is a populist govt in charge making decisions and has been for the last 4 years. Their job to find the solutions and address the issues at the moment.
Oh, I quite agree.
Nevertheless it's because the issue of the EU and full immigration control (on the levers) was addressed that so many left-wing/centrist liberals on here this morning can enjoy laughing at the patheticness of UKIP and their outriders.
It has precisely nothing at all to do with them. Had we followed their policies those parties would now be on 30%+ of the national vote and the kingmakers in any Government, and demanding even more radical politics than we have at present.
A fair voting system might have been nice.
Ok, but do you see any evidence the outcomes would have been different if we had?
I'm not saying you're saying this but a lot of centrist PR advocates seem to want it because they think it'd be an effective way of benefiting centrists and structurally locking out everyone else.
I'm baffled as to why they think this. It hasn't been the case in Europe and, had we had it here, we'd have had a Tory-UKIP coalition in 2015 and probably Farage as Deputy PM or foreign secretary.
Would you still favour it accepting all of that?
Of course. Not having my vote in every parliamentary election simply thrown away into the bin is a personal win, regardless of how everyone else votes. And is the right thing to do.
The governments in the UK and US are bad advert enough for our system.
What do you expect when the negotiations are overseen by the likes of Johnson and Cummings?
And Barnier
As far as I can see the EU leaders have instructed Barnier to maintain a consistent line. We and they also know he can be trusted. The same cannot be said of Johnson, Cummings and their representatives.
What do you expect when the negotiations are overseen by the likes of Johnson and Cummings?
And Barnier
As far as I can see the EU leaders have instructed Barnier to maintain a consistent line. We and they also know he can be trusted. The same cannot be said of Johnson, Cummings and their representatives.
Their consistent line is an unacceptable one, that's the problem.
In a negotiation people compromise not remain consistent to their opening position.
Snap reaction to London restrictions from Londoners - everyone hates it.
Not pleased with the lockdown as it gives us massive headaches viz. childcare and other family responsibilities. However, rates are rising in London and this tightening is probably warranted (it might not be enough actually!). Time will tell as ever but the public will overwhelmingly support the thrust of this tightening as the YouGov from yesterday suggested.
Rates are not rising in London, we have a 7 day rate of 120 per 100k in London. Other tier 2 places are at 400-600 per 100k. The restrictions are completely unnecessary. Additionally there's evidence that the rate rise is already slowing down, the doubling time in London is 12 days as of yesterday, that's down from 5 days two weeks ago.
Max, out of interest what's your source for that? Not doubting the accuracy of your figures, just looking for the London wide (not borough level) stats.
Snap reaction to London restrictions from Londoners - everyone hates it.
Not pleased with the lockdown as it gives us massive headaches viz. childcare and other family responsibilities. However, rates are rising in London and this tightening is probably warranted (it might not be enough actually!). Time will tell as ever but the public will overwhelmingly support the thrust of this tightening as the YouGov from yesterday suggested.
Rates are not rising in London, we have a 7 day rate of 120 per 100k in London. Other tier 2 places are at 400-600 per 100k. The restrictions are completely unnecessary. Additionally there's evidence that the rate rise is already slowing down, the doubling time in London is 12 days as of yesterday, that's down from 5 days two weeks ago.
Max, out of interest what's your source for that? Not doubting the accuracy of your figures, just looking for the London wide (not borough level) stats.
Worked backwards from the standard data provided by PHE. The doubling time is based on working backwards from specimen day data also from PHE data.
What do you expect when the negotiations are overseen by the likes of Johnson and Cummings?
And Barnier
As far as I can see the EU leaders have instructed Barnier to maintain a consistent line. We and they also know he can be trusted. The same cannot be said of Johnson, Cummings and their representatives.
Exactly , they have been upfront and consistent from the get go.
What do you expect when the negotiations are overseen by the likes of Johnson and Cummings?
And Barnier
As far as I can see the EU leaders have instructed Barnier to maintain a consistent line. We and they also know he can be trusted. The same cannot be said of Johnson, Cummings and their representatives.
Their consistent line is an unacceptable one, that's the problem.
In a negotiation people compromise not remain consistent to their opening position.
Sometimes the price is the price, you take it or leave it.
What do you expect when the negotiations are overseen by the likes of Johnson and Cummings?
And Barnier
As far as I can see the EU leaders have instructed Barnier to maintain a consistent line. We and they also know he can be trusted. The same cannot be said of Johnson, Cummings and their representatives.
Their consistent line is an unacceptable one, that's the problem.
In a negotiation people compromise not remain consistent to their opening position.
They could compromise by mixing their position with bananas, or by playing aeroplanes to make accepting their position fun.
Interesting that Elmbridge has been singed out, rather than simply the whole of Surrey.
That's JohnO's parish, clearly the government are punishing Elmbridge because JohnO and I are friends.
Elmbridge has the highest house prices of any district outside London I believe (and an average house price even above the London average), clearly a lot of wealthy London commuters live there and some have started going back to the office and brought cases back on the tube
Interesting that Elmbridge has been singed out, rather than simply the whole of Surrey.
That's JohnO's parish, clearly the government are punishing Elmbridge because JohnO and I are friends.
Elmbridge has the highest house prices of any district outside London I believe (and an average house price even above the London average), clearly a lot of wealthy London commuters live there and some have started going back to the office and brought cases back on the tube
Elmbridge is the Beverly Hills of the UK, it really is
To the story we can add the parties we were promised (or threatened with) that never got done. Alan Sked - the very original founder of UKIp who parted company with his baby long ago - was briefly in the news again a few years ago through some new party he was intending to launch. Arron Banks during the Brexit parliamentary saga was apparently going to pour his money into a new party. And Farage at various times has threatened us with new political entities.
Once you start with a new party it clearly becomes a habit.
First they ignore you, then laugh at you, then they fight you.. then you win.
We've gone from "win" (2016) back to ignoring and laughing, which is where we were in the late 90s/ early 00s, but we shouldn't forget what's happened next.
If you want to keep laughing (or ignoring) the populist right then centrist parties need to address the issues that mobilise voters around them or they'll be doomed to relive the same experiences all over again - or worse. Just shouting more loudly that they're wrong and you don't agree won't do it.
The reason I keep saying centrists are like the Bourbons is that I don't see much evidence they've learn anything or forgotten anything from the last five years. So I'm not overly hopeful although I pray there is at least some cognitive diversity and intelligence out there.
It is a populist govt in charge making decisions and has been for the last 4 years. Their job to find the solutions and address the issues at the moment.
Oh, I quite agree.
Nevertheless it's because the issue of the EU and full immigration control (on the levers) was addressed that so many left-wing/centrist liberals on here this morning can enjoy laughing at the patheticness of UKIP and their outriders.
It has precisely nothing at all to do with them. Had we followed their policies those parties would now be on 30%+ of the national vote and the kingmakers in any Government, and demanding even more radical politics than we have at present.
A fair voting system might have been nice.
Ok, but do you see any evidence the outcomes would have been different if we had?
I'm not saying you're saying this but a lot of centrist PR advocates seem to want it because they think it'd be an effective way of benefiting centrists and structurally locking out everyone else.
I'm baffled as to why they think this. It hasn't been the case in Europe and, had we had it here, we'd have had a Tory-UKIP coalition in 2015 and probably Farage as Deputy PM or foreign secretary.
Would you still favour it accepting all of that?
Of course. Not having my vote in every parliamentary election simply thrown away into the bin is a personal win, regardless of how everyone else votes. And is the right thing to do.
The governments in the UK and US are bad advert enough for our system.
It would have the added advantage (in the long run) of those like Farage actually having to take responsibility for their policies in government. For example, if the no deal Brexit in January proves an utter shitshow, he'll absolve himself from any blame.
What do you expect when the negotiations are overseen by the likes of Johnson and Cummings?
And Barnier
As far as I can see the EU leaders have instructed Barnier to maintain a consistent line. We and they also know he can be trusted. The same cannot be said of Johnson, Cummings and their representatives.
Their consistent line is an unacceptable one, that's the problem.
In a negotiation people compromise not remain consistent to their opening position.
They are however expected to remain consistent to things they have already signed up to. Which I expect is the problem. A negotiation where there is bad faith is difficult to end well.
What do you expect when the negotiations are overseen by the likes of Johnson and Cummings?
And Barnier
As far as I can see the EU leaders have instructed Barnier to maintain a consistent line. We and they also know he can be trusted. The same cannot be said of Johnson, Cummings and their representatives.
Their consistent line is an unacceptable one, that's the problem.
In a negotiation people compromise not remain consistent to their opening position.
They are however expected to remain consistent to things they have already signed up to. Which I expect is the problem. A negotiation where there is bad faith is difficult to end well.
Quite, it is the governments decision not the local MPs or the mayor. The local politicians have said what they need to support it. Now is the time for the central government to decide to do it anyway with 1) no further support 2) support the locals have asked for 3) something in between.
Continuous negotiations hoping the local politicians eventually back down is spineless and dangerous when the virus is spreading rapidly.
The problem with "local politicians" is who exactly are they? They do not speak with one voice. Burnham wants money OK, but. 9 of the 27 MPs in GM are Tory. They aren't backing the government line. Most of Lancashire' s Mps are likewise. LCC is Tory. Lancashire doesn't want Tier 3. So the government will have to impose or not in the end.
This is one of the biggest tests any government has faced since the war
HMG must not be swayed by various politicians following their own agenda or courting popular opinion as will no doubt be seen in the oncoming polls
I support the tier process and would add curfews between 9 and 6 am as just happened in France, which by the way is closing 9 cities but not locking down the whole of France
What happens when, as seems the case from the track record, it is HMG in London who is swayed by courting popular opinion, politicians following their own agenda (Mr Sunak, Mr Cummings), etc.
Interesting that Elmbridge has been singed out, rather than simply the whole of Surrey.
That's JohnO's parish, clearly the government are punishing Elmbridge because JohnO and I are friends.
Elmbridge has the highest house prices of any district outside London I believe (and an average house price even above the London average), clearly a lot of wealthy London commuters live there and some have started going back to the office and brought cases back on the tube
Elmbridge is the Beverly Hills of the UK, it really is
Indeed, John Terry, the Linekers, Frank Lampard and Didier Drogba, Theo Paphitis, Eamonn Holmes, Chris Tarrant, Andy Murray, Nicola Roberts and Peter Crouch amongst its residents (plus John O of course).
Letting people go on foreign holdiays was absolutely moronic policy. Totally unnecessary.
Yet we still allow it.
Its total madness. While the media obsess over cornish pasties, no attention to this. I absolutely guarantee loads of people are still busy booking holidays for Christmas and Easter.
Interesting that Elmbridge has been singed out, rather than simply the whole of Surrey.
That's JohnO's parish, clearly the government are punishing Elmbridge because JohnO and I are friends.
Elmbridge has the highest house prices of any district outside London I believe (and an average house price even above the London average), clearly a lot of wealthy London commuters live there and some have started going back to the office and brought cases back on the tube
Edit - Unfair comparison, at least Trump was elected Head of State, Brenda's not even got that.
'Twas ever thus... you might want to ponder the origin of the word "privilege"
From Middle English privilege, from Anglo-Norman privilege and Old French privilege, from Latin prīvilēgium (“ordinance or law against or in favour of an individual”), from prīvus (“private”) + lēx, lēg- (“law”).
Private + Law... Literally, one rule for her and other rules for the rest of us
I have to say, and yes this does agree with my book ! that the Democrat numbers in the WOW suburbs are as bad as that early vote track makes out. Democrat postals are ahead of their registrations everywhere else we know about party affiliation. I think it's more likely to be an artifact of their methodology where they don't have registration data provided.
I am very confused by he Target Voter Party modelling in NC given what we know about Unaffiliated's Primary choice. They have the returns way more Republican than I would.
Letting people go on foreign holdiays was absolutely moronic policy. Totally unnecessary.
Yet we still allow it.
Its total madness. While the media obsess over cornish pasties, no attention to this. I absolutely guarantee loads of people are still busy booking holidays for Christmas and Easter.
You think way more northerners took foreign holidays than southerners this year?
Or maybe something else lies behind the pattern of infection.
Interesting that Elmbridge has been singed out, rather than simply the whole of Surrey.
That's JohnO's parish, clearly the government are punishing Elmbridge because JohnO and I are friends.
Elmbridge has the highest house prices of any district outside London I believe (and an average house price even above the London average), clearly a lot of wealthy London commuters live there and some have started going back to the office and brought cases back on the tube
Interesting that Elmbridge has been singed out, rather than simply the whole of Surrey.
That's JohnO's parish, clearly the government are punishing Elmbridge because JohnO and I are friends.
Elmbridge has the highest house prices of any district outside London I believe (and an average house price even above the London average), clearly a lot of wealthy London commuters live there and some have started going back to the office and brought cases back on the tube
What tube?
The tube I went on yesterday when I had to go into London to process a request
Letting people go on foreign holdiays was absolutely moronic policy. Totally unnecessary.
Yet we still allow it.
Its total madness. While the media obsess over cornish pasties, no attention to this. I absolutely guarantee loads of people are still busy booking holidays for Christmas and Easter.
You think way more northerners took foreign holidays than southerners this year?
Or maybe something else lies behind the pattern of infection.
Its not the only reason. Its is a range of factors. For starters, the first wave was much bigger in the South.
Interesting that Elmbridge has been singed out, rather than simply the whole of Surrey.
That's JohnO's parish, clearly the government are punishing Elmbridge because JohnO and I are friends.
Elmbridge has the highest house prices of any district outside London I believe (and an average house price even above the London average), clearly a lot of wealthy London commuters live there and some have started going back to the office and brought cases back on the tube
Elmbridge is the Beverly Hills of the UK, it really is
I used to live there in the 60s and 70s along with George Harrison of the Beatles (His then wife Pattie Boyd once asked my mother in the local grocers if she could recommend somewhere for Afternoon Tea), Adam Faith (He lived two roads away. He once did the raffle for the local fete. Nice chap but short) and two members of Pan's People, who lived in the same road (Their rent was paid by an elderly admirer. There was a lot of speculation about which one he was bonking or was it both of them and if so, was it at the same time?).
Interesting that Elmbridge has been singed out, rather than simply the whole of Surrey.
That's JohnO's parish, clearly the government are punishing Elmbridge because JohnO and I are friends.
Elmbridge has the highest house prices of any district outside London I believe (and an average house price even above the London average), clearly a lot of wealthy London commuters live there and some have started going back to the office and brought cases back on the tube
What tube?
HYUFD's Essex privilege is showing.
You likely have to use the tube to get to Waterloo station to get back to Elmbridge
Letting people go on foreign holdiays was absolutely moronic policy. Totally unnecessary.
Yet we still allow it.
Its total madness. While the media obsess over cornish pasties, no attention to this. I absolutely guarantee loads of people are still busy booking holidays for Christmas and Easter.
You think way more northerners took foreign holidays than southerners this year?
Or maybe something else lies behind the pattern of infection.
Its not the only reason. Its is a range of factors. For starters, the first wave was much bigger in the South.
And earlier, which means there were probably more residual cases remaining in the north after we came out of lockdown.
Test everyone at airports (inbound or outbound), and guys like this would be in isolation before they did the damage.
A rapid antigen test might miss a few, but it would pick up 90-95% of those actually infectious.
Would he be in isolation, we'd send him home and say "now don't go outside" and he'd be down the pub immediately.
If we were to have adopted my testing regime, I'm pretty sure we'd have done the same for your isolation policy first. And he certainly wouldn't have made it onto the plane.
FYI - probably got lost in all the talk on lockdowns and the US but pretty bleak assessment from the IEA yesterday on oil prices. Has implications for Iran, Russia etc. Good obviously for inflation in the advanced economies. May also raises some questions on the independence debate.
"The longer term offers little encouragement for the producers; the curve shows prices not reaching $50/bbl until 2023. Truly, those wishing to bring about a tighter oil market are looking at a moving target."
What do you expect when the negotiations are overseen by the likes of Johnson and Cummings?
And Barnier
As far as I can see the EU leaders have instructed Barnier to maintain a consistent line. We and they also know he can be trusted. The same cannot be said of Johnson, Cummings and their representatives.
Their consistent line is an unacceptable one, that's the problem.
In a negotiation people compromise not remain consistent to their opening position.
Sometimes the price is the price, you take it or leave it.
And that's the heart of the matter. Going back to Dave's renegotiation, the UK's assumption has been that determined enough haggling and refusal to blink can unlock some secret better deal that the EU has been hiding under the counter all along. Whereas the EU's attitude has been that access to their market is a valuable thing, not to be given away willy-nilly. And that they'll be the judge of that value, thank you very much.
And that question- how much are the benefits of seamless trade between the EU and UK worth to each party?- is at the heart of the disagreement. Disagreements like that happen all the time; it's why betting is interesting.
Maybe those who think that the UK can just walk away with minor temporary damage are right. (Though it's interesting that people who understandably fear the Covid hit to the public finances are casual about a WTO Brexit hit of similar magnitude.) Maybe the EU, which has completed a lot more of these negotiations successfully, has more heft to absorb shocks and (let's face it) doesn't have Boris'n'Dom, is better at judging the odds.
More Elmbridge reminiscences. A couple who were friends of my parents sold their house in Esher to Errol Brown, of Hot Chocolate, who was discussed on this board a few days ago. By coincidence the wife died the same week as Errol.
Chris Tarrant, who has already been mentioned, is generally regarded as an a**e by locals and was once rude to my mother in Esher carpark.
Yeah and what happens in September, schools and universities are back. We just have to live with it.
Yes. My girlfriend said yesterday that it's dificult for the govt as they have a duty to keep us safe, but I had to ask "Do they?" I dont think it is the governments job to stop us dying from naturally occurring diseases, they aren't their fault. If some people want to stay in and have everything delivered, and avoid everyone who doesnt do likewise, so be it. The rest of us should be allowed to take our chances
At the moment Biden will likely win the popular vote with about 50/51% but if Trump gets his vote up to 47/48% it could still be close yes.
The state polling also suggests Trump is now ahead in Ohio and Iowa and near tied in Florida and North Carolina and Arizona but Biden is ahead in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, if Trump holds all the former he would then just need one of the latter to win and we know most of the state polls in the latter in 2016 were wrong except Trafalgar
Trump is over and good riddance
When one compares the polls now with the figures, state by state, last time it looks as though Trump is down across the board, and most if not all the States that he scraped home in in 2016 will go Dem this year. HYUFD says 'now ahead'; in fact the leads as published are half or less of what they were in 2016.
I think that is based on RCP which is saying that, in the battleground states, Trump is very slightly ahead of where he was in 2016.
I think it depends which set of polls you believe (or believe them at all). If you think the national polls, then he is in serious trouble, if the state ones, as HYFUD says, he has a chance. The state polls were more inaccurate in 2016 but there is an argument for saying they might be more accurate in 2020 in that the errors of 16 forced them to correct their mistakes. The national pollsters still have the view they basically got it right in 16, which leads to complacency.
Also, only 1%+ of respondents actually answer.
But the RCP battleground poll comparison is comparing stte polls in 2016 which we now know to have been biased against Trump.
So if you think 2020 state polling is more accurate than the national polling this time out then Trump is still fucked.
I said they "might" be better, not are. You can make changes but sometimes you make it worse.
I think it was Drutt last night who said there are signs that non-college educated voters are coming in droves in WI and ahead of 2016. It is entirely possible their influence in 2016 is understated again.
In any event, if Biden is up over 9% nationally, he shouldn't be up less than 3% in Florida. The polls for states like CA seem to be showing swings in line with the national swings.
538 thinks Florida leans 3% Republican, so if Biden is up 9% nationally he should be up 6% in Florida?
Basically yes.
Florida is a tough nut to crack for various reasons. I'm confident of Biden winning the election (and easily) but it would not surprise me if he just misses Florida. Indeed that (at 2.2) is one of my hedges.
That's my stance too. 538 takes this kind of thing into account in its probability estimates. Some States are more 'elastic' than others in the sense that they vary as to how flexible they are in their voting habits. Florida and Georgia are good examples of inelastic States.
South Carolina also (for those betting on the Senate race)
Letting people go on foreign holdiays was absolutely moronic policy. Totally unnecessary.
Yet we still allow it.
To be fair most foreign parts are safer than Liverpool at present.
The whole business of sharing space with lots of strangers from all over at airports and on planes is probably the dodgy bit.
Exactly. It is not so much where they go, its not even what they do when they get there (although @nichomar had valid points about that). The very act of travelling through airport hubs at the present time makes you a higher risk that the community you are returning to deserve to be protected from. Personally, I would use ankle bracelets to track the movements of everyone returning for 14 days.
(I'm tempted to suggest a broken leg for a first breach of curfew but I don't want my moderate image to slip).
FYI, just looking at the early votes data, one thing I might be concerned about if I was a Democrat in Michigan is that the requests for mail in ballots in Wayne County (which includes Detroit and is the biggest county) are around 10% below other Democrat-leaning areas in the states. The returned / accepted rate is also low compared with other counties (but similar to Oakland, another big Democrat county). To me (and I'm sure I will be accused of bias), that would raise questions about voter enthusiasm in Detroit
(Before anyone says it, I would expect Republican counties generally to have lower requests for mail in ballots given Trump's comments so comparing Wayne with Republican counties is probably not appropriate.
Traditionally African Americans prefer voting early in person over mail-in ballots.
It's higher in Milwaukee though by around 10% (as a comparison)
What do you expect when the negotiations are overseen by the likes of Johnson and Cummings?
And Barnier
As far as I can see the EU leaders have instructed Barnier to maintain a consistent line. We and they also know he can be trusted. The same cannot be said of Johnson, Cummings and their representatives.
Their consistent line is an unacceptable one, that's the problem.
In a negotiation people compromise not remain consistent to their opening position.
Sometimes the price is the price, you take it or leave it.
And that's the heart of the matter. Going back to Dave's renegotiation, the UK's assumption has been that determined enough haggling and refusal to blink can unlock some secret better deal that the EU has been hiding under the counter all along. Whereas the EU's attitude has been that access to their market is a valuable thing, not to be given away willy-nilly. And that they'll be the judge of that value, thank you very much.
And that question- how much are the benefits of seamless trade between the EU and UK worth to each party?- is at the heart of the disagreement. Disagreements like that happen all the time; it's why betting is interesting.
Maybe those who think that the UK can just walk away with minor temporary damage are right. (Though it's interesting that people who understandably fear the Covid hit to the public finances are casual about a WTO Brexit hit of similar magnitude.) Maybe the EU, which has completed a lot more of these negotiations successfully, has more heft to absorb shocks and (let's face it) doesn't have Boris'n'Dom, is better at judging the odds.
Faites vos jeux messieurs, faites vos jeux.
From the EU's perspective the main win from a deal is to get leverage over the UK to stop it misbehaving. It can't apply sanctions unless there is something in place that it can remove. From the UK's point of view it's worth having a deal because No Deal is effectively sanctions applied in full from Day 1.
What do you expect when the negotiations are overseen by the likes of Johnson and Cummings?
And Barnier
As far as I can see the EU leaders have instructed Barnier to maintain a consistent line. We and they also know he can be trusted. The same cannot be said of Johnson, Cummings and their representatives.
Their consistent line is an unacceptable one, that's the problem.
In a negotiation people compromise not remain consistent to their opening position.
Sometimes the price is the price, you take it or leave it.
And that's the heart of the matter. Going back to Dave's renegotiation, the UK's assumption has been that determined enough haggling and refusal to blink can unlock some secret better deal that the EU has been hiding under the counter all along. Whereas the EU's attitude has been that access to their market is a valuable thing, not to be given away willy-nilly. And that they'll be the judge of that value, thank you very much.
And that question- how much are the benefits of seamless trade between the EU and UK worth to each party?- is at the heart of the disagreement. Disagreements like that happen all the time; it's why betting is interesting.
Maybe those who think that the UK can just walk away with minor temporary damage are right. (Though it's interesting that people who understandably fear the Covid hit to the public finances are casual about a WTO Brexit hit of similar magnitude.) Maybe the EU, which has completed a lot more of these negotiations successfully, has more heft to absorb shocks and (let's face it) doesn't have Boris'n'Dom, is better at judging the odds.
Faites vos jeux messieurs, faites vos jeux.
From the EU's perspective the main win from a deal is to get leverage over the UK to stop it misbehaving. It can't apply sanctions unless there is something in place that it can remove. From the UK's point of view it's worth having a deal because No Deal is effectively sanctions applied in full from Day 1.
I'm struggling to see what incentive the EU actually has to do a deal before 1 Jan. Surely it would be better from their POV to let the UK dangle in the wind for a month or two before coming back to the table next year?
Test everyone at airports (inbound or outbound), and guys like this would be in isolation before they did the damage.
A rapid antigen test might miss a few, but it would pick up 90-95% of those actually infectious.
Would he be in isolation, we'd send him home and say "now don't go outside" and he'd be down the pub immediately.
If we were to have adopted my testing regime, I'm pretty sure we'd have done the same for your isolation policy first. And he certainly wouldn't have made it onto the plane.
Yes, though unfortunately I don't think either are going to be implemented though and we'll end up in an unnecessary lockdown which wil destroy businesses and jobs.
Quite, it is the governments decision not the local MPs or the mayor. The local politicians have said what they need to support it. Now is the time for the central government to decide to do it anyway with 1) no further support 2) support the locals have asked for 3) something in between.
Continuous negotiations hoping the local politicians eventually back down is spineless and dangerous when the virus is spreading rapidly.
Are we entering peak blame transferring season? When problems don't have solutions, and any good outcomes are unnoticed because the disaster that was avoided was invisible, the politically sensible thing is to ensure that one when the music stops the parcel is being held by someone else.
Eh? I am not involved, not in Manchester, not a supporter of any political party so don't need to "transfer blame".
If a party run for office and gets a big majority they have a responsibility to deliver and make decisions. This years decisions are a lot tougher than probably any year in recent memory. They still remain the responsibility of the govt, and it is right the public try and hold them to account where they are being indecisive and weak.
Snap reaction to London restrictions from Londoners - everyone hates it.
Snap reaction from my mates - no ones going to take any notice of it
Yeah tbf, we just got invited for drinks on Saturday evening with 4 other friends. Pretty sure we're still going to go.
Yeah I am in that situation and I am going.
I'm Spartacus!
I had an invite for Sunday, and was prepared to make the trip into the south's plague capital, but my London friends have cancelled in anticipation of the restrictions. One less table for the gastropub.
What do you expect when the negotiations are overseen by the likes of Johnson and Cummings?
And Barnier
As far as I can see the EU leaders have instructed Barnier to maintain a consistent line. We and they also know he can be trusted. The same cannot be said of Johnson, Cummings and their representatives.
Their consistent line is an unacceptable one, that's the problem.
In a negotiation people compromise not remain consistent to their opening position.
Sometimes the price is the price, you take it or leave it.
And that's the heart of the matter. Going back to Dave's renegotiation, the UK's assumption has been that determined enough haggling and refusal to blink can unlock some secret better deal that the EU has been hiding under the counter all along. Whereas the EU's attitude has been that access to their market is a valuable thing, not to be given away willy-nilly. And that they'll be the judge of that value, thank you very much.
And that question- how much are the benefits of seamless trade between the EU and UK worth to each party?- is at the heart of the disagreement. Disagreements like that happen all the time; it's why betting is interesting.
Maybe those who think that the UK can just walk away with minor temporary damage are right. (Though it's interesting that people who understandably fear the Covid hit to the public finances are casual about a WTO Brexit hit of similar magnitude.) Maybe the EU, which has completed a lot more of these negotiations successfully, has more heft to absorb shocks and (let's face it) doesn't have Boris'n'Dom, is better at judging the odds.
Faites vos jeux messieurs, faites vos jeux.
From the EU's perspective the main win from a deal is to get leverage over the UK to stop it misbehaving. It can't apply sanctions unless there is something in place that it can remove. From the UK's point of view it's worth having a deal because No Deal is effectively sanctions applied in full from Day 1.
I think true No Deal unlikely, as there needs to be a barebones deal on flying etc, but I would not expect much more than that.
Very, very interesting thread (and paper) on the dynamics of the (early) Chinese epidemic. (Thought this worth reposting, as I missed it at the time, and it's fairly good evidence for the relative accuracy of the Chinese data.)
Yeah and what happens in September, schools and universities are back. We just have to live with it.
Yes. My girlfriend said yesterday that it's dificult for the govt as they have a duty to keep us safe, but I had to ask "Do they?" I dont think it is the governments job to stop us dying from naturally occurring diseases, they aren't their fault. If some people want to stay in and have everything delivered, and avoid everyone who doesnt do likewise, so be it. The rest of us should be allowed to take our chances
It's not the duty of government to keep you safe - you can make your own choices where the risk is only to yourself.
However, it is the duty of government to prevent you from imperiling other people's safety.
Test everyone at airports (inbound or outbound), and guys like this would be in isolation before they did the damage.
A rapid antigen test might miss a few, but it would pick up 90-95% of those actually infectious.
Would he be in isolation, we'd send him home and say "now don't go outside" and he'd be down the pub immediately.
If we were to have adopted my testing regime, I'm pretty sure we'd have done the same for your isolation policy first. And he certainly wouldn't have made it onto the plane.
Yes, though unfortunately I don't think either are going to be implemented though and we'll end up in an unnecessary lockdown which wil destroy businesses and jobs.
While rapid testing and secure isolation is certainly desirable, I don't see how it is feasible with current case numbers. It seems to me that we need a short sharp lockdown in order to get the numbers down to a level at which it is feasible.
Comments
The governments in the UK and US are bad advert enough for our system.
In a negotiation people compromise not remain consistent to their opening position.
Police investigate 'superspreader' who flew to Spain and back to Manchester Airport with coronavirus symptoms
Exclusive: a man from Heywood who flew to and from Spain despite allegedly showing symptoms is in intensive care
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/police-investigate-superspreader-who-flew-19107065
For example, if the no deal Brexit in January proves an utter shitshow, he'll absolve himself from any blame.
https://twitter.com/adamboultonSKY/status/1316694491420647431
Edit - Unfair comparison, at least Trump was elected Head of State, Brenda's not even got that.
https://www.independent.co.uk/property/house-and-home/is-elmbridge-britains-beverly-hills-2190344.html
From Middle English privilege, from Anglo-Norman privilege and Old French privilege, from Latin prīvilēgium (“ordinance or law against or in favour of an individual”), from prīvus (“private”) + lēx, lēg- (“law”).
Private + Law... Literally, one rule for her and other rules for the rest of us
https://twitter.com/JamieOGrady/status/1316701627735212033
Confirmed by Graham Stringer.
Cross Party consensus.
Or maybe something else lies behind the pattern of infection.
A rapid antigen test might miss a few, but it would pick up 90-95% of those actually infectious.
(And I bet she's mustard on the Second.)
https://twitter.com/AmerIndependent/status/1316425454128070662
Happy memories.
It's the group behind her who should be sent to the Tower.
https://twitter.com/davieclegg/status/1316699284440571904?s=20
Just as well she's got nothing else to worry about.....
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/18796835.coronavirus-scotland-covid-related-deaths-1300-new-cases/
I'm Spartacus!
And he certainly wouldn't have made it onto the plane.
"The longer term offers little encouragement for the producers; the curve shows prices not reaching $50/bbl until 2023. Truly, those wishing to bring about a tighter oil market are looking at a moving target."
And that question- how much are the benefits of seamless trade between the EU and UK worth to each party?- is at the heart of the disagreement. Disagreements like that happen all the time; it's why betting is interesting.
Maybe those who think that the UK can just walk away with minor temporary damage are right. (Though it's interesting that people who understandably fear the Covid hit to the public finances are casual about a WTO Brexit hit of similar magnitude.) Maybe the EU, which has completed a lot more of these negotiations successfully, has more heft to absorb shocks and (let's face it) doesn't have Boris'n'Dom, is better at judging the odds.
Faites vos jeux messieurs, faites vos jeux.
Chris Tarrant, who has already been mentioned, is generally regarded as an a**e by locals and was once rude to my mother in Esher carpark.
I'll get my coat.
(wasn't that the defence on Hunter Biden yesterday?)
(I'm tempted to suggest a broken leg for a first breach of curfew but I don't want my moderate image to slip).
That was the excuse the White House used.
How did that turn out ?
The lib dems were close last time. As a furious, furious tory voter I reckon they might do it next time.
Hell,. I might even vote for them.
Nobody seems to want to bother.
But like Trump she sets a bad example.
https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1315708407136112640?s=20
If a party run for office and gets a big majority they have a responsibility to deliver and make decisions. This years decisions are a lot tougher than probably any year in recent memory. They still remain the responsibility of the govt, and it is right the public try and hold them to account where they are being indecisive and weak.
(Thought this worth reposting, as I missed it at the time, and it's fairly good evidence for the relative accuracy of the Chinese data.)
https://twitter.com/NAChristakis/status/1255465996128849920
However, it is the duty of government to prevent you from imperiling other people's safety.
https://twitter.com/chrisshipitv/status/1316704859664666631?s=20