Veteran commentator Peter Oborne on the real reasons why Cummings had to go – politicalbetting.com
Veteran commentator Peter Oborne on the real reasons why Cummings had to go – politicalbetting.com
Interesting article in Middle East Eye from Peter Oborne on what he says are the real reasons why Cummings is no longer at Number 10. He writes:
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Something both BJ and Cummings have learned the hard way, it has been a difficult lesson for them to swallow.
(That's enough - Innuendo editor.)
The "Toby Young" who is into traditional academic values and had a part in setting up a genuinely good secondary school must be furious that there's a gibbering fool who keeps popping up spouting rubbish who shares the same name.
They might just consider putting off a US trade deal until a new President comes along is a price that has to be paid.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onB0w3_Su9I
Until it didn't. That this strategy may be highly successful in winning referendums and attaining power was shown on November 3rd to have a limited shelf life in government. That's why he went.
I've spent most of today in briefings on how impacts the country, spoiler alert: very badly, cf Kent, or Northern Ireland.
Just blame breaching the government red lines on the pandemic, and put down a clause in the EU deal that it has a review clause 24 months after we've all been vaccinated.
Anyway, the extension is probably good news.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/green-homes-grant-extended-for-extra-year
"But with a US trade deal essential to a post-Brexit Britain"... isn't just begging the question, it's plain nonsense.
Though I suppose those in government might actually believe it.
Current IFR in England, using ONS survey data, with daily deaths from coronavirus dashboard lagged 19 days from daily infection and with 7-day average (date of infection along x-axis)
Hospitalisation rates for England, using ONS survey data, with daily admissions from coronavirus dashboard lagged 10 days from daily infection and with 7-day average (date of infection along x-axis)
Hospitalisation fatality rate for England, using hospital admissions from coronavirus dashboard and deaths from coronavirus dashboard, with deaths lagged 9 days from admission and 7-day average (admission date along x-axis)
My extrapolation to see what deaths are "baked in", using 0.85% fatalities from date of infection (yellow columns) and, as a comparator, 26.5% fatalities from hospitalisations (blue column); deaths are red columns. Note that, unlike the above, this is UK estimates with an additional step: numbers of infections and hospitalisations are taken from the English ones and multiplied by 1.2 (necessary as Wales does not treat the numbers in a comparable way to the others), but with actual UK-wide deaths.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/18/opinion/trump-election-stimulus.html
"Two narratives about what happened stand out. First, the idea that left-wing slogans like “defund the police” cratered the Democratic Party in down ballot fights for the House and Senate, and second, that President Trump’s modest gains with Black and Hispanic voters herald the arrival of a working-class, multiracial Republican Party.
"There are obvious objections to both stories. There is no hard evidence that voters turned against Democratic congressional candidates because of “defund the police” and other radical slogans. It does not show up in the congressional generic ballot — there is no decline that corresponds with the unrest of the summer — and there’s little other data to support the idea of a direct causal relationship between the slogans and the performance of Democratic candidates.
"What we have, instead, are the words of moderate Democratic lawmakers who believe those slogans left them unusually vulnerable to Republican attacks. But this is a textbook case of assuming one thing caused the other because they followed in chronological order. Perhaps Democrats slipped because they were associated with “defund the police” or perhaps — as Democrats as different as Doug Jones, Beto O’Rourke and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have suggested — it had something to do with poor campaign infrastructure and a message that was unresponsive to the electorate. ....
"The problem with the second narrative — Republicans have built a new working-class, multiracial coalition — is that it takes Trump out of the context of past election results. If preliminary exit polls are any indication — and they have real flaws as measurement tools — Trump did hardly any better with Black voters than George W. Bush in 2004 and quite a bit worse with Hispanic voters. Far from a seismic shift, Trump, with 32 percent support among Hispanics (a four-point upswing from his first run) is doing about as well as John McCain did in 2008.
"But even as we throw cold water on these narratives — at least until there’s more evidence to back them up — we’re still left with the unanswered question of how Trump performed as well as he did. He may not have transformed the Republican coalition, but he held onto much of his 2016 support and even enlarged it, if not in percentage terms then in absolute ones. Democrats who thought he would be swamped by high turnout were wrong; not only did he benefit, but his ability to turn nonvoters into voters is what likely kept him in the game.
"At the risk of committing the same sin as other observers and getting ahead of the data, I want to propose an alternative explanation for the election results, one that accounts for the president’s relative improvement as well as that of the entire Republican Party.
"It’s the money, stupid. At the end of March, President Trump signed the Cares Act"
And in its defence, Thatcher
I don't mind writers engaging in a dramatic licence but this was bullshit of the highest order.
I'm planning on doing a piece on Sir Roger Hollis soon.
"I am still terrified that, but for a few thousand votes in key states, how easily it could have been our last election."
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/17/opinion/trump-democracy-republican-party.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage
The government will announce a £300 milion rescue package for sport tomorrow with rugby union set to be the main beneficiary.
The emergency funding package will not include Premier League and EFL football nor cricket, but will target other 11 sports which have suffered from the coronavirus pandemic.
Horse racing, rugby league, basketball, netball and Women’s Super League football are understood to be among the other sports that will benefit.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/sport/government-agrees-to-give-sport-300m-bailout-xvkdh7q9b
I do wonder whether at least some of these people were truly turned off by the defund the police slogan, but do not want to be explicit about that for fear of being labelled racist, and so instead focus emphasize the 'hard left tack' fear.
PS But such people probably are only at the margins. Trump biggest success was turning non-voting rednecks into voters.
https://twitter.com/socialistcam/status/1329099054442291200?s=21
If so, it's more a case of shy Republicans who can't stand Trump, and they probably made the difference. The Lincoln Project was probably exactly on the crux of this election.
My understanding is that this and the Modema vacccine work in essentially the same way, so it's not surprising that they end up with the same outcome. Good, thouigh!
Some PL want to give it in loans, whilst the EFL want non repayable grants.
Some PL clubs have pointed out that some EFL clubs have richer owners than them, also do they want to bail out clubs which have been poorly run for years, just so they can replace them in the PL.
As for rugby league, I'm a proper Northerner, and I don't like the sport.
Fifth rule tackle is for big girl's blouses.
The major parties are exhausted and starting to implode.
In other words, the question is not whether they will be unhappy (they will), but with whom will they be unhappy.
https://twitter.com/gtconway3d/status/1329114292445016066?s=20
ETA the point is that if MPs have widely differing expectations of Brexit, most of them will necessarily be disappointed, however it works out. Possibly all of them.
Starmer was a sycophantic toady to Corbyn when he was in the Shadow Cabinet only finding a moral consciousness after he got the top job.
Keir successfully swerves bad press, makes it look like the NEC aren't on his side and will reform it, a blinder
In short it really does go to show how Corbyn is history.
(Assuming he did. Which of course we shouldn't).
https://twitter.com/alexmassie/status/1329120182384664584?s=20
However, to claim that it was all down to him, is simply wrong. Engima was broken before he got involved.
Dilly Knox did more, but is ignored in the popular imagination. As is Tommy Flowers.
Cummings et al wanted to play chicken with the EU, believing (as they do) that the EU needs a deal more than we do and therefore that we "hold the cards". Johnson in the end lacked the stomach for a game of chicken, and Cummings came to see the writing on the wall which will be a poor deal for the UK tarted up by Johnson as a great deal and Cummings upped sticks, wanting no further part in this.
Before my time but my medical sgt had held his gf while she died in his arms there.
When you play chicken with no cards, you end up getting stuffed.
1) Do you mean Enigma or do you actually mean another cipher, such as Fish (which may have been more important)
2) Which version of the Enigma machine
3) Which keying/setup system
4) Which rotors
5) Which Enigma network (combines 2, 3 & 4 with an actual usage)
6) Do you mean a real break, rather than a theoretical demonstration
7) Do you mean a daily break
8) Do you mean a break of the majority of the traffic
I had a go at building a table of this stuff a long time ago - should really finish it and add it the Wikipedia article on ULTRA
BBC News - Coronavirus: Police fine 29 at Blackburn wedding party
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-54985449
What's stupid is that freedom of movement is only a problem because we never fixed it in the 15 odd years it's been an obvious problem,