I'm sure it is an amazingly complex task to design and construct such a vessel, but it doesn't seem too much to ask that it can spend a little more time at sea than that. Just think of the alternate history where the government had been able to cancel it like they wanted to.
This is what's most concerning at the moment. Many more people seem to be surviving, but many more seem to be young. Maybe the two are connected.
It's also why my central forecast for tier levels is much more bearish than it was a few weeks ago. With the new covid variant it will be much slower to open up as young people are clogging up hospitals in large absolute numbers even of the proportion that are hospitalised is still fairly low.
I'm fairy confident in my July forecast, I can't see where Boris is getting the 5th of April from, it seems like a really arbitrary date.
He's absolutely correct, though it won't happen overnight. However, Brexit will prove such a major let-down that its advocates will be broken men who will have neither the stamina nor the arguments to resist when the pendulum begins its inevitable swing in the other direction.
Total bullshit
Brexit means Brexit, and Brexit will be.... Brexit. Some will see its advantages, and some will see it horrors. Most - the vast majority - will shrug, and sigh with relief that it is all over. The appetite to repeat this horrendous battle will be approximately zero.
That does not mean Rejoin is impossible as a concept. It just means it is roughly where euroscepticism was in about 1980. Forty years of campaigning from the next referendum, if you really stick at it. And of course there is the very high likelihood that by then the EU will have morphed into something we can never tolerate, or will have disintegrated altogether (as, also, might the UK).
The UK should give serious thought to becoming a vassal state of the European Union. I don't mean colony. I mean the kind of independent state on the fringes of the Roman and Chinese empires that threw their lot in with the bigger party in exchange for favourable treatment. The UK doesn't have a Europe policy of any kind right now and it needs one, along with a thought-through general foreign policy. It has rejected EU membership and isolation doesn't suit it. Vassal State is probably the best other option, albeit not great from a sovereigntist point of view. Most of the UK's peers are on the other side of the Channel and that's where the UK's best prospects lie.
This is the kind of stuff that makes the hardcore remainers look like traitors. I mean really, the UK become a vassal state. You really need to get your head examined.
It's not a plan. It's a rejection of a continent - the one the UK happens to be a part of - without any roadmap of how to get a substitute.
It's not a rejection of a continent. Barely more than half the countries in Europe are in the EU, well under half the land area and only about 60% of the population. It's a rejection of a power-hungry, expensive, inflexible and often incompetent and corrupt bureaucracy that got above itself.
There is some serious trouble brewing in America. Legally Trump's case is hopeless. All the nonsense by politicians in Congress is (currently) grandstanding.
BUT Trump controls the levers of power. He controls the Department of Justice. Short of calling in the military i'm not sure exactly how they're going to get him out. All it takes is for Pence to do something stupid.
And the Republicans have publicly disavowed the rule of law. Even if something goes to SCOTUS and is chucked out they will not accept it. Because all their actions are based on ludicrous conspiracy theories about fraud which they say that the Courts are ignoring.
Presumably at noon on 21st it becomes illegal to follow any order from Trump. He has literally no status in government at that point.
Reportedly he is asking his team what point there is in him stopping now. In his delusional state there is merit in being literally dragged out of office - as the election has been Stolen from the American People why would he go voluntarily?
He's in a complete social media bubble spending most of his time every day searching out conspiracy theories on twitter and his favourite news media. And virtually the only people he is in physical contact with are feeding him crazy stuff. He's not getting any serious independent/push back advice any more.
It's not a plan. It's a rejection of a continent - the one the UK happens to be a part of - without any roadmap of how to get a substitute.
It's not a rejection of a continent. Barely more than half the countries in Europe are in the EU, well under half the land area and only about 60% of the population. It's a rejection of a power-hungry, expensive, inflexible and often incompetent and corrupt bureaucracy that got above itself.
That being said, if you want to say "the EEA", then how much of the Continent of Europe's GDP is not in it? (Us, Russia, and err...)
He's absolutely correct, though it won't happen overnight. However, Brexit will prove such a major let-down that its advocates will be broken men who will have neither the stamina nor the arguments to resist when the pendulum begins its inevitable swing in the other direction.
Total bullshit
Brexit means Brexit, and Brexit will be.... Brexit. Some will see its advantages, and some will see it horrors. Most - the vast majority - will shrug, and sigh with relief that it is all over. The appetite to repeat this horrendous battle will be approximately zero.
That does not mean Rejoin is impossible as a concept. It just means it is roughly where euroscepticism was in about 1980. Forty years of campaigning from the next referendum, if you really stick at it. And of course there is the very high likelihood that by then the EU will have morphed into something we can never tolerate, or will have disintegrated altogether (as, also, might the UK).
The UK should give serious thought to becoming a vassal state of the European Union. I don't mean colony. I mean the kind of independent state on the fringes of the Roman and Chinese empires that threw their lot in with the bigger party in exchange for favourable treatment. The UK doesn't have a Europe policy of any kind right now and it needs one, along with a thought-through general foreign policy. It has rejected EU membership and isolation doesn't suit it. Vassal State is probably the best other option, albeit not great from a sovereigntist point of view. Most of the UK's peers are on the other side of the Channel and that's where the UK's best prospects lie.
Isn't that "The Norway Model"?
Roughly, yes. The UK isn't Norway, so it wouldn't be the same. I can't seeing the UK outsourcing its foreign policy in quite the same way as Norway. It would follow the EU a bit less and offer the EU a bit more.
Its hardly a surprise though, is it? They have fucked up absolutely everything else so it would have been extraordinary had this gone smoothly.
Pretty sure if they f up the vaccine then this government is dead man walking.
Why? They get away with things that would have destroyed any other politicians because Brexit. Now that its done will the people who have defended literally anything to defend Brexit suddenly turn on the people who gave them the prize?
I'm sure it is an amazingly complex task to design and construct such a vessel, but it doesn't seem too much to ask that it can spend a little more time at sea than that. Just think of the alternate history where the government had been able to cancel it like they wanted to.
They built that one a year faster than the first one because of how much they had "learned"...
There is some serious trouble brewing in America. Legally Trump's case is hopeless. All the nonsense by politicians in Congress is (currently) grandstanding.
BUT Trump controls the levers of power. He controls the Department of Justice. Short of calling in the military i'm not sure exactly how they're going to get him out. All it takes is for Pence to do something stupid.
And the Republicans have publicly disavowed the rule of law. Even if something goes to SCOTUS and is chucked out they will not accept it. Because all their actions are based on ludicrous conspiracy theories about fraud which they say that the Courts are ignoring.
Presumably at noon on 21st it becomes illegal to follow any order from Trump. He has literally no status in government at that point.
If we make it to 20th Jan in one piece then we are fine. But i still feel that there is the possibility that they are trying to find a way to avoid declaring Biden President. It seems impossible. But things are ramping up VERY fast. And i don't think it's being instigated primarily by Trump - he hasn't really got a clue what is going on (i think he might actually be mad). But people are feeding him crazy theories of what can be done, and he's grabbing onto them.
To stay in power he needs the military's assistance.
I'm fairly confident he won't get it.
That's what i said - but if it gets to the stage of the military being called in then America is truly fecked. It's not just about him staying in power or not.
He's absolutely correct, though it won't happen overnight. However, Brexit will prove such a major let-down that its advocates will be broken men who will have neither the stamina nor the arguments to resist when the pendulum begins its inevitable swing in the other direction.
Total bullshit
Brexit means Brexit, and Brexit will be.... Brexit. Some will see its advantages, and some will see it horrors. Most - the vast majority - will shrug, and sigh with relief that it is all over. The appetite to repeat this horrendous battle will be approximately zero.
That does not mean Rejoin is impossible as a concept. It just means it is roughly where euroscepticism was in about 1980. Forty years of campaigning from the next referendum, if you really stick at it. And of course there is the very high likelihood that by then the EU will have morphed into something we can never tolerate, or will have disintegrated altogether (as, also, might the UK).
The UK should give serious thought to becoming a vassal state of the European Union. I don't mean colony. I mean the kind of independent state on the fringes of the Roman and Chinese empires that threw their lot in with the bigger party in exchange for favourable treatment. The UK doesn't have a Europe policy of any kind right now and it needs one, along with a thought-through general foreign policy. It has rejected EU membership and isolation doesn't suit it. Vassal State is probably the best other option, albeit not great from a sovereigntist point of view. Most of the UK's peers are on the other side of the Channel and that's where the UK's best prospects lie.
This is to presume the EU is as mighty, confident, powerful and immovable as imperial Rome or China. Which is, frankly, laughable.
It may have escaped your attention that the EU has just lost its 2nd or 3rd largest "province", containing its most important city, its best universities, the home of its most widely spoken language, its equal best military, its biggest soft power, and about a sixth of its population and GDP. This is not something that casually happens to great empires on the up.
It would be like Imperial Rome losing all of Gaul, with a chunk of Spain as well. A colossal blow. And it has a currency which is a disaster waiting to happen.
Who would bow in vassalage to an empire so clearly on the decline?
Absolutely nothing is quite as laughable as "Anglosphere". At least the EU is a political, economic and diplomatic construct, which happens to contain most of the UK's peers, with whom a deal is genuinely possible.
The options are EU membership (rejected), isolation (not good), common ground with the EU (possible). What's the UK going to choose to be? I am not seeing a lot of debate about this.
Complete and utter codswallop that the EU are our only peers. Our peers are around the globe. It is absolutely preposterous to suggest that fellow G7 and English speaking Canada is not a peer but the rest of Europe all are.
People on your side of the fence mock 'little Englanders' but the real little ones are the little Europeans who can't see beyond their tiny corner of the globe. There is a big wide world out there and Europe is just one teensy tiny fraction of it.
No comment on this except to point out I didn't make a single one of the observations you appear to ascribe to me.
He's absolutely correct, though it won't happen overnight. However, Brexit will prove such a major let-down that its advocates will be broken men who will have neither the stamina nor the arguments to resist when the pendulum begins its inevitable swing in the other direction.
It won't be a battle to rejoin, or at least not for decades, it will be a series of skirmishes on a series of points designed in each case to align us more closely with where we used to be.
Or further away, depending on what brings more trade advantages. IF Europe completely stagnates (look at the demography of Italy, or even Germany) then the EU will soon seem much less appealing.
Germany's just had a huge influx of young-skewed migrants, which was probably quite a canny move for its economy. Italy's had a much less organised influx, which, being a much more culturally conservative society, it will probably take much longer to integrate.
No. Germany took in a sudden huge unvetted surge of mostly young men, often unskilled, many of them hostile to German culture. It was insane. It will not benefit Germany.
Wasn’t someone talking about wishes being the father of the thought earlier?
From what I’ve read Germany seems to be making some serious efforts to integrate its new eGermans.
My friend in the CDU is pretty comfortable with the Syrian integration into Germany. His motives are a bit suspect to me, but he sees these immigrants as mostly being in trade when in Syria, good with people and just what Germany needs.
It always seemed to me that the vast, vast majority of Syrian refugees would be people desperate to escape the sectarian murderfest, not recreate it.
My own passing experience of a tiny subsample of Syria refugeeship in Rothesay suggests it’s been modestly successful.
It's not a plan. It's a rejection of a continent - the one the UK happens to be a part of - without any roadmap of how to get a substitute.
It's not a rejection of a continent. Barely more than half the countries in Europe are in the EU, well under half the land area and only about 60% of the population. It's a rejection of a power-hungry, expensive, inflexible and often incompetent and corrupt bureaucracy that got above itself.
That being said, if you want to say "the EEA", then how much of the Continent of Europe's GDP is not in it? (Us, Russia, and err...)
How meaningful is that though now?
Seriously what are the most meaningful differences between the UK's zero-tariff, zero-quota and no customs union FTA with the EU, finance still to be negotiated . . . and the Swiss EFTA, no customs union, no financial passports?
There is some serious trouble brewing in America. Legally Trump's case is hopeless. All the nonsense by politicians in Congress is (currently) grandstanding.
BUT Trump controls the levers of power. He controls the Department of Justice. Short of calling in the military i'm not sure exactly how they're going to get him out. All it takes is for Pence to do something stupid.
And the Republicans have publicly disavowed the rule of law. Even if something goes to SCOTUS and is chucked out they will not accept it. Because all their actions are based on ludicrous conspiracy theories about fraud which they say that the Courts are ignoring.
Presumably at noon on 21st it becomes illegal to follow any order from Trump. He has literally no status in government at that point.
If we make it to 20th Jan in one piece then we are fine. But i still feel that there is the possibility that they are trying to find a way to avoid declaring Biden President. It seems impossible. But things are ramping up VERY fast. And i don't think it's being instigated primarily by Trump - he hasn't really got a clue what is going on (i think he might actually be mad). But people are feeding him crazy theories of what can be done, and he's grabbing onto them.
I've got to say when I see some of his "stop the steal" fanatical followers, such as former GOP candidate Mindy Robinson, with her bikini and semi-automatic rifle twitter profile pic earlier today, it does seem prudent to stay alert.
He's absolutely correct, though it won't happen overnight. However, Brexit will prove such a major let-down that its advocates will be broken men who will have neither the stamina nor the arguments to resist when the pendulum begins its inevitable swing in the other direction.
Total bullshit
Brexit means Brexit, and Brexit will be.... Brexit. Some will see its advantages, and some will see it horrors. Most - the vast majority - will shrug, and sigh with relief that it is all over. The appetite to repeat this horrendous battle will be approximately zero.
That does not mean Rejoin is impossible as a concept. It just means it is roughly where euroscepticism was in about 1980. Forty years of campaigning from the next referendum, if you really stick at it. And of course there is the very high likelihood that by then the EU will have morphed into something we can never tolerate, or will have disintegrated altogether (as, also, might the UK).
The UK should give serious thought to becoming a vassal state of the European Union. I don't mean colony. I mean the kind of independent state on the fringes of the Roman and Chinese empires that threw their lot in with the bigger party in exchange for favourable treatment. The UK doesn't have a Europe policy of any kind right now and it needs one, along with a thought-through general foreign policy. It has rejected EU membership and isolation doesn't suit it. Vassal State is probably the best other option, albeit not great from a sovereigntist point of view. Most of the UK's peers are on the other side of the Channel and that's where the UK's best prospects lie.
This is the kind of stuff that makes the hardcore remainers look like traitors. I mean really, the UK become a vassal state. You really need to get your head examined.
As a remainer, I presume this a trial meme, by an ultra-hard-brexiter (the kind who thinks that Nigel Farage sold out by agreeing with the deal) to get "All pro-Europeans are traitors and should be shot" to 50% in the opinion polls.
He's absolutely correct, though it won't happen overnight. However, Brexit will prove such a major let-down that its advocates will be broken men who will have neither the stamina nor the arguments to resist when the pendulum begins its inevitable swing in the other direction.
Total bullshit
Brexit means Brexit, and Brexit will be.... Brexit. Some will see its advantages, and some will see it horrors. Most - the vast majority - will shrug, and sigh with relief that it is all over. The appetite to repeat this horrendous battle will be approximately zero.
That does not mean Rejoin is impossible as a concept. It just means it is roughly where euroscepticism was in about 1980. Forty years of campaigning from the next referendum, if you really stick at it. And of course there is the very high likelihood that by then the EU will have morphed into something we can never tolerate, or will have disintegrated altogether (as, also, might the UK).
The UK should give serious thought to becoming a vassal state of the European Union. I don't mean colony. I mean the kind of independent state on the fringes of the Roman and Chinese empires that threw their lot in with the bigger party in exchange for favourable treatment. The UK doesn't have a Europe policy of any kind right now and it needs one, along with a thought-through general foreign policy. It has rejected EU membership and isolation doesn't suit it. Vassal State is probably the best other option, albeit not great from a sovereigntist point of view. Most of the UK's peers are on the other side of the Channel and that's where the UK's best prospects lie.
This is the kind of stuff that makes the hardcore remainers look like traitors. I mean really, the UK become a vassal state. You really need to get your head examined.
As a remainer, I presume this a trial meme, by an ultra-hard-brexiter (the kind who thinks that Nigel Farage sold out by agreeing with the deal) to get "All pro-Europeans are traitors and should be shot" to 50% in the opinion polls.
There's no other explanation, maybe he's an undercover leaver trying to make remainers look bad.
Translation: they looked at the available talent on the lower ministerial ranks and back benches and decided too much of it would show Johnson up for his unfitness for office, so decided to stick with the current shower.
There is some serious trouble brewing in America. Legally Trump's case is hopeless. All the nonsense by politicians in Congress is (currently) grandstanding.
BUT Trump controls the levers of power. He controls the Department of Justice. Short of calling in the military i'm not sure exactly how they're going to get him out. All it takes is for Pence to do something stupid.
And the Republicans have publicly disavowed the rule of law. Even if something goes to SCOTUS and is chucked out they will not accept it. Because all their actions are based on ludicrous conspiracy theories about fraud which they say that the Courts are ignoring.
Presumably at noon on 21st it becomes illegal to follow any order from Trump. He has literally no status in government at that point.
If we make it to 20th Jan in one piece then we are fine. But i still feel that there is the possibility that they are trying to find a way to avoid declaring Biden President. It seems impossible. But things are ramping up VERY fast. And i don't think it's being instigated primarily by Trump - he hasn't really got a clue what is going on (i think he might actually be mad). But people are feeding him crazy theories of what can be done, and he's grabbing onto them.
I believe it is at midday on the 20th that Biden becomes President and Donald Fucking Trumps ceases to be.... President.
There is some serious trouble brewing in America. Legally Trump's case is hopeless. All the nonsense by politicians in Congress is (currently) grandstanding.
BUT Trump controls the levers of power. He controls the Department of Justice. Short of calling in the military i'm not sure exactly how they're going to get him out. All it takes is for Pence to do something stupid.
And the Republicans have publicly disavowed the rule of law. Even if something goes to SCOTUS and is chucked out they will not accept it. Because all their actions are based on ludicrous conspiracy theories about fraud which they say that the Courts are ignoring.
Presumably at noon on 21st it becomes illegal to follow any order from Trump. He has literally no status in government at that point.
If we make it to 20th Jan in one piece then we are fine. But i still feel that there is the possibility that they are trying to find a way to avoid declaring Biden President. It seems impossible. But things are ramping up VERY fast. And i don't think it's being instigated primarily by Trump - he hasn't really got a clue what is going on (i think he might actually be mad). But people are feeding him crazy theories of what can be done, and he's grabbing onto them.
I believe it is at midday on the 20th that Biden becomes President and Donald Fucking Trumps ceases to be.... President.
Case numbers on the 29th by specimen date look horrific. Where are those chumps claiming that the scientists and government made up the mutation and it's actually just Christmas shoppers?
Am I right in thinking these numbers will get worse one the impacts of the Christmas Hall Pass kick in?
Yes, and with the new strain having a much higher base R value there's no kind of lockdown that is going to work to bring that down. The only way to beat this now is to jab more people than can be infected.
On that note The Times had some good news from AZ that they are set to deliver 2m doses per week from the w/c 18th January. From what I know of the Pfizer delivery schedule we should be getting 1-1.5m per week of that too. Now it really is all on the government and NHS to jab faster than the virus spreads.
Can I also point out - for those who think it is impossible to manage a mass vaccination scheme - that in the last 12 days, Israel has managed to get first shots into more than 10% of their population.
That's close to 1% of the population every day.
Yes, that's a good rate but don't forget that to keep it going they effectively need to double it from day 22 onwards or the rate of bringing people into the vaccine funnel drops to a trickle. Either that or work in batches which seems inefficient.
FPT (I'm playing catchup...):
It's not *that* bad.
Even if you assume that Israel's vaccination system tops out at 1% of the population getting jabs every day (i.e. pretty much the current rate), that still means that more than a quarter of all adults get their first dose by day 21. Then by day 42, the second quartile of the Israeli public starts getting it, and by day 63, one quarter have had two jabs, and another quarter a single jab. By the end of February, then, half the Israeli population will have had at least one jab, with the most vulnerable having had two.
I'd be pretty happy if that was going to be the situation in the UK.
Yes, I absolutely agree, if we were in that situation by mid Feb it would be a miracle.
I wrote out what my central scenario is, essentially I expect 30m to get their first jabs done by the beginning of April then 2m first jabs per week plus 3m second jabs per week from then until the end of the list, overall we're looking at 12-15 weeks of very, very tough national restrictions equivalent to tier 5 or tier 6 with schools and universities closed, maybe finally closing the airports. Moving down to the current tier 3/4 restrictions until the middle of May at least as the most vulnerable are all jabbed a second time in that 3 week period and then another 3 weeks for it to take effect. After that I think it will be a mix of tier 1-3 until the end of June, then everywhere will be in tier one as basically all eligible people will have had their first jab. Another 6 weeks later all restrictions are removed and we have the old normal back regardless of what the scientists think about keeping social distancing and mask wearing indefinitely to guard against localised outbreaks.
And that's all on the assumption that there aren't any successful mutations that evade the vaccines. Apparently the mRNA vaccines can be tweaked pretty quickly, but it would still reset the vaccination count to zero.
I think you're worrying too much.
Are we seeing people who got CV19 last year, and are now catching Cockney Covid? I haven't heard of a single case. Indeed, despite all the mutations, and the millions upon millions of people who got CV19 the first time around, the number of confirmed reinfections (across all CV19 variants) is in the low double digits.
That suggests to me that the mutations we're seeing aren't radical enough to evade the body's immune system.
But even if you were right, this is not a case of immune/not immune, it's a continuum, where the vaccination gives your body a head start in recognising the intruder. The more the virus has changed, the more the body struggles to recognise it. But it's still a lot better than starting from scratch: hence the fact that people who have had "cold type" coronaviruses in the past had much better immune responses to CV19 than those of us who didn't.
In other words, mutations might dampen the effectiveness of vaccines, but they are unlikely to make them completely useless.
There is some serious trouble brewing in America. Legally Trump's case is hopeless. All the nonsense by politicians in Congress is (currently) grandstanding.
BUT Trump controls the levers of power. He controls the Department of Justice. Short of calling in the military i'm not sure exactly how they're going to get him out. All it takes is for Pence to do something stupid.
And the Republicans have publicly disavowed the rule of law. Even if something goes to SCOTUS and is chucked out they will not accept it. Because all their actions are based on ludicrous conspiracy theories about fraud which they say that the Courts are ignoring.
Presumably at noon on 21st it becomes illegal to follow any order from Trump. He has literally no status in government at that point.
If we make it to 20th Jan in one piece then we are fine. But i still feel that there is the possibility that they are trying to find a way to avoid declaring Biden President. It seems impossible. But things are ramping up VERY fast. And i don't think it's being instigated primarily by Trump - he hasn't really got a clue what is going on (i think he might actually be mad). But people are feeding him crazy theories of what can be done, and he's grabbing onto them.
Yes, they are working towards the Führer. Hopefully the military will refuse to play along & that will be the end of it, but there’s still the possibility of some very bad outcomes for the USA this month. Which is a kind of astonishing thing to be saying.
There is some serious trouble brewing in America. Legally Trump's case is hopeless. All the nonsense by politicians in Congress is (currently) grandstanding.
BUT Trump controls the levers of power. He controls the Department of Justice. Short of calling in the military i'm not sure exactly how they're going to get him out. All it takes is for Pence to do something stupid.
And the Republicans have publicly disavowed the rule of law. Even if something goes to SCOTUS and is chucked out they will not accept it. Because all their actions are based on ludicrous conspiracy theories about fraud which they say that the Courts are ignoring.
Presumably at noon on 21st it becomes illegal to follow any order from Trump. He has literally no status in government at that point.
If we make it to 20th Jan in one piece then we are fine. But i still feel that there is the possibility that they are trying to find a way to avoid declaring Biden President. It seems impossible. But things are ramping up VERY fast. And i don't think it's being instigated primarily by Trump - he hasn't really got a clue what is going on (i think he might actually be mad). But people are feeding him crazy theories of what can be done, and he's grabbing onto them.
I've got to say when I see some of his "stop the steal" fanatical followers, such as former GOP candidate Mindy Robinson, with her bikini and semi-automatic rifle twitter profile pic earlier today, it does seem prudent to stay alert.
Fortunately a few Republican senators are finally starting to become more vocal on the "Biden won side". And hopefully a lot of the perception of civil unrest is a result of reading too much of people spouting off on social media (we can all get sucked in way too easily). But even if the short term crisis is averted, there don't appear to be any long term positives for US democracy. The Republican party are going to be hopelessly and irreconcilably split. Whilst that may sound like good news for the Democrats, it is clearly terrible for American democracy, which depends (even more than ours) on two main viable political parties.
He's absolutely correct, though it won't happen overnight. However, Brexit will prove such a major let-down that its advocates will be broken men who will have neither the stamina nor the arguments to resist when the pendulum begins its inevitable swing in the other direction.
Total bullshit
Brexit means Brexit, and Brexit will be.... Brexit. Some will see its advantages, and some will see it horrors. Most - the vast majority - will shrug, and sigh with relief that it is all over. The appetite to repeat this horrendous battle will be approximately zero.
That does not mean Rejoin is impossible as a concept. It just means it is roughly where euroscepticism was in about 1980. Forty years of campaigning from the next referendum, if you really stick at it. And of course there is the very high likelihood that by then the EU will have morphed into something we can never tolerate, or will have disintegrated altogether (as, also, might the UK).
The UK should give serious thought to becoming a vassal state of the European Union. I don't mean colony. I mean the kind of independent state on the fringes of the Roman and Chinese empires that threw their lot in with the bigger party in exchange for favourable treatment. The UK doesn't have a Europe policy of any kind right now and it needs one, along with a thought-through general foreign policy. It has rejected EU membership and isolation doesn't suit it. Vassal State is probably the best other option, albeit not great from a sovereigntist point of view. Most of the UK's peers are on the other side of the Channel and that's where the UK's best prospects lie.
This is the kind of stuff that makes the hardcore remainers look like traitors. I mean really, the UK become a vassal state. You really need to get your head examined.
As a remainer, I presume this a trial meme, by an ultra-hard-brexiter (the kind who thinks that Nigel Farage sold out by agreeing with the deal) to get "All pro-Europeans are traitors and should be shot" to 50% in the opinion polls.
No sadly FF43 is a genuine Remainer and appears to actually believe this garbage.
He's absolutely correct, though it won't happen overnight. However, Brexit will prove such a major let-down that its advocates will be broken men who will have neither the stamina nor the arguments to resist when the pendulum begins its inevitable swing in the other direction.
Total bullshit
Brexit means Brexit, and Brexit will be.... Brexit. Some will see its advantages, and some will see it horrors. Most - the vast majority - will shrug, and sigh with relief that it is all over. The appetite to repeat this horrendous battle will be approximately zero.
That does not mean Rejoin is impossible as a concept. It just means it is roughly where euroscepticism was in about 1980. Forty years of campaigning from the next referendum, if you really stick at it. And of course there is the very high likelihood that by then the EU will have morphed into something we can never tolerate, or will have disintegrated altogether (as, also, might the UK).
The UK should give serious thought to becoming a vassal state of the European Union. I don't mean colony. I mean the kind of independent state on the fringes of the Roman and Chinese empires that threw their lot in with the bigger party in exchange for favourable treatment. The UK doesn't have a Europe policy of any kind right now and it needs one, along with a thought-through general foreign policy. It has rejected EU membership and isolation doesn't suit it. Vassal State is probably the best other option, albeit not great from a sovereigntist point of view. Most of the UK's peers are on the other side of the Channel and that's where the UK's best prospects lie.
This is to presume the EU is as mighty, confident, powerful and immovable as imperial Rome or China. Which is, frankly, laughable.
It may have escaped your attention that the EU has just lost its 2nd or 3rd largest "province", containing its most important city, its best universities, the home of its most widely spoken language, its equal best military, its biggest soft power, and about a sixth of its population and GDP. This is not something that casually happens to great empires on the up.
It would be like Imperial Rome losing all of Gaul, with a chunk of Spain as well. A colossal blow. And it has a currency which is a disaster waiting to happen.
Who would bow in vassalage to an empire so clearly on the decline?
Absolutely nothing is quite as laughable as "Anglosphere". At least the EU is a political, economic and diplomatic construct, which happens to contain most of the UK's peers, with whom a deal is genuinely possible.
The options are EU membership (rejected), isolation (not good), common ground with the EU (possible). What's the UK going to choose to be? I am not seeing a lot of debate about this.
Complete and utter codswallop that the EU are our only peers. Our peers are around the globe. It is absolutely preposterous to suggest that fellow G7 and English speaking Canada is not a peer but the rest of Europe all are.
People on your side of the fence mock 'little Englanders' but the real little ones are the little Europeans who can't see beyond their tiny corner of the globe. There is a big wide world out there and Europe is just one teensy tiny fraction of it.
No comment on this except to point out I didn't make a single one of the observations you appear to ascribe to me.
The idea that we should be a "vassal" to our "peers" is preposterous.
We should be a "peer" to our "peers".
The UK should be a self-confident independent nation and we can be friendly and work with our "peers" in Europe - as well as our "peers" across the rest of the world.
I'm sure it is an amazingly complex task to design and construct such a vessel, but it doesn't seem too much to ask that it can spend a little more time at sea than that. Just think of the alternate history where the government had been able to cancel it like they wanted to.
I suggest you read DK Brown's excellent books on ship building for the Royal Navy since the end of the age of sail.
A number of classes of ship spent quite a lot of time in their early years in dock being rebuilt.
I always like the story of the foretop in some of the battlecruisers.
Imagine the genius in designing the fastest capital ship ever, with the largest engines available. Put a manned position on a mast *behind* and *above* the top of the first funnel - where very, very hot exhaust gasses from said engines are issuing. The foretop being especially there for battle. When the engines will be running full tilt....
I'm sure it is an amazingly complex task to design and construct such a vessel, but it doesn't seem too much to ask that it can spend a little more time at sea than that. Just think of the alternate history where the government had been able to cancel it like they wanted to.
Perhaps Dura Ace can give an expert view but I’ve wondered if the compartmentalised build with sections pulled together from all over the UK has anything to do with it? Maybe that’s the only way capital ships can be built nowadays in the UK.
There is some serious trouble brewing in America. Legally Trump's case is hopeless. All the nonsense by politicians in Congress is (currently) grandstanding.
BUT Trump controls the levers of power. He controls the Department of Justice. Short of calling in the military i'm not sure exactly how they're going to get him out. All it takes is for Pence to do something stupid.
And the Republicans have publicly disavowed the rule of law. Even if something goes to SCOTUS and is chucked out they will not accept it. Because all their actions are based on ludicrous conspiracy theories about fraud which they say that the Courts are ignoring.
Presumably at noon on 21st it becomes illegal to follow any order from Trump. He has literally no status in government at that point.
If we make it to 20th Jan in one piece then we are fine. But i still feel that there is the possibility that they are trying to find a way to avoid declaring Biden President. It seems impossible. But things are ramping up VERY fast. And i don't think it's being instigated primarily by Trump - he hasn't really got a clue what is going on (i think he might actually be mad). But people are feeding him crazy theories of what can be done, and he's grabbing onto them.
I've got to say when I see some of his "stop the steal" fanatical followers, such as former GOP candidate Mindy Robinson, with her bikini and semi-automatic rifle twitter profile pic earlier today, it does seem prudent to stay alert.
Lol. No.
Biden has won and will be inaugurated on 20 January. The ludicrous bed wetting and drama queenery over legal challenges, military coups and armed proletariat revolution are the stuff of pathetic PB fantasy, not reality.
There is some serious trouble brewing in America. Legally Trump's case is hopeless. All the nonsense by politicians in Congress is (currently) grandstanding.
BUT Trump controls the levers of power. He controls the Department of Justice. Short of calling in the military i'm not sure exactly how they're going to get him out. All it takes is for Pence to do something stupid.
And the Republicans have publicly disavowed the rule of law. Even if something goes to SCOTUS and is chucked out they will not accept it. Because all their actions are based on ludicrous conspiracy theories about fraud which they say that the Courts are ignoring.
Presumably at noon on 21st it becomes illegal to follow any order from Trump. He has literally no status in government at that point.
If we make it to 20th Jan in one piece then we are fine. But i still feel that there is the possibility that they are trying to find a way to avoid declaring Biden President. It seems impossible. But things are ramping up VERY fast. And i don't think it's being instigated primarily by Trump - he hasn't really got a clue what is going on (i think he might actually be mad). But people are feeding him crazy theories of what can be done, and he's grabbing onto them.
Yes, they are working towards the Führer. Hopefully the military will refuse to play along & that will be the end of it, but there’s still the possibility of some very bad outcomes for the USA this month. Which is a kind of astonishing thing to be saying.
Er no. Trump lost when Biden reached 270. That’s it.
I would be laying Pence for 2024 (price dependent)
Last time that a sitting VP was defeated for re-election, then went on to be nominated and elected POTUS was - never.
But Richard Nixon
Veep - 1953 - 1961.
Lost Presidncy to JFK in 1960
President 1968 - 1974
That should give Pence some comfort he might become President in 2029.....!
Nixon was President from Jan 1969 to Aug 1974.
IF Eisenhower had lost his bid for re-election in 1956, with VP Nixon as running mate, would Dick have been presidential timber in 1960 or later? Doubtful at best.
Keep in mind that being a loser in America - especially in American politics - is NOT a good thing. Way worse in OUR culture than it is Europe (including obscure offshore islands).
Nixon pulled off the trick of the 20th century by being nominated AND elected after having lost a presidential election. And Mondale did well to be nominated after the 1980 defeat, even though he was trounced in the 1984 general.
Not sure that Mike Pence has what it takes to pull of the trick of the 21st century. Leastways not in 2024.
If Biden/Harris are polling high in the polls in 2024 who else is going to bother to run other than Pence? Certainly not Trump, he is not that stupid and will stick to saying he was cheated in 2020 and likely few other establishment Republicans either. That was how Mondale won the nomination in 1984, few other major Democrats could be bothered to run to likely lose to a Reagan with sky high approval ratings.
The only way Pence is likely not the nominee in 2024 is if Biden/Harris are polling abysmally and there is a crowded GOP field given the strong likelihood of winning the presidency that November.
"The only way Pence is likely not the nominee"...
Here's a few others:
(1) Trump Sr decides to back Ivanka or Junior (2) Trump Sr decides to back AN Other (3) Pence is sick. Or has a scandal. Or decides he doesn't want to run. (4) Pence becomes very unpopular with the Right, due to his certifying Biden's victory (5) Someone else bursts onto the national stage from left field. (Or maybe I should say right field.) (6) The Republican Party splits.
That might be one of the most pathetic things I have ever seen in politics. Essentially admitting the team is not up to the job, but being unwilling to do anything about it and pushing it back most of the year to boot.
It'd be less pathetic, if silly, if the leaked information were simply that he saw no need to do a reshuffle.
There is some serious trouble brewing in America. Legally Trump's case is hopeless. All the nonsense by politicians in Congress is (currently) grandstanding.
BUT Trump controls the levers of power. He controls the Department of Justice. Short of calling in the military i'm not sure exactly how they're going to get him out. All it takes is for Pence to do something stupid.
And the Republicans have publicly disavowed the rule of law. Even if something goes to SCOTUS and is chucked out they will not accept it. Because all their actions are based on ludicrous conspiracy theories about fraud which they say that the Courts are ignoring.
Presumably at noon on 21st it becomes illegal to follow any order from Trump. He has literally no status in government at that point.
If we make it to 20th Jan in one piece then we are fine. But i still feel that there is the possibility that they are trying to find a way to avoid declaring Biden President. It seems impossible. But things are ramping up VERY fast. And i don't think it's being instigated primarily by Trump - he hasn't really got a clue what is going on (i think he might actually be mad). But people are feeding him crazy theories of what can be done, and he's grabbing onto them.
I've got to say when I see some of his "stop the steal" fanatical followers, such as former GOP candidate Mindy Robinson, with her bikini and semi-automatic rifle twitter profile pic earlier today, it does seem prudent to stay alert.
I tend not to worry too much about the SARs, because the people who own them know how terrifyingly lethal they are and know the consequence of using them in anger will be reprisals by a lot of law enforcement bods who also have terrifyingly lethal SARs and are better at using them than you are. Unless you are suicidal they are valueless.
That might be one of the most pathetic things I have ever seen in politics. Essentially admitting the team is not up to the job, but being unwilling to do anything about it and pushing it back most of the year to boot.
It'd be less pathetic, if silly, if the leaked information were simply that he saw no need to do a reshuffle.
I thought the timing was more so that the reboot would be once covid is done and dusted.
There is some serious trouble brewing in America. Legally Trump's case is hopeless. All the nonsense by politicians in Congress is (currently) grandstanding.
BUT Trump controls the levers of power. He controls the Department of Justice. Short of calling in the military i'm not sure exactly how they're going to get him out. All it takes is for Pence to do something stupid.
And the Republicans have publicly disavowed the rule of law. Even if something goes to SCOTUS and is chucked out they will not accept it. Because all their actions are based on ludicrous conspiracy theories about fraud which they say that the Courts are ignoring.
Presumably at noon on 21st it becomes illegal to follow any order from Trump. He has literally no status in government at that point.
If we make it to 20th Jan in one piece then we are fine. But i still feel that there is the possibility that they are trying to find a way to avoid declaring Biden President. It seems impossible. But things are ramping up VERY fast. And i don't think it's being instigated primarily by Trump - he hasn't really got a clue what is going on (i think he might actually be mad). But people are feeding him crazy theories of what can be done, and he's grabbing onto them.
I've got to say when I see some of his "stop the steal" fanatical followers, such as former GOP candidate Mindy Robinson, with her bikini and semi-automatic rifle twitter profile pic earlier today, it does seem prudent to stay alert.
Lol. No.
Biden has won and will be inaugurated on 20 January. The ludicrous bed wetting and drama queenery over legal challenges, military coups and armed proletariat revolution are the stuff of pathetic PB fantasy, not reality.
It doesn't have to be plausible in any way to still be a concern that people are still indulging Trump's fantasies, up to and including members of the Senate. No it won't lead to anything, but it is well beyond demostrating they are on his side at this point, every one of them must actually believe what they are saying and, though they know it won't, wish they could change things.
Its hardly a surprise though, is it? They have fucked up absolutely everything else so it would have been extraordinary had this gone smoothly.
Pretty sure if they f up the vaccine then this government is dead man walking.
Why? They get away with things that would have destroyed any other politicians because Brexit. Now that its done will the people who have defended literally anything to defend Brexit suddenly turn on the people who gave them the prize?
There is a sizeable minority of people who think he can do no wrong. If he shot someone on 5th Avenue the Express would still be on his side. (Boris Trump).
That might be one of the most pathetic things I have ever seen in politics. Essentially admitting the team is not up to the job, but being unwilling to do anything about it and pushing it back most of the year to boot.
It'd be less pathetic, if silly, if the leaked information were simply that he saw no need to do a reshuffle.
I thought the timing was more so that the reboot would be once covid is done and dusted.
Doesn't change a thing. They wouldn't talk about it being put off if all they wanted to do is not disrupt things during Covid, they'd just talk about the good team that is in place. By saying they want to do one, but for Covid, they are admitting certain of them are not up to the job. And as such, might as well go ahead and make a change now - 11 months of someone not up to the day job being in place could cause considerable damage, more than the disruption of replacing them now.
There is some serious trouble brewing in America. Legally Trump's case is hopeless. All the nonsense by politicians in Congress is (currently) grandstanding.
BUT Trump controls the levers of power. He controls the Department of Justice. Short of calling in the military i'm not sure exactly how they're going to get him out. All it takes is for Pence to do something stupid.
And the Republicans have publicly disavowed the rule of law. Even if something goes to SCOTUS and is chucked out they will not accept it. Because all their actions are based on ludicrous conspiracy theories about fraud which they say that the Courts are ignoring.
Presumably at noon on 21st it becomes illegal to follow any order from Trump. He has literally no status in government at that point.
If we make it to 20th Jan in one piece then we are fine. But i still feel that there is the possibility that they are trying to find a way to avoid declaring Biden President. It seems impossible. But things are ramping up VERY fast. And i don't think it's being instigated primarily by Trump - he hasn't really got a clue what is going on (i think he might actually be mad). But people are feeding him crazy theories of what can be done, and he's grabbing onto them.
I've got to say when I see some of his "stop the steal" fanatical followers, such as former GOP candidate Mindy Robinson, with her bikini and semi-automatic rifle twitter profile pic earlier today, it does seem prudent to stay alert.
Lol. No.
Biden has won and will be inaugurated on 20 January. The ludicrous bed wetting and drama queenery over legal challenges, military coups and armed proletariat revolution are the stuff of pathetic PB fantasy, not reality.
I'm not expecting Biden not to be inaugurated ; what worries me is a possible consistent turnout of armed loons on "stop the steal" demos for months or years to come, and through any early part of the Biden presidency.
That might be one of the most pathetic things I have ever seen in politics. Essentially admitting the team is not up to the job, but being unwilling to do anything about it and pushing it back most of the year to boot.
It'd be less pathetic, if silly, if the leaked information were simply that he saw no need to do a reshuffle.
Yep it's ludicrous. The argument is based on a presumption that a reshuffle is purely for show, and has nothing to do with putting competent people in place to run things. An approach that is an abdication of sound government in normal times (albeit sometimes a necessary compromise to keep wings of the party happy), but in a time of national crisis you prioritise the best people for the job. If nothing else get rid of fecking Williamson. He should have been ditched after his lamentable performance in failing to anticipate the exams fiasco last year. That he has been allowed to remain to feck up schools reopening in September, university returns, schools opening either side of Christmas all whilst failing to order schools to prepare contingency planning for home learning (especially when kids have been routinely sent home to quarantine) is an absolute disgrace.
And it's not like there isn't loads more for him to feck up before November - there's still time to put in sensible contingency plans for exams in the summer, but not much.
She needs clarity on her second vaccine because she :
"rang a friend who had also had her first vaccine, and we began to plan for a dinner together at the end of January. I let my mind conjure visions of a restaurant table, a tempting menu, a glass of wine. "
I find it really depressing that there is an even an argument over this. Young people, like Ms Cyclefree, have made so many, many sacrifices for the old.
We now ask the old to make a small sacrifice (they are at the head of the vaccine queue anyhow). It is explained to them that many more people can be saved with the new policy (and it is not difficult to understand the argument).
Yet, we get these whiney old people who have to get out urgently to a restaurant meal, a tempting menu & a glass of wine or they have to go on their wanky skiing trip in January and .... so they must have their second jab.
There is zero sympathy from me.
It is time for old people to acknowledge the enormous sacrifices made by younger people.
I'm sure it is an amazingly complex task to design and construct such a vessel, but it doesn't seem too much to ask that it can spend a little more time at sea than that. Just think of the alternate history where the government had been able to cancel it like they wanted to.
I suggest you read DK Brown's excellent books on ship building for the Royal Navy since the end of the age of sail.
A number of classes of ship spent quite a lot of time in their early years in dock being rebuilt.
I always like the story of the foretop in some of the battlecruisers.
Imagine the genius in designing the fastest capital ship ever, with the largest engines available. Put a manned position on a mast *behind* and *above* the top of the first funnel - where very, very hot exhaust gasses from said engines are issuing. The foretop being especially there for battle. When the engines will be running full tilt....
Only Lion of the Lion Class was completed with the dodgy fore-mast. Princess Royal and Queen Mary were completed with the redesigned mast.
She needs clarity on her second vaccine because she :
"rang a friend who had also had her first vaccine, and we began to plan for a dinner together at the end of January. I let my mind conjure visions of a restaurant table, a tempting menu, a glass of wine. "
I find it really depressing that there is an even an argument over this. Young people, like Ms Cyclefree, have made so many, many sacrifices for the old.
We now ask the old to make a small sacrifice (they are at the head of the vaccine queue anyhow). It is explained to them that many more people can be saved with the new policy (and it is not difficult to understand the argument).
Yet, we get these whiney old people who have to get out urgently to a restaurant meal, a tempting menu & a glass of wine or they have to go on their wanky skiing trip in January and .... so they must have their second jab.
There is zero sympathy from me.
It is time for old people to acknowledge the enormous sacrifices made by younger people.
My mum was hopping mad when she saw that article. Not because she's not critical of the way the Government have instigated the U-turn (she's a doctor involved in implementing it) but because of the sheer lack of awareness and selfishness evident in it.
Case numbers on the 29th by specimen date look horrific. Where are those chumps claiming that the scientists and government made up the mutation and it's actually just Christmas shoppers?
Am I right in thinking these numbers will get worse one the impacts of the Christmas Hall Pass kick in?
Yes, and with the new strain having a much higher base R value there's no kind of lockdown that is going to work to bring that down. The only way to beat this now is to jab more people than can be infected.
On that note The Times had some good news from AZ that they are set to deliver 2m doses per week from the w/c 18th January. From what I know of the Pfizer delivery schedule we should be getting 1-1.5m per week of that too. Now it really is all on the government and NHS to jab faster than the virus spreads.
Can I also point out - for those who think it is impossible to manage a mass vaccination scheme - that in the last 12 days, Israel has managed to get first shots into more than 10% of their population.
That's close to 1% of the population every day.
Yes, that's a good rate but don't forget that to keep it going they effectively need to double it from day 22 onwards or the rate of bringing people into the vaccine funnel drops to a trickle. Either that or work in batches which seems inefficient.
FPT (I'm playing catchup...):
It's not *that* bad.
Even if you assume that Israel's vaccination system tops out at 1% of the population getting jabs every day (i.e. pretty much the current rate), that still means that more than a quarter of all adults get their first dose by day 21. Then by day 42, the second quartile of the Israeli public starts getting it, and by day 63, one quarter have had two jabs, and another quarter a single jab. By the end of February, then, half the Israeli population will have had at least one jab, with the most vulnerable having had two.
I'd be pretty happy if that was going to be the situation in the UK.
Yes, I absolutely agree, if we were in that situation by mid Feb it would be a miracle.
I wrote out what my central scenario is, essentially I expect 30m to get their first jabs done by the beginning of April then 2m first jabs per week plus 3m second jabs per week from then until the end of the list, overall we're looking at 12-15 weeks of very, very tough national restrictions equivalent to tier 5 or tier 6 with schools and universities closed, maybe finally closing the airports. Moving down to the current tier 3/4 restrictions until the middle of May at least as the most vulnerable are all jabbed a second time in that 3 week period and then another 3 weeks for it to take effect. After that I think it will be a mix of tier 1-3 until the end of June, then everywhere will be in tier one as basically all eligible people will have had their first jab. Another 6 weeks later all restrictions are removed and we have the old normal back regardless of what the scientists think about keeping social distancing and mask wearing indefinitely to guard against localised outbreaks.
And that's all on the assumption that there aren't any successful mutations that evade the vaccines. Apparently the mRNA vaccines can be tweaked pretty quickly, but it would still reset the vaccination count to zero.
I think you're worrying too much.
Are we seeing people who got CV19 last year, and are now catching Cockney Covid? I haven't heard of a single case. Indeed, despite all the mutations, and the millions upon millions of people who got CV19 the first time around, the number of confirmed reinfections (across all CV19 variants) is in the low double digits.
That suggests to me that the mutations we're seeing aren't radical enough to evade the body's immune system.
But even if you were right, this is not a case of immune/not immune, it's a continuum, where the vaccination gives your body a head start in recognising the intruder. The more the virus has changed, the more the body struggles to recognise it. But it's still a lot better than starting from scratch: hence the fact that people who have had "cold type" coronaviruses in the past had much better immune responses to CV19 than those of us who didn't.
In other words, mutations might dampen the effectiveness of vaccines, but they are unlikely to make them completely useless.
Thank you very much, all good points, and I hope you're right.
One point I will add though that so far there's been little evolutionary pressure towards reinfection, as still only a small proportion of people have been infected or vaccinated. That will change as vaccination becomes more widespread. It seems it didn't take long to evolve to exploit the school-shaped hole in our lockdowns ...
That might be one of the most pathetic things I have ever seen in politics. Essentially admitting the team is not up to the job, but being unwilling to do anything about it and pushing it back most of the year to boot.
It'd be less pathetic, if silly, if the leaked information were simply that he saw no need to do a reshuffle.
The argument is based on a presumption that a reshuffle is purely for show, and has nothing to do with putting competent people in place to run things. An approach that is an abdication of sound government in normal times (albeit sometimes a necessary compromise to keep wings of the party happy), but in a time of national crisis you prioritise the best people for the job.
Exactly this. It gets more and more ridiculous the more I think about it, to preannounce such an intention. If they are good enough for now, they will be good enough in 11 months so why make a change then?
It's putting me very much in mind of the (very excellent) Jack McDevitt novel I read a couple of days ago, in that even in a desperate, literally life and death situation, some people, very realistically, will only be concerned about themselves, appearences, or trivial matters.
Not wanting to get political blowback with a reshuffle at this time (as he apparently wants to do one, and the Covid reason does not hold up given the damage a poor minister can do in 11 months) is certainly focusing on trivialities.
I'm sure it is an amazingly complex task to design and construct such a vessel, but it doesn't seem too much to ask that it can spend a little more time at sea than that. Just think of the alternate history where the government had been able to cancel it like they wanted to.
I suggest you read DK Brown's excellent books on ship building for the Royal Navy since the end of the age of sail.
A number of classes of ship spent quite a lot of time in their early years in dock being rebuilt.
I always like the story of the foretop in some of the battlecruisers.
Imagine the genius in designing the fastest capital ship ever, with the largest engines available. Put a manned position on a mast *behind* and *above* the top of the first funnel - where very, very hot exhaust gasses from said engines are issuing. The foretop being especially there for battle. When the engines will be running full tilt....
Only Lion of the Lion Class was completed with the dodgy fore-mast. Princess Royal and Queen Mary were completed with the redesigned mast.
Yes - but the actual design. That passed review. And was built. IIRC one of the other was altered in building - at some cost.
Mind you, I would have hung Jellicoe from a boat crane. He stuffed up several years worth of dreadnoughts with his obsession with boat handling. Bridge building is a nice activity - but not on the main deck of gun armed ship. Above the turrets.
She needs clarity on her second vaccine because she :
"rang a friend who had also had her first vaccine, and we began to plan for a dinner together at the end of January. I let my mind conjure visions of a restaurant table, a tempting menu, a glass of wine. "
I find it really depressing that there is an even an argument over this. Young people, like Ms Cyclefree, have made so many, many sacrifices for the old.
We now ask the old to make a small sacrifice (they are at the head of the vaccine queue anyhow). It is explained to them that many more people can be saved with the new policy (and it is not difficult to understand the argument).
Yet, we get these whiney old people who have to get out urgently to a restaurant meal, a tempting menu & a glass of wine or they have to go on their wanky skiing trip in January and .... so they must have their second jab.
There is zero sympathy from me.
It is time for old people to acknowledge the enormous sacrifices made by younger people.
I have some concerns given the initial comments from Pfizer, but I'm with you on that kind of whininess.
There is some serious trouble brewing in America. Legally Trump's case is hopeless. All the nonsense by politicians in Congress is (currently) grandstanding.
BUT Trump controls the levers of power. He controls the Department of Justice. Short of calling in the military i'm not sure exactly how they're going to get him out. All it takes is for Pence to do something stupid.
And the Republicans have publicly disavowed the rule of law. Even if something goes to SCOTUS and is chucked out they will not accept it. Because all their actions are based on ludicrous conspiracy theories about fraud which they say that the Courts are ignoring.
Presumably at noon on 21st it becomes illegal to follow any order from Trump. He has literally no status in government at that point.
If we make it to 20th Jan in one piece then we are fine. But i still feel that there is the possibility that they are trying to find a way to avoid declaring Biden President. It seems impossible. But things are ramping up VERY fast. And i don't think it's being instigated primarily by Trump - he hasn't really got a clue what is going on (i think he might actually be mad). But people are feeding him crazy theories of what can be done, and he's grabbing onto them.
I've got to say when I see some of his "stop the steal" fanatical followers, such as former GOP candidate Mindy Robinson, with her bikini and semi-automatic rifle twitter profile pic earlier today, it does seem prudent to stay alert.
Lol. No.
Biden has won and will be inaugurated on 20 January. The ludicrous bed wetting and drama queenery over legal challenges, military coups and armed proletariat revolution are the stuff of pathetic PB fantasy, not reality.
I'm not expecting Biden not to be inaugurated ; what worries me is a possible consistent turnout of armed loons on "stop the steal" demos for months or years to come, and through any early part of the Biden presidency.
There is another side to it as well, which is that Republican politicians have in effect declared that had they a firm majority in both houses of Congress then they would have overturned the election. Which then leaves the question of how on earth we can have free and fair Presidential Elections in the future. Which in itself could lead to the Democrats losing their faith in the electoral process as well.
For Trump Republicans now the argument seems to be that the Presidential Election was actually the least important vote on November the 3rd. The most important was for Congress, as they could decide the outcome. The second most important was state legislatures (!) as they could overturn the vote in their state. Really the big one was of little consequence at all an might as well not have happened. Basically, like the EU referendum, it was no more than 'advisory'.
She needs clarity on her second vaccine because she :
"rang a friend who had also had her first vaccine, and we began to plan for a dinner together at the end of January. I let my mind conjure visions of a restaurant table, a tempting menu, a glass of wine. "
I find it really depressing that there is an even an argument over this. Young people, like Ms Cyclefree, have made so many, many sacrifices for the old.
We now ask the old to make a small sacrifice (they are at the head of the vaccine queue anyhow). It is explained to them that many more people can be saved with the new policy (and it is not difficult to understand the argument).
Yet, we get these whiney old people who have to get out urgently to a restaurant meal, a tempting menu & a glass of wine or they have to go on their wanky skiing trip in January and .... so they must have their second jab.
There is zero sympathy from me.
It is time for old people to acknowledge the enormous sacrifices made by younger people.
Exactly. But it is the exact same selfishness we are seeing in France from the young - "I need my rave"
Personally I would say - "Yes, you can have your party". Call in the army, build a fence round that rave site. Wait a couple of months......
According to the poll, the Liberal Democrats would crumble to just two seats in parliament, down from 11 won in the last general election.
A quarter of those who voted Lib Dem in 2019 say they would now vote Labour. The poll says the Lib Dems would cling on only to Bath, and Kingston and Surbiton, both by the tightest of margins. The party won 62 seats in 2005.
So either the Lib Dem’s are done - I actually think it’s possible they get wiped out next time - or perhaps mid-term polling is a waste of time.
I genuinely think they are done.
At the last election they were the only GB wide party with a polarised electorate, they were pitching for 48% of voters and they ballsed that up.
Even in my own seat, where Jared O'Mara had done so much to put off people voting Labour the Lib Dems failed, there's something really wrong. It's just not the impact of going into coalition with the Tories.
As a LD party member, I agree that at national level things look very bleak. In England the anti-Tory vote is consolidating with Labour. Bad for LDs, but probably worse for the Tories, as in target seats both LD and Green will vote tactically, in a way they would not for Corbyn.
And in marginal Tory/LD seats, pro-EU Tories will vote LD where they wouldn't last time because of Corbyn.
I'm surprised by the antipathy to Johnson and his cabinet by Tories here in Barnes including Tory members. They are spitting angry.
But that's part of why Boris isn't going to be PM at the next election, he'll last out until he's PM for longer than Theresa May but ultimately he's already made too many mistakes this year and burned far too much political capital to ensure his own survival.
Boris brings precisely one thing to the table - he's a winner. If he looks like he's not going to win then there's little point to keeping him around. MPs looking at their own majorities in the middle of next year when the Tories are 5 points down on Labour will make their move. Boris has made too many enemies in the parliamentary party, very much like Theresa May did, just for reasons other than Brexit.
And even Tory MPs can simply see that he isn’t that good.
Hardly, 48 new Tory MPs owe their seats won in 2019 to Boris
Yeah, but what has he done for them lately?
Loyalty will be there for some time, but in time they'll come to believe they won their seats because they are so good, not thanks to Boris.
That electoral bloodbath in the Red Wall is likely to concentrate a few minds...
Were that to happen I would expect it more in 2 Parliamentary terms rather than one, depending on a) the current Government delivering *some* things, and b) how well the MPs connect with their constituencies.
AIUI Lib Dem experience is that a constituency focussed MP who digs in well is expected to last 2 or 3 terms.
Some then succeed and last longer, and in a very small number of places a tradition existed or gets created.
With very few exceptions a Constituency vote is just a delusion of the incumbent. Indeed in some cases there is a negative incumbency vote...
There is actually pretty strong evidence of a First Term incumbency boost for new MPs.Stretching back to 1959, quite a few Tory gains from that year were held in 1964, and two - Briereley Hill and Lowestoft - stayed Tory even in 1966. Similarly Labour held on to several 1966 gains in 1970 - Plymouth Sutton and Brentford & Chiswick being examples. Rugby was a surprise Tory hold in 1964 - and a surprise Labour hold in 1970!
There is some serious trouble brewing in America. Legally Trump's case is hopeless. All the nonsense by politicians in Congress is (currently) grandstanding.
BUT Trump controls the levers of power. He controls the Department of Justice. Short of calling in the military i'm not sure exactly how they're going to get him out. All it takes is for Pence to do something stupid.
And the Republicans have publicly disavowed the rule of law. Even if something goes to SCOTUS and is chucked out they will not accept it. Because all their actions are based on ludicrous conspiracy theories about fraud which they say that the Courts are ignoring.
Presumably at noon on 21st it becomes illegal to follow any order from Trump. He has literally no status in government at that point.
If we make it to 20th Jan in one piece then we are fine. But i still feel that there is the possibility that they are trying to find a way to avoid declaring Biden President. It seems impossible. But things are ramping up VERY fast. And i don't think it's being instigated primarily by Trump - he hasn't really got a clue what is going on (i think he might actually be mad). But people are feeding him crazy theories of what can be done, and he's grabbing onto them.
I've got to say when I see some of his "stop the steal" fanatical followers, such as former GOP candidate Mindy Robinson, with her bikini and semi-automatic rifle twitter profile pic earlier today, it does seem prudent to stay alert.
Lol. No.
Biden has won and will be inaugurated on 20 January. The ludicrous bed wetting and drama queenery over legal challenges, military coups and armed proletariat revolution are the stuff of pathetic PB fantasy, not reality.
I'm not expecting Biden not to be inaugurated ; what worries me is a possible consistent turnout of armed loons on "stop the steal" demos for months or years to come, and through any early part of the Biden presidency.
Ted Cruz is on board to "stop the steal"! This is troubling in many ways.
The 6th is the next date of interest.
If Trump hasn't done anything insane before the 20th, anything he tries after will be unquestionably sedition and treason.
What exactly does “vassal” of the EU mean? What a ridiculous notion.
The U.K. (despite the odd aircraft carrier) is essentially a regional power. Our region is Europe.
Logically speaking (and accepting that this country is not acting very logically at present), we likely have two outstanding foreign policy goals.
1. Safeguarding and further promoting London’s role as a/the global financial capital, which means supporting the global rules that underpin London’s position.
2. Deterring Russia, using both hard and soft power to delegitimise and defend against the current regime.
Beyond that; we have an interest in stability in MENA, and ought to be cooperating with Europe on refugee support and deterrence. We still have both hard and soft power assets in the Middle East.
China is really more of an issue for the USA, Japan, Australia and India. Obviously China is not a military threat to the U.K., and our influence there is not significant. However, for ideological and historical (Hong Kong) reasons it will be difficult to ignore China’s various abuses and provocations. I think the current government is set on an anti-China course, but I worry this is to appease the USA rather than for coherent reasons of our own.
I'm sure it is an amazingly complex task to design and construct such a vessel, but it doesn't seem too much to ask that it can spend a little more time at sea than that. Just think of the alternate history where the government had been able to cancel it like they wanted to.
Perhaps Dura Ace can give an expert view but I’ve wondered if the compartmentalised build with sections pulled together from all over the UK has anything to do with it? Maybe that’s the only way capital ships can be built nowadays in the UK.
Pretty much everything bigger than a bath toy is built that way these days - civil or military.
Google for some of the videos from the South Korean yards - multi-thousand ton chunks of ship manoeuvred to literally millimetric accuracy for welding together.
According to the poll, the Liberal Democrats would crumble to just two seats in parliament, down from 11 won in the last general election.
A quarter of those who voted Lib Dem in 2019 say they would now vote Labour. The poll says the Lib Dems would cling on only to Bath, and Kingston and Surbiton, both by the tightest of margins. The party won 62 seats in 2005.
So either the Lib Dem’s are done - I actually think it’s possible they get wiped out next time - or perhaps mid-term polling is a waste of time.
I genuinely think they are done.
At the last election they were the only GB wide party with a polarised electorate, they were pitching for 48% of voters and they ballsed that up.
Even in my own seat, where Jared O'Mara had done so much to put off people voting Labour the Lib Dems failed, there's something really wrong. It's just not the impact of going into coalition with the Tories.
As a LD party member, I agree that at national level things look very bleak. In England the anti-Tory vote is consolidating with Labour. Bad for LDs, but probably worse for the Tories, as in target seats both LD and Green will vote tactically, in a way they would not for Corbyn.
And in marginal Tory/LD seats, pro-EU Tories will vote LD where they wouldn't last time because of Corbyn.
I'm surprised by the antipathy to Johnson and his cabinet by Tories here in Barnes including Tory members. They are spitting angry.
But that's part of why Boris isn't going to be PM at the next election, he'll last out until he's PM for longer than Theresa May but ultimately he's already made too many mistakes this year and burned far too much political capital to ensure his own survival.
Boris brings precisely one thing to the table - he's a winner. If he looks like he's not going to win then there's little point to keeping him around. MPs looking at their own majorities in the middle of next year when the Tories are 5 points down on Labour will make their move. Boris has made too many enemies in the parliamentary party, very much like Theresa May did, just for reasons other than Brexit.
And even Tory MPs can simply see that he isn’t that good.
Hardly, 48 new Tory MPs owe their seats won in 2019 to Boris
Yeah, but what has he done for them lately?
Loyalty will be there for some time, but in time they'll come to believe they won their seats because they are so good, not thanks to Boris.
That electoral bloodbath in the Red Wall is likely to concentrate a few minds...
Were that to happen I would expect it more in 2 Parliamentary terms rather than one, depending on a) the current Government delivering *some* things, and b) how well the MPs connect with their constituencies.
AIUI Lib Dem experience is that a constituency focussed MP who digs in well is expected to last 2 or 3 terms.
Some then succeed and last longer, and in a very small number of places a tradition existed or gets created.
With very few exceptions a Constituency vote is just a delusion of the incumbent. Indeed in some cases there is a negative incumbency vote...
An automatic incumbency bonus - you are no doubt right. But there is almost certainly an earned incumbency bonus for good conscientious MPs who work hard and make themselves accessible (and on behalf of ALL their constituents). And of course this can be demonstrated by politicians who manage to turn small majorities into incredibly safe seats (even without fundamental demographic change) if they are around for long enough.
One thing it makes me wonder is if the Americans may be on to something in having everyone, not just the elderly, get the annual flu jab.
Presumably if you go decades as a healthy young adult without often catching the flu or getting the vaccine then you will surely have little acquired immunity to variants of the flu by the time you become a vulnerable old one? You get the flu vaccine then when you're old but it may not be the right strain and presumably you lack decades of other strains?
Whereas presumably the Americans who go decades getting annual flu jabs will have more of a repository of acquired immunity, from not just this year's targeted strains but decades of prior targeted strains?
Watching that 'Death to 2020' Netflix special, is it just me or is Hugh Grant a much, much better actor than he was 20 years ago, even as he is more annoying as a person?
Scrap the red tape for retired doctors to be able to give vaccinations.
Is this a Lazy general aim at “red tape” and bureaucracy in general completely lacking any supportable detail to your argument. Rules are there to create order out of chaos. Order helps, protects, chaos frustrated, hurts. You saying they shouldn’t have conscious bias and passive by standing refresher training before wielding the needle on armfulls of different skin colour?
Fake arguments are no argument at all. Chaff. Smokescreens. Want a real argument “roll out is post code lottery” screams the Times. That means posh sods first, Brexit voting poor areas and ethnic minorities have to wait their turn.
According to the poll, the Liberal Democrats would crumble to just two seats in parliament, down from 11 won in the last general election.
A quarter of those who voted Lib Dem in 2019 say they would now vote Labour. The poll says the Lib Dems would cling on only to Bath, and Kingston and Surbiton, both by the tightest of margins. The party won 62 seats in 2005.
So either the Lib Dem’s are done - I actually think it’s possible they get wiped out next time - or perhaps mid-term polling is a waste of time.
I genuinely think they are done.
At the last election they were the only GB wide party with a polarised electorate, they were pitching for 48% of voters and they ballsed that up.
Even in my own seat, where Jared O'Mara had done so much to put off people voting Labour the Lib Dems failed, there's something really wrong. It's just not the impact of going into coalition with the Tories.
As a LD party member, I agree that at national level things look very bleak. In England the anti-Tory vote is consolidating with Labour. Bad for LDs, but probably worse for the Tories, as in target seats both LD and Green will vote tactically, in a way they would not for Corbyn.
And in marginal Tory/LD seats, pro-EU Tories will vote LD where they wouldn't last time because of Corbyn.
I'm surprised by the antipathy to Johnson and his cabinet by Tories here in Barnes including Tory members. They are spitting angry.
But that's part of why Boris isn't going to be PM at the next election, he'll last out until he's PM for longer than Theresa May but ultimately he's already made too many mistakes this year and burned far too much political capital to ensure his own survival.
Boris brings precisely one thing to the table - he's a winner. If he looks like he's not going to win then there's little point to keeping him around. MPs looking at their own majorities in the middle of next year when the Tories are 5 points down on Labour will make their move. Boris has made too many enemies in the parliamentary party, very much like Theresa May did, just for reasons other than Brexit.
And even Tory MPs can simply see that he isn’t that good.
Hardly, 48 new Tory MPs owe their seats won in 2019 to Boris
Yeah, but what has he done for them lately?
Loyalty will be there for some time, but in time they'll come to believe they won their seats because they are so good, not thanks to Boris.
That electoral bloodbath in the Red Wall is likely to concentrate a few minds...
Were that to happen I would expect it more in 2 Parliamentary terms rather than one, depending on a) the current Government delivering *some* things, and b) how well the MPs connect with their constituencies.
AIUI Lib Dem experience is that a constituency focussed MP who digs in well is expected to last 2 or 3 terms.
Some then succeed and last longer, and in a very small number of places a tradition existed or gets created.
With very few exceptions a Constituency vote is just a delusion of the incumbent. Indeed in some cases there is a negative incumbency vote...
There is actually pretty strong evidence of a First Term incumbency boost for new MPs.Stretching back to 1959, quite a few Tory gains from that year were held in 1964, and two - Briereley Hill and Lowestoft - stayed Tory even in 1966. Similarly Labour held on to several 1966 gains in 1970 - Plymouth Sutton and Brentford & Chiswick being examples. Rugby was a surprise Tory hold in 1964 - and a surprise Labour hold in 1970!
How do you separate such holds from the drift of the constituency itself in a particular political direction? When we see a replacement from the same party, often the trend continues.
How much difference is there between swings in such seats as when incumbents stand again?
According to the poll, the Liberal Democrats would crumble to just two seats in parliament, down from 11 won in the last general election.
A quarter of those who voted Lib Dem in 2019 say they would now vote Labour. The poll says the Lib Dems would cling on only to Bath, and Kingston and Surbiton, both by the tightest of margins. The party won 62 seats in 2005.
So either the Lib Dem’s are done - I actually think it’s possible they get wiped out next time - or perhaps mid-term polling is a waste of time.
I genuinely think they are done.
At the last election they were the only GB wide party with a polarised electorate, they were pitching for 48% of voters and they ballsed that up.
Even in my own seat, where Jared O'Mara had done so much to put off people voting Labour the Lib Dems failed, there's something really wrong. It's just not the impact of going into coalition with the Tories.
As a LD party member, I agree that at national level things look very bleak. In England the anti-Tory vote is consolidating with Labour. Bad for LDs, but probably worse for the Tories, as in target seats both LD and Green will vote tactically, in a way they would not for Corbyn.
And in marginal Tory/LD seats, pro-EU Tories will vote LD where they wouldn't last time because of Corbyn.
I'm surprised by the antipathy to Johnson and his cabinet by Tories here in Barnes including Tory members. They are spitting angry.
But that's part of why Boris isn't going to be PM at the next election, he'll last out until he's PM for longer than Theresa May but ultimately he's already made too many mistakes this year and burned far too much political capital to ensure his own survival.
Boris brings precisely one thing to the table - he's a winner. If he looks like he's not going to win then there's little point to keeping him around. MPs looking at their own majorities in the middle of next year when the Tories are 5 points down on Labour will make their move. Boris has made too many enemies in the parliamentary party, very much like Theresa May did, just for reasons other than Brexit.
And even Tory MPs can simply see that he isn’t that good.
Hardly, 48 new Tory MPs owe their seats won in 2019 to Boris
Yeah, but what has he done for them lately?
Loyalty will be there for some time, but in time they'll come to believe they won their seats because they are so good, not thanks to Boris.
That electoral bloodbath in the Red Wall is likely to concentrate a few minds...
Were that to happen I would expect it more in 2 Parliamentary terms rather than one, depending on a) the current Government delivering *some* things, and b) how well the MPs connect with their constituencies.
AIUI Lib Dem experience is that a constituency focussed MP who digs in well is expected to last 2 or 3 terms.
Some then succeed and last longer, and in a very small number of places a tradition existed or gets created.
With very few exceptions a Constituency vote is just a delusion of the incumbent. Indeed in some cases there is a negative incumbency vote...
There is actually pretty strong evidence of a First Term incumbency boost for new MPs.Stretching back to 1959, quite a few Tory gains from that year were held in 1964, and two - Briereley Hill and Lowestoft - stayed Tory even in 1966. Similarly Labour held on to several 1966 gains in 1970 - Plymouth Sutton and Brentford & Chiswick being examples. Rugby was a surprise Tory hold in 1964 - and a surprise Labour hold in 1970!
Dorset South was Labour's only gain in 2001. It should have been the second seat to fall to the Tories in 2005, but Labour held it.
Watching that 'Death to 2020' Netflix special, is it just me or is Hugh Grant a much, much better actor than he was 20 years ago, even as he is more annoying as a person?
He was great in Paddington 2. Haven't seen much of him since then.
What exactly does “vassal” of the EU mean? What a ridiculous notion.
The U.K. (despite the odd aircraft carrier) is essentially a regional power. Our region is Europe.
Logically speaking (and accepting that this country is not acting very logically at present), we likely have two outstanding foreign policy goals.
1. Safeguarding and further promoting London’s role as a/the global financial capital, which means supporting the global rules that underpin London’s position.
2. Deterring Russia, using both hard and soft power to delegitimise and defend against the current regime.
Beyond that; we have an interest in stability in MENA, and ought to be cooperating with Europe on refugee support and deterrence. We still have both hard and soft power assets in the Middle East.
China is really more of an issue for the USA, Japan, Australia and India. Obviously China is not a military threat to the U.K., and our influence there is not significant. However, for ideological and historical (Hong Kong) reasons it will be difficult to ignore China’s various abuses and provocations. I think the current government is set on an anti-China course, but I worry this is to appease the USA rather than for coherent reasons of our own.
Why is the UK a regional and not global power?
We are a global leader in finance. We trade globally - the majority of our exports already going to the rest of the world before we rebalance further post Brexit. We are a permanent UNSC power. We are a G7 economic nation. We have a global military alliance and are one of the world's leading military powers. We have a global espionage network and global Five Eyes alliance.
The UK has always been globally not regionally oriented.
Scrap the red tape for retired doctors to be able to give vaccinations.
Is this a Lazy general aim at “red tape” and bureaucracy in general completely lacking any supportable detail to your argument. Rules are there to create order out of chaos. Order helps, protects, chaos frustrated, hurts. You saying they shouldn’t have conscious bias and passive by standing refresher training before wielding the needle on armfulls of different skin colour?
Fake arguments are no argument at all. Chaff. Smokescreens. Want a real argument “roll out is post code lottery” screams the Times. That means posh sods first, Brexit voting poor areas and ethnic minorities have to wait their turn.
Mandatory training can be done online including the diversity and terrorism sections, in a day at most. It isn't much of an obstacle.
Watching that 'Death to 2020' Netflix special, is it just me or is Hugh Grant a much, much better actor than he was 20 years ago, even as he is more annoying as a person?
He was great in Paddington 2. Haven't seen much of him since then.
I'm sure it is an amazingly complex task to design and construct such a vessel, but it doesn't seem too much to ask that it can spend a little more time at sea than that. Just think of the alternate history where the government had been able to cancel it like they wanted to.
Perhaps Dura Ace can give an expert view but I’ve wondered if the compartmentalised build with sections pulled together from all over the UK has anything to do with it? Maybe that’s the only way capital ships can be built nowadays in the UK.
Pretty much everything bigger than a bath toy is built that way these days - civil or military.
Google for some of the videos from the South Korean yards - multi-thousand ton chunks of ship manoeuvred to literally millimetric accuracy for welding together.
I’m not surprised at that, but wouldn’t a carrier be several times more complex than say a tanker? Would these SK yards have sections built and floated several hundred miles to the final construction site?
Had a quick look at the build of the USS Gerald Ford on Wiki and it says it was a modular build though it implies it was mostly at the same yard.
Watching that 'Death to 2020' Netflix special, is it just me or is Hugh Grant a much, much better actor than he was 20 years ago, even as he is more annoying as a person?
Yes, I think he has become a much better actor since escaping floppy haired leading man roles.
There is some serious trouble brewing in America. Legally Trump's case is hopeless. All the nonsense by politicians in Congress is (currently) grandstanding.
BUT Trump controls the levers of power. He controls the Department of Justice. Short of calling in the military i'm not sure exactly how they're going to get him out. All it takes is for Pence to do something stupid.
And the Republicans have publicly disavowed the rule of law. Even if something goes to SCOTUS and is chucked out they will not accept it. Because all their actions are based on ludicrous conspiracy theories about fraud which they say that the Courts are ignoring.
Presumably at noon on 21st it becomes illegal to follow any order from Trump. He has literally no status in government at that point.
If we make it to 20th Jan in one piece then we are fine. But i still feel that there is the possibility that they are trying to find a way to avoid declaring Biden President. It seems impossible. But things are ramping up VERY fast. And i don't think it's being instigated primarily by Trump - he hasn't really got a clue what is going on (i think he might actually be mad). But people are feeding him crazy theories of what can be done, and he's grabbing onto them.
I've got to say when I see some of his "stop the steal" fanatical followers, such as former GOP candidate Mindy Robinson, with her bikini and semi-automatic rifle twitter profile pic earlier today, it does seem prudent to stay alert.
Lol. No.
Biden has won and will be inaugurated on 20 January. The ludicrous bed wetting and drama queenery over legal challenges, military coups and armed proletariat revolution are the stuff of pathetic PB fantasy, not reality.
I have to say Anabob - if Sky news suspended duo reappear on Sky, I was wrong. I thought Sky would protect the integrity of their newsroom better than that.
There is still a chance they don’t return, send a letter of resignation apologising to their colleagues, I wouldn’t be so comprehensively wrong in that situation. But my gut feeling is they are lying low till blows over. You were right and I, wrong.
I would add though, you could still be wrong on your Trump not remaining president claims. To be so certain and assertive is so reckless this stage. The wild card here is Trumps dealings in flying saucers with extra terrestrials. We know thanks to British journalism Trump has made a deal with them, and who know what they may be capable of?
What exactly does “vassal” of the EU mean? What a ridiculous notion.
The U.K. (despite the odd aircraft carrier) is essentially a regional power. Our region is Europe.
Logically speaking (and accepting that this country is not acting very logically at present), we likely have two outstanding foreign policy goals.
1. Safeguarding and further promoting London’s role as a/the global financial capital, which means supporting the global rules that underpin London’s position.
2. Deterring Russia, using both hard and soft power to delegitimise and defend against the current regime.
Beyond that; we have an interest in stability in MENA, and ought to be cooperating with Europe on refugee support and deterrence. We still have both hard and soft power assets in the Middle East.
China is really more of an issue for the USA, Japan, Australia and India. Obviously China is not a military threat to the U.K., and our influence there is not significant. However, for ideological and historical (Hong Kong) reasons it will be difficult to ignore China’s various abuses and provocations. I think the current government is set on an anti-China course, but I worry this is to appease the USA rather than for coherent reasons of our own.
Why is the UK a regional and not global power?
We are a global leader in finance. We trade globally - the majority of our exports already going to the rest of the world before we rebalance further post Brexit. We are a permanent UNSC power. We are a G7 economic nation. We have a global military alliance and are one of the world's leading military powers. We have a global espionage network and global Five Eyes alliance.
The UK has always been globally not regionally oriented.
Indeed, this fatalist notion that the UK should be a vassal to the EU really shows how these hardcore remainers think. They love nothing about this country, they want to see us subsumed by the EU because they know that it is weaker now that we've left but will never admit it. Look at how even people like ff43 admit that the EU needs us for it's foreign policy objectives but know that we won't align now that we're independent so they only way that the EU gets our foreign policy weight behind it is to be a vassal state so that's what he's proposing.
The UK will pivot further and further away from the EU in the coming years, as Gardenwalker mentions ensuring London stays a global leader is more about following global rules, the EU wants to be a regulatory exporter but as we pivot away from them and towards APAC and America, the EU will find it will need to adjust to that to ensure easy access to London, New York and Singapore given it doesn't have any big domestic money markets.
Watching that 'Death to 2020' Netflix special, is it just me or is Hugh Grant a much, much better actor than he was 20 years ago, even as he is more annoying as a person?
Yes, I think he has become a much better actor since escaping floppy haired leading man roles.
One of the best things about him is that he really doesn’t give a fuck about how he looks. That and the remainery, Tory-enraging, incipient wokeness of course.
Scrap the red tape for retired doctors to be able to give vaccinations.
Is this a Lazy general aim at “red tape” and bureaucracy in general completely lacking any supportable detail to your argument. Rules are there to create order out of chaos. Order helps, protects, chaos frustrated, hurts. You saying they shouldn’t have conscious bias and passive by standing refresher training before wielding the needle on armfulls of different skin colour?
Fake arguments are no argument at all. Chaff. Smokescreens. Want a real argument “roll out is post code lottery” screams the Times. That means posh sods first, Brexit voting poor areas and ethnic minorities have to wait their turn.
Mandatory training can be done online including the diversity and terrorism sections, in a day at most. It isn't much of an obstacle.
But how many are doing it tomorrow, ready to start jabbing 100's a day from Monday?
What exactly does “vassal” of the EU mean? What a ridiculous notion.
The U.K. (despite the odd aircraft carrier) is essentially a regional power. Our region is Europe.
Logically speaking (and accepting that this country is not acting very logically at present), we likely have two outstanding foreign policy goals.
1. Safeguarding and further promoting London’s role as a/the global financial capital, which means supporting the global rules that underpin London’s position.
2. Deterring Russia, using both hard and soft power to delegitimise and defend against the current regime.
Beyond that; we have an interest in stability in MENA, and ought to be cooperating with Europe on refugee support and deterrence. We still have both hard and soft power assets in the Middle East.
China is really more of an issue for the USA, Japan, Australia and India. Obviously China is not a military threat to the U.K., and our influence there is not significant. However, for ideological and historical (Hong Kong) reasons it will be difficult to ignore China’s various abuses and provocations. I think the current government is set on an anti-China course, but I worry this is to appease the USA rather than for coherent reasons of our own.
Why is the UK a regional and not global power?
We are a global leader in finance. We trade globally - the majority of our exports already going to the rest of the world before we rebalance further post Brexit. We are a permanent UNSC power. We are a G7 economic nation. We have a global military alliance and are one of the world's leading military powers. We have a global espionage network and global Five Eyes alliance.
The UK has always been globally not regionally oriented.
Because we aren’t.
Since 1989 there has only been one true global power: the USA.
Even China is not (yet) a global power in the sense of being able to project significant force anywhere in the world.
Scrap the red tape for retired doctors to be able to give vaccinations.
Is this a Lazy general aim at “red tape” and bureaucracy in general completely lacking any supportable detail to your argument. Rules are there to create order out of chaos. Order helps, protects, chaos frustrated, hurts. You saying they shouldn’t have conscious bias and passive by standing refresher training before wielding the needle on armfulls of different skin colour?
Fake arguments are no argument at all. Chaff. Smokescreens. Want a real argument “roll out is post code lottery” screams the Times. That means posh sods first, Brexit voting poor areas and ethnic minorities have to wait their turn.
Mandatory training can be done online including the diversity and terrorism sections, in a day at most. It isn't much of an obstacle.
Watching that 'Death to 2020' Netflix special, is it just me or is Hugh Grant a much, much better actor than he was 20 years ago, even as he is more annoying as a person?
Yes, I think he has become a much better actor since escaping floppy haired leading man roles.
Ah, like Matthew Mcconaughey.
Hugh does deliver some good lines as his character. Early days, but I am getting a Starkey vibe from his character, in terms of style.
Hugh: Polarization is the problem of our age. And not just in America, in the actual world too. Whether the debate is over Trump or Brexit or science or gender, God help us, or reality itself, no two factions can agree, or agree to disagree, or even that their disagreement might be disagreeable. Director: I'm not sure I totally agree. HIgh: Well, then why don't you fuck off?
Scrap the red tape for retired doctors to be able to give vaccinations.
Is this a Lazy general aim at “red tape” and bureaucracy in general completely lacking any supportable detail to your argument. Rules are there to create order out of chaos. Order helps, protects, chaos frustrated, hurts. You saying they shouldn’t have conscious bias and passive by standing refresher training before wielding the needle on armfulls of different skin colour?
Fake arguments are no argument at all. Chaff. Smokescreens. Want a real argument “roll out is post code lottery” screams the Times. That means posh sods first, Brexit voting poor areas and ethnic minorities have to wait their turn.
Mandatory training can be done online including the diversity and terrorism sections, in a day at most. It isn't much of an obstacle.
But how many are doing it tomorrow, ready to start jabbing 100's a day from Monday?
When people are called they will step up to the plate, to imply otherwise is slander?
The governments knowing post code lottery of a roll out is the REAL STORY here.
What exactly does “vassal” of the EU mean? What a ridiculous notion.
The U.K. (despite the odd aircraft carrier) is essentially a regional power. Our region is Europe.
Logically speaking (and accepting that this country is not acting very logically at present), we likely have two outstanding foreign policy goals.
1. Safeguarding and further promoting London’s role as a/the global financial capital, which means supporting the global rules that underpin London’s position.
2. Deterring Russia, using both hard and soft power to delegitimise and defend against the current regime.
Beyond that; we have an interest in stability in MENA, and ought to be cooperating with Europe on refugee support and deterrence. We still have both hard and soft power assets in the Middle East.
China is really more of an issue for the USA, Japan, Australia and India. Obviously China is not a military threat to the U.K., and our influence there is not significant. However, for ideological and historical (Hong Kong) reasons it will be difficult to ignore China’s various abuses and provocations. I think the current government is set on an anti-China course, but I worry this is to appease the USA rather than for coherent reasons of our own.
Why is the UK a regional and not global power?
We are a global leader in finance. We trade globally - the majority of our exports already going to the rest of the world before we rebalance further post Brexit. We are a permanent UNSC power. We are a G7 economic nation. We have a global military alliance and are one of the world's leading military powers. We have a global espionage network and global Five Eyes alliance.
The UK has always been globally not regionally oriented.
Also, I am using power in the most traditional sense.
I will concede that we are a global soft power, probably only alongside the USA and China really.
What exactly does “vassal” of the EU mean? What a ridiculous notion.
The U.K. (despite the odd aircraft carrier) is essentially a regional power. Our region is Europe.
Logically speaking (and accepting that this country is not acting very logically at present), we likely have two outstanding foreign policy goals.
1. Safeguarding and further promoting London’s role as a/the global financial capital, which means supporting the global rules that underpin London’s position.
2. Deterring Russia, using both hard and soft power to delegitimise and defend against the current regime.
Beyond that; we have an interest in stability in MENA, and ought to be cooperating with Europe on refugee support and deterrence. We still have both hard and soft power assets in the Middle East.
China is really more of an issue for the USA, Japan, Australia and India. Obviously China is not a military threat to the U.K., and our influence there is not significant. However, for ideological and historical (Hong Kong) reasons it will be difficult to ignore China’s various abuses and provocations. I think the current government is set on an anti-China course, but I worry this is to appease the USA rather than for coherent reasons of our own.
Why is the UK a regional and not global power?
We are a global leader in finance. We trade globally - the majority of our exports already going to the rest of the world before we rebalance further post Brexit. We are a permanent UNSC power. We are a G7 economic nation. We have a global military alliance and are one of the world's leading military powers. We have a global espionage network and global Five Eyes alliance.
The UK has always been globally not regionally oriented.
Because we aren’t.
Since 1989 there has only been one true global power: the USA.
Even China is not (yet) a global power in the sense of being able to project significant force anywhere in the world.
I think we are by virtue of having nuclear weapons and a permanent seat on the security council. I also think the UK may begin insisting that the EU be barred from G7 meetings along with the other non-EU nations, or they send a representative in lieu of France, Italy or Germany. I do expect things to become a little bit more us vs them for a while, even with a deal.
According to the poll, the Liberal Democrats would crumble to just two seats in parliament, down from 11 won in the last general election.
A quarter of those who voted Lib Dem in 2019 say they would now vote Labour. The poll says the Lib Dems would cling on only to Bath, and Kingston and Surbiton, both by the tightest of margins. The party won 62 seats in 2005.
So either the Lib Dem’s are done - I actually think it’s possible they get wiped out next time - or perhaps mid-term polling is a waste of time.
I genuinely think they are done.
At the last election they were the only GB wide party with a polarised electorate, they were pitching for 48% of voters and they ballsed that up.
Even in my own seat, where Jared O'Mara had done so much to put off people voting Labour the Lib Dems failed, there's something really wrong. It's just not the impact of going into coalition with the Tories.
As a LD party member, I agree that at national level things look very bleak. In England the anti-Tory vote is consolidating with Labour. Bad for LDs, but probably worse for the Tories, as in target seats both LD and Green will vote tactically, in a way they would not for Corbyn.
And in marginal Tory/LD seats, pro-EU Tories will vote LD where they wouldn't last time because of Corbyn.
I'm surprised by the antipathy to Johnson and his cabinet by Tories here in Barnes including Tory members. They are spitting angry.
But that's part of why Boris isn't going to be PM at the next election, he'll last out until he's PM for longer than Theresa May but ultimately he's already made too many mistakes this year and burned far too much political capital to ensure his own survival.
Boris brings precisely one thing to the table - he's a winner. If he looks like he's not going to win then there's little point to keeping him around. MPs looking at their own majorities in the middle of next year when the Tories are 5 points down on Labour will make their move. Boris has made too many enemies in the parliamentary party, very much like Theresa May did, just for reasons other than Brexit.
And even Tory MPs can simply see that he isn’t that good.
Hardly, 48 new Tory MPs owe their seats won in 2019 to Boris
Yeah, but what has he done for them lately?
Loyalty will be there for some time, but in time they'll come to believe they won their seats because they are so good, not thanks to Boris.
That electoral bloodbath in the Red Wall is likely to concentrate a few minds...
Were that to happen I would expect it more in 2 Parliamentary terms rather than one, depending on a) the current Government delivering *some* things, and b) how well the MPs connect with their constituencies.
AIUI Lib Dem experience is that a constituency focussed MP who digs in well is expected to last 2 or 3 terms.
Some then succeed and last longer, and in a very small number of places a tradition existed or gets created.
With very few exceptions a Constituency vote is just a delusion of the incumbent. Indeed in some cases there is a negative incumbency vote...
There is actually pretty strong evidence of a First Term incumbency boost for new MPs.Stretching back to 1959, quite a few Tory gains from that year were held in 1964, and two - Briereley Hill and Lowestoft - stayed Tory even in 1966. Similarly Labour held on to several 1966 gains in 1970 - Plymouth Sutton and Brentford & Chiswick being examples. Rugby was a surprise Tory hold in 1964 - and a surprise Labour hold in 1970!
I believe statistically this is true which bodes well for the Conservatives in 2024. However, I suspect the aftermath of the pandemic and whether we all feel cheered or downcast over "deal done" Brexit plays out nationally. How all this works out and for whom is debatable.
Johnson is a unique politician. However incompetent, capricious and lazy he appears, the punters love him. So will he and the Conservatives take the blame for the economic chaos, or the plaudits for ending the pandemic? My own view is, any other political figure would be crucified on the back of all the unemployment, poverty and financial ruin that is heading our way. However, any other political figure would end their political career, caught in mid air on a zip wire. Therefore I am convinced the next election hinges on the national picture and the fortunes or otherwise of the incumbent leader and their party rather than constituency MPs
What exactly does “vassal” of the EU mean? What a ridiculous notion.
--- Call it a partnership agreement, if you prefer
The U.K. (despite the odd aircraft carrier) is essentially a regional power. Our region is Europe.
--- The UK might be a power within Europe, despite Brexiteer rhetoric. It needs a Europe policy first and that Europe policy will need to deal with the organisation that essentially runs the show in Europe.
Logically speaking (and accepting that this country is not acting very logically at present), we likely have two outstanding foreign policy goals.
1. Safeguarding and further promoting London’s role as a/the global financial capital, which means supporting the global rules that underpin London’s position.
--- London will no longer be Europe's financial capital for regulatory reasons. EU regulators will not normally allow transactions that they carry risk for in jurisdictions they don't control. London will probably survive long term for global services it has specialities in. By definition these are less regulated.
3. Deterring Russia, using both hard and soft power to delegitimise and defend against the current regime.
--- Pretty much has to be in conjunction with EU/member states to be effective
Beyond that; we have an interest in stability in MENA, and ought to be cooperating with Europe on refugee support and deterrence. We still have both hard and soft power assets in the Middle East.
--- Interesting. I haven't heard much about UK and MENA since Cameron's abortive intervention in Syria.
China is really more of an issue for the USA, Japan, Australia and India. Obviously China is not a military threat to the U.K., and our influence there is not significant. However, for ideological and historical (Hong Kong) reasons it will be difficult to ignore China’s various abuses and provocations. I think the current government is set on an anti-China course, but I worry this is to appease the USA rather than for coherent reasons of our own.
--- China is the major prospect for the UK striking out on its own. The current government is very anti-China, for mostly good reasons. Eventually the UK will engage with the too-big-to-ignore country, by which point the EU may already have a coherent position on China.
Scrap the red tape for retired doctors to be able to give vaccinations.
Is this a Lazy general aim at “red tape” and bureaucracy in general completely lacking any supportable detail to your argument. Rules are there to create order out of chaos. Order helps, protects, chaos frustrated, hurts. You saying they shouldn’t have conscious bias and passive by standing refresher training before wielding the needle on armfulls of different skin colour?
Fake arguments are no argument at all. Chaff. Smokescreens. Want a real argument “roll out is post code lottery” screams the Times. That means posh sods first, Brexit voting poor areas and ethnic minorities have to wait their turn.
But radicalisation prevention training? I assume you'll be given a pep-talk about not joining Al Qaeda during your injection or something.
What exactly does “vassal” of the EU mean? What a ridiculous notion.
The U.K. (despite the odd aircraft carrier) is essentially a regional power. Our region is Europe.
Logically speaking (and accepting that this country is not acting very logically at present), we likely have two outstanding foreign policy goals.
1. Safeguarding and further promoting London’s role as a/the global financial capital, which means supporting the global rules that underpin London’s position.
2. Deterring Russia, using both hard and soft power to delegitimise and defend against the current regime.
Beyond that; we have an interest in stability in MENA, and ought to be cooperating with Europe on refugee support and deterrence. We still have both hard and soft power assets in the Middle East.
China is really more of an issue for the USA, Japan, Australia and India. Obviously China is not a military threat to the U.K., and our influence there is not significant. However, for ideological and historical (Hong Kong) reasons it will be difficult to ignore China’s various abuses and provocations. I think the current government is set on an anti-China course, but I worry this is to appease the USA rather than for coherent reasons of our own.
Why is the UK a regional and not global power?
We are a global leader in finance. We trade globally - the majority of our exports already going to the rest of the world before we rebalance further post Brexit. We are a permanent UNSC power. We are a G7 economic nation. We have a global military alliance and are one of the world's leading military powers. We have a global espionage network and global Five Eyes alliance.
The UK has always been globally not regionally oriented.
Because we aren’t.
Since 1989 there has only been one true global power: the USA.
Even China is not (yet) a global power in the sense of being able to project significant force anywhere in the world.
No. Since 1989 there has only been on true global superpower: the USA.
The UK is not a superpower, of course not. But we are a global power.
If you want to pretend we're not a global power then there's no reason to still call us a regional one. Just pretend there are no regional ones either. But that's a nonsense because the premise is a nonsense.
In every way we are a regional power, we are also a global one.
Scrap the red tape for retired doctors to be able to give vaccinations.
Is this a Lazy general aim at “red tape” and bureaucracy in general completely lacking any supportable detail to your argument. Rules are there to create order out of chaos. Order helps, protects, chaos frustrated, hurts. You saying they shouldn’t have conscious bias and passive by standing refresher training before wielding the needle on armfulls of different skin colour?
Fake arguments are no argument at all. Chaff. Smokescreens. Want a real argument “roll out is post code lottery” screams the Times. That means posh sods first, Brexit voting poor areas and ethnic minorities have to wait their turn.
Mandatory training can be done online including the diversity and terrorism sections, in a day at most. It isn't much of an obstacle.
But how many are doing it tomorrow, ready to start jabbing 100's a day from Monday?
I dunno. But if they cannot be arsed to be paid to watch a video and answer a few questions, then you have to question their motivation surely?
That might be one of the most pathetic things I have ever seen in politics. Essentially admitting the team is not up to the job, but being unwilling to do anything about it and pushing it back most of the year to boot.
It'd be less pathetic, if silly, if the leaked information were simply that he saw no need to do a reshuffle.
“My team are crap, but I’m going to hang on to them this year”...
It doesn’t surprise me greatly that he’s doing so, but briefing about it, even off the record, is just weird.
What exactly does “vassal” of the EU mean? What a ridiculous notion.
The U.K. (despite the odd aircraft carrier) is essentially a regional power. Our region is Europe.
Logically speaking (and accepting that this country is not acting very logically at present), we likely have two outstanding foreign policy goals.
1. Safeguarding and further promoting London’s role as a/the global financial capital, which means supporting the global rules that underpin London’s position.
2. Deterring Russia, using both hard and soft power to delegitimise and defend against the current regime.
Beyond that; we have an interest in stability in MENA, and ought to be cooperating with Europe on refugee support and deterrence. We still have both hard and soft power assets in the Middle East.
China is really more of an issue for the USA, Japan, Australia and India. Obviously China is not a military threat to the U.K., and our influence there is not significant. However, for ideological and historical (Hong Kong) reasons it will be difficult to ignore China’s various abuses and provocations. I think the current government is set on an anti-China course, but I worry this is to appease the USA rather than for coherent reasons of our own.
Why is the UK a regional and not global power?
We are a global leader in finance. We trade globally - the majority of our exports already going to the rest of the world before we rebalance further post Brexit. We are a permanent UNSC power. We are a G7 economic nation. We have a global military alliance and are one of the world's leading military powers. We have a global espionage network and global Five Eyes alliance.
The UK has always been globally not regionally oriented.
Because we aren’t.
Since 1989 there has only been one true global power: the USA.
Even China is not (yet) a global power in the sense of being able to project significant force anywhere in the world.
No. Since 1989 there has only been on true global superpower: the USA.
The UK is not a superpower, of course not. But we are a global power.
If you want to pretend we're not a global power then there's no reason to still call us a regional one. Just pretend there are no regional ones either. But that's a nonsense because the premise is a nonsense.
In every way we are a regional power, we are also a global one.
I think you are just being pedantic.
Whatever you call it, the great bulk of Britain’s hard power capability is and should be focused on our own neighbourhood.
We do not have the money to fund ambitious strategies elsewhere.
That means engaging in European issues, and naturally enough it means engaging v closely with the EU.
Scrap the red tape for retired doctors to be able to give vaccinations.
Is this a Lazy general aim at “red tape” and bureaucracy in general completely lacking any supportable detail to your argument. Rules are there to create order out of chaos. Order helps, protects, chaos frustrated, hurts. You saying they shouldn’t have conscious bias and passive by standing refresher training before wielding the needle on armfulls of different skin colour?
Fake arguments are no argument at all. Chaff. Smokescreens. Want a real argument “roll out is post code lottery” screams the Times. That means posh sods first, Brexit voting poor areas and ethnic minorities have to wait their turn.
But radicalisation prevention training? I assume you'll be given a pep-talk about not joining Al Qaeda during your injection or something.
Its this government that made it mandatory.
It only involves watching a video and answering a few questions. Half of it is about far right terrorism btw.
Watching that 'Death to 2020' Netflix special, is it just me or is Hugh Grant a much, much better actor than he was 20 years ago, even as he is more annoying as a person?
Yes, I think he has become a much better actor since escaping floppy haired leading man roles.
Ah, like Matthew Mcconaughey.
Hugh does deliver some good lines as his character. Early days, but I am getting a Starkey vibe from his character, in terms of style.
Hugh: Polarization is the problem of our age. And not just in America, in the actual world too. Whether the debate is over Trump or Brexit or science or gender, God help us, or reality itself, no two factions can agree, or agree to disagree, or even that their disagreement might be disagreeable. Director: I'm not sure I totally agree. HIgh: Well, then why don't you fuck off?
Watching that 'Death to 2020' Netflix special, is it just me or is Hugh Grant a much, much better actor than he was 20 years ago, even as he is more annoying as a person?
Yes, I think he has become a much better actor since escaping floppy haired leading man roles.
One of the best things about him is that he really doesn’t give a fuck about how he looks. That and the remainery, Tory-enraging, incipient wokeness of course.
He’s always been a decent actor; it’s just that in recent years he’s started to get more interesting roles. As with most actors, unless they’re completely beyond the pale, I couldn’t give much of a crap about their politics.
Comments
The lists I've seen only seem to place one in Newcastle City Centre however people in Northumberland, for example, are still getting vaccinated.
Remember normality by Christmas?
https://twitter.com/MesutOzil1088/status/1345496193619660803
My own passing experience of a tiny subsample of Syria refugeeship in Rothesay suggests it’s been modestly successful.
Seriously what are the most meaningful differences between the UK's zero-tariff, zero-quota and no customs union FTA with the EU, finance still to be negotiated . . . and the Swiss EFTA, no customs union, no financial passports?
I believe it is at midday on the 20th that Biden becomes President and Donald Fucking Trumps ceases to be.... President.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-20
Are we seeing people who got CV19 last year, and are now catching Cockney Covid? I haven't heard of a single case. Indeed, despite all the mutations, and the millions upon millions of people who got CV19 the first time around, the number of confirmed reinfections (across all CV19 variants) is in the low double digits.
That suggests to me that the mutations we're seeing aren't radical enough to evade the body's immune system.
But even if you were right, this is not a case of immune/not immune, it's a continuum, where the vaccination gives your body a head start in recognising the intruder. The more the virus has changed, the more the body struggles to recognise it. But it's still a lot better than starting from scratch: hence the fact that people who have had "cold type" coronaviruses in the past had much better immune responses to CV19 than those of us who didn't.
In other words, mutations might dampen the effectiveness of vaccines, but they are unlikely to make them completely useless.
https://twitter.com/CovidLeics/status/1341452477170892800?s=19
We should be a "peer" to our "peers".
The UK should be a self-confident independent nation and we can be friendly and work with our "peers" in Europe - as well as our "peers" across the rest of the world.
A number of classes of ship spent quite a lot of time in their early years in dock being rebuilt.
I always like the story of the foretop in some of the battlecruisers.
Imagine the genius in designing the fastest capital ship ever, with the largest engines available. Put a manned position on a mast *behind* and *above* the top of the first funnel - where very, very hot exhaust gasses from said engines are issuing. The foretop being especially there for battle. When the engines will be running full tilt....
Biden has won and will be inaugurated on 20 January. The ludicrous bed wetting and drama queenery over legal challenges, military coups and armed proletariat revolution are the stuff of pathetic PB fantasy, not reality.
https://www.bbc.com/news/health-55274833
GPs will be involved too, and the various stadiums etc. for the AZN vaccine.
Here's a few others:
(1) Trump Sr decides to back Ivanka or Junior
(2) Trump Sr decides to back AN Other
(3) Pence is sick. Or has a scandal. Or decides he doesn't want to run.
(4) Pence becomes very unpopular with the Right, due to his certifying Biden's victory
(5) Someone else bursts onto the national stage from left field. (Or maybe I should say right field.)
(6) The Republican Party splits.
It'd be less pathetic, if silly, if the leaked information were simply that he saw no need to do a reshuffle.
And it's not like there isn't loads more for him to feck up before November - there's still time to put in sensible contingency plans for exams in the summer, but not much.
https://tinyurl.com/y8jyej43
She needs clarity on her second vaccine because she :
"rang a friend who had also had her first vaccine, and we began to plan for a dinner together at the end of January. I let my mind conjure visions of a restaurant table, a tempting menu, a glass of wine. "
I find it really depressing that there is an even an argument over this. Young people, like Ms Cyclefree, have made so many, many sacrifices for the old.
We now ask the old to make a small sacrifice (they are at the head of the vaccine queue anyhow). It is explained to them that many more people can be saved with the new policy (and it is not difficult to understand the argument).
Yet, we get these whiney old people who have to get out urgently to a restaurant meal, a tempting menu & a glass of wine or they have to go on their wanky skiing trip in January and .... so they must have their second jab.
There is zero sympathy from me.
It is time for old people to acknowledge the enormous sacrifices made by younger people.
One point I will add though that so far there's been little evolutionary pressure towards reinfection, as still only a small proportion of people have been infected or vaccinated. That will change as vaccination becomes more widespread. It seems it didn't take long to evolve to exploit the school-shaped hole in our lockdowns ...
It's putting me very much in mind of the (very excellent) Jack McDevitt novel I read a couple of days ago, in that even in a desperate, literally life and death situation, some people, very realistically, will only be concerned about themselves, appearences, or trivial matters.
Not wanting to get political blowback with a reshuffle at this time (as he apparently wants to do one, and the Covid reason does not hold up given the damage a poor minister can do in 11 months) is certainly focusing on trivialities.
Mind you, I would have hung Jellicoe from a boat crane. He stuffed up several years worth of dreadnoughts with his obsession with boat handling. Bridge building is a nice activity - but not on the main deck of gun armed ship. Above the turrets.
For Trump Republicans now the argument seems to be that the Presidential Election was actually the least important vote on November the 3rd. The most important was for Congress, as they could decide the outcome. The second most important was state legislatures (!) as they could overturn the vote in their state. Really the big one was of little consequence at all an might as well not have happened. Basically, like the EU referendum, it was no more than 'advisory'.
Personally I would say - "Yes, you can have your party". Call in the army, build a fence round that rave site. Wait a couple of months......
The 6th is the next date of interest.
If Trump hasn't done anything insane before the 20th, anything he tries after will be unquestionably sedition and treason.
The U.K. (despite the odd aircraft carrier) is essentially a regional power. Our region is Europe.
Logically speaking (and accepting that this country is not acting very logically at present), we likely have two outstanding foreign policy goals.
1. Safeguarding and further promoting London’s role as a/the global financial capital, which means supporting the global rules that underpin London’s position.
2. Deterring Russia, using both hard and soft power to delegitimise and defend against the current regime.
Beyond that; we have an interest in stability in MENA, and ought to be cooperating with Europe on refugee support and deterrence. We still have both hard and soft power assets in the Middle East.
China is really more of an issue for the USA, Japan, Australia and India. Obviously China is not a military threat to the U.K., and our influence there is not significant. However, for ideological and historical (Hong Kong) reasons it will be difficult to ignore China’s various abuses and provocations. I think the current government is set on an anti-China course, but I worry this is to appease the USA rather than for coherent reasons of our own.
Google for some of the videos from the South Korean yards - multi-thousand ton chunks of ship manoeuvred to literally millimetric accuracy for welding together.
One thing it makes me wonder is if the Americans may be on to something in having everyone, not just the elderly, get the annual flu jab.
Presumably if you go decades as a healthy young adult without often catching the flu or getting the vaccine then you will surely have little acquired immunity to variants of the flu by the time you become a vulnerable old one? You get the flu vaccine then when you're old but it may not be the right strain and presumably you lack decades of other strains?
Whereas presumably the Americans who go decades getting annual flu jabs will have more of a repository of acquired immunity, from not just this year's targeted strains but decades of prior targeted strains?
Rules are there to create order out of chaos. Order helps, protects, chaos frustrated, hurts. You saying they shouldn’t have conscious bias and passive by standing refresher training before wielding the needle on armfulls of different skin colour?
Fake arguments are no argument at all. Chaff. Smokescreens. Want a real argument “roll out is post code lottery” screams the Times. That means posh sods first, Brexit voting poor areas and ethnic minorities have to wait their turn.
How much difference is there between swings in such seats as when incumbents stand again?
We are a global leader in finance.
We trade globally - the majority of our exports already going to the rest of the world before we rebalance further post Brexit.
We are a permanent UNSC power.
We are a G7 economic nation.
We have a global military alliance and are one of the world's leading military powers.
We have a global espionage network and global Five Eyes alliance.
The UK has always been globally not regionally oriented.
Had a quick look at the build of the USS Gerald Ford on Wiki and it says it was a modular build though it implies it was mostly at the same yard.
There is still a chance they don’t return, send a letter of resignation apologising to their colleagues, I wouldn’t be so comprehensively wrong in that situation. But my gut feeling is they are lying low till blows over. You were right and I, wrong.
I would add though, you could still be wrong on your Trump not remaining president claims. To be so certain and assertive is so reckless this stage. The wild card here is Trumps dealings in flying saucers with extra terrestrials. We know thanks to British journalism Trump has made a deal with them, and who know what they may be capable of?
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/world-news/former-israeli-space-chief-insists-23131323
The UK will pivot further and further away from the EU in the coming years, as Gardenwalker mentions ensuring London stays a global leader is more about following global rules, the EU wants to be a regulatory exporter but as we pivot away from them and towards APAC and America, the EU will find it will need to adjust to that to ensure easy access to London, New York and Singapore given it doesn't have any big domestic money markets.
Since 1989 there has only been one true global power: the USA.
Even China is not (yet) a global power in the sense of being able to project significant force anywhere in the world.
Hugh does deliver some good lines as his character. Early days, but I am getting a Starkey vibe from his character, in terms of style.
Hugh: Polarization is the problem of our age. And not just in America, in the actual world too. Whether the debate is over Trump or Brexit or science or gender, God help us, or reality itself, no two factions can agree, or agree to disagree, or even that their disagreement might be disagreeable.
Director: I'm not sure I totally agree.
HIgh: Well, then why don't you fuck off?
The governments knowing post code lottery of a roll out is the REAL STORY here.
I will concede that we are a global soft power, probably only alongside the USA and China really.
Johnson is a unique politician. However incompetent, capricious and lazy he appears, the punters love him. So will he and the Conservatives take the blame for the economic chaos, or the plaudits for ending the pandemic?
My own view is, any other political figure would be crucified on the back of all the unemployment, poverty and financial ruin that is heading our way. However, any other political figure would end their political career, caught in mid air on a zip wire. Therefore I am convinced the next election hinges on the national picture and the fortunes or otherwise of the incumbent leader and their party rather than constituency MPs
The UK is not a superpower, of course not. But we are a global power.
If you want to pretend we're not a global power then there's no reason to still call us a regional one. Just pretend there are no regional ones either. But that's a nonsense because the premise is a nonsense.
In every way we are a regional power, we are also a global one.
It doesn’t surprise me greatly that he’s doing so, but briefing about it, even off the record, is just weird.
https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2013/oct/15/tony-blair-selfie-photo-op-imperial-war-museum
Whatever you call it, the great bulk of Britain’s hard power capability is and should be focused on our own neighbourhood.
We do not have the money to fund ambitious strategies elsewhere.
That means engaging in European issues, and naturally enough it means engaging v closely with the EU.
It only involves watching a video and answering a few questions. Half of it is about far right terrorism btw.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-53308061
As with most actors, unless they’re completely beyond the pale, I couldn’t give much of a crap about their politics.