Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Why getting to Number 10 at the next election could be a tad easier for Starmer than Johnson – polit

1356789

Comments

  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 2,876
    Most Surgeries have already started doing this Age Group, a local one to me has 600 65-69s booked in this afternoon for their vaccines
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 35,477

    kle4 said:


    I actually think the header is quite wrong & SKS does not want to deprive the Tories of a majority in 2024.

    For the Labour Party, the very best thing is to win an absolute majority, of course. But, barring a huge improvement in their performance in Scotland, that is very, very unlikely, IMO.

    Given that the options for SKS are

    1. Deprive the Tories of a majority, and lead a minority Govt backed by an unstable hodge-podge of a coalition. This will lead to squabbling chaos and probable collapse in short order.

    2. Leave the Tories in power with a majority of ~ 5 to deal with the mess, with the likelihood that within a year, it is the Tory Govt that will have collapsed in squabbling chaos. A second election in quick succession is much more likely to deliver what SKS wants, which is a Labour majority.

    Surely, SKS needs option 2.

    Too risky. We've seen how governments can limp on for a long time, even when they repeal FTPA I bet.

    This is just a variant on the 'good election to lose' argument, but winning is almost always better. You have so many more options to work with even in a chaotic win, and you can turn things around. Look at Ardern.

    If the Tories eke a win who is to say Labour dont fall to infighting?
    Ardern is a good counter-example, and I did think of it before posting.

    Ardern took a gamble in a Coalition with NZ First, but there was no major downside to her gamble. (Of course, she later won the Worldwide Covid Lottery, and so it all worked out peachy for her & NZ Labour).

    By contrast, as @noneoftheabove has articulated, there are major downsides for SKS in a coalition with the SNP, depending on how it actually pans out.

    For SKS, it really comes down to whether he thinks he is a nimble enough politician to beat Sturgeon & Co in Scotland in the referendum he will have to run as the price of support (probably, a referendum largely on the SNP's terms).

    If not, SKS will end up with the blame for the loss of Scotland (fair or not) and the creation of a largely Tory rUK.

    Is SKS that nimble? Is he as nimble as Nicola? Or Jacinda, for that matter?

    SKS is a serious-minded plodder, not a graceful dancer.
    A good analysis of Starmer's capabilities and his dilemma. I remain unconvinced that the Conservatives can weather the forthcoming economic storm. I may of course be completely wrong and Philip Thompson's expectation of a post-Brexit, post- pandemic boom may indeed come to pass. I don't see how this happens, but my economic knowledge stopped at A level (and neither did I achieve a fantastic grade).
    The Bank of England saying the UK is like a coiled spring ready to bounce back once restrictions are lifted

    The question of course is when will the restrictions be lifted
    I'd like to believe that but the governor is absolutely rubbish. Rishi chose poorly.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 43,125
    HYUFD said:
    'Their goal is to destroy everyone': Uighur camp detainees allege systematic rape
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-55794071
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 2,876

    I have just watched some of the questions at PMQs. I used to occasionally teach presentation skills, and I know I am biased against Johnson, but HOW can anyone think he is a great orator is completely beyond me. It must be the case that you really can fool some of the people all of the time. His presentation skills, even discounting his ludicrous scruffy appearance are quite dreadful. Someone should at least coach him on how to er and um less. That would be a small improvement. He really is a national embarrassment.

    Lots of people love him though
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 7,137
    edited February 2021

    Dura_Ace said:

    HYUFD said:
    Haha. His stupid fucking hair. He looks like he has radiation poisoning.
    He thinks that looking like a twat gives him an eccentric appeal. Problem is that more and more people just think he looks like a twat.
    His current incarnation is beginning to make him look a bit like the lost eccentric, of the lead role of Werner Herzog's film about Kaspar Hauser from the 1970s, the idiot-savant boy who grew up chained in a cellar and then wondered the forest.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 29,112
    MaxPB said:

    kle4 said:


    I actually think the header is quite wrong & SKS does not want to deprive the Tories of a majority in 2024.

    For the Labour Party, the very best thing is to win an absolute majority, of course. But, barring a huge improvement in their performance in Scotland, that is very, very unlikely, IMO.

    Given that the options for SKS are

    1. Deprive the Tories of a majority, and lead a minority Govt backed by an unstable hodge-podge of a coalition. This will lead to squabbling chaos and probable collapse in short order.

    2. Leave the Tories in power with a majority of ~ 5 to deal with the mess, with the likelihood that within a year, it is the Tory Govt that will have collapsed in squabbling chaos. A second election in quick succession is much more likely to deliver what SKS wants, which is a Labour majority.

    Surely, SKS needs option 2.

    Too risky. We've seen how governments can limp on for a long time, even when they repeal FTPA I bet.

    This is just a variant on the 'good election to lose' argument, but winning is almost always better. You have so many more options to work with even in a chaotic win, and you can turn things around. Look at Ardern.

    If the Tories eke a win who is to say Labour dont fall to infighting?
    Ardern is a good counter-example, and I did think of it before posting.

    Ardern took a gamble in a Coalition with NZ First, but there was no major downside to her gamble. (Of course, she later won the Worldwide Covid Lottery, and so it all worked out peachy for her & NZ Labour).

    By contrast, as @noneoftheabove has articulated, there are major downsides for SKS in a coalition with the SNP, depending on how it actually pans out.

    For SKS, it really comes down to whether he thinks he is a nimble enough politician to beat Sturgeon & Co in Scotland in the referendum he will have to run as the price of support (probably, a referendum largely on the SNP's terms).

    If not, SKS will end up with the blame for the loss of Scotland (fair or not) and the creation of a largely Tory rUK.

    Is SKS that nimble? Is he as nimble as Nicola? Or Jacinda, for that matter?

    SKS is a serious-minded plodder, not a graceful dancer.
    A good analysis of Starmer's capabilities and his dilemma. I remain unconvinced that the Conservatives can weather the forthcoming economic storm. I may of course be completely wrong and Philip Thompson's expectation of a post-Brexit, post- pandemic boom may indeed come to pass. I don't see how this happens, but my economic knowledge stopped at A level (and neither did I achieve a fantastic grade).
    The Bank of England saying the UK is like a coiled spring ready to bounce back once restrictions are lifted

    The question of course is when will the restrictions be lifted
    I'd like to believe that but the governor is absolutely rubbish. Rishi chose poorly.
    Obligatory meme for "he chose poorly" -

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VA7J0KkanzM
  • felix said:

    While it is true that, if we end up in a hung Parliament Labour will find it easier to form a government, the precedent of the 2015 GE campaign is that this is politically an albatross around Labour's neck.

    The voters will be told that the choice at the election is not between a majority Tory government or a majority Labour government, but between a strong and stable Tory majority government or Labour's coalition of chaos led from Holyrood.

    This is why a resurgence in Scotland is so crucial to Labour's hopes at Westminster. It's not because, numerically, they need Scottish seats. They can win enough English seats. It's because it kills off the political argument of a Labour government propped up by the SNP.

    A difference between then and now, though, could be that perceptions of Nicola Sturgeon in England have been changed by the pandemic. The bigger question is whether the SNP actually would prop up a Labour minority government. If it does and the government is successful, the SNP loses a significant calling card for independence.

    So you expect the SNP to voluntarily play nice, and to voluntarily give away their calling card? You don't see the problem in that plan?

    The SNP as the scorpion 🦂 has no reason to make a success of a minority Labour frog 🐸 government.

    The SNP has every incentive to allow a Labour PM to be in office but for Westminster to be a catastrophe. They are agents of chaos, they have no incentive or desire to make your Westminster government work.
    It was interesting on Euro news this morning that the forthcoming Catalonia election is seeing a collapse in support for parties seeking independence, with those interviewed saying covid has relegated independence as an issue and the result is likely to be welcomed in Madrid
    Looking at the most recent polls - the pro-independence parties look very likley to win with around 72 seats . Of course the polls could be wrong.

    The voting system in Catalonia heavily favours the separatist parties. They can very easily win a majority of the seats while not getting a majority of the votes. The way the seats are allocated means that they are much easier to win in rural areas where separatist support is stronger than it is in and around Barcelona where the unionist parties get more support.

  • AlistairM said:

    Isn't it the traditional view that people vote for Labour in good economic times as they think we can afford to be generous. Then after they have (or portrayed to have) messed up the economy then the Tories get back in.

    After the Covid shock were are not in a good economic position. Will people feel like they can afford to be generous and let Labour have a go? I'm not convinced.

    The counter-argument would be that the Tories will have been in power for 14 years by the next election. All governments eventually lose.

    Is good times = Labour win what happens?

    1997: yes.
    1974: not really.
    1964: dunno
    1945: hardly

    My impression is that, until a governing party visibly and epically fails, people are inclined to let it continue. It's only once it has failed, that they really consider what the alternative is like.

    So from here, the government's job is to avoid visible epic fails. Hmm.
  • On topic: It's going to be a God-awful mess in any scenario, isn't it?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 43,125
    ydoethur said:

    OK, so a voodoo poll to start the morning.

    TES ran an online poll to get the views of teachers on the performance of the DfE. They had eight thousand responses, which is as near as bugger it 1% of the education workforce. Probably a majority of them were teachers, although many other school staff read the TES as well (as it’s about the only reliable resource for finding out what’s happening in education - and that includes DfE announcements).

    Now normally I would of course dismiss such polls as bollocks, as when exploitative business owner with links to UNITE unemployed carer and ordinary person Rachael from Swindon runs a similar poll and finds 92% of people still think the Jezaster is awesome.

    But here is one thing that did strike me.

    Of those 8,000 respondents not a single one based in England has complete confidence in the DfE. Not ONE.

    Only 4% have even *reasonable* confidence.

    Now, such polling being self selecting, to put too much weight on it would be as foolish and dishonest a use of statistics as Nick Gibb trying to justify his hamfisted bullying to keep open schools.

    But how the actual fuck did the DfE manage to mess things up so badly that in a large sample size of education professionals of all grades not a single person believes they know what they’re doing?

    That tells me that the DfE is in for a very nasty ride. It might even have to close over this.

    Good riddance, admittedly, as long as the inept fools working in it are sacked and not redeployed to ruin other departments.

    Edit - article (complete with undue weight on stats) is here:
    https://www.tes.com/news/exclusive-school-staff-trust-dfe-covid-plummets

    My wife did not take part in the poll, but would certainly have been in the 96%.
    As, I suspect, would be at least nine tenths of the teachers in the country.

  • FishingFishing Posts: 3,706

    HYUFD said:
    Farage has a cheek trying to speak about Churchill. Churchill stood up to foreign fascist despots. Farage sucks up to them, and tries to emulated them. Along with Johnson Farage enthusiastically advanced Putin's foreign policy objective. Both would be despised by Churchill.
    Churchill sometimes sucked up to foreign fascist despots, e.g. Mussolini in the 1920s and 1930s or Franco during the war.
  • I get the feeling Sir Keir is doomed. Because Covid has completely upended politics many will think: Boris hasn't really been able to strut his stuff so we'll give him another term - it's only fair. A similar thing happened with Tone in 2001, when it was felt that four years wasn't enough to achieve anything after eighteen years in opposition. Boris will probably go of his own accord after that.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 18,896
    Good morning. Maybe we'll reach 15 million today.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 19,190

    AlistairM said:

    Isn't it the traditional view that people vote for Labour in good economic times as they think we can afford to be generous. Then after they have (or portrayed to have) messed up the economy then the Tories get back in.

    After the Covid shock were are not in a good economic position. Will people feel like they can afford to be generous and let Labour have a go? I'm not convinced.

    The counter-argument would be that the Tories will have been in power for 14 years by the next election. All governments eventually lose.

    Is good times = Labour win what happens?

    1997: yes.
    1974: not really.
    1964: dunno
    1945: hardly

    My impression is that, until a governing party visibly and epically fails, people are inclined to let it continue. It's only once it has failed, that they really consider what the alternative is like.

    So from here, the government's job is to avoid visible epic fails. Hmm.
    Hopefully a repeat of 1945 is on the cards
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 45,523

    On topic: It's going to be a God-awful mess in any scenario, isn't it?

    Nah, Sunak taking over from Boris in 2025 with Truss as Chancellor and a majority of 68 - we'll be fine.
  • Barnesian said:

    Barnesian said:

    Foxy said:

    Barnesian said:

    Morning all,

    Good header. It shows that despite LibDems only being on 6 or 7% in national polls what really matters is what their support is like in their key Con "winnable" seats.

    Would be an interesting header: How many key "winnable" seats do they actually have now post Next Prime Minister Jo Swinson?
    Here are the 20 most marginal Con/LD seats. I think LDs could win at least half of them now that Corbyn has gone and many traditional Tories are dissatisfied with Johnson. They would then have 20+ seats which could make a difference to a Labour minority government.


    I think that Starmer would want a strong candidate and campaign in Golders Green, to show a clear line against antisemitism.

    Yes. Perhaps the LDs will "give" Labour Golders Green even though the LDs were in second place last time as long as Labour do not campaign in the other 19 marginals, or even covertly help deliver tactical votes.
    Do we think Sunak rather than Johnson might hold some of these? Both are Brexiteers of course, but Sunak was not up front in the campaign.
    I was assuming that the Tories would hold half of them. Hence my suggestion that the LibDems win 10 making a total of 20+ seats.

    The betting suggests that Johnson's exit date as party leader will be 2024+ (1.78 on Betfair).

    Thanks.

    I think Johnson will stand in 2024. I dont subscribe to the view that he will gently drift into retirement in a year or so and go and earn the big money. Maybe half way through a second term.
    I agree that Boris's retirement is entirely in his own hands. He will not be forced out. Putting the Prime Minister's post-Covid health and finances to one side, Boris might have an eye on opinion polls. Will he want to risk losing? He will have seen how Donald Trump was diminished by defeat. Boris won two Mayoral elections, the Brexit referendum, the leadership election and a general election. Surely he would rather leave, like Mrs Thatcher, undefeated.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 43,125
    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    OK, so a voodoo poll to start the morning.

    TES ran an online poll to get the views of teachers on the performance of the DfE. They had eight thousand responses, which is as near as bugger it 1% of the education workforce. Probably a majority of them were teachers, although many other school staff read the TES as well (as it’s about the only reliable resource for finding out what’s happening in education - and that includes DfE announcements).

    Now normally I would of course dismiss such polls as bollocks, as when exploitative business owner with links to UNITE unemployed carer and ordinary person Rachael from Swindon runs a similar poll and finds 92% of people still think the Jezaster is awesome.

    But here is one thing that did strike me.

    Of those 8,000 respondents not a single one based in England has complete confidence in the DfE. Not ONE.

    Only 4% have even *reasonable* confidence.

    Now, such polling being self selecting, to put too much weight on it would be as foolish and dishonest a use of statistics as Nick Gibb trying to justify his hamfisted bullying to keep open schools.

    But how the actual fuck did the DfE manage to mess things up so badly that in a large sample size of education professionals of all grades not a single person believes they know what they’re doing?

    That tells me that the DfE is in for a very nasty ride. It might even have to close over this.

    Good riddance, admittedly, as long as the inept fools working in it are sacked and not redeployed to ruin other departments.

    Edit - article (complete with undue weight on stats) is here:
    https://www.tes.com/news/exclusive-school-staff-trust-dfe-covid-plummets

    BREAKING NEWS: DEWEY WINS!
    I didn't think your expertise lay in state education, Charles ?
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 10,012

    Dura_Ace said:

    HYUFD said:
    Haha. His stupid fucking hair. He looks like he has radiation poisoning.
    He thinks that looking like a twat gives him an eccentric appeal. Problem is that more and more people just think he looks like a twat.
    His current incarnation is beginning to make him look a bit like the lost eccentric, of the lead role of Werner Herzog's film about Kaspar Hauser from the 1970s, the idiot-savant boy who grew up chained in a cellar and then wondered the forest.
    Uncanny.




    The statue even has a perpetual budgie's tongue like Johnson.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 43,125
    edited February 2021

    I have just watched some of the questions at PMQs. I used to occasionally teach presentation skills, and I know I am biased against Johnson, but HOW can anyone think he is a great orator is completely beyond me. It must be the case that you really can fool some of the people all of the time. His presentation skills, even discounting his ludicrous scruffy appearance are quite dreadful. Someone should at least coach him on how to er and um less. That would be a small improvement. He really is a national embarrassment.

    Lots of people love him though
    Dishevelled blond Marmite.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 15,495

    Starmer cannot give up on Scotland. Therefore what he should do is decouple Scottish Labour from the UK party, and create a new Scottish party, with Unionism in its constitution, but that doesn't take its orders from 'London'. This will give a small moment of opportunity as Scottish voters listen to what the new, renamed party has to say. This opportunity is also open to the Tories, to the Lib Dems (except nobody would care), to a break away faction of the SNP (though obviously they'd have to live with death threats), and also more authentically to a completely new party.

    Agree with this.
  • felixfelix Posts: 14,264

    felix said:

    While it is true that, if we end up in a hung Parliament Labour will find it easier to form a government, the precedent of the 2015 GE campaign is that this is politically an albatross around Labour's neck.

    The voters will be told that the choice at the election is not between a majority Tory government or a majority Labour government, but between a strong and stable Tory majority government or Labour's coalition of chaos led from Holyrood.

    This is why a resurgence in Scotland is so crucial to Labour's hopes at Westminster. It's not because, numerically, they need Scottish seats. They can win enough English seats. It's because it kills off the political argument of a Labour government propped up by the SNP.

    A difference between then and now, though, could be that perceptions of Nicola Sturgeon in England have been changed by the pandemic. The bigger question is whether the SNP actually would prop up a Labour minority government. If it does and the government is successful, the SNP loses a significant calling card for independence.

    So you expect the SNP to voluntarily play nice, and to voluntarily give away their calling card? You don't see the problem in that plan?

    The SNP as the scorpion 🦂 has no reason to make a success of a minority Labour frog 🐸 government.

    The SNP has every incentive to allow a Labour PM to be in office but for Westminster to be a catastrophe. They are agents of chaos, they have no incentive or desire to make your Westminster government work.
    It was interesting on Euro news this morning that the forthcoming Catalonia election is seeing a collapse in support for parties seeking independence, with those interviewed saying covid has relegated independence as an issue and the result is likely to be welcomed in Madrid
    Looking at the most recent polls - the pro-independence parties look very likley to win with around 72 seats . Of course the polls could be wrong.
    It seemed a genuine live report to be fair
    I've scoured the new outlet but can see nothing that suggests at the very best a close and unpredictable result.
  • Nigelb said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    OK, so a voodoo poll to start the morning.

    TES ran an online poll to get the views of teachers on the performance of the DfE. They had eight thousand responses, which is as near as bugger it 1% of the education workforce. Probably a majority of them were teachers, although many other school staff read the TES as well (as it’s about the only reliable resource for finding out what’s happening in education - and that includes DfE announcements).

    Now normally I would of course dismiss such polls as bollocks, as when exploitative business owner with links to UNITE unemployed carer and ordinary person Rachael from Swindon runs a similar poll and finds 92% of people still think the Jezaster is awesome.

    But here is one thing that did strike me.

    Of those 8,000 respondents not a single one based in England has complete confidence in the DfE. Not ONE.

    Only 4% have even *reasonable* confidence.

    Now, such polling being self selecting, to put too much weight on it would be as foolish and dishonest a use of statistics as Nick Gibb trying to justify his hamfisted bullying to keep open schools.

    But how the actual fuck did the DfE manage to mess things up so badly that in a large sample size of education professionals of all grades not a single person believes they know what they’re doing?

    That tells me that the DfE is in for a very nasty ride. It might even have to close over this.

    Good riddance, admittedly, as long as the inept fools working in it are sacked and not redeployed to ruin other departments.

    Edit - article (complete with undue weight on stats) is here:
    https://www.tes.com/news/exclusive-school-staff-trust-dfe-covid-plummets

    BREAKING NEWS: DEWEY WINS!
    I didn't think your expertise lay in state education, Charles ?
    Eton likes to call itself the first state school, back in 14-hundred and something. Not really sure what Dewey wins has to do with teachers' opinions of the DfE though.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 7,873

    Foxy said:

    https://twitter.com/COVID19actuary/status/1360131370366959618?s=19

    The graph assumes a constant prevalence of Covid-19, which in turn would presumably mean some relaxations of restrictions.

    It also assumes that vaccination is 100% effective in preventing hospitalization, ICU admission, and death, though.

    ICU admissions will be the limiting factor -- as indeed has been predicted right from the beginning of the pandemic -- and its reduction by only 0.8 times vaccine effectiveness once groups 1-9 are completely done shows that vaccinating over 50s doesn't get us out of the woods. I have long thought that the trickiest period, politically, will be when deaths are right down (which I don't expect to happen as fast as Max and Robert do) but the hospitals still packed with unlucky 30-50 years olds like my relative. (Still on a ventilator, but now stable. Doctors not talking about his chances.)

    --AS
    https://twitter.com/ashishkjha/status/1356079020878786561
  • Dura_Ace said:

    HYUFD said:
    Haha. His stupid fucking hair. He looks like he has radiation poisoning.
    He thinks that looking like a twat gives him an eccentric appeal. Problem is that more and more people just think he looks like a twat.
    His current incarnation is beginning to make him look a bit like the lost eccentric, of the lead role of Werner Herzog's film about Kaspar Hauser from the 1970s, the idiot-savant boy who grew up chained in a cellar and then wondered the forest.
    The question then is why are the conservatives leading labour, and in yesterdays poll Boris is leading Starmer

    Of course the vaccination success is a big win for Boris and frankly Starmer is just too bland and not cutting through

    There are many as evidenced on here who dislike Boris with a passion but this forum is not necessarily a reflection of the publics views and as indicated by the most recent polling
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 41,381
    edited February 2021

    AlistairM said:

    Isn't it the traditional view that people vote for Labour in good economic times as they think we can afford to be generous. Then after they have (or portrayed to have) messed up the economy then the Tories get back in.

    After the Covid shock were are not in a good economic position. Will people feel like they can afford to be generous and let Labour have a go? I'm not convinced.

    The counter-argument would be that the Tories will have been in power for 14 years by the next election. All governments eventually lose.

    Is good times = Labour win what happens?

    1997: yes.
    1974: not really.
    1964: dunno
    1945: hardly

    My impression is that, until a governing party visibly and epically fails, people are inclined to let it continue. It's only once it has failed, that they really consider what the alternative is like.

    So from here, the government's job is to avoid visible epic fails. Hmm.
    Alastair's "good economic times" isn't quite right. People tend left when the mood is of hoping for a better future, and right when the mood is fearing bad times are coming.

    1945 qualifies because the bad times of the war were ending and people were looking toward a better future. 1964 similarly saw the post-war greyness of austerity shading into what became known as the swinging sixties (actually mid 60s to mid 70s, sex being invented in 1963 and all that). 1974 came after the dark days (literally) of Ted Heath, the three day week and electricity rationing.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 43,125

    Nigelb said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    OK, so a voodoo poll to start the morning.

    TES ran an online poll to get the views of teachers on the performance of the DfE. They had eight thousand responses, which is as near as bugger it 1% of the education workforce. Probably a majority of them were teachers, although many other school staff read the TES as well (as it’s about the only reliable resource for finding out what’s happening in education - and that includes DfE announcements).

    Now normally I would of course dismiss such polls as bollocks, as when exploitative business owner with links to UNITE unemployed carer and ordinary person Rachael from Swindon runs a similar poll and finds 92% of people still think the Jezaster is awesome.

    But here is one thing that did strike me.

    Of those 8,000 respondents not a single one based in England has complete confidence in the DfE. Not ONE.

    Only 4% have even *reasonable* confidence.

    Now, such polling being self selecting, to put too much weight on it would be as foolish and dishonest a use of statistics as Nick Gibb trying to justify his hamfisted bullying to keep open schools.

    But how the actual fuck did the DfE manage to mess things up so badly that in a large sample size of education professionals of all grades not a single person believes they know what they’re doing?

    That tells me that the DfE is in for a very nasty ride. It might even have to close over this.

    Good riddance, admittedly, as long as the inept fools working in it are sacked and not redeployed to ruin other departments.

    Edit - article (complete with undue weight on stats) is here:
    https://www.tes.com/news/exclusive-school-staff-trust-dfe-covid-plummets

    BREAKING NEWS: DEWEY WINS!
    I didn't think your expertise lay in state education, Charles ?
    Eton likes to call itself the first state school, back in 14-hundred and something. Not really sure what Dewey wins has to do with teachers' opinions of the DfE though.
    I think Charles was implying that the poll was an inaccurate representation of teachers' feelings ?
    If not, then just a small surrealist experiment, for which I applaud him.
  • felixfelix Posts: 14,264

    felix said:

    While it is true that, if we end up in a hung Parliament Labour will find it easier to form a government, the precedent of the 2015 GE campaign is that this is politically an albatross around Labour's neck.

    The voters will be told that the choice at the election is not between a majority Tory government or a majority Labour government, but between a strong and stable Tory majority government or Labour's coalition of chaos led from Holyrood.

    This is why a resurgence in Scotland is so crucial to Labour's hopes at Westminster. It's not because, numerically, they need Scottish seats. They can win enough English seats. It's because it kills off the political argument of a Labour government propped up by the SNP.

    A difference between then and now, though, could be that perceptions of Nicola Sturgeon in England have been changed by the pandemic. The bigger question is whether the SNP actually would prop up a Labour minority government. If it does and the government is successful, the SNP loses a significant calling card for independence.

    So you expect the SNP to voluntarily play nice, and to voluntarily give away their calling card? You don't see the problem in that plan?

    The SNP as the scorpion 🦂 has no reason to make a success of a minority Labour frog 🐸 government.

    The SNP has every incentive to allow a Labour PM to be in office but for Westminster to be a catastrophe. They are agents of chaos, they have no incentive or desire to make your Westminster government work.
    It was interesting on Euro news this morning that the forthcoming Catalonia election is seeing a collapse in support for parties seeking independence, with those interviewed saying covid has relegated independence as an issue and the result is likely to be welcomed in Madrid
    Looking at the most recent polls - the pro-independence parties look very likley to win with around 72 seats . Of course the polls could be wrong.

    The voting system in Catalonia heavily favours the separatist parties. They can very easily win a majority of the seats while not getting a majority of the votes. The way the seats are allocated means that they are much easier to win in rural areas where separatist support is stronger than it is in and around Barcelona where the unionist parties get more support.

    Yes but even looking at the percentages in the polling the best you get is around 50/50 and that would assume Vox and the PP in alliance with PSC/Podem and Citizens. The PSC are doing well individually but nowhere near enough to win.
  • On topic, I'm not so sure. Let's say that the Cons get 315 seats. In theory all the other parties can now remove Boris and put in SKS but would they? What is SKS supposed to do next having to work with multiple different parties to get anything done? Realistically in such a scenario, I would expect a Con minority and another election within a year.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 30,691
    edited February 2021
    Yes, good header. The Cons are billy no mates. Hence why I like BOTH these bets - Cons largest party at 1.8, Starmer next PM at 5. Given the next election will barring accidents be Johnson v Starmer, this is a killer brace. They can both win - quite likely in fact - but they cannot both lose. It's a win vs flat profile. Total smug city.
  • felix said:

    felix said:

    While it is true that, if we end up in a hung Parliament Labour will find it easier to form a government, the precedent of the 2015 GE campaign is that this is politically an albatross around Labour's neck.

    The voters will be told that the choice at the election is not between a majority Tory government or a majority Labour government, but between a strong and stable Tory majority government or Labour's coalition of chaos led from Holyrood.

    This is why a resurgence in Scotland is so crucial to Labour's hopes at Westminster. It's not because, numerically, they need Scottish seats. They can win enough English seats. It's because it kills off the political argument of a Labour government propped up by the SNP.

    A difference between then and now, though, could be that perceptions of Nicola Sturgeon in England have been changed by the pandemic. The bigger question is whether the SNP actually would prop up a Labour minority government. If it does and the government is successful, the SNP loses a significant calling card for independence.

    So you expect the SNP to voluntarily play nice, and to voluntarily give away their calling card? You don't see the problem in that plan?

    The SNP as the scorpion 🦂 has no reason to make a success of a minority Labour frog 🐸 government.

    The SNP has every incentive to allow a Labour PM to be in office but for Westminster to be a catastrophe. They are agents of chaos, they have no incentive or desire to make your Westminster government work.
    It was interesting on Euro news this morning that the forthcoming Catalonia election is seeing a collapse in support for parties seeking independence, with those interviewed saying covid has relegated independence as an issue and the result is likely to be welcomed in Madrid
    Looking at the most recent polls - the pro-independence parties look very likley to win with around 72 seats . Of course the polls could be wrong.
    It seemed a genuine live report to be fair
    I've scoured the new outlet but can see nothing that suggests at the very best a close and unpredictable result.
    Maybe Euro news is more pro EU then
  • Scott_xP said:
    Dick is the plod equivalent of VDL... continually to fail and fall upwards.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 19,190

    Dura_Ace said:

    HYUFD said:
    Haha. His stupid fucking hair. He looks like he has radiation poisoning.
    He thinks that looking like a twat gives him an eccentric appeal. Problem is that more and more people just think he looks like a twat.
    His current incarnation is beginning to make him look a bit like the lost eccentric, of the lead role of Werner Herzog's film about Kaspar Hauser from the 1970s, the idiot-savant boy who grew up chained in a cellar and then wondered the forest.
    The question then is why are the conservatives leading labour, and in yesterdays poll Boris is leading Starmer

    Of course the vaccination success is a big win for Boris and frankly Starmer is just too bland and not cutting through

    There are many as evidenced on here who dislike Boris with a passion but this forum is not necessarily a reflection of the publics views and as indicated by the most recent polling
    TBF I quite like Boris.

    Will never vote for him mind.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 43,125

    Scott_xP said:
    Dick is the plod equivalent of VDL... continually to fail and fall upwards.
    Though it ought to be far less difficult to sack her.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 35,477
    Interesting that the Pfizer response to the SA variant is being classes as good (rightly) because it has a robust t-cell response but the AZ vaccine had a very similar t-cell response but was on the receiving end of some very unfair briefings.

    It's almost as if there is an element of the media that wants the vaccine to fail.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 34,595
    tlg86 said:

    I think Mike is looking at this from the wrong direction. It is an advantage for the Tories to be seen as capable of winning a majority. It is a disadvantage for Labour to be seen as being incapable of winning without the support of the SNP.

    And on the Lib Dems. It's worth remembering that four of their 11 seats are in Scotland. I mean, it would be a very Lib Dem thing to do, but throwing your lot in with the SNP might not be the smartest of moves.

    I think the LD seats in Scotland will be more difficult without a Scottish Leader, marmite Swindon may have been, but at least not English. Davey won't have that advantage.

    Labour having a Scottish leader was a big advantage North of the border in 2010.

    All the 5 big parties in England are very SE English middle class led.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 103,034
    edited February 2021
    felix said:

    While it is true that, if we end up in a hung Parliament Labour will find it easier to form a government, the precedent of the 2015 GE campaign is that this is politically an albatross around Labour's neck.

    The voters will be told that the choice at the election is not between a majority Tory government or a majority Labour government, but between a strong and stable Tory majority government or Labour's coalition of chaos led from Holyrood.

    This is why a resurgence in Scotland is so crucial to Labour's hopes at Westminster. It's not because, numerically, they need Scottish seats. They can win enough English seats. It's because it kills off the political argument of a Labour government propped up by the SNP.

    Yesterday's poll is not encouraging for Labour:

    Scottish parliament voting intention(s): Savanta Com Res.

    Constituency:
    SNP: 54% (+1)
    CON: 23% (+4)
    LAB: 16% (-2)
    LDEM: 5% (-1)

    List:
    SNP: 43% (-1)
    CON: 21% (+5)
    LAB: 18% (-)
    GRN: 10% (-1)
    In 2016 the Scottish Conservatives got 22% on the constituency vote and 22.9% on the list vote so on that poll are little changed, up one on the constituency vote and down one on the list.

    Scottish Labour got 22.6% on the constituency vote and 19% on the list so are down 6% on the constituency vote and down 1% on the list.

    So it is mainly Labour who the SNP have made further gains from and the new Labour leader needs to make gains not just for Labour but for Unionists too
  • kinabalu said:

    Yes, good header. The Cons are billy no mates. Hence why I like BOTH these bets - Cons largest party at 1.8, Starmer next PM at 5. Given the next election will barring accidents be Johnson v Starmer, this is a killer brace. They can both win - quite likely in fact - but they cannot both lose. It's a win vs flat profile. Total smug city.

    Of course they can both lose. If Labour looks set to win most seats next election, then Johnson will probably retire or be pushed, in which case you could end up with Lab largest party and a Tory as next PM.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 10,012
    Nigelb said:
    No doubt it's as dangerous as frig - when done properly. MotoGP champion Nicky Hayden was killed cycling a few years ago,

    I will take his Daytona 500 seat if pressed.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 103,034
    Foxy said:

    tlg86 said:

    I think Mike is looking at this from the wrong direction. It is an advantage for the Tories to be seen as capable of winning a majority. It is a disadvantage for Labour to be seen as being incapable of winning without the support of the SNP.

    And on the Lib Dems. It's worth remembering that four of their 11 seats are in Scotland. I mean, it would be a very Lib Dem thing to do, but throwing your lot in with the SNP might not be the smartest of moves.

    I think the LD seats in Scotland will be more difficult without a Scottish Leader, marmite Swindon may have been, but at least not English. Davey won't have that advantage.

    Labour having a Scottish leader was a big advantage North of the border in 2010.

    All the 5 big parties in England are very SE English middle class led.
    I doubt it makes much difference, all the LD seats in Scotland are strongly Unionist and the LD vote benefits from Unionist tactical voting to keep out the SNP
  • Foxy said:

    tlg86 said:

    I think Mike is looking at this from the wrong direction. It is an advantage for the Tories to be seen as capable of winning a majority. It is a disadvantage for Labour to be seen as being incapable of winning without the support of the SNP.

    And on the Lib Dems. It's worth remembering that four of their 11 seats are in Scotland. I mean, it would be a very Lib Dem thing to do, but throwing your lot in with the SNP might not be the smartest of moves.

    I think the LD seats in Scotland will be more difficult without a Scottish Leader, marmite Swindon may have been, but at least not English. Davey won't have that advantage.

    Labour having a Scottish leader was a big advantage North of the border in 2010.

    All the 5 big parties in England are very SE English middle class led.
    isn't Davey a Notts lad?
  • Scott_xP said:
    Khan end of term report is even more underwhelming...achieved....hmmmm....knife crime massively up count as an achievement?
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 15,495
    HYUFD said:

    felix said:

    While it is true that, if we end up in a hung Parliament Labour will find it easier to form a government, the precedent of the 2015 GE campaign is that this is politically an albatross around Labour's neck.

    The voters will be told that the choice at the election is not between a majority Tory government or a majority Labour government, but between a strong and stable Tory majority government or Labour's coalition of chaos led from Holyrood.

    This is why a resurgence in Scotland is so crucial to Labour's hopes at Westminster. It's not because, numerically, they need Scottish seats. They can win enough English seats. It's because it kills off the political argument of a Labour government propped up by the SNP.

    Yesterday's poll is not encouraging for Labour:

    Scottish parliament voting intention(s): Savanta Com Res.

    Constituency:
    SNP: 54% (+1)
    CON: 23% (+4)
    LAB: 16% (-2)
    LDEM: 5% (-1)

    List:
    SNP: 43% (-1)
    CON: 21% (+5)
    LAB: 18% (-)
    GRN: 10% (-1)
    In 2016 the Scottish Conservatives got 22% on the constituency vote and 22.9% on the list vote so on that poll are little changed, up one on the constituency vote and down one on the list.

    Scottish Labour got 22.6% on the constituency vote and 19% on the list so are down 6% on the constituency vote and down 1% on the list.

    So it is mainly Labour who the SNP have made further gains from and the new Labour leader needs to make gains not just for Labour but for Unionists too
    Seems to suggest that Tory support in Scotland is pretty fixed in the low twenties regardless of Brexit.

    Whereas, some Remain-inclined Lab/Libs have been lost to the SNP.
  • Mr. Malmesbury, tragic that one of the few officers to serve and survive Darth Vader ended up doomed by a poor choice of drinking vessel.
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 2,876
    Nigelb said:

    I have just watched some of the questions at PMQs. I used to occasionally teach presentation skills, and I know I am biased against Johnson, but HOW can anyone think he is a great orator is completely beyond me. It must be the case that you really can fool some of the people all of the time. His presentation skills, even discounting his ludicrous scruffy appearance are quite dreadful. Someone should at least coach him on how to er and um less. That would be a small improvement. He really is a national embarrassment.

    Lots of people love him though
    Dishevelled blond Marmite.
    Thats a great description of him, the problem for Labour is that lots of people like Marmite.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 6,178
    Charles said:

    I am sure this has been asked before so forgive me asking again but I don't remember the answers.

    What do people think is the protocol if Starmer is in place as PM and Johnson is only short a majority because of SNP seats, if the Scots win an Independence referendum? I assume it triggers a vote of No Confidence and a GE? But with the fixed term Parliament act in place can their be a change of Government without a GE?

    And if the Scots win independence in this Parliament, say 6 months prior to a GE so without sufficient time to enact it in the current term, would they stand for election in 2024 knowing they were only going to be in Parliament for a few months?

    You wouldn’t want them standing - they would be on the other side of the negotiating table from parliament
    FTPA covers parliaments not governments. Change of government is possible, even if unlikely.

  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 7,873

    Mr. Malmesbury, tragic that one of the few officers to serve and survive Darth Vader ended up doomed by a poor choice of drinking vessel.

    Didn't he snuff it at the Battle of Endor?
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 15,495

    Scott_xP said:
    Khan end of term report is even more underwhelming...achieved....hmmmm....knife crime massively up count as an achievement?
    Khan is an absolute do-nothing.

    I mean, I hate Boris, but even he was a better mayor than Khan.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 19,190
    MaxPB said:

    Interesting that the Pfizer response to the SA variant is being classes as good (rightly) because it has a robust t-cell response but the AZ vaccine had a very similar t-cell response but was on the receiving end of some very unfair briefings.

    It's almost as if there is an element of the media that wants the vaccine to fail.

    Easy for people with Pfizer in their arm to claim both are as good as each other.

    Would anyone, given a free choice not go Pfizer?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 72,103
    edited February 2021
    I am still not convinced Boris will be leading the Tories come 2024. He looks bloody awful, I suspect long covid and incredible unrelating stress that will continue for much of this year.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,541
    kinabalu said:

    Yes, good header. The Cons are billy no mates. Hence why I like BOTH these bets - Cons largest party at 1.8, Starmer next PM at 5. Given the next election will barring accidents be Johnson v Starmer, this is a killer brace. They can both win - quite likely in fact - but they cannot both lose. It's a win vs flat profile. Total smug city.

    This is a really good point. Starmer being replaced seems the only risk...
  • Mr. Seal, if General Veers had been on the ground the ewoks would've been annihilated.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,504

    Scott_xP said:
    Khan end of term report is even more underwhelming...achieved....hmmmm....knife crime massively up count as an achievement?
    Khan is an absolute do-nothing.

    I mean, I hate Boris, but even he was a better mayor than Khan.
    Does the MoL have any actual real power to do anything of significance without the blessing of Westminster?

    I ask because the mayor of "North of Tyne" is just as impotent it seems.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 23,537
    Foxy said:

    tlg86 said:

    I think Mike is looking at this from the wrong direction. It is an advantage for the Tories to be seen as capable of winning a majority. It is a disadvantage for Labour to be seen as being incapable of winning without the support of the SNP.

    And on the Lib Dems. It's worth remembering that four of their 11 seats are in Scotland. I mean, it would be a very Lib Dem thing to do, but throwing your lot in with the SNP might not be the smartest of moves.

    I think the LD seats in Scotland will be more difficult without a Scottish Leader, marmite Swindon may have been, but at least not English. Davey won't have that advantage.

    Labour having a Scottish leader was a big advantage North of the border in 2010.

    All the 5 big parties in England are very SE English middle class led.
    Very much agree about Brown helping Labour in Scotland in 2010.

    But I'm sceptical about Swinson's help for the Lib Dems in Scotland in 2019 given that she lost her own seat. I suppose you could argue that she was hurt by not being able to spend time in the constituency a bit like Chris Patten in 1992.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 7,873
    MaxPB said:

    Interesting that the Pfizer response to the SA variant is being classes as good (rightly) because it has a robust t-cell response but the AZ vaccine had a very similar t-cell response but was on the receiving end of some very unfair briefings.

    It's almost as if there is an element of the media that wants the vaccine to fail.

    Whatever gets us out of this in the end is what matters, Those nifty little T-Cells will help us out as, I suspect, they have with previous coronaviruses that have morphed into variations on the common cold. Once of those crept out of a bat or similar prior to the twentieth century but humanity didn't notice given that life expectancy, even in the UK, only exceeded 50 about 100 years ago.
  • If the Tories get above 315 seats they stay in office, IMHO. And right now I think they will.

    The Liberal Democrats are vanishing into oblivion and I don't see much evidence that Starmer can score more than a handful of seats.

    If he does crack it he cracks it big time in my view, and not somewhere in the middle.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 19,190

    I am still not convinced Boris will be leading the Tories come 2024. He looks bloody awful, I suspect long covid and incredible unrelating stress that will continue for much of this year.

    I think you are right.

    If it was Gove Labour would rejoice.

    Sunak not so much unless the economy is in ruins.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 7,873

    Mr. Seal, if General Veers had been on the ground the ewoks would've been annihilated.

    I had been assuming that his stellar performance on Hoth meant he was promoted onto the Second Death Star. Or something. He wasn't actually in Return of the Jedi was he?
  • Scott_xP said:
    Khan end of term report is even more underwhelming...achieved....hmmmm....knife crime massively up count as an achievement?
    Khan is an absolute do-nothing.

    I mean, I hate Boris, but even he was a better mayor than Khan.
    He is just continuing his record in government. He sounds good, he is good at the politics of appearing to be doing the right things, then achieves the square root of f##k all.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 29,112

    Mr. Malmesbury, tragic that one of the few officers to serve and survive Darth Vader ended up doomed by a poor choice of drinking vessel.

    I'm trying to remember the pub next to Borough Market - has zillions of beers, draft and bottled. Also the branded glasses to go with them....

    I'm pretty sure I've heard the "Chose your grail wisely" joke when the bar tender was looking for the glass to match the beer...
  • felixfelix Posts: 14,264

    felix said:

    felix said:

    While it is true that, if we end up in a hung Parliament Labour will find it easier to form a government, the precedent of the 2015 GE campaign is that this is politically an albatross around Labour's neck.

    The voters will be told that the choice at the election is not between a majority Tory government or a majority Labour government, but between a strong and stable Tory majority government or Labour's coalition of chaos led from Holyrood.

    This is why a resurgence in Scotland is so crucial to Labour's hopes at Westminster. It's not because, numerically, they need Scottish seats. They can win enough English seats. It's because it kills off the political argument of a Labour government propped up by the SNP.

    A difference between then and now, though, could be that perceptions of Nicola Sturgeon in England have been changed by the pandemic. The bigger question is whether the SNP actually would prop up a Labour minority government. If it does and the government is successful, the SNP loses a significant calling card for independence.

    So you expect the SNP to voluntarily play nice, and to voluntarily give away their calling card? You don't see the problem in that plan?

    The SNP as the scorpion 🦂 has no reason to make a success of a minority Labour frog 🐸 government.

    The SNP has every incentive to allow a Labour PM to be in office but for Westminster to be a catastrophe. They are agents of chaos, they have no incentive or desire to make your Westminster government work.
    It was interesting on Euro news this morning that the forthcoming Catalonia election is seeing a collapse in support for parties seeking independence, with those interviewed saying covid has relegated independence as an issue and the result is likely to be welcomed in Madrid
    Looking at the most recent polls - the pro-independence parties look very likley to win with around 72 seats . Of course the polls could be wrong.
    It seemed a genuine live report to be fair
    I've scoured the new outlet but can see nothing that suggests at the very best a close and unpredictable result.
    Maybe Euro news is more pro EU then
    Oh it is - one of their featured journos is Mike Keating - otherwise known as Comical Pierre/Franz/Pieter/Jose.....
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 7,873

    MaxPB said:

    Interesting that the Pfizer response to the SA variant is being classes as good (rightly) because it has a robust t-cell response but the AZ vaccine had a very similar t-cell response but was on the receiving end of some very unfair briefings.

    It's almost as if there is an element of the media that wants the vaccine to fail.

    Easy for people with Pfizer in their arm to claim both are as good as each other.

    Would anyone, given a free choice not go Pfizer?
    An absolutely free choice? Yes, Pfizer, but at 47 I am (I think) just about young enough to say that if I were depriving someone older I would comfortably fo with AZ and leave Pfizer for someone older.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 14,758

    Foxy said:

    tlg86 said:

    I think Mike is looking at this from the wrong direction. It is an advantage for the Tories to be seen as capable of winning a majority. It is a disadvantage for Labour to be seen as being incapable of winning without the support of the SNP.

    And on the Lib Dems. It's worth remembering that four of their 11 seats are in Scotland. I mean, it would be a very Lib Dem thing to do, but throwing your lot in with the SNP might not be the smartest of moves.

    I think the LD seats in Scotland will be more difficult without a Scottish Leader, marmite Swindon may have been, but at least not English. Davey won't have that advantage.

    Labour having a Scottish leader was a big advantage North of the border in 2010.

    All the 5 big parties in England are very SE English middle class led.
    isn't Davey a Notts lad?
    Yes. Couple of miles from here.

    Not sure how much it would convince now.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 7,873

    Mr. Malmesbury, tragic that one of the few officers to serve and survive Darth Vader ended up doomed by a poor choice of drinking vessel.

    I'm trying to remember the pub next to Borough Market - has zillions of beers, draft and bottled. Also the branded glasses to go with them....

    I'm pretty sure I've heard the "Chose your grail wisely" joke when the bar tender was looking for the glass to match the beer...
    The Market Porter
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 29,004
    edited February 2021
    Nigelb said:
    If the current difficulties in exporting/importing and travel continue I wouldn't be too surprised to see F1 move it's operations to the EU.

    Edit.FFS.
  • I am still not convinced Boris will be leading the Tories come 2024. He looks bloody awful, I suspect long covid and incredible unrelating stress that will continue for much of this year.

    I think you are right.

    If it was Gove Labour would rejoice.

    Sunak not so much unless the economy is in ruins.
    Gove isn't ever getting the gig.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 35,477

    MaxPB said:

    Interesting that the Pfizer response to the SA variant is being classes as good (rightly) because it has a robust t-cell response but the AZ vaccine had a very similar t-cell response but was on the receiving end of some very unfair briefings.

    It's almost as if there is an element of the media that wants the vaccine to fail.

    Easy for people with Pfizer in their arm to claim both are as good as each other.

    Would anyone, given a free choice not go Pfizer?
    Well I have neither and would genuinely just take whatever is given to me, Pfizer, AZ, Moderna or Novavax.

    On one side you've got AZ showing a robust t-cell response and diluted antibody binding efficiency to the SA variant with the sub-optimal dosing schedule and people are going mental and on the other the Pfizer vaccine shows an almost identical t-cell response and diluted antibody binding efficiency and it's being hailed as a huge step forwards.

    The FT in particular leaked loads of damaging information and left out the key slide that said the t-cell response from AZ to the variant was almost as good as it is to the standard virus.

    If you can't see the agenda then I'm not surprised given you've become a walking talking fake news bot but others will.
  • felixfelix Posts: 14,264

    HYUFD said:

    felix said:

    While it is true that, if we end up in a hung Parliament Labour will find it easier to form a government, the precedent of the 2015 GE campaign is that this is politically an albatross around Labour's neck.

    The voters will be told that the choice at the election is not between a majority Tory government or a majority Labour government, but between a strong and stable Tory majority government or Labour's coalition of chaos led from Holyrood.

    This is why a resurgence in Scotland is so crucial to Labour's hopes at Westminster. It's not because, numerically, they need Scottish seats. They can win enough English seats. It's because it kills off the political argument of a Labour government propped up by the SNP.

    Yesterday's poll is not encouraging for Labour:

    Scottish parliament voting intention(s): Savanta Com Res.

    Constituency:
    SNP: 54% (+1)
    CON: 23% (+4)
    LAB: 16% (-2)
    LDEM: 5% (-1)

    List:
    SNP: 43% (-1)
    CON: 21% (+5)
    LAB: 18% (-)
    GRN: 10% (-1)
    In 2016 the Scottish Conservatives got 22% on the constituency vote and 22.9% on the list vote so on that poll are little changed, up one on the constituency vote and down one on the list.

    Scottish Labour got 22.6% on the constituency vote and 19% on the list so are down 6% on the constituency vote and down 1% on the list.

    So it is mainly Labour who the SNP have made further gains from and the new Labour leader needs to make gains not just for Labour but for Unionists too
    Seems to suggest that Tory support in Scotland is pretty fixed in the low twenties regardless of Brexit.

    Whereas, some Remain-inclined Lab/Libs have been lost to the SNP.
    I think the Tories have lost around 5/6% from their previous peak but they could edge up a little with Lab and the LDs currently looking pretty irrelevant.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,504

    Nigelb said:
    If the current difficulties in exposing/importing and travel continue I wouldn't be too surprised to see F1 move it's operations to the EU.
    I dunno. The reason why there are so many F1 teams clustered in the same part of England is because there's a critical mass of sub-suppliers and skilled labour.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 29,112

    Scott_xP said:
    Khan end of term report is even more underwhelming...achieved....hmmmm....knife crime massively up count as an achievement?
    Khan is an absolute do-nothing.

    I mean, I hate Boris, but even he was a better mayor than Khan.
    Does the MoL have any actual real power to do anything of significance without the blessing of Westminster?

    I ask because the mayor of "North of Tyne" is just as impotent it seems.
    Sacking Sir Ian Blair was rather popular.
  • DougSeal said:

    Mr. Seal, if General Veers had been on the ground the ewoks would've been annihilated.

    I had been assuming that his stellar performance on Hoth meant he was promoted onto the Second Death Star. Or something. He wasn't actually in Return of the Jedi was he?
    He might have died in Empire Strikes Back though?

    Whether he survived Hoth isn't canon.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 14,401
    Andy_JS said:

    Good morning. Maybe we'll reach 15 million today.

    Absolutely no chance in terms of first doses.

    However, they will beat the Valentine's Day target.

  • felixfelix Posts: 14,264

    If the Tories get above 315 seats they stay in office, IMHO. And right now I think they will.

    The Liberal Democrats are vanishing into oblivion and I don't see much evidence that Starmer can score more than a handful of seats.

    If he does crack it he cracks it big time in my view, and not somewhere in the middle.

    Barnesian upthread thinks the Lds can gain around 10 seats from the Tories. I know! :smiley:
  • MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Interesting that the Pfizer response to the SA variant is being classes as good (rightly) because it has a robust t-cell response but the AZ vaccine had a very similar t-cell response but was on the receiving end of some very unfair briefings.

    It's almost as if there is an element of the media that wants the vaccine to fail.

    Easy for people with Pfizer in their arm to claim both are as good as each other.

    Would anyone, given a free choice not go Pfizer?
    Well I have neither and would genuinely just take whatever is given to me, Pfizer, AZ, Moderna or Novavax.

    On one side you've got AZ showing a robust t-cell response and diluted antibody binding efficiency to the SA variant with the sub-optimal dosing schedule and people are going mental and on the other the Pfizer vaccine shows an almost identical t-cell response and diluted antibody binding efficiency and it's being hailed as a huge step forwards.

    The FT in particular leaked loads of damaging information and left out the key slide that said the t-cell response from AZ to the variant was almost as good as it is to the standard virus.

    If you can't see the agenda then I'm not surprised given you've become a walking talking fake news bot but others will.
    The best vaccine is the one available to you now.

    I'm sticking with my New Years Eve predictions. The vaccine rollout is working and the economy will rebound as a result.
  • AlwaysSingingAlwaysSinging Posts: 464
    edited February 2021
    DougSeal said:

    Foxy said:

    https://twitter.com/COVID19actuary/status/1360131370366959618?s=19

    The graph assumes a constant prevalence of Covid-19, which in turn would presumably mean some relaxations of restrictions.

    It also assumes that vaccination is 100% effective in preventing hospitalization, ICU admission, and death, though.

    ICU admissions will be the limiting factor -- as indeed has been predicted right from the beginning of the pandemic -- and its reduction by only 0.8 times vaccine effectiveness once groups 1-9 are completely done shows that vaccinating over 50s doesn't get us out of the woods. I have long thought that the trickiest period, politically, will be when deaths are right down (which I don't expect to happen as fast as Max and Robert do) but the hospitals still packed with unlucky 30-50 years olds like my relative. (Still on a ventilator, but now stable. Doctors not talking about his chances.)

    --AS
    https://twitter.com/ashishkjha/status/1356079020878786561
    Look, I've seen that table, but you have to understand that it's a bit misleading. Although tens of thousands received vaccines in the trial, most weren't exposed to COVID. The table needs to compare with the (size-corrected) placebo groups in those trials: how many of *those* were hospitalized with or died of COVID (and not of something else).

    I don't know all the answers. In the case of Pfizer I think it was 4 who died in the placebo group, and I'm not sure whether all 4 died of COVID. There were two deaths in the placebo group, judged to be of unrelated conditions. Totalling all trials we're probably talking something like say ten COVID deaths in placebo to none in vaccine, which would certainly be good news but nowhere near evidence of 100% efficacy.

    (Rule of thumb in statistics called "the rule of three": if something fails to happen at all in n possibilities, the upper 95% confidence interval for the probability of it happening is about 3/n.)

    It will take another couple of months to get proper data on how well vaccines prevent hospitalization or ICU admission. I confidently predict that it will be age-dependent, and won't be 100%. 90% would be a good result imo.

    --AS

    Edit, update: None of the four placebo deaths in the Pfizer trial were considered due to COVID either. Two were definitely not and two were of unknown cause, though you can imagine that they looked rather carefully for signs of COVID. So in the case of Pfizer it's really nil-nil.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 35,477

    Nigelb said:
    If the current difficulties in exposing/importing and travel continue I wouldn't be too surprised to see F1 move it's operations to the EU.
    That's very, very unlikely.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 29,112

    DougSeal said:

    Mr. Seal, if General Veers had been on the ground the ewoks would've been annihilated.

    I had been assuming that his stellar performance on Hoth meant he was promoted onto the Second Death Star. Or something. He wasn't actually in Return of the Jedi was he?
    He might have died in Empire Strikes Back though?

    Whether he survived Hoth isn't canon.
    Wasn't the death scene for him cut?
  • DougSeal said:

    Mr. Seal, if General Veers had been on the ground the ewoks would've been annihilated.

    I had been assuming that his stellar performance on Hoth meant he was promoted onto the Second Death Star. Or something. He wasn't actually in Return of the Jedi was he?
    He might have died in Empire Strikes Back though?

    Whether he survived Hoth isn't canon.
    Wasn't the death scene for him cut?
    Yes so his fate was left unknown. The novelisation kept his death scene, the now non-canon legends books said he survived. He could have died off camera or he could have survived, it wasn't spelt out and his absence from Jedi leaves me no reason to assume he survived Empire.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 23,537
    felix said:

    If the Tories get above 315 seats they stay in office, IMHO. And right now I think they will.

    The Liberal Democrats are vanishing into oblivion and I don't see much evidence that Starmer can score more than a handful of seats.

    If he does crack it he cracks it big time in my view, and not somewhere in the middle.

    Barnesian upthread thinks the Lds can gain around 10 seats from the Tories. I know! :smiley:
    It's certainly possible. What I would say is that after Lewes, the hill becomes very steep:

    http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/liberal-democrat
  • Thinking those vaccination numbers that showed 7m pfizer, 3m AZN by end of Jan. We were supposed to be getting 2m AZN a week through January, but clearly we haven't been getting that, and already reports of poor supply coming over the next couple of weeks.

    Sounds like AZN production is still far from sorted.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 29,004

    Nigelb said:
    If the current difficulties in exposing/importing and travel continue I wouldn't be too surprised to see F1 move it's operations to the EU.
    I dunno. The reason why there are so many F1 teams clustered in the same part of England is because there's a critical mass of sub-suppliers and skilled labour.
    I'm referring to what used to be Bernie E's operation. Not the teams. Yet. A few customs or immigration foul-ups and the picture might change there, too.
  • DougSeal said:

    Mr. Seal, if General Veers had been on the ground the ewoks would've been annihilated.

    I had been assuming that his stellar performance on Hoth meant he was promoted onto the Second Death Star. Or something. He wasn't actually in Return of the Jedi was he?
    He might have died in Empire Strikes Back though?

    Whether he survived Hoth isn't canon.
    Wasn't the death scene for him cut?
    According to Wookieepedia:

    "Veers himself was critically injured during the battle when a Rogue Squadron snowspeeder crashed into his AT-AT's cockpit, destroying the walker, but ultimately survived."
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 56,095
    edited February 2021
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 103,034

    If the Tories get above 315 seats they stay in office, IMHO. And right now I think they will.

    The Liberal Democrats are vanishing into oblivion and I don't see much evidence that Starmer can score more than a handful of seats.

    If he does crack it he cracks it big time in my view, and not somewhere in the middle.

    The Tories will almost certainly win a majority in England in 2024 regardless, Starmer is not going to win a Blair style 1997 landslide that is clear.

    However it remains possible he could get the 50 to 100 Tory seats he needs to force a hung parliament across the UK and form a government with SNP and LD support and backing from the other minor parties
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 5,105
    Interesting on here this morning. I'd been led to believe that Starmer had no chance whatsoever of winning anything due to his dullness, lack of ideas, boring persona, rubbish shadow cabinet and so on. Now some of those same people are speculating about his chances of winning enough seats to form a minority government.

    For what it's worth, I haven't a clue what the outcome of the next GE will be. I strongly suspect it will be Starmer (definitely) vs. Johnson (probably), and I'm still thinking each has a 50:50 chance of being the subsequent PM.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 35,477

    Nigelb said:
    If the current difficulties in exposing/importing and travel continue I wouldn't be too surprised to see F1 move it's operations to the EU.
    I dunno. The reason why there are so many F1 teams clustered in the same part of England is because there's a critical mass of sub-suppliers and skilled labour.
    I'm referring to what used to be Bernie E's operation. Not the teams. Yet. A few customs or immigration foul-ups and the picture might change there, too.
    I seriously doubt it. If anything given the global nature of F1 being in the UK which will be more flexible towards its approach to this is a better bet.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 29,112
    DougSeal said:

    Mr. Malmesbury, tragic that one of the few officers to serve and survive Darth Vader ended up doomed by a poor choice of drinking vessel.

    I'm trying to remember the pub next to Borough Market - has zillions of beers, draft and bottled. Also the branded glasses to go with them....

    I'm pretty sure I've heard the "Chose your grail wisely" joke when the bar tender was looking for the glass to match the beer...
    The Market Porter
    No - it was The Rake... I think!
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,504
    HYUFD said:

    If the Tories get above 315 seats they stay in office, IMHO. And right now I think they will.

    The Liberal Democrats are vanishing into oblivion and I don't see much evidence that Starmer can score more than a handful of seats.

    If he does crack it he cracks it big time in my view, and not somewhere in the middle.

    The Tories will almost certainly win a majority in England in 2024 regardless, Starmer is not going to win a Blair style 1997 landslide that is clear.

    However it remains possible he could get the 50 to 100 Tory seats he needs to force a hung parliament across the UK and form a government with SNP and LD support and backing from the other minor parties
    Nothing is 'clear'. It certainly doesn't look like Keir is going to make much headway in 2024 at the moment but events dear boy, events. We have no idea what is round the corner. Who could have predicted a global pandemic, for example?

    A Blair style 1997 landslide, while incredibly unlikely at the moment, is far from impossible.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 30,691
    edited February 2021
    PT - "racial aggravation"
    Charles said:

    And that is the fundamental difference between us.

    I punish actions. You criminalise thoughts and beliefs.

    To quote Bacon: I do not want to open windows into men’s souls

    Thoughts and beliefs not actioned are clearly a private matter. Here we're considering whether a racial motive for a crime adds to its gravity. You say it doesn't for you and this is what I am probing.

    Let's macro it up. Genocide. This for most people has a uniquely awful place in the annals of atrocities. But not for you, right? To you it's just about the numbers. The horror of the Holocaust is purely the 6m. That it was targeted at wiping out the Jews adds nothing. Ditto China and the Uighurs today. The crime is adequately described simply by the quantum of victims not by who they are and why chosen.

    Are you sure that such a view stacks up?
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 14,401
    Great to see Lord Blunkett in the papers this morning, calling for a clear road out of this. We need more Labour voices to amplify his critique.

    My view FWIW:

    KEEP EVERYTHING CLOSED UNTIL 0001hrs on 2 April.

    There is very little point opening schools for three weeks then running into the Easter holidays, when we could be holing this thing below the waterline.

    Then, open up beer gardens (table service on Good Friday 2 April). Schools go back after the Easter holidays.

    Then the weather should be warming up and we can look towards a full reopening around May Day.

    Crunch hard, then open up properly.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 29,004
    MaxPB said:

    Nigelb said:
    If the current difficulties in exposing/importing and travel continue I wouldn't be too surprised to see F1 move it's operations to the EU.
    I dunno. The reason why there are so many F1 teams clustered in the same part of England is because there's a critical mass of sub-suppliers and skilled labour.
    I'm referring to what used to be Bernie E's operation. Not the teams. Yet. A few customs or immigration foul-ups and the picture might change there, too.
    I seriously doubt it. If anything given the global nature of F1 being in the UK which will be more flexible towards its approach to this is a better bet.
    We shall see. They used to have excellent relationships with governments all over the world; doesn't seem quite the same now. And there are quite a few races in the EU.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,504
    kinabalu said:

    PT - "racial aggravation"

    Charles said:

    And that is the fundamental difference between us.

    I punish actions. You criminalise thoughts and beliefs.

    To quote Bacon: I do not want to open windows into men’s souls

    Thoughts and beliefs not actioned are clearly a private matter. Here we're considering whether a racial motive for a crime adds to its gravity. You say it doesn't for you and this is what I am probing.

    Let's macro it up. Genocide. This for most people has a uniquely awful place in the annals of atrocities. But not for you, right? To you it's just about the numbers. The horror of the Holocaust is purely the 6m. That it was targeted at wiping out the Jews adds nothing. Ditto China and the Uighurs today. The crime is adequately described simply by the quantum of victims not by who they are and why chosen.

    Are you sure that such a view stacks up?
    There's a very obvious counter-point here.

    Even if you disregard the mental element of committing (or procuring) many murders with the goal of wiping out a race of people, the punishment for 6m murders without the "genocide" element is likely to be the same as the punishment for 6m murders with the "genocide" element.

    So it doesn't realllyyyy matter.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 18,896
    edited February 2021

    Andy_JS said:

    Good morning. Maybe we'll reach 15 million today.

    Absolutely no chance in terms of first doses.

    However, they will beat the Valentine's Day target.

    I was being vague. The reported figures are always from the previous day, whereas I was thinking about today itself, which hopefully will be half a million more than what is announced later today.
  • Interesting on here this morning. I'd been led to believe that Starmer had no chance whatsoever of winning anything due to his dullness, lack of ideas, boring persona, rubbish shadow cabinet and so on. Now some of those same people are speculating about his chances of winning enough seats to form a minority government.

    For what it's worth, I haven't a clue what the outcome of the next GE will be. I strongly suspect it will be Starmer (definitely) vs. Johnson (probably), and I'm still thinking each has a 50:50 chance of being the subsequent PM.

    In time honoured fashion, Starmer will scrape home if there is sufficient 'time for a change' feeling in the swing electorate in marginals. I doubt being dull will make much difference.
  • HYUFD said:

    If the Tories get above 315 seats they stay in office, IMHO. And right now I think they will.

    The Liberal Democrats are vanishing into oblivion and I don't see much evidence that Starmer can score more than a handful of seats.

    If he does crack it he cracks it big time in my view, and not somewhere in the middle.

    The Tories will almost certainly win a majority in England in 2024 regardless, Starmer is not going to win a Blair style 1997 landslide that is clear.

    However it remains possible he could get the 50 to 100 Tory seats he needs to force a hung parliament across the UK and form a government with SNP and LD support and backing from the other minor parties
    Nothing is 'clear'. It certainly doesn't look like Keir is going to make much headway in 2024 at the moment but events dear boy, events. We have no idea what is round the corner. Who could have predicted a global pandemic, for example?

    A Blair style 1997 landslide, while incredibly unlikely at the moment, is far from impossible.
    Sky reporting that the economy shrunk 9.9% in 2020 but there was growth in December and the UK will not go into a double dip recession
  • Interesting thread on why the EU may be storing up trouble down the road:

    Yes, he makes some very good points. The EU is being short-sighted on this, although that's partly because the UK's approach has been so insulting and unhelpful. For example: if we want the EU to be sensitive to the political and economic issues in NI, why did we ban them from having the office in Belfast which would have made it easier for them to be well informed about them?

    Ultimately, though, this is going to be about how well the Republic does in calming things down and promoting practical solutions, especially within the EU. After all, 26 out of 27 EU countries don't have any particular interest in NI and the GFA. It's only solidarity with the Republic that pushes them to be positive at all.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 103,034

    HYUFD said:

    If the Tories get above 315 seats they stay in office, IMHO. And right now I think they will.

    The Liberal Democrats are vanishing into oblivion and I don't see much evidence that Starmer can score more than a handful of seats.

    If he does crack it he cracks it big time in my view, and not somewhere in the middle.

    The Tories will almost certainly win a majority in England in 2024 regardless, Starmer is not going to win a Blair style 1997 landslide that is clear.

    However it remains possible he could get the 50 to 100 Tory seats he needs to force a hung parliament across the UK and form a government with SNP and LD support and backing from the other minor parties
    Nothing is 'clear'. It certainly doesn't look like Keir is going to make much headway in 2024 at the moment but events dear boy, events. We have no idea what is round the corner. Who could have predicted a global pandemic, for example?

    A Blair style 1997 landslide, while incredibly unlikely at the moment, is far from impossible.
    The first Mori poll after Blair was elected Labour leader in July 1994 was Labour 56% and the Tories just 23%.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_1997_United_Kingdom_general_election

    The latest Mori poll has the Tories on 42% and Labour on 38%
    https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/strong-approval-governments-vaccine-programme-johnson-preferred-lead-pandemic-response
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 35,477

    Great to see Lord Blunkett in the papers this morning, calling for a clear road out of this. We need more Labour voices to amplify his critique.

    My view FWIW:

    KEEP EVERYTHING CLOSED UNTIL 0001hrs on 2 April.

    There is very little point opening schools for three weeks then running into the Easter holidays, when we could be holing this thing below the waterline.

    Then, open up beer gardens (table service on Good Friday 2 April). Schools go back after the Easter holidays.

    Then the weather should be warming up and we can look towards a full reopening around May Day.

    Crunch hard, then open up properly.

    Yes, agree with this. Get all over 50s and teachers first jabs done by the middle of March so that by the time we get to reopening after Easter all over 50s and teachers are immunised against severe symptoms. Opening schools for three weeks in March is such an unnecessary risk to take when we're so close to having this under control.
This discussion has been closed.