Howdy, Stranger!

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

Starmer’s big speech barely moves the betting markets – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited September 29 in General
imageStarmer’s big speech barely moves the betting markets – politicalbetting.com

So after eighteen months in the job Starmer has had his first chance to address his party. I was quite surprised by the heckling which he dealt with well and possibly encouraged most in the audience to be even more enthusiastic about what he was saying. This was the assessment of the Guardian’s Zoe Williams:

Read the full story here

«13456

Comments

  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 1,522
    First
  • Been polled on this speech by Opinium, replete with a video of part of Starmer's speech.

    Last time I remember a leader's speech moving the betting market was Dave in 2007.
  • Re the speech length.

    To all those complaining about the length of Starmer's speech.

    You're getting to hear a top lawyer speak for 90 mins for FREE and you're complaining.

    You lot don't know how lucky you are.
  • Starmer’s speech revealed three critical weakness – the first rhetorical, the second programmatic, the third both.

    Am I the only one who doesn't get this?
  • isamisam Posts: 38,441
    Maybe he finds it hard to talk about his background because he went to a Grammar school, which went Private while he was there (possibly paid for by the state)

    You cant really say "I want working class people to get the life chances I got as a youngster", whilst forbidding them - so best to keep schtum
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 20,675
    It's been mentioned already, but the contrast could not be more stark.

    Any pro-mask people on here want to defend them?


  • kle4kle4 Posts: 69,704
    Hecking response was good. Most if not all were probably prepared lines, but he delivered them well.

    Not surprised it's not had much effect, one of the few things people don't overreact about for some reason.
  • tlg86 said:

    It's been mentioned already, but the contrast could not be more stark.

    Any pro-mask people on here want to defend them?


    Not defending them but I did read that entry into conference is much more stricter than entry in to the Commons.

    Test/proof of vaccination etc beforehand.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 38,749
    Scott_xP said:

    nico679 said:

    As a Remainer I see no problem with “ Make Brexit Work”.

    The way to make it work is abolish the border in the Irish Sea.
    So you will be supportive when David Frost invokes Article 16?
  • tlg86 said:

    It's been mentioned already, but the contrast could not be more stark.

    Any pro-mask people on here want to defend them?


    As on the last thread, it was suggested better ventilation at the conference would negate the need for masks, and also that vaccination and tests were required to attend.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 27,519

    Re the speech length.

    To all those complaining about the length of Starmer's speech.

    You're getting to hear a top lawyer speak for 90 mins for FREE and you're complaining.

    You lot don't know how lucky you are.

    I managed the whole thing, while driving. It could have been shorter and punchier, and it was rather short on detail. On the whole though it was typical of the speaker: solid, strong on values and the work ethic, a bit long winded and a little short of snappy flourishes. He would be a solid, and reliable if unspectacular PM.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 20,675

    tlg86 said:

    It's been mentioned already, but the contrast could not be more stark.

    Any pro-mask people on here want to defend them?


    Not defending them but I did read that entry into conference is much more stricter than entry in to the Commons.

    Test/proof of vaccination etc beforehand.
    You must have missed this...

    https://order-order.com/2021/09/27/labour-abandons-conference-vaccine-passes-due-to-bad-weather/

    As of this morning, security is no longer checking for passes, instead conducting random spot checks on those already in the venue – long after attendees could have spread Covid around the conference centre.
  • A 'necessary but not sufficient' speech that pretty much went as expected. Not surprised its not moved the markets as there were no real surprises.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 2,142

    Starmer’s speech revealed three critical weakness – the first rhetorical, the second programmatic, the third both.

    Am I the only one who doesn't get this?

    There's three things I don't get about it. Its meaning, its intention, and both.
  • isam said:

    Maybe he finds it hard to talk about his background because he went to a Grammar school, which went Private while he was there (possibly paid for by the state)

    You cant really say "I want working class people to get the life chances I got as a youngster", whilst forbidding them - so best to keep schtum

    I'm with Starmer. Who votes for a leader or singer on BGT on the basis of their backstory? It should have been left out.
  • isamisam Posts: 38,441

    Starmer’s speech revealed three critical weakness – the first rhetorical, the second programmatic, the third both.

    Am I the only one who doesn't get this?

    What is programmatic?
  • tlg86 said:

    It's been mentioned already, but the contrast could not be more stark.

    Any pro-mask people on here want to defend them?


    Not defending them but I did read that entry into conference is much more stricter than entry in to the Commons.

    Test/proof of vaccination etc beforehand.
    How does that make a single bit of difference considering the mask is supposed to protect others supposedly?

    How does someone the vaccinated are supposedly at risk of infecting being negative before they put them at risk meant to reduce the risk of infecting them? Almost exclusively those who are negative for the virus will be the ones who get infected by it.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 4,476
    tlg86 said:

    It's been mentioned already, but the contrast could not be more stark.

    Any pro-mask people on here want to defend them?


    Shit ventilation in the HoC vs good at the conference venue? Maybe.
    But yes, looks like shithousery to me...
  • tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    It's been mentioned already, but the contrast could not be more stark.

    Any pro-mask people on here want to defend them?


    Not defending them but I did read that entry into conference is much more stricter than entry in to the Commons.

    Test/proof of vaccination etc beforehand.
    You must have missed this...

    https://order-order.com/2021/09/27/labour-abandons-conference-vaccine-passes-due-to-bad-weather/

    As of this morning, security is no longer checking for passes, instead conducting random spot checks on those already in the venue – long after attendees could have spread Covid around the conference centre.
    Yeah but let us assume anyone setting out this morning met all the requirements because they did not know there would only be random checks. Guido is reaching on this.
  • kle4 said:

    Hecking response was good. Most if not all were probably prepared lines, but he delivered them well.

    Not surprised it's not had much effect, one of the few things people don't overreact about for some reason.

    He should have gone all Jimmy Carr on the hecklers.

    Absolutely NSFW or if you have kids about.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7PoQ7HLaq8
  • tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    It's been mentioned already, but the contrast could not be more stark.

    Any pro-mask people on here want to defend them?


    Not defending them but I did read that entry into conference is much more stricter than entry in to the Commons.

    Test/proof of vaccination etc beforehand.
    You must have missed this...

    https://order-order.com/2021/09/27/labour-abandons-conference-vaccine-passes-due-to-bad-weather/

    As of this morning, security is no longer checking for passes, instead conducting random spot checks on those already in the venue – long after attendees could have spread Covid around the conference centre.
    I did.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 27,519
    tlg86 said:

    It's been mentioned already, but the contrast could not be more stark.

    Any pro-mask people on here want to defend them?


    Does Parliament require a vaxx passport or negative LFT for entry, including the thousands of support workers?

    The conference seemed to do so:

    https://labour.org.uk/conference/faqs/#COVID
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 20,675
    Foxy said:

    tlg86 said:

    It's been mentioned already, but the contrast could not be more stark.

    Any pro-mask people on here want to defend them?


    Does Parliament require a vaxx passport or negative LFT for entry, including the thousands of support workers?

    The conference seemed to do so:

    https://labour.org.uk/conference/faqs/#COVID
    Fake news.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 2,142
    Foxy said:

    Re the speech length.

    To all those complaining about the length of Starmer's speech.

    You're getting to hear a top lawyer speak for 90 mins for FREE and you're complaining.

    You lot don't know how lucky you are.

    I managed the whole thing, while driving. It could have been shorter and punchier, and it was rather short on detail. On the whole though it was typical of the speaker: solid, strong on values and the work ethic, a bit long winded and a little short of snappy flourishes. He would be a solid, and reliable if unspectacular PM.
    Mighty oaks from little acorns grow.
    The fact that I'm somewhat keen on Starmer being PM shows how low we find ourselves. We can do better, but it's ok to start by doing a little bit better.
  • isamisam Posts: 38,441
    I don't think a speech is going to move the betting markets really, unless it was outrageously bad, which it obviously wasn't

    Might move the polls though, which would move the markets I guess
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 20,675
    Fair play. I'm pleased to see that PBers are prepared to have a go at defending the indefensible.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 27,519
    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    It's been mentioned already, but the contrast could not be more stark.

    Any pro-mask people on here want to defend them?


    Not defending them but I did read that entry into conference is much more stricter than entry in to the Commons.

    Test/proof of vaccination etc beforehand.
    You must have missed this...

    https://order-order.com/2021/09/27/labour-abandons-conference-vaccine-passes-due-to-bad-weather/

    As of this morning, security is no longer checking for passes, instead conducting random spot checks on those already in the venue – long after attendees could have spread Covid around the conference centre.
    So after the first day, and then with spot checks?
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 2,142
    tlg86 said:

    Fair play. I'm pleased to see that PBers are prepared to have a go at defending the indefensible.

    That's not new :lol:
  • gealbhangealbhan Posts: 2,362

    Scott_xP said:

    nico679 said:

    As a Remainer I see no problem with “ Make Brexit Work”.

    The way to make it work is abolish the border in the Irish Sea.
    So you will be supportive when David Frost invokes Article 16?
    Touché
  • Foxy said:

    tlg86 said:

    It's been mentioned already, but the contrast could not be more stark.

    Any pro-mask people on here want to defend them?


    Does Parliament require a vaxx passport or negative LFT for entry, including the thousands of support workers?

    The conference seemed to do so:

    https://labour.org.uk/conference/faqs/#COVID
    How does that make any difference at all?

    Are you saying that the vaccinated can't infect the unvaccinated who have tested negative?
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 20,675

    Foxy said:

    tlg86 said:

    It's been mentioned already, but the contrast could not be more stark.

    Any pro-mask people on here want to defend them?


    Does Parliament require a vaxx passport or negative LFT for entry, including the thousands of support workers?

    The conference seemed to do so:

    https://labour.org.uk/conference/faqs/#COVID
    How does that make any difference at all?

    Are you saying that the vaccinated can't infect the unvaccinated who have tested negative?
    I wonder. If the government proposed vaxports as a way of ending any need to wear masks, would Labour support it?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 27,519

    Scott_xP said:

    nico679 said:

    As a Remainer I see no problem with “ Make Brexit Work”.

    The way to make it work is abolish the border in the Irish Sea.
    So you will be supportive when David Frost invokes Article 16?
    The other way would be dynamic alignment with EU food and agriculture regulations.

    This would help our exporters at the Channel too, imports are fine as we don't check them.
  • tlg86 said:

    Foxy said:

    tlg86 said:

    It's been mentioned already, but the contrast could not be more stark.

    Any pro-mask people on here want to defend them?


    Does Parliament require a vaxx passport or negative LFT for entry, including the thousands of support workers?

    The conference seemed to do so:

    https://labour.org.uk/conference/faqs/#COVID
    How does that make any difference at all?

    Are you saying that the vaccinated can't infect the unvaccinated who have tested negative?
    I wonder. If the government proposed vaxports as a way of ending any need to wear masks, would Labour support it?
    Labour have supported everything the government has proposed all pandemic so why not?
  • gealbhangealbhan Posts: 2,362
    isam said:

    I don't think a speech is going to move the betting markets really, unless it was outrageously bad, which it obviously wasn't

    Might move the polls though, which would move the markets I guess

    As the front bench have spent the week reaching out to lost voters, I think it will move the polls.

    It may be a mistake to blame fuel crisis for poll movement and say it’s short term, if Labour deal with it lexit glass ceiling in polls then removing the Tory majority at next election could be very much on.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 12,635
    Foxy said:

    Re the speech length.

    To all those complaining about the length of Starmer's speech.

    You're getting to hear a top lawyer speak for 90 mins for FREE and you're complaining.

    You lot don't know how lucky you are.

    I managed the whole thing, while driving. It could have been shorter and punchier, and it was rather short on detail. On the whole though it was typical of the speaker: solid, strong on values and the work ethic, a bit long winded and a little short of snappy flourishes. He would be a solid, and reliable if unspectacular PM.
    No jokes about Kermit the Frog so a 1/10 on PB I suspect.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 27,519

    Foxy said:

    tlg86 said:

    It's been mentioned already, but the contrast could not be more stark.

    Any pro-mask people on here want to defend them?


    Does Parliament require a vaxx passport or negative LFT for entry, including the thousands of support workers?

    The conference seemed to do so:

    https://labour.org.uk/conference/faqs/#COVID
    How does that make any difference at all?

    Are you saying that the vaccinated can't infect the unvaccinated who have tested negative?
    No, but like masks it is a significant partial mitigation. Very little is 100%.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 20,675
    ITV leading with Sarah Everard. Presumably SKS would actually approve of that (and I mean that sincerely).
  • Seattle Times ($) - Fight looms over 2022 midterms as Democrats and Republicans propose dueling Washington congressional maps . . .

    The two Republican and two Democratic commissioners issued competing maps for the state’s 10 U.S. House districts — the starting point for negotiations as they face a Nov. 15 deadline to come to final agreement.

    As they did with legislative maps proposed last week, the Republican commissioners, Joe Fain and Paul Graves, are aggressively pushing for more favorable competitive boundaries for the GOP, which now holds three of the state’s 10 House seats.

    The Democratic commissioners, April Sims and Brady Piñero Walkinshaw, proposed maps that would more likely maintain the status quo partisan split, and said they’re hewing to legal requirements including fair representation and uniting communities of interest.

    Three of the four commissioners must agree on a final legislative map and congressional map by the Nov. 15 deadline [or] the state Supreme Court will take over and draw the maps.

    Battle for 8th District
    The Republican proposals would make major shifts to the swing 8th Congressional District, now represented by U.S. Rep. Kim Schrier, the Sammamish pediatrician who flipped the seat away from Republicans in 2018, defeating Republican Dino Rossi in one of the nation’s most expensive congressional races. . . .

    Both Graves’ and Fain’s plans would draw Schrier out of her district. . . . Graves’ plan also would push Democratic Suzan DelBene, D-Medina, out of the 1st Congressional District. . . .

    Walkinshaw predicted the Republican plans, if adopted, would be shredded by courts, and said he wrote his own proposal with legal principles in mind, so that it would be looked on favorably by the state Supreme Court if the two sides are unable to reach a compromise. . . .

    Under state law, the electoral districts must be as equal in population as possible — about 770,000 people for each congressional district — and aren’t supposed to be gerrymandered to favor any party or discriminate against any group. They’re supposed to avoid dividing cities and other political subdivisions as much as possible. The law also says maps should “provide fair and effective representation” and “encourage electoral competition.” . . .

    https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/fight-looms-over-2022-midterms-as-democrats-and-republicans-propose-dueling-washington-congressional-maps/

    To see proposed congressional AND legislative redistricting proposals:
    https://www.redistricting.wa.gov/

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,925

    kle4 said:

    Hecking response was good. Most if not all were probably prepared lines, but he delivered them well.

    Not surprised it's not had much effect, one of the few things people don't overreact about for some reason.

    He should have gone all Jimmy Carr on the hecklers.

    Absolutely NSFW or if you have kids about.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7PoQ7HLaq8
    That would have been far too tame.

    He should have gone the full Bill Hicks
    https://youtube.com/watch?v=AetJWKjVqOI (very NSFW).
  • Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    tlg86 said:

    It's been mentioned already, but the contrast could not be more stark.

    Any pro-mask people on here want to defend them?


    Does Parliament require a vaxx passport or negative LFT for entry, including the thousands of support workers?

    The conference seemed to do so:

    https://labour.org.uk/conference/faqs/#COVID
    How does that make any difference at all?

    Are you saying that the vaccinated can't infect the unvaccinated who have tested negative?
    No, but like masks it is a significant partial mitigation. Very little is 100%.
    No, for the vaccinated its not any mitigation whatsoever that they're not going to infect others - which is what the mask is supposedly about.

    You're mitigating against the risk of the unvaccinated infecting others (since they've tested negative) but you've not remotely adjusted the risk of the vaccinated infecting others.

    So the vaccinated wearing masks normally is pure theatre isn't it?
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 12,635
    tlg86 said:

    ITV leading with Sarah Everard. Presumably SKS would actually approve of that (and I mean that sincerely).

    One would hope so. I was moved by the Mother's testimony. Every parent's nightmare.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 27,519

    Foxy said:

    Re the speech length.

    To all those complaining about the length of Starmer's speech.

    You're getting to hear a top lawyer speak for 90 mins for FREE and you're complaining.

    You lot don't know how lucky you are.

    I managed the whole thing, while driving. It could have been shorter and punchier, and it was rather short on detail. On the whole though it was typical of the speaker: solid, strong on values and the work ethic, a bit long winded and a little short of snappy flourishes. He would be a solid, and reliable if unspectacular PM.
    No jokes about Kermit the Frog so a 1/10 on PB I suspect.
    The only bits that drew a smile from me were when he described both his father and Johnsons as toolmakers, and when he put down the hecklers by saying he was used to being heckled by the Tories.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 4,356
    Don't agree with the general line about the heckling. The top performers, Harold Wilson, Boris get the audience to laugh, and especially laugh at the heckler. Rubbish performers get the audience to side with the heckler. Good, decent people like SKS get our toes to curl, we absolutely side with him, and feel for him. This is good in ordinary human life. But politics at the absolute top - like here - has different rules.

    My take away from the heckling: SKS a fine and decent man; like most people uncomfortable outside his comfort zone; would make a decent honourable PM; but whatever you do don't let his party anywhere near power.
  • gealbhangealbhan Posts: 2,362

    Foxy said:

    Re the speech length.

    To all those complaining about the length of Starmer's speech.

    You're getting to hear a top lawyer speak for 90 mins for FREE and you're complaining.

    You lot don't know how lucky you are.

    I managed the whole thing, while driving. It could have been shorter and punchier, and it was rather short on detail. On the whole though it was typical of the speaker: solid, strong on values and the work ethic, a bit long winded and a little short of snappy flourishes. He would be a solid, and reliable if unspectacular PM.
    No jokes about Kermit the Frog so a 1/10 on PB I suspect.
    “I will say at the start, there are no jokes about muppets in this speech. Other than the current government is already full of them.”
  • isamisam Posts: 38,441
    edited September 29
    gealbhan said:

    isam said:

    I don't think a speech is going to move the betting markets really, unless it was outrageously bad, which it obviously wasn't

    Might move the polls though, which would move the markets I guess

    As the front bench have spent the week reaching out to lost voters, I think it will move the polls.

    It may be a mistake to blame fuel crisis for poll movement and say it’s short term, if Labour deal with it lexit glass ceiling in polls then removing the Tory majority at next election could be very much on.
    Lexit voters left because of immigration- The Tories gave 5,000 Visas to foreign drivers, and Sir Keir said he'd have made it 100,000
  • Re: WA State congressional redistricting proposals, interesting that NEITHER Democratic nor Republican proposal much affect the two districts currently held by Republicans who voted in favor of impeaching You-Know-Who after the attack on the US Capitol, namely Jaime Herrera Beutler in the 3rd CD (southwest WA) and Dan Newhouse in the 4th CD (Columbia Basin in eastern WA).

    Of course lines for both districts ARE altered, largely due to fact that 3rd has grown in population relative to the rest of the state, while the 4th has declined in relative terms. However, proposed changes to both districts are minimal - certainly compared to situation re: 8th CD.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 12,861
    Starmer's speech already down to 7th place on the BBC News website, and also replaced by the distressing Everard deets at the top of the Guardian

    This certainly does not feel like Blair in 1994. Kinnock in 1989?
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 15,260
    Look North did a tour of filling stations in Barnsley. Most fully stocked with no queues. Hopefully we are seeing the back of this nonsense.
  • isamisam Posts: 38,441
    Phoned up the vets to get my cat booked inn for a vaccination - vaccine shortage due to vials being taken for Covid vaccine and no lorry drivers to deliver what is available
  • LeonLeon Posts: 12,861

    Look North did a tour of filling stations in Barnsley. Most fully stocked with no queues. Hopefully we are seeing the back of this nonsense.

    Absolutely no problem getting Ubers in London. So obvs plenty of people are indeed filling up
  • Re: WA State congressional redistricting proposals, interesting that NEITHER Democratic nor Republican proposal much affect the two districts currently held by Republicans who voted in favor of impeaching You-Know-Who after the attack on the US Capitol, namely Jaime Herrera Beutler in the 3rd CD (southwest WA) and Dan Newhouse in the 4th CD (Columbia Basin in eastern WA).

    Of course lines for both districts ARE altered, largely due to fact that 3rd has grown in population relative to the rest of the state, while the 4th has declined in relative terms. However, proposed changes to both districts are minimal - certainly compared to situation re: 8th CD.

    Would a partisan supreme court skew the boundaries against the Dems?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 27,519

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    tlg86 said:

    It's been mentioned already, but the contrast could not be more stark.

    Any pro-mask people on here want to defend them?


    Does Parliament require a vaxx passport or negative LFT for entry, including the thousands of support workers?

    The conference seemed to do so:

    https://labour.org.uk/conference/faqs/#COVID
    How does that make any difference at all?

    Are you saying that the vaccinated can't infect the unvaccinated who have tested negative?
    No, but like masks it is a significant partial mitigation. Very little is 100%.
    No, for the vaccinated its not any mitigation whatsoever that they're not going to infect others - which is what the mask is supposedly about.

    You're mitigating against the risk of the unvaccinated infecting others (since they've tested negative) but you've not remotely adjusted the risk of the vaccinated infecting others.

    So the vaccinated wearing masks normally is pure theatre isn't it?
    Not true.

    We know that the risk of a double vaxxed individual catching covid is markedly reduced, and when they do the condition is both shorter in duration and less severe. Together this is probably a reduction of infectivity of perhaps 80%, a figure comparable or better than masking.
  • Any decent restaurant recommendations for central Glasgow?

    Last time I was there I nearly incited a riot after describing the local food as tasting like deep fried shavings from a ped egg.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,925
    Alastair Campbell would have had Sir Keir make his big speech yesterday, so as not to be overshadowed by another story that was scheduled for today and always going to lead the news.
  • isamisam Posts: 38,441
    edited September 29

    Look North did a tour of filling stations in Barnsley. Most fully stocked with no queues. Hopefully we are seeing the back of this nonsense.

    I drove for an hour last night without finding a petrol station that was open, and another hour this morning before queuing for 40 mins to fill up.

    Very thoughtlessly I made myself a self service Costa Hot Chocolate before I left the shop. It only dawned on me as I was walking out how annoying that must be for the 50 odd cars behind me... so I tried to cover up the cup!
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 41,503
    isam said:

    Phoned up the vets to get my cat booked inn for a vaccination - vaccine shortage due to vials being taken for Covid vaccine and no lorry drivers to deliver what is available

    That's a problem that's affecting flu vaccines too.

    That's what happens when six billion doses of Covid vaccine are given in about six months.
  • gealbhangealbhan Posts: 2,362
    isam said:

    gealbhan said:

    isam said:

    I don't think a speech is going to move the betting markets really, unless it was outrageously bad, which it obviously wasn't

    Might move the polls though, which would move the markets I guess

    As the front bench have spent the week reaching out to lost voters, I think it will move the polls.

    It may be a mistake to blame fuel crisis for poll movement and say it’s short term, if Labour deal with it lexit glass ceiling in polls then removing the Tory majority at next election could be very much on.
    Lexit voters left because of immigration- The Tories gave 5,000 Visas to foreign drivers, and Sir Keir said he'd have made it 100,000
    You can have your view Lexit is wholly immigration. It’s provably not true though, because if it was, it would have showed up at previous elections too, like through the Blair years, and 2015 when immigration was a hot topic - Labour Heartlands stayed Labour Heartlands. 🙂 Brexit is a whole load of promises for the better, not just one as you claim.

    Labour continue with this Lexit dialogue that is main take out from this conference, much of that Red wall in north and midlands can easily come crashing back.

    Labour will need that 24 election though, such a slow start on this messaging 22 or even 23 will come much too soon.
  • Oregon Redistricting 2021

    oregonlive.com - Oregon’s redistricting maps official, after lawmakers pass them, Gov. Kate Brown signs off

    SALEM — Oregon Democrats on Monday passed plans for new congressional and legislative districts on mostly party line votes, after House Republicans returned to the Capitol to provide the quorum necessary for Democrats to conduct business.

    In the House, debate lasted several hours as Democrats listed the many ways their electoral lines met the state constitution and laws and Republicans railed against the political maps and accused Democrats of gerrymandering.

    The Senate, which passed congressional and legislative district plans a week ago along party lines, met relatively briefly to repass the congressional plan after it was amended by Democrats in an attempt to secure some Republican support.

    Gov. Kate Brown, a Democrat, then signed both bills into law hours before the midnight deadline set by the Oregon Supreme Court earlier this year when it gave state officials more time to complete redistricting due to U.S. Census Bureau delays. . . .

    Democrats’ new congressional district plan, which they offered to Republicans late last week, would create three extremely safe Democratic seats, one extra safe Republican seat, one seat that tilts in Democrats’ favor and one seat that is a virtual 50-50 tie in terms of how its voters have sided in key Republican-Democratic match-ups since 2015, an analysis by The Oregonian/OregonLive shows. The district that would apparently have nearly even Democratic-Republican match-ups would include fast-growing Bend, where expected Democratic growth could make the district bluer over the next decade. . .

    https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/2021/09/oregon-legislature-passes-new-legislative-and-congressional-redistricting-plans-sends-to-gov-kate-brown-for-signature.html

    SSI - Note that the great Beaver State has gained a new seat in the US House (from 5 to 6) the result of population growth as per the 2020 US Census.
  • gealbhangealbhan Posts: 2,362
    Sandpit said:

    Alastair Campbell would have had Sir Keir make his big speech yesterday, so as not to be overshadowed by another story that was scheduled for today and always going to lead the news.

    A smirking OJ says hi.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 12,861
    isam said:

    Look North did a tour of filling stations in Barnsley. Most fully stocked with no queues. Hopefully we are seeing the back of this nonsense.

    I drove for an hour last night without finding a petrol station that was open, and another hour this morning before queuing for 40 mins to fill up.

    Very thoughtlessly I made myself a self service Costa Hot Chocolate before I left the shop. It only dawned on me as I was walking out how annoying that must be for the 50 odd cars behind me... so I tried to cover up the cup!
    Yeah, Blair felt like a winner from the start. Tho of course his circumstances were entirely different, and the 92-97 Tory government was loathed. And Boris is much more formidable, on multiple levels, than Major

    IF I was forced to bet now I would predict a narrow Tory win in 2024, then the wheels will come off HMG, also Sturgeon will retire, and Labour will get a narrow majority (with a few more Scottish seats) in about 2028

    Lord knows who will be their leader by then
  • Re: WA State congressional redistricting proposals, interesting that NEITHER Democratic nor Republican proposal much affect the two districts currently held by Republicans who voted in favor of impeaching You-Know-Who after the attack on the US Capitol, namely Jaime Herrera Beutler in the 3rd CD (southwest WA) and Dan Newhouse in the 4th CD (Columbia Basin in eastern WA).

    Of course lines for both districts ARE altered, largely due to fact that 3rd has grown in population relative to the rest of the state, while the 4th has declined in relative terms. However, proposed changes to both districts are minimal - certainly compared to situation re: 8th CD.

    Would a partisan supreme court skew the boundaries against the Dems?
    The other way around in WA State.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 12,635
    Leon said:

    Starmer's speech already down to 7th place on the BBC News website, and also replaced by the distressing Everard deets at the top of the Guardian

    This certainly does not feel like Blair in 1994. Kinnock in 1989?

    The party is yet to be dragged back into reality, like it already had been by 1994. I couldn't believe Pidcock's dour intervention. I think her hating Starmer and his speech might be counter-intuitive.

    If today was the turning point, it's a start. Whether it is enough for 2023/24, who knows?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 41,503
    @SeaShantyIrish2

    Districting should be done to equalise population, while minimizing boundary lengths.

    It would entirely non-partisan. Whoever could come up with a design with the shortest boundaries would be the winner.

  • isam said:

    Look North did a tour of filling stations in Barnsley. Most fully stocked with no queues. Hopefully we are seeing the back of this nonsense.

    I drove for an hour last night without finding a petrol station that was open, and another hour this morning before queuing for 40 mins to fill up.

    Very thoughtlessly I made myself a self service Costa Hot Chocolate before I left the shop. It only dawned on me as I was walking out how annoying that must be for the 50 odd cars behind me... so I tried to cover up the cup!
    Roy Orbison - I Drove All Night
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5N9IHqqGcA
  • pingping Posts: 1,409
    edited September 29
    isam said:

    gealbhan said:

    isam said:

    I don't think a speech is going to move the betting markets really, unless it was outrageously bad, which it obviously wasn't

    Might move the polls though, which would move the markets I guess

    As the front bench have spent the week reaching out to lost voters, I think it will move the polls.

    It may be a mistake to blame fuel crisis for poll movement and say it’s short term, if Labour deal with it lexit glass ceiling in polls then removing the Tory majority at next election could be very much on.
    Lexit voters left because of immigration- The Tories gave 5,000 Visas to foreign drivers, and Sir Keir said he'd have made it 100,000
    Yes. That was a mistake by sks.

    However good his speech was, today, he’s shown his neoliberal impulses. He’s comfortable with low skilled migration. The country, and red wall labour voters, are not.

    He should be out-torying the tories on low-skilled migration.
  • Re: WA State congressional redistricting proposals, interesting that NEITHER Democratic nor Republican proposal much affect the two districts currently held by Republicans who voted in favor of impeaching You-Know-Who after the attack on the US Capitol, namely Jaime Herrera Beutler in the 3rd CD (southwest WA) and Dan Newhouse in the 4th CD (Columbia Basin in eastern WA).

    Of course lines for both districts ARE altered, largely due to fact that 3rd has grown in population relative to the rest of the state, while the 4th has declined in relative terms. However, proposed changes to both districts are minimal - certainly compared to situation re: 8th CD.

    Would a partisan supreme court skew the boundaries against the Dems?
    The other way around in WA State.
    Ah, so no incentive to agree early?
  • Starmer is labour's best bet, but I agree with the header that the speech was too long and todays news agenda is utterly shocking and I doubt it will get the coverage in the media

    However, it was not a disaster and is a start but a long way to go as far as I can see
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 2,142
    rcs1000 said:

    @SeaShantyIrish2

    Districting should be done to equalise population, while minimizing boundary lengths.

    It would entirely non-partisan. Whoever could come up with a design with the shortest boundaries would be the winner.

    Brilliant!
  • theProletheProle Posts: 547
    edited September 29
    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    tlg86 said:

    It's been mentioned already, but the contrast could not be more stark.

    Any pro-mask people on here want to defend them?


    Does Parliament require a vaxx passport or negative LFT for entry, including the thousands of support workers?

    The conference seemed to do so:

    https://labour.org.uk/conference/faqs/#COVID
    How does that make any difference at all?

    Are you saying that the vaccinated can't infect the unvaccinated who have tested negative?
    No, but like masks it is a significant partial mitigation. Very little is 100%.
    No, for the vaccinated its not any mitigation whatsoever that they're not going to infect others - which is what the mask is supposedly about.

    You're mitigating against the risk of the unvaccinated infecting others (since they've tested negative) but you've not remotely adjusted the risk of the vaccinated infecting others.

    So the vaccinated wearing masks normally is pure theatre isn't it?
    Not true.

    We know that the risk of a double vaxxed individual catching covid is markedly reduced, and when they do the condition is both shorter in duration and less severe. Together this is probably a reduction of infectivity of perhaps 80%, a figure comparable or better than masking.
    Making unmasking conditional on double vaxing now is pointless - Labour MPs in the HoC are about the only people left wearing them, and that's voluntary. Cases are under control (and only really occurring in any number in kids, who rarely get seriously ill) hospitalisations are falling... No need for what amounts to reintroducing mask mandates for the unvaxed now.

    It's about time our politicians grew some backbone, declared Covid over, binned the special powers and quarantine requirements and cut the testing regime down to "serious cases only". We're still spending a fortune on a test and trace service which wasn't any good at the hight of the pandemic, and now generally just wastes everybody's time by ringing up double vaxed contacts of positive cases to tell them they don't have to isolate (I did this when I got it a month ago - not a single person test and trace contacted from the details I gave them needed to isolate. They also kept ringing my up at stupid times like 7am on a Saturday to check I was still isolating - I didn't see the funny side).
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 27,519
    isam said:

    Look North did a tour of filling stations in Barnsley. Most fully stocked with no queues. Hopefully we are seeing the back of this nonsense.

    I drove for an hour last night without finding a petrol station that was open, and another hour this morning before queuing for 40 mins to fill up.

    Very thoughtlessly I made myself a self service Costa Hot Chocolate before I left the shop. It only dawned on me as I was walking out how annoying that must be for the 50 odd cars behind me... so I tried to cover up the cup!
    As I was humming along smugly in my EV on the way to the IoW, about 2/3 of the service stations that I passed had no fuel.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 5,162

    Any decent restaurant recommendations for central Glasgow?

    Last time I was there I nearly incited a riot after describing the local food as tasting like deep fried shavings from a ped egg.

    It looks like the Italian place on West George Street is closed. That's a shame.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 43,072
    Foxy said:

    isam said:

    Look North did a tour of filling stations in Barnsley. Most fully stocked with no queues. Hopefully we are seeing the back of this nonsense.

    I drove for an hour last night without finding a petrol station that was open, and another hour this morning before queuing for 40 mins to fill up.

    Very thoughtlessly I made myself a self service Costa Hot Chocolate before I left the shop. It only dawned on me as I was walking out how annoying that must be for the 50 odd cars behind me... so I tried to cover up the cup!
    As I was humming along smugly in my EV on the way to the IoW, about 2/3 of the service stations that I passed had no fuel.
    Two thirds of fuel stations on my route home were closed. Fortunately after topping up yesterday I have enough to last me well into next week.
  • Any decent restaurant recommendations for central Glasgow?

    Last time I was there I nearly incited a riot after describing the local food as tasting like deep fried shavings from a ped egg.

    It looks like the Italian place on West George Street is closed. That's a shame.
    I did Roganos a while back, but that is shut for the rest of the year.
  • Re: WA State congressional redistricting proposals, interesting that NEITHER Democratic nor Republican proposal much affect the two districts currently held by Republicans who voted in favor of impeaching You-Know-Who after the attack on the US Capitol, namely Jaime Herrera Beutler in the 3rd CD (southwest WA) and Dan Newhouse in the 4th CD (Columbia Basin in eastern WA).

    Of course lines for both districts ARE altered, largely due to fact that 3rd has grown in population relative to the rest of the state, while the 4th has declined in relative terms. However, proposed changes to both districts are minimal - certainly compared to situation re: 8th CD.

    Would a partisan supreme court skew the boundaries against the Dems?
    The other way around in WA State.
    Ah, so no incentive to agree early?
    Certainly LESS for the Dems than for the Reps. However, legislators of whatever persuasion are unwilling as a rule to leave redistricting up to the courts, because it's not just a wild card, but surrenders their control of the process. (In WA State the 4 voting redistricting commissioners are each appointed by one of the four legislative caucuses, Sen Ds & Rs, House Ds & Rs.)

    My quasi-educated guess is that they will achieve a compromise before (or rather right at) deadline.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 27,519
    theProle said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    tlg86 said:

    It's been mentioned already, but the contrast could not be more stark.

    Any pro-mask people on here want to defend them?


    Does Parliament require a vaxx passport or negative LFT for entry, including the thousands of support workers?

    The conference seemed to do so:

    https://labour.org.uk/conference/faqs/#COVID
    How does that make any difference at all?

    Are you saying that the vaccinated can't infect the unvaccinated who have tested negative?
    No, but like masks it is a significant partial mitigation. Very little is 100%.
    No, for the vaccinated its not any mitigation whatsoever that they're not going to infect others - which is what the mask is supposedly about.

    You're mitigating against the risk of the unvaccinated infecting others (since they've tested negative) but you've not remotely adjusted the risk of the vaccinated infecting others.

    So the vaccinated wearing masks normally is pure theatre isn't it?
    Not true.

    We know that the risk of a double vaxxed individual catching covid is markedly reduced, and when they do the condition is both shorter in duration and less severe. Together this is probably a reduction of infectivity of perhaps 80%, a figure comparable or better than masking.
    Making unmasking conditional on double vaxing now is pointless - Labour MPs in the HoC are about the only people left wearing them, and that's voluntary. Cases are under control (and only really occurring in any number in kids, who rarely get seriously ill) hospitalisations are falling... No need for what amounts to reintroducing mask mandates for the unvaxed now.

    It's about time our politicians grew some backbone, declared Covid over, binned the special powers and quarantine requirements and cut the testing regime down to "serious cases only". We're still spending a fortune on a test and trace service which wasn't any good at the hight of the pandemic, and now generally just wastes everybody's time by ringing up double vaxed contacts of positive cases to tell them they don't have to isolate (I did this when I got it a month ago - not a single person test and trace contacted from the details I gave them needed to isolate. They also kept ringing my up at stupid times like 7am on a Saturday to check I was still isolating - I didn't see the funny side).
    I see that around a thousand covid deaths per week are still happening. The drop in hospitalisations may well just be temporary, reflecting the drop in cases 2 weeks ago before the rebound. We may also see the spread going up the age range as per last autumn too.

    Declaring Covid over is premature. Certainly, I am being quite cautious in my behaviour while the prevalence is so high.
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 3,681
    ping said:

    isam said:

    gealbhan said:

    isam said:

    I don't think a speech is going to move the betting markets really, unless it was outrageously bad, which it obviously wasn't

    Might move the polls though, which would move the markets I guess

    As the front bench have spent the week reaching out to lost voters, I think it will move the polls.

    It may be a mistake to blame fuel crisis for poll movement and say it’s short term, if Labour deal with it lexit glass ceiling in polls then removing the Tory majority at next election could be very much on.
    Lexit voters left because of immigration- The Tories gave 5,000 Visas to foreign drivers, and Sir Keir said he'd have made it 100,000
    Yes. That was a mistake by sks.

    However good his speech was, today, he’s shown his neoliberal impulses. He’s comfortable with low skilled migration. The country, and red wall labour voters, are not.

    He should be out-torying the tories on low-skilled migration.
    He is a North London left-wing professional. The idea he could sound even remotely convincing on low-skilled migration is for fantasy land.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 17,393
    Sandpit said:

    Alastair Campbell would have had Sir Keir make his big speech yesterday, so as not to be overshadowed by another story that was scheduled for today and always going to lead the news.

    SKS led the 6 o'clock news with a broadly favourable piece lasting about 5 minutes.
  • rcs1000 said:

    @SeaShantyIrish2

    Districting should be done to equalise population, while minimizing boundary lengths.

    It would entirely non-partisan. Whoever could come up with a design with the shortest boundaries would be the winner.

    Effective gerrymanders may be done with "shortest boundaries' so THAT by itself is NOT a panacea.

    Indeed, part of the art & science of gerrymandering in the 3rd millennium, is coming up with line that LOOK good to judges.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 20,675
    Foxy said:

    theProle said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    tlg86 said:

    It's been mentioned already, but the contrast could not be more stark.

    Any pro-mask people on here want to defend them?


    Does Parliament require a vaxx passport or negative LFT for entry, including the thousands of support workers?

    The conference seemed to do so:

    https://labour.org.uk/conference/faqs/#COVID
    How does that make any difference at all?

    Are you saying that the vaccinated can't infect the unvaccinated who have tested negative?
    No, but like masks it is a significant partial mitigation. Very little is 100%.
    No, for the vaccinated its not any mitigation whatsoever that they're not going to infect others - which is what the mask is supposedly about.

    You're mitigating against the risk of the unvaccinated infecting others (since they've tested negative) but you've not remotely adjusted the risk of the vaccinated infecting others.

    So the vaccinated wearing masks normally is pure theatre isn't it?
    Not true.

    We know that the risk of a double vaxxed individual catching covid is markedly reduced, and when they do the condition is both shorter in duration and less severe. Together this is probably a reduction of infectivity of perhaps 80%, a figure comparable or better than masking.
    Making unmasking conditional on double vaxing now is pointless - Labour MPs in the HoC are about the only people left wearing them, and that's voluntary. Cases are under control (and only really occurring in any number in kids, who rarely get seriously ill) hospitalisations are falling... No need for what amounts to reintroducing mask mandates for the unvaxed now.

    It's about time our politicians grew some backbone, declared Covid over, binned the special powers and quarantine requirements and cut the testing regime down to "serious cases only". We're still spending a fortune on a test and trace service which wasn't any good at the hight of the pandemic, and now generally just wastes everybody's time by ringing up double vaxed contacts of positive cases to tell them they don't have to isolate (I did this when I got it a month ago - not a single person test and trace contacted from the details I gave them needed to isolate. They also kept ringing my up at stupid times like 7am on a Saturday to check I was still isolating - I didn't see the funny side).
    I see that around a thousand covid deaths per week are still happening. The drop in hospitalisations may well just be temporary, reflecting the drop in cases 2 weeks ago before the rebound. We may also see the spread going up the age range as per last autumn too.

    Declaring Covid over is premature. Certainly, I am being quite cautious in my behaviour while the prevalence is so high.
    Did you go to the game on Saturday? If you're worried about COVID, I'd avoid hanging around under the stand for long.
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 4,768
    edited September 29
    MrEd said:

    ping said:

    isam said:

    gealbhan said:

    isam said:

    I don't think a speech is going to move the betting markets really, unless it was outrageously bad, which it obviously wasn't

    Might move the polls though, which would move the markets I guess

    As the front bench have spent the week reaching out to lost voters, I think it will move the polls.

    It may be a mistake to blame fuel crisis for poll movement and say it’s short term, if Labour deal with it lexit glass ceiling in polls then removing the Tory majority at next election could be very much on.
    Lexit voters left because of immigration- The Tories gave 5,000 Visas to foreign drivers, and Sir Keir said he'd have made it 100,000
    Yes. That was a mistake by sks.

    However good his speech was, today, he’s shown his neoliberal impulses. He’s comfortable with low skilled migration. The country, and red wall labour voters, are not.

    He should be out-torying the tories on low-skilled migration.
    He is a North London left-wing professional. The idea he could sound even remotely convincing on low-skilled migration is for fantasy land.
    Come midwinter, though, and especially if there are shortages and anger at those, that may not be the political handicap it would have been even two years or so ago.
  • I think Starmer is fit to be the next Kinnock.

    People deride Kinnock but he was no Foot.

    I've been concerned he wasn't even that - that Labour might struggle to materially improve their position over 2019 - but now, I think that's virtually certain.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 14,924
    edited September 29
    I've seen very little of the Conference like most people. Just bits here and there. My sense though is that Starmer has come out of it well. It was all very much in your face and as Nabavi noted the thugs from Central Casting were perfectly on cue. A picture is building which it hasn't done since he took over. He's going unashamedly for Tories with brains. The betting markets might not have shifted but I'd be surprised if the polls don't.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 26,158
    Foxy said:

    isam said:

    Look North did a tour of filling stations in Barnsley. Most fully stocked with no queues. Hopefully we are seeing the back of this nonsense.

    I drove for an hour last night without finding a petrol station that was open, and another hour this morning before queuing for 40 mins to fill up.

    Very thoughtlessly I made myself a self service Costa Hot Chocolate before I left the shop. It only dawned on me as I was walking out how annoying that must be for the 50 odd cars behind me... so I tried to cover up the cup!
    As I was humming along smugly in my EV on the way to the IoW, about 2/3 of the service stations that I passed had no fuel.
    That's actually a really good idea for a tax: a tax on smugness. The higher your smugness quota, the more tax you pay... ;)
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 69,704

    Re: WA State congressional redistricting proposals, interesting that NEITHER Democratic nor Republican proposal much affect the two districts currently held by Republicans who voted in favor of impeaching You-Know-Who after the attack on the US Capitol, namely Jaime Herrera Beutler in the 3rd CD (southwest WA) and Dan Newhouse in the 4th CD (Columbia Basin in eastern WA).

    Of course lines for both districts ARE altered, largely due to fact that 3rd has grown in population relative to the rest of the state, while the 4th has declined in relative terms. However, proposed changes to both districts are minimal - certainly compared to situation re: 8th CD.

    Would a partisan supreme court skew the boundaries against the Dems?
    The other way around in WA State.
    Ah, so no incentive to agree early?
    Certainly LESS for the Dems than for the Reps. However, legislators of whatever persuasion are unwilling as a rule to leave redistricting up to the courts, because it's not just a wild card, but surrenders their control of the process. (In WA State the 4 voting redistricting commissioners are each appointed by one of the four legislative caucuses, Sen Ds & Rs, House Ds & Rs.)

    My quasi-educated guess is that they will achieve a compromise before (or rather right at) deadline.
    What's quasi education in this context :)?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 12,861
    Just realised - in my geeky shame - I've watched quite a few party leader speeches, over the years, particularly the debuts, but also some others. Very few affected me - or politics - but these stand out:


    Blair 's debut in 1994. Not a great speech (if you watch it now he is extremely stiff, far from the confident charmer he became) but you just knew he was going to win in 1997, ending the many years of Toryism

    Thatcher's in Brighton after the IRA bomb in 1984. Extraordinary. Her resilience, the drama, the horror of it all. A prime minister moving towards greatness (this still looks amazing in retrospect)

    Kinnock's Militant speech. Brave, fiery, dramatic, the beginning of a long slow recuperation (finished by Blair)

    Corbyn's first speech, so utterly bad, so ridiculously inept, you knew Labour were heading for a terrible result - at some point- if they kept him

    Theresa May's Red Line speech. One of the stupidest speeches ever made. I recall watching it in stunned disbelief as she boxed herself in, red line by red line, ensuring a horrendously complex and painful Brexit, and condemning herself in the process


    And that's it. Those are the only really significant ones, that impacted me or the world. Apart from that I can recall
    some of Blair's later lines ("causes of crime"), some Thatcher stuff ("the Lady's not for turning"), the IDS volume man cringefest. Maybe a Boris gag if I really try? But what tho?

    I cannot recall any single thing from Major, Brown, Smith, Foot, or Cameron. Nor Starmer. He only did it today and it's gone. Whoosh


  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 27,519
    It does look as if there is a floor effect for some voters, but even so quite a shift in 3 months amongst Tory and Leave voters:

    Who thinks Brexit has been going well this year?

    Con voters: 39% (-12)
    Leave voters: 35% (-10)
    British public: 18% (-7)
    Remain voters: 5% (-3)
    Lab voters: 3% (-2)

    Changes from Jun 21, 2021

    https://t.co/Vc1NkmmAS0 https://t.co/m80O2Itxmg

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1443245367349424130?s=19
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 43,072
    kle4 said:

    Re: WA State congressional redistricting proposals, interesting that NEITHER Democratic nor Republican proposal much affect the two districts currently held by Republicans who voted in favor of impeaching You-Know-Who after the attack on the US Capitol, namely Jaime Herrera Beutler in the 3rd CD (southwest WA) and Dan Newhouse in the 4th CD (Columbia Basin in eastern WA).

    Of course lines for both districts ARE altered, largely due to fact that 3rd has grown in population relative to the rest of the state, while the 4th has declined in relative terms. However, proposed changes to both districts are minimal - certainly compared to situation re: 8th CD.

    Would a partisan supreme court skew the boundaries against the Dems?
    The other way around in WA State.
    Ah, so no incentive to agree early?
    Certainly LESS for the Dems than for the Reps. However, legislators of whatever persuasion are unwilling as a rule to leave redistricting up to the courts, because it's not just a wild card, but surrenders their control of the process. (In WA State the 4 voting redistricting commissioners are each appointed by one of the four legislative caucuses, Sen Ds & Rs, House Ds & Rs.)

    My quasi-educated guess is that they will achieve a compromise before (or rather right at) deadline.
    What's quasi education in this context :)?
    Our education system after Gove, Cummings, Freedman, Gibb, Spielman and Williamson had finished fucking it up.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,925

    Foxy said:

    isam said:

    Look North did a tour of filling stations in Barnsley. Most fully stocked with no queues. Hopefully we are seeing the back of this nonsense.

    I drove for an hour last night without finding a petrol station that was open, and another hour this morning before queuing for 40 mins to fill up.

    Very thoughtlessly I made myself a self service Costa Hot Chocolate before I left the shop. It only dawned on me as I was walking out how annoying that must be for the 50 odd cars behind me... so I tried to cover up the cup!
    As I was humming along smugly in my EV on the way to the IoW, about 2/3 of the service stations that I passed had no fuel.
    That's actually a really good idea for a tax: a tax on smugness. The higher your smugness quota, the more tax you pay... ;)
    Watch out for all the private jets at the forthcoming climate change conference!
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 20,675
    edited September 29

    I think Starmer is fit to be the next Kinnock.

    People deride Kinnock but he was no Foot.

    I've been concerned he wasn't even that - that Labour might struggle to materially improve their position over 2019 - but now, I think that's virtually certain.

    I think Labour will probably do better, but the 1983 and 2019 elections were very different.

    Con share of the vote (GB) - 43.5% - 44.7%
    Con share of the vote in seats won - 1983 - 2019
    Under 37.5% - 7 - 1
    37.5% to 42.5% - 55 - 7
    42.5% to 47.5% - 67 - 40
    Over 47.5% - 268 - 317

    Total - 397 - 365

    In short, tactical voting happened in 2019 in a way that it didn't happen in 1983.

    And then there's all those Brexit Party votes.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 4,476
    Foxy said:

    theProle said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    tlg86 said:

    It's been mentioned already, but the contrast could not be more stark.

    Any pro-mask people on here want to defend them?


    Does Parliament require a vaxx passport or negative LFT for entry, including the thousands of support workers?

    The conference seemed to do so:

    https://labour.org.uk/conference/faqs/#COVID
    How does that make any difference at all?

    Are you saying that the vaccinated can't infect the unvaccinated who have tested negative?
    No, but like masks it is a significant partial mitigation. Very little is 100%.
    No, for the vaccinated its not any mitigation whatsoever that they're not going to infect others - which is what the mask is supposedly about.

    You're mitigating against the risk of the unvaccinated infecting others (since they've tested negative) but you've not remotely adjusted the risk of the vaccinated infecting others.

    So the vaccinated wearing masks normally is pure theatre isn't it?
    Not true.

    We know that the risk of a double vaxxed individual catching covid is markedly reduced, and when they do the condition is both shorter in duration and less severe. Together this is probably a reduction of infectivity of perhaps 80%, a figure comparable or better than masking.
    Making unmasking conditional on double vaxing now is pointless - Labour MPs in the HoC are about the only people left wearing them, and that's voluntary. Cases are under control (and only really occurring in any number in kids, who rarely get seriously ill) hospitalisations are falling... No need for what amounts to reintroducing mask mandates for the unvaxed now.

    It's about time our politicians grew some backbone, declared Covid over, binned the special powers and quarantine requirements and cut the testing regime down to "serious cases only". We're still spending a fortune on a test and trace service which wasn't any good at the hight of the pandemic, and now generally just wastes everybody's time by ringing up double vaxed contacts of positive cases to tell them they don't have to isolate (I did this when I got it a month ago - not a single person test and trace contacted from the details I gave them needed to isolate. They also kept ringing my up at stupid times like 7am on a Saturday to check I was still isolating - I didn't see the funny side).
    I see that around a thousand covid deaths per week are still happening. The drop in hospitalisations may well just be temporary, reflecting the drop in cases 2 weeks ago before the rebound. We may also see the spread going up the age range as per last autumn too.

    Declaring Covid over is premature. Certainly, I am being quite cautious in my behaviour while the prevalence is so high.
    Certainly a thousand deaths a week is significant. It’s mostly the old and 5h3 unvaccinated now. I’d argue our testing regime is prolonging the sense of crisis. I know hospitals are busy, and will have a shit winter. Perhaps that aff3cts how you see things @foxy?
  • Vaccination news: there was a large team of nurses in school today vaccinating Years 8-11, among to get them all done in a day.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 17,393
    edited September 29
    By the way, my office (90 people), which was planning a phased return to work in October, has postponed return to work (except for exceptional meetings) until at least March. We decided that wfh was working reasonably well and it was foolhardy to go into winter with most people working in the office.

    Noticeable that the minority who had pressed for a return have been less keen recently, though they'd still quite like to come in one day a week - mostly reluctance to return to commuting more than nervousness about Covid. There's general acceptance that we'll eventually settle next year on teams coming in for joint meetings now and then, some more than others.

    Theory: the relaxation of restrictions on meeting friends and family and going to events has made people who especially long for in-person contact feel less bothered about doing it in the office as well.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 69,704

    Foxy said:

    isam said:

    Look North did a tour of filling stations in Barnsley. Most fully stocked with no queues. Hopefully we are seeing the back of this nonsense.

    I drove for an hour last night without finding a petrol station that was open, and another hour this morning before queuing for 40 mins to fill up.

    Very thoughtlessly I made myself a self service Costa Hot Chocolate before I left the shop. It only dawned on me as I was walking out how annoying that must be for the 50 odd cars behind me... so I tried to cover up the cup!
    As I was humming along smugly in my EV on the way to the IoW, about 2/3 of the service stations that I passed had no fuel.
    That's actually a really good idea for a tax: a tax on smugness. The higher your smugness quota, the more tax you pay... ;)
    You trying to bankrupt me?

    I'm asset poor but rich in smug.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 43,072

    Sandpit said:

    Alastair Campbell would have had Sir Keir make his big speech yesterday, so as not to be overshadowed by another story that was scheduled for today and always going to lead the news.

    SKS led the 6 o'clock news with a broadly favourable piece lasting about 5 minutes.
    And he’s still the headline on BBC News website.

    The snag is, he’s down to number 8 on the most read.

    However worthy his speech (and a quick scan of comments suggests he did pretty well) he’s apparently still struggling to cut through.

    Of course, a week from now we may find it’s resonating.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 27,519
    tlg86 said:

    Foxy said:

    theProle said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    tlg86 said:

    It's been mentioned already, but the contrast could not be more stark.

    Any pro-mask people on here want to defend them?


    Does Parliament require a vaxx passport or negative LFT for entry, including the thousands of support workers?

    The conference seemed to do so:

    https://labour.org.uk/conference/faqs/#COVID
    How does that make any difference at all?

    Are you saying that the vaccinated can't infect the unvaccinated who have tested negative?
    No, but like masks it is a significant partial mitigation. Very little is 100%.
    No, for the vaccinated its not any mitigation whatsoever that they're not going to infect others - which is what the mask is supposedly about.

    You're mitigating against the risk of the unvaccinated infecting others (since they've tested negative) but you've not remotely adjusted the risk of the vaccinated infecting others.

    So the vaccinated wearing masks normally is pure theatre isn't it?
    Not true.

    We know that the risk of a double vaxxed individual catching covid is markedly reduced, and when they do the condition is both shorter in duration and less severe. Together this is probably a reduction of infectivity of perhaps 80%, a figure comparable or better than masking.
    Making unmasking conditional on double vaxing now is pointless - Labour MPs in the HoC are about the only people left wearing them, and that's voluntary. Cases are under control (and only really occurring in any number in kids, who rarely get seriously ill) hospitalisations are falling... No need for what amounts to reintroducing mask mandates for the unvaxed now.

    It's about time our politicians grew some backbone, declared Covid over, binned the special powers and quarantine requirements and cut the testing regime down to "serious cases only". We're still spending a fortune on a test and trace service which wasn't any good at the hight of the pandemic, and now generally just wastes everybody's time by ringing up double vaxed contacts of positive cases to tell them they don't have to isolate (I did this when I got it a month ago - not a single person test and trace contacted from the details I gave them needed to isolate. They also kept ringing my up at stupid times like 7am on a Saturday to check I was still isolating - I didn't see the funny side).
    I see that around a thousand covid deaths per week are still happening. The drop in hospitalisations may well just be temporary, reflecting the drop in cases 2 weeks ago before the rebound. We may also see the spread going up the age range as per last autumn too.

    Declaring Covid over is premature. Certainly, I am being quite cautious in my behaviour while the prevalence is so high.
    Did you go to the game on Saturday? If you're worried about COVID, I'd avoid hanging around under the stand for long.
    Yes, but I wore an FFP3 mask as per usual.

    I will do so until the prevalence drops. It isn't fear for myself (I am triple vaxxed now) but rather that I do not want to assymptomatically transmit it to my patients, many of whom are very vulnerable medically.
  • Leon said:

    isam said:

    Look North did a tour of filling stations in Barnsley. Most fully stocked with no queues. Hopefully we are seeing the back of this nonsense.

    I drove for an hour last night without finding a petrol station that was open, and another hour this morning before queuing for 40 mins to fill up.

    Very thoughtlessly I made myself a self service Costa Hot Chocolate before I left the shop. It only dawned on me as I was walking out how annoying that must be for the 50 odd cars behind me... so I tried to cover up the cup!
    Yeah, Blair felt like a winner from the start. Tho of course his circumstances were entirely different, and the 92-97 Tory government was loathed. And Boris is much more formidable, on multiple levels, than Major

    IF I was forced to bet now I would predict a narrow Tory win in 2024, then the wheels will come off HMG, also Sturgeon will retire, and Labour will get a narrow majority (with a few more Scottish seats) in about 2028

    Lord knows who will be their leader by then
    Blair had the massive advantage that the heavy lifting had been done by Kinnock and Smith. Labour already had a comfy lead and Blair's job was to not stuff it up. Which he did with brutal aplomb. Starmer, like Smith, is imaginable as PM in a way Kinnock wasn't. But Operation Dynorod is only part-finished.

    Agree that the centre of the needle is a narrow Conservative win... and that makes 2024 more likely. But the range bar then goes from comfy Conservative to Coalition of chaos.

    On top of that, I don't see BoJo having the guile to make a small majority work like Major did. It was ugly, but he survived five years. And if BoJo goes, the magic goes as well.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 43,072

    Vaccination news: there was a large team of nurses in school today vaccinating Years 8-11, among to get them all done in a day.

    How close did they get? No sign of them in my school yet.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 15,449

    Any decent restaurant recommendations for central Glasgow?

    Last time I was there I nearly incited a riot after describing the local food as tasting like deep fried shavings from a ped egg.

    It looks like the Italian place on West George Street is closed. That's a shame.
    I did Roganos a while back, but that is shut for the rest of the year.
    There is this chain called Greggs which has bistro tables outside. The vegan sausage rolls are particularly admired by the food writers.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 20,675
    Leon said:

    Just realised - in my geeky shame - I've watched quite a few party leader speeches, over the years, particularly the debuts, but also some others. Very few affected me - or politics - but these stand out:


    Blair 's debut in 1994. Not a great speech (if you watch it now he is extremely stiff, far from the confident charmer he became) but you just knew he was going to win in 1997, ending the many years of Toryism

    Thatcher's in Brighton after the IRA bomb in 1984. Extraordinary. Her resilience, the drama, the horror of it all. A prime minister moving towards greatness (this still looks amazing in retrospect)

    Kinnock's Militant speech. Brave, fiery, dramatic, the beginning of a long slow recuperation (finished by Blair)

    Corbyn's first speech, so utterly bad, so ridiculously inept, you knew Labour were heading for a terrible result - at some point- if they kept him

    Theresa May's Red Line speech. One of the stupidest speeches ever made. I recall watching it in stunned disbelief as she boxed herself in, red line by red line, ensuring a horrendously complex and painful Brexit, and condemning herself in the process


    And that's it. Those are the only really significant ones, that impacted me or the world. Apart from that I can recall
    some of Blair's later lines ("causes of crime"), some Thatcher stuff ("the Lady's not for turning"), the IDS volume man cringefest. Maybe a Boris gag if I really try? But what tho?

    I cannot recall any single thing from Major, Brown, Smith, Foot, or Cameron. Nor Starmer. He only did it today and it's gone. Whoosh


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6J2QUw0A-0

    British jobs for British workers.
This discussion has been closed.